Mr. Kinsley Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 christ.Which way do you mean that? "Christ. Don't make such a big deal out of that." or "Christ. What an asshole for saying that." Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cousin Tupelo Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Which way do you mean that? "Christ. Don't make such a big deal out of that." or "Christ. What an asshole for saying that." Maybe she just meant it: "Jesus, etc." Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Which way do you mean that? "Christ. Don't make such a big deal out of that." or "Christ. What an asshole for saying that." No it was "Christ for President" I know Flick, and it was the latter. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I read this Newsweek article about a conspiracy about McCain lying about POWs still alive in Vietnam. He hushed it up in the 90's during some hearings or some shit. I looked around for other info...couldn't find much. Anyone? BTW, Ross Perot is the current whistleblower. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I was away from a TV all weekend. I only saw random clips of the HRC concession speech and a few talking heads giving their approval. What did people here think? A good speech? Convincing? Is unity possible? Other than MrRain, I dont think anyone weighed in. Lots of people here were very vocal about her need to get out, and to do so appropriately. Were you satisfied? Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I was away from a TV all weekend. I only saw random clips of the HRC concession speech and a few talking heads giving their approval. What did people here think? A good speech? Convincing? Is unity possible? Other than MrRain, I dont think anyone weighed in. Lots of people here were very vocal about her need to get out, and to do so appropriately. Were you satisfied?I thought she could have been a bit more conciliatory, but all in all she did fine. Even though Barack is now the figurehead of the party HRC still holds the key to his success imo. If she gets out there and works hard for Barack (and doesn't appear to just be going through the motions) Obama will stomp on the terra this fall. Link to post Share on other sites
Moe_Syzlak Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Obama will stomp on the terra this fall.He's already got the "terrorist fist jab" down! Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 What did people here think? A good speech? Convincing? Is unity possible? Other than MrRain, I dont think anyone weighed in. Lots of people here were very vocal about her need to get out, and to do so appropriately. Were you satisfied? I thought she was self-campaigning the whole time, but I understand what she had to do, I suppose. I was satisfied enough. Unity will be possible, as soon as the Democrats realize that shit needs to get put together or else we lose and get a 6-3 or 7-2 conservative-leaning Supreme Court, which basically kills the Dems on all social issues. Link to post Share on other sites
mfwahl Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 He's already got the "terrorist fist jab" down! The coverage of the "fist-bump" is horrific. I can't even believe that this is an issue. These people are so dumb. Obama's going to be making his case to young evangelicals soon. He's launching a project called Joshua Generaiton: "The Joshua Generation project will be the Obama campaign's outreach to young people of faith. There's unprecedented energy and excitement for Obama among young evangelicals and Catholics. The Joshua Generation project will tap into that excitement and provide young people of faith opportunities to stand up for their values and move the campaign forward."I think he'll fare well with young evangelicals and ones with decent minds/non-racist. McCain doesn't have much there though, he's willing to sell out. Obama also is going to have a staff dedicated to dispelling internet rumors. I still hear once a week someone say something about Obama being a muslim, swearing in on a Qu'ran, etc. Hopefully, they'll be effective at that. Also, what's the deal with John McCain's war on beer. I can't watch that video at work. Isn't his wife a beer heiress? Link to post Share on other sites
Moe_Syzlak Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Also, what's the deal with John McCain's war on beer. I can't watch that video at work. Isn't his wife a beer heiress?It was just a slip of the tongue (albeit a funny one) where he meant to say "bill with earmarks" and combined the "b" of bill with the "ear" of earmarks to say "veto any 'beer' (or is it b-ear?)." Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I think he'll fare well with young evangelicals and ones with decent minds/non-racist.actually i don't think that those "evangelicals" with "decent minds" would actually consider voting for Obama. if so, i don't think they take their evangelical status that seriously. evangelicals are largely social conservatives, something barack definately is not. since i guess i would be considered an evangelical myself (although i don't use that label) i think that those votes would either go to mccain or else stay at home on election day. barack thinking he can sway many of those votes is laughable. and i don't personally know any racist evangelicals. way to slip that in there. "The Joshua Generation project will be the Obama campaign's outreach to young people of faith. There's unprecedented energy and excitement for Obama among young evangelicals and Catholics. The Joshua Generation project will tap into that excitement and provide young people of faith opportunities to stand up for their values and move the campaign forward." Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 actually i don't think that those "evangelicals" with "decent minds" would actually consider voting for Obama. if so, i don't think they take their evangelical status that seriously. evangelicals are largely social conservatives, something barack definately is not. since i guess i would be considered an evangelical myself (although i don't use that label) i think that those votes would either go to mccain or else stay at home on election day. barack thinking he can sway many of those votes is laughable. and i don't personally know any racist evangelicals. way to slip that in there. Young, self-identified evangelicals today are in some ways more liberal than their predecessors. This has something to do with a loose movement often described as the emergent church. While emergents may still be socially conservative, they generally place less emphasis on social conservatism vis a vis other issues than more traditional evangelicals do. Polls have shown that young Christians aren't any less concerned about the "family values" issues that have traditionally driven Christians to the Republican camp. (In fact, a study by the Barna Group, an evangelical polling organization, shows young Christians are actually more conservative on abortion than their elders.) It's just that they're also concerned about issues such as social justice and immigration, issues traditionally associated with Democrats.http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/poli...angvote11m.html I've been surprised that a lot of kids I knew as conservative evangelicals in high school (and I knew a lot of them, as I grew up in Wheaton, IL--one of the centers of evangelicalism) have become politically moderate of even liberal since then. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 So, apparently Obama found time to play Medinah #3 a few days ago. He took an 8 on #2 and apparently isn't very good. Thought you would like to know. Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Young, self-identified evangelicals today are in some ways more liberal than their predecessors. This has something to do with a loose movement often described as the emergent church. While emergents may still be socially conservative, they generally place less emphasis on social conservatism vis a vis other issues than more traditional evangelicals do.well, if that is the case, then they aren't really evangelicals. Evangelical: Of, relating to, or being a Christian church believing in the sole authority and inerrancy of the Bible, in salvation only through regeneration, and in a spiritually transformed personal life. (from Dictionary.com) The Bible never changes. People do. You can't claim to live by the sole authority of the Word and endorse a set of values that runs counter to it. Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 well, if that is the case, then they aren't really evangelicals. You might not call them evangelicals, but they still may consider themselves to be. It's really irrelevant though -- Obama is going to "market" towards them with messages that his campaign feels will resonate to them. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 With all due respect, fuck the evangelicals Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 You can't claim to live by the sole authority of the Word and endorse a set of values that runs counter to it.I agree. That's why I'm strictly anti-war, etc. It's not as if either political party has very biblical values. You're not going to find a candidate who bases his or her policies on the sermon on the mount. Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 You might not call them evangelicals, but they still may consider themselves to be. It's really irrelevant though -- Obama is going to "market" towards them with messages that his campaign feels will resonate to them. salesmen/politicians, it's all the same. i don't care how great the advertising, i ain't buying it. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Obama sounds like Robin Hood with his tax plans. This will be a friggin mess. Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I agree. That's why I'm strictly anti-war, etc. It's not as if either political party has very biblical values. You're not going to find a candidate who bases his or her policies on the sermon on the mount. exactly right. however, with politics you have to sift through all the crap and come out with something that at least resembles something you can live with. barack is way out there in that regard imo. mccain still makes me nauseous, but what choice is there? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cousin Tupelo Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 well, if that is the case, then they aren't really evangelicals. Evangelical: Of, relating to, or being a Christian church believing in the sole authority and inerrancy of the Bible, in salvation only through regeneration, and in a spiritually transformed personal life. (from Dictionary.com) The Bible never changes. People do. You can't claim to live by the sole authority of the Word and endorse a set of values that runs counter to it. Evangelical holds a connotation not just to belief, but to spreading the gospel. I have never quite understood that, what should be a bedrock value among the Christian church -- helping the poor, widows and orphans, the oppressed -- probably ranks the least in priorities. Cut social programs, but legislate morals. They will call themselves what they will, but isn't it a scripture not to say "Lord, Lord" with your lips if you don't mean it in your heart? Not that I'm casting judgment mind you ... <cue thunder clap> Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cousin Tupelo Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 and i don't personally know any racist evangelicals. way to slip that in there. 11 a.m. Sundays is the most segregated hour in America. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Obama sounds like Robin Hood with his tax plans. This will be a friggin mess. I hate to say it, but I agree. Imposing a moral judgment on whether certain companies are making too much money, and then taxing their windfalls, is a slippery slope. Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Evangelical holds a connotation not just to belief, but to spreading the gospel. I have never quite understood that, what should be a bedrock value among the Christian church -- helping the poor, widows and orphans, the oppressed -- probably ranks the least in priorities. Cut social programs, but legislate morals. They will call themselves what they will, but isn't it a scripture not to say "Lord, Lord" with your lips if you don't mean it in your heart? Not that I'm casting judgment mind you ... if you look into it, you will see that the evangelical churches are making huge strides worldwide to combat human trafficking, AIDS in Africa, bringing clean water wells to India, etc. It's not just about spreading the Word, it's about doing something to help our fellow man. My church in particular is hands on doing these very things. It's sad that blowhards like Falwell and Robertson have sullied the reputation of the Church. Evangelicals are aware of this perception and are trying to do something about it. Churches have gotten a bad rap over the years because of these egomaniacs. It shouldn't be the goal to influence politics, but rather to take care of the needs of those less fortunate locally and abroad and live by example. 11 a.m. Sundays is the most segregated hour in America.i'm really sorry you feel that way. that's certainly not what i see every Sunday. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts