Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
President Obama's Religion & The Deep South  
User currently offlineIllinoisMan From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 163 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3042 times:

I just came across this article from about month ago and I couldn't believe the shocking numbers of what people in the Deep South think about President Obama. There was a poll conducted a few days before the Republic Presidential Primaries in Tennessee and Alabama, and the polling asked Republican voters to share their opinions about - get this - President Obama's religion? Yep, we're still there folks.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar...rs-in-alabama-mississippi-20120312

"The poll of Mississippi Republicans found that 52% said they believed Obama is a Muslim, 36% weren’t sure and only 12% said they believed he is a Christian. He fared slightly better in Alabama, where 45% said he is a Muslim, 41% weren’t sure, and 14% said he is a Christian."

Only 12-14% believe that he's a Christian?! Really? Are we at a point in Mississippi and Alabama where's its not really what you believe, but its what you want to believe?

121 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2985 times:

Why do we care what religion any politician is? Show me where in the Constitution that every politician HAS to be Christian or that the government endorses Christianity of some sort.

Go ahead.

I'll wait...



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinedanielmyatt From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2964 times:

It is shocking how a community can feel that much hate for a person, and be so wrong about it at the same time without any factual basis whatsoever. I mean our current government is hardly liked in many parts of the country but I doubt many people hate David Cameron, which is more to be said for a previous Tory PM, but that had a base, and it's for a different thread.

Come to think of it, our PM has to be Church of England (Protestant), Tony Blair was Catholic, but converted, then converted back after he left government. I don't think it's that much of a bother nowadays, and obviously as we have an unwritten constitution, we can't write it down. It think it was brought in with Cromwell and his anti Catholic ways, but don't quote me on that.
It seems surprising that a fairly secular country like ours has religious laws regarding our Prime Minister, but a country like the US where religion is deeply ingrained into everyday life doesn't have such a rule in its constitution.


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5683 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2952 times:

Quoting IllinoisMan (Thread starter):
Are we at a point in Mississippi and Alabama where's its not really what you believe, but its what you want to believe?

That's always been the case, everywhere. That is why fear is such a good tool, it helps make you believe something is "wrong" even if there is nothing wrong.

Quoting danielmyatt (Reply 3):
hate

This is probably the biggest problem going on in the USA lately. Many people seem to be able to transmute their dislike of something, a person, a political party, anything really, into hatred for that thing. And it is often fed by others around to drive them in a certain direction.

There is simply no reason to hate the President, there was no real reason to hate the previous president or the ones before that. They are just people that have been elected to office, to lead the nation, to do a job. But hate is now becoming a tool to be used just like fear is, and it is being used for things where hate is not deserved.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2947 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 2):
Why do we care what religion any politician is? Show me where in the Constitution that every politician HAS to be Christian or that the government endorses Christianity of some sort.
Quote:
ARTICLE VI: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

My emphasis added.

I consider these people to be un-American, anti-American, disloyal to the Constitution and the Republic that it defines, and a danger to national security and the security of democracy itself. It's a pity that nothing can be done about it.


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5683 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2936 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
I consider these people to be un-American, anti-American, disloyal to the Constitution and the Republic that it defines, and a danger to national security and the security of democracy itself. It's a pity that nothing can be done about it.

Now wait, just because they believe one thing does not mean they are applying a religious test to anything when they vote. It is not "un-American" to know what religion a President (or someone vying to be the President). Plain and simple there may be a whole bunch of people that think President Obama is a Muslim but are still voting for him because they are supportive of him, his policies, Democrats, whatever. And if they are voting against him it is just as likely for purely nonreligious reasons.

Believing that the President is Muslim is certainly not something demonstrating intelligence but it is also not demonstrating "un-Americaness".

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2912 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
Believing that the President is Muslim is certainly not something demonstrating intelligence but it is also not demonstrating "un-Americaness".

Believing that the President is a Muslim and that this makes him unfit for office (which is the implication and let's not pretend it isn't) is to deny the very Constitution itself.

[Edited 2012-04-25 18:32:05]

User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2910 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
It is not "un-American" to know what religion a President (or someone vying to be the President).

It is not un-American to know what religion a politician practices. However, to vote for a politician, or against a politician, based only on what religion he or she practices is un-American IMHO. I don't care that Romney is Mormon. Not my business. I don't care that Gingrich converted to Catholisism. Not my business. It is not even my business that he is divorced twice and is with wife number three*. However, that matters to some people. Just like the perception that someone went to Harvard makes them an elitist and they must be voted against based soley on that one item.

*The laughable thing about Gingrich is he goes on and on and supports a party that goes on and on about marriage being between one man and one woman only and sees zero irony in all his divorces and philandering.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2902 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
I don't care that Romney is Mormon.

I do, but only because he seems to want to make a deal of it. When you use it as a political tool, then it becomes very much a matter of public interest.

Obama rarely speaks about his religion and doesn't use it as a political tool.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
It is not even my business that he is divorced twice and is with wife number three*.

It isn't our business UNTIL he starts talking about making the "sanctity of marriage" a matter of public policy. At that point, his hypocrisy is VERY MUCH our business.


User currently offlinejbirdav8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2861 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):
Plain and simple there may be a whole bunch of people that think President Obama is a Muslim but are still voting for him because they are supportive of him, his policies, Democrats, whatever. And if they are voting against him it is just as likely for purely nonreligious reasons.

Great, salient point.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
Believing that the President is a Muslim and that this makes him unfit for office (which is the implication and let's not pretend it isn't) is to deny the very Constitution itself.

The survey didn't make this extrapolation. Such an interpretation falls far outside the scope of this survey.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
It is not un-American to know what religion a politician practices. However, to vote for a politician, or against a politician, based only on what religion he or she practices is un-American IMHO. I don't care that Romney is Mormon. Not my business. I don't care that Gingrich converted to Catholisism. Not my business. It is not even my business that he is divorced twice and is with wife number three*. However, that matters to some people. Just like the perception that someone went to Harvard makes them an elitist and they must be voted against based soley on that one item.

I don't necessarily find it "un-American." One of the great things about America, in my opinion, is that we are free to vote for or against any political candidate for any reason we might choose...regardless of whether or not someone else might think it silly. We all use our individual brainpower to choose our own personal favored candidate.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
I consider these people to be un-American, anti-American, disloyal to the Constitution and the Republic that it defines, and a danger to national security and the security of democracy itself. I

This seems like a very extreme view. Tolerance and respect for people with differing world views are everyone's responsibility.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
It's a pity that nothing can be done about it.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here but it seems nefarious. Are you suggesting we send all Southerners to gulags or something?



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2850 times:

Quoting jbirdav8r (Reply 10):

I'm not sure what you're getting at here but it seems nefarious. Are you suggesting we send all Southerners to gulags or something?

No, it's a pity that politicians fear churches and that the legal system cannot be used to forcibly remove churches from politics. It is what was intended by the first amendment and it has been completely circumvented by Big Money Religion.

Quoting jbirdav8r (Reply 10):
This seems like a very extreme view. Tolerance and respect for people with differing world views are everyone's responsibility.

I have no tolerance for intolerance. I do not have to tolerate someone using someone else's PRIVATE religious beliefs and behaviors as a criterion for employment any more than I have to tolerate people using someone else's race in such a manner.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15795 posts, RR: 27
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2847 times:

Quoting IllinoisMan (Thread starter):
Only 12-14% believe that he's a Christian?! Really? Are we at a point in Mississippi and Alabama where's its not really what you believe, but its what you want to believe?

Does it really matter if stupid rednecks don't vote for him because they think he's a Muslim or because he's black?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineNW747400 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 329 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2836 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):

I don't get that from the article. I think it would be reasonable to think that some might not vote for him because they believe he is Muslim but that is entirely different than saying he is unfit for office. Also I don't think it is un-American to vote or not vote for someone based on religion. As an American you have the right to choose who to vote for based on eye color if you so desire. That doesn't mean you should necessarily, but you should have the freedom to vote for or against a candidate based on what in your mind are the most important characteristics of a good leader without being ridiculed as Un-American. On a side note calling someone un-American is an ad hominem that is used by both sides when they don't have a leg to stand on so to speak.

NW747400


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2827 times:

Quoting jbirdav8r (Reply 10):
We all use our individual brainpower to choose our own personal favored candidate.

But that's just it: Some people unplug their brains and just start voting.

Quoting jbirdav8r (Reply 10):
Are you suggesting we send all Southerners to gulags or something?

How about removing all religion from politics? Right-wingers hate government regulating every corner of our lives, so why not this?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinemke717spotter From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

Quoting IllinoisMan (Thread starter):
Only 12-14% believe that he's a Christian?! Really? Are we at a point in Mississippi and Alabama where's its not really what you believe, but its what you want to believe?

Exactly who is stunned by this? I'm pretty sure Mississippi and Alabama rank as some of the poorest states in terms of wealth and their educational system. I consider myself a moderate Republican, but unless you have been living in a cave the past 4 years it has been obvious the Republicans in these deep southern states live in some alternate fact free universe. In regards to these polling numbers I think it might be fair to play the race card...



Will you watch the Cleveland Browns and the Detroit Lions on Sunday? Only if coach Eric Mangini resigned after a loss.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2801 times:

Quoting NW747400 (Reply 13):

I don't get that from the article. I think it would be reasonable to think that some might not vote for him because they believe he is Muslim but that is entirely different than saying he is unfit for office.

Judging someone based on their private religious beliefs is WRONG.

This would come out very differently if people thought he were secretly a Jew. But it's OK to rag on Muslims these days. That sort of vilification leads to holocausts and "ethnic cleansings" and I do not have to tolerate it.


User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13148 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2704 times:

Those with beliefs that President Obama is not a Christian but a Muslim, are almost always white suggesting that racism is more of a factor but using faith beliefs as a cover.

User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2739 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2685 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 4):
Quote:ARTICLE VI: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

You misunderstand or intentionally misapply the intent of this. Article VI does not apply to the states or to the people. It applies to the federal government so that they shall not literally apply a "test" or "oath" to run for office.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6):
Believing that the President is a Muslim and that this makes him unfit for office (which is the implication and let's not pretend it isn't) is to deny the very Constitution itself.

Wrong again. As a citizen there is nothing that we cannot apply when it comes to our vote.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
No, it's a pity that politicians fear churches and that the legal system cannot be used to forcibly remove churches from politics. It is what was intended by the first amendment and it has been completely circumvented by Big Money Religion.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
Judging someone based on their private religious beliefs is WRONG.

Why? It can go along way in telling what they might do in office. There where plenty who judged Bush on his beliefs. What about all the rabid rantings against Santorum? Religious Tests?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
I have no tolerance for intolerance
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
and I do not have to tolerate it.

Which makes you the same as the very people you are railing against.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2684 times:

Quoting jbirdav8r (Reply 9):
I don't necessarily find it "un-American." One of the great things about America, in my opinion, is that we are free to vote for or against any political candidate for any reason we might choose...regardless of whether or not someone else might think it silly. We all use our individual brainpower to choose our own personal favored candidate.

The problem is that ever since 9/11 anyone who is not white and doesn't have an American surname is considered suspicious. And unless that person ranks with the GOP, then that person is often unfit to even be American. To this day, the birther movement is still active even after Hawaii released his birth certificate. Not only that, since he has the middle name "Hussein" and a last name "Obama" (which people quickly assume it means Muslim from Africa), they think he's sympathetic with terrorists and/or linked with them.

Every time I travel to the states, specifically Southern states, I go with my passport. It is the only way I can prove my citizenship. Having Spanish surnames, I sometimes think I might be detained for being "an illegal immigrant". I'm not white, not born/raised in the states, and I'm not your typical Christian either.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
Does it really matter if stupid rednecks don't vote for him because they think he's a Muslim or because he's black?

It does. That's discrimination. Their only loophole is that absolutely no one will know where they put the X on the ballot (if they put it). The vote (for an incumbent president) has to be solely based on:
1. The job he's done so far
2. If he does not share most of your ideals

And you want to know what the ironic part is? These people yell foul if you call them rednecks on the grounds that that is racist.

People here need to learn how to vote. Being a Democrat, if I could vote, I would judge both candidates and would be willing to cross party lines if the opponent does a better job of convincing me. Right now, Romney WAS likable at first, but ever since he's gone WAY down. Do I care if he's Mormon? No. As long as his religion doesn't dictate my way of life, I couldn't care less if he was Muslim, atheist, Buddhist, etc. But if I thought he was the better candidate (in every aspect), why shouldn't I give Romney my vote?



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2675 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):
Why do we care what religion any politician is? Show me where in the Constitution that every politician HAS to be Christian or that the government endorses Christianity of some sort.

Most of them have been, and its a Toss up on whether that streak ends in November.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6):
Believing that the President is a Muslim and that this makes him unfit for office (which is the implication and let's not pretend it isn't) is to deny the very Constitution itself.

First of all these people are idiots and I bet they couldn't find their state on a map of the US.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
It is not un-American to know what religion a politician practices. However, to vote for a politician, or against a politician, based only on what religion he or she practices is un-American IMHO.

It's done though as Windy95 said it can be used against you by voters and it was a big reason Bush got re-elected in 2004 as he made gay marriage a huge issue (that wasn't the only reason but it was one them). I would bet that if Chris Christie ran and no doubt would be a solid GOP candidate, his weight would hurt him with voters. It's a sad fact about humans is that we are shallow and subconsciously like attractive people more.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Obama rarely speaks about his religion and doesn't use it as a political tool.

He keeps his mouth shut because I bet he thinks the whole thing is a piece on nonsense, He probably is the first atheist president he will just never admit it.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
Does it really matter if stupid rednecks don't vote for him because they think he's a Muslim or because he's black?

Lets be real its because he is black that these people don't like him, now that's not why everyone doesn't like him. People in these state know that saying you don't like black people is not good so they just make another excuse to not like him.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
Right now, Romney WAS likable at first, but ever since he's gone WAY down. Do I care if he's Mormon?

I actually think Romney would govern pretty well on how he thinks and he is centre right initially. However what I fear and think will happen is he will be a puppet a much more right wing congress than he is.

The same cannot be said about Obama he (probably to his detriment) was to eager to compromise and probably could have been Nancy Pelosi's puppet a bit more as it would have lead to more centrist compromises which is where most people are.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2653 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 4):
I consider these people to be un-American, anti-American, disloyal to the Constitution and the Republic that it defines, and a danger to national security and the security of democracy itself. It's a pity that nothing can be done about it.

Doc, you need to remember that the Constitution restrains the government. It does not restrain the people. Folks can, and will, use a religious test when voting for someone. It's that simple. I don't see it any different than voting for someone who is pro-abortion vs. someone who is pro-life. You are voting for someone whose beliefs, political and non-political, are closest to yours.

As for me, I could give a rat's ass if the guy worships mice from Mars; if his political beliefs are aligned with mine, he may get my vote. And, to be clear, Obama will not get my vote because his political beliefs are nowhere near mine and Romney will get my vote because his politically beliefs closely match mine.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
I do, but only because he seems to want to make a deal of it.

The media and the Democratic Party are making a big deal about it. He responds. My guess is that he'd be just as happy not talking about it.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
I have no tolerance for intolerance.

So, you are intolerant.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
The problem is that ever since 9/11 anyone who is not white and doesn't have an American surname is considered suspicious.

And, that's why Barack Obama got elected??? Because we are suspicious of foreign sounding names?

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
It does. That's discrimination

You do realize everyone discriminates when they vote. We discriminate based on political beliefs. Some discriminate on religion, and yes, some discriminate on race. But, it is the right of the elector to discriminate based on whatever factor he wants, whether it's rational or not. They say Kennedy won because he was better on camera than Nixon.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
Most of them have been, and its a Toss up on whether that streak ends in November.

So, which one do you think is not a Christian?

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
Lets be real its because he is black that these people don't like him, now that's not why everyone doesn't like him.

Why is it that folks can not accept the fact that the dislike of Mr. Obama is largely based on his policies and not on his race? Yes, there are some folks out there that vote with eyes and not their heads...but they are in the minority...otherwise Mr. Obama would not have been elected in the first place.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2634 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
The problem is that ever since 9/11 anyone who is not white and doesn't have an American surname is considered suspicious.

And, that's why Barack Obama got elected??? Because we are suspicious of foreign sounding names?

No. He won because 8 years of Republican leadership were more than enough and he offered an alternative. Had the 8 years the GOP was in power were good years (as in good economic growth, unemployment less than 4%, etc.) , you can bet McCain would have won the elections or at least narrow the gap from Obama's 365 electoral votes. But Obama's candidacy has never been without controversy and up to this day people still believe in that. It took Hawaii's release of his long-form birth certificate to convince many that he was a natural born US citizen with Kenyan ancestry.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
It does. That's discrimination

You do realize everyone discriminates when they vote. We discriminate based on political beliefs.

And that's why we vote (emphasis added). But to vote based on religious beliefs or race is plain wrong. Race and religion doesn't define a person's ability to lead effectively (as long as he doesn't use race or religion as an excuse for his policies). Obama might be African American, but he has not governed solely for that community. He's a Christian and yet he has demonstrated tolerance for those who don't share his beliefs. The GOP today has yet to prove that to me and the poll released confirms that people still harbor a hatred (or at least resent) having a leader that is:
1. Not white
2. Of Kenyan ancestry
3. Tolerant of other beliefs and willing to separate religious beliefs from the government.

I wonder, had Obama been named Steve Michael Obama, would people think he's Muslim?



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineronglimeng From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 626 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2634 times:

Quoting danielmyatt (Reply 2):
... to think of it, our PM has to be Church of England (Protestant)

I believe you are wrong there, it is the Monarch who has to be C of E (Defender of the Faith, etc,etc). This latter has implications for Canada as indirectly our Head of State thus has to be C of E too.

All this talk of politicians' religion is mostly eyewash. A really religious person probably wouldn't bother with politics, they'd probably be insufferable if they did anyway. I think most politicians pack religion as part of their image just as they do the attractive, supportive wife and 2 children.

As long as a politician doesn't get too gungho about his "faith", he shouldn't have too much trouble with the electorate.


User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7593 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2613 times:

But who really knows for sure he's not a closet muslim, his father was and he did go to school in Indonesia, both those facts are pretty good pointers for folks who believe Obama is muslim. Lets face facts if he was a practicing muslim there is no way in hell he would get elected.

User currently offlineNW747400 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 329 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2608 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 17):
Why? It can go along way in telling what they might do in office. There where plenty who judged Bush on his beliefs. What about all the rabid rantings against Santorum? Religious Tests?

Absolutely. A person's religious beliefs can say a lot about what values they hold most dear. Because of this a person's religion CAN say something about how they would govern and conduct themselves in office. I'm supposed to vote for who best represents me and someone who is the same religion as I am more times than not represents my beliefs better than someone of a different religion. I'm not saying I would never vote for someone of a different religion or that religion should necessarily be the deciding factor, but I am saying that pretending that a person's religion has no effect on how they govern is naive.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
He keeps his mouth shut because I bet he thinks the whole thing is a piece on nonsense, He probably is the first atheist president he will just never admit it.

That is what I think. I think he is an atheist/agnostic but he knows that he could never get elected if he acknowledged that fact.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
So, you are intolerant.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that saw the irony in that statement!

NW747400


User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2123 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2654 times:

Quoting IllinoisMan (Thread starter):

Only 12-14% believe that he's a Christian?! Really? Are we at a point in Mississippi and Alabama where's its not really what you believe, but its what you want to believe?

There's a silver lining about that news.   It implies that a Muslim president in America may not be as far off the line as people may think.

You'd think that it would be all but impossible for a Muslim to be elected president in America, right? Because the voters would never accept it? Well for 90% of the people in the poll, this scenario is already reality.   For all intents and purposes, they already live in a United States with a Muslim president - and the world hasn't ended, they still go about their daily lifes and bicker not much more than usually. Good news for religious tolerance in America, eh?  



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2739 posts, RR: 8
Reply 26, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2641 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
even after Hawaii released his birth certificate
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 21):
took Hawaii's release of his long-form birth certificate to convince many

Sorry but that never happened. Hawaii did not release the original long form. Obama released a alleged copy of it.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
Lets be real its because he is black that these people don't like him, now that's not why everyone doesn't like him. People in these state know that saying you don't like black people is not good so they just make another excuse to not like him.

Let's be real you have no clue to what you are talking about and are just using the usual leftist race baiting talking point. Why did white people not like the Clinton's? Why would I never vote for any leftist? Suggesting that it is skin color and not the politics is pure BS politics or ignorance.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 27, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2652 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 21):
He won because 8 years of Republican leadership were more than enough and he offered an alternative.

That is why the other party normally gets elected. The people are fed up with the party or person currently in office. But, that doesn't square with the narrative, does it? The conventional wisdom says that Americans, especially those in the deep south are racists and xenophobes, yet Obama was still elected with a resounding majority. My point is that Mr. Obama couldn't have been elected without capturing a large percentage of those who currently being called racists.

Quoting Rara (Reply 25):

I like your perspective.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 21):
Obama might be African American, but he has not governed solely for that community.

I'll argue that the entire Democratic Party has failed to govern in a way that supports that community. But, that's a different thread.


Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 21):
It took Hawaii's release of his long-form birth certificate to convince many that he was a natural born US citizen with Kenyan ancestry.

I'm waiting to see which major news outlet starts running stories about folks who believe that he was born abroad. I'm guessing we'll see the stories pop up around the convention and then really start pouring in during October.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 28, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2628 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 26):
Obama released a alleged copy of it.

And, according to Snopes, it is real.

Quoting mke717spotter (Reply 14):
I'm pretty sure Mississippi and Alabama rank as some of the poorest states in terms of wealth and their educational system.

Their private education system is great. This is the problem come November: The right wants to privatized everything. Like schools. Those of us that can not afford private schools will end up with educations similar or worse than those of Mississippi and Alabama.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 17):
It applies to the federal government so that they shall not literally apply a "test" or "oath" to run for office.

So, why does it matter for Obama and Romney what religion they practice?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 29, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2626 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 26):
Why would I never vote for any leftist?

That's because there aren't any actual "leftists" in the running, or none with any hopes of getting more than maybe 1% of the vote.  



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 30, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2615 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
Lets be real its because he is black that these people don't like him,

No, they just believe Øbama is a lying about his religion. I actually like his black African half, it's the white European socialist half I can't stand.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):

And, according to Snopes, it is real.

When the USSC get's the original then I'll believe it.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 23):
But who really knows for sure he's not a closet muslim, his father was and he did go to school in Indonesia, both those facts are pretty good pointers for folks who believe Obama is muslim.

Some who knew him in Indonesian said he was a studying fool (ages 6-10) when it came to the Koran.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 31, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2597 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 30):
When the USSC get's the original then I'll believe it.

First, the birthers demanded the birth certificate, then they demanded a different form of it, now you demand an examination by the Supreme Court. Do you really think that anyone with the authority to stop Obama's bid for the presidency wouldn't have done so if any of the doubts were based on facts?



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 32, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2590 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 30):
Some who knew him in Indonesian said he was a studying fool (ages 6-10) when it came to the Koran.

So. I studied The Bible, and at best, I'm a non-practicing, Catholic Church (because the kids are in the school) going, Greek Orthodox Christian. In other words, the Bible study I dealt with (and endured) did not make me a Bible thumping Christian.

I've also read The Koran (Quoran?). Does that make me a closet Muslim?



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 33, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2589 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 31):

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 30):
When the USSC get's the original then I'll believe it.

First, the birthers demanded the birth certificate, then they demanded a different form of it, now you demand an examination by the Supreme Court. Do you really think that anyone with the authority to stop Obama's bid for the presidency wouldn't have done so if any of the doubts were based on facts?

They want a holy sign that says the certificate is real. They're most likely waiting for an angel to drop from the sky bearing a message from God confirming or denying the authenticity, and even then that might not be enough.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 32):
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 30):
Some who knew him in Indonesian said he was a studying fool (ages 6-10) when it came to the Koran.

So. I studied The Bible, and at best, I'm a non-practicing, Catholic Church (because the kids are in the school) going, Greek Orthodox Christian. In other words, the Bible study I dealt with (and endured) did not make me a Bible thumping Christian.

I've also read The Koran (Quoran?). Does that make me a closet Muslim?

GASP! I'm a closet Muslim too...and a closet Jew...and a closet Buddhist...and a closet Hinduist...and a closet Wiccan...



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 34, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2567 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 33):
They're most likely waiting for an angel to drop from the sky bearing a message from God confirming or denying the authenticity, and even then that might not be enough.

Well, the things I read about Jesus in the Bible don't exactly adhere to Republican standards - turn the other cheek vs. castle laws, for example. So any such angel would of course be of doubtful provenance.  

[Edited 2012-04-26 10:18:48]


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8344 posts, RR: 9
Reply 35, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2550 times:

You're taling about Mississippi. Anything is possible there, especially when discussing people of color.

And, let's face it, the Bubba Factor that fills Mississippi and other Southern states will never go away. Sort of like their family trees not forking.

Quoting danielmyatt (Reply 2):
It is shocking how a community can feel that much hate for a person, and be so wrong about it at the same time without any factual basis whatsoever.

White Bubbas in the South are so ingrained in hate that I'm past being shocked by them. Just look at the KKK and the history of hate

Quoting tugger (Reply 3):
This is probably the biggest problem going on in the USA lately.

Hate plus the explosive growth of gun "ownership" in the country. We are moving to an environment of open carry - just like people did back of the days of Cowboys & Indians. "Strapping on leather". How long before people want to see who is the fastest draw in town? And how easy is it going to be for hot hots like Zimmerman to strap on leather and go out to "protect" the neighborhood?

Quoting windy95 (Reply 26):
Obama released a alleged copy of it.

Oooops! You're sounding like a Birther.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 26):
Why would I never vote for any leftist?

A "leftist"? Just like the other side of the political coin the definition of "leftist programs" change over time.

Years ago Huey Long in Louisiana got the conservatives going into horrid spasms with a horrid leftist program he was bringing in.

The program that so enraged the right?

Free textbooks in high schools.

So maybe one day you will vote for someone who is not hard right because you believe they are the better choice.

Boy, that is a real leftist/communists program that can destroy the country.  


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 36, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2530 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 35):
Boy, that is a real leftist/communists program that can destroy the country.

Just take Planned Parenthood as an example. The three to four hundred millions that it receives from the government are a "funding issue" to republicans - yet they vehemently oppose so-called millionnaire taxes which would bring in billions because they are allegedly not even worth the effort.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 37, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2531 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 30):

When the USSC get's the original then I'll believe it.

They did. In 2008. And they cleared it. His mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth, so whether he was born in Hawaii, Memphis, Tora Bora, or Olympus Mons on Mars, he's American.

And that is a FACT. A fact is something that is not subject to debate.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
So, you are intolerant.

If that's intolerance, then damn right. And I'd never hurt anyone, but if you punch me in the face, I'll kick your butt. Does that make me violent? If so, then damn right.

I don't have to "tolerate" racism, homophobia, or other forms of intolerance. I also don't have to "tolerate" the KKK or the Nazi Party. If that makes me "intolerant," then so be it.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
You do realize everyone discriminates when they vote. We discriminate based on political beliefs.

No. Political beliefs are a chosen behavior. That is not "discrimination." Public religious behavior is chosen. The accusations that he is a "Muslim" are similar to the Nazi use of "Jew." It is something that cannot be erased by any religious conversion any more than a Jew converting to Christianity in Nazi Germany would have spared him from the gas chambers. To the people accusing him of being a "Muslim," it is an inherent property of his identity. I guarantee you that precisely 0.0% of people accusing him of being "Muslim" would change their opinion if he publicly converted to Catholocism.

In those cases, it is most certainly "prejudice."


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 38, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2511 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
So, you are intolerant.
Quoting NW747400 (Reply 24):
I'm glad I'm not the only one that saw the irony in that statement!

There is no irony in intolerance towards the intolerant.

Quoting Karl Popper:
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

If you don't fight intolerance and refute those who teach it, you will lose your freedom.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15795 posts, RR: 27
Reply 39, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2460 times:

Quoting mke717spotter (Reply 14):
I'm pretty sure Mississippi and Alabama rank as some of the poorest states in terms of wealth and their educational system.

It's no surprise at all. It seems like every other week there is another study showing that Southerners are poor and stupid.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 13):
How about removing all religion from politics? Right-wingers hate government regulating every corner of our lives, so why not this?

You can't suggest telling people what they can and cannot consider when voting. Part of having freedom is having the freedom to be a dumbass.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
People in these state know that saying you don't like black people is not good so they just make another excuse to not like him.

The number of Confederate flags they fly tends to say otherwise. Muslims are a more acceptable target, but being racist isn't too big of a deal down there.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 18):
2. If he does not share most of your ideals

What if your ideals are largely based on your religion?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 40, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2454 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 39):
You can't suggest telling people what they can and cannot consider when voting.

No, but making it an issue for political debate is another story. If people want to vote a strict Catholic ticket, fine. I think that is stupid, but whatever. When candidates and/or their supporters start screaming "That candiate is worthless because s/he is *fill in the sect*" is wrong, IMO.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
His mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth, so whether he was born in Hawaii, Memphis, Tora Bora, or Olympus Mons on Mars, he's American.

Notice that when this argument is made about McCain, not a peep out of the right. He was born on Panamanian soil. To an American mother.

cue crickets from the right...



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 41, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2453 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
I don't have to "tolerate" racism, homophobia, or other forms of intolerance. I also don't have to "tolerate" the KKK or the Nazi Party. If that makes me "intolerant," then so be it.

No, neither you nor I have to tolerate these behaviours. But, we do have to tolerate their right to exist and spew their hate. That is the country we live in.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
No. Political beliefs are a chosen behavior. That is not "discrimination."

Of course it's discrimination. If I refuse to vote for a 2nd Amendment advocate because of his stance on the 2nd Amendment, I am discriminating against him (and his ilk).



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 42, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2433 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 41):
But, we do have to tolerate their right to exist and spew their hate.

You may have to tolerate their right, but you certainly don't have to tolerate their actions - it is well within your rights to refute them, expose their lies and decry their hatred at every step.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21730 posts, RR: 55
Reply 43, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2422 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 17):
You misunderstand or intentionally misapply the intent of this. Article VI does not apply to the states or to the people.

It certainly does.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Emphasis is mine. How can you interpret that as not applying to the states when the states are specifically mentioned?

And the Constitution doesn't apply to the people - it only applies to how the federal and state governments may or may not operate.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 17):
It applies to the federal government so that they shall not literally apply a "test" or "oath" to run for office.

Read it again. It explicitly states that there shall be an oath applied to those who hold office. And as far as a literal test being applied, you couldn't be more wrong. It's not talking about getting out a pencil and paper and answering questions to determine how much about a particular religion they know.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
Doc, you need to remember that the Constitution restrains the government. It does not restrain the people. Folks can, and will, use a religious test when voting for someone.

They can, but it is clearly against the spirit of the Constitution to do so, and deserves to be called out as such.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 27):
The conventional wisdom says that Americans, especially those in the deep south are racists and xenophobes, yet Obama was still elected with a resounding majority. My point is that Mr. Obama couldn't have been elected without capturing a large percentage of those who currently being called racists.

Because of the electoral college system, you can't really make that claim. Obama didn't win any of the deep south states. So whatever support he had there was electorally irrelevant.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineNW747400 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 329 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 2387 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 42):

That's fine. You are well within your rights to do that just don't feed me a bunch of BS about how tolerant and open minded you are. You are only tolerant and open minded of view points that you deem acceptable. On a side note I took a logic and reasoning course four semesters back and the professor seemed to take joy in exposing the logical fallacy behind claiming to be tolerant while in actuality being what he called "selectively tolerant."

NW747400


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21730 posts, RR: 55
Reply 45, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2374 times:

Quoting NW747400 (Reply 44):
You are well within your rights to do that just don't feed me a bunch of BS about how tolerant and open minded you are.

Nothing Aloges said implied any intolerance whatsoever. Tolerance does not mean agreement.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8870 posts, RR: 24
Reply 46, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2372 times:

Quoting NW747400 (Reply 44):
You are only tolerant and open minded of view points that you deem acceptable.

No surprise. Here is a Pew Research report from last month that shows that Liberals (who call themselves tolerant and conservatives as intolerant) are actually far more intolerant of opinions different from their own, at least on social networking sites (see graph on page 6)

http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//...orts/2012/PIP_SNS_and_politics.pdf



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 47, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2357 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
Why is it that folks can not accept the fact that the dislike of Mr. Obama is largely based on his policies and not on his race? Yes, there are some folks out there that vote with eyes and not their heads...but they are in the minority...otherwise Mr. Obama would not have been elected in the first place.
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
So, which one do you think is not a Christian?

I think Obama is a secret non-believer and padering to make everyone believe otherwise.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 26):
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
Lets be real its because he is black that these people don't like him, now that's not why everyone doesn't like him. People in these state know that saying you don't like black people is not good so they just make another excuse to not like him.

Let's be real you have no clue to what you are talking about and are just using the usual leftist race baiting talking point. Why did white people not like the Clinton's? Why would I never vote for any leftist? Suggesting that it is skin color and not the politics is pure BS politics or ignorance.

I'm not saying there are not people who dislike Obama because of his policies but if you do then blatantly state that. When you say you don't like him because he is a Muslim then that is a form of prejudice.

I think that a good portion of the people in the states mention claim he is a Muslim for no rational reason and I may be speculating but I think that has something to do with skin colour. Other presidents have been hated this one has received 400 times more threats against him, that is more than just having bad policies.
There is something motivating the hatred of him more than previous presidents and I think that is his skin colour.

link below.
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo...erwhelmed-by-increased-threats.php



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21730 posts, RR: 55
Reply 48, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2341 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):
I think that a good portion of the people in the states mention claim he is a Muslim for no rational reason and I may be speculating but I think that has something to do with skin colour.

I'd tend to agree, but in a sort of roundabout way. It's a lot easier to be seen disliking someone because they're a Muslim than it is to be seen disliking someone because they're black these days. After all, Muslims aren't a race, so you're not being racist, and there is a recent history of Muslims doing harm to the country.

So if you're one of those people looking for an irrational reason to really hate Obama, the "fact" that he's a Muslim works pretty damn well.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineNW747400 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 329 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2326 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 45):

I did not mean to say Aloges was intolerant I was referring to Doc's reply in which he admits to being intolerant. Also I am not claiming to have a problem with intolerance (for example I don't tolerate racism). I just wanted to expose the fallacy behind claiming to be "tolerant" while in reality just tolerating that with which you agree. I for one don't have a problem with intolerance (again I don't tolerate racism) what I do have a problem with is people who have a superiority complex based on their own perceived level of "tolerance" when in fact they do not tolerate any viewpoints they deem unacceptable. I have had many a discussions in which I have been told that what I believe cannot be tolerated because it is not tolerant enough. They then immediately take an arrogant tone bragging about how tolerant they are when in reality they just said my viewpoint should not be tolerated. If you're intolerant that's fine all that I ask is that you be honest about it and give up claiming some moral high ground based on your "tolerance."

NW747400


User currently onlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 50, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2294 times:

Frankly I don't care to get involved in this because no one wins when arguing on the internet but so far in this thread I see that I am the only person who has ever actually lived in Mississippi (Starkville, Olive Branch, and Aberdeen) and Alabama (Athens, where I grew up).

Yes, I rise in defense of the "Bubbas" because even though I was born in Connecticut and I'm a Southern transplant (we moved to Alabama in 1987 when I was three), having gone to college at Mississippi State University I have met a lot of damn fine people who are Mississippians and they are good people. Yes, I think it's silly that that many people in a poll gave answers that can be construed to mean that they think Obama is a Muslim. But there's a lot of bigotry being displayed with stupid pride in this thread and it's not people from Alabama or Mississippi who are proudly flaunting it.

And news flash for the people who want to pull the race card--Mississippi is 1/3 black and not all of those blacks are Democrats.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):

I think Obama is a secret non-believer and pandering to make everyone believe otherwise.

I think this might be true.

But it really doesn't matter, because whether a believer is genuinely a Christian or merely proclaims to be one is a personal matter of the heart and really none of our business because no one can honestly know whether someone else is a Christian or not (although by your fruits they will know you, etc).


User currently offlineROSWELL41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 800 posts, RR: 1
Reply 51, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 2265 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 40):
Notice that when this argument is made about McCain, not a peep out of the right. He was born on Panamanian soil. To an American mother.

cue crickets from the right...

Actually on that point, respectfully, you are totally (partially) incorrect. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone (which was entirely inside the nation of Panama) which was an unorganized U.S. territory from 1903 to 1979. Thus, McCain was born on U.S. soil. Congress specifically addressed this issue in 1937 stating that anyone born in the canal zone (from its inception) with one U.S. parent is a U.S. citizen. He was also born to two parents who were U.S. citizens and his family was there in the service of the U.S. military. All of these factors make his eligibility for President never in question.

[Edited 2012-04-26 21:46:26]

User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 52, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 46):
Liberals (who call themselves tolerant and conservatives as intolerant)

It would be such an improvement if everyone realised that dividing people into just these two categories is counterproductive.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 53, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 2236 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 46):
are actually far more intolerant of opinions different from their own, at least on social networking sites

And we all know you can trust every letter of every word ever written on every social networking site...



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 54, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 2230 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 53):
And we all know you can trust every letter of every word ever written on every social networking site...

   It is like judging the state of society from the comments on YouTube.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3070 posts, RR: 5
Reply 55, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 2223 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 50):
Yes, I think it's silly that that many people in a poll gave answers that can be construed to mean that they think Obama is a Muslim.

From the linked article:
"The PPP poll used automated telephone interviews on March 10-11 to survey 1,256 likely Republican voters in Mississippi and Alabama. Such surveys are not considered as reliable as live interviews because they are automated and cannot make use of mobile telephone numbers. The poll sampling error for Mississippi is 3.8% and for Alabama is 4%".

I've been wondering how the L. A. Times identified 1,256 "likely" Republican voters in Mississippi and Alabama. What exactly would make one a "likely" Republican voter? Could it possibly have been the presence an anti-Obama bumper sticker on their cars?

[Edited 2012-04-26 23:16:29]


Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 56, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2169 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 48):
I'd tend to agree, but in a sort of roundabout way. It's a lot easier to be seen disliking someone because they're a Muslim than it is to be seen disliking someone because they're black these days. After all, Muslims aren't a race, so you're not being racist, and there is a recent history of Muslims doing harm to the country.

It is still prejudice, is it really any better to attack someone for their alleged faith vs their skin colour??



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 57, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2144 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
They did. In 2008. And they cleared it. His mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth, so whether he was born in Hawaii, Memphis, Tora Bora, or Olympus Mons on Mars, he's American.

Got a source for that? I never heard that the USSC has even acknowledged it let alone 'cleared it'

Quoting seb146 (Reply 40):
Notice that when this argument is made about McCain, not a peep out of the right. He was born on Panamanian soil. To an American mother.

The issue for both McCain and Øbama is whether they are 'natural born citizens' Congress has the authority to determine who becomes a citizen but cannot change the Constitutional requirement for a federal office without an ammendment.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13148 posts, RR: 15
Reply 58, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2143 times:

As I said earlier, many who believe Pres. Obama is of the Muslim faith, are probably using that to cover their racism. That belief isn't just found in the 'deep South' but from California to New York albeit at lower levels. I also think some other factors further encourage questions about his beliefs.

Obama was born in Hawaii, only a state for a few years, to a white, pretty much at that time single mother, with a Black father.

His father was of foreign birth and citizenship, a person of Black African birth, has many relatives that are not USA citizens.

That he has a white mother and a Black father, that is of mixed race, is something that was illegal in some USA states only a few years around the time of his birth later and then and now very socially unacceptable for many.

Both of his parents are dead and died long before he became President. If his mom were still alive, I bet there would be a lot less or none of this 'birther' talk.

He spent a number of years of his youth outside the USA in a Muslim dominate country, and may have gone to a school where that faith was part of the curriculum.

He lived for a number or years as a teen and HS age in Hawaii, at a private and diverse school, a place very different from the rest of America.

He apparently was not active in any faith until his young adulthood, like many college educated young adults.

He attended a urban, Black, politically liberal Church in Chicago and many see that and not part of their faith. That was further compounded by some of the challenging opinions in the recorded preachings of Rev. Wright. Some see his attendance at that church more about his political ambitions rather than his true belief in faith.

Let us not forget that many, and not just in the South, do not see Catholics, Jews, of 'liberal' Protestant churches (ie; have women ministers, diverse, accept GLTB members), or of the Mormon/LDS faith and of course the Muslim faith as real 'Americans'. Democrat Presidential candidate Al Smith in 1924, a Catholic, lost as many saw due to his faith. Kennedy came close to losing in part due to his Catholic faith. We seen now problems with Romney due to his LDS/Mormon faith.

I would love to see a time when a faith belief would not be a factor in who someone elects, but that may take more generations to get past that.


User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 59, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 2128 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 58):

I would also like to add that having studied in Indonesia would be considered a plus for him. How many people can say they've studied abroad?



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21730 posts, RR: 55
Reply 60, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2076 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 56):
It is still prejudice, is it really any better to attack someone for their alleged faith vs their skin colour??

In my mind? Not really. In the minds of those who believe he's a Muslim? Yeah, I'd bet they think of it that way. Or at least they see it as less controversial.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 61, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week ago) and read 2024 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 40):

Notice that when this argument is made about McCain, not a peep out of the right. He was born on Panamanian soil. To an American mother.

And American father. But I also thought he was born on a U.S. Base. Maybe I'm wrong. Either way, he wasn't born in the US (he will tell you himself if you ask) and yet he is eligible.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 41):

Of course it's discrimination. If I refuse to vote for a 2nd Amendment advocate because of his stance on the 2nd Amendment, I am discriminating against him (and his ilk).

No, that is not discrimination. That is disagreement.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 41):
No, neither you nor I have to tolerate these behaviours. But, we do have to tolerate their right to exist and spew their hate. That is the country we live in.

Unfortunately, our country does not have a history of a genocide of which we are ashamed like Germany. In Germany, hate speech is illegal. They learned through bitter experience that there are certain forms of speech and political ideology that are truly harmful. The same is true in the UK, although they didn't have concentration camps. Someone like Fred Phelps cannot enter the UK.

Quoting NW747400 (Reply 44):
That's fine. You are well within your rights to do that just don't feed me a bunch of BS about how tolerant and open minded you are.

The first line of an intolerant despot is to decry others for being intolerant of his intolerance. It makes as much sense as whining that "Johnny hit me back!"

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):
I think Obama is a secret non-believer and padering to make everyone believe otherwise.

Now THAT, I'm willing to believe. Or some sort of agnostic.

Quoting NW747400 (Reply 49):


I did not mean to say Aloges was intolerant I was referring to Doc's reply in which he admits to being intolerant.

I did not. I said that if your defintion of "intolerance" is that I think that people shouldn't be intolerant, then I can only agree. The problem is that your definition is incorrect.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 57):

Got a source for that?

For Obama's birth certificate? I'm not going to even bother.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 59):


I would also like to add that having studied in Indonesia would be considered a plus for him. How many people can say they've studied abroad?

In the mind of many Republican voters, having ever left the country for any reason than being in the Service is a negative.


User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 62, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1994 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
Or some sort of agnostic.

I'll buy that.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
Unfortunately, our country does not have a history of a genocide of which we are ashamed like Germany

Really? Unfortunately? Those nations that outlaw hate speech or hate groups haven't eliminated those groups, they've driven them underground. Here, we allow them to speak...and expose their idiocy. Yes, some people may be swayed, but, by and large, those groups will lose any political power they may have had. As the saying goes: sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
For Obama's birth certificate? I'm not going to even bother.

Actually, I believe he's looking for a source to the USSC validating the certificate. I seem to recall something about it, but I don't think it had to do with the birth certificate, per se.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently onlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 63, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1973 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 54):
It is like judging the state of society from the comments on YouTube.

If aliens came to earth and did that they would kill us all without remorse.


User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 64, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1941 times:

Quoting ROSWELL41 (Reply 51):
Thus, McCain was born on U.S. soil. Congress specifically addressed this issue in 1937 stating that anyone born in the canal zone (from its inception) with one U.S. parent is a U.S. citizen. He was also born to two parents who were U.S. citizens and his family was there in the service of the U.S. military. All of these factors make his eligibility for President never in question.

Ah, but having been born in a place that was already a state should raise no doubts over being born in a territory under US jurisdiction. That's the irony of it all.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8344 posts, RR: 9
Reply 65, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1934 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
Unfortunately, our country does not have a history of a genocide of which we are ashamed like Germany.

We might not have a history that qualifies as genocide, but the horrid bases towards non-whites by groups like the KKK is a pretty dark time in our country's history. Between out history of slavery and lynching I believe we are living in our glass McMansions, trying to forget the past.


User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13148 posts, RR: 15
Reply 66, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1918 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):Unfortunately, our country does not have a history of a genocide of which we are ashamed like Germany.
We might not have a history that qualifies as genocide, but the horrid bases towards non-whites by groups like the KKK is a pretty dark time in our country's history. Between out history of slavery and lynching I believe we are living in our glass McMansions, trying to forget the past.

What about Indian/Native/Pre-European persons throughout the Americas and especially in what came to be the USA ? Millions murdered buy government armed forces, starved, made sick intentionally, herded into 'reservations' which were (and in some ways even today) pretty much like concentration camps.


User currently offlineSSTeve From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 722 posts, RR: 1
Reply 67, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1903 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
But I also thought he was born on a U.S. Base

There were reports that he was born in a hospital outside the canal zone in Colon, and there's not necessarily a local record of his birth. His campaign claimed to have a birth certificate showing birth in a canal zone hospital, but if you're the type to impugn candidates veracity, maybe that's not enough for you. It's enough for me.

In other fun trivia, Mitt Romney's father ran for president (against Nixon in the primaries) despite having been born in Mexico. A quixotic crusade to disenfranchise Romney Sr. would likely have been considered a pretty lousy move then, and given that Obama was actually born in Hawaii, it's an even lousier move now-- to try to disenfranchise him and everyone who voted for him. You lost in '08. Get over it. No more sour grapes.


User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6017 posts, RR: 3
Reply 68, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1874 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 62):
Actually, I believe he's looking for a source to the USSC validating the certificate. I seem to recall something about it, but I don't think it had to do with the birth certificate, per se.

I don't know about the USSC (and how would they be able to do so anyway?), but the state of Hawaii have confirmed repeatedly, that the birth certificates released by Obama matches their own data.


User currently offlineGBLKD From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1847 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
The same is true in the UK, although they didn't have concentration camps.

Sadly Doc that's not true, concentration camps were "invented" by the British during the second Boer War. A shameful policy that many believe gave Hitler the idea for his camps.

As for the title and original direction of this thread I find it incredible that in the year 2012 a powerful first world nation has citizens who put religious persuasion as a primary reason to vote for or against a potential presidential candidate. Surely if church and state are seperated as laid down in your constitution then religion shouldn't mean squat.

The candidate you vote for should really be the one who has the policies you agree with, it should be about who will handle the economy, education, health, defence etc not about if he or she belongs to a particular sect or thumps the bible the hardest. If church and state are seperate and every proposed law has to be debated and voted on then how can your president's private religious beliefs have any bearing on economic policy? The saddest thing here is that if Mr Obama (or any senior American polotician) is actually an athiest admitting it would be political suicide. Why does being athiest or Mormon affect someone's intelligence or ability to make the tough decisions associated with governing a modern first world democracy? I'm sorry but I simply don't get it.

I personally don't give a damn if Mr Cameron is athiest, catholic, CofE, scientologist etc behind closed doors. That's as private and irrelevant as if he plays golf or builds model boats in his spare time. I actually want them to keep thier religion private and tell me how they plan to make my country a better place for my son's future. I want to know that when it comes to the business of governing the country and making important decisions that they are the right ones**


**We're officially in a double dip recession now, maybe he's not called it right but that's a seperate discussion altogether.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 70, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1798 times:

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 69):
Surely if church and state are seperated as laid down in your constitution then religion shouldn't mean squat.

No, people would still vote keeping religion in mind. That is not really an issue. What is an issue is the media has become pushed so far to the right that it is the only source of information for many voters.

I know I am going to get flamed for that, but think about it: Who owns media in the South and rural America? Since Reagan and Clinton made it easier for fewer people to own more media outlets, one messege has been taking over. Any discussion on adding alternate views quickly devolves into "who needs it? you people just hate us" and so forth.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
our country does not have a history of a genocide of which we are ashamed like Germany.

Not genocide on the scale of WWII Germany, but there have been atrocities. Spreading disease throught native camps, kidnapping Chinese and Irish to work on the railroads, herding Asians into camps during WWII. American history is pretty bad when it comes to treatment of minorities.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 71, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1772 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
But I also thought he was born on a U.S. Base.
Quoting SSTeve (Reply 67):
There were reports that he was born in a hospital outside the canal zone in Colon,

The Naval hospital was not yet built in PCZ when McCain was born. He was born at the public hospital in Colon about a kilometer from the base.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 61):
In Germany, hate speech is illegal.

It's a Federal crime in the U.S. too.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 72, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1766 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 71):
It's a Federal crime in the U.S. too.

I believe the speech is protected. It's when the speech results in violence that it becomes a factor.

Hate crimes legislation...another topic for another day.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently onlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 73, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1757 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 72):

Hate crimes legislation

Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.


User currently onlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 74, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1755 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):
American history is pretty bad when it comes to treatment of minorities.

Not when compared to Russia, China, Japan, and Germany.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 75, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1731 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 74):
Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):American history is pretty bad when it comes to treatment of minorities.
Not when compared to Russia, China, Japan, and Germany.

Americans go around acting like nothing even remotely similar has ever happened here. No, not as bad as other countries, but slavery and no rights for others is pretty bad.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 71):
He was born at the public hospital in Colon about a kilometer from the base.

So, he was not born on American soil at all. Period. How is he eligable to be president but Obama, born to an American mother in Hawaii not, according to some?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 76, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1724 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 75):
but Obama, born to an American mother in Hawaii not, according to some?

Some people believe that 'natural born' means two citizen parents and born on US soil. Øbama's father was a British subject at the time and never became a US citizen.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 72):
I believe the speech is protected. It's when the speech results in violence that it becomes a factor.

Hmmm...not sure of all the circumstances but appears Mr. Young starting yelling racial slurs after the fight.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...i?f=/c/a/2012/04/27/SPK01OA9S2.DTL



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineakiss20 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 633 posts, RR: 5
Reply 77, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1718 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 75):
Quoting MD-90 (Reply 74):
Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):American history is pretty bad when it comes to treatment of minorities.
Not when compared to Russia, China, Japan, and Germany.

Americans go around acting like nothing even remotely similar has ever happened here. No, not as bad as other countries, but slavery and no rights for others is pretty bad.

Also Japanese internment in WWII and treatment of native americans, things people seem to forget about...



Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 78, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1706 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 76):
Hmmm...not sure of all the circumstances but appears Mr. Young starting yelling racial slurs after the fight.

Not a lawyer, but my guess is that since the alleged 'hate speech' was directed at an individual and not a group, the charge of harassment can be made. I guess you can generalize, not specify. And, that appears to be a state or possibly local law and not federal.

I guess "You Jews suck" is ok, but "You sir, suck, because you are a Jew" is not.

Hate crime legislation is stupid.

And, because this is A-Net and way too many people get their panties in a wad for no reason: I do not now, nor have ever harbored any ill towards Jews.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):
No, people would still vote keeping religion in mind.

Let's look at it this way; too may folks are uninformed voters. During the primary, they look for the person they think they most identify with. In many cases, this will be someone that shares the same religious beliefs. Or, at least, a religion that they can identify with.

And, so long as that happens, we will continue to have politicians pander to the religious and we will continue to have the media ask stupid questions about a politician's religion.

And, to be sure, we will have politicians attack each other through the use of religion in order to deflect from the current issues on the floor.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6309 posts, RR: 33
Reply 79, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1703 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):
Why do we care what religion any politician is? Show me where in the Constitution that every politician HAS to be Christian or that the government endorses Christianity of some sort.

I agree totally. I wait for the day a poiltician has the courage to refuse to answer such questions. I'll be long dead before it happens but I'll wait.



Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5518 posts, RR: 14
Reply 80, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1701 times:

Quoting IMissPiedmont (Reply 79):

I agree totally. I wait for the day a poiltician has the courage to refuse to answer such questions. I'll be long dead before it happens but I'll wait.

Agreed.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8870 posts, RR: 24
Reply 81, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1695 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 58):
We seen now problems with Romney due to his LDS/Mormon faith.

I know an awful lot of Republicans, and I live in the Deep South. I haven't heard anyone mention Romney's religion as being a problem.

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 69):
As for the title and original direction of this thread I find it incredible that in the year 2012 a powerful first world nation has citizens who put religious persuasion as a primary reason to vote for or against a potential presidential candidate.

Where was that said? All I saw in the OP was a poll that said a lot of people think Obama's a Muslim. It did not say that they would not vote for him because of that, or that they wouldn't vote for him for any other reason.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't think he is a Muslim. But I will go ahead and say that I would not vote for a Muslim unless he declared himself to be effectively an apostate and does not believe in all of Islamic law. I think that way because, the way I see it, Islam is a political system mascarading as a religion, and is based on political duality of the world and its inhabitants (one set of laws for Muslims, and another for everyone else). Any Muslim I would vote for would have to convincingly reject such a system. I would not vote for a Nazi either.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineraffik From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 1717 posts, RR: 4
Reply 82, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1509 times:

Why is it always the religious nuts who do not like him? From what I've read and heard about the people who live in the "Deep South", they are a bunch or racist bigots. I have a friend who lives in North Carolina and she is hates Bush, hates the fact that there is a black president and wants Bush back, despite all of the trouble he got America into.
Obama, certainly from a British perspective, is viewed as a major improvement. The Americans have had some terribly suspect leaders- Clinton, Bush..



Happy -go- lucky kinda guy!
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 83, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1484 times:

Quoting raffik (Reply 82):
and heard about the people who live in the "Deep South", they are a bunch or racist bigots.

That's generalizing a bit. There are plenty of people who are NOT like that. Unfortunately, we only get to hear about those who are.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 84, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1437 times:

Quoting raffik (Reply 82):
From what I've read and heard about the people who live in the "Deep South",

Until you have personally met a large statistical sample from the "Deep South" I would suggest that you follow the old axiom..."It is better to be thought a fool, then open your mouth and remove all doubt". Having lived in MEM and CHO I can tell you I've seen many 'white folk' risking their lives for 'black folk'.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6875 posts, RR: 34
Reply 85, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1420 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6):
Believing that the President is a Muslim and that this makes him unfit for office (which is the implication and let's not pretend it isn't) is to deny the very Constitution itself.

I think Obama's past is very much subject for vetting since it wasn't in the first election. It's reasonable to say that you don't sit in radical jeremiah Wright's church for decades and then play dumb about his anti-white views or grow up Islamic without having some of those beliefs, but this vetting will finally come this year forcefully since it was deliberately ignored the first time around). But his religion or any candidate's religion PER SE, is not the issue.

Irrespective of Obama, I think it is very germane to bring up that Islam IS completely antithetical to the Constitution in its practices and demands. So in that context, I wouldn't vote for nor want an Islamic president regardless of his skin color. Christianity can co-exist with our government; Islam cannot.


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 86, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1415 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 86):
Irrespective of Obama, I think it is very germane to bring up that Islam IS completely antithetical to the Constitution in its practices and demands.
(...)
Christianity can co-exist with our government; Islam cannot.

Why don't you say that to the face of a Muslim serviceman (or woman, of course) risking his life in the American forces? I'd be interested in the result of that discussion.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6875 posts, RR: 34
Reply 87, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1414 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 87):
Why don't you say that to the face of a Muslim serviceman (or woman, of course) risking his life in the American forces? I'd be interested in the result of that discussion.

Taqiyya...nothing more..

Just because they're confused about their faith or don't understand what it calls for doesn't mean I don't understand it.

And we've already had one mass murdering sociopath radical Islamist in Nidal Hasan in our military who snapped. I don't want to take any more chances. Sadly, the rest of the Western world sleeps.


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 88, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1413 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 88):
Taqiyya...nothing more..

How do you know what's on the minds of all Muslims serving in the US military?

Quoting slider (Reply 88):
And we've already had one mass murdering sociopath radical Islamist in Nidal Hasan in our military who snapped.

You have also had numerous mass murdering sociopaths of other or no faiths in your military.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 89, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1416 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 86):
Irrespective of Obama, I think it is very germane to bring up that Islam IS completely antithetical to the Constitution in its practices and demands. So in that context, I wouldn't vote for nor want an Islamic president regardless of his skin color. Christianity can co-exist with our government; Islam cannot.

Have you ever thought about moderate to liberal Muslims? That's stereotyping right there. There might be a president who, while a Muslim or Atheist or Agnostic or Jewish or whatever, will be able to set aside his beliefs and work under the framework of the Constitution. Right now, plenty of Christians in the GOP are not willing to do that: Santorum being perhaps the most notable example. If I recall correctly, the Constitution is not the Bible nor was it created with the Bible in mind.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6875 posts, RR: 34
Reply 90, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1390 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 88):
How do you know what's on the minds of all Muslims serving in the US military?

I don't. But I do know the history of Islam and I'd say that the lessons of nearly 14 centuries are pretty clear to draw some conclusions.

Quoting aloges (Reply 88):
You have also had numerous mass murdering sociopaths of other or no faiths in your military.

This is true. But sociopathic behavior unto itself knows no boundaries. But when a zealot such as Hasan was known and still allowed to pontificate, when the red flags were deliberately ignored out of a sick sense of political correctness in a military establishment that should NEVER espouse such views, that's problematic.

But just as with any religion or way of life, we're all human and we all fail. That's unique to the human condition overall; however, it doesn't mean we can use that as a means of condoning the evil that, more often than not in the world, is perpetrated by followers of Islam. That's my take. Many disagree with it and that's fine.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 89):
Have you ever thought about moderate to liberal Muslims?

Well, without getting too much off track here, I've made my views clear on this before. I believe there are peaceful and moderate practitioners of Islam, but I don't believe Islam itself to be peaceful. Fruthermore, as it exists and has been dictated, it isn't able to really be reformed.

I've asked some of my Muslim friends about it--have some close family friends, fraternity brothers and co-workers too, and there are varying degrees to which this can be broached in an open spirit of just learning about one another's religion or beliefs. But none have an answer when I point out the history of Islam, the idea of abrogation, taqiyya, dhimmitude, jihad, etc. and when they're faced with the truth about their own methodology that many of them didn't even know much less understand. What I really just don't like though is that in today's world, even ASKING the questions brands one as a hater, bigot, islamophobe, blah blah blah.... it tells you a lot about the state of things when you can't even approach the questions that have no answers.


User currently offlineMudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5
Reply 91, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1386 times:

Quoting mke717spotter (Reply 14):
Exactly who is stunned by this? I'm pretty sure Mississippi and Alabama rank as some of the poorest states in terms of wealth and their educational system. I consider myself a moderate Republican, but unless you have been living in a cave the past 4 years it has been obvious the Republicans in these deep southern states live in some alternate fact free universe. In regards to these polling numbers I think it might be fair to play the race card...

Let me just say the I am very disappointed in my fellow Mississippians, but not surprised. We are not all a bunch of uneducated, uncultured, racist, incest loving rednecks, that claim to be Christian on Easter Sunday. I am a Moderate that leans to the right, but I will say that most of the hatred toward Pres. Obama has to do with race, and the belief that he is a Muslim in disguise, although none of them will ever admit to it. I am ashamed to be associated with these people.
I am not a member of the red or blue team, I am a member of the Red, White and Blue team, and I could care less what religion the POTUS is, or what color for that matter, as long as he has our countries best interests at heart.


User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6875 posts, RR: 34
Reply 92, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 1377 times:

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 91):
but I will say that most of the hatred toward Pres. Obama has to do with race

Who's being racial by making this blanket judgment?


User currently offlineGBLKD From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 93, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 1376 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 85):
Christianity can co-exist with our government

Death penalty for a start debunks that statement. Jesus Christ, who Christianity takes it's name from was executed, you think he'd support the needle or old sparky? He lived his life (so we're taught) preaching peace and forgiveness not "string em up!"

Quoting slider (Reply 90):
I've asked some of my Muslim friends about it--have some close family friends, fraternity brothers and co-workers too, and there are varying degrees to which this can be broached in an open spirit of just learning about one another's religion or beliefs. But none have an answer when I point out the history of Islam, the idea of abrogation, taqiyya, dhimmitude, jihad, etc. and when they're faced with the truth about their own methodology that many of them didn't even know much less understand. What I really just don't like though is that in today's world, even ASKING the questions brands one as a hater, bigot, islamophobe, blah blah blah.... it tells you a lot about the state of things when you can't even approach the questions that have no answers.

Every major religion has it's major flaws and it's fair share of lunatics. Christians have been pretty damn violent over the centuries. Crusades? Spanish Inquisition? KKK burning crosses infront of black people's houses?

The fact is that any religion can, will be, and is twisted by extremists. They'd be extremists whatever faith they followed or if they followed no faith at all, the Koran or The Bible are convenient things to hide behind and interperet to suit an indivual or group's way of life.

I grew up with terrorism affecting my country. Do I think all catholics are evil terrorists? NO! do I think that every catholic church has a room stocked with semtex and AK47s? NO!

You may not find any answers re Islam and find those you ask defensive but I've had the same from every "Christian" I've challenged about it's violent history and inconsitancies. I get no answers either.


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 94, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 1373 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 90):
I don't.

So why did you say that a Muslim's service in the US forces is "Taqiyya...nothing more.."?

Quoting slider (Reply 90):
But I do know the history of Islam and I'd say that the lessons of nearly 14 centuries are pretty clear to draw some conclusions.

The history of 20 centuries of Christianity isn't exactly free of zealots and bloodshed. If I were to base my judgement of it on that, I would have to leave the Lutheran church this instant. So why do you condemn one religion in its entirety and let another off the hook over their respective histories?

Quoting slider (Reply 90):
the evil that, more often than not in the world, is perpetrated by followers of Islam

It is perpetrated by power-hungry people who will abuse any possible faith and/or philosophy as a justification for their behaviour. Al-Qaeda, the Lord's Resistance Army, the Irish Republican Army and the Irgun are examples of that.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineATTart From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 95, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 1363 times:




Remember: When someone talks behind your back, it only means you're two steps ahead of them!
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 96, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1347 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 90):
Well, without getting too much off track here, I've made my views clear on this before. I believe there are peaceful and moderate practitioners of Islam, but I don't believe Islam itself to be peaceful. Fruthermore, as it exists and has been dictated, it isn't able to really be reformed.

I've asked some of my Muslim friends about it--have some close family friends, fraternity brothers and co-workers too, and there are varying degrees to which this can be broached in an open spirit of just learning about one another's religion or beliefs. But none have an answer when I point out the history of Islam, the idea of abrogation, taqiyya, dhimmitude, jihad, etc. and when they're faced with the truth about their own methodology that many of them didn't even know much less understand. What I really just don't like though is that in today's world, even ASKING the questions brands one as a hater, bigot, islamophobe, blah blah blah.... it tells you a lot about the state of things when you can't even approach the questions that have no answers.

Well, for starters, Christianity doesn't have a peaceful history either, and so far, it hasn't had one either. The fact that the Church doesn't publicly call for the death of people in return for riches does not mean that its leaders and followers don't commit other evil things.

Just like a mullah can twist the words of the Koran to suit his plans, priests here do so as well. I still remember back in the 2008 elections how there were reports of religious, Christian leaders saying that a vote for Obama is a sin and how Obama was the anti-Christ, etc. Aren't these the same people who stand up every Sunday to preach about tolerance?

Second, Christianity doesn't tolerate questioning either. Remember (Google) the ever infallible Bible Cycle.

Third: so far, all US presidents have been Christian. They are not prime examples of how a Christian behaves. I don't recall the Bible calling for starting wars when suspecting your enemies. So to think that a Muslim president would turn out as a violent one shows very little tolerance and a serious degree of stereotype.

For us, the most important thing is that regardless of their religion, a president (in fact, strike that: a politician) in our system should learn to set aside his beliefs and not govern based on what his priest tells him to do on Sunday. I again bring up the example that many in the GOP are against a Muslim because he would have us all under Shariah law and praying 5 times a day. But how is that any different from not allowing gays to marry or not allowing a woman have birth control? Aren't they governing based on their beliefs as well?



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineMudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5
Reply 97, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1339 times:

Quoting slider (Reply 92):
Who's being racial by making this blanket judgment?

You are saying I am being racial, because I know how my friends and people where I live think? I guess you focused on only what you wanted to hear, and did not even get the point I was trying to make?


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 98, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1309 times:

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 91):
as long as he has our countries best interests at heart.

...and that's the REAL problem with Øbama....he doesn't



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6017 posts, RR: 3
Reply 99, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1304 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 98):
...and that's the REAL problem with Øbama....he doesn't

That's a bold statement. Care to back that up with evidence?


User currently offlineATTart From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 100, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1262 times:

N.C. Preacher Tells Parents to Crack Wrists, Punch Effeminate Children

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfOr8rnc6Yk



Remember: When someone talks behind your back, it only means you're two steps ahead of them!
User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8657 posts, RR: 3
Reply 101, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1254 times:

Quoting IllinoisMan (Thread starter):
Only 12-14% believe that he's a Christian?! Really? Are we at a point in Mississippi and Alabama where's its not really what you believe, but its what you want to believe?

What about Romney? Right-wing Christians okay with the Mormon church ?!?!?

Depending on my race+class, I can start a totally blasphemous religion and the right wing Christians will still support me, because of my race and class?

Maybe the right-wing church is more about business credentials? Romney wins there.


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 102, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1252 times:

Quoting ATTart (Reply 100):
N.C. Preacher Tells Parents to Crack Wrists, Punch Effeminate Children

Has he been arrested for inciting violence against children?



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineATTart From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 103, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1247 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 102):
Has he been arrested for inciting violence against children?

No, he has not.



Remember: When someone talks behind your back, it only means you're two steps ahead of them!
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 104, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1243 times:

Quoting ATTart (Reply 103):
No, he has not.

Well, I certainly hope he will be. That sort of sermon can get children killed.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineATTart From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 105, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1239 times:

[quote=aloges,reply=104]Well, I certainly hope he will be. That sort of sermon can get children killed.

I so hope he is, however I doubt he will be!



Remember: When someone talks behind your back, it only means you're two steps ahead of them!
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 106, posted (2 years 6 months 2 hours ago) and read 1171 times:

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 99):
That's a bold statement. Care to back that up with evidence?

1st President to sign an Executive Order sealing all his and his mother's records after declaring to have the most transparent administration in the history of the USA.
1st President to claim that under his presidency the, "rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."
1st President to rack up over 5 trillion dollars in debt in less than four years.
1st President to have the national debt exceed 10, 11 , 12 , 13 ,14 and 15 trillion dollars.
1st President to spend a trillion dollars on shovel ready jobs that he later admitted never existed.
1st President to invest/loan hundreds of billions to solar energy firms going bankrupt, then re-write the loans so the taxpayers were in last place when they did go bankrupt and his supporters walked away with their pockets full.
1st President to have coninuous 8% or higher unemployment for over a continuous three year period.
1st President to preside over a period where over 45% of the American public paid no taxes.
1st President to have over 45% of the American people on Government assistance.
1st President to preside over a cut in the credit rating of the United States.
1st President to have 17 vacations in his first four years.
1st President to issue an unlawful recess appoint when the Senate was not in recess (against the advise of his own Justice Department).
1st president whose Attorney General presided over an illegal sale of thousands of illegal weapons to the Mexican drug cartels.
1st President whose Attorney Genral blatantly dismissed charges against New Black Panthers who were filmed wearing camo uniforms and wielding Billy Clubs initmidating voters during the 2008 elections. Simply dropped the charges.
1st President to call for our ally, Israel to retreat back to the pre-war 1967 borders.
1st President to actively support the overthrow of an allied leader, at peace with Israel, in Egypt and support his replacement by militant Islamics, the Muslim bortherhood.
1st President to sue a State for requiring valid IDs to vote.
1st President to halt deportation of illegal aliens in order to issue them temporary work permits.
1st President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing Oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
1st President to sign into law a bill that permits the government to "hold anyone suspected of being associated with terrorism indefinitely, without due process. No indictment. No judge or jury. No evidence. No trial
1st President to appoint 45 czars to issue directives in lieu of legislation
1st President to bypass Congress and implement the DREAM ACT be executive fiat.
1st President to threaten a private Auto Company (Ford) after it publically made light of bailouts to GM and Chrysler.
1st President to threaten insurance companies after they publically complained that the President's health care legislation was why the had to increase rates.
1st President to terminate America's ability to put a man in space.
1st President to require private companies to disclose their political contribution records before being able to bid on government contracts
1st President to golf over 90 times in his first four years.
1st President to have 22 personal assistants/servants for the 1st lady.
1st Presidnet to have a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000/year at taxpayer expense.
1st President to publically threaten the Supreme Court while it was deciding a case...particular a case regarding his own initiative. (Affordable Health Care Act)
1st President to propose taking over the entire health industry, which proposal and legislation is what the Supreme Court is deciding on.
1st president to defy a Federal Court order to cease implementing his "Health Care Reform" law.
1st President to tell a private manufacturing company which state it could or could not locate a factory in.
1st President to refuse to comply with a Congressional Oversight Committee supoena .
1st President to withdraw an existing coal permit to a private company that had been properly applied for and granted years earlier.
1st President to take over a US Auto Company and determine who its executives would be.
1st President to aborgate US Bankruptcy law so he could turn the company over to his Union supporters.
1st President to issue an Executive Order making his educational, travel, and health history a national security secret.
1st President to fire an inspector General of Ameri-corps for catching a friend of the president in a corruption case.
1st President to bow to foreign heads of state.
1st President to cancel the National Day of Prayer at the White House.
1st President to eat dog.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 107, posted (2 years 6 months 1 hour ago) and read 1150 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to claim that under his presidency the, "rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."

Oh dear! He's clearly fanning the flames of ire especially after a third showdown almost loomed to the world scenario.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to have coninuous 8% or higher unemployment for over a continuous three year period.

Like the GOP did so much better during their eight years before that...and like they are doing SO much better. Where are the jobs, Mr. Speaker?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to preside over a cut in the credit rating of the United States

Did you even read why the S&P rating agency cut the credit rating?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to call for our ally, Israel to retreat back to the pre-war 1967 borders.

A move recognized by the entire world community. It's illogical to keep the charade up. That has been the basis for negotiations and that was what was agreed in the UN, a thing that the US also agreed to.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to actively support the overthrow of an allied leader, at peace with Israel, in Egypt and support his replacement by militant Islamics, the Muslim bortherhood.

What the heck? If anything, Obama remained silent about the issue and only when it was clear that Mubarak would be overthrown did he encourage Egyptians to get out and vote. So in your opinion, the US should support puppet governments everywhere, even when they brutally oppress people... Of course, since you aren't living in a place where you could get shot for speaking against the government, it's quite easy to criticize.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to halt deportation of illegal aliens in order to issue them temporary work permits.
1st President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing Oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
1st President to sign into law a bill that permits the government to "hold anyone suspected of being associated with terrorism indefinitely, without due process. No indictment. No judge or jury. No evidence. No trial

1. If they are willing to do the work that you don't want to do, why shouldn't they stay? They'll still contribute to the economy by doing what many Americans are too lazy or unwilling to do.
2. Yeah, because BP's oil spill should happen again but at an even larger scale. Forget the gulf and all the creatures. It's not our problem.
3. And yet you don't criticize the Patriot Act which enabled the government to spy on you...

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to terminate America's ability to put a man in space.

Wrong. The space shuttle program was scheduled to end long before Obama even announced his intentions to run for office which clearly shows your sources (if any) are completely biased.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to bow to foreign heads of state.

So...should they bow down to him instead? It's called respect.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to cancel the National Day of Prayer at the White House.

So? What about separation of church and state?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to eat dog.

Oh dear, those poor dogs! I suppose you are this die-hard vegetarian that only eats tofu. Why don't we criticize other presidents who eat turkey or chicken or steaks or pork?



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6017 posts, RR: 3
Reply 108, posted (2 years 6 months ago) and read 1129 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 107):

  

Though I will add one thing...

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to sign an Executive Order sealing all his and his mother's records after declaring to have the most transparent administration in the history of the USA.

Starting off with a blatant lie is not a good way to make an impression. Executive Order 13489, signed by President Obama on January 21, 2009, repealed a previous EO by President Bush Jr., which limited the access to the records of former Presidents. It also restored the wording of previous EO on the subject, namely Executive Order 12667 signed by that liberal saint, President Reagan, in his last days of office on January 18, 1989.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8870 posts, RR: 24
Reply 109, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1113 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 107):

I noticed that you pick and chose which ones to answer and ignore all the others. Some of the items are, yes, either overstated or distorted. But a large part are unquestionably true, and it's going to haunt him, if there is any justice in the political world.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 107):
Like the GOP did so much better during their eight years before that...and like they are doing SO much better. Where are the jobs, Mr. Speaker?

During GWB's tenure the average was far better, and he also came in during a recession (the bursting of the Internet bubble, in which trillions of dollars simply went 'POOF' - vanishing from the economy, not terribly unlike the housing bubble). And then you had the mini-recession caused by 9/11 - 3 Trillion dollars was lost in just one week. GWB might not have been the best around, but his administration had to deal with some pretty severe economic troubles, and the recovery was pretty good. 2008 was a hard blow but we should be growing at full blast by now - the reason we are not is that the current administration is to the economy what a soaked towel is to a campfire.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 107):
Wrong. The space shuttle program was scheduled to end long before Obama even announced his intentions to run for office which clearly shows your sources (if any) are completely biased.

Ah, but in the past, whenever one program ended (Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab), another was in the planning stages to replace it with something better. Obama killed the Constellation program and relegated the one saved item (Orion) to low-earth orbit only - basically, we are thrown back to the Apollo 7 / Saturn I level of capability.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 107):
So...should they bow down to him instead? It's called respect.

How about both sides stand up straight and shake hands?



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 110, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1096 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 109):
Ah, but in the past, whenever one program ended (Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab), another was in the planning stages to replace it with something better. Obama killed the Constellation program and relegated the one saved item (Orion) to low-earth orbit only - basically, we are thrown back to the Apollo 7 / Saturn I level of capability.

How would the US pay for another large space programme? By going back to the federal income tax levels of the 1960s?   



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8870 posts, RR: 24
Reply 111, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1084 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 110):
How would the US pay for another large space programme? By going back to the federal income tax levels of the 1960s?

Are you aware that from 1945 until now that Federal Revenue has been relatively constant, between 16 and 19% of GDP (with the odd peak and trough). The linear trend since then has been a horizontal line. Average in the 50s was 17.2%. In the 60s, 17.9%, again 17.9% in the 70s, 18.3% in the 80s (after those Reagan tax cuts), 18.5% in the 90s, and 17.7% in the 2000s.

This shows that tax rates don't change revenue levels very much, if at all.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa.../budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z2.xls



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 112, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1077 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 111):
In the 60s, 17.9%

That was the decade of the Apollo programme, so let's compare the current level to that. It was 15.4% in 2011. Are you seriously suggesting that this decline is insignificant?

Even more impressive is the comparison to the average rate during the Clinton administration: 19.0%. And some people wonder why there's a monstrous deficit...



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3594 posts, RR: 2
Reply 113, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1067 times:

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 108):
Starting off with a blatant lie is not a good way to make an impression. Executive Order 13489, signed by President Obama on January 21, 2009,

From Executive Order 13489:

Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.

(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination.

(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.

(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.

Sounds to me like Øbama gets to say who sees them and who doesn't.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8870 posts, RR: 24
Reply 114, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1057 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 112):
That was the decade of the Apollo programme, so let's compare the current level to that. It was 15.4% in 2011. Are you seriously suggesting that this decline is insignificant?

Even more impressive is the comparison to the average rate during the Clinton administration: 19.0%. And some people wonder why there's a monstrous deficit...

The current decline is because the Federal government taxes earnings and profit. A lot of people earned less money and businesses lost big money in 2008 onward. This illustrates the danger of progressive taxation - you are getting the majority of your revenue from those few people whose revenue is the most volatile. "Millionaires and Billionaires" like Bill Gates might make great money one year, and make only a tiny fraction of that the next. A middle-level or entry level employee is more likely to make pretty much the same one year to the next.

And the Clinton years were marked by the Internet bubble that started to burst in 2000 - money from nowhere, and it was taxed.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3199 posts, RR: 8
Reply 115, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1053 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 109):
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 107):

I noticed that you pick and chose which ones to answer and ignore all the others. Some of the items are, yes, either overstated or distorted. But a large part are unquestionably true, and it's going to haunt him, if there is any justice in the political world.

The ones I'm ignoring are because I have nothing to back up a counter-argument or because I recognize that they are true. I may be passionate about politics, but even I learn to admit defeat when something is brought up and have no way of disproving it. What I will not accept, however, is people stating things that either don't make sense, are false, or are completely irrelevant and I'll do my best to counter that.

Also...I was answering with my iPad and it's VERY hard to do so.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 116, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1048 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 102):
Has he been arrested for inciting violence against children?

No he has not. And he will not. This is "freedom of speech," a right that is being increasingly abused by those who seem to admire a former political leader from your own country and who want to engage in mass execution of gays. Or at least say they do.


User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7961 posts, RR: 12
Reply 117, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1048 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to claim that under his presidency the, "rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."

I really don't wish to interfere, but that was something he said during a campaign speech not when he was president. And as a matter of fact he did take some steps to cap greenhouse gases, albeit not too successfully so which, however, wasn't his fault alone.

You see, there is a lot of spin to it, and I doubt it is much better with the other points you copied from here
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2879876/posts

Posting a link would have been more appropriate to comply with copyright laws. This way we would have seen what ranks first on the list that is supposed to make Americans "weep for (their) nation".
Very telling ... really.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 118, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1015 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 89):
If I recall correctly, the Constitution is not the Bible nor was it created with the Bible in mind.

It was created with the bible in mind, the bible is supposed to be ignored because it hasn't been used for democracy and freedom in history. It has been used for control and repression through fear and that is long before you start killing people who disagree with you. You have a freedom to practice whatever you want to believe

No church that I know of takes kindly to any questioning of what is being said.

Quoting slider (Reply 85):
Christianity can co-exist with our government; Islam cannot.

   Religion of any kind can't co-exist with the US government.

Both religions have just as big a history of violence and I would reckon the body count from Christianity is higher than that of Islam. Christians happen to live in democratic countries where they cannot govern through religion depsite how many may want that which is why the religion is more peaceful today.

Where as a lot of Muslim counties aren't free democracies and they follow their religion to govern.

My personal experience is that Muslims far more than Christians keep their faith to themselves and if you look at what is going on in the US it is mostly the Christians that want to enforce their beliefs on everyone else and not the Muslims.

Quoting slider (Reply 92):
Quoting Mudboy (Reply 91):
but I will say that most of the hatred toward Pres. Obama has to do with race

Who's being racial by making this blanket judgment?

Some of it is and its easy to figure out if the hatred comes from something else besides policy. The litmus test is simple if someone says they do not like Obama and use a blanket statement like he is a socialist, muslim, or wasn't born here there is a greater chance that its a form of prejudice towards him.

If someone points out things he has done or not done then its ideological differences and they may like the man personally but not his policies.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20015 posts, RR: 59
Reply 119, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1014 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 118):

Both religions have just as big a history of violence and I would reckon the body count from Christianity is higher than that of Islam. Christians happen to live in democratic countries where they cannot govern through religion depsite how many may want that which is why the religion is more peaceful today.

Very well-said. And it is also worth pointing out that MOST of these democracies were rebellions against Christianity-based dictatorships. Even the United States was started with some religious fanatics escaping a religious dictatorship (England). The British monarch was (and still is) the head of the Church of England.

In fact, there are no democracies in which religious law is allowed to make public policy.


User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6017 posts, RR: 3
Reply 120, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 975 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 113):
Sounds to me like Øbama gets to say who sees them and who doesn't.

With minor changes, this is the exact same wording found in Executive Order 12667 of January 18, 1989.

Quote:
Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President.
(a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other Federal agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of Executive privilege is justified.
(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of Executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be promptly notified of any such determination.
(c) If after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of Executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.
(d) If the President decides to invoke Executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.

The bolded line was deleted in the EO signed by Obama, the rest is the same (apart from the "Federal agencies" line in section a becoming "executive agencies".


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11737 posts, RR: 15
Reply 121, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 940 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to rack up over 5 trillion dollars in debt in less than four years. 1st President to have the national debt exceed 10, 11 , 12 , 13 ,14 and 15 trillion dollars.

After two wars started under the right-wing controlled House and right-wing president who's spending were all off budget.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to have coninuous 8% or higher unemployment for over a continuous three year period.

Because of years of "voodooo/trickle down" economics. "Give tax breaks to the rich and they will create jobs!" Well, they had decades to create jobs. Why are we still at such an high unemployment rate? They have the money. Where are the jobs?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to have 17 vacations in his first four years.

GWB took how many?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to issue an unlawful recess appoint when the Senate was not in recess

John Bolton

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 106):
1st President to bow to foreign heads of state.

GWB kissed and held hands with the leader of the country who gave us 17 of the 19 Sept 11 hijackers.

Let's also not forget which president presided over the largest expanstion of government in history. All while telling everyone "Let's keep big gub'mint out of everyone's lives!"

[Edited 2012-05-05 10:13:47]


Life in the wall is a drag.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The Deep South Has Gone Too Far - Halloween Anger posted Sat Oct 16 2004 03:15:15 by Mir
Is The "Deep South" Marginalized Forever? posted Tue Nov 11 2008 06:25:12 by Planespotting
Best Time To Visit Deep South America? posted Tue Jan 4 2011 20:28:07 by Coal
President Obama Or Clinton? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 11:26:36 by windy95
President Obama Visits Afghanistan posted Fri Dec 3 2010 11:53:41 by propilot83
President Obama's Nato Summit posted Wed Nov 17 2010 14:30:40 by propilot83
Steve Kroft Interviews President Obama 60 Minutes posted Sun Nov 7 2010 18:05:41 by dxing
Has Mitch McConnell Gone Off The Deep End? posted Fri Nov 5 2010 06:59:17 by Cadet985
President Obama, "they Gotta Sit In Back". posted Thu Oct 28 2010 04:49:40 by dxing
Obama On The Attack posted Thu Sep 30 2010 00:29:16 by fr8mech