rushmc 23 #1 July 1, 2008 http://www.newsmax.com/politics/Obama_faith_based/2008/07/01/108938.html this type of idea has been torn apart not long ago"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #2 July 1, 2008 Didn't you get the memo - only Dems can talk about religion.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #3 July 1, 2008 Quotehttp://www.newsmax.com/politics/Obama_faith_based/2008/07/01/108938.html this type of idea has been torn apart not long ago I think it was a bad idea when Bush came up with it, and it's still a bad idea, no matter who's supporting it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hausse 0 #4 July 1, 2008 "support some ability to hire and fire based on faith." What the fuck? Obama just lost a lot of sympathy (although he won't care since I'm not allowed to vote). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #5 July 1, 2008 Sorry to disappoint you, but, it was a bad idea then and is still a bad idea now. Believe it or not, some Democrats don't think every idea floated by Obama is perfect.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #6 July 2, 2008 Quotehttp://www.newsmax.com/politics/Obama_faith_based/2008/07/01/108938.html this type of idea has been torn apart not long ago I object to taxpayer dollars going to religious organizations for any purpose whatsoever. OTOH I don't see why, say, the Southern Baptists should be forced to hire a Jewish secretary or an Islamic accounts clerk.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #7 July 2, 2008 QuoteSorry to disappoint you, but, it was a bad idea then and is still a bad idea now. Believe it or not, some Democrats don't think every idea floated by Obama is perfect. Not my point but thanks for your opinion"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #8 July 2, 2008 Quote Quote http://www.newsmax.com/politics/Obama_faith_based/2008/07/01/108938.html this type of idea has been torn apart not long ago I object to taxpayer dollars going to religious organizations for any purpose whatsoever. OTOH I don't see why, say, the Southern Baptists should be forced to hire a Jewish secretary or an Islamic accounts clerk. Talk about two faced Global warming is a supported religion"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #9 July 2, 2008 Quote Didn't you get the memo - only Dems can talk about religion. Perhaps some of them will walk the walk... instead of just talking the talk like the Party of Morality has Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #10 July 2, 2008 QuoteSorry to disappoint you, but, it was a bad idea then and is still a bad idea now. Believe it or not, some Democrats don't think every idea floated by Obama is perfect. Agreed, I'm not a fan of this at all. But I'm also not part of 90% of this country that is god-fearing. The problem here lies in the disingenuous motives of the opposite side. The GOP is far more interested in finding talking points and issues to bash the opponent instead of standing on their own issues. If they heard the Obama supporters speaking out against this you would see polls up until November on how many faithless liberals were not going to vote for him. The GOP would create a strawman out of this and then beat it to death by trying to scare secular liberals to vote for him. What they can't understand is that we understand that we can support part of a platform, hate other parts but still prefer the whole over the opposition. It's a bit complex for them since they are conditioned to trying to a Reader's Digest simplistic writing style. As you can see, the GOPs have already jumped all over this thinking it's a major issues for guys like me. Oh how wrong they are. But I will sit back and laugh at them while they waste their time not talking about the strengths of their own campaign. I'm sure Bill O will have plenty to say on this._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 July 2, 2008 QuoteThe GOP is far more interested in finding talking points and issues to bash the opponent instead of standing on their own issues. If they heard the Obama supporters speaking out against this you would see polls up until November on how many faithless liberals were not going to vote for him. The GOP would create a strawman out of this and then beat it to death by trying to scare secular liberals to vote for him. You mean like how Obama's camp is doing with the 'racist' thing?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #12 July 2, 2008 posters on this site to condem Obama in the same fashion they blasted Bush on this topic. Where the hell are you? Is this not an expansion of the very program many of you called un-constitutional and just plain bad? Where are the name callers? Where is the outrage? Oh wait, this is the Dem canidate. Thats right. That fact makes everything much different "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #13 July 2, 2008 QuoteYou mean like how Obama's camp is doing with the 'racist' thing? Clearly Grover Norquist wasn't adding anything racist to the conservative mix of bullshit talking points. I see a few of the typical liberal posters that are on dz.com posting that they do not agree with this. I'm sure their opinions, like mine, are the same on this topic now as it was back the. Use the search function and see our outrage the last time this came up. What I'm curious on is all the conservatives that bitched about the Habeas Corpus stuff not commenting on my post related to the first appeal. If I was to take your line of posting I would make some claim that you no longer care or some crap._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #14 July 2, 2008 >>My line of posting You couldn't... well, I suppose you COULD, but you'd need a time machine to go back and show the people bitching about Clinton's abuses how 41 did the same thing.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #15 July 2, 2008 >Where is the outrage? Probably the same place your outrage over McCain's massive emissions of greenhouse gases went. When will we see you screaming purple-faced over his hypocrisy the same way you were screaming about Gore's? After all, both advocate reductions in CO2 emissions. Heck, McCain is far worse objectively - he is threatening to pass laws to stop you from emitting CO2 while he flies the "straight talk express" all over the US. Gore, as you may have noticed, is not a presidential candidate. But I have a feeling that you will be far more likely to come up with excuses than express outrage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #16 July 2, 2008 Quote >Where is the outrage? Probably the same place your outrage over McCain's massive emissions of greenhouse gases went. When will we see you screaming purple-faced over his hypocrisy the same way you were screaming about Gore's? After all, both advocate reductions in CO2 emissions. Heck, McCain is far worse objectively - he is threatening to pass laws to stop you from emitting CO2 while he flies the "straight talk express" all over the US. Gore, as you may have noticed, is not a presidential candidate. But I have a feeling that you will be far more likely to come up with excuses than express outrage. Ah, you still have not figured it out yet I see. I DONT LIKE MCCAIN, I JUST LIKE OBAMA LESS! So your "I really know what is going on" and your "CDIF" type statements are unfounded sir. Fun to see you use the CDIF type arguments though. Would expect not to see you bitch about that anymore"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #17 July 2, 2008 >Ah, you still have not figured it out yet I see. Nope, I have it figured out. You haven't yet. You asked where the outrage was. I answered you. It went to the same place that your "green hypocrisy" outrage went. You have stated that you don't like McCain; I will take that to mean that you don't like McCain's position on greenhouse gas. Fair enough. I don't like Obama's position on funding of faith-based activities. So next time you ask "where's the outrage?" look in the mirror first - and you will have your answer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #18 July 2, 2008 Quote>Ah, you still have not figured it out yet I see. Nope, I have it figured out. You haven't yet. You asked where the outrage was. I answered you. It went to the same place that your "green hypocrisy" outrage went. You have stated that you don't like McCain; I will take that to mean that you don't like McCain's position on greenhouse gas. Fair enough. I don't like Obama's position on funding of faith-based activities. So next time you ask "where's the outrage?" look in the mirror first - and you will have your answer. No you don’t get it. I do not like McCain or MOST of his positions. His pandering to those like you is just one of his crapy positions. You like to "insert what YOU think" someone means in many of your replies. YOU prove over and over again you don’t know by putting comments into a post. Now I await your next "I take it you mean" reply. You drag the thread off topic to protect yourself. You instead display extreme hypocrisy. Now, can we talk about the thread? Or will you drag it off topic yet again?[ crazy]"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #19 July 2, 2008 >I do not like McCain or MOST of his positions. Which is what I said. >You instead display extreme hypocrisy. The standard gratuitous insult. It wouldn't be a RushMC post without one! >Now, can we talk about the thread? Sure! You asked "where's the outrage?" I answered you. Next? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #20 July 2, 2008 Quote >I do not like McCain or MOST of his positions. Which is what I said. >You instead display extreme hypocrisy. The standard gratuitous insult. It wouldn't be a RushMC post without one! >Now, can we talk about the thread? Sure! You asked "where's the outrage?" I answered you. Next? You didnt answer shit. You drug the topic off target with a CDIF type reply. And now you cant even admit itSo I will ask again. Why is the media silent on this? Why are those who lambasted Bush silent? I will answer it. Because Obama is a Democrate. Now, what topic are you going to next? Oh, pointing out hypocrisy is an insult?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #21 July 2, 2008 I see a bunch of responses (mine included) that object to Obama's stance on this. I guess you selectively ignore them and then pretend they don't exist.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #22 July 2, 2008 Quote I see a bunch of responses (mine included) that object to Obama's stance on this. I guess you selectively ignore them and then pretend they don't exist. And at least those are honest. Some were even replies to me. But, in comparison, there is something missing dont you think?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #23 July 2, 2008 I am wondering where the moral outrage is from Lush Rimjob.....he and his bretheren on Fringe Right Radio are supposed to have a lock on this kind of activity..... oh the humanity.. Oh wait.. that is probably who brought it up... someone.. quick.. check the EIB so we know how NEO CONS are supposed to be thinking about this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #24 July 2, 2008 Quote I am wondering where the moral outrage is from Lush Rimjob.....he and his bretheren on Fringe Right Radio are supposed to have a lock on this kind of activity..... oh the humanity.. Oh wait.. that is probably who brought it up... someone.. quick.. check the EIB so we know how NEO CONS are supposed to be thinking about this. LIMBAUGH SIGNS THROUGH 2016; $400 MILLION DEAL SHATTERS BROADCAST RECORDS Wed Jul 02 2008 09:02:18 ET **Exclusive** The American broadcast industry is rocked, realigned and blasted into a new orbit, yet again, by Rush Limbaugh, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. In what is being described as an unprecedented radio contract, Limbaugh will keep his syndicated show on-the-air and e-v-e-r-y-w-h-e-r-e through 2016 with CLEAR CHANNEL and PREMIERE RADIO. Already host of the most lucrative hours since radio's inception, Limbaugh's total package is valued north of $400 million, according to media insiders. The NEW YORK TIMES will claim this weekend that Limbaugh, marking 20 years this summer as a national host, has secured a 9-figure signing bonus for the new deal, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE. MORE In its controversial profile, the TIMES reports that Limbaugh is buying a new G550 jet and is making an estimated $38 million a year. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #25 July 2, 2008 >You didnt answer shit. I answered you directly, but since you can only see fault in others, you were unable to understand the answer. >So I will ask again. Why is the media silent on this? RushMC Tactic #7 - when RushMC gets confused, change the subject! Why is the MEDIA silent on this? Simple answer - they're not. Google "faith based" Obama. 1699 hits in the News section. >Oh, pointing out hypocrisy is an insult? You feel that "pointing out hypocrisy" is not an insult but "pointing out cluelessness" is? It's hard to keep up with your ever-shifting values sometimes! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites