Mitt's Speech...and a rebuttal

[Downthestretch55]

Pgardn my friend,
At issue is not "health care".
At issue is freedom of, or freedom from, religion.
In my humble view, Romney cooked himself in his pathetic speech. Huckabee, though quite appealing to the evangelicals, is also as scarey. His agenda, as a Southern Baptist preacher, will place the presidency in the hands of yet another "ordained" leader, as we have presently.
Damn the Constitution. Welcome to the American Taliban!
DTS

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Pgardn my friend,
At issue is not "health care".
At issue is freedom of, or freedom from, religion.
In my humble view, Romney cooked himself in his pathetic speech. Huckabee, though quite appealing to the evangelicals, is also as scarey. His agenda, as a Southern Baptist preacher, will place the presidency in the hands of yet another "ordained" leader, as we have presently.
Damn the Constitution. Welcome to the American Taliban!
DTS

DTS..Not to be obvious, but it's a numbers game. You and I agree...well, he was cooked in our minds before the speech, but he also endeared himself to probably just as many as he may have scared. Hence the "ovation" blips in your transcript

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Pgardn my friend,
At issue is not "health care".
At issue is freedom of, or freedom from, religion.
In my humble view, Romney cooked himself in his pathetic speech. Huckabee, though quite appealing to the evangelicals, is also as scarey. His agenda, as a Southern Baptist preacher, will place the presidency in the hands of yet another "ordained" leader, as we have presently.
Damn the Constitution. Welcome to the American Taliban!
DTS

My rant was on the system that gives us our choices.
The system to fit what WE want to hear.

Health Care was merely and example.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pgardn

My rant was on the system that gives us our choices.
The system to fit what WE want to hear.

Health Care was merely and example.

PG and GbBob,
Both correct. All of 'em pander to the numbers, the sheep that they (wolves) wish to comfort. Sounds like "the blind leading the blind" to me.
It's just a matter of time until the consequeces of their actions demand reaction. Believe me, it will be. Sooner better than later.
If not, this once great nation is doomed to follow Rome's example.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Pgardn my friend,
At issue is not "health care".
At issue is freedom of, or freedom from, religion.
In my humble view, Romney cooked himself in his pathetic speech. Huckabee, though quite appealing to the evangelicals, is also as scarey. His agenda, as a Southern Baptist preacher, will place the presidency in the hands of yet another "ordained" leader, as we have presently.
Damn the Constitution. Welcome to the American Taliban!DTS

I see you're back with your hysterical nonsense once again. Please take us step by step how it so happens that if a person like Romney or Huckabee were to become president that its the same as an American Taliban?
how does either of these guys jeopardize freedom from religion?
please be specific and reference policies they support or actions they took as govenors that lead you to this conclusion.

[skippy3481]

I want to know how romney is trying to push state sponsored religion. I must be missing something major in his speech.

Originally Posted by skippy3481

I want to know how romney is trying to push state sponsored religion. I must be missing something major in his speech.

He is not.
In fact Mitt has to do
exactly the opposite.

He has state very clearly
that he takes the separation
of church and state clearly.

If anyone MUST make these statements,
it is Romney. And he has.

If Romney had rejected Mormonism,
and become some sort of WASP,
he would have a chance. He has zero shot.

When people go to vote, the will say they have
no problem with Romney being Mormon. But they do,
and they will not vote for him. I'll put money on Romney
not becoming the Rep. nominee. Taking bets now.

[Danzig]

i'd like to take this moment to remind everyone that the president does not make laws. nor can he suddenly change a part of the constitution. i'm sure everyone remembers all that from civics class.

Originally Posted by Danzig

i'd like to take this moment to remind everyone that the president does not make laws. nor can he suddenly change a part of the constitution. i'm sure everyone remembers all that from civics class.

GW did not take that class.

Especially reguarding "enemy combatants".

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pgardn

GW did not take that class.

Especially reguarding "enemy combatants".

But he does speak to a higher "father".
Can we have another signing statement?
What Constitution? What's that?
What me worry?
The "smirking chimp" has spoken, and he ain't wearing any clothes.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I see you're back with your hysterical nonsense once again. Please take us step by step how it so happens that if a person like Romney or Huckabee were to become president that its the same as an American Taliban?
how does either of these guys jeopardize freedom from religion?
please be specific and reference policies they support or actions they took as govenors that lead you to this conclusion.

ArlJim,
Don't label my views as "hyterical nonsense". I've previously seen what those that have "religious agendas" have done to people in the name of their "god".
Can you remember anything about those that flew planes into the Twin Towers? Or Robertson? or Hagee? Or even our beloved president's "crusade comment"?
You are indeed deluded if you don't think that one's religious beliefs don't influence their own actions.
Romney has already made his statements. Go back and read the link.
Huckabee has done so as well. Google it.
DTS

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I see you're back with your hysterical nonsense once again. Please take us step by step how it so happens that if a person like Romney or Huckabee were to become president that its the same as an American Taliban?
how does either of these guys jeopardize freedom from religion?
please be specific and reference policies they support or actions they took as govenors that lead you to this conclusion.

These are recent quotes from Huckabee. I'm not sure how they can be interpreted as anything other than jeoprdizing freedom from religion.

" Science changes with every generation and with new discoveries, and God doesn't...So I'll stick with God if the two are in conflict"

he will oppose gay marriage until " Moses comes down with two stone tablets from Brokeback Mountain saying he's changed the rules."

"If you're with Jesus Christ, we know how it turns out in the final moment. I've read the last chapter in the book, and we do end up winning."

I respect and even envy those with strong faith, no matter who the deity. But this guy, IMO, will clearly let his beliefs determine policy

[Danzig]

i just hope whoever does end up winning doesn't turn out to be a complete embarrassment with no credibility.

i know that the president is head of foreign policy. can't help but think that maybe that should change. why should our approach to other countries go thru a change every four years?

i don't know that i'd say bush is our worst ever (he's not our first bad one for sure!!) but is he our worst two-term president ever? that may be the case.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i just hope whoever does end up winning doesn't turn out to be a complete embarrassment with no credibility.

i know that the president is head of foreign policy. can't help but think that maybe that should change. why should our approach to other countries go thru a change every four years?
i don't know that i'd say bush is our worst ever (he's not our first bad one for sure!!) but is he our worst two-term president ever? that may be the case.

The above is actually a great litmus for evaluating a candidate that often gets ignored. There are many that feel the US should have no "foreign policy" and that our image World wide is a moot point because we are the only country that matters.

[Danzig]

i just think there are far more important tests for who should be the next president then what religion he or she follows. there's supposed to be a separation of church and state, yet so often the religious part of the candidates gets too much play.
i don't care how mitt, or hillary, or any of them celebrate christmas, i care how they will handle the middle east, or russia, or china, or domestic issues.

but no, let's focus on important stuff such as the teachings of a candidates religion. goodness knows that matters in the grand scheme of things.

Did someone really compare Ward Cleaver to the taliban?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by GBBob

These are recent quotes from Huckabee. I'm not sure how they can be interpreted as anything other than jeoprdizing freedom from religion.

" Science changes with every generation and with new discoveries, and God doesn't...So I'll stick with God if the two are in conflict"

he will oppose gay marriage until " Moses comes down with two stone tablets from Brokeback Mountain saying he's changed the rules."

"If you're with Jesus Christ, we know how it turns out in the final moment. I've read the last chapter in the book, and we do end up winning."

I respect and even envy those with strong faith, no matter who the deity. But this guy, IMO, will clearly let his beliefs determine policy

what should a person use to determine a policy position other than your belief system? what policys do you see him pushing based on the above quotes? the only quote that is a real issue is gay marriage and I don't think that is an issue that the president can do much about on his own.

he is not my cup of tea, frankly he talks about his faith too much for my taste, he's running for president not nations pastor.
but please tell me what president does not let his beliefs guide him. how can any religious person not have their views influenced by religion? is it any shock that this is where his beliefs come from?

i just think people worry too much about this threat to being free from religion. most presidents are somewhat religious people. its talked about a lot in the primary season in order to motivate the base, but in the general election and in actual governing it gets put aside.

Originally Posted by GBBob

These are recent quotes from Huckabee. I'm not sure how they can be interpreted as anything other than jeoprdizing freedom from religion.

" Science changes with every generation and with new discoveries, and God doesn't...So I'll stick with God if the two are in conflict"

Science does not change, it is a way of seeking the truth about very specific questions.The things science finds out causes us to change our ideas of how things work as we continue to use this process.

And on God... He knows God does not change. I would like that email address. I have some questions.

An agnostic has absolutely no chance of becoming president in this country. You have to be sure about everything to become president. Kind of scary.
Candidates are not ever allowed to say, "I dont know." I got a problem with that.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Science does not change, it is a way of seeking the truth about very specific questions.The things science finds out causes us to change our ideas of how things work as we continue to use this process.

And on God... He knows God does not change. I would like that email address. I have some questions.

An agnostic has absolutely no chance of becoming president in this country. You have to be sure about everything to become president. Kind of scary.
Candidates are not ever allowed to say, "I dont know." I got a problem with that.

here's a fuller explanation of the context of that quote:

Huckabee "raised his hand in a debate when the candidates were asked en masse if they believed in intelligent design." In fact, what the candidates were asked at the GOP presidential debate on May 4 was to raise their hands if they did not "believe in evolution." Huckabee raised his.

Immediately after the debate, Huckabee said that it was "fine with me" if other people want to believe that they "came from apes." "I'll accept that," he said. "I just don't happen to think that I did."

But by the time Huckabee appeared on Bill Maher's show in August, he had that more "nuanced" view on evolution. "It's not a proper yes-or-no question," he said. "Do I believe that it is all about just random selection, that it just happened without any design, designer, anybody behind it? No I don't believe that, I think there was a God behind that."

When Maher asked Huckabee if he believed that man came from monkeys, he said: "I don't know."

At a press conference Monday, Huckabee suggested that reporters read Alter's "very thoughtful" piece, saying that he thought the columnist had gotten it right.

A reporter asked Huckabee how he thought his views -- including his view on evolution -- might play in the general election.

"Oh, I believe in science. I certainly do," he said. "In fact, what I believe in is, I believe in God. I don't think there's a conflict between the two. But if there's going to be a conflict, science changes with every generation and with new discoveries and God doesn't. So I'll stick with God if the two are in conflict."

this is a stiff inflexible mind just barely capable of nuance when the possible reward is great enough.

i join his supporter's in praying he gets the nominination.

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

here's a fuller explanation of the context of that quote:

Huckabee "raised his hand in a debate when the candidates were asked en masse if they believed in intelligent design." In fact, what the candidates were asked at the GOP presidential debate on May 4 was to raise their hands if they did not "believe in evolution." Huckabee raised his.

Immediately after the debate, Huckabee said that it was "fine with me" if other people want to believe that they "came from apes." "I'll accept that," he said. "I just don't happen to think that I did."

But by the time Huckabee appeared on Bill Maher's show in August, he had that more "nuanced" view on evolution. "It's not a proper yes-or-no question," he said. "Do I believe that it is all about just random selection, that it just happened without any design, designer, anybody behind it? No I don't believe that, I think there was a God behind that."

When Maher asked Huckabee if he believed that man came from monkeys, he said: "I don't know."

At a press conference Monday, Huckabee suggested that reporters read Alter's "very thoughtful" piece, saying that he thought the columnist had gotten it right.

A reporter asked Huckabee how he thought his views -- including his view on evolution -- might play in the general election.

"Oh, I believe in science. I certainly do," he said. "In fact, what I believe in is, I believe in God. I don't think there's a conflict between the two. But if there's going to be a conflict, science changes with every generation and with new discoveries and God doesn't. So I'll stick with God if the two are in conflict."

this is a stiff inflexible mind just barely capable of nuance when the possible reward is great enough.

i join his supporter's in praying he gets the nominination.

Well he just lost the Biologist vote.
That is a huge block in the Republican party dont ya know.