The Republican National Convention

This is what happens when you mix religion and politics....

Sorry, forgot that people with deeply held religious views weren't allowed to let those views color their political opinions.

I'll shut up, I suppose in the name of tolerance.

 

Sorry, forgot that people with deeply held religious views weren't allowed to let those views color their political opinions.

I'll shut up, I suppose in the name of tolerance.

Thank you, that is all we ask.

Why do you think they have the the separation of church and state? Think before you respond.

 

Chin:

I'm looking for the optimisim in a Bush future, and it wasn't the optimism that blinded me, it was the horrors of 4 more years.

Sure there is an optimistic future, with the best possible out come, but what about the worst possible outcome? The bad things?

One of them -- Saddam Hussein obtaining WMDs -- has already been prevented.

By reelecting Bush, we will also prevent another terrible outcome: the increase of terrorism that inevitably comes with responses that are weak and indecisive.

Will every terrorist attack be prevented? Probably not, but by showing the thugs the utter futility and insanity of enraging the United States, we will make terrorism far less attractive than it has been in the past.

 

Why do you think they have the the separation of church and state? Think before you respond.

I'm continually frustrated in my attempts to find the phrase "separation of church and state" in the U.S. Constitution.

The closest I come is the Establishment Clause, but that was passed by a Congress that also unanimously passed a call for a national day of thanksgiving and prayer.

History is clear: the absolute church-state separation is a myth perpetuated by militant secularists who are either woefully ignorant of their own country's history or dangerously flippant in their attempts to rewrite it.

ANYTHING ELSE?


(Funny that you are asking me to shut up. Very tolerant of you.)

 

One of them -- Saddam Hussein obtaining WMDs -- has already been prevented.

Ahha! Preventing him from obtaining WMD...Bush told us that he had them.Uh-Oh.
'One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong...'

Guess where he got the weapons we found he had to begin with?


By reelecting Bush, we will also prevent another terrible outcome: the increase of terrorism that inevitably comes with responses that are weak and indecisive.
OOOOO!! Do me next,what is my future?


(Funny that you are asking me to shut up. Very tolerant of you.)
You said you were shutting up(though I noticed you kept your word) I just thanked you for doing it.

 

Guess where he got the weapons we found he had to begin with?

You know exactly where, but its irrelevant because the point was that he agreed to get rid of them and to show that he was complying to that agreement fully and without obstruction.

Whether going to war over it is obviously a source for debate, but that still stands.

 

"I'm continually frustrated in my attempts to find the phrase "separation of church and state" in the U.S. Constitution"

Uh, we call it the 1st Amendment (to the US Constitution)? Heard of that?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

This means the state cannot make laws of any kind establishing or blocking the free excercise of religion. It's the "make no law respecting" part that Bush and his GOP has worked to undermine...

 

Whether going to war over it is obviously a source for debate, but that still stands.

I doubt it will ever be laid to rest.

I am sorry, if you were actually searching for an exact quote in the Constitution. Sometimes you have to read more deeply.
make no law respecting an establishment of religion
Meaning no laws based on biblical, mosaic, hindu, (etc) and that law is sort of its own entitiy, and religion doesn't combine with it.

 

"I doubt it will ever be laid to rest."

Oh I don't know...I don't hear much from you human rights activists about when Clinton [rightfully] used military action in Yugoslavia. That seems to be laid to rest pretty well methinks...

Selective reasoning huh?

Now you know why no one takes anti-war protesters seriously - you never see them protest when a democrat is in office.

 

Sellars wrote: P.P.S. I see that no one has dared to refute my observation regarding Republican women.

What, that Republican women are hotter than their Democratic counterparts? Well, if we're going to debate this let's agree to keep the celebrities out of it. If your argument comes down to "the Bush twins are hotter than Kerry's daughters," I have to words for you: Karenna Gore.

But none of that is statistically significant. A broader argument is harder to prove, but lets look at the demographics. I don't really know what the exact numbers are for voting trends of women of certain age groups, but it seems only fair to compare the looks of those who are of the same age. I'm guessing Republican women include fewer minorities. I guess opinions may differ, but you won't catch me arguing that some people are less attractive based on their race. I know Strom Thurmond didn't discriminate in this regard , so I don't think anyone else should either.

Now, I guess one could argue that on average a female Republican is raised to believe that it's virtuous to hold to the idea that a women's place is to stay in the kitchen, make babies, and look pretty (or "purdy").

But I guess I don't find that mindset very attractive...


And, oh yes, the Dubya speech: Honestly, I don't think he will get a dramatic boost in the polls because 1) the country is polarized 2) the parts of it I saw were basically all the things he's said before in a slightly more polished package.

At any rate, tomorrow it will be yesterday's news and next week it will pretty much be forgotten. I'm guessing we'll see what the final voting trend is after the debates, though those are pretty scripted as well.

 

Oh I don't know...I don't hear much from you human rights activists about when Clinton [rightfully] used military action in Yugoslavia. That seems to be laid to rest pretty well methinks...
Maybe you took that a different way than I meant it to be understood.
I meant that I doubt that that issue will ever be laid to rest, if it was a justifiable reaosn to go to war or not.

Now you know why no one takes anti-war protesters seriously - you never see them protest when a democrat is in office.
So that was a war we fough in Yugoslavia?Nothing is concidered war anymore.



Sellars wrote: P.P.S. I see that no one has dared to refute my observation regarding Republican women.
Not sure what this is about though.

 

I'm continually frustrated in my attempts to find the phrase "separation of church and state" in the U.S. Constitution.

The closest I come is the Establishment Clause, but that was passed by a Congress that also unanimously passed a call for a national day of thanksgiving and prayer.

History is clear: the absolute church-state separation is a myth perpetuated by militant secularists who are either woefully ignorant of their own country's history or dangerously flippant in their attempts to rewrite it.

See, this is the **** that scares me the most about this administration: it's clear that Bible-thumpers of all degrees (hardcore-n-proud to preach-thru-"patriotism") are rallying behind Bush because this election is their BIG CHANCE to really entrench and impose their views into this country's culture via obvious avenues like reactionary censorship and more subtle ones, like slowly seeping their belief structure into various policies. The "Richie Riches" and "Peter Pencilnecks" and "Marty Meat 'n' Potatoes" will ALWAYS be in the Republican corner, and they bother me, but don't TERRIFY me. This time it's different.

For the record, I'm Roman Catholic, and I have an innate need to believe in 'something more' and I try to nurture my spirituality. I'm far from an atheist. Simultaneously, I know that this country acknowledges RELIGIONS (plural) via freedom of speech and that it's not the purpose of the Constitution to force-feed everyone thinly-disguised FUNDAMENTALIST Christianity.

True, the values inherent to the Constitution are largely congruent with values that are also found in Christianity, but there are two things to keep in mind: 1.)the United States is a far different landscape than it was over two hundred years ago, and 2.) if ANY religion is brought to the foreground explicitly and adversely affects the advancement of our society, then it is a RELIGIOUS STATE. If you want that, then I truly have MAJOR, fundamental (pun intended) issues with you.

It is clear that a serious REACTIONARY effort is afoot. This isn't about partisanship anymore, and it really hasn't been for the last four years. Heaven, for many of us, is NOT sitting around in robes in vaguely Greek architecture singing bland hymns, avoiding alcohol and profanity and sexuality, while chuckling over today's "Family Cirucs" comic strip, a puffy white mist from the clouds at our feet.

P.S. Give me someone like Guiliani in 2008 and I might have to really think hard about where my vote goes. For you see, I'm not DOGMATIC like so many unfortunately are. (The Religious Right being right up there)

 

Interesting views on Miller's speech:

After gauging the harsh reaction from Democrats and Republicans alike to Sen. Zell Miller?s keynote address at the Republican National Convention, the Bush campaign ? led by the first lady ? backed away Thursday from Miller?s savage attack on Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, insisting that the estranged Democrat was speaking only for himself.

What's people's take on that?

 

Now you know why no one takes anti-war protesters seriously - you never see them protest when a democrat is in office.

Not to let the facts get in the way of your rhetoric, but there were indeed anti-war protests during the Clinton administration, and there would assuredly have been more of them if he'd authorized full-scale invasion of Yugoslavia, as opposed to bombing.

And in case you think that's a one-time deal, perhaps you never read up on the huge Vietnam protests that took place while Johnson was president.

Now, although he was from Texas, President Johnson was a Democrat.

Oh, the things you can learn by reading history. But like I said, don't let facts stop a good rant.

 

GWB's speech tonight was probably his best performance ever on the podium.

He even joked about his flaws in that arena, which I found funny and humble of the man.

It is clear who the more substantive, decisive, and trustworthy leader is.

There are two months left though, and the GOP should not change their strategy. They should keep hammering away.

Oh, and for Kerry to come on at midnight after the RNC Convention shows his desparation. That was an absolutely stupid move on his part. He should have had the patience to wait until tomorrow morning.

Kerry has certainly demonstrated that he has a very thin skin.

 

Oh, the things you can learn by reading history. But like I said, don't let facts stop a good rant.

Word.

About your User name though...gee, how do I say this....

 

Now, although he was from Texas, President Johnson was a Democrat.

Bush is from Mass. and a Republican. Stranger things happen.

It is clear who the more substantive, decisive, and trustworthy leader is.
Guess that is why there is such great debate about it then. Good thing it isn't so easy for everyone.

Kerry has certainly demonstrated that he has a very thin skin.
Yes sensetivity is a bad quality in a leader.

 

Bush is from Mass. and a Republican.

 

GWB's speech tonight was probably his best performance ever on the podium.

Assuming that's true, it's safe to say that after the debates, it will still be his "best performance ever on the podium."

"Thousand point of light! Stay the course! Thousand points of light!"


I miss Dana Carvey.

 

Bush is from Mass. and a Republican. Stranger things happen.

Bush was born in Conn, went to Yale and attended Harvard business school. So you could say he was born in New England and went to school in New England.

Now he lives in Texas, and bought the Crawford ranch in 1999 on advice from Karl Rove.

 

About your User name though...gee, how do I say this....

Nothing that (hypothetically) happens to Mace in Episode III can't be explained by clones and long lost twins More I dare not stray for that would take us off-topic.


On a more topical point. General Tommy Franks spoke at the convention. A couple weeks ago he said John Kerry was absolutely qualified to be Commander in Chief and that he was basically correct about attrocities committed in Vietnam in his days as a protester.

Geez, first Zell "Flip Flop" Miller, now some "General" who insults the troops by saying they were baby-killers [/sarcasm]. What kind of Republican Convention is this?

What was the term for the Bush administration? Mayberry Machiavellis?

 

"...but there were indeed anti-war protests during the Clinton administration, and there would assuredly have been more of them if he'd authorized full-scale invasion of Yugoslavia, as opposed to bombing."

Right.

I'm sure they would have been out there comparing Clinton to Hitler too huh? I'm sure these loonies would be chanting meaningless slogans like "No war for....uh...Wheat!" [Yugoslavia's Main Export at the time].

Give me a break...

 

You know, this thread would benefit from this great Daily Show mockumentary of Bush's term as President.

 

It will be interesting to see how the convention affects the polls.

I loved the "swagger/walking" line.

 

I so think the Republicans should have given Alan Keyes a chance to speak. I guess affirmative action is only objectionable to GOP when it applies to sane people.



I'm sure they would have been out there comparing Clinton to Hitler too huh? I'm sure these loonies would be chanting meaningless slogans like "No war for....uh...Wheat!" [Yugoslavia's Main Export at the time].


The slogan I heard was something like "Kosovo is not Monica," although protesting was not as widespread. True fact, but don't let that stop the rants. (Did a protester eat your dog or something?)

This history lesson, like so many others, brought to you by me.