Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
Michelle Malkin can't be racist since she is brown skinned girl, herself.
Obama General Discussion... (Part 2)
- Thread starter zooropop40
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
You still believe there are NFL teams that just happen to look like monkeys?
HyperU2
War Child
I can't believe we still have Redskins.
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
Guys, I heard Obama met someone and shook their hand and stuff. What will that crazy Obama do next, in the slow destruction of our glorious Republic?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
exactly. there are many teabaggers who have met black people before and didn't have any problems whatsoever.
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
WTF are you talking about?
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Guys, I heard Obama met someone and shook their hand and stuff. What will that crazy Obama do next, in the slow destruction of our glorious Republic?
He probably had Swine Flu virus on his hands. I wouldn't put it past him.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Forget it, reference to an OLD thread.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
this proves that there's nothing racist motivating anyone at the tea bagger conventions.
likewise, people who interact with black people on a regular basis cannot be racist! so it's far, far worse to "play the race card" like
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
2861U2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I think the G20 protesters could learn a little from the tea parties. There have been zero arrests made at the tea parties, versus probably a few dozen at least at the G20. Not to mention the tea parties don't exactly go around causing destruction, which the Daily Show failed to highlight.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
politico.com
Does Obama use God's name in vain?
By: Gary Bauer
October 5, 2009 04:49 AM EST
American presidents have long invoked religious faith to bolster arguments for favored policies. Barack Obama is no exception and has made God talk a staple of his public appearances since he burst onto the national political scene at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, declaring, “We worship an awesome God in the blue states!” As a recent POLITICO story noted, the president has discussed faith more often than did President George W. Bush.
But whereas most liberal politicians are content to confine their religious references to public statements about things like caring for the poor expressed through government funding for welfare programs or through minimum-wage increases, Obama goes much further. He often invokes God at what seem the unlikeliest moments — in support of policies condemned by the Bible and most major religions. Obama gets away with it only because he benefits from a curious double standard.
Whereas Bush was excoriated by the left whenever he cited God, Obama’s religious imagery receives silence from both sides of the aisle. The left won’t criticize him, while the right ignores any politician invoking the Almighty. But it’s how he invokes the Lord’s name, so to speak, that’s unprecedented.
For example, Obama has referenced the Sermon on the Mount in support of special rights for homosexuals, despite the Scriptures’ clear support of marriage between one man and one woman and its admonitions to celebrate sex inside the married relationship only.
While the Bible details that human beings are fearfully and wonderfully made, and that life is a gift from God, Obama uses Scripture to support a mentality in support of abortion rights. Explaining his decision to lift an executive ban on federal funding of embryo-destructive stem cell research, Obama said, “As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research — and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.”
At the University of Notre Dame, he told graduates, “Maybe we won’t agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.”
Obama has played the faith card during the health care debate, too. When prospects for passing Obamacare started to go south, Obama framed the debate as “an ethical and moral obligation.” “We are God’s partners in matters of life and death,” he told rabbis during a conference call to sell his reform proposals.
Life and death issues became the spark igniting the public backlash against Obama’s plans. They arose from concerns over possible death sentences for the ill and elderly should care be rationed and from concerns about tax-payer funded abortions, to name a few. Obama wrapped himself in Scripture to combat opposition to his plans. At one point, he alleged that Obamacare opponents were not just mistaken but also immoral and “bearing false witness” for worrying about taxpayer funding of abortion under his plan.
Obama also has tried to quell faith-based outrage at his liberal policies on human life by deploying prominent Catholics like Nicholas Cafardi and Doug Kmiec to argue on his behalf and by appointing evangelical and embryonic stem cell research proponent Dr. Francis Collins to run the National Institutes of Health.
I don’t mean to question the sincerity of Obama’s faith. This is a discussion of language. Increasingly, it seems as though the president’s deepest belief is in his own ability to disregard his critics’ moral objections by touting abstract religious principles and embracing empty religious symbolism. Obama seems to think that Americans will accept his out-of-the-mainstream views on moral issues as long as he claims those views arise in part from his religious beliefs.
No doubt Obama’s God talk is a smart political move. While polls show the United States has more professed atheists than at any time in the past few decades (and Obama shrewdly mentions them whenever possible), America is still a profoundly religious nation. There is only one professed atheist in Congress, and polls show most Americans would not vote for an atheist for president.
Moreover, a 2008 Pew poll found that 72 percent of Americans polled believe the president should have “strong religious beliefs,” an increase since 2004. And just 29 percent think there is “too much” religious expression by politicians.
Obama’s God talk also combats two durable perceptions: that Democrats are unfriendly to religion (only 38 percent of respondents believe Democrats are friendly to religion, according to Pew) and that Obama is not a Christian (53 percent, according to an Pew poll in April).
Obama has long recognized the value of reaching out to faith communities. As a young, unknown politician with an exotic background, Obama needed a home in a black church to gain credibility with less-affluent constituents in Chicago’s black neighborhoods. That realization prompted him to join the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ.
In “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama writes that “it’s bad politics” for “progressives ... to avoid joining a serious debate about how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic society.” He continues, “There are a whole lot of religious people in America, including the majority of Democrats.” He also insists that if progressives don’t talk about faith, “others will fill the vacuum.”
For the record, I believe elected officials should talk about faith. Our founders believed the moral principles of faith were indispensable to our nation’s survival. The Declaration of Independence mentions God four times. And faith has been a source of many of America’s most important social movements, from abolition and civil rights to the right to life.
But in using faith to advocate positions that are contrary to the teachings of Scripture, Obama undercuts his credibility. As Obama writes in “The Audacity of Hope”: “Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith, ... such as the politician who ... sprinkles in a few biblical citations to spice up a thoroughly dry policy speech.” Obama should heed his own advice.
Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer is president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families.
Does Obama use God's name in vain?
By: Gary Bauer
October 5, 2009 04:49 AM EST
American presidents have long invoked religious faith to bolster arguments for favored policies. Barack Obama is no exception and has made God talk a staple of his public appearances since he burst onto the national political scene at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, declaring, “We worship an awesome God in the blue states!” As a recent POLITICO story noted, the president has discussed faith more often than did President George W. Bush.
But whereas most liberal politicians are content to confine their religious references to public statements about things like caring for the poor expressed through government funding for welfare programs or through minimum-wage increases, Obama goes much further. He often invokes God at what seem the unlikeliest moments — in support of policies condemned by the Bible and most major religions. Obama gets away with it only because he benefits from a curious double standard.
Whereas Bush was excoriated by the left whenever he cited God, Obama’s religious imagery receives silence from both sides of the aisle. The left won’t criticize him, while the right ignores any politician invoking the Almighty. But it’s how he invokes the Lord’s name, so to speak, that’s unprecedented.
For example, Obama has referenced the Sermon on the Mount in support of special rights for homosexuals, despite the Scriptures’ clear support of marriage between one man and one woman and its admonitions to celebrate sex inside the married relationship only.
While the Bible details that human beings are fearfully and wonderfully made, and that life is a gift from God, Obama uses Scripture to support a mentality in support of abortion rights. Explaining his decision to lift an executive ban on federal funding of embryo-destructive stem cell research, Obama said, “As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research — and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.”
At the University of Notre Dame, he told graduates, “Maybe we won’t agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.”
Obama has played the faith card during the health care debate, too. When prospects for passing Obamacare started to go south, Obama framed the debate as “an ethical and moral obligation.” “We are God’s partners in matters of life and death,” he told rabbis during a conference call to sell his reform proposals.
Life and death issues became the spark igniting the public backlash against Obama’s plans. They arose from concerns over possible death sentences for the ill and elderly should care be rationed and from concerns about tax-payer funded abortions, to name a few. Obama wrapped himself in Scripture to combat opposition to his plans. At one point, he alleged that Obamacare opponents were not just mistaken but also immoral and “bearing false witness” for worrying about taxpayer funding of abortion under his plan.
Obama also has tried to quell faith-based outrage at his liberal policies on human life by deploying prominent Catholics like Nicholas Cafardi and Doug Kmiec to argue on his behalf and by appointing evangelical and embryonic stem cell research proponent Dr. Francis Collins to run the National Institutes of Health.
I don’t mean to question the sincerity of Obama’s faith. This is a discussion of language. Increasingly, it seems as though the president’s deepest belief is in his own ability to disregard his critics’ moral objections by touting abstract religious principles and embracing empty religious symbolism. Obama seems to think that Americans will accept his out-of-the-mainstream views on moral issues as long as he claims those views arise in part from his religious beliefs.
No doubt Obama’s God talk is a smart political move. While polls show the United States has more professed atheists than at any time in the past few decades (and Obama shrewdly mentions them whenever possible), America is still a profoundly religious nation. There is only one professed atheist in Congress, and polls show most Americans would not vote for an atheist for president.
Moreover, a 2008 Pew poll found that 72 percent of Americans polled believe the president should have “strong religious beliefs,” an increase since 2004. And just 29 percent think there is “too much” religious expression by politicians.
Obama’s God talk also combats two durable perceptions: that Democrats are unfriendly to religion (only 38 percent of respondents believe Democrats are friendly to religion, according to Pew) and that Obama is not a Christian (53 percent, according to an Pew poll in April).
Obama has long recognized the value of reaching out to faith communities. As a young, unknown politician with an exotic background, Obama needed a home in a black church to gain credibility with less-affluent constituents in Chicago’s black neighborhoods. That realization prompted him to join the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ.
In “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama writes that “it’s bad politics” for “progressives ... to avoid joining a serious debate about how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic society.” He continues, “There are a whole lot of religious people in America, including the majority of Democrats.” He also insists that if progressives don’t talk about faith, “others will fill the vacuum.”
For the record, I believe elected officials should talk about faith. Our founders believed the moral principles of faith were indispensable to our nation’s survival. The Declaration of Independence mentions God four times. And faith has been a source of many of America’s most important social movements, from abolition and civil rights to the right to life.
But in using faith to advocate positions that are contrary to the teachings of Scripture, Obama undercuts his credibility. As Obama writes in “The Audacity of Hope”: “Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith, ... such as the politician who ... sprinkles in a few biblical citations to spice up a thoroughly dry policy speech.” Obama should heed his own advice.
Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer is president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
i think this is true. i would attribute much of it to differences in age -- the G20 protesters tend to be very young, while the teabaggers trend old.
i would also say that the G20 protesters are much further to the left than your given teabagger and are not representative at all of the mainstream left wing, whereas it seems, and based upon what the teabaggers are telling us, they are indeed the republican right wing mainstream.
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
Is that the way to Rio?
<>
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
The people who post political comments on youtube scare the shit out of me.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
NY Times
October 7, 2009, 9:26 pm
Obama to Name Openly Gay Ambassador
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg
President Obama plans to name an openly gay lawyer to serve as his ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, administration officials said Wednesday evening. If confirmed by the Senate, the lawyer, David Huebner, would become the first openly gay ambassador in the Obama administration.
Mr. Huebner is the general counsel for a gay rights organization, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination. His nomination is timed to coincide with a speech Mr. Obama is giving Saturday night to the Human Rights Campaign, which also advocates equal rights for gays.
Mr. Obama is facing continuing criticism from gay leaders that he is not living up to his campaign promises, including repealing the Clinton-era “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’’ policy, which bars openly gay people from serving in the military. The president’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, told reporters on Wednesday that the president is ‘’intent on making progress’’ on the issue.
October 7, 2009, 9:26 pm
Obama to Name Openly Gay Ambassador
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg
President Obama plans to name an openly gay lawyer to serve as his ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, administration officials said Wednesday evening. If confirmed by the Senate, the lawyer, David Huebner, would become the first openly gay ambassador in the Obama administration.
Mr. Huebner is the general counsel for a gay rights organization, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination. His nomination is timed to coincide with a speech Mr. Obama is giving Saturday night to the Human Rights Campaign, which also advocates equal rights for gays.
Mr. Obama is facing continuing criticism from gay leaders that he is not living up to his campaign promises, including repealing the Clinton-era “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’’ policy, which bars openly gay people from serving in the military. The president’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, told reporters on Wednesday that the president is ‘’intent on making progress’’ on the issue.
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
My people of The FYM, you've all been brainwashed.
Educational and rehab video can be found here:
YouTube - PJTV: The Power & Danger of Iconography
Thank you.
<>
Educational and rehab video can be found here:
YouTube - PJTV: The Power & Danger of Iconography
Thank you.
<>
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Proof that conservatives still don't get it, have leadership or a clue...
And that they're always behind the times.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Toymaker releases Michelle Obama doll - which is expected to outsell those of her husband |
I can get my Xmas shopping done early this year.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
The market was at 6500 in March.
Now it is at 9990, will break 10,000 soon.
Looks like Obama is leading the country to financial recovery.
Now it is at 9990, will break 10,000 soon.
Looks like Obama is leading the country to financial recovery.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Toymaker releases Michelle Obama doll - which is expected to outsell those of her husband |
I can get my Xmas shopping done early this year.
Christmas shopping? What about this?
maycocksean
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
The market was at 6500 in March.
Now it is at 9990, will break 10,000 soon.
Looks like Obama is leading the country to financial recovery.
Eh, I don't know how much credit I give him for that. I've never been inclined to credit (or blame) the president for what happens in the economy.
2861U2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
This could get interesting. Let's see if Obama yet again caves in to the far left.
Huff to Biden: Resign if Obama escalates Afghan conflict - Michael Calderone - POLITICO.com
If President Barack Obama escalates the “disastrous” war in Afghanistan, Arianna Huffington has some advice for Vice President Joe Biden: resign.
Planting The Huffington Post, her popular news and aggregation site, in an ever firmer place to the left of the Obama administration, Huffington cited the arguments Biden has made in private against Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s request for 40,000 additional troops in Afghanistan, and wrote that “if the president does decide to escalate, Biden, for the good of the country, should escalate his willingness to act on those reservations.”
Huffington’s attack on the escalation plans under consideration by the White House ran under a banner headline which said: “Arianna: Why Joe Biden Should Resign.”
While Huffington Post was decidedly pro-Obama in its 2008 campaign coverage, its editor-in-chief has not been afraid to take on his administration and the Democratic Congress. Just a few days ago, she told ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos that embattled Democratic congressman Charles Rangel should step down from his chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee while under an ethics investigation.
A long-time conservative who was once married to a Republican congressman before she underwent an ideological conversion experience, Huffington has turned her website into a popular platform for liberal bloggers but bristles at the idea that there's only a left and a right viewpoint on hot-button political issues. And she’s adamant that her site will not simply carry water for the administration now. “There’s absolutely no way you’d call the Huffington Post a partisan defender of the Obama White House,” she told POLITICO in July.
Indeed, Huffington has been a fierce critic of both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and top economic adviser Larry Summers. In March, it was Geithner who was in Huffington’s cross-hairs, and she also talked then about the need for a resignation. “[Use] any window dressing you want, just take the steering wheel out of Geithner's hands,” Huffington wrote, noting that “it might seem extraordinary to be calling for the resignation or demotion of President Obama's point man on our financial system.”
The following day, Huffington focused on the other high-profile economic guru. Her headline: “Larry Summers: Brilliant Mind, Toxic Ideas.”
When writing about the economic crisis, Huffington has targeted Wall Street, wagging her finger at both Republicans and Democrats. Similarly, she’s written critically of the lobbying industry—again, both sides of the aisle aren’t immune. And now, after talking about the need for resignations from top White House officials and a powerful Democratic committee chairman, Huffington’s latest column focuses on Biden, who she thinks should consider resigning out of principle, not because of incompetence or malfeasance.
“If Biden truly believes that we’re doing in Afghanistan is not in the best interests of our national security – and what issues is more important than that?” she wrote, then keeping his doubts to himself would not be enough. And once he resigned, she wrote, he “would then become the natural leader of the movement to wind down this disastrous war and focus on the real dangers in Pakistan,” she wrote.
“Obama may be no drama, but Biden loves drama,” Huffington wrote. “And what could more dramatic than resigning the vice presidency on principle? And what principle could be more honorable than refusing to go along with a policy of unnecessarily risking American blood and treasure — and America's national security?”
A top Biden aide declined to comment. A White House spokesman had no immediate response.
Huff to Biden: Resign if Obama escalates Afghan conflict - Michael Calderone - POLITICO.com
If President Barack Obama escalates the “disastrous” war in Afghanistan, Arianna Huffington has some advice for Vice President Joe Biden: resign.
Planting The Huffington Post, her popular news and aggregation site, in an ever firmer place to the left of the Obama administration, Huffington cited the arguments Biden has made in private against Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s request for 40,000 additional troops in Afghanistan, and wrote that “if the president does decide to escalate, Biden, for the good of the country, should escalate his willingness to act on those reservations.”
Huffington’s attack on the escalation plans under consideration by the White House ran under a banner headline which said: “Arianna: Why Joe Biden Should Resign.”
While Huffington Post was decidedly pro-Obama in its 2008 campaign coverage, its editor-in-chief has not been afraid to take on his administration and the Democratic Congress. Just a few days ago, she told ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos that embattled Democratic congressman Charles Rangel should step down from his chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee while under an ethics investigation.
A long-time conservative who was once married to a Republican congressman before she underwent an ideological conversion experience, Huffington has turned her website into a popular platform for liberal bloggers but bristles at the idea that there's only a left and a right viewpoint on hot-button political issues. And she’s adamant that her site will not simply carry water for the administration now. “There’s absolutely no way you’d call the Huffington Post a partisan defender of the Obama White House,” she told POLITICO in July.
Indeed, Huffington has been a fierce critic of both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and top economic adviser Larry Summers. In March, it was Geithner who was in Huffington’s cross-hairs, and she also talked then about the need for a resignation. “[Use] any window dressing you want, just take the steering wheel out of Geithner's hands,” Huffington wrote, noting that “it might seem extraordinary to be calling for the resignation or demotion of President Obama's point man on our financial system.”
The following day, Huffington focused on the other high-profile economic guru. Her headline: “Larry Summers: Brilliant Mind, Toxic Ideas.”
When writing about the economic crisis, Huffington has targeted Wall Street, wagging her finger at both Republicans and Democrats. Similarly, she’s written critically of the lobbying industry—again, both sides of the aisle aren’t immune. And now, after talking about the need for resignations from top White House officials and a powerful Democratic committee chairman, Huffington’s latest column focuses on Biden, who she thinks should consider resigning out of principle, not because of incompetence or malfeasance.
“If Biden truly believes that we’re doing in Afghanistan is not in the best interests of our national security – and what issues is more important than that?” she wrote, then keeping his doubts to himself would not be enough. And once he resigned, she wrote, he “would then become the natural leader of the movement to wind down this disastrous war and focus on the real dangers in Pakistan,” she wrote.
“Obama may be no drama, but Biden loves drama,” Huffington wrote. “And what could more dramatic than resigning the vice presidency on principle? And what principle could be more honorable than refusing to go along with a policy of unnecessarily risking American blood and treasure — and America's national security?”
A top Biden aide declined to comment. A White House spokesman had no immediate response.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
"yet again"?
most on the "far left" -- by which we more accurately mean just plain old Left, there really aren't any far leftists in the US that have the ear of the president -- are disappointed at how mainstream, incrementalist, moderate, and cautious Obama has been.
most on the "far left" -- by which we more accurately mean just plain old Left, there really aren't any far leftists in the US that have the ear of the president -- are disappointed at how mainstream, incrementalist, moderate, and cautious Obama has been.
Tiger Edge
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Despite being a liberal, how many "liberal things" has Obama done while in office? I'm genuinely curious.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Yeah, I'm baffled by this as well.
Diamond keeps showing us how he's letting down the left.
I know of at least two posters in here that think he's not doing enough.
Yet Rush, Hannity, and 2861 keep calling him radical?
Life is confusing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
U2 Live From Sphere - Final Show SiriusXM stream
- Latest: Headache in a Suitcase