Beware. The Democratic Bible Thumping Begins

[Stealth]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/05/democrats.religion.ap/index.html


Complete and utter horseshit and pandering for votes IMO. (And for heaven's sake, learn the meaning of the word verses versus versus CNN).




WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a rare public discussion of her husband's infidelity, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that she probably could not have gotten through her marital troubles without relying on her faith in God.

Clinton stood by her actions in the aftermath of former President Clinton's admission that he had an affair, including presumably her decision to stay in the marriage.

"I am very grateful that I had a grounding in faith that gave me the courage and the strength to do what I thought was right, regardless of what the world thought," Clinton said during a forum where the three leading Democratic presidential candidates talked about faith and values. (Watch Clinton and other candidates talk about how their faith guides them )

"I'm not sure I would have gotten through it without my faith," she said in response to a question about how she dealt with the infidelity.

The forum, sponsored by the liberal Sojourners/Call to Renewal evangelical organization, provided an uncommon glimpse into the most personal beliefs of Clinton and rivals John Edwards and Barack Obama. The three candidates were invited by Sojourners founder Jim Wallis; most of the other Democratic candidates appeared on CNN later Monday to discuss their faith.

The most intimate question came about the Clintons' relationship, one of the world's most debated marriages but one that the husband and wife rarely speak openly about.

Clinton said she's "been tested in ways that are both publicly known and those that are not so well known or not known at all." She said it's those times when her personal faith and the prayers of others sustain her. (Watch Clinton talk about how God helped her through tough times )

"At those moments in time when you are tested, it is absolutely essential that you be grounded in your faith," she said.

Edwards: 'I sin every single day'
Edwards revealed that he prays -- and sins -- every day. The crowd gasped loudly when moderator Soledad O'Brien asked Edwards to name the biggest sin he ever committed, and he won their applause when he said he would have a hard time naming one thing.

"I sin every single day," said Edwards, the 2004 vice presidential nominee. "We are all sinners and we all fall short."

Edwards, wearing a purple tie to match Sojourners' signature color, promoted himself as the candidate most committed to the group's mission of fighting poverty. He said he doesn't feel his belief in evolution is inconsistent with his belief in Christ and he doesn't personally feel gays should be married, although as president he wouldn't impose his belief system on the rest of the country.

"I have a deep and abiding love for my Lord, Jesus Christ," Edwards said, but he said the United States shouldn't be called a Christian nation.

He said he has been going to church since he was a child and was baptized as a teen. He said he strayed from his faith as an adult and it came "roaring back" when his teenage son died in 1996. (Watch Edwards talk about his religious beliefs and how they play a role in his life )

"It was the Lord that got me through that," Edwards said, along with both of his wife's cancer diagnoses.

Clinton acknowledged that talking about her religious beliefs doesn't come naturally to her.

"I take my faith very seriously and very personally," she said. "And I come from a tradition that is perhaps a little too suspicious of people who wear their faith on their sleeves."

Each candidate was given 15 minutes to appear before the packed auditorium at George Washington University's Lisner Auditorium and a live audience on CNN. They were questioned by O'Brien and by church leaders across the country.

Good verses evil
Obama's appearance focused more on policy than the personal. Asked whether he agreed with President Bush's portrayal of the current global struggles in terms of good verses evil, Obama said there is a risk in viewing the world in such terms. (Watch Obama talk about the risks of viewing the world as a battle between good and evil )

He said he believes that the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, were the result of evil. But he said that the United States' treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay is unjust.

"The danger of using good verses evil in the context of war is that it may lead us to be not as critical as we should about our own actions," Obama said to applause.

[Jenisi]

Was she asked about it or did she just decide to go "Oh by the way I <3 god because he gets me through shit?" If she was asked how she got through that rough time, and she asked god for help and felt she couldn't do it without him (which most of many faiths do in troubled times) who cares. At least she didn't think she had a conversation with him ;p

[Stealth]

I just honestly can't see Hillary Clinton truly believing this.

[Tolwynn]

It was, of course, faith and not her own political ambitions that saw her through those tough times with Bill. Pff.

[Stealth]

Not having seen the entire transcript or the video, I will say Obama was the only one who seems to not be pulling crap trying to get the religious vote.

[Jenisi]

Well any politican will say pretty much anything to get elected, and they forget everything they said as soon as they are elected. If she's not a person of faith and didn't rely on god at all, and just said "well I guess if I wanna run for pres someday might as well stick it out", either way I'm sure it had to be hard for her.

[Ilvane]

You should watch the video if you get a chance. It was interesting.

I didn't like Obama's answers for the most part, it seemed like he was skirting the issues.

This quote was very interesting.
"I take my faith very seriously and very personally," she said. "And I come from a tradition that is perhaps a little too suspicious of people who wear their faith on their sleeves."

I feel the same way about people who walk around being overly zealous about it, just have your faith and don't try to push it on other people.

It wasn't bible thumping last night either, it was more of a discussion. And Paula Zahn's program afterwards had the rest of the candidates on to ask questions. All of the ones on PZ's program were Catholic.

I can't wait to see the Republican debate tonight.

[Daniel]

So if you're a democrat you don't believe in god?

[CrystalTears]

Oh please. This is ridiculous.

[Jorddyn]

Each candidate was given 15 minutes to appear before the packed auditorium at George Washington University's Lisner Auditorium and a live audience on CNN. They were questioned by O'Brien and by church leaders across the country.

Not surprising.

They were responding to the audience they had.

Jorddyn

[Ilvane]

It was a show specifically to discuss faith.

That's why it was about religion..makes sense, no?

Angela

[Kefka]

So if you're a democrat you don't believe in god?

Democrats are all atheist baby killers. Where's that memo...

[Parkbandit]

Hillary should just come out of the closet already and admit to munching carpet. I work with 4 lesbians and they all believe she is.

[Ilvane]

This was the full quote on Hillary's talk on the infidelity in her marriage and how her faith helped her.

"I am very grateful that I had a grounding in faith that gave me the courage and the strength to do what I thought was right, regardless of what the world thought," Clinton said during a forum where the three leading Democratic presidential candidates talked about faith and values.

~~

I believe people are always going to find fault in her and say that she was just trying to get power by staying with Bill, but do you really think she wouldn't have gotten anywhere if she wasn't with Bill? She's not exactly his little wifey who sits by and flutters her eyelashes.

There is nothing wrong with a woman being ambitious, a strong woman and still be able to forgive a husband who isn't faithful.

Angela

[Stealth]

I never said democrats were not religious, what I doubt is the sincerity behind the statements Hillary made. I am sorry, I just don't buy it coming from Hillary and I see it as I said earlier, pandering for a vote. I also don't think the republicans are any better so puhlease don't get off on a they did this vs they did that thing. I am just calling it like I see it, she is full of shit.


Stealth

[Stealth]

Have the courage to come out and say, "You know, I am not all that religious, I came through my ordeal because I am determined and have a strong will."

I certainly would respect her (or anyone) a lot more for that.

[Back]

At least she also believes in evolution.

[Sean of the Thread]

What a crock of shit.

[Tea & Strumpets]

I'm skeptical of anything she says. We are doomed if she gets elected. Her opinions change with the breeze.

[Ilvane]

heh, how so?

She's been pretty clear on what she believes. Because she changed her vote on Iraq?

Many of us have evolved enough in our opinions of the war to know that opinions CAN change due to what is going on there.

Angela

[CrystalTears]

Oh for the love of GOD, please stop.

[DeV]

That's bible thumping? Not even close.

[Sean of the Thread]

Oh for the love of GOD, please stop.

hahahha. I don't want her to stop it's great entertainment.

[Ilvane]

I don't mind having a discussion about things, you know. It's just sad that some people feel the need to ridicule how other people think. I at least respect what is said, whether I agree with it or not.

:shrug:

Angela

[CrystalTears]

Please, if this were anyone else, especially Bush or someone else Republican, there would be a lot of eyerolling and sighs and "I can't believe he's pushing his religious views down my throat" crap. But oh it's okay for Hillary, who is saying what she knows she has to in order to get the religious vote. Whatever.

[Parkbandit]

heh, how so?

She's been pretty clear on what she believes. Because she changed her vote on Iraq?

Many of us have evolved enough in our opinions of the war to know that opinions CAN change due to what is going on there.

Angela


Yea.. when the going gets tough, the pussies throw up their white flags and declare retreat and how they were tricked into voting for the war.

[Sean]

I don't know that most people openly mock Dubya for having faith in god. They openly mock him when god talks to him.

[Parkbandit]

Please, if this were anyone else, especially Bush or someone else Republican, there would be a lot of eyerolling and sighs and "I can't believe he's pushing his religious views down my throat" crap. But oh it's okay for Hillary, who is saying what she knows she has to in order to get the religious vote. Whatever.

And this somehow surprises you? As soon as I saw Stealth's OP, I was just wondering which one would defend them first... Ilvane, Backlash, Warriorbird or TheE. My money was on Backlash.. but he must still be sleeping it off.

[Parkbandit]

I don't know that most people openly mock Dubya for having faith in god. They openly mock him when god talks to him.

LOL

First of all.. understand I am a complete Atheist..

BUT if one believes in God.. and prayers.. and miracles.. why is it a huge stretch that God WOULD speak to the most powerful human being on the planet right now?

[Sean]

I wouldn't be the right person to ask. I don't believe in the concept of god so god talking to anyone is a bit nuts to me.

[Back]

And this somehow surprises you? As soon as I saw Stealth's OP, I was just wondering which one would defend them first... Ilvane, Backlash, Warriorbird or TheE. My money was on Backlash.. but he must still be sleeping it off.

Thanks. You lose. Been busy since 7am.

There is nothing to defend here. The issue is not black and white. Republican does not mean religious and democrat does not mean atheist. What she does on her own time is her own business and if she wants to talk about what she does on her own time it is her own business. America was set-up that way, you know.

What I find truly disturbing when talking about presidential candidates and viewpoints is that 3 of the republican candidates in the last debate said they did not believe in evolution.

[DeV]

Please, if this were anyone else, especially Bush or someone else Republican, there would be a lot of eyerolling and sighs and "I can't believe he's pushing his religious views down my throat" crap. But oh it's okay for Hillary, who is saying what she knows she has to in order to get the religious vote. Whatever.First of all, "In a rare public discussion of her husband's infidelity"

Now how in the hell do you equate that to Hillary pushing God down my throat or anyone else's for that matter?

She said she got through a very personal matter through her faith in God. Fine, I'll give her that. She didn't say she creates legislation by first praying to God, waiting for his answer and then letting Him direct her decision making process with regard to politics. Now, if she starts with that bullshit I'll have a completely different response all lined up for her ass. But, umm, where has she done that now? And I feel it's fairly understood that most politicians pander to the religious vote, Democrats as well as Republicans. Most (Democrats and Republicans) refrain from openly flaunting the fact that they may talk to God and get his guidance when it comes to matters of, say, for instance, running a fucking country.

[DeV]

LOL
why is it a huge stretch that God WOULD speak to the most powerful human being on the planet right now?Alternately, why is it a huge stretch that Satan WOULD speak to the most powerful human being on the planet right now? I mean, those are questions best suited for someone well versed in theology. But since you asked, I think it could easily go both ways.

[Khariz]

Alternately, why is it a huge stretch that Satan WOULD speak to the most powerful human being on the planet right now? I mean, those are questions best suited for someone well versed in theology. But since you asked, I think it could easily go both ways.

I don't understand how your question adds to or diminishes the line of thinking. Are talking to God and Satan mutually exclusive? :help:

Also...Very few people who claim to "talk to God" mean it in a literal "God said he had a ham sandwhich for lunch" kind of way. They typically mean that they prayerfully decided something. They sit down, pray to God about a decision they need to make, and then make a decision based on the way they think God would want them to, which they typically deduce from their faith/religious background.

Are there problems inherant in this system? Hell yeah! If Bush was a fanatical muslim extremist, I certainly would not want him praying to Allah and deciding the best course of action from there.

I'm just saying that regardless of how Bush phrases his talking to God, I highly doubt he literally means that he's having a literal, bilateral communication in real time.

[Kefka]

LOL

First of all.. understand I am a complete Atheist..

BUT if one believes in God.. and prayers.. and miracles.. why is it a huge stretch that God WOULD speak to the most powerful human being on the planet right now?

Like how God approached Ramses instead of Moses? I'm sure sure God favors the meek and humble over the rich and powerful.

[Khariz]

Like how God approached Ramses instead of Moses? I'm sure sure God favors the meek and humble over the rich and powerful.

Or how about Ramses wasn't praying to God for assistance.

Bush does.

[DeV]

I don't understand how your question adds to or diminishes the line of thinking. Are talking to God and Satan mutually exclusive? :help: I'm not really intending to do either, just adding to the mix by throwing it out there so to speak.




I'm just saying that regardless of how Bush phrases his talking to God, I highly doubt he literally means that he's having a literal, bilateral communication in real time.
Like someone else mentioned it has more to do with him saying that God talks to him, not so much the other way around.

[Warriorbird]

Why the hell would I defend Hillary? She's going to hand the Republicans the Presidency.

[Khariz]

Like someone else mentioned it has more to do with him saying that God talks to him, not so much the other way around.

That's what I meant though. When he says God is talking to him, I don't think he means it literally.

[Warriorbird]

He also talks to God before he makes any foreign policy decisions. I wouldn't be so sure.

[Parkbandit]

I wouldn't be the right person to ask. I don't believe in the concept of god so god talking to anyone is a bit nuts to me..

Couldn't agree more.

Although, I do want to open up a church... find a dynamic speaker and boom.. I'm in the big money that is also tax free.

[Parkbandit]

Alternately, why is it a huge stretch that Satan WOULD speak to the most powerful human being on the planet right now? I mean, those are questions best suited for someone well versed in theology. But since you asked, I think it could easily go both ways.

Um, duh.. because George W Bush denounced Satan!

[Gan]

First Hillary was against gays (lesbians specifically), now she supports them (came out during her first senate run).

Then Hillary supported the war effort, now she says she was duped.

If you look early on, you'll see Hillary off center, but as her prospect for candidacy brightened she began the gradual shift to center in order to appeal to more voters. Therefore its not suprising that she's adopting a 'pious' posture. Next thing you know, she'll go after the Pope's endorsement... (not holding my breath)

Other than that, I find the recent evolution of Democratic public religion quite entertaining. At least this election season is living up to its hype.

[Warriorbird]

Parkbandit... we should open up a carbon offset church. Get ALL the gullible money.

[DeV]

Um, duh.. because George W Bush denounced Satan!Satan usually talks through the all rich and powerful. God, not so much. Satan, that trickster. :yes:

[Parkbandit]

Parkbandit... we should open up a carbon offset church. Get ALL the gullible money.

Holy fucking shit.. I THINK You might be onto something...

I seriously need to figure out if the energy savings I am contributing are mine to sell, or the utility that pays me. I could sell these savings every year until the Global Warming Scare turns back to Global Cooling Scare or the Acid Rain Scare.

I need to strike while the Earth is Hot!!

[Drew]

(came out during her first senate run)

Probably not the best phrasing given who we are discussing.

:eatme:

[Ilvane]

Hey Ganalon, did you take the info George Bush put out in the State of the Union as truth? I still see it that those things he said were taken at face value, that they would give correct information, and not mis-state what was really going on.

But, of course we found out later it wasn't all true..so..

I still want to know, would you not have changed your mind knowing things were different and less urgent than you had originally expected?

I think people are allowed to have a change of opinon, even on wars.

There were a lot of people for the Vietnam war before they were against it..including some prominent people who bravely served in the war.

It doesn't make them any less of a person, or a flip-flopper because they changed an opinion. I think most of us have done that in our lives.

Angela

[Gan]

Hey Ganalon, did you take the info George Bush put out in the State of the Union as truth? I still see it that those things he said were taken at face value, that they would give correct information, and not mis-state what was really going on.
Yes. However I did not have the intelligence report that all the congressman had available to them which outlined even more detail to the evidence and its credibility. Thinking that the politicians should be held to the same standard of impression as the general public is just stupid.



I still want to know, would you not have changed your mind knowing things were different and less urgent than you had originally expected?
Had I seen the intelligence briefings from Niger in their entirety along with other details, I would not have given credibility to Saddam having purchased yellow cake; however, I would have supported the notion that he had made efforts to initiate a future purchase based on the known details of his trade delegation (since over 75% of Niger's national exports is Uranium ore).


I think people are allowed to have a change of opinon, even on wars.
Sorry, in politics you dont have that option when assessing blame. You do have that option when you are calling for a redirection in the direction or management of the war; just be aware of the consequences of saying you were 'duped'; to which I wave the BS flag over.


There were a lot of people for the Vietnam war before they were against it..including some prominent people who bravely served in the war.
Yes, and the Vietnam Vets really appreciated the treatment they received when they came home too. Not to mention how that change in opinion adversely affected how the war was managed (fight for a political target, give up the political target, fight for the same target again, give it up again). Let the professionals run the war the way wars should be managed, leave politics out of it. And have the temerity to follow through with something like war. Its not like you're returning a bad tie that you dont want to wear.


It doesn't make them any less of a person, or a flip-flopper because they changed an opinion. I think most of us have done that in our lives.
It does when you're a hypocrite while assessing blame.

[grapedog]

Sorry, in politics you dont have that option when assessing blame. You do have that option when you are calling for a redirection in the direction or management of the war; just be aware of the consequences of saying you were 'duped'; to which I wave the BS flag over.

The entirety of the American populous was "duped"...

You stand up for the people who voted you into office, you try to do what they want you to do. If they ring the bells for war, you vote that way.

[Parkbandit]

The entirety of the American populous was "duped"...

You stand up for the people who voted you into office, you try to do what they want you to do. If they ring the bells for war, you vote that way.


Wall of text says your full of shit:


"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

[Ilvane]

I think it's obvious we would never see things the same way(which is fine), and I don't even try to make someone change a way of thinking..but..

Hillary is the senator from New York. She is representing what her people want, and how they want her to vote. She has every right to vote on that, just like someone like from a traditionally Republican state has every right to vote the that way.

:shrug: Again, I'm not seeing a problem with changing how you feel about things, they are only human. Yes, that even included George Bush.

Angela

[Ilvane]

Yay, it's PB's wall of text again!!!!

[Parkbandit]

Yay, it's PB's wall of text again!!!!


Whenever ignorance shows it's ugly head, the great Wall of Text will be there to right the ship. Consider it a beacon through the stupidity shitstorm that is the Democratic Party.

[grapedog]

...

what does any of that have to do with 9/11...?

Iraq and 9/11 are seperate shit-storms...

[TheEschaton]

They were on a show discussing religion and faith. I've never heard Hillary on the campaign trail suddenly whip out the "It's my faith in God that makes me a good politician..." bit.

Whereas G.W., when asked an open ended question about how he comes up with the crazy ass shit he speaks daily, usually references his faith and ability to talk with God, though he probably skipped most of the New Testament (especially those parts highlighted in red).

-TheE-

[Gan]

Whenever ignorance shows it's ugly head, the great Wall of Text will be there to right the ship. Consider it a beacon through the stupidity shitstorm that is the Democratic Party.

The bastion of liberty and justice and right mindedness.

:ultimate:


Whenever you feel lost and grey
The Wall O Text will light your way.
Cutting through the political fog
to right the erroneous log,
of Democrats who seek to blame
others for their acts of shame.

Wall O Text, thou art reverred
to light the darkened path so near.
And give the wayward children hope
to avoid the noose of the liberal rope.

AAAAAMen.

[Warriorbird]

Right there with the bastion of "9-11 and Iraq are totally connected! Really!"

[Latrinsorm]

"God said he had a ham sandwhich for lunch" kind of way.INFIDEL that's not kosher!!!!!!!!!
Hillary is the senator from New York. She is representing what her people want, and how they want her to vote. She has every right to vote on that, just like someone like from a traditionally Republican state has every right to vote the that way.So if an opinion poll came out saying most New Yorkers wanted to make abortion illegal, you'd say Senator Clinton ought to push for that? Or would you say Senator Clinton ought to do what's right, regardless of what some poll says?

[grapedog]

INFIDEL that's not kosher!!!!!!!!!So if an opinion poll came out saying most New Yorkers wanted to make abortion illegal, you'd say Senator Clinton ought to push for that? Or would you say Senator Clinton ought to do what's right, regardless of what some poll says?

She ought to vote for what he people want her to vote for, why is that even being debated. Thats the whole point of REPRESENTATION...they are supposed to be a representative of the people that put them into that position...not just some random person doing what ever they want. We all vote for politians who believe in the same things we do...and we hope that they vote in ways we want in order to make our lives a little better.

[Sean of the Thread]

We all vote for politians who believe in the same things we do....

I've never voted for a politian but I hope education is on their platform.

[Stanley Burrell]

I read this as making complete sense as she probably didn't give up any of the non-Christian orifices. And if I had to speculate, bitch prolly declined many-a needed bikini wax because of, obviously, Satan.

Seriously; people always wonder why religious fanatics always turn out so violent. A shame, really -- Imagine what would happen if we created an institution specifically designed to start lining up groups of people (with your everyday human libido) by the tens of thousands, and then started instilling sexual repression and equiping them with weapons while guinea pigging them into close quarters with only the same sex gender. That'd be some serious shit, eh?

Oral sex happens everywhere.

[TheEschaton]

JFK wrote Profiles in Courage about the struggle about representing what your constituents want, and representing what's right. Sumner during slavery is a fine example.

-TheE-

[Latrinsorm]

We all vote for politians who believe in the same things we do...and we hope that they vote in ways we want in order to make our lives a little better.What we want and what will make (all of) our lives better are not only not always the same thing, they're usually not the same thing. As such, I'll thank you not to lump me in with your incoherent voting strategy in the future.

[Parkbandit]

LOL.. just saw an excerpt from a book about Hillary and her extreme makeover to gain the White House.. and becoming a 'god fearing' pseudo conservative was predicted.

[grapedog]

What we want and what will make (all of) our lives better are not only not always the same thing, they're usually not the same thing. As such, I'll thank you not to lump me in with your incoherent voting strategy in the future.

I think we're having a miscommunication...

So, you actively go out and vote for politicians who will make your life worse/more difficult? I don't know a single person who votes hoping that who they voted for completely ignores their segment of the population, or worse, tries to lower the quality of life.

We all vote for people who we think will make our lives and our world a better place. The whole point of democratic representation is that we elect people who we think will do a good job representing us on a large scale.

[Tolwynn]

The trouble with that is that people don't always look out for their own best interest, much less that of other people, much less that of society as a whole.

Florida's perennial issue of education is a fine example of that. The system needs improvement, more schools are needed, more funds are needed, etc. Every time a vote comes up to try and increase funding, whether by sales taxes, property taxes, you name it, it pretty much gets blasted down hard.

So the people there apparently would rather keep their hard-won pennies and watch the education system slowly decay. If people want that, and resoundingly so, is it still honestly the best thing to do, and the only course of action an elected official there should seek?

[Back]

What we want and what will make (all of) our lives better are not only not always the same thing, they're usually not the same thing. As such, I'll thank you not to lump me in with your incoherent voting strategy in the future.

Incoherent voting strategy? Uh, dude, its the whole basis of our democracy. You are starting to sound more communist with your approach. People don’t know whats best for them, Big Brother does.

I understand your argument loud and clear. You’ve used the example of slavery before... if everyone decided that slavery was ok and voted for it, does it make it ok? But this isn’t an if a tree fell in the woods question. We can have an entire discussion on social mores, evolution of society and even the most basic argument of what is right and wrong and who says so.

But at this point in time, remember that today[/] is the most advanced day in the history of civilization, we have in place a democracy. Through years of every other kind of system, tried and tested through time by our ancestors, its now generally accepted as evident that [i]every person should have a voice (involvement) in how we all move forward.

You aren’t the only one I have heard doubt democracy recently. Its just astounding. What else do you propose?


I think we're having a miscommunication...

So, you actively go out and vote for politicians who will make your life worse/more difficult? I don't know a single person who votes hoping that who they voted for completely ignores their segment of the population, or worse, tries to lower the quality of life.

We all vote for people who we think will make our lives and our world a better place. The whole point of democratic representation is that we elect people who we think will do a good job representing us on a large scale.

This reminds me of people who say “a leader should not pander, a leader should be a leader!” Well thats just stupid. What people are really saying when they throw out that phrase is “a follower should follow and never question”.

Of course we vote for people whom we think will lead to our benefit. And if that leader does not follow through they don’t get elected again, and in the worst cases are removed in various ways. We generally don’t elect people just because we like them and say “do whatever you want”.

Real leaders are popular with the majority, inspire people and accomplish the things they boldly say they will accomplish.


The trouble with that is that people don't always look out for their own best interest, much less that of other people, much less that of society as a whole.

I’d say thats the exception rather than the rule.

[Sean of the Thread]

I vote that illegal immigrants become indentured servants for 5 years to earn their citizenship!

I LOVE TACOS!

[Alfster]

He sewed his eyes shut because he is afraid to see
He tries to tell me what I put inside of me
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity
He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity
Your god is dead and no one cares
If there is a hell I'll see you there
He flexed his muscles to keep his flock of sheep in line
He made a virus that would kill off all the swine
His perfect kingdom of killing, suffering and pain
Demands devotion atrocities done in his name
Your god is dead and no one cares
Drowning in his own hypocrisy
And if there is a hell I'll see you there
Burning with your god in humility
Will you die for this?

[grapedog]

the problem is that we WANT an idyllic democracy...and what we have is not one of those. Most of the middle class are not adequately represented any more, it's all polar ends of the spectrum and lobby groups. i wish someone would create a lobby for the middle class...then maybe we could get some political love...some attention...

oh, and Bush can have my 300 tax "relief" back and maybe buy some body armor for someone over in Iraq...

This is what, the first war time EVER where taxes were lowered...? Nice job bringing us to war and asking us to not only not sacrifice like our soldiers...but to go out and shop...Bush is such a dipshit...this is easily the worst presidency EVER.

[Sean of the Thread]

..this is easily the worst presidency EVER.

Idiot.

Go stand in line next to Ilvane at the community college please.

[Parkbandit]

the problem is that we WANT an idyllic democracy...and what we have is not one of those. Most of the middle class are not adequately represented any more, it's all polar ends of the spectrum and lobby groups. i wish someone would create a lobby for the middle class...then maybe we could get some political love...some attention...

oh, and Bush can have my 300 tax "relief" back and maybe buy some body armor for someone over in Iraq...

This is what, the first war time EVER where taxes were lowered...? Nice job bringing us to war and asking us to not only not sacrifice like our soldiers...but to go out and shop...Bush is such a dipshit...this is easily the worst presidency EVER.


What is stopping you from sending your $300 back to the US Government? Hell, what is stopping you from sending more? You believe that the US Government is the best way to spend your money, then feel free to write a check to them. They will gladly accept it.

So I'm guessing your age is what.. around 18-20? Clearly not much life experience there.

[Parkbandit]

Idiot.

Go stand in line next to Ilvane at the community college please.

Um.. she had a 3.75 GPA in high school..

[Latrinsorm]

Incoherent voting strategy? Uh, dude, its the whole basis of our democracy. You are starting to sound more communist with your approach. People don’t know whats best for them, Big Brother does.Hey, I'm perfectly willing to let (some) people vote. :D
But at this point in time, remember that [i]today[/] is the most advanced day in the history of civilization, we have in place a democracy.You make my argument for me. Muhammad's government was incredibly advanced for its day and location, does that mean we should all submit to Islam? Of course it does, but my point is that what was best yesterday and what's best today is no indication of what will be best tomorrow. You wear contact lenses over bifocals, don't you?
Through years of every other kind of system, tried and tested through time by our ancestors, its now generally accepted as evident that every person should have a voice (involvement) in how we all move forward.I would consider it fairly disingenuous to say "you have your pick of two old white guys, isn't it great how you have a voice in the government?" I wonder, do you think someone made the argument of "Through years of every other kind of system, it's now self-evident that every person should submit unquestioningly to the monarch" around 1760 or so? How about when that guy Caesar was around?
You aren’t the only one I have heard doubt democracy recently. Its just astounding. What else do you propose?Is it really that astounding? The main thing I propose is cursory voter awareness screenings along with some sort of national voter identification registry. What astounds me is how anyone can disagree with either of those points. We're not a democracy, and we never have been. If we're going to forbid people from voting because they stole a car, how can we not mind a person voting who doesn't know Saddam Hussein from Krusty the Clown?
So, you actively go out and vote for politicians who will make your life worse/more difficult?No, you have proposed a false dichotomy. I actively go out and vote for politicians regardless of how they will influence my personal life.

[Warriorbird]

It's kinda funny. I think the classic "voter registration gives Democrats votes" strategy bit the Democrats hard last election. I wonder if "voter awareness screenings" the Latrin-style plan to make less Democrats available to vote wouldn't turn around and bite the Republicans hard...provided such an undemocratic thing actually happened. There's a lot of folks that just luuuuuv Bush who might have a few awareness issues.

Both parties want dumb people.

[grapedog]

What is stopping you from sending your $300 back to the US Government? Hell, what is stopping you from sending more? You believe that the US Government is the best way to spend your money, then feel free to write a check to them. They will gladly accept it.

So I'm guessing your age is what.. around 18-20? Clearly not much life experience there.

I didn't say that the government is the best when spending money, but I did say that Bush is the first president in US history to give a tax relief during wartime...and a TOKEN tax relief at that. Really, how many peoples lives were changed by the $300? The only people that really affected were the people who didn't already have a living wage job and were barely scraping by already...and at that point $300 at most puts food on the table for another month. Not a bad thing, but tax relief in a time of war, especially to the tune of $200 or more is a joke. What would have went over better is if he rescinded some of his tax breaks for moving labor off shore, then maybe more people could find actual living wage jobs instead of Bush's line of thinking that a McJob can support a family of 4.

What does age have to do with anything, am I supposed to infer that people in your age range are all republican pole smokers without a mind of their own just because you're a jackass? I try to let people dig their own graves, as you have done without pigeonholing them myself.


Idiot.

Go stand in line next to Ilvane at the community college please.

I've already got a degree, a good job, a nice house...what would going to a community college do for me? You make assumptions about me because I think Bush is a fucking moron with less sense than a thimble. That could be true if I wasn't on the majority side of Bush's 70%-80% disapproval rating. You can wait 40-50 years to see the "greatness" that was Bush...but I live in the here and now, and Bush is pretty much the worst president ever. When the worst kid on an elementary school debate team can come up with more salient points than Bush in pretty much any topic...it's a sad commentary on the backwords way our Democracy works sometimes.

Bush is a moron... http://www.youtube.com/?v=r9sa7YjCblU

[Sean of the Thread]

I've already got a degree, a good job, a nice house...what would going to a community college do for me? You make assumptions about me because I think Bush is a fucking moron with less sense than a thimble. That could be true if I wasn't on the majority side of Bush's 70%-80% disapproval rating. You can wait 40-50 years to see the "greatness" that was Bush...but I live in the here and now, and Bush is pretty much the worst president ever. When the worst kid on an elementary school debate team can come up with more salient points than Bush in pretty much any topic...it's a sad commentary on the backwords way our Democracy works sometimes.


Well I hope you didn't pay much for your degree.. That aside I wasn't making assumptions about you because you think Bush is a moron. I made an observation that you're a fucking moron based on your worse presidency ever comment.

Clearly the comment of an uneducated retard.

[Gan]

Not to mention he totally glossed over the effect the mass $300.00 tax refund had on the economy as a spending stimulus...

Edited because I forgot to add:



The only people that really affected were the people who didn't already have a living wage job and were barely scraping by already...and at that point $300 at most puts food on the table for another month.

The only people who go the refunds were people who actually filed taxes. An estimated 95 million to be exact. Single people got $300, Single parents got $500, and married families got $600. The aim of this as well as other facets of the 2001 tax cuts were to stimulate the economy which had just received reports from Greenspan of a threat of recession and an unemployment figure appearing at ~6.2%.

Just go back to your moveon.org propeganda and quit bandstanding here. You'll find most will agree that W is not the best president thats ever graced the white house; however, you'll only find a few wing nuts that populate the PC that will agree with you that he's the worst we've had.

[Some Rogue]

Not to mention he totally glossed over the effect the mass $300.00 tax refund had on the economy as a spending stimulus...


But that just went to line the pockets of the big bad evil corporations...duh.

[Gan]

But that just went to line the pockets of the big bad evil corporations...duh.

See the rest of the post. ;)

[Parkbandit]

I didn't say that the government is the best when spending money, but I did say that Bush is the first president in US history to give a tax relief during wartime...and a TOKEN tax relief at that. Really, how many peoples lives were changed by the $300? The only people that really affected were the people who didn't already have a living wage job and were barely scraping by already...and at that point $300 at most puts food on the table for another month. Not a bad thing, but tax relief in a time of war, especially to the tune of $200 or more is a joke. What would have went over better is if he rescinded some of his tax breaks for moving labor off shore, then maybe more people could find actual living wage jobs instead of Bush's line of thinking that a McJob can support a family of 4.

What does age have to do with anything, am I supposed to infer that people in your age range are all republican pole smokers without a mind of their own just because you're a jackass? I try to let people dig their own graves, as you have done without pigeonholing them myself.



I've already got a degree, a good job, a nice house...what would going to a community college do for me? You make assumptions about me because I think Bush is a fucking moron with less sense than a thimble. That could be true if I wasn't on the majority side of Bush's 70%-80% disapproval rating. You can wait 40-50 years to see the "greatness" that was Bush...but I live in the here and now, and Bush is pretty much the worst president ever. When the worst kid on an elementary school debate team can come up with more salient points than Bush in pretty much any topic...it's a sad commentary on the backwords way our Democracy works sometimes.

Bush is a moron... http://www.youtube.com/?v=r9sa7YjCblU


Actually, the token tax relief made way for one of the strongest economic turnarounds in history. While it's only $300 per family, you fail to see what impact it had on our economy as a whole. Billions of dollars were pumped into our companies which initiated growth and turned around a gloomy outlook.

And age has to do with maturity, life experience and posting style and nothing to do with what party you are affiliated with. You expertly provide an example with your 'Republican pole smokers' retort.