Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditThe long-awaited smear campaign against Barack Obama has once again gone mainstream, with the McCain campaign and their Republican allies caricaturing Obama as a terrorist-loving 60s radical.
Like me, you may be experiencing a sense of déjà vu. Much the same thing happened to Obama last spring, with Hillary Clinton and her surrogates pushing these flimsy connections and the mainstream media latching on. I documented these smears and their origins in two pieces, "Smearing Obama" and "Obama Under the Weather."
That strategy didn't work then and it isn't likely to work now, as former Clinton communications chief Howard Wolfson writes in a new blog.
Yet it's worth reflecting on just how low the McCain campaign is stooping. Many of the dubious claims and outright falsehoods against Obama first took root in the far, far right, started by anti-Semitic con artists (as my colleague Chris Hayes documented in "The New Right-Wing Smear Machine"), discredited fringe bloggers and Islam-hating Christian right radicals.
McCain once pledged to fight this kind of politics. After all, it was Rove-spread lies that brought him down in South Carolina in 2000.
The Dow plunged 500 points today and the McCain campaign is talking about Bill Ayers a month before the election. How pathetic and irrelevant.
As Wolfson writes:
Republican philosophies have been discredited by events. Voters understand this. This is a big election about big issues. McCain's smallball will not work. This race will not be decided by lipsticked pigs. And John McCain can not escape that reality.
"The dow tumbled 300 points today and the McCain campaign is talking about Bill Ayers a month before the election. How pathetic and irrelevant."
Thank-you Mr. Berman. I couldn't agree more.
Posted by HAL9000 at 10/06/2008 @ 11:22am
We knew this was coming. Desperate and out of time, the Straight Talk Express is stuck, spinning its wheels and flinging mud. I only hope the American people take this as an opportunity to emphatically reject this kind of campaign. Say whatever you want about Obama's policies and his voting record (the ACTUAL voting record), but to question this man's character and patriotism is ridiculous. John McCain has lost all sense of decency, this is truly despicable.
In my weaker moments I feel sorry for McCain, but then I snap back to reality and look forward to seeing Obama capture 325+ electoral votes and end a seven year war on the middle class.
Obama/Biden '08
Posted by DGKusel at 10/06/2008 @ 11:39am
and end a seven year war on the middle class.
Posted by DGKusel at 10/06/2008 @ 11:39am
that gonna kinda be like trying to plant corn after gettysburg......
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/06/2008 @ 11:51am
's
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/06/2008 @ 11:51am
Come on, guys....what do you expect?
1. They CAN'T win on the issues.
2. The polling has slipped (and continued to slip this weekened) since the GOP Convention and Palin's supposed draw of "all the Hillary voters" never appeared.
They've got nothing left. Frankly, this new run of old stuff is actually PRETTY GOOD NEWS....because it means they don't have anything NEW to run with!
heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 12:07pm
Posted by madlib at 10/06/2008 @ 12:10pm
Another reason the polling is taking its toll....
Virginia and North Carolina are now "toss-ups"....that's two FORMERLY "Solid Red" states that Bush won in 2004....and McCain can't afford to lose ANY of the states that Bush won in '04 or he's through.
Soooooo....despite "jayne's" insistance, he surrendered Michigan, which Bush lost by only 150,000 and "re-focused" in Virginia. Which isn't the main problem...the main problem is MONEY, which McCain doesn't have, though the GOP can shore him up with 527s and "issue ads".
But that's money defending "previously held territory" that ISN'T available for the battlegrounds.
Obama has them fighting a multi-front war and trying to protect what ground they already SHOULD have locked-up.
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 12:20pm
If you want THE best VISUAL reason for why the Republicans are just throwing out anything and seeing if it will stick....this is it-
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10
(In fairness, that's converting "leaners" and "toss-ups" into solid states....but the other map isn't much better for them!)
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 12:33pm
From Obama Camp:
Over the weekend, John McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more direct, personal attacks on Barack Obama.
In the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to change the subject from the central question of this election. Perhaps because the policies McCain supported these past eight years and wants to continue are pretty hard to defend.
But it's not just McCain's role in the current crisis that they're avoiding. The backward economic philosophy and culture of corruption that helped create the current crisis are looking more and more like the other major financial crisis of our time.
During the savings and loan crisis of the late '80s and early '90s, McCain's political favors and aggressive support for deregulation put him at the center of the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan, one of the largest in the country. More than 23,000 investors lost their savings. Overall, the savings and loan crisis required the federal government to bail out the savings of hundreds of thousands of families and ultimately cost American taxpayers $124 billion.
Sound familiar?
In that crisis, John McCain and his political patron, Charles Keating, played central roles that ultimately landed Keating in jail for fraud and McCain in front of the Senate Ethics Committee. The McCain campaign has tried to avoid talking about the scandal, but with so many parallels to the current crisis, McCain's Keating history is relevant and voters deserve to know the facts -- and see for themselves the pattern of poor judgment by John McCain.
http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 12:39pm
Yep, it's working soooo well...
OCTOBER 6, 2008
US: Obama 52, McCain 44 (Rasmussen 10/03-05) By PH Staff
Rasmussen 10/03-05,08; 3,000 LV 2% Mode: IVR
&&&&
Will we see McPOWhowmanyCARSMANSIONS hit 39%? Will Obamanation stay in the 50's?
It's beginning to look a lot like this.
Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2008 @ 12:40pm
Here's the problem with the Republicans running strategy right now. Every point the DOW drops. Every attack in Afghanistan. Every step backward in Iraq. Equals points lost for them. Since all of these things are happening right now, they can't win on the issues so they have to low ball and try any trick the can. They have already lost the battle of issues. Now they have to hope that their tried and true method of fighting dirty works.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/06/2008 @ 12:58pm
Quite honestly even a terrorist attack wouldn't work at this stage. As bad as that sounds. Everything they have been doing to "protect" us. If it was all proven worthless by a terrorist attack that would hurt the McCain campaign even more.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/06/2008 @ 12:59pm
VA may be lost to McCain already. Latest polls in VA show Obama with a pretty solid lead...
...and it appears to be growing.
Posted by Lillian at 10/06/2008 @ 1:00pm
And now McCain is taliing about cutting Medicare/Medicaid.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.html
So it looks like he's conceding Florida as well.
Posted by Lillian at 10/06/2008 @ 1:03pm
And Palin didn't help...she actually HURT McCain with undecideds...
Key Part---"It also found that Palin's performance in the debate did nothing to clinch undecided votes for her running mate, Arizona Sen. John McCain. Before the debate, those same undecided voters were leaning 56 percent to 44 percent for McCain. The day after the debate, the numbers tilted 52 percent to 48 percent for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.
"It's suggesting an overall tendency of undecideds toward Obama, so it is significant," said Clifford Young, a senior vice president at Ipsos Public Affairs. "We're catching an underlying trend that's going on."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53475.html
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 1:09pm
"Islam-hating Christian right radicals." wow, LVLIBERTY. mr. berman reads YOUR COMMENTS!!
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/06/2008 @ 11:39am
Of course I hate Islam. It is the work of the devil designed to steer people away from the true G-d. It is a religion based upon hate. It is a religion who's doctrines require the murder or subjugation of others.
But like most who rant ignorantly as you are oft given to, you conflate hatred of a false and hate-filled dogma with hatred of people. I don't hate the Muslim people. Just as G-d loves them and desires them to be set free from their bondage and embrace Him and His love, so do I.
My hatred of false teaching that attempts to steer people away from Jesus is found in following Christ's example;
John 8:42-45
"Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:16pm
Posted by RedRiver_. at 10/06/2008 @ 1:03pm
The problem with McCain's attacks is they are FACTUALLY INACCURATE and imply much more of a connection than what is actually there.
It would be more persuasive RED RIVER if you could cite ANY advice on the economy Obama received from these men...and if you can't, that should be a large Red Flag that you are pushing distortions, innuendos and untruths for McCain.
Keating 5, on the other hand, is VERY REAL. McCain vacationed with the Keating family, flew around on the Keating jet, and took lots of money from Charles Keating since Keating was one of John's first political patrons.
And perhaps more significantly, Keating and John McCain were on the same page concerning deregulation of the Savings and Loans banks, and this cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts, just like the current crisis.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 1:20pm
"Islam-hating Christian right radicals." wow, LVLIBERTY. mr. berman reads YOUR COMMENTS!!
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/06/2008 @ 11:39am
And Mr. Berman is also right that Christians are or should be radicals in living and speaking the message of the Gospel of the Kingdom, at least those who actually believe in Christ's message of the Gospel of the Kingdom. As Jesus said Himself,
"Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here."
Matthew 10:11-15, 34-38 "Now whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out. And when you go into a household, greet it. If the household is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet. Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city!
"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; and a man's enemies will be those of his own household.' He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me."
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm
Of the members of Congress who own investments in Fannie and Freddie, 7 of the top 10, and 16 of 28 are Republicans, including...
...John McCain.
Posted by Lillian at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm
This is the basic problem with the Fundies - they twist the words of Jesus Christ to support a "war ideology" and completely forget about the GREATEST COMMANDMENT according to Jesus, which was about LOVE.
>>>One of the Pharisees tested Jesus with a question, "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" (Matthew 22:36 NIV). Jesus replied, " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" (Matthew 22:37-40 NIV). <<<
How could the Fundies like LVL miss the ENTIRE ESSENCE of the Gospel of Jesus - which is about LOVE - and still call themselves Christians? Could it be they are so hung up on hate and killing those who don't believe as they do that they missed the whole point of Jesus?
When Jesus says "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments", doesn't that suggest that his entire Gospel is based on this, so if you miss these commandments and don't elevate them above all others you couldn't possibly be a true follower of Jesus?
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 1:36pm
Funny. Lvliberty sounds my mom and my aunt when describing Catholicism. They always say, "the one true faith". I love her but that is one of the very few things we disagree on.
Now back to the topic. Okay I'll give you one. McCain's campaign is neither straight talk nor an express. Discuss.
Posted by k330k at 10/06/2008 @ 1:37pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm
The mental image here is of the weary chaplain praying for the soul of a man on his way to the gallows.
McCain will tough it out, he's done it before. I do expect Palin to break down before this is over, though.
Posted by MyParadigm at 10/06/2008 @ 1:40pm
Of course I hate Islam. It is the work of the devil designed to steer people away from the true G-d. It is a religion based upon hate. It is a religion who's doctrines require the murder or subjugation of others.----Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:16pm
But you ALSO believe that we can bring a "peaceful, friendly democracy in Iraq" into being?!??!?!?
What? Are the 97% of Iraqis who are Muslim going to convert to Christianity?
Or do you hold two opposing views in your head at the same time?
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 1:43pm
It took 3 months for McPalin to move the polls back from just a high a Obama lead-- see the graph and numbers here:
http://tinyurl.com/2yke8u
Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2008 @ 1:45pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 1:43pm
No, MASK...Fundies like LVL really believe that war making should be used to get "non-Christians" - whatever that means - to convert to the same version of Christianity as them.
It's The Crusades all over again with more destructive weapons, and megalomaniacs as politicians who want to meet Jesus by hastening the end of the world!
Truly scary!
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 1:48pm
er, it's war for profit not prophet..., but they do so enjoy the confusion-- DUH!
Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2008 @ 2:03pm
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 1:48pm
You really don't have to get so hyperbolic about it.
LL (and others like him on the Right) prove their weird-ass hypocrisy via that paradox all the time...
on the one hand, they agree with Dubya and the neo-cons and defend the idea of us "bringing peace and democracy to Iraq...even the entire Middle East" (which is 97% Islamic).
on the other, they (in their Islamophobic zeal) tell us that NO Muslims can be trusted and Islam "is a religion based upon hate. It is a religion who's doctrines require the murder or subjugation of others."
Yet, they don't see any contradiction in the two positions?!?!?!?!???
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 2:08pm
What? Are the 97% of Iraqis who are Muslim going to convert to Christianity?
Or do you hold two opposing views in your head at the same time?
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 1:43pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Didn't you hear....on "Countdown" the other night. Bush has awarded approximately $300 million to private contractors (more than his alternative energy research budget) for development and aid of Iraqui television. I assume this will include televangelists singing the praises of Jesus and asking for donations to 1-800's. Onward Christian soldiers..........
Posted by OneVote at 10/06/2008 @ 2:09pm
Okay so here's the deal... Imagine if Obama had sought political endorsements from preachers who said...
"God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve."
"Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans,"
"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."---talking about 9/11.
McCain sought out Hagee and Falwell, but that's not talked about by the media like the way they love to fall for race baiting with Wright.
Posted by CanWeQuestionPalin? at 10/06/2008 @ 2:13pm
McCain sought out Hagee and Falwell, but that's not talked about by the media like the way they love to fall for race baiting with Wright.
Posted by CanWeQuestionPalin? at 10/06/2008 @ 2:13pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Who needs Hagee and Falwell when you got Palin?
Posted by OneVote at 10/06/2008 @ 2:16pm
Posted by OneVote at 10/06/2008 @ 2:09pm |
LVLIB's contradictions on the Middle East are the stuff of legend.
Try this one on him next time some post or thread on Israel comes up--Simply ask-
"LVLB, you worry about Iran getting a nuclear weapon...is it possible for Iran to destroy Israel?"
He locks up. On one hand, he MUST stick with his paranoid view of Iran and say that "it poses a grave threat to Israel" and "Ahmadinejad has SAID he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth"....
but as a fundey/evangey Christian he ALSO must stick with his religious dogmatic idea that Israel has a "shield" around it, granted by God, that will NOT see it destroyed.
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 2:19pm
What if Obama had a preacher who was "Laying Hands" on him saying protect him from witchcraft? Like Palin did with head bowed. What if Obama had sat and listened to a Jews For Jesus "preacher" talk about...
NEW YORK (JTA)--Vice presidential pick Sarah Palin says she doesn't share the views of a Jews for Jesus leader who in a speech at her church suggested that violence against Israelis resulted from God's judgment against Jews who have failed to embrace Jesus.
David Brickner, the executive director of Jews for Jesus, suggested in his Aug. 17 sermon at Wasilla Bible Church that the refusal to accept Jesus was responsible for the long history of devastation visited upon Jerusalem. He also described his group's successful targeting of Israeli Jews, both in Israel and elsewhere.
"Judgment is very real, and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television," said Brickner, according to a transcript posted on the church's Web site. "It's very real. When [my son] Isaac was in Jerusalem he was there to witness some of that judgment--some of that conflict--when a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment--you can't miss it."
I guess in the end it seems the only times the "mainstream media" find religious figures relevant to a candidate is if that candidate is at least half-black. A cute white woman can apparently get away with anything.
Posted by CanWeQuestionPalin? at 10/06/2008 @ 2:28pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 2:19pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Is it my imagination, or is LivLib getting ever more irrational as the election nears? He seems to quoting alot of ominous scripture stuff today.
Contradiction is the Middle Name of a Charlatan --- ancient proverb.
Posted by OneVote at 10/06/2008 @ 2:38pm
Obama's Radical and Marxist Mentors and other Marxist Connections
As Gov. Palin has stated, it's time for the gloves to come off. The MSM which desperately wants to see a leftist in the White House, refuses to really investigate and address this issue for the American People.
Here are some of the key players apart from Ayers.
Frank Marshall Davis-member of the Communist Party USA
The wire service notes that Frank Marshall Davis is referred to in Obama's book Dreams From My Father "only as Frank."
AP does note that Davis was "an important influence" on Obama but doesn‘t mention Davis‘s communist views and how he took the Stalinist line before, during, and after World War II. AP even uses the term "mentor," noting that Obama "struggled to find mentors in his search for a black identity." But the failure to mention that Davis was a Communist means that AP deliberately ignored the newsworthy significance of the relationship.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/ap-lies-about-obamas-red-mentor/
Mike Klonsky-Communist, partner with Bill Ayers and Obama Mentor and Supporter
In 1968 Mike Klonsky was the national secretary of SDS.
In late 1969, Klonsky founded the October League, a a pro-Mao communist organisation which in 1977 became the Communist Party, Marxist-Leninist (CP-ML). Klonsky chaired the CP-ML which was recognised by the Chinese Communist Party as their US fraternal party.
In 1991, Klonsky co-founded the Small Schools Workshop in Chicago with Bill Ayers
The Workshop was given at least $175,000 by Chicago's Annenberg Challenge. This organisation was chaired by Barack Obama, who had been recruited for the job by a group which included Bill Ayers.
Until June this year Klonsky ran a Blog on Obama's campaign website
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:42pm
More on Obama's Marxist connections
Then you have Carl Davidson-Marxist, member of UPJ (United for Peace and Justice), MDS member, former SDS member and webmaster of Progressives for Obama. After the SDS broke up Davidson became involved in Maoist politics until 1992 when he became a leader of the newly formed Committees of Correspondence (CoC), a Marxist-Leninist coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and former Communist Party USA (CPUSA) members. The organization has since changed its name to the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). Davidson remains a prominent figure in CCDS alongside several MDS board members including Noam Chomsky and Manning Marable. At the center of these ties you find groups like the New Party which Obama was a member of and a fact the MSM continues to ignore And who is New Party? It was founded by ACORN, DSA (Democratic Socialists of America, and Committees of Correspondence (CoC), an offshoot of the CPUSA (Communist Party USA). It is part of an effort by MDS (Movement for a Democratic Society) which is an offshoot from SDS and Marxist organizations. From these groups you get Progressives for Obama which is led by the people I've listed and other well known Marxists and anarchists. New Party News article Spring 1996 page 1, celebrated the Davis' congressional victory and went on to say;
"New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)..."these victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work' said Obama".
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:49pm
Well, lets see, with the Dow tumbling and and the country in economic crisis, the Nation is examining Palins realationship with Polar Bears.
How Equally Pathetic
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/06/2008 @ 2:53pm
LVLIB's contradictions on the Middle East are the stuff of legend.
Try this one on him next time some post or thread on Israel comes up--Simply ask-
"LVLB, you worry about Iran getting a nuclear weapon...is it possible for Iran to destroy Israel?"
He locks up. On one hand, he MUST stick with his paranoid view of Iran and say that "it poses a grave threat to Israel" and "Ahmadinejad has SAID he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth"....
but as a fundey/evangey Christian he ALSO must stick with his religious dogmatic idea that Israel has a "shield" around it, granted by God, that will NOT see it destroyed.
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 2:19pm
Having G-d's protection does not mean that you do nothing.
And my concerns over Iran seem to go over your head. Even with G-d's protection, attempts by Iran against Israel would surely provoke an even greater global conflict which it appears you don't consider.
Secondly, it means that Iran is a threat to Europe and any other enemies it believes would stop it's goal of creating a dominant Shia led Islamic rule.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:54pm
Hey LivLib - how about Palin's association with secessionist characters in Alaska? They want to expropriate lots of Federal land - our land. How anti-American can you get?
Posted by OneVote at 10/06/2008 @ 2:55pm
Dow is down almost 800 points now. Thanks to Republicans. And still they blather on..
Posted by chaoszen at 10/06/2008 @ 2:55pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:42pm
One thing for sure...after Karl Rove loses this election, the POLITICS OF DISTRACTION AND FEAR that he learned from Lee Atwater will never again gain currency in presidential level politics.
Most Americans are tired of you NOT telling them how you are going to help improve their lives, and if all you have to offer is distraction and fear then you really have nothing to offer Americans at all.
Atwater is dead and Rove is dying a slow and painful political death.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 2:59pm
How Equally Pathetic
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/06/2008 @ 2:53pm | ignore this person | warn this person
This election should be titled "Name Your Poison." All this Palin fodder would be better left to Entertainment Tonight. The Nation seems to be getting their cues from the MSM as to what is newsworthy.
Posted by OneVote at 10/06/2008 @ 3:00pm
it's goal of creating a dominant Shia led Islamic rule.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:54pm
BOO!
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/06/2008 @ 3:10pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:54pm
You don't answer the question, LL.
Here it is in another way-
"In a future scenario, could the Islamic Republic of Iran with multiple nuclear warheads at its disposal, destroy much of the State of Israel?" Yes or No?
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 3:21pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:54pm
Oh, and the OTHER question you won't answer...
"Do you believe that Iraq, a country that is 97% Islamic, can become a peaceful democracy and ally to the United States?"
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 3:22pm
Just wanted to bounce around a scenario. What if on election day all the exit polls show Obama as the clear winner buy a large margin. But all the newspapers and cable network staions declare McCain the winner? What then?
Posted by chaoszen at 10/06/2008 @ 3:26pm
Posted by chaoszen at 10/06/2008 @ 3:26pm
Paranoia gets you nowhere....especially on a GRAND scale.
Want to get it "neck-n-neck" and McCain pulls out a "strange" squeaker in Pennsylvania which wins him the EC...sure.
But if you are thinking Obama will be up by 10% and McCain WINS by 10%....that's RESE/PLUNGER Country.
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 3:30pm
"Rove is dying a slow and painful political death."
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 2:59pm
I guess if Mr. Turdblossom laughing all the way to the bank is your definition of "painful", then ok.
As long as it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Otherwise, he seems pretty happy to me on television with that familiar look of 'You'll never catch me coppers!!"
Posted by Benchrest at 10/06/2008 @ 3:34pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:49pm
Keating 5.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/06/2008 @ 3:36pm
Paranoia gets you nowhere....especially on a GRAND scale. Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 3:30pm
It was just a what if question. No paranoia. Im not paranoid anymore. After 8 years of Bush and 12 years of Republican rule the facts are what scare me. The things I never thought I would ever see in this country have come to pass.
It difficult to be paranoid when reality supercedes paranoia.
Posted by chaoszen at 10/06/2008 @ 3:45pm
Posted by chaoszen at 10/06/2008 @ 3:45pm
Well, I'd just wait and see. Remember, McCain's not dead, nor terminally wounded...yet.
He's got two debates and 30 days, he CAN pull it back to within the MoE in the polls. Glacier Gidget will keep the base happy, so he's free to appeal to moderates and Indies.
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 3:50pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 2:42pm
(and other posts)
That's really hilarious. You take the fact that several individuals who were far-left at some point in the past and see that they are now in some way working for the first serious black candidate for president, and conclude that the candidate must be influenced by them.
Yeah, and my drunk cousin who sweeps up on the third shift at the local Ford plant has undivided attention of the board of directors.
Your pyramid is upside down, pal.
Posted by MyParadigm at 10/06/2008 @ 4:00pm
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c44e0c7b53
This is awesomely hilarious, and probably a role model for LVL.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/06/2008 @ 4:03pm
Once again we see another example of how "pathetic" the McCain campaign is. How could anyone in there right "mind" vote for someone who approves of such "disgusting" tactics. The blatant realization of the McCain campaign not having any concrete strategies, or even putting more effort into talking to people about the "real" problems/issues, clearly shows they know they are running out of time!
Americans have had eight (8).....count them...eight years of lies and deceitfulnesses from this diabolical administration (and the people behind them who are really in control). Eight years of facts, facts that "no" smear campaign can divert from.
To vote for John McCain is a blatant act of cowardliness.
Posted by rayven at 10/06/2008 @ 4:07pm
One thing for sure...after Karl Rove loses this election, the POLITICS OF DISTRACTION AND FEAR that he learned from Lee Atwater will never again gain currency in presidential level politics.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 2:59pm
you are dreaming in colour.
plus, it's only october.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/06/2008 @ 4:07pm
Speaking of the profit/prophet confusion:
http://tinyurl.com/3lesxn
http://whereisthemoney.org/collateral_II.htm
Posted by hsuBfools at 10/06/2008 @ 4:12pm
Posted by Benchrest at 10/06/2008 @ 3:34pm
First he will lose his "one-trick-pony" political genius status as his DIVIDE AND DISTRACT strategy fails in a huge way in this election.
Then he goes to federal prison where all that "laughing all the way to the bank" stuff you just talked about won't seem so funny any more.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 4:21pm
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 4:21pm
I may be eating crow and offering apologies in the future..
however,
I do not see Rove spending one minute in custody of any kind, unless you count talk shows as prison.
Posted by Benchrest at 10/06/2008 @ 4:36pm
Rove will spend eternity in the purgatory of richly deserved public opinion, namely that he is the one who, nmore than any other person, brought us eight years of having an idiot for a leader.
Ah, so sweet to have someone to blame.
Posted by MyParadigm at 10/06/2008 @ 4:49pm
>>>unless you count talk shows as prison.
Posted by Benchrest at 10/06/2008 @ 4:36pm <<<
I am sure there will be some show that will want to interview him from prison but I don't think anyone will ever take his political advice seriously anymore.
Rove was the ultimate usurper. He stole Atwater's political tactic of "divide and distract", but since Atwater was dead, Karl was made out to look like some sort of political genius for stealing Atwater's ideas.
Divide and distract only works when the public doesn't realize that this is what you are doing to them. As soon as the public becomes aware that you are trying to manipulate them with this tactic, the tactic fails.
The problem for Karl is that he doesn't have any other tool than Divide-and-Distract in his toolbox.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 5:05pm
Deuteronomy 13:6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. 9 You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone him to death
There are a thousand more scriptures just like this that prove you to be a hypocrite lvliberty1.
Christianity is as intolerant and violent religion as any other.
Posted by analogcolor at 10/06/2008 @ 5:57pm
No, MASK...Fundies like LVL really believe that war making should be used to get "non-Christians" - whatever that means - to convert to the same version of Christianity as them.
It's The Crusades all over again with more destructive weapons, and megalomaniacs as politicians who want to meet Jesus by hastening the end of the world!
Truly scary!
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 1:48pm
No wonder you are an Obama sycophant. Your ignorance seems to be without limits.
I am not a Fundamentalist (which I've also stated often). I am an evangelical/pentecostal Christian.
I have never believed nor will I ever that war can ever be used to convert people to Christianity. That is such an ignorant statement that it almost defies belief that it could be uttered by anyone over the age of 5.
Finally, I have consistently corrected the falsehood that leftists like yourself keep perpetuating that Christians believe they can hasten the end of the world by any means other than sharing the gospel. (Mt 24:14)
It is simply a lie typical of Christian hating people like yourself who wallow in their ignorance.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:08pm
"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; and a man's enemies will be those of his own household.' He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me."
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm | ignore this person | warn this person
sounds kinda cultish to me.
Posted by dexter666 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:17pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:08pm
OK - you say you are not a Fundamentalist Christian and do NOT believe that war should be used to "bring people to Christ".
So from a strictly Christian point of view, what was the purpose of invading and occupying Iraq?
Don't you think your stories from the Bible about the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah sound like a Fundamentalist Christian that wants to substitute THEIR judgment for God's?
Re-Read your post - Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm - and then tell us how this post does not appear to condone force and war to spread your Christian views?
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 6:23pm
...so Obama "the fundamentalist drug dealer" must have sold junkie Cindy McCain her prescription pain killers... no he was like 11 then in Thailand somewhere....
Posted by ucanthandlethetruth at 10/06/2008 @ 6:33pm
So from a strictly Christian point of view, what was the purpose of invading and occupying Iraq?
Don't you think your stories from the Bible about the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah sound like a Fundamentalist Christian that wants to substitute THEIR judgment for God's?
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 6:23pm
There was no "Christian" point of view reason to go to war with Saddam. It was justified on the basis of international law. Saddam was guilty of a Material Breach which allowed a resumption of hostilities.
On your second point.
No the stories you mention have nothing to do with Christians bringing judgment. The judgments there and those mentioned by Jesus in Matthew for those who reject our gospel message are from G-d, not man.
As to your third point:
"Re-Read your post - Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm - and then tell us how this post does not appear to condone force and war to spread your Christian views?"
Your ignorance is showing again. The sword that Jesus refers to is both the Word of G-d and the Holy Spirit (Eph 6:17 and Hebrews 4:12). It has nothing to do with a physical war.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:35pm
There are a thousand more scriptures just like this that prove you to be a hypocrite lvliberty1.
Christianity is as intolerant and violent religion as any other.
Posted by analogcolor at 10/06/2008 @ 5:57pm
I'm sorry you seem to be without understanding of Christianity. If you actually knew scripture then you would know that Christians are no longer under the law for right standing with G-d. In Luke 16:16 Jesus says:
"The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it."
And as stated by Paul in Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Galatians 3:2-7
Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? 4 Have you suffered so many things in vain--if indeed it was in vain?
5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?-- 6 just as Abraham "believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."[c] 7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.
Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree"[h]), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
Perhaps this will speak something deeper to you than mere criticism.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:49pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:35pm
By that logic we should invade and occupy Israel since they CONTINUE TO VIOLATE INTERNATIONAL LAW with their illegal settlements on Palestinian land, right?
And where do you draw the line between "Man's judgment" and God's judgment"? Isn't it easy to slip into this Palin religious view that "we are doing God's will" by invading and occupying Iraq. In essence, man becomes an "agent of God" carrying out his judgment against other men, right?
And I know about the "sword" being the Word, but some Fundamentalists twist this verse and others like it (e.g. Moneychangers in the Temple) to meant that Jesus condoned violence against other men to pursue "God's will" from the Christian perspective.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 7:11pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 6:35pm
Hey, LL....now explain Titus 3:2 and how it doesn't apply to blogs!
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 8:05pm
The things I never thought I would ever see in this country have come to pass.
Posted by chaoszen at 10/06/2008 @ 3:45pm
What things?
Posted by twillie at 10/06/2008 @ 8:11pm
Hey, LL....now explain Titus 3:2 and how it doesn't apply to blogs!
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 8:05pm
What you have in the english is an oversimplification of the greek word used. unlike most cases in the NT, here and with Peter, the greek word blasphemeo (blaspheme) is used. The context shows then that you should not speak in a way that shows contempt for someone that is actually good.
So like Jesus who is my example, I will call hypocrites and liars and those who mock G-d exactly what they are. That is not inconsistent.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 8:14pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 8:14pm
But if you believe God's judgment against certain people is appropriate because God tells you so in the Bible, is it appropriate for man to carry out this judgment as "agents of God"?
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 8:23pm
By that logic we should invade and occupy Israel since they CONTINUE TO VIOLATE INTERNATIONAL LAW with their illegal settlements on Palestinian land, right?
And where do you draw the line between "Man's judgment" and God's judgment"? Isn't it easy to slip into this Palin religious view that "we are doing God's will" by invading and occupying Iraq. In essence, man becomes an "agent of God" carrying out his judgment against other men, right?
And I know about the "sword" being the Word, but some Fundamentalists twist this verse and others like it (e.g. Moneychangers in the Temple) to meant that Jesus condoned violence against other men to pursue "God's will" from the Christian perspective.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 7:11pm
1. No. Israel has not violated international law. There is no Material Breach of a Cease Fire Agreement as there was with Iraq. Nor are the settlements illegal according to a) the British Mandate of 1946, b)international law in that the West Bank, the Golan Heights and Gaza were not seized from "Palestinians", but from Jordan, Syria, and Egypt who had attacked Israel. Thus under international law, Israel has legal right to these lands.
2. That calls for lengthier discussion than is responsible on this thread or that I have time for.
3. Again, I'm not a Fundamentalist so your point about some whom you say take a different interpretation means nothing to me. It is certainly not the view held by most Christians.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 8:27pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 8:14pm
See, I KNEW there was an excuse for your insults and put-downs. As long as us "leftists" are not "good people"...it's "okay" with God for you to insult us.
BTW, here's the verse and the next one as well (see if 3:3 sounds familiar)
Titus 2--To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.
Titus 3--For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.
((Oh, and LL...still waiting for your explanation of why you think we can bring peace and democracy to a nation full of Muslims like Iraq?))
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 8:33pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 8:27pm
Fourth Geneva Convention, article 49 makes the Israeli settlements illegal. Period.
And failing to answer question #2 is peculiar since this is the entire crux of the issue concerning Christians having poser in world affairs.
When does God's judgment of other men according to the Christian Bible become "man's judgment" of other men, as men seek to carry out this judgment as "agent's of God"?
And once this line is crossed, how are these Christians any different than the Islamic extremist that they deem their enemies?
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 8:39pm
Ayers is old news. Move along, nothing to see here.
Much more fun is to follow the bread crumbs trailing behind Penny Pritzker, the Obama campaign finance chairperson. They lead back to the failed Superior Bank and a $460M settlement related to, wait for it, sub prime loans and accounting irregularities! Wheee!
Posted by sntauri at 10/06/2008 @ 9:26pm
Jeez I wonder if the mainstream media will ever talk about Palin's own connection to an anti-American group - The Alaska Independence Party. DON'TCHAKNOW!
Posted by caibarra at 10/06/2008 @ 9:29pm
Jeez I wonder if the mainstream media will ever talk about Palin's own connection to an anti-American group - The Alaska Independence Party. DON'TCHAKNOW! Posted by caibarra at 10/06/2008 @ 9:29pm
They already did. Extensively. NPR, even. There's nothing there. Except they both reside in Alaska.
Posted by twillie at 10/06/2008 @ 10:01pm
Ayers is relevant for people to understand Obama's ideologies. His black power radicalism from Rev Wrong is also part of Obamas thought processes that he continues to hide at all cost. It is relevant and has finally come to light. The DOW sliding should not affect most of the liberals posting here since they are anti-capitalism anyway. Aren't they?
Posted by apoorspic at 10/06/2008 @ 10:02pm
Jeez I wonder if the mainstream media will ever talk about Palin's own connection to an anti-American group - The Alaska Independence Party. DON'TCHAKNOW! Posted by caibarra at 10/06/2008 @ 9:29pm
They already did. Extensively. NPR, even. There's nothing there. Except they both reside in Alaska.
I'm still waiting for the MSM to ask Obama to name the rulers of Uzbekistan, Myanmar, and Djibouti. Somehow, I think I'll still be waiting on Nov. 5th.
Posted by twillie at 10/06/2008 @ 10:04pm
Love Liberty, first off you are on shaky ground if you are gonna quote the Gospel of Matthew to buttress your positions. That Gospel includes the Sermon on the Mount, and even if one acknowledges that this is more or less cribbed from the Gospel of Mark (Sermon on the Plain as it were), it is a pretty good template for a socialist society. If you are gonna quote gospel, why not get about to the whole picture instead of picking and choosing.
Also, you wrote, "The sword that Jesus refers to is both the Word of G-d and the Holy Spirit (Eph 6:17 and Hebrews 4:12). It has nothing to do with a physical war." This is very debatable considering the Old Testament is among the most genocidal books out there. As well, there is no holy spirit in the Old Testament--there is some mention of breath of god and the like, but not the Holy Spirit as you type it. That is a product of the New Testament.
Posted by onthehelm at 10/06/2008 @ 10:07pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:16pm
I don't think you have the slightest idea of significance of Islam, and it's emphasis and influence on the monotheistic tradition of expansionist western ideology. You slam it, and with it some of the most enlightened thought since that of one of its true prophets, ol' JC hisself. And I'm a little surprised at you, LL. I haven't been around long but for all the LL shell I believe there is a heart down in there connected a sense of abstract goodness bestowed on you by our creator, whatever that may or may not be. Maybe we are just a theory in god's r & d department, anyway. But I think you are better than hatred, and I think that, if you will excuse my possible impertinence, J.C. would be proud of you if you could just set it aside.
Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/06/2008 @ 10:21pm
Fourth Geneva Convention, article 49 makes the Israeli settlements illegal. Period.
Posted by Metteyya at 10/06/2008 @ 8:39pm
How so?
Posted by twillie at 10/06/2008 @ 10:21pm
You know, I was trying to explain Lying Larry to my pastor, a wonderful old Monsignor with some 50 years experience as a true Christian and priest.
He was having a hard time grasping what kind of person could be a whacked out, psycho, nutjob, perverting the word, claiming Jesus didn't teach love and peace...and yet still claim to be, not only a Christian, but a preacher.
Then I showed him Loony Larry's posts here, and a few others, like where Larry was advocating dropping a few nukes on the Chinese...
...now Monsignor gets it.
Posted by Lillian at 10/06/2008 @ 10:29pm
I just read the New Mexico GOP told their Senate candidate he's on his own, McCain has made his last stop there for the season.
Iowa isn't looking too good either and he just wrapped up an appearance there too.
That's 12 electorals that went to Bush in 2004 that are now "toss-up" or "leaning Obama".
Again, explains why "Bill Ayers" has been brought out AGAIN after a late summer vacation....heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 10:34pm
"As well, there is no holy spirit in the Old Testament-"
Posted by onthehelm at 10/06/2008 @ 10:07pm
I thought I would give you a heads up before LVL comes back to gloat, even though he is a false teacher.
He guided God's people --- "Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them, who sent his glorious arm of power to be at Moses' right hand, who divided the waters before them, to gain for himself an everlasting renown, who led them through the depths?" (Isaiah 63:11-12) " You gave your good Spirit to instruct them." (Nehemiah 9:20)
"Teach me to do your will, for you are my God; may your good Spirit lead me on level ground." (Psalm 143:10)
"Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me." (Psalm 51:10-11)
He gave power to Israel's leaders --- "Then the Spirit of the Lord came upon Gideon, and he blew a trumpet, summoning the Abiezrites to follow him." (Judges 6:34) "So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the Lord came upon David in power." (1 Samuel 16:13)
Posted by Benchrest at 10/06/2008 @ 10:34pm
Posted by onthehelm at 10/06/2008 @ 10:07pm
onthe, you are obviously mistaken.
If you cock your head (to the Right of course) and close one eye and turn the Bible sideways a bit...
it is quite clear that Jesus was a laissez-faire capitalist who disapproved of all government spending, except for road-building and space travel, and that he favored total war and the utter destruction of the enemy, including 'regretable' civilian casualties, and the use of insults and ad hominem attacks in more "peaceful" venues like political discussions.
Love thy neighbor and turn the other cheek was ONLY for fellow conservative Christians and Titus 3:2 was ONLY to apply to "good people" which Jesus allows Christians to judge for themselves since he was all in favor of Christians judging others.
Anything to the contrary is just liberal, Marxist, atheist, America-hating pseudo-Christianity.
here endeth the lesson....
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/06/2008 @ 10:39pm
McCain is actually still stuck back in the 60s, resenting those damn liberals who wanted to end the war that got his sorry ass stuck in Hanoi. If the damn hippies hadn't interfered, he believes, we could have won! That's what his position on Iraq is all about--trying to redeem his wasted youth in Vietnam.
What he doesn't seem to realize is that half the voters alive today have no memory of Vietnam. They don't care about the vets vs. the hippies.
He is so yesterday!
Posted by EvelynU at 10/06/2008 @ 10:54pm
E=mc2
He who cut and pastes King James will claim truth, have only half truths, and will not be persuaded by truth.
Posted by winyahn at 10/07/2008 @ 12:03am
Jesus was right IMHO in that truly loving our neighbor, enemy, brother, sister is the greatest, as in most important, difficult, humbling, transformative, rewarding, impossible, critical, etc, etc, of all endeavors.
Posted by winyahn at 10/07/2008 @ 12:15am
why doesn't the bible warn us about chinese people or eskimos?
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 12:21am
Why in the world do you REICH wingers support Mcwars and his dogma? are you folks that robotic and mindless that you would rather vote for mcwars and his smears because he can`t win on the real issues like iraq and the billions of dollars spent and not to mention the fact that it was a ruse,or our country`s infrastructure that is collapsing like a house of cards or is it that you can`t stomach an african american man running this country and doing it the right way by giving the middle class a break it sorely needs and regulations that business needs to keep from doing what has been going on for 28 eight years.Can`t you see that 28 years of reaganomics has killed our manufacturing which in turn gives jobs that give peole money to spend on the things we make which keeps the economy moving.John Mccain has sold his soul and has lost his honor in this campaign and yet you would still vote for him, Why?
Posted by crease at 10/07/2008 @ 01:49am
It's always amusing when Liberty posts passages from his favorite fairy tale...
Posted by Balrog at 10/07/2008 @ 02:29am
""Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; and a man's enemies will be those of his own household.' He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me."
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:21pm | ignore this person | warn this person "
"It is a religion based upon hate. It is a religion who's doctrines require the murder or subjugation of others."
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:16pm | ignore this person | warn this person
So, apparently, is your version of Christianity. To argue that you can hate Islam but not hate those who practice it is pure hair-splitting.
Posted by brunowe at 10/07/2008 @ 05:19am
I am always amazed by those who say that they hate Islam. They say that Islam is based on this or that, its obvious then that you do not know christian history then. Christians do not want to open to their to the fact that their own history is just as violent as Islam. Have you forgotten the Crusades and the Inquisition? Those things happened folks, at any rate for McCain and Palin to bring up this tired song about Obama "palling" around with terrorists and leaving out the part that he was 8 years old at the time and that a reformed Bill Ayers held a fund raising event at his home and Obama only met with the guy briefly (oh yea thats really palling around). Lets look at what McCain and Palin have in their closests shall we? McCain was involved in the Keating 5 debacle and he was involved in the Iran-Contra affair, but its ok hes a "war hero". Palin attended a church where the "visiting" pastor commited an act of domestic terrorism in Africa against a woman whom he claimed was a witch. Her husband was part of the Alaska Independence Party that wants to secced from the union, talk about your guilt by association.....why is it the more mud these 2 toss the more they manage to get on themselves????
Posted by jloughry1976 at 10/07/2008 @ 07:32am
"The guys who brought down wall street singlehandedly, where are they today?
Posted by RedRiver_. at 10/06/2008 @ 1:03pm
Explain to me how it takes 3 guys to do something "singlehandedly".
Dipstick.
Posted by drhammer at 10/07/2008 @ 07:32am
So, apparently, is your version of Christianity. To argue that you can hate Islam but not hate those who practice it is pure hair-splitting.
Posted by brunowe at 10/07/2008 @ 05:19am
An absolutely idiotic conclusion. Let me ask you, do you hate conservative people or hate the ideology? Do you hate poverty or do you also hate the poor?
Hating philosophies, political ideologies, or even wrong acts, does not and should not translate always into hating those within such.
In fact the difference is exactly the same as the principle that G-d continues to love even while He hates our transgressions.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 08:39am
What about Reagan,Iran and the osama funding in Afghanistan, weren't they terrorists? Rumsfeld meeting Hussein and Aziz, not terrorists? I do not think you would have heard McCain back then and since Palin couldn't see Iran from her backgarden she probably still believed the world was flat and Russia was purgatory...
Posted by blowfly at 10/07/2008 @ 08:50am
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 08:39am
Still waiting LL, how does Iraq become a peaceful, US-friendly country...
if 97% of its population believes in a religion that YOU say "is the work of the devil designed to steer people away from the true G-d. ... is a religion based upon hate. (and)...is a religion who's doctrines require the murder or subjugation of others.----Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:16pm??!?!?!?!?!?!?????
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/07/2008 @ 08:59am
For you who are trying to associate Obama with Ayers and let's see who McCain has been PROVEN to "pal" around with in the past.
Mr. Ayers is now a professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, holding the honor of Distinguished Professor. Ayer's was awarded the title of Chicago's Top Citizen in 1997 for his outstanding charity work. Obviously has turned his life around in the last 40 years. Obama has run across his path only in the PRESENT!
Where is Charles Keating? That's right, PRISON!
Posted by throwin at 10/07/2008 @ 09:34am
In fact the difference is exactly the same as the principle that G-d continues to love even while He hates our transgressions.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 08:39am
that's right.
i hate cluster bombs and depleted uranium
but i don't hate you.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 09:40am
answer mask's question.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 09:43am
Still waiting LL, how does Iraq become a peaceful, US-friendly country...
if 97% of its population believes in a religion that YOU say "is the work of the devil designed to steer people away from the true G-d. ... is a religion based upon hate. (and)...is a religion who's doctrines require the murder or subjugation of others.----Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 1:16pm??!?!?!?!?!?!?????
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/07/2008 @ 08:59am
With G-d, all things are possible. Most Christians in the world and throughout the history of the faith, came from outside of the Christian faith. When I travelled from village to village in South Africa, local tribal pastors shared with me that we were continuously entering villages and farms that still had never heard of Jesus. Throughout the history of Christianity, whenever the truth of the hope that is in Christ is shared, some respond to that hope.
It would seem impossible to the rational mind that in areas like Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan that people would leave Islam for Christianity, but it happens all the time.
A Pakistani pastor friend has had great success in spreading the gospel in Pakistan. He now has more than a dozen churches and 3 private Christian schools there. No without great sacrifice. Two of his nephews were murdered outside of one church as they left services a few years ago. Men and women are attacked frequently for attending the churches. The pastor must communicate in code with me and others by phone or even email because of the Pakistan Intelligence's cooperation with the Taleban and others.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 10:04am
So like Jesus who is my example, I will call hypocrites and liars and those who mock G-d exactly what they are. That is not inconsistent.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/06/2008 @ 8:14pm | ignore this person | warn this person
.
When Jesus was on the cross, he did not call his tormentors hypocrites, liars, or murderers (even though they obviously were.) He prayed for them, asked God for their forgiveness. This is the absolute essence of everything Jesus was and is. "Love one another, as I have loved you." Not 'judge one another as I will judge you.'
Larry's words are a vile and contemptuous perversion of the message of Jesus. Just as his words when he lumps together all who disagree with him and spews the label 'baby killing leftists'. These words are, in themselves, a sin against God and his Son. What's more, Larry's sin is born of another sin...pride. Larry just can't admit that he is wrong...his ego won't allow it.
I pity Larry and I pity the poor people who seek his 'council' for spiritual advice. I pray for their souls...and for Larry's soul...even as he defecates on it in thrawl to his own ego.
Posted by Lillian at 10/07/2008 @ 10:07am
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 10:04am
you are dreaming in colour......
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 10:22am
HEY LARRY,
"- but the fact is, if we went in on the ground into Baghdad that's the only way I know of that the Arab world could turn Saddam Hussein from the bum that he is into the hero that Nasser was, number one.
Number two is I don't think you could do it with air power. Unbeknownst to a lot of people, we tried bombing- We weren't trying to kill him, but we were just trying to bomb every place we thought he might be or could possibly be.
Third of all, I'm not sure that if we did go in on the ground we could tell a Shiite from a Sunni, even from a Kurd. And who is it that we'd be fighting and battling against on the streets of Baghdad? And, if we got into Baghdad, we would lose all of our military supremacy and we would take casualties. . ."
guess who...........
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 10:23am
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 10:04am
Okay, let me get that straight...and NO, there is NO OTHER WAY of "interpreting" or "spinning" or "lying about what I said"....
you think Iraq is going to become a peaceful, US-friendly democracy...
because the Iraqis are going to convert to Christianity?!??!?!?!???
Man! I didn't realize how MUCH of a bind that paradox puts you in! To keep BOTH your religious hatred of Islam AND your neo-con "idealism"....you have to go TOTALLY off the end of the Earth into thin air!
ROFLMAO!
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/07/2008 @ 10:34am
BTW, to those who even want to momentarily seriously consider LL's "theory"...
Christianity PRE-DATES Islam in Iraq, beginning with the "Church of the East" which spread outward from Syria.
Yet since the life-time of Muhammed, Iraq has been 90%+ majority Islamic, with only the tiny Chaldean Catholic Church occupying a itty-bitty Christian contingent in the country.
OH and before Larry claims that "the only reason it hasn't taken root is because of Islamic suppression"?....the destruction of the Church of the East came at the hands of the Mongol Timur (or Tamerlane), not Islamic governments. And upto World War-I (and anti-Western sentiments) they operated quite freely in the Ottoman Empire and other parts of the Mid-East.
Yet with a "head start" and little repression, Christianity couldn't gain a foothold in Iraq...
yet SOMEHOW it will now, since OBVIOUSLY ANY government by Muslims CANNOT be friendly or non-repressive! (Again, LL's theory)
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/07/2008 @ 10:44am
Men and women are attacked frequently for attending the churches. The pastor must communicate in code with me and others by phone or even email because of the Pakistan Intelligence's cooperation with the Taleban and others.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 10:04am
THAT is persecution. You cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, claim that Christians are persecuted in the US. What happens here in the US is DISAGREEMENT.
Posted by Balrog at 10/07/2008 @ 11:04am
"Hating philosophies, political ideologies, or even wrong acts, does not and should not translate always into hating those within such.
In fact the difference is exactly the same as the principle that G-d continues to love even while He hates our transgressions.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 08:39am | ignore this person | warn this person"
Such a distinction IS possible, but your posts on such matters are so full of bile that I don't believe that you make such a distinction.
Posted by brunowe at 10/07/2008 @ 11:09am
Jeez I wonder if the mainstream media will ever talk about Palin's own connection to an anti-American group - The Alaska Independence Party. DON'TCHAKNOW!
Posted by caibarra at 10/06/2008 @ 9:29pm | warn this person
Check out "Countdown" commentary by Olberman last night.
Posted by OneVote at 10/07/2008 @ 11:25am
You cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, claim that Christians are persecuted in the US.----Posted by Balrog at 10/07/2008 @ 11:04am
SURE he can. Despite being 90% of the population, with others cracking only single digits and "atheist/agnostic" lower than Jews and Moslems...every President being a nominal Christian...Christian holidays Federal holidays...."In God We Trust" on the money and a benediction before the start of Congress....
"Christians are an OPPRESSED majority, unable to practice their full religious rights (i.e. to indoctrinate in the schools, remove science, and keep control the agenda)!"
Oh...he'll stretch his imagination, trust me!
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/07/2008 @ 11:37am
The pastor must communicate in code with me and others by phone or even email because of the Pakistan Intelligence's cooperation with the Taleban and others.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 10:04am
Whew!
Posted by OneVote at 10/07/2008 @ 12:17pm
i'm sure this has been mentioned, but instead of just exposing McCain's smear as the absurdity it is and refocusing back onto what really "matters" -- ffs, wasn't Obama 8 when the Underground bombings occurred? -- Obama instead decided to drag the Keating Five scandal back into the fray.
while the latter exposes poor judgment on McCain's part and might have some bearing on our current economic crisis, most people have no idea what the keating five was, nor what it was related too and as such it just seems like more of the same type of smear that McCain is peddling.
i don't think it will help Obaman's cause to get into a race with McCain to see who can get to the gutter first.
Posted by Shaad at 10/07/2008 @ 12:29pm
John McCain himself was big enough to embrace former '60s radical David Ifshin.
According to a recent Marc Cooper huffingtonpost story: ". . . Ifshin traveled to North Vietnam with other anti-war radicals and it was then that he went on Radio Hanoi to denounce his own country's war effort. That broadcast was piped directly into POW McCain's cell in the Hanoi Hilton and he was understandably enraged by what he thought was a traitorous act by a fellow American."
Cooper quotes McCain two years ago, recalling his eventual relationship with Ifshin (who is now dead):
McCain: "We worked together in an organization dedicated to promoting human rights in the country where he and I had once come for different reasons. I came to admire him for his generosity, his passion for his ideals, for the largeness of his heart, and I realized he had not been my enemy, but my countryman . . . my countryman ...and later my friend. His friendship honored me. We disagreed over much. Our politics were often opposed, and we argued those disagreements. But we worked together for our shared ideals."
It is hypocritical for McCain to tell voters that they should disqualify Obama for something he did more so himself. (Though to me that was to McCain's credit.)
Posted by rainstick at 10/07/2008 @ 1:00pm
When Jesus was on the cross, he did not call his tormentors hypocrites, liars, or murderers (even though they obviously were.) He prayed for them, asked God for their forgiveness. This is the absolute essence of everything Jesus was and is. "Love one another, as I have loved you." Not 'judge one another as I will judge you.' Posted by Lillian at 10/07/2008 @ 10:07am
Lillian,
Certainly you are correct that the Lord did not call out against His accusers while on the cross. First of all, He was acting in a manner to fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah 53
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, And as a sheep before its shearers is silent, So He opened not His mouth.
Secondly, Jesus also showed us the example that when it is time to confront liars and hypocrites, you must do that strongly and with righteous judgment.
John 8:44 Jesus demonstrates very strong language and accusation against those who labeled Him as not being of G-d.
You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
In Luke 13:32 Jesus calls Herod a fox
In Matthew 23, Jesus gives a lengthy discourse against the Pharisees that is hardly mild in tone. Some examples of the names He calls them.
Brood of Vipers Serpents Hypocrites (continuously) Blind Guides White Tombs full of dead man's bones Accused of devouring widows' houses Full of extortion and self indulgence
more to come
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 1:17pm
to Lillian (continued)
In pretty strong language Jesus also condemned those who reject Him
in verses 33-35
Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? 34 Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, 35 that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 1:21pm
Is there ANYbody here ...
who isn't laughing at LVLIBERTY sermonizing on "hypocrites"?!???!???
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/07/2008 @ 1:25pm
hey larry,
are all the people born before jesus in hell?
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 1:27pm
And Lillian, the apostles understood the lessons. Be humble and meek when it is called for. Be direct and strong i language when it is also called for.
In Acts 2 he calls the Jews in Jerusalem listening to him speak, a perverse generation.
In Acts 23, after Ananias the High Priest orders Paul struck on the mouth Paul replies
Then Paul said to him, "God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?"
the Word of G-d is at the same time, simple, yet complex in it's richness and deep thought. I would suggest to you that you think through these responses with guidance from the Holy Spirit.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 1:29pm
It is hypocritical for McCain to tell voters that they should disqualify Obama for something he did more so himself. (Though to me that was to McCain's credit.) Posted by rainstick at 10/07/2008 @ 1:00pm
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you equating a friendship with a misguided peacenik, to a friendship with someone who bombed institutions in his own country, went to prison, then lamented that he didn't do enough?
Posted by twillie at 10/07/2008 @ 2:00pm
Are you equating a friendship with a misguided peacenik, to a friendship with someone who bombed institutions in his own country, went to prison, then lamented that he didn't do enough?
Posted by twillie at 10/07/2008 @ 2:00pm
The record is clear: Obama and Ayers had and have no friendship.
Posted by Balrog at 10/07/2008 @ 2:08pm
are all the people born before jesus in hell?
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/07/2008 @ 1:27pm
No. At this point no one on earth has been put into hell. This is actually a good question. It is also one that unfortunately has been badly taught by many pastors and others.
Up until the time of Jesus' death, everyone went to Hades. Hades is comprised of two divisions, Torments, the abode of the ungodly; and Paradise or Abraham's bosom, the abode of the godly. Hell is not currently occupied by anyone from Earth. There are only fallen angels there at this time.
Jesus describes this division in Luke 16. He also points out that there is no way to cross from one to the other. When Jesus died, he went to Hades and declared Himself as Lord over both the living and the dead. The godly who accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior have now ascended into heaven with Him. The ungodly, along with all those like them and those who have rejected Christ, remain in Torments in Hades
I agree with the teaching of Dr. Billy Graham on this subject that those who live their lives seeking G-d and to serve Him as best they know how, yet have not heard the gospel, will be presented the same opportunity that Jesus presented during the 3 days before He rose from the grave. All those like that who accept Him as Lord and Savior will be welcomed into the kingdom of Heaven.
Those since the cross who either reject the gospel or did not live the kind of life I wrote of above, will remain in Hades until the day of judgment. Jesus declared in Revelation 1:18 that He holds the keys to death and Hades. In Revelation 20:14 at the Judgment Seat of Christ, He will open Hell and cast death and Hades into the lake of fire. That is called the second death.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 2:15pm
The record is clear: Obama and Ayers had and have no friendship. Posted by Balrog at 10/07/2008 @ 2:08pm
Well, in the end we have to let Obama decide if he would use the "F" word to describe his relationship with Ayres. Personally, if I served on a board with someone, served as chairman of a foundation he founded, and served on another board with his father and brother, I would consider that person a "friend". But, that's just me.
Posted by twillie at 10/07/2008 @ 6:03pm
LV, Just trying to follow along... How long ago did the earliest human go to bad Hades - and same question for good Hades.
Were you referring to the before Christ folks and/or the during & after but on the other side of the globe, etc., when you said "the ungodly, along with all those like them" go to bad Hades?
Does this all reach back in time to the early hominids, say 60-100,000 years ago? Or just 4000 years?
How does the "3 days" thing work with the earliest of these folks?
How does the "3 days" thing work with those who lived after Christ, but didn't have any knowledge of him?
How does the "3 days" thing work with those who lived after Christ, but only learned about him when they were 19, or 17, or 15, or 13, or 11, or 9, or 7?
Or the info was conveyed by a person with dyslexia and most of the facts of Christ, being saved correct, some of the facts correct, few of the facts correct, learned about everything correctly but then suffered a closed head injury, or suffered the injury just before hearing the good news, or were brainwashed by a pagan cult after being saved, or same, but recommitted themselves, or this but then were threatened and recanted then persuaded by a mix of intimidation and confusional techniques while coping with early onset dementia, but only a mild form?
Peace!
Posted by winyahn at 10/07/2008 @ 6:55pm
Posted by winyahn at 10/07/2008 @ 6:55pm
While your post is mostly just dishonest gibberish, I'll respond in general.
I said clearly that every human before the cross went to Hades, good or bad.
I won't even go to your evolution hominid which is completely off subject.
And as I said, everyone after Christ rose from the grave appears before the judgment seat of Christ. Those who have rejected Him go to Torments in Hades. Those who lived an ungodly life, go there likewise. Those as I said who sought to know G-d and serve Him according to the best of their knowledge of Him, have the opportunity to acknowledge Jesus as Lord and Savior. Now I will admit that not all Christians accept this last statement. They will say that G-d will still send them to hell. I disagree and see strong consistency in the theological position I have stated which shows G-d's consistency with those before the cross.
As to the ages you asked about. It's called the age of accountability and Christians believe that children remain innocent before G-d of the judgment of sin until they reach an age to know right from wrong, good vs evil. That could be 6, it could be 12. That depends on the child.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/07/2008 @ 7:12pm
On Sunday night the RNC repeatedly ran the ad in prime time that in this time of financial meltdown, Obama would add more debt. With no mention of whose financial policies got us into this mess.
Beth Wellington The Writing Corner
http://bethwellington.blogspot.com
Posted by BethWellington at 10/07/2008 @ 8:10pm
With no mention of whose financial policies got us into this mess. Beth Wellington The Writing Corner
So whose financial policies got us into this mess?
Posted by twillie at 10/07/2008 @ 9:14pm
LV, So in some cases, some percentage of kids who die at age 6 year suffer eternal damnation.
Regarding those sent to Hades A or Hades B, does this all reach back in time to the early hominids, say 60-100,000 years ago? Or just 4000 years?
Posted by winyahn at 10/07/2008 @ 9:54pm
I am a Jewish believer in Jesus. Most blogs and news services have quoted the same one paragraph of the six-page transcript of the message that David Brickner of Jews for Jesus delivered at Sarah Palin's church, giving the false impression that he is saying that a bulldozer attack by a deranged Palestinian is God's judgment on the Jewish people. Please read or listen to the entire message for yourself at www.jewsforjesus.org/blog/20080817 so that you can hear Brickner's remarks in context. Please also take a look at Brickner's comments concerning his message at Wasilla Bible Church, as well as interviews by Christianity Today and MSNBC with Brickner about this issue, at www.jewsforjesus.org. Among other things, Brickner says, "The comments attributed to me were taken out of context. The notion that the terrorist, bulldozer attack in Jerusalem this summer was God's judgment on Israel for not believing in Jesus, is absolutely not what I believe. In retrospect, I can see how my rhetoric might be misunderstood and I truly regret that . . . . Let me be clear. I don't believe that any one event whether a terrorist attack or a natural disaster is a specific fulfillment of or manifestation of a Biblical prediction of judgment. I don't believe that the newspaper should be used to interpret the Bible. The Bible interprets the Bible. I love my Jewish people and the land of Israel. I stand with and support her against all efforts to harm her or her people in any way."
Posted by msieger at 10/08/2008 @ 1:54pm
LV so all true: Adam/Eve were real humans? Made from mud? Earth created in seven days? Virgin birth? Demon possession? Exorcism? Evolution?
Posted by winyahn at 10/11/2008 @ 10:48pm