[quote]Mufasa wrote:
From somebody whom has studied Lincoln most of his adult Life; neither one of the Self-Serving, hypocritical parties of 2008 should “lay claim” to Lincoln.
Both should stick to Reagan and Clinton.
Mufasa[/quote]
I thought that this wasn’t the forum for rational thought.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
From somebody whom has studied Lincoln most of his adult Life; neither one of the Self-Serving, hypocritical parties of 2008 should “lay claim” to Lincoln.
Both should stick to Reagan and Clinton.
Mufasa[/quote]
I don’t think anyone is laying claim to Lincoln. Unless using a great President’s words is now being construed as co-opting his ideas.
Fighting Irish jumped to the wrong conclusion. I’m not surprised, though. He’s not the sharpest tool in the shed.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Beyond hipocracy.
All hail our overlords![/quote]
Funny…
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid. You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
[/quote]
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
[quote]orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid. You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.[/quote]
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Gibson also read Palin a comment she made in her former church. “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God”…
[/quote]
This statement is one that is an actual quote from her message. This is what I think that is causing Fightin’s attitude about her being a dangerous, religious wackjob.
I watched this entire interview and not only did Gibson read the statement, but he played a video clip of her saying it in her church to back it up. It was accurate. She cleaned it up during the interview, but the damage was done. She made the statement and it is available for public consumption.
I am a Christian. I have been one for a very long time. So when I hear a person make a statement like that, it scares me. It scares me because it means that they have mixed God with politics and that never works out well. It reminds me of the stories that my family would tell me and the clips that I have watched of people claiming that it is God’s will to justify all types of atrocities that were happening during my family member’s time. It scares me even more when that person has the potential to be in the #2 spot in the country and is a heartbeat away from the #1 spot.
I don’t like it when religion gets mixed into politics. Religious and spiritual beliefs, to me, are very personal and very pure and should not be mixed in with politics, which is corrupt by its very nature. You can’t mix good and pure with bad and evil and expect a good outcome. Human beings are too flawed for that.
Other than that, she really didn’t present anymore than she did during the convention about herself. She spent most of the interview not really answering any serious questions, spitting out talking points and wrapping herself in the flags of her country and her religion. She is really just window dressing to distract people from the real issues.
I’m not really impressed by any of the four and media coverage has not helped at all.
[quote]Ouiser wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid. You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.[/quote]
No, I am saying that having other rules for the government and/or the USA than the rest of the world, that is moral relativism.
However, while both parties are doing this, only Republicans have the additional nerve to call others out because of their “moral relativism”.
[quote]orion wrote:
Ouiser wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid. You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.
No, I am saying that having other rules for the government and/or the USA than the rest of the world, that is moral relativism.
However, while both parties are doing this, only Republicans have the additional nerve to call others out because of their “moral relativism”.
[/quote]
We have our set of rules - called the constitution. You have to be a member to get that treatment. It’s not moral relativism - it’s just the way it is.
[quote]orion wrote:
Ouiser wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid.
You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.
No, I am saying that having other rules for the government and/or the USA than the rest of the world, that is moral relativism.
However, while both parties are doing this, only Republicans have the additional nerve to call others out because of their “moral relativism”.
[/quote]
Orion … that’s exactly what moral relativism IS … establishing the same rules for everyone REGARDLESS of their moral worth. What you are saying is that all countries are morally equal and that they should all have the same rules apply.
I don’t agree. I don’t think Robert Mugabe has the same moral authority as the US does. Nor does Communist China … nor Saddam Hussein and on and on and on. This is classic secular liberal thinking on display.
It was Obama’s first gut reaction when Russia invaded Georgia … “Well uhhh BOTH sides should calm down and uhhh both sides should stop the violence it’s not conducive to peace.”
Both sides are morally equal in his eyes … the one that invaded and the one that was being invaded. Liberals do this with criminals too … they want to understand the motivations and the root causes of the murderer … they absolutely refuse to make moral judgements.
When you say it’s moral relativism that we have one set of rules for ourselves and another set for others … that’s right … that’s the OPPOSITE of moral relativism.
[quote]orion wrote:
Ouiser wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid.
You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.
No, I am saying that having other rules for the government and/or the USA than the rest of the world, that is moral relativism.
However, while both parties are doing this, only Republicans have the additional nerve to call others out because of their “moral relativism”.
[/quote]
Orion … that’s exactly what moral relativism IS … establishing the same rules for everyone REGARDLESS of their moral worth. What you are saying is that all countries are morally equal and that they should all have the same rules apply.
I don’t agree. I don’t think Robert Mugabe has the same moral authority as the US does. Nor does Communist China … nor Saddam Hussein and on and on and on. This is classic secular liberal thinking on display.
It was Obama’s first gut reaction when Russia invaded Georgia … “Well uhhh BOTH sides should calm down and uhhh both sides should stop the violence it’s not conducive to peace.”
Both sides are morally equal in his eyes … the one that invaded and the one that was being invaded. Liberals do this with criminals too … they want to understand the motivations and the root causes of the murderer … they absolutely refuse to make moral judgements.
When you say it’s moral relativism that we have one set of rules for ourselves and another set for others … that’s the OPPOSITE of moral relativism.
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
It scares me even more when that person has the potential to be in the #2 spot in the country and is a heartbeat away from the #1 spot. [/quote]
In this case, it’s not as much about a heartbeat as a heart-NOT-beat.
[quote]lixy wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
It scares me even more when that person has the potential to be in the #2 spot in the country and is a heartbeat away from the #1 spot.
In this case, it’s not as much about a heartbeat as a heart-NOT-beat.[/quote]
Childern and their keyboards…you never know whats going to spew from it.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
Ouiser wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid. You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
Let’s assume instead of being from Alaska she was from New Jersey.
Let’s assume her kid was named Bob.
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.
No, I am saying that having other rules for the government and/or the USA than the rest of the world, that is moral relativism.
However, while both parties are doing this, only Republicans have the additional nerve to call others out because of their “moral relativism”.
We have our set of rules - called the constitution. You have to be a member to get that treatment. It’s not moral relativism - it’s just the way it is.
[/quote]
That is wrong because the constitution is binding for the government of the US.
There is only one member in that club.
And even if it were the way you say it is, American politicians not only routinely violate the constitution but moral relativism would also stay exactly that if your constitution called for it expressis verbis.
[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
orion wrote:
Ouiser wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
So FightingIrish, back to the topic at hand … why exactly is palin so stupid? I’m not following you I’m afraid.
You don’t like her kids name … you think she’s a hillbilly and she says that if Georgia was part of Nato we’d have to honor our solemn treaty obligations to defend them against invasion?
Well let’s make a few assumptions so this is easier for you:
NOW what’s your problem?
She advocates Georgian entry into Nato like dozens and dozens of other officials in the foreign policy establishment and which is current US policy. Does this make her stupid?
Why don’t we skip all the Northeastern/Urban bigotry and get right to the bottom line.
What really gets under you skin is that she has a belief in God.
And that she has morals. The Loony Left can’t stand people who actually take concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ seriously.
I can´t take people seriously who have one set of morals for the common people and another set of morals for themselves, i.e. the government.
So far, only Republicans have insulted my intelligence by decrying the evils of moral relativism on top of it.
I don’t quite understand your last sentence. Are you saying that Republicans are the only ones guilty of moral relativisim? If so, LOL.
No, I am saying that having other rules for the government and/or the USA than the rest of the world, that is moral relativism.
However, while both parties are doing this, only Republicans have the additional nerve to call others out because of their “moral relativism”.
Orion … that’s exactly what moral relativism IS … establishing the same rules for everyone REGARDLESS of their moral worth. What you are saying is that all countries are morally equal and that they should all have the same rules apply.
I don’t agree. I don’t think Robert Mugabe has the same moral authority as the US does. Nor does Communist China … nor Saddam Hussein and on and on and on. This is classic secular liberal thinking on display.
It was Obama’s first gut reaction when Russia invaded Georgia … “Well uhhh BOTH sides should calm down and uhhh both sides should stop the violence it’s not conducive to peace.”
Both sides are morally equal in his eyes … the one that invaded and the one that was being invaded. Liberals do this with criminals too … they want to understand the motivations and the root causes of the murderer … they absolutely refuse to make moral judgements.
When you say it’s moral relativism that we have one set of rules for ourselves and another set for others … that’s the OPPOSITE of moral relativism. [/quote]
In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances.
Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition’s truth; moral subjectivism is thus the opposite of moral absolutism. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries (cultural relativism) or in the context of individual preferences (moral subjectivism).
An extreme relativist position might suggest that judging the moral or ethical judgments or acts of another person or group has no meaning, though most relativists propound a more limited version of the theory. In moral relativism there are no absolute rights and wrongs, only different situations.
Apparently your idea of moral relativism is the exact opposite of what was the original idea.
I do not care, there are arguments for both sides, but if Mugabe is a murderous swine for lying, killing and stealing, so is Bush.
To explain that away with the idea that America is somehow different, therefore she may kill, bomb and steal, in other words engage in behavior that is NOT permissible for other people, that is moral relativism.
To think that a government can lie, steal and torture that is moral relativism.
Because, you see, the morality in these cases depends on who is doing it and for what reasons ergo the morals of a situation are not absolute but relative.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
She’s a psycho christian conservative who thinks America is on a mission from God? Just what we don’t need right now on the world stage.
No, she said let us PRAY that what we are doing is Gods will. It’s a basic Christian philosophy that we HOPE we are doing the right thing. You blow it out of proportion.
Kennedy said it, Regan, Lincoln said it, all of a sudden the land free from religious persecution is NOT? Liberals want to TAKE rights, and this stance, as demonstrated by you, is showing intolerance from an otherwise “tolerant” group of liberals. Whats the REAL story here Irish??
What does your avatar represent???
Beyond hipocracy.[/quote]
It represents my PERSONAL FUCKING CHOICE of religion. You know, the one that doesn’t influence foreign policy, that I generally keep to myself, and don’t spew all over and try to force on others.
I’m not saying that Palin does this- I have no idea about that. It doesn’t seem like it just yet, but then not much is known about her.
Again, I don’t want someone in the White House babbling about missions from God when we’re dealing with sensitive situations involving a multitude of religions. There is no room for the right-wing, envangelical Christian “I’m better than you” attitude here. Again, I worry about that because I see signs in her of that.
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Gibson also read Palin a comment she made in her former church. “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God”…
This statement is one that is an actual quote from her message. This is what I think that is causing Fightin’s attitude about her being a dangerous, religious wackjob.
I watched this entire interview and not only did Gibson read the statement, but he played a video clip of her saying it in her church to back it up. It was accurate. She cleaned it up during the interview, but the damage was done. She made the statement and it is available for public consumption.
I am a Christian. I have been one for a very long time. So when I hear a person make a statement like that, it scares me. It scares me because it means that they have mixed God with politics and that never works out well.
It reminds me of the stories that my family would tell me and the clips that I have watched of people claiming that it is God’s will to justify all types of atrocities that were happening during my family member’s time.
It scares me even more when that person has the potential to be in the #2 spot in the country and is a heartbeat away from the #1 spot.
I don’t like it when religion gets mixed into politics. Religious and spiritual beliefs, to me, are very personal and very pure and should not be mixed in with politics, which is corrupt by its very nature. You can’t mix good and pure with bad and evil and expect a good outcome. Human beings are too flawed for that.
Other than that, she really didn’t present anymore than she did during the convention about herself.
She spent most of the interview not really answering any serious questions, spitting out talking points and wrapping herself in the flags of her country and her religion. She is really just window dressing to distract people from the real issues.
I’m not really impressed by any of the four and media coverage has not helped at all.[/quote]
What he said.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And I’m sure I don’t have to tell you that Lincoln was, by all means, a progressive, and in this day and age, would have not been a Republican.
Unfounded assumption.
“Progressive” in the 1860’s sure as hell didn’t mean the same thing it does today. I doubt if Lincoln would view the wholesale secularization of society and the exploding size and intrusiveness of government as progress.[/quote]
Not that I propose to know what he would think, but remember that this is the only president to suspend habeas corpus.
Not to mention, he was pretty clearly about having a strong Federal government as opposed to having rights lie with the states.
[quote]lixy wrote:
MrRezister wrote:
I think the religion angle is mostly a distraction. Palin asks people to pray that US Soldiers are doing God’s will.
How does that work? Retroactively?
What’s done is done. Iraq was bombed and invaded. Innocent people (and not-so innocent people) have died.
If you want to pray for something, pray that heinous acts such as those that took place in Al-Mahmudiya don’t happen again.
BFD. I pray with my family that He will ensure that we “do the right thing” all the time, does that make me an insane snake-handler? Nope.
I don’t think there are any chances of people confusing your daily activities with some sort of crusade.
And as far as I can tell, there are just as many stupid people who don’t believe in God as those who do, so until someone comes up with something more substantial than “WHAT AN IDEOT!!!lol” I’ll assume that she didn’t get to be mayor, governor, and VP pick by smiliing sweetly and saying “um… I don’t know, but look at my tits!”
There’s nothing inherently wrong with believing in God. Most people do. It’s when God is invoked politically or to pander to the masses that trouble generally ensues.
I don’t think anyone said Palin was an “IDEOT”. It’s just that she has the potential to be dangerous if she bases her actions on what her god tells her to do.
Also, with regard to Russia, the main point that has been missed is that they don’t really NEED to invade Poland or anyone else.
They’ve got the market cornered on natural resources for most of the continent, and all they really need to do is switch off their neighbor’s heat or oil for a few weeks and they can have pretty much whatever they want.
Russia is going to be a huge problem in the coming years, anyone who listens to Putin knows it’s the truth. So refusing to take a hot war off the table if they attack one of our allies isn’t stupid at all, it’s global politics. That’s how it’s supposed to work, you attack one of our friends and we will be forced to act.
As much as I think the US is the world’s sole hyperpower, I have to seriously doubt if you can handle the Russians without being brought down yourselves.
Everybody knows that. And although people in Washington like to talk tough about the issue, I don’t think they’re zealots enough to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ossetia. And yes, even if Georgia was in NATO.
[/quote]
This was well put.
George Washington:
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.
The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity.
Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
— Farewell Address
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm
Obama’s supporters would vote against him. OMG, he believes in God and morality!! He’s a religious psycho! Move to Canada!!!
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
I thought Vlad the Impaler was Romanian.
Vladimir Putin.
Kinda like Obama = Opie. [/quote]
I get it now.
By the way, it may interest you to know that you can rearrange the letters of the phrase “President Barack Hussein Obama” to spell “A Democrat speaks inane rubbish.”