Hasn't that pretty much been the Democrat Party Platform since the late 1960s?
I'm just glad he had the honesty to tell us what he really thinks. What thinking evangelical leaders can possibly take his candidacy seriously now?
Matt Lewis (of TownHall and the Leadership Institute) sums it up nicely:
The most disturbing aspect of this entire scandal is that Obama's comments demonstrate how liberals truly view religion: As unwelcome competition to government -- their real savior.
Newt piles on:
If you go to the most expensive private school in Hawaii and then move on to Columbia University and Harvard Law School, you may not understand normal Americans. Their beliefs are so alien to your leftwing viewpoint that you have to seek some psychological explanation for what seem to be weird ideas.
They can’t really believe in the right to bear arms.
They can’t really believe in traditional marriage.
They can’t really believe in their faith in God.
They can’t really want to enforce the law on immigration.
Therefore, they must be “bitter” and “frustrated.”
This is the closest Senator Obama has come to openly sharing his wife’s view that “America is a mean country”. Not since Governor Dukakis have we seen anyone so out of touch with normal Americans. It makes perfect sense that it was in a fundraiser in San Francisco that he would have shared the views he has so carefully kept hidden for the entire campaign.
***
Not that Hillary can fully take advantage, since her Hubby won't shut up about the Tuzla canard... Clinton Fatigue II, the Return...
Honestly, I don't know who to root for on the D side, the Marxist or the Serial Liar.
***
Is it any wonder, then, that McCain has taken small leads in Florida, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania... and New York??!? This is going to be a fifty state race, but with Hillary and Obama shooting their own feet, you've got to think McCain wins out if the Dems can't hold on to big blue states.
***
Meanwhile, Jimmy Carter sums up what's been wrong with Democrat Presidential foreign policy for three decades: "I've been meeting with Hamas leaders for years."
14 comments:
So do you think small-town people in PA aren't bitter? What/who do you turn to when times are tough?
Me? I turn to my Saviour. And my family. And my friends. One of whom just happens to live in a small town in Southeastern Pennsylvania. Heh.
He's not bitter. Neither are his parents. Nor his neighbors. Nor his friends. He loves God, too. And he fully supports the Second Amendment. And so do I.
Barack Obama, on the other hand...
So when Obama says that people turn to their faith when times are tough it's offensive, but not if anybody else says it? And are you questioning his faith? When he says he's Christian you don't believe him?
As far as the 2nd amendment goes, he does believe in an individual right to own guns, so it doesn't seem like he's going to try and take your gun away, but that's probably not 'fully' enough for you.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UQTAS80&show_article=1
Listen again, Jay, that's not what he said.
Please, spare me...
The right to bear arms, traditional marriage, faith in God, enforcing immigration laws? Those are all "issues" that your right wing "saviours" enjoy brining out to further drive a wedge between all Americans every year. Instead of using these issues to push us apart, why can't you and ever other person like you show and teach your children to be tolerant of those who may not believe in the same things as you?
Spare ME...
I think it's interesting that you claim 'right wingers' use faith and the 2nd amendment as wedges to drive Americans apart.Wake up. What do you think Obama is doing when he links someone's personal beliefs with a universally negative trait? Very tolerant of him. Josh is right on.
MC
Regarding the 4/15 posting, playing the “tolerance” card isn’t really appropriate. While it’s true that differences on some issues can be set aside, other issues have very tangible consequences. Family values and structure is a great example. The Institute of American Values recently released a report showing that the fragmentation of the family (i.e. breaking apart such as through divorce or unwed pregnancy) costs U.S. taxpayers $112 billion EACH year and South Carolina $469 million EACH year in direct services (such as medicaid) and lost tax revenue. That’s an issue with direct implications to me. Same with immigration. So, if negative consequences stem from certain values being disregarded, why in the world should I be tolerant of others’ disregard? Unless, of course, they want to pay be back those excess taxes…
"Family values and structure is a great example." Last time I checked Obama wasn't divorced, neither were the Clintons... Yet McCain was an adulterer who married his lover... And you are supposed to be the "morals" party?
You're really throwing Bill Clinton into your argument? The fact that he isn't divorced doesn't give him moral credibility. Or did you miss the news in the late 90's? But, the main point is that some issues are not isolated to one or two people but can seriously affect society at large, thereby having a trickle down effect to you and me. Our taxes ARE HIGHER because of these matters. Crime has increased in part because of these matters. These affect all of us, regardless of political affiliation.
You cite divorce as a reason our taxes are higher "(i.e. breaking apart such as through divorce or unwed pregnancy)" - to quote you specifically.
McCain is the only one on the ticket still who is divorced. I don't mean to be too technical since I really hate it when people get like that with me, but it is your argument. Are you talking Morality or Divorce? I don't see how being "Moral" has anything to do with marriage, since I know plenty of scumbags who are married...
Also, last time I checked it was Hillary Clinton running for president here, or are they the same person to you?
You mentioned "the Clintons", hence my reference to Bill. And, my point isn't even isolated to marriage. My point is a larger one, that some people dismiss certain arguments as "intolerance" but seem to ignore the bigger reality that some issues have wide-spread ramifications. Break-up of marriage (or failure to marry yet continuing to have children) is one example of this.
Right, in that it's costing you personally because you pay your taxes and they don't... I get it already...
Why is it that anytime something that costs us our "hard earned" tax money that goes to actually helping people (whether directly deserved or not) is always such a huge issue but we'll completely ignore much larger money sucks like the Iraq war, or other more widely affecting cataclysms that cost us our hard earned tax money? When is the government going to pay me back for my portion of the taxes that go to the war? I don't support that, give that back to me? Yeah, you'll say it doesn't work like that right...
I understand your point. But, the reason I made any comment was because the 4/15 posting raised a tolerance issue. That argument ignores the effects that some matters have on society overall. It’s basically asking us to turn a blind eye to certain correctable problems and their consequences. Instead, we should acknowledge when a problem exists then do what we can to fix it.
Post a Comment