Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Guy, I've tried to hold a civil discussion with you.
No you haven't, you dishonest, bigoted fuck.
Guy, I've tried to hold a civil discussion with you.
No you haven't, you dishonest, bigoted fuck.
Uh, yes, I have.
Do the Dems seem to care whether he even attends services?
Nope.
Do the Dems have millions of registered voters who meet to discuss the "Faith and Values" of their candidates?
Nope.
Did Obama have to quit that church because it was a Christian church?
Nope.
Did he change his faith, denomination etc...?
Nope.
Was it about his religion or about his pastor?
His pastor.
Did he quit because he found out the azzhole running was screaming "G-d danm America!"
Yup.
Even after the Wright videos came out, did the Dems vote him in a BIG way?
Yup.
DWho brought up his religion and STILL do (at least in the case of the more whackjobbery types?) Repubs & Conservs.
Libs & Dems don't have the same fixation on religion as a litmus test for their candidates. Not even close.
Your statement is full of a lot of supposition that defies credulity, not the least of which is that Obama was unaware of what Wright was about. Come on, do you really think he sat in this guy's church for 20 years and didn't know what the man was? Really?
The left is fine with ministers and clergymen who support leftist causes. He'll they are even dedicating a statue of one today!
Your statement is full of a lot of supposition that defies credulity, not the least of which is that Obama was unaware of what Wright was about. Come on, do you really think he sat in this guy's church for 20 years and didn't know what the man was? Really?
The left is fine with ministers and clergymen who support leftist causes. He'll they are even dedicating a statue of one today!
Nice dodge. We were discussing the FACT that the GOP is much more fixated with religion as a qualification for office, than the Dems. What I did was show that your Wright argument was a strawman and now you're going for a rather overt attempt to change the subject.
But I give you credit! Yo do BOTH much more skillfully than most people!
In any case, my point stands. It is the GOP that overwhelmingly considers religion a qualification or disqualifier for political office. The Dems overwhelmingly just don't care.
No you haven't, you dishonest, bigoted fuck.
Uh, yes, I have.
You have done NOTHING but repeat the same bitoged, hateful democrat talking points over and over and over like some utterly hopeless OCD patient all day every day. You are a cowardly, useless waste of humanity, shitbag.
[JoeB-izarro, nobody cares what you "buy". The fact is that the dems, the libs, and the left do not care about Romney's religion anymore than Perry's. To many of the left, they are both strange, but, hey, who cares.
The Pubs on the other hand are eating their young. Romney can beat Obama, but the purity fools in the Party don't care.
Romney can't beat Obama. He couldn't beat Ted Kennedy, he couldn't beat Devall Patrick and he couldn't beat John McCain. He couldn't even beat Mike Huckabee.
The point is, the left is giong to vote against the Republican, regardless.
The right isn't going to support Romney. If stuck with him, they'll go third party or they will stay home. Just like they did in 2008 with McCain.
People who disagree with you are snarkey? Really?? Come on JoeB-izarro. You are the decider of the message board now? Really??
What's happening is this. The tea party and the evangelical right is losing numbers and % in this primary season. Neither has the combined strength necessary to knock Romney out as his opponents did in 2008.
The fact is simple: Romney is the nominee, and you vote for him, against him, or don't vote. Those are your alternatives because what you are posting here is nothing more than a failing wail of those who believe as you.
Actually, Romney's the nominee, Obama gets a second term. That's the ONLY outcome that's going to happen.
The GOP establishment would rather lose an election than lose control of the party to the rabble. that's why they've lost 4 out of 5 popular votes in the last 20 years.
He was addressing people who think Mormonism is a cult. Sorry, that's a valid point of view. You guys are a cult. Deal with it. Or at least learn to think for yourself.
No, I do this because I enjoy doing it.
You clearly do enjoy being a liberal, bigoted, bag of shit. Way to go, shitbag.
I enjoy exposing pious fraud, yes.
I am an atheist. I really despise all religions, not just LDS.
LDS is particularly onerous to me because the fraud is so obvious. Everything Joseph Smith said has been disproven or debunked, but you have 6 million little zombies wandering around following it.
And if you can't debunk the obvious frauds like Mormonism and Scientology, what chance do we have of freeing ourselves of the superstition, ignorance and fear that the mainstream religions live off of?
Joe's weird for sure. Most of the active, educated LDS women I know are thinking about these issues, trying to figure how to balance them. Someone who works at church hqs said the figures are 50% lds young woman drop out by 21 from the church and that for the men it's even worse: 50% by 19 and then another 50% of RMs by age 25.
I don't know how accurate those figures actually are. If they are 1/3rd accurate, that still indicates a coming shift of major portions.
But don't assume the official LDS church will be the one that won't change based on its tradition. The Community of Christ (former RLDS) adopted female priesthood and universal marriage, with the Restoration branches taking almost 40% of the former RLDS membership.
Mormonism will continue to have another full century of excitement at least in its memberships.
Almost 15 million and growing !!!
Pretty soon this will be the Night Of The Living Dead !!!
A valid point of view ? Just becuase he thinks someone is a cult...it is ? Wow.
Sorry about your bad experience almost 30 years ago. I have had lots of run ins with people in my church over various topics, some of which are very important to me (like my kids).
I do know the difference between people and doctrine and if, after 30 years, you are still focused on this, then bitter is your name.
You are simply not worth it any more.
The Left does not decide elections in this country. Only 1/5 of Americans describe themselves as liberal. The center decides elections. There isn't a single Presidential election (that I'm aware of) where the winner lost the independents. It will be no different this time. And there is no reason to think that the center won't vote for Romney. The idea that Romney can't beat Obama is horseshit. That is rank and uninformed speculation. You are allowing your hatred of Mormonism to bias and skew your conclusions. Truth is, Obama is extremely vulnerable, and many Republican candidates can beat him, including Romney.
The Left does not decide elections in this country. Only 1/5 of Americans describe themselves as liberal. The center decides elections. There isn't a single Presidential election (that I'm aware of) where the winner lost the independents. It will be no different this time. And there is no reason to think that the center won't vote for Romney. The idea that Romney can't beat Obama is horseshit. That is rank and uninformed speculation. You are allowing your hatred of Mormonism to bias and skew your conclusions. Truth is, Obama is extremely vulnerable, and many Republican candidates can beat him, including Romney.
No, it's keen analysis, guy.
"Independents" is an artificial construct anyway. I call myself an "independent", but I've voted Republican in every Presidential election since 1980. (Almost voted for Perot in 1992, though.) Fact is, Neither party ever dips below 45% of the electorate in a two way race. So you are really talking about less than 10% of the electorate that is maleable.
Romney comes to the table with a whole lot of strikes. Weird religion, sleazy business practices, cold and robotic campaigner. Key constiuencies the GOP needs- Evangelicals, Women, Hispanics- won't vote for him at the rates they voted for McCain.
McCain lost by 10 million votes. So in order to win, ROmney has to get everyone who voted for McCain to vote for him, and then get 5 million Obama voters to switch. (And some of us only voted for McCain to get the nomination so Romney wouldn't get it.) A tougher cookie to crack because McCain's demographic skewed older while Obama's skewed younger. That means some of those McCain voters died of old age. (Which means they can't vote outside of Chicago.)
So where does he pick up those 5 million votes? Frankly, can't see it.
People who disagree with you are snarkey? Really?? Come on JoeB-izarro. You are the decider of the message board now? Really??
What's happening is this. The tea party and the evangelical right is losing numbers and % in this primary season. Neither has the combined strength necessary to knock Romney out as his opponents did in 2008.
The fact is simple: Romney is the nominee, and you vote for him, against him, or don't vote. Those are your alternatives because what you are posting here is nothing more than a failing wail of those who believe as you.
Actually, Romney's the nominee, Obama gets a second term. That's the ONLY outcome that's going to happen.
The GOP establishment would rather lose an election than lose control of the party to the rabble. that's why they've lost 4 out of 5 popular votes in the last 20 years.
Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is? Will you walk the talk?
No, it's keen analysis, guy.
"Independents" is an artificial construct anyway. I call myself an "independent", but I've voted Republican in every Presidential election since 1980. (Almost voted for Perot in 1992, though.) Fact is, Neither party ever dips below 45% of the electorate in a two way race. So you are really talking about less than 10% of the electorate that is maleable.
Romney comes to the table with a whole lot of strikes. Weird religion, sleazy business practices, cold and robotic campaigner. Key constiuencies the GOP needs- Evangelicals, Women, Hispanics- won't vote for him at the rates they voted for McCain.
McCain lost by 10 million votes. So in order to win, ROmney has to get everyone who voted for McCain to vote for him, and then get 5 million Obama voters to switch. (And some of us only voted for McCain to get the nomination so Romney wouldn't get it.) A tougher cookie to crack because McCain's demographic skewed older while Obama's skewed younger. That means some of those McCain voters died of old age. (Which means they can't vote outside of Chicago.)
So where does he pick up those 5 million votes? Frankly, can't see it.
Absolute nonsense. And pollsters know it. Pollsters have identified moderates as economically conservative and socially liberal. It is that cohort that decides elections, not conservatives and certainly not liberals.
.
As for you being an analytical guy, you are a reasonable and intelligent poster, except when it comes to Mormonism. On that issue, you are one of the least objective person here. Keeping lists of Mormons so you won't buy from them is your right but is more than a little over the top, and demonstrates a deep seated bias which almost certainly makes objectivity impossible, which you've repeatedly demonstrated here. You are as objective as rdean
No, it's keen analysis, guy.
"Independents" is an artificial construct anyway. I call myself an "independent", but I've voted Republican in every Presidential election since 1980. (Almost voted for Perot in 1992, though.) Fact is, Neither party ever dips below 45% of the electorate in a two way race. So you are really talking about less than 10% of the electorate that is maleable.
Romney comes to the table with a whole lot of strikes. Weird religion, sleazy business practices, cold and robotic campaigner. Key constiuencies the GOP needs- Evangelicals, Women, Hispanics- won't vote for him at the rates they voted for McCain.
McCain lost by 10 million votes. So in order to win, ROmney has to get everyone who voted for McCain to vote for him, and then get 5 million Obama voters to switch. (And some of us only voted for McCain to get the nomination so Romney wouldn't get it.) A tougher cookie to crack because McCain's demographic skewed older while Obama's skewed younger. That means some of those McCain voters died of old age. (Which means they can't vote outside of Chicago.)
So where does he pick up those 5 million votes? Frankly, can't see it.
Absolute nonsense. And pollsters know it. Pollsters have identified moderates as economically conservative and socially liberal. It is that cohort that decides elections, not conservatives and certainly not liberals.
.
I do want to note you didn't address any point I made. Now why is that?
The pollsters show Obama running even with Romney or a little ahead of him.
The RCP average shows that Obama leads Romney in 5 polls, is tied with him in two and is behind him in two.
With as fouled up as this country is, Romney should be mopping the floor with the guy. And he's running behind? Really?
This is before the sympathetic media who keeps telling us he's the only credible candidate turns on him when they threaten their messiah. It's like you people learned absolutely nothing from the whole McCain experience.
As far as people describing themselves as "moderate", well, yeah, given how the mass media describes conservative and liberal as pejoratives, that's not to be unexpected.
As for you being an analytical guy, you are a reasonable and intelligent poster, except when it comes to Mormonism. On that issue, you are one of the least objective person here. Keeping lists of Mormons so you won't buy from them is your right but is more than a little over the top, and demonstrates a deep seated bias which almost certainly makes objectivity impossible, which you've repeatedly demonstrated here. You are as objective as rdean
Actually, I think I'm the only one who sees them for what they are. And it's understandable, the LDS spend millions trying to convince people they are every bit as normal as everyone else. So again, I'm not surprised you are getting fooled.
Keeping a list is sensible. For instance, Glen Larson produced the original Battlestar Galactica in the 1970's. But he snuck in a whole bunch of Mormon propaganda under the radar when no one was looking. (also the show was mind-numbingly awful.) This is what they do. Or you can take Prop 8, where the Church was 70% of the pro-8 donations when LDS only make up 2% of California's population. In short, they want to influence the country and leave no fingerprints. Well, I'm dusting for fingerprints, dammit.
Now, the evangelicals are trying to get things across, too. but they are straightfoward that is what they are doing. If it's all above board, we can have an honest discussion.
If polls mean something now, surely you know Perry is done, right?
And it's not how the media defines political leanings. It's how pollsters define it. Blaming it on the media is uber-lame.
Your statement is full of a lot of supposition that defies credulity, not the least of which is that Obama was unaware of what Wright was about. Come on, do you really think he sat in this guy's church for 20 years and didn't know what the man was? Really?
The left is fine with ministers and clergymen who support leftist causes. He'll they are even dedicating a statue of one today!
Nice dodge. We were discussing the FACT that the GOP is much more fixated with religion as a qualification for office, than the Dems. What I did was show that your Wright argument was a strawman and now you're going for a rather overt attempt to change the subject.
But I give you credit! Yo do BOTH much more skillfully than most people!
In any case, my point stands. It is the GOP that overwhelmingly considers religion a qualification or disqualifier for political office. The Dems overwhelmingly just don't care.
Not a dodge guy.
Okay then I'll change the stuff off point of whether religion is a big deal to GOPers, to yellow.
Obama was forced to renounce his church, and I don't think he's even found a new one since then. Frankly, I think that his behavior was pretty reprehensible, because denouncing Wright wasn't his first response. His first response was to call his 80-something year old grandmother a racist. Why? Because she wanted her no-account husband to drive her to work because she was menaced by a stew-bum who happened to be black.
Why, yes. That's really racist. I mean, that's just as bad as saying "God Damn America!"
He only renounced Wright after Democratic elders told him he had to. Incidently, I don't think that Romney's religion has ever gotten much of a litmus test. The whole of Huckabee's supposed slander on LDS in 2008 was "Don't they believe that Jesus and Satan were brothers."
(For the record. Yeah. That's what Mormons believe. That and about 600 other batshit crazy things.)
The more devastating things Huckabee said about Romney were not about his religion, but about his business practices and lack of moral convictions. My favorites-
"I look like the guy you work with. He looks like the guy who lays you off."
"He's not pro-Choice, he's multiple choice"
"He reached political maturity at 60"
None of the other candidates have even mentioned ROmney's religion this, other than Romney himself saying "Don't you dare call my cult a cult."
Seriously, I think we need a litmus test. Or a bat guano test.
