Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Putting aside partisan politics
On Sept.11, John McCain and Barack Obama will put aside partisan differences and make a joint appearance in New York at the site of the World Trade Center to honor those who died in the attacks seven years ago. On that day, both candidates have pledged to not air any TV commercials critical of each other. In a joint statement, they said, “All of us came together on 9/11—not as Democrats or Republicans—but as Americans. We were united as one American family. On Thursday, we will put aside politics and come together to renew that unity.”
In that same spirit, I propose that we follow their lead and suspend our usual partisan bickering here on WorldMagBlog on Sept. 11 as well. Are you with me?
Topic: Campaign 2008, WorldMagBlog
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
back to top164 Comments to “Putting aside partisan politics”
Yes.
Report comment to moderator
I won’t be around anymore after today, but good luck with this. Would be nice to see.
Report comment to moderator
This is a good idea Mickey –
Count me in!
Report comment to moderator
Amen.
Report comment to moderator
As I teach my students: ¡Claro que sí! (An emphatic ‘Yes!’)
Unfortunately, you may have to temporarily block certain users.
Report comment to moderator
I’m in.
As many of us have said before, most of us don’t think Obama is a bad person. We simply disagree with his policies and worldview.
Report comment to moderator
I’m in, too. September 11th is a hard day for me. So don’t put up any political posts!
And I agree with Outkast that Obama is not a bad person. I would say misled. I would also urge everyone — left and right — to go to the Volokh Conspiracy, scroll down to September 5th and read the post on Obama’s community organizing. It’s fair and balanced. This is something both sides should read.
Report comment to moderator
OK, but I think it’s cheesy.
Report comment to moderator
Sure, what are going to talk about instead?
Report comment to moderator
#8 – LOL!
Report comment to moderator
NJL – 7 – I read the post – I don’t believe it, it sounds good, it sounds balanced, but it’s not SOUND of truth.
Report comment to moderator
KBELLS: I’m sure that between Lynn, Kristin, Harrison, and me, we’ll come up with something to post about.
Report comment to moderator
I’m with Outkast. I find Barack the man to be fascinating and unquestionably an intelligent fellow given his accomplishmts at Harvard Law.
I’m looking forward to all the major US cities having demonstrations by patriotic, US flag-waving, muslim immigrants who ALL repudiate 100% of the stuff that Bin Laden/Sayid Qutb etc say about our great secularized democracy.
Report comment to moderator
Anyone here had a chance to read “The Death of Protestant America: A Political Theory of the Protestant Mainline”?? Joseph Bottum, an editor at FIRST THINGS has a splendid piece there, no?
Report comment to moderator
Victoria, I didn’t mean to “start” anything — certainly not on a thread about non partisanship on September 11th! I don’t know enough about this, it’s not something we’ve heard about in the media at all, so I just posted it to put the issue on the radar. It didn’t change my view of Obama, and I don’t expect it to change a lefty’s view either, but there is something in there for everyone to consider.
Re: KBells’ what are we going to talk about? I don’t know if it was ever done here, but tell everyone what we were doing on 9/11? Or we could do some “Something Light” threads on different topics. Those are always fun, at least for me, to read what people did as youngsters in regard to this or that, but I’m sentimental. And I always get a big kick out of it when you guys tell stories about your kids.
Report comment to moderator
Though it’s off topic, Sawgunner, I’v e read and reread Jody Bottum’s piece: The Death of Protestant America: A Political Theory of the Protestant Mainline. It explains basically how mainline Protestants caved to the secular cultural elite and in so doing gave up its traditionally strong influence on national affairs.
Report comment to moderator
Now, I’ve got to go to the bookstore again……
Report comment to moderator
This seventh commemoration for the dead of 9/11 really should be the last. We have given enough honor to the 2,998 lost, and further ceremonies for this small cohort of victims among hundreds of thousands who have died seems like a nursing of grievance. The natural cycle of remembrance is fulfilled.
I suppose we have to go through with this exercise once again, even though it does fuel an unhealthy obsession on the part of Republicans. Let us remember that 9/11 has come to represent the false rationale for an immoral war, a self-inflicted national dishonor.
Report comment to moderator
NJL
John Judis who wrote the piece you are referencing, is a senior editor for ‘The New Republic’ – that’s where the article was published – The New Republic supports the liberal left, very little center – in essence, it would not be unusual for a piece such as this to have been written and published in this biweekly mag.
Here is the link to The New Republic – http://www.tnr.com/ – notice the article that was written on the blog you referenced is on the top.
Report comment to moderator
Scroop: Some of us will never forget those who lost their lives to terrorists on 9/11, and will forever pause to say a prayer at the exact moments the planes killed innocent civilians in our nation. I still remember exactly what I was doing when I first heard the news, and I’m sure many of the other patriotic (and even those not so patriotic) can remember as well.
Thanks to our current President there has never again been a terrorist strike on American soil, and although I’ve already pledged not to talk politics on 9/11 this year I certainly might make that point. I think it’s something those from both major parties in our country can be proud of President Bush for.
Report comment to moderator
BTW, I’m sorry if in post 20 I made it sound as if I said the “planes” killed innocent civilians on 9/11. In reality it was the Islamofascists who killed the innocents.
That said, I think Mickey’s idea is an honorable one.
Report comment to moderator
Outkast
You’re right on target about 9-11 – we aren’t going to forget, nor are we going to forget all the children, wives, husbands, moms and dad’s who feel pain. They will always feel the tears come to their eyes when they REMEMBER that terrible day.
Report comment to moderator
Mickey, I’m willing to try a thread that attempts to set aside partisan politics, though, like StuBob, I’m a bit skeptical. The fact is that, while McCain and Obama may be agreed to honor the some three-thousand who were lost due to the savagery of the Islamic jihadis, the question is which of the two candidates will deal more effectively with the Islamic savages. Presumably, each candidate will speak at Ground Zero; we’ll see how non-partisan the event turns out to be, both in New York and on this blog.
Report comment to moderator
Amen, Peter.
Report comment to moderator
I think that, most importantly, 9/11 was a pathetic attempt by religious zealots to impose their will on a democracy which recognizes, among other things, religious freedom and freedom of speech.
I think that voluntarily silencing the voices, however strident, of democratic debate is a TERRIBLE way to memorialize that event.
I respectfully decline the invitation.
Report comment to moderator
No one is “silencing” any voices, Arcadia. We’re voluntarily agreeing not to talk about the Presidential campaign on 9/11, and instead discuss other things.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t think that 9/11 should be memorialized in any way. It was an inglorious loss for our country and our response to it caused hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths, including those of our our own soldiers.
In the annals of history, 9/11 in and of itself will never warrant any more than a footnote. Our over-reaction to it however, may be forever noted as the beginning of the end of a long period of almost worldwide respect for, and co-operation with, this country. At the very least it will be noted as a massive distraction from our attention to matters which were truly important to our national well-being.
Report comment to moderator
Outkast: Thanks to our current President there has never again been a terrorist strike on American soil, and although I’ve already pledged not to talk politics on 9/11 this year I certainly might make that point. I think it’s something those from both major parties in our country can be proud of President Bush for.
OK. But if we grant that and express our appreciation to President Bush, will you man up and acknowledge that after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, there was not another foreign terrorist strike on American soil during the rest of Clinton’s two terms?
The Oklahoma City bombing may be a partial blemish on Clinton’s record, but that was not foreign terrorists. There were attacks on American targets overseas during Clinton’s tenure, but that has also been true in Bush’s.)
If that’s your standard, it would seem both your beloved George Bush and your hated Bill Clinton were effective at preventing further attacks after the ones that occurred near the start of their respective two-term runs.
Report comment to moderator
Outkast: Read my post again. You do know the meaning of the word “voluntarily” don’t you?
Report comment to moderator
I would like to see this seventh commemoration be the final major annual one, but the day should remain on the calendar in perpetuity, like Pearl Harbor Day, and a major memorial event every five or 10 years for the rest of our generation’s time on this world might be appropriate.
Report comment to moderator
All I’m asking is to set aside this one day on WMB to not snipe at one another, to try to find some common ground. Whether you all are capable of doing that, we’ll see. But I hope most of you at least will be willing to give it a try.
If attempting to get along with one another for one measly day offends any of you for some reason or you think you can’t control yourself, then stay away from this site on Thursday and come back on Friday to resume business as usual. Or show up and refuse to honor what I proposed. It’s up to you.
Report comment to moderator
I hope most of the discussion on 9/12 will be about who broke the agreement first.
Report comment to moderator
That should be I hope most of the discussion on 9/12 will NOT be about who broke the agreement first.
Report comment to moderator
I was starting to wonder, KBells. Not really.
Report comment to moderator
Mickey
I might be going too far, but it might not be a bad idea to institute something such as: – anyone who brings strife, arguments, etc., would be suspended from posting until next Monday – a weekend to ‘cool off’ and think about it!
Report comment to moderator
Mickey:
If WMB really wishes to “promote unity” rather than act as a partisan advocate of hybridized rightist politics and fundamentalism, it certainly can do that any day it wants. All its bloggers have to do is compose posts calculated to draw thoughtful responses.
And,for reasons I stated above, I think that a 9/11 anniversary is exactly the WRONG time for a partially religious blog to disregard the divisive role that religion plays in ALL politics.
Democratic politics, by definition, is about the competition of ideas. In religious life, there is no room for competing ideas and doctrines; dissent is heresy. When was the last time anybody rose in your church to debate the preacher’s doctrine?
When political and military power become the servants of any religious doctrine, be it derived from the inerrant word of “God” or “Allah”, or the Invisible Pink Unicorn Which Makes All Things Possible, dissent becomes heresy and debate becomes dangerous to one’s health.
Report comment to moderator
Since all of the partisan bickering only comes from half of us … oops!
Report comment to moderator
Tell you what Mickey. I will just not post anything on September 11th. That way I can be part of the solution rather than part of the problem
Report comment to moderator
Victoria, I was only wondering if our leftist friends would finally admit to what’s in that thread. Evidently not, but we’ll deal with the subject on an appropriate thread.
I’ll be in and out on 9/11, too. I have a meeting and something else planned for that day, but I’ll probably stop off at our “local” county memorial in a park high on a mountain where we have always been able to see the NY skyline.
Snipe is a good word. We do that.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, I agree another thread would be appropriate
The NY skyline is wonderful, just thinking about the ‘Twin Towers’ makes me sad – I remember the breathtaking view from the restaurant on top, the ‘Statue of Liberty’ – when we looked out the windows, I thought of all the people, my father coming from Europe by boat with his sister her husband and little girl – I still cry when I think of that day –
Enjoy the rest of your weekend my friend.
Report comment to moderator
Mickey,
Sounds fine by me.
Can we also make that a day where no personal attacks are made on here against anyone? I’d like to have one day on here where Outkast, Vicky, Drill, etc. don’t make a personal attack on me.
Otherwise I think your plea for no partisan bickering will be pretty much a sham.
Report comment to moderator
I’ll agree to it. I suggested the same thing on a Fundamentalist Islamic blog I frequent and they agreed to it as well… well mostly.
Report comment to moderator
It is fine to transcend partisan politics for a day, not at all because participating in partisan politics is a bad thing, but because it’s good to remind ourselves that there is more to life than partisan politics. It’s nice to take time to seek the bigger picture.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir: Personal attacks are already against the rules of this blog.:)
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer: Volokh Conspiracy, scroll down to September 5th and read the post on Obama’s community organizing. It’s fair and balanced. This is something both sides should read.
and
Victoria, I was only wondering if our leftist friends would finally admit to what’s in that thread. Evidently not
I read it. I’m not sure what your point is. He had some frusrations in his early efforts, so later he rejected some of the principles he’d learned in favor of other ideas.
I am guessing that what I’m supposed to be afraid of is that he was more open to the idea of having charismatic leaders (and being one maybe), and using the political process?
Not exactly shaking-in-my-boots material, there.
It’s also interesting that in so far as the article mentions the radicals that the right is forever insisting Obama is “connected to” — Alinsky and Ayers — it’s to say that he rejected what he’d heard from them.
Report comment to moderator
Hi Arcadia,
I’m afraid this post may not meet your standard of a “thoughtful response,” hamstrung as it is, since it’s coming from a religious guy.
You wrote,
Democratic politics, by definition, is about the competition of ideas. In religious life, there is no room for competing ideas and doctrines; dissent is heresy. When was the last time anybody rose in your church to debate the preacher’s doctrine?
An obvious question this statement raises is, what is the nature of the disputes you believe should be occurring in churches? You must have something in mind besides the doctrinal disagreements and disputes that have resulted in the proliferation of denominations. Also, most denominations have as part of their church government the means of addressing disagreements and controversies arising therein, and frequently make use of such.
I can’t tell from the balance of your post how robust your condemnation of “religious life” and doctrine is. A fair reading might suggest you would exclude religious ideas from the political sphere, but that notion would run counter to your argument extolling “Democratic politics,” which by your definition is “about the competition of ideas.” In any competition, there are winners and there are losers. If an idea is a loser, does that mean the winners were being divisive? If you *don’t* wish to exclude religion from the competition of ideas, then what’s the problem if it comes out a winner?
Report comment to moderator
Steveg – 45
Steveg post 45 – “It’s also interesting that in so far as the article mentions the radicals that the right is forever insisting Obama is “connected to” — Alinsky and Ayers — it’s to say that he rejected what he’d heard from them.”
Obama HAS NEVER come out and ’stated’ that he, Obama has rejected what Alinsky and Ayers wrote, stated or preached.
This isn’t earth-shaking, there is much in Obama’s past which has shadows of Alinsky or Ayers, and/or most likely something more subtle, to present to the American public, thinking them rather uneducated/unlearned as many liberals typically depend upon – this will not serve Obama well –
Alinsky and Ayers aren’t going to go away – in fact they are going to be more prominent (in the news) as the weeks and days go by, perhaps BIG TIME, when everyone thought the stories were buried - No one gets a ‘free pass’ on the <b<past- even Obama should know that -
Report comment to moderator
Everyone has got to be kidding here, right? Participants at this web site can no more “put aside partisan difference” for say five posts than they can put aside breathing for five minutes or so.
#1 9/7
Report comment to moderator
We could instead talk about, say…homosexuality, abortion, or creation/evolution. What do y’all think?
Report comment to moderator
Well, I guess the words “radical incrementalist” don’t bother SteveG. Obama hasn’t rejected what Alinsky and Ayers believe, he’s just learned that the methods they use to implement their radical ideas don’t work, and like Hillary, he wants to impose these radical ideas from within the system.
I don’t associate with people like Alinsky and Ayers at all. If I met Ayers today, knowing that he is a domestic terrorist, I wouldn’t be sitting at his feet learning from him. Obama has done that. He knowingly, willingly listened to these people and learned from them. What was one of things he and Michelle were touting with their community activism? That the government should take children away from their parents and “re-educate” them. This should bother you. It doesn’t, and that is very scary. And I have no doubt that you will come up with some sort of justification for it. That the idea was ever conceived, let alone pursued, is so unAmerican, so far left, that it is hard for me to believe — nevertheless, that’s what they were doing.
The American people have a right to know about that. Obama’s commercial that says “I was 8 years old when Ayers did his thing” really isn’t truthful, is it? It wants to lead people away from the truth of what they are up to now and Obama’s connection to it.
The last two words of that post “radical incrementalist” should bother you. They don’t, and you should ask yourself why.
Report comment to moderator
What are the people who decline to participate going to do? Will they talk partisan politics anyway or just not show up? If they do the former, how should we react? I can see some people using this opportunity to try and goad people into breaking their promise. Kind of like Lucy and the palace guard.
Report comment to moderator
KBells
There’s always the weather and sports
Report comment to moderator
Sounds good to me.
I will interested to see how this will play out!
Good luck!
Report comment to moderator
#52
Weather? You mean like Hurrican Katrina?
Sports? You mean like American endorsing the tyranny Olympics in China?
Report comment to moderator
To answer Mickey’s original question though, sure, I can agree to that.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah: Nice post. Thanks.
My initial reaction is simply to ask, “Country first, bible second” or “Bible first, country second”? But let’s get down in the grass with it.
An obvious question this statement raises is, what is the nature of the disputes you believe should be occurring in churches? You must have something in mind besides the doctrinal disagreements and disputes that have resulted in the proliferation of denominations.
No, I think you nailed it right there. Democracy involves a commitment by all to live together and to submit to government by those with whom we disagree. Religion cannot handle that. So you have schisms and tens of thousands of denominations, most of which think they are absolutely right. Right now, one of the most august and long established denominations, the Episcopalians have been unable to resolve a doctrinal difference over a really trivial issue and are in the process of splitting up. That’s the way religion handles disagreement. Unless of course they have enough adherents to go to war and eliminate the opposition. Or enough to at least control the government and silence dissenters who are now officially heretics.
A fair reading might suggest you would exclude religious ideas from the political sphere, but that notion would run counter to your argument extolling “Democratic politics,” which by your definition is “about the competition of ideas.” In any competition, there are winners and there are losers. If an idea is a loser, does that mean the winners were being divisive? If you *don’t* wish to exclude religion from the competition of ideas, then what’s the problem if it comes out a winner?
Once again, Democracy involves willingness to submit to the will of the majority which can and does change. It also involves a commitment on the part of leaders to listen to other ideas and have an open mind. And, perhaps most importantly it involves a commitment to rational examination of policies in the interest of achieving objective results and then to use that open mind to foster achievement of those results.
Some religions are marginally more compatible with these requirements. Most aren’t. NONE of the “fundamentalist” religions are. If their god’s word, wherever they find it, is deemed inerrant then they are duty bound not to submit, not to listen, and not to let objective evidence get in the way of what they believe.
Consider, if you will, Sarah Palin. Her religious beliefs lead her to advocate “abstinence only” education. Yet her daughter is exhibit “A” for what happens to millions of kids who do not have access to comprehensive sex ed, condoms, etc. Do you really think that her daughter’s experience, or the statistics in the article I am about to link to is going to change her mind, or even think seriously about this position? She can’t. Some minister’s interpretation, or possibly her own personal analysis of her bible, will not let her objectively consider the numbers in this article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/06/opinion/06blow.html
What happens if Sarah Palin’s rummagings through her Bible yield the result that the one absolute rule of American foreign policy MUST be the defense of a few thousand miles of “the Holy Land”?
Or if she is convinced that the Apocalypse is imminent and that it really not such a bad thing since, even though we don’t know it, most of us will go to heaven?
Could/would she listen or submit to other voices? If it is the Word of God telling her this, how could she?
But to get back to daughters, I remember not too long ago in a debate Michael Dukakis being asked if he would favor the death penalty for the rapist of his daughter. I howled at the unfairness of the question.
But it does bring up what I think should be the first question for Ms. Palin. If my daughter were raped and pregnant and wanted an abortion, would your government allow her to have one? Or would you tie her to the delivery table? (And where, for crying out loud, does your bible tell you that abortion must be illegal?)
Report comment to moderator
NJL: What do you suppose Shrub learned sitting at the feet of ex-commie Olasky? The 60’s are over. 40 years ago. Get over it.
Report comment to moderator
Fine by me.
But this is on September 11th, right? So right now I can mention how the same day the McCain campaign agreed to this spirit of national unity, they pulled a cheap political stunt intended to smear the Democrats as unpatriotic.
At one of their rallies, they had veterans distribute miniature American flags that they claim the Democrats “threw away” at their convention.
The Democrats say that the flags were intended for re-use, not for the garbage. A senior Democratic official:
>>>>>
All of the flags at Invesco were picked up and put in bags and into storage, along with the unused flags and campaign signs. The flags were going to be donated, and the signs were going to be sent out to be used elsewhere,” the official said, speaking anonymously since he was not authorized to talk to the press. … It’s pretty reprehensible on their part. Someone made an assumption, took the flags, and essentially lied about what was going to happen to them.
>>>>>
That story also notes that “emails to three McCain spokespersons inquiring where the flags were found and how the McCain campaign obtained them were not returned.”
I wish the spirit of national unity would begin a couple days sooner. Maybe with not gleefully implying that half of America doesn’t love their country.
Report comment to moderator
Picture of the neatly rolled-up and bagged flags and another source.
Report comment to moderator
Amen JJF, the senseless attacks on the patriotism of the democrats really does need to end. I have worked with both committed dems and reps and both groups love their country.
Report comment to moderator
The dirty trick that the Republicans pulled in Denver (stealing the American flags) is unfortunately par for the course. They have shown over and over again that they will do anything, no matter how low-down and dirty, to try and win elections. I suppose when you’ve lost your moral compass, as the Republicans and CCR’s have, it then become possible to justify any tactic. They should be ashamed of themselves, but they have no shame.
Report comment to moderator
Wouldn’t think of talking politic. If it crossed my mind, I would immediately think of football instead.
Uhhhhhhhh, maybe I will talk some politics. We have Georgia thie week.
Report comment to moderator
Sorry about that loss to Vandy, Chas. Well, not really – we Tennessee fans are always happy when Spurrier loses. Even the Georgia fans rate him as the coach they most dislike in the SEC. I’m guessing Spurrier is on the hot seat right now over that Vandy loss, especially for the 2nd year in a row.
Report comment to moderator
#61
Now, it really depends on who’s story you listen to. The Republicans say the flags were found with other bagged garbage around dumpsters. I would have assumed that they were meant to be garbage too.
Now, there could be a few other explanations:
1) Somebody at the Democratic convention made a mistake. The flags were carefully rolled up and put in garbage bags, but were not meant to be garbage. But, being in garbage bags, someone mistakenly put them out with the garbage.
This happens to me on occasion, since we will use garbage bags to collect out-grown clothing and other items to take to the Goodwill. I’ve usually caught it, but it is something to keep in mind. Lots of people use garbage bags for lots more than garbage, and so it would be easy to make a mistake.
2) The guy who found the bags made a mistake. The bags could have been close enough to the garbage that HE thought they were intended as garbage, even though the Dems knew how they’d piled stuff.
This happens all the time in my brother’s household. His wife is a piler and knows exactly what is in each pile. But, my brother likes no clutter. He can easily mistake her “pile” for recycling or other garbage. He once accidentally recycled an important paper of hers for school.
So, it could have been this guy’s mistake. Naturally, the Republicans would have accepted his word…especially when the flags turned up in garbage bags.
3) The Republican guy who found them was lying. But, if so, that doesn’t make Republicans or John McCain at fault for believing him…again, especially when they turn up in garbage bags.
4) The Dems could now be lying to save face about the discarded flags.
I think the garbage bags boil down to being the single likeliest culprit for the “mistake” if it was one. Garbage bags are NOT the best way to store something you want to keep, even though we’ve all done it.
Assuming that the Republicans “stole them” and maliciously spread false rumors is simply Partisan and not really any more fair than immediately assuming that the Dems wanted to throw them out.
I think a mistake on one or both sides is much more likely the culprit.
Report comment to moderator
Exactly TRS. Mistakes can be made. But it was the Republicans who blew it up into a big story, and used it to question the Democrats patriotism. That’s the low-down dirty part.
All the stuff like this – the “gotcha” stuff – I don’t think it’s going to work this time around like the Republicans (particularly) hope it will. First of all, people are much more wise to it. Second, they’re cynical about it. And third, they’re just plain tired of it. Will there be enough Americans who will say “enough!”? It remains to be seen.
I call tell ya this much though. If it’s the same dirty political campaign like we had in 2000 and 2004, whomever is elected will find it next to impossible to govern effectively because at least half of the people will despise him.
Report comment to moderator
Just a topic suggestion for 9/11, which I think was mentioned already by NJL, I think a thread about where you were and what you were doing on 9/11 might be a fitting thread to observe the day…just a thought.
Report comment to moderator
TRS:
I agree, any one of those situations could plausibly explain it.
But I think the issue is that in no case, not even in the “worst case scenario” — the Democrats collected the flags for the trash, and a worker rescued them and delivered them to the McCain camp — should the Republicans have questioned the Democrats’ patriotism. After all, they had been waving those flags with patriotic fervor just a week before. Every one of those 80,000 Democrats loved his or her country enough to be an activate participant in the political system.
Report comment to moderator
But Anlir, in post #61 you accused the GOP of stealing the flags? I think TRS offers a far more reasonable range of possibilities, without any of the accusations of the knee-jerk Left.
Report comment to moderator
After all, they had been waving those flags with patriotic fervor just a week before.
Was it patriotic fervor, or just Obama fever? I would guess both.
Report comment to moderator
I mean, what do people think happens to all those flags that are waived at conventions, political rallies, inaugurations, and so forth? What do people think happens to all the flags that are on all the 4th of July crap in Wal-Mart (made in China made no less)? What do they think happens to all the little flags that are on the cupcakes at 4th of July picnics all over America?
Report comment to moderator
And all those flags being waved at the Republican convention last week- was it patriotic fever, or just Palin fever?
If the Republicans want to question Democrats patriotism, let’s question theirs right back.
Report comment to moderator
Outkast:
The senior Democratic official accused a stadium worker of stealing the flags, and the Republican party of being complicit in his theft.
And the stadium worker did steal the flags. Or, if you prefer, “remove them without authorization.” And the Republican party should have said, “these aren’t our flags — we won’t take them.” But instead they said, “ooh, a free cheap shot! Let’s have boy scouts sort them out, and military veterans distribute them, and send the story to Fox News!”
All that was missing in that bit of political theater was baseball and a kindly old grandmother offering slices of apple pie.
Report comment to moderator
I thought John McCain said his campaign was gonna be above all this kind of cheap-shot crap? That was before he brought the Karl Rove folks on board. Now he’s just another two-bit Republican who will do anything to win. Isn’t 8 years of that enough already?
Report comment to moderator
Well, if WMB wants to refrain from posting idiotic drivel for a day, I won’t muddy the waters. You all actually have to follow through though. I’m pessimistic.
Report comment to moderator
If we can trust them on Sarah Palin being the best Vice Presidential nominee ever, surely we can trust them on this Luke. Don’t be such a pessimist!
Report comment to moderator
I am always amazed when Democrats call the Bush Administration thugs who invade countries and kill people in a cynical attempt to make oil profits for their cronies and then complain that when Republicans question whether Democrat’s proposed policies are in the best interests of America their patriotism is being questioned. Yeah, you Dennis Kucinek, and your hypocritical cohorts.
“will you man up and acknowledge that after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, there was not another foreign terrorist strike on American soil during the rest of Clinton’s two terms?”
The US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania are considered US soil by international treaty and law. They were attacked on August 7, 1998, while Clinton was president.
Report comment to moderator
I assume we will not have a thread about the Republican Administration, Republican Senate, Republican House, Republican Governor, and Republican Mayor who were in charge at the time…..or discuss that no terrorism meetings were held in the first 8 months of the Bush administration.
Probably best we leave that alone on the 11th.
Report comment to moderator
MICKEY: Whether you all are capable of doing that, we’ll see.
Can you set up a neutral frame of discussion if you wanted to?
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia, I don’t know who Shrub is, but Obama wasn’t in “community activism” 40 years ago. Just a decade ago. We have a right to know what he was up to. That’s a fair topic, that’s fair vetting.
Report comment to moderator
Speaking of “community organizers” did y’all catch the sneers and denigration from Sarah Palin and the other Republicans on them? They actually booed them in the hall at the Republican convention. If you work in your community trying to make it better, you’re nothing to the Republicans. That “thousand points of light” the Republican used to tout? It’s now one dim lightbulb at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Report comment to moderator
NJL
he’s just learned that the methods they use to implement their radical ideas don’t work, and like Hillary, he wants to impose these radical ideas from within the system.
Hilary — a radical?? I almost choked on my coffee. I consider her a conservative slight right of center. The so-called chasm between the Democratic Party and Republican Party is mostly social issues and window dressing. The Democratic Party has a more refined approach where the Republicans like the smash mouth approach.
Report comment to moderator
____________________________________Obama made the big gaffe “My Muslim Faith”
“My Muslim Faith”
____________________________________Report comment to moderator
All that was missing in that bit of political theater was baseball and a kindly old grandmother offering slices of apple pie.
******Well, I’m not going to disagree with you. The Republicans used it and used it with a great deal of theater.
BUT, where I am going to disagree with you is that this is something only the Republicans would have done.
Seriously, you can’t believe that.
Partisan, mean politics is pretty much universal. I have certainly seen the Democrats pull similar stunts. In some ways, I imagine they’re just sorry they went first and couldn’t have done the same thing.
Not ALL Democrats certainly, and not ALL Republicans. I wouldn’t do it, for example.
But, honestly, I just wish both sides would stop and admit that BOTH sides do silly, childish, mean, Partisan, things, including name-calling, innuendo, picking out parts of what someone said and purposely misunderstanding them, and so on. To act as if the Republicans have some sort of monopoly on this is really just not reality. Nor is it reasonable to believe that only the Democrats do this (which a great many Conservatives would like to believe.)
Honestly, some Democrats would really do better for their side if they weren’t so *exactly* what they criticize us for being — just on the other side.
Report comment to moderator
The flag flap was a manufactured stunt. The Dem convention was over for almost a week; their garbage would’ve been removed by then. The flags were said to be donated to the Denver community and were left for someone to pickup who obviously forgot. A stadium employee noticed the flags still there a few days later and phoned someone in and the Republicans took it from there.
McCain sold his soul somewhere in 2006; he’s not the maverick campaigner of 2000 (if he ever was). A sign that he’s desperate for power is the hiring of Bush’s election team that smeared him in South Carolina.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir,
You will like this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJGCnk_wDMA
Basically Stewart points out to trash Obama’s work in the community demonstrates the Republican opinion of community service.
Report comment to moderator
A sign that he’s desperate for power is the hiring of Bush’s election team that smeared him in South Carolina.
*****I disagree. If someone did a good job, even if it was against you, then it makes sense to look at them. I think it is a sign that he doesn’t hold grudges and can admire someone’s work even when it was against him.
Report comment to moderator
Basically Stewart points out to trash Obama’s work in the community demonstrates the Republican opinion of community service.
*******I disagree again. What they are trashing is the claim that working in the community somehow shows more leadership than working as a mayor and a governor.
That’s a different thing than trashing community workers.
I do a lot of work in my community, but I would never say that it qualifies me to be President.
Report comment to moderator
Hilary — a radical?? I almost choked on my coffee. I consider her a conservative slight right of center.
******I guess that just shows you how Left of center you are.
Report comment to moderator
The “left” in America would be the center/moderates in other western democracies. We don’t have a true “left” in America, at least not as a viable party.
As for the Democrats being more “refined” and the Republicans being more “smash mouth”, that’s absolutely true. The Democratic voters (the regular people outside the Washington beltway) want the Democrats to grow a pair and stand up and fight for the Democrats and against the Republicans for all their worth. After 8 years of being “swiftboated” by the Republicans we want the Democratic leaders to take the fight right back to the Republicans. If we let the Republicans sucker-punch us again, they will be right back in the White House for another 4 years. I don’t know if the Democratic leadership has it in them to fight. I look at Obama and I think that he might not be tough enough to fight the Republicans. But then I remember that he took on the two most powerful people in the Democratic Party (Bill and Hillary Clinton) and beat them. Everyone said the nomination was a sure thing for Hillary, but somehow Obama took it away from her. So I’m somewhat trusting that the Obama team knows what they’re doing and has a method to this madness. As I’ve said many times, it will be a true Miracle if Obama wins.
Report comment to moderator
As for the original reason for the thread — what’s the point.
Is Sept. 11 to be used to squelch political disagreements? Let’s agree that debate, argument and compromise especially the later are the foundational principles of democracy and shall continue despite an act of religious fanaticism.
Report comment to moderator
Is Sept. 11 to be used to squelch political disagreements?
No, it’s meant to be a day when we stop the bickering and whining. We’ll see.
Report comment to moderator
TRS
*I disagree. If someone did a good job, even if it was against you, then it makes sense to look at them. I think it is a sign that he doesn’t hold grudges and can admire someone’s work even when it was against him.
However, McCain’s image or repuatation has always been that he is above the politics that Bush’s team represented. Hiring this team represents an abandonment of principle for power in the same way as his commencement address at Bob Jones U.
What they are trashing is the claim that working in the community somehow shows more leadership than working as a mayor and a governor.
No Guillani laughed and declared he had no idea what a community organizer was and Palin declared a community organizer has no responsibilities — community service is a responsible position. If Palin’s claim is true then why is not the Palin-McCain ticket since she has more experience?
guess that just shows you how Left of center you are.
Actually it shows how narrow the political spectrum is in America. There are very few leftist politicians in federal American politics – perhaps Saunders, Frank and Kuscinch could qualify but thats it. Those three would be considered moderately left of center elsewhere in the developed world. Even in Canada, they might feel more comfortable in the Liberal party more than the leftist NDP and Canada’s political spectrum isn’t much wider than America’s.
Anlir — Obama seems to have a pair that Kerry and Gore didn’t posses, which is why I think Biden was a good pick — he also is no BS speaker.
Report comment to moderator
The Democrats have something going for them that the Republicans don’t: empathy.
Barack Obama’s story about his mother teaching him empathy was dead on right.
The Republican sneer at people who are “below” them. If you’re black, hispanic, gay, poor, or whatever, they’ve got nothing but contempt for you. The Republican Party is for white, conservative Christian, upper income & wealthy Americans. In all four days of the Republican convention one was hard pressed to find anything other than a white person amongst the 20,000 folks in the hall. Yes, there were a few “tokens” here and there, but the picture presented to America by the Republicans does not look like the real America.
Given the demographic changes in America, the Republicans are dooming themselves to minority status. Even some conservatives recognize that.
Report comment to moderator
it’s meant to be a day when we stop the bickering and whining.
Why? Seriously why is it more appropriate to pretend its a happy happy world then to continue with a free discussion as is the norm in western society.
Report comment to moderator
This lack of empathy or understanding of what it means to work for the community sometimes causes the Republicans to be more abrasive than is politically wise. The Catholics weren’t too impressed that the Republicans thought so little of the charity Obama worked for.
http://tinyurl.com/6c6wtc
Report comment to moderator
They don’t have days in Canada when they show respect?
Report comment to moderator
I’ll take a man any day who knows how to organize people in their local community to get things done over a politician who thinks power comes from the top down (Governor, President, what-have-you).
Report comment to moderator
Anlir
Speaking of demographics and target audiences here’s a billboard you may appreciate;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thezeppelin/2784188452/
Although there are many historical and cultural reasons why America has a strong right wing political culture, one demographic that favors conservatives is the large rural population in comparison to other developed countries. The rural urban divide almost mirrors the conservative liberal divide. The electoral systems also favours the rural states over the urban states — urban political districts often have more than twice the population as a rural district.
Report comment to moderator
#96 Remembrance Day — Nov 11 but that’s for army veterans for service to the country. The bombing of Air India (the flight originated in Vancouver and exploded over the Atlantic) is not commemorated in anyway and definitely not through a silencing of differences.
Remembrance Day shows respect but also show respect for the different voices that make up the Canadian landscape. We still argue over what we commemorate and how we commemorate but we do agree we should commemorate.
Report comment to moderator
True enough HRW. However, our congressional districts are divided up every 10 years based on the census, so that the number of people each congressperson represents in congress remains fairly equal. It keeps the rural areas from having an influence greater than their numbers. So an urban area like Chicago will have several congressional representatives, while the less populated downstate area of Illinois will have a few representatives over a larger area. Many states are this way too.
Report comment to moderator
I also thought Guiliani and Palin were snide and nasty about community organizing. But I think it was just an angle of attack on Obama. When you’re playing attack politics, you throw principles completely out the window. I doubt they even stopped to think whether using grassroots activism and local charities rather than depending on the federal government for help was something that they, as Republicans, ought to applaud. Instead, it was just an opportunity to needle the opponent.
Actually, I’m sure Palin was just reading the script she was given by the Bush script-writer. She probably didn’t think about the lines at all, she was just fully willing to play the role that had been handed to her.
It’s a commentary on the win-at-all-costs culture that has overtaken the Republican party. It’s Rove’s permanent majority theory filtering down through all levels of the party.
Does the Democratic leadership do it, too? Certainly not to the extent the Republicans do. Compare the convention speeches. With the single exception of McCain’s speech, the Republican convention was more about Obama than it was about McCain or Palin. I don’t remember choruses of boos from the Democratic convention (a frequent sound at the Republican), or snide jokes and laughter about the other candidate (also a set piece at the Republican convention). I don’t remember recalcitrant chants of “drill, baby, drill” (which is taking an intentionally provocative and aggressive stance on a complex and divisive issue — like if the Democrats had chanted “abort, baby, abort”).
So no, I don’t think the Democrats “do it too.” If I’m wrong, prove it to me. Show me links of the Democrats acting at their convention the way the Republicans did.
Report comment to moderator
I just read The Weekly Standard from cover to cover. It was an all-out personal attack on Barack Obama, full of rumors, lies, slander, and innuendo. The entire issue was devoted to attacking Obama.
Do you know what wasn’t there? Not a single article or mention of John McCain and what he would do for America.
And that sums up the Republican campaign of 2008.
The Republicans want to make the campaign about personalities, not the issues facing America. It’s the Karl Rove tactic of promoting the divisions in America, not bringing people together. It’s a naked play for power, by pitting people against each other, and hoping you can come out the top dog.
The thing to ask is: how far are the Republicans willing to tear this country apart in order to remain in power? Is that really the kind of America we want? We shall see.
Report comment to moderator
Exactly right, Anlir. This blog itself avoids threads about McCain. We’ll have hundreds about Obama and Palin, but very few about McCain.
Report comment to moderator
Please enlighten me as to what community organizing is, and not just a general description. Please enlighten me as to the details of what Obama did as a community organizer. Then tell me how that work is equal to the executive experience of being a mayor of a town and governor of a state.
I really do not know what Obama was doing.
Report comment to moderator
“Community organizing” is probably not much more than registering people to vote Democrat.
Report comment to moderator
HRW, 9/11 is not a national holiday here, and I doubt it will become one, but it astonishes me that anyone would be so crass as to put a limit on another’s grief or empathy for that grief. No one is asking that you be happy on 9/11 — we know it has no meaning for you. But your comment at 94 was callous (as are other comments here) and then in your very next post, you condemn others for a lack of empathy. I guess you Canadians are just choosy about feeling empathy.
If you really look at the electoral system (not to mention the red state/blue state map), you will see that if the coastal states continue with their rate of growth, it will be possible for them — the densely populated, metropolitan states — to come up with the 270 electoral votes on their own — which is one reason Obama is a little scared about NJ. People here are really tired of the Dems because of taxes and bankruptcy. He would lose a lot of electoral votes here.
Report comment to moderator
NJL:People here are really tired of the Dems because of taxes and bankruptcy.
They are a lot more tired of the R’s because of health care bills and bankruptcy. It’s pretty hard for a working stiff to run up a bankruptcy inducing big tax bill; unlike the bosses, workers generally have their taxes withheld. And, of course most of the bosses have insurance anyway…
Report comment to moderator
Here’s what Obama did as a community organizer:
>>>>>
In 1985, freshly graduated from Columbia University and working for a New York business consultant, Barack Obama decided to become a community organizer.
…
Obama, only 24, struck board members as “awesome” and “extremely impressive,” and they quickly hired him, at $13,000 a year, plus $2,000 for a car–a beat-up blue Honda Civic, which Obama drove for the next three years organizing more than twenty congregations to change their neighborhoods.
…
Often by confronting officials with insistent citizens–rather than exploiting personal connections, as traditional black Democrats proposed–Obama and [Developing Communities Project] protected community interests regarding landfills and helped win employment training services, playgrounds, after-school programs, school reforms and other public amenities.
One day a resident at Altgeld Gardens, a geographically isolated public housing project surrounded by waste sites, brought a notice about planned removal of asbestos from the project manager’s office. Obama organized the community to find out if there was asbestos in their apartments. They persisted as officials lied and delayed, then took a bus–with far fewer people than Obama had anticipated–to challenge authorities downtown. Ultimately, the city was forced to test all the apartments and eventually begin cleaning them up.
>>>>> The Nation
After graduating from Columbia University in 1983 with a major in political science, Obama worked as a financial consultant in New York City. But he was bored—and drawn to public service. In 1985, he moved to Chicago to work with local churches organizing job training and other programs for poor and working-class residents of Altgeld Gardens, a public housing project where 5,300 African-Americans tried to survive amid shuttered steel mills, a nearby landfill, a putrid sewage treatment plant, and a pervasive feeling that the white establishment of Chicago would never give them a fair shake.
…whether it was getting the city to fill potholes, provide summer jobs, or remove asbestos from the apartments or persuading the apartment managers to repair toilets, pipes, and ceilings, Obama encouraged residents to come up with their own priorities with the gentle admonition: “It’s your community.”
>>>>> US News
That is admirable work, especially for a 24 year old leaving a lucrative job because he felt called to service. I think the Republicans, in some kind of blood-frenzy, made a moral and political mistake in attacking it as laughable and useless.
Report comment to moderator
NJL: If you don’t believe me, perhaps consider this, from David Frum in the NY Times today.
IN SHORT, the trend to inequality is real, it is large and it is transforming American society and the American electoral map. Yet the conservative response to this trend verges somewhere between the obsolete and the irrelevant.
Conservatives need to stop denying reality. The stagnation of the incomes of middle-class Americans is a fact. And only by acknowledging facts can we respond effectively to the genuine difficulties of voters in the middle. We keep offering them cuts in their federal personal income taxes — even though two-thirds of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than in income taxes, and even though a majority of Americans now describe their federal income tax burden as reasonable.
What the middle class needs most is not lower income taxes but a slowdown in the soaring inflation of health-care costs. If health-insurance costs had risen 50 percent rather than 100 percent over the Bush years, middle-income voters would have enjoyed a pay raise instead of enduring wage stagnation
Frum is most certainly a certified AEI conservative yet the article, which I thought pretty interesting is entitled “The Vanishing Republican”.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07Inequality-t.html
Report comment to moderator
Yes, south Chicago is a wonderful place to live and shop as a result of BO’s organizing. Great job, Barry!
Report comment to moderator
HRW does point out a legit reason why we have, especially in rigid institutions like the Senate, such a hard time a mass political culture.
Which leads me to ask, are we suspending the whole “culture war” or JUST Democratic V. Republican partisanship? I seriously doubt that Victoria and Night Train can refrain from making personal attacks against gays and pro-choice Americans for a whole day.
Report comment to moderator
I seriously doubt that Victoria and Night Train can refrain from making personal attacks against gays and pro-choice Americans for a whole day.
Since Night Train is no longer with us and Victoria has agreed to the “pledge,” Luke . . . .
Report comment to moderator
Regardless of Chicago’s problems, Outkast, Obama put aside the “me first, country second” attitude by taking a low-paying job in public Service (remember those red signs at the Republican convention?). So however bad it is, he made it a little bit better for the people living there. He deserves better from your and your party for it.
Or has the Republican party now become the party of “let Washington fix your problems?”
That’s what struck me as so ironic. The party that used to distrust government and appreciate local effort was mocking the man’s local effort and praising Palin’s (much over-hyped) government. What was the message? We trust government, as long as they’re our people. Grassroots work is laughably ridiculous, it’s smooth politicians we need.
Huh?
Report comment to moderator
Evangelicals do NOT have a “me-first, country-second” attitude, JJF. We have a “God-first, family-second, country-third” attitude (speaking for myself and those in my genre, at least).
We make neighborhoods better because Christ (in Scripture) asks us to, not because the Republican Party asks us to. For Barry’s worldview, look at where he gets direction (Jeremiah Wright, et al).
Report comment to moderator
Outkast: We make neighborhoods better because Christ (in Scripture) asks us to.
Not because it would occur to you on your own? Or because it makes you feel good?
You really need a church to tell you that helping others is a good thing? Kind of sad, really.
As for “God first, family second, country third”, that is exactly why I so bitterly oppose the involvement of religion with politics. You are disloyal to this country when you put your interpretation of what your god says ahead of what is good for the country.
Gods and their interpreters are, by definition, anti-democratic and often dangerous.
Report comment to moderator
No, I would probably be as selfish as the pagans if I didn’t have Christ in my life, Arcadia.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia – you are really misguided on that point. God is the reason why this country was founded in the first place. Most of the founders were believers, or did you not know that?
http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5097
This is of course, another discussion for another thread but the reality is that we are living in a country founded by Christians. Their daily lives were centered around the Bible and Christian beliefs.
Report comment to moderator
Look at yourselves, both Christian and non. This is a post about stowing partisan bickering on 9/11 and you can’t even simply agree to do that without partisan accusations, some of which are laced with innuendo and gotchaism long enough to simply agree to do that. Sad.
Report comment to moderator
Coyote Blue is correct.
Report comment to moderator
It’s not yet 9/11, CB.
Report comment to moderator
coyoteblue post 118,
an astute observation.
We will have an interesting conundrum:
1) we will not enter politics into the discussion
- reasonable enough perhaps
2) but religion is entered into the political discussion here regularly
- much religious discussion may become problematic
3) and victoria would suggest no arguments
- with an open issue of what is considered starting an argument.
and of course, depending on which side of an issue one is on, one may veiw the situation very differently.
So lets try an experiment. I am about to simply make a statement: note I have “started” no argument:
- the documentary evidence does not support the assertion that the Bible as we know it has come down unchanged form the original autographs:
c.f. references as a minimum to John 7:53 – John 8:11, and Mark 16:9-20
Now lets watch the development.
Notes:
1) this is completely unpolitical
2) I have argued with no one
3) I have made no assertions about those who disagree with me nor used and language whatsoever to describe them
Now lets see what happens!
P.S. outkast’s assertion that personal attacks are not allowed already is an interesting one which does not appear to be supported by observaton of the posts in the blog.
Report comment to moderator
NOw lets continue the point further.
There are a large number of Christian denominations in the U.S.:
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports
which results in amny different perspectives on how to interpret the Bible:
http://www.usccb.org/seia/southernbaptist.shtml
which make it implausible that one could argue that Christians have a constant moral compass, at least if it is based on Biblical teachings.
By contrast, Islam has a single version of the text today:
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ISLAM/QURAN.HTM
and there is a carefully established Islamic legal systems to interpret and apply the text:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
We can expore further, but the simplest observations are that that the Islamic system would appear to provide more consistency in religious interpretation than the Christian system.
And this plausibly suggests that in fact the Islamic moral compass may be more constat than the Christian, eve if one disagrees with the direction of the Islamic moral compass.
Again non-political.
Again, I have not started an argument, but merely made statements supported by references.
Nor have I case aspersions on any given individuals or groups.
And how would this be judged in the context of the proposed Sept. 11 model?
Report comment to moderator
Mickey McLean,
you will have your work cut out for you.
Unless your requirement is that no controversial statements get made Sept 11, then I believe I have provided examples which show that your goal may in fact be very difficult to achieve!
Report comment to moderator
Perhaps we could just celebrate diversity that day and make ourselves more familiar with the radical extremist wing of the Muslim faith.
Report comment to moderator
#121 Musing – We’ve been round and round this mulberry bush before. Go fishing somewhere else. No one’s biting…
Report comment to moderator
No one gets a ‘free pass’ on the <b<past- even Obama should know that -
Victoria – Bush got a free pass about his previous DUI and cocaine use, saying when he was young and foolish, he did things that were foolish. He got a free pass in that the media did not follow up and the Democrats did not trot out people detailing the DUI or his drug use.
Bush never had to answer to any specific charges or apologize 30 years after the fact.
Why should any other candidate be different?
Report comment to moderator
Klasko post 125,
did you check what the discussion in post 121 was about?
Arguably in missing the topic you did bite!
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know how Mickey could say “no controversial commments.” Many comments are not meant to be controversial and they end up causing a firestorm.
But that’s because people assume evil intent.
And if I just took a bite, so be it.
Report comment to moderator
Well, I think I can solve the problem by just staying away on 9/11 because this site is going to be boring without any arguments.
Kidding aside, I do like tough but respectful disagreement. The tone here on WMB often crosses into disrespectful, but if the 9/11 goal is no disagreement, it would be best to follow mom’s good advice: “if you’ve got nothing nice to say, then say nothing at all.”
But I’m going to enjoy disagreement while it lasts.
Outkast, you misunderstood my point. I was not suggesting that the Evangelical Right was “me first, country second.” I was echoing McCain’s campaign slogan and speeches (something about leaving behind the “me first country second” attitude for a “country first” attitude), and in doing so trying to point out the irony of making “country first” your party’s slogan then snidely laughing at someone’s grassroots work for his community.
Guiliani’s sarcastic sneer and eye-bulge makes for a pretty ugly party poster boy.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer post 129,
actually given that pretty much eveyrone posting on this blog has strnong opinions AND since there is a fairly wide ideological spread in these opinions, vritually anything that was said on 9/11 will be construed by someone as controversial.
Hence your point: it will be impossible to avoid controversy.
We can perhaps be non-political. We might even just barely make non-partisan. But the liklihood that everything said on 9/11 will be non-controversial is approximately zero.
Report comment to moderator
People are partisan on this blog? I thought this was a place for trading recipes. No wonder so many of my posts are being misconstrued.
I will just not comment on 9/11; but the idea of shutting down partisan debate for one day and replacing it with harmonious paeons is a good idea.
Like most good ideas it will probably founder on the dread reef of human nature. And the fact that this is a Presidential election year.
Report comment to moderator
You know, I think WMB has been using too much bandwidth lately with all the Gov Palin threads going well over 100 posts each. This non-confrontational day would do a lot to use less bandwidth.
Report comment to moderator
Let’s all talk about cats. I’m sure we can all agree that they are the best pets ever.
Report comment to moderator
Cats suck! They leave fur and hairballs in hidden places. The get underfoot. Anybody who likes cats is a pinko commie socialist America-hating Europhile sissy terrorist-lover!
Report comment to moderator
Oh yeah. Hitler like dogs.
Report comment to moderator
Hi Arcadia: thanks for your response at #56.
I’d like to get this straight: are you proposing that, somehow, religiously-based ideas should be prohibited from participation in the “competition of ideas”?
If you really wish to exclude religion from the arena of competing ideas, I’m not sure how the irony of your posts can be overlooked. I don’t know which to conclude: either you *would* exclude religiously-based political ideas, in which case you undermine your entire thesis regarding the virtues of democracy as you define it, or you just think the idea of religion is distasteful. If it’s the latter, the bulk of your posts on this topic are merely question-begging in the extreme. Who says the controversy in the Episcopal Church is trivial? Who says submission to the majority is always good? Of course, you imply that Biblically informed politics is irrational, non-objective and closed-minded. That’s question begging par excellence.
As for Sarah Palin and the abstinence-only issue. I’m no abstinence-only advocate myself. I don’t want some pro-choice Planned Parenthood lackey teaching my kid a curriculum that teacher is antithetically opposed to. Same goes with teaching Creationism in the public schools. I don’t understand Christians who want to implement it there. I advocate for the abolition of government schools so I consider such subjects moot. But those things should be decided, as you say, in the competition of ideas.
Two final things:
Regarding your question about the Bible’s teaching on abortion, the argument is quite simple, really. There are about 3 dots to it; I can connect them for you if you’d like–let me know. Agree with it or not, but the argument is easily discerned.
And the American form of government isn’t a democracy–I have to think you know that.
Report comment to moderator
kbells,
I disagree. I think ferrets are far preferable, although I have cats also.
Oh dear we can’t even talk about pets!
Report comment to moderator
yeah,
and the three dots?
Report comment to moderator
musing: Scriptures imply human life begins in the womb; taking innocent human life is prohibited in the 6th commandment; terminating life in the womb is prohibited. Not insisting on agreement, just pointing out that the argument is hardly a trade secret.
Report comment to moderator
JJF, I’m with KBells. Cats are the best pets ever! Anyone who dislikes cats is insecure.
I’m thinkin’ one ignored you.
Report comment to moderator
Musing at 130 — agreed. Which is why I won’t be placing any bets.
Report comment to moderator
yeah post 139,
what in scripture says human life begins in the womb?
I refer you to Exodus 21:22 which arguably asserts otherwise:
Exodus 21:22 [NIV]:
” 22 “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows.”
see note e: Exodus 21:22 Or she has a miscarriage
It would seem you need to do better than this to provide your first dot.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer post 141,
I have a policy of not betting unless the odds in my favor are 100%!
Hmm, maybe I can bet on this!
Report comment to moderator
NJL
106 I’m not callous I just don’t wish for tragedies to be used as a sledge hammer to silence dissent, discussion and debate.
BTW you are dreaming with New Jersey. Admittedly the data is a month old but NJ has consistenly polled above 10 for Obama in July and August.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia 109
AS Bush’s former speech writer, Frum is definitely a conservative but as Canadian he does understand the pragmatic application of universal health care. However, please keep him we don’t need his annoying rhetorical excess. Now of course I just gave NJL, Victoria and Outkast a reason to ignore this particular conservative.
Report comment to moderator
Musing, I’m aware of the verse; no responsible exegete ignores it. As I meant to imply, I didn’t intend to *make* the case, only to state that there is one, and it’s no secret how the argument is made. To express bewilderment, the way Arcadia did at the end of #56, is goofy.
Report comment to moderator
Musing 137, Ferrets are cute in a cat-like way but one tried to bite me at the pet shop the other day.
JJF, 143. You have a problem with a little hair ball. We had a dog throw up half a rabbit once, shortly after dropping the other half in my sister’s lap.
But the worse pet ever is a fish. You can’t walk them, you can’t pet them and they forget you by the time they reach the other side of the bowl.
Report comment to moderator
yeah post 146,
I understand.
But to state that the Bible clearly argues that life begins at say conception or in the womb would appear, based on my study of the materials, to overstate the case.
You can indeed make a Biblically based case against abortion.
I suggest you can also make a Biblically based case that abortion is not neccessarily prohibited.
And indeed both cases are made and sustained in vigorous argument.
Report comment to moderator
kbells post 147,
and my last cat used to scratch and bite me (but we loved him anyway).
It is critical to train young ferrets not to nip. In their normal play with each other, they will wrestle and bite. It is an important training exercise to train them not to take the same approach towards people.
At this point, short of a prolonged play wrestling matches with them (during which they get very excited), our ferrets do not bite people.
Report comment to moderator
HRW, happy to oblige:
“…but as Canadian he does understand the pragmatic application of universal health care.”
He just doesn’t understand why Americans like a free, private market. (Guess you didn’t read those posts that object to the “government takeover” of Fannie and Freddie.) And why doesn’t he understand? Because he’s Canadian, and he’s used to having someone else to foot the bill.
Report comment to moderator
HRW, I live here, and while it may be a long shot, it’s not as long as it was before. And they’ve pulled my right to vote — very odd after voting for more than 35 years and just in June and earlier this year in the primaries. But NJ is corrupt. We rival Chicago in the number of dead people who vote. I wouldn’t be surprised if they set up a voting booth in the cemetery.
Report comment to moderator
And no one said you can’t dissent, HRW. But the reason people feel sad on 9/11 if because of the deaths. My town suffered a great deal, other towns in NJ even more. We take the memory of those people very seriously. For one day, instead of thinking about it in a political way, consider the families left behind.
Report comment to moderator
Musing at 148: I appreciate the humility of your response when you say qualify your conclusion as being “based on [your] study of the materials.” Perhaps in another thread we could discuss how deeply you’ve studied the anti-abortion view of the verse you mentioned and other Scriptures bearing on the subject. I don’t doubt you’ve given some consideration to that view–although I admit I’m skeptical you’ve dug all that deeply, but I don’t really care in the context of this thread and the point I tried to make re: Arcadia.
Arcadia’s comment at the end of 56 is illustrative of the lack of respect for the debate that often comes from the pro-choice side. He talks like pro-life Christians are just so plum sh** stoopid, how in the gosh darn heck do they get their views from the Bible and why all this sticking their noses into bedrooms and taking rights from women and making sure folks stick to the missionary position and living in denial of their own latent homosexuality. You might not mind that kind of puerile drivel between fans discussing a baseball manager, but the discussion here has to do with *human life*. Just look at Arcadia at #56 before his inane abortion comment. He talks up ‘democracy’ and the interchange of ideas *at the very same time he bars Christians from the playing field!* When it comes to politics, he says, Christians should just let the enlightened folk handle things. How pathetic.
Report comment to moderator
Going back over Arcadia’s post, at 56, it would appear that Arcadia has forgotten that the government of the United States is NOT a Democracy, it’s a Democratic Republic – a representative form of government deliberately put into place to avoid the mob rule of a Democracy,(protecting us from the plebs). Civics 101.
Report comment to moderator
yeah post 152,
so trying to understand the structure and intent of the scriptures has been both a religous effort and a hobby of mine.
I have primarily focused on the books up thorugh perhaps Kings as well as some material on the Gospels.
In my perusal, as well as the perusal of the verious published pro-life materials, what has regarding your point 1.
Now I am content that one can indeed develop a pro-life model for point one from the Bible.
It also appears when I make the effort, that one can make a pro-choice model as well.
If you have a sharper clarity on how to construct the Biblical argument for your point 1 I wuold love to hear it.
Report comment to moderator
HOW NEVER TO FORGET 9/11:
1.) Broadcast pictures of the airplanes hitting the towers in order to illustrate the consequences of electing your political opponents.
2.) Inform voters you know how to catch Osama bin Laden but they have to elect you in order to learn your secret.
Report comment to moderator
*
O
| | * * * * * * * * * *
____________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
____________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
____________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
____________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
____________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________GOD Bless America
Report comment to moderator
Well this was a test!
Report comment to moderator
*
O
| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________| |
_______________________________________GOD Bless America
Report comment to moderator
Another test is needed!
Report comment to moderator
*
O
| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________GOD Bless America
Report comment to moderator
*
O
| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
| |
GOD Bless America
Report comment to moderator
*
O
| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| | * * * * * * * * * *
__________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
______________________________________| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
GOD Bless America
Report comment to moderator
May we all give thanks that our land is still the land of the free.
Pray for our troops, the men and women who are putting their lives on the line for our FREEDOM.
We are blesssed!
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!