• Home
  • Friends
  • Groups
  • Share

SIGN IN | HELP
onedrflday.gather.com
  • profile|
  • posts|
  • photos|
  • videos|
  • comments|
  • friends|
  • groups
by Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz
Member since:
September 8, 2006

Remember, You Saw It Here First

February 26, 2008 10:21 AM EST (Updated: March 18, 2008 10:31 AM EDT)
views: 225 | comments: 146

 Edit Article Title changed today, March 18, 2008, to Remember, You Saw It Here First.

 This articel was originally published on February 26, 2008. At that time, there was no allusion to Obama's affiliation with Pastor Wright and his controversial teachings. No matter your opinion, this is an issue that took some time to catch on, but it finally did.

Edit: Title changed from This Is The Reason He Doesn't Salute Our Flag to the above. Last sentence "I maintain that herein is the reason that Obama will not and cannot salute the flag of the United States of America,"  removed.     March 6, 2008

Outside of mainstream Christianity, the Protestant and Catholic denominations, there are three major goups of Christian sects, Fundamentalists, churches like the Assemblies of God, of which Pat Robertson is a member, Evangelicals like the sect of President Bush, and  Pentecostals, mostly comprised of former Baptists of the Protestant denomination.

There are other fringe sects such as the Messianic Jews, and probably others of which I'm unaware. Within these sects are also, often, what I will term as sub-sects, a subtle flavor that is distinctive for a particular Church or several Churches within that sect. The Fundamentalists seem to have fewer of these sub-sects. Their features are all basically the same within sub-sects. It can also be viewed as the personality of the sect.  An example would be that the Fundamentalists seem to cater more to the family. You'll feel most welcome and comfortable in one of these churches if you are an established family with more than one child with plans to have more children. This is not to say that you'll be ostracized should you not be in that category, but you might not have the sense of belonging that you would otherwise. All of these sects and sub-sects have some type of such personality, at least in my vast experience with them.  The one thing they all have in common is a desire to grow and develop. Money is tantamount to the endeavors of all the sects and sub-sects.

The United Church of Christ of which Barack Obama is a member, would fall into the Evangelical category. As its name indicates, its purpose is to evangelize, or spread the  Word of God. The Bible, however, is a very complicated book if not understood as it should be, which is really very simple, an all encompassing message of unadulterated love, a pervading and underlying goodness superseding all other interpretation. Since, however, that message is often obscured by its many interpretations, it largely depends upon how the Bible is interpreted as to what kind of message is spread. The Pastor of any of these sects sets the tone from his/her interpretation of the Bible to the congregation, and the Word is disseminated as such.

There are some churches, like Obama's, belonging to the Evangelical sect, that also have a set agenda further categorizing them into that sub-set of the sects that I mentioned above. These might also be more commonly referred to as cults. They are identified by a set of rules or tenets that are exclusive to their evangelism or to whatever base upon which they have been founded. Thanks to Lera, who pointed out this informative link to me yesterday, I am able to provide the link to the Church to which Obama belongs with its tenets listed on its website. (Edit February 27, 2008  This site is inaccessible today, not only from this link, but from a Google search or from the URL in any browser. Very interesting in light of last night's debate.)

I could expound on all of them, but the most important to the point of this article is tenet #4, quoted here with the same capitalizaton as is on the website.  "A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA." This clearly indicates an uncompromising loyalty and allegiance to Africa.  If one has such loyalty, there is no way that he can possess or express his allegiance to any other entity without negotiating a portion of such allegiance to that entity.

Expand Tags: obama, allegiance, flag, pledge, loyalty usa
Expand To Groups: !!! Random Posts !!!, !!! The World Is Crazy !!!, A Cross Section Of Society, A Place for Opinions, a24hourpostit, Affairs of the State, All you have to do is comment., Amateurs, Newbies, Rookies, and Friends, Amusing Musings, Any Article, Image, Poem, Story or First Chapters Reject, Any article, picture or comment...Oh My!, Anything and Everything, ANYTHING GOES, Anything You Wish!, Articles Galore, Breaking News, Confused about which/what article to post where? Post it here!, Current Events 2, Daily Chit Chat & More ( any thing ), Deadline News, Debate Anonymous, Deep Thinking and Meanings, Did I Say That?, Do you need to promote it....promote it here!, FoxFansAtGather, Free Thinking, gatherers from everywhere, Gatherholics Anonymous, Gatherism, General Chit-Chat, Get the point?, Go ahead ~ POST, POST, POST !, Independent Minds, Intelligent politics, Making A Difference, News 24 Hours, Nonconformists, Philosophy on Gather, Political Moderates, politics and international news, Politics Corps, Politics Today, Post Everything Here, Post it High, Post it Low, Post it Here, Post It If You Got It!, ! Post Office @ Gather Town !, Post the moon, Post what doesn't FIT anywhere else!, Post What You Want Base, POSTaholics, Promote It, Public Forum, Religion Talk!!, The Posting Station, Things that make you go hmmm, This & That, thought provoking, THOUGHTS & MUSINGS, Today's NEWS, Type and post What You want AND dont get Deleted!, What's on your Mind, YaDaYadaYada, Yawp!, You Name It, Your Group, ~Dump Anything Here~
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Paste this link into an email or IM
Bookmark this post:
Facebook
Twitter
Delicious
Buzz
More

Comments: 146

Mickey B. Feb 26, 2008, 10:45am EST
Wow This is interesting. I will check out the link. The reason the media is not asking the tough questions about Obama church is that the majority of the reporters are white and they do not want to look like they are beating up on Obama who is black.

Obama, should be asked these tough questions. He is such a smooth guy I am sure he can handle it.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rex T. Feb 26, 2008, 11:04am EST
I find it odd how Huckabee's evangelism and Romney's Mormonism were the subject of much scrutiny while BO seems to get a pass on all this stuff. He and the Dragon Lady make no bones about being Christians but, somehow, their type of religion doesn't threaten the foundations of our republic.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Larry M. Feb 26, 2008, 11:07am EST
Africa is not an entity nor a political organization. It has many different cultures, tradtions and beliefs. The statement from that church/sect/cult is meaningless and even in the website is completely out of context. In short it is nothing at all. Please don't waste your time being upset by such things.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Katie Scarlett (Site Bouncer Wanna Be) O. Feb 26, 2008, 11:13am EST
I absolutely agree with Rex on this one. The slamming received by Huckabee and Romney for their religious views went as far as to call them cult members. But Obama
and his companions are above scrutiny? I don't think so.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 26, 2008, 11:32am EST
"The statement from that church/sect/cult is meaningless and even in the website is completely out of context." Out of exactly what context, Larry? These are the tenets of the church to which he belongs. Africa is to where he pledges his allegiance according to the rules set forth in his church of which he himself has claimed to be a member for decades.

I'm not upset, but I do NEED to wonder why someone running for the highest office in this country does not salute the flag of this country. Maybe after this article's ideas get around, he'll get a special dispensation from his Pastor, but I'll know the truth and that's what counts.

Yes, isn't it odd, Katie and Rex? It reminds me of the subtitle of the article preceding this, When It Matters Not What Is Done, But Who's Doing It.

That's right, Mickey. It would have to be very gingerly approached by a White reporter.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 26, 2008, 11:45am EST
"Maybe after this article's ideas get around, he'll get a special dispensation from his Pastor..." Let me expound a bit on that in case you might not understand why he'd get a special dispensation. If I'm correct, which I am 95% sure I am, it would not be politically expedient for the majority to know this, because in the best interests of his Church and its agenda, Obama's election is of the highest importance. They will sacrifice a ritualistic symbolism for the attainment of the ultimate goal, if absolutely necessary.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Feb 26, 2008, 11:55am EST
"The statement from that church/sect/cult is meaningless and even in the website is completely out of context. In short it is nothing at all. Please don't waste your time being upset by such things. "

How do you know larry? You really do not know. This is your personal opinion. Unless you are part of the church you do not know. Maybe someone in the press should ask Obama. He is a big boy, he can handle it.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 26, 2008, 12:08pm EST
I see the ratings have gone down...Well here's a comment I just left on another artilce that's sure to be a rating O-bomb-er!

"Obama supporters are like heroin addicts. You'll not dissuade them. You can tell them that it will kill them tomorrow, but they'll find a way to go back to it because they just can't help themselves. They like that false euphoria and the feeling that anything is better than their reality."

Get that mouse firmly in place over the one star!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Clarke M. Feb 26, 2008, 2:16pm EST
Sue B.,
Your referenced comment (to my article) was directed to another's comment, and while it may be fair in his case, surely it doesn't apply to many of "Obama's supporters." I am sceptical of Obama's qualifications myself, in no small part because he has not addessed himsef to serious issues, as at least several candidates (now no longer in the game) have. I am disappointed that he and the other active leading candidates have not.
In regard to your article, which is informative, I ( an American Episcopal "mouse") question the value of judging Obama based on his association with a church that declares its commitment to Africa. That doesn't give me a reason to think he "cannot salute the flag of the United States." I can understand his commitment to their community without accepting every statement
some of their leaders make. Obama supported the cause of the Palestinians for some years, but when he became a candidate , he reversed his position and courted the influential American Jewish lobby. He reasoned that this was a political necessity, as have the all the other candidates who are still active.
If there is a point to add here , I suggest that FDR courted various groups to get elected, but he also included proposals and ideas that ran counter to the most "popular" ones: he left himself an "edge" and the power to claim a mandate to act independently. When he was elected he had the power to act to change policies
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 26, 2008, 3:15pm EST
We had better let Senator Dodd know about all this! He has endorsed Obama today!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
~Lady Neeetah of California~Obama #44 W. Feb 26, 2008, 3:27pm EST
My good friend Sue's intentions are well-meaning, and she loves opening the floor to discussion, but Sue, this is a live can of worms to open
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
~Lady Neeetah of California~Obama #44 W. Feb 26, 2008, 3:28pm EST
I'll be back, in the eternal words of our great Governor, Schwarzzie. . .
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
~Lady Neeetah of California~Obama #44 W. Feb 26, 2008, 3:52pm EST
As promised Sue, like the old song -- "Here I Am Baby"

Sue, read this:

Sliming Obama

It is going to shock you, and disspell all of the lies being circulated about Senator Obama, for that is all that they are -- lies, political smut, and innuendo, based on one thing and one thing alone -- F-E-A-R, aka FEAR.

Now let me go on record again in saying something that may appear to make me look like a buffoon, but I do not care about appearances, so here it goes:

It shall not work. Period. The END.

Try as they may, these tactics shall not work, and if anything, they shall backfire.

Senator Obama shall win the nomination, and shall go on to win the Presidency.
The best they may hope for is a failed Presidency, but as far as stopping his Presidency? Forget it. It won't happen.

For those of us who love this country, what we should be doing is working TOGETHER to try to fix, repair, mend all that is broken; there is much work to be done, and there are many who would love to see this country fail and fall.

Instead some -- maybe even many -- prefer in-house fighting, tearing down and bickering, and to what purpose?

We need to unite to combat our real enemy: terrorism and terrorists.

A house divided cannot stand. Your next President shall need your help, all of you.

I do not remember who said it, but the words still ring true:

If you are not for me, then you are against me.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
~Lady Neeetah of California~Obama #44 W. Feb 26, 2008, 3:58pm EST
A Footnote: I just tried the link to "Sliming Obama" and it does not work.

Not a problem. Do this. Access it manually. Here:

1. http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977267553

and I shall attempt to link it one more time:

2. Sliming Obama

So there! If one link does not work, the other most certainly shall!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
~Lady Neeetah of California~Obama #44 W. Feb 26, 2008, 4:00pm EST
Okay, now it works the second time. Coolio.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Linda G. Feb 26, 2008, 4:00pm EST
Probably not true, but it is the way it will be thru the final election.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Austin Cushing Feb 26, 2008, 4:47pm EST
Why not just talk to him and ask him this stuff?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Austin Cushing Feb 26, 2008, 4:47pm EST
This comment is to let you know that this content has reached ten comments, and as such has been removed from Comment Speedway! Congratulations!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
P B. Feb 26, 2008, 4:59pm EST
while I support Hillary, And would love nothing better then to discover a good reason why undecided democrats should vote for Senator Clinton, I doubt this will have much of a "hook" as the news folks call it still its well written and rates a ten
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 26, 2008, 5:22pm EST
Austin, ask him??!! lol...now that would be too simple to go and read what he, himself has stated about all this.

IF Obama was some sort of subversive, wouldn't he go to great pains to hide this? He would wear TWO flag lapel pins and salute the flag with both hands! He would be sure to join all the most patriotic sounding organizations. For a fellow who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, surely he would have thought of some of these ways to conceal his REAL identity.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Joe T. Feb 26, 2008, 5:27pm EST
One of the greatest facets of the Trinity United Church of Christ is its commitment to Africa. They have many other projects that are noteworthy as well. They have an AIDS outreach, a food pantry, and a tutoring program for the unfortunate children of the inner city neighborhood where they find themselves. In the end, Obama belongs to an active church that is about the business of doing good works. It stands to reason. His life before politics was about the same thing. Personally, I wanted Hillary to win, but I will vote in November for Barack should he win the nomination.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Katie Scarlett (Site Bouncer Wanna Be) O. Feb 26, 2008, 5:39pm EST
Um, one of you commentors accused (on another thread) anyone using the lack of experience on Sen. Obama's part to be racist and we were told to get real and put on our white sheets. Now she sucks up and plays nice? I would imagine that questioning the company he keeps would illicit the same attitudes. Guess you're the only Jim Crow friend she can stand Sue.
Feel free to delete my comment if you choose. I don't get insulted nor do I care.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 26, 2008, 6:47pm EST
Joe, you are making an excellent point about some of what the Trinity Church does in it's Chicago neighborhood. As Obama worked there as a community organizer, he often heard of Dr. Jeremiah Wright and eventually went to him to get his support. He was attracted to this church partly because of it's committment to the poor in that area. Interested people, including those wanting to hear all sides of the story before deciding on what to really believe, can find an account in Chapter 14 of Dreams from My Father.

Austin made a good point about asking Obama. Of course, many will say, how can we believe him? I try to form my beliefs from checking out different sources. This would be just one source, of course. But it would not be wise to listen to only one side of the story.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Katie Scarlett (Site Bouncer Wanna Be) O. Feb 26, 2008, 7:08pm EST
Amazing how I NEVER get a response to my comments. I have to be careful or I may start to think that I actually have the ability to shut certain people down.

Again, feel free to delete me. IDC. I don't care.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 26, 2008, 8:25pm EST
Clarke, the only reason I put that same comment here that I left on your article was stated clearly in that comment. I came back to find my ratings low balled and it was a come on for them to low rate some more. Just l'il ol' me me havin' some fun here! Thanks for the rest of the comment, though. You made some very good points.

Sure, Austin, I never realized all the answered questions there are on the threads of the candidates' articles on Gather, including Obama's. How remiss of me to notice 0!

Oh, yeah, Bruce, Dodd, my favorite senator! Usually I run as far as I can from anything he supports. I live here with the results.

No dah, Joe! Why wouldn't they have all those programs? They are a church, aren't they? There's nothing wrong with a committment to helping the poor and diseased in any continent, in any country, state, or city, or any race, religion or nationality, HOWEVER, "A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA" bothers me just a wee bit when the possible future leader of the USA who should have a non- negotiable commitment to the USA belongs to such a congregation with such a tenet and so is obviously already otherwise engaged. Excuse me for my concern.

Katie, as you already know, I NEVER delete comments because I despise the feature. You are, and have been a great connection and friend, and I would not do that to your comment even if I didn't hate the feature.

I haven't looked up the location of that church, Bruce, but I would venture a wild and unsubstantiated guess of the predominant race of its location, not to say that's a bad thing, but it's nice to see a Christian church go beyond the barriers of race to helping all.

Katie, I always respond to your comments, and if I have missed any, it's an oversight. I haven't been on here since about 2:30 this afternoon because I've been working continuously since that time. As you know, I spend lots of hours at the office here, but when I work I work diligently and non-stop for hours, and today was one of those days.

Thanks, Paul. Your comments are always appreciated, whether we agree or not.

Nalita, I haven't looked at the link yet, but I will and let you know what I think.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Joe T. Feb 26, 2008, 11:20pm EST
Sue - I won't excuse you for your concern. It is an unfounded suggestion that you are trying to make. It is inexcusable and disgusting.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Marilyn M. Feb 27, 2008, 2:09am EST
I wrote a bit about this myself, Sue. Obama's association - for over 20 years - with this church and this pastor, whom he calls his friend/mentor/pastor, scares me. By the way, I read that Oprah also attends the same church.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 8:52am EST
Joe, I'm not making any suggestion that isn't clearly stated. If you wish to close your eyes to what's written in black and white on the website of a Church that's your business. I think that's inexcusable and disgusting.

El homo, I am not singing GWB's praises here either, but that's not the issue. Even if it were, the reason we have people in office that we complain about later is because of lack of due diligence on the part of the electorate. Always willing to listen to or read another viewpoint, but when I've taken the time to substantiate my points, whether you agree or not, please don't expect a response from me in the future if you want to spew off your distaste for someone or something unrelated to the issue while contributing nothing of worth to the thread.

Marilyn, that doesn't surprise me, although I didn't know that before. That school that she started in Africa is right in line with the commitment of her church that Africa comes first. I'm not saying what she did was wrong, but it doesn't benefit anyone here. At least she's not running for President. Thanks so much for that info, because it now validates some other things that I've thought about her in the past.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Katie Scarlett (Site Bouncer Wanna Be) O. Feb 27, 2008, 12:04pm EST
Sue - I won't excuse you for your concern. It is an unfounded suggestion that you are trying to make. It is inexcusable and disgusting.
Joe T., Feb 26, 2008, 11:20pm EST


I'm sorry Sue, I missed you saying "Excuse Me" in the first place. Lol, did you delete your own comment? Lol lol
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
C A. Feb 27, 2008, 12:12pm EST
As a 30+ yr. affiliate of a UCC in Missouri, I would like to point out that the Trinity UCC, of which Obama is a member, is indeed one of the "sub-sect" churches you refer to.

My UCC lists no tenets, and is the most Bible-oriented church I've ever seen.

No wonder it boasts some 2,000+ members.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 2:31pm EST
Right, CA. I'm sure that there are some churches in the UCC, like yours, that are a sub-sect of the Evangelicals just like the UCC in Chicago. As I stated in my article, the sub-sects have different flavors. The flavor of your church and that of Obama's is different. Yours may be Bible oriented, but, as I also said, The bible has many interpretations and the pastor who interprets and gives his sermons based on his interpretations is feeding the sheep what he believes the Bible is saying. One of the reasons I don't attend Church anymore is because, as I also said, any variation from the theme of love, and any that professes anything contrary to the love of Christ is not Christian. Your church may and your church may not, but it's unlikely that I would care to be a member of that church either. The last evangelical church I attended was in excess of 3500 members. The number of members has nothing to do with how Christian it is. I was a bit tired of the money theme for one thing. I've been to more different churches than I care to acknowledge, and I've come across some of the most un-Christian people in most of them than I'd run into in a brothel.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
William M. Feb 27, 2008, 2:32pm EST
Interesting article and comments.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 2:46pm EST
Thank you, William. I hope we hear some good news from your doctor soon. You're in my prayers and I'm praying especially for you.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 3:39pm EST
I read Brian's article, Nalita. What that tenet says is what it says. Whatever else Brian was talking about in that article is not of my concern. The fact that he belongs to a church where one of the top 10 commitments of its members to that church is being a part of "a congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA" is something that should not be a top priority for anyone seeking the office of Presidency. The President's only commitment that is non-negotiable is to the United States of America. For liberals so intent on the separation of church and state, it's awfully odd that they can ignore the very philosophy that makes it impossible for Obama not only to be unable to separate it, but allow it to dominate every aspect of every decision he will make in office. "You can't serve God and mammon." This is a perfect example of that. He can be true to his church's NON-NEGOTIABLE commitment to Africa, OR he can be true to his commitment to the USA. If his commitment is non-negotiable then he cannot commit even partially to the US over his commitment to Africa unless he is untrue to his Church's obligations.

You said don't remember who said, "If you're not for me then you're against me." I don't know what it has to do with this, but that was Jesus Christ, Nalita.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Katie Scarlett (Site Bouncer Wanna Be) O. Feb 27, 2008, 4:40pm EST
Bullseye. Nice Sue.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 8:02pm EST
Thanks, Katie! :)
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 27, 2008, 9:11pm EST
One reason that Romney and Huckabee might have been more scrutinized, and I am sure "slammed", is that I think they did not express their desire to see a clear separation of church and state.

In Audacity of Hope, Obama writes, Jefferson and Madison in particular argued for what Jefferson called a "wall of separation" between church and state, as a means of protecting individual liberty in religious belief and practice, guarding the state against sectarian strife, and defending organized religion against the state's encroachment or undue influence."

Obama feels that personal morality and religious beliefs should be injected in public-policy debate but "What our deliberative, pluralistic democracy does demand is that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values."
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 10:15pm EST
"What our deliberative, pluralistic democracy does demand is that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values." I will say one thing positive about him. He's very smart! This one quote very nicely covers and validates any agenda toward Africa he might want to pursue.
It sounds noble, just and forthright and sets the stage for any detractors of any plans he might have in that respect to seem heartless, cruel, bigoted and un-Christian.

To me, it's downright dirty!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 27, 2008, 10:29pm EST
Sue, what sort of things might be included in such an agenda? Is there anything we should be on the look out for?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 10:33pm EST
OH GOODIE!!!....are we talking about obama again?!?!....such fun!...Ok,...Lets see,..does anyone find ANYTHING wrong w/this obama statement?!?!!?!?

" OBAMA: You know, I've heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.

And as a consequence, they didn't have enough ammunition, they didn't have enough Humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 10:37pm EST
I have no idea what he has planned, Bruce. I would suppose you could ask the Reverend Wright, though.

I would bet he and his teachings had a good deal of influence on Oprah starting the girls' school in South Africa but, of course, I don't know that for sure. All reports I've heard or read just say that it was a promise she made to Nelson Mandela. It does go right along with the agenda of the Trinity UCC Church of which she and Obama are members.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 10:41pm EST
I sometimes do it too, but you forgot to end the quote, Christene. I assume it ends at the end of the comment? Makes a difference in what I will reply.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 10:49pm EST
Hey, I'm not the one with the name el homo fabuloso.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 10:50pm EST
First:It's Congress that gives the money to the Military ….not the Commander in Chief.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 10:52pm EST
2nd:Captains don't lead platoons, they lead companies.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 10:57pm EST
3rd:No corroborating evidence besides allegedly talking to the (former?) officer? Further more, no mention that M2s, MK-19s, and HMMWVs are not part of the 10th MOUNTAIN Division's standard MTOE at Rifle Co level in 2003.

in other words,...Some guy told some staffer who told Obama who couldn't even repeat the story accurately. That's the reality, the truth, and the facts.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:04pm EST
OH,..I do love the drama in this theater!....Lol..: o )
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 11:09pm EST
Oh geez, Christene, I think I finally found the conservative Nalita! Great package! :)
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:15pm EST
Awwww,...SHUCKS!....lol
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:16pm EST
Want more?...lol
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 11:20pm EST
Yeah, keep it comin'!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 11:23pm EST
Christene, what happened to your article about the most ridiculous lib statements? Need I ask? I looked to read it this morning but I guess it got the big F.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:24pm EST
." It's a Q&A with Barack Obama December 20th in the Boston Globe, Charlie Savage wrote the story. Try this one. This is number five. "Does the Constitution permit a president to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants?" Obama's answer: "No. I reject the Bush Administration's claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants." Memo to Obama: It is not the Bush administration's position. The Supreme Court held in 2004 -- this is the famous case, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. The president has the power to detain American citizens without charges as enemy combatants. Now, I just have to think here -- I don't know what to think. He's either ignorant or he's saying something far more dangerous. If he is saying that he's not bound by the Supreme Court's interpretation of the law, liberals would have a stroke if Bush claimed the kind of authority that Obama is claiming in this -- and ignorance.

Liberals are out there going bonkers every day over how stupid Bush is. This Obama interview is just scary. Let's see. Find another one here. He gets it wrong on who ratifies treaties and who consents to them. He says the president doesn't have the authority to abolish treaties. And the president does! Bush abolished the ABM Treaty shortly after taking office because Bush said it's irrelevant. The Soviets are gone. I'm getting rid of this. The liberals went nuts, but they couldn't stop him because the president does have the authority to get rid of treaties. Obama says here that the president does not have the authority to undermine Congress, the Senate here, which ratifies treaties. The Senate doesn't ratify, they consent to them. The president makes treaties, negotiates them, comes up with them. When's the last time you saw Gorbachev meeting with some senator at Reykjavik or anywhere else? Gorbachev met with Reagan, for crying out loud.
...And Obama wants to run this country, I guess write his own laws,..since he doesn't know our laws!!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:26pm EST
I'm not sure,...I left one more post,..and said I would not be taking the time to post again,..it was forever (or so it seemed) before I could load the page,....It was Teresa who started the thread,..but it should still be there,....did you send her a message about it?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 11:36pm EST
Well, I think that the President needs a Senate majority to make a treaty. It's not all that cut and dry though. There are legalities and circumstances that make a difference, and I don't have any idea what they are.

I'm not really sure on any of what you've just said at all. A lot of this is very legal and it would take some research for me to know the facts. Glad you brought it up, though. I definitely will make a point of looking into it.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 11:38pm EST
No, I didn't but I also thought it was yours. I tried to track it through my comments and I couldn't find my comment so I went to your namespace, and, of course, since you didn't write it, I didn't find it. Will have to check hers. I don't know what happened to my comments though, which is why I thought it might have been deleted.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:46pm EST
I just sent her an e-mail ,....I know it was pretty late,...and past 300 post.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 27, 2008, 11:51pm EST
I have a feeling it got flagged, because I just looked through your comments and I don't see any from that post.

Looks like you had a good time with Clarkie boy!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 27, 2008, 11:55pm EST
Right now Luckky is posting about the 1million Iraqis Bush killed!...lol..at (
Farrakhan Sings Obama's Praise)
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 28, 2008, 12:02am EST
LOL I just heard Anderson Cooper say that Obama mispronounced Massachusetts more than once. I'm in another room so I don't know how many times he said he did it. How do you mispronounce Massachusetts? Maffatusets? Mathatatusets? Machustits?
Machapequa?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christene,. Silence is golden Duck-tape is silver! Feb 28, 2008, 12:19am EST
Mass-uh-tootsie?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 28, 2008, 12:17pm EST
Sorry, I should have said good night, but it was way past my bedtime, so I just signed off.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 28, 2008, 9:28pm EST
Sue, If you have no idea what the agenda of the Trinity church is, why are you so worried? I asked you earlier:

"Sue, what sort of things might be included in such an agenda?"
You answered as if you didn't really know"
"I have no idea what he has planned, Bruce."

Then later, talking about Oprah, you apparently did seem to know:
"It does go right along with the agenda of the Trinity UCC Church of which she and Obama are members."

If you don't know then you are making some pretty strong assumptions and possibly unfounded accusations. If you do know, why don't you share?

Another Gatherer also wrote about this and also would not venture a guess as to the "agenda" that he referred to.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sandy (Site Psychic™) Knauer Feb 28, 2008, 9:36pm EST
I think the discussion would be more meaningful it if were about the difference between symbolism and sincerity. Wearing a lapel pin and placing a hand in position means absolutely nothing. How a person lives and honors what those things SYMBOLIZE is what matters.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Don(time to open them FEMA camps) S. Feb 28, 2008, 9:49pm EST
DESPERATION

So they smear and lie and smear and lie and smear and lie all the while Americans die for NO reason in Iraq and the rest of the US goes in the toilet.

You bushies are just plain pathetic.

Photobucket
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 28, 2008, 9:50pm EST
The agenda of the TUCC Church is clear, Bruce. I stated it in here at least a half dozen times. I'll scream it out one more time for you though. Obama's church, according to the 4th tenet of its precepts is non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.


You asked me what sort of things might be included in that agenda. I don't know. I can speculate, I suppose, but I'm not going to get drawn into that nonsense. I have no idea. Maybe we'll have a new tax that will go to Darfur. Now the nuts can come in and pick up on that one sentence that I didn't even want to write, and have a riot. Make you happy? OK.

I know about what Oprah did because it's already been done and it's a good example, but I'm not Jean Dixon so I don't know what specific plans are in the offing, or if there are any at the present time. What I do know is that if, once again, a person is a member of a church that espouses a non-negotiable commitment to ANYTHING, and if that person is of the character to be true to such a belief system, then that commitment CANNOT be superseded by any other commitment, including a commitment to any other person, place or thing, including his own country, that will take precedence over that most important pledge, in this case the commitment to Africa.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Don(time to open them FEMA camps) S. Feb 28, 2008, 9:50pm EST
This is larry "bathroom" craig's ad for interns.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 28, 2008, 9:56pm EST
Sandy, symbolism and sincerity would be a nice theme for an article and if you'd care to write one, I'll be happy to share my thoughts with you. This article is not about that though. I would much appreciate your input if you have anything to contribute about what we're discussing here which is the non-negotiable commitment to Africa to which Obama is obligated according to his church.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 28, 2008, 10:00pm EST
Thanks for reminding me, Don. There are some sites where the comments remain but you have what's called an IGNORE option, so while the discussion is taking place you can blot them from your own view while others can still see them. I keep meaning to ask Tom. Please keep coming back to remind me.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 28, 2008, 11:05pm EST
Sue, in a way, you have answered. "I can speculate". In my opinion, mission statements of various organizations are full of rubbish that most don't pay attention to. The idea of a non-negotiable committment to Africa is as clear to me as mud. If Obama's actions suggest anything for me to worry about then I will.

I don't see something dangerous to our nation in building a school in Africa.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 28, 2008, 11:53pm EST
El homo, you're right, I probably normally would not explain something as trivial as the comment that I replied back to you because it's a waste of time and it doesn't matter, but I see that this answer is important to you, so I'll do it this one time. In the future, however, should you make a comment like you did, here ("Sue, go ahead and have your moral indignation. Go ahead and try to minimize what I've said. The questions I posed are relevant to the topic. That you don't disagree with them or dislike the fact that I don't fall at your feet claiming you the greatest mind of our time, is more your issue than mine.") I am not going to answer it at all, because I don't want to ever have to take the time to explain something this silly to you again. I hope you understand what I just said, because if you don't, I am not explaining that too. OK?

My response to your comment which I quoted in bold text above, to which you would like an answer was "Hey, I'm not the one with the name el homo fabuloso."
According to the clock there was a two minute time frame and there were no other comments between your comment and my reply. I don't see any need for any explanation but I'm not going back on my word.

You had, moments before, just told me that I dislike the fact that you didn't fall at my feet and declare me the greatest mind of our time so I replied that I'm not the one with the name "fabulous human." That means that I'm not the one that thinks I'm worthy of such praise, but since you have such a name, you probably do. It was rather sarcastic, I suppose. I hope you 'get it' now.

Now to answer your second comment and question: "Do you have the same concerns over jews and roman catholics?" The issue is not about religion. The issue is about a particular sect that has a member running for the highest office of this country. Michael Bloomberg is not going to run for President, but if he did, unlike Obama, he had no commitments to any continent or country that would interfere in his allegiance to this country. JFK was a Catholic but he also had no other allegiances that would take priority over this country's priority.

If Obama belonged to another church that did not have that commitment to Africa that is not able to be compromised , I would not have a problem with his church either. I do not have any problem with his religion, it's just the particular church to which he belongs that has these odd rules. If you see the post of CA, above, she belongs to the same group of churches that Obama does, but her church has no such rules of any kind, she said.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 29, 2008, 1:04am EST
If Obama's actions suggest anything for me to worry about then I will.


The boy was just a quiet type. Well, maybe sometimes, in retrospect, he may have been too quiet, but he never caused any trouble and he just faded into the background. How may lives did he take that day along with his own? Why didn't we pay more attention? The signs were there but his actions seemed benign. We should have seen those clues.

Very different scenario, but you get the idea, Bruce.

I don't see something dangerous to our nation in building a school in Africa.

I never said there was something dangerous in that at all. What I did say is that it implies that Oprah, who also belongs to that church, has a very avid interest in Africa. She can give ALL her time and money to Africa and that's her business as long as she doesn't run for the office of President while she still puts another continent's welfare above our country's.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 29, 2008, 1:14am EST
If anyone cares to express any opinions on this now, of course they can, but I've said all I wish to on this for now. There is no more for me to say. I've given you my opinion and I'm not asking you to agree, nor am I asking you to change yours. I just hope all who vote will be diligent in their research before making any final decisions.

Thank you to all who have commented.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 29, 2008, 9:14am EST
"Very different scenario, but you get the idea, Bruce."

Very different is quite an understatement! This sounds like you are equating Obama with some young kid who open fires in a school. Fearmongering is the only word that comes to mind.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 29, 2008, 11:20am EST
Bruce, I know I said I was through here , but I can't let it go that you would think that "fearmongering" is my intention. Yes, it was an exaggerated example to make my point, that being, awareness BEFORE the fact. Let's totally forget that example since you don't wish to interpret it as it was meant.

One of the most common human 'frailties' is hindsight. Everyone has some. There's no one I know, including myself, who hasn't said AFTER the fact that there were clues that something was evident before an event took place. The event would not have been so surprising had we paid ATTENTION or been more AWARE of the evidence that preceded it and what its consequences would mean to us. It might be something as innocuous as not taking your umbrella when you glanced toward the sky and saw an ominous cloud before you got into your car upon leaving your house. In your hurry, you didn't wish to go back inside to retrieve your umbrella. You later get caught in the rain and say that you knew it was going to rain, but you ignored it and now you're caught in a downpour without it. You now wish you had heeded your thought when you saw the cloud. Now please don't accuse me of likening Obama to an ominous cloud or a downpour of rain. This is merely a metaphor, just as was my last example. (which we have forgotten)

Obama, at this point in time, doesn't have a lot of political backgound so we have much less upon which we can evaluate his actions than we do of the other candidates. We're just really learning about him now. I am merely pointing out things that I think MAY BE significant to his nature. I hope I'm not right, but all evidence from what I know and have experienced, about churches and the people who follow their leaders, points to the fact that I cannot dismiss the point I've made in this article and I'm not going to quote that quote again.

As I said, I am not asking you to agree, nor change your mind. I am merely asking that you OPEN your mind to legitimate possibilities that you may not have thought of before. If we had evidence of his actions that would prove that he is not going to put his Presidential duties beneath his allegiance to anything else, that would be fine, but I don't know of any. Do you? Besides asking that you open your mind, I also ask that you don't totally dismiss my point without EVIDENCE to the contrary. No fear, just a healthy vigilance...
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Feb 29, 2008, 1:09pm EST
Sue, your last comment seems so reasonable you almost make me feel badly about my earlier remarks! I mean that! But somehow you had me riled up. You did open my mind to other possibilities. I am not going to go back and re-read this thread now but if we manage to keep discussing things, perhaps we can improve on our communications. Thanks for coming back to respond. I won't say anything to "encourage" you to have to come back again. Onward...
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Feb 29, 2008, 1:28pm EST
Bruce, sorry, but you've already said something that makes me HAVE to come back. I have to come back to say thank you. I took the time to try to make point reasonable and your response has let me know I didn't waste that time.

So may others would refuse to keep an open mind. I'm looking for people just like you who have a different opinion from mine. It's always nice to hear when someone agrees and validates your points, but without someone like you who can, or is at least willing to offer a legitmate and reasonable perspective that is different, it doesn't afford me an opportunity to learn anything or to expand my knowledge and mindset.

So...thanks again.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Clarke M. Mar 2, 2008, 7:42am EST
Sue,
No, I don't see that Obama's association with the African church indicates any commitment to some of its beliefs. I don't even think he supports their generally positive concerns and interests. Obama is a calculating politician. Was it an indication of commitment when he went to Connecticut to campaign for Sen. Lieberman?
Obama's rhetoric and speeches appeal, yet his record has consistently shown he is no supporter of 'change. 'He has supported the wealthy and politically powerful interests since he has been a US Senator. This article by a San Francisco liberal commentator examines his record:
http://quartz.he.net/~beyondch/news/nucleus/plugins/print/print.php?itemid=5413
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Mar 2, 2008, 11:15am EST
Clarke, I just checked out your link and it does raise some very good points. I am printing out the article to read it more closely. I do think Obama supports his church's
"generally positive concerns and interests" however. I will have to say at this point it is just my opinion as I am not offering any support of that. *smile* I will likely endeavor to do that in the future.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Mar 2, 2008, 11:25am EST
A lot of people say they regret that they feel they are always forced into voting for the lesser of two evils. When someone comes along that seems to give the opportunity to rise above that cynical, pessimistic outlook, it does give hope. Hope feels so good. Hope can be empowering.

Then, of course, the arguments mount against this candidate. He or she is defended and then you become even more committed to the candidate. In today's world, it seems like if you give an inch, someone takes advantage of it. If you admit a mistake or a weakness, you are never forgiven, no quarter is given. The "other side" does not likewise admit a weakness or mistake and thus bring about more open, honest discussion. So the penalty for being "open" is greater than the penalty for fighting for your candidate.

We justify this by admitting that our candidate has flaws but in the end will be better for the country than the other. The end justifies the mean.

I know I am rambling. I am just trying to give back to Sue a little of my thoughts how how I process things as she is open with how she forms her opinions.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Mar 2, 2008, 12:24pm EST
I love your 'ramblings,' Bruce. I certainly can't blame anyone for seeking hope, especially after having been so disappointed. Not sure how what you wrote fits into an ends justifies the means scenario, but aside from that, I think I understand what you mean.

I will continually look for reasonable people like you to give me evidence of justifying that there is hope, as my concern remains that there are those who will take advantage of the knowledge that people are desperately seeking such while only offering rhetoric that appears to suffice.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bruce B. Mar 2, 2008, 3:39pm EST
In this case, I meant the end justifies the mean in that we are willing to accept things that "our" candidate has done that we don't approve of because we think he or she will do mostly good things once in a position of power. For example, we might say, "oh sure, they accepted money from such and such corporation but I know they are generally for campaign finance reform and will help put an end to this once they are in office." So the means to get elected, taking money, is justified by the end, getting a position to reform this financing process. Maybe I am still not making sense!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Mar 2, 2008, 7:14pm EST
I guess that would be an example. I'm not an ends justifies the means type person though.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
t b. Mar 3, 2008, 4:24pm EST
Interesting article.
My own belief is that to embrace ANY organized religion is most fowl--and will be the ultimate end to us all.
This is one of those times I hope I am mistaken.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Mar 3, 2008, 4:44pm EST
All organized "anythings" are dangerous, Terry. When you put a group together under the auspices to factionalize and promote an agenda, there is most likely going to be trouble, understatedly.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Jonathan G. Mar 4, 2008, 3:20am EST
On discussion posted by Lady Nita, where you participated, directly bellow your comment I left the comment bellow. The post asked members to submit any objections they may have against Obama.

On my comment: the segment bellow came after a short discussion on one rational objection about Obama that I read during my short times at gather.




{But most of the articles and comments that I found on gather describing misgivings of the Senator was completely irrational.

This is the first election that I have followed with this much enthusiasm. And it is mostly due to Obama. I find the prospect of an Obama presidency very appealing. I think the symbolic message alone will do great deal of good for the country. Yet, I am willing to stop and try to make sure that my final judgment is governed by reason.

On gathers, I was looking for a medium that allows for sound exchange of ideas about the candidates, especially the candidate of my choice, Obama. It is really discouraging when all you find is unfounded arguments by people seemingly not willing to consider any other prospective.

I will continue to look for reasonable discussions. Sue, the one who left the comment above, seem to at least claim that her opinions are formed based on reason [and facts], so I will go check out her article.}





I must say I was disappointed.

Ok where should I start -- how about the title -- "This Is The Reason [Obama] Doesn't Salute Our Flag"

He does SALUTE the flag!!!

Since the rest of your article is explaining the why, it is no longer relevant; It is just as valid is as an article explianing why gravity only acts on yellow objects. In one sentence your whole argument just evaporates.

This is the information age; facts are just a click away.

Here is a link showing Obama saluting the flag with hands squarely placed on his heart.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200710240006?f=h_latest

Sue, you know what is funny, there was one incident where Obama did not place his hands on his heart, and you wrote a whole article speculating why. You know what Obama spokesman said when asked why Obama did not place his hand on his heart-- "[no particular reason] sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't".

That put Obama in the same category as many Americans; any speculation that suggest beyond that is outright misrepresentation.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Mar 4, 2008, 7:43am EST
Jonathan, I'm very glad you showed me this. I'm always willing to listen when someone can point out the truth. Of course, with all the PhotoShop possibilities, you never know for sure anymore whether it's real or it isn't. What I will tell you is that I do plan to write a very objective, dry article that will outline all the issues with which I disagree, and I'll let you know when that is out, since I like to see opposing views when they can be backed up. I still don't like the Farrakhan connection to the Pastor who has led Obama's spiritual life for so many years. It has to influence his thinking.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Jonathan G. Mar 4, 2008, 3:52pm EST
>Of course, with all the PhotoShop possibilities, you never know
>for sure anymore whether it's real or it isn't.


No Sue! An appropriate response would be to make a note of the pictures in your original article. And an even more appropriate response would be for you to change the title all together.

Why did you not question the images showing him not placing his hand on his heart? Is it because it suited your predisposition? The picture is the best evidence I can present you; if you are going to question that, then there is no hope in convincing you.

You know the link I gave you also shows Bush, on one occasion, not placing his hand on his heart during the pledge, yet nobody speculated why. You did not write article titled "This Is The Reason [Bush] Doesn't Salute Our Flag" an I don't think you will.


I think this is unfair. Sue please reread the last two paragraphs of my previous comment.


>I still don't like the Farrakhan connection to the Pastor who has led Obama's spiritual life for >so many years. It has to influence his thinking

You know what, I had the same concern too, so I researched. One Idea in particular that concerned me was, if Obama harbors anti Israel sentiments. When I checked his willingness to continue to treat Israel as a friend of the US, he passed with flying Colors.

I have yet not found a reason to lead me to believe that Obama was negatively influenced by his pastor. I don't think you did neither.

I will continue to do more research. The most important thing is the willingness to look at the issue from all possible modes OBJECTIVELY.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Mar 4, 2008, 7:10pm EST
Jonathan:

There's no doubt that his voting record is pretty much on par with other Senators on Israeli issues. Once again, I look to the people with whom a candidate associates, because a President chooses a cabinet and the people comprising such are not going to be much different, and may even be some of the same as the ones with whom he is and has been associated throughout his career.

You might not find it important that he gets his spiritual leadership from a man who gets his advisement from someone who is not only anti-Semitic, but anti gay and anti-White. I'm sorry, but that bothers me. (of course, there are things called lies and deceit that bother me too, but one thing I've learned on Gather is that lies and deceit are OK as long as the person you like is doing them) That doesn't work for me though. If it works for you, that's fine, but don't put me down just because it doesn't suit my taste to like someone and approve of what they do because you like them rather than to like them because you approve of what they do.

There are others with whom he has associated that are also of concern to me. I won't go into Tony Rezko here because that's a different issue for a different day, but let's stick to the anti-Israel theme now, since that seems to be the one that's gotten you snagged.

There's also some concern that his association with Brzezinski, Obama's foreign policy advisor and creator of the Trilateral Commission who advocates conciliatory talks with Hamas, may belie some of Obama's future dealings in the area of foreign policy. I think he endorsed Obama because he feels that Obama can be more easily persuaded and influenced by him. Obama is very left wing and Brzezinski will have no problem, under Obama's leadership, to weaken the US further to the point of realizing the one world order he endorses.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Jonathan G. Mar 4, 2008, 10:38pm EST
"(of course, there are things called lies and deceit that bother me too, but one thing I've learned on Gather is that lies and deceit are OK as long as the person you like is doing them)"

What are you taking about Sue?

"There's also some concern that his association with Brzezinski, Obama's foreign policy advisor"

Wrong!!!

Obama already have said He is not among his advisors.

I was going to look for a credible source to collaborate this info, but what is the use, you may say it is a misprint.

I can't help the strange feeling that in a dialog with you, I would be at a disadvantage, because my argument is constrained by facts, while yours, well……...
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Mar 5, 2008, 11:37am EST
I said, "(of course, there are things called lies and deceit that bother me too, but one thing I've learned on Gather is that lies and deceit are OK as long as the person you like is doing them)"

You said, "What are you taking about Sue?"

For one thing, in the case of the Obama, (that is about whom we're speaking now, I think) I find it deceptive that he used his opposition to NAFTA and his support of the same to his advantage depending upon the group he was addressing. I don't know how that sits with you, but it certainly reeks of deception to me, so in answer to your question, I suppose this is something you dismiss because you like him, while I see it as a reprehensible act that is equally as reprehensible no matter the perpetrator.

So now we get to the FACTS. You use the excuse to say that I won't believe your source not to have to prove that as you said, "Wrong!!!Obama already have [sic] said He is not among his advisors. I accept credible sources, but don't take me to a blog or a slanted site like the Huffington Post to prove it either. If you can provide a source that is within reason, I'll accept it. To be very honest, I've seen sources that corroborate both of our views on this. One fact is that Brzezinski has ENDORSED Obama, and that's for sure. No matter how much Obama may try to disassociate himself from the Farrakhans and Brzezinskis that have endorsed him, one must ask why these types choose to endorse him. I certainly know I wouldn't endorse someone with views and interests counter to my own.

I go to B&N every couple of weeks to take a look at books I won't buy and read parts of them while there. I happened to take a look at Obama's autobiography. In this book, he expresses his admiration for Malcolm X. On page 80 of Dreams From My Father he states, "Malcolm's discovery toward the end of his life, that some whites might live beside him as brothers in Islam, seemed to offer some hope of eventual reconciliation."

A statement like that is certainly an example of what would prove to me why Louis Farrakhan, whose main objective is to promote Islam worldwide, endorsed him. I'm sure there are also plenty of other reasons the good Reverend could cite if asked why he supports Obama. Obama can kick and scream all he wants to disassociate, but to copy your style, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, well...
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Jonathan G. Mar 5, 2008, 3:40pm EST
Sue,

On Mar 4, 2008, 7:10pm EST you wrote:

I said, "(of course, there a