Let the pandering to the fringe.....BEGIN!

[RightIsWrong]

Stop me if you've heard this one before.

Five GOP hopefuls walk into a forum in Iowa and try to one up the other. The first one says:

"It means that power comes from God to each one of you personally, you loan power to the government. The government does not loan power to you."

The next one then says:

"We have people in Washington, D.C., who say marriage will be defined however we feel like defining it." "No, it won't. It should be defined as between a man and a woman."

Well, the third one can't let that go without chiming in:

"In spite of all the talk of it being about the economy and jobs - and clearly economy and jobs were critical - they found that 32 percent of the entire electorate on Nov. 2 was made up of conservative and evangelical Christians."

Not to be outdone, the fourth comes up with a doosey!

"If a child is born as a result of a quote 'botched' abortion, then that child is entitled to medical protection and entitled to treatment. To my knowledge in this country it was only one person on the floor of any state legislature who stood up and opposed it. That happens to be the current president of the United States"

The fifth one was so inconsequential, that his barbs weren't even reported on.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...ential-hopefuls-push-moral-code-at-Iowa-forum

 

[glenn1]

Stop me if you've heard this one before.

Five GOP hopefuls walk into a forum in Iowa and try to one up the other. The first one says:

"It means that power comes from God to each one of you personally, you loan power to the government. The government does not loan power to you."

The next one then says:

"We have people in Washington, D.C., who say marriage will be defined however we feel like defining it." "No, it won't. It should be defined as between a man and a woman."

Well, the third one can't let that go without chiming in:

"In spite of all the talk of it being about the economy and jobs - and clearly economy and jobs were critical - they found that 32 percent of the entire electorate on Nov. 2 was made up of conservative and evangelical Christians."

Not to be outdone, the fourth comes up with a doosey!

"If a child is born as a result of a quote 'botched' abortion, then that child is entitled to medical protection and entitled to treatment. To my knowledge in this country it was only one person on the floor of any state legislature who stood up and opposed it. That happens to be the current president of the United States"

The fifth one was so inconsequential, that his barbs weren't even reported on.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...ential-hopefuls-push-moral-code-at-Iowa-forum

I only find #2 (about gay marriage) to be pandering. I don't disagree with #1 and the medical treatment part of #4 and IMHO both are relatively mainstream positions. I have no idea if #3 is correct but the numbers seem plausible if perhaps somewhat inflated depending on how the people characterize their beliefs.

 

[HomerJS]

Don't you think we would have a better run country if politicians didn't have to pass a religious test?

What business is it of anyone if a candidate for high office what is or isn't his religion.

 

[Siddhartha]

Stop me if you've heard this one before.

Five GOP hopefuls walk into a forum in Iowa and try to one up the other. The first one says:

"It means that power comes from God to each one of you personally, you loan power to the government. The government does not loan power to you."

The next one then says:

"We have people in Washington, D.C., who say marriage will be defined however we feel like defining it." "No, it won't. It should be defined as between a man and a woman."

Well, the third one can't let that go without chiming in:

"In spite of all the talk of it being about the economy and jobs - and clearly economy and jobs were critical - they found that 32 percent of the entire electorate on Nov. 2 was made up of conservative and evangelical Christians."

Not to be outdone, the fourth comes up with a doosey!

"If a child is born as a result of a quote 'botched' abortion, then that child is entitled to medical protection and entitled to treatment. To my knowledge in this country it was only one person on the floor of any state legislature who stood up and opposed it. That happens to be the current president of the United States"

The fifth one was so inconsequential, that his barbs weren't even reported on.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...ential-hopefuls-push-moral-code-at-Iowa-forum

You think that the people who make up the GOP base are politically "fringe". These are the same people who have been running the GOP since Mr Reagan.

 

[PokerGuy]

Don't you think we would have a better run country if politicians didn't have to pass a religious test?

Yeah, because leaders with no religions are so wonderful (China, NK etc) . Nothing wrong with wanting to know where someone stands on moral issues, I just don't want religion codified as law.

 

[PokerGuy]

You think that the people who make up the GOP base are politically "fringe". These are the same people who have been running the GOP since Mr Reagan.

You idiots seem to conveniently forget the fact that the vast majority of Americans identify themselves as religious, so religion as a guiding force is hardly "fringe" in any sense of the word.

 

[MovingTarget]

Don't you think we would have a better run country if politicians didn't have to pass a religious test?

What business is it of anyone if a candidate for high office what is or isn't his religion.

I don't think that it is anybody's business. No religious test, either codified or implied, should be required for office. However, knowing a bit about a candidate's theological/philosophical positions can make a huge difference.

There are plenty of Baptists, Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Mormons, etc. that have very sound and well-reasoned positions on moral/legal issues of our time. Then again, many Christians ( I only mention them here as they are the most prominent demographic) have positions that are absolutely horrendous and belong nowhere near the white house. All too often, as the GOP seems to do lately, people use Christianity as a "brand" that is to be promoted/marketed to one group's advantage. They are no better than the moneychangers of old...

 

[her209]

Jon Stewart had a clip from the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition of one of the speakers...

"We are concerned that a country that was founded on European-style Christian moral values has now become a mutli-cultural haven for every weird and kinky lifestyle."

 

[brandonb]

Jon Stewart had a clip from the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition of one of the speakers...

"We are concerned that a country that was founded on European-style Christian moral values has now become a mutli-cultural haven for every weird and kinky lifestyle."

And that is strange why?

It was founded on European-style christian moral values, and it is not a multi cultural haven of every weird and kinky lifestyle.

Maybe some people are concerned. I am, and it has nothing to do with my religious background. I just find human behavior these days disgusting, we are above animals but we sure act like a bunch of pigs.

 

[her209]

And that is strange why?

It was founded on European-style christian moral values, and it is not a multi cultural haven of every weird and kinky lifestyle.

Maybe some people are concerned. I am, and it has nothing to do with my religious background. I just find human behavior these days disgusting, we are above animals but we sure act like a bunch of pigs.

If it doesn't violate or infringe on your rights or the rights of others, why worry about what other people are doing?

 

[Siddhartha]

You idiots seem to conveniently forget the fact that the vast majority of Americans identify themselves as religious, so religion as a guiding force is hardly "fringe" in any sense of the word.

The GOP base is composed of:
1. the Religious Right
2. Gun are us guys
3. Anti-abortionist
4. Big money
5. Neo-cons

These are the groups I was referring to. My point was anyone running for the GOP 2012 POTUS nomination will have to win over the GOP base.

 

[WHAMPOM]

And that is strange why?

It was founded on European-style christian moral values, and it is not a multi cultural haven of every weird and kinky lifestyle.

Maybe some people are concerned. I am, and it has nothing to do with my religious background. I just find human behavior these days disgusting, we are above animals but we sure act like a bunch of pigs.

You have no idea of all the religions that shipped out to America to practice their (weird and kinky beliefs). Check out religion in the early colonies for a real laugh. PBS had a series on religion in America.

 

[brandonb]

If it doesn't violate or infringe on your rights or the rights of others, why worry about what other people are doing?

Our laws are based on what is acceptable or not to society. Those who support the current laws do not want the laws changed, because they feel it would degrade society to do so.

There is a reason why people are saying these things... If you find it acceptable or not...

Our rights say we can scream FIRE in a movie theater. Freedom of speech, but society has forbid it because of tramplings and the mass hysteria it will create.

Just like members of the society do not want our country to move a certain direction as mentioned by Jon Steward's clip. What is strange about that?

 

[Fern]

Let the pandering to the fringe.....BEGIN!

Is there a difference between "pandering" and "campaigning"? Or is it in the eye of the beholder?

According to 'experts' on cable TV, the Iowa GOP is dominated by the religious right types. Accordingly, remarks quoted above are to be expected; otherwise don't bother to show up there.

I don't really care about those type of comments. Heck, even Obama makes remarks about his faith/religion when it suits him.

What really bothers me is how a few states Iowa et al have such a big influence on the primaries. In late voting states like mine the primary has already been decided by the time we vote. Why don't we have a voice?

I think rotating the states' voting schedules would be more fair.

Fern

 

[werepossum]

Our laws are based on what is acceptable or not to society. Those who support the current laws do not want the laws changed, because they feel it would degrade society to do so.

There is a reason why people are saying these things... If you find it acceptable or not...

Our rights say we can scream FIRE in a movie theater. Freedom of speech, but society has forbid it because of tramplings and the mass hysteria it will create.

Just like members of the society do not want our country to move a certain direction as mentioned by Jon Steward's clip. What is strange about that?

I fully support society's right to order itself, right up to the point at which it affects people's personal lives. The majority should not have the right to keep a small minority of gays from marrying anymore than it should have the right to keep a small minority of blacks as property. We are all granted by G-d the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; the Declaration and the Constitution recognize no "except if people pursue things we find icky" clause by which we can back back rights granted by G-d if we don't like what people do.

I don't actually have problems with the other things. It amazes me that some people, our President included, actually think that if a baby is born during an abortion, that baby is not human because the doctor intended to kill it, so it is not deserving of the same emergency medical care that any other human deserves. Or that people can be so ignorant of our country's founding that the concept of power being bestowed on Man by the Creator and loaned to government now seems to be a fringe view to some.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Well, IMHO, Christianity as a "brand" is worthless. When we get leaders who are comfortable in consistently lying (Newt, Sarah, Mike, etc.) while identifying themselves as some kind of premium people because they are more Christian than average, they devalue "being Christian" in any rational mind.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Is there a difference between "pandering" and "campaigning"? Or is it in the eye of the beholder?

According to 'experts' on cable TV, the Iowa GOP is dominated by the religious right types. Accordingly, remarks quoted above are to be expected; otherwise don't bother to show up there.

I don't really care about those type of comments. Heck, even Obama makes remarks about his faith/religion when it suits him.

What really bothers me is how a few states Iowa et al have such a big influence on the primaries. In late voting states like mine the primary has already been decided by the time we vote. Why don't we have a voice?

I think rotating the states' voting schedules would be more fair.

Fern

Uh, not all Iowa GOP is that way but we do seem to have a pretty strong faction withing the GOP base that is vocal and active enough to push those sorts of things. Iowa is the only reason the huckster got as far as he did and the reason he got his FOX gig. I dare say it was because of 1 radio show host that he did so well here in Iowa. That radioshow host just resigned a month or so ago so maybe we can send a winner out of Iowa next time around instead of some fundie nutball like huck.