gadgetlady

You are absolutely right, and this is the philosophy that Obama also subscribes to. I read an article recently about how the American Communist Party was very excited about this election (they weren't endorsing anyone, but they were clearly electrified that "their" ideas were coming to the forefront). I suspect an endorsement from the American Communist Party would kill Obama's chances, so they're keeping their endorsement to themselves.

Here's what I posted earlier about that at http://www.lapbandtalk.com/f7/we-rea...l#post1017169: One GOOD thing that will happen with the debate is that it won't be edited (in contrast to the recent interviews). Everyone laughs at the media's representation of Palin's answer on foreign policy, the representation of which is that she understands it because Russia can be seen from Alaska. Ha ha. What a silly answer. Isn't she stupid. Mock, mock, mock. But how many of you know the REAL question and answer? The FULL question and answer? Here it is (parts in bold are the parts edited out of the broadcast): GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you? PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska. GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia? PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along. Big difference when you read the whole thing. Her response is that we must always remember that our world is ever growing smaller and we must take this into consideration in any foreign policy matter. It's a thoughtful and reasonable answer when you read the part that was edited out. The same thing happened with her answer on NATO and war with Russia. When you have edit control, it's amazing what ends up on the cutting room floor -- and how bad you can make someone look.

Equal protection? This doesn't bestow a mother's "Constitutional right" to kill her child, but certainly could be used to argue the unborn's EQUAL PROTECTION of the State under the law. Right now, unborn people (female and male alike) are discriminated against to the point of death.

Devana, here's an article I just read that sums up a lot of my conerns about the upcoming election: So Why Did We Fight the Cold War? One of the most chilling quotes came from Pelosi: "We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income in our country, and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest." When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied, "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as Americans." As a believer in freedom and the free-market, this philosophy from someone in a position of power is literally terrifying.

Homeschooling is currently a state issue and should remain that way. But I'm confident if a Democrat-controlled Congress, Senate, and Presidency could outlaw it, they would. It is a huge threat to what they believe in.

Of course they can't. Neither will they find the supposed "right to privacy" in their either. Yet that doesn't stop them from lying and saying a mother has a "Constitutional right" to kill her children.

I'm not embarrassed at all. When she was nominated, I told my husband, "It's a good day to be a woman in America." You may not like her politics, but that doesn't mean she's a bitch, a bimbo, worthless, incompetent, or any other of the personal attacks you've put forth.

She's not strong, successful, or powerful? She's useless and a bimbo because only liberals can be feminists and only people who agree with you are valuable?

How could I be more clear. WHY is abortion a Constitutional right? I can tell you why gun ownership is a right; I can point to the Second Amendment. I can tell you why free speech is a right; I can point to the First Amendment. Can you tell me WHERE In the Constitution on ON WHAT GROUNDS you base a supposed Constitutional "right" to abortion?

Hilarious. The Constitution promises us a lot of things. Abortion is not one of them. I'm still waiting to hear where you've managed to locate it in the Constitution. I won't hold my breath.

I'd love to get some kind of funding for homeschooling; sadly, we get nothing. We spend A LOT of money (and invest A LOT of time) doing it, and it's well worth it to see the rewards in our beautiful children. Nothing can compare to one-on-one education.

Homeschooling is a wonderful blessing, both academically and socially. I can't imagine shoving my children out the door every morning and not knowing what's going on in their lives, much less not being their best friend. I love teaching them and I love seeing them develop a love of learning. I love it when they ask me questions all day long, when they try to expand their minds, when they reject illogical arguments that they hear others using on tv and the news, and when they speak intelligently. I wouldn't change it for anything.

Oh, goodness, no! I didn't mean to imply that at all! We cannot ever be perfect parents and shouldn't stress about every decision we make -- especially if it is out of our control.

I was, too. I was shocked, and every time someone reminds me of it I think I must have imagined the whole thing, because it is utterly incomprehensible.

Forigive me for not expanding my comparison further (and for being gone all this time to make you wonder what I meant :w00t:). I didn't at all think you were equating Obama with Christ. As I understand it, what you were saying is that Jesus believed in forgiveness and grace, and that that was a wonderful thing. I agreed. But to compare Jesus' position towards the woman about to be stoned (a position of forgiveness and grace) to Obama's position towards Ayres is inappropriate, because 1) Obama is not Ayres' savior, 2) Jesus wasn't running for political office, and 3) Obama's desire to be the elected political leader of the free world doesn't even remotely equate to Jesus' position as an unelected, non-political, Savior. Does that make what I said a little clearer? I understand that you might not agree, but I hope I've been able to at least clarify why I said it.

I have two girls, ages 11 and 8, grades 6 and 3, although they are far ahead in many subjects and have no problem having intelligent conversations with adults on a variety of subjects. We are currently using AOP's SOS (Switched on Schoolhouse). Prior to 3rd grade (when SOS starts) we used Abeka.

Thanks, Wheetsin. I had a hard time putting my finger on my discomfort. This post did it for me.

Amen, absolutely. We would be lost without it. But Obama is not Messiah. I trust Jesus and I believe His goals were and are different than Obama's.

The children who are being neglected and abused currently weren't aborted. Abortion doesn't cure neglect and abuse! You can't predict when a mother is pregnant whether she will neglect and/or abuse her children.

You go from "it's good to still see you fighting for what you believe in" and "I disagree with your beleifs [sic] but I commend your commitment to them" to "Your arrogance and hate creates a blemish on what is a beautiful world" and, then speaking directly of me, "in truth I think I know where evil lurks." I think people can draw their own conclusions.

Wait, are you saying anyone who attacks Obama is a racist, but it's OK for you to call Palin a "bitch" and suggest her husband should be executed?

I have many concerns, but here are my top ones: taking a country that's already financially on the ropes and increasing taxes on everyone (and I do believe he will do this, despite what he says), and further taxing small businesses, is a recipe for disaster. Great Depression, part II, here we come. I am very, very concerned about the overall goal that he has of redistributing the wealth; the last thing we need right now is socialism. I am concerned, as a homeschooling parent, about his goals in the education system -- and I do fear that, given the power, he would attempt to outlaw homeschooling. I am concerned that his plan to socialize health care will destroy our medical system. I am horrified by his votes in the Illinois Senate to deny lifesaving medical care to babies who are born after botched abortions, despite his lying to the American public to try to offer an "excuse" for this action. I'm concerned about his indicating he would sign FOCA, codifying abortion-on-demand through all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason, and his goal of providing this at taxpayer expense. I'm concerned about the Supreme Court justices he will nominate. I'm concerned about his wholesale lack of understanding about foreign affairs, his willingness to meet with terrorists, and his ignorance about how to handle foreign conflict. On more than one occasion, when asked how he would deal with terrorist states, he has indicated that he would talk to them and try to reason with them. When one of his advisers was asked about the Russian intrusion into Georgia and how he would handle that, the knee-jerk response was something along the lines of "Obama wouldn't have let it get to that point; he would have negotiated with them before they invaded" -- as if foreign countries are going to run their invasions by him and follow his instruction. There are many, many more things I'm worried about -- the above is just a sample -- but does that help you understand my concerns?

Well, if we're going to go Biblical, 1 Cor 15:33: Bad company corrupts good character. Jesus wasn't nominating the woman for a position of leader of the free world. He also didn't launch his "campaign" in her brothel. I agree with you on that one! But, again, Falwell didn't cause the hurricane or wish he had done more to further its destruction.

I would. I'd have a problem if someone launched his political career or had numerous ties both socially and professionally to an unrepentant abortion-clinic bomber, an unrepentant KKK member, or an unrepentant terrorist bomber.

Really? If someone used to be a member of the KKK, NEVER denounced their actions, SAID recently that he wished they had gone further, still held radical and troubling positions, but had somehow managed to effect a position at a major university, you wouldn't doubt their motives? You wouldn't question whether they were still a radical and had just managed to weasel their way around the system, navigate the system, manipulate the system, etc.? I don't know. We are all very practiced at hiding the things we don't want others to see. I believe very strongly in redemption, forgiveness, and giving people second chances, but when the person who committed the crimes doesn't denounce them but rather praises them and whose only regret is that he didn't do more, I have to question his current motives and state-of-mind -- regardless of what his current job is.