Mark,

First off, I have to laugh when you accuse Democrats of trying to "talk Christian", considering that the Republican front runner is a lapsed Christian, with two ugly divorces, and is estranged from his own children. Just who is demonstrating Christian values among the leading Republican candidates?

Frankly, I think you've lost your way. Your previous post stating that any of the GOP candidates would make a fine president suggests that the only value you have is winning - defeating those political opponents who you've come to despise. Apparently, no amount of bad behavior on the part of GOP candidates trumps your desire to win. You conveniently minimize that behavior by saying that nobody is perfect, but what kind of moral standard is that?

James Dobson recently said something like to choose the lesser of two evils is still to choose evil, and he's not going to do that. I'm no fan, but I have to respect a man to sticks to his principles. Similarly, evangelicals across America are waking up to the fact that they've cast their lot with a political party who has used them, and repeatedly let them down on values. According to the Times piece, white evangelical approval of the president has plummeted from 90% to 45%.

I think you are going out on a limb to suggest that your views somehow represent the religious right. We all know plenty of conservative Christians, and few possess the sort of angry bile of you and your cohorts endlessly spew here. It's the product of bitter partisans with huge chips on their shoulders, not Christian values.

Mark,

First off, I have to laugh when you accuse Democrats of trying to "talk Christian", considering that the Republican front runner is a lapsed Christian, with two ugly divorces, and is estranged from his own children. Just who is demonstrating Christian values among the leading Republican candidates?

Frankly, I think you've lost your way. Your previous post stating that any of the GOP candidates would make a fine president suggests that the only value you have is winning - defeating those political opponents who you've come to despise. Apparently, no amount of bad behavior on the part of GOP candidates trumps your desire to win. You conveniently minimize that behavior by saying that nobody is perfect, but what kind of moral standard is that?

James Dobson recently said something like to choose the lesser of two evils is still to choose evil, and he's not going to do that. I'm no fan, but I have to respect a man to sticks to his principles. Similarly, evangelicals across America are waking up to the fact that they've cast their lot with a political party who has used them, and repeatedly let them down on values. According to the Times piece, white evangelical approval of the president has plummeted from 90% to 45%.

I think you are going out on a limb to suggest that your views somehow represent the religious right. We all know plenty of conservative Christians, and few possess the sort of angry bile of you and your cohorts endlessly spew here. It's the product of bitter partisans with huge chips on their shoulders, not Christian values.

...the only value you have is winning - defeating those political opponents who you've come to despise.

I must disagree with you on this one, extra. We want to defeat the Clinton machine because the Clinton machine will bring this country to its knees, socially and economically. It's funny how you lefties always bitch and moan about civil liberties, when your front-runners want to silence voices of dissent and control your life with socialistic programs such as SCHIP and DREAM.

I doubt that Mark "despises" anyone, just as I doubt the Limbaugh's, Hannity's, and Ingraham's of the world despise anyone. They're all just getting out the information on the other side, information your drive-by media chooses to ignore.

The GOP will lose a large percentage of women voters in 2008.
The GOP has turned its back on the Hispanic vote.
The GOP has turned its back on the Black vote.
The GOP has turned its back on the Gay vote.
The GOP is turning its back on Christian conservatives.
The GOP is CTD.

You might recall some years back when the public face of the reigious right demonstrations out in front of the premier of a movie like The Last Temptation of Christ

You mean like when those gentle Catholics got so worked up about a movie that had neither seen nor understood, they firebombed the theater in France? Religion of peace!

the latest version of the movie was The Da Vinci Code, which we in the religious right simply destroyed in reviews, exposing it for the hodge-podge of fraud and bigotry that it was

Yes, you guys sure exposed that self-proclaimed work of a fiction as being a work of...uh...fiction. And you sure "destroyed" it, too--it only turned a domestic profit of about $100 million. Ouch.

Neocon posited, "the Clinton machine will bring this country to its knees, socially and economically." And what exactly is that based on? Oh right, thin air. Because what happened under the last Clinton administration was, well, the OPPOSITE of that, while these last six years have been a Shakespearean tragedy. You knuckleheads don't even get that Hillary is the most conservative of the Democratic contenders - but it's all about the hate.

This conservative seems to get at your problems:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/

Kinda OT, but are the continuous technical problems this site is plagued with evidence of a religious right crack-up? Lol! Seriously though, whoever administers this site seems to have a very hard time keeping it viable.

Frankly, I think you've lost your way. Your previous post stating that any of the GOP candidates would make a fine president suggests that the only value you have is winning - defeating those political opponents who you've come to despise. Apparently, no amount of bad behavior on the part of GOP candidates trumps your desire to win. You conveniently minimize that behavior by saying that nobody is perfect, but what kind of moral standard is that?

Extra, I think for most of us, the primary "value" we have is to further a conservative agenda. The main prerequisite to that is "winning". I assume your comment about "bad behavior" is aimed at Giuliani, and I doublt you would get much argument from Conservatives that Rudy has the most baggage with regard to his personal life. You may (and many Conservatives do) assign a label of immorality to his personal behavior. Funny, that same label never seemed to stick to der Schleichtmeister who made Rudy look like a Boy Scout by comparison. And comparing Rudy to Hillary; I'd rather support someone who has behaved immorally over someone who has committed numerous criminal acts any day of the week. In the end I suspect the majority of Americans will see it that way too.

James Dobson recently said something like to choose the lesser of two evils is still to choose evil, and he's not going to do that. I'm no fan, but I have to respect a man to sticks to his principles.

If that means that a large number of Evangelicals stay home next November, and it results in Hillary getting elected, then they deserve the "evil" that they'll get. Hillary has more evil, deceit, and intellectual dishonesty in her bones than all the rest of the candidates of BOTH parties combined.

According to the Times piece, white evangelical approval of the president has plummeted from 90% to 45%.

Last time I checked the Constitution prohibited Bush from running again, but, hey, if you guys want to run against him again, knock yourselves out.

Retired Spook,

Regarding Bill Clinton, I'll say what Mark says about Guliani - nobody's perfect. See how convenient that is?

In fact, I would say that by Christian/Catholic standards, Clinton is far better than Guliani, because he is STILL married. It's those that discard their wives and families who are considered morally inferior, as opposed to those that commit sins (as they are expected to do) but keep the family intact.

I don't think the Evangelicals will stay home if somebody like Mike Huckabee gets the nomination. To your point about winning - don't you reckon that conservatives will need to unite behind somebody with those kind of moral credentials in order to win? Do you think you can thumb your nose at evangelicals with candidates like Guliani and still "advance the agenda"?

The Religious Right has started to get back to their roots and ask, "what would Jesus do?" He would not; let his fellow man drown in New Orleans, start an illegal war for oil, praise those who would encurage the destruction of our environment.

Clinton is far better than Guliani, because he is STILL married.

Extramedium, so if I understand you correctly, You're saying it's OK to commit criminal acts and associate with numerous know criminals as long as you stay married? ROTFLMAO!!!

Retired Spook asks:
"You're saying it's OK to commit criminal acts and associate with numerous know criminals as long as you stay married?"

It seems to be working for Bush, Cheney, and Libby just fine.

ROTF LMAO IYF

Spook: You're saying it's OK to commit criminal acts and associate with numerous know criminals as long as you stay married? ROTFLMAO!!!

The trouble is, Giuliani doesn't leave much in the way of wiggle room on any of the three counts. That's the trouble with Giuliani (well, one of them): if he's the nominee, he effectively neutralizes the Hillary "slime factor".

he effectively neutralizes the Hillary "slime factor".

Hillary isn't just slimey, she's a criminal -- unindicted, but a criminal nonetheless. She's the kind of person Giuliani used to put in prison when he was a Federal Prosecutor. Other than being twice divorced and estranged from his kids, is there something else about Rudy that I don't know? Have numerous friends, acquaintenances and business associates been indicted, convicted, sentenced to jail time or died under mysterious circumstances? Have little Chinese guys gotten caught bringing grocery sacks of illegal campaign cash to his campaign headquarters? Has he gotten rid of members of his staff by filing trumped up criminal charges against them, bankrupting them and ruining their lives instead of simply firing them? What exactly has he done that neutralizes that kind of criminality and sleeze?

To turn Extramedium's original statement back around; what's to admire about a woman who stays with a man against whom there have been credible allegations of rape, who fondled co-workers in the workplace, who attempted to sodomize a campaign worker in his hotel room and who sodomized an intern with a cigar in the Oval Office? I wonder how much bleach it took to get rid of the stench when he left office? Can you imagine what would happen to, say, an elementary school principal who sodomized a student teacher in his office. It so happens I can tell you the answer to that because it happened years ago at my daughter's school. I don't know about whether or not there was a cigar involved, but the principal was fired on the spot and marched out the door by security. Bill Clinton, OTOH, held an impeachment party in the Rose Garden and received a standing ovation from fellow Democrats.

Sorry, as I said before, Rudy is a Boy Scout compared to the Clintons.

They need another name for the Religious Right. I suggest the Christian Taliban.

People who are truly realigious don't burn books, decry evolution, hate homosexuals, and force victims of rape and incest to have children they don't want.

These days, its a bit diferent - the latest version of the movie was The Da Vinci Code, which we in the religious right simply destroyed in reviews, exposing it for the hodge-podge of fraud and bigotry that it was.......

Wrong, Mark. Dead wrong.

First, the religious right had nothing to do with the majority of critics hating the film. The critics found out that The DaVinci Code was a horrible transition from novel to movie, all on their own.

And second, despite the negative comments from the movie critics and the religious right, The DaVinci Code still grossed over $200 million domestically.

You guys won nothing.

First, the religious right had nothing to do with the majority of critics hating the film.

Jonathan,

The majority you refer to IS Christian Conservatives.

You guys won nothing

The movie makers probably did show overall materialist impact, but overall, we Christians gained more than the Atheist crowd did, because, essentially, what it done is, it help to reaffirm peoples faith in God.
The movie in and of itself gave a horrible depiction of faith in Christ, and Faith power points. Thus, making steadfast stronger Christians.

Jeremiah

extramedium,

If I were to give my vote to a Democrat--I might as well not even vote, burn my house down, and go jump in front of a bus.

Of course--you can't understand, because you've been brainwashed like the rest of your leftist tag-alongs.

Pity.

Jeremiah

Spook: Hillary isn't just slimey, she's a criminal -- unindicted, but a criminal nonetheless. She's the kind of person Giuliani used to put in prison when he was a Federal Prosecutor. Other than being twice divorced and estranged from his kids, is there something else about Rudy that I don't know?

Yes. Considering how nakedly you asked the question, I have to add... are you freakin' kidding me??? LOL! Seriously though, I guess that's the problem with concentrating on the faults in the opposition: you don't see similar faults in your own.

Have numerous friends, acquaintenances and business associates been indicted, convicted, sentenced to jail time or died under mysterious circumstances?

Yup -- or at least there's a very good chance of it. And there is also a very good chance that at least one of those trials will be held during the prime election season -- early 2008. Giuliani's association with Bernie is likely to be front page news for more than a weekend. And the ramifications of it are likely to last longer too.

Have little Chinese guys gotten caught bringing grocery sacks of illegal campaign cash to his campaign headquarters? Has he gotten rid of members of his staff by filing trumped up criminal charges against them, bankrupting them and ruining their lives instead of simply firing them?

Well... I'm not sure. I don't think he's a big friend of his erstwhile Chinese constituency, if that helps. The Italian constituency may be another story (I repeat -- may be).

That's the problem -- you want me to answer you charge for charge and assume that if he didn't do exactly what the Clintons did (or do) he's free and clear. But there's plenty of things that he did do, or might have done, that the Clinton's didn't. Look into what people are saying about him building his emergency headquarters in Building 7 in the WTC complex. No, I don't mean the conspiracy theorists. I mean people in his (previous) inner circle. Look into what people are saying about his associations with Bernie Kerik. Or in some of his state-wide apparati -- particularly South Carolina. Where is he still employed, and how is that going to look if he gets the nomination -- even IF he resigns from those positions before the nomination? How is he going to explain why he left the Iraq Study Group without lifting a finger? And if he gets the nomination, you'd better HOPE no one in his first two families feels compelled to speak out. If that happens to any great degree, that could sink him like a lead weight.

IMHO, Giuliani is a ticking time bomb. Added to that is the very vocal dissent among the social conservatives. Some significant blood has already been spilled. And at this point he's not going to be able to reclaim it all. Another hurdle is that he will have to convince the independents that he's going to be somehow different -- and better -- than the current administration (which, as you may have noticed, is mired in the low 30s). And considering who he has on his staff, that's going to be a nearly impossible sell. And it goes without saying that the Dems are going to have a field day with that.

Then there's Mike Huckabee. What's wrong with him other than a shortage of money and name recognition? I truly do think he's the sleeper in the GOP stable.

she's a criminal--Retired Spook.

Right on, Spook!

You know, aside from the under-the-table funds she has received from Chinatown, I think it probably goes a bit further than that--she is probably receiving funds from the Arab countries-(Nancy Pelosi and conference with Middle Easterners), North Korea, Communist China, Japan and we know for sure she's getting funds from Mexico, and many others we don't know about.

This proves her record even more, that Democrats will stop at nothing to obtain POWER, no matter how illegal or fraudulent they have to be!!!

Hillary Clinton is a DANGEROUS person!!!

Jeremiah

you'd better HOPE--Ricorun.

Ricorun,

I'll just put it this way--You better HOPE Hillary doesn't get it for President!!!!!!!!!!

Jeremiah

Did anyone hear about Hillary's hilarious comments last night?

She said she would use--carrots--Can you imagine?? She is actually going to award the Terrorists!!!

That senss chills all over me!!!

Jeremiah

Jonathan,

The majority you refer to IS Christian Conservatives.

You mean, are, right?

And btw Jeremiah: how do you know that the critics who were negative on the movie were conservative Christians? They could have been those Godless Atheists or those evil liberals you Christian nutjobs despise. Or did it ever cross your mind that the movie critics thought The DaVinci Code just plain sucked and religious background had very little influence going into the final consensus in judging the film?

It's called thinking, you religious lunatic. The rest of us use this skill in a place called reality. When you get off your delusions of the Second Coming of Christ, the Rapture, and anyone who isn't some ignorant, Bible-thumping dimwit is going to burn in Hell, try and join us sometime.

Sinners !!! You are all sinners !!

Jeremiah,

I believe you said before that you like Huckabee for the GOP nomination. If Guiliani got the nomination, would you vote for him?

Jeremiah: you'd better HOPE--Ricorun.

Wouldn't you say the above quote was taken a wee bit out of context? Knowing what you did, or at least now that it has been pointed out to you, do you feel any shame?

Just curious.

do you feel any shame?--Ricorun.

Actually, No, Ricorun.

I'm just simply alluding to the way in which you have pointed out some of the possiblities that might destroy Rudy during his possible nomination as President.

As with Hillary? I'm 100% sure of what would happen if she became President, that's why I say--'You better HOPE Hillary doesn't get it for President!!!

There's no shame!!!!

Any further questions?

Jeremiah

Wow, Mark actually said something that I agreed with:

to be a member of the religious right is to be a person absolutely certain of victory, in spite of all difficulties and set backs.

That's correct. The religious right will stick with its story, no matter what's going on with that inconvenient "reality". Thanks for telling it like it is!

Decidenator,

But there's a difference in the way you on the Left view victory as do we on the right--

The difference--We on the right see victory as acheivable, winnable--the war is clearly not finished!!

You on the Left see victory as "already won" and act as if there "were no threat".

The REALITY is--the war is not won, there remains a threat, and victory IS acheivable through continued efforts to bring an end to the violence, instead of trying to figure ways to halt the war, and jeopardize literal millions of American families.

Jeremiah

If Guiliani got the nomination, would you vote for him?

extramedium,

If Rudy got the nomination I would have no other option but to vote for Rudy. To vote for Hillary would be to cancell all my friends votes out, and sell my own life-long identity, Birth-right and ALL away.....

To vote for Hillary would be akin to saying--"I don't care about my God, my family, and my country." That's how stupid a vote for Hillary would be.

As far as the run between Rudy and Mike, Yes, I would rather see Mike get the nomination, but when push comes to shove on the day of the nomination, and Rudy gets it, then I don't have any other choice.

Jeremiah

Jremiah writes:
"If Rudy got the nomination I would have no other option but to vote for Rudy. To vote for Hillary would be to cancell all my friends votes out, and sell my own life-long identity, Birth-right and ALL away....."

Or Jeremiah, you could simply not vote or vote for a write in candidate as many Christians are doing.
Instead you are going to vote for a man who has divorced twice, is despised by his children; and was until recently pro-choice, anti-2nd amendment, and pro gay rights. Even now he still appears indifferent to these issues, the very issues you care so much about.
If you vote for Rudy, you lose the moral authority you claim so often to have in your posts. Are you reday to do that? REalize that whenever you post about abortion, we will remind you that you compromised your values and voted Rudy.
You may say that Rudy is better than Clintion and sometimes you have to make sacrafices. There are two problems with this line of thinking. First, you have made it clear that you are a man of principle. Compromising would be, as mentioned, against everything you claim to believe in.
Second and more important, by compromising you are sending a message to the Republican party that you'll elect anyone they throw up on stage. You will be saying you are docile and will do what your told. They, in turn will, count on you every four years to elect someone you don't really agree with and who will likely pay lip service to your concerns.
In short, by voting for Rudy or Romney, the Christian Right would doom itself to irrelevance. Why cater to you when you've already agreed to buy?

I, like a previous poster, admire Dobson for sticking to his values and not picking the winning horse. I also admire Rudy somewhat for not pandering too much to the evangelicals. Although, he realized early on that it wouldn't work. McCain should have realized that before he tried to snuggle up to Falwell.
It is pitiful watching Hannity, the biggest Republican cheerleader on Fox, try to sell Rudy to the evangelicals using the argument above. Yeah, what a Catholic he is!

The rest of us use this skill in a place called reality.

Jonathan,

You know what I think? I think one day Reality is going to meet up with you one day, and when it does, I have feeling, since you've very possibly not been living it, it will come as a shock!!!

The matter of the fact IS--what influence the Da Vinci Code had on people, was on people of Faith, because most people faith know the truth when the see and hear it, and likewise when it's not the truth. As for those who aren't living the Faith, they wouldn't now it if it ran over top of them, because they don't understand it, and can't understand it.

2 Corinthians 6:14-16

Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols?

For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live in with them and walk among them, and will be their God, and they will be my people."

What is this saying? That Believers do not intertwine and believe the beliefs of the unblievers, and that God only lives in the hearts of those who believe so that He may guide our every thoughts and actions.

Therefore, we may assemble in public places, but we do it in a watchful manner that we do not co-mingle our beliefs with those of the unbelieving--

In example; Church youth travel in groups to see the Da Vinci Code film, and then discuss their reviews among themselves on the trip home, or at Church Youth rally, camp etc,etc. Thus, we expose the movie's hypocrisy for what it is.
--------------

Now, like I said, those who are living in disbelief--In some cases--Atheists--are most likely going to the film to find things in which they can refute Christ's teachings as a "falsehood", and ultimately, will lead those who are not sure about their faith into hopelessness--which doesn't benefit the Atheists or others in any way shape or form, they only further their state of hopelessness--digging that pit deeper and deeper.

So, in the end--The Christiam community have more to gain, and nothing to lose--exposing the falsity of the movie for what it is.
------------------

Final note: As for the new movie my Philip Pullman coming out on December 7th--Golden Comapss--we already know where he is coming from in the Anti-Christian workings of his series of books. We know his message is harmful to young minds, because he has one thing in mind--to get children to hate Chrisitans and anything pertaining to Christianity--so that's an automatic NO for any child to view--The reason being, and you have to keep in mind--With the current generation growing up being polluted with all the filth on television and violence of video games--such as those which show the game players cutting peoples heads off with swords, shooting people with machine guns and other such harmful viewings, and then this film coming up on top of it, it will only further the destructive influence upon the minds of an already degenerate society.

We must do everything in our means to stop and halt all this Culture of Death. PERIOD!!!

Jeremiah

Jeremiah writes:
"We must do everything in our means to stop and halt all this Culture of Death. PERIOD!!!"

Dude, that is what I am saying. If you vote for Rudy, you are not do everything in your power to stop the Culture of Death. You are sorta shrugging your shoulder and saying: "Well Guiliani is kinda against abortion." You have to set the agenda for the Republican party, not the other way around. If Huckabee is your man, vote for him. In the primary and the general election. If Hillary is as horrible as you believe her to be, a Republican will likely take her place. You want to be the one Republicans are coming to when they are deciding what candidate they want to run.

P.S. If were an evangelical, I would likely vote for Huckabee. He seems competent and true to cause. If I were just a Republican I would vote for Ron Paul. I may still vote for Ron Paul.

If you vote for Rudy, you lose the moral authority you claim so often to have in your posts.

What,

That's where the major conflict arises.

Let's make this simple:

I can't speak for everybody, meaning--I can't cast their votes for them, even for my Brothers and Sisters in Christ.

Although, speaking for myself as a Christian I can see the one major underlying problem in our society-What is it? People have failed to serve the Lord!!! They have turned their backs upon Him and have grown cold in their spirit towards one another. They have no love for on another and one of the main contributors to this is Liberalism and its main theme--Personal Gratification-(no limits, just go as you please despite the consequences)-Thus, a degenerate society as the outcome.

Make no mistake, all Nations that defied God's All Mighty will fell, because God does not tolerate disobedience.

So, people who follow the worthless line of thinking of Choice, and limitless personal gratification, they go into a state of mind where they think--"I'm more important, no-one else matters, whatever makes me feel good is what I will do, who cares what happens to me, it's no ones fault except mine, so I don't care the heck with what other people think"--Thus, they knowingly damn themelves and lead their children down that same road of despair.

There IS HOPE for America, and it depends upon Christians and their willingness to help spread the message of Hope!!!

So, if the Majority of the American people don't turn back to God, and they continue in the Liberal mindset that glorifies themselves, in that Radical Individualist mindset, and that every choice is a "good" choice no matter what, not differentiating between the good and the bad, America will continue to decline and be destroyed from within.

What do I say? People need to put God fearing men and women in office who will represent this country well!!!

Me personally, I find Mike Huckabee to be that person!!!

Jeremiah

what,

Huckabee over Giuliani on life issues - but Giuliani over any Democrat on life issues. Get it? We're not dumb, we here in the religious right. I know the lefties like to think we are, but we're actually better educated than most lefties. At any rate, no matter what you might think of our educational achievements, we didn't just fall off the turnip truck - we're not about to ensure the election of a culture of death fanatic like Hillary or Edwards or Obama just because we didn't get a culture of life stalwart as the GOP nominee. We'll take what we can get - anything that helps end the cutlure of death is a good thing, even if its only a half step in the right direction.

First Mark,
I didn't insult your educational acheivements. Stop playing the victim.
Second, your viewpoint is directly contrary to the leadership of evengelical leaders. If the religious right is ever going to be a force in this country, they have to demonstrate an independence from a political party, otherwise you will get lip service.
This is the quote I find problematic:

"We'll take what we can get - anything that helps end the cutlure of death is a good thing, even if its only a half step in the right direction."

You'll take what you can get. For someone who talks up Christian values and plays to the moral high ground this does not cut it. You have a candidate, Mike Huckabee, that reflects your beliefs yet you abandon him for the candidate your party and your media tell you is the correct one, the electable one. He is also one that is a lapsed Catholic who doesn't oppose abortion.
This is done by the democrats as well. Clinton is not my first choice but the media and Democrats tell us time and again that she is the person to back. Mark, you shouldn't settle and neither should Democrats. If the religious right don't show up and vote in 08, REpublicans will run back to you and support the candidate you want. They need you now more then ever considering how they are losing ground in every other demographic.
C'mon Mark, live up to the principles you tout on this site. Half way ain't good enough.

Jeremiah, you do the same. Don't compromise your movement for politcal expediency and use the excuse that the alternative is worse.

Don't compromise your movement for politcal expediency and use the excuse that the alternative is worse

What,

It's like I said--I can't take everybody's place and vote for them.

And no, I won't compromise my beliefs--but if others vote for Guiliani, I for Huckabee--then we just run against each others purposes; in essence, making mine and theirs votes worthless.

In the end, whoever the people choose for their President and whoever gets the nomination will inevitably lead the country in the direction they wish to go, Thus, agreeing to whatever consequences those actions may hold.

If people know what's best for America they will vote for the candidate that promises the most for the country and for Life.

Mike Huckabee is a good Christian man, and the man that will vote to strike Roe V. Wade down.

It is left to the people to answer!!

Jeremiah