# Since posting links seems the trend :)



## ozymandias (Jul 26, 2012)

As a human being I have nothing against this guy but as President of the U.S.A...do I want someone who seriously believes this c**polla - no frickin' way! If you can convince someone to believe this - then you can convince them to believe anything. As they saying goes "those who believe in absurdities can be made to commit atrocities".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/30/mitt-romneys-religion-key-issue-bet


----------



## Jill (Jul 26, 2012)

Seriously? The Mormon bashing again?


----------



## andi (Jul 26, 2012)

Ozy, an important part of the trend, that you left out, is you have to laugh at the people while you "bash" them. You need to hide your opinion behind a joke, so atleast those with a sense of humor will have to agree with you or risk being called a stick in the mud. You are articulating too directly your intent, which makes you far to personally responsable for your view, and therefore an easy target for all us left leaning brainwashed lemmings.


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

This is how I feel about "The One Group _(Some People Think)_ It’s Still Socially Acceptable to Bash".

In our modern society, we do not find it socially acceptable to bash, mock, ridicule or belittle people because they are:


Gay

From a different culture or nation

Of a different race

Experiencing poor financial circumstances

Handicapped


However, we can watch media coverage, observe the happenings in our own towns, and read online discussions, including right here on LB (a tight nit group of people who often come together in prayer), and see that it IS still okay to bash, mock, ridicule and belittle people over their religious faith and convictions. This is most especially true if the people are Christian (in its various forms), Catholic, or Mormon.

For many people, their religion is as much a part of their personal being and identity as would be their race, nationality, sexual orientation, etc., yet it seems to be the ONE area that there’s a “blanket okay” to beat them up and make fun of them over this particular quality. And most especially if the person or people targeted are followers of a few “less favored” (by the haters / baiters) religions because it does seem certain faiths are off limits and are to be highly respected.

Think about it… if you compare the things the faithful are mocked for, and contrast that to how you’d feel if one of the itemized groups was mocked for something outsiders might see as equally hard to relate to, how would you feel? I bet a measurable percentage of you would speak up and even more would be very upset.

The definitions of hate and intolerance do not change according to the group that has befallen the attention.


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

Gosh, such a difference IMO from taking a jab at a politician or a political ideology than slamming someone's faith. Really and truly... I also think it reflects quite a bit on a person's character.

And you think 1/2 of the people on LB are Liberal? I think it's a higher number when it comes to people who_ chime in _on LB. But, I am happy to know that is not the case when it comes to the USA population:







My view on liberals is truly best summed up through the current "Chick-Fil-A" controversy. Liberals are, once again, outraged because someone voiced their sincere opinion... yet is it not always the liberals who bleat for tolerance and understanding? Well, liberal hate and intolerance is, once again, on display for all to see. As much as I support equal marriage rights, I also support the right of others to voice their own sincere opinion. And, we'll be participating in:


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> Romney is getting CLOBBERED over there!!!


And the best news of all is..................... OVER THERE doesn't really matter. Not at all. None of them will be voting in the US Presidential Election.

Did you see the latest *Rasmussen* and _*Gallup*_ polls yesterday? That's about likely AMERICAN voters, and It was all good news for Team Romney


----------



## MountainWoman (Jul 27, 2012)

What is a liberal? I think of myself as fiscally conservative but socially very liberal so I think I fall into the Libertarian party. Romney doesn't speak to me at all. He's been around for years, running every election cycle and unfortunately (in my opinion), he's the choice of the Republican voters this year. I think there were far better candidates in the primary election.

As to religion, everyone should practice and be free to practice their beliefs and I don't want ultra conservatives telling me how to live my life because it's Biblical in their opinion. I consider myself a very religious person but I also believe in live and let live. We each come to God in our own way and religion should play no part in elections either to bash people of differing faiths or to expect people to conform to your belief of what is Biblically correct.

I know we'll all never see eye to eye on any of these issues but hopefully if we were to meet at Nationals or whereever, we'd be able to find some common ground and enjoy each other's company as I do enjoy these discussions.


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

MW, have you looked much at Libertarianism? What you say makes me think that might be the way you lean... I lean that way, but I realize that at this time, it's at two party system... and I will never again throw away my vote.


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> I did not read the article Ozy posted...


It was just about bashing Mormons. Again. I feel bad for any Mormon members here. While I am not a Mormon, I respect them and I will never have the opinion that faith is a reflection of personal weakness. It is an asset and I find it very distasteful when a handful of people decide to mock the faith of others.


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 27, 2012)

andi said:


> Ozy, an important part of the trend, that you left out, is you have to laugh at the people while you "bash" them. You need to hide your opinion behind a joke, so atleast those with a sense of humor will have to agree with you or risk being called a stick in the mud. You are articulating too directly your intent, which makes you far to personally responsable for your view, and therefore an easy target for all us left leaning brainwashed lemmings.


Oh I'm sorry...I need to brush up on my sarcasm a little more so I can fit in with the group. Thanks Andi





Looks like his foreign relations are off to a jolly good start too

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/26/mitt-romney-olympics-blunder?newsfeed=true


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

_Maybe..._ England just doesn't want to return that Winston Churchill bust that Obama famously banished from the White House?





And, of course, Brits will not be voting in this US election ... MORMONS will, though


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 27, 2012)

Poor Old Mittens, Looks like he should save us tax payers a lot in foreign visits as even his own countrymen are suggesting he stay home lol.

Last time I looks the Brits were one of the only countries left still on our side.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/27/carl-lewis-mitt-romney-olympics


----------



## Bess Kelly (Jul 27, 2012)

Could we pre-vote with "I don't like either one" .......... and get a new slate ? ! ?





It's sad, really. We are simply able to vote for the lesser of two evils --





The "situation" in which we Americans find ourselves is truly the result of many, many people and not JUST the president and it will not cure itself soon. We have issues with general bad behavior within the populace, the elected officials, policy and war --violence, drugs, health & values in general are declining. NOW, drought and higher food prices abound.

On top of all that, the price of horse feed and hay!!!!! Wish this was the only delimma.......at least that can be handled.


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 27, 2012)

Bess Kelly said:


> Could we pre-vote with "I don't like either one" .......... and get a new slate ? ! ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


BK, Very well said, this is EXACTLY how I feel. I've been a life long voting Republican - I ask myself over and over "is this the best a nation like ours can come up with?"


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 27, 2012)

andi said:


> You need to hide your opinion behind a joke, so atleast those with a sense of humor will have to agree with you or risk being called a stick in the mud. You are articulating too directly your intent, which makes you far to personally responsable for your view, and therefore an easy target for all us left leaning brainwashed lemmings.


Is this okay LLBL?






I'm not voting for a scientologist either....because I'm NOT posessed by aliens


----------



## minimomNC (Jul 27, 2012)

I am democrate, was raised that way, my parents, grandparents etc were raised that way. Guess that again makes me the lazy, good for nothing liberal I have been called before, sit at home without a job and taking taxpayers money. Yep thats me or so I have been told. EXCEPT.... I have never been on welfare, never collected unemployment and while I don't own a company, I have worked a paying job since I was 14, yes I barned tobacco for three years to pay for things I wanted for school. I have held a job now for 38 years. I think the Chick-Fil-A thing is just plain stupid, my mom doesn't believe in gay marriage either but I am not fighting with her because I do, get real. Not all liberals think the same way so once and for all PLEASE STOP LUMPING US ALL IN ONE POT. And thank goodness not all republicans are the same either.


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 27, 2012)

minimomNC said:


> I am democrate, was raised that way, my parents, grandparents etc were raised that way. Guess that again makes me the lazy, good for nothing liberal I have been called before, sit at home without a job and taking taxpayers money. Yep thats me or so I have been told. EXCEPT.... I have never been on welfare, never collected unemployment and while I don't own a company, I have worked a paying job since I was 14, yes I barned tobacco for three years to pay for things I wanted for school. I have held a job now for 38 years. I think the Chick-Fil-A thing is just plain stupid, my mom doesn't believe in gay marriage either but I am not fighting with her because I do, get real. Not all liberals think the same way so once and for all PLEASE STOP LUMPING US ALL IN ONE POT. And thank goodness not all republicans are the same either.


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

On November 6, US voters have two (2) viable choices when it comes to the next President of our Nation. Two. Period...





But was that what this thread was about? Nope. It was, once again, about bashing religion and mocking those who have faith


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

Minimomnc... I am republican, was raised that way, my parents, grandparents etc were raised that way. Guess that means I take personal responsibility seriously. I have never been on welfare, never collected unemployment, I own a company and meet a payroll, I appreciate a financial bottom line. As an employer, I pay unemployment taxes which have multiplied 4 fold during Obama's administration. I have worked a paying job since I was 15. I have never used tobacco nor illegal drugs, but I do enjoy a good cocktail sometimes. I have held a job now for 29 years. I think the Chick-Fil-A thing showcases the intolerance of the most vocal liberals. My mom, dad, sister AND myself believe in gay marriage. The liberals who do tolerate opinions of others might want to speak up... and maybe also patronize Chick-Fil-A next Wednesday. Their grilled chicken sandwiches and chicken strips are really good


----------



## minimomNC (Jul 27, 2012)

Jill, I never said anything against you about being a republican. I have never said anything bad about anyone being a republican, yet everything posted that doesn't agree with the way a "party" should think is bashed. You want to talk bashing, it shouldn't be tolerated in any form, yet its seems to be the only political way to campaign. If I don't agree with something the republican candidate says, then I am yet again the "lazy, good for nothing liberal" when in truth I just don't agree with a statement. The bottom line is, our political beliefs are our own business and NO ONE has the right to put someone else down because of what they believe, I don't care what it is. Just because I don't believe everything you say about political views, would never give me the right to say your beliefs are wrong. As humans, we all see things differently. I just don't understand why making someone look bad would ever make themselves look good. And its not just one party, its both I disagree with, how about we vote for the first candidate that will give up their salary for their term in office? How about one of them tell us what they can do to help the country without having to lie about it. How about acting like grown ups instead of name calling 10 year olds. How about being nice to each other because its the thing to do no matter what party you stand for, or is just to hard to be nice these days?


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

Do you really think the financial reward is the relatively small salary for when a president is in office? Lecturing, book royalties, speaking fees, ETC... But hey, I bet Romney could easily afford to meet your challange. Please don't tell me that would make him the bad guy... It is a sad state of affairs when the main strikes against a US presidential candidate are that he is a financial success and he is a religious person.


----------



## Katiean (Jul 27, 2012)

I did not read the entire post. But, didn't Obama royally p*ss off the English when he would not use "their motorcade"? Oh and didn't he touch the queen? I think there were other things too. But hey, we aren't keeping score are we?


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

Katiean said:


> I did not read the entire post. But, didn't Obama royally p*ss off the English when he would not use "their motorcade"? Oh and didn't he touch the queen? I think there were other things too. But hey, we aren't keeping score are we?


Yep. Plus he impressed no one "over there" and embarrassed many "over here" with a tacky gift that included an iPod, a signed copy of his own book, etc. for Queen Elizabeth back in 2009. She, on the other hand, gave the Obamas one of the earliest known copies of William Shakespeare’s _Henry V _and framed original sheet music of John Newton’s “Amazing Grace.” The first daughters were given a dollhouse replica of Windsor Castle and a Shetland pony...


----------



## Riverrose28 (Jul 27, 2012)

OZY, I love you, whoever you are, Jill I love you too, and all that belong to the LB family, I so enjoy all these posts, like MW I get up in the morning grab my coffee and head to my computer to check it all out. I had to read the original link twice, and although it started out OK it did end on a sour note. I feel that everyone has a right to believe in what ever religion they want to, and this article was the opinion of one author. As I said yesterday on another thread, sometimes the written word on the net is truth and sometimes you need to take it with a grain of salt, you can't believe everything you read. Frederick the Great said, "All relgions must be tolerated...for every man must get to heaven his own way." I know that religion and politics are not to be combined, but yes I'm not so gullable as to feel that it does enter into every mans thoughts, and therefore may be intertwined. I don't know how Chick Fi la CEO got into this, but, I'm a DEmocrate, but I do believe that we all have freedom of speech and can say what we will as long as it doesn't offend others. We also have the right to shop and eat whereever, so we are offended by this companies stance we can eat somewhere else. Personally I've never eaten there as I don't eat take out very often. I do believe that gays have a right to the same rights as the rest of us, but also believe this CEO has a right too his/her opion and the right to express it.

Seriously I'm starting to hate all the political commercials and their negitivity. I would like to hear and see each candidate with a poitive atitude and hear how they plan to get the country back on it's feet. I also know three are three branches and that the President is not a ruler, nor do they have the right to get us back without the Congress and Senate all coming to terms. I am looking forward to each ones proposals instead of critizing each other.

Off my soapbox! Oh one more thing, then I promise I'll go hide back in my hole, "Can't we all just get along?"

Please excuse all the typos and mis spellings.


----------



## MountainWoman (Jul 27, 2012)

Riverrose, I agree with you. As to Chick-Fil-A, we don't have it in Vermont but I loved it when I lived in the South. I always admired the fact they were closed on Sunday to allow their employees to go to church. However, I don't support their views on gay marriage and if I travel down south again, no matter how much I love their sandwiches, I wouldn't eat there. That's a choice I have when a company makes public its beliefs about certain topics and I find their beliefs offensive.

I got another mailing from Romney's party today. That makes about 4 this week. I'm just one person. Combine that with all the mailings each candidate and party is doing, all the money spent on advertising, super pacs, etc. The amount is staggering. If we took all this wasted campaign money (on both sides) plus the money the government wastes and used it to better people's lives so no one would be homeless, no one would worry about medical insurance and no one would worry about their children going hungry, how much better this world would be. Put people not parties first.


----------



## tagalong (Jul 27, 2012)

*NO - Obama did not touch the Queen* - Michelle Obama and the Queen briefly touched other - the Queen initiating it - that was not "forbidden". *Obama NEVER touched her *- and it is easy to look that up - _but why bother with facts??!!_ _Who cares about facts??!! _

Is it really so hard to try and stick to facts? I am sorry - I just find this extremely frustrating.

Ditto for the way the Churchill bust thing being rehashed from 2008 in an attempt to make it sensational again when once again, the FACTS do not bear that out. Plus it is old news - no need for grasping at such distant and desperate straws to try and make a point of some kind or another.

The facts - if anyone cares - are that the bust of Churchill was not sent back to the UK or to the British Embassy - but placed in the residence part of the White House outside the Treaty Room on a table of its own. The bust has been photographed there time and time again to debunk the lie - but it does not meet up with the prescribed agenda so the facts must therefore be ignored.

A bust of Lincoln is now in the Oval Office.

_*FACTS.*__ I know they are inconvenient little things but it would be nice if they could be used once in a while._

That is why many of these political threads at LB go south - because actual FACTS are cast aside by some and do not matter.



> Liberals are, once again, outraged because someone voiced their sincere opinion... yet is it not always the liberals who bleat for tolerance and understanding? Well, liberal hate and intolerance is, once again, on display for all to see.


_Once again, _we see a Conservative _once again_ maintaining that anyone who even leans a bit left must be of the same mindset as some of the extreme left. _Once again, _ we see that a Conservative is outraged that any Liberal should voice their sincere opinion - unless it is one they approve of. God forbid a Liberal actually say that they disagree with the Chick Fil A president's opinion - that is not allowed!! And yet, is it not always Conservatives who think they are the only ones with tolerance and understanding? Well, a bit of Conservative tunnel vision, hate and intolerance is _once again_, on display for all to see.

Had to turn that ^ around just to show how inaccurate and intolerant it was. Except that I only said ConservativeS (plural) once because they do not all think exactly the same way. No more than all Liberals think the same way - and they never have and never will.

The whole Chick Fil A thing is being blown wildly out of proportion.

And this...



> Yep. Plus he impressed no one "over there" and embarrassed many "over here" with a tacky gift that included an iPod, a signed copy of his own book, etc. for Queen Elizabeth back in 2009. She, on the other hand, gave the Obamas one of the earliest known copies of William Shakespeare’s _Henry V _and framed original sheet music of John Newton’s “Amazing Grace.” The first daughters were given a dollhouse replica of Windsor Castle and a Shetland pony...


...is wildly inaccurate. Yes, Obama gave the Queen an engraved iPod on his first visit - an upgrade to the one she apparently already had. An American icon gift - even if it was deemed inappropriate by some. What was on it? Show tunes from musicals she likes, photos and videos of her visits to the US and a couple of audio clips of Obama speeches. The last part was lame but not an OMG!!! OMG!!! scandal. _The Obamas also gave her a vintage songbook signed by Richard Rodgers - one of the Queen's favourite composers. _

The actual facts are out there and easy to find and check - and yet many simply do not bother.

The next gift to the Queen was a leather-bound album with memorabilia and photos of her parents’ 1939 trip to the U.S., the first time a British monarch ever visited. Prince Philip the avid carriage driver received a custom-made set of bits and shoes from an American champion carriage horse that he admired. Prince Charles and Camilla (who love to garden) got a selection of plants, seeds and honey from the grounds of Mount Vernon, Monticello and White House. That as per CBC and not any biased American media, bloggers etc.

The Queen's basic gift to visiting dignitaries is a signed, silver framed photo of herself. Nothing else.

The Obama kids got neither a pony or a doll house of Windsor Castle - that has become part of the mythology that is presented as truth.

Can we please stick to the facts? They can be bizarre enough without half-truths, myths and outright... fabrications.

SO frustrating!

And I would NEVER be so _intolerant_ of someone else's concerns and opinions that I would put them on ignore - on this forum (which is really tame compared to actual political forums where myths presented as facts get you skewered) _or anywhere else. _


----------



## Jill (Jul 27, 2012)

I'm not sure what information is thought to be incorrect, but it's pretty easy to do an internet news search "Obama 2009 gifts to Queen Elizabeth" and get the scoop from any number of reputable sources.

As if that ^, or even -- gasp -- a presidential candidate who is a Mormon, were as important as: the economy, unemployment, illegal immigration, voter fraud, gun running, ETC.


----------



## tagalong (Jul 27, 2012)

> but it's pretty easy to do an internet news search "Obama 2009 gifts to Queen Elizabeth" and get the scoop from any number of reputable sources.


And if you actually get the info from _reputable sources_ - and not bloggers, talking heads, websites with agendas etc. -* the actual facts are there*. As I listed them. And no, I do not believe that Jill does not read my posts at times - even though she says she has put me on ignore as she is intolerant of anything I have to say - especially when it comes to verifying facts.

Just one example of a myth - show me a link where it is documented ANYWHERE that Obama touched the Queen. There are none. Just the Michelle Obama interaction with the Queen that I already mentioned.

LINK, PLEASE. And not some lame blog or viral email where someone else is insisting that the myths are true._ An actual __*link*__ documenting the event. _

_*crickets* _

*Facts, please* and none of this mythology that some insist is true. I cannot be the only one who finds this frustrating beyond belief. I am dismayed that people would prefer to believe the lies and myths as opposed to the truth - and although that can be applied to both sides, some will believe absolutely anything that is said about Obama. Anything. Everything. As I said, there are enough actual facts out there that are d a m n i n g enough without resorting to creating "facts" that do not exist. And never did.

I like to think that people are smarter than that...



.. I am interested in everyone's opinions even if they do not agree with mine - but it would be good if said opinions were based on... you guessed it - facts. You cannot have a balanced, intelligent discussion about the issues without facts.



> As if that ^, or even -- gasp -- a presidential candidate who is a Mormon, were as important as: the economy, unemployment, illegal immigration, voter fraud, gun running, ETC


Well then, why is the placement of a bust 4 years ago such an important scandalous thing _*GASP*_ that it deserves multiple mentions in this forum?? It doesn't.


----------



## Minimor (Jul 27, 2012)

tagalong said:


> And if you actually get the info from _reputable sources_ - and not bloggers, talking heads, websites with agendas etc. -* the actual facts are there*. As I listed them. C
> 
> Just one example of a myth - show me a link where it is documented ANYWHERE that Obama touched the Queen. There are none. Just the Michelle Obama interaction with the Queen that I already mentioned.
> 
> ...


Good post, as is your earlier one; while you would like to think people are smarter than that (as you said above) the unfortunate truth is many of them are not. That gets proven over and over again.

I'm waiting for someone to post that link that will prove Obama touched the Queen...because I remember the news coverage of the event and it most certainly was not Obama that touched the Queen--it was Michelle.

There might have been a handshake, which was a bit of a gaff, but I can't say for sure who that was and at the time I commented that the reporter sounded much more outraged that the Queen looked.


----------



## andi (Jul 27, 2012)

A short clip from an *INCREDIBLE* new series on HBO,_ Newsroom_, this clip is about the spreading of lies that the news is often so involved in ...


----------



## vickie gee (Jul 27, 2012)

Jill said:


> It was just about bashing Mormons. Again. I feel bad for any Mormon members here. While I am not a Mormon, I respect them and I will never have the opinion that faith is a reflection of personal weakness. It is an asset and I find it very distasteful when a handful of people decide to mock the faith of others.


I did not click on the link in the original post either but somewhere between first post and umpteen posts we seem to be so all over the board I cannot even focus. Oh, and the Chic-Fil-A thingy is a very hot topic on _twitchy.com. _The black guy that has made the video about his feelings about the restaurant chain...I can't describe it and since I don't embed videos I will just say he was very entertaining and has a good attitude. No chicken tonight for us though, I picked up fish at a friend of mine's restaurant, which I know as far as her business goes *she DID build it.*


----------



## Katiean (Jul 27, 2012)

tagalong said:


> - _but why bother with facts??!!_ _Who cares about facts??!! _
> 
> Is it really so hard to try and stick to facts? I am sorry - I just find this extremely frustrating.
> 
> ...


POT----Kettle..........BLACK?

I could sight lots of things that you say are facts that....well....really are not. So, I think we all tend to see what we want to.


----------



## minimomNC (Jul 27, 2012)

So, what are some of the things Tag has posted that are not true. Please give the statement that you think was wrong and the correct information. Just like Tag did.

Its so easy to say, well you did it too, and that be an answer. I want to know what she said that was not true and what the correct answers are. Thats discussion. So lets discuss it like adults. For the 100th time, why is each candidate good for the job as president. Not why is he bad (lord knows they both are) but if you think your pick is that great, tell me why with facts that you can back up. It is that easy, or maybe not, who knows. Could be there is nothing redeeming about either one and again that is going to be a huge blow to the country either way.

Oh except I did see an ad on TV where Rommney is going to get jobs for thousands of people in his first week in office, now thats hopefull, but I don't think realistic.


----------



## susanne (Jul 27, 2012)

.

With either side, it often seems that disliking someone is all the"proof" against them that is needed.

.


----------



## tagalong (Jul 28, 2012)

> POT----Kettle..........BLACK?
> I could sight lots of things that you say are facts that....well....really are not. So, I think we all tend to see what we want to.


No Pot Kettle Back there with me, *Katiean*. Please cite those facts that you claim are lies.

And do not start by telling us that all the fact checking websites are biased. I have seen some of them sneered at here - and then used by the same people when something the websites have debunked is to a poster's liking. If something does not have multiple links attached to it that you can investigate further on your own, it is not doing a decent job of fact-checking. And no - I do not rely on those websites for all my news/info as I am sure someone might suggest. Far from it.

Please point out where I dealt in myths and rumours. Show me where I have EVER posted news from viral emails or talking heads and presented it as fact. Many of us have repeatedly debunked viral emails and the like that _were_ presented as truth. Show me ONCE where I insisted a lame rumour was true. Just once.

Once upon a time, I snarked about the Saturday Night Live skit about Sarah Palin where she could supposedly see Russia from her house. I was talking about the skit - but got jumped for saying it was true - which was not the case. That is the only "incident" I can even recall where I was supposedly dealing in lies.

More recently, I got jumped for relating a personal healthcare experience in Canada and was told I was wrong because So & So radio host or commentator had said the opposite. That thread is long gone - but my personal experience and that of my family was deemed to be a lie - and yet what some pompous talking head said on TV or in a blog was the absolute truth. Based on... spin, myth and rumour and not fact. The facts were unimportant.

Do not tell me I am an Obama lover because it would not be true - I have many issues with many of his policies.

BOTH sides of the political game - both parties - are guilty of the same thing - spin , hypocrisy and political doublespeak. It is not all just Liberals or Democrats as repeated threads and posts here have asserted.

And when I see it suggested multiple times here that unless you are a Republican or Conservative or believe select opinions, you must be intolerant and hateful. ... it just makes me sad.

Facts are not photos or comments taken out of context and twisted to meet certain agendas. I loathe the attack commercials both sides use now and will use in the future.

The same nonsense goes on on both "sides" - both parties pull the same lame stunts - unless you read some of the political threads at LB - where apparently only Liberals or The Left or Democrats (pick one or all) are at fault or to blame...


----------



## Jill (Jul 28, 2012)

susanne said:


> .
> 
> With either side, it often seems that disliking someone is all the"proof" against them that is needed.
> 
> .


That can pretty much be the case, and on a couple different levels.



vickie gee said:


> Oh, and the Chic-Fil-A thingy is a very hot topic on _twitchy.com. _


Yes, it is! And I adore Michelle Malkin




I saw this yesterday and feel it really sums up the heart of the controversy where Chick-Fil-A is concerned!








> Though liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, it sometimes shocks them to learn that there _are_ other points of view.


The current media hot topic surely supports ^ THAT ^ point of view


----------



## MountainWoman (Jul 28, 2012)

I heard on FOX NEWS last night that the bust of Winston Churchill in the Oval Office was on LOAN to President Bush after 9/11 and it was returned and is now in the British Embassy. There is another bust of Winston Churchill that sits in the hall of the White House (forgot where) and has been there for years.

As to Chick-Fil-A, husband and I don't agree. I said "Well, I won't eat there" and he said, "If I were them and you didn't like what I believe in than I'd tell you to go buy your dang chicken somewhere else."

Vive La Difference!!!


----------



## Jill (Jul 28, 2012)

Here's another current take on the facts of the Winston Churchill bust, along with many citations:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/white-house-hey-we-never-got-rid-of-that-churchill-bust/


----------



## Jill (Jul 28, 2012)

MountainWoman said:


> Vive La Difference!!!


Amen!!! If we all agreed on everything, life would not be nearly as interesting


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 28, 2012)

The answer to Chick-Fil-A is so simple. If you disagree - eat somewhere else. Now THAT's freedom at work. It's just another hater hiding behind religion. Pick out the parts that suit you and leave the rest - but we've been there done that before. 

It's pretty much the same old thing with the "freedom of speech" comments - it's freedom of speech when it agrees with your agenda but if it's something you disagree on (gods forbid it's a liberal, democrat or atheist commenting on something) 

I think it's past time that this country DID start talking about peoples beliefs because their "faith" is going to influence them more than their politics. For thousands of years the church has ostracized, imprisoned, tortured and killed free thinkers and scientists that have disagreed with them. Times are changing. There are people on this MB who think it's perfectly fine to attack someones political standing if it differs from their own but religion is out of the ball park for comments. Thankfully that fastest growing segment of America when it comes to "faith" or lack of it is those who now claim NO religion. We're better educated these days (sadly lagging behind most "educated" countries in that field still though). When a bronze age book tells you a god flooded the world to 22 feet above the highest mountain - ANYONE with half a brain cell has to look at that and question it. 22 ft above the highest mountain - oh, seriously!! Look up next time you see a commercial airplane overhead. Not one landing or taking off but one in it's flight path. They cruise at an average of 30,000 ft. Mt. Everest is 29,028 ft high. Add 22 ft to that and you're looking at a flood covering the world at the height that a commercial jet cruises at. You don't even have to go into the fact that that's in the "death zone" where there isn't enough oxygen to support human life - let alone an ark full of animals etc. etc. There is NO evidence of this flood EVER occurring and overwhelming evidence that it didn't. From uninterrupted historical records of civilizations existing and functioning pre-flood and post-flood to geological proof (the list goes on) If you're not seriously questioning the myths written in one bronze age book that contradict so much of what science can prove then you're not being intellectually honest with yourself. 

There's nothing wrong with taking someones religion into account in politics anymore than it's wrong to look at their political or fiscal policies. Times are changing and in the same way people are in an outcry over chick-fil-A's religious based bigotry they are also finally starting to examine how that same "my religion is better than yours, my god is better than yours" attitude will influence them in leading our nation into the future.


----------



## Sonya (Jul 28, 2012)

Is saying that folks who have faith only have 'half a brain cell' considered a personal attack ML, just curious?


----------



## tagalong (Jul 28, 2012)

Early this morning that article was being discussed on CNN and I found it online - Jill has already metnioned it. Here is the link . Here it is in its entirety...



> *(CNN)* – A bronze bust of Winston Churchill is becoming hotly contested in Washington. Well, actually, make that two of them.
> 
> A bust of the former British Prime Minister was lent by the British government to the White House in 2001 and displayed in the Oval Office. Conservatives, pointing to reports from British and American news outlets, blasted President Barack Obama for allegedly returning the statue after becoming president in 2009.
> 
> ...



I was going to point out in my earlier post that Mitt Romney _knew _ a bust was in the White House. That is why when he has been bringing it up this week and trying to make it an Issue (you know, as opposed to jobs, wars, the economy etc.




)

... he_ never_ said it was at the Embassy or sent back. _But he did suggest that it was_ - saying he would "return it to the Oval Office". Careful wording and planting a seed - that many ran with this week.


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 28, 2012)

It doesn't say "folks who have faith have half a brain cell"...better go back and read it again



It says "ANYONE with half a brain cell has to look at that and question it." I'd say if someone is asking you to believe something so "out of the ordinary" then it should be examined. If you examine all the evidence and still believe it's reasonable - good for you, at least you did some research and didn't follow blindly.


----------



## Jill (Jul 28, 2012)

Sonya said:


> Is saying that folks who have faith only have 'half a brain cell' considered a personal attack ML, just curious?


I think it's just that some people who don't enjoy religious faith in their own lives take delight in belittling those who do. We see it time and time again. It's kind of sad, really


----------



## Sonya (Jul 28, 2012)

Ok, Well apparently anyone of faith that believes in the flood without question has 'half a brain cell'....same difference.


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 28, 2012)

Sonya said:


> Ok, Well apparently anyone of faith that believes in the flood without question has 'half a brain cell'....same difference.


You can take it any way you like



If you choose not to question and follow - that's your right





It's my opinion, that if you can weigh up mountains (no pun intended) of evidence in favor or against something being factual and still base a decision against all of that "real" evidence based on "faith" (definition of "faith" = belief that is NOT based on proof), that is why I started this thread. I firmly believe that if faith allows a person to be intellectually dishonest to themselves because it's contradictory to their religion then it's something to be considered when choosing a presidential candidate.

Are they going to weigh up the actual facts in a situation or are they going to let their faith override that? Look at the worlds MOST peaceful, highest educated, highest standard of living nations and you'll find one overriding commonality - they are overwhelmingly non-religious (atheist) nations. Interestingly some of the most war like are the most religious





JMHO


----------



## vickie gee (Jul 28, 2012)

Jill said:


> I think it's just that some people who don't enjoy religious faith in their own lives take delight in belittling those who do. We see it time and time again. It's kind of sad, really


Jill, I don't think it really is "delight." Scientists, think tanks, and geniouses around the world are trying to determine what causes the brain to function this way. Zahzillions of dollars have been spent researching, questioning, and experimenting to determine if the answer lies in DNA, diet, chemical exposure, past life regression, or alien abduction. They have closed the program studying the brain and are now in the development stage of determing how many blahblahzillions of dollars it will take to initiate a program to study a new theory that perhaps it is the heart that actually causes the brain to ultimately reveal such behavioral characteristics of one who seemingly does take delight in trying to change the minds of people of faith. They code name for the new study of the heart is called Born Again.

This has abrupted in a swelchie of Christian faiths offering objects that could be used in the la*BOR*atories to study the heart. To date, the items received are a bucket of propolis, a bottle of quereitron, four pairs of komagers, a frozen tarpoon, a mysterious bag monogrammed _camerlingo _which contains several bundles of money, a wobbly threstle, some jankers, several board feet of shi*tim, a rather jumentous krybylos, a faded gonfalon, a harridan (which was refused for hygienic reasons and almost made the quaestary who delivered such items refuse to be tasked as such). By now anyone reading this is wondering if I fell victim to latrociny who drugged me with upas.

Psyche! I just wanted to see what using a plethora of words that are not "normal in conversation" would feel like. So stick a graip in me; I'm done. At least it broke up the usual "back and forth" and will give everyone a chance to use some new words in their next game of Scrabble. Now, I shall go back to being a little hodmandod.


----------



## ozymandias (Jul 28, 2012)

vickie gee said:


> Now, I shall go back to being a little hodmandod.


It's "HOMINID" and we are one of the Great Ape Species. The Hominidae include Orangutans, Gorillas, Chimpanzees, Bonobos and Humans


----------



## vickie gee (Jul 28, 2012)

ozymandias said:


> It's "HOMINID" and we are one of the Great Ape Species. The Hominidae include Orangutans, Gorillas, Chimpanzees, Bonobos and Humans


Only in your spelling bee, Ozy.





"hawd-man-dawd"



*? *


----------

