Earlier today, I posted on NewsBusters "CNN's Analysis: At Saddleback, Obama Was 'Thoughtful.'" The piece described how CNN repeatedly described Barack Obama at the Saddleback Church forum as "thoughtful." Other observers saw it differently, thinking Obama appeared evasive and indecisive. His hesitant fumbling especially contrasted with the very specific and resolute responses from John McCain.
The Reverend Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback and the host of the forum, appeared on CNN Newsroom this evening. Questioned by anchor Rick Sanchez, it seems clear Warren got the network memo.
SANCHEZ: There you have two of the responses on two of the questions. Each allotted the same amount of time, by the way, the way we divided that up. Pastor Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church and the author, of course, of "The Purpose-Driven Life." Who hasn't read or heard of that book? Let me start you this way. Were you surprised -- I was just listening to Barack Obama there. Were you surprised that he didn't respond the way Democrats have almost consistently responded in the past, if they happen to have or share his position. They say something like, look, personally I'm against abortion, but I'm not against a law that allows it.You asked him specifically when does a baby get human rights. He said, it is above my pay grade, at some point. Were you taken aback by his nuanced response?
WARREN: No. Actually, Rick, I think what we saw last night was two personalities exactly playing according to form. I see Barack Obama as kind of the thoughtful consensus builder. I see John McCain as the happy, straight forward warrior. And they both answered exactly according to casting. Just the way they work. One of them tends to get right to the point. Barack is more nuanced. He's more -- he thinks things through.
He's a constitutional attorney. And so it didn't surprise me at all. In fact, it was a good balance to show the difference.
Oh, so that's what we should keep in mind. Obama is a thoughtful consensus builder, a nuanced man who thinks things through, just as you'd expect from a constitutional attorney. By contrast, McCain is simply a happy, straightforward warrior. That's the difference.
Warren has all the makings of a CNN "senior" political analyst. Of course, he probably couldn't take the pay cut.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Thoughtful...as opposed
August 17, 2008 - 22:32 ET by ConservativeRexThoughtful...as opposed to what? Let me guess, he put a finger to his chin and said Umm...a lot.
This empty suit is a chameleon..capable of striking any kind of pose the media wants, and thinking up the most ridiculous Hallmark Card crap he can spew.
There is no one in the MSM who will ask him a hard question. I define a hard question as "why the hell do/did you hang around people that want to do harm to American citizens by blowing up buildings with people in them"..that type of hard question. This Warren shyster isn't the one to do it. Evidently, it won't get asked. Until it's much too late. As usual.
There you go again
August 17, 2008 - 22:54 ET by DEVILDOCMOMConservative, making racist comments about bho. LOL
There you go again
August 17, 2008 - 22:59 ET by Mike BatesBusted!
I'm not sure
August 17, 2008 - 23:31 ET by DEVILDOCMOMhow to take your comment Michael, mine was a joke, meant to be taken in jest.
Not sure
August 18, 2008 - 09:02 ET by Mike BatesOK.
Busted!! /SARC
Is that better?
Sure,
August 18, 2008 - 21:29 ET by DEVILDOCMOMjust short, simple statments which are clear to me. LOL
Strike a pose
August 17, 2008 - 23:01 ET by Mike Bates. . . capable of striking any kind of pose the media wants. . .
A lifetime ago, I bet a few times on a nag named Strike a Pose. He was a loser, too.
Just when Rick Warren moves
August 18, 2008 - 03:22 ET by Andrew H.Just when Rick Warren moves a bit into the realm of credibility, he moves away again. A "consensus builder???" What, Rick? Will Obama build a consensus to include not appointing strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, to not protecting infants born alive, to civil marriage of people who call themselves "gay?"
Probably he was being careful himself--don't call what it is anymore lest you suffer the rage from the left like Jerry Falwell, meanwhile, give your weak minded, dependent parishoners the okay to vote for a secular socialist. It's safer that way and guarantees membership.
I want my money back for "A Purpose Driven Life."
It's all bullshit, isn't it?
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
Andrew H
August 18, 2008 - 03:46 ET by Cool ArrowI'm just being curious, so you don't have to answer if you're self conscious about it.
What Faith are you? I've kinda got a bet on it.
I ♣ my seal
Warren is proof that some
August 17, 2008 - 22:39 ET by bigtimerWarren is proof that some people don't know when to keep their mouth shut when they are ahead.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Obama thoughtful
August 17, 2008 - 22:44 ET by merlin61Yes, he was thoughtful. Thoughtful to try not to
offend anyone by just giving general answers that
do not solve anything. He is not able to give
fast, intelligent answers, like how do you confront
evil. Mc Cain answered immediately just like he
did when asked about when a fetus has human
rights. Obama didn't answer either of these
questions, he danced around them. No experience
no experience, no experience. Not a Messiah
after all.
It's nuance BT
August 17, 2008 - 22:45 ET by Cool ArrowI'm still giving Warren high marks for his interviews last night.
In a way, he's right.
Putin is "thoughtful" and he has displayed "new wants"
I ♣ my seal
Mouth wide open, big
August 17, 2008 - 23:11 ET by Mike BatesI think it was Silent Cal Coolidge who said he'd rarely gotten into trouble for something he didn't say.
We're sunk
August 17, 2008 - 22:41 ET by Cool ArrowDid you see that?
"Barack is more nuanced"
Well, if he's more "nuanced", can "complex" be far behind?
But there's nothing wrong with being thoughtful. I had a problem with him twisting truth as he stammered out a new reality.
Hey Barack! Abortions have declined during the last 7 years. But you were thoughtful enough to know your followers were too stupid to be aware of this fact.
I ♣ my seal
Mulville Rule #8
August 17, 2008 - 23:09 ET by KC MulvilleAnother rule
August 17, 2008 - 23:15 ET by Mike BatesSmart people don't start sentences with, "I think what I meant was. . ."
Notice - I am stealing that line
August 18, 2008 - 08:28 ET by KC MulvilleThat's too good not to steal. In a couple weeks, I'll use that line somewhere (either in a post or in a bar, and when you think about it, what's the difference?), but by then I'll think I thought it up myself. LOL!
Steal this line
August 18, 2008 - 09:05 ET by Mike BatesGreat! Looking forward to those royalties rolling in.
"He's a constitutional attorney"?
August 17, 2008 - 22:59 ET by DelsaWhere? When?
What Constitution? Not OURS.
SOBama wouldn't know our Constitution if he fell over it.
He said his main complaint about Judge Roberts was that he gave more power to the Executive Branch than to the Congress???
Whatever decision SOBama is talking about, YOU can bank on the FACT Roberts went strictly by OUR Constitution and NEVER once thought of making up a new Constitutional right!
But then SOBama, the "Constitutional attorney" sees no permanence to the document of which he speaks. He is looking for EXTRA Constitutional decisions by the court.
HE has NO CLUE when it comes to OUR Constitution.
I thought his questioning was good but
His words prove Warren to an A$$!
He needs to stick to being purpose driven.
Or is he??
Attorney Obama
August 17, 2008 - 23:06 ET by Mike BatesBarry was a "senior lecturer" at the University of Chicago Law School until a better gig in Washington became available.
If it were me...
August 17, 2008 - 23:01 ET by Tom1969ca...I'd be glad to be called "the warrior" as opposed to "the thoughtful one". By being the thoughtful one, one could argue that Obama had to think about his answers to questions about his beliefs and values - specifically, to think about what answer will win him the most votes and alienate the fewest members of his base.
If someone asked me a question about my beliefs and values, I'd be able to answer immediately - because (a) I know what my beliefs and values are, and (b) I would like to think that I'm principled enough that I'm going to defend those beliefs and values ("warrior") and let the chips fall where they may.
The problem with saying the right things to be elected is that, once elected, few politicians then follow through on the "right things" they said; rather, they then govern according to their beliefs and values. It's almost a form of false advertising. In my previous example, by stating my beliefs and letting the chips fall where they may, at least no one will be surprised when my governing decisions are based on those beliefs and values...
==
Conservation doesn't get us more energy. It's as if we were running out of food and the Democrats were telling us: "Just eat a little less every day!"
--Anne Coulter
Anybody out there with a
August 17, 2008 - 23:05 ET by maggieqpublicAnybody out there with a pro-Obama point-of-view who can nail down some specifics about the thoughts of the thoughtful one?
A pro-Obama view
August 17, 2008 - 23:09 ET by Mike BatesAnybody out there with a pro-Obama point-of-view who can nail down some specifics about the thoughts of the thoughtful one?
Anybody out there with a pro-Obama point-of-view willing to admit it?
You think I might be waiting
August 17, 2008 - 23:15 ET by maggieqpublicYou think I might be waiting awhile....?!
Waiting
August 17, 2008 - 23:18 ET by Mike BatesYou think I might be waiting awhile....?!
Not necessarily. Plenty of mini-Obamas wandering the streets these days. If they'd only stay out there. . .
The Obamassiah can't seem to cut it without a tele-prompter.
August 17, 2008 - 23:06 ET by R D HelmEvery time I have seen him without one, he seems very unsure of himself as he bumbles and fumbles his way along.
Somewhere right about now, I'm guessing Broom Hilda is is busily waxing her broomstick in near-breathless anticipation. :-)
I know I would be.
-Dave.
Givin' good teleprompter
August 17, 2008 - 23:07 ET by Mike BatesI surprised Axelrod lets BO leave home without it.
McCain, "the happy warrior" Ruled the Evening
August 17, 2008 - 23:11 ET by Delsaand SOBama looked like a thoughtful small minded empty suit with absolutly NO sense of History.
Hopefully, anyone watching could see the difference and is smart enough to make up their own minds as to who the leader was on the stage
McCain rules
August 17, 2008 - 23:13 ET by Mike BatesHopefully, anyone watching could see the difference and is smart enough to make up their own minds as to who the leader was on the stage
I hope many, many people watched it last night.
Hopefully, anyone watching
August 17, 2008 - 23:14 ET by bigtimerHopefully, anyone watching could see the difference and is smart enough to make up their own minds as to who the leader was on the stage
...that's the problem Delsa...they did and the msm knows it....
Doing their best to change that fact...
Desperation mode....the fools.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
A "senior lecturer" does
August 17, 2008 - 23:14 ET by Delsanot a Constitutional attorney make!
Proof affirmative action is alive and well in these United States!
Where is his thesis?
Obama's thesis
August 17, 2008 - 23:16 ET by Mike BatesWhere is his thesis?
I think it was on market forces affecting the price of arugula.
CNN replayed
August 17, 2008 - 23:23 ET by Delsathe entire thing again this evening.
All I know is McCain was good enough to get my brother, a reluctant McCain voter, to call me last night and all but order me to watch the FOX replay.
He liked the way McCain handled himself and he is now an enthusiastic vote for McCain.
May not agree on all issues BUT believes McCain is honest and over flowing with Core values.
Rick Warren is out to sell
August 17, 2008 - 23:30 ET by cocodrieRick Warren is out to sell his books and get speaking engagements, maybe get to be the resident religious expert on CNN. if he upsets liberals they won't buy his books or listen to him speak. Barack Hussein seems thoughtful because he is trying to remember the last lie he told about the question at hand. John McCain is just plodding along being himself.
cocodrie
August 17, 2008 - 23:55 ET by Cool ArrowDo you really think Warren is hurting for speaking engagements?
Obama "thoughtful"? Sure.
Forrest Gump was thoughtful too.
I ♣ my seal
I have some of Rick warren's
August 18, 2008 - 00:57 ET by cocodrieI have some of Rick warren's books thanks to one of the pastors at my church who took a liking to him. Rick inaccurately quotes scripture and I find that his theology is badly flawed. I believe that he has pretty well ridden the christian circuit as far as he can. The liberal pastures look mighty green; he might also consider writing a book called "An Ego Driven Life".
OK
August 18, 2008 - 01:08 ET by Cool ArrowS o it is your claim Pastor Rick is in it for Pastor Rick even with the knowledge he plows 90% of his income into charitable works?
I hope to someday be so egocentric, but as yet haven't the faith for it.
I don't know a lot about the man, but I did witness what I thought to be a fair interview of both candidates heretofore unparalleled.
Those who think Barrabas Obama came across as honest were not going to be swayed with antagonistic followups. Followups would have diverted the focus from Obama's evasive answers to questions of whether Warren were fair.
I ♣ my seal
Exactly
August 18, 2008 - 01:47 ET by MikeknaJExactly.
Warren, and his wife, are anything but what cocodrie describes them as. Just because you don't like his theology does not give you the right to prescribe dishonest motivation and greed to him. He gives away most of the money he makes. You want to know what they did after PDL became a best-seller?
http://www.christian...
How many of us would act the same in that position?
They've used their unexpected fame and wealth to further the work of the church for the Kingdom of God and to reach out to those in need, rather than simply enriching themselves and their friends, as too many sadly often do. There are no gold pianos in their house or at Saddleback and they aren't asking you to send in your paycheck as a seed for an extra blessing.
He may not be perfect, obviously (who is?), but quit bashing him over a soundbyte (and, perhaps, a simple attempt at being gracious) and quit painting him as a charletan when his life shows him to be anything but. I daresay there are few Christian leaders in the public eye outside of Billy Graham who act more Christ-like - with grace, humility, and a stand for Truth - than Pastor Warren.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
http://www.xanga.com/mikeknaj
Mikeknaj
August 18, 2008 - 01:56 ET by Cool ArrowReminds me of the juvenile delinquents who hounded Elisha the prophet with "Go up baldy!", apparently telling him "Let's see you go up in a chariot of fire like Elijah did"
I'm scared of bears, and I'm not ready to call Pastor Rick a charlattan.
I ♣ my seal
Thoughtful answers
August 17, 2008 - 23:40 ET by KC MulvilleObama went to the debate, and when asked questions, he paused to give a "thoughtful" answer. Why? Was this the first time he had ever "thought" about the questions? Why did he have to do his thinking now?
This is just image. He's vogue-ing for the camaras. Obama is trying to project himself as someone who isn't a pure partisan. He wants you to think that the reason he holds certain policy positions is because he's deliberated over both sides, and he has intellectually evaluated all arguments, and that while he may have chosen one conclusion, he respects other arguments.
Now given that I agree that pure partisanship is anti-intellectual, you'd think I'd admire Obama for that approach. But I don't, and here's why: all of his conclusions are liberal, some radically so.
If you want me to believe that you're not a pure ideological partisan, you'd expect him to have some non-liberal positions. He ain't got any. Tugging at his chin and giving halting, stammering answers is therefore just a pretense.
At the very least, he's going to have to offer a thorough discourse on why one idea is better than another. THAT's why "above my pay grade" reveals the lack of substance behind the choreography. If he was truly "thoughtful," why was his answer a refusal to think about the issue? Isn't that a self-contradiction?
Obammy was against the Iraq
August 17, 2008 - 23:50 ET by Captain RepusObammy was against the Iraq war only because he is an anti-war idiolog, regardless of the circumstances.
His anti-war stance was a blind position with no knowledge whatsoever as to the overwhelming intelligence reports those who had the actual RESPONSIBILITY to make these critical decisions were charged with. He would have opposed the war if Saddam Hussein himself had personally signed a confession of responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.
This guy is the equivalent of a margarita without tequila; looks great, lots of color, just the right amount of salt, but won't wind up gettin you laid.
OK, another thoughtful
August 17, 2008 - 23:49 ET by maggieqpublicOK, another thoughtful thought about last night… McCain was very well-prepared, and he came out with a strategy.
McCain’s handlers were certain that Obama would make his usual mealy-mouthed presentation. “Gee, Pastor Rick, I’m really on both sides of this issue.”
McCain was prepared to come out with direct, concise, unequivocal answers, and that proved to be a real ‘turn-on’ to a lot of voters (at least conservatives).
It might not be a bad idea for McCain to continue the same strategy in the upcoming debates…. provide the answer, relinquish the balance of his time, and let Obama talk and talk and talk and talk.
On the other hand, once McCain gives one of his direct answers to an immigration question, I’ll probably swear off voting for him…. for ever.
While we're not as bad as the Kossacks....
August 18, 2008 - 02:58 ET by dydxI swear sometimes we're getting close.
You know...I was there at Saddleback during the forum . After the forum ended Pastor Rick spoke to us about how he wanted to bring "civil" back to civilization. He wanted to show how you can encourage someone to articulate their worldview without having to go all negative.
Today (Sunday) in sermon he said how wonderful it was for each of the candiated to show us who they were without having to attack each other. He talked about the three things that are important in leadership: integrity, humility, and genorosity.And then he asked us to pray for the candidates for those qualities.
You guys get it? Pastor Rick is not going to go negative like you people want him to. He's gonna look at the positive side of things...from the optimistic side of things. If Mother Teresa were to say the say the same of BHO would any of you get your thongs in a bunch? Hmmm? He's not a sour person...and to expect him to be so is...well....projection, isn't it?
He's a pastor and a leader of one of the biggest church in the nation. He's not talk...like some here...he's ACTION. This man and his church alone has done more actual good in this nation and in this world then every single person writing for and reading this website will ever do in 3 lifetimes. And this man did it being exactly the way he is. I would take him over this blog any day. I'd take him over all the blogs combined.
Think about it...the conservative blogosphere and talk radio did not want McCain...I think only Medved didn't think he was a bad candidate. Blogs have some influence....but not a whole lot. They didn't even managed to influence their own party the way they wanted to. So how much influence do they have in the world?
On the other hand...look at Saddleback. Monsterously huge. Incredibly influential. Hell...the President of Rwanda wants his NATION to be a purpose driven nation. He spoke at Saddleback's 25th year anniversary....the friggin' president of a country! He flew in just to speak. Granted...it was a little hard to understand what he was saying...but I'm sure it was all good and positive.
Pastor Rick is a man with many flaws...you know it, I know it, he knows it. But if you look at all the tremendous good he's done and will continue to do, it far outweighs any ticky-tacky flaws the people here so reflexively point out. Far outweighs. He is not above criticism....but please if your gonna heap it do so with at least a modicum of regard to all the good that he's done.
So when I see Michael Bates post this crap about Pastor Rick getting the network memo, about him being a typical drive-by media political analyst, and about him living so high on the hog that the salary for such a position would be too low for him...will it just ticks me off. And then when I read the posts here jumping on that bandwagon...well it sort of diminishes this website in my eyes.
FYI...Pastor Rick said today that 33 years ago, he and his wife decided to tithe the standard 10%. But the next year they upped that to 11%, and then the next year 12%....etc...Some years he would increase it more, some not as much. Today, he's at 90% and says it won't stop there. edit: BTW...from what I understand he doesn't even take a salary from the church.
In light of that...and in light of what Michael Bates and others have said in regards to some avaricious tendencies they somehow see in him...I say you guys have to step back and really see why you really dislike Pastor Rick so much. Kinda reminded me of all the anit-Romney stuff going around. I mean...many here were way to bent out of shape when it came to conjecturing how the forum was going to turn out...and they were wrong. Now it looks like they're looking for more reasons to be pissed off at Pastor Rick.
We don't want to go the way of Kos, Indymedia, and DU, do we?
Solid
August 18, 2008 - 03:12 ET by MikeknaJSolid post. Especially the point about how Warren is, obviously, a PASTOR, and to expect him to go all media-pundit-negative is missing the point of who he is and what he's trying to stand for.
Also, I had originally missed the end of Michael Bates' post, where he too basically accused Warren of greedy motivation. Perhaps Bates should do a little bit of research himself into the subject of his writings to combat some of his own biases - it seems fair to say that he's not a Rick Warren fan. I was shocked when I initially read this article and couldn't believe it was actually published on this site.
I really like NB, and other sites like RedState, but was quite unpleasantly surprised this week to see how negative so many people were about Pastor Warren, and how quick they were to assume the worst about him - before the debate even took place, based upon some random press release. It was very Kos-like, and I would hope that in the future thoughtful conservatives could and would be a little more fair-minded and balanced, and not so quick to pre-judge. Warren was and remains one of the most remarkable pro-life voices in America, on top of the other great work that he does, and it makes zero sense to turn on him so quickly and with so little actual reason to do so.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
http://www.xanga.com/mikeknaj
Mike, in all honesty....it
August 18, 2008 - 04:31 ET by dydxMike, in all honesty....it really does remind me of all the Romney bashing. You know...where it seemed like people were attacking his positions, but I had suspicions that they really didn't like Mormonism and just didn't want to admit it.
With Pastor Rick...dunno...mebbee his M.E. trip to Syria and elsewhere, his books that some think are loosely biblically based, his lack of neckties*, the fact that people actually like what he says and want to do as he asks...dunno.
Could be that his optimism is seen as naivetee (or worse, as in adding an abetting the enemy whether he be the liberal candidate or the leader of Syria)...but to Pastor Rick that optimism is just a manifestion of a deep faith and a deep trust in God. That man is a living embodiment of how far you can go when you put your faith in God. I wish I had half the courage you have to have in order to do so.
COEXIST!!
*as far as attire is concerned....Pastor Rick says he follows the Gilda Radner (R.I.P.) school of fashion: wear anything that doesn't itch...XD....
dydx
August 18, 2008 - 04:41 ET by Cool ArrowThose who say it can't be done need to get out of the way of those who are doing it.
Don't know to whom that quip is attributed, but unless I'm shown otherwise, Warren seems to walk his talk.
I ♣ my seal
Amen to that Cool Arrow...
August 18, 2008 - 13:02 ET by dydxAmen to that...
BTW...I think it was Pastor Rick that came up with that originally
/sycophant mode off
Warren bashing
August 18, 2008 - 09:17 ET by Mike BatesMike, in all honesty....it really does remind me of all the Romney bashing. You know...where it seemed like people were attacking his positions, but I had suspicions that they really didn't like Mormonism and just didn't want to admit it.
It would be tough for me to bash Warren's religion; I don't know what to what denomination he belongs.
Some readers take objection to my referencing Warren's income. Obama mentioned the pastor's book sale income Saturday night, but I've not seen any criticism of that.
I am neither a fan nor an unfan (yeah, I made that word up) of Rick Warren. My post was written because what he said so closely paralleled CNN's earlier observations.
Maybe
August 18, 2008 - 13:03 ET by MikeknaJThat may be true, but since you're a reporter I would think you would have a little more legwork in your reporting and commentary.
It's exactly like the Andrea Kraemer quote - she was just quoting the Obama people, but she's been taking to task because she so quickly and willingly passed it along w/o and regard to how it may or may not be true. You just did the same thing. Even a small bit of research would've told you that your comment on his wealth was totally off-base.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
http://www.xanga.com/mikeknaj
I'm a what?
August 18, 2008 - 13:38 ET by Mike BatesThat may be true, but since you're a reporter. . .
Where did you get that idea?
Gee, you're a real genius*...
August 18, 2008 - 13:34 ET by dydxThat statement was said in jest (uh, the BHO 25 million remark that is), from someone who was not attacking Pastor Rick's character, whom Pastor Rick introduced as a friend. We all laughed at that one...BHO and non-BHO supporters alike. It was funny.
Your statement, however, was at the end of a snarky article that accused Rick of being a CNN stooge of sorts. Not the same thin', Lucy. Not as funny (as BHO or Lucy) either.
BTW...according to Pastor Rick Saddleback belongs to the Southern Baptist Conference....I don't know what that means...but I do see your point of not being sure of his religion. Many of us just call it a Christian church and leave it at that.
*an example of how context is everything. Truly, Mike, not meant to be as mean as it sounds.
It was funny
August 18, 2008 - 13:42 ET by Mike BatesWe all laughed at that one...BHO and non-BHO supporters alike. It was funny.
Not nearly as amusing as Warren's characterization of Obama.
BTW, how did you identify the BHO and non-BHO supporters? Were badges issued?
dydx
August 18, 2008 - 03:25 ET by Cool ArrowI would be one of those disagreeing "thoughtful" equates with Obama's stammering, eyes averted, inventive answers.
But as I said a couple of days ago:
I must admit to being wrong about McCain responding with the rope-a-dope, but I'm happy to conclude now, after the fact, Pastor Rick Warren was not bullied or otherwise intimidated as a moderator in the interviews.
Not all of us were unfair with Warren.
I ♣ my seal
I was plenty fair, but my predictions were plenty right.
August 18, 2008 - 03:55 ET by sarcasmoRick didn't invite/mention any third party candidates, and he didn't ask anything like the tax-tithe question I predicted he wouldn't ask.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
sarc
August 18, 2008 - 04:01 ET by Cool ArrowHow many people understand your tax/tithe question. I haven't read it though I certainly don't doubt you've posted it.
My only question about tax/tithe is "What makes the Government think it deserves more than God, Himself requires?"
I ♣ my seal
My question is like yours
August 18, 2008 - 04:21 ET by sarcasmoBible thumper types talk an awful good game about how church & family are supposedly more important to them than the government. I hear it over & over every election year, but then they keep on voting for politicians who keep passing tax & spending packages which belie this. Which is it? What's the truth?
I've heard, but failed to confirm, that when the individual income tax was originally passed by congress (only for "the rich" of course) an amendment was proposed to keep it under 10%. This was rejected at the time because it was wrongly assumed government would never get so big. Well, it has gotten that big, many times over, in part because of sacred cows the left and right don't want to talk about but some guy called sarcasmo does.
Why is our bloated Federal government three or four times as important by monetary percentage than The Creator Of All Things?? And if it's really not so-important like some people claim, then what government programs are you going to get rid of to bring government back to a level where it's costing Americans less than what God Almighty Himself asks? Doing nothing and cutting no spending simply isn't an option at this point.
Rick Warren would probably put it more-politely, but that might be a start for the unasked tax/tithe question. In fact, IMO the unasked tax/spending question kinda answers why Bob Barr (who is a bit unfamiliar with actually being a Libertarian -- sigh) & Chuck Baldwin were nowhere to be seen that night on "mainstream" network TV or in that enormous megachurch, doesn't it?? Can't have those sheeple* thinking too much about their actual voting options....
JMR
* I know, I shouldn't use this insulting term, but sometimes it's hard to resist given the reality of an obvious media & religious subsidy for the failed US political duopoly, so Warren's parishoners will have to please forgive me for stating what I think is the obvious.
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
Baaaaaaa!!!!!!
August 18, 2008 - 12:52 ET by dydxBeing sheeple ain't so bad. Could be worse. Could be an @$$hole.
BTW...your pet (baaaa!!!) annoyances aren't necessarily others. And third party candidates don't interest the vast, vast majority of peoples (or sheeples). Really.
So to expect long shrift for what very few consider worthy of fighting for instead of the short shrift that it deserves is sorta...uh....narcissistic, dontchya think? My God....the program was long enough with two candidates...and you want to open it up to three or four more? And to expect people to have as much passion for this as you...well....it just doesn't make a lot of sense if you think about it.
And to say that implementing the current tax & spend packages somehow belies church and family is a bit of a stretch too. Right now...because of my mortgage and business deductions and other deductions I actually don't end up paying a lot of federal taxes. Saving a thousand or two a year is not going to undermine anything...Yeah, I could bye some really good amusement park annual passes with that money...but really, not doing so doesn't undermine anything but superficial entertainment. I know ymmv, and there are people whose cirmcumstances are much different, but I'm just saying this as an example of how your pet grievances aren't necessarily others, and hence no reaason for others to get too excited over.
I'ts not because we're blind...it's just not that big a deal.
COOOOOOEXIIIIIIST!!!
Your claim is provably wrong.
August 19, 2008 - 03:22 ET by sarcasmoYou claim, with 0 backup: "third party candidates don't interest the vast, vast majority of peoples (or sheeples). Really."
Zogby says (with polling as backup) "55% of likely voters want to see Bob Barr in the presidential 'debate'." Really. Despite all the media bias I've busted here against libertarians, and despite minimal media coverage at best, they've got 55% -- a majority.
I believe Zogby, not you. Really.
As for tax rates demanded by obese government that far exceed the tithe asked by the church being defended as "pet grievances" and "not so bad," I'll let that speak for itself with those who can read & think for themselves.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
Really?
August 20, 2008 - 05:47 ET by dydxThinking and reading for myself I get this:
Barr gets 6% of the national vote. 55% does not pass the smell test. Come on, sarc.....I bet you that 55% of likely voters don't even know who Bob Barr is.
And I also bet that if you asked people if they would want to include a third party candidate (who has no hope of winning like Barr) in the the general election debates...if it meant that the program would go on much longer or not be as in-depth or both......at least 55% of the peop...uh....sheeple would saaaaayyyy : noooooooooo waaaayyyy
Really.
BTW...Libertarians are sheeple too...(really).
COEXIST!!
note:
I actually wrote the above response a day ago. I decided not to post until I did some "research." So I went out today and spoke to 10 people, all of whom were customers or people who were with my customers. These are people that I met throughout the day, in person or whom I spoke by phone, that were already scheduled appointments or just a random call into the shop. I stopped at 10 to make for easy math.
Know what? Only one of them knew who Bob Barr was. When asked if they were willing to let a third party candidate that was doing three times worse than Ross Perot attend the remaining three debates, 8 said no, 1 said yes...why not?, and the other I either forgot to ask or just forgot what they said (mind you...I'm working while doing this). I'll count that as a yes to be safe. So that's 2 out of 10.
All of the no votes said that it would a waste of time. Some said that it would be nice to hear their ideas...but not that way. Some said it would be distracting.
So...ymmv, of course...but it does comport with intuition. I actually did it out of curiosity...and was willing to eat crow if I were wrong or even close to being wrong. The only thing that slighty took me aback was how many people really didn't know who Bob Barr was when first asked.
Again....55% of the likely voting public wanting Barr to be in the debates is just to whacked to be believe outright.
Really.
"What makes the Government
August 18, 2008 - 14:07 ET by motherbelt"What makes the Government think it deserves more than God, Himself requires?"
Good point, Cool. And you're in good company:
Walter Williams had this to say about Congressional spending:
My personal preference is a constitutional amendment limiting federal
spending to a fixed percentage, say 10 percent, of the GDP. You say,
"Williams, why 10 percent?" My answer is that if 10 percent is good
enough for the Baptist Church, it ought to be good enough for the U.S.
Congress.
Barack is more nuanced.
August 18, 2008 - 04:56 ET by Jack BauerOh -- so now we are back to frigging "nuanced" to describe "liberals."
I don't know where these people keep their dictionaries, but they should try reading them.
They seem to think NUANCED means NOT answering a question but offering a glib, evasive, stupid remark, such as "above my pay grade."
Nuance does NOT mean "thinking things through." NUANCE means "subtle difference in or shade of meaning." I'm sure Mr McCain's answers have been thought through.
What liberals mistakenly mean by "nuanced" is someone with whom they agree.
Though Mr Obama's "tire guage" answer seems to be an example of something not thought through at all.
Mr Obama's opinion on abortion is NOT nuanced. He's for it. At all times. INCLUDING PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. I put this in caps to show just how "un-nuanced" it is.
And this includess letting a born alive baby die, should it actually survive an attempted abortion.
There is NOTHING subtle, or nuanced about that. It's about as in your face as it gets.
Contemplative, conversational, and nuanced...
August 18, 2008 - 13:55 ET by cest moiAt another site, the progressive wonkette quoted the cable news analysts, who viewed the ONE as being contemplative, conversational, and, yes, once again - nuanced.
Like attaching a lead weight to a deflated balloon and calling it gravitas...
What We Need is Lawyer!
August 18, 2008 - 06:24 ET by ChasvsYeah, that's the ticket. A lawyer in the oval office. He'll be thinking things through as the next global crisi rages on!
Thank the Lawyer Bill Clinton for 9/11. What was he thinking through when they were plotting the atack? How to get into Monica's pants?
When lawyers think, we ALL end up geting SCREWED!
Hey Barack, we don't need your stinkin CHANGE!
He thinks about it because he is trying to fool the listener
August 18, 2008 - 08:38 ET by c5thenObama's cop-out non-answer shows his true character (or rather lack of it). Right after talking about being a christian and what it means to him (all very nice and all the correct words and phrases were used) he says that he is pro-choice not because he is pro-abortion, but because he doesn't think that the women make these decisions lightly. OK. Then he says that the question of when life begins and when a baby gets all the human and citizen rights are 'above his pay grade'. What a cop-out!
He is applying for the highest pay grade job in the US government!
He is pro-choice because he thinks that the women agonize and fret over the decision. Fine. I'm sure that they do, most of them. But then they should be allowed to kill the child because they agonize over that decision? IS it OK to kill a 2-year-old because you've spent many months 'agonizing' over the decision? Where is the christian belief and idiology behind this thinking? Hell, where is the Muslim belief and idiology in this thinking? It's not there. This way of thinking is purely secular. Therefore he is someone who doesn't allow his professed religion to influence is foundational idiology. That makes him a pretender and a false believer and a deceiver.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
What's the Purpose?
August 18, 2008 - 08:45 ET by Lee BoggsI knew Saturday, when the former preacher turned political correspondent asked each candidate how his forum would be received, that Warren's purpose in his driven life was to become more than a spiritual leader. Maybe he has the same wordly goal as Obama, supreme ruler.
Student
August 18, 2008 - 08:56 ET by Cool ArrowDoes this mean you thought the interviews were intentionally tailored to benefit Obama?
I'm missing something here, I guess, because what I saw Saturday night was more revealing of both candidates than any forum to date.
I ♣ my seal
cool -- three conservative
August 18, 2008 - 13:49 ET by Jack Bauercool -- three conservative commentators whom I respect and trust have all said they thought the forum was fair, well thought out, and revealing of the candidates views.
That's good enough for me.
"I want my money back for
August 18, 2008 - 09:12 ET by misterbee241"I want my money back for "A Purpose Driven Life."
It's all bullshit, isn't it? "
I didnt worry about getting my money back, I merely sent it to the landfill with the rest of the trash. Besides, you have to pay for an education and my education came at same price as the cost of Purpose Drivel.
And to answer your question - Yes.
Not self conscious at all
August 18, 2008 - 10:27 ET by Andrew H.I'm Christian but not the stereotype kind--more of one who is weary of Preachers and church "leaders"imposing nothing more than what is man's ideas of protocol.
What's your bet?
I certainly lend no credibiliy to the many hucksters calling themselves Preachers or Priests or Ministers.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
Some good news at Forum
August 18, 2008 - 17:41 ET by exLibSome good news that came out of this forum is that the people from Saddleback that listened to Obama's answer about abortion were dead silent and I was feeling like some people were going to boo.
I was extremely disappointed that Warren didn't press Obama on his votes/non-votes on the bills related to children born during botched abortions. It would have been a fair question and would have brought that issue to light. I am sure few people really know about it.
Also, it is an incongruent, as well as totally incomprehensible position to hold that a baby is born at conception and that you "Totally Respect" the people who are against abortion, yet feel it's your duty to ensure that children are aborted at an extremely high rate.
I do not want a truce with people who believe in murder as acceptable from of birth control. And the drivel about "Let's all work together to decrease unwanted pregnancies, now that's something we can ALL get behind". The implication being, of course, is that those who are against abortions do NOTHING to decrease unwanted pregnancies.
Again, if we are talking about strategies to decrease unwanted preganancies, we are about as far apart as two sides can get as to how to accomplish that. One side is against self-control and teaching such, and actually ridicules the opposition for "abstinence only" as antiquated and "impossible". How do you reconcile that?
Jesus certainly didn't compromise on core principles and was ultimately crucified for calling people on their sin. He didn't try for the "middle ground". God is even quoted as saying "If you are luke-warm I will spit you out of my mouth". God wants you to pick a side!!
Badges? We don't need to wear no stinkin' badges....
August 19, 2008 - 05:34 ET by dydxWe were forbidden to wear anything that was pro either candidate.
You could tell who was what based on who applauded at what. The folks in front of me were obvious BHO supporters. There didn't seem to be a whole lot.