Open Thread | NewsBusters.org

<a href="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&c=a054f5f7-e081-2c1c-3bdc-5deb2d418cd2" target="_blank"><img src="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&w=728&h=90&c=a054f5f7-e081-2c1c-3bdc-5deb2d418cd2" width="728" height="90" border="0" /></a>
home blogs about forum contact search account “Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”


Open Thread By NB Staff (Bio \| Archive) January 16, 2008 - 10:21 ET For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Mitt takes Michigan. How do you see Romney's victory last night impacting the campaign? Is there a GOP frontrunner in your mind, or is this race as wide open as it can be? Also, with Mitt getting his first win, how will a Romney-hating media cover the story? Read comments <a href="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&c=122c344b-04b3-4b68-bb30-20e7a66bc14c" target="_blank"><img src="http://harvest.AdGardener.com/noscript.aspx?s=16&w=468&h=60&c=122c344b-04b3-4b68-bb30-20e7a66bc14c" width="468" height="60" border="0" /></a> Related Stories RNC Open Thread Open Thread RNC Day Three Open Thread Open Thread GOP Convention Open Thread Most Emailed Stories Gingrich Slams MSNBC's Allen Concerning Palin's Qualifications Campbell Brown Interview Leads McCain to Cancel CNN Appearance 'Dr. Phil' Chastises Letterman's Deriding of Palin's Bad Parenting Us Magazine Launches Tabloid Style Attack On Sarah Palin Obama and Fox News: 'Tentative Truce?' Related Topics Open Thread Comments Policy All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters. Viewing options Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes. }}---> Romney ridin' high January 16, 2008 - 10:28 ET by Cool Arrow Looks like Mitt's gonna carry the flag this election cycle. Fred better get moving if he wants the Republicans to keep the White House. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page Let's hope.... January 16, 2008 - 10:47 ET by Prester John ....the good people of South Carolina think the same thing and act accordingly. Login or register to post comments Email this page Romney/Thompson - our next January 16, 2008 - 11:38 ET by TruthMonger Romney/Thompson - our next administration... read and weep, oh corrupt and despised MSM:) Login or register to post comments Email this page How about January 16, 2008 - 11:42 ET by Prester John Thompson/Romney (actually I'd prefer Hunter for VP but I'm willing to negotiate). Mitt is young enough to wait a few more years. Login or register to post comments Email this page if Fred had executive January 16, 2008 - 12:24 ET by TruthMonger if Fred had executive experience this would work - but alas, no:) he qualifies just fine for veep, tho... it's a nicely balanced north-south ticket - a winner - probably the only Repub ticket that could win... Login or register to post comments Email this page → Wish it were true TM January 16, 2008 - 11:42 ET by Cool Arrow But we've basically got nothing but business as usual candidates. November will find the onyx ceiling shattered and we'd better hope we've got a Republican Congress. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page neither leading Dem can win January 16, 2008 - 12:28 ET by TruthMonger neither leading Dem can win the nation - impossible... Obama has zilch real-world qualifications - same with Hillary... the MSM can ignore it now if they wish - but the voters will not on election day I promise you... Real conservatives need to grow some pairs and they will take back congress and keep it for a long long time - as Rush keeps saying - just be conservative and talk about it ad nauseum - the MSM can't hurt you now... Login or register to post comments Email this page → I see your point Truthie January 16, 2008 - 12:41 ET by Cool Arrow But a big split is forming in the Republican party. You're seeing it right here in this blog. We're not satisfied to disagree with Ron Paul. We have to demean, belittle, and lampoon his followers as unwelcome members. Same with a very large demographic, evangelicals. The term is used as an insult more often than not. That's why I make it a point to refer to Bishop Romney often. There is a lot of insulting rhetoric floating around and a lot of votes taken for granted. Yes, it bothers me that the loudest Republican voices claim the only kind of Conservative is the Fiscal Conservative. Right now you're busy defending Mitt's flip-flopping on social issues. If his flip-flops were on economic issues you wouldn't be so forgiving. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page I'm not defending Mitt - January 16, 2008 - 14:04 ET by TruthMonger I'm not defending Mitt - you made an un-founded accusation and offered a lame example - Mitt needs no defense from me... Mitt is not my ideal, he's simply the best choice I have at this point - such is the state of the Republican party... list all the "flips" if you like - I've been following Mitt for a couple of years now before he even entered the race and have yet to see a problem... and if he is indeed a flipper as you say he is still probably the best qualified candidate - I fail to see the flipping problem at this point - I do see communication problems - but all the candidates suffer that - Fred probably the least... Login or register to post comments Email this page "...the loudest Republican January 16, 2008 - 14:56 ET by MikeB "...the loudest Republican voices claim the only kind of Conservative is the Fiscal Conservative." In that case, CA, there would not be any Ron Paul detractors here. Most of us opposed to Ron Paul are opposed because his foreign policy is dangerous, perhaps fatal to this country. Paul's foreign policy, if enacted would also bring economic ruin to this country. The Republican Party has frequently, if not always been a battleground of ideas. If you want a monolith of homogeneous ideas, look at the Democrat Party pols...soak the rich, reward sloth, tear down the military, murder babies not yet born, tear down religion (except when you need the religious to further other goals), enact marxism. "A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan Login or register to post comments Email this page 1,191 Delegates Required to Win Repub. Convention January 16, 2008 - 12:30 ET by JayTee Guys (and Gals) we is a lonnnggg way away........NH doesn't set Republican Standards, and neither does Blue State Michigan, or 50/50 Iowa. You're falling Victim of the MSM Crystal ball Mentality......It ain't over until its over. The VP has to Bring in VOTES, and Tenn. is a guarantee, so Thompson has no value as a VP. The Only thing a VP is good for, besides Votes, is someone the MSM can hate, and someone who makes daily inquiries into the health of the Current President. "Barack Obama is a Powerful Speaker—And so is My Bose Bass Amp" Doug Giles Login or register to post comments Email this page JT -- how many votes did January 16, 2008 - 12:35 ET by Jack Bauer JT -- how many votes did Dick Cheney bring? Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me! Login or register to post comments Email this page Dick Cheney brought the Deer Hunter vote, January 16, 2008 - 13:08 ET by JayTee I see your points on VP, but will Romney bring Mass. or NY votes with him ? Thompson may still sweep, as the Republican party is Split between Social Conservatives, religious Right, and everyone else, someone has to Unify, and it may be the Convention FIGHT that decides, not Hew Hampshire. "Barack Obama is a Powerful Speaker—And so is My Bose Bass Amp" Doug Giles Login or register to post comments Email this page Al part deux January 17, 2008 - 10:43 ET by Agnostic Remember due to states violating rules set forth by the Republican Party there are approximately 100 delagates (half of the approx. 200) that can be applied nearly any way the convention leaders want to apply them. That could create a moment to make Al Gore seem like a gracious winner. Login or register to post comments Email this page Thompson brings the south - January 16, 2008 - 12:36 ET by TruthMonger Thompson brings the south - not just Tennessee:) Login or register to post comments Email this page Electable January 16, 2008 - 10:48 ET by TBAR I am so disappointed that Conservatives have allowed the MSM to dictate who is or is not electable this year. Instead of looking at just who is a real Conservative, we are inundated with information on who the MSM thinks and wants to be the leading candidates. Big $ and perceived values trumps core conservative ideals. Several of the 2nd tier candidates are more in keeping with true conservative values than the front running Republicans. Guess I will have to hold my nose and hope for the best, come November. Life is too short to be serious Login or register to post comments Email this page just because they broadcast January 16, 2008 - 11:39 ET by TruthMonger just because they broadcast their crap doesn't mean we let them do anything... the writer's strike proves nobody is watching anymore... everyone reads NB now:) Login or register to post comments Email this page Agreed...Fred hasn't been January 16, 2008 - 10:57 ET by tater Agreed...Fred hasn't been doing too well and is probably needing a good showing in South Carolina. Still given so far it's been Huck, McCain, and Romney as the frontrunners...I'd have to side most with Romney...mostly because Popular Tech hasn't come up with a laundry list of things Romney has been shady about ;). Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns Login or register to post comments Email this page → tater January 16, 2008 - 10:59 ET by Cool Arrow Maybe it's because PopTech is a Bishop Romney supporter. It's possible. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page me thinks you and I have January 16, 2008 - 11:04 ET by vrwc13 me thinks you and I have seen the same pattern! v "…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Login or register to post comments Email this page Say and think what you want about Romney... January 16, 2008 - 11:15 ET by AJSHOPE but he is 1,000 times better than Ron Paul, Huckabee, or McCain. Being an evangelical Christian, I don't agree with Mormonism; however, this election is too important to be that petty. If someone will appoint constitutionalists to the Supreme Court, if someone will keep taxes low to help stimulate the economy, if someone will do what it takes to keep our country safe, if someone will do something regarding the illegal immigration issue, then that someone will get my vote. Romney, Thompson, Hunter and Guiliani (he says) would all do this. One of the four is an extreme long shot and another two need to get something going pretty quick and then the last one is now the undisputed front runner. Again, this election is too important to be so ridiculously petty about something. Unfortunately my grandparents are this way (or at least they were the last time I spoke with them), they don't want a Mormon is office and they are slobbering all over Huckabee. Not me. I'm not a Mormon and I don't agree with the Mormon doctrine, but I'm also not a moron. Login or register to post comments Email this page I don't agree with January 16, 2008 - 11:19 ET by tater I don't agree with Mormonism either as a Catholic but someone who says they are a Mormon wouldn't scare me off as a voter. Somebody with Islam or Islamic ties though...no way. Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns Login or register to post comments Email this page Oh I agree... January 16, 2008 - 11:23 ET by AJSHOPE in fact I was going to mention that, but I forgot. However, there is a difference. We haven't been fighting Mormon's, Jehovah Wittnesses, or even atheists in the war on terror. Login or register to post comments Email this page or true Muslims either - January 16, 2008 - 11:40 ET by TruthMonger or true Muslims either - just terrorists:) Login or register to post comments Email this page Yeah right TruthMonger January 16, 2008 - 11:44 ET by Cool Arrow Keep thinking the happy thoughts. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page just like Jesus:) will January 16, 2008 - 11:54 ET by TruthMonger just like Jesus:) will do... Login or register to post comments Email this page Huh? Do you even know January 16, 2008 - 12:14 ET by AJSHOPE Huh? Do you even know anything about Jesus or the Bible? Jesus was very forceful and straight forward with idolators (i.e. worshipping other gods) as well as hypocritical Jews of His time. He was softer on the sinner that didn't really have any religious belief because most of the time the sinner didn't know any better, but once they did and they continued to sin, then He was very forceful (scolding more or less) and was not happy. Also, if you read the Koran and understand the way it was written, you would see that the terrorists are the true Muslims, not the other way around. Login or register to post comments Email this page i know a bit, yeah - for January 16, 2008 - 12:30 ET by TruthMonger i know a bit, yeah - for instance Jesus gave us the heroic Samaritan parable - just replace the word "Samaritan" with the word "Muslim" for contemporary reference - it'll take some courage - but I believe you can do it... Login or register to post comments Email this page Huh? Islam wasn't even January 16, 2008 - 12:52 ET by AJSHOPE Huh? Islam wasn't even created until the 7th century... Login or register to post comments Email this page the point is Jesus made a January 16, 2008 - 14:07 ET by TruthMonger the point is Jesus made a despised group (Samaritans) heroic in that parable - so who do you despise right now? Just insert whoever is applicable then to get the message... Login or register to post comments Email this page Jesus often said peace be January 16, 2008 - 12:17 ET by tater Jesus often said peace be with you...not happiness be with you. I would think Jesus would of had more peaceful thoughts than happy thoughts. Where in the Koran does it say that? Or how many Muslims practice that? Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns Login or register to post comments Email this page the short and plainly January 16, 2008 - 12:34 ET by TruthMonger the short and plainly obvious story is that the vast majority of Muslims do not practice terrorism as it is against their religion - regardless of your non-Muslim interpretations of the Koran... for quick reference you can equate modern "Islamic" terrorists with WW2 "Christian" Nazi's as an example... Or do you consider WW2 Nazi's true Christians...? Login or register to post comments Email this page Hugs and kisses... January 16, 2008 - 14:53 ET by Sua Sponte 75 "the short and plainly obvious story is that the vast majority of Muslims do not practice terrorism as it is against their religion" You should keep this as your tag line and indication of the absolute cluelessness you maintain. So I imagine that just looking the other way is not supporting it? Practice terrorism? Heh, well if you cast your eyes to http://newsbusters.o... and you might want to reconsider the "not practicing" part. Your logic of equation is beyond comical at best. The little qwips about "non-muslim" interpretation shows the bottom line on how you can not even debate logically for the ones you shrill for. Again with the Nazi/Christian comparison? Heh, just in case you didn't know, Nazism is nationalistic, the god is the government/dictator/country. How, when you somehow misconstrue the two is beyond understanding. Keep up the apologetics, it’s fitting…. "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem" Login or register to post comments Email this page yah right - whatever you January 16, 2008 - 15:23 ET by TruthMonger yah right - whatever you say then man - good argument... Deny if you wish Nazi's were Christian - blessed by the pope and protestant leaders - and were much closer to taking over the world than al-queda will ever be... I understand you deny this - fine - go ahead... Muslims are no where near taking over the world - and you would be hard pressed to find a Muslim that truly supports or practices terrorism EVEN IN BAGHDAD RIGHT NOW... Again I understand that you deny - fine - go ahead... I know you can't refute this beyond a few web links - instead you wish to ridicule me - fine - go ahead... I work with anti-US Muslims on a weekly basis and they do not support terrorism... I have visited with them all over the globe - they do not support terrorism any more than Christians support the Nazi's or the KKK - both who claim to be Christian... I understand you deny this - fine - go ahead... Login or register to post comments Email this page TM, can we deny this if we January 16, 2008 - 15:38 ET by tracheostomy TM, can we deny this if we have the facts laid out, or will you continue to assert regardless of additional information? Are you even willing to listen? "Nazi's were Christian - blessed by the pope and protestant leaders -" Wow. Just. . .wow. That is quite the bold assertion and is worthy of its own thread. -PJ "Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 Login or register to post comments Email this page it's belief and January 16, 2008 - 18:40 ET by TruthMonger it's belief and interpretation - we all proceed based on the same "facts" - it's not really a matter of listening - otherwise I could simply assert that you ignore my facts and refuse to listen as well - then it becomes a stale mate... You deny that Nazi's were Christians and had the blessings of their Christian leaders - including the pope? Italy was a German ally... You actually deny all of this?! Login or register to post comments Email this page I made a new thread about January 16, 2008 - 18:44 ET by tracheostomy I made a new thread about it. Wanna hear it? Here it go. . .! http://newsbusters.org/forums/topic-discussion/nazis-christians-18512 It's more open-minded than you think. I'm kindly asking you to cough up or shut up. -PJ "Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 Login or register to post comments Email this page LOL truthie... January 16, 2008 - 15:54 ET by Sua Sponte 75 It is a good arguement, simply because you can't even come up with any sort of logical rebutal whatsoever and never have provided any sort of viable factual counter arguement. All you can do is repeat the Nazi/Christan thing over and over again, then you can't even provide backing to that. Deny? You truly are of clownmanship stature. As with your denial of the facts I back up? And yours is backed up with....hugs, teddy bears and apologetics. Yes you've been refuted with MANY links, time and time again so let's rethink that whole deny thing. "and were much closer to taking over the world than al-queda will ever be.." The concept or the central base? "and you would be hard pressed to find a Muslim that truly supports or practices terrorism EVEN IN BAGHDAD RIGHT NOW" I'll have to remember that the next time my section gets hit with an IED.... "Muslims are no where near taking over the world" So what's witht the big stacks of bodies they are leaving everywhere for? "I work with anti-US Muslims on a weekly basis and they do not support terrorism" anti-U.S. muslims that don't support terrorism? Oh my, you've visited with them all over the globe and work with them, wow. Unfortunately taking a tour package doesn't measure up. Please, I've spent more time in the ME than I care to remember...and you've "talked" to a few, well wonderful for you...oh and they "told you" they do not support terrorism, well that wraps this all up. I don't have to ridicule you, you're doing just fine on your own "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem" Login or register to post comments Email this page Apologies to Sua and the January 16, 2008 - 16:10 ET by tracheostomy Apologies to Sua and the rest of the NB crew. . .I wasn't aware this was brought up once already. :glaring at TM: -PJ "Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 Login or register to post comments Email this page No need trach... January 16, 2008 - 16:24 ET by Sua Sponte 75 He's a chickenwire canoe..... "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem" Login or register to post comments Email this page I can provide tons of January 16, 2008 - 18:48 ET by TruthMonger I can provide tons of backing - the Nazi's were Christian - I am a Christian fundie and even I can admit that - it's all over the history books - and the net - I could crash the NB server with links - wouldn't even matter to you tho I can tell - I've been down this route before with deniers... And yet you want Muslims to go way out of their way when they condemn their whackos with elaborate condemnation productions everywhere and what have you - it's never enough for you - and at the same time you can't even bring yourself to even just admit the naked truth about the Nazi's Christianity - which largely helped justify their anti-Semitism and final solution...? ...so your message to Muslims is do as you say, not as you do? How deliciously ironic... You get one link - the rest is up to you - unless you pay me to educate you on the rest - learning ain't free, easy, or spoon-fed to adults:) http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm Login or register to post comments Email this page I could crash the NB server January 16, 2008 - 18:55 ET by tracheostomy I could crash the NB server with links - wouldn't even matter to you tho I can tell - Don't be too assumptive. You know I'd love to read 'em all. You've known me long enough to know that my motive isn't necessarily to campaign for my beliefs, but also to analyze (and deconstruct) those of others. I'm reading your link right now. Why don't we take this to the OT thread? I'd hate to be the only one filling it with my own posts. -PJ "Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 Login or register to post comments Email this page if you like - I'm always January 16, 2008 - 19:10 ET by TruthMonger if you like - I'm always game... don't expect a ton of links from me however - if the link above does not impress I have no interest in converting deniers... I'm done with free educations around here... Login or register to post comments Email this page But TM, I must object. January 16, 2008 - 20:06 ET by tracheostomy But TM, I must object. Why are you closing class all of a sudden on account of lil' ol' me? How about just a link to your previous "classes" here, hm? Please? -PJ "Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 Login or register to post comments Email this page The nazi's were not January 16, 2008 - 19:04 ET by BD The nazi's were not actually Christian. Most of their official ceremonies were in fact based on paganism and the Heirarchy sought to bring Germany back to a Pre-Christianity paganism. Not that I really care.... Just had to get the historical perspective in... Login or register to post comments Email this page and so like I say - al January 16, 2008 - 19:14 ET by TruthMonger and so like I say - al queda ain't actually Muslims, either... they really like it when you guys buy into it, however:) incidentally modern American Christianity is rife with a ton of paganism itself isn't it? Christ was not born in December, and the "Easter" services at thousands of our local churches remain intact at this time... Login or register to post comments Email this page WTH? January 17, 2008 - 01:45 ET by Sua Sponte 75 What the heck does that have to do with anything? This is the game you play, get smacked with the facts and go into derail mode...well played. Heh. "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem" Login or register to post comments Email this page dude - your density is January 17, 2008 - 13:40 ET by TruthMonger dude - your density is approaching breathtaking here:) are you blogging from pre-school somewhere? Login or register to post comments Email this page What's ironic.. January 17, 2008 - 01:29 ET by Sua Sponte 75 All this time you spend on your so called "facts" and still crickets....Denier again? You're the same person who refuses to acknowledge the facts on your religion of peace even when undeniable facts are presented constantly. Your response-----Nazis....What is it with you people and Nazis? Well you should know, some of their biggest fans were of the religion of peace, but you'll just ignore that. Do as I say not as I do? You are a clown. Yea, I'm running around cutting heads off and sending in suicide bombers against women and children all in the name of my religion...you're out of your league clown boy. You're going to educate me...that's a good one. "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem" Login or register to post comments Email this page good one, man - that's you January 17, 2008 - 13:06 ET by TruthMonger good one, man - that's you all right - the name-calling strategery - clown boy - well you really got me there! very impressive argument...boy am i shacked - gosh darn... that sure does prove that the Nazi's were not Christian after all - you have shown us all - no arguing there... oh, well...i will go back to the library and try to work my way up to your level of expertise on this - if I can - boy, it's going to be a lot of hard work and thinking... I'll start with the "clown boy" material - where did you get that one - Mad Magazine December 1976? Login or register to post comments Email this page what an absolute joke this gets to be... January 16, 2008 - 19:05 ET by TruthMonger damn how I have to suffer you spiritual ignorants on a daily basis around here... is this supposed to be your rebuttal? Is this your expertise on global Islam - you serve in Iraq as a soldier? Are you even a chaplain or is your does your expert knowledge likely reside somewhere outside of theology? Are you even an officer educated on the nuances of local Muslim culture at that level - or do you just recieve the enlisted curriculum? About 15% of the world's Muslims live in the entire ME - of which a fraction reside in Iraq - of which a fraction reside in the DMZ's - of which a tiny fraction hate the US (aptly demonstrated on NB constantly) - of which a small fraction support terrorism - of which a small fraction actually participate in terrorism... Ask any WW2 expert how close the allies were to losing WW2 - it was a race won by a nose - and the Nazi's organization at it's military height 60 YEARS AGO was light years beyond the capability of these pathetic al-queda yokels cowering as we speak in their ghetto "cell locations" and podunk 3rd-world caves... Have you been to the rest of the ME and talk to the otehr 15% of the world's Muslims? How about Asia? Australia? Europe? Africa? Any of the major pockets of Islam in your own damn home country? Get that done and then you can at least debate with me as a peer me on Islam - surpass that and then you can lecture me... Login or register to post comments Email this page Truth denier... January 17, 2008 - 01:43 ET by Sua Sponte 75 Once again, no substance....I continue to provide backing and proof, you continue to provide apolgetics. Let's see, Bosnia, Herzegovino, Moroco, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Kosovo, Croatia, Lebonon, Maylasia, Egypt, Iraq, Saudi, Djibouti, Afghanistan, Phillipines, Turkey, Kuwait, UAE, Somalia, Eritria, Qatar, Sudan, Chad...that enough for you, that's just scraping the surface. A FRACTION of muslims live in Iraq, you are loopy. You want a schooling, then start a thread, I notice you gave up before when you couldn't side-step the facts... "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem" Login or register to post comments Email this page Not sure who that was directed toward... January 16, 2008 - 12:48 ET by AJSHOPE However, if it was towards me, you have to realize that the Koran was written in two different time periods and there is a method of reading and understanding the Koran. Unfortunately unlike the Bible, which is organized and fairly easy to understand, the Koran is not. Islam is also based on progressive revelation, whereas Christianity is not. In Christianity God is the same God, always. In Islam, allah changes his mind all the time. The Koran is supposed to be read and understood in the context that everything written after Mohammed's "encounter with an angel from allah" is to override what was written before. At first Mohammed had a true genuine want and desire to be at peace with and live side by side with Christians and Jews, however that changed after his visit from an "angel from allah." So all of the kill the Jews and Christians verses that you read in the Koran were written after his encounter with the "angel." Unfortunately, like I said before, the Koran isn't written in a "old testament - new testament" fashion, the verses from the peaceful times and the revenge times are all mixed together, so you have to check to see when they were written to see if it's supposed to be followed or not. If it was written during the peaceful times, then more than likely you will find a verse that contradicts it. Login or register to post comments Email this page Muslims understand Mohammed January 16, 2008 - 14:12 ET by TruthMonger Muslims understand Mohammed to just be re-affirming the original God of Abraham, Noah, etc - they believe the Jews corrupted via Jacob and Esau, and that and the Christians are just based upon that Jewish corruption... I don't agree with them, but I do understand their logic... Login or register to post comments Email this page Did you even read my post? January 17, 2008 - 09:23 ET by AJSHOPE Did you even read my post? Yeah at first he was... then he was visited by an "angel from allah" aka demon and all of that changed. He started writing more and more about killing Jews and Christians and he claimed that Jesus was not the Son of God. Learn the facts buddy. I've been doing extensive research on Islam even before 9/11/2001. Login or register to post comments Email this page → AJSHOPE January 16, 2008 - 11:23 ET by Cool Arrow You could also be buying in to just another flip flop flip. He could change his mind about important issues again for all we know. We can whistle past that graveyard if it makes us feel safer, but the evidence is that Romney changes his mind every time he seeks another office. Doesn't bode well for those who want a staunch defender. There are a couple of problem questions Bishop Romney hasn't answered yet, and he won't even be asked them until it's established that Obama is his opponent. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page So at worse we would have a January 16, 2008 - 11:42 ET by AJSHOPE So at worse we would have a Dem-lite... That would be a problem... however, the difference is that at least Romney has shown that he can change and he is at least saying the right things. Huckabee and McCain on the other hand are sounding exactly like the Democrats (save the abortion issue and in McCain's case the Iraq war/war on terror issue). Now theoretically that shouldn't be bad because that would just make it easy for people to see that they aren't the ones to vote for, but it's NOT happening that way. People are being taken in by one or two issues or by titles (Christian, minister, etc) instead of looking at the entire spectrum. Someone even called into Rush yesterday saying that regardless of who gets the nomination we should vote for him because he will appoint constitutionalists to the Supreme Court. That's all well and good, but that's not the only issue. How do we know that McCain and Huckabee won't find someone who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade but agrees with amnesty and global warming? We already know that those two agree with those issues. Let us not forget that McCain "flip flopped" on amnesty as well. Login or register to post comments Email this page what is this about Mitt January 16, 2008 - 11:45 ET by TruthMonger what is this about Mitt flip-flops...? I am intrigued... Login or register to post comments Email this page → Here's one Truthie January 16, 2008 - 11:52 ET by Cool Arrow Having stated he has never supported pro-abortion legislation, it has now been revealed Bishop Romney's Massachussetts Health care plan included $50 copay on abortions. So he lied? So what? So he's trying to have it both ways? I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page did he support that measure January 16, 2008 - 11:56 ET by TruthMonger did he support that measure of the plan? or oppose it? Login or register to post comments Email this page Truthie January 16, 2008 - 12:00 ET by Cool Arrow Did he veto it or sign it? Here's a hint: He signed it. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page doesn't mean he supported January 16, 2008 - 12:10 ET by TruthMonger doesn't mean he supported it now does it - looks like he opposed it as I suspected... and your trying to extrapolate him into a flip-flopper based on this...? So when did he flip back, and forth, and back, and forth over the last few months on this then...? looks like he did revisit his position recently and has become more conservative on it...this is a good explanation: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7482.html if he becomes pro-abortion again next week like Kerry would and then pro-life again one week after that then it's safe to say you can call him a classic Kerry-style flipper... also seems that anti-Mormon bigots are not giving him fair consideration and he has attempted to over-sell his abortion record as pro-life - it's his mistake to do that - and he seems to be owning up to it now - just because bigots are against him doesn't mean he should polish his record as a response - he can't change their bigotry that way - think he has learned that now... If you're looking for the perfect candidates then good luck - never has been one ever... Mitt's not perfect - just the best of the bunch... Abortion will fall by the works of more then just the president - even a pro-lifer can't stop it now... The boomers are the problem - and the sooner they croak the sooner the original murder laws will be re-instated... Login or register to post comments Email this page → Good try Truthie January 16, 2008 - 12:14 ET by Cool Arrow So his signature means nothing to you. Why should his word mean anything? I'm starting to wonder where the nick "TruthMonger" comes from. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page his executive January 16, 2008 - 12:43 ET by TruthMonger his executive signature means something, yes - but not pro-abortion by a long shot, sorry - feel free to run with it tho if you want to Since when has any governor or president signed legislation that was absolutely exactly what he or she wanted? Your notion is completely ridiculous - it has to work in the real world as well - not just your head... Mitt opposed this measure - and kept it to a minor $50 co-pay - I'm sure his opponents wanted full abortion funding at some fantastic spa/retreat - but he resisted and at least kept it miniscule if not removed entirely as I'm sure he tried - and in the people's republic of Massachussett's I'd call that a huge pro-life victory... and you want to try and extrapolate that into pro-abortion? flip-flopping? as I said go ahead and try - it will be fun to watch:) Login or register to post comments Email this page → Tap Dancing Truthie January 16, 2008 - 12:53 ET by Cool Arrow Like I said, Bishop Romney's trying to have it both ways. (and so is Truthie) Mitt is bragging about his Health Care package on the campaign trail, but Truthie clams it's not fair to question the specifics of that legislation. No truth to your argument Truthie. You'd argue OJ is against murder. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page Real good dance, beats your argument January 16, 2008 - 13:00 ET by PawpawN I think Truth gotcha there. Dance is a lot better than your argument. And Truth's got the right partner! Login or register to post comments Email this page → Love is blind January 16, 2008 - 13:34 ET by Cool Arrow Anyone who chooses to say they believe $50 copay Abortions is anti-Abortion legislation is free to do so. But saying so doesn't make it true. By the way, Truthie. Are you assuming $50 out of pocket is an expensive abortion? No surprise here. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page CA, I'm for Thompson, so I January 16, 2008 - 15:08 ET by MikeB CA, I'm for Thompson, so I have no dog in this fight. But, I'm gonna ask: if the $50 co-pay for abortions had been a stand alone bill, do you think Romney would have signed it, or vetoed it? I think he would have vetoed it. Even Reagan signed spending bills that he didn't like because the Democrat controlled Congress told him take it or leave it. The bills contained the items he thought vital to the nation, and Congress tacked on a doodoo load of earmarks onto the bills. Then the Democrats had/have the audacity to bellyache about the "Reagan deficits" that they, the Democrats were responsible for. "A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan Login or register to post comments Email this page Reagan really wanted the January 16, 2008 - 15:44 ET by TruthMonger Reagan really wanted the line item veto created - even Repubs wouldn't back him for fear of future Dem presidents... This is where we get the "health bills" and "education bills" that always seem to include $500 million dollar highways and bridges in West Virginia (right Sen. Byrd?)... So go ahead and oppose the highway - you are now officially against health care and education everytime your opponents go on TV - and for Repubs that's a hell of a lot of the time:)... Login or register to post comments Email this page The anti-Mitt forces don't believe in Realpolitik January 16, 2008 - 12:56 ET by RJ "politics based on practical and material factors rather than on theoretical or ethical objectives" Was Mitt facing a veto-proof majority, like the Dems have here in CT? Did he get the best deal he could before signing? Any MA posters know about this? Login or register to post comments Email this page What? RJ January 16, 2008 - 13:01 ET by Cool Arrow Did Bishop Romney sign it? Nuff said. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page Romney states he personally January 16, 2008 - 13:06 ET by tater Romney states he personally is pro-life but politically is pro-choice in that he supports the current law. He also said he would overturn Roe v. Wade. He's a moderate in that fact IMO. But if it's him vs. Hillary or Obama when it comes to abortion, you better bet I'd vote for Romney. Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns Login or register to post comments Email this page → tater? January 16, 2008 - 13:15 ET by Cool Arrow What you've just described as Romney's position sounds a lot like Hillary's "safe, legal, and rare". I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page CA believe me Mitt isn't my January 16, 2008 - 13:19 ET by tater CA believe me Mitt isn't my first or second choice but unlike Hillary, Mitt has stated he sides on the side of life (ever hear Hil say that?). Obama is the first to vote yes for anything that involves killing a baby. I understand Mitt might be seeing the light when it comes to being pro-life politically but I'd rather see him come out and state that he is firmly for life. Basically I would cringe but if those are the choices Romney is better than those two. Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns Login or register to post comments Email this page AAAAHHH, I'm SO conficted. January 16, 2008 - 13:15 ET by AJSHOPE I agree with Cool Arrow and clearly disagree with truthmonger about the Muslim/terrorist issue... but at the same time I disagree with Cool Arrow and agree with truthmonger about the Romney/abortion issue. I'm not happy that Romney signed a bill like that, but it's not Alabama we're talking about. He was governor of one of the most liberal states in the union and yet he got some conservative issues into that state. I believe he may show his true conservative feelings if he becomes President because he'll be backed by a lot more conservative people. Being a republican governor in a state like MA is like being a Christian in China, you have to tread lightly and not be too anti-establishment, otherwise you'll get killed. Login or register to post comments Email this page In other words...comprimise? January 16, 2008 - 13:22 ET by vrwc13 In other words...comprimise? Or patronize? v No patronizing here: "Faith doesn't just influence me. It really defines me. I don't have to wake up every day wondering what do I need to believe," Huckabee says in the ad. "Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody's politics. Not now, not ever." Login or register to post comments Email this page unfortunately abortion is January 16, 2008 - 15:49 ET by TruthMonger unfortunately abortion is not a big part of even a pro-lifer's legislative day - so Mitt will have little time and influence regarding it one way or the other - the president has a nice big pulpit - but the actual power to re-instate murder laws must come from many, many other quarters... we probably need the baby-killing boomers to start croaking before we can really make any big headway - could be another 20 to 30 years at least... Login or register to post comments Email this page Maybe not... January 16, 2008 - 15:59 ET by AJSHOPE Maybe they'll still have some influence, but by now a lot of them can't have babies anyway, so they won't be getting pregnant and then going to get an abortion. So in that sense, the rate should have already come down and should continue to come down before they have to outright die. It depends on how much influence the baby boomers have on the younger generation (like me and my wife, soon to be 25 yr old male and soon to be 21 yr old female who don't believe in abortion). Login or register to post comments Email this page → Thanks AJSHOPE January 16, 2008 - 13:23 ET by Cool Arrow But these same people giving Bishop Romney a pass on $50 Abortions refuse to listen to Rev.Huckabee's explanation that the Ark. Supreme Court forced him to raise taxes. Seems to be a lot of selective apologists in here. I ♣ My Seal Login or register to post comments Email this page Sounds like "double January 16, 2008 - 13:26 ET by vrwc13 Sounds like "double standards" to me... Thanks for pointing that out Cool! v "…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Login or register to post comments Email this page i can accept that from January 16, 2008 - 13:51 ET by TruthMonger i can accept that from huckabee:) but he's still a crack pot Login or register to post comments Email this page President Crack Pot...hmmm January 16, 2008 - 14:00 ET by vrwc13 President Crack Pot...hmmm has sort of a Biblical ring to it doesn't it? Singing "You are the potter I am the clay"! v Login or register to post comments Email this page That's not the only reason I don't like Huckabee January 16, 2008 - 13:33 ET by AJSHOPE And besides, that right there is the problem... he allowed the court to direct what he as the Executive of his state did. Instead of cutting government that wasn't needed, he had to raise taxes? Also, as a supporter of amnesty, I don't think he would be against raising taxes again. How would he pay for all of the illegal immigrants schooling? And he's not in the majority of Christians that believe homeschooling should be a right and private religious schooling should be a right. He wants big government schools and is against homeschooling and vouchers. Most Christians want everything that he is against and don't want anything that he is for (except for the whole abortion issue). So who exactly is compro