The depraved state of US politics

[waitforufo]

In all honesty, much of my approach here is just how deathly scared I am that our insane sheeple of a populace might must elect McCain/Palin, both of whom have been caught in more lies and ridiculous statements than I can remember ever from a politician.

 

I am also someone who is invested in environmentalism and also the fight against creationist nonsense which ignores the mountains of evidence in favor of evolution.

 

Those two concerns of mine skewed me VERY heavily against Palin. I was still teetering somewhat on Obama v. McCain... UNTIL Palin wound up on the Republican ticket. That eliminated all doubt in my mind.

 

Also, Obama does have issues. I won't sit here and try to lie and say he doesn't. But when it comes to measuring those issues against his other qualifications and abilities, against the way he talks about real issues and how much he knows, against how he seems to want to steer this country in a direction with which I agree... then those religious based concerns of mine lose some of their poignance.

 

Palin though doesn't inspire me about her knowledge. She doesn't reflect my version of where I want the country to go. She doesn't show any concern for the things that I care about, and she proudly represents so many of the things which I hate about humanity.

 

Yes, I've picked a horse in this race. I've picked one that came out ahead when I considered all of the various issues in my mind. Yes, I'm now supporting my pick, trying to convince others and also trying to open up dialogue from others such as yourself so I can continue to evaluate whether or not my own choice is appropriate.

 

That doesnt' make me partisan, though. It means I've picked a favorite. The only thing that might be partisan is how strongly I've been impacted by a deep anxiety that (what is now, since coming to my decision) the "other" side might just win and bring my worst fears to reality.

 

I hope you can appreciate the sincerity of my introspection above.

 

Excellent post.

[iNow]

Thanks.

 

 

You know, one thing that's wild about all of this? Obama is not running against Palin, yet that's all we can talk about. McCain has taken a back seat in all of this. Is it because so many of us are convinced that his age and health are an issue that we see Palin as so relevant?

 

We discussed McCain's age and the actuarial tables recently, but we didn't factor in previous medical record into those probabilities. I saw the below video today on that very subject. Take it for what it's worth. I'm not saying I support or renounce it, but it's still interesting:

 

[Pangloss]

And Obama is a smoker, but his chances of dying from that poor health habit while in office are very slim, I agree. We have actually talked about that before, just not recently. I concede the point that his previous health record suggests a lower survivability rate, but I don't think we can state scientifically valid statistics on it. If you run across a study that can build actual statistics based on those factors, I'd be interested in hearing it.

 

Regarding the subject of "which church is worse", in my opinion that actually comes down to ideologies, not absolutes. Many here apparently feel that Palin's goo-goo-ga-ga churchgoers are more dangerous than Rev. Wrights "take the LSD out of my cereal, CIA!" churchgoers. But I just came from a moderate conservative forum in which the general consensus was the opposite -- that the conspiracy stuff is the more serious, more detrimental thing.

 

I think both sides have valid points of view, but I also think neither point is relevant to the current debate. Show me a presidential candidate that speaks in tongues or believes that the CIA is lacing our food with acid, and we'll talk.

[ParanoiA]

As you pointed out' date=' she's standing behind her church. Have you seen the trailer for the Third Wave Master's Commission movie? It's the first video on the page. At about 00:46 they use the image of missiles shooting out of Alaska to strike the lower 48 and eventually the rest of the globe. The world is consumed in a firestorm as the announcer says, "The Master's commission is one of the keys in God's plan for Alaska, the United States, and the entire world".

 

I think what Palin is standing behind is very disturbing.[/quote']

 

Uh....I watched that video and there's not a damn thing wrong with it. The theme of the video is god is "invading" Alaska...the US...and the rest of the world. Those missles look like firecracker projectiles my kids shot off in the front yard. They're not ICBM's or something - that's a CGI generated theme of god invading the planet. I didn't see any mushroom clouds - I saw a disney style fireworks display.

 

Meanwhile, the very next line following the claim that god is invading Alaska is their very limited mission "To know god". Did you not listen to the video? It didn't say their mission was to help god invade the world with ICBM's.

 

How about everytime Disney simulates missles and firecrackers? Are we scared of their influence on children? Are we freaking out over that message?

 

Sorry, but that's not going to cut it. I do see that their church rattles a line or two on "violent" pursuit of spreading god's word on their website - now that's disturbing. But a video with flashy CGI fireworks display to visually simulate god invading the hearts of the world? Whatever. You're just not allowing them any artistic license at all. As if every single thing coming out of church must be soft, warm and fuzzy - creepy, actually.

 

Have you ever seen Guts church do the Halloween thing in Oklahoma? I'm not sure about any other states, but they set up some extremely dramatic, terrifying scenery. They have a body all cut up and bloodied dangling through a broken winshield of a car set up to have been in a crash - with some title about drinking and driving. There's nothing that says a church has to be warm and fuzzy and never, ever, ever mention guns, bullets, missles, military, blood..sorry but that's part of life and those people want to believe their kids are dying for a cause that makes their god proud.

 

That's not a statement of "hey let's start a war god would like so my kid can die for god", rather it's a statement of "hey this war just took my son's life, it must be the will of god, this must be god's plan".

 

Then the one beneath that is a typical church session. God's plan mumbo jumbo. To them, everything is god's plan and everything dramatic in their lives is god's work. It's god's plan that I'm typing this post to you brother Phi. And through this board we can do god's work and spread the truth of freedom and liberty. Yadda yadda yadda.

 

That's church. I haven't seen anything in those videos I haven't seen before in every church I've ever had the misfortune of stepping in. You're going to see the same thing from Obama's church. Yeah it's weird and depressing, but not out of the ordinary in the least.

 

When I see Palin, or her church for that matter, come out advocate waging war for god then I'll jump on board. Until then, this is just typical religio stuff. It's creepy and I don't like it, but I don't think there's really anything to fear. At least, nothing more to fear than Obama's church rhetoric.

 

I still think Obama offers a "lite" version of religion, while Palin's is more promoted - again, a direct appeal to their respective bases.

[waitforufo]

You know, one thing that's wild about all of this? Obama is not running against Palin, yet that's all we can talk about. McCain has taken a back seat in all of this. Is it because so many of us are convinced that his age and health are an issue that we see Palin as so relevant?

 

This seems to me to be strategy on McCain's part. Time spent talking about Palin is time not spent talking about Obama. There is not much time between now and the election. People know McCain. The less people know about Obama, the better it is for McCain when the election comes.

 

McCain is currently down in the polls. How much of that is the Palin choice and the negative campaigning against her and how much is the banking crisis? You can make your own call on that. Either way Obama is still not above 50% so swing voters are still swinging. When the election comes, swing voters will in my opinion look for the candidate that is optimistic and that they know best. With all the negative campaigning against Palin, and less talk about Obama, that person could likely be McCain.

[PhDP]

ParanoiA, it's a science forum here, you can't expect a positive response for a fundamentalist christian. Palin has very little education (I know; McCain's not better), she prefers religion to reason on many issues, and I'm sure many people are not impressed by her intellect (I'm not anyway, and I could list the reasons).

 

I'm not a big fan of Obama, and to me his religion is a problem. Yet, he might talk all he wants about religion, it doesn't seem to have a huge impact on his political belief.

Edited September 18, 2008 by PhDP

[Phi for All]

ParanoiA, it's a science forum here, you can't expect a positive response for a fundamentalist christian. Palin has very little education (I know; McCain's not better), she prefers religion to reason on many issues, and I'm sure many people are not impressed by her intellect (I'm not anyway, and I could list the reasons).

 

I'm not a big fan of Obama, and to me his religion is a problem. Yet, he might talk all he wants about religion, it doesn't seem to have a huge impact on his political belief.

Perhaps it would be best to bring *extreme* religious stances up before both candidates and their VPs. Personally, I think the need to tie religion into a candidate's stance is part of the depraved state of US politics, substituting church attendance and faith for actual deeds as a moral barometer. But I'd like to know how a literal interpretation of the Bible can possibly serve us well from our commander-in-chief.

 

Maybe we should ask all four point blank: Do you believe that the prophecies in the Book of Revelations will come to pass and that only the righteous will survive? Will you consider yourself "safe" from a global holocaust because of your faith? This is the heart of my objection to Palin's church but I guess it should be no different for any Christian leader. I don't want someone in charge of our nuclear arsenal who might decide to "kill them all and let God sort them out". And I certainly don't want someone in office who sees their quick rise to power as a mandate from God that they are working His will with their every decision. This applies to both Obama and Palin.

[iNow]

It might be more telling (and likely to get an honest response) to ask them if they'd consider having an atheist in a position of power.

 

---

line[/hr]

 

CNN Fact Checks McCain: Verdict He's Not Telling the Truth

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLswpZtca48

[bombus]

I think both sides have valid points of view, but I also think neither point is relevant to the current debate. Show me a presidential candidate that speaks in tongues or believes that the CIA is lacing our food with acid, and we'll talk.

 

Mmm. Maybe, but this guy's got a very good point:

 

Sarah Palin and the Rapture

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20821.htm

[Pangloss]

Yes, well, consider the source. At any rate, the article asks the question; it doesn't offer an answer.

[bombus]

This is good: extract below:

 

"She totally reminds me of my cousin!" the delegate screeched. "She's a real woman! The real thing!"

 

I stared at her open-mouthed. In that moment, the rank cynicism of the whole sorry deal was laid bare. Here's the thing about Americans. You can send their kids off by the thousands to get their balls blown off in foreign lands for no reason at all, saddle them with billions in debt year after congressional year while they spend their winters cheerfully watching game shows and football, pull the rug out from under their mortgages, and leave them living off their credit cards and their Wal-Mart salaries while you move their jobs to China and Bangalore.

 

And none of it matters, so long as you remember a few months before Election Day to offer them a two-bit caricature culled from some cutting-room-floor episode of Roseanne as part of your presidential ticket. And if she's a good enough likeness of a loudmouthed middle-American archetype, as Sarah Palin is, John Q. Public will drop his giant-size bag of Doritos in gratitude, wipe the Sizzlin' Picante dust from his lips and rush to the booth to vote for her. Not because it makes sense, or because it has a chance of improving his life or anyone else's, but simply because it appeals to the low-humming narcissism that substitutes for his personality, because the image on TV reminds him of the mean, brainless slob he sees in the mirror every morning.

 

Full article here:http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20914.htm

[iNow]

This quote seems to hit nails on heads:

 

 

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1845116,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner

A number of commentators, including The Atlantic's James Fallows and Slate's Christopher Beam, have said that Palin resembled, in Beam's words, "a high-schooler trying to BS her way through a book report," which is an insult to both high-schoolers and B.S.

[Realitycheck]

The more and more that I hear from Obama, the more I keep thinking, "Why, why, why did we have to get this guy?" The only consolation I see is that he is ONLY a politician and 50% of what he says WON'T happen. The list of empty promises just never ends with this guy. Luckily, hopefully, he'll listen to Bill Clinton's guys.

[bombus]

This quote seems to hit nails on heads:

 

 

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1845116,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner

A number of commentators, including The Atlantic's James Fallows and Slate's Christopher Beam, have said that Palin resembled, in Beam's words, "a high-schooler trying to BS her way through a book report," which is an insult to both high-schoolers and B.S.

 

LOL! That is sooo funny!

 

 

The more and more that I hear from Obama, the more I keep thinking, "Why, why, why did we have to get this guy?" The only consolation I see is that he is ONLY a politician and 50% of what he says WON'T happen. The list of empty promises just never ends with this guy. Luckily, hopefully, he'll listen to Bill Clinton's guys.

 

 

Well there is this opinion:

 

So, sure, Barack Obama might be every bit as much a slick piece of imageering as Sarah Palin. The difference is in what the image represents. The Obama image represents tolerance, intelligence, education, patience with the notion of compromise and negotiation, and a willingness to stare ugly facts right in the face, all qualities we're actually going to need in government if we're going to get out of this huge mess we're in.

 

Here's what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat ****ing pig who pins "Country First" buttons on his man titties and chants "U-S-A! U-S-A!" at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.

Edited October 2, 2008 by bombus
multiple post merged

[Realitycheck]

He talks as if he has one of those credit cards without any spending limits. Spend, spend, spend. Healthcare, education, bailout bill, keep on fighting in Afghanistan, and guess what? We don't have to charge any more taxes either!!!!! Isn't that cool? Lalalalalalalal (We're all getting drunk with enamor and envy. Just how does he do it? Aren't we? )

[bombus]

He talks as if he has one of those credit cards without any spending limits. Spend, spend, spend. Healthcare, education, bailout bill, keep on fighting in Afghanistan, and guess what? We don't have to charge any more taxes either!!!!! Isn't that cool? Lalalalalalalal (We're all getting drunk with enamor and envy. Just how does he do it? Aren't we? )

 

Yes but at least its money spent on joe public, rather than on tax cuts for the super rich!

[iNow]

<shudder>

 

A clip from "Now on PBS". A right wing religious woman and her reasons for disliking Barack Obama.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4wQfQtpDAc

 

 

 

Now, compare/contrast that with this:

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27265729#27265729

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thankfully, our values voters (like the folks in "real Virginia") have people like Rush Limbaugh to explain the good Generals endorsement in terms that are completely wrong untrue invalid unsupported ignorant ridiculous in-line with what they want to hear.

 

 

 

 

Republicans are known for bringing people together, aren't they? Yeah. It's really too bad these groups being brought together tend so often to be carrying pitch forks, torches, and lighting crosses in people's yards.

 

Oh angry mob, is there any ignorance which you don't swallow and ask for seconds?

Edited October 21, 2008 by iNow
multiple post merged

[bascule]

Okay, it's official, there's no substance to US presidential politics:

 

[iNow]

That was quite well done.

[iNow]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gmNIDbwu0zmrI1pMMqyKZ6Lsg4uQD94700FG5

 

In the hours before Election Day, as inevitable as winter, comes an onslaught of dirty tricks — confusing e-mails, disturbing phone calls and insinuating fliers left on doorsteps during the night.

 

The intent, almost always, is to keep folks from voting or to confuse them, usually through intimidation or misinformation. But in this presidential race, in which a black man leads most polls, some of the deceit has a decidedly racist bent.

 

Complaints have surfaced in predominantly African-American neighborhoods of Philadelphia where fliers have circulated, warning voters they could be arrested at the polls if they had unpaid parking tickets or if they had criminal convictions.

 

Over the weekend in Virginia, bogus fliers with an authentic-looking commonwealth seal said fears of high voter turnout had prompted election officials to hold two elections — one on Tuesday for Republicans and another on Wednesday for Democrats.

 

In New Mexico, two Hispanic women filed a lawsuit last week claiming they were harassed by a private investigator working for a Republican lawyer who came to their homes and threatened to call immigration authorities, even though they are U.S. citizens.

 

"He was questioning her status, saying that he needed to see her papers and documents to show that she was a U.S. citizen and was a legitimate voter," said Guadalupe Bojorquez, speaking on behalf of her mother, Dora Escobedo, a 67-year-old Albuquerque resident who speaks only Spanish. "He totally, totally scared the heck out of her."

 

In Pennsylvania, e-mails appeared linking Democrat Barack Obama to the Holocaust. "Jewish Americans cannot afford to make the wrong decision on Tuesday, Nov. 4," said the electronic message, paid for by an entity calling itself the Republican Federal Committee. "Many of our ancestors ignored the warning signs in the 1930s and 1940s and made a tragic mistake."

 

Laughlin McDonald, who leads the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, said he has never seen "an election where there was more interest and more voter turnout, and more efforts to suppress registration and turnout. And that has a real impact on minorities."

Trying to mislead voters is nothing new.

 

"We see this every year," said Jonah Goldman of the advocacy group Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "It all happens around this time when there's too much other stuff going on in the campaigns, and it doesn't get investigated."

 

In 2006, automated phone calls in the final days leading to the federal election wrongly warned voters they would not be allowed to vote without a photo ID. In Colorado and Virginia, people reported receiving calls that told them their registrations had expired and they would be arrested if they showed up to vote.

 

The White House contest of 2004 was marked by similar deceptions. In Milwaukee, fliers went up advising people "if you've already voted in any election this year, you can't vote in the presidential election." In Pennsylvania, a letter bearing what appeared to be the McCandless Township seal falsely proclaimed that in order to cut long voting lines, Republicans would cast ballots on Nov. 2 and Democrats would vote on Nov. 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

line[/hr]

 

Apparently, on Halloween this woman refused candy to children if their parents supported Obama, and the candy she did hand out had a McCain/Palin flyer connected to it:

 

 

 

Indoctrinate 'em while they're still too young to know any better, that's what I always say. McCain can still win this thing if we just keep those darned five year olds from voting for the other side.

 

 

h/t Pharyngula

Edited November 2, 2008 by iNow
multiple post merged

[Pangloss]

It takes a village!!!

[john5746]

Sorry to bump an old thread, but I thought this one fit into it pretty well.

 

 

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iTHvyXMSeuAHmv8eJyl7v2pmkgkgD9ABCLUO0

[Pangloss]

I almost started a thread on this, but I figured it would be like putting lipstick on a pig.

[Sisyphus]

That's pretty funny. Whoops! I wonder how that phrase worked its way into her consciousness as positive, while not knowing what it specifically referred to. Maybe she's discovering some relatives are actually big old racists.

[iNow]

A bizarre NJ poll that showed 35% of the conservatives in that state believe Obama is the anti-christ. Heh, "We have a village idiot in this country, it's called fundamentalist Christianity".

 

 

Check it out: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/32886436#32886436|336988