By-Tor.com

Devil's Advocate wrote: The fake Kerry & Fonda photo was too good to be true from the anti-Kerry faction's perspective, and the fake military documents relating to Bush are too good to be true from the anti-Bush faction's perspective. The photo you posted last week would appear to fall into the former group.

I saw nothing good in that photo at all. Yeah, it made that group of Kerry supporters look bad, but I took no pleasure in that. Too good to be true? Quite the contrary. If it turned out that the AP newswire had run a phony photo with a phony story, I would have been embarrassed that I propogated the story. But I also would have been relieved that the event never happened.

Y'know, this post and previous ones from ER in this thread have gotten this old man thinking more seriously about something that has been rolling around in the back of my brain for a couple of months.

There's no denying that both the left and the right have their kook fringes. But there is a marked difference in how each side regards its kooks and their bad behavior. As you would expect from this dottering old windbag, I'll offer an example to back up my claim.

About ten years ago a "documentary" movie made by some kook fringe conservatives started circulating called "The Clinton Chronicles". It supposedly exposed Bill Clinton being involved in drug-running, money-laundering, murder, etc. It was narrated in breathless tones so the weak-minded might connect dots that weren?t there. Here's the description from a distributor. "This revealing video is an investigation into the Alleged Criminal Activities of Bill Clinton and his Circle of Power. For the first time on video, an in-depth documentary shows you all of the pieces of the Clinton puzzle, and fits them all together to reveal the whole story. You'll hear from and see the faces of the key players who Clinton used to build his Circle of Power...as well as those who got in his way and lost their jobs, reputations, freedoms, virtue, and even their lives!"

The most popular radio programs in the US at the time were both conservative talk shows; Rush Limbaugh and G.Gordon Liddy. Neither one of those guys would give the movie any acknowledgement. The most powerful republican elected official was Newt Gingrich. Newt completely ignored the movie's existence. They all knew it was a pack of kook fringe lies and they wanted no association with it. About the only conservative with an audience who talked about it was Jerry Falwell, and it cost him what little credibility he may have had. He's been apologizing for it ever since.

Today we have something of the very same ilk. Michael Moore released that thing he also peddles as a "documentary". It is as equally outrageous, and it is as easily discredited. But what do the liberal talking heads and elected leadership do with it? They think it's the greatest thing since Watergate! They adore and embrace Michael Moore. They celebrate him. They seat him next to Jimmy Carter at their national convention for cryin' out loud! Kerry has even started dropping lines from the movie in his speeches. They all know it's a pack of lies but they don't care. It makes Bush look bad, and that's all that matters.

Good points, Matt.

EndlesslyRocking wrote:Riiiiiiiiiight...the poor put upon conservatives are so decent and well behaved, while the unwashed liberals roam the streets burning the flag and urinating on the Constitution...puh-leeze!

that's not what i said.

i hate talking politics, it just makes me mad, so i'm gonna leave here..have fun kiddos!

carolynn

The part about politics that bothers me the most is that the majority of this country labels themselves as Left or Right, and will not view anything outside of that path. I tend to lean Right, but I don't consider myself Rightwing / Consertive. I voted for Bush 4 years ago, but the only certain thing about this election for me is that I won't vote for Kerry. For all Bush has done in his 4 years that I have agreed with, he's done just as much to piss me off. All his faith based shit....my Constitution says that church and state are to be kept seperate. He wants to wave his magic wand, and make one million illegal Mexicans automatic US Citizens? Fuck that. Where has his magic wand been for me when my wife and I have been doing everything by the book, paying out over $6000 to keep her legal? And she still has to wait two more years before she can even think about taking the citizenship test. I supported the move into Iraq without UN approval (extra super-duper approval), because I'm tired of this country being the UN's bitch, but all Bush's bending over for the UN lately is making me sick. What credibility does and organization which has China sitting on the human rights commitee have?

Basically, follow an idea, create an idea, don't blindly accept a party.

The UN has no credibilty, that's for sure, and I don't know why Bush is still "playing nice" with them either. The Mexican amnesty thing really bugs me too. As did the new prescription drug entitlement. Those were both liberal moves and they really ticked me off.

There has never been a candidate who espouses everything I could hope for in a national leader (except perhaps John Adams, but he was a bit before my time), so I have to go on what's most important at the time. Currently, a very active branch of Islam has declared war on all the western world, just as they did 500 to 700 years ago. Whether we want it or not, the war is on and in our faces. Bush understands that. Kerry doesn't. Bush has taken the war overseas and off of our soil. Kerry promises retaliation only after we're attacked again. To me that makes the choice very easy.

By the way, I know you hate references to God on our currency, etc., and that is your undeniable right. Despite our differnces on this issue, I still hold you in very high esteem. Or to state it for simpletons (like me), I think you're a great guy! But I do feel a need to clarify the fact that nowhere does the constitution say that state and church are to be kept separate.

In fact, the words "separation," "church," or "state" are not found in the First Amendment, nor in any other founding document for that matter.

That whole concept started with an 1801 letter written by the Baptists of Danbury, Conn., to newly elected President Thomas Jefferson and Jefferson's brief response, in which he coined the phrase "a wall of separation between church and state" to assure his constituents that the new Constitution would not establish a national church or otherwise infringe on their religious liberties.

But now that phrase has been twisted to justify all sorts of warped stuff.

For example, in Missouri, when fourth-grader Raymond Raines bowed his head in prayer before eating his lunch in the cafeteria of Waring Elementary School in St. Louis, his teacher ordered him out of his seat, in front of the other students, and sent him to the principal?s office. After his third such prayer "offense," Raymond was segregated from his classmates, ridiculed for his religious beliefs, and given one week's detention.

What comes next, getting thrown in the lion's den?

by-tor wrote:What credibility does and organization which has China sitting on the human rights commitee have?

No kidding, By-tor. The same commitee that is chaired by Sudan. China is fucking Switzerland compared to Sudan. The UN is a sham.

I would LOVE a candidate I could ged behind totally. Still looking....

I had someone ask me recently why I didn't join the Republican party, since I was conservative. Oy! I would join the party if I believed they represented me, and that it would be a benefit to both of us. I don't believe either, so I don't join.

As for what will happen next and the Lion's Den comment:

A kid at my church is running for president of the school council. Her platform is based on gedding G-d back into the school. This is a kid, remember, not a teacher or parent, and it was her idea, not an adult's idea. Anyway, what happens? Well, the kid geds pulled in to the principals office and told she cannot run on that. She was told that if she runs on it and the kids like it and elect her with that platform, the principal will not allow her to take the position. She has been threatened with disciplinary action as well. So, now it seems, that no more can the kids initiate religous activites. This kid is not forcing it on the school, she is saying, IF you like this idea, elect me. A representative government in action, with a tyrant dictating over her.

ElfDude wrote:By the way, I know you hate references to God on our currency, etc., and that is your undeniable right. Despite our differnces on this issue, I still hold you in very high esteem. Or to state it for simpletons (like me), I think you're a great guy! But I do feel a need to clarify the fact that nowhere does the constitution say that state and church are to be kept separate.

In fact, the words "separation," "church," or "state" are not found in the First Amendment, nor in any other founding document for that matter.

That whole concept started with an 1801 letter written by the Baptists of Danbury, Conn., to newly elected President Thomas Jefferson and Jefferson's brief response, in which he coined the phrase "a wall of separation between church and state" to assure his constituents that the new Constitution would not establish a national church or otherwise infringe on their religious liberties.

But now that phrase has been twisted to justify all sorts of warped stuff.

I realize that the phrase doesn't appear in there...but in the context that I use it, the meaning is the same as what the Constitution does say. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". While I don't find the word "God" offensive, my problem with it on our money, and in our pledge isn't about the word, or Christianity for that matter. My problem with it is, "Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a mile". Most people in this country who follow a belief in a higher power are secure enough in their beliefs to where they don't have to display it loud and proud. It's a small minority, the religious zealots, who feel it is their duty to display it, and force it upon others. By putting, "In God we trust" on our money, and, "One nation under God" in our pledge, Congress used it's power to single out Christianity. Maybe it is just a small infraction on the First Amendment, but it's an infraction all the same. This is how these things snowball. Once we sample just a small bit of icing on the cake, from a part of the cart that not many people will notice, what's to stop us from eating the whole cake.

ElfDude wrote:For example, in Missouri, when fourth-grader Raymond Raines bowed his head in prayer before eating his lunch in the cafeteria of Waring Elementary School in St. Louis, his teacher ordered him out of his seat, in front of the other students, and sent him to the principal?s office. After his third such prayer "offense," Raymond was segregated from his classmates, ridiculed for his religious beliefs, and given one week's detention.

While I personally don't think religion has any place in our schools (I send my kids there to learn about Science, Math, History, etc.), this is one area that I don't agree with the 'anti-religion' people. This is where I don't believe 'Seperation of church and state' applies. The Constitution says that congress can make no laws respecting religion, but it also says that they cannot stop you from practicing your religion. A public school is just that, public, run by the government, and if you are not allowed to practice your religion there, it's un-Constitutional. Private schools are a different matter...they can make up their own rules. As long as the government doesn't set aside any 'special time', taking time away from learning, I have no problem with kids saying a prayer, bowing their heads, etc. in school.

ElfDude wrote:What comes next, getting thrown in the lion's den?

If I don't get my way, then yes.

Of course, when Daniel was thrown in with the lions, it was punishment for praying in his bedroom. I don't think you're opposed to that...

Nope....not even against my wife praying in our bedroom....not even against my wife teaching our son about her beliefs. I guess in alot of ways, I'm not a good Atheist. I don't try to convert people, I don't look down on those who do believe, and I don't think those who do believe are wasting their time. To me, it's whatever get's you thru your day. The only problem I have with religion is when someone tries to force their beliefs on me (aka my mother), or on my kid. And this issue with me isn't just about religion...I'd feel the same way about someone if that someone tried to force their political/social/etc. views on me.

by-tor wrote:I'd feel the same way about someone if that someone tried to force their political/social/etc. views on me.

But I thought that's what this forum was created for...

Actually, I think this forum was started for us to talk about whatever non-Rushian things we feel like talking about, not trying to convert someone to something. This thread was started to possibly open some eyes to a truth they may not have known before, but not to force anything on others. They can stay out, they can not read it, they can skim it only, they can disagree...

ElfDude wrote:

by-tor wrote:I'd feel the same way about someone if that someone tried to force their political/social/etc. views on me.

But I thought that's what this forum was created for...

Discussing pros and cons on an issue is one thing, not to mention no-one is forced to come to any thread on here, so if you come into a thread, views are not being forced upon you, you've pretty much asked for them. I wasn't trying to say that you, or anyone else on here were forcing anything on anyone.

Anyway, this forum was created so that I could force my views on you people.

Well, then my fat hariy redneck of a friend, you are not doing so well in reaching your goals. I am still a Christian. I still don't think Louisiana is a good place to live. And I don't like any of your sports teams.

awip2062 wrote:Well, then my fat hariy redneck of a friend, you are not doing so well in reaching your goals. I am still a Christian. I still don't think Louisiana is a good place to live. And I don't like any of your sports teams.

On the contrary. My people...we white folks...have already convinced your people to give up their religion for Christianity...it's only a matter of time before the process is completed.