Skip to comments.
Chris Matthews Attacks Pence and Conservatives on Belief in Science
Rush Limbaugh ^
| May 6, 2009
| Rush Limbaugh
Posted on 05/11/2009 11:39:25 AM PDT by Conservative Coulter Fan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
Frankly, anyone who defines “science” as “a belief in evolution” is an idiot.
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
These are the same liberals who don’t think a developing fetus is alive.
3
posted on
05/11/2009 11:46:02 AM PDT
by
Soothesayer
(The United States of America Rest in Peace November 4 2008)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
Anyone who believes in God but does not believe in God's role as Creator (I am not talking about "young Earth" or any of the rest of what some people try to affix to "creation-ist" belief) must then explain whether they believe God(s) evolved from the Big Bang or if God(s) was/were surprised by the spontaneous Big Bang, or whether God does not really exist?
Either God made things or He didn't.
There can be "processes" put into motion.
4
posted on
05/11/2009 11:47:04 AM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(If Liberals are so upset over torture, why did they mock John McCains stiff arms during the campaign)
To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
“I would like evolution to join the roster of other discredited religions.”—Ann Coulter
5
posted on
05/11/2009 11:48:47 AM PDT
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(I am defiantly proud of being part of the Religious Right in America.)
To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
Mike Pence missed a shot here. He could have reminded Matthews that he, Matthews, has actually stated on national TV that crap flows uphill!
6
posted on
05/11/2009 11:48:49 AM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
Republicans aren't known for being green! Your party's come up with this alternative but nobody really believes you got any passion on this subject! If there's any passion on the subject it's Limbaugh! How can your party be credible on dealing with CO2 emissions, with greenhouse gases, when the loudest voices in your party don't believe in it? Putting the cart before the horse. You can be "environmentmally friendly" (what used to be known by the shorthand 'green') in being against the dumping of toxins into the rivers and local water supply. But that does not mean that you HAVE to accept the myth of man-made global climate change (we were making it too cool ushering in another ice age and now we are making it too warm, all in the span of 40 years).
And what are the ties between the International Green Party (Socialist) and globally stated "green" initiatives?
7
posted on
05/11/2009 11:49:41 AM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(If Liberals are so upset over torture, why did they mock John McCains stiff arms during the campaign)
To: Soothesayer
“No liberal cause is defended with more dishonesty than abortion.”
8
posted on
05/11/2009 11:50:09 AM PDT
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(I am defiantly proud of being part of the Religious Right in America.)
To: a fool in paradise
Why didn’t you add the case where God is not only NOT SURPRISED by the Big Bang, but our local one was just one of trillions He’s set off over the vast ages of the Multi-Verse.
9
posted on
05/11/2009 11:50:12 AM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
MATTHEWS: Why should your party believe you're going to get serious -- PENCE: Yeah, absolutely, I --
MATTHEWS: -- about if you say the science is mixed?
We should NOT be saying that we are going to "get serious" about addressing "global warming" and restricting American lighting and energy option.
We would be conceding and issue on fallacy.
How about addressing the SCIENCE of "when life begins" and whether abortion ends a growing life of unique individual(s)?
10
posted on
05/11/2009 11:51:30 AM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(If Liberals are so upset over torture, why did they mock John McCains stiff arms during the campaign)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
portray Republicans as not believing in evolution I certainly hope Republicans are not dumb enough to "believe in" evolution. I hope they are not dumb enough to "believe in" any scientific theory. Make a reasoned judgment as to whether the theory is the best scientific explanation for the phenomena, yes. Believe, no.
Did you take science, which is all based on evolutionary belief and assumption?
But apparently Matthews is dumb enough to think that science is about belief.
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
This evolution meme gets a bit tiresome after a while.
Considering that a large faction of the liberal electorate
and Obama's supporters think that pregnancy can be prevented
by copulating while standing up or douching with Coca-Cola afterwards,
this business about conservatives being anti-science seems a little hypocritical.
Let's get the Dems up to speed on basic science before casting stones here.
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
MATTHEWS: See how you're hedging? PENCE: In the mainstream media --
MATTHEWS: (screaming) This is why people don't trust Republicans!
Barack Obama said that the answer to "when life begins" is above his paygrade. THAT is hedging. Especially since he supported the policy of letting infants born alive struggle under their own lungpower to die (in a matter of hours) in a utility closet if they survive an abortion attempt.
13
posted on
05/11/2009 11:54:27 AM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(If Liberals are so upset over torture, why did they mock John McCains stiff arms during the campaign)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
I do not believe in Chrissy Mathews! There is no scientific proof that he really exists. I’ve never seen him or talked to him. I can’t see him now. I see something called Chris Mathews on TV but TV isn’t real. Its electrons and beams and digital stuff. So, maybe Chris Mathews is digital or something. So, how do we know Chris mathews exists????
14
posted on
05/11/2009 11:57:30 AM PDT
by
April Lexington
(Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
To: HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity; All
"The few climate-change "skeptics" with any sort of scientific credentials continue to receive attention in the media out of all proportion to their numbers, their qualifications, or the merit of their arguments. And this muddying of the waters of public discourse is being magnified by John Holdren and Obama's War on Science the parroting of these arguments by a larger population of amateur skeptics with no scientific credentials at all."
Never mind that scientists who are skeptical of man-made climate change have far more qualifications and far greater merit to their arguments than John Holdren could ever dream of having. What John Holdren seems to be saying in this passage is that scientists ought not to express dissent with John Holdren's views on climate change because such tends to confuse the great unwashed. Why is this dangerous? John Holdren explains."-- Published Content: 1,378 Total Views: 1,597,426 Fans: 109 View Profile | Follow | Add to Favorites ,
John Holdren and Obama's War on Science
15
posted on
05/11/2009 11:57:30 AM PDT
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(I am defiantly proud of being part of the Religious Right in America.)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
What is this liberal obsession with evolution all about?
What does that have to do with anything important going on in the country?
Liberals have created a secular humanist educational system that produces
students who cannot read and who know virtually nothing about American history
or Western Christian culture. They are not exactly in a position to give lectures on these topics.
To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
Frankly, anyone who defines science as a belief in evolution is an idiot.Exactly, Mathews is an idiot. Either there is evidence and observation or there is not. Mathews is a fool and Pence could have done a better job of pointing that out.
17
posted on
05/11/2009 12:03:22 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
18
posted on
05/11/2009 12:09:05 PM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(When do the impeachment proceedings begin?)
To: jwalsh07
so 5 people watched chris matthews that day
19
posted on
05/11/2009 12:10:27 PM PDT
by
personalaccts
(Is George W going to protect the border?)
To: jwalsh07
so 5 people watched chris matthews that day
20
posted on
05/11/2009 12:10:31 PM PDT
by
personalaccts
(Is George W going to protect the border?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson