Free Republic

Exactly what occurred to me 5 minutes ago. You can’t tell the states to decide the issue and then tell them that their decision on the issue is unconstitutional.

I think you’ve got it.

Bleeding Cool is a comic book “news” site run by a leftist who is actively stoking the flames of rage against Card. As a long time comic fan, I’ll say this about my hobby in the age of the internet - Almost all of the fans and creators are progressive kooks that I personally cannot stand. It’s really taken away a lot of my love for the hobby.

Ping

ping

My humble suggestion is that they make Elmo the mascot for their campaign.

I believe that this is an accurate reflection of what’s going on in the country right now. Obama’s been elected, and most people want to believe that that’s a good thing. They certainly don’t want to accept reality - that the best case scenario right now is that the US is in for a world of hurt. They are clinging to hope because it’s all they have and they are afraid of the alternative. When the market meltdown begins, they are paying $10 per gallon, and all the “benefits” of socialized medicine kick in, this is going to turn around. Ma and Pa America won’t look in the mirror and blame themselves for voting the Obama creature into office. They will blame him. It will be too little too late, but there will be some satisfaction in seeing the Kenyan trying to blame Bush while the country turns on him.

“Executives knew since June but decided to hold off until after the election. Stop funding PBS now!”

I didn’t see that in the article. Has that been documented somewhere? If so..... wow!

ping

Give it up. It is not going to happen. We lost. An impeachment now will only be seen as sour grapes. The mainstream media will continue to cover for Obama, so any move to impeach will just look like desperation from a party that got clobbered in the election. America is stuck with him. We’re going to get what we deserve. Unfortunately.

I agree completely. The party that booed God at its convention has just won a second term. We can’t deny it any further. We live in a post-Christian society.

Really? You think that Obama is going to win?

In two weeks, it will be President-Elect Romney.

Did they keep the penny?

Absolutely correct. The weekend bump now moves Obama up to being tied with Romney. He’s losing traction. I wish it were better news, but this is not bad. He’s in trouble. I will like it better when he remains behind even with the weekend bump.

It won’t stop them if they are citizens with proper ID.

I agree completely. But if people want socialized medicine (or elect people who champion socialized medicine), then they should deal with the consequences. I used to be 60 pounds overweight. I lost it and I have kept it off. I put great effort into trying to live a healthy lifestyle. I frankly don’t want my taxes going up because someone else thinks that being obese is a civil right. If the healthcare is socialized, it’s my business if you abuse yourself. I’ll have to pay for it.

Oh is that bullying? Cry me a river.

Under Obamacare, it will be everyone’s business. Obese people are generally less healthy, will cost taxpayers more money, and will use a disproportionate amount of the country’s limited healthcare resources.

Now, it’s none of my business. It may be one day.

I agree with you to the degree that neither of these men is going to solve our problems for us. If we look to politicians, we are an insanely stupid people.

But Obama is a huge problem.

You are not getting into the spirit of it. At this point, we are supposed to scream, cry, run around in a circle, and wet ourselves. Then we’re supposed to plan a trip to the ammo store to stock up before the zombie apocolypse hits on November 7.

“.. it’s unreasonable to think Obama isn’t at least slightly ahead of Mitt Romney; moreover, if Romney’s internal polls told a different story, he’d certainly trumpet them.”

Completely disagree. It’s not only reasonable to think that Obama isn’t ahead, it’s completely logical and reasonable to have serious doubts that he’s ahead. The only indicator that we have that he isn’t losing this election are polls that are incredibl skewed and based on a previous election that had over the top Democrat participation. What’s unreasonable is expecting that same level of participation this year.

This election is not in the bag, but this just looks at another hit piece.

Hhhhmmmmm. Wonder who this guy voted for in the last election?

Why not? That’s what the libs do.

You know, that’s a good question. And I personally don’t know the answer to it. Maybe someone else can fill us both in. I do not understand what is behind the Dems always getting a bump on the weekends....

It’s fine. This is his post-weekend bump. He’ll be back down by Wednesday. This race is still locked up (according to the polls), and that is bad news for Obama. He can’t break away. Time is on Romney’s side. Unless he makes a serious misstep, I am more and more confident in the outcome. October 1 is a major tipping point. People are going to start making up their minds, and no one who didn’t vote for Obama before is going to vote for him now. He’s not going to attract many new votes. He’s got nowhere to go but down.

Considering the fact that Kwame Kilpatrick could run for mayor again in Detroit.... AND PROBABLY WIN, I think you are right.

Cautiously optimistic about these numbers. That’s a huge number of Independents, most of whom will break for Romney. While I don’t have a lot of confidence in some of the knuckleheads that live in this state (saw some of them on TV last night - a panel of citizens who were talking all over each other arguing about which left wing idea should be put in place right after the election), is it possible that Michigan might swing red this time?

This is just verification off what Romney said. The 53% are not happy. I think this is great. Make Obama own this.

Ok. If you’ve got this spectacular plan that’s going to turn us around economically, why wait until your second term to implement it? What have you been doing for the past 4 years? You screw around your first term and now you’re ready to roll up your sleeves and get to work in your second? Do you really think we’re that stupid?

Idiot.

If that’s his approach, I guarantee he will lose the election. Americans hate a failure. But they reserve their most intense disgust for those who are arrogant in their failure.

Agree completely. If Obama has a bad night after this kind of advantage, he truly is an incredible imbecile.

Rasmussen has them locked neck and neck again today. Can’t deny that. Of all the polling organizations, this one is the most trustworthy.

My gut tells me something else. I think we may be at a tipping point. Obama’s doing everything he can just to tread water. The media’s doing everything it can to make the narrative state that Romney is losing big. But I think the story is starting to fall apart. I think Romney/Ryan are on the verge of pulling ahead. Big time. We’ll see.

Ping

Very happy to see Obama no longer getting his weekend bounce. I could be wrong, but these may be the cracks beginning to appear in Dear Readers bid for the White House. I’m hoping that we’re going to start seeing things breaking for Romney.

By the way, this is why internal polls used by a campaign are so different from what we see. When they want something to spin, campaigns and interested parties go to polling organization and say, “Here’s my check. Please do a national poll on the outcome of the election. Please assume that turnout will be the same as it was in 2008.” When they want to know what’s really going on for their own information, they say, “Here’s my check. Take poll that is completely objective and tells me exactly what in reality is going on with this election.” They guard that information zealously.

Thanks. That’s all I’m trying to say. Accusing the polling organizations of being in the tank for Obama is stupid. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose by behaving that way. However, will they take a poll that a partisan organization (like a news network or a publication)can then spin? Oh yeah!

And you know this for a fact? You honestly don’t believe that if someone pays for a poll, they don’t tell the poster what they want to measure?

Yike. Thanks at least for proving that on the Internet, someone will argue about anything. Have a nice day.

But... they don’t know that it’s false. They are simply giving their customers what they want. If their customer wants to know how the campaign is going based on the same turnout as 2008, why should Joe’s Polling Service say, “Sorry. I won’t take your money. I don’t think the turnout’s going to be anywhere near that. Take your check and shove it.” They sell a service. If someone wants to pay them perfectly good money to run a poll based on ridiculous assumptions, why should they say no?

I don’t believe that the pollsters have an agenda. At least not all of them. The ones who have an agenda are the ones who hire them to conduct the polls. You know - the ones who cut the checks and then say something like, “I want you to do a national poll on the outcome of this election. Assume a massive Dem turnout even greater than that of 2008...”

I hope she’s not right. But I’ll say this.... She’s a heck of a motivator. Romney HAS to win.... so we can shove it back in this bitch’s face.

Romney needs to push harder. We need to see some breakout numbers. Obama can’t help being himself - an immature, whining, spoiled brat with no sense of strategy or leadership skills. When he starts to see the presidency slipping through his fingers, he’s going to start acting more and more crazy. And pick up by Romney will get him feeling more and more desparate, especially as the election approaches.

I agree completely. This stinks to high heaven. A dogmatically liberal labor union in a city with an erstwhile member of the Obama administration decides to go on strike during an election year, throwing the entire city into chaos and threatening its children?

Just waiting for Obama to step into a phone booth to put on his costume so he can fly in and save everyone. When you don’t have any accomplishments, you have to invent them. Romney better be ready to counter this. I’m pretty sure it’s coming.

Total flake. This woman is a stark raving nutjob.

Well, I couldn’t eat at Chick fil a because there’s not one near me. So I just ordered some swag from their store. Sorry, Shep.....

Wait. No I’m not.

Sounds like a BFD.

Quite true. What makes it “less so” is that it doesn’t follow the scientific method to any degree. It is not observable, reproducible, or predictive.

I’m sorry. One last comment and then I’m really done for now.....

“The ones that drive me nuts are those who pretend they hold some kind of alternative ‘scientific’ theories.
They don’t, they’re just trying to be true to their understandings of Genesis, but won’t admit it here.”

I love it. You just described exactly what you are doing. You’re taking the “scientific” theory of evolution, combining it with your own theology, and coming up with your own understanding of Genesis, all while pretending it’s an alternative “scientific” theory. The icing on the cake - I’ll bet that you won’t admit it here!!!

;-)

BroJoeK to Shadowfax
“Sorry, but that’s all nonsense.”

Actually, it’s not. I’ve heard honest evolutionists loudly proclaim that there is no objective meaning or purpose in life, there is no hope, and no transcendent absolute truth or morality. Such people, while I consider them wrong in their thinking, are at least being honest and logical about the end result of their evolutionary beliefs.

“Those ideas are outside the realm of science, so you can’t learn them from science.
You can only learn them in church, or perhaps a theology course in school.”

So, it appears that you are not standing with science. You are expressing your religious doctrine, which appears to be an amalgam of creationism (albeit not creationism in the Christian sense) and evolution. So, if I have a choice between traditional historic Christianity and your merged theology, why would I choose the latter?

“I don’t know what “fence” you imagine straddling.”

The fence I refer to is that which separates the beautiful truth of God’s Word and the damned lies of the pit of Hell. You can’t straddle the two. Christ made that clear. Either you are for Him or against Him.

“Theistic evolution is exactly the response of most Christian churches to evolution theory — meaning: if as science theorizes, life evolved, then obviously God directed its evolution, so what’s your problem with that?”

My problem with that is that it is contrary to the Biblical account. I would never sit under a pastor who proclaims theistic evolution in contrary to the clear teaching of scripture for the simple reason that if he or she had no problem gutting and disposing of one book of the Bible, why would I expect that he or she would treat the rest of the Bible respectfully as God’s truth?

“Indeed, this whole effort to find physical evidence for DNA’s “intelligent design” is ludicrous from the beginning.
Can anyone name even a single sub-atomic particle in the entire Universe which was not ‘intelligently designed’ by God?
No, of course not.
Everything is part of God’s grand design, and behaves according to His laws and purposes, including evolution.”

What you just expressed puts you totally outside the realm of today’s scientific thinking. The theory of evolution precludes an intelligent designer. It states that all life arose completely by random accident through natural processes. Again, the choice you are offering me is between my religion and yours.

Look, let me bottom line the issue for you - God created the universe and everything in it. When He did that, He was the only one around to witness that act of creation. He gave us His testimony of how it went down in the book of Genesis. He did in 6 days, and the Creation was perfect and without sin. (And, may I hasten to point out, without death. Death was clearly not a process that existed before the Fall. Scripture is clear on that point. “The wages of sin is death.” Ring a bell? Your argument that death had to exist because of rampant reproduction of animals is a huge assumption on your part. An assumption you’ve jumped to not because of the Bible or anything that it says but because of your attempt to reconcile your own ideas of origins with the Biblical account.) After those 6 days, He rested. He was done creating. Finished. Then, Adam sinned, Creation fell, and death entered the scene. That’s not my testimony. That’s God’s testimony. I believe Him. Your problem is that you don’t. I don’t know why that you think that a God who is powerful enough to do it all couldn’t manage it in 6 days or why God would lie about how He did it and exclude billions of years in history that atheistic man says is there but He doesn’t. However, that’s not an issue between you and me. That’s between you and God. Speaking for myself, He said it and I believe Him. It’s really that simple. You can disagree, but frankly, the world’s been disputing God’s Word for a long time now. There truly is nothing new under the sun. The lies may change, but it doesn’t alter the fact that they are lies.

This is my last word on the subject because... frankly, if you’re not going to take God’s word for how it went down, you won’t believe me. Why should you? But if you ever have any doubt and you want to really dig into the scripture and discuss this, contact me privately. I’m not interested in converting you. As long as you can’t accept God’s testimony, I’ve got nothing to offer you. In the meantime, I suggest you review the materials of a Christian ministry called Answers in Genesis. They maintain that the evidence available for the origins of the universe are completely consistent with the Genesis account. They have a lot of material on the flaws inherent in your theistic evolution.

God bless you!!!!!!

I accept the Genesis account of Creation. I stand with God. Either you do or you don’t. Can you be a Christian and believe in evolution? Sure, but there are a ton of inconsistencies in your stance. Why not just accept God and His Word in its entirety?

Evolution preaches that life slowly arose through natural processes without outside influence or intelligence. It was an accident. If you accept evolution, you are an accident. Your existence has no purpose. You are a freak. A bit of primorial ooze with delusions of granduer. Any meaning or purpose you devise for your life is simply you fooling yourself. On the other hand, if you are created in the image and likeness of God by Him, He has a purpose for you. The two are irreconciable.

Lastly, try as you might, you can’t straddle the fense. Theistic evolution is nonsense. Evolution is a process driven by death where lower order lifeforms give rise (through some inexplicable magic) to more complex lifeforms in succeeding generations. However, Gensis tells us that the animals were created in their final forms by God. It also tells us that death did not enter into creation until after the Fall. So, if there was no death until after the animals were created, how could God have used evolution, a process depended on death, to create life? Totally illogical.

You’re too smart to believe what you just wrote. You know as well as I do that if your rabbit scenario ever happened, “science” would find a way to dismiss its importance or make up an explanation for it. In fact, evolution is not falsifiable. It’s the creation myth of atheists, and it’s adherents cling to it regardless of the evidence that invalidates it. Its an illogical, nonsensical belief system that holds that genetically complex lifeforms and orderly systems can arise from nothing all by themselves.

That is logically impossible.