(2008-10-28) — The latest Quinnipiac University poll shows presidential candidate John McCain’s handlers losing ground to rival Barack Obama’s handlers by redistributing popular support from the Republican to the Democrat.
The handlers, professional message molders and political strategists, play a crucial role in American politics by helping candidates understand what they believe and how to be themselves, and by giving journalists someone to talk to during long bus and plane trips on the campaign trail.
The Quinnipiac survey of ‘likely phone answerers’, shows that McCain’s handlers once again fumbled a major opportunity yesterday when they inaccurately characterized Sen. Obama’s 2001 remarks about the Supreme Court and redistribution of wealth.
Instead of honing in on the fact that Sen. Obama favors accomplishing socialist goals through community organizing and administrative action, the McCain handlers tried make it seem like the Democrat would appoint socialists to the Supreme Court, quite the opposite of what he had said.
As a result, Sen. Obama’s handlers were able to deftly deflect attention from his socialist agenda and revisionist view of the Constitution by simply noting that Sen. McCain’s people mischaracterized the quote, and by portraying Republicans as too dull-witted to comprehend the finer points of Constitutional law.
“It’s great playing against the McCain handlers,” said one unnamed Obama handler. “It’s like a a golf match where you get an unlimited number of Mulligans.”
Upon hearing the remark, a McCain handler immediately slammed Sen. Obama for his blatant racism against the Irish because his aide used the word ‘Mulligan’ to describe a do-over — a slur on the order of ‘going Dutch’, ‘Chinese fire drill’ or ‘macaca’, the epithet which sunk the presidential hopes of Sen. George Allen, R-VA.
Within hours the McCain campaign had a new video on YouTube featuring sinister music and a breathy conspiratorial announcer saying:
“Barack Obama says he’s for the people of the world. But he doesn’t mean all of the people. In a recent interview, one of his top aides used the M-word. Obama failed to repudiate the remark. Barack Obama: not ready to lead Irish Americans. Not ready for you.”
59 responses so far ↓
1 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:12 am
God Bless America
2 Ms RightWing, Ink // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:30 am
Seems lie this is one step above satire. Hmmm.
3 Ms RightWing, Ink // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:32 am
er, I mean, Seems “like” one step….
4 beekabok2 // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:52 am
The tape doesn’t lie - he said those things. Even if it was somewhat mischaracterized (which I don’t think it was) isn’t it kind of like that famous question put out there by another famous democrat: What is the meaning of “is”?
Well I looked up the meaning of redistribution:
1)Any process, such as inflation or taxation or the provision of social services, that reallocates household income.
2)Economics. the theory, policy, or practice of lessening or reducing inequalities in income through such measures as progressive income taxation and antipoverty programs.
3)An economic theory or policy that advocates reducing inequalities in the distribution of wealth.
Personally, I believe that we reap what we sow and that if I work harder that “Barack the Plumber”, then I should make more $$$ than him. Does anyone else agree?
[Editor's Note: What the candidate said is actually more threatening than what the McCain handlers say he said. What Sen. Obama said is that the Supreme Court is not the venue to accomplish the redistribution he earnestly desires...that such change is an administrative task (which the Court is not historically good at), but which, one might easily surmise, is right up the alley of a Chief Executive -- the job for which Sen. Obama has now applied.]
5 beekabok2 // Oct 28, 2008 at 11:47 am
RE: Editor’s Note …..and with democrats controling all 3 branches, you bet your sweet bippy that he will get it done. Heaven help us all!!
6 RepublicanAttackMachine // Oct 28, 2008 at 11:52 am
I would trust a Quinnipiac University poll, about as much as much as I would bl31u to post something here that ACTUALLY made sense to anyone with any grey matter left.
Not included in “ANYONE with grey matter left” would be, ANY lib voting for Obama, any kool-ade swilling Obamaniac, or ANY trolls slithering on this site, crying and whining that THEY do not have COMPLETE control over ALL the media as of yet.
Take heart, your “earthly messiah” will soon reinstitute the “fairness doctrine” and you will celebrate, UNTIL you find out YOU may want to complain about something the new administration does and they then shut YOU down too!
7 RepublicanAttackMachine // Oct 28, 2008 at 11:57 am
Sorry Scott, ON-TOPIC:
Amazing how LIBS think their judges are gods, UNTIL or UNLESS, they get a filibuster proof majority along with the other branches of government and then do NOT need them to override the will of the people!
High priest obama will override the will of the people, all by himself!
Wonder how the lib Suspreme Court judges will deal with the demotion?
8 Fred Sinclair // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Too much doom and gloom on the radar. A little snow here last night, Rush said Florida has a cold wave coming in (down into the 50’s) virtually unheard of in October. Nevada, Arizona, Utah & New Mexico will have norm temps this winter.
I move we all relocate to Las Vegas for the winter. since The Farmers Almanac is predicting possibly the coldest winter on record. Now out in Las Vegas…….
Las Vegas churches accept gambling chips. This may come as a surprise to those of you not living in Las Vegas, but there are more Catholic Churches than casinos.
Not surprisingly, some worshipers at Sunday Services will give casino chips rather than cash when the basket is passed. Since they get chips from many different casinos, the churches have devised a method to collect the offerings.
The churches send all their collected chips to a nearby Franciscan Monastery for sorting and then the chips are taken to the casinos of origin and cashed in. This is done by the chip Monks.
9 NeaL // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Photo of the Day:
http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2008/10/hurricane-sarah-blows-into-virginia.html
Look for the 4th one down.
10 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Speaking of Redistribution
“The earned income tax credit (”EITC”) was enacted by Gerald Ford and then re-enacted and expanded in 1986 by… could it be, don’t tell me, say it ain’t so!… Ronald Reagan.
The EITC uses tax revenues (derived from our progressive tax system) to provide additional income to people below certain income levels under a formula so that it gradually phases out as incomes increases. Qualifying families receive a monthly check from the government.
So, Ronald Reagan was a redistributor. That must mean he was a socialist, even a communist.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/reagan-the-redistributor_b_138428.html
11 Maggie // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Neal re#9,
Are you from Va.?
12 NeaL // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Maggie Re #11
Yes. I live a short drive from Fredericksburg but I’m not affiliated with CommonCts. I found that picture via Michelle Malkin’s site.
I wish I could have been there, but I had to work.
13 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Factchecking Obama Redistribution Bombshell:
You can read the entire transcript of the interview here:
http://www.foxnews.com/urgent_queue/#50041ecb,2008-10-27
courtesy of Fox News, but here is the passage in which Obama explains that courts are “not very good” at redistributing wealth:
Maybe I am showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but you know I am not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know the institution just isn’t structured that way…. Any of the three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. I think that, as a practical matter, that our institutions are just poorly equipped to do it.
In other words, Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said.
14 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:52 pm
The Quinnipiac survey of ‘likely phone answerers’…
Great line, Scott!
15 Fred Sinclair // Oct 28, 2008 at 1:13 pm
R.A.M. #’S 6&7 - The problem with your postings is the same as mine and most all other Scrapplers - You make sense! Using logic and reason, predicated upon actual facts. That simply will not work with trolls, Obamaphytes, and assorted liberal Socialists a/k/a Democrats.
An earlier post of mine (prior thread) told of subliminal hypnotism Obama uses in his speeches.
There once was a man who had evidently either mastered the Science of subliminal hypnotism (unawares) or it was given to him by satan as it was later given to Hitler and now it seems apparent that someone else has been given the same gift.
It’s recorded in the book of Acts:
Acts 12:21 And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.
Acts 12:22 And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.
Acts 12:23 And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
Acts 12:24 But the word of God grew and multiplied.
So this is why I went “on the wagon” and swore off of trolls. I skim their postings as nothing more than Bull - sprinkled with sugar which they try to pass off as candy.
A spoonful of their ‘candy’ mixed with shards of broken glass is an appetizer I no longer care to sample. (It leaves a bad taste in the mouth that no amount of Scope or Listerine can ever hope to overcome.)
Hypnosis is a distinctive, often trance-like mental state that is induced by an organized pattern of suggestions, usually verbal in nature
Although the long held popular view was that hypnosis is form of unconsciousness, the informed contemporary view is that it is actually a wakeful state of focused attention[1] and heightened suggestibility,[2] with diminished peripheral awareness.[3]
According to the American Psychological Association’s Division 30, hypnosis may bring about “…changes in subjective experience, alterations in perception, sensation, emotion, thought or behavior.”
I also read that subliminal suggestions can be programmed to activate only in certain situations (like entering a voting booth).
Convinced that they are alert and in full control of their faculties they would be compelled to do a certain thing (like vote a certain way)
I don’t recall the when and where but I recall part of one of B.O’s speeches where he said something coming down from above and you will know you have to vote for me.
I thought at the time that it sounded like preacher talking about the Holy Spirit descending.
16 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 1:26 pm
BL31U #13,
In other words, Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said.
Maybe I’m missing something here (I’ve been known to do that), but I don’t see how you can say that. Obama said…
He didn’t say the courts were not CAPABLE of doing it. He didn’t say the courts SHOULD NOT do it. In fact, he said it was one of the “failures” of the Civil Rights movements that the courts DID NOT do it, simply because…
He says point blank…
He’s just disappointed because nobody got together and figured that out before now.
He essentially says that the courts SHOULD HAVE done it, but they just didn’t, and he chastised the Warren court because they…
Obama WANTS the court to “break free” from what the founding fathers intended, because he doesn’t agree with what the founding fathers believed - plain and simple.
Therefore, because the courts would not do it, and the Civil Rights movement lost track of…
then “as a practical matter” it is up to those who can perform the “administrative” work to get the job done.
Isn’t that really what McCain said?
17 MajorDomo // Oct 28, 2008 at 1:57 pm
RAM #7: “Wonder how the lib Suspreme Court judges will deal with the demotion?”
What’s to deal with? The both want the same thing!
18 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:14 pm
It’s been snowing here the last couple hours in beautiful Downtown, NJ… not sticking though. Now turning back to rain. It’s too early for snow!
19 onlineanalyst // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Heh, France’s Sarkozy observes in closed sessions that Obama is an “empty suit” when it comes to foreign policy. The concern is Obama’s unilateral attitudes and naive positions towards Iran, which are contrary to Europe’s position.
20 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Hawkeye,
I wish I could do that italics thing.
(spell check is off below)
(BL31U) When I read in context, the statement below, I understand Obama to be basically saying that the civil right movement introduced issues that the courts had never had to confront and were not structured to do so. At the end of the paragraph he states that because the movement became so court focused, that they lost focus of the political, organizing activities and coalitions on the ground that did have the ability to bring about redistributive change.
“….it didnt break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the constituion at least as it has been interpreted and the warren court interpreted it generally in the same way that the constitution is a document of negative liberties 40:43 says what the states cant do to you says what the federal govt cant do to you but it doesnt say what the federal govt or state govt mst do on your behalf and that hasnt shifted and i think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that 41:01 the civil rights movement becaem so court focused i think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities 41:12 on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change 41:20 and in some ways we still suffer from that”
(BL31U) His response below is to a caller questioning whether the court is the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place. He starts out responding by saying as a legislator he and his associates could craft theoretical legal justification for it, “court is not very good at it and politically it is hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard ”
“…you know the institution just isn’t structured that way just look at very rare examples where during he desegregation era the court was willing to for example 46:55 order you know changes that cost money 46:59 to local school district and the court was very uncomfortable with it it was hard to manage..”
“…i think that as a practical matte that our institutions are just poorly equipped to do it..”
(BL31U) It sounds to me that he is saying that this should not be a court issue but should be handled on the ground by organizations more prepared to handle these matters.
21 onlineanalyst // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Excellent explication at #16, Hawkeye.
I might add also that Obama is not a professor of law or of any sort.
22 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:14 pm
OLA,
A graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review, (I think that would be kinda hard if he weren’t a lawyer) Obama worked as a community organizer and practiced as a civil rights attorney before serving three terms in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004. He taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004. (I think that would give him the title something like Constitutional Professor)
So, Barack Obama is an Attorney AND was a Constitutional Professor for 12 years.
Where are you getting your info from? That one was too easy.
23 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Hey Scrapplers,
You aren’t going to start blaming each other if McCain loses the election are you? I really don’t want our family here to become dysfunctional like the McCain campaign is doing.
“Blame game: GOP forms circular firing squad”
24 onlineanalyst // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Several points: The Founding Fathers placed “the negative constraints” on the State (the government), for they recognized that our rights are inherent. They do not come from the State. The Bill of Rights limited the powers of the State so that our inherent rights would not be taken away.
Obama said that the Warren court was not radical enough. Obama saw that a process of “reparations” would be too slow and unwieldy.
He sees that legislative and executive power achieve his vision more quickly and intends to exert his influence to this end.
Now the whole idea of reparations is of itself an affront to our liberty and our rule of law. It is a bottomless pit of grievance, real or imagined. For over forty years, we have had redistributive programs through law and tax dollars that have imposed affirmative action, the Great Society, Medicaid, low-income housing, low-interest housing loans with no collateral or proof of income, etc. Our inner-city schools spend more per pupil than many suburban or rural districts, and the results are abysmal.
Since the beginnings of this social engineering and do-goodism, African Americans have seen the disintegration of their families, an increase in illegitimate children who have no father-figure as masculine models, gangs that rely on drug-trade for bling, status, and a sense of family, and disdain for academic achievement as being a sellout to The Man, etc.
When the State determines one’s level of appropriate income, all personal incentive and self-reliance dry up. We saw the passivity of the government-dependent in the Ninth Ward in New Orleans.
There is nothing admirable about a federal command economy that engineers how we live through redistribution of wealth. The over-taxed will eventually be tapped out, and “trickle up poverty” will be assured for all but the ruling elite.
Economists Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell, African Americans both, explain these points so much better than I. They reject the whole concept of reparations.
Furthermore, poverty is not unique to a particular race or ethnic group. Obama uses class warfare as a thinly disguised racial issue. Perhaps that is why the Rev. Wright’s TUCC Black Liberation Theology had so much appeal to him.
25 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:45 pm
BO was not a professor.
26 onlineanalyst // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Obama was designated president of the Harvard Law Review at a time when the rigors for that achievement were seriously compromised. (Check the history of how these honors were determined in that era.) Futhermore, Obama has no published works from that tenure. In fact, Obama has no paper trail of transcripts or legislation from his Illinois years.
Also, in academia the title of Professor is reserved for scholars who have done more than teach classes, If anything, Obama was probably no more than an adjunct instructor.
When Obama was serving as a community organizer and later when he was a civil-rights attorney, he was active in pressuring banks to provide loans to risky applicants. No wonder that ACORN and he have such a mutually remunerative relationship.
27 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 4:25 pm
BL31U #20,
You may interpret Obama’s statements in any manner you choose, but I stand by my analysis.
I agree with OLA’s comment that Obama thought the Warren court was not radical enough. To his way of thinking, their choice to not legislate from the bench in the area of wealth redistribution was a “failure” on their part.
And it was a “failure” on the part of the Civil Rights movement to remain so “court focused” when it was evident they weren’t able to do the job of redistributing wealth. It is only because of that “failure” that he says “the court is not very good at it”.
We may agree to disagree if you wish.
28 Maggie // Oct 28, 2008 at 4:57 pm
BlackLion31u,
Remember this?
“Dewey Elected President”headlined front page of newswpapers the morning after presidential election.BTW he ran against Harry Truman.
29 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Hawkeye,
Sounds good, we can agree to disagree. Good discussion though.
BlackLion
30 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Maggie,
I am aware. I can only hope that the news papers will wait until at least the 5th to print Obama’s victory should he win.
31 Fred Sinclair // Oct 28, 2008 at 7:22 pm
This from a former pollster who walked off the job in disgust because of the the dishonest things she was told to do, to taint the polls in Obama’s favor.
FL; OH; NC; MO & NV in the bag for McCain
COL & NH tied
VA 75% chance for McCain
IBD/TIPP - highly accurate
All the rest of the public pollsters are worth nothing more than a bucket of warm spit.
32 Darthmeister // Oct 28, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Blacklion, you can spin what Obama says to placate your own conscience on the matter, but the undeniable fact is Oblahblah wants to redistribute wealth whether it’s through the courts, through Congress or through the White House. The man is a neo-Marxist, he hung around Marxist communists and if you understand his code as we do, he speaks like a collectivist/communist/socialist/neo-Marxist.
Here’s an excellent speech by John McCain today. He doesn’t concern himself with the forced nuance of whether Obamessiah’s 2001 speech concerning wealth distribution should or should not be by the courts …
We’ve learned more about Senator Obama’s real goals for our country over the last two weeks than we learned over the past two years, and that only because Joe the plumber asked him a question in Ohio. That’s when Senator Obama revealed he wants to quote “spread the wealth around.”
Now, Joe didn’t ask for Senator Obama to come to his house, and he didn’t ask to be famous. He certainly didn’t ask for the political attacks on him from the Obama campaign. Joe’s dream is to own a small business that will create jobs, and the attacks on him are an attack on small businesses all over the country. Small businesses employ 84 percent of Americans, and we need to support small businesses, not tax them.
After months of campaign trail eloquence, we’ve finally learned what Senator Obama’s economic goal is: to spread the wealth. In a radio interview revealed this week, he said the same thing — that one of the quote, “tragedies” of the civil rights movement is that it didn’t bring about “redistributive change.”
You see, Senator Obama believes in redistributing wealth, not in policies that grow our economy and create jobs. He said that even though lower taxes on investment help our economy, he favors higher taxes on investment for quote “fairness.” There’s nothing “fair” about driving our economy into the ground. We all suffer when that happens, and that is the problem with Senator Obama’s approach to our economy. He is more interested in controlling wealth than in creating it … in redistributing money instead of spreading opportunity. I am going to create wealth for all Americans, by creating opportunity for all Americans.
Senator Obama is running to be Redistributionist in Chief. I’m running to be Commander in Chief. Senator Obama is running to spread the wealth. I’m running to create more wealth. Senator Obama is running to punish the successful. I’m running to make everyone successful.
Senator Obama has made a lot of promises. First he said people making less than 250,000 dollars would benefit from his plan, then this weekend he announced in an ad that if you’re a family making less than 200,000 dollars you’ll benefit — but yesterday, right here in Pennsylvania, Senator Biden said tax relief should only go to “middle class people — people making under 150,000 dollars a year.” It’s interesting how their definition of rich has a way of creeping down. At this rate, it won’t be long before Senator Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just 42,000 dollars a year should get a tax increase. We can’t let that happen.
And one more thing, if I hear Biden or Obamessiah lie about not raising our tax burden if we make under $250,000 dollars, I’m going to kick the radio/television. ANY tax levied on business, small or large, will always be paid by the consumer in the form of higher retail costs. That means me, you, and the poor will end up paying for Obama’s redistributive tax increases. And everyone knows demagogues like Obama who pretend to care about the middle class are no different than Bill Clinton when he too promised tax relief for the middle class but all that changed virtually the week he got in office with a “things were worst than I thought” so I have to raise taxes blah, blah, blah.
All hail the State … and it’s messiah!
33 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Darth,
And everyone knows demagogues like Obama who pretend to care about the middle class are no different than Bill Clinton when he too promised tax relief for the middle class but all that changed virtually the week he got in office with a “things were worst than I thought†so I have to raise taxes blah, blah, blah.
Jon Corzine did the exact same thing in New Jersey. He ran on a platform of no new taxes, then when he was in office less than a month, he raised the state sales tax from 6% to 7%. He said half of that increase would go to property tax relief. Then he took away the homestead rebate. D’UH! Some property tax relief.
Most Dems (I was going to say “all” but thought better of it) are just lying scum.
34 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:00 pm
On a lighter note…
As I walked past the magazine rack at a local convenience store this morning I noticed the cover of Men’s Fitness, or maybe it was Men’s Health, anyway, on the cover the layout had three main focals poiunts, a picture of the new messiah, the name of the mag, and a caption off to Thebomba’s pic that said, “Strong and Fit”. Of course that wasn’t referring to Obama, but to a completely different article.
But, it was their way to get on the pro-O bandwagon with a subliminal message addressing two of the “ones” perceived weaknesses. Everybody wants to make their political impact these days.
35 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:36 pm
For Americans an Obama win is not a victory. Were it not for the radical anti-American jurists he will put on the Subprime Court, I think an Obama win would do more for the conservative movement than even Dhimmie Carter, and would actually be a good thing in that regard.
And let’s face some undeniable facts, our nation is running away from God as fast as their little feet will carry them, and without a about-face and double time march, it is going to pay a price. The idea that some super smart politician can be voted into office and deliver America from God’s judgment is naive hope born in the minds of secular humanistic dreamers.
God has always dealt with wayward people the same way, turn (repent) or suffer the consequences of your abominations. A man of God that could strike fear into the hearts of this nation would do a hundredfold the good of the best of the best in political leaders.
ETsaid in a post a few months back, that his trust was in Barack Obama. It is obvious that many share in his trust, and see him as the hope for tomorrow.
Their words convey the attitude of their hearts saying, “God, we don’t need your help, we are (invincible) Americans.”
We will see how this election goes in just 7 days, no matter the outcome God is the one in control, and our future, whether it be good, or bad, is always in his hands. I doubt that even 5% of the people in this nation believe that God will one day judge our nation for its sin. That just isn’t how they view him. In fact, in their minds God really cannot judge us because it would not be PC.
36 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:44 pm
“I can do my job there in developing our natural resources and doing things like getting the roads paved and making sure our troopers have their cop cars and their uniforms and their guns, and making sure our public schools are funded,†she added. “But really all of that stuff doesn’t do any good if the people of Alaska’s heart isn’t right with God.†- Sarah Palin
Now that is the kind of attitude that God can use. Whether they are republican or democrat. I wonder though, could we find one democrat that would agree with her statement?
37 RepublicanAttackMachine // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:56 pm
bl31u “seems” to have a LOT of information about O’Bama’s supposed college years, (and achievements he SUPPOSEDLY” has), that “number 2″ will NOT release(?)
How about YOU releasing those records of your “SUPPOSED” facts about your messiah?
bl31u, you are ALWAYS questioning us here about our Christianity. I think we would ALL agree, the difference between us and you is, WE do not go to a lib site looking for a fight because that is NOT a Christian thing to do.
I will try to simplify for you since you have that disease called “lib brain”, if YOU were not here, WE would not be having the arguements that we have with you.
While I have just admitted to NOT being a good Christian, I have ALSO pointed to the FACT, YOU are here as a stumbling block, AND a tool of satan, and you WILL, from this moment forward be IGNORED by me.
I am sure you will return under another name, (if everyone else decides to ignore you too), as MOST trolls do when their motivations are found out.
Fred re: #8, Was the “Head Monk” named Alvin?
38 RepublicanAttackMachine // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Hawkeye re #33, Be careful, I used the word “scum” a few threads back when responding to a resident troll/dimocrat/lib and my ENTIRE post was deleted!
I reposted it with the word “scum” replaced by a different word and it was then posted.
I guess I still do not understand the rules. An American hero can be attacked and called vile names by, (well, you know), but it is against the rules to attack a typical troll and call them a name which is BETTER than they deserve???
Scott, I love ya man, but I believe GOD wants us to stop bending over backwards to be “fair” to the other side. That “turning the other cheek thing” is OK, but even GOD finally says enough is enough, as HE did with Sodam and Ghamorrah(sp), Pharoah, and the world during the great flood in Noah’s day!
In the end, the ONLY thing the evil ones will respect or understand is MIGHT and standing up to them!
39 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:24 pm
I would rather be standing outside of the (political) houses warning of the pending judgment than inside enjoying the party while it lasts.
Don’t get yourself all caught up in things that count for naught. Lay up treasure where it counts. America isn’t forever, Heaven is forever.
40 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Y’all do remember there is coming one day a leader who is so charismatic and popular that the whole world is going to swoon at his feet? Man is he gonna be somethin’! Simply to die for…
41 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:39 pm
RAM #38,
Thanks for the heads-up. I will try to watch my language from now on…
42 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:43 pm
RAM, #37
You should really work on that anger disorder. You also seem to have a fetish for capitalizing words, as I’ve mentioned before, kind of a juvenile thing.
“How about YOU releasing those records of your “SUPPOSED†facts about your messiah?”
I am currently using “The Message” Parallel Bible. You can find all of the details you like of my Messiah there.
I don’t expect you would understand that any more than you understand politics.
Luv ya, mean it!
43 Hawkeye // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:54 pm
mkk #40,
Simply to die for…
Reminds me of this passage…
Readin’ ya loud and clear buddy.
44 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Elections will come and go, the Kingdom of God is eternal, so…
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.
Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
Let not your hearts be troubled, even if McCain wins it will all be quite alright.
45 Fred Sinclair // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:01 pm
mkk #35 - Abraham was trying to cut a deal with God, God kept agreeing with each of Abe’s propositions. He got the deal down to ten righteous and quit, thereby sealing the fate of Sodom, Gomorrha and some other nearby towns. America has more than ten. I may be wrong, I’ve been wrong before (you probably knew that) but I’ve been right too.
In 1948 I was eleven years old and thought I was pretty smart. My Parents, my uncles and aunts, my friends parents - everybody was talking about “President Thomas Dewey.” At that time Harry Truman was probably the most hated man in America, I heard nasty, dirty comments that no kid should hear, but I was laughed at, kidded, made fun of and otherwise became a pariah. I insisted President Truman would be re-elected.
When asked why I was so stupid, I just smiled and said, “loyalty is more than just a word. President Truman stopped the war and I don’t believe God will reward him with a defeat.”
After Dewey lost, I was as surprised as anybody. When everybody asked, “How did you know?” being a stupid smart alec kid, I answered, “God understands loyalty.”
I hope I’m surprised again. President Bush and God has kept a repeat of 9/11 from happening. President Bush has done a whole bunch of things to which I strongly disapprove. Yet with all his faults (I’ve got a few of my own) he was loyal to his oath of office, he prioritized and to the best of my knowledge, he never compromised on what he saw as best for America’s security. God understands loyalty.
Then I recall that David had his own sins, yet God loved him. True David paid a great price under God’s hand of discipline, but God forgave and restored him.
Of course McCain is a horse of a different color but I find it hard to believe that God would turn America over to someone ho promotes and supports a platform based on the absence of God.
I guess we’ll have an idea in about a week. We won’t know the results until thousands of preplanned lawsuits are settled and the riots settle down. In the meanwhile, I’m praying for God’s will be done.
46 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:01 pm
MNK,
And even if Obama wins it will be quite alright, yes.
For God’s kingdom is not of this earth, correct?
47 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Bet you thought I was gonna name that other guy…
I realized as I was thinkin’ what I would say, that they are the ones that will have difficulty being gracious in defeat.
Dis you folks see where them skinhead punks in Tennessee were busted for plotting to be unkind to Obama? ET said we were going to be the ones that would mistreat him. Conservative republican skinheads?…
48 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Oh, R.A.M.,
A non-response is welcomed, but you won’t be able to ignore me. It’s not in your personality.
49 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:09 pm
MNK,
Respectfully, it is very difficult for some of us to tell the difference between the thought process between the skinhead punks and some posting here.
50 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Well, I have to go,
I have an Obama ralley to be at tomorrow morning.
I’ll check back and fill you all in on the details when I return.
Good night and God bless our troops.
51 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Hawkeye #43
I figured the brighter bulbs would catch that one.
But I do wonder a bit about how similar the current messiah will be in comparison to that one.
BlackLion #46
That’s what I’ve heard anyhow…
52 mindknumbed kid // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:18 pm
OK, but from what I hear McCain is canceling the Obama rally!
Remember, it’s up to us to keep the fun in fanatic.
53 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Sorry correction on #50 should be rally, for those of you stuck on spelling, typo’s and grammar.
54 BlackLion31U // Oct 28, 2008 at 10:23 pm
MNK,
I’m beginning to like you.
55 Tuesday Links : Stop The ACLU // Oct 28, 2008 at 11:03 pm
[...] Magazine: Something Happened Rightwing News: Building a Right Roots Movement Scrappleface: McCain’s Handlers Redistributing His Support Marion’s Space: Destroyed from [...]
56 everthink // Oct 28, 2008 at 11:06 pm
MNK,
“ET said we were going to be the ones that would mistreat him. Conservative republican skinheads?…”
Where do you think Skinheads fall on the political spectrum?
ET
57 everthink // Oct 28, 2008 at 11:16 pm
MNK,
Hint: Ask the Darthmeister.
58 gafisher // Oct 29, 2008 at 8:15 am
“Where do you think Skinheads fall on the political spectrum?
With the National Socialists, alongside all the other Socialists.
59 Poll: McCain’s Handlers Redistributing His Support at Republicans On Best Political Blogs // Oct 29, 2008 at 9:45 pm
[...] Poll: McCain’s Handlers Redistributing His Support McCain’s people mischaracterized the quote, and by portraying Republicans as too dull-witted to comprehend the finer points of Constitutional law. “It’s great playing against the McCain handlers,†said one unnamed Obama handler. … [...]
You must log in to post a comment.