Arlen Specter (D!!!-PA)

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="freedomCM" date=1241051903]Why is it that "abortion" is the only litmus test?



What about state sponsored killing via the death penalty? via war?



What about taking care of the poor? Respecting the weak?





I can see many reasons why people of various faiths, including xtians, might vote for the Democratic party.</blockquote>




From Rick Warren and again Not saying I agree......



"Hey Rick, let?s talk about the big elephant in the room,? Warren recalled Obama saying.



?When we Democrats ? do stuff for the poor and we do stuff for the sick, we don?t get many letters about it. But when we vote to support abortion we get thousands and tens-of-thousands of letters. What?s the issue here?? Obama had asked, according to Warren.



In response, Warren told Obama and the other Democrats in the room ? which included Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer ? that almost everybody has a single issue that they care about.



Turning to Clinton, Warren said the New York senator would likely not vote for someone who she felt was wrong on the civil rights issue, even though she might agree with them on everything else.



?And I went around the room and when I came to Chuck Schumer I said, ?Chuck, how bad, if you had a candidate and he was right in every single area that you agreed with but he?s a Holocaust denier??



??There?s no way you?re gonna vote for a holocaust denier,?? Warren recalled telling the Jewish American politician. ?That?s a single issue issue for you.?





<a href="http://www.christianpost.com/Society/Ethics_rights/2008/12/rick-warren-not-satisfied-with-making-abortions-rare-17/index.html">Full Article</a>
 
[quote author="MojoJD" date=1241051613]Well, as I see it, every "devout" Christian should give up the deed to their house and liquidate all of their savings to give to the homeless and hungry, fly to Africa, and lead a life in poverty just to help other people, right? haha. I never could get a straight answer from a priest when asking why they have such an expensive church when, if they sold it, they could feed so many starving people for so many years. Hypocrisy is the name of the game, in both religion and politics.</blockquote>


Mojo, it might surprise you (or not) that many Protestants actually feel the same as you do when it comes to a lavish church. The Catholics, I believe, see a beautiful church as honoring the Lord. The Protestants will look at it and ask the same question as you.... because Jesus said, "I was hungry and you gave me something to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you took me into your home." We feel the same that the resources could be spent in other ways. Be careful when grouping all of the denominations together. Actually, we are called to give our entire selves to God and for His will to be done, yes money and everything. Missionaries do like you describe and give up everything to evangelize in other parts of the world. Not every person is convicted to be a missionary because we are the church body, each with its own gift and purpose, just like our human body - the hand has its job, the foot has its job, the eyes have their job. Everything works together as one.
 
Please don't take this as partisan; it is just an observation: I have never seen such a complete and catastrophic collapse of a political party in my lifetime. Prior to the 2006 elections, Republicans had 56 senators, a solid majority in the House and the Presidency. Now with Specter switching parties, the Republicans can't even must a filibuster in the Senate. They have absolutely no power in Washington at all: none. In two election cycles, they went from controlling all the levers of power in Washington to being utterly powerless. I can't even think of a historic parallel to this. Amazing.
 
[quote author="IrvineRenter" date=1241081197]Please don't take this as partisan; it is just an observation: I have never seen such a complete and catastrophic collapse of a political party in my lifetime. Prior to the 2006 elections, Republicans had 56 senators, a solid majority in the House and the Presidency. Now with Specter switching parties, the Republicans can't even must a filibuster in the Senate. They have absolutely no power in Washington at all: none. In two election cycles, they went from controlling all the levers of power in Washington to being utterly powerless. I can't even think of a historic parallel to this. Amazing.</blockquote>






<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/4/29/725689/-The-Goposaur"><img src="http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/3/Goposaur_xlg.gif" alt="" /></a>
 
[quote author="IrvineRenter" date=1241081197]Please don't take this as partisan; it is just an observation: I have never seen such a complete and catastrophic collapse of a political party in my lifetime. Prior to the 2006 elections, Republicans had 56 senators, a solid majority in the House and the Presidency. Now with Specter switching parties, the Republicans can't even must a filibuster in the Senate. They have absolutely no power in Washington at all: none. In two election cycles, they went from controlling all the levers of power in Washington to being utterly powerless. I can't even think of a historic parallel to this. Amazing.</blockquote>


I actually think that is a spot on observation.



The Democrats, Obama's campaign team especially, have really done a great job of using todays technology and savy marketing to get their message out.



Part of that message is "It was all the Republicans fault".



What the Republicans need to realize is they are at fault for not grasping the technology that is available. They need be more concise in their messaging.



The fact that John McCain didn't even use email is just ridiculous. His marketing team should be shot for that. He should have been on email, facebook, twitter etc. etc.



The dinosaur picture is what they look like to most young and middle age people. Not being able to email just further solidifies that image.



I still don't think that would have won them the election or stopped the loss of power that has occured but they better catch up quickly.
 
[quote author="SoCal78" date=1241080290][quote author="MojoJD" date=1241051613]Well, as I see it, every "devout" Christian should give up the deed to their house and liquidate all of their savings to give to the homeless and hungry, fly to Africa, and lead a life in poverty just to help other people, right? haha. I never could get a straight answer from a priest when asking why they have such an expensive church when, if they sold it, they could feed so many starving people for so many years. Hypocrisy is the name of the game, in both religion and politics.</blockquote>


Mojo, it might surprise you (or not) that many Protestants actually feel the same as you do when it comes to a lavish church. The Catholics, I believe, see a beautiful church as honoring the Lord. The Protestants will look at it and ask the same question as you.... because Jesus said, "I was hungry and you gave me something to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you took me into your home." We feel the same that the resources could be spent in other ways. Be careful when grouping all of the denominations together. Actually, we are called to give our entire selves to God and for His will to be done, yes money and everything. Missionaries do like you describe and give up everything to evangelize in other parts of the world. Not every person is convicted to be a missionary because we are the church body, each with its own gift and purpose, just like our human body - the hand has its job, the foot has its job, the eyes have their job. Everything works together as one.</blockquote>


I disagree. I have set foot inside a structure, which was a protestant church. That building and land have substantial value, nevermind the adornments. What, you cant have a service in a park? And it stands to reason that the fact you have a computer and internet access means that you are not living at your bare minimum, leaving plenty for you to donate to the starving/dying people of the world to make yourself more "christ-like".



Ah yes, convenience vs. necessity.



My point is that no one is REALLY committed to the underlying ideals. Everyone participates to a degree, and rationalizes the rest for their own sake. Its human nature. Just because you are not a missionary doesnt mean that you are incapable of being one. You ENJOY your standards of living, and thus participate in a way that is convenient for you but which also satisfies your perception that you are doing "enough".



Almost no one is immune from this kind of scrutiny. People pick and choose what they like, advocating for some parts, ignoring others. Once people recognize this, maybe they'll stop feeling so compelled to push their personal views of morality upon others through political action.
 
<blockquote>Almost no one is immune from this kind of scrutiny. People pick and choose what they like, advocating for some parts, ignoring others. Once people recognize this, maybe they?ll stop feeling so compelled to push their personal views of morality upon others through political action.

</blockquote>


Mojo isn't that really what politic's is about. Is it morally right to give an unwed mother with 5 kids wellfare? Some would say yes some would say no. So by offering wellfare someone is pushing their morals on others.



Is the death penalty morally right or wrong? How about age of consent for statutory rape?



All of our decesions our wrapped up in our moral fiber and I think we all believe we are probably right. Why do we condem religous people who beleive that it is not a womans right to chose and vote that way?



Again I am not defending them but we must all realize the way we vote is based on our beliefs and we have no problem pushing our views on others. Maybe not because of religion but for some personal reason.
 
[quote author="MojoJD" date=1241144412]

I disagree. I have set foot inside a structure, which was a protestant church. That building and land have substantial value, nevermind the adornments. What, you cant have a service in a park? And it stands to reason that the fact you have a computer and internet access means that you are not living at your bare minimum, leaving plenty for you to donate to the starving/dying people of the world to make yourself more "christ-like".



Ah yes, convenience vs. necessity.



My point is that no one is REALLY committed to the underlying ideals. Everyone participates to a degree, and rationalizes the rest for their own sake. Its human nature. Just because you are not a missionary doesnt mean that you are incapable of being one. You ENJOY your standards of living, and thus participate in a way that is convenient for you but which also satisfies your perception that you are doing "enough".



Almost no one is immune from this kind of scrutiny. People pick and choose what they like, advocating for some parts, ignoring others. Once people recognize this, maybe they'll stop feeling so compelled to push their personal views of morality upon others through political action.</blockquote>


You said you could never get a straight answer from a "priest". If you were in a Protestant church, you would have been speaking with a pastor instead of a priest. If you were talking with a priest, the closest you could have come to Protestant was being in an Episcopal church which is like "Catholic Light". So naturally that is a red flag to me.



You are right - services can and do meet up at a park. My old church actually used a movie theatre after hours for meeting up. The one I go to now doesn't own a chapel... they are in an industrial complex and co-rent a small space with one or two other groups (not sure how many others it is now) then stagger the hours of use.



I'm sorry, how is it again that you know God's will if you're not a Christian? Are you saying since Christians aren't perfect, you're not even going to bother? That sounds pretty silly to me, but hey I do understand the backlash right now. I don't feel guilty about having a roof over my head and internet access. I am thankful for these blessings and I also want everyone to have their needs met. I do enjoy helping other people although in our beliefs grace is not earned through works. Christ came to convict and save. Salvation is a free gift, you can not earn your way to heaven through good deeds. If you want to have a sincere discussion about the "fruit of the spirit" which your comments border on... then I'd be happy, otherwise carry on. I hope this helps shed some light and thank you for reading. P.S. Trrenter - good comment.
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1241148246]<blockquote>Almost no one is immune from this kind of scrutiny. People pick and choose what they like, advocating for some parts, ignoring others. Once people recognize this, maybe they?ll stop feeling so compelled to push their personal views of morality upon others through political action.

</blockquote>


Mojo isn't that really what politic's is about. Is it morally right to give an unwed mother with 5 kids wellfare? Some would say yes some would say no. So by offering wellfare someone is pushing their morals on others.



Is the death penalty morally right or wrong? How about age of consent for statutory rape?



All of our decesions our wrapped up in our moral fiber and I think we all believe we are probably right. Why do we condem religous people who beleive that it is not a womans right to chose and vote that way?



Again I am not defending them but we must all realize the way we vote is based on our beliefs and we have no problem pushing our views on others. Maybe not because of religion but for some personal reason.</blockquote>


Is it Morally correct to tell that unwed mother of 5 that is pregnant that she cant have

an abortion and then tell her in the next breath that she cant have welfare either ?



I love the Pro Life attitude of taking abortion away from the poor and them letting the

child after birth, starve to death or face a life on the streets that means crime and prison.



But those Pro Life souls are clean for stopping abortion. Amen.



40% of US Births are to Unwed Mothers. Highest in the civilized world.



Where is Sarah Palin when we need her. Perfect example is her Daughter.

Unwed and Single. We really need to keep teaching abstinence.



You know what they call Parents that teach abstinence to their children ?



Grandparents.
 
[quote author="bltserv" date=1240980369]Nothing wrong with being conservative. Or Conservative ideas.

FYI: I am voting NO on all the California Initiatives.

Screw the Prison and Teacher unions.</blockquote>


You mean screw public schools and the children taught in them, of course. Important kids have parents who can afford private schools, right?
 
[quote author="Geotpf" date=1241953062][quote author="bltserv" date=1240980369]Nothing wrong with being conservative. Or Conservative ideas.

FYI: I am voting NO on all the California Initiatives.

Screw the Prison and Teacher unions.</blockquote>


You mean screw public schools and the children taught in them, of course. Important kids have parents who can afford private schools, right?</blockquote>


No screw the UNIONS. Save the Schools.



I suggest you read the LA Times pieces written by Jason Song the last week.



<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-teachers6-2009may06,0,3038809.story">http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-teachers6-2009may06,0,3038809.story</a>[



"The article found that firing permanent teachers can involve years of rehabilitation efforts, union grievances and administrative and court appeals. Administrators must spend months -- sometimes years -- observing and documenting the flaws of poorly performing teachers. Teachers can appeal firings to specially convened panels, which overturn the dismissals more than a third of the time."





"The newspaper examined all available decisions by those panels over the last 15 years -- 159 cases statewide -- finding that teaching performance was rarely a factor in firing an instructor. The vast majority of educators were dismissed for egregious misconduct"
 
was your dander similarly riled by the attempt to run out the heathen?



or the teachers of the 'wrong' political party? the commies in the 50s? the married women in the 20s?





no one is going to defend the operation of the larger, dysfunctional administrations, but the protections are there to remedy past abuse by the same administrations.
 
No, but it was before I was born. All I can do is shake my head much like much before the 60s and no endure the misguided heavy headed 'corrections' or 'equalizations' or 'leveling of the field' or yadda yadda similarly rationalized BS.
 
310,000 Teachers in California. Only 159 have been fired in the last 15 years.

Unless you commit murder. You would never be fired for poor performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top