Why shouldn't I vote for Obama??

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by Ferd

So it is perfectly fine for you to point out that Nazi's and Skinheads are on my team, but when I point to Che being on your team, the sweet clean Lord Jesus Chirst needs to forgive me?

LOL!

You see there’s a fundamental disconnect here. You see these as “teams”, like this is all just some game. I don’t. I see them more like political schools of thought each presenting their positions in the marketplace of ideas. The Democrats are not “my team” I’ve just found that I agree with them on more issues than not at this moment. But let’s continue with this “team” logic since you appear to understand it. You missed the complexity of my comparison. I wasn’t saying that Nazis are on your “team”…I was pointing out that they are extremists that give your “team” a bad name…but DON’T represent your team. Likewise those who might do something as stupid as supporting Che are not on my “team”…they are just extremists that give our team a bad name. Neither do the Nazis or the Che supporters represent either team in any official capacity. They are a non issue. But you continue to bring it up. And…I’ll continue to explain that it’s a non-issue.

What I ask the Lord to forgive you for is you insinuating that I’d personally support a madman like Che. And just in case you can’t grasp the complexity of my argument, I’ll clarify something before it launches out of your brain (because I can hear you ranting about this next if I don’t explain). I don’t think you support Nazis or white extremists. My point is that if I did accuse you of such… I would sound as insulting as you do for accusing me of being a Che supporter. It’s only a conversational tool meant to explain to you my point by using invalidation through comparison.

Simplified:

The mere idea of you supporting Neo-Nazis is as outlandish as your accusation that I support Che.

[DividedThigh]

Originally Posted by Neckstadt

I bet she is one tough cookie to live with...

well i am glad i dont have to worry about that , lol, dt

[Sister Alvear]

sent to me from a UPC pastor....

You folks know how I feel about politics...but thought this would give you more to talk about...ha...Blessings to all you folks.
> Friends,
> One of the men in my Sunday School Class sent this to me and I think it
> is worthy of your time to read what is written and to also click on the
> web site given
> below. It seems that she bagan this teaching the first of the year.
> Friends, this is prophecy
> being fulfilled right before our eyes.
>
> 'Oprah and Friends' to teach course on New Age Christ Many of you, like
> me, have probably
> been Oprah fans for a long time. This is very discouraging news to hear
> about one who has
> such tremendous influence on the general public. Please ask God to show
> Oprah the real
> Jesus Christ. Just to make sure this was true, I went on Oprah's website
> and there it is. The
> below article is very interesting, so I thought I would share.
> Subject: Oprah joins false prophets Bible warned about
> http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/007/smith-oprah.htm or
>
> 'Oprah and Friends' to teach course on New Age Christ Jesus Christ being
> reinvented,
> redefined, and blasphemed and, this false New- Age Christ teaching is
> about to make huge
> inroads into the world, with the help of the queen of television talk
> shows, Oprah Winfrey.
> Oprah Winfrey, beginning January 1, 2008, on her daily radiprogram will
> offer a year-long
> course on the New Age Christ , in a lesson a day and completely cover the
> 365 lessons
> from the Course in Miracles 'Workbook.' Listeners will be encouraged to
> buy A Course in
> Miracles for the year-long course, and an audio version, recited by
> Richard (John Boy
> Walton) Thomas will be available on compact disc. Those who finish the
> Course will have
> a wholly redefined spiritual mindset-a New Age worldview that include the
> beliefs that
> there is no sin, no evil, no devil. A Course in Miracles teaches
> itsstudents to rethink
> everything they believe about God and life, and,bluntly states: 'This is a
> course in mind
> training' and is dedicated to 'thought reversal.'The Course in
> Miracles -in reality-is the truth
> of the Bible turned upside down. Oprah told her television audience that
> Williamson's book,
> A Course in Miracles was one of her favorite books, and that she
> hadalready bought a
> thousand copies and would be handing them out to everyone in her studio
> audience.
> Oprah's endorsement skyrocketed Williamson's book to the top of the New
> York Times
> bestseller list .
>
> A Course in Miracles is allegedly a 'new revelation' from 'Jesus' to help
> humanity work
> through these troubled times. This 'Jesus'-who bears no doctrinal
> resemblance to the
> Bible's Jesus Christ-began delivering channeled teachings in 1965 to a
> Columbia
> University Professor of Medical Psychology, Helen Schucman. One day
> Schucman
> heard an 'inner voice' stating, 'This is a course in miracles. Please take
> notes.' For
> seven years she diligently took spiritual dictation from this voice that
> described himself as
> 'Jesus.' Here are some quotes from the 'Jesus' voice of A Course in
> Miracles :
> · 'There is no sin . . . '
> · A 'slain Christ has no meaning.'
> · 'The journey to the cross should be the last ' useless
> journey.'
> · 'Do not make the pathetic error of 'clinging to the
> old rugged cross.''
> · 'The Name of Jesus Christ as such is but a symbol...
> It is a symbol that is safely used as a replacement for
> the many names of all the gods to which you pray.'
> · 'The recognition of God is the recognition of yourself.'
> · 'The Atonement is the final lesson he [man] need
> learn, for it teaches him that, never having sinned,
> hehas no need of
> salvation.'
>
> Popular author Wayne Dyer told his PBS television audience that the
> 'brilliant writing'
> of A Course in Miracles would produce more peace in the world.
>
> The Course in Miracles-based book, Forgiveness, continues to be sold in
> Robert
> Schuller's Crystal Cathedral bookstore as Schuller prepares to host a
> January 17-19, 2008,
> 'Rethink Conference' at his Crystal Cathedral.
>
> King James Version (KJV) 2 Timothy 3:1-5
> 1) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall
> come.
> 2) For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous,
> boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents,
> unthankful, unholy,
> 3) Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
> incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
> 4) Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than
> lovers of God;
> 5) Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof:
> from such turn away.
> It's not surprising at all that Oprah Winfrey is supporting
> Barak Obama!!!
> Christians.....Take heed!!

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

You see there’s a fundamental disconnect here. You see these as “teams”, like this is all just some game. I don’t. I see them more like political schools of thought each presenting their positions in the marketplace of ideas. The Democrats are not “my team” I’ve just found that I agree with them on more issues than not at this moment. But let’s continue with this “team” logic since you appear to understand it. You missed the complexity of my comparison. I wasn’t saying that Nazis are on your “team”…I was pointing out that they are extremists that give your “team” a bad name…but DON’T represent your team. Likewise those who might do something as stupid as supporting Che are not on my “team”…they are just extremists that give our team a bad name. Neither do the Nazis or the Che supporters represent either team in any official capacity. They are a non issue. But you continue to bring it up. And…I’ll continue to explain that it’s a non-issue.

What I ask the Lord to forgive you for is you insinuating that I’d personally support a madman like Che. And just in case you can’t grasp the complexity of my argument, I’ll clarify something before it launches out of your brain (because I can hear you ranting about this next if I don’t explain). I don’t think you support Nazis or white extremists. My point is that if I did accuse you of such… I would sound as insulting as you do for accusing me of being a Che supporter. It’s only a conversational tool meant to explain to you my point by using invalidation through comparison.

Simplified:

The mere idea of you supporting Neo-Nazis is as outlandish as your accusation that I support Che.

well let me be clear. I dont need you asking the Lord on my behalf to fogive me for doing exactly what you did.

It seems your capasity to extend yourself certain lattidudes, exceeds your capasity to extend the EXACT SAME lattitude to others.

I said he was on your 'team' not that you were ideological soul mates. my use of the term team, means exactly the same that you said in the "schools of thought" rant.

by using the word "team" i was using a bit of scarcasm to stress the point.

you seem to get to say what ever. even insulting my intelegence (even in the post I just quoted)

yet at the same time accusing me of doing this to you. Do they give you guys a handbook or something? it is Clintonesk.

Peace out CheMan.

[DividedThigh]

ferd you crack me up, lol, dt

[BrotherEastman]

I guess some people are gluttons for punishment. *sigh*

[ChristopherHall]

Well Ferd, if that’s all you had issues with in my post I’m satisfied that I made my point. God bless ya.

So in my mind the issues of the phony email campaign against Obama and the Che flag are settled non-issues. Neither represent Obama himself in any official capacity.

But, Sis. Alvear brings up an interesting point to discuss. The email she presents closes,

> It's not surprising at all that Oprah Winfrey is supporting Barak Obama!!!

The email may be truthful; I’m going to look into it.

But I’ve known for many years that Oprah’s spirituality is essentially a New Age spirituality, so that’s a fact. But that has little to do with Barack Obama. President Reagan was good friends with and consulted a New Age astrologer named Marianne Williamson. Nancy was admittedly entirely into the New Age Astrology stuff and Billy Graham voiced his concerns to President Reagan. Yet Ronald Reagan is considered a paragon in politics of values, faith, and conservatism. While Marianne Williamson may have been associated with Reagan it doesn’t truly say anything about Reagan as an individual. Likewise, Oprah’s endorsement doesn’t truly say anything about Obama as an individual. Oprah is an African American woman who has always been concerned with social advancement of African American people. She is also concerned with the socio-economic issues that face the poor, especially inner-city African Americans. It’s of no surprise that she would endorse Obama.

Again, this is the “guilt by association” strategy, and while it adequately proves that liberal minded Hollywood types like Oprah might feel drawn to him…it doesn’t mean those are the only individuals who feel drawn to support him. I know solid conservatives that will vote for him in the primaries and in the general election to try to ensure that neither McCain nor Hillary (a womanizing basket case, yes McCain slept around on his wife of 14 years and then filed for a divorce) have a chance at the White House. I know a few African American Apostolics who disagree with Obama on several issues but are voting for him to raise the ceiling and social status of African Americans. There are networks of black churches who are “conservative” in theology and values, yet they are supporting him because he has talked about using the Office of Faith Based Initiatives to relieve poor inner city areas they minister to.

My point is that all of this is an attempt at “guilt by association”. Allow Obama to speak for himself. Evaluate his positions on their merits and then judge him fairly on the issues. All of this rings of tabloid politics.

[ChristopherHall]

Barack Obama was interviewed by Christianity Today. Here’s the interview should anyone wish to read it:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/.../104-32.0.html

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Well Ferd, if that’s all you had issues with in my post I’m satisfied that I made my point. God bless ya.

So in my mind the issues of the phony email campaign against Obama and the Che flag are settled non-issues. Neither represent Obama himself in any official capacity.

my issue with you in this thread is you speak from both corners of your mouth....often in the same post.


You dont support the Clintons yet you defend their positions.
you arent a democrat but you argue for all the salient points of democratism.
you dont support Che but defend fellow demcrats who give tacit approval of the murdering monster.
you claim to be maligned and attacked while maligning and attacking the intelegence of your detractors.
you stand for free speach but you support the fairness doctrine
AND
you arent a communist but you advocate the socializing of one fith of the US ECONOMY.

i think that sums it up pretty good.

[DividedThigh]

i love it, dt