It’s Sunday, do you know where your lord Obama is?
The salacious assassination p0rn around Obamessiah still pops up, as Karl notes. The Obamagod portion of the trinity is being protected by a wider wedge of the faithful who are deciding what will or will not be acceptable campaigning against Obamagod, while He remains above the fray. Howard Kurtz asks
Is Barack Obama protected by a special suit of armor–one that fits only African Americans?Obviously, anyone running against the first black candidate with a serious shot at the presidency has to be sensitive about racial slights, real or perceived.
While Ben Smith points out how Obamagod works this to his advantage
And the dynamic of outrage and offense this campaign has proved race to be a much touchier subject than gender. At times, Obama’s campaign has sought to downplay burgeoning outrage. At others, the candidate has stoked it for political advantage.But most of the flaps ended the same way: with Obama forgiving the alleged offender. Sometimes he’s accepted the apologies graciously, sometimes sternly, but always in line with his message. And that message of reconciliation  often explicitly racial reconciliation  is a central part of his campaign’s appeal. With a general election that appears likely to open him to more Republican attacks, and more line-crossing, the campaign ritual of offense and forgiveness appears likely to be repeated often this year. [...]
“There is no better way to appear magnanimous and above the fray than in gracefully accepting an apology,†said Chris Lehane, a California political consultant who supports Clinton. [...]
“It’s simple. He’s Teflon,†said Jim Jordan, a Democratic consultant who worked for the campaign of Sen. Chris Dodd.
At the faithful level, the pre-emptive strategy is to demonize Republicans even before the general election
Right now, deep in the GOP dungeons, they’re planning their racist, disgraceful assault.
The true difficulty facing the GOP’s henchmen in the coming months will be how to get those who are just a tiny bit smarter, calmer, less easily swayed, those on the right who might actually be a bit impressed and charmed by Obama’s obvious intelligence and oratory power, to hate him, fear him, find his genuinely moving brand of hope and inspiration to be suspicious and problematic and even deeply dangerous. [...]
When they stole two elections for Bush, the brutal, homophobic conservative machine was tightly organized, had focus, mountains of cash, Karl Rove, the backing of a very nefarious, deeply inbred team of ultra-wealthy war hawks hell-bent on taking over the nation and ruling with a flaccid peni- … er, iron fist.
This is not just the province of politics, but potential Obama blasphemy is being challenged in pop culture
Is Fred Armisen, who is not African American, “black enough” to embody Obama on “Saturday Night Live”?
Maureen Ryan of the Chicago Tribune put the question bluntly: “Call me crazy, but shouldn’t ‘Saturday Night Live’s’ fictional Sen. Barack Obama be played by an African American?” Ryan went on to conclude: “I find ‘SNL’s’ choice inexplicable. Obama’s candidacy gives us solid proof of the progress that African Americans have made in this country. I guess ‘SNL’ still has further to go on that front.”
Hannah Pool, a writer for the Guardian newspaper in Great Britain, suggested the whole setup had “minstrel” overtones.
“Casting a black actor wouldn’t have guaranteed the quality of the sketch, but it would have made the whole thing a lot less shoddy,” Pool wrote. “Let’s get one thing straight. The moment anyone starts reaching for ‘blackface,’ they are on extremely dodgy territory. Anyone who thinks it’s either necessary or, for that matter, remotely funny to black-up needs to have the gauge on their moral compass reset.”
Todd Boyd, a professor of critical studies at the University of Southern California, at the end of the article states:
“[W]hen you have a figure as historically important as Barack Obama … people can get mighty protective of his image.”
Ah, Obama’s image. Much like the Danish cartoon flap, mocking, parodying or criticizing Obama’s image Will Have Consequences!
It’s a long road to November and it will be interesting to see how much political opposition to, or even doubt of, His Holiness will be dismissed as “unacceptable.”
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 11:38 am #
awww…who did the photoshop?
its adorable.
;)
O isnt teflon, but he was dipped in the pool of invincibilty.
like Achilles.
so he does have a vulnerable spot, where the goddess held him by the heel.
its pretty funnie watching the right flail around trying to find it.
hehe, i dont think tryin to make the muslim connection with cartoon flap is gonna work either darleen.
that weapon has turned in your hand every time so far.
that wasnt nearly subtle enuff.
try harder hehe.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 11:43 am #
nishi
look at the bottom right hand corner of the pic.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 11:44 am #
tch, tch, crude wont cut it darleen.
ur a slower learner than bilary’s campaign staff.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 11:45 am #
It’s not the moslem connection, nishi, it’s the religious fanatic connection.
try to keep up, eh?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 11:45 am #
oh, i like the photoshop!
but im afraid it will not have the desired effect.
lulz
Comment by Sticky B on 3/2 @ 11:46 am #
Man!!!
That dude from the SF Chronicle is from another planet. How the fuck do people that deranged get a pulpit to spout from in a MSM organ? Wait…..my bad. What the fuck was I saying?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 11:46 am #
but it is wat ppl will percieve, darleen.
it is all about teh perception.
Comment by SGT Ted on 3/2 @ 11:48 am #
Well, it IS SF. They are chock full of ObamaGodbags.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 11:49 am #
tarring O with a muslim brush already didnt work.
you need something new.
telling ppl they are stupid to like obama so much (im decoding ur message here) is both sort of offensive and ineffective.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 3/2 @ 11:54 am #
It will be interesting to see how much quiet resentment such a campaign strategy will generate, telling people they are racists if they have any questions about Obama.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 12:01 pm #
People who hitch their wagons to substanceless Hopeychangitude are stupid. If that offends, oh well.
Comment by gahrie on 3/2 @ 12:09 pm #
I’ll get upset about actors “wearing blackface” immediately after the wayans brothers are attacked for White Chicks.
Comment by heet on 3/2 @ 12:13 pm #
Nishi, you are totally missing the point. Darleen pukes out these posts because they just feel so darn good to write. Being superior morally isn’t just a state of mind, it’s a freakin’ way of life! It doesn’t matter what the issues are, all that matters is those filthy people not like Darleen are doing something distasteful, and totally being made to do it by the media. Ungodly souls! To the internet for some typing!
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 12:14 pm #
nice projection there, heet.
Comment by heet on 3/2 @ 12:15 pm #
nice photoshop, Darleen.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 12:25 pm #
omg i lurved white chix!
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 12:28 pm #
Nishi, heet, while I leave open the likelihood that your inability to get the point is purposeful, Darleen’s point in comparing the cartoon flap and the possibility of people being “protective” of Obama’s “image” is people using rage for a political weapon to quell speech. Will anyone be able to criticize Obama as a politician without being accused of racism? Will the reactions to criticism of Obama be to answer the criticism, or to attack the critic for various perceived sins?
So far, it appears the left is taking the “racism and sins” path. That’s not very comforting.
No doubt the left’s patting themselves on the back for this, out of the belief they’ve been “persecuted” for the last eight years.
Comment by heet on 3/2 @ 12:41 pm #
No, Rob, you are not getting the point. Constructing fanciful straw men of the left and the media to lash out against does not make an argument, it makes you sad.
Comment by Carin on 3/2 @ 12:46 pm #
Oh, teh irony when you compare this from nishi:
With this from the SF article:
And, Obama’s hope and inspiration are rooted in Socialism. I don’t care for it. The projection, by those on the left, is simply never-ending. McCain=Hagee, but pay no attention the man (Wright) behind the Obamassiaha.
Comment by Ted Nugent's Soul Patch on 3/2 @ 12:52 pm #
“Constructing fanciful straw men of the left and the media to lash out against does not make an argument, it makes you sad.”
Translation: Directly quoting people’s own words is not an accurate indication of what they actually mean.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 12:54 pm #
not irony, truth.
;)
O can repudiate Wright and still keep his balck voters.
he has made his bones in black already.
mccain is tryin to make his bones as a theocon.
the repubs cant win without the theocon vote, they are 1/3 of the party.
that is why u wont see mccain repudiate hagee, even tho hagee is an obvious whackjob.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 12:58 pm #
those on the right who might actually be a bit impressed and charmed by Obama’s obvious intelligence and oratory power,
also any that might lean pro-choice.
O will paint mccain as the anti-abortion candidate and independents and repubs that are prochoice will bail like rats on a sinking ship.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 12:59 pm #
mccain must embrace LIFE!
or u lose for sure.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:00 pm #
Yeah, that’s how they beat Bush…twice.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 1:04 pm #
mccain as the anti-abortion candidate and independents and repubs that are prochoice will bail
We haven’t yet, nishi, because as much as you and heet’s double standards and chosen willingness to believe in mythical Republican stereotypes, Roe v Wade isn’t the #1 concern of Republicans, or most conservatives for that matter. Remember, the two only overlap. They aren’t the same.
We already know that Obama says one thing while his campaign makes hurried, whispered calls to people to tell ‘em “never mind O’s rhetoric, he doesn’t really mean it.”
Comment by heet on 3/2 @ 1:04 pm #
So you have no problem with lefty blogs finding the most outrageous wingnut quotes and claim they represent the whole of Republicans? Now that I think about it, some of those quotes come from here. So, uh, yeah. Carry on.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:05 pm #
different times, pablo hunnie.
perot beat bush, not clinton.
i dont think u can beat O, even with the theocons on board, but im dammed sure u will lose the general without them.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 1:07 pm #
heet
I’m quoting above MSM columnists and writers.
And yeah, quoting Moby comments on “winger” sites as representing all Republicans is pretty much SOP in lefty blogs.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:08 pm #
LIFE! is not a stereotype, darleen.
for ur core constituency it is the single issue.
that is why Huckabee.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:09 pm #
Try this century, nishi. There’s no Perot in this race.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:10 pm #
Lost?
Comment by Carin on 3/2 @ 1:11 pm #
O can repudiate Wright and still keep his balck voters.
Well,then all means … why doesn’t he do that? Regardless, the hard questions will probably never be asked of him. Like, how does he reconcile his afro-centric religion with being leader of a multi-racial society?
And, I checked the mission statement of my (new! – yea, finally found a good one) church today. No reference to race or ethnicity anywhere.
Comment by Carin on 3/2 @ 1:14 pm #
So you have no problem with lefty blogs finding the most outrageous wingnut quotes and claim they represent the whole of Republicans? Now that I think about it, some of those quotes come from here. So, uh, yeah. Carry on.
You know, I don’t really want to pick on heet, because I think he/she might be mentally challenged.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 3/2 @ 1:15 pm #
Nishi is ineducable. Why try?
Comment by Carin on 3/2 @ 1:16 pm #
LIFE! is not a stereotype, darleen.
for ur core constituency it is the single issue.
that is why Huckabee.
That’s why you NEVER see conservatives hotley debate abortion. Ever. Lock/step we are on it.
nishi – do you actually know any Republicans?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:16 pm #
and GW always brings it up, and mccain said…..
“I am hopeful that Catholics, Protestants and all people of faith who share my vision for the future of America will respond to our message of defending innocent life, traditional marriage, and compassion for the most vulnerable in our society.â€Â
LIFE!==anti-abortion, darleen.
Comment by Ted Nugent's Soul Patch on 3/2 @ 1:16 pm #
“So you have no problem with lefty blogs finding the most outrageous wingnut quotes and claim they represent the whole of Republicans?”
heet, I realize your emotional maturity level never passed kindergarten (hence the old “Republicans do it too!” tu quoque argument found on any playground), but those excerpts are from mainstream sources, not your perjorative wingnut blogs. It’s becoming pretty damn obvious when one actually reads the news that Obama’s supporters are angling to preempt any criticism of the man by insinuating that the critic is a racist bigot. Normally, I’d chalk this up to simple cynical political strategy, but when a man is cheered for simply blowing his nose, it’s clearly crossing over into the realm of a personality cult, a sociological development that a self-styled “liberal” should be immediately suspicious of.
Comment by Old Dad on 3/2 @ 1:17 pm #
I think I can simplify things for the more troll minded among us.
1. Mark Morford is an idiot. Your dog makes more sense.
2. McCain will not get the African American vote. Neither did W.
3. Like it or not, McCain will get the reactionary racist vote (however small) no matter what.
4. Thus, race is a nonissue.
5. McCain will attack Obama on Obama’s ridiculous policy proposals–successfully.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:17 pm #
oh pablo hunnie u meant congress?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 1:18 pm #
I don’t think you have understood what the stereotype is, nishi. That second statement of yours? That’s the stereotype.
And it’s a false stereotype.
Comment by Rusty on 3/2 @ 1:19 pm #
#21
You are becoming oh so redundant.
they are 1/3 of the party.
No. They’re not.
Comment by JD's Better Half on 3/2 @ 1:21 pm #
heet – Could you explain to us the racially correct ways in which one can criticize Obama’s socialist policies?
I would ask nishi, but she seems to be intent on drawing some connection between Republicans and Christians, and have us assume that there are no Christians on the Democrat team. It is to laugh.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:24 pm #
No, I meant the guy who currently lives in the WH. Remember this?
It doesn’t work that way. Most people, particularly those with any sense, realize that the POTUS has damned little to do with abortion. It’s not a huge issue in electing a POTUS except for a very small minority on either side.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:25 pm #
but old dad.
rasmussen markets poll
O will get the pro-choice vote.
the anti-war vote.
the GW was libertine on spending an we got nuttin for it.
the hope vote.
the change vote.
and others.
i think O’s gonna win, and part of the reason is that the repubs became pathologically dependent on the theocons.
mccain could attract a lot of independents, but once he embraces LIFE! he loses all the prochoice indepentdents.
cuts both ways.
the pew poll was interestin…the word that most describes mccain is old.
55%
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:29 pm #
And McCain will get the “Let’s elect an adult” vote.
Comment by heet on 3/2 @ 1:29 pm #
The sfgate opinion page is now the MSM. Huh.
And Kurtz is simply pointing out a fact that the GOP is struggling with now. What he says is true, though it makes you squirm because it removes a powerful weapon from the GOP armamentarium.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 1:30 pm #
the word that most describes mccain is old.
AGEIST!!!!1!!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:30 pm #
The pro-life position of the Republican Party Platform was arrived at through the democratic process and has been consistently maintained through seven Republican National Conventions. Speaking through its Platforms adopted in 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, and 2000, the Republican Party has consistently upheld the right to life of unborn babies ever since the Roe v. Wade decision. The text has remained remarkably constant ever since 1984 and offers the voters a clear difference from the Democratic Platform.
Comment by heet on 3/2 @ 1:30 pm #
JD’s better half – yeah, just do it and quit bitching and moaning like a bunch of ninnies.
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 1:31 pm #
O will get the pro-choice vote.
the anti-war vote.
the GW was libertine on spending an we got nuttin for it.
the hope vote.
the change vote.
and others.
There’s quite a bit of overlap there.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 1:33 pm #
The sfgate opinion page is now the MSM
Since SFgate runs his columns twice a week and pays his salary, I would consider him just as much a part of the MSM as Krugman, Dowd, G. Will, or the late Buckley.
Or since Kurtz is just expressing his opinion, he doesn’t count?
you’re really into Calvinball, aren’t you, heet?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:34 pm #
the Wirthlin poll found that Republicans are united on the abortion issue. Sixty-four percent of Republicans took a pro-life position, while 32% took a pro-abortion position. Republican women gave equally pro-life responses, with 65% taking a pro-life position and 33% taking a pro-abortion position.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:36 pm #
WaPo/CNN’s Kurtz? Yeah, he’s MSM.
Comment by Carin on 3/2 @ 1:37 pm #
United with 64%? Majority, yes, but united? Get ten republicans in a room, and almost four of then are pro-choice.
Regardless, what percentage of that 64% would list abortion as their “core” issue?
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 1:38 pm #
So, nishi those pro-choice Repubs and independents should have bailed long ago, but didn’t. And you think they’re going to now why, exactly? Because of the hopeychangitude?
Comment by J. Peden on 3/2 @ 1:39 pm #
Obama is half-white, half-woman, born in Hawaii – not Africa – etc.. So SNL probably did the best they could under Progressivism’s continually changeling conditions, then oso progressively projected upon the rest of us.
But regardless of whether Islam considers Barak Hussein Obama an apostate, Barak Hussein Obama is certainly a useful dhimmi to the Religion of Islamofascism’s deathworshipping metaethic and practice.
Some coincidence, eh?
Comment by Hope Muntz on 3/2 @ 1:40 pm #
The last thing this presidential campaign will stimulate will be any sort of open or honest debate about race. That would actually be a wonderful thing if, as some bloggers claim, we have as a nation moved beyond racism. But we haven’t, least of all on the left. Their arguments are not only reverse-racist (‘It’s time for this country to have a black president’–apparently ANY black president), but age-ist and at times sexist as well. Nowhere is this more evident than on college campuses like mine. A number of aging male professors here are routinely dismissed, with a contemptuous sneer, as ‘old white men’ (even quite openly and shockingly to their faces in seminars); now I hear McCain insulted with exactly the same epithet. Imagine uttering the reverse aloud as a pejorative–it would be grounds if not for dismissal, then at least suspension, if I said any such thing to my students. Yet Obama supporters haven’t hesitated to employ the term ‘old white woman’ in regard to Clinton.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 1:41 pm #
good Lord Obama, nishi, nothing better than a 9 yearold poll that doesn’t give us the poll questions nor explains what defines “pro-life” or “pro-choice.”
However, I will be interesting to see Obama faithful explaining His vote against a bill that would keep live-born victims of abortion from active/inactive euthansia.
Comment by Old Dad on 3/2 @ 1:41 pm #
The hopeitude will get old. How many times can you listen to a Donnie Osmond song without puking for crissakes?
The choice is exceptionally clear cut. At the end of the day, how many moderates will pull the lever for for a completely untested lefty? American’s appreciate a good song and dance man, but most won’t bet the farm on him.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:42 pm #
In 2004, white evangelicals made up 23% of the population, and 37% of the Republican Party.
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 1:44 pm #
I wonder what percent of the population is made up of weatherman-sympathizing, anti-Israel, anti-American flag leftists, and what percentage of them are in the Democratic party.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:46 pm #
pablo, im prochoice, proESCR, and violently opposed to my tax dollars funding the bioluddite council.
and im a republican.
my desire for safety trumped everything up to now.
i think GW has done an excellent job in Iraq.
and i think it is time for us to let the Iraqis take over.
we have done what we can.
we cant be foreverbabysitters.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 1:48 pm #
Hmmm…
Polls are consistently showing that Americans are becoming more pro-life. A December poll conducted by Zogby International, a respected nonpartisan polling firm, confirms that, by a 53% to 36% margin, the public supports the statement, “Abortion destroys a human life and is manslaughter.”
http://www.zogby.com/soundbites/readclips.dbm?ID=6982
Some 68 percent of Republicans agreed with the statement that abortion “destroys a human life and is manslaughter” while 43 percent of Democrats in the U.S. also agreed.
You best stop percieving abortion as being such a seminal issue, nishi, because the reality ain’t breaking in your favor.
Comment by Ted Nugent's Soul Patch on 3/2 @ 1:50 pm #
“The sfgate opinion page is now the MSM. Huh.”
Uh, yeah, the same way the NYT editorial page is. You really are getting desperate.
“And Kurtz is simply pointing out a fact that the GOP is struggling with now. What he says is true, though it makes you squirm because it removes a powerful weapon from the GOP armamentarium.”
Thank you for so aptly proving the point of my previous post.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 1:51 pm #
So what?
They’re not the boogeymen you believe they are.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 1:52 pm #
We can do a lot more. Iraq is not a discarded toy, it’s a shiny Gundam for the display case that we want people to see and covet. This way people in the Middle East will have an objective correlative for progress. It’s very sad how they have gone so long without one.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 3/2 @ 1:55 pm #
8% of the US population are Evangelicals, regardless of race, and represent 19% of Republicans.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 1:56 pm #
On what issues — other than defense — do you agree with the Republican party? Taxes? Trade? Environmental policy? Federalism? Regulatory excess?
If you’re willing to ignore these other issues because of the single issue of “LIFE!!!one!!”, then aren’t you merely the mirror-image of the “theocon” stereotype you’ve constructed?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 1:56 pm #
darleen i dont care.
i think abortion is a personal choice and shud be between u and god/allah/hashem.
i think gay marriage is a personal choice.
i dont want ur religious ideas legislated.
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 2:00 pm #
You know Obama isn’t pro gay marriage, right nish?
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 2:00 pm #
Gay marriage is not about personal choice. That’s a complete misunderstanding. Gay marriage is about creating a societal dictat that gay people should get married and have babies.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 2:03 pm #
Gay marriage says silly faggot you don’t even know how wrong you’ve been doing your gay. It’s time for you to settle down and raise a family.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:03 pm #
ima libertarian, a federalist and a constitutionalist.
but i dont much of that in todays republican party.
GW and the repubs increased size of governtment and spent like drunken sailors.
GW’s only two vetoes were on ESCR, not porkbarrel spendin or government growth.
GW signed a bill at 1:00 am that attempted to subvert the separation of powers!!!!
tell me why i shud stay…can u?
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 2:04 pm #
ESCR is porkbarrel spendin. Der.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 2:06 pm #
i think abortion is a personal choice and shud be between u and god/allah/hashem.
…
i dont want ur religious ideas legislated.
No, you want your own religious ideas legislated. Just like the theocons.
Are there bullet holes in your mirror, nishi?
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 2:09 pm #
No, you want your own religious ideas legislated
Yes, that’s it exactly. That’s the thing people most of the time just can’t see.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 2:10 pm #
B Moe
No, you want your own religious ideas legislated
You beat me to it.
nishi? Didn’t you know that laws against stealing and murder are based on religious values?
Or maybe you think it was rabid secularists behind the abolitionist movement?
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 2:10 pm #
Bush has 8 vetoes to date. You’re a statistician/scientist like I’m a lesbian astronaut.
Well, no. NIH isn’t pork.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:11 pm #
but im not just runnin away.
im running towards.
the very things about O that u find so offensive, empower him.
he is not owned by policy, in the sense that mccain and bilary are.
he has a much bigger window of hysteresis, simply because he is not committed.
he is empowered to be adaptible.
the way he has run his campaign is simply brilliant.
what if he can apply that brilliance to running the presidency?
Comment by Techie on 3/2 @ 2:11 pm #
I’m about to ask nishi to learn to freaking type, but would that be forcing my Christian Hetero-normative syntax on him?
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 2:14 pm #
And there you have the essence of it, the cry for attention, the call for affirmation.
I kinda think you should just go, nish, but I’m not even a Republican so my opinion should be taken with that in mind. Maybe a registered GOPer or two will have something to offer you so that you’ll stay in the fold. Let’s see, shall we?
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 2:16 pm #
he is empowered to be adaptible
BWHAHAHAH!
So when he hauls out the far Left agenda that he cannot even be questioned on during the run up to the annointing to the White House, you’ll be forbidden from questioning even that
becuz of teh ADAPTIBLITY!!!1!!!1!
:::guffaw:::snicker:::
Comment by McGehee on 3/2 @ 2:16 pm #
The very things about N that you find so offensive, only empower her.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:16 pm #
nishi? Didn’t you know that laws against stealing and murder are based on religious values?
oh no….those are biology driven tribal values.
those are things that were biologically bad for your consanguinous kin, so they were bad for survival and reproduction.
religion just extends those tribal benefits to a wider memetic, nonconsanguinous tribe.
ensoulment of a fetilized egg is a religious idea.
gay marriage bein “bad” is a religious idea.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 2:17 pm #
I don’t think so Pablo. The NOH isn’t pork when it is left to them to be the arbiter of investment of research moneys. ESCR directs them to devote that money to a particular vested political interest. That’s pork. ESCR is not about science, it’s about creating fundraising appeals for Democrats. That’s why Christopher Reeve was such a great prop. Sort of Hollywood Schiavo really.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:17 pm #
haha, ok pablo.
im interested, what were the other vetoes?
but u wont change my vote.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 2:19 pm #
*NIH* also, I am pro-lesbian astronaut. I don’t want that to get lost.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 2:20 pm #
he is empowered to be adaptible.
Damn right, how do you think he will adapt to this trend?
A December poll conducted by Zogby International, a respected nonpartisan polling firm, confirms that, by a 53% to 36% margin, the public supports the statement, “Abortion destroys a human life and is manslaughter.â€Â
Do you think he will support your theocratic solution of letting God/Allah/Hashem speak for the rights of the unborn?
i think abortion is a personal choice and shud be between u and god/allah/hashem.
Or will his brilliance be empowered by the will of the majority, and potential voters?
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 2:21 pm #
#84 nishi
so religious values are biologically based? So why do you argue against pro-life and anti-samesex marriage? Obviously abortion and samesex marriage are anti-biological. They don’t further human existence.
Comment by Techie on 3/2 @ 2:21 pm #
Hashem works in mysterious ways, but apparently not through the electorate.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 2:23 pm #
oh, btw, nishi, small nit
Gays can get married. It’s samesex marriage that is problematic and a radical departure from history.
Comment by ushie on 3/2 @ 2:24 pm #
Jesus H. Goddam Christ, nishi, would it fucking kill you to fucking type in fucking standard fucking English?
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 2:28 pm #
oh no….those are biology driven tribal values.
Robbery, maybe. Murder not so much.
Murder is often completely accepted under the right circumstances.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:35 pm #
no…the belief that fertilized eggs are ensouled could hardly have arisen in the EEA.
so its religious.
and kinda stupid.
marriage now….marriage is evolutionary.
samesex marriage is evolving…originally most marriages were polygamous.
hehe, its in the bible.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 2:36 pm #
So the concept of marriage as a public contract for a man and woman to commit to one another for the purpose of bearing and raising children, that is not biologically driven? Who knew?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:38 pm #
haha, i come here for three reasons, feets, dan and jeff.
and also….5 years of the bioluddite council and the theocon hijacking of the republican party has given me….an appetite for your dismay.
delicious!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:40 pm #
ur one man and one woman concept evolved from one man and several women.
that was the original biological model that was successful in the EEA.
Comment by Techie on 3/2 @ 2:41 pm #
I’m lost.
What the hell is nishi talking about? The Equal Employment Act?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:42 pm #
marriage is a biological concept.
stipulating number of partners and sex of partners is religious.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 2:42 pm #
Environment of Evolutionary Advantage.
Comment by wwjfkd? on 3/2 @ 2:52 pm #
“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.” – John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 2:53 pm #
Pork is when a Congresscritter directs money to their district through earmarks. ESCR, as it has been twice vetoed, doesn’t come with any money attached. It only allows ESC research projects, under some very specific guidelines, to compete for existing NIH funding with everything else that is currently eligible. That’s not pork, and they are not directed to fund ESCR, only to consider it with everything else they consider funding. Their mission is to fund the best science.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 2:55 pm #
No, it isn’t. If we went on pure biology, men would never marry.
Yeah, like marriage.
Comment by JD's Better Half on 3/2 @ 2:55 pm #
Now I know why JD enjoys some of you so much, and why some of you infuriate him so. The ones that disagree with you around here seem to disagree with the mere idea OF you, rather than your actual ideas. Heet and this nishi character, I am looking directly at you.
Comment by Belvedere jones on 3/2 @ 2:56 pm #
>ima libertarian, a federalist and a constitutionalist.
>but i dont much of that in todays republican party.
>GW and the repubs increased size of governtment and spent like drunken sailors.
is it just me or does the above reasoning for turning to the dems/obama make no sense? dems have no use for federalism or libertarianism. and though bush spent like crazy, no one spends like a dem.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 3:02 pm #
marriage is a biological concept.
stipulating number of partners and sex of partners is religious.
Do you understand how biology works? Polygamous systems were also more social in nature. When old, rich men could stockpile wives, it forced young men to go out and conquer and kidnap. Monogamy tends to encourage stability, and diversity in the gene pool.
Comment by Kirk on 3/2 @ 3:11 pm #
Lost in the shuffle….great Photoshop!
Comment by serr8d on 3/2 @ 3:17 pm #
Nishi, religion (as you define religion, Godless) has to be purely biological in origin. Without a God, and as an atheist, you only have biology from which to derive religion; those holy books (bible, Koran, etc) are, without a God, simply primers on how to live life for the increasing sophisticated animals we as Godless are.
But you say there is a God? Then you have to believe in a soul, because without a soul, what is a God’s use and purpose? Most religions see our souls as a bit of God-self superimposed on some well-constructed cellular creatures (that you are having trouble figuring out, eh?)
And, answer my ethics question while you’re at it.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 3:36 pm #
Oh. Ok. It’s not pork. But it’s not really about science either, from the Dem pov I don’t think. It’s mostly fundraising and how Christians are bad and that’s why your Mom is sick. Politicizing science is not how you depoliticize science. Then again, when they frame it as an issue of squandering our lead in bioscience, I think that’s fair game. I really should give this all a rethink.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 3:38 pm #
Indeed. Nor from the R pov.
Amen to that.
Comment by MlR on 3/2 @ 3:39 pm #
“GW signed a bill at 1:00 am that attempted to subvert the separation of powers!!!!
tell me why i shud stay…can u?”
And nearly everything you listed, I am as well. Libertarian, federalist, constitutionalist. Old-school, small-government Conservative. It is easy to make a passable argument why someone such as this should be unhappy with the Republicans. I’ve made numerous times.
This, however, is much different from voting for and endorsing just about the polar-opposite of all three of these.
Comment by MlR on 3/2 @ 3:42 pm #
Seems to me that all you’ve really got is a crush. Well, and a serious non-conformist conformist streak.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 3:43 pm #
Hi better half! Glad you guys are back home.
Oh and also yes I guess stipulating number of partners and sex of partners is religious, but for real I don’t see why gay people covet that institution. They have a tabula rasa, save for Europa is how I look at it. They can make new shapes and forms, and I’ve heard they have a rather artistic bent, but this whole marriage dealio suggests a real dearth of creativity.
Starting from the idea that stipulating number of partners and sex of partners is religious is letting the churchy tail wag the gay dog I think.
Comment by Sean M. on 3/2 @ 4:01 pm #
How did I know that SF Chron link was a Morford piece without even clicking on it?
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 4:04 pm #
Uh oh. Barack proclaimed himself a Christian today and said that he prays to Jeebus every night. This is BOOOOOSH! all over again.
Comment by JD on 3/2 @ 4:05 pm #
happyfeet – Quit kissing up to her, you already know she thinks you are the best.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 4:06 pm #
For the same reason a child wants the toy in the other kid’s hands, despite there being toys scattered around the floor. And, for some, there’s the thrill of going against the straights.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 4:08 pm #
No one will bat an eye — Hillary could say the same thing, and probably has. No one on the left actually believes leftists are informed by their faith (except when they rail about “real Christians” who, oddly, always seem to toe the leftist line).
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 4:09 pm #
nishi
maybe you could explain the evoluntionary advantage of samesex marriage and maybe point out where in history, ever, it existed.
Comment by JD on 3/2 @ 4:11 pm #
Darleen – How many countries have bestowed recognition on same sex marriage, in the history of the world ?
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:12 pm #
Hah! But for real, I did think a lot how just wrong it was to be pregnant and not at home. I think Hilton for a boy and Marriott for a girl.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:13 pm #
Names, I mean.
Comment by Terrye on 3/2 @ 4:13 pm #
Is nishi illiterate? Or a non English speaker because she is making absolutely no sense to me.
I think Obama is a fraud, just another crooked Illinois Democrat who is smart enough to hide behind his race. Meanwhile his followers swoon, screech, drool and treat the man like the second coming of what? Jim Jones?
I have seen several polls in the last few days that actually have McCain ahead of Obama by a couple of points. The idea that Republicans are going to stay home over abortion or whatever and let some peacenik, socialist, Elmer Gantry wannabe waltz into the White House with his snotty little wife who has never really been proud of America yada yada yada…is absurd. However, I do think that Obama’s little cult will continue to treat any attempts at indepth coverage of their candidate to be an attack on the Chosen One, the Messiah, the Uniter and the One who stands above it all. In other words, they will avoid specifics and call the opposition bigots.
Comment by JD on 3/2 @ 4:13 pm #
I wanted Paris, but that got the old ixnay. So, Madeline Grace it is. Maddie for short.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 4:15 pm #
JD
Two, IIRC. Canada and Spain.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 4:15 pm #
Some Euros, Canada and the People’s Republic of Massachusetts recently. Beyond that, I’ve got nothing.
Comment by JD on 3/2 @ 4:17 pm #
Given the entire history of the world, that does not make much of a compelling argument for immediate implementation of the wishes of the gleens and andy’s.
Comment by Pablo on 3/2 @ 4:18 pm #
The Netherlands, Belgium and, oddly enough, South Africa also.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:24 pm #
It’s getting really hard to find people that don’t think most of the marriage contracty stuff should not be available to same-sex partners. The rest is just ceremony and conventionality and at the end of it, they wants to do it in a church. Well, ok, but I think that’s just a myopic framing of the question of how does one move towards a society that’s more supportive of same-sex bonding, like how people give cash to newlyweds so they get off on the right foot, the subtext being that everyones know money troubles are the hardest thing on a marriage. And how society generally frowns on adultery and cheating or whatnot – thereby strengthening and supporting the institution.
Whatnot means cause I think more and more flirting is more accepted for married people – and some online stuff… But gay marriages I don’t think are a lot predicated on monogamy, least not to the extent that I think gay people are eager for society to get all frowny on nonmonogamy. For real I don’t think they’ve thoroughly thought this through.
Comment by serr8d on 3/2 @ 4:25 pm #
And/Or a theocon?
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:28 pm #
Madeline is a great name. I was actually going to say that the other day if someone had asked well what do you think is a good name for a doctor if you think Buffy is somehow a deficiently doctory name. No one asked though.
Comment by CharlesP on 3/2 @ 4:29 pm #
Whenever I read Nishi’s comments, I feel like I’m witnessing a Turing Test in action. I’m not quite sure he/she would pass.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:30 pm #
Oh. At #129 should not should be should or don’t think should be think.
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 4:31 pm #
samesex marriage is evolving
no
it is lobbying
and not doing very well
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:34 pm #
But Obama sure is smiley. He smiles and smiles. Just that right there is sort of vapid. If everything sucks so bad what are you incessantly grinning about, foo?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 4:42 pm #
look…im neutral to xians; they keep their quaint religious folklores to themselves.
i dislike theocons.
theocons seek to impose their religious ideology on others thru politics.
ric locke thinks theocons have the right to impose religious ideolgy on others thru political representation.
i dont.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 4:45 pm #
i dunno feets……he is simulated in the SNL skit by being serious and sort of frowny.
that must be more recognizable.
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 4:48 pm #
oh no….those are biology driven tribal values.
nishi’s ridiculous default position seems to be that views she accepts are based on biology whereas views she rejects are based on religion. She can default back to biology for everything, because we all start out as a nonsentient clump of cells according to her, but she chooses to make that argument only selectively. Her argument against murder ignores honor killings practiced within the muslim faith and her arguments against incest are a stretch at best. The religious case she makes against gay marriage fail to take into account demonstrated medical risks and psychological risks of the lifestyle.
Her intellectual dishonesty continues to amaze on a daily basis. For a republican, I am impressed by her restraint in criticizing the views of liberal MSM commentators outlined here. Personally, she strikes me as another garden variety malignant narcissist you cross paths with on the internet who believe themselves to be smarter than they have demonstrated.
She posts, therefore she deserves attention, even if there is no content!!!111!1!!
Hooray for lifelong hereditary republicans who don’t know any republicans!!!!!!
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:49 pm #
Nishi though, you really can only get to that stance by aggressively discounting the foisting of what the theocons call teh secular humanism. It’s not really fair, that approach. Passing a law about how ANWR is a sacred and holy site, peace be upon blessed Earth Mother, is no more or less noxious than anything you point to as a theocon political aim.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 4:49 pm #
Oh. I don’t watch tv, so I have to work with just the elephant’s trunk a lot.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 4:51 pm #
theocons seek to impose their religious ideology on others thru politics.
ric locke thinks theocons have the right to impose religious ideolgy on others thru political representation.
i dont.
So what are you proposing, a Constitutional Amendment banning religious zealots from participating? The motivation is immaterial, nishi, if someone can get legislation passed, and it is not unconstitutional on its face, that is all that matters. The law doesn’t care the reason you voted yeah or nay.
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 4:52 pm #
What precisely do you know about xians, nishi? Anything not spoonfed? You know, your inquiring mind and all.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 4:53 pm #
oh noes, u completely misunderstand the polygamy thing.
that was the first successful model….likely fitness was initially the strongest…that individual could take and keep more mates.
after the agricultural revolution the males with higher SES could afford to take and keep more wives, still within the polygamy model. like moses and abraham and biblical figures.
the monogamy model began to evolve in the context of individual rights and women-as-persons.
try real hard to unnerstand….culture doesnt shape society….society shapes culture according to its needs.
polygamy survived longer in islamic societies bacause of religionous adoption of the modell.
it is on the way out.
samesex marriage is on the way in, because of reproductive freedom in our society.
u dont have to have offspring.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 4:54 pm #
lulz, JD i was one.
Comment by Drumwaster on 3/2 @ 4:58 pm #
As opposed to those scientific whiz kids in the Democratic Party? Maybe nishi has been so lost in her research, she/he/it (s’h'it?) has missed the obvious fact that Bush is the very first President to authorize funding for stem cell research in all of written history. Apparently, if one is not willing to fertilize a human ovum solely to cannabalize it for parts, one is anti-science and wants nothing more than to burn every book in the library, except for the Quran.
Oh, wait…
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:00 pm #
oh no, im just griping.
u cant kick the theocons out of the republican party at this point.
like i said, once u invite the vamphyre into the house, its pretty much game over.
but, sillie me, i did actually think some ppl here might be capable of self realization, and unnerstand their motivations and nonscientific beliefs.
and also im explaing whu O can repudiate Farrakhan and Wright, but Mccain doesnt have the luxury of repudiating Hagee.
Hagee is a theocon and Mccain really needs those votes.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 5:02 pm #
nishi
polygamists in countries like the UK and USA are fighting to have polygamy legally sanctioned, using the exact same arguments that SSM adocates use.
secular humanism meets all the requirments of a religion, so let’s say trying to cry foul on “theocons” and demanding they don’t have a right to participate in the public square is hypocritical at best.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:02 pm #
drumwaster we went over the whole thing about GW’s faux fundage for ESCR.
its just lipservice, misdirection.
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:02 pm #
Or realize the unintended irony…
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:04 pm #
oh noes, u completely misunderstand the polygamy thing.
This is easy to understand. Why do you keep insulting people by telling them they don’t?
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:05 pm #
Indeed, and was only narrowly not ruled such, AIRC.
Once nishi’s pointed out what’s sure to be a unique take on the “xian” religion, I’m sure a expository on philosophy’s next. You know, her inquiring mind and all.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:07 pm #
Indeed, and was only narrowly not ruled such, AIRC.
i call bs here
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:07 pm #
Social conditioning. You know, her inquiring mind and all.
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 5:07 pm #
and also im explaing whu O can repudiate Farrakhan and Wright, but Mccain doesnt have the luxury of repudiating Hagee.
But Obama does not repudiate Wright. He also did not repudiate Donny what’s his name.
There are certainly other things Obama couldn’t repudiate that McCain could. Teacher’s unions, for instance.
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:07 pm #
nonscientific beliefs.
Be Specific For A Change
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:09 pm #
Fine. I may be wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism#Torcaso_v._Watkins
Nishi, really curious to know how you divide the baby wrt religion vs philosophy wrt the Constitution. You know, the part enumerating mob-rule social values and actions.
Comment by B Moe on 3/2 @ 5:10 pm #
try real hard to unnerstand….culture doesnt shape society….society shapes culture according to its needs.
I’ll tell you what I unnerstand, a society full of sexually frustrated, disaffected young men is not desirable, polygamy only works if situations of war or expansion.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:10 pm #
maybee i said he CAN.
praps he shud, and certainly he may have to.
mccain CANT repudiate Hagee…hes a theocon, and mccain needs theocon votes.
i notice that u all have stopped tryin to tell me theocons dont exist.
see? u can learn.
i dont unnerstand ur beef with the teachers union maybee.
are they the eqivalent of hagee or farrakhan to u?
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 5:13 pm #
nishi
not bs
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:13 pm #
I’m also wondering whether nishi is familiar with the word “faith” and what it means. Obama calls himself a man of faith.
Did I miss a law being published in the federal register that all government actions must be guided by scientific priciples?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:14 pm #
ah.
thats the lag of evolutionary culture.
polygamy was a response to the need for reproudction.
war is perhaps a response to polygamy, or an excess of young men who cannot afford marriage.
the chinese one-child mandate is creating a similiar excess.
a lot of girl babies are aborted or adopted overseas.
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 5:14 pm #
see? u can learn.
you presume an awful lot for someone as berift of logic and reason.
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:15 pm #
i dont unnerstand ur beef with the teachers union maybee.
That’s because you don’t understand the issues we have in our current education system as you so ably demonstated on another thread.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:16 pm #
but the one-child mandate was a response to overpopulation.
the excess of boys is a cultural hangover from when a boychild became the sustenance of his parents, while girlchildren left home.
see how it works?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:16 pm #
i dont have kids, no.
but is the teachers union==farrakhan or hagee?
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:17 pm #
see? u can learn.
Can u?
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 5:17 pm #
Teachers unions exploit children. They are not changey. Pay us more money and then maybe we’ll teach your stupid brats, but least in Los Angeles that’s not what happens.
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:18 pm #
but is the teachers union==farrakhan or hagee?
Why does it have to be either?
Comment by Darleen on 3/2 @ 5:19 pm #
nishi
teachers’ UNIONS (as opposed to many individual teachers) are decidedly anti-parent
Comment by daleyrocks on 3/2 @ 5:20 pm #
Corrupt, inneffective unions are a democratic staple, not that I’m saying all teachers are ineffective. Aren’t you familiar with history, nishi?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:21 pm #
oh yes bs.
secular humanism is a philosophy..it is not organized as a religion.
the judge misspoke.
the two actual churches cited would be categorizable as religions.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:22 pm #
so no, not even close.
Comment by serr8d on 3/2 @ 5:23 pm #
Not so many seculars, as compared to fundie theocons, now is there? And atheists…pew, barely noted them.
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:24 pm #
nishi, religion is a philosophy of works and outcomes, overlaid with a philosophy of thought, motive, and speech. Religion requires belief, no?
I say that all forms of social, domestic government are also based in a philosophy of works and outcomes, with much of it previously overlaid with a philosophy of thought, motive, and speech. Social government requires belief.
Is social, domestic government therefore wholly constitutional? Can it be?
Or to be constitutional, shouldn’t government be quite limited from the sphere of thought and behavior, period, provided only that the latter not be grossly criminal?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:25 pm #
i had great teachers.
my public school teachers were better than my private school teachers, imho.
i had great parents.
sometimes it isnt the teachers fault.
no parent likes to think their kid is…limited.
so it becomes the teachers fault.
sometimes it is the nonlearners fault.
jus sayin.
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 5:26 pm #
maybee i said he CAN.
Saying he can when he doesn’t and probably won’t is really just an idea you have, then. It doesn’t mean he actually can do it. It just means you think he can. And maybe that’s true, because I agree with you that many of his voters aren’t all that interested in his religious beliefs.
i dont unnerstand ur beef with the teachers union maybee.
are they the eqivalent of hagee or farrakhan to u?
I think bad teachers, and many of the policies the teachers unions push, affect more Americans that Hagee or farrakhan. But that’s just one example.
I don’t think he could repudiate the anti-American left. I don’t think he could give a big barn burner “America is the greatest country on the face of the planet” speech.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/2 @ 5:26 pm #
No, idiot, we’ve just taken your (apparent) definition and shown how no one like that exists.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 5:27 pm #
Which is not to say a lot of parents don’t suck. Also, every child can learn. To recycle. To disavow military service. To have no pride in individual accomplishment. To eat the government cheese. For the life of me I don’t unnerstand why school cafeterias aren’t all free, buffet style thingies. Just price that in to the tax bill. Kids gotta eat, why all the drama?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:27 pm #
religions have liturgies which are taken on faith.
that is the discriminator.
Comment by Log Cabin on 3/2 @ 5:29 pm #
I check out PW to see the latest political happenings, and all I can find in these threads are hundreds of idiotic comments from that leftard, Nishi-whatever-the-fuck!
If I really wanted to hear all these non sequiturs by semi-literate losers, I could hang out at the local pub.
It’s cheaper to drink at home.
Could someone please put a cork in it’s/his/her yaphole?
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:29 pm #
Really? I see where some humanists are exempt from taxation, the legal strategy being to slip under cloak of religious privilege.
But you avoid the underlying question. Merely saying the judge misspoke is insufficient. You must offer points why you believe this or you’ll risk your position being quite akin to never discussing the companionship between religion and philosophy or between the domestic State and the Constitution.
Comment by MayBee on 3/2 @ 5:31 pm #
sometimes it isnt the teachers fault.
no parent likes to think their kid is…limited.
so it becomes the teachers fault.
But you are very gifted, right? So maybe it wasn’t that you had great teachers, maybe it wsn’t the teacher’s success.
Anyway, I think it’s odd the way you won’t acknowledge there might be bad teachers out there, or union policies that aren’t good for the schools. There are bad people in every job.
But let me ask if there’s any union Obama could repudiate.
Comment by guinsPen on 3/2 @ 5:33 pm #
but is the teachers union==farrakhan or hagee?
Worse.
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 5:35 pm #
I remember cause of the unions Kroger in Texas was paying checkers $20 bucks an hour like in the early 80s. I remember cause it was the first time I ever saw picket signs. There’s no more Krogers there now.
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:37 pm #
Now you’re really grasping — obviously that has nothing Constitutional (or reasonably) to do with the difference between religion and State philosophy. Domestic policy has dogma which is taken on faith. For the changeyness, for the hope, for the Obama, for the children, for The Village.
Tell me, nishi, by what enumerated right would a statist school system teach personal values if not for a rote set of edicts passed along by a central moral authority, in this case the NEA?
You say liturgical, a term of religion in neither the Constitution nor a separation clause. Kindly stop throwing dust in the air.
Comment by serr8d on 3/2 @ 5:38 pm #
Log Cabin, Nishi brings out some good thinking. And, politics isn’t all cut and dried exactitudes; if it were, there would be no need for any discussions. Follow the link at #108 to get fulfilled on Nishi.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:46 pm #
jhoward the two churches cited were religions if they aplied for tax exempt.
neither one seemed to represent secular humanism as i understand it…it is the belief that science will explain all eventually without recourse to the supernatural.
the Ethics church believed that they got moral direct from space aliens i think.
in case u are curious, my sect of islam believes that reason and science can enable one to approach allah/god/hashem, and indeed one is obligated to use ones gifts in that fashion, but faith is also required.
Comment by guinsPen on 3/2 @ 5:48 pm #
What was it about sausages? Don’t question the process, just sit back and enjoy what’s coming off. Strip-teases, even.
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:48 pm #
By way of secular humanistic values, so is much of an increasingly unavoidable social government. Social government absolutely enacts a standard of behavior simply not part of criminal law.
So where does it get that authority if not from legislation motivated by special interests with what amount to relatively extreme philosophies and isolated dogmas? A religion of State.
Put another way, what exactly prevents the State erecting such behavioral standards? I’ve seen so-called constitutional reviews and they’re bullshit as often as not. nishi?
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:51 pm #
Thanks for the admission. Now on to a definition of constitutionally-consistent domestic standards of behavior. See, no others need apply.
I am just so excited, nishi.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/2 @ 5:51 pm #
jhoward the discriminator is belief in the supernatural.
secular humanism has no supernaturalism.
it cannot be a religion.
the judge was wrong.
Comment by Civilis on 3/2 @ 5:57 pm #
Seeing as how the previous thread attempting to engage Nishi got abandoned after my last post, I’ll repeat it here…
Nishizono-san, is there some reason that religious values are particularly bad for the country? Are you saying that if support for Israel or opposition to abortion was based on purely secular values you’d be okay with them being enshrined into law?
Values are values, no matter what source people use to justify them. Rationally, it doesn’t matter whether people believe in “Fair-trade goods†or “Environmental Stewardship†based on a sense of secular moral duty to fellow man or because God told them to, the beliefs are equally based on moral preference. Denigrating one source of moral preference as uniquely wrong is, ultimately, prejudice. You’re basically saying the moral values of religious voters, specifically Christians, render them unfit to participate in a shared civic community, whereas the moral values of secular voters like animal-rights terrorists are fine in the shared civic community despite being equally irrational (at best). Why should beliefs, however lunatic, founded on irrational supernatural justifications be treated any different than lunatic beliefs from other sources?
Furthermore, there’s a difference between enshrining religious values in a secular law and enacting religious law. A theocracy is a state based around religious law. You’d be hard pressed to find a law on the books that doesn’t trace it rationale to religious values.
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 5:57 pm #
Science doesn’t exactly convert well to spirituality, nishi, or for that matter, experience. Tragically, experience matters. Science isn’t even too elegant concerning origins, matter, energy, and other little stuff like that. Science shows how stuff works, not why it works or even what it is.
Conversely, the “supernatural” is a reasonable definition of the existence of the Universe. Delicious irony, wouldn’t you agree?
At the least humanists have made for themselves a thorny semantic problem…
Comment by JHoward on 3/2 @ 6:05 pm #
Moving goalposts, nishi? When last we met you said that liturgy defined religion.
At any rate, a view of the supernatural isn’t it either — the Founders were all into natural law and Nature’s God, notions that to my view bound the natural universe to God, or as I’d put it, they were into The Universe. As you know, what they sought to prevent was a State beholden and bound to centralized, collectivized, moralizing, unappealable oppression.
Centralized, collectivized, moralizing, unappealable oppression. Might any of that sound familiar to you in this, our age of $9,000,000,000,000 Departments of Health and Human Services? Statist school systems?
And…by definition, the Universe is itself supernatural, wouldn’t you agree? A mind of your caliber should have a perspective on the probabilities of quantum states — the stuff under all the stuff — that clearly shows as much, at least in my humble opinion.
Comment by serr8d on 3/2 @ 6:09 pm #
By ‘approach’, you must mean to become as a god, an equal? That’s the sign of atheism; the refusal to allow God in one’s head, and the establishment of self as the godhead.
Christians, fundies or whatever you style us, sometimes use that quaint old form called prayer to approach deity.
Comment by Rusty on 3/2 @ 6:12 pm #
secular humanism has no supernaturalism.
Oh now u be fuuny!
Where,pray, tell(pun), do our rights derive?
Comment by J. Peden on 3/2 @ 7:58 pm #
OT:Anyone else here have the problem where the posts run into the left margin and start to disappear as the thread gets longer – as though the thread is not centered between the margins?
Comment by happyfeet on 3/2 @ 7:59 pm #
That seems to only happen in IE, not Firefox.
Comment by Drumwaster on 3/2 @ 8:13 pm #
Neither does Shintoism. Nor Taoism, but those two are considered religions.
The ACLU has an underlying philosophy they are trying to get written into law, and they have applied for a tax-exempt status. Does that make them a religion? If not, why not?
Is atheism a religion? What about the rejection of Theism not based in an outright denial of existence of Diety?
Comment by RTO Trainer on 3/2 @ 8:28 pm #
It can’t? Perhaps you aren’t really familiar with what religion is. The various extablished “religions” are not, of themselves, the definition. Religion does not require a curhch, or a community. It doesn’t require any explicit “god” either nor anything “supernatural.
Religion is a part of the human condition. All human beings are religious, whether they subscribe to a religion or not. Religion is that set of activities that humans engage in because they beleive that engaging in those activities will rescue them from unhappiness. “God,” whether a Charlton Hestonesque bearded man in the clouds (Zeus, Christ, Allah), some intangible or set of intangibles (Faith, Hope Charity, Love… Change), or the lampshade in the phsychiatrists waiting room, is that agency through which this rescue is effected, facilitated, or outright causes it to come about.
Secular humanistm is indeed a religion (or rather a set of highly individualized religions–there’s no doctrine or orthodoxy,…yet the Narrative is trying) as is Communism which replaces God with socialist work.
Far more things in heaven and earth, Nishi….
Comment by mishu on 3/2 @ 8:54 pm #
Fuck Obama.
I just wanted to say it before I can’t say it.
Comment by cynn on 3/2 @ 9:11 pm #
I have an idea. This would be sensational. Can anybody who is good with photoshop do a riff on his name? Would be funny and irreverent. I.e.
baroque obama (picture of mozart)
bark obama (pug in a purse)
barrack obama (airstream trailer)
brick obama (cinderblock)
brack obama (dead swamp)
You get the idea. Hurry before I shop this elsewhere!
Comment by Russ on 3/2 @ 9:22 pm #
Why not Brak Obama (Space Ghost reference….)
He is, after all, a cartoonish figure… or would be, if one were allowed to criticize him.
Comment by Davyd Bowen on 3/2 @ 9:23 pm #
Alternatively, to avoid controversy, in future portrayals SNL could adopt “the Frank Gorshin look” from Star Trek’s 1969 “Let That Be Your Last Battle”
Strictly speaking it sure as hell isn’t blackface but somehow I suspect the phrase “conflicting internal psycho-dynamics” would be bandied about somewhat more often in day to day conversation.
Uh, where was I goin’ again?
Oh yeah, granma’s house.
Lost the thread there for a minute.
Comment by cynn on 3/2 @ 9:37 pm #
I forgot the most important iteration: Broke Obama.
Comment by Drumwaster on 3/2 @ 9:45 pm #
Or the Swedish chef, Bork Obama
Comment by J. Peden on 3/2 @ 10:01 pm #
/anks, hf.
Comment by lee on 3/2 @ 10:09 pm #
Maureen Ryan of the Chicago Tribune put the question bluntly: “Call me crazy, but shouldn’t ‘Saturday Night Live’s’ fictional Sen. Barack Obama be played by an African American?â€Â
Odd. That Asian guy that played Obama has also played women and Hispanic guys. Why no blunt criticism of SNLs comedic choices in those instances?
Actually, that was a rhetorical question.
Nishi is making me sleepy, much like the babbling of a particularly slow creek does.
Comment by PCachu on 3/2 @ 10:16 pm #
ALL HAIL BRAAAAAAAK (obama)!
Comment by cynn on 3/2 @ 10:23 pm #
There’s always Bjork Obama, that fashion ascendant.
Comment by maggie katzen on 3/2 @ 11:01 pm #
or whose been playing Jess Jackson lately? that right there is funny.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 8:01 am #
Centralized, collectivized, moralizing, unappealable oppression.
but that is the theocons.
use of goverment to enforce religious ideas.
shintoism, taoism, buddhism all involve an after-life. which is supernatural.
secular humanism does not involve the supernatural.
the judge was wrong.
from Dr. Atrans In Gods We Trust
religion is (1) a community’s costly and hard-to-fake committment (2) to a counterfactual and counterintuitive of supernatural agents (3) who master peoples existential anxieties such as death and deception.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 8:02 am #
..world of supernatural agents….
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 8:27 am #
look! i can make darleen’s threads go over a hunndred too!
lulz.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 8:37 am #
and im right…..again.
Comment by Darleen on 3/3 @ 9:06 am #
and im right…..again.
yes yes yes, nishi, of course, that’s the ticket. You can have your cookies and milk now and take a nap.
Comment by PCachu on 3/3 @ 9:07 am #
Sadly, nishizonololcat, the assertion does not make it so. And, as always, the assertion (plus a couple of weak insults you couldn’t even be bothered to write yourself) is all you have. Your “authority” on what constitutes a religion is nothing more than the opinion of some frothing rage-boy attempting to put a threadbare academic beard on his (and your) bigotries.
Honestly, you couldn’t even find a pull-quote that doesn’t sound like a five-year-old with a thesaurus. That’s just weak sauce.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 9:11 am #
supernatural content discriminates between religion and not-religion.
insulting Dr. Atran or me doesnt cut it.
offer a counterexample.
im right…again.
;)
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 9:16 am #
offer a counterexample or stfu.
and the judges case was not secular humanism, since it involved supernatural actors, like the aliens in the Ethics religion.
secular humanism is not a religion.
nyah nyah nyah-nyah-nyah
Comment by SoCal Dave on 3/3 @ 9:17 am #
Log Cabin, Nishi brings out some good thinking.
Yes, but going through her posts trying to find the stuff that is actually cogent and logical is like digging through a bucket of salt and razor blades in order to find a diamond.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/3 @ 10:54 am #
Why is a Muslim defending secular humanism?
And, really, nishi, nobody cares. Seriously — you’re an ignorant buffoon, we got that.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 10:58 am #
u guyz told me secular humanism “almost got ruled as a religion”.
Judge Black is the ignorant buffoon, not me.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 3/3 @ 12:52 pm #
Again, nishi, nobody cares. We get that you’re a poseur, a moby. A “lifelong Republican” who, suddenly, doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the issues, because Barack Hussein Obama makes you light headed.
Comment by MayBee on 3/3 @ 1:02 pm #
Obama 2004:
But as nishi illustrates daily, Obama’s actual positions will not taint what his followers see in him.
Comment by JHoward on 3/3 @ 1:08 pm #
Well, actually you’re wrong about supernaturalism and religion, nishi, as was pointed out, and that despite all your precocity and special parental dispensations and unique prose and that presumably high cost education and all the enlightenment that assortment of features entails.
But do make those assertions, because such proofs are bound to make a dent around here eventually.
And continue to assert, as is your wont, that far finer minds than yours, except in your universe, are flatly wrong. Like SCOTUS justices.
How long before you’re appointable? Because if wisdom doesn’t catch up with you in the intervening five decades, you could yet make right those frequent and egregious high court wrongs.
Comment by SoCal Dave on 3/3 @ 1:34 pm #
offer a counterexample or stfu.
and the judges case was not secular humanism, since it involved supernatural actors, like the aliens in the Ethics religion.
secular humanism is not a religion.
nyah nyah nyah-nyah-nyah
That’s it. Now u CAN’T haz cheezburger. BAD nishizololcat!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 2:22 pm #
ur the poseur rob crawford
maybee said secular humanism was “nearly” ruled to be religion.
i brought it.
TEH SCIENCE FTW!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 2:28 pm #
sry jd, but black is wrong.
there has to be a discriminator between secular philosophy and religion.
the supernatural is it.
otherwise marxism and the green party and the girl scouts could be defined as religions.
ur wrong too.
and i didnt start this.
so……can i haz cheezburger anyways?
Comment by MayBee on 3/3 @ 2:35 pm #
maybee said secular humanism was “nearly†ruled to be religion.
I did what?
Comment by Pablo on 3/3 @ 2:35 pm #
Got that? Good.
If it’s a right, Barack should be all about seeing that everyone has it. Instead, he’s making the same argument about gay marriage that the theocons make about abortion: it’s a states rights issue.
Therefore, Obama = Theocon.
Do you like apples, nishi?
Comment by Pablo on 3/3 @ 2:39 pm #
Religion is an organized set of beliefs based on faith in that which cannot be objectively observed and that are shared among a group. Marxism counts, the Girl Scouts don’t.
Comment by MC on 3/3 @ 2:45 pm #
Great ’shop Darleen! Was sorta shocking to see on PW – I almost thought there was a resurrection of the Martha Stewart Chronicles for a sec.
There is no god but nanny-state and Obama is his prophet!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 2:57 pm #
Obama said he would not let his religious beliefs dictate the way he approaches public policy.
not-a-theocon
sry maybee praps it was darleen…i get u confused sumtimes.
pablo, ima go with Dr. Atran on this.
he has a little more seducation than u do.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 3:02 pm #
i might cud believe use dissembly on arbotion except for the 400000 nonsentient cell clumps in cryostasis part of the LIFE! argument.
states rights abortions is a just a sneaky way to strike down Roe v Wade.
theocons dont really believe in states rights.
Congressional Republicans anticipated Greer’s adverse ruling well before it was delivered and worked on a daily basis to find an alternative means of overturning the legal process by utilizing the authority of the United States Congress.
Comment by MayBee on 3/3 @ 3:06 pm #
Obama said he would not let his religious beliefs dictate the way he approaches public policy.
He won’t let his religious beliefs dictate what he does on the gay marriage issue, so despite his religious beliefs, he doesn’t support them. He supports gay unions, as does George W Bush.
Obama explains his reasoning using a biblical passage. But it is George W Bush that is the theocon.
That is beautiful.
Comment by Pablo on 3/3 @ 3:08 pm #
Nor does Obama. He just isn’t going to support gay marriage because of his religious beliefs. Which I guess makes sense because Obama is a theocon.
Comment by Pablo on 3/3 @ 3:10 pm #
Lots of people have said that. But then Barry told you what he would do…which is to let his religious beliefs inform his policy positions. Obama, theocon. Deal with it.
Comment by Pablo on 3/3 @ 3:12 pm #
Mmmm…that’s awfully religiousy, ain’t it? What with him praying to Jesus every night….
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 3:14 pm #
haha prove it!
U are the theocons on this bus.
i told u already, ESCR fundage is my pound of flesh for this election.
watch, mccain will be forced to renounce it.
to accept revolting whackjob theocon hagee, and to reject the ESCR expansion bill.
cuz…..thats just the way u roll.
Comment by MayBee on 3/3 @ 3:19 pm #
to accept revolting whackjob theocon hagee,
McCain already says he doesn’t agree with Hagee.
I know ESCR is your pound of flesh…but then you keep pretending Obama has all these other magical qualities. If you just could criticize the things you don’t actually agree with, rather than explain them away, everything would be sooo muuuch easier.
Comment by Education Guy on 3/3 @ 3:19 pm #
Someone bump the nishi machine, she’s skipping again.
Don’t get me wrong nishi, you can support whichever candidate for whichever reason you want, but from where I’m sitting you are lying to yourself and to the rest of us in order to sell that decision, or to be able to live with it. Down the road I may have to do something similar with McCain, at least as far as being able to sell the decision to myself.
Pingback by Nightly Ramble: Emergency services, Liberalism is the real totalitariansm, Obama, more | BitsBlog on 3/3 @ 3:20 pm #
[...] It’s gotten crazy, and there’s no way he’s going to be able to live up to the expectations. Hope it does before he manages to get himself elected, in which case it’ll blow up in all [...]
Comment by JHoward on 3/3 @ 3:22 pm #
Wrong. I said that as I recalled, secular humanism narrowly avoided being ruled a religion. I added that I was more than willing to be wrong about that and both Darleen and I then provided the basis for my recollection, a body of evidence that, BTW, simply doesn’t hew to your far narrower and incorrect view of religion.
Including the part about the humanists who gained religious tax status, a point I don’t recall you credibly addressing even yet.
Like you won’t address your own misconception about what constitutes religion except to reassert it as you reassert that you’re just that much smarter than SCOTUS justices.
Or, with all that convenient dust thrown into the air, like you never dealt with Pablo’s point, which is the link between religion and philosophy. Fourth call, nishi, although two strikes ago I gave up on you as a serious debater.
But not as a child. So nishi, wrong, wrong, and wrong. And wrong. Does daddy’s girl’s education come with a refund policy?
Because, you know, words mean stuff even where sheer evasion means nothing.
Comment by JHoward on 3/3 @ 3:31 pm #
Assuming the Wikipedia entry is credible, classic religion looks a heck of a lot like the so-called religion of the contemporary, social State, nishi.
So best of luck with that one, nishi. There’s no doubt in my mind that we’re living in a time of religion of statism. Thanks for reminding me.
Comment by Rusty on 3/3 @ 4:07 pm #
my sect of islam believes that reason and science can enable one to approach allah/god/hashem…
Where’s the rest of your lot been for the last thousand years?
Comment by SoCal Dave on 3/3 @ 4:41 pm #
ur the poseur rob crawford
maybee said secular humanism was “nearly†ruled to be religion.
i brought it.
haha prove it!
U are the theocons on this bus.
Sorry, nishi, but I don’t find your schoolyard “I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I” arguments to be all that compelling.
To quote you from earlier in the thread:
“offer a counterexample or stfu”
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 5:17 pm #
sry jd, i dont buy the “everything is religion” argument.
supernatural component…..i think i will edit the wiki.
like justice black, the wiki is wrong.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 3/3 @ 5:22 pm #
Rusty, the mu’tazhili were persecuted nearly out of existance during the origins of the sunni shi’ia conflict over the line of the Imam.
The sunni feared the mu’tazhili concept of free will was a threat to their power to rule. The head of the Mu’tazhili refused to choose sides and said both the shi’ia and sunni were wrong to shed blood over the succession.
the sufi have always been persecuted, just like the jews pretty much.
Comment by SoCal Dave on 3/3 @ 9:43 pm #
pablo, ima go with Dr. Atran on this.
he has a little more seducation than u do.
I’m sure Dr. Atran’s PhD in anthropology makes him extremely knowledgeable in human psychology, which you would expect him to have to be in order to be considered an expert in the field of evolutionary psychology.
By the way, from the wiki entry for Evolutionary psychology:
“The application of evolutionary theory to animal behavior is uncontroversial. However, adaptationist approaches to human psychology are contentious, with critics questioning the scientific nature of evolutionary psychology, and with more minor debates within the field itself.”
Of course, I’m sure that evolutionary psychology is just like Anthropomorphic Global Warming… there is consensus on the subject, the science is settled, and everyone who doesn’t believe is merely delusional and a ‘denier’.
Are you going to rewrite the wiki entry for this topic too? Still trying to make reality match up with your world view?
Pingback by Webelf Report Blogroll « The WebElf Report on 3/6 @ 12:44 pm #
[...] PROTEIN WISDOM: Thou shalt have none other candidates before Me …. [...]
Trackback by Non Sequitur Daily Master Planning Pages on 3/19 @ 3:00 pm #
Non Sequitur Daily Master Planning Pages
that were found in the older comics through Non Sequitur, and you are a maste
Trackback by Suunto Core Light on 4/2 @ 12:37 pm #
Suunto Core Light
.i’ve been loaned the suunto core light green, pictured above (there are 6 different models in
Trackback by Suunto Core Light on 4/4 @ 12:39 am #
Suunto Core Light
eWatches is an Authorized Suunto Dealer. This light
Trackback by Suunto A Series Compass A 10 on 4/10 @ 1:48 pm #
Suunto A Series Compass A 10
Displaying 1 to 10 (of 10 products) Result Pages: 1. A compact a
Trackback by Non Sequitur Daily Master Planning Pages on 4/14 @ 5:12 am #
Non Sequitur Daily Master Planning Pages
Its very sad, but too true that comics such as Non Sequitur and comedy sho
Trackback by Non Sequitur Daily Master Planning Pages on 5/5 @ 7:06 am #
Non Sequitur Daily Master Planning Pages
Sequitur, Non comics, editorial cartoons, email comi
Trackback by Baroque Mirror Estate on 5/5 @ 5:33 pm #
Baroque Mirror Estate
Farmhouse Hutch 23dx36wx91h Baroque Dream. Curbed; Brow
Trackback by The Waltz Classic Art Reproduction Small on 6/4 @ 4:44 pm #
The Waltz Classic Art Reproduction Small…
0…
Trackback by Recourse Student Loans on 6/7 @ 4:38 am #
Recourse Student Loans…
Today many more uses for neck lanyards are being found for other. …
Trackback by Thy Name Address Labels From Image Checks on 6/8 @ 10:58 pm #
Thy Name Address Labels From Image Checks…
Click the Adobe symbol for a printable pdf of this. cover 99 of the c…
Trackback by Imediate Cash Advance Approval on 6/16 @ 6:54 pm #
Imediate Cash Advance Approval…
0…
Trackback by Used Car Trade In Value New Jersey on 6/18 @ 5:04 am #
Used Car Trade In Value New Jersey…
The used car trade in value new fact is that most car salesmen are paid on commission and …
Trackback by Jackson Michigan Credit Card Consolidation on 6/18 @ 10:00 am #
Jackson Michigan Credit Card Consolidation…
Find international, small and Michigan local business articles about Flint- Grand Rapids- Jackson- …
Trackback by Beta Prostate on 6/19 @ 7:07 am #
Beta Prostate…
Each daily dose of Salaam Nutrition’s Beta Prostate formula con…
Trackback by Agenda Kansas Car Insurance Quote on 6/19 @ 10:31 am #
Agenda Kansas Car Insurance Quote…
0…
Trackback by Boat Cruises In Caribbean on 6/20 @ 9:58 am #
Boat Cruises In Caribbean…
the inhabitants of a coral reef on a glass-bottomed boat. latin…
Trackback by Frustrated Golfer Figurine on 6/20 @ 12:43 pm #
Frustrated Golfer Figurine…
0…