1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Sarah Palin learns Web has no undo feature

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, Jan 14, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,495
    Likes Received:
    2,880
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm registered 'R' but I'm not voting for her. She is a neo-con. If she ever becomes president we WILL be in war with Iran. She has courted AIPAC from the beginning and Netunyahu loves her solely for her willingness to use military force with Iran. Which puts your opinion about her losing in question. If the Jews want her elected she'll have a very powerful influential ally with the Jewish Lobby. Add to that the votes of the brainwashed Israel Cult and Christian Zionists, she will be a very serious contender.

    [edit] ....and I meant to add, you're right, the attacks against her is pure garbage. Sure, those places were meant to be targets, but by no means was it intended the way those lying liberals are accusing her.
     
    #21 kyredneck, Jan 15, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2011
  2. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    Yep, good points. I just don't think they'll have the influence over the American people like we think they and she could have.

    It's just a feeling really, and most of it based on the many opinions of people like myself who are "R" registered who do not want her as president.

    Now she could possibly change my mind, I don't know, as I would of course be willing to listen.

    One thing is for certain, at least to me, she seems to favor a government for the people by the people.
     
  3. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,495
    Likes Received:
    2,880
    Faith:
    Baptist
  4. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
  5. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist

    She absolutely is. She supports endless Mideastern war as much as Bush/Clinto/Bush/Obama do. That is reason enough to vote against her. Take her on substance, and there is no way I could vote for her. I think a lot of people feel that way.

    But the disgusting attacks, lies, and unChrist-like obsession with tearing this woman down has definately endeared me to her. I certainly think we would be better off with someone like her that the last 4 clowns.
     
  6. mets65

    mets65 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0

    I'm not an Obama supporter but it's unchristlike the way people tear him down. Frankly the way most christians tear each other apart and force political viewpoints on each other is un Christlike. There are worldy people out there that treat each other so much better then we as christians do.
     
  7. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,495
    Likes Received:
    2,880
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I read this very scholarly work by two of the world's most prominent academics on U.S. foriegn policy soon after it's release. It's funny, it went around the globe like wildfire within two weeks yet never caught on here in the States (the Jewish owned media here would not publicize it). There are soooo many that desperately need to become enlightened to the incredible influence that this tiny FOREIGN COUNTRY has upon the federal government of the United States.

    [I'm referring to the original paper released by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt in March 2006. These two virtually put their careers and reputations on the line with this work]
     
    #27 kyredneck, Jan 15, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2011
  8. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I call baloney. There is a difference between taking someone on with policy as opposed to calling them accomplices in murder.

    How did Christ talk to people ? Stephen ? Elijah ? Paul ? If they were around today, the libbies would be trying to censor them.
     
  9. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    How exactly does one force one's political viewpoint upon another?

    The only person that has the power to force a viewpoint on me is my wife. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  10. NiteShift

    NiteShift New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was publicized as much as any book about foreign policy would be. It was reviewed in Foreign Affairs and NY Times among others.

    Maybe they desperately need to become enightened about the AARP lobby, the NAACP lobby, the Big Agra lobby, the Cuban-American, Armenian-American, Taiwan lobbies as well. Lobbying is part of the American way of doing government. If they (Mearsheimer and Walt) want to abolish all lobbying they should say so. But they don't. They only whine about the Israel lobby.
     
  11. sag38

    sag38 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,395
    Likes Received:
    2
    Our liberal book stocker used to post thread after thread bashing "W." Now that President "W" is gone Crabby needs a new conservative to bash so I guess Sarah is Crabby's new whipping boy, I mean girl.
     
  12. mets65

    mets65 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0

    I'm not talking about on here. I'm just saying in general I feel like I come across this from time to time. I've been on the verged of being cussed out because maybe I questioned some of George Bush's policies, mainly no child left behind. I feel like forcing a viewpoint on someone is when it goes from friendly debate to extremely tense and you end up feeling like :BangHead:
     
  13. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    3
    This may come as a shock to you Curtis, but your aren't Christ! You cannot blame God on the vitriol you post.
     
  14. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He's in my prayers. He has to be confused over the Holy Spirit telling him to be "civil". Sarah Palin brings out the worst in him and his ilk.
     
  15. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,495
    Likes Received:
    2,880
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Are you referring to the book published in August 2007, or to the essay which was released in March 2006? I was aware of the release of the essay almost immediately and know first hand of the criticisms that were circulating concerning the lack of publicizing it here in the states. The NY Times did belatedly catch on and gave the essay a blatantly biased negative review afterward. The book, on the other hand, was a NY Times Best Seller. They HAD to review it. They had no choice.

    Excerpt from:

    Breaking the Taboo: Why We Took On the Israel Lobby _ October 16, 2007
    Interview with John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt http://www.alternet.org/story/65271

    “The article received enormous attention because it challenged what had become a taboo issue in mainstream foreign policy circles, namely the impact of the Israel lobby on U.S. Middle East policy......Although the views we expressed are often discussed openly in other democracies -- including Israel itself -- they have rarely been set forth in detail by mainstream figures in the United States....”

    More excerpts from the same interview:

    “....The Israel lobby uses the same basic strategies that other interest groups employ......These various strategies are as American as apple pie, and there is nothing illegitimate about them. Yet it ought to be equally legitimate to examine and discuss how the Israel lobby works to push its agenda in government, and to debate whether its influence is beneficial, the same way that one might examine other interest groups like the gun lobby, the farm lobby, the pharmaceutical lobby, the energy lobby, and other ethnic lobbies (e.g., Cuban-Americans, Indian-Americans, Armenian-Americans, etc.)...Although most of the lobby's tactics are legitimate forms of political participation, some groups and individuals in the lobby also try to silence or marginalize opponents and critics by smearing them as anti-Semites or self-hating Jews. This sort of response was evident in the personal attacks directed at Jimmy Carter for writing a controversial book about Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories, and in the efforts of the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League to prevent the historian Tony Judt from giving a lecture on the Israel lobby to a group in New York City. True anti-Semitism is loathsome and should be firmly opposed, but using this sort of accusation to silence or marginalize critics is antithetical to the principles of free speech and open debate on which democracy depends....”

    [Q] “Do you think the upcoming 2008 presidential campaign will provide a chance for the Israel lobby's influence to be discussed?”

    [A] “Regrettably, no. The candidates will undoubtedly disagree on a wide array of domestic and foreign-policy issues: health care, education, taxes, the environment, what to do in Iraq, how to deal with a rising China, etc. But the one issue on which there will be virtually no debate is the question of whether the United States should continue to give Israel unconditional backing. Even though almost everyone recognizes that U.S Middle East policy is a disaster, no serious candidate is going to suggest anything other than steadfast and largely unconditional support for Israel. Indeed, all the major candidates (Clinton, Edwards, McCain, Obama, Romney, etc.) have already expressed their strong and uncritical backing for Israel, even though the campaign is just getting underway. Not only is this situation bad for the United States, it is also not good for Israel. The United States would be a better ally if its leaders could make support for Israel more conditional and if they could give their Israeli counterparts more candid and critical advice without facing a backlash from the Israel lobby.”

    I'm thinking of starting a thread on 'The Israel Lobby' over on the political forum. There's no doubt that this issue will be a very prominent one between now and the general elections in 2012.
     
  16. NiteShift

    NiteShift New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes I was referring to the book. Not to defend NY Times, but there are literally thousands of essays written each year that they do not comment on.

    Well that is fine, and they (Mearsheimer and Walt) are certainly free to argue that Israel requires strict scrutiny. As you mention, the book version was a best-seller. So it's not as if they have been censored, and they don't seem to have suffered financially for their viewpoints.

    It's true, some pro-Israel groups and individuals do try to marginalize opponents. But very rarely do you see them storming the stage on US college campuses as the Muslim/anti-Israel groups frequently do when pro-Israel speakers are allowed to talk. There are youtube videos of this occuring.

    Isreal did indeed try to influence the US before the Iraq invasion, but not to invade Iraq. They made it clear that if the US was to confront anybody, they wished it to be Iran. And we all know how that turned out. So it appears the 'Israel Lobby' wins a few and loses a few.
     
    #36 NiteShift, Jan 16, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2011
  17. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    18,441
    Likes Received:
    259
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I find it quite revealing and interesting that almost no one has addressed the subject of the thread, that what you post on the Internet is there forever. Why is that?
     
  18. Don

    Don Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    11,048
    Likes Received:
    321
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Because you focused on something stupid, instead of making it objective and showing that all sides have the same "learning problem."
     
  19. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    18,441
    Likes Received:
    259
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Another reply totally off topic. Show how this topic is not objective. Your posts, my posts, everyone who posts ... their posts will be somewhere on the web forever.

    In case you forgot here is the OP:

    No editorial comment. just showing that posts are forever. Right? Now can you reply, on topic?
     
    #39 Crabtownboy, Jan 17, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2011
  20. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who doesn't know that once something is on the internet that it is out there virtually forever?

    So what's your point?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...