In the credit where credit is due file, leaders of the moral majority (Gary Bauer, Richard Land, Penny Nancy) have come out in favor of electric cars.
Electrifying the transportation system is the most feasible way of displacing oil. Electricity therefore represents a practical solution and offers exactly what oil lacks: a domesticlaly produced, stable source of energy that cannot be cut off by our enemies. The advangates are clear. Our economy would be insulated from devasating price shocks and we would no longer be funding hostile regimes that seek our demise.
I gotta say, more of this and less obsession with sex, and you might have me voting Republican again.
On a completely different tangent, it will be interesting to see what the Christian Right does if the Republicans manage to retake the House and Senate in November. I wonder whether they'll stick with their traditional talking points of Gays are Evil and Sex is Bad. Or whether they'll shift to talking about the economy and the importance of jobs. Because you know what's really important to the health of the American family, working parents. Do you think Christians in Ohio are spending their days worried about prayer in schools or gay marriage. No. They're worried where there next paycheck is going to come from. The Democrats have left a huge opening for some political group to come in and say "Hey, we're very concerned about the financial health of the American family. And the best way to improve that health is to get Americans working again." Evanglicals would be smart to jump on that bandwagon.
But I bet they don't, because morons like James Dobson are worried less about whether his followers have a job and more aboout whether they might stumble across porn on the internet. Meh.
Although… when Jesus walked the earth, he didn’t seem especially concerned about what kind of jobs where available for his followers. He was more concerned about the spiritual condition…
.. so folks like James D certainly do seem “out of touch” with modern society and our needs/wants, but they may just have a handle on what matters from an eternal perspective.
Fair point. Christ wasn’t concerned about worldly wealth.
Really, I’m just trying to post something. And politics interests me.
I think myself and my family are more concerned about the moral demise of our country than the financial crisis. YES, my family is suffering, and everyone in the family (except one, who must remain nameless and is neither my parents nor myself) has seen a DRASTIC pay-cut. But, honestly, I’d rather live on beans and potatoes and the lettuce and tomatoes in the garden than see my country’s leaders continue to make decisions for us as a whole that will affect the world the future generations will have to grow under… it’s just scary. At times, I find it amusing and rather comical, but I’m pretty sure that’s only a cover and technique to not go crazy.
No matter what, we’re going to have to continue relying on oil. I’ll never be able to afford an electric car, and I can’t imagine what it would do to our general population if the president suddenly decided oil sales would be banned. Ha!
Anyway, I do think there are some bigger issues going on right now – in the moral fibers of the nation. I hope the conservatives do take over, but I can’t stand for republicans who are swayed this way and that… only people with real, strong, moral, honest convictions on the issues can truly lead our country. I have too many beefs with the way things are going to get involved and stay civilized, while still remaining anonymous.
I just see a LOT of danger when we start dismissing the moral-ness of the people, under God, and replacing it with an interest or special support for less eternal and “drastic consequence” issues.
Ditto to what NoStatusQuo said. While I am very interested in the economy, perhaps all of this is a reflection of the lack of spiritual discernment on the part of ‘We The People’–those who would so ignorantly vote someone so anti-American and inexperienced as Barack Obama into office are sorely lacking in their spiritual lives.
Just 3 words to add: Sarah Palin 2012.
Good points, NSQ and Just visiting.
I’ll only say this. Republicans are no more spiritual or moral than Democrats. And vice versa. They’re all just politicians. You can support Sarah Palin all you want. But please don’t think that she is more Godly or Christlike than Obama.
I guess my ultimate point is that people should vote on issues that matter to them. Not along party lines. And I feel that Evangelicals get sucked into voting for people who talk like them without really examining their issues. Liberals do this as well, but I think to a lesser extent.
Anyway, I know I brow beat people with my “liberal” agenda. But honestly, it’s pretty much what interests me the most. So I appreciate everyone on this blog putting up with me and my preaching.
“Electrifying the transportation system” will rerquire a huge investment in nuclear power generation. There just isn’t any other way to get there, and our current power grid isn’t up to the task either. I don’t think there is a consensus on nuclear power that would allow us to go forward with it.
It would also be nice if we would stop sending our young people off to wars in foriegn countries and bringing too many home in body bags. The Christian leadership of our country has never seen a war they didn’t like. How about we send some of them over to Afghanistan with a rucksack and M-16? Then they could have a prayer meeting with the boys while the action is going on!
Yes, it would be nice if we would rethink our opposition to nuclear energy. The French have been using very safe nuclear energy for years. The technology is there; we’re just too scared as a country to implement it.
catalyst, with all due respect, I don’t think I said anything about Obama’s godliness or Christlikeness, nor Sarah Palin’s spirituality in my comment. I did comment on his lack of experience prior to the election and choices since then that seem to be not good for the country’s overall success.
I do like Sarah Palin’s approach to governing, though. She believes in smaller government, lower taxes, and encouraging the free market to bring a boost to the economy versus government bailouts which will add a greater burden to the taxpayer. Amongst other things, she represents true hope to me. I know my faith and hope are in Christ alone, but sometimes we need a freedom-loving, AND God-loving individual to set the country back on it’s feet again. I see the country going down a road currently that is not good for Americans, and is not looking like the country I grew up enjoying.
And, you are right, we shouldn’t vote along party lines only. The problem is that the Republicans for me, although they are imperfect, still most closely represent my values in life, though they can always do better, too. That’s another reason I like Sarah Palin–she’s not afraid to challenge the powers that be no matter what party they are if it’s not good for the people she represents.
It was your anti-American crack that had me concerned.
But yeah, you make a compelling case for Sarah Palin’s popularity.
I voted for George W. Bush in 2000, believing that he was a small government conservative as well. And instead, he vastly increased the size of government, doubled the national debt from five trillion to ten trillion and engaged us two wars without any thought to how we extricate from those wars.
I am very skeptical that the current Republican party has any interest in small government. But I am happy to be wrong.
Lastly, if you really want small government, vote for Ron Paul.
catalyst, in reference to my anti-American ‘crack’, I guess I will then have to ask you, what has Obama done that is pro-American? I’d be happy to be wrong, too.
I think when you say that President Bush engaged us in a war ‘without any thought to how we extricate from those wars’ is a huge presumption and fallacy amongst many anti-war folks. Congress did vote to go to war, by the way, Democrats as well as Republicans. Clearly, none of us can know what was in President Bush’s discussions in terms of strategy that he had to have with military commanders, the armed forces advisors in Congress, CIA, and everyone else involved in the effort here and abroad, including the United Nations, so how can one suggest, irresponsibly I might add, that he hadn’t a clue as to how to leave? I guess we’ll find out more when his book comes out soon, and some questions will be satisfied then I hope.
As far as Bush’s deficit goes, the one who is now president is a far worse spender than President Bush ever was. I appreciate that you voted for Bush in 2000 and I understand your expectations of him, but don’t forget that Sept. 11th happened 9 months into his presidency. I heard him in a speech I attended in 2004, and he said his original goal when elected was to focus on domestic policy as president, and most definitely not to be a war president. 9/11 changed that goal. I accept Pres. Bush is blamed for his spending by many on both sides of the aisle, but I do believe that 9/11 and the blow to the economy that occurred after that had a lot to do with his trying to get the economy going. Personally, I think he’s the best person we could have had in the White House during that horrific time in our country–I felt safe with him at the helm throughout his presidency, and I miss him terribly. Here’s a good article with a comparison chart comparing Bush to Obama in the area of deficits. Hope the links work.
Here’s from 2009:
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/
And, here’s the same chart as of Feb. 2010:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/05/past-deficits-vs-obamas-deficits-in-pictures/
I’m sure Ron Paul has some good, conservative qualities, but I just can’t get beyond that he at one time said that our own government was behind the attacks of Sept. 11th, and that he’s also an isolationist/non-interventionist. When it comes to defending our country, I want someone who would have no hesitation if war is warranted. No one likes war, including me. But, because of wars won and sacrifices made we all have the freedom now to say what we want on blogs such as this. As an aside, I do have friends in the Republican Party who also love Ron Paul, and we are all willing to work together, so that’s a good thing.
@Just Visiting… couldn’t have said it better myself. I’m sure, in real life, we’re good friends.
Thanks, NoStatusQuo. I never actually went to City Bible Church, except to visit, but went to a church very much like it. I’m sure we would be good friends even so!
So just visiting? Where does quitting half way through your term fall into what you like about Palin’s approach to governing?
Seriously you all need to drop the “Obama is Anti-american”schtick . It makes you sound ignorant and vaguely Fascist which I’m going to assume you are not. You can disagree vehemently and think the country should go another way, without diving into the fever swamps of right-wing lunacy.
The sad thing is that there are many like myself who might be able to find common ground with you, but find your framing and assumptions so offensive that any hope of a civil conversation, much less actual cooperation is sadly ruled out.
Seriously as I reread this passage “lack of spiritual discernment on the part of ‘We The People’–those who would so ignorantly vote someone so anti-American and inexperienced as Barack Obama into office are sorely lacking in their spiritual lives.” I’d have to exhort you to get busy on that rough hewn log in your own eye before you start handing out any more advice or commentary.
Haha! I know. At least, I was saying… if we knew each other in real life, we’d probably be friends.
Scipio Rising, not sure how to respond to your ridiculous comment which accuses people, myself included, of fascism (sounds like you don’t know the meaning of fascism?), and am pretty sure it would be fruitless to try. Nor will I try to respond on the logical and understandable reasons Sarah Palin resigned early in her term as Governor of Alaska. Nice talking points, though.
I should say, though, the Bible, since you are using the Bible out of context to further your political agenda and stifle the voice of anyone who disagrees with you, I will add something IN context to further the truth–it says that we are to judge ALL things. 1 Cor. 2:14-16. If we didn’t use the ability the Holy Spirit gives us to judge and discern, how would we ever recognize false prophets and leaders who try to deceive us and others? Or, the salesman who comes to your door, trying to sell you something illegally, etc.? The scripture that you are referring to (Luke 6:42) is referring to being ‘judgmental’ in your heart. There is a vast difference between the two examples. So, no, I don’t have a beam in my eye on this point but thanks for your sincere “Christian” concern, lol.
Just visiting,
I actually stated that you sounded vaguely Fascistic and then went on to say that I would assume that you weren’t.
There is actually so much wrong with your reply that I dont really know where to start.
The irony is as thick as your projection as you accuse me of using the Bible to further a political agenda and “stifle the voice of anyone who disagrees”.
You of course being the person who equated voting for Obama with some sort of flaw in spiritual life.
So i fail to see how you could be any Less judgemental in your heart and my original point remains.
Nice talking points though.
Scipio, sounds like you just iterated everything I stated in my comment, but o.k.
You know, one thing I will add about my original comment about people voting for Obama and their spiritual condition in doing so. I realize that the mainstream media was in bed with Obama from the beginning, and that added huge success to Obama’s campaign. That on top of the fact that, even though I didn’t listen to all of his speeches, I understand he was quite ‘moderate’ sounding as a candidate in his stance on the issues, which was diametrically different than his voting record: http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/pdf/08fringes.pdf ; http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib_cons.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=desc#results (scroll down a bit on this last one to see the chart).
I realize that the majority of people are not as much into politics as I am–who could blame them–and so they didn’t know that Obama had the most liberal voting record in the Senate on economic, social, and foreign policy issues because the media did not only not cover it, but wanted to hide his voting record from the general public. Then, to top it all off, after the mainstream media (aka, the liberal media) unfairly bashed Pres. Bush tirelessly day in and day out for 8 years, I guess folks believed it, and decided to vote against Pres. Bush and his party, and voted for ‘change’ and ‘hope’ instead.
So, I hope I did not offend anyone here about how they voted as I definitely do not want to inflict guilt as I know that doesn’t help anyone. Having said that, I believe that people being misled won’t happen again in the next couple of voting cycles as the American people have awoken to see what we may have taken for granted for a while now, which is that elections matter. And, their vote matters. And, that their liberties and freedoms depend on their voice being heard. For that reason alone, I am very thankful that Obama was elected in 2008, and I truly mean that. I am proud of the American people!
My statement about Obama being anti-American? Well, I’ve had time to think on that, too. Perhaps he is pro-American, but it’s just a ‘different’ America he wants to promote? After all, he did say on the campaign trail that he wanted to “fundamentally transform The United States of America”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvJJP9AYgqU . And, Michelle Obama said in 2008 that Obama doing well politically was the “first time in her life that she was proud of her country”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYY73RO_egw . So, what kind of America are they proud of and want to see implemented through fundamentally transforming it–you know, the country we all know and love and are proud of in spite of it’s imperfections?
I am voting for whoever will get us out of debt! This is a bondage I can not pass to my children and children’s children. Can you?
I agree with you on this issue NBCC. But it’s also why I was furious with the Republican party during the Bush years. They doubled the deficit from five trillion to ten trillion. Republican’s talk a good game about the deficit until it actually comes time to reducing it, and then they just cut taxes and increase spending.
Do you know that the only President over the last 30 years to reduce the deficit was Bill Clinton. The deficit increased under every other President, (Regan, Bush 1 & Bush 2).
I’m not saying you have to vote Democratic. But if you vote Republican and they win, can you promise me that you won’t abandon this belief, just because your party is suddenly in charge?
I call BS catalyst, I have read enough of your posts to know your classic liberal and I find it difficult to believe your a “reformed republican”. In 2006 (6 years of Republican majorities and Executive under Bush) We had 6% unemployment low debt (under 3% of GDP) booming economy and a stock market around 11000. This includes the problems with economic spending for wars, an attack on 9/11 and increased benefits in medicare for prescription drugs (Medicare Part D).
Also the across the board tax cuts increased revenues in to the federal budget by increasing the tax base.
I am sorry, when exactly did the republicans hod the check book in a bad economy? Pelosi took the checkbook in 2006 immediately passed a bad energy bill that rose the cost of energy across the board and gas prices went through the roof. You can make the case that Bush should have vetoed more of Pelosi/Reid budgets but you can not say that your not voting for republicans because they are fiscally irresponsible. Our Government is not the President.
Case in point: Clinton’s 1st 2 years they robbed the candy jar the economy was in the tank (its the economy stupid – remember that) and not till the Newt Revelation and the Contract with America (90% passed) did our economy have the “Clinton prosperity”.
Its not who is president its who holds the checkbook. And this year your Representative only has to make 1 vote and they can be stupid all year and that is the vote for speaker. If your Rep will be voting for a Republican Speaker then your vote is for fiscal responsibility if his/her vote is for Pelosi then its for more spending and sending our kids, kids kids into debt.
Former NBCC…You have hit the maximum allowable word count for the day. You must now wait 24 hours before you can bore us with anymore of your posts.
I see I touched a nerve. Look, believe what you want. I voted for Bush in 2000. And was a registered Republican until 2007, when I switched parties so I could vote for Obama in the DC primary. I’m definitely a classic liberal now, but it wasn’t always the case.
Bush doubled the deficit by starting two unfunded wars (Iraq & Afghanistan). And by cutting taxes without cutting spending. It really is that simple.
Here’s the deal. Democrats don’t talk about the deficit. It’s a Republican issue. But when the R’s are in power, they don’t have the guts to actually raise taxes or cut spending, so we just get more of the same.
lol.
The above comment wasn’t so bad. It was the 5000 word dissertation on the word “Pastor” that had me concerned.
Am I really prevented from posting? Shees its not like anyone actually goes to this blog anymore
I liked the 5000 word dissertation on the word “Pastor” one of my finer works
President Obama’s deficit spending is
Higher % of GDP than during the Great Depression
Higher % of GDP than during World War II
Higher deficit % than during the Great Depression
Comparable deficit % to World War II
Higher deficit % than Reagan
Higher % of GDP than Bush
Twice the deficit % of Bush
So, FDR had to deal with the Great Depression and World War II, and Obama’s outspending him. Obama campaigned against Bush’s spending habits, and then doubles him up.
Speaking of doubling up, the total US Debt was $5.7 Trillion on 2/1/2001 when GW Bush took office. It was a shade under $10.7 Trillion on 12/31/2008 when he was about to leave office. Please explain how that fits in with your earlier defense of his spending when he almost doubled the debt during his term in office. He had Republican majorities in 6 of those years too.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
When Pelosi took the House Speaker position the national debt was 8 trillion up 3 trillion from 2000 but up
Now its 13,286,013,611,158
This news article came out right before the Dems took office:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/13/business/13deficit.html
And Bush is not even in the Top 3 top spenders (Obama will be)
http://www.davemanuel.com/2010/06/21/us-government-spending-increases-by-president-1961-2012/
Just the facts bro!
See, this is why I am a staunch member of the Ostrich party. Although I am thinking of changing my registration to the Maranatha party.
Your facts still leave Bush and his 6 years of republican congress on the hook for around 3 trillion in debt. With that record, I wouldn’t want them balancing my checkbook either.
The fact is neither party has good spending habits. You’re welcome to believe the Republicans will change their stripes if they regain power, but history doesn’t back that up. I don’t have a good answer other than do your homework instead of blindly voting for the candidate with an R or D next to his name.
This thread is all the more evidence that Christians are the easiest people to brainwash in today’s political environment of appearances first, substance later. It’s a shame that many believers lack the ability to think for themselves, outside the box of the churches political agenda.
Just so everyone is clear, it is OK to be a God-fearing, Bible reading, church going, faith living person and think with a progressive mind in support of liberal values. Christians don’t have to be conservative just because that’s what a majority are. Anyone who believes otherwise might want to reevaluate the core of their Christian beliefs to begin with.
Never made the case about Christian vrs Democrat … I made the case that voting Democrat is stupid on its own accord Christian or not
Its still about the economy stupid!
(disclaimer: Not calling anyone on this blog stupid using the term as Clinton did in the 1992 election).
Just cause Bush isn’t in the top three, doesn’t mean that he didn’t take a dump and leave for the rest of us to clean up. Think of it like when you leave an apartment messy– they take it out of your deposit. Perhaps they should have made Bush leave a deposit before they swore him in.
Just a thought.
[Comment ID #38018 Will Be Quoted Here]
I love you.