Politics...revealed

Post by **Mikey** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:07 pm

They just started arguing about who mentioned Reagan first, and then got into a bit of "you had your two minutes" squabbling.

Better than that, did anyone see Bill Clinton SLEEPING in his chair on the dais while Martin Luther King III was speaking?

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:21 pm

They just started arguing about who mentioned Reagan first, and then got into a bit of "you had your two minutes" squabbling.

........
And these two are trying to be president of the most powerful country in the world?

Better than that, did anyone see Bill Clinton SLEEPING in his chair on the dais while Martin Luther King III was speaking?

Post by **Mikey** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:32 pm

ADMIRAL Rochey wrote:And these two are trying to be president of the most powerful country in the world?

As I've said before: the surest way to tell that someone is undeserving of public office is by the fact that he or she wants it. However, look at it this way - things can't get worse...

Captain Peabody · Post by **Captain Peabody** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:36 pm

Reminds me of the big Guliani-Romney battles earlier in the GOP race...man, do I hate those two. Squabbling like children, trying to 'out-hardline' each other on every issue ("I hate Mexicans more!" "Well, I love waterboarding more than you!"), trading little 'gotcha!' barbs (Can anyone say 'Sanctuary mansion'?), and generally behaving like a bunch of dolts.

And now the Democrats have started it, too? Well, all I can say is, God save us from politicians.

Monroe · Post by **Monroe** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:34 pm

Captain Peabody wrote: Just as a side note: did any of you hear about the big Clinton-Obama scuffle at the Democratic debate last night? Crikey, people...act like adults.

Watching it on youtube now.

CNN's Democratic Debate January 21th, 2008 - Part [insert which part you want to watch]

is the title.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:41 pm

Rochey wrote:And these two are trying to be president of the most powerful country in the world?

Look on the bright side - at least neither of them are hyper-religious lunatics who'd give the Ayatollahs a run for their money.

Monroe · Post by **Monroe** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:09 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:
Rochey wrote:And these two are trying to be president of the most powerful country in the world?
Look on the bright side - at least neither of them are hyper-religious lunatics who'd give the Ayatollahs a run for their money.

Romney and Huckabee?

Post by **Mikey** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:15 pm

I don't think Romney falls into that category as much - I think more is made of his personal religion than actually comes out in his platform. Remember, one of the knocks against JFK was his Catholicism; people actually thought he would deliver leadership of our country to the Vatican!

I mean, what's he going to do - outlaw coffee and chocolate?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:20 pm

Monroe wrote:Romney and Huckabee?

Of course - when Presidential candidates start advocating that an already extremely religious country become even more religous, alarm bells start ringing.

Jordanis · Post by **Jordanis** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:26 pm

Mikey wrote:I don't think Romney falls into that category as much - I think more is made of his personal religion than actually comes out in his platform. Remember, one of the knocks against JFK was his Catholicism; people actually thought he would deliver leadership of our country to the Vatican!

I mean, what's he going to do - outlaw coffee and chocolate?

Chocolate's a gray area. It'd be coffee and alcohol, if he was going to pull that.

Anyway, his tenure as governor shows that he personally is a pretty soft-line religious sort. He's just macho-ing it up for the primaries.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:29 pm

Mikey wrote:I don't think Romney falls into that category as much

Not even with stuff like this? Yeh, I know, the Grauniad.

I think more is made of his personal religion than actually comes out in his platform. Remember, one of the knocks against JFK was his Catholicism; people actually thought he would deliver leadership of our country to the Vatican!

I mean, what's he going to do - outlaw coffee and chocolate?

Stuff like the speech menationed above may be run-of-the-mill in the States, I don't know. In my book, the fact that a politician's religious beliefs are even an issue, let alone a major one, is f*cking scary. This side of the pond, the only place it even comes up is Northern Ireland.

sunnyside · Post by **sunnyside** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:36 pm

Captain Seafort wrote: Look on the bright side - at least neither of them are hyper-religious lunatics who'd give the Ayatollahs a run for their money.

I'll assume you're going for hyperbole there.

At any rate Romney seems to be a bit more of an opportunist than fanatical, but that can be hard to say. He had been known to attend Planned Parenthood fundraisers. Now he's pro-life. Make of it what you will.

Huckaby seems more solidly to the right

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:44 pm

sunnyside wrote:
Captain Seafort wrote: Look on the bright side - at least neither of them are hyper-religious lunatics who'd give the Ayatollahs a run for their money.
I'll assume you're going for hyperbole there.

From where I'm sitting? Yes, but not by much.

Captain Peabody · Post by **Captain Peabody** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:54 pm

Stuff like the speech menationed above may be run-of-the-mill in the States, I don't know. In my book, the fact that a politician's religious beliefs are even an issue, let alone a major one, is f*cking scary. This side of the pond, the only place it even comes up is Northern Ireland.

Well, no offense, but that's just messed up...

"Even if we think religion insoluble, we cannot think it irrelevant. Even if we ourselves have no view of the ultimate verities, we must feel that wherever such a view exists in a man it must be more important than anything else in him."

-G.K. Chesterton

From where I'm sitting? Yes, but not by much.

Um...excuse me? Last time I checked, Huckabee wasn't wanting to burn homosexuals at the stake, or make conversion from Christianity punishable by death, or any one of the other thousand nutty things Iran does...

Frankly, that's just stupid...

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:19 pm

Captain Peabody wrote:Well, no offense, but that's just messed up...

"Even if we think religion insoluble, we cannot think it irrelevant. Even if we ourselves have no view of the ultimate verities, we must feel that wherever such a view exists in a man it must be more important than anything else in him."

-G.K. Chesterton

How is that any refutation of the statement that a politician's specific religious beliefs should have no relevence to his suitablity to hold political office? Religion, or lack thereof, is a personnal matter, not something that should be used to determine whether an individual is suitable to hold high political office.

Um...excuse me? Last time I checked, Huckabee wasn't wanting to burn homosexuals at the stake, or make conversion from Christianity punishable by death, or any one of the other thousand nutty things Iran does...

Frankly, that's just stupid...

The fact that the same fundamental principle held by both Huckabee and the Ayatollahs, that the laws of the state should be subordinated to the laws of a particular religion, is the source of my concern, and of the comparison.