That was a given. Politicians do share some reality here and there.

The reality is it's about OIL, not religion, like your posts have implied.

I don't drink the koolaid.

BJ,

Where the hell do you get - or make up - the idea that liberals pretend there isn't a problem with radical Islam? Every liberal I know understands that radical religious zealots are a threat, whether they are Muslim, Christian, or anything else. It only makes sense to keep an eye on 'em all, and when they cross the line, send 'em to meet their maker.

Like Salmo, I also think the "liberals" understand the problem with radical Islam. The difference between the sides over here are the tactics in countering it. Many "conservatives" (a really mis-used term these days) see anyone that isn't immediately willing to drop nuclear weapon as "appeasing the terrorists". Liberals tend to see conservatives tactics as fueling radical Islam. The Iraq war is a good example. The support for dictatorships while endlessly talking of democracy is another. The misuse of military power is another. The selective selling of high tech weapons is another. Blindly supporting Israel is another.

We have to stop creating more radicals. Just imagine how Americans would react if foreign troops wandered our country, imposing their form of law. No American would stand for it. Americans would be fighting back however possible - sniping and making homemade explosives.

Luckily, I don't see this as a holy war. I see this as U.S. desire to control oil by having puppet governments and maintaining a strong miliary presence in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has filled that roll for a long time but that has perhaps reached a breaking point on both sides. That is where Iraq comes into play. Just look at the military bases being contructed and the deal that was just signed by Bush and Maliki this last week. We have no intention of ever leaving.

Exactly. No matter who is elected in 2008, we're there long term now.

I'm glad you guys realize that. Sometimes It's hard to tell.

BJ,

If you'd listen to what we say and write instead of making it up in your mind or absorbing it from your right wing whack job radio entertainers, you'd already know it. I have the same values I've always had, but I seem liberal today because so many conservatives and the Republican Party have moved so far over the edge. I'm a fiscal conservative and have always been a social liberal.

Social liberalism is kind of a conservative attribute if you agree with the conservative thought that the government should stay the hell out of people's private business or affairs.

I believe, consistent with the Constitution, that the federal gov't's first responsibility is national defense. Note: that is defense, not offense as in unprovoked invasions of sovereign nations ala Bushco. Somebody attacks the US and the natural, logical, legal, moral, and ethical consequence is to kill 'em. Pretty simple. How's that for liberalism? Defending strategic minerals abroad, like oil for instance, is not Constitutionally defensible. It is, however, defensible for reasons of lifestyle maintenance or greed or avarice or any number of lower human attributes. I don't care; just call a spade a shovel, and stop the sugar-coating; it's intellectually insulting.

I believe that reducing Constitutional protections of citizens is treasonous. Ergo, Buscho and every Congressman and Congresswoman who voted for it is a traitor of the US. I try to keep these things as simple as possible so that even conservatives may understand them.

When conservatives support gov't intervention in people's private lives and reductions in Constitutional protections, I can only conclude that they are stupid beyond belief or are agents of the Devil.

Sg

All a lib in my mind is someone who believes in civil rights and liberties free from tradition, far from religion, one that believes in science that also believes in a system of govt. that controls via modification of social, political & economic situations.

I wouldn't consider myself a hard core conservative right wing nut job you might think I am. I don't get a Limbaugh letter. I don't go to Sean's Freedom concerts. I don't listen to them all the time. I do however enjoy listening to their entertainment as much as I like to watch Scarborough, Blitzer and Couric. I believe in civil rights & liberties. I think pot should be legal. I am against taxes although I pay them faithfully. I believe there is a God. I also believe God has his hands in science from the beginning. However I am not a church goer. I don't believe in "Global Warming", instead I believe in Climate Change. Sounds as If I'm left of center really. I also believe one has the right to bare arms.

When it comes to the president's position, I believe he has the right to defend our country and protect it's interests since we voted for him to do that. That is his #1 responsibility. I also believe in respecting that position no matter what decision he makes whether I am for it or not. We all make bad decisions now and then. If someone else gets elected Pres. that I don't care for, I will still share that same respect for them. Bush wasn't the first president that made bad choices in the minds of many.

Govt. intervention in peoples private lives in the form of taxes is a fact of life. Another fact of life is if you think Bush is having your phone line tapped then you are a nut job. That's crazy business.

AuntyM,
Thanks for the heads up, I found the website, printed out info and I will see my Uncle on Thursday. Between the 2 of us we just might be able to figure out how to get the next round of hearing aids covered. He pays about 2 thousand dollars after insurance approx every 3-5 years. Thanks!

BJ,
I believe in some of the same things. The right to bear arms, God being involved in science, the fact that the president has the right to defend our country. (Not sure it is #1 thing though, the pres oath is basically to defend the constitution, just as the govern oath is I think to balance the budget). And of course civil rights & liberties - I agree

Anyway, just wanted to tell you that.

BJ, how old are you? You seem bright, but fairly young and seem to have a serious gap in your education.

Civil rights are based on the US Constitution, which is about as historical AND traditional as you can get IMO. Our system of government is based upon the concept of liberty and as far as I am concerned, that takes precedance over any other political idea and it must be protected at all costs.

Liberty? Religion? I get real tired of the religious zealots wanting to interject their personal faith in whatever God they worship into government operation. We were set up as a secular form of government to protect religious freedoms (liberty) but the right can't seem to grasp the nuances. Just because the majority in Amercia are Christians doesn't mean any of you have the RIGHT to dicatate whatever your idealogy suggests to the rest of America.



If that respect means keeping silent when you vehemently disagree, that's a serious mistake, not unlike what many Germans did in Hitlers time. We have protected freedom of speech in the US for a damn good reason and I just gave you a perfect example of why it's so important.



The power of taxation can be abused. Ask those at the Boston Tea Party.

It isn't that people think GW is tapping their phone. It's the fact that we have a Constitutional right to be free from government intrusion in our private lives. What part of that don't you understand?

amen

Does freedom OF religion mean freedom FROM religion? Considering just how personal religion is to people, probably one of the most difficult rights. Other people’s beliefs will always be there and at times in your face but you can put yours out there and in their face. Even if it is no religion – not sure how to represent that except – sell your fairy tale somewhere else.

I do NOT think religion belongs in government institutions because it is IMPOSSIBLE to equally represent all religions in a manner so that no one religion is forced & none left out.

Many politicians pretend a religious angle for votes. It would be nice if politicians had to conform to the same standards as institutions but since they are people they have rights. Many are "playing" the religion card on purpose; it is particularly played at this time. Politicians that are playing that game should not be voted for because they are dishonest (don’t believe what they pretend), predatory, and unconscionable.

Freedom of religion means to me that a person can worship if they want, how they want & can change their mind tomorrow if they want, it is never forced on anyone, and laws are not made based on a religion. It does not belong in our courts or government institutions, mainly so that no one is prejudiced against, (or made to feel prejudiced against) or forced into a belief that they do not believe. Most important of all, freedom of religion means that our country is never considered to be a particular religion irregardless of the majority.

I don’t like anyone trying to force their beliefs on me; in fact it makes me angry when people do that, but I also don’t want to have to hide my religion. Freedom of religion is one of the rights Americans enjoy that most countries do not.

Sounds like a sermon - hahaha.

BWP,

Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion, but it includes freedom from religion if one so wishes. Freedom of religion means nothing unless it also includes freedom from religion. As Aunty M says, it's the only way to be inclusive of all, and not just some or most, people.

Just like the right of freedom of speech means that the speech you hate is also protected. Otherwise it is a meaningless right.

BJ,

It's nice to hear you say you don't think you're a right wing nut job, but unfortunately many of your posts read like they were written by one, your connecting Saddam with 9/11 in particular.

Sg

...

I just don’t see how a person could ever be free from religion in a country were people have freedom of religion unless a law is be made so that people who are in public office can’t speak of their beliefs and that people would have to keep their beliefs private & to themselves. Personally would like to be free FROM other people’s personal beliefs but in reality that ends up seperating people and causing misunderstanding. Some people would like to regain that which was lost due to the suppression of their religion. STILL CONFUSED – (& believe me I am not trying to be difficult).

I'm not understanding you BWP. What religion has lost something due to suppression in the US? Government should not be endorsing one faith over another, but they should also not try to "suppress" any religion, as long as it complies with our laws.

To be free from religion is a choice the same as choosing one over the other. No one's "right" to be free from religion is violated by someone else speaking about their faith, unless it's incessant on a personal level and harrassment occurs. For example, if you had a Buddhist living next door and they contacted you every day to discuss conversion that you weren't interested in, I'd consider that to be offending. If, on the other hand, you had a pcinic with said neighbor and he gave you a background of Buddhism for the sake of conversation and learning about each other, that's perfectly OK, in fact, the exchange of ideas should be beneficial to both of you.

If other peoples religious ideas are a threat to you in some way, then I'd say the problem might be your insecurity in your own beliefs.

AuntyM,
It is Native Americans that were suppressed in their spirituality & beliefs “religion”; missionaries, boarding schools, disallowing practices, language, & dance, etc. to which much was lost. This is why I lean more to religious tolerance than suppression.

I asked about freedom FROM religion because of the group Freedom From Religion Foundation that sues often over religion being expressed – sometimes they win & sometimes they lose. I was actually being sarcastic when I asked about making a law so public official couldn’t express their beliefs and people had to hide their religion (I know the 1st Amendment better than that!).

I don’t like religion in government, doesn’t belong there, & I really don’t like people trying to push their beliefs on me because I consider religion very personal. But I still think people should be able to freely practice, express their religion. It is just such a difficult fine line that it often confuses me and it doesn’t help that these popularity seeking politicians exploit it. Have you ever seen the bumper sticker that says, “Quit playing politics with my religion”? Well that says it for me.

Believe it or not I agree with what you said in your post, I think I was being too simple minded in the freedom From thing.

If you have studied history, you already know it's very difficult to separate some tribes religious practices with breaking of our laws, which we never could have tolerated. Native Americans weren't even considered human at some points in time, so our government wouldn't have bothered with the religious freedom question. Religion was the least of Native Americans worries.

AuntyM,
I think that a lot of what happened back then can be contributed to uneducated folks doing what they thought best to even more uneducated people. I hate it when people try to hold people accountable by todays standards for things done a long time ago. While it wasn't right, or even close to right, it does have to be looked at in the perspective of the times. I can't and wouldn't even try to justify what happened back then, it seems unfair of the tribes to look at the US government and point out how unfair they were, without considering what happened to their own enemies when they defeated them.

Blue water,
First let me state that the above statement is in no way meant to take away from the validity of how you feel.
Let me state that coming from an ultraconservative background, I can't understand how Christians can read the bible, look at the Book of Revelations in the Bible and what is stated; and then try to insert religion into government. The way I see it, the main point of Revelations is that the government gives itself over to a world wide religion and attacks those who refuse to worship the beast and his number. Freedom from religion and Freedom of Religion are in reality, the same thing. I can teach my kids what I believe and you should be free to teach yours how you feel. If I want, I can allow someone else to do it, by I most certianly don't what anyone I don't trust to.

Yes, AuntyM, I have taken a few history classes, even one that included atrocities done & laws broken by all religions, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Catholics, etc. In fact, people continue to break laws, bombing abortion clinics in the name of religion, surely you are up on current events of what has been going on in the name of religion. Maybe we should round up their children and re-educate them (sarcasm).

African-Americans were suppressed in their religion in US, not allowed their usual practices & forced into a foreign religion. To think that the US has not suppressed religion is to be an ostrich (to use BJ’s word).

Justice & liberty for all? The US who polices the world for human rights & dignity? Who for some reason needed a civil war & civil rights when they always had what was needed: The Bill of Rights. Don’t kid yourself, they knew they were human but it was in their own interest to deny rights, murder, steal. The propaganda of that day - not considered people. I would think you would be a bigger proponent of civil rights since women were considered inferior to men, in US, even by some women in US, even today.

As for the comment that the least of Native American worries was loss of religion, that just tells me one thing, you don’t know anything about Native Americans.
--------
KriJack, You act as if people have gotten smarter & as if this happened once upon a time, so long ago. It was not so long ago & I don’t see people as any smarter, a little more tolerant – MAYBE- but not smarter. How else do you explain torture at Guantanamo?

You are so general in your comment about enemies; but anyway, at least they upheld their treaties with each other and still do. Your word defeated makes me sigh. The US should be held responsible today.

There are people in the US who claim the Holocaust did not happen, that it was a farce thought up by the Jewish people, that disgusts me when I hear it. We should be better at this; we should be a leader in the world in human rights because we have a melting pot of people, and because we have freedoms other do not. If we can’t get beyond prejudice here, then where?