Hmm, Doesn't Fit The Narrative. Carry On With The Name Calling

[LiveLaughLove]

"When you look at Santorum’s actual record and involvement with black Americans, you find something entirely different from the media caricatures of a racist Republican. Longtime staff member Robert Traynham served with Santorum for ten years. Traynham is an openly homosexual black man who has repeatedly defended Santorum from these assaults on his character,"

http://bigjournalism.com/cjohnson/20...t/#more-259624

It sucks when facts get in the way of demagoguery.

I don't get it. I've been told by the media that he (along with all conservatives) is a racist homophobe that hates everyone that's not rich.

What was that John Adams quote about facts, SP?

[SanJoaquinSooner]

"When you look at Santorum’s actual record and involvement with black Americans, you find something entirely different from the media caricatures of a racist Republican. Longtime staff member Robert Traynham served with Santorum for ten years. Traynham is an openly homosexual black man who has repeatedly defended Santorum from these assaults on his character,"

http://bigjournalism.com/cjohnson/20...t/#more-259624

It sucks when facts get in the way of demagoguery.

I don't get it. I've been told by the media that he (along with all conservatives) is a racist homophobe that hates everyone that's not rich.What was that John Adams quote about facts, SP?

I've watched the Anderson Cooper video and he is not accusing Santorum of being racist. He is simply making Santorum look bad for being in denial about what he said. Santorum says, "it kinda sounds like I said "black" Americans, but it really wasn't the word "black." I be word pivoting when I be talking."

[SicEmBaylor]

Santorum is the most dangerous man running for President up to and including Obama. If he were to get the GOP nomination, god forbid*, then I'm reasonably sure that I would never vote Republican again. If he gets the nomination, I will join in whatever effort to make sure the Republican Party dies a painful but quick death as soon as possible.

*Pun intended

[cccasooner2]

Santorum is the most dangerous man running for President up to and including Obama. If he were to get the GOP nomination, god forbid*, then I'm reasonably sure that I would never vote Republican again. If he gets the nomination, I will join in whatever effort to make sure the Republican Party dies a painful but quick death as soon as possible.

*Pun intended

But, but, but ....h..his daughter was sick.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Also, Santorum had a strange (not racist) comment -- that the movie "Waiting for Superman" was about black children.

If a movie has some characters who are black, the movie is about black people?

[soonercruiser]

Santorum is the most dangerous man running for President up to and including Obama. If he were to get the GOP nomination, god forbid*, then I'm reasonably sure that I would never vote Republican again. If he gets the nomination, I will join in whatever effort to make sure the Republican Party dies a painful but quick death as soon as possible.

*Pun intended

SicEm!
Would you leave the country if Santorum is elected?
No pun intended....

[SoonerPride]

"When you look at Santorum’s actual record and involvement with black Americans, you find something entirely different from the media caricatures of a racist Republican. Longtime staff member Robert Traynham served with Santorum for ten years. Traynham is an openly homosexual black man who has repeatedly defended Santorum from these assaults on his character,"

http://bigjournalism.com/cjohnson/20...t/#more-259624

It sucks when facts get in the way of demagoguery.

I don't get it. I've been told by the media that he (along with all conservatives) is a racist homophobe that hates everyone that's not rich.

What was that John Adams quote about facts, SP?

You act as though I've never heard of Robert Traynham before. He's been on TV quite a bit and is a known quantity. At first blush I thought he was just a shill or possibly lying. Over the past months when I've seen him speak about Santorum I've decided he was sincere. Rick Santorum was not personally hateful to his face.

That leaves two distinct possiblities...

1. Rick Santorum is a fraud. He espouses all the right wing talking points about gays, and the gay agenda, but in private accepts them and even encourages them and welcomes them and their partners into his home for dinner and drinks. So he's possibly a hypocrite. There's a whole lot of that in Washington. The "do as I say not as I do" credo.

or

2. Robert Traynham is willing to overlook Santorum's political stance which is anethma to his own lifestyle for his own personal career and political gain. There is a term for people like that derived from a character in Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, but I find it offensive to call someone that. But the description of the behavior pattern fits.

Besides how he may treat someone face to face, the main point is what he believes government should do. Santorum advocates for personal freedom everywhere but in the bedroom, where he thinks the state can outlaw contraception and sodomy (gay or straight). Um, dude, keep your nose out of everyone's private affairs. Santorum's policy positions are a frothy mix of repression and idiocy.

[AlboSooner]

. Rick Santorum is a fraud. He espouses all the right wing talking points about gays, and the gay agenda, but in private accepts them and even encourages them and welcomes them and their partners into his home for dinner and drinks. So he's possibly a hypocrite. There's a whole lot of that in Washington. The "do as I say not as I do" credo.

That's the opposite of being a hypocrite. The Christian position has ALWAYS been, hate the sin, love the sinner. And we are all sinners. Looks like Santorum is practicing good Christian doctrine.

[SoonerPride]

That's the opposite of being a hypocrite. The Christian position has ALWAYS been, hate the sin, love the sinner. And we are all sinners. Looks like Santorum is practicing good Christian doctrine.

Yeah, you can always feel the love around Chrisitians.

If Jesus was on Earth today, he'd be stoned to death as a liberal.

[AlboSooner]

If Jesus was on Earth today, he'd be stoned to death as a liberal.

Not for being a liberal, but for being Holy. Love, compassion, sacrifice, holiness and so on are neither conservative values, nor liberal values, those are values that come from God.

Jesus would do exactly what Santorum did, by hanging around and being friendly to people who don't practice the same values he does.

[SicEmBaylor]

Jesus was a self-righteous d-bag.

[LiveLaughLove]

Jesus was a self-righteous d-bag.

You're doing that whole Baylor thing wrong.

[SicEmBaylor]

SicEm!
Would you leave the country if Santorum is elected?
No pun intended....

No. I'm going to be too busy here at home working to see the GOP consigned to the dustbin of history. I see no reason to have TWO parties who believe in nanny-state government -- one is more than enough. Let there be one party that believes in a government that serves by protecting and expanding liberty and another party for everyone else.

Rick Santorum would be an American Ahmadinejad.

[LiveLaughLove]

Rick Santorum would be an American Ahmadinejad.

Same thing was said about GW Bush. It was a lame scare tactic then, and it's the same with Santorum.

I do agree that he isn't conservative enough (the nanny state stuff), but none of the three left are.

The whole theocracy stuff is just pure trash though. I know Christians, Christians are dear friends of mine, I don't know any that want a theocracy. None. In any fashion.

I've heard my pastor preach on our Constitution numerous times, I've never heard him say we need to push for a theocracy. Never. In any fashion.

[Chuck Bao]

You act as though I've never heard of Robert Traynham before. He's been on TV quite a bit and is a known quantity. At first blush I thought he was just a shill or possibly lying. Over the past months when I've seen him speak about Santorum I've decided he was sincere. Rick Santorum was not personally hateful to his face.

That leaves two distinct possiblities...

1. Rick Santorum is a fraud. He espouses all the right wing talking points about gays, and the gay agenda, but in private accepts them and even encourages them and welcomes them and their partners into his home for dinner and drinks. So he's possibly a hypocrite. There's a whole lot of that in Washington. The "do as I say not as I do" credo.

or

2. Robert Traynham is willing to overlook Santorum's political stance which is anethma to his own lifestyle for his own personal career and political gain. There is a term for people like that derived from a character in Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, but I find it offensive to call someone that. But the description of the behavior pattern fits.

Besides how he may treat someone face to face, the main point is what he believes government should do. Santorum advocates for personal freedom everywhere but in the bedroom, where he thinks the state can outlaw contraception and sodomy (gay or straight). Um, dude, keep your nose out of everyone's private affairs. Santorum's policy positions are a frothy mix of repression and idiocy.

^^^This

Besides, I remember Sarah Palin stating with a straight face that she wasn't homophobic because she has some gay friends. That's the GOP ticket: spread bigotry and fear, but make sure that you have a few gay friends/employees to serve as cover. Dammit, where can I sign up for this gig.

[SicEmBaylor]

Same thing was said about GW Bush. It was a lame scare tactic then, and it's the same with Santorum.

I do agree that he isn't conservative enough (the nanny state stuff), but none of the three left are.

The whole theocracy stuff is just pure trash though. I know Christians, Christians are dear friends of mine, I don't know any that want a theocracy. None. In any fashion.

I've heard my pastor preach on our Constitution numerous times, I've never heard him say we need to push for a theocracy. Never. In any fashion.

Uh...there are four left not three and one of those four sure as hell is.

Christians love to preach the Constitution. The problem is their interpretation of the document. Many view it like it was some sort of God ordained document from the heavens....like God handed the outline to Madison like he handed the commandments to Moses.

Santorum has said almost as much throughout his career.

[LiveLaughLove]

Uh...there are four left not three and one of those four sure as hell is.

Christians love to preach the Constitution. The problem is their interpretation of the document. Many view it like it was some sort of God ordained document from the heavens....like God handed the outline to Madison like he handed the commandments to Moses.

Santorum has said almost as much throughout his career.

Sorry but there are only three that have a chance. Your guy isn't one of them, Praise God!

As for the Constitution being handed down from God. Well, the Founders believed they were certainly following his tenants in it's creation. They fasted and prayed before creating it:


"in a letter to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts, John Adams writes, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Noah Webster stated, "The moral principles and precepts contained in the scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws. All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible."

Delegate Governor Morris of Pennsylvania forthrightly professed, "I believe that religion is the only solid base of morals, and that morals are the only possible support of free governments. Therefore education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God."


Good read here: http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and...and-government


"We had an atheist visit our site and expressed a good bit of displeasure with some of the above citations. We responded that he should relish the freedom of expression that a Christian culture put in place for him. And that he should be thankful that our culture was not founded on atheism, given the horrible result of atheistic governments in the past (such as Communist Russia, etc.).

Jesus did not usher in a political kingdom. But Christianity has been the single largest influence on western society. America's Founding Fathers had the benefit of thousands of years of history to draw on when establishing their government. They could see what had failed in the past. There had been times when the state had absolute authority and persecuted the church. At other times the church had effective control of the state. The founders saw that neither of these extremes were ideal. They developed a system that stood the test of time. Observers everywhere generally agree that American's Founding Fathers achieved a solid balance between church and state, one consistent with biblical concepts."

I google stuff.

[IBleedCrimson]

I thought the founders believed in a clockwork universe... that if there is a perfect God, then the universe he created must be perfect, and he wouldn't need to intervene to correct imperfections...

You use as citation "faithfacts.org" How on earth can that be considered objective?

[LiveLaughLove]

I thought the founders believed in a clockwork universe... that if there is a perfect God, then the universe he created must be perfect, and he wouldn't need to intervene to correct imperfections...

You use as citation "faithfacts.org" How on earth can that be considered objective?

Didn't say faithfacts was an objective source. I said it was a good read. You can disagree.

The quotes from Adams et al were not from that source. They were from a quick google search of quotes by our founding fathers.

I don't believe the founders had any single Christian philosophy, clockwork or otherwise. 50 of the 54, or 54 of the 59 (can't recall the exact number) were Christians of one denomination or another.

I know Dickson of Pennsylvania was a staunch Quaker. Adams was a Methodist I believe, or Episcopalian. Can't recall off my head. Even Franklin who was considered a "rounder" for back then, cites the God of Providence as being the true creator of our Republic.

You do realize, the British were considered unbeatable at that time. We were farmers with old muskets. Most of the founders believed they were signing their death warrants when they signed the Declaration.

Even with France's aid they thought it a long shot. Yet time and time again, things happened the way we needed them to happen. God? Providence? Happenstance? Pure luck?

The vast majority of them saw it for what it was. Franklin was right, as usual.

It strikes me as almost laughable if it weren't so sad, at how many hoops people will jump through to deny God in today's world.

[SicEmBaylor]

I thought the founders believed in a clockwork universe... that if there is a perfect God, then the universe he created must be perfect, and he wouldn't need to intervene to correct imperfections...

You use as citation "faithfacts.org" How on earth can that be considered objective?

This is exactly right. The Founding Fathers, by and large, believed in a conceptual God. Their view of God was as the great-architect. When you read what they say about God, it isn't the evangelical Christian-style God of 20/21st century America.

You have to remember that our Founding Fathers were the extreme liberals of their day. The principles they espoused come from the Enlightenment. The "great experiment" of the United States is that it was based on these principles and not on religious beliefs, ancient claims to land, or even Hellenistic values. There had been plenty of nations and civilizations based on religious texts and there certainly had been other democracies and republics before ours. The United States is unique in that it was in the incarnation of enlightenment principles.