Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > The Newsroom
Facebook

Notices

The Newsroom FYI: News & Current Events, Political Discussions, etc.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 05-16-2007, 08:47 AM
Chan
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berkeley View Post
why does Romney's religion bother you? Utah is a very red state!!
Yes, Mormon Utah is a very red state; but Romney was governor of Massachusetts - a very blue state where the Court imposeded gay marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-16-2007, 08:53 AM
Chan
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 View Post
I am now watching a few minutes of the debate being rerun. Ron Paul just made outragous statements regarding 9-11 and the war but Rudy J. slapped him right back down into his place. The audience that had been quiet as I am sure instructed roared in approval and clapped when Rudy put Ron Paul in his place. I hope the Paulites on AFF catch this debate.
Were the statements really so outrageous or are you stupidly interpreting them to mean something other than what Ron Paul said the way Rudy did? Look at American foreign policy since at least the 1950s and look closely at how we interfered in the affairs of various Middle Eastern nations. Ron Paul's assessment was accurate: our unconstitutional entanglement in the affairs of other, particularly Muslim, nations is why terrorists carried out 9/11 and are so bent on hurting us. And, no, Rudy didn't put Ron Paul in his place. Rudy merely parked his brain and reacted with his emotions. He presented a Democrat-like feigned offense at Ron Paul's remarks and, like a Democrat, demanded that Paul withdraw his statements. But Ron Paul, not given to such political correctness nonsense, stood his ground and explained his position as much as he was allowed to.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:04 AM
StillStanding's Avatar
StillStanding StillStanding is offline
Beautiful are the feet......


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Right...behind...you!
Posts: 6,600
These debates are useful only for posturing. The fun hasn't really started yet!

The fun starts when Fred Thompson declares he is running! The guns will really start blasting then! The other Republican candidates know he will be the frontrunner, but they can't say anything until he declares. The Democrats know he can win the election, so you can bet they have people looking into every crevace of his life trying to find something negative.
__________________
Words: For when an emoticon just isn't enough.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:04 AM
SoCaliUPC's Avatar
SoCaliUPC SoCaliUPC is offline
Blessed!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truly Blessed View Post
When will Christians in the US acknowledge that George Bush has been a disaster and that in spite of his shortcomings, Bill Clinton was the most effective president the US has had in recent history? You should be out there campaigning for Hillary!
No way, in a million years, would I ever vote for Hillary. She is a socialist..at best.

After watching the debates...right now, I am heavily leaning towards supporting Mitt Romney. John McCain....where I honor his service to our country, and the sacrifices that he has made...he has made me a little weary in his debates. Awkward. Rudy...where I thought he would be the person I favored....speaks out of both sides of his mouth when he talks. He has done this over and over again. I am not talking "flip-flopping" (as I think it has become a "norm" in politics) but in the same sentence he will "flip-flop" his views.

I really would like to see a Romney vs. Edwards presidential election.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:08 AM
Chan
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 View Post
Perhaps I should have said naive. It is the same old broken libetarian record. Non interventionism that is impossible in the modern world. Also minimalist government that is not realistic either. There would be chaos.
IF YOU THINK IT'S IMPOSSIBLE, CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:
I consider the concept that if we just ignore the rest of the world they will go away and leave us alone as childish and not worth consideration. Anyone that advocates it is dimwitted in my opinion.
So typical of someone who doesn't understand that Ron Paul's position is the same position many of the founding fathers held. You are a traitor to America by suggesting as you did here that the founding fathers were "dimwitted"!

George Washington said, "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is—in extending our commercial relations—to have with them as little political connection as possible."

James Madison wrote, "Of all enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few."

John Quincy Adams said, "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will be America’s heart, her benedictions, and her prayers. But she does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own."

19th century politician Henry Clay explained to Hungarian patriot Louis Kossuth that if America gave aid to his cause, we would have abandoned "our ancient policy of amity and non-intervention." He explained further: "By the policy to which we have adhered since the days of Washington. . . we have done more for the cause of liberty in the world than arms could effect; we have shown to other nations the way to greatness and happiness. . . . Far better is it for ourselves, for Hungary, and the cause of liberty, that, adhering to our pacific system and avoiding the distant wars of Europe, we should keep our lamp burning brightly on this western shore, as a light to all nations, than to hazard its utter extinction amid the ruins of fallen and falling republics in Europe."

Lincoln's Secretary of State William Seward (the man who bought Alaska from Russia) responded to France's request for the United States to help Poland by defending, "our policy of non-intervention—straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations."

A Yale University professor in the late 1800s named William Graham Sumner opposed the expansionist leanings of the then-current Administration when he said regarding the founding fathers, "They would have no court and no pomp; nor orders, or ribbons, or decorations, or titles. They would have no public debt. There was to be no grand diplomacy, because they intended to mind their own business, and not be involved in any of the intrigues to which European statesmen were accustomed. There was to be no balance of power and no 'reason of state' to cost the life and happiness of citizens."
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:44 AM
CC1's Avatar
CC1 CC1 is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,840
You Paulites can dream on. He is the choice of a whopping 2% of Republican voters in every legitimate poll.

He is going to fade a lot faster than the midget from TX did a few years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:46 AM
CC1's Avatar
CC1 CC1 is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,840
BTW - I am quite familiar with the isolationist wing of the Republican party through history. I do not agree with it. It was naive then and it is naive now.

You guys would have sat and ate popcorn while Hitler rolled through all of Europe and Africa.

What are the isolationist going to do when Iran has a nuclear weapon? Do you guys think that just because you will have pulled out of the Middle East and left the oil and Israel to the whims of Middle Eastern despots that Iran and others will not explode one in America? Naive I say!
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:47 AM
Chan
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 View Post
BTW - I am quite familiar with the isolationist wing of the Republican party through history. I do not agree with it. It was naive then and it is naive now.

You guys would have sat and ate popcorn while Hitler rolled through all of Europe and Africa.
And so would the founding fathers! Hmmm, pretty good company to be in. You are essentially saying you don't agree with the founding fathers!

John Quincy Adams said, "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will be America’s heart, her benedictions, and her prayers. But she does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own."

19th century politician Henry Clay explained to Hungarian patriot Louis Kossuth that if America gave aid to his cause, we would have abandoned "our ancient policy of amity and non-intervention." He explained further: "By the policy to which we have adhered since the days of Washington. . . we have done more for the cause of liberty in the world than arms could effect; we have shown to other nations the way to greatness and happiness. . . . Far better is it for ourselves, for Hungary, and the cause of liberty, that, adhering to our pacific system and avoiding the distant wars of Europe, we should keep our lamp burning brightly on this western shore, as a light to all nations, than to hazard its utter extinction amid the ruins of fallen and falling republics in Europe."

Lincoln's Secretary of State William Seward (the man who bought Alaska from Russia) responded to France's request for the United States to help Poland by defending, "our policy of non-intervention—straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations."
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:48 AM
CC1's Avatar
CC1 CC1 is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chan View Post
And so would the founding fathers! Hmmm, pretty good company to be in.
So you admit you would have let Hitler take the rest of the world? If so I think that says plenty about your view.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-16-2007, 09:53 AM
Chan
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 View Post
So you admit you would have let Hitler take the rest of the world? If so I think that says plenty about your view.
I would have followed the founding fathers' advice and maintained a non-interventionist policy. However, once Hitler started across the Atlantic toward the United States I would have called on Congress to declare war.

If you don't like the founding fathers' non-interventionist policies, I strongly suggest that you work toward having the Constitution changed to allow the United States to carry out your globalist tendencies.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Amanah

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.