Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Anyone else tired of "faith-based" presidents?
OLD American Century / White Rose Society message boards > Political Discussion forums > Politics In General
anniefey
Last year, Fred Thompson said his first act in office would be to pray. John McCain says we are a Christian nation. Mike Huckabee says he's going to take America back for Christ. (And who can forget eight years ago when Bush said Jesus was his favorite political philosopher?)

I don't want a president who sees himself (or herself) as an agent of God. I want a president who sees himself as a defender of the Constitution. Make that the defender of the Constitution, considering he holds the highest office in the land.

Tell me, how is Huckabee's vow to take America back for Christ any different from Osama Bin Laden's call for jihad to overthrow the Saudi royal family and take back his nation for Allah?

I have a better idea. Let's take back our Constitution from the Christian fundamentalists!





Jubal
You interpreted Huckabee's vow as a call for war? eek.gif
soon2b
QUOTE(Jubal @ Thursday, 7 February 2008, 6:58 pm) *
You interpreted Huckabee's vow as a call for war? eek.gif


ji·had [ ji hd ] (plural ji·hads) or je·had [ ji hd ] (plural je·hads)


noun

Definition:

1. Islamic campaign against nonbelievers: a campaign waged by Muslims in defense of the Islamic faith against people, organizations, or countries regarded as hostile to Islam


2. relentless campaign: a relentless campaign against somebody or something


[Mid-19th century. < Arabic jihād "effort"]


Jubal
QUOTE(soon2b @ Thursday, 7 February 2008, 7:54 pm) *
ji·had [ ji hd ] (plural ji·hads) or je·had [ ji hd ] (plural je·hads)
noun

Definition:

1. Islamic campaign against nonbelievers: a campaign waged by Muslims in defense of the Islamic faith against people, organizations, or countries regarded as hostile to Islam


2. relentless campaign: a relentless campaign against somebody or something


[Mid-19th century. < Arabic jihād "effort"]

You're absolutely correct. Jihad isn't war.

And waterboarding isn't torture.
Southpaw
Back on subject.

Yes!


QUOTE
“Civilization will not attain to its perfection until the last stone from the last church falls on the last priest” , Emile Zola
soon2b
Thought I'd help out by showing the post might have some substance beyond the paranoic hyperbole that Jubal read into it. My mistake eek.gif Carry on!
Jubal
QUOTE(soon2b @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 7:58 am) *
Thought I'd help out by showing the post might have some substance beyond the paranoic hyperbole that Jubal read into it. My mistake eek.gif Carry on!

You're right. Osama bin Laden is a kind, gentle, non-violent soul, sort of a Muslim Martin Luther King. Any criticism of him should be considered neocon Bushbot paranoia.
POAC
QUOTE(Jubal @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 11:13 am) *
You're right. Osama bin Laden is a kind, gentle, non-violent soul, sort of a Muslim Martin Luther King. Any criticism of him should be considered neocon Bushbot paranoia.


strawman much?
soon2b
QUOTE(Jubal @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 12:13 pm) *
You're right. Osama bin Laden is a kind, gentle, non-violent soul, sort of a Muslim Martin Luther King. Any criticism of him should be considered neocon Bushbot paranoia.

"Paranoic hyperbole" referred to the tone of the original post, not your comment. Is my grammar that bad?
Southpaw
QUOTE(POAC @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 12:20 pm) *
strawman much?


seems so.

On the subject , if one took the pandering, religious or ethnic, out of politics, many of these clowns wouldn't be more than a blip on the horizon,. They tend to make the zealots feel important.
Jubal
QUOTE(POAC @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 12:20 pm) *
strawman much?

You tell me.

anniefey said:

QUOTE
Tell me, how is Huckabee's vow to take America back for Christ any different from Osama Bin Laden's call for jihad to overthrow the Saudi royal family and take back his nation for Allah?


I take this to mean she sees no difference between Huckabee's vow and Osama's jihad. Now, I do believe Osama's jihad includes elements of large-scale violence. I haven't seen any indication that Huckabee's vow includes such elements of large-scale violence. That would be "different." So I responded:

QUOTE
You interpreted Huckabee's vow as a call for war?


In so doing, I was following annifey's format of expressing a statement as a question.

With me so far? OK, pressing on...

That's when soon2b threw in the dictionary definition of "jihad" as "relentless campaign against somebody or something." By this he was implying that "jihad" need not be violent. He apparently didn't comprehend that anniefey made specific reference to Osama Bin Laden's call for jihad. So I pointed that out by, admittedly sarcastically, observing that his implication that "jihad" wasn't necessarily war was about as laughable as the administration's claim that waterboarding isn't torture, when applied to Osama bin Laden's notion of jihad.

That's when the name-calling started. Please note that my responses, while again sarcastic, remained on topic and didn't join in the ad hominem festival.

In the interests of peace (and time), I'll restate.

I see at least one difference between Osama bin Laden's call for jihad and Huckabee's vow to take back America for Christ. Osama has in the past included massive violence, terrorism, and warfare in his concept of jihad. To the best of my knowledge, Huckabee hasn't included a call for massive violence, terrorism, and warfare in his vow to take back America for Christ. I see this as a significant distinction.

Better now?

I do apologize for the sarcasm, and for any confusion it may have caused among the board regulars, who of course are unfamiliar with sarcasm because they would never, ever stoop to such a vile, barbarous tactic.
sky of mind
Or perhaps if you soften all the hard lines, maybe she's saying that there are similarities worthy of mention?
POAC
QUOTE(Jubal @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 12:03 pm) *
I do apologize for the sarcasm, and for any confusion it may have caused among the board regulars, who of course are unfamiliar with sarcasm because they would never, ever stoop to such a vile, barbarous tactic.


Guess therein answers my question.
soon2b
There you are then. You just have to dummy it down enough for us.
QUOTE
I do apologize for the sarcasm, and for any confusion it may have caused among the board regulars, who of course are unfamiliar with sarcasm because they would never, ever stoop to such a vile, barbarous tactic.

We might. rolleyes.gif
sky of mind
QUOTE(soon2b @ Friday, 8 February 2008, 10:53 am) *
There you are then. You just have to dummy it down enough for us.

We might. rolleyes.gif




Especially with such a qualified teacher!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.