Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

Friday, May 1, 2009

INTERESTING POLLS AND OTHER THINGS TO THINK ABOUT FOR THE WEEKEND


A new Gallup poll shows Mr. Obama's approval rating among religious Americans to be very favorable, in fact, according to Gallup, his favorability is very high among Catholics, more so than among Protestants, those hostile Notre Dame protestors notwithstanding.


PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup Poll Daily tracking during President Obama's first 100 days in office finds broad support for him among Americans affiliated with most major U.S. religions. U.S. Muslims and Jews give Obama his highest job approval ratings, at 85% and 79%, respectively. He also receives solid majority support from Roman Catholics (67%) and Protestants (58%), and more approval than disapproval from Mormons.


Mr. Obama's favorability among Jews and Muslims is the same, very high.


The commonality between U.S. Jews and Muslims in their broad approval of Obama is notable given the global friction between Jews and Muslims with respect to Mideast politics.

High U.S. Jewish support for Obama is not surprising given that Jews are traditionally heavily Democratic in their political orientation. Democratic Jews supported Hillary Clinton by a slight margin over Obama in the battle for the Democratic nomination last year, but they gradually came around to supporting him in large numbers for the general election.


And it is very high among nonbelievers.


Obama also enjoys broad support -- 73% approval -- from the sizable group of Americans with no religious affiliation, including those calling themselves atheists or agnostics.

These findings are based on large sample sizes for each religious group contained in the combined Gallup Poll Daily tracking results from Jan. 21-April 29, 2009. This includes interviews with approximately 55,000 Protestants (defined in this study as those who identify themselves either as Protestant or with another non-Catholic Christian religion), 24,000 Catholics, 2,500 Jews, 1,600 Mormons, and 350 Muslims.
White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.
Do those torture-friendly people ask themselves "Who Would Jesus Torture?" If not, can we ask them to imagine Jesus in a room with a terrorist and allowing him/her to be tortured? Can they really imagine that?
And don't we frequently hear from religious people that people can't possibly have morals without religion? How, then, do nonbelievers know that it is morally wrong to torture and the evangelical Christians do not?

95 comments:

TAO said...

With approval ratings like that across the various religious denominations one can only assume that...

Right wing bloggers who absolutely hate everything about Barack Obama are in the minority and most likely not religious?

Sarah said...

I for one do not agree with those polls. Believe me, I am no apologist for Obama. The funds he has sent to Gaza, ostensibly to aid civilians, almost certainly is going right into the hands of Hamas, which use it for weapons or some other nefarious purpose.

It is obvious that Obama would not want “Palestinians” from Gaza to emigrate here. That would leave fewer civilians for Hamas to hide behind, fewer heartrending videos for CNN to show, less pressure on Israel to cease to exist so these people could take over.

Obama has already done more terrible things than I can count. So we don’t need to make up one that isn’t true.

I apologize for not posting very much lately. Aside from the depressing news, I’ve been dealing with some personal issues that have been taking up most of my time.

But let me just sum up what Obama has accomplished not even a month into his presidency.

He ordered the closing of the Guatanamo Bay prison. Where those poor cute little cuddly misunderstood terrorists will go is still up in the air.

He ordered the CIA detention centers shut down.

And he dropped charges against that Al Qaeda terrorist responsible for the USS Cole bombing.

Remember, his first call as President to a foreign leader was to Mahmoud Abbas. His first interview as POTUS was to Al Arabiyah. Need I also remind you of all the foreign donations that came in from Gaza?

Anyway, as a result of the self-inflicted suffering of the Hamastinians, Obama has signed a Presidential Determination allowing these genocidal Hamas supporters to resettle in the U.S., at the expense of us taxpayers.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Sarah,

You need not apologize for your lack of blogging lately, I didn't even know you had one. After clicking on the link to your blog, I can now say with firmness that I will not be crushed should you continue to fall behind in your blogging.

One does not expect intellectual insight or even rationality when one reads this sort of 6th grade level writing:

Unfortunately, winning an election does not make stupid ideas any less stupid, and neither I nor anyone else who understands what this despicable creep is really up to has any intention of just throwing up our hands and walking away. He will be opposed, he will be fought, and for America’s sake we can only hope he will be defeated, and will not be re-elected, because American will never be capable of sustaining that moronic dictator loving traitor, for 8 years. .Really. You and your rightwing extremists need to internalize the fact that a majority of Americans--religious and nonreligious approve of President Obama.

In that post, you come off sounding like a petulant child with a very bad vocabulary.

Sarah said...

I didn't think it was necessary to apologize for being rightwing.
And although I know it won't make any difference to the likes of YOU. I found your reply to my comment to be as inappropriate as can be. Why did you find it to be necessary to insult me?
This only goes to show how closed minded and arrogant you are.
And no, you can't hurt my feelings, I simply don't respect you enough. I never insulted you, yet because I have a republican blog your found it necessary to insult me. You are unable to see past your own prejudices.

In fact, I'm too much of a lady to tell you what I really think of you.

TRUTH 101 said...

Let's take a deep breath and think about this Ladies. president Obama is doing what he said he would do. Opening a dialogue with enemies in an effort to start the peace process. Let's all be proud he is keeping his word and there were no surprises regarding this approach.

There is a time for war. But it isn't until diplomacy fails.

SarahG said...

TRUTH 101 said...
"Let's take a deep breath and think about this Ladies."

There is ONLY ONE LADY here and that is ME!

Shaw Kenawe said...

Sarah G,

You came here to a liberal blog that supports President Obama and you dislike--I would say, actually, hate, Mr. Obama.

When I, in turn, visited your blog I read that your opinion of Mr. Obama is that he is a "despicable creep" and a "moronic, dictator loving traitor."It is my opinion that that level of writing is childish. You've done nothing but call Mr. Obama names.

You insulted the president, I called what you wrote juvenile. Now you're insulted.

If you have some constructive criticism of Mr. Obama, fine, please elucidate.

Calling him a "moronic, dictator-loving traitor," is, IMHO, silly and not deserving of anything but ridicule.

Anonymous said...

I am extremely conservative and Christian and he isn't ranking high in our corner of the world. In fact our church has 7000 members and we dicuss daily the effects of his administration being more of a socialist agenda.

I don't believe the polls either!

Religion and Faith are two different things. Those of us that have a strong faith live by morals set forth by the Bible. We don't accept abortion nor gay marriage. We don't turn our back on the word of God to be PC or accepted.

Those the cite religion and rank him high, most likely are following the religion not faith.

Patrick M said...

Let me copy my thoughts on the religion and torture polls, as it may shed a little light:

I'm guessing there are two reasons for this.

First, strongly religious people of the Christian persuasion believe more firmly in right and wrong in the individual. And when you view an enemy as evil (and terrorists, in their hearts and by their actions, are), then there is no greater good in protecting the innocent from them, even if it requires the Comfy Chair.

Second, any Catholic who went to Catholic school is not bothered too much by torture. After all, torture is an apt description of the experience. Trust me, after eight F'ing years, I know. :)

Just a thought.

SarahG said...

I came to your blog to express MY opinion in a peaceful manor, I did NOT use foul language, I did NOT insult You, and I was pleasant.. . You in turn called me names, criticized my grammar It is
I love my Country as you do, but we see it differently. I expressed my feelings passionately. I do hate the way Obama is running things and the way he is changing the Country that I love. You and your cohorts that cadre of nincompoops have done the exact same thing all over the blogs and don’t deny it. You have posted horrific pictures and cartoon of President Bush and called him every name under the sun, so don’t get on your high horse with me.
Yes, Now I’m insulted. But I should have know better to even enter your chamber of horrors. You can be sure that it won’t happen again. A perfect conclusion to the events via the liberal logic.

Susannah said...

I'm w/ Sarah & Patrick (& TAO, I'd beg to differ on your last 4 words).

Now see, Shaw, Sarah has a point & I don't think you heard it. Blogs are supposed to be about exchanging ideas, unless you're so full of yourself that you must silence your visitors w/ ridicule in order to maintain your smugness.

'M not sure about you, but I was taught to be respectful & courteous of visitors, if you want to have them again. Seems to me that you don't want a discussion or dialogue, just a forum for spewing venom when someone challenges you. Progressive eruptions, indeed.

Btw, I used your blog once (in comments w/ a lib blogger) as an object lesson for the Cult of Obama Worship. The other blogger was denying that people hold him up as an idol of worship. Your blog, dear friend, was my case-in-point.

The charicature pics you have posted are so very offensive, esp. the messiah one. Even my Christian liberal friends (ye gads! yes, I have some very dear friends who are of the liberal persuasion) are offended by the likes of that. If it's all a joke, then sweet one, you're joking up the wrong tree. You might wish to rethink the messiah thing...
I'm just sayin'.

Listen To John said...

Susannah you or I could not have said it better.
Thank You and Thank YOU Sarah for taking a stand here. You deserve all the credit in the world.

It's My Choice said...

I also agree with Sarah and with Susannah who put it so very eloquently.
Shaw you said that Sarah came to a LIBERAL blog. I didn't know that Liberal blogs were only for liberals!

Do you have a NO republican's allowed policy here?

Shame on you for the way you treated and insulted her.

OweMe1Cannoli said...

Sarah, take heart. This is all they have. Liberals have nothing constructive to provide this country in terms of direction. They have nothing to provide this country in terms of returning the United States to a manufacturing economy. They have NOTHING. The best they can do is insult and parody. Even at that, it's just a perk that comes with owning the mainstream media. While it's nice to have an internet available which helps define words like "petulant", this information has not helped liberals do anything constructive at all. It hasn't helped them conjure up a meaningful plan for rebuilding the economy, It hasn't helped them restore morality to faithless, arrogant socialists, and it hasn't brought "unity" to a very distrusting citizenry. We MUST focus on empowering our children, or we will allow them to suffer the dominance of a nanny state that can't even teach them to read. And you trust them to correct your grammar with all the other problems they need to tend to? Laughable.

TRUTH 101 said...

You know folks. I always told my son, "if you can't find a girl like your mother, find a girl like Shaw Kenawe."

Fortunately, he found a nice, intelligent young lady like Shaw.


I won't try to come to Shaw's defense at this time because I am am trying to live up to the goals set by Oracular Opinion's Pamela and my fellow Lefty, Octopus. Shaw doesn't need my help anyway.

But I humbly ask all of you to at least try some civility and see if it works. There's time to call each other pinkos, right wing fools and the rest.

Thank you all for reading this and I wish all of you successful blogs.

rockync said...

BACK TO THE TOPIC OF THIS POST --
In his first 100 days, Obama and his administration have done a few things that disappointed me. I wasn't surprised since I think all pols will disappoint in some way or another.
What absolutely did NOT disappoint me was the ceasing of torture and the closing of Gitmo.
How anyone can call themselves a decent American or a devout Christian and support the torture of another human being is beyond me.
We cannot be a nation who supports human rights worldwide while abusing them in our own backyard.

Shaw Kenawe said...

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you...

Then it's time for a Pulitzer Prize winning Charles Simic poem:

Take it away, Charlie:

BIG TIME WRESTLING*

Something and Nothing battle here.
One we never get to see at all,
The other we watch closely
Changing costumes and masks
In hope it'll add up to something.

Our hearts are spilled popcorn
Under the stomping boots
Of some blond angel indignant
At the slow pace of his own demise
In the arms of nothing-we-can-see.

The heavy silence presiding
Has the air of a bow-tied referee
Occasionally raising a false hand
The color of old ivory. The Exits
Are red with hangman's blck curtain.



*My answer to Sarah, Anonymous, Susannah, Listen to John, It's My Choice, and the Cannoli dude ["Leave your comment, take the cannoli."].


TRUTH101,

Thank you for that. I had some really awful news today. I appreciate your kind words.

Thayer Nutz said...

To the righwingers who come here to pile on Shaw:

Barack Obama’s seemingly tireless efforts to revive the economy have gone over well with business leaders, and the stimulus in particular has been a big hit, BusinessWeek reports. “We’re happy with the general outlines of what he’s done,” says John Castellani, president of the Business Roundtable, an association of CEOs. “They’re working very hard to get things moving forward.” But the business community hardly speaks as one.

Obama’s cap-and-trade scheme, for example, is a big hit with the alternative energy companies it would profit, and a big problem for coal companies. Others worry that Obama is too close with labor or is becoming too involved in corporate governance. “There are still some things that remain troubling,” says Castellani. The next 100 days will be “a lot more telling.”
Source: BusinessWeek
And as Shaw reported in the post, religious Americans strongly support him. He's popular with a majority of the American people, and they have confidence in what he's doing.

The wingnuts who come here and disparage him are unhappy because they've been marginalized by a very smart, very savvy man.

Ignore their taunts and insults.

I hope you're okay, Shaw.

Susannah said...

'M not losing my head & placing blame on you; just kindly pointing out the obvious...Just want to reiterate what I said earlier, about visitors, manners & Obama worship, etc. That stuff is simply the truth.

The Simic poem didn't do much for me, Shaw; sorry.

And, whatever your news today was, I'm sorry about it. Hope things look brighter in the morning. You'll be in my prayers tonight. I mean that.

Anonymous said...

Shaw, I hope whatever your bad news was, that it can and will get better.

On another note, the irony is being missed here. They claim that they came here simply to discuss politics and you, Shaw the terrible, insulted them and called them names, which, you did not; ironically, they do the EXACT same thing on their blogs (and I've been to MANY). You go there, you make a simple comment or rebuttal and they go ape sh*t on you. I was recently told to go have intimate relations with myself.

The people who live in glass houses are here throwing stones.

This, incidentally, is why I post anonymously. They are brutal.

Carl L. said...

Hey Shaw, just visited Deranged Left Wing Baker's blog and read this:

Bill Maher explains in the LA Times that America is just not into you anymore, Republican party. And BTW, it’s not America, it’s you:


Here are the big issues for normal people: the war, the economy, the environment, mending fences with our enemies and allies, and the rule of law.
And here's the list of Republican obsessions since President Obama took office: that his birth certificate is supposedly fake, he uses a teleprompter too much, he bowed to a Saudi guy, Europeans like him, he gives inappropriate gifts, his wife shamelessly flaunts her upper arms, and he shook hands with Hugo Chavez and slipped him the nuclear launch codes.
Do these sound like the concerns of a healthy, vibrant political party?
That says it all, doesn't it?

Take care. Hope you're okay.

TAO said...

Shaw,

I hope you are doing okay! You got my email address if you need anything!

I just have to say one thing, I have never been all that interested in politics and truthfully did not see much of a difference between the two parties and thus I never voted for a period of 28 years but in 2004 I went and voted because I was absolutely disgusted by what GWB and his Republican cohorts were doing to our economy and our country.

I am not going to say that I agree with everything Obama is doing but the direction that this country was headed in under the Republicans was obviously not to the liking of the majority of Americans and no matter how much right wing conservatives want to say they didn't totally support GWB they ARE in fact supporting him and responsible for all the damage he and his cohorts have done to this country.

dmarks said...

Sarah. Do you have a problem with just typing Palestinian? That is the name of the ethnic group/nationality, regardless of the contentions issues with Hamas, mideast peace, and the like.

dmarks said...

And I tried to comment in Sarah's blog. It is indeed locked.

Arthurstone said...

Heh. Heh.

You must be doing something right Shaw. Always amusing watching a group of ostensibly sturdy 'Real Americans' slide into group hysterics.

Cheers!

The Wordsmith said...

dmarks said...
"And I tried to comment in Sarah's blog. It is indeed locked"

Of course it's locked, and why is it locked? Because all of you people from HERE came there using dumb and Anonymous name and insulting and game playing like 6 year olds.. her by the dozens....I SAW IT!

She was very smart in locking it. Grow up.
Especially YOU Shaw.

The Wordsmith said...

FOOL Arthurstone said..."Heh. Heh.
You must be doing something right Shaw"

That was very cleaver Heh. Heh.! Is that the best you can say about this..
Talking about the 6 year old mentality

New York Gal said...

I’ve been reading through these posts of the "So Called Liberal posters" and, my God, ...It never ceases to amaze me what a tenuous group you are . You surely lack any substance or strength but you are rather a weak and cowardly group.

Your attacking that gal SarahG was beyond petty. It really brought out the true colors of a liberal, "YELLOW"

dmarks said...

Wordsmith said: "That was very cleaver"

Is that Beaver or Wally? Please elaborate.

TRUTH 101 said...

Look folks. We may be a congregation of Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Agnostics, Jews ands Athiests. But we are all Americans dag nabbit! Except for the half dozen or so from Europe and Asia that visit our sites. And the two from Dubai that keep visiting my site for the Neocon Hottie picture.

But can't we at least try to be agreeably disagreeable till Mothers Day comes and goes?
Do it for our mothers.


Shaw: please delete the first wise guy that calls me a mother #$##@%.

Thank you.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Shaw Kenawe wrote to Sarah G:

"One does not expect intellectual insight or even rationality when one reads this sort of 6th grade level writing:

"...you come off sounding like a petulant child with a very bad vocabulary."

Sarah G's blogpost at her site:

Unfortunately, winning an election does not make stupid ideas any less stupid, and neither I nor anyone else who understands what this despicable creep is really up to..."

we can only hope he will be defeated, and will not be re-elected, because American will never be capable of sustaining that moronic dictator loving traitor, for 8 years.
Sarah, when I read that sort of hysteria, I call people on it.

Mr. Obama is not, in any sane person's mind, a "moronic" nor a "traitor."

When you toss those sort of incendiary words around about the president, you'll get criticized for it.

You came here, refuted the polls that were recently published and criticized everything Mr. Obama has accomplished in his first 100 days. I went to your blog and read your opinion, then criticized your name-calling.

You need to give me hard evidence for calling the president a "traitor" and I'll apologize for calling you out on that.

TRUTH101:

I've tried appealing to the Right the same way, but most hardliners, like the ones who believe the president is a "traitor," are not interested in our similarities, only our differences.

TAO,

I'll be in touch via email later in the day. Thanks for your concern.

Lynne said...

How about that Two Faced Poster Beth
or is it Pro-Life, that posts under at least TWO screen names..?
With her relentlessly pursued anti abortion crusade??
Unfortunately its a bit of a one trick pony.

Im Here To Say It said...

It looks like Sarah is not going to be coming back here to argue the point. And who could blame her?
With people like "dmarks" making fun at "WordSmith’s" error in spelling or typo in the word “cleaver" ..He know that "Word Smith meant to type "clever" So why did he have to bring it up.. and Arthur with his stupid school yard one liners. etc. . Another guy calls someone a mother #$##@%. And so on and on it goes.
From what I read, Sarah posted her opinion and said
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I for one do not agree with those polls. Believe me, I am no apologist for Obama. The funds he has sent to Gaza, ostensibly to aid civilians, almost certainly is going right into the hands of Hamas, which use it for weapons or some other nefarious purpose.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to me that this WAS on topic and just because it didn’t fit well with Shaw’s agenda, she got into a hissy-fit.
Don’t tell me that if anyone on the left says something that Shaw disagrees with that she will go after them with the same kind of aggressive behavior that she did to Sarah! There's a lot of talk about why the left don't seem to be able to compete with right of center blogs or right wing Talk Shows. And I see why. It's easier to bad mouth them and to attack them with a gang of Anonymous or in this case Stupid made up names as the did to Sarah and she was smart in deleting them. I would have also. It’s one thing to use the name “Anonymous” if you are going to post a sensible post, but to use it in an attack is simply stupid and cowardly.
Let's not be coy about it , or pretend that what Shaw did was justified. She was wrong and the whole bunch of you that followed to gang up on Sarah were just as wrong. What was that a Kool-aide feast? If she attacked Sarah did you ALL have to do so as well? I see racist and anti-Semitic posters by the score, but I’ve never seen such a hive of them as I do right here on this blog. It’s disgusting. There are a lot of radical lefties here who have been very aggressive towards her and that is crazy. When you see a blog with 99% of the posters agreeing with the author then something is wrong.. Just to laugh at a conservative because she is a conservative, is not only wrong but it’s silly and childish. And that’s what we have here. Its all vile garbage and nothing less.

The Pajama Underground said...

Interesting that when Sarah G expresses her opinion above, the individual who runs this blog immediately launches into…what? A rational defense of Obama? No. Instead, we see an attack on Sarah G’s writing style, obviously fueled by a simmering rage that anyone would dare make “incendiary” comments about the Obamessiah. That sort of shaky, panicked response is what’s really “6th grade level” here.

In any event, what in the world is wrong with making “incendiary” comments about a person you believe is harmful to the future of the country? This blog’s defense of Obama goes something like this: Obama is a charismatic speaker who has high personal approval ratings across the board; therefore it is an outrage to ridicule either the president or his policies (and anyone who does so is either a racist or a hate-monger). This sort of defense is acceptable if you’re running from fraternity president, maybe, but pretty lame for someone who is supposedly tough enough to be commander-in-chief.

Myself said...

Congratulations to The Pajama Underground ...who put this entire into proper perspective ..
You people here an this blog will go on hating each other until the entire country falls down.
Can a conservative no longer voice an opinion with being insulted and attacked? Or is this blog meant only for African American political opinion's?

Arthurstone said...

Myself typed:

'Can a conservative no longer voice an opinion with being insulted and attacked? Or is this blog meant only for African American political opinion's?'

Oh woe is us.

Conservatives and Christians 'insulted' and 'attacked'. Funny how Conservatives pull the coat of victimhood out of the closet time and time again. While it certainly is in fashion it isn't very becoming.

Shaw Kenawe said...

To the people who come here and defend Sarah and especially to the commenter "Myself" who asked this:

"Can a conservative no longer voice an opinion with being insulted and attacked?"I criticized Sarah because on her blog, she calls the president, Mr. Obama, a traitor and a despicable creep.That's NOT a reasoned criticism, it's wingnuttery of the highest order. It's also childish and rises to the level of schoolyard name-calling.

I criticized her for it, called it as I see it, and she got her knickers in a twist because I dared to speak against her calumny.

Then her gang of defenders come here, misrepresent what actually happened, and go on a rampage about liberals.

"I'm Here to Say It" is a perfect example of Sarah's defenders not having reading comprehension skills or at best being sloppy readers.

This is what TRUTH 101 actually typed:

"Shaw: please delete the first wise guy that calls me a mother #$##@%."

And this is how "I'm Here to Say It" misinterpreted it:

Another guy calls someone a mother #$##@%. And so on and on it goes.No wonder certain people in this country are so easily led, like sheep, by demagogues [Limbaugh and Hannity]. Those people, represented by "I'm Here to Say It" DON'T KNOW HOW TO READ.

None of this is about liberals ganging up on Sarah. It's about a liberal (me) offering my opinion on Sarah's childish name-calling--backed up by absolutely no evidence, except her toxic hatred.

Handsome B. Wonderful said...

Mark another one down for Buddhists who support Obama. :)

The Red Head said...

Shaw. I must give you credit for one thing! You are a EXPERT Spin Master!

And if you don't like my reading or writing comprehension, it's too dam bad.
You can criticize me all you want to.
You are not going to get me upset.

Arthurstone I have to say that you sound like a Shaw Kenawe Puppet who does nothing but insult, insult and insult.. But you do it like a kindergarten child. And perhaps you are.

libhom said...

Wow, there are lots of extreme right trolls here.

Anyway, I'm a liberal who would give Obama a poor rating because he has governed way too much like a Republican (e.g. continuing the war on Iraq, blatant heterosexism, pandering to the banksters, betraying the autoworkers, not trying to make the rich pay their fair share in taxes, obstructing the prosecutions of Bush regime officials, etc.).

There are some differences between Obama and the GOP, but, so far at least, there have been more similarities.

Rightwing Politics said...

Come on now, Bambi's first 100 days were a disaster. And the worst is yet to come.. OK….we have complete morons on the SCOTUS bench. Idiots. Utterly contemptable douchebags.

Justices Stevens and Bryer, who would no doubt be the first to say that we need MORE gun control laws to *protect* society from the scary GUNS in said society, have a problem with ENFORCING the very laws put into place by the nanny-staters and panty-wetters of Congress.
By the way.. I think that Shaw was 100 percent OFF-Base!

And Lib-Head, or "Libhom" go ahead and call me a "extreme right troll" I couldn't care less about what the heck YOU think!

dmarks said...

I'm Here to Say It said: "With people like "dmarks" making fun at "WordSmith’s" error in spelling or typo in the word “cleaver"

You are new around here. But Wordsmith is the wurst speler out their, when it comes to comments in this blog.

I don't get into spelling flames that much, but when someone claims to be a "word smith", that calls attention to the frequent word-mangling.

Libhom: Extreme right-wing trolls? Actually, while the opinions are very strong and often hot-headed, there's nothing really "Extreme" here.

You have it backwards about Iraq. Obama is not waging "War on Iraq". The terrorists are. And Obama is continuing the policy of helping Iraq fighting of the terrorists. He hasn't betrayed the autoworkers: they are still overpaid for making shoddy cars. Banksters? Yes, he has bailed them out. The rich were overtaxed before Obama took office, and he promises to overtax them more. So there's no problem with him not wanting the rich to pay enough taxes.

Sorry for the foray into actual political issues. I now cede the stage so the wing-bat vs moon-nut insult wars can resume.

TRUTH 101 said...

I never thought this would happen. After three years as THE ORACLE, and six months as Truth101, I am the rational one.


I'm sorry Octopus and Pamela D. I don't think I can keep this up much longer.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Dear Rightwing Politics,

Thank you for proving my point.

Shaw Kenawe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaw Kenawe said...

“It is clear that all verbal structures with meaning are verbal imitations of that elusive psychological and physiological process known as thought, a process stumbling through emotional entanglements, sudden irrational convictions, involuntary gleams of insight, rationalized prejudices, and blocks of panic and inertia, finally to reach a completely incommunicable intuition.”

Conservative News said...

I don't believe these polls. Obama didn't get in with a landslide, remember? He won 53% of the vote. It's really hard to believe that considering all the screwups between him and Joe Biden, gaffes, foreign policy issues, etc...he's has not won over the general public since the inauguration. You'd expect him to have alienated a large number instead...the average person thought he'd operate as a centrist, that's what he SAID he'd do, not run flat out to the left...if the media is just flat out lying, they're probably polling 75% registered Democrats, 15% Republicans and 20% independents like they usually do. That’s how they get the numbers that you are reading.
Have you read your communist manifesto today?
I don't care if you are a lib or not, an Obama worshiper or not. I'm not going to pull any punches. I'm not going to get into the pissing contest that you seem to have going on here. The subject is Obama and his poll ratings. So here's my opinion.. We can't ignore the failures of Obama any longer, it will be so much harder to repair the damage he has done. Our country will survive whatever damage he has and will continue to do. But will the average citizen? In my opinion, Obama is a spineless, gutless, ivory tower lib who thinks that the whole world would is in his pocket.
Obama is nothing more than a puppet, and I find your bias to be disturbing. He will continue to screw us and you will continue to defend him..

Remember, Bush had an approval rating in the 60's at one point. Obama's approval rating is useless and meaningless until November of 2012

The Griper said...

he just sits back and shakes his head in wonder then laughs to himself.

Haras said...

I think that the industry of racism in this country, (run by democrats) along with the democrat mind's yearning for collectivism leads them to put people in neat and tidy groups. That's an inherently racist view.

Like MLK said, Only when we look at the content of each person's character as an individual can we move past racism. Democrats just aren't there yet. How they managed to swindle his great words for their "causes" is beyond me.

Individualism and individual rights (the conservative's view and what our founding fathers were trying to do) is the only way to get past this. Democrats argue that the founding fathers promoted Slavery by not abolishing it then, but what I believe is that what they did was lay the groundwork for where we are today even though politically at the time they just weren't allowed.

My guess is there were some racist Democrats in their midst at the time.

RightKlik said...

As of today, 5/22/09, Obama's Presidential Approval Index rating is +1. That's down from a rating of +21 on 1/21/2009. It's too early for Obama supporters to get comfortable with Obama's popularity.

http://tinyurl.com/5tnd2b

dmarks said...

Shaw: "Right Wing Politics" lost me in the first sentence with calling the President "Bambi". Is it some sort of deer-hunting reference? Who knows. I see we already have many who are incapable of using the President's name, just like in the past 8 years there were many who could not use President Bush's name (resorting instead to pejoratives like Junior, Dubya, Shrub, etc).

For all I know, he had some valid points. Maybe all of them were valid. But the juvenile playground names really chuck any pretense of seriousness out the window.

---------------
"Conservative News": You are so correct about the polls. But the "spineless, gutless.... puppet" stuff punctuates your statement like an unintelligent snarl. It seems that many have fallen prey to the Obama version of "Bush Derangement Syndrome".

Those afflicted with Bush Derangement Syndrome AND Obama Derangement Syndrone are like a version of werewolf. Except it isn't the full moon that turns human beings into snarling monsters (Grrr! Nobama! Grrr! Dubya!!! Grrr! Shrub!!! Grrr Bambi!!!). it is the mention of a hated president's name.

TRUTH 101 said...

Why must I be a man of my word Oh Wise Shaw?

Gregory Scott said...

he Bush Administration and his Congress are gone, and if things were going well right now we wouldn't be hearing continuous crap about Bush. Pretty soon, people are going to tire of hearing about how bad Bush was and will want results. In terms of corruption, it is rampant on both sides. However, if the story about the administration funneling stimulus funds and green energy research contracts to GE, when GE owns a T.V. network that actively campaigned for Obama while attracting anyone who disagreed with him about anything is true, that should concern you.
You want to see damage and destruction - look at the records of Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Frank...et al. Look at Fannie and Freddy. That's where you'll find the impetus and fingerprints of destruction all over the state of this economy.
Obozo the biggest discrace to America and the American people of all Presidents, Obozo will always be remembered as the President in charge when America fall in to 3rd worldism.

dmarks said...

Obozo? I had not heard that one before. Perhaps I should go back to the playground and listen more.

The Griper said...

to whom it may concern,
i would suggest you read my post at my blog before commenting as you did.
i won't make any accusations on who i am talking to but using "anonymous" to hide behind is no way to earn my respect.

dmarks said...

That's a tricky proposition. You have three blogs. Which is the real one?

Pamela D. Hart said...

Truth, now I see why you are so frustrated.
My goodness people. We ALL want our opinion to be recognized, accepted and treated with respect. What is the reason for insulting a PERSON? Does that solve anything? So what if someone doesn’t like Bush or Obama. State your opinion, but don’t attack the PERSON. Stay on TOPIC. These personal attacks achieve nothing. We are human beings. We all have feelings. We have jobs, homes and families. We all put our pants on one leg at a time. We all bleed red. The only difference between some of us is our political opinion. Does that make us evil, jack-asses, stupid, bitches, bastards, etc.? NO, it just makes us DIFFERENT. The purpose of the comment section is to voice an opinion. Why can’t that be done without debasing human value?

Now if anyone wants to attack me for sounding like a mother hen, go ahead. I have a nasty habit of trying to get people to be considerate. My bad.

Arthurstone said...

By golly the 'Real Americans' are out in full fury.

Full moon?

Joe McCarthy's birthday?

Anniversary of the founding of the John Birch Society?

2nd Amendment repealed?

Forced labor camps opening Monday morning?

NASCAR nationalized?

Wayne LaPierre water-boarded?

Southern Baptist Convention outlawed?

What's going on?

The Griper said...

dmarks,
if you were speaking to me, the blog i was referring to in regards to the comment left is "just a man with his thoughts"

you won't see the comment tho. i deleted it but the post was my last one and someone came in and repeated there what i said here word for word in my first comment.

it was a tribute to my mother who had just died wednesday night.

dmarks said...

Pamela: "Does that make us evil, jack-asses, stupid, bitches, bastards, etc.?"

Considering the party mascots, best take "jack ass" out of that one.

Griper: So sorry to hear that. I had no idea.

Pamela D. Hart said...

dmarks: You're right! I shouldn't have used jackass! lol.

Anonymous said...

i have trouble understanding obama's approval rating also - - - i must be as dumb as Arthurstone

Shaw Kenawe said...

To The Griper,

My condolences to you. I know how awful it is to lose one's mother.

Please accept my sincere and heartfelt sympathy.

Shaw Kenawe

Gordon said...

Late, but on topic: Jesus would have no need of a torture chamber, since he could look into the heart of the terrorist and know his thoughts. I'm amazed a former Catholic school girl would forget that.

Time said...

WOW. That thread was the best roller coaster ride I've ever had.

It's not reality that one side has it all correct and the other side has it all wrong. That's how the debate here read.

No one side owns the truth.

This debate does not clarify as a good debate should, it's just an exercise in mutual accusations. If there is ANY truth in any of these accusations, it still gets us nowhere.

If your using nasty and bad words to describe someone, that reflects on you, not the person you are talking about, or the blog you are posting on.

Using bad and nasty words is a sign of not being able to intelligently express yourself. Most sides in this thread proved that well.

I'm not a prude. It got so thick that I was laughing by the end of the 64 comments.

Get a grip people. No wonder we can't get anything done in this country.

IMHO said...

THE GALLUP POLLAlso said:
THINGS DONE WORST ABOUT OBAMA:

1. Giving away too much in bailouts

2. Too much spending

3. Too friendly with US enemies

4. Economic stimulus package

5. Making poor cabinet choices

6. Not being honest/keeping promises

And I'll add.. His Belle Michelle spends too much money on sneakers, she could have gotten a pair of Air Jordon's for $400.00 less

Beth said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dmarks said...

Imho said: "And I'll add.. His Belle Michelle spends too much money on sneakers, she could have gotten a pair of Air Jordon's for $400.00 less"

It does seem rather showy. But they are millionaires in their own right. Elite, really. There's really nothing wrong with it unless she is wasting taxpayer dollars for the sneakers.

Shaw Kenawe said...

But Gordon,

My point was this:

Would Jesus stand by and watch anyone torture a human being?

What do you, or anyone who understands Jesus' message, think he would do if he were in a room where, say, waterboarding was taking place?

Let's go a step further on those extra-human powers you assign Jesus and imagine him appearing in a room just as some prisoner's neck was being put in a collar and then that same prisoner's head was slammed against a wall--I believe that's what those torture memos described as "walling?'

Would Jesus stop it?

PUBLIUS said...

Ms.Shaw,

I think this column by Frank Rich in today's NYTimes covers your blog post quite nicely and it also explains the host of hate-crazed dead-enders who come here to bash you and Obama:

BELIEVE it or not, there are Americans who have a “very negative” opinion of Barack Obama (13 percent, in the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll). Some are even angry at him (10 percent, New York Times/CBS News).The fact is that Obama haters are a small, angry minority.

The piece continues:

"But for a second, anyway, I could imagine what it’s like to be among the Limbaugh-Cheney deadenders who loathe Obama. Those who feel the whole world is against them. Those who think the press corps is in the tank. Those so sickened by the fawning that they’d throw a brick through the television screen if the Bush-Cheney economy had left them with enough money to buy a new set.

I confess to being among the 81 percent (per Wall Street Journal/NBC) who like the guy. And I share the belief of nearly two-thirds of the American people (per every poll) that he has made an impressive start. The new president is largely doing what he promised, and he is doing it with the focus, brainpower and preternaturally calm temperament..."

"As The Economist recently certified, the G.O.P. is now officially in the throes of “Obama Derangement Syndrome.” The same conservative gang that remained mum when George W. Bush praised Putin’s “soul” and held hands with the Saudi ruler Abdullah are now condemning Obama for shaking hands with Hugo Chávez, “bowing” to Abdullah, relaxing Cuban policy and talking to hostile governments. Polls show overwhelming majorities favoring Obama’s positions. But his critics have locked themselves in the padded cell of an alternative reality. Not long before The Wall Street Journal informed its readers that 81 percent of Americans liked Obama, Karl Rove wrote in its pages that “no president in the past 40 years has done more to polarize America so much, so quickly.”

From derangement it’s a small step to madness."
That last sentence aptly describes the Obama haters who post here.

Good luck with your blog.

Beth said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Obama confuses safety with popularity. If our enemies can be made to like us, we’ll be out of danger. With our charming president making nice to terrorist regimes we can all sleep soundly.
And, his apologist attitude sickens me.It is obvious Obama is very proud and pleased with himself ,he will be our Chavez,Ortega and Castro if he is not challenged. Hopefully the Republicans/ Conservatives will gain control of Congress and the Senate in 2010 ,but that will depend how well Acorn does its job again,they outsmarted us by brainwashing the youth and getting 98 percent of the blacks in the last election.
The only thing missing from this administration is gold teeth and tattoos.

dmarks said...

Obama's "talking" with that trio of fascist dictators bears watching, but talking is not the same as giving away the store.

IMHO said...

dmarks said...
"Obama's "talking" with that trio of fascist dictators bears watching, but talking is not the same as giving away the store."


I wouldn't bet on it.

Anonymous said...

Richard Engel, here visting from his home in Afghanistan said on Friday that there is a huge shift in the attitude in the middle east since Obama became president. Anti-americanism has eased significantly. What Obama has done in 100 days has gone a long way to keeping us safer. He LIVES there, he would know. The people who comment here are hardly experts on foreign policy.

dmarks said...

If Obama agreed that the Israelis don't have a right to exist (the demand of so many in the Middle-East), he would be very very popular there. But so far he has said no to that insistence on genocide, and I believe he is sincere on it.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Anonymous,

Don't confuse the Obama haters with facts. That will feed their cognizant dissonance, which makes them even more deranged in their fury over how popular and well-liked Mr. Obama is and how much he has done in changing Americans' attitudes so that now they believe the country is moving in the correct direction. That is the first time in FIVE YEARS that Americans have felt positive.

Beth said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

In August of 1963, on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., Martin Luther King delivered a speech to more than 250,000 persons present that became one of the greatest and notable speeches in history and the top American speech of the 20th century. The essence of Dr. King’s speech was captured in one sentence wherein he stated, “I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Millions of people thought that the fulfillment of that speech occurred 45 years later in the election of Barrack Hussein Obama as the 44th president of the United States. The majority of voters made that event happen. But was Barrack Obama’s victory actually a fulfillment of that speech? I do not think so. Dr. King eloquently stated that the dream was for a person to be judged by inner character, not by skin color. In this election, masses voted for Obama for no other reason than for skin color. This can hardly be called a fulfillment of Dr. King’s dream.

Never in the entire history of the United States has there been elected a man of whom so little is known. His history in the Illinois legislature and in the U. S. Senate has been dismal. Most of his historical records including his school, law practice, medical and even birth records are sealed and not available to public scrutiny. In those times that he did vote in support of an issue rather than simply voted present, he became known as the most liberal, pro-abortion, anti-family values senator in the entire U.S. Senate.
Obama has said one of the first things he will do as president is sing the euphemistically-named "Freedom of Choice Act," which will remove any restrictions on late-term abortions across the United States. Children will be able to be killed by sticking scissor-like instruments in the back of the their necks while being partially born, and other sick atrocities will be legal again, thanks to the pro-abortion extremists.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Beth,

When you use other people's words, you should at least put them in quotations.

I've read your writing many times. Those are not your words.

PS. Whoever wrote that doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

Nowhere in that pathetic piece does the writer back up the statement: "In this election, masses voted for Obama for no other reason than for skin color." with one iota of evidence.

That's the writer's racist opinion, not a fact.

It's My Choice said...

Shaw Kenawe said...
"Beth,
When you use other people's words, you should at least put them in quotations.
I've read your writing many times. Those are not your words."

Beth? That was Beth who wrote that?
No way are those here words..I've also read her writing many times.
And she could hardly ever put two words together, let alone a comment like that.

Good cut and paste job Beth... but no cigar. Regardless, why bring abortion into this blog subject

dmarks said...

Anon: Anecdotally, I personally know many people who voted for Obama primarily for skin color. However, that is anecdotally, I would not say "masses" or estimate the numbers.

And, not to be a spelling Nazi, but you consistently are spelling the President's first name incorrectly. There's really no excuse for this, when you consider the media saturation of stories about Barack Obama in this era.

The only other person I know who loved to spell Barack as "Barrack" was someone with a pathological hatred of Mr. Obama, and he thought "Barrack" was some sort of clever insult that made him appear as a wit. (This individual, by the way, was a strong liberal, was non-white, and was very pro-Hillary, and disliked Obama for his race).

Anonymous said...

I live in a VERY liberal state and do not know even ONE person who voted for him BECAUSE he is black. Not one.

dmarks said...

New Anon: Usually those who make a big issue about "people only voted for Obama because of his skin color" end up being likely to be among those who voted AGAINST him because of his skin color.

They personally see everything in racial terms, and project their "race first" views on others.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
" I live in a VERY liberal state and do not know even ONE person who voted for him BECAUSE he is black. Not one."
----------------------------------

If they were Black they voted for Obama because he is Black...Plain and simple.

David#999 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David#999 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaw Kenawe said...

Anonymous 2 typed:

Anonymous said...
" I live in a VERY liberal state and do not know even ONE person who voted for him BECAUSE he is black. Not one."
----------------------------------

If they were Black they voted for Obama because he is Black...Plain and simple.
And you, Anonymous II who wrote that, are known to rob elderly people of their Social Security checks...plain and simple.

See how easy it is to make crap up?

Now prove that you don't.

dmarks said...

"If they were Black they voted for Obama because he is Black...Plain and simple."

Let's bring some facts into this, to see if it is true? It is no secret that the Democrats have a lock on the Black vote in the modern era.

In 2004, 88% of blacks voted for Kerry. A similar percentage supported Al Gore. Obama get 95% of the black vote. So, doing the math, you have at least 88% of Blacks who definitely vote for a Democrat regardless of color. So, what is the differnce here? Between 88% and 95%, you have a mere 7% of black voters: the maximum possible who could be voting for Obama "just because he is black". To me, that is a pretty small precentage. It is comparable to a similar amount of whites (see this story): "An AP-Yahoo poll conducted April 2-14 found that “about 8 percent of whites would be uncomfortable voting for a black for president.” Which would mean that it would be about true that whites chose McCain on skin color as blacks chose Obama on skin color. And it is a very small percentage for both. So small as to make a blanket statement such as yours flat-out wrong.

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

My friend Lizardbreath is of the opinion that as long as the Democrats have the black vote locked up, the Republicans, even when doing nothing that is overtly racist, nevertheless have the racist vote locked up:

Anyone whose voting is strongly influenced by a belief that the political interests of black and white people in the US are in opposition, and who wants to favor the political interests of whites over blacks, is going to vote for not-the-Democrats, and in a two party system, that's the Republicans …

The lousy thing about this, from the Republican point of view, is that it's not entirely their fault. Once the Democrats were identified in the public mind (whether they deserve to be or not) as the party that cares about the interests of black people, the Republicans would have been handed the racist vote whether or not they did anything active to attract it (and there's certainly room for a lot of argument about how much they did to attract it.)

Nonetheless, the GOP is in the uncomfortable position of having a really ugly, unpleasant bird in the hand, and to make matters worse, they can't really tell how big it is. All they know is that if the GOP successfully breaks the identification of the Democrats as the only party for African Americans, it will lose a segment of its base that's now voting GOP for racial reasons.


How ironic. When Reagan played out his Southern strategy, that is exactly what he accomplished..

Satyavati devi dasi said...

When I see the way people get absolutely hysterical and start going on about Obama's "failures", Obama being a dictator, Obama being this and that and so on, it reminds me of something my mother said:

"The best revenge is success. If you win against those who don't like you, it will only make them angrier."
Personally, I think that for some people there is nothing the President could do that would make them happy. They'd continue to twist scraps of half-truth into giant conglomerations, or outright make stuff up, which is standard for when you can't find anything real to complain about.

I think what we're seeing with all of this is something akin to 'Short Man Syndrome'; a small group trying to compensate and look bigger by being really loud.

They could all always do what my father said:

"If you don't like it, get the hell out."For your abortion troll: you may wish to do a bit of research. It took me about 30 seconds to find a post on a Christian news site (CBN) saying that it appears Obama has no real interest in the Freedom of Choice Act. That's coming from the Christians themselves.

Of course, by posting this hither and yon (verbatim on several blogs) you have the opportunity to misinform your compatriots and perpetuate the spin.

On the other hand, you may have just heard it from somewhere else and found it appropriate for your needs.

Either way, it's kind of sorry.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Saty,

Thank you TAO and (O)CT(O)PUS and the others here who take the time to inject rationality into these comments. There are conservatives who comment here who are not flame throwers--Patrick, dmarks, The Griper, Gordon, come to mind. We don't agree, but they don't stoop to yelling and name-calling.

Those who do are not taken seriously. Ever.

Time said...

That is NOT the case with dmarks towards me.
He has been calling me names for months and at other blogs. It started at Ireland blog, continued on to your blog, and has been ongoing for months.
I see no problem in treating someone in the same manner they have treated me, and your blog is no stranger to this kind of vitriolic speech. In fact I consider it normal for your threads.
That's fine, I'm no prude, but don't mark me as being the trouble maker.
You, and others have seen my comments on this blog and other blogs. This is not normal for me, it is for dmark towards me. So defend him all you want, but keep it to the truth and the facts.
You won't have to worry about me< I won't be back, and don't bother coming to my blog.

bluepitbull said...

rockync said...

BACK TO THE TOPIC OF THIS POST --
In his first 100 days, Obama and his administration have done a few things that disappointed me. I wasn't surprised since I think all pols will disappoint in some way or another.
What absolutely did NOT disappoint me was the ceasing of torture and the closing of Gitmo.
How anyone can call themselves a decent American or a devout Christian and support the torture of another human being is beyond me.
We cannot be a nation who supports human rights worldwide while abusing them in our own backyard.
___________________________________

The funniest part about all of that 'closing of GITMO' is twofold:

1. You have that really smart guy Eric Holder looking weak going to Europe and asking them to take our GITMO prisoners. That is funny enough, but..

2. Now Obama wants the Military Tribunals back in the spotlight.

This is the beginning of Obama not studying the issue, talking, and then having to pray to science or Darwin, or Himself, that no one will notice he had to backtrack.

KIND AND GENTLE101 said...

Things take time Rocky and Putbull. It will take time to get us completely out of Iraq. It will take time to take away Bluepitbull's guns. (Just kidding on that one friend. That is something that would even piss me off.)