All Comments (19)

!
>))))2)0)0)8))))) HUSSAiN OBAMA, Let Saudi Arabia hear You, Please Say, "NO-TO-SHARIA!"
!
!
!
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}///
[ ?: +) http:///\ VOTE http://\Hillary )
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}
[ ?: +) http:///\ VOTE http://\Hillary )
[][][][][]][][]][]][]]][]][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
PEACE, PAZ, SALAAM, SHOLOM:........_______________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary/Clinton AMERiCA:U.S.A!

VOTE:
NO' Sharia!
NO Hallakha!
NO Caste System(s)!
NO Rule By BiBLE, GiTA, QURAN!
NO Putting Down Woman More Anywhere!

VOTE: Lower GaS Pricing!

VOTE: Fix OUR Over Crowded PRiSON's SYSTEM NOW!

THANKA SHAME!

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a 2 :) :) "JUDAS!" SHAME! Goodbye Governator!

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a 2 :) :) "JUDAS!" SHAME! Goodbye Governator!

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a 2 :) :) "JUDAS!" SHAME! Goodbye Governator!

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a 2 :) :) "JUDAS!" SHAME! Goodbye Governator!

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a "JUDAS!"

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a "JUDAS!"

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a "JUDAS!"

New Mexico Gov. BiLL RiCHARDSON is a "JUDAS!"

This has gotta be the dumbest post I've ever read. So the guy has oratorical skills? And Donna, you're supposed to be Catholic - is Obama's record as an abortion supporter copacetic with you? You sound as superficial as the people you write about.

Yeah yeah yeah Daniel it's all about the fact that Obama is black. Sorry no. It is about bad ideas. The notion that we have the sort of universal health care now that Both Hillary and Barack think is a good idea and which has largely failed in every country where it has been tried is ludicrous. If you think the current system is expensive wait'll you see what happens whne you add another million plus bureaucrats to a system that already has more functionaries than it could ever possibly need.

Universal health care has proven to be universally rationed health care in every country that has used the System and France is already considering more cost saving measures read reductions in service. The fact that you are reality adverse is your fault not mine sir. Do some research some where other than among the leftist hoi polloi and you'll quickly discover that getting kidney dialysis in Britain and France if one exceeds 67 years of age to say nothing of a kidney transplant is increasingly difficult.

There is an Ambulance Crisis in London. It was created by rules that said emergency room patients must be seen by a doctor in less than four hours.
To avoid compliance hospitals increasingly leave patients sitting in the Ambulance until such time as a doctor is within four hours of seeing them.

It is becoming increasingly common now that people die in Ambulances while waiting in the hospital parking lot In London England which has your marvelous universal health care system.

I have a great deal of compassion for people sir which is why I dislike seeing plans put in place which will in the fullness of time cost a great many lives for no real gain beyond allowing leftist to think better of them selves than they in truth ought.

Yeah yeah yeah Daniel it's all about the fact that Obama is black. Sorry no. It is about bad ideas. The notion that we have the sort of universal health care now that Both Hillary and Barack think is a good idea and which has largely failed in every country where it has been tried is ludicrous. If you think the current system is expensive wait'll you see what happens whne you add another million plus bureaucrats to a system that already has more functionaries than it could ever possibly need.

Universal health care has proven to be universally rationed health care in every country that has used the System and France is already considering more cost saving measures read reductions in service. The fact that you are reality adverse is your fault not mine sir. Do some research some where other than among the leftist hoi polloi and you'll quickly discover that getting kidney dialysis in Britain and France if one exceeds 67 years of age to say nothing of a kidney transplant is increasingly difficult.

There is an Ambulance Crisis in London. It was created by rules that said emergency room patients must be seen by a doctor in less than four hours.
To avoid compliance hospitals increasingly leave patients sitting in the Ambulance until such time as a doctor is within four hours of seeing them.

It is becoming increasingly common now that people die in Ambulances while waiting in the hospital parking lot In London England which has your marvelous universal health care system.

...: said, "He knows the perfect words to say, and he knows what to talk about to get ignorant Americans all excited..."

Pat Robertson conferring with supernatural beings again?

I'm changing my name to %$^%$##^ so I can better express my feelings.

Mark B:

Everything you say about Obama's speeches fit those of A. Hitler equally well. And the mood is that of the usual banana republic generalissimo takeover.

"Happy days are here again..." There's no doubt about that. But why do happy days always go away?

President Obama will know what to do about your delicate financial situation, your lack of insurance, your sub prime loan, your stupidity...

I like that, president Obama. Sounds like, president Carter. Now there's one who knew what to do.

So, you don't want universal health care. Don't we already have that? Anyone sick or injured going to the emergency room gets treated; no one gets turned away; not uninsured Americans, not illegal aliens. So? Why not get ourselves together and try to be more organized about it?

Mmaybe it will cost as much as GaryD says. But doesn't that really say more about GaryD, that he does not love his neighbor, but that he is at most indifferent to his neighbor, but actually seems to hate his neighbor? (I only mention this because he often cites Jesus Christ, in support of his belief system).

But in citing Jesuss Christ, he is insenstive, bigotted, greedy, and cheap.

Obama is not a socialist; he is quite centrist, and conventional. But even if he were, the President cannot convert a Capitalist economy to a socialist one, without movement on the part of many people, including the Congress. That is just GaryD's ignorance and fear-mongering speaking. For someone so filled up with the love of Jesus Christ, he certainly seems to be filled with an awful lot of fear. What GaryD is really afraid of is Democracy and freedom, and the will of the people, to be expressed, where-ever it might lead.

What he is really saying is that if the will of the American people is realized through the Presidential election, then America will be ruined.

But, Dear Mr. GaryD, you should not despair, while there is still hope left. It is by no means certain that Americans will elect a black man as President. On that, you can still keep you hope alive, that he may be defeated.

Everyone talks about Obama's oratorical skills, about his ability to inspire the people. What I am hoping is that, if he becomes president, he could make good use of this skill in addressing congress! I'd like to see him, as president or senator, move that fractured, fractious body in directions of progress rather than disparity, toward cooperation rather than its usual progress-be-damned competition.

GaryD said it perfectly...

"These people aren't seeking change but rather restoration to the heady days of US socialism pre Ronald Reagan. Never mind that it gave rise to double digit inflation rates, double digit interest rates and the highest unemployment since the great depression."

This is EXACTLY what will happen if Obama Hussein is elected president! He knows the perfect words to say, and he knows what to talk about to get ignorant Americans all excited....but how is he going to pay TRILLION dollar universal, socialistic healthcare? He is going to tax you! And we think we are in debt NOW? Good night people! I'm sorry, but Obama will not help this country one bit, period!

Professor Freitas,

I posted some comments under Andy Bachman’s where I discuss a religious humanist’s perspective, but I want to take issue with some of your thoughts.
Yes, Obama “lifts spirits,” but not in the way of an ordinary politician. His audiences are not responding to policy positions or even attacks on conservative policies – they are responding to his ability to lead in a way that seeks more noble purposes. This aspirational message is what resonates deep within us, and it is a fundamental, moral call to our better selves. That is the basis of all religion over all of history, is it not?

As a professor of religion, I’m sure you understand the deep spiritual aspects of openness, listening, and reconciliation. This is the healing salve between people. I doubt very much that an Obama presidency would be about policy-making by consensus, but I do believe that lots of diverse viewpoints will have a seat at the table. I agree with you that religious differences should be valued, but when religious differences drive us toward division (or worse, enmity and hatred, as it has over the last 8 years and more, thanks to Karl Rove and Co.), then religion defeats its own healing purposes.

Take abortion. As a social and religious liberal, I believe in a woman’s right to choice. As a parent, I abhor the idea of a fetus of any age being aborted, because I know the love that these two cells will become. I can’t (now) imagine this world without my children in it. And I understand how deeply some people believe that abortion should banned outright. But it’s not their or my right to tell you what to do with your body. We all, especially those who want abortion banned, should realize that it is a fact of life that there will always be abortions. Most everyone agrees this is not a good method of birth control, and many people like me agree that while abortion should be legal, we need to have a society that values human life so highly that abortion is extremely rare. The question, given that abortions will always exist, is how we minimize them in a way that is loving, respectful, effective, and doesn’t pit sides in pitched battles with each other.

That’s what so many of us see in Obama, and how I’ve described it indeed shows how his message is indeed, very, very religious, and very faithful.

One of the major challenges we face, as a country, is to understand the uncompromising religious fervor among neochristians in our own county.

Right you are, Norrie

Obama continues to mouth platitutdes before the socialist faithful in the high holy church of lets- blame-the-rich-and-the-corporations-for-every-evil in-society-including-the-ones-that-are-so-obviously- the-fault-of-excessive-government-only-an-idiot would-believe-otherwise.

These people aren't seeking change but rather restoration to the heady days of US socialism pre Ronald Reagan. Never mind that it gave rise to double digit inflation rates, double digit interest rates and the highest unemployment since the great depression.

There are five phases to everything even life. The politically 'fervent' are now in phase 1.

1. Enthusiasm, (fervor).
2. Disillusionment.
3. Panic.
4. Search for the guilty.
5. Praise and honors for the non participants.

We are in phase 5 for past political enthusiasts. Obama fills the bill of non participant, a position he holds alone among the candidates left standing. So naturally he garners the most enthusiasm even to the point of calling it fervor.

It won't be long now before we know if Hillary or Huck will be left standing. Then we can brace for all the things we never wanted to know about both candidates. Bring on the "Prisoners of War for Truth." Don't you ever wonder what McCain was doing for all those years chumming up to the commies? But then there isn't a Bush in this one so we may never know.

Yes anonymous, we supported the wrong side during the godless communist invasion of Afghanistan. Somebody lied a long time ago and it's been repeated time and time again and told as the absolute truth. Don't believe it and go to hell. Not to worry, president Obama will know what to do -cut and run.

Ms. Donna Freitas,

Hello. The questions posed by WaPo On Faith on Obama made me think a bit again on what kind of leaders we want, what we expect of them and from them, especially since our own general elections is coming up on 8 March 2008.

You also seem to be infected with the message of "hope" by Obama as reflected in your essay. I envy all those who feels it about any politician with positive messages and the optimism and can do spirit it brought out.

I only would like to take issue with the word, "fervour" used to describe the response or reactions of Obama's supporters. "Enthusiasm" would be better.

Even using "fervour" for for believers is not quite a positive trait. It smacks of fanaticism.

"Commitment" is a better word to describe how one feels and to act in accordance to one's faith and beliefs.

Which brings us to the question:

- How committed and able is Obama to translate his words into action?

- How committed are Obama's followers to act in tandem to get into action to support his "vision"? The "vision thing" as Bush Sr. calls it, is what Obama is speaking about thus far.

The reality is that, the more diverse a group of supporters are, the most possibilities and probablities for some to be dissapointed. Something, someone, some groups got to give, got to be sacrificed for the "larger interest".

The experience of the country I am living in shows that in not checking our differences at the door, in not giving up our differences, in insisting on our differences as our rights, we really are not "together".

Acceptance of political, religious and ethnic diversity calls for a lot of mutual respect of differences, to accomodate and tolerate them without any laws breached. This is the hard part for some due to personal and political reasons.

There may be apatheists, non-believers who are indifferent to all faiths and beliefs. Perhaps we should have a new categorisation, apathyeists - those beleivers and non-believers who are indifferent of religious and political leaders pronouncements.

Osama raised great expectations. There may be great dissapointments. Our own elections is coming on 8 March 2008. We have had so many politicians giving us many great hopes for change before.

"Hope" and "change" is not really bandied on issues. Only that the incumbents "hope" to win again and the opposition to dislodge them. Only the dissapointed ones "hope" their vote will be enough to "change" the goverment leadership.

Most candidates/political parties are talking about "reforms", not "change" to address issues and on policies. Same difference.

I never worry that no political leader was and is able to reach me completely. After all God gave me free will and freedom, and politicians do take them away, or try to take them away with their laws and policies.

Yes well, like most Muslims, I do tend to have a very high standard of "political test" for our leaders covering everything from integrity to morality to ability to effectiveness.

An aspiring politician or public official's personal belief in God and devoutness as Muslims have nothing to do with how just and effective they are in governing. If he can't lead by example, by expectation and effectively, don't try.

Makes us Muslims most ungovernable with such high expectations on leadership, no? Ever ready to overthrow failed and corrupt governments by force and come out with alternatives, even theocracies to "cleanse" the body politic for better or for worse, and for the worse as it is apparent.

Perhaps we should try to cut our politicians some slack and ignore their sillier notions, visions or pronouncements as we do for some members of our ulema. After all, religious and political leaders are doing their best to identify and articulate our spiritual and political needs as well as they could as common consensus in the community of religious and political "believers/followers" for common ground, one purpose and unified action. They are human after all.

Thank you and best regards

"J"

Come now, Donna,

You surely know that Barack is not in the religion business, nor should he be, given his present pursuits.

Importing specifically religious topics into politics is mischievious and destructive.

And doing so would only lose Barack votes, in which case he'd never get to do the good things he is capable of.

Different people discovering what their views have in common, in my experience, never deters them from standing fast with their own particular views. In fact, discussing what's held in common makes clearer to individuals how their thinking differs from that of others.

So I think your fears are groundless.

It's too bad you quit the Green Mountain State for the noise and hassle of Boston. Things are seen more clearly up here, as I suspect you know.

And if you hadn't left, you could vote for Barack next Tuesday.

Best wishes.

I guess the question is who you're comparing Obama too, a conspicuously absent point in the post. Of course real dialogue and appreciation for diversity is preferable to bland common ground. But Obama, in the 2006 Sojourners speech cited here, was the first prominent Democrat in a long time to acknowledge that faith-based values have a place in the public square, instead of falling back on the usual reductive separation boilerplate. This was his main point--the stuff about translating it into universally moral terms was secondary, a way of distinguishing his position from the theocratic right. Of course, other Democrats have said similar things since, but he said it first. Does anyone really think that John Kerry's (and the Democratic establishment's, until quite recently) "I believe what I believe, but it has no place in my public life. Separation, separation, separation" talking point promotes diversity and real dialogue better than Obama's view does? Or, for that matter, that it's a remotely realistic assessment of how one's values influence one's work?

http://stevethorngate.blogspot.com

Just wondering. Does Boston U do things like take the evidence presented in the Bible and do probabilities about which supernatural being that was in the famous burning bush?

Give it a try. http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul is an example of what conclusion can be drawn. Moses was a murderer on the run who made a deal with the biggest Devil of them all, Lucifer.

I'm sure Boston University seeks truth -does not intentionally turn out students that are more ignorant than when they arrived -learned lies and believe they are so.

Remember, the soul you save may be your own. Agreed, there is a lot of money for those leading multitudes to hell but, "what profit a man who gains the whole world and suffers the loss of his immortal soul"?