All of the liberals whining about this need to STFU. This is good for us. A few possibilities... very likely: teabaggers pull repubs wayyyy to the right, decreasing their chances of winning general election; less likely: teabaggers try to pull repubs waaaayyyyy to the right, fail, and they try to do a 3rd party (think Perot) and Obama def wins 2nd term.

Also, el oh el at the 4:1 statistic.

You must be new here.

All I have to say is ,plzzz let her stupid ass run for pres.I can't think of anything more entertaining.LOL By then she might be able to buy an idea.

I guess I'm wondering if the Repubs want to go down this road again. I don't think she cost McCain the election, but I certainly think she hurt him. She she united the psycho side of the Repubs, but they weren't voting for Obama anyways. Maybe she pulled a few of them towards the polls, but I'd have been interested to see how McCain did with someone more moderate/less polarizing.

And does she survive a primary against someone like Romney? Especially if the economy is still poor and he will likely to be seen as a person who can fix it compared to her. I know he's Mormon and all, but we elected Obama and he's moo-slim.

I still wonder htf she became governor of Alaska. Was the democrat running against her a penguin?

Are there not dozens of politicians more fit to run the country than Sarah Palin?

Palin is trying to make her bid for 2012. She's going after the Tea Party crowd and the social conservatives at once. Get to be the face of the Tea Party movement, even if you are absolutely nothing for it, and then use that to try to win the nomination. Sadly, it might work.

ldo

OP, "god-fearing" is practically as important a qualification as "proof of citizenship" for American politicians.

As far as Palin goes, independents don't vote for morons.

rigggght.

and that proves god was divorced from political thought in pre revolutionary America?


Thats one figure in political thought...not even a leading one.

Try harder....read more.

What specifically do you disagree with?

Palins involvement in the tea party movement is definately going to help give it broader appeal and awareness to the people but in so doing is also going to distort it's message from being focused on libertarianism to core republican ideals including religious devotion and their social traditionalism etc. Ultmately I think she is incompatible with the movements core principles to represent them in the long term but presently is benefitting both the movement because of driving awareness and appeal and herself personally for a presidential bid by acrueing support from the movement.

Fixed. And yes.

Grunching: 1) God fearing already works for a large portion of the states. 2) I hope Palin gets the GOP nomination (will never happen but w/e) it would be Obama's easiest victory.

Why would you fear God? He's a nice dude. I drank with him once.

LUL Tom Paine wasn't a leading figure of American political thought.

Try harder... read more. I've seen prominent historians describe Common Sense and Rights of Man as two of the most important documents in the history of the modern western world.

Any and all of the folks who wrote extensively in the federalist papers had more influence on our nations govt/political thought than Paine imho.

Many of them discussed the connection between natural law and god's connection to man explicitly in all manner of written document and oral delivery.

Look....Paine aside(and yes I understand he was highly hostile to all manner of organized religion)...religion is not divorced from our nation's politics and never has been...lets get real for a second.

That DOESNT mean church has any role in the state.
That doesnt even mean we should have christmas symbols in school.
Hell, I get turned off as much as anyone when people start bringing god into politics...but it doesnt mean I can pretend that theyve been kept apart all these yrs. The civil rights movt largely found its impetus in the church as did prohibition and abolitionism.

Seriously, religion and politics have been comingling since the inception of our nation...get over it.

Im not even a Christian btw.

Okay, let me read some more. I'll start with your poast:

So finding one figure disproves your generalization.

Calm down....condescend less.

NEVER

Meaning/referring to a discreet time period...not cases of one individual thinker.

KTHNXBYE.

Well, in the case, overt racism was never EVER divorced from political thought in this country.

Sexism was never EVER divorced from political thought in this country.

Anti-semitism was never EVER divorced from political thought in this country.

Kinda makes your statement meaningless, imo.

lol really?

This sentence is trivial and essentially meaningless for what you're trying to prove. What does this mean? That Columbus, Pizarro, Cortez, et al. conquered and set up in the name of god? That the late 18th century forefathers believed in god? No one will dispute that.

And also, your little condescending barb at the end is ridiculous. I hope you know that the "You'd agree with me if you were as educated as me" shtick is immature.

Again, what does this even mean? From your tone, and from other statements made in this post, you seem to think that leaders believing in a god = GOD IS EVERYWHERE IN THE GOVERNMENT AND ALWAYS WAS. Again, if you're making the trivial statement that United States leaders have traditionally (and presumably without exception) believed in god, well then you're just shadow boxing at this point. No one's going to debate that.

But if you're making the bigger claim that separation of church and state is merely a cute catchphrase without teeth, then I dunno what to say. A lot of our political thought comes from John Locke, who coined the concept of separation of church and state, and a lot more of our political thought comes from Jefferson, who coined the phrase. The idea is reflected throughout the US's history, from before its beginning (Locke), to its beginning (Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses), to directly after its beginning (the 1791 Treaty of Tripoli states, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."), to later SCOTUS cases (Reynolds v. U.S. (1878) -- "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and state'"; Everson v. Board of Education (1947) -- "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."), to .... Of course I could keep going. I think anyone reading this thread knows that you're not going to change your mind no matter how many examples I come up with. I guess I can just say "Read moar, plz."

More meaningless tripe. I don't know wtf an "effete easterner" is, nor did I know there were 50 million of them. You've misused "post-modern," and you've misspelled "antiquated." And there are multiple grammatical errors. All of this makes me think either that (1) you're in middle school and trying to use new vocab words or (2) English isn't your native language. I'm not trying to be a grammar nazi, but when your prime debating tactic is "YOU SHOULD READ MOAR THEN U WILL HAVE THE INTELLECT AND KNOWLEDGE THAT I CURRENTLY HAVE IN MY POSSESSION," you're going to invite a measure of cattiness in response.

And what's the point of the condescending and insulting language? You're just admitting that you have no interest in a constructive dialogue. And you make it sound like separation of church and state is some quirky taste that's going out of fashion. If you can't see the staunch secular direction the world's been going in, then you've just got blindfolds on.


When you say crap like "uber liberals don't have kids," you invite a number of responses. "What the **** is an uber liberal" is one, as is "Cite, plz." I think what you're trying to say in this paragraph is "Only extremely liberal people believe in the separation of church and state, and those people don't ever have any children, so their ideas will die with them. And teh mexicans are coming in droves with their catholocism. So America is becoming more god-fearing." That's just my guess, but I really have no idea because it's near impossible to understand this depressing hodgepodge of words and out-of-place ellipses.

Ah, so you're a middle-schooler.

I know you expected this to be your gotcha coup de grace, but no one is disputing that our leaders have been men of god.

It wouldn't be so bad using this dumb sentence to end your post had you written semi-legibly and put forth an actual argument instead of coming across as an arrogant troglodyte spewing nothing but baseless assertions.

I'm glad other people are catching on that the statements behind his "YOU NEED 2 EDUCAT URSELF...TO BE ON PAR WITH...MY KNOWLEDGE!!!!" are empty.

Also, the fact that you can write this and be genuinely perplexed that anyone can disagree with you speaks volumes.

timotheeeee - first time reading a zaxx19 post?