Posted on 08/16/2008 11:59:35 AM PDT by XR7
LAKE FOREST, Calif. — When John McCain and Barack Obama appear on the same stage today, they will vividly demonstrate the reach that has made the Rev. Rick Warren among the most significant evangelists of his generation.
He's a megastar who leads the nation's fourth-largest church and reaches thousands of ministers through the Internet and crusades against poverty and AIDS. That globe-trotting work and his successful book — "The Purpose-Driven Life: What on Earth Am I Here For?" — puts him at the vanguard of a movement that inspires young, socially conscious Christians.
But his willingness to soft-pedal political issues once central to U.S. evangelicals, such as opposition to abortion, has opened him to criticism that he has strayed from his calling to spread the Gospel.
Today's forum also is a sign of religion's importance in the 2008 presidential campaign, and the emergence of a new style of evangelical leadership on the national stage that is not tied to a single party and has broadened its social agenda beyond that of the religious right.
"This is absolutely a changing of the guard, and it suggests that the new guard of the evangelical movement is able to generate the attention and focus of both parties," said D. Michael Lindsay, a sociologist at Rice University and author of "Faith in the Halls of Power: How Evangelicals Joined the American Elite."
Warren personally invited the two candidates — "friends of mine" — via their cellphones. His event at the Saddleback Church will be broadcast live on CNN and Fox News Channel and streamed on the Web. It has among its aims "helping the church regain credibility and encouraging our society to return to civility," he said.
It's likely that fans and critics will be watching closely...
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
I don’t think it was as much Chris Isaak as it was the location. A lot of the people were Arboretum members and are old hippy types.
One of the sponsors was a winery and they were selling wine by the bottle. So most people started out normal enough (can’t say that for Old Baby New Year or Obama red Crocs). But by the time the opening act left the stage, seemingly normal ladies were dancing with traffic cones (no that was not me! I am way too tall to dance with a traffic cone ;-)).
“McCain went a long way toward cementing the conservative voters into his column last night.”
Sorry, but frankly, in the interest, at least, of our country’s sovereignty and security, many of those folks ought to take their noses out of their bibles and get to know John McCain’s Mr. Hernandez:
“In July 2003, congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) gave Insight Magazine the following account of his conversation in Mexico with Juan Hernandez, head of the newly created Ministry of Mexicans Living in the United States.
Does anyone know if this is the same Juan Hernandez described in the current article?
According to Mr. Tancredo in the Insight Magazine interview:
“ I asked [Mr. Hernandez] about the purpose of the government agency he heads, since I had never heard of such a thing. He said its purpose is to increase the flow of Mexican nationals to the United States. I asked, ‘Why?’
“’It serves Mexico’s needs,’ he said, and ticked off a list of such things as remittances to Mexico of $10 billion a year, which is 30 percent of the Mexican GDP [gross domestic product]. It provides employment for an exploding population, it alleviates social instability due to rising unemployment and it provides training for Mexicans, ultimately repatriating those skills back to Mexico.
“I responded to his final aim - repatriation of trained and skilled Mexicans back into Mexico - and asked, ‘Then your government would oppose amnesty for the illegal Mexicans in the United States?’
“He cried, ‘Oh no! We support amnesty totally. . . . by populating the United States with millions of Hispanics who are tied economically, politically and linguistically to Mexico, we are able to exert enormous influence and pressure on U.S. policy and its dealings with Mexico.’
“President Vicente Fox believes the U.S. border is a figment of the imagination. In fact, Fox and/or members of his government stated at one point that the borders of Mexico extend much farther north than currently drawn on the map.””
Could this really be the same guy that McCain has tapped for his campaign’s “Hispanic outreach director”?
5 posted on Sunday, August 17, 2008 5:52:25 PM by Maceman
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2063417/posts?page=5
His parents also acted as foster parents to a black teenager named George, whose mother had died. Rogers eventually came to consider George his older brother. George later became an instructor for the Tuskegee Airmen of World War II and also taught Rogers to fly.[2]Following secondary school, he studied at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, between 1946 and 1948 before transferring to Rollins College in Winter Park, Florida. He received a BA in music composition there in 1951.
In 1962, Rogers graduated from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and was ordained a minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA).
it is worth noting the MSM is not covering this debate much because McCain trounced obama. (and Obama failed horribly to attract any votes)
Warren is a touchy feely oprahfied chinese menu christian.
(purportedly speaking at the DNC convention too.)
Somehow I wish it WAS mr rogers moderating the debate, we know his judgment would not be impared by political moral relativism.
[OR maybe Warren secretly likes Hillary? :-) ]
I’m late on this thread, but wanted to welcome you to Free Republic!
You make stuff up about people, out of whole cloth.
Typical Romney person.
Fake badges.
Remember PhonyFred.com? Was that you?
Lies about endorsements that never happened.
Remember the push-polling by the Romney Sleaze machine to its own workers then sending those employees out to the media to complain about anti-Mormon pushpolling?
Ahh, all the memories of the sleaze and dirt that was the Romney operation. Thank God he lost.
So your lies about me preforming abortions in the back of my car fit right in with the filth and sleaze that was the Romney campaign. No wonder you were attracted to that bunch and thought they were the best.
What's with him keeping his head cocked to the side in every inetrview?
Gives me a stiff neck just watching him!
That is an excellent analysis, IMO.
“Obama...malignant narcissist...” ~ AliVeritas
Now there’s an interesting diagnosis. Where’d you come up with that term?” ~ XR7
Here are a couple possible sources:
To: shrinkermd
“Obama seems to suffer from malignant narcissism whereby he feels he is exceptional, acts like he is exceptional and his followers believe he is exceptional. On the basis of his followers opinion, Obama feels even more justified in his exceptionalism...”
To nail that reality down further:
“..The pathological narcissist imagines he’s giving you milk when he’s actually feeding you poop; in short, he’s not a bountiful breast but a toxic a$$hole. Once you get a feel for this, you can really appreciate the ubiquity of the dynamic. Ever wonder how Noam Chomsky can be so prolific? Because the large intestine never sleeps. Likewise, mass culture is a sewer. Literally. ...
...Look at Obama. What is he? That’s part of the problem, because he clearly doesn’t know. He’s certainly not “priestly” or spiritual, based upon his long-time membership in a racist cult. He’s not intellectual, based upon his skin-deep grasp of the issues, and a mind that seems to consist of little more than recycled leftist cliches with no discernible center. He’s not a warrior; quite the opposite, as he has no feel whatsoever for military culture. He’s not a leader, as his basic masculinity is too much in doubt. He’s pretending to be something, but even he doesn’t seem to know what it is. Apparently, he wasn’t even a good community agitator, like Al Sharpton. ..” ~ Gagdad Bob
Click “show original post”:
Beauty, Milk, Poop, Soul Jazz, and the Miscaste Obama
8 posted on 07/18/2008 5:28:20 AM PDT by Matchett-PI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2047396/posts?page=8#8
More:
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Narcissism, the Grandiose Left, and the Missing Strawberries
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2006/07/narcissism-grandiose-left-and-missing.html
We’re continuing from yesterday with our discussion on narcissism. If it looks as if I’m not addressing the questions directly, it’s because I’m probably not. Gotta set things up first.
By the way, it seems to me that Both Dr. Sanity and ShrinkWrapped have written some excellent posts on this subject. Perhaps I can just direct you to their sites and take the morning off. Let’s see.... This looks good. Here’s one from Dr Sanity, entitled Narcissism and Society. And here’s one from ShrinkWrapped, a little thing he calls Narcissism, Malignant Narcissism, and Paranoia: Part I.
[...]
bttt
The key element here for me is the freedom and responsibility for determining what will happen inside a woman's body. In China, the government determines reproductive matters - one child per family. That must involve some number of abortions. I don't want the government making those kinds of decisions - either way.
The Declaration of Independence lists a number of “unalienable rights, among them, and foremost, is “the Right to Life.” It is a right, and no human being has the right to take it away - certainly not when we are talking about a baby’s life. There is a legal term for taking a defenseless baby’s life: Murder.
What the hell is it you're doing now?
The punishment for murder is often execution. Do you favor that?
Innocent civilians are killed in war. Do you support war?
A fetus is not a baby. A baby breaths on its own, eats on its own, excretes waste on its own and is somewhat aware of the human environment; the developing fetus within a womb is not in that category - especially in the early stages.
As far as human life is concerned, if life is the only consideration then we should be against capital punishment and war under any and all circumstances. The argument for self defense is like the argument for health of the mother - they both can be abused.
Ya savvy?
There are two men who have a chance to be inaugurated on January 20, 2009. Can you name them?
One of these two will be commander-in-chief in a time of world war. Can you name them?
One of these two will appoint two SCOTUS justices in his first term. Can you name them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.