Talk about whatever news you think is news. As for me……
I’d like to pick up from the story I mentioned yesterday about God and any mention of Jerusalem being the capital of Israel being removed from the DNC platform. After the uproar, they decided to add the language back in at the President’s request. Which caused a whole new uproar.
From CNN
“Democrats voted to update their party’s platform Wednesday evening at their convention to include a reference to Jerusalem being the capital of Israel, as well as the insertion of the word “God,” neither of which was included in their platform this year but was in previous platforms.
President Barack Obama himself intervened regarding the Jerusalem language, a senior Democratic source told CNN, adding, that he thought the original draft was “a strong statement and he didn’t want there to be any confusion about his unshakeable commitment to the security of state Israel.”
The video in the above link doesn’t have the vote of the delegates in it’s entirety. You need to see the whole thing here to see the obvious division this is causing. Note the lady at the 2:39 mark who tells the chair to just push it thru, “they’re gonna do, what they’re gonna do”. What they were gonna do was fix the delegate vote. It had already been decided. A fixed election. Shocking right? Or not.
From C-SPAN
Now that you’ve watched that video, here’s another from Debbie Wasserman Schultz denying the booing and division ever happened. 🙄
Who are you gonna believe? Debbie, or your lying eyes and ears? Division? What division?
Even Anderson Cooper isn’t buying it.
Wandering Views 
When people stumble over their words as much as this woman did they are usually making up the lies as they go.
LikeLike
Kim,
Exactly. I thought the video did a fine job of pointing that out.
LikeLike
I saw the vote about changing the Platform. It was equally divided and the chairman made three tries to get a consensus. Then he just declared it passed.
Whoever organized this thing didn’t do a good job. If I didn’t know better, I’d think Obama organized it.
I didn’t see Clinton. Too late for me. Rush will tell me if he said anything. It’s his job.
LikeLike
Party platforms for both parties are usually in the hands of the folks who are wild eyed extremists. This is the only reason I’m not too alarmed by the R’s platform as it represents the fringe. The problem that the reps do have and more than the dems is that the fringe is pulling the leadership ever more to the extreme. Rush won’t tell you that.
LikeLike
What I found interesting was that the Arab American dude was about to come unglued when it was obvious that the fix was in on the vote. Then as I was watching Fox and Friends this morning Geraldo Rivera said the dude was a secularist and not an Arab American. If it weren’t so sad, it would be funny
LikeLike
C’mon CB,
That’s amusing, but not very accurate. The Dem party has veered so far left, because of their leadership, that they are nothing like what the Dem party used to be. All I’ve learned from 2 days of the DNC is that abortion is one of their favorite things, why else would they spend so much time trumping it as a great and noble thing? It’s disgusting, and it’s not mainstream. The majority of people are pro-life. The other thing I learned is that myself and other R’s are evil. That’s all I’ve heard from them. And then Clinton stands up there and acts like they’re the reasonable, polite side? Really? Are you having a DWS moment? Has reality become what you want it to be, and not what the rest of us are seeing? You may be buying what they’re trying to sell, I’m not. But what do I know, I’m just an evil extremist. The Dems said so. I’ve heard it over and over again for 2 days. But just because they keep repeating these lies, doesn’t make them true.
LikeLike
Aj,
The dems moved to the right over the past 20 years on fiscal and foreign policy. Outside observers see that as do objective ones. Take the names off and compare Reagan and Obama policy.
LikeLike
Do you think that is true across northern Africa, CB?
Something I read last night indicated the Muslim Brotherhodd president (who has 2 sons who are American citizens, which I thought curious) has felt free to completely throw out the Egyptian Constitution and purge the military because he knows rh Obama administration will not do anything.
I don’t believe Reagan’s presidency would have aided and abetted Egypt’s fall.
I don’t know enough about northern Africa to choose a side, but it looks to me that the waning US power is creating a political vacuum being exploited by one violent side.
😦
LikeLike
OK, but even if I give you that, and I won’t on foriegn policy because they went hard left on the Israel/Palestinian issue and now embrace extremist groups like the Brotherhood, but what about the rest? What about social issues? They veered hard to the left. Economic? They veered hard to the nanny state, govt handouts, socialist leaning left. Abortion? They now embrace abortion as if it were a great thing. They went hard left. What about enviromental and conservation issues? Again, hard to the enviro nutjob left. I could go on.
LikeLike
Why do you guys think that someone like Wick Anderson; former editor of the NRO when Buckley was alive, is not worked up at the prospect of a 2nd Obama term but opposes Romney?
LikeLike
As an atheist, I would much prefer that the Democratic party not include God in their platform. As both Romney (probably not a “real” Christian) and Obama feel obligated (either sincerely or out of political calculation and expediency) to claim fealty to God, I will vote based on other prejudices. God doesn’t care one way or the other. There is no God. We are on our own. We are doomed. As my atheist group business card states, “Cheerful Despair.” Even the Devil knows that being gloomy is a downer. He smiles cheerfully as he slides us down into the fiery pit.
LikeLike
Uh, Random, if there is no God, (and you are wrong on that) then how can there be a Devil?
LikeLike
The amount of time that the Dem convention has spent on social issues could really be a gift to Romney. He gets the benefit of wedge social issues – getting the voters that the Dems ticked off – without ticking off anyone by hammering on the subject himself.
LikeLike
CB, I don’t know how a person could compare these two conventions and conclude that the GOP is more extreme. Is a non-extreme convention one which plays to the base focusing on wedge social issues? One which moves all the way to the left to take a position opposed to a bill and executive order that was signed by the previous President from its party – the very same President who had a prime-time speaking slot at the same convention? One which trots out speakers and “testimonials” from NARAL and Planned Parenthood as if it is perfectly mainstream for those organizations to insist on no restrictions to abortion at all? Is it non-extreme to have a speaker in prime-time who wants all employers to pay for abortion and contraception, including religious employers and institutions whose conscience would be violated? And this same speaker’s main claim to fame is simply having been slurred by a radio talk show host who later apologized? (And yes that host’s actions were wrong, but that’s irrelevant to the merits of including the speaker at a convention). Is it moderate to claim that the other side will block access to birth control – when she can walk to the nearest Walgreens and buy contraceptives of various types at very low prices – and Georgetown, like a lot of colleges, probably hands out contraceptives for free. Is it moderate to hear and cheer for the extremely ugly accusation that the other party’s nominee wants pregnant women to die? How is the biggest bit of far-left whining ever at a convention of one of the two main parties not extreme?
And if you listen to speeches like Romney’s or others such as Marco Rubio’s at the RNC convention, how can that be a party headed in a more extreme direction? (Seriously, listen to Rubio’s speech if you haven’t. One of the best, most uplifting I’ve ever heard).
LikeLike
I thought it was odd listening to Sandra Fluke (I didn’t hear all of her speech, though). You’d think contraception had been banned and was completely inaccessible.
Really?
How that’s become some kind of a viable political issue for the Dems is beyond me. This isn’t 1955. Contraception has not only been widely available but free, or close enough to it, for decades now.
Well, unless you’re trying to get the Catholic church to hand it out (which essentially is what she’s doing).
As for Clinton, he was in fine form last night, speaking for almost an hour and getting everyone whipped up into a frenzy. Even I almost re-joined the Dems listening to him. 😉
He’s good if a bit transparent. But he’s got a tough sale to make in 2012. Maybe too tough even for him.
Obama needs him. But I doubt that’ll be enough to buy the president “four more years.” (And that phrase forever will be stuck in my mind as the Nixon chant from ’72, I can’t hear it without seeing Richard Nixon, hands outstretched in victory signs.)
LikeLike
And Matt’s right. I think many on the left are really so far out of touch with the mainstream of American society (which were what the messages reflected at the Rep convention) that they don’t see themselves as the ones who are, quite frankly, “extreme.”
LikeLike
I don’t know how a person could compare these two conventions and conclude that the GOP is more extreme
—-
That is because the left loves to try and protary themselves as being the main stream views. When they are not.
Just look at the Church’s on the left and how they work so hard to say that their views are the views of the Christian Faith.
LikeLike
Since the Cowboys and Rangers were on TV last night, I didn’t get to watch the commies. Did Clinton start his speech: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Fluke”?
LikeLike
MS Fluke has never read the Law concerning Title 1.
LikeLike
My niece & SIL were watching the DNC convention the other night. Niece remarked on Facebook that she was getting goosebumps from NARAL president Nancy Keenan’s speech. “Women deserve the rights to their bodies!” she added. Her mom, my SIL, agreed whole-heartedly.
Obama could run our country into the ground fiscally, but as long as women have the right to free contraception, & the right to kill their unborn babies, it’s all good.
😦
LikeLike
The video of the vote about God and Jerusalem, like Chas said, was very telling. I was like, Wait a minute! Totally get why the guy was upset at the vote results. That wasn’t the result! But typical of DNC MO. Let’s take this out of the platform–oops that upset the voters–lets put it back in and make it look soul-searching.
LikeLike
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=D9vQt6IXXaM&hd
Interesting ad from the Catholic church
LikeLike
That was an impressive video by the Catholic Church. I wonder if will have any effect?
I clicked on a debate Between Megyn Kelly and Kirsten Powers. It’s scary to see two women talking over each other like that.
LikeLike
Chas, Those two really don’t like each other. I like Kirsten Powers as I’ve always found her to be reasonable and well-mannered, though liberal. She is sort of the TV version of Coyote Blue. I also generally like Megyn Kelly. She is smart, but not quite as smart as she thinks she is. Kelly needs to stop hanging around Bill O’Reilly as he is teaching her bad manners.
LikeLike
Wow, great video!
LikeLike
“He’s not what he once was” -Larry Sabato, political scientist from UVa.
He never was what they thought he once was. He was a phony from the beginning.
LikeLike
So, there was a website that posted a comparison of God refs in the platforms. He went to the 50s. I’ll just do the 2000s. For the reps in 2000 – 1, 2004 – 3, 2008 – 2, 2012 – 10. For the dems in 2000-4, 2004 – 7, 2008 – 1, 2012 – 0 then 2.
On Mubarek – the man was a brutal dictator from the start. Pretty sure Reagan would have urged reform and departure.
Matt, my formerly GOP signficant other was appalled by Rubio. You all think abortion is your wedge issue but rep overreach is going to hurt at the polls.
LikeLike
Question for you guys and I want to be clear that I am not going to debate your answers. Does it serve God and the message of Christ when they are tied to a political party and political positions?
LikeLike
CB
No, it doesn’t serve God nor the message of Christ.
However, it does identify the position of those who try to remove God from the arena. i.e. It doesn’t affect God nor His message in any way.
It does tell us who they are. It’s for our benefit because the nation that forgets God is eventually going to fail.
Also, the deletion of Jerusalem as capital of Israel tells us of their intent, regardless of their forced insertion back into the platform.
LikeLike
Chas
You do understand that inclusion of Jerusalem in both platforms is sheer cynical politics? As a practical matter the status of the city is one of the hotly debated items md-east peace process talks since talks began.
LikeLike
I understand that Jerusalem is a holy city to the Jews and they will never relinquish it. It not a debatable Item. The Israeli government is located there.
They intend to stay.
I don’t see how any Jew could vote for Obama, given his record.
LikeLike
Who is Eva Longoria?
LikeLike
Chas, Jerusalem is a holy city to the religious Jews who make up about half of the Jewish population here and in Israel. The relationship between irreligious Israeli leaders and supporters of Israel and Christian dispensationalists is interesting, to say the least.
LikeLike
CB, I’m assuming that those two sentences are not connected, since Rubio did not mention abortion in his speech as far as I can tell. So I’m just a little fuzzy on what was appalling about it. Not sure how the Republicans are overreaching on abortion. The Romney campaign is focusing on jobs and fiscal issues and that’s what swing voters want to hear about. I mean there’s Akin but he’s obviously an outlier – the party isn’t supporting him. The Dems seem to be the ones overreaching – abortion isn’t popular in the first place with a small majority of Americans being pro-life, and they’re acting like it’s a winning issue for them.
I don’t really care how often a party platform mentions God, although the optics of convention delegates booing “God” probably won’t go over too well in middle America. But as far as talking about God in a speech, I think Rubio did it right. He spoke of God in asserting philosophical differences over where our rights come from (and what he said agrees with the declaration of Independence). And he spoke of God a couple of times when talking about American values – quoting our national motto, and also making the point that God, as opposed to government, is the source of all we have. Philosophical, foundational things that need to be understood and said – and he said them well, because as an observant Catholic who often attends an evangelical church, it comes from his heart.
Other other hand, Democrats and some other Republicans often seem awkward when talking about God and it seems like pandering. They don’t speak evangelicalese and it shows.
LikeLike
That should be, “On the other hand… “
LikeLike
It’s the Rays’ third baseman.
Oh wait, that’s EVAN Longoria.
LikeLike
CB, politicians should glorify God, particularly Christian politicians. And of course that involves actions predominantly, but glorifying God in speech is important as well. That is not to say that they should claim God is on their party’s side or replace the message of Christ – the gospel of forgiveness of sins – with their own message that takes its place.
So no, it does not serve God for His message to be tied to a political party. And although Christians should be alert for Scriptural principles while considering economic and foreign policy issues, it does not serve God for political positions in those areas to be considered THE Christian position. But on moral issues, I would definitely say there IS a Christian position, broadly speaking. There is room for nuance but not outright contradiction of Scripture. On the other hand, I wouldn’t make that a litmus test for one’s faith.
LikeLike