Author Topic: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy  (Read 1771 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

richpo64

  • Guest
Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« on: September 23, 2008, 04:39:31 PM »
OBAMA: LUCIFER IS MY HOMEBOY
by AnnCoulter.com
September 17, 2008

It's another election season, so that means it's time for Democrats to start uttering wild malapropisms about the Bible to pretend they believe in God!

In 2000, we had Al Gore inverting a Christian parable into something nearly satanic. Defending his nutty ideas about the Earth during one of the debates, Gore said: "In my faith tradition, it's written in the book of Matthew, where your heart is, there is your treasure also." And that, he said, is why we should treasure the environment.

First of all, people who say "faith tradition" instead of "religion" are always phony-baloney, "Christmas and Easter"-type believers.

Second, Jesus was making almost the exact opposite point, saying: "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on Earth," where there are moths, rust and thieves, but in heaven, because, Jesus said, "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

I guess that's the kind of mix-up that can happen when your theological adviser is Naomi Wolf.

Then in 2004, Democratic presidential candidate and future Trivial Pursuit answer Howard Dean told an interviewer that his favorite part of the New Testament was the Book of Job. The reporter should have asked him if that was his favorite book in all three testaments.

And now in 2008, we have Democrats attacking Sarah Palin for being a Christian, while comparing Obama to Jesus Christ. (And not in the sarcastic way the rest of us do.)

Liberals have indignantly claimed that Palin thinks the founding fathers wrote the Pledge of Allegiance, which is Olbermannic in the sense that (a) if it were true, it's trivial, and (b) it's not true.

Their claim is based on a questionnaire Palin filled out when she was running for governor of Alaska in 2006, which asked the candidates if they were "offended by the phrase 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance." Palin answered: "Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, it's good enough for me, and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."

As anyone can see, Palin was not suggesting that the founding fathers "wrote" the Pledge of Allegiance: She said the founding fathers believed this was a country "under God." Which, um, it is.

For the benefit of MSNBC viewers who aren't watching it as a joke, the whole point of the Declaration of Independence was to lay out the founders' breathtaking new argument that rights came not from the king, but from God or, as the Declaration said, "Nature's God," the "Creator."

That summer, in 1776, Gen. George Washington -- a charter member of the founding fathers -- rallied his troops, saying: "The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves. ... The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of the army."

So Washington not only used the phrase "under God," but gave us one of the earliest known references to the rights of the "unborn." That's right! George Washington was a "pro-life extremist," just like Sarah Palin.

There is no disputing that a nation "under God" was "good enough" for the founding fathers, exactly as Palin said.

Meanwhile, on the House floor last week, Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee compared Palin to Pontius Pilate -- and Obama to Jesus. Cohen said: "Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor." Yes, who can forget the Biblical account of how Jesus got the homeless Samaritan to register as a Democrat in exchange for a carton of smokes!

Rep. Cohen would be well-advised to stay away from New Testament references.

As anyone familiar with the New Testament can confirm for him, there are no parables about Jesus passing out cigarettes for votes, lobbying the Romans for less restrictive workfare rules or filing for grants under the Community Redevelopment Act. No time for soul-saving now! First, we lobby Fannie Mae to ease off those lending standards and demand a windfall profits tax on the money-changers in the temple.

David Freddoso's magnificent new book, The Case Against Barack Obama describes the forefather to "community organizers" like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton -- the famed Saul Alinsky.

Alinsky is sort of the George Washington of "community organizers." If there were an America-hater's Mount Rushmore, Saul Alinsky would be on it. He tried to hire Hillary to work for him right out of Wellesley. A generation later, those who had trained with Alinsky did hire Obama as a community organizer.

In Freddoso's book, he quotes from the dedication in the first edition of Alinsky's seminal book, "Rules for Radicals," where Alinsky wrote:

"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: From all our legends, mythology and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer."

I suppose it could have been worse. He could have dedicated his book to George Soros.

Even liberals eventually figured out that they shouldn't be praising Satan in public, so the Lucifer-as-inspiration paragraph was cut from later editions of Alinsky's book. (But on the bright side, MSNBC adopted as its motto: "Who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which.")

That's exactly what happens to most Democratic ideas -- as soon as they are said out loud, normal people react with revulsion, so Democrats learn to pretend they never said them: I was NOT comparing Palin to a pig! I did not play the race card! I did not say I would meet with Ahmadinejad without preconditions!

Sarah Palin might be just the lucky break the Democrats need. As a staunch pro-lifer, Palin could give Democrats an excuse to steer away from topics they know nothing about, like the Bible, and onto a subject they know chapter and verse, like abortion.

COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2008, 05:08:16 PM »
<<As anyone can see, Palin was not suggesting that the founding fathers "wrote" the Pledge of Allegiance: She said the founding fathers believed this was a country "under God." Which, um, it is.>>

That's your first Big Lie.  If the founding fathers believed their nation was one nation under God, God would have been written into the Constitution.  Which wasn't the case.  Atheists and non-Christians would have been prohibited from holding office, as, for example, they were in the home country.  Which wasn't the case.  "God" wasn't even written into the Pledge of Allegiance until Republican zealots forced it in in 1956. 

<<For the benefit of MSNBC viewers who aren't watching it as a joke, the whole point of the Declaration of Independence was to lay out the founders' breathtaking new argument that rights came not from the king, but from God or, as the Declaration said, "Nature's God," the "Creator.">>

Exactly.  The Constitution didn't even mention God, the Declaration of Independence referred only to the Creator - - God?  or simply Nature?  A simple statement in the Constitution that the nation was under God so that atheists, Muslims, Jews and Hindus could never hold public office would have sufficed.  There was no such statement.

<<That summer, in 1776, Gen. George Washington -- a charter member of the founding fathers -- rallied his troops, saying: "The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves. ... The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of the army.">>

That's your Big Lie No. 2.  The entire population of the Thirteen Colonies in 1775 was about 2.4 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteen_Colonies
Assume that half of them were women - - 1.7 million - - and assume that this figure had increased by 10% at the time that George Washington spoke - - 1.9 million women of all ages.  Assume that when Washington spoke, every one of the 1.9 million women was pregnant and bearing a single fetus; 1.9 million unborn children.

Even if Washington HAD meant to refer to the unborn fetuses anxiously awaiting the success of the revolution, there weren't "unborn millions (plural)" of Americans but only an unborn 1.9 million (singular.)  Now unless you want to make out the Father of your Country to be a total fucking idiot, one has to assume that "unborn millions" referred to future generations, who depending on the success or failure of the Army, would be freemen or slaves - - WHEN THEY WERE BORN.  And not before.

richpo64

  • Guest
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2008, 05:16:00 PM »
>>That's your Big Lie No. 2.  The entire population of the Thirteen Colonies in 1775 was about 2.4 million.<<

I'm still laughing ... wow .... unbelievable.

Mikey, are you able to project into the ... future? You're an expert at projection man. It's what you do. What are you saying here? Are you serious? Are you sane?

Hilarious ...  :D

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2008, 05:49:12 PM »
>That's your Big Lie No. 2.  The entire population of the Thirteen Colonies in 1775 was about 2.4 million.<<

<<I'm still laughing ... wow .... unbelievable.[ that the entire population of the Thirteen Colonies in 1775 was about 2.4 million]>>

There's something funny about that?  Well, I provided the link to Wikipedia for you, but if you have an alternative source and an alternative figure, I'd be happy to check it out.  You CAN follow a link to a source, can't you?

<<Mikey, are you able to project into the ... future? You're an expert at projection man. >>

No, actually, I read the facts and I take them at face value until proven otherwise.  You seem to have been projecting your religious bullshit into places where there's no indication whatsoever that it belongs there.  I pointed out your errors, gave you my reasons, and note your complete inability to provide any serious fact-based rebuttal.  From which I conclude I am right, you are wrong, and you are unable to prove otherwise.  That's what debate's all about.  Separates those who know from the idiots and the blowhards.

<<It's what you do. >>

Projection?  No, as I just finished demonstrating, it's what YOU do.

<<What are you saying here? >>

Read it real slow, Rich.  Use a dictionary for any word over two syllables.  You'll get it eventually.

<<Are you serious? >>

You'll know when I'm kidding you, Einstein.

<<Are you sane?>>

Define sane.  I have often wondered the same thing about you.  But I'll tell you this much, Rich, if YOU'RE sane, I wanna be crazy.

<<Hilarious ...  Cheesy>>

Fuck you too.

richpo64

  • Guest
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2008, 05:55:21 PM »
>>Fuck you too.<<

Anybody listening?

Look, if you can't understand what it is you're trying to say, don't blame me. What the hell does the number of women in George Washington's America have to do with his projecting currents events effects on future generations? If you're really stupid enough to think the actual number matters then I suggest you buy yourself a helmet and where the fucking thing wherever you go.

Good grief.

_JS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Salaires legers. Chars lourds.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2008, 05:58:08 PM »
I've got to be honest, this is a crap article Rich even by Coulter...erm..."standards."

The Founding Fathers held rather humanist views, which are the very views Ms Coulter is praising. Their view of "freedom of religion" was radically different (and very much a humanist view) from that of The Catholic or mainstream Protestant churches of the day.

I smell something burning, hope it's just my brains.
They're only dropping peppermints and daisy-chains
   So stuff my nose with garlic
   Coat my eyes with butter
   Fill my ears with silver
   Stick my legs in plaster
   Tell me lies about Vietnam.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2008, 06:00:15 PM »
Look, if you can't understand what it is you're trying to say, don't blame me. What the hell does the number of women in George Washington's America have to do with his projecting currents events effects on future generations? If you're really stupid enough to think the actual number matters then I suggest you buy yourself a helmet and where the fucking thing wherever you go.

Good grief.

==========

The point was that "millions yet unborn" was not - - and could not possibly have been - - a reference to the freedom or slavery of fetuses in American wombs, because they wouldn't have numbered anywhere near "millions."  "Millions yet unborn" referred clearly to unborn generations.  It might INCLUDE then-current fetuses, or not, but it referred primarily to the millions of future Americans who would be conceived and born in the years to come.

richpo64

  • Guest
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2008, 06:01:35 PM »
>>The Founding Fathers held rather humanist views,...<<

This is of course a lie that has been disproved over and over and time after time.

richpo64

  • Guest
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2008, 06:02:37 PM »
>> ... because they wouldn't have numbered anywhere near "millions." <<


Once again ... good grief.

_JS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Salaires legers. Chars lourds.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2008, 06:11:50 PM »
>>The Founding Fathers held rather humanist views,...<<

This is of course a lie that has been disproved over and over and time after time.

No. It is a fact. It is a lie because you and your ilk look at the 1770's from a 2000's perspective.

In the 1770's they were very humanist, which does not mean they were some sort of evil atheist/satanists. It means they held humanist views (i.e. they identified with people like Erasmus, Descartes, Voltaire).

They believed in reason above what the more Medieval paradigm that most Protestant and Catholic churches were still adhering to.

The problem many on the right and left have today is that they force Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, etc into 20th and 21st century paradigms (i.e. modernism and post-modernism). And thus it breeds arguments like Coulter's which make no sense.
I smell something burning, hope it's just my brains.
They're only dropping peppermints and daisy-chains
   So stuff my nose with garlic
   Coat my eyes with butter
   Fill my ears with silver
   Stick my legs in plaster
   Tell me lies about Vietnam.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2008, 06:23:53 PM »
>>The Founding Fathers held rather humanist views,...<<

This is of course a lie that has been disproved over and over and time after time.

No. It is a fact. It is a lie because you and your ilk look at the 1770's from a 2000's perspective.

In the 1770's they were very humanist, which does not mean they were some sort of evil atheist/satanists. It means they held humanist views (i.e. they identified with people like Erasmus, Descartes, Voltaire).

They believed in reason above what the more Medieval paradigm that most Protestant and Catholic churches were still adhering to.

The problem many on the right and left have today is that they force Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, etc into 20th and 21st century paradigms (i.e. modernism and post-modernism). And thus it breeds arguments like Coulter's which make no sense.

We were more humanist then than now?

Christians are more or less 80% of us now humanists are how many?

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2008, 06:26:21 PM »
<<Once again ... good grief.>>

LMAO.  That's about the highest form of argument they're capable of, so don't be too hard on them, guys.   And on the bright side - - 25% of the word count was polysyllabic.

richpo64

  • Guest
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2008, 06:32:16 PM »
>>We were more humanist then than now?<<

Of course not, that's the lie. As I said, this nonsense has been proven alie over and over again.

richpo64

  • Guest
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2008, 06:35:54 PM »
>>That's about the highest form of argument they're capable of,...<<

I'm sorry but there's nothing in your idiotic rambling about the population of 1775 America that merits any more response. You're clearly off on some weird tangent only you understand.

Let me know when you return to rational debate.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy
« Reply #14 on: September 23, 2008, 06:54:39 PM »
<<Let me know when you return to rational debate.>>

As proven by your answers (or should I say, your non-answers,) and your apparent inability to follow links to their sources, you wouldn't know rational debate if it bit you in the ass.  I'm still waiting for your opinion of John Insane's vile and unprovoked attack on Chelsea Clinton's looks, which you obviously lack the guts to provide.

Don't waste your breath talking of rational debate.  You're not rational and you don't debate.