Good stuff does not matter with bias press.

They will look for bad with Romney.

They only looked for good with Obama.

I disagree Donna. The press found plenty of 'bad' with Obama - but I think they were scared to death to push it very far for fear of being branded as 'racist'.

Originally Posted by djplong

I disagree Donna. The press found plenty of 'bad' with Obama - but I think they were scared to death to push it very far for fear of being branded as 'racist'.

OK Let me rephrase my previous post.

If the press found anything damaging in Obama's past, they skimmed over it or did not report it.

If the press find anything damaging in a Republican or conservative's past, they will not only report it, they will beat the public over the head with it like a club.

I hope this is more clear. People are not falling for the racist BS anymore. When the media tries to silent the protesters with racists allegations, it only encourages more rebellion. These are not skin heads, they are your hard-working neighbors.

Originally Posted by bkcunningham1

Regarding Mormons, including Harry Reid, I think there are currently 16 Mormons who are members of Congress.

Calling someone's religous garments or vestments that are a reminder of your obligations to God "magic underwear" is as wrong as making fun as a Jewish kippah, an Islamic headscarves, a Christian cross, ornamental eucharistic garments or any other religous covering that represent a commitment to God IMHO.


Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) since 1977

Harry Reid (D-Nevada) since 1987

Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) since 1997

Representatives:

Robert Bishop (R-Utah) since 2003

Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa) since 1997

Christopher Cannon (R-Utah) since 1997

John Doolittle (R-California) since 1991

Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) since 2001

Dean Heller (R-Nevada) since 2007

Walter Herger (R-California) since 1987

James Matheson (D-Utah) since 2001

Howard McKeon (R-California) since 1993

Michael Simpson (R-Idaho) since 1999

Thomas Udall (D-New Mexico) since 1999



Read more at Suite101: Mormons in the U.S. Congress: Which U.S. Senators and Representatives Are Mormon?

http://mormonism.suite101.com/articl...#ixzz0le7pSKQJ

OMG The Mormons are taking over the country!!! lol

Much as Ron Paul has appeal & there is much validity to his bservations about the monetray system, please keep in mind his opinions about international issues.

In one debate he stridently defended his defense position; (approx. that the only reason the Muslim fudamentalists hate us is because we have military presence in that part of the world. If we weren't there, they wouldn't bother us; 9/11 o8od never have happened. That shows a dangerous lack of 3-D perspective regarding the world's number one military issue.

I figured I'd use the direct sources fromthe 2007 debate: (Emphasis mine)


REP. PAUL: Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Congressman?

REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.

They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there. I mean, what would we think if we were -- if other foreign countries were doing that to us?"


END

Despite the attack by the High Priest of Republican 9/11 Theology, Rudy Giuliani, Ron Paul stood his ground. And he was rewarded for that by running a strong second in FOX News' own text poll with 25%, four points behind Mitt Romney and 6 points ahead of Rudy Giuliani.

The Libertarian Defense Science Board is on his side:

'Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies [the report says]. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.'

You've left out the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the "New" Republican Party- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.

I'm sure the American people would be thrilled to have any of them at the top of the ticket, since they speak for so many.

Originally Posted by ptownrob

You've left out the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the "New" Republican Party- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.

I'm sure the American people would be thrilled to have any of them at the top of the ticket, since they speak for so many.

Yes, and their number get bigger every day. I wonder why?

Originally Posted by djplong

I disagree Donna. The press found plenty of 'bad' with Obama - but I think they were scared to death to push it very far for fear of being branded as 'racist'.

Dont agree a lot with you but on this one I totally agree. What was there was not hidden, just ignored for whatever reason and the one you gave was a big one !!! It, that reason you gave, continues with the media today and fostered by the WH !!!

Originally Posted by ptownrob

You've left out the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the "New" Republican Party- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.

I'm sure the American people would be thrilled to have any of them at the top of the ticket, since they speak for so many.

You lost me with Savage.

Yoda