• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Court Rules Bush Can be Sued over Faith-Based Initiatives

KCConservative said:
FYI

Post #3 is a bold faced lie. The poster wrote the untruthful quote and attibuted it to me. I never said it. Never. He made it up and is trying to pass it off as one of my quotes. His post has been reported because it is a lie.

:2mad:

Uh, we know. The giant red words that say TRANSLATION sort of give it away.
 
Engimo said:
Uh, we know. The giant red words that say TRANSLATION sort of give it away.
If you were the target, you'd feel the same way. It isn't right, and you know it.
 
KCConservative said:
If you were the target, you'd feel the same way. It isn't right, and you know it.

I don't see why not. He was making a humorous conjecture at the sentiments that you were expressing. Don't see the problem.
 
Engimo said:
I don't see why not. He was making a humorous conjecture at the sentiments that you were expressing. Don't see the problem.
creating a quote box with my name on it and inserting an untruthful quote is the problem.
 
Originally posted by Hoot
Most of you know that I am no fan of Bush, however, I'm leaning toward support of the faith based initiatives.

Why? Because I believe churches can do a far better job of helping the poor in this nation then any government program can hope to achieve.

Perhaps the problem can be solved by doing away with the tax exemptions of churches that receive government funding?

If this is in violation of the separation of church and state, then so be it, but perhaps the Prez could implore the American people, through donations, to support these programs without taxpayer money?
I've got a better idea. Siphen off some money from our obscene defense budget!
 
Hoot said:
Most of you know that I am no fan of Bush, however, I'm leaning toward support of the faith based initiatives.

Why? Because I believe churches can do a far better job of helping the poor in this nation then any government program can hope to achieve.

Perhaps the problem can be solved by doing away with the tax exemptions of churches that receive government funding?

If this is in violation of the separation of church and state, then so be it, but perhaps the Prez could implore the American people, through donations, to support these programs without taxpayer money?


Churches do better at helping the useless than government does for a couple of reasons:

They get to pick and chose who they'll help, and they will refuse to help those that refuse to try to help themselves. Government can't do this.

Churches aren't burdened by senseless bureaucrats telling them to file the proper paperwork. Governments are senseless bureaucrat magnets.

Guaranteed that government money flowing to churches will be followed by government rules and government stupidity. If Bush's Faith Based Charity scam becomes accepted policy, so too will government control of churches.
 
KCConservative said:
creating a quote box with my name on it and inserting an untruthful quote is the problem.

Except it's blatantly obvious that it's not an actual quote. Nobody here really thinks that you said it, buddy. I suggest you just get over it.
 
Engimo said:
Except it's blatantly obvious that it's not an actual quote. Nobody here really thinks that you said it, buddy. I suggest you just get over it.
Okay, well thanks for the input.....buddy.
 
Billo_Really said:
I've got a better idea. Siphen off some money from our obscene defense budget!


I've got an even better idea than that.

Tell the people they're respsonsible adults, so they should buy their own damn insurance and stop expecting other people to bail them out of predictable situations.
 
Originally posted by Scarecrow Akhbar:
I've got an even better idea than that.

Tell the people they're respsonsible adults, so they should buy their own damn insurance and stop expecting other people to bail them out of predictable situations.
That's a pretty callous statement considering our defense budget is so large it's obscene and our government is nothing more than a corporate bitch whoring itself out to enable white collar crime.
 
Billo_Really said:
That's a pretty callous statement considering our defense budget is so large it's obscene and our government is nothing more than a corporate bitch whoring itself out to enable white collar crime.
Hang on a sec, I'll have my kids leave the room.
 
Originally Posted by KCConservative
Hang on a sec, I'll have my kids leave the room.
They should be at school instead of watching your cyber-debate.
 
Call me distrustful of government programs...too much money not going where it's supposed to go. That's why I said I believe churches could do a better job of helping the poor then another beauracracy.

If 'faith based initiatives' are illegal, then I have no problem with that, but this was one of the few Bush ideas I believed might have some merit?

So...shoot me! LOL

Also, KC...for what it's worth, I knew those were not your quotes...merely a bit of witticism.

Perhaps you doth protest too much? Maybe those inner thoughts hit too close to home? J/K
 
Billo_Really said:
They should be at school instead of watching your cyber-debate.
In case you haven't heard, it's Martin Luther King's birthday. They aren't in school.
 
Originally posted by KCConservative:
In case you haven't heard, it's Martin Luther King's birthday. They aren't in school.
Maybe their in parochial school?

Who are you, the topic Cop?
 
Hoot said:
Also, KC...for what it's worth, I knew those were not your quotes...merely a bit of witticism. Perhaps you doth protest too much? Maybe those inner thoughts hit too close to home? J/K

It is one thing to 'translate' another posters comments. I do it all the time. It is quite another to create a quote box, attach my name to it and insert a ficticious quote.
 
Billo_Really said:
Maybe their in parochial school?

Best to stay on topic with the KC Cop floating around.
Being opposing to your pofanity is not being a cop. It's being an adult. nevermind.
 
Originally posted by Hoot:
Call me distrustful of government programs...too much money not going where it's supposed to go. That's why I said I believe churches could do a better job of helping the poor then another beauracracy.

If 'faith based initiatives' are illegal, then I have no problem with that, but this was one of the few Bush ideas I believed might have some merit?

So...shoot me! LOL

Also, KC...for what it's worth, I knew those were not your quotes...merely a bit of witticism.

Perhaps you doth protest too much? Maybe those inner thoughts hit too close to home? J/K
He has every right to doth all he wants. If you disagree, put his doth on the docket.
 
Originally posted by KCConservative:
Being opposing to your pofanity is not being a cop. It's being an adult. nevermind.
Like you've never used a profane word in your life. I use them merely to indicate emphasis.
 
danarhea said:
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in a case which seeks to find President Bush's faith based initiative violates separation between church and state. This program was instituted by Bush in an executive order, thus bypassing Congress, and has also never been tested by the courts as to its consitutionality, ruled the appelate court. This is going to be a good case to follow. I have my own reasons why the faith-based initiatives should be shot down, but would like to hear the views of a few others on both sides first.

Article is here.

Oh please.....WTF, I'm not a Bush fan, but aren't they going a little over board? Its like grasping for straws......
 
KCConservative said:
It is one thing to 'translate' another posters comments. I do it all the time. It is quite another to create a quote box, attach my name to it and insert a ficticious quote.

Let me address this, then I will get back to topic. The way I did the post, a reasonable person would know that this is not KC's actual quote. I think the big red tags marked <Translation> and <End translation> make that perfectly clear. So if a reasonable person can determine that this was not KC's actual quote, then it is clear that there was another reason for me doing this. Humor, of course. It is funny. Of course, could it be that KC, with his crocodile tears, has an ulterior motive for raising hell about it? Seems the quote, although ficticious, seems to be on the mark, wouldnt you think? Also, it seems to me that, if KC wants to start trouble in other peoples' threads, he shouldnt be whining about being turned into the butt of a joke.
 
danarhea said:
Let me address this, then I will get back to topic. The way I did the post, a reasonable person would know that this is not KC's actual quote. I think the big red tags marked <Translation> and <End translation> make that perfectly clear. So if a reasonable person can determine that this was not KC's actual quote, then it is clear that there was another reason for me doing this. Humor, of course. It is funny. Of course, could it be that KC, with his crocodile tears, has an ulterior motive for raising hell about it? Seems the quote, although ficticious, seems to be on the mark, wouldnt you think? Also, it seems to me that, if KC wants to start trouble in other peoples' threads, he shouldnt be whining about being turned into the butt of a joke.
When did I start trouble? I posted a yawn icon as my response to your thread. That is how I felt about it. If you're going to start a thread, then be man enough to read what others have to say about it. The way you handled it was cowardly.
 
Last edited:
KCConservative said:
whatever make you feel like a man, dana.

Sorry to hurt your feelings, but if you want to play offense, you had best learn some defense too. Applies to internet forums, as well as football.:smile:
 
bumped ........
KCConservative said:
When did I start trouble? I posted a yawn icon as my response to your thread. That is how I felt about it. If you're going to start a thread, then be man enough to read what others have to say about it. The way you handled it was cowardly.

Shall I invent some dana quotes and post them online? Are you ready to go around correcting the record?
 
Billo_Really said:
That's a pretty callous statement considering our defense budget is so large it's obscene and our government is nothing more than a corporate bitch whoring itself out to enable white collar crime.


Is there something factual in what I said that you disagree with, or are you just having a testosterone moment?

I won't say the defense budget isn't a bloated cow, it is. Every state views it as just another federal program bringing money in, every congressman wants to make sure their district gets a piece of the action.

But national defense IS a legitimate and a Constitutional priority of the federal government.

Being everyone's nanny is not.
 
Back
Top Bottom