Anyone see CNN last night?

[IAMX 3,055]

Wow! You sure do have your head somewhere is shouldn't be! You also have no clue what mainstream is. Just because in your little world these things seem out of touch does not mean that is where the majority are. Tell you what, come november when McCain wins try giving us that little rant again.

So enlighten me, Gary, what is mainstream. What majority thinks creation should be in public school? What majority think a woman should not have any choice of having an abortion regardless of any possible circumstance?

Because Palin is VP means they're voting for that? No, not quite.

However, by all means show me what majority, because this mainstream ####### you speak of hasn't even come to fruition.

[GaryC 7]

It seems that some here can't tell the difference between the far right nuts and the mainstream. So I guess to be fair then the far left nuts should be seen as the same as their mainstream. If you guys want to own this line of smear then please carry on.

Ohhh! You mean pushing religious bullshit in schools is in the mainstream? Or completely overturning Roe v. Wade in any circumstance is in the mainstream? Hahahaha. Seriously, way to delude yourself. Some of us know what "mainstream" is, not that "mainstream" is right to begin with, but clearly you're making #### up to seem far less of an extremist and a political party fanboy than you really are. It's glaringly obvious.

You might be able to fool yourself, but good luck fooling someone with an allegiance to no political party.

I have an idea. Go up to any moderate, Rockefeller Republican and suggest the same thing. You'll get the same laugh from them too.

Talk about delusional. You take the cake.

Quite unintelligible, as usual. More "mainstream" talk, I suppose.

So humor me, Gary, how the flying #### is her positions "mainstream"? Because if it were, we'd already be swimming in creationism in class, as there's no way the entire damn country could withstand a "mainstream" onslaught of people wanting god in their public schools. Why is it relegated to the most hypocritically squeamish, most conservative part of the entire country, which, itself, can't even keep it in the class, as their local school board keeps overturning the creation nuts public school bible fantasies? Huh? And why, while there's only partially limits on the third trimester abortion in most states, there's none suggesting to rid of abortion entirely? Yes, because that's clearly "mainstream".

Takes very little thinking to come up with an assertion, something anyone with half a brain can see through. Feel free to actually back it up and make your assertion have some weight, for a change.

Wow! You sure do have your head somewhere is shouldn't be! You also have no clue what mainstream is. Just because in your little world these things seem out of touch does not mean that is where the majority are. Tell you what, come november when McCain wins try giving us that little rant again.

I think SVRT has valid points there. You need to substantiate your claims.

I don't need to substantiate anything. And SVRT does have some points, on top his head. But if you want here are a few polls:

Support for Roe vs. Wade Declines to Lowest Level Ever

U.S. adults almost equally split: 49 percent in favor, 47 percent oppose

The Harris Poll® has been measuring attitudes toward the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion ever since it was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973. During the 33 years since then, Harris Polls found majorities, between 52 and 65 percent of all U.S. adults, in favor of Roe vs. Wade. Now, a new Harris Poll finds that Roe vs. Wade is supported only by a slender 49 percent to 47 percent plurality. In other words, support and opposition are almost equal.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_po...dex.asp?PID=659

This site refers to polls about Creationism, ID and evolution.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I had a look at the table about Creationism - It seems to suggest that Creationism thrives among the poor and uneducated...

[IAMX 3,055]

It seems that some here can't tell the difference between the far right nuts and the mainstream. So I guess to be fair then the far left nuts should be seen as the same as their mainstream. If you guys want to own this line of smear then please carry on.

Ohhh! You mean pushing religious bullshit in schools is in the mainstream? Or completely overturning Roe v. Wade in any circumstance is in the mainstream? Hahahaha. Seriously, way to delude yourself. Some of us know what "mainstream" is, not that "mainstream" is right to begin with, but clearly you're making #### up to seem far less of an extremist and a political party fanboy than you really are. It's glaringly obvious.

You might be able to fool yourself, but good luck fooling someone with an allegiance to no political party.

I have an idea. Go up to any moderate, Rockefeller Republican and suggest the same thing. You'll get the same laugh from them too.

Talk about delusional. You take the cake.

Quite unintelligible, as usual. More "mainstream" talk, I suppose.

So humor me, Gary, how the flying #### is her positions "mainstream"? Because if it were, we'd already be swimming in creationism in class, as there's no way the entire damn country could withstand a "mainstream" onslaught of people wanting god in their public schools. Why is it relegated to the most hypocritically squeamish, most conservative part of the entire country, which, itself, can't even keep it in the class, as their local school board keeps overturning the creation nuts public school bible fantasies? Huh? And why, while there's only partially limits on the third trimester abortion in most states, there's none suggesting to rid of abortion entirely? Yes, because that's clearly "mainstream".

Takes very little thinking to come up with an assertion, something anyone with half a brain can see through. Feel free to actually back it up and make your assertion have some weight, for a change.

Wow! You sure do have your head somewhere is shouldn't be! You also have no clue what mainstream is. Just because in your little world these things seem out of touch does not mean that is where the majority are. Tell you what, come november when McCain wins try giving us that little rant again.

I think SVRT has valid points there. You need to substantiate your claims.

I don't need to substantiate anything. And SVRT does have some points, on top his head. But if you want here are a few polls:

Support for Roe vs. Wade Declines to Lowest Level Ever

U.S. adults almost equally split: 49 percent in favor, 47 percent oppose

The Harris Poll® has been measuring attitudes toward the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion ever since it was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973. During the 33 years since then, Harris Polls found majorities, between 52 and 65 percent of all U.S. adults, in favor of Roe vs. Wade. Now, a new Harris Poll finds that Roe vs. Wade is supported only by a slender 49 percent to 47 percent plurality. In other words, support and opposition are almost equal.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_po...dex.asp?PID=659

This site refers to polls about Creationism, ID and evolution.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

Gary, giving me a polling company website and a pro-ID/creationist website says nothing.

How many schools are teaching creationism? How many are pushing for it? Kansas has the most pro-ID push and they can't even convince their own school boards to keep it, as it keeps getting turned back. How many states ban first and second trimester abortions? How many still ban abortion entirely through the cases of rape and incest?

If this were mainstream, it would come to fruition. It isn't. Why not Gary? Liberal agenda in Kansas?

[GaryC 7]

Gary, giving me a polling company website and a pro-ID/creationist website says nothing.

How many schools are teaching creationism? How many are pushing for it? Kansas has the most pro-ID push and they can't even convince their own school boards to keep it, as it keeps getting turned back. How many states ban first and second trimester abortions? How many still ban abortion entirely through the cases of rape and incest?

If this were mainstream, it would come to fruition. It isn't. Why not Gary? Liberal agenda in Kansas?

As usuall you didn't even look. It was citing gallup and newsweek polls. But since it had "religion" (gasp!!!!) in the URL you dismissed it out of hand. Typical response and not surprising. Ok, I will give you the poll from another source.

Poll shows belief in evolution, creationism

By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON —

Majorities of Americans in a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll say evolution and creationism are both likely explanations for life on Earth — underscoring the complexities of an issue that has put Republican presidential candidates on the spot in recent weeks.

Two-thirds in the poll said creationism, the idea that God created humans in their present form within the past 10,000 years, is definitely or probably true. More than half, 53%, said evolution, the idea that humans evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, is definitely or probably true. All told, 25% say that both creationism and evolution are definitely or probably true.

Geoffrey Layman, a politics and religion expert at the University of Maryland, says people are trying to reconcile science and religion. "They might believe the science, or they might see the science as hard to dismiss, and they don't necessarily take Genesis to be literal," he says. "But they do think that God played some role in directing this evolutionary process."

At a May 3 debate of GOP candidates, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee indicated they did not believe in evolution. The subject has arisen repeatedly since then.

Brownback wrote last week in The New York Times that "man was not an accident" and that he accepts parts of evolution consistent with that belief. Huckabee told reporters Wednesday that "for me it's as simple as 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.' "

Nearly three in 10 in the new poll said they'd be less likely to vote for a candidate who rejects evolution; 15% said they'd be more likely, and 53% said it would make no difference. Huckabee says the issue is not relevant to a White House race and seven in 10 in the poll agreed with him.

Lawrence Krauss, a physicist and astronomer at Case Western Reserve University, said evolution is an important campaign issue. "Evolution happened whether or not a candidate believes in it," he said, and presidents shouldn't let "religious or ideological beliefs trump reality."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...on-debate_N.htm

[HAL 9000 96]

It seems that some here can't tell the difference between the far right nuts and the mainstream. So I guess to be fair then the far left nuts should be seen as the same as their mainstream. If you guys want to own this line of smear then please carry on.

Ohhh! You mean pushing religious bullshit in schools is in the mainstream? Or completely overturning Roe v. Wade in any circumstance is in the mainstream? Hahahaha. Seriously, way to delude yourself. Some of us know what "mainstream" is, not that "mainstream" is right to begin with, but clearly you're making #### up to seem far less of an extremist and a political party fanboy than you really are. It's glaringly obvious.

You might be able to fool yourself, but good luck fooling someone with an allegiance to no political party.

I have an idea. Go up to any moderate, Rockefeller Republican and suggest the same thing. You'll get the same laugh from them too.

Talk about delusional. You take the cake.

Quite unintelligible, as usual. More "mainstream" talk, I suppose.

So humor me, Gary, how the flying #### is her positions "mainstream"? Because if it were, we'd already be swimming in creationism in class, as there's no way the entire damn country could withstand a "mainstream" onslaught of people wanting god in their public schools. Why is it relegated to the most hypocritically squeamish, most conservative part of the entire country, which, itself, can't even keep it in the class, as their local school board keeps overturning the creation nuts public school bible fantasies? Huh? And why, while there's only partially limits on the third trimester abortion in most states, there's none suggesting to rid of abortion entirely? Yes, because that's clearly "mainstream".

Takes very little thinking to come up with an assertion, something anyone with half a brain can see through. Feel free to actually back it up and make your assertion have some weight, for a change.

Wow! You sure do have your head somewhere is shouldn't be! You also have no clue what mainstream is. Just because in your little world these things seem out of touch does not mean that is where the majority are. Tell you what, come november when McCain wins try giving us that little rant again.

I think SVRT has valid points there. You need to substantiate your claims.

I don't need to substantiate anything. And SVRT does have some points, on top his head. But if you want here are a few polls:

Support for Roe vs. Wade Declines to Lowest Level Ever

U.S. adults almost equally split: 49 percent in favor, 47 percent oppose

The Harris Poll® has been measuring attitudes toward the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion ever since it was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973. During the 33 years since then, Harris Polls found majorities, between 52 and 65 percent of all U.S. adults, in favor of Roe vs. Wade. Now, a new Harris Poll finds that Roe vs. Wade is supported only by a slender 49 percent to 47 percent plurality. In other words, support and opposition are almost equal.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_po...dex.asp?PID=659

This site refers to polls about Creationism, ID and evolution.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

Thanks Gary. Unfortunately, you already know that polls are prone to sampling bias.

Gary, giving me a polling company website and a pro-ID/creationist website says nothing.

How many schools are teaching creationism? How many are pushing for it? Kansas has the most pro-ID push and they can't even convince their own school boards to keep it, as it keeps getting turned back. How many states ban first and second trimester abortions? How many still ban abortion entirely through the cases of rape and incest?

If this were mainstream, it would come to fruition. It isn't. Why not Gary? Liberal agenda in Kansas?

As usuall you didn't even look. It was citing gallup and newsweek polls. But since it had "religion" (gasp!!!!) in the URL you dismissed it out of hand. Typical response and not surprising. Ok, I will give you the poll from another source.

Poll shows belief in evolution, creationism

By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON —

Majorities of Americans in a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll say evolution and creationism are both likely explanations for life on Earth — underscoring the complexities of an issue that has put Republican presidential candidates on the spot in recent weeks.

Two-thirds in the poll said creationism, the idea that God created humans in their present form within the past 10,000 years, is definitely or probably true. More than half, 53%, said evolution, the idea that humans evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, is definitely or probably true. All told, 25% say that both creationism and evolution are definitely or probably true.

Geoffrey Layman, a politics and religion expert at the University of Maryland, says people are trying to reconcile science and religion. "They might believe the science, or they might see the science as hard to dismiss, and they don't necessarily take Genesis to be literal," he says. "But they do think that God played some role in directing this evolutionary process."

At a May 3 debate of GOP candidates, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee indicated they did not believe in evolution. The subject has arisen repeatedly since then.

Brownback wrote last week in The New York Times that "man was not an accident" and that he accepts parts of evolution consistent with that belief. Huckabee told reporters Wednesday that "for me it's as simple as 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.' "

Nearly three in 10 in the new poll said they'd be less likely to vote for a candidate who rejects evolution; 15% said they'd be more likely, and 53% said it would make no difference. Huckabee says the issue is not relevant to a White House race and seven in 10 in the poll agreed with him.

Lawrence Krauss, a physicist and astronomer at Case Western Reserve University, said evolution is an important campaign issue. "Evolution happened whether or not a candidate believes in it," he said, and presidents shouldn't let "religious or ideological beliefs trump reality."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...on-debate_N.htm

That only underscores the need for better science education, Gary.

[Heracles 417]

Interesting how the media drags their feet on dem related stories such as Edwards and plays down anything negative about Obama. Yet, the second they find something out about a republican they jump in it.

Other networks/newspapers pulling this sort of ####### is the reason Fox news is doing so well.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[IAMX 3,055]

Here you go, Gary, 18% say in ALL CASES should abortion be banned:

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

Over 50% say legal in all or most cases. There's your "mainstream".

Of course, it's just polls.

In terms of ID/Creationism, well, local school boards are very easy to sway, so if there's any sort of mainstream push for ID/Creationism, it would be taught.

Yet, the reality is, abortion is legal, ID/Creationism is not.

Hey guess what Gary, you're not mainstream, and neither is Palin. Extremists unite!

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

What's interesting is how the party that is in pursuit of the vote of the morally righteous puts a divorced and remarried guy on top of the ticket (one who left his first wife less than honorable if I remember right) and offers a VP candidate whose family can't seem to live up to their morality standards as the icing on the cake, so to speak. And here they are celebrating these choices. Truly wonderful. Comes to show that the GOP and the religous righteous right is more inclusive and accepting than some might like to think. Way to go!

And what's interesting to me is some of the comments I am reading from "progressive" young Democrats. It proves that the sexist cave men aren't necessarily members of the Republican party.

Sexist cavemen? How did we arrive at that label? Weighing the professed stance of candidates on family values and their pursuit of a seemingly morally superior crowd against the personal realities of these candidates makes one a sexist caveman now? That is interesting indeed. Carry on!

Because when someone who calls themselves a Demoract uses the kind of language I am hearing and reading on blog entries on the Huffington Post, Andrew Sullivan's column in the Atlantic Monthly, Daily Kos and watching Bill Maher's show it's just as bad as when I see it written on the Free Republic or the O'Reilly Factor.

These are articles and commentary made by men who have either never been a teenaged girl or raised one. There is an implication in a lot of the discussion that because Bristol Palin didn't live up to the moral expectations her mother taught her that she (Sarah) has somehow failed and this disqualifies her to run for office. It is insane. I was raised in a strict Catholic home with values very similar to Bristol - yet I had sex as a teenager anyway. It had nothing to do with anything other than I thought I was in love and wanted to do it. I didn't get pregnant - my sister did at 17. This was not a failure on my mother's fault or in anyway undermined her moral teachings - she did everything she could. At the end of the day teenagers will do what they want to do (I also rebelled by smoking pot and dropping acid, but hey I now have a college degree and succesful career and pay taxes and all so it's good).

Now if we found out that Bristol had an abortion, that actually might be something to get upset about because that would actually expose hypocrisy on Palin's part. Also, choosing to keep the baby and provide support and love to a teenage mother can be consistent with a pro-choice position.

[britty 1]

Interesting how the media drags their feet on dem related stories such as Edwards and plays down anything negative about Obama. Yet, the second they find something out about a republican they jump in it.

Other networks/newspapers pulling this sort of ####### is the reason Fox news is doing so well.

Bravo Mr (or Ms ?) Aficionado

[Peikko 1,575]

Poll shows belief in evolution, creationism

By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON —

Majorities of Americans in a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll say evolution and creationism are both likely explanations for life on Earth — underscoring the complexities of an issue that has put Republican presidential candidates on the spot in recent weeks.

Two-thirds in the poll said creationism, the idea that God created humans in their present form within the past 10,000 years, is definitely or probably true. More than half, 53%, said evolution, the idea that humans evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, is definitely or probably true. All told, 25% say that both creationism and evolution are definitely or probably true.

Geoffrey Layman, a politics and religion expert at the University of Maryland, says people are trying to reconcile science and religion. "They might believe the science, or they might see the science as hard to dismiss, and they don't necessarily take Genesis to be literal," he says. "But they do think that God played some role in directing this evolutionary process."

At a May 3 debate of GOP candidates, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee indicated they did not believe in evolution. The subject has arisen repeatedly since then.

Brownback wrote last week in The New York Times that "man was not an accident" and that he accepts parts of evolution consistent with that belief. Huckabee told reporters Wednesday that "for me it's as simple as 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.' "

Nearly three in 10 in the new poll said they'd be less likely to vote for a candidate who rejects evolution; 15% said they'd be more likely, and 53% said it would make no difference. Huckabee says the issue is not relevant to a White House race and seven in 10 in the poll agreed with him.

Lawrence Krauss, a physicist and astronomer at Case Western Reserve University, said evolution is an important campaign issue. "Evolution happened whether or not a candidate believes in it," he said, and presidents shouldn't let "religious or ideological beliefs trump reality."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...on-debate_N.htm

That only underscores the need for better science education, Gary.

Well, only if you want US science to keep up with the scientific Jones'. I am beginning to suspect that this idea that man simply can't have any effect on the natural world (negative) is part and parcel of the religous dogma mind set. It's fantastic to me, in the bad sense, that so many people (even if they are still well in the minority even in the US) can dismiss what is known and what they experience in favour of things that fly in the face of reality. Science is predictable and happens the same way every single time. What these believers in the bible as a literal source seem to want to do is to reject all the principals, the so called natural laws and embrace a sort of chaos theory that anything is possible because god can do it. Extraodinary is what I find that, mind bogglingly extraordinary.

Of course, I am a great believer in transmography, flatearthism and I am seriously thinking gravity is an evil delusion. Really, I want to fly!

Edited September 2, 2008 by Madame Cleo

[HAL 9000 96]

Poll shows belief in evolution, creationism

By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON —

Majorities of Americans in a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll say evolution and creationism are both likely explanations for life on Earth — underscoring the complexities of an issue that has put Republican presidential candidates on the spot in recent weeks.

Two-thirds in the poll said creationism, the idea that God created humans in their present form within the past 10,000 years, is definitely or probably true. More than half, 53%, said evolution, the idea that humans evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, is definitely or probably true. All told, 25% say that both creationism and evolution are definitely or probably true.

Geoffrey Layman, a politics and religion expert at the University of Maryland, says people are trying to reconcile science and religion. "They might believe the science, or they might see the science as hard to dismiss, and they don't necessarily take Genesis to be literal," he says. "But they do think that God played some role in directing this evolutionary process."

At a May 3 debate of GOP candidates, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee indicated they did not believe in evolution. The subject has arisen repeatedly since then.

Brownback wrote last week in The New York Times that "man was not an accident" and that he accepts parts of evolution consistent with that belief. Huckabee told reporters Wednesday that "for me it's as simple as 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.' "

Nearly three in 10 in the new poll said they'd be less likely to vote for a candidate who rejects evolution; 15% said they'd be more likely, and 53% said it would make no difference. Huckabee says the issue is not relevant to a White House race and seven in 10 in the poll agreed with him.

Lawrence Krauss, a physicist and astronomer at Case Western Reserve University, said evolution is an important campaign issue. "Evolution happened whether or not a candidate believes in it," he said, and presidents shouldn't let "religious or ideological beliefs trump reality."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...on-debate_N.htm

That only underscores the need for better science education, Gary.

Well, only if you want US science to keep up with the scientific Jones'. I am beginning to suspect that this idea that man simply can't have any effect on the natural world (negative) is part and parcel of the religous dogma mind set. It's fantastic to me, in the bad sense, that so many people (even if they are still well in the minority even in the US) can dismiss what is known and what they experience in favour of things that fly in the face of reality. Science is predictable and happens the same way every single time. What these believers in the bible as a literal source seem to want to do is to reject all the principals, the so called natural laws and embrace a sort of chaos theory that anything is possible because god can do it. Extraodinary is what I find that, mind bogglingly extraordinary.

Of course, I am a great believer in transmography, flatearthism and I am seriously thinking gravity is an evil delusion. Really, I want to fly!

Oh but there are certain substances that CAN make you fly. Really!

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

The difference is that this girl, like Chelsea Clinton, has not chosen to be in the spotlight.

You mean, by attending campaign events like this:

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/2008090...HZz_r3oZtaGNw--

Nonsense. By campaigning with her mom she puts herself in the spotlight. Sorry, your invasion-of-privacy or spare-the-innocent-child nonsense doesn't fly.

The poster is funny as hell.

So does that apply if the Right suddenly taste blood and go after the Obama children? Hey - fair's fair!

If they're out campaigning for him, why not?

Also, this teenager (Palin's daughter) is pretty much an adult, and can make conscious choices about things.

Interesting. Children are now fair game to score political points. This is not "change" I can believe in.

well you were promised change.........

[Not Available 0]

dannnnnng, gone for the day and come back to this... wasn't expecting 11 pages lol.

[dalegg 143]

Just my take on this, but the girl is not 13, she's 17. It seems to me like not too long ago it was extremely normal to be pregnant and married at 17, yet people are acting like this girl is in grade school. My own mother was pregnant and married with her 2nd child (that'd be me) at 17 so its hard for me to see this as some travesty.