BlogHer - debate - Comments

Fossil Record Explanation

a.peters — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 01:51:35 -0500

I am by no means an expert in creationist science, but I believe creationists explain away the fossil record by saying the bones were put there by God to test their faith. Apparently, God is a trickster.

Personally, the fact anyone could even make that argument with a straight face only proves to me that we aren't evolving. We are devolving.

I'm not an atheist, but if your belief in God requires that you come up with fantastic explanations to deny objective evidence and rational thought, it's time to change your belief.

I'm with you, and I'll

KimF — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:12:12 -0500

I'm with you, and I'll take your thought a step further and say that if the churches don't agree with evolution being taught in Sunday School, for example, they risk their tax exempt status.

Thanks for commenting.

Kim Ficera

Pimp My Wry!

So the Dinosaurs Walked the Earth 10,000 Years Ago?

Dr. Polly — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:54:05 -0500

Whenever I hear people question evolution and propose God created the earth only 10,000 years ago I always think of the dinosaurs. How do the creationists explain the dinosaur fossils? Are scientists simply a few million years off track when it comes to aging the fossil evidence? Jesus walked the earth two thousand years ago. Do we really think the dinosaurs existed a mere few thousand years before him?

Honestly.....please, let's do all we can to improve the teaching of science in this country. As a former researcher who respects the scientific process , I am truly mystified by our continuing debate over evolution -

And by the way, I also would like to propose that if creationism is taught in schools that we should stipulate evolution be taught in every church too.

http://mommadata.blogspot.com/

Um, yeah

yellowbird — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:14:02 -0500

Thanks for the name calling, by the way.

If you vote for McCain, I would have to say you are making an uneducated choice. If you choose to educate yourself you would see that McCain is only going to be a continuation of the Bush Admin. Unless you are stupid, who would want that? Not so hard to understand, is it?

The Debate

Carrie Blankenship — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:58:17 -0500

I was in Palm Springs when the debate was aired live and walked right by those old geezers in the lobby watching it with my cocktail in hand (it was happy hour) and did not even blink!

I really shocked myself. But thank you Lindsay, for your thoughtful analysis - this definitely gives me more to think of when I get the time to watch it, even though my mind is made up. I think it is still incredibly important to see how the candidates answer and respond to questions.

http://www.stopscreamingimdriving.com

Being old doesn't make you

shelleyp — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:34:34 -0500

Being old doesn't make you wise. My dear long dead uncle had a favorite plaque in German that read, "We get too soon old, and too late smart."

You're aware of course, which is why you wrote your opaque posting, of the article stating that seniors favor McCain, like the younger folks favor Obama.

Luckily, the majority of us middle aged folk also support Obama. And interestingly enough, the seniors loath Palin, but like Biden. I wouldn't count on the seniors just yet.

I wonder how much the seniors will continue to like McCain when they hear about their Medicare being chopped to pieces. Now this is information that will probably come out in the next debate.

Too bad, too, they don't remember that the Republican party was the one in charge the last 8 years and look how crappy things are now. Or about a war more of them dislike. No, they're "afraid" of someone younger, though Obama will have good company in the "young" category: John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

The Obama retirement fund

KeegsMom — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:55:40 -0500

Er, Norma156, how do you know that the Obamas don't have a 401K or some other retirement fund, most of which are stock market based? I mean, how would you even know if they own stocks or have other direct investments??

That's a bizarre claim.

I, too, am in disbelief that anyone following the election, with these candidates being out in the spotlight now for what seems like an eternity, is still undecided. The candidates -- and the parties -- are like apples and oranges.

Simple question: do you think the Republicans have done a good job leading the country the last 8 years?

KeegsMom blogs at:
KIDSFLIX
http://kidsflix.blogspot.com

For our children......

MegV — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:41:29 -0500

Don't do it. You have seen what has happened on the Republican watch. What's wrong with giving someone else a shot? It can't get much worse can it? If anyone thinks they're getting a tax break in the next 8 years, they're crazy. Do they really think the American public is stupid enough to believe they can pay for a neverending war in Iraq and Afghanistan and an $850 million bailout and not pay more taxes?

We need to take care of our children (health and education) and improve our image with the rest of the world (Mr.Bush doesn't care).

With the money we have spent on the war in Iraq alone we cold have funded world class public schools, rebuilt/repaired our highways, and have maybe, found a cure for cancer. (every week in Iraq we spend as much money as we allocate each year for cancer research in this country )

Don't even get me started on reproductive rights. (You don't have a uterus? You don't have a say!!!...my opinion)

I hope as a mother you would not even consider this evil war monger for president of our country. Your children's welfare depends on it.

McCain=Buffet AND Whitman

SuburbanTurmoil — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:57:57 -0500

No mix up. Read the transcripts. Warren Buffet was the first name McCain said. I'm not surprised he threw a Republican out there as well.

Heh.

SuburbanTurmoil — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:55:59 -0500

Heh.

Distraction Issues

Paddycake — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:34:58 -0500

Thats what I like to call them. Politicians don't really care about reproductive rights that is just a tool to seduce votes, same with gay rights, healthcare etc...

You are right in talking about the stock market.

I'm losing money big time in my pension account, hopefully It will recover by the time

I'm ready to retire, I feel really sad for those who are planning to retire right now.

Who's gonna be the best presidential choice for them? You know the older people.

The wiser people. Has anyone seen any polls on who seniors are voting for?

So a vote not for Obama is an uneducated choice?

Maria0305 — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:08:16 -0500

I'm voting for Obama too, definitely, but you sound like a complete nut. I'm assuming you're a troll like I've been noticing scattered around the political posts here on BlogHer.

- Maria

http://immoralmatriarch.com

I completely agree, ShelleyP.

Maria0305 — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:05:34 -0500

Although I'm still not sure what the Obamas not having money in the stock market has to do with anything. I don't personally have any money in the stock market either, but I'm damn sure feeling the strain of the economy as a whole.

http://immoralmatriarch.com

I'm sorry you find

shelleyp — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:41:54 -0500

I'm sorry you find reproductive rights and health care to be old and irrelevant, but a lot of us don't.

The most important decision a President makes is who he or she appoints to the Supreme Court. This is more important than, yes, even the current economic meltdown. I know for a fact that Obama will appoint a justice to the court that will ensure balance, in support of a living Constitution, while McCain will side with the Federalist Society, which believes that the Constitution should be interpreted in light of white slave-owning men.

Frankly, there is only so much a President can do about the economy, other than project hope. I don't see that McCain projects anything but small-minded anger, and vague "I can fix that" assertions without any details. Oh, an chaotic responses to crises, including his recent mortgage suggestion, which has all economists appalled.

As for the current situation, McCain favors deregulation, a major factor in today's meltdown. He's also still stuck in Reagon Economics, which we now know does not work. He favors tax breaks for the wealthy and the corporate, and I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of welfare for the rich.

As for Obama not having any investment in the stock market...sigh. It's true, he may not be as rich as McCain. I guess condemning Obama because he doesn't have any stockmarket investments is a change from the Ayers stuff, but not much. I don't have investments in the stock market but I understand how the current situation could have negative impact on me and others like me. Your assumption that one has to have stock market investments in order to "understand" the current situation is, frankly (since we're being blunt), simplistic. Even more than a little elitist.

So all in all, you'll have to excuse us if we continue to look for a President for the future, rather than a relict from the past. A well rounded President, able to deal with today's problems, and tomorrow's.

I find it absolutely

Norma156 — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:37:07 -0500

I find it absolutely fascinating that a thoughtful blog on the debate where the writer is still an uncommitted voter, generated, as of this count, eighty comments from this community.

Most, if not all, of the comments are vehemently pro-Obama with the exception of a post by an alleged eighty-year old. However, writers doubt she is authentic. (I don't know how that determination is made. Interent voodoo? I just don't know.)

I also find it fascinating that most of the posts are concerned with what I consider the "old" issues and I mean old in the sense of two weeks old. To me, in the context of a global financial meltdown, gender, reproductive rights, and healthcare are old issues and irrelevant.

Wait. Don't jump on me yet. Did you notice what the market did today? It was down 600 points. Have you noticed what's disappeared from your 401K accounts? Wealth by the trillions is disappearing.

In this country we've had the luxury over the last three decades (since the Reagan Revolution to be precise) to pick and choose political alliances over relatively narrow issues. For example, witness the pro-choice post above where the writer says she would never, ever vote for anyone who threatened her reproductive rights.

Would she feel the same way if her candidate, while supporting reproductive rights, brings down the global financial system and plunges us into a depression?

Does anyone really think either McCain or Obama is going to be able to deliver on healthcare promises? Why even argue about it? It's moot, ladies. Ain't gonna happen. To me, watching the debate was an exercise in total irrelevance.

We are on the brink of a financial catastrophe the likes of which most of us have never lived through. This is not hyberbole.

It seems to me, the real question for Suburbanturmoil and for all of us, is which candidate has the brains and balls to face up to the mess and make some hard choices.

I don't think McCain understands the economy very well, but I know Obama doesn't. Did you know that he and Michelle don't have a single dollar in the stock market? He is definitely not feeling our pain.

Okay, that may have been a little snide, but the point remains. He proposes to increase taxes on income, capital, and social security. He proposes increased corporate tax rates. This is precisely the prescription we don't need at this time. We know this.

I've enjoyed reading these posts, although today a few minutes after the market closed, they seem a little old-fashioned.