I'd sure like to know why everyone thinks Exxon John is a baptist. He's never been baptized into the church. Do the right wing know that?

No one cares even if he isn't religious at all.  He believes what religious people believe - that abortion is wrong.  

No one cares even if he isn't religious at all.  He believes what religious people believe - that abortion is wrong.  

As usual, you're wrong, Science101.  Not all religious people oppose abortion - many, in fact, are pro-choice.  That's the problem in making sweeping comments like that - they don't hold water.

Maybe what he meant to say was Evangelical Christians? I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt here. Even though I still know plenty of evangelicals that are pro choice as well.

MM's claim that "Obama leads McCain among all Catholic voters" is dubious - at best. Check these out:

1. "Poll: McCain Leads Obama Among Catholics Due to Social issues" (Aug. 2008 via Zogby: "The latest poll now shows they favor Republican Sen. John McCain by a margin of 50 to 34 percent.")

2. "The Battle For Catholic Voters" ("Obama now polls 44% to his G.O.P. opponent's 45%.")

3. "Poll: McCain Winning Catholics"

I think MM owes its readers a correction!

Awww, Shoes, you make me sad...

Item 1, from the Eternal Word Television Network gives results of only two polls, the one which you don't quote saying "On the other hand, an Associated Press/Ipsos poll conducted between July 31 and August 4 finds Catholic support evenly divided between both candidates."

Item 2, from Time, puts the candidates polling virtually even, well within the margin of error.

item 3: Published Friday April 18, 2008

No need for you to apologize to MMfA readers, we're used to you.

MM said Obama leads among Catholics.

Why is it O.K. for them to say Obama leads, but not O.K. for me to show polls that show that he doesn't?

Apparently Media Matters finds nothing wrong with you posting that because it's here.  Even if you have to retrieve your point with a post hole digger.

Shoes, MM was citing the Pew poll, which says exactly what they say it does. Why are you demanding a correction for stating the truth?

And you are allowed to post links to your other polls, if it makes you feel good. Just stop whining about not being allowed to do stuff that you're doing. It makes you look like an imbecile.

I think if MMFA is going to call out others for ignoring an item they deem as important, then I think it's appropriate for someone to call out MMFA for ignoring other polls that contradict their claims.  Personally I think these polls are a bunch of hogwash.  Who really cares what these polls offer to us.  It's essentially a means of getting voters to assume something about an entire demographic or voter base.  MSNBC will surely display poll results that state the opposite, the CNN will release results that confirm Barabak's claim.  Then it will be contradicted again by another poll.........blah blah blah, who cares about these polls.  If you agree with the candidate's moral standing on enough issues that are important to you personally, then that is all you need to vote for that candidate.  We don't need these polls to let us know that others agree with our view point and thus, we feel better about ourselves because we're not alone in our belief.  Polls are simply false ammunition to win yourself an argument.

 -- Polls are simply false ammunition to win yourself an argument -- smittymatt

I mostly agree with your comment. mmfa's contention that Obama could garner the catholic vote is disputed by other polls...all of which are just a snapshot in time and subject to those same opinions changing tomorrow.

They can reflect trends but they are not...at this time...a predictor of the final results. It's like reporting the score of a baseball game in the 7th inning...with the 9th inning coming in Nov.

While Obama leads in most polls...Reuters/Zogby announces that Obama has lost his lead:

 -- McCain leads Obama among likely U.S. voters by 46 percent to 41 percent, wiping out Obama's solid 7-point advantage in July and taking his first lead in the monthly Reuters/Zogby poll...

Obama's support among Democrats fell 9 percentage points this month to 74 percent... fell 12 percentage points among liberals --

With six outs left to win the game...will democrats in Denver opt for a new closer? In the democrat primaries...Obama started fast but weakened in the late innings.

Could the Reuters/Zogby poll reflect a growing nervousness about Obama's ability to close the deal? Yep...setting the stage for some potential fireworks and interesting possibilities in Denver. 

 

Only in the last few months has he come to believe that. Such as, once he got the nomination for the republican party. That's about the time he came to believe that abortion was "wrong". But then again, you're kind of whacked out, because I know plenty of highly religious people who believe that abortion is a choice. Sure, not one that they would make, not one that my wife or I would make, but not something we should choose for someone else. Anyway, isn't it the religious folks who always say that God / Jesus / Allah will judge you once you die and head off to Heaven? Why don't we leave the judgement to them for a change?

Somehow, you turn almost every thread into some debate about abortion. Guess what? Nobody is forcing it on you, and nobody is running around saying HAVE ABORTIONS!!! You choose not to do it, someone else chooses to do it. That's how, you know, pro-choice works.

Let's just take a look at a few choice flip flops of jukebox john:

23. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.

57. McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.

74. McCain has been both for and against considering a pro-choice running mate for the Republican presidential ticket.

He believes what religious people believe - that abortion is wrong.  

No Way! REAL religious people believe that ANY killing is wrong, even government sanctioned killing like the death penalty.  

Unless it's self-defense or food

So, I'm cool since that fetus was the agressor?

(I was going to address the "or food" part of your comment, but decided it was not in good taste).

Soylent Green anyone?

So, I'm cool since that fetus was the agressor?

I think so, Neon. I know most conservatives support any force necessary in the defense of private property. I have no child support payments to make, thanks to my courage in "standing my ground" in the face of Feto-Terrorists.

Ah, yes.  I seem to recall once being enchanted by your tales of valor and derring-do as part of the Fighting Forceps of C-section in the battle against the radical infanto-fascists.  It was because of those exploits - and that brief period that you don't talk about much as a former Prisoner Of Womb - that you attained the rank of Colonel, as I recall.  I hope that some day you'll find the time to regale us again with your saga of heroism.  Most of today's generation doesn't even realize how close they came to growing up barely able to move in an oppressive embryocracy.

Neon you have to be especially careful at night especially  when the fetal Crips and Bloods are running the streets carrying their mini Uzi's and Tech 9's. Now myself I have to be especially careful during the day as I might get mugged by a fetal mugger on the street in broad daylight.   :( < snark over sarcasm chip turned off> 

Snoop,

I do believe that the major Christian denominations, whether Protestant or Catholic, recognize the rite of Baptism by any of the denominations. Therefore there is no need to be re-baptized if one switches denominations.

That's not true for baptists. Check this out. Unless this has since passed, baptism is still a requirement to become a baptist.

It's not that Baptists wouldn't recognize the rite of Baptism by other denominations, it's just that it would need to be done again.  Baptists believe in baptism by submersion only, if you were baptised by aspersion, affusion or immersion, it would need to be done again. 

Also, Baptists don't believe in baptism of infants and typically not of young children.  They promote "believer's baptism" ... you must be able to make a credible confession of faith in Christ, to be baptised.  Infants can't do that and young children are generally not able to make "credible confessions".

Then how come he leads among Catholics?

No one cares even if he isn't religious at all.  He believes what religious people believe - that abortion is wrong.  

Exactly...and IMO some religious nut jobs would sell out their country if it meant overturning Roe v. Wade. That's why I never consider religious fanatics true Americans...their first allegiance is to Jesus and the Bible.

Most peoples dedication is to themselves and their personal beliefs, not whats better for everyone else.  Its what makes each person an individual and why we have voting.

Put it whatever way you want to spin it...bottom line is that there are antiabortion fanatics who would sell out this country to AlQaeda in exchange for overturning  Roe v. Wade. They are not true Americans...they have no allegiance to America...they are religiouis fanatics. 

There is no spin about it at all.  If someone does not believe it's right, then they don't believe it's right, regardless of their reasoning.

The spin is about glossing over the fact that many anti-abortion religious fanatics would IMO actually sell out their country in exchange for overruling Roe v. Wade. They are not true Americans IMO...they are simply religious fanatics.

Please back up this fact.

Barabak did not note that in that poll, Pew found that Obama leads McCain 88 percent to 6 percent among "Black Protestant[s]."

Wow - how surprising.  The same guy who gets over 90% of the black vote.  Ahh yes, it MUST be becuase they are protestant.  

So are black protestents less religious than other groups? Because, last I checked, they were Christians as well.

Im saying they are not voting on Obama's Christianity.  And thats a fact.

If its a fact, Science prove it.  As a white protestant, Obama has my vote.

As a white protestant, Obama has my vote.

And as a white Free Thinker, he has my vote, too.

As a white, former Catholic, he's got my vote as well.

...and as a (white) Jew, he has my vote as well!

As a Southern Baptist and weekly churchgoer...

He has my vote.  And I know a lot of people in my congregation who are voting for Obama.  This thing with Mr. Corsi has turned a lot of my congregation over to Obama.

...and as a (white) Jew, he has my vote as well!

Hey, Keil - Mazel Tov!!!

(30 years ago when i was still a practicing Catholic, I appeared in my church's production of "Fiddler on the Roof".  I played the rabbi's son.)

As an Atheist, Obama has my vote too no matter how hard he tries to keep religion in the government, which I abhor.

As a white person with a Catholic history,

Obama most certainly has my vote.

Raised a Methodist, now a non-denominational white Christian and former Republican...I'm voting for Obama.

As a white Godless leftist scum abortion fanatic and non-POW, I find Obama more conservative and religious than I like, but I'll have no problem giving him my vote as long as the other choice is the addled lifetime government employee Grampy McCrankypants.

As a seriously lapsed Southern Baptist and one who hasn't set foot in a church in years Obama has my vote. Jefferson knew what he was talking about when it came to religion and government would that he were still alive today.

So, you still pushing that "the only reason blacks are voting for Obama is because he's black" line again? That's a pretty racist claim to make.

Not only is it racist, Snoop, Science is implying that race trumps God for Black Protestants.

Perhaps this is the kind of thing science looks for in religion for it to be "viable".

The only religion that really matters is the white people's religion...

The brown people's religion doesn't count.  They believe in a lesser God.  They're working at their religion, and some day they'll be as important as white people.

White people are just naturally closer to Jesus.  Especially old, white flip-floppers, like Sen. George McCain.

Because Jesus was white.  It's a documented fact:

See?

Thank you Neon...

One of these days you'll see a Spanish guy kicking a soccer ball with a brown Jesus.

But that'll be a while. 

Right now, only white Jesus matters according to the L.A. Times. 

That's cool. Where can I get one of those?  Do they also have one with Jesus facing off against Wayne Gretzky?

You can order them here. I didn't see the Great One, though.

Those are pretty sweet! And I have a feeling that the little boy in the gymnastics model is a future wingnut pastor.

 -- That's a pretty racist claim to make. -- snoopy

I'm not reframing scienceguys question...but I'll ask my own.

My question is about race...but that doesn't make it racist. According to this Pew Poll about 9 of 10 black voters support Obama...while the total for all voters is split about even.

How come? 

 

 

How about 9 out of 10 black voters support Obama because he's a democrat? Only about 5-10% (at most) black people are republicans. It stands to reason that even if Obama were white, he'd still get 9 out of 10 black votes.

Ok...I'll buy that.

him being black could be one reason for some, but suggesting it's the only reason is what makes science's statement racist. He's basically saying that black people aren't diverse enough to have multiple reasons like the rest of us.

Perhaps they just like the lingo that Obama uses by calling them his "brothas" and Michelles infamous "my baby daddy".

That crap alone is reason enough for me not to support him.

Wow, you even went so far as to write "black". If we had audio I'm sure you'd be sounding just like savage does when he makes fun of mexicans.

Snoop, sorry if I got your post wrong, but Scienceguy, I think, is referring to an introduction where M.Obama referred to Barack as her baby's daddy.Sort of a tongue in cheek thing, years ago. Every right-wing race-baiter jumped on it as confirming their worst ghetto-nightmares.

I think Laura Schlesinger refers to herself as her child's mother all the time. I wonder why that doesn't freak them out as much. Hmmm.

I do agree that Scienceboy may be pushing this screen name past its shelf-life. The re-animated zombie-fetus as judge and jury and parole board idea was possibly his Jumping the Shark moment.

Science, that racist "crap" you just wrote is enough to make me want to throw-up.  Maybe you call yourself "science" because you still think that Eugenics is a valid scientific theory.

Even if he ever did say those things, which I doubt, it was probably in jest.  It's not Obama's fault that you are an idiot.

But get ready for this phrase: "The Obama Presidency". 

Science, formerly known as Histybuff, always starts out sounding logical and will even post a few points that backs up his position. But as he treads along the ranks of the thinking he slowly starts to devolve until one day he goes so far off the deep end and reveals his racial hatred that he gets banned. I'm giving him two weeks tops that he'll have a new name.

I'm confused, Snoop. Scienceboy is Hissey? I thought Sandss was Hissy.

How many screen names does the pretentious old fart have, anyway?

"Democratic candidates at the presidential level have traditionally received the overwhelming majority of black votes. In 2004, Kerry won over Bush among blacks by 88% to 11%. At this point, Obama is winning over McCain by a 91% to 5% margin. So, there is little difference in how Obama fares among blacks compared to how Kerry did in 2004, in part a result of the already very high, "pre-existing" Democratic tilt of black voters as seen in previous presidential elections."

Apparently it doesn't have very much to do with Obama's skin.

How do you know that? You don't. They might be voting for him because he's black. They might be voting for him because he's a Christian. They might actually be voting for him because they like his policy positions. Or, they might be voting for him, because he's a democrat. I would say out of all of those "they might" be's, the last one is probably the most true. Because black voters have been reliably democratic for, oh, since they gained the right to vote.

Im saying they are not voting on Obama's Christianity.  And thats a fact.

Science, how do come to know so much about how black people think?

Wow - how surprising.  The same guy who gets over 90% of the black vote.  Ahh yes, it MUST be becuase they are protestant.  

Science, African Americans voted Republican for over 100 years, it was the party of Lincoln. African Americans started switching to the Democratic party, when they believed Democrats were doing more for them, than the Republicans were, around the late 1930s. This was due to Roosevelt, and his "New Deal" policies, whereas the Republicans started courting white southerners. A majority of African Americans moved to the Democratic party, around the 1960s. Many of the southern Democrats didn't want to move to the Republican party, because it was the party of Lincoln and considered a "black person lovers" party (this is where Republicans like to pretend that Democrats didn't support the Civil Rights bill). The old "Dixiecrats", didn't start switching to the Republican party until the 1970s.

If race were the only reason African Americans were voting for Obama, African Americans would have lined up behind Republican, Alan Keys when he ran for president. They didn't support Keys, because it's not about race, it's the "R".

Yep.  Thanks for the history lesson.  Wish more people would study history instead of making it up.

It looks like Sen. McBush has a real problem with...

Black Protestants and Catholics.  Why would the L.A. Times author have completely ignored this?

This is almost journalistic malpractice.  An attempt to paint Obama as "having problems" with religious voters when just the opposite is true.

This is almost journalistic malpractice.  An attempt to paint Obama as "having problems" with religious voters when just the opposite is true.

Yep. A recent survey from the Barna Group shows Obama leading overall with the faithful, with Christians, as well as with every "faith segment" other than evangelicals.

Good, voting based on religious ideology is unamerican.

A religious litmus test for candidates is unamerican.

 A government based on an evangelical interprtation of the bible is unamerican.

Science101 is unamerican. 

Before science can get to 101 he must take the pre-college level courses.  Maybe 60 or 65.  It might take a while.

But as Catholics hear more about his views on aborting babies, those numbers will probably change.

The rest of Americans hopefully will continue to scrutinize his radical left winged ties.