GreekChat.com Forums

GreekChat.com Forums (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/index.php)
-   Alpha Kappa Alpha (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Politics 2008:The Caucuses and The Dem/Rep Conventions (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=83575)

AKA2D '91 01-03-2007 07:46 PM

Politics 2008:The Caucuses and The Dem/Rep Conventions
 
Congressman to use Thomas Jefferson's Quran during swearing in ceremony....


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070103/.../ellison_quran

_Opi_ 01-03-2007 07:51 PM

Virgil Goode is a jackass.

Xylochick216 01-03-2007 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Opi_ (Post 1377937)
Virgil Goode is a jackass.

I AGREE! I don't know why everyone in my district keeps voting for him. Then again, this is the land of Jerry Falwell. About 90% of the letters to the editor are in support of Goode. My favorite headline from one of the letters last week? "Muslims want to kill us all." He's an ignorant man.:rolleyes:

mccoyred 01-04-2007 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKA2D '91 (Post 1377935)
Congressman to use Thomas Jefferson's Quran during swearing in ceremony....


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070103/.../ellison_quran

I guess the fact that the Book once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, a founding father and slaveowner, makes it different than any other Book? :rolleyes: I am glad that this is finally settled though, and the country can get on with the business at hand....

AlphaFrog 01-04-2007 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378124)
I guess the fact that the Book once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, a ...slaveowner

Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

mulattogyrl 01-04-2007 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378124)
I guess the fact that the Book once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, a founding father and slaveowner, makes it different than any other Book? :rolleyes: I am glad that this is finally settled though, and the country can get on with the business at hand....

I don't understand what you mean either. :confused:

mccoyred 01-05-2007 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog (Post 1378129)
Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Well, Ellison is BLACK...

Besides, I have SEVERAL issues with TJ and his ilk that I won't further go into.

mccoyred 01-05-2007 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulattogyrl (Post 1378131)
I don't understand what you mean either. :confused:

When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.

Drolefille 01-05-2007 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378628)
When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.

I don't think the fact that it is TJ's Qu'ran changes Virgil Goode's mind. The irony is really only evident for those who know that the founding fathers were more Deist than Christian although there was quite a range of beliefs.

Goode can ramble on about tradition etc. but when John Adams and Teddy Roosevelt didn't use a Bible, you can't really fuss about a Congressman.

AlphaFrog 01-05-2007 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378628)
When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.

This makes more sense then saying that he shouldn't use TJ's book because TJ was a slaveowner and Ellison is black. That's like saying a Jew shouldn't spend money that Hilter touched...it's just a functional object, regardless of previous ownership. But I can understand the concern in the quoted post.

mulattogyrl 01-05-2007 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378628)
When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.


Gotcha. ;)

ladygreek 01-05-2007 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog (Post 1378129)
Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Maybe she is seeing it as ironic.

Drolefille 01-05-2007 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladygreek (Post 1378788)
Maybe she is seeing it as ironic.

Perhaps, but I don't think anyone's views have changed, thus making her point invalid. If Virgil Goode went "oh it's TJ's Qu'ran? nm then thx" I'd see the concern. But no one seems to be changing their mind.

mulattogyrl 01-05-2007 02:02 PM

Kind of off topic, but I find it fascinating that Jefferson owned a Quran. Sure, it's naive, but at least I admit it, lol.

lovelyivy84 01-05-2007 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille (Post 1378794)
Perhaps, but I don't think anyone's views have changed, thus making her point invalid. If Virgil Goode went "oh it's TJ's Qu'ran? nm then thx" I'd see the concern. But no one seems to be changing their mind.

It didn't seem to me that she was trying to change anyone's mind, just pointing out the irony of a black man being sworn into office by a koran owned by one of the most famous hypocrites of all time when it comes to race. Added of course to the fact that his ownership of the book seems to make the situation ok for some folks, it's actually pretty amusing.

What exactly is the issue you have with her pointing it out?

Drolefille 01-05-2007 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovelyivy84 (Post 1378835)
It didn't seem to me that she was trying to change anyone's mind, just pointing out the irony of a black man being sworn into office by a koran owned by one of the most famous hypocrites of all time when it comes to race. Added of course to the fact that his ownership of the book seems to make the situation ok for some folks, it's actually pretty amusing.

What exactly is the issue you have with her pointing it out?

I haven't seen anyone say "OOOH it's TJ's then no big deal" The people who think that it's neat that it is TJ's Qu'ran are not the anti-Qu'ran swearing people. Those people don't care whose Qu'ran it is. Does that make sense?

Mr. Goode and his ilk aren't saying that ownership of the book makes it ok. Thus I think her concern is misguided.

mccoyred 01-05-2007 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille (Post 1378851)
I haven't seen anyone say "OOOH it's TJ's then no big deal" The people who think that it's neat that it is TJ's Qu'ran are not the anti-Qu'ran swearing people. Those people don't care whose Qu'ran it is. Does that make sense?

Mr. Goode and his ilk aren't saying that ownership of the book makes it ok. Thus I think her concern is misguided.

I think it IS a big deal simply because, unless I missed something, this swearing in wasn't going to happen on a qu'ran PERIOD. When this particular qu'ran was brought forth it happened right away. If I DID miss something, please inform me and I will adjust accoridingly. Thank you.

Drolefille 01-05-2007 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378968)
I think it IS a big deal simply because, unless I missed something, this swearing in wasn't going to happen on a qu'ran PERIOD. When this particular qu'ran was brought forth it happened right away. If I DID miss something, please inform me and I will adjust accoridingly. Thank you.

To my knowledge it was going to happen no matter what and here's why:

The official swearing in is a group thing where everyone raises their hand and swears the oath (no books, bible or otherwise).

Then, after that there are private ceremonies that are mostly just photo opportunities. This is where they swear on a book. He is not the first person to request a non-Bible. They've stated that not only have presidents chosen other books, John Q. Adams chose a law book for example, but that Senators and Congressmen have also chosen others or none at all.

Here's an article that talks about it. It refers to Ohio's state legislators as well as the national ones. Columbus Dispatch

There was never anything in the news about the Qu'ran not being allowed except in the sense that some prejudiced idiots think that the Bible is and should be the only option. Particularly Rep. Goode. However I've not seen anything stating that it wouldn't be allowed, he just thinks that it shouldn't be ok.

/But I've read his comments and he's also a grade-A idiot

SummerChild 01-08-2007 12:22 AM

AlphaFrog,

Who are you or anyone else to say what makes more sense to someone else or whether someone's thoughts are basically valid?
Different people care about different things. That's what makes the world go around. It may be a functional object to you but it may have deeper symbolic meaning to someone else.


ETA: On my own personal opinion, I think that he *should* use the book that has significance for him. It seems to me that the point of swearing to something and placing one's hand on a book is to really mean it based on the content of the book. If the Bible will not be as meaningful for him as the Qu'ran, he should use the Qu'ran. I don't see the big deal at all.

What if an athiest swore on the Bible? I'm sure that it has happened but in hindsight, it seems quite silly.


SC

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog (Post 1378694)
This makes more sense then saying that he shouldn't use TJ's book because TJ was a slaveowner and Ellison is black. That's like saying a Jew shouldn't spend money that Hilter touched...it's just a functional object, regardless of previous ownership. But I can understand the concern in the quoted post.


ladygreek 01-08-2007 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille (Post 1378675)
The irony is really only evident for those who know that the founding fathers were more Deist than Christian although there was quite a range of beliefs.

THANK YOU!! And folx ask me why I am a Humanist, which is an outgrowth of Deism, rather than a Christian.

So I do see the irony. ;)

ladygreek 01-08-2007 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1378968)
I think it IS a big deal simply because, unless I missed something, this swearing in wasn't going to happen on a qu'ran PERIOD. When this particular qu'ran was brought forth it happened right away. If I DID miss something, please inform me and I will adjust accoridingly. Thank you.

That's not true. The real swearing in happens en mass without any hands on bibles or anything else. They just all stand and raise their hands and repeat what they are told. The hands on the bible, Qu'ran, etc. are privately done after the official swearing in, and are for photo-op, personal gratification purposes.

ETA: oops, should have read ahead.

ladygreek 01-08-2007 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SummerChild (Post 1379851)
What if an athiest swore on the Bible? I'm sure that it has happened but in hindsight, it seems quite silly.


SC

And there have been presidents who did not swear on the Bible or anything. My guess is that athiest chose not to do the private swearing in photo-ops. And yes I believe there have been and are more athiest and agnostics in public office than we know.

mccoyred 01-08-2007 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladygreek (Post 1379938)
That's not true. The real swearing in happens en mass without any hands on bibles or anything else. They just all stand and raise their hands and repeat what they are told. The hands on the bible, Qu'ran, etc. are privately done after the official swearing in, and are for photo-op, personal gratification purposes.

ETA: oops, should have read ahead.


Thank you for the information on the process, soror.

So if the whole 'swearing/affirming on a book' thing is not the official process, why all the big deal? I swear, this country spends more time on extraneous stuff than a little bit.

mccoyred 01-08-2007 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille (Post 1378991)
To my knowledge it was going to happen no matter what...

Everyone does not have your knowledge (at least on this subject). I appreciate being informed because I learn something new everyday but I don't appreciate your tone or how you speak to people, Ms Superiority.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille (Post 1378991)
/But I've read his comments and he's also a grade-A idiot

So are you :cool:

Drolefille 01-08-2007 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1379999)
Everyone does not have your knowledge (at least on this subject). I appreciate being informed because I learn something new everyday but I don't appreciate your tone or how you speak to people, Ms Superiority.



So are you :cool:

Retract your claws. You asked, I replied.

No, not everything that happens is "to my knowledge" but seeing how you haven't exactly refuted what I said, I don't see my knowledge being wrong in this situation.

AKA2D '91 01-16-2007 07:53 PM

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/topsto...ist=topstories

Obama is IN!

SummerChild 01-17-2007 01:40 AM

My old constitutional law prof is going to be President!!! :)
Anywho, why did this Irish newspaper have a headline on MSN.com today talking about Obama is attempting to be the first Black President??:confused:

Talk about out of touch with reality. Haven't they ever heard of Shirley Chisolm and Jesse Jackson, Sr. (who apparently ran twice). Shoot you could even count Al Sharpton. But I thought that *everyone* knew that Jessee had run b/c he's all over in the Middle East doing peace talks, etc. Surely they have heard about him in Ireland???:confused:

How could the paper have been so ignorant as to publish that and not catch that huge mistake?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKA2D '91 (Post 1384623)


shinerbock 01-17-2007 09:50 AM

Obama is attempting to become the first black president. He's not the first person to attempt, however. Fortunately, like Jackson and Sharpton, he won't win.

Honeykiss1974 01-17-2007 11:44 AM

Why "fortunately"? :confused: Not trying to bait you or anything, but I'm curious to know why it would be a good thing if Obama didn't win?

Although, based on those who have OFFICIALLY announced their intention to run in '08, I don't have a favorite either way.

TonyB06 01-17-2007 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SummerChild (Post 1384801)
My old constitutional law prof is going to be President!!! :)

Look at SummerChild, angling for the Atty. Gen. gig ...:D

Seriously, this will be interesting to watch unfold. We all see what we think we know and like about Obama. As he takes definitive political positions and defines his ideas -- which he better do first, before his political opponents do it for him -- we'll be better able to access his candidacy and make our assessments about his ability to perform on the domestic and international stages.

Personally, I'd like to have seen more of a legislative track record in the Senate, but that's not to say he wouldn't do a great job as president. Clearly, many have come the presidency with a lot less....Obama is intelligent, pragmatic and moderate in his thinking, so that will go in his favor with a lot of people.

AlphaFrog 01-17-2007 12:00 PM

I think shiner's a big ol' GOP. That's why he doesn't want Obama to win.

Chris Morier 01-17-2007 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog (Post 1384915)
I think shiner's a big ol' GOP. That's why he doesn't want Obama to win.

Yeah, he must be.

MysticCat 01-17-2007 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog (Post 1384915)
I think shiner's a big ol' GOP. That's why he doesn't want Obama to win.

I don't think he's made any secret about that.

AlphaFrog 01-17-2007 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 1384985)
I don't think he's made any secret about that.

True, true.

shinerbock 01-17-2007 01:52 PM

Correct. I lean right. I like Obama personally, but don't agree with his political ideology. I'm glad he's running, the DNC will hopefully do to him what they did to Edwards. Democrats better hope Carville comes to bail them out, because they're incredibly inept when it comes to strategy.

SummerChild 01-17-2007 02:12 PM

Tony, you're crazy!

The only bad thing about him winning is that he will get all old and gray and ugly before his term is over like the prior Presidents. LOL. It would be a shame to mess him up so young. LOL.

SC


Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyB06 (Post 1384914)
Look at SummerChild, angling for the Atty. Gen. gig ...:D

Seriously, this will be interesting to watch unfold. We all see what we think we know and like about Obama. As he takes definitive political positions and defines his ideas -- which he better do first, before his political opponents do it for him -- we'll be better able to access his candidacy and make our assessments about his ability to perform on the domestic and international stages.

Personally, I'd like to have seen more of a legislative track record in the Senate, but that's not to say he wouldn't do a great job as president. Clearly, many have come the presidency with a lot less....Obama is intelligent, pragmatic and moderate in his thinking, so that will go in his favor with a lot of people.


lovelyivy84 01-17-2007 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyB06 (Post 1384914)
Look at SummerChild, angling for the Atty. Gen. gig ...:D

Seriously, this will be interesting to watch unfold. We all see what we think we know and like about Obama. As he takes definitive political positions and defines his ideas -- which he better do first, before his political opponents do it for him -- we'll be better able to access his candidacy and make our assessments about his ability to perform on the domestic and international stages.

Personally, I'd like to have seen more of a legislative track record in the Senate, but that's not to say he wouldn't do a great job as president. Clearly, many have come the presidency with a lot less....Obama is intelligent, pragmatic and moderate in his thinking, so that will go in his favor with a lot of people.

Well said.

While it's nice that he's running, I think it's a ploy to get him into a vp-slot for the 08 race. I don't think there is any way on earth the man could win- not in this country. And he is fully aware of this.

It seems like McCain in 00 in some ways- he's trying to take advantage of his huge upsurge in popularity and ride it to a position of greater visibility and prominence. Maybe it will pay off for him the way it has for McCain (in all probability our next president IMO, although I have lost a lot of respect for him).

hazelle 01-17-2007 02:59 PM

Hey!! the best thing I want to say about Senator Obama is he can state without hesistation....he was totally against the Iraq "police action," "temporary war: from banner to banner??" whatever you entitle it...and never has to retrieve an earlier position. How many of our politicians can truly say that now??

His future will be in the stars....one way or the other...but he can stand proud. 3000 + cannot reply...they have given their best for our country. Just read on line that Bush's approval rating now equals Nixon's prior to a week before his resignation.

TonyB06 01-17-2007 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SummerChild (Post 1385000)
Tony, you're crazy!

The only bad thing about him winning is that he will get all old and gray and ugly before his term is over like the prior Presidents. LOL. It would be a shame to mess him up so young. LOL.

SC

LOL. your post made me think about Cedric-the-entertainer's "black president" stand-up bit. :D

"wha, whaa did you say? how you gon ask me some bullisht all like that, in front of my family and isht? Hey homeboy, president or not, how 'bout I come out there and whup your inquisitive azz, how 'bout that? Put that on CNN."

TonyB06 01-17-2007 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovelyivy84 (Post 1385021)
Well said.

While it's nice that he's running, I think it's a ploy to get him into a vp-slot for the 08 race. I don't think there is any way on earth the man could win- not in this country. And he is fully aware of this.

It seems like McCain in 00 in some ways- he's trying to take advantage of his huge upsurge in popularity and ride it to a position of greater visibility and prominence. Maybe it will pay off for him the way it has for McCain (in all probability our next president IMO, although I have lost a lot of respect for him).

I, too, think McCain will be the GOP nominee in '08. Don't go so far as to say he'll win. There's a long way to go on the campaign trail. You mention loss of respect for McCain...regarding what? He generally gets favorable national media, so it made me wonder what he did to run afoul of you?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.