No: Democrats are flummoxed by having a failure and a hypocrite at the top of
the ticket; God and Jerusalem controversies are merely symptomatic
Ah, Deseret News. Where would we be without your impartiality and lack of bias?
"Where would we be without your impartiality and lack of bias?"Probably mindlessly regurgitating MSNBC.Thank heaven for multiple
Re: KJB1 Eugene, OR"Ah, Deseret News. Where would we be without your
impartiality and lack of bias?"It that the best defense you can
come up with for this Democratic gaffe? Typical of the Obama Administration.
The right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
God is added back to the Democratic platform and the arena erupts in a united
chorus of BOO's?? Really? We are supposed to think that the party that
boo's God is main stream America? Sounds to me like the radicals are
running the party and that party is far far separated from main stream America.
I will take it a step further and suggest that the Democratic party has been
hi-jacked by radical Marxist atheists and it is these radicals that set the
platform and the vision of the party going forward. I would also say that many
in the Democratic party are completely embarrassed (as they should be) at the
conduct of their party leaders. Barack didn't seem to know that God was
left out of HIS OWN party platform .... or perhaps he was aware and in fact
ordered the removal. Which is it? Isn't he supposed to be the leader and
the CEO of the party has no idea what is going on? Really inspires confidence
doesn't it. Geez dem's - you guys had better wake up and take control
of your party before it is gone!!!
Is anyone surprised by this?
"the Democratic party has been hi-jacked by radical Marxist
atheists..."And, of course, atheists cannot possibly be decent,
moral human beings, with strong family values, a love for the United States of
America, and all that good stuff -- because they are atheists!Good
to know what good sense characterizes the thinking in the Republican party.By many estimates, there are as many as three times more atheists in
America than there are Mormons!
No, not at all.... The republican party is an addict and has yet to pass the
first step to recovery. They are in denial... Keep lying about their lies
(Seriously).... keep justifying there party positions even though it has proven
to NOT WORK.... it really is sad.
@A Scientist"And, of course, atheists cannot possibly be decent, moral
human beings, with strong family values, a love for the United States of
America, and all that good stuff -- because they are atheists!"Of course atheists can be good people: however when your posts repeatedly
demean and vilify anyone of faith who is not an atheist, you ironically
legitimize the conclusion you disdain.And the fact is: all atheists
are not good people just like all believers are not good people. Mostly they
are human; with all that entails
re:A ScientistOur founders were NOT atheists. One nation under GOD -
In GOD we trust. Remember? Atheists can be fine patriotic Americans and many are
but the foundation of America is NOT atheistic. Never was. Read about George
Washington, John Adams , Thomas Jefferson, etc... All these great founders saw
GOD as central to our freedom and survival as a nation. Now we have a political
party that wants us to believe that they are "just like us" and they BOO
GOD???? I don't think so!! By the way - Catholics , Jews, Protestants and
Muslims ALL want GOD - only radical democrats don't!!! Go figure.
Democrats run their convention like Chicago politics. They changed the wording,
"voted" on it and arbitrarily decided on the outcome--the voice of the
people be damned. If Obama wants it (obviously for purely political purposes),
he will get it. I don't really want this party to be in charge of the USA
Counter Intelligence,Then you prove my point: belief makes NO
Outstanding piece of investigative journalism with profound implications for the
election. Oh by the way, did you happen to listen to Bill
Clinton's speech last night? I understand he said some important things in
Typical article from the Romney Reader, a.k.a. the Deseret News.The
Democratic Convention had such a more positive message than the "I hate
Obama" GOP/Tea Party/Koch Industries Convention featuring Willard Mitt
Romney. The Democratic Convention also mentioned specific plans and
details--something sorely lacking in last week's convention. The
Democratic Convention mentioned Afghanistan and thanked the troops--something
not done in the GOP convention--whoops!Couldn't sum it up
better than two lines: Michele Obama "We didn't measure success in the
amount of money we made but by the people we helped." Bill Clinton, "We
(GOP) made a total mess, you (Democrats) didn't clean it up fast enough,
let us take over."Is it any wonder the Romney Reader had to
insert a story like this with how good the Democratic Convention was? I hope
the Romney Reader can pick up the pieces and move on after November 6th when
patriot wrote:"Our founders were NOT atheists."Neither were they "believers" in the same way most religionists are
today. Many WERE atheists. More were "Deists" who passively accepted a
flaccid notion of "Providence" and "natural religion" that are
indistinguishable from a secular scientific naturalism today.And
please do not bring up Thomas Jefferson unless you have actually read his works,
including his revision of the New Testament."Catholics , Jews,
Protestants and Muslims ALL want GOD - only radical democrats
don't!!!"The fact that the word "god" did not
appear in the D platform (prior to their caving in to the judgmental believers
who played the Emperor's New Clothes scam on them) cannot be taken as
evidence that D's "don't want god" anymore than the absence of
the word "love" in the Republican Party platform means Republicans do
not believe in nor want love!
@A Scientist"By many estimates, there are as many as three times more
atheists in America than there are Mormons!"So having a majority
is important? Great, I follow your reasoning that a pragmatic party would side
with the majority. According to the Pew Forum's survey on Religious
Affiliation, Americans are 78% Christian, 5% Other Religions, 16% Unaffiated, 1%
Unknown. (Detailed breakdown shows 1.7% Mormon and 1.6% Atheist). Seems to me
the Democratic Party realized they were on the minority side of this issue and
made the appropriate course correction by adding God back into their platform.
"One nation under GOD - In GOD we trust. Remember? "Yes I do
remember.I remember that In God We Trust was added to coins in the
1860's.I remember that One Nation Under God was added to the pledge
in 1942.I remember that this nation was founded in 1776, well before those
two events.Our founders may or may not have been Christian. Mottos do not
support your case.
This is another example of the clear choices in this election. Mitt Romney is in
100% agreement with his party's platform.
There was no need to remind Americans of our dependence upon God, until 1962,
when school prayer was outlawed by the leftist Supreme Court. Rather than
deists many of the Founders were non-Trinitarian Christians, just as is Mitt
Romney. For example, Thomas Jefferson rejected the doctrine of the Trinity,
calling it "mere Abracadabra" and "hocus-pocus phantasm."
This is a shame. The democratic party got sucked into this quagmire. One thing
is for sure, either religion or Israel, or both, are going to get us into
trouble. And nothing divides us like religion.
A Scientist"Then you prove my point: belief makes NO
DIFFERENCE"Actually my point was: you can not credibly slam
Mormons for wanting a "theocracy" (your words) while claiming to be
oppressed when others do not want an atheocracy.But yes: There is no
difference in that people are people and the "atheist good, religion
bad" mentality is as bad as "atheist bad, relgion good" knee-jerk
assumption. However having a formally defined value system does help guide most
people and in the absence of other factors, I tend to trust a believer more than
Re: Hutterite American Fork, UT"This is a shame. The democratic party
got sucked into this quagmire. "With the Democrats it isn't
the principle that counts. Obviously they're willing to take whatever
position will harvest the most votes.
I find it funny that "In the opinion of he chair, two thirds vote in the
affirmative..." was in the teleprompter. He READ it. It wasn't a real
vote with the words already in the teleprompter. Were they planning on
switching it if it wasn't 2/3? I doubt it.No matter what happened,
they were going to change it. They were terrified of the reprocussions if they
didn't. Debbie Wasseran Schultz says it was an "oversight". How
do you oversee a principle that has been part of the base of this country since
the founding fathers? It's common sense.
So I take it that omitting the word God from a platform and then reinserting it
is much more offensive than a presidential candidate who finished second in the
2008 primary and spoke at this years Republican convention who referred to the
LDS religion as a cult, and never retracted that statement?
patriotCedar Hills, UT"God is added back to the Democratic
platform and the arena erupts in a united chorus of BOO's?? Really?"Have you ever considered they were boo'ing the process, not the
result? I am sure you didn't give it even the slightest consideration.
And lets go ahead and ignore that both issues were things the Republicans claim
the want... but now once agin, when they get what they want, rather then being
gracious and acknowledge that the "country" has a united platform here,
they resort back to acting like 8 year olds.... the "in God we
Trust" was introduced WAY after the founding fathers - just a point of fact.
" will take it a step further and suggest that the Democratic
party has been hi-jacked by radical Marxist atheists " says patriot..In reality, what happened was a step away from the radical fringe of the
party having control, a fact that group didn't like. On the other side of
the isle, the pandering to the Tea Party and extremist seems to be full throttle
forward.The good news is some peoples comments are so regularly hate
filled, they are easy to ignore.
re:Moderate and A ScientistPlease stop the spin. Have EITHER of you
done any reading at all on George Washington or John Adams. I don't know
what hoohaw you are trying to spin here but BOTH men were deeply religious men.
That is factual history!!! Now on to the DNC - let's stop all
the excuse making and talk like intelligent mature adults for a moment. It is a
FACT that the platform language is gone over with a fine tooth comb. Every word
and every sentence is examined and agreed upon by party leaders ESPECIALLY the
head of the party - the sitting president of the United States. It was NO
accident or oversight that GOD was left out of the party platform for the FIRST
time in US history. This act was on purpose and what it DOES say is that this
party is so far detached from the main stream of America but they have to
continually lie and attempt to falsely project themselves as Michelle Obama did
- "just like you". No Michelle neither your husband nor your party is
just like us. That is the LIE. This party is AWOL!!
What is truly sad is rather than looking at the two meetings and being able to
identify where the two groups can work together to build a stronger and better
country, we still have this huge divisive gap where people on either side truly
hate the other side.... all the while claiming to exhibit Christ like traits.If these people just spent a fraction of the time they spent hating the
other, image the good that could come from it. We don't have to agree on
everything. We have plenty of issues we can agree on. But rather, these people
choose to turn life into one giant Gerry Springer episode trying to define
themselves a being superior to another. This pride is preventing truly great
things from happening.Just like at work, you don't have to like
everyone, you just need to learn to work with one another. This idea that being
loyal to a party means you must hate the other side is absurd. When it comes to
Utah versus Y football, this gamesmanship is mostly harmless. But when it comes
to actually hating your neighbor, we as a society have gone to far.
So Obama can fix platform positions that he doesn't agree with... does that
mean Romney could've insisted the abortion language in his platform include
rape, incest, and life of mother exceptions? Oh who am I kidding... that would
require Mitt to have a spine.
patriotCedar Hills, UT"God is added back to the Democratic
platform and the arena erupts in a united chorus of BOO's?? Really?"You don't get it, a lot of those boos came from Christians.
Christians who believe that it is not proper to indicate a preference for a
particular god (don't play dumb, we all know that it's one specific
god that's being referred to... the Judeo-Christian God) in our government
based on the principle of separation of church and state.
I'm glad to see the democratic party take their cues from the Republicans.
Still half the dems don't like what happened. Funny, if they all said
"Nay" it would have still passed. This convention has been a joke.
I demand to force my religion on all! Ye shall pray to my God and my God
only!Don't let equality and impartiality requirements of the
constitution stop me. I look forward to the new dark ages.
The democratic party is just as it should be : completly divided in religious
views. The democratic party doesn't have a religious test.
That's called RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
I disagre with the Republicans stance on Israel. Unfortunately, the Democrats
now have the same stance. The Dems were not booing God. I think they were
booing how the party leadership has sold their soul for political expediency.
The Republicans (and now the Democrats) position hurts Isreal. They should make
peace with their brothers while they are still ahead. Romney's visit to
Israel highlighted something significant. The West Bank is living in an
apartheid state. They desl with blockades and massive restrictions on free
movement in their own country and they still have a GNP which is half of
Israel's. They must be full lof enterpreneurs. If Israel ended the
occupation and permited a Palestinian state their (and the Palestinians) economy
would boom. The occupation is bad for business.
To atl134 12:52 p.m. Sept. 6, 2012So Obama can fix platform
positions that he doesn't agree with... does that mean Romney could've
insisted the abortion language in his platform include rape, incest, and life of
mother exceptions? Oh who am I kidding... that would require Mitt to have a
spine.-------------------Exactly my thought. Like you
said, though, that would require Mitt to have a spine and to actually take an
unequivocal position on something (and enforce it against those who would not
agree with him). That's something he has proved himself unable to do.
Business as usual for Mitt -- go along with ANYONE, even if it means taking
different diametrically different positions which each person to whom he speaks,
if that's what it takes to get elected.
@ UtahblueDevil "What is truly sad is rather than looking at the two
meetings and being able to identify where the two groups can work together to
build a stronger and better country, we still have this huge divisive gap where
people on either side truly hate the other side...."I agree with
this statment. And this current president is the most divisive we have had in a
long time. In what way has he EVER tried to unite this country? He speaks to
his own and that's it.Didn't Michelle say she was never
proud of America till her husband was president? WHAT? This is the first lady?
re:PatriotAnd the framers of the Constitution left out "God" too.
The Democratic platform included a paragraph discussing the
importance of the role of faith in American society. This is all
This "vote" should put absolute fear into the heart of every thinking
American. This is only another, but much more public, display of Obama's
modus operandi. If you don't like the law, change it by fiat. Issue an
executive order. Ignore your constitutional duty to enforce the law. And now,
hear only the voices you want to hear.Don't any of you
Obama-defenders worry about the day that your voice will be ignored?
Doesn't it concern you that Obama acts more like a despot than a President?
Doesn't it bother you that he does exactly what he wants to do without
regard to his constitutional duty or his role as a public servant?The thing that concerns me is the apparent lack of thinking Americans who
continue to apologize for this man and his heavy-handed, bullying methods of
getting things done.
Re: Furry1993 Ogden, UTThe Democrats should be happy that God was
invited back into their platform. Based on what the pollsters are noticing the
Democrats may want to consider asking Him for some divine help. They are going
to need it.
@Rifleman"Based on what the pollsters are noticing "You mean Nate Silver's model that has Obama as a 75% favorite to win
right now? (That might fall to the 60s in a few days though since the model
accounts for conventions and Romney had a smaller than usual convention bounce,
if Obama does the same then it'll drop back to around the 65-70% range that
it was at before the conventions). @Furry1993Funny thing is
that I actually generally trust Romney. I really liked him as a Governor, as far
as Republicans go. Of course he's flipped most of his positions since then
and I just don't see him bucking a Republican Congress that has made their
interests and priorities well known, especially with the Ryan VP pick. I could
trust Romney a lot more if he had a Democratic Congress to work with.
re:UtahBlueDevil and alt134You guys are pretty funny. A little bit
of "staining at Gnats and swallowing camels" going on here with you two.
UtahBlueDevil suggests all the booing had to do with the process. Say what?? The
speaker asked for the Yea's and the Nays - this was TWO separate calls -
for haven sake listen to the audio yourself. The BOO's for the NAY's
were louder than the yea's. But nice try - you are the first to suggest
such an absurd excuse. What you two just can't accept is that you belong to
a party of people that ON PURPOSE removed GOD from the party platform. OUCH!
Sorry guys but there is NO spin out of this one. Alt123 claims that people just
don't want to offend anyone anymore so they - out of the goodness of their
hearts - decided to remove GOD from their platform. Geez, this is more silly
that the first excuse! Listen guys, I know you are liberals and I don't
lump you two in with the liberal crazies that have hi-jacked your party but
there comes a point when you simply have to admit the obvious ugliness.
We often forget that there are many religious beliefs and principles among
Americans. Some of us have few friends from a religion other than our own.
Exactly what does "God" mean to them?It is very common for
Americans to not respect other's beliefs. Where a particular religion is
dominant, such as here in Utah, there is less tolerance. Yes, our leaders
council us to be loving and tolerant, but in meetings, hallways and private
conversations, we are intolerant.So...the Democrats apparently want
to follow the principle of Separation-of-Church-and-State in their platform. Can
you blame them?Rather than invoke some group's religious
standards on a nation of disparate religions, it may be better to separate
religion (but also acknowledge each other's).So many have a
hard time acknowledging Obama's true beliefs (Methodist). We really are
What's interesting, those who speak most loudly about Christ and God are
usually the most un-Christlike. The republicans tends to speak loudly on such
issues, but there's very little in their actions that would make me believe
they possess greater wisdom or moral compass.
Democrats aren't flummoxed, bewildered, perplexed, or confused by this.
Conventions by their nature are complex, with a bit of cat herding thrown in for
good measure. Using the word flummoxed is biased and irresponsible. Were
Republicans flummoxed when they adopted a plank that rejected abortion under any
circumstances and the nominated a candidate who rejected that plank out of hand?
If you are going to use biased language, at least be even-handed about it.
@patriot"Alt123 claims that people just don't want to offend
anyone anymore so they - out of the goodness of their hearts - decided to remove
GOD from their platform. Geez, this is more silly that the first excuse!
"I myself am a Christian who opposes the use of language in the
platform that suggests preference for a particular religion, even when it's
my own. I know what you're thinking, something like "disagreeing is one
thing but why the booing?". Most of the booing itself was because it was
clear that the voice vote was too close to call which would lead to an actual
counted vote, but that was ignored and people were expressing their frustration
that the system felt rigged (after all, Democrats aren't terribly fond of
voter suppression efforts, and facing that in their own convention would be
annoying). Were a few booing based on hatred of religion? Sure, but that
wasn't what most of them were booing about. If you were in a
position where a voice vote seemed tied, or leaning your way, and those in
charge declared a winner without confirmation that that side actually won, would
you be frustrated?
If the Democratic platform had continued without the word "god," it
would have been more like the U.S. Constitution, which includes no mention of
god. Of course, with the Republicans engaging in their usual grandstanding for
Jesus, it was easier just to give in. That way, we can get on to real issues.Speaking of God, the Founding Fathers taught us a valuable lesson by
refusing to have any prayers at the Constitutional Convention, after which they
produced a document inspired by God.I believe that most prayers in
political settings are offered out of fear that not having prayers might turn
into a political liability.
The vast majority of democrats believe in God. The types of people who become
delegates at the Democratic convention are not a part of the mainstream of the
party and certainly are not representative of the mainstream of America. That
said, it was a terrible embarrassment to democrats. PR-wise, the dems
gift-wrapped a useful visual which fits in with the narrative of President
Obama's perceived lack of belief in the Almighty and other more unsavory,
and mostly untrue, suppositions about him and his faith. The party may becoming
somewhat divided but clearly at the top there are some extremists who make the
entire party look bad-- Kind of reminds me of another major political party.Letting the minority rule the majority is very common within each party.
Taking God out of the platform not only treads on the beliefs of those of faith
within the democratic party, but worse smacks of Matt 15:8.
@A ScientistNone of the founding fathers were atheist or deist.Not even Jefferson.And many were very deeply religious. The
confusion may come because many questioned whether their religious establishment
was the true church of Christ.Jefferson NEVER rewrote the new
testament.Jefferson authored two works:The first was an
abridgment of the new testament, published by congress for use among the
indians, to remove the redundancy and make easier for the indians to read and
understand. It included many the miracles and divinity of ChristThe
second, he authored after studying over 30 philosphers and concluded
Christ's was best. So her authored The teachings and morals of Jesus
Christ, which also includes a few miracles and the divinity of Christ.--The description of what happened at the vote is a perfect
example of why the founding fathers did not want the tyranny of democracy.
Well... I guess the Democrats were not trying to win North Carolina (and the
rest of the Bible Belt) after all...?! ?!Obama was probably
screaming at his TV screen watching this hit the fan...
Re: atl134 Salt Lake City, UT"You mean Nate Silver's model that
has Obama as a 75% favorite to win right now?"No, I was
referring to Senior Obama Campaign adviser David Axelrod reportedly contacting
The Gallup Organization to discuss the company's research methodology after
their poll's findings were unfavorable to the President.The
Obama campaign is in trouble and is trying to keep a lid on it in hopes things
will turn around for them. You'll have to dig below the surface if
you're looking for the truth.
Liberals don't like the DesNews use of the word "flummoxed" in the
headline of this story. What would you prefer? "Confused"?
"Bewildered"? How about "perplexed"? There is no bias in this
particular headline! Did you see the vote on this!? It was total confusion,
bewilderment, even some anger and frustration!Just because the
liberal media couldn't move on to the next story fast enough doesn't
mean that the headline of the Deseret News was inaccurate. "Flummoxed"
was actually kind! And what if the headline was a bit right leaning? It
isn't enough to have CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, the NY Times, and the
majority of other newspapers and news outlets nationwide that are lap dogs for
the liberal point of view? No, YOU WANT THEM ALL! And if anyone dares to watch
or listen to anything other than those channels exclusively, those people are
immediately demonized as "nut jobs" "less educated", "right
wingers" and much, much worse.It's completely hypocritical to demand
complete impartiality from organizations that admittedly lean right but then
conveniently look the other way, even embrace, the blatant liberal bias from
the majority of the U.S. national media.
Patriot... I am done playing your little games. If you want to try to feel
superior to someone, have at. The level of disrespect you have of
other people because you decide they are "liberal" makes a mockery of
common sense. So just go ahead, feel all superior. It is clear you will not
respect other peoples views - ever... it is pointless.You hear what
you want to hear. Nothing I can do about that, because there is no openness for
Vice-President Biden used the word that they voted to include now into their
platform in his speech, sort of off the cuff but inappropriate to use in a
formal speech. He is used to using those types of words for the second in
@atl134:"You don't get it, a lot of those boos came from
Christians."The boos against inclusion of Israel and God in the
Democrat platform are reported in the news as coming from some Muslims as well,
who don't like Israel and who would like to infuse their god into the
American picture. (monitor: See today's DNews: 'From School to
Mosque')@atl134:"... does that mean Romney
could've insisted the abortion language in his platform include rape,
incest, and life of mother exceptions? ... that would require Mitt to have a
spine."Nice try... trying to link Obama's leadership
capacity lack, to Mitt. If all else fails bring out the 'blame others'
card.@Sigfried:"Didn't Michelle say she was
never proud of America till her husband was president? WHAT? This is the first
lady? sheesh."Right. And when she and her husband are thrown out
of the White House she will likely revert back to her former 'not proud of
America' (her words).@joe5:"If you don't
like the law, change it by fiat."We see this mentality in real
time... with Obama's recent declaration of amnesty for certain illegal
@Steve C. Warren:"If the Democratic platform had continued
without the word 'god,' it would have been more like the U.S.
Constitution, which includes no mention of god."Check
closely...Article VII - 'Done in Convention by the Unanimous
Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in THE YEAR OF
OUR LORD...' Of course, with the Republicans engaging in their
usual grandstanding for Jesus, it was easier just to give in. That way, we can
get on to real issues.