Comments on: The Case For Divided Government

By: mw

mw — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 05:06:20 +0000

Great post Michael. Agree completely. I've been blogging about this topic for a couple years, so have become something of a clearinghouse for supporting documentation. As you chew this over, you might find some of this material useful This post would be a good place to start: Voting By Objective.

By: Michael Merritt

Michael Merritt — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:10:57 +0000

Two things:

1. RRRocks, if you could re-post the comment over at the other article, that’ll be better. I can’t move them myself and anyone who could would end up posting it under their own name (unless Michael wants to delve into the MySQL tables). I think I can delete comments in my articles, but I’ll wait for you to re-post it.

2. Several people here and at another site have given me some food for thought, and I think there’s some things I didn’t make clear, having posted this late at night. I’ll make a followup post later tonight or tomorrow.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 23:34:13 +0000

One point not mentioned. From the classic conservative viewpoint, less government and less government intervention is markets is a good thing. A divided government is likely to “do less”. Some conservatives would see this a good thing.

By: RRRocks

RRRocks — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:13:55 +0000

lol……sorry this is wierd I was responding to a different article and it got posted here. Sorry. You might want to delete this or move it over to American Muslims Object to Obama.

Strange.

By: RRRocks

RRRocks — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:11:58 +0000

I really hesitate to talk about another mans religion for a few basic reasons.

1. He who denies me denies the father. Denial that the works of the holy spirit are in fact the works of the holy spirit is the one unpardonable sin in the bible. In other words if you see someone who is claiming to be doing something in the name of God and you deny that it is God doing that when in fact it is then you are denying God and denying the power of the holy spirit. You are blaspheming.

2. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone……speaks for itself.

In conclusion. I do not speak against Obama in any way shape or form considering his christianity. That is between he and his god and in the end it will be God who judges him just as it is God who will judge me.

However if he belongs to a church that parlays their works into Politics then I do believe that God who said "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars and render unto God that which is god’s" I do believe that Christ through the Apostle Paul was making a distinction and that when one begins delving into worldly matters because one is of the world then that which is rendered Caesar (worldy matters) is subject to evaluation and potentially criticism.

Example would be a preacher claiming God told him to run for office. Fine do not question this but question then what he stands for, professes and teaches because those then become Caesars works and not Gods.

By: Rudi666

Rudi666 — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:59:31 +0000

Bob - No I don’t like the Repugs policies, but if the Democrats screw up like Foley and Cunningham I want them voted out. I Obamama triangulates like the Clintons, then one term and he’s out. I want both parties held to high standards, not just concerned with reelection.

By: RRRocks

RRRocks — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:56:19 +0000

Missed also is that while the GOP had a majority it was not cloture proof. That is what Im talking about when I discuss a bloodbath in which not only would the Democrats have all 3 branches but they would have unimpeded power. Period.

The Democrats could still filibuster under Bush and did it quite a bit. Losing that one feature is sure to lead to a national assembly that is drunk with power and most likely will result in the abuses that led to the GOP downfall…..BUT at what cost in the interim??

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:06:12 +0000

The point is Rudi, do you honestly like the policies the GOP put in place from 2000-2006? More importantly do you not think some of them will have very long lasting effects and be extremely hard to fix?

I would like to avoid that again.

By: Rudi666

Rudi666 — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 18:52:58 +0000

If the Demonocrats get a real majority and screw up, wouldn’t the 2010 elections be a mandate to throw out the bums. The 2006 election saw the Republican given a message and lose their majorities in Congress. Why wouldn’t the same thing happen in 2010 to the Demonocrats?

By: Dymersion » Blog Archive » The Case for Divided Government

Dymersion » Blog Archive » The Case for Divided Government — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:52:00 +0000

[...] Check it out. [...]