Sure, it is—I had some time to think about it and realized that I could come on some and just ignore those that called me stupid. I see, so yours is kind of a personal thing with Sarah Palin. Well, unfortunately, that is what is so difficult about politics. People in politics are well—people. So the same reason you dislike Sarah Palin, is partially the same reason I dislike Bill Clinton. I mean, he just makes me think “icky.” Well, of course, I don’t like all of his politics—but I did like some. But I still think “ick.” It’s important for us both to remember that it’s iikely we would both have different opinions if we knew these people personally. I was really impressed by Kanye West while being interviewed at the inaugural. He was excited that Obama was elected, but he also said, “You know, George Bush is a human with feelings (paraphrasing) and it’s too bad he couldn’t repair his legacy.” It was so empathetic and classy—a few women/men on her could work on their empathy (including me). So it is possible to disagree with politics, but be respectful of the other politicians. But then WE are people too. :-)

It’s not speculation, it’s been discussed and John Murtha mentioned it to reporters, that he “would have them in his town, but they only had a minimum security prison.” If we close it, where are they going? What country wants them? Who do you think will be able to sweet talk another country into taking them? Do you think the Afghan administration wants them back—they’ve got enough problems. It’s good PR for Pres Obama, but we’ll see what happens. It’s easy to sign an executive order, it’s a lot harder to execute another plan.

Do you really have so little faith in our military that you think they captured and detained people who did nothing? I want to be respectful, but this doesn’t make sense. Are there some there that are innocent—possibly. But the mastermind of 9/11 is there and he confessed. He tried to kill thousands of our innocent citizens. And remember Bush did not make the final decision on Iraq—lots of Dems did too. Pres Obama may have spoke out against the war, but he had nothing to lose. He wasn’t in Congress and didn’t have to vote. I hope you are right about Obama, but no decision is without consequence.

Hi Belinda, I said I would never come back here—but here I am. Okay, tell me what you hate about Sarah Palin—just her politics? She’s an accomplished young woman on the other side of the fence from you. Why so nasty? She has every right—just like a lot of other governors who engage nationally—to get involved in her way. Have you noticed that are plenty of Democrats that are pundits on news programs ad nauseum? I try to respect people from both parties—but it’s seems the liberals on this site have a tough time doing that.

I must say I’m glad he is a man of his word—but I disagree with this totally. Do we want these people on our land, close to our children? These people were not American citizens and therefore not under our Constitution. If you look at the reports, they are treated famously with probably more food and drink than some of them had ever had. I hope he finds a good solution for this, but bringing them over here and giving them the same rights they tried to destroy—that’s disrespecting us. (I know, they haven’t been tried, proven guilty, etc.)

I continue to be amazed at how disrespectful someof the hostesses are to Pres. Bush. He is a human, after all and a former president. You may disagree with the war and some others things he did. But he actually did many things that Democrats should have cheered—Medicare Prescriptions, No Child Left Behind (with T. Kennedy), and pushed for leniency on immigration. Now I disagreed with those, but I’m conservative. So everyone on here, including Marlo, loses credibility when they do not objectively comment on Pres. Bush and his presidency—and just talk as thought they are referring to the latest stray dog that showed up. Emotion is high right now, but Pres. Obama will disappoint, because alas, he is human after all and not perfect.

I’d whisper—Thanks for the dance. Just to let you know 59,934,786 Americans, including me, didn’t vote for you. Would you govern as a moderate and make me wish I did?

HI Belinda, You got me—so that wasn’t my last post. Thank you for your kind words and the comment about differences—EXACTLY! I have at least 3 close friends who are liberal in their political leanings and we love each other. And it’s healthy to hear different opinions from your own, but there has got to be some objectivity too. I’ll certainly continue to check in and definitely read your posts—but don’t know if I’ll post again. Quite honestly, I think most people that post on here are not interested in another opinion or a different view—they just want to read more of their own. :-) Many blessings again, Susan

Hi Belinda, First of all—thank you for your time in this. I find you to be really heart-felt and respectful (except for that idiots comment above—but you probably wouldn’t have said that to my face!). It’s obvious that pretty much nothing I say on this site in defense of Bush’s record or presidency has any impact. So I want to mention something else that actually bothers me more than anything and that is Bush’s intent or motives. I know some people that know him (twice-removed) and say is a good, well-meaning man that wants the best for our country (just like Obama, you or I). And this comment, “He entered the White House on a host of distorted and erroneous promises. Promises he knew he had no intention of fulfilling, or even attempting to” is you, Belinda, telling me what Bush internal motives are—his heart. And that has turned into a total disdain for him as a man and an attempt to discount every action or good situation (ie gas prices). Most on here would think this is a totally irrelevant and weak discussion, but here’s why I think it’s not. I believe by questioning his motives/heart, you also question the motives and hearts of those of us that voted for him. And that’s what causes the huge divide in this country. It becomes not a discussion of ideas and policies—but one of personalities and motives. If Obama speaks,reacts and treats people like most of the women/men on this site do to those that have other opinions—then he is certainly not who you say he is. But on here, most of his supporters are dismissive, disrespectful and in a lot of cases demeaning to those that have different opinions. Let me tell you who I am..I’m 42, have two little kids, own a business with my husband who employs people (on contract right now), go to church, 10 pounds overweight, live in a diverse neighborhood, love Sbux, have a bachelor’s degree, paid 25% of our income in taxes 4 years ago and will probably pay little this year (started a new business and still in the red.) If you were my neighbor, I’m sure we’d be friends. I love my country—my motives are positive and I’m at least a little smart. I say that to tell you there are smart, real people on both sides. I didn’t vote for Obama because I don’t want universal healthcare, etc. But I assume his motives are pure and I think he is a smart family man. That’s the same respect I want for myself and the others who are on the “other side.” But I’ll tell you—in most cases—I’ve started getting a sick feeling when I get a response to my comments. Because I know I’m getting ready to find out how stupid I am. And I don’t need that. So this is my farewell post and thank you again for taking your time to respond. Best wishes to you and God bless you at this holiday season.

I’m certainly not going to debate Bush, because that is a big mistake on this site—there are very few objective opinions of Bush on these blogs. I’m not fond of a lot of his decisions either (though they may not be the same ones as you). It’s clear that Al Qaeda and others dislike us for our religion(s) unlike their own and our western lifestyle—they clearly state this in all kinds of writings, videos, etc. I’m sure they don’t like us “meddling” as you have said, but it’s not just that. And if we think that, we are dangerously wrong. I have friends from the Middle East that confirm this.

Yes, I’m in TN but followed prop 8 somewhat and I know the Mormon church put a lot of resources into that referendum. And I’m inclined to agree with you that if an tax-exempt org participates to that degree, than they should lose their status. Then, of course, how do you define “how much is too much?” Of course, Jeremiah Wright’s previous church has a lot to say about politics from the pulpit—is that right? It’s a complicated subject. But either way Happy Holidays and God bless you! - usan

Hello Maurine, Yes—I am familiar with the Jefferson Bible and how he took out parts of the gospel to accomodate his beliefs. That’s a whole ‘nother topic to discuss though! :-) And that would mean I would have to tell you my personal story—too long for this forum. Thanks for the information—I haven’t seen or studied any of this detail. But now after seeing it, I agree with most of this in theory. But I note that since he is someone trying to tailor the Bible to his own beliefs, I believe “he protests too much.” Of course, He is just a (hu)man after all, like you and I. Regardless, this is the nation in which we live and I’m required to respect our laws. I would propose that we give ALL religions more opportunity for free expression. Unfortunately what happens when trying to respect all minorities, often the majorities (such as Christians) are disrespected. Isn’t the idea equal treatment of all—even the “majorities?” Small example—instead of a “winter party” at school—we allow everyone in the class to bring, display, discuss, etc. items regarding their faiths? School is one of the most formative times for our lives—why limit the discussion to just secularism? And in regards to taxes, your argument could be used against many other tax-supported agencies or programs (such as the NEA in some circumstances) that push forms of religious expression or direct antagonism towards the religious/spiritual. And the playing field will never be level with taxes, since we have a progressive tax system that will likely become more skewed towards those with more money as the years go on. Interesting point though, do citizens become less invested in government when they pay less to participate? But as I often do, I’m going off topic. Thanks for this interesting information and respectful discussion. I’m going to keep it in my files. - Susan

Hello Maurine, Yes—I am familiar with the Jefferson Bible and how he took out parts of the gospel to accomodate his beliefs. That’s a whole ‘nother topic to discuss though! :-) And that would mean I would have to tell you my personal story—too long for this forum. Thanks for the information—I haven’t seen or studied any of this detail. But now after seeing it, I agree with most of this in theory. But I note that since he is someone trying to tailor the Bible to his own beliefs, I believe “he protests too much.” Of course, He is just a (hu)man after all, like you and I. Regardless, this is the nation in which we live and I’m required to respect our laws. I would propose that we give ALL religions more opportunity for free expression. Unfortunately what happens when trying to respect all minorities, often the majorities (such as Christians) are disrespected. Isn’t the idea equal treatment of all—even the “majorities?” Small example—instead of a “winter party” at school—we allow everyone in the class to bring, display, discuss, etc. items regarding their faiths? School is one of the most formative times for our lives—why limit the discussion to just secularism? And in regards to taxes, your argument could be used against many other tax-supported agencies or programs (such as the NEA in some circumstances) that push forms of religious expression or direct antagonism towards the religious/spiritual. And the playing field will never be level with taxes, since we have a progressive tax system that will likely become more skewed towards those with more money as the years go on. Interesting point though, do citizens become less invested in government when they pay less to participate? But as I often do, I’m going off topic. Thanks for this interesting information and respectful discussion. I’m going to keep it in my files. - Susan

Maurine, No actually I wasn’t necessarily trying to defend a relationship between church and state the way you are explaining it I haven’t read Jefferson closely, but I have read some and have a decent understanding of it. And of course, the context the letter to the Danbury Baptists does use the term “separation of church and state.” I did say though that the constitution does say their government “should make no law…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” And I firmly believe that that does not cover praying in public schools, having the ten commandments in front of court houses, etc. Because that prohibits free exericise of religion—especially when conducted on a state and local level. And though Jefferson did discontinue some practices that other presidents did, he didn’t stop all mention of God and activities such as praying in Congress. So he was adamant about the establishment portion, but evidently supportive of the free exercise. I also know that lots of other smart men (and women recently) have written on the this—so I humbly say I am not even remotely any kind of expert. But I also assert that there were state religions (Jefferson was referring to national) back then and I don’t think he touched on it at least not at this time to the Danbury Baptists, right?

Ha—Gulliver you are hilarious! But then I think most Americans like the gridlock (even me sometimes)—but I’m interested to see how effective Obama will be too. He wasn’t involved in much change in the IL Senate (according to my Dem mother-in-law who lives in 10 minutes from Springfield)—but I’m sure that’s debateable too. And who cares about that now?