posted on January 20, 2005 02:11:34 PM new
As we're all read, I'm sure, the dems are working to find 'balance' in their party disagreements so that they might become more successful in the future at getting their canidates in office.
Here is one democrat considering continuing the change and that hillary has spoken up about. A change I'm certainly glad to see. Maybe some democrats are beginning to 'get it'.
This, along with some democratic leaders revisiting their position on late term abortions. Some dems deciding to come more to the center.
---
Sen. Clinton urges use of faith-based initiatives
By Michael Jonas, Globe Correspondent | January 20, 2005
On the eve of the presidential inauguration, US Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton last night embraced an issue some pundits say helped seal a second term for George W. Bush: acceptance of the role of faith in addressing social ills.
In a speech at a fund-raising dinner for a Boston-based organization that promotes faith-based solutions to social problems, Clinton said there has been a "false division" between faith-based approaches to social problems and respect for the separation of church of state.
"There is no contradiction between support for faith-based initiatives and upholding our constitutional principles," said Clinton, a New York Democrat who often is mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2008.
Addressing a crowd of more than 500, including many religious leaders, at Boston's Fairmont Copley Plaza, Clinton invoked God more than half a dozen times, at one point declaring, "I've always been a praying person."
She said there must be room for religious people to "live out their faith in the public square."
The issue of faith in politics has been at the center of debate following the presidential election, with some arguing that Bush's strong identification with religious values was a key to his victory over Senator John F. Kerry.
The dinner was a fund-raiser for the National TenPoint Leadership Foundation and the Dorchester-based Ella J. Baker House. Both youth outreach programs are directed by the Rev. Eugene F. Rivers 3d, a leader of the clergy-based efforts to stem youth violence in Boston in the 1990s that has become a national model for community-police partnerships.
The minister has often criticized established black leaders and liberal politicians, saying they have failed to deal honestly with the problems of youth violence.
Rivers said he hoped Clinton's appearance last night would build broader support for an issue on which some Democrats have been skittish.
"She is in a position to articulate a progressive vision around this issue of faith and values," Rivers said.
"The Clintons, on faith-based solutions, have always been way ahead of the curve," said Rivers, citing President Clinton's support of a 1996 law banning the federal government from discriminating against religious organizations seeking funding available to groups delivering social services.
In her speech, Clinton praised the efforts of Rivers and others working to curb youth violence, saying those of faith are often most willing to walk the streets of the country's most dangerous neighborhoods to try to reach young people. Where others "see trouble," she said, Rivers and faith-based soldiers "see God's work right in front of them."
Although the senator has insisted that she is focused only on her work in the Senate and constituents in New York (she faces reelection in 2006), talk of another Clinton seeking the White House seems to be a topic of speculation wherever she goes.
Mayor Thomas M. Menino got the ball rolling with his introduction of Clinton last night, calling her "the first first lady to be a US senator and maybe the first woman to be something else."
"I don't know who the right person will be in 2008, but Hillary is certainly one of the most compelling political figures on the horizon," said Alan Solomont, the former finance chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who attended last night's event. '
Clinton wasn't the only would-be candidate generating buzz at the dinner. Seated prominently at the head table was Deval Patrick, a former assistant attorney general in the Clinton administration who said last week that he is considering a run for Massachusetts governor in 2006.
"I'm interested and I'm exploring," said Patrick last night. "I'm trying to cast a wide net and talk to a lot of people."
The 48-year-old black attorney from Milton said he will decide in the next several months whether to seek the Democratic nomination for the state's highest office. Patrick, who was in charge of the Justice Department's civil rights division from 1994 to 1997, left his position last month as chief legal counsel to Coca-Cola Co., where he worked for nearly four years.The event was billed as the Ella J. Baker Awards Dinner, and four leaders were honored for supporting the youth outreach efforts of the Baker House.
Receiving awards were Boston Police Commissioner Kathleen M. O'Toole; Sylvia R. Johnson, associate director of the Hyams Foundation; former US attorney Donald K. Stern; and Roxbury District Court Judge Edward R. Redd.
---
Michael Jonas - The New York Times Company
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 02:21:19 PM new
Don't know if it is possible to warm up that cold witch.... A word to the wise ain't necessary, it's the stupid ones that need the advice."
- Bill Cosby
posted on January 20, 2005 02:22:42 PM new
Linda, I have read this over and over that the Democratic party needs to improve with their morals. Now that is not going to set with many posters in here, but, early in December I posted a thread about the DNC. It was only to show the posters in here that the committee stated that they need to improve the morals. I didn't do it to bash them only to show them what the committee said. Even Ted Kennedy said that a couple of days ago. I think Hillary is a hard working women with religious values and she has shown and also has helped New Work but is the US ready for a women president. Time will tell.
posted on January 20, 2005 02:34:59 PM new
You're right, bear....even her own husband has had trouble in that area.
Libra - I was just thinking how much our ultra-liberal dems here were going to take to this new moral position when coming from someone that most would support as our next President. My projection is that it will most likely be 'oh-so-different' when hearing all the 'God' and religious statements coming from a progressive they'd support....while they've criticized the every bit of the same position that has come from this President.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 20, 2005 02:37 PM ]
posted on January 20, 2005 02:37:12 PM new
If the Dems want to increase their moral values, the first thing they should do is lose that drunken philandering carousing murdering fat-pig Kennedy.
I really do believe that the US public is already too familiar with the real Hitlery Clinton to be fooled by any last-minute personality changes. And in her case, four years before the election she hopes to win is last-minute.
She's gonna try for the election. I don't think she will be very popular. I can't say if she has an actual shot or not until we know who she'll be running against.
The 2008 elections may be even more of the "lesser of two evils" than this one was.
--------------------------------------
Replay Media - The best source for board games, card games and miniatures on the web! http://www.replaymedia.com
posted on January 20, 2005 02:44:34 PM new
Oh, but replay, just think of all the fun the Republicans would have rehashing all the stolen silverware and all the indictments that were handed down against those in clinton's advisory group.
No....you're correct...the public won't forget that quickly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 02:53:06 PM new
:: This, along with some democratic leaders revisiting their position on late term abortions.::
Linda - I don't know anyone that was in favor of late term abortions. What they were against was the absolute wording of the ban which made it illegal to perform a late term abortion even in the case of medical neccessity. Nothing is black and white no matter how desperately the religious right tries to make it and this one was a prime example. Personally though I think that the wording was sheer political manipulation. Anyone that came out against it was immediately portrayed as being "for" late term abortions as you and Libra and others demonstrated this past electroral season while the reality of what was really being said was completely ignored.
Truth is - it's pretty damn pathetic when our politicians actually write laws that directly effect peoples lives with political agendas as opposed to greater good in mind.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 03:00:13 PM new
::think of all the fun the Republicans would have rehashing all the stolen silverware::
Good to know that you are looking forward to the party focusing on the important things. Who really gives a damn about about policy and vision when there are missing forks to concentrate on.
Out of curiosity - just how childish and petty are you hoping for your party to be given the opportunity to be?
Isn't about damn time that people grow up and start trying to figure out how to start fixing what is really wrong with this country?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 03:14:29 PM new
Well...hello fenix - well I think in answer to your questions that there was a MAJOR LACK of moral values/standards during the clinton administration....and that's all that would be rehashed again. THEIR actions...and deceit towards the voters.
Now...you want to address how you, as a liberal, feel about hillary starting to show support for all the good things the religious groups have been doing for the down and out....the same actions that the dems here were so upset about when this President has supported them and the good they do for the poor?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 03:17:18 PM new
Oh...I forgot...on the late term abortion issue. Sure the dems stopped the measure from passing. They wanted to put wording in there that would totally keep things 'status quo'.
But now...their party is seriously revaluating their position on abortion...especially the late term abortions. Wouldn't surprise me one bit for them to come more to the center and away from the mind think 'leave abortion alone - totally'.
edited to add - They never presented any proof that there EVER was a need for the late term abortions to take place. Matter of fact, just the opposite was part of the testimony....as I recall.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 20, 2005 03:20 PM ]
posted on January 20, 2005 03:32:03 PM new
Perhaps the Democrats have just learned a valuable lesson from the Republicans...that is just lie and tell the majority of the people what they want to hear..it may just win you the election? Then once you have won the elections, twist and turn and do as you dam well please...LOL
posted on January 20, 2005 03:40:17 PM new
LOL - No...I think this election proved that the majority of Americans trust this President more than a democratic one....especially the 'take-all-sides-of-each-issue' kerry.
So...now we have TWO dems who don't wish to address hillary giving support to 'faith based' groups....the groups so many dems here didn't want to see ONE PENNY of Federal funds being spent on.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 03:41:59 PM new
Here is what I do not understand.... Religious fervor or leanings are not going to effect the loss on manufacturing job in this country.
Moral fiber does not have any known coralation to declining average annual wage of americans, the strength of the dollar in overseas markets, or trade surplus/deficits. Prayer is not going to extended the life of out Medicare funding, decrease the national debt, or hault the us from hemoraging money in some inane effort to Christianize the middle east.
"Family Values" has become the political equivalent of a photographers "Watch the Birdie". As long as everyone is so busy swathing themsemves in the glory of god they seem to be blind to economic and political realiies of what is going on around them.
To be brutally honest Linda - Right now I think that the vast majority of our politicians are a bunch of bought and paid for self centered egotistical twits who do not give a damn if if they actuyally accomplish anything that they swear to do when they take their oath as long as they just get to take the same oath again 2,4 or 6 years later (whatever their term may be), who think that common sense is spelled with a c and t (cents) and is dolled out b lobbists and who if they ever managed to have an original thought would only see it die of lonliness anyway. These are people who sell their entire belief systems and bettr judgement out the window if it means that someone will ad an amendment to a medical bill that will build a bridge in their opponents district that they can take credit for. Do youREALLY think that any of them have half of the moral righeousness that you credit them with?
BTW - In case you didn't notice - I'm feeling a bit jaded today
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 03:48:15 PM newSo...now we have TWO dems who don't wish to address hillary giving support to 'faith based' groups....the groups so many dems here didn't want to see ONE PENNY of Federal funds being spent on
I thought I had addressed this issue.. I repeat.. tell them what they want to hear, do what you have to, lie, cheat, steal.. to win the election.. just like Bush did..
Do you hear me now? LOL
posted on January 20, 2005 03:56:32 PM new
fenix - I'm not sure if you're referring to this issue Japan is discussing....but I'm not sure how that goes along with hillary publically beginning to support the 'religious groups' that the dems have so long been against. http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=1&id=284434
And on family values, et all.....if people were marrying before they decided to bear children....there would be a lot less dependant on government assistance..in it's many forms. But the moral values of too many, imo, have changed to the 'what's the big deal' type of thinging. Which has only led to too many needing government aid.
There are many issue like that that the religious groups are forced to deal with....the poverty of single parents having more children they can't care for nor control. Can't keep in school....values that a normal family tries to instill in their own children. With the support of both parents the childred are much less likely to get into trouble...drop out of school...thereby continuing all the social ills we deal with today.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 04:03:41 PM new
Linda - Not the Japanese issue I was referring to. I know someone will get the reference... they probably will not appreciate it but they will know where it comes from. If no one does in the next few hours I will explain it but if I remember right, Replay should get it.
As for the family values thing - unless you are going to come up with a law that makes sex out of wedlock and Divorce illegal there are always going to those social issues you speak of but that feeling of dispair does not come from too many kid or not enough parents - it comes from not being able to envision a properous future which is directly related to our country's economic lethargy.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 04:13:49 PM new
fenix - I will look forward to someone responding to the Japan pilot issue then.
But we don't need to make laws governing sex and out-of-wedlock issues. We just need to encourage it as this President has done with the welfare moms. Promoting married and family in other ways too.
The country has been making a slow transfermation of its own in this area. I truly believe that this Presidents promotion of family values...etc...has helped many to see that the way of 'anything' goes....no moral foundation...wasn't working...only leading to more social problems.
And from what I read there are success stories....fewer abortions...fewer out-of-wedlock babies being born...more choosing to 'wait until marriage' to have children.
But again...I say honestly that no I don't believe a lot of politicans mean what they say...and will lie to get what they want...but I don't believe this President is one of them. I believe his heart is true and his purpose sincere.
helped the public.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 04:47:19 PM new
No Linda, Fenix is wishing that a depressed Japanese airline pilot will kamikaze his plane into the capitol building and kill everyone inside... Senators, Representatives, the president, cabinet and Supreme Court.
Tom Clancy, Debt of Honor / Executive Orders
I can't even believe he would joke about that after 9/11, but he does have a more or less valid point.
But it sure would be nice if we had the opportunity to start our government over without all the politicians. Look at the progress Arnold is making in California.
--------------------------------------
Replay Media - The best source for board games, card games and miniatures on the web! http://www.replaymedia.com
posted on January 20, 2005 04:48:22 PM new
Do I win a prize for that?
--------------------------------------
Replay Media - The best source for board games, card games and miniatures on the web! http://www.replaymedia.com
posted on January 20, 2005 04:56:26 PM new
Replay - you lost your prize when you referred to me as "he".
The reference did have a great deal more to do with the possibility of a government recreated with people without special interest puppet masters and political agendas and some good old fashion common and business sense than how that scenerio was created.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 05:02:51 PM new
Linda - have serious problem blieving that Bush has effected the bahavior of teens. I think that seeing the results o the behaviors of those that have gone before them is having a much greater effect than the words of a priviledged politician.
More girls are seeing what their older friends who had kids are going thru right now and making the decision that they want something better for themselves. To tell you the truth, I don't think it has anywhere near as much to do with "morality" as it does with ambition. Rather than tell kids that god won't approve (which lets face it, is no big thing to a 14 year old) why isn't our goverment working to make sure that there are jobs and affordable education avenues out there to aspire to.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 05:06:55 PM new
Durn it! I can never keep the He's & She's straight on this board. They outta have pictures!
I know Linda & Maggie are women, and both Tom and Ralphie are pooches, but most of the rest???
But yeah, I did get the meaning, and I agree with you. But without a disaster like in the book or some kind of actual revolution, it'll never happen. How many of the founding fathers were politicians?
------------------------------------------
And now to address another point you made earlier:
"Religious fervor or leanings are not going to effect the loss on manufacturing job in this country"
Ahh. but if implemented properly, religious idealism eschews worldly goods, so you don't need as good a job. You don't need a flat screen TV or Lexus, you should be praying!
------------------------------------------
But also, between OSHA laws, government taxation, uotrageous wages demanded by the labor laws and nearly-slave-labor available in China, wht makes you think the manufacturing deficit can EVER be repaired? I personally believe that the unions forced manufacturers into such high pay deals that they simply had no other choice but to leave.
Tell me WHY should an assembly line factory worker make $15-$20 an hour. Why should a Kroger checkout-counter clerk make $12 an hour? These jobs do NOT require any special training, so why not give them the minimum wage kids?
------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
Replay Media - The best source for board games, card games and miniatures on the web! http://www.replaymedia.com
posted on January 20, 2005 05:36:44 PM new
replay - I don't believe that the vast majority of manufacturig will ever return to the US. I agree with you that between cheaper overseas labor and union management that the manufacturing age in the Us is gone. Unfortunately those people formerly invoved in it are still here. They still have car payments, mortgages, families to raise and educate and all of these thing require wages that are no longer being earned. We, as a nation, need to figure out what the next econmic stage is and how we are going to implement it.
As for your "prayer will take care of all" suggestion to government... it is really strange to me to see those that are on the religious right trying to push our government and national mindset more and more towards the same philosophies held by countries that they are simultaniously endorsing the "reform" of.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 20, 2005 05:47:28 PM new
I don't think even Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson really want a fundamentalist US government. Not really. It's just that there are SO MANY loud voices pushing the opposite way (read liberals) that they have to push hard too.
Look at the degradation of morals over the past forty years. It's only going to continue to get worse. Some people see that and have to fight against it. It's not that anyone wants the US to become a "Christian State", but if you have enough people pushing in that direction, as well as those already pushing against it, you'll hopefully wind up with something in the middle.
The Religious Right isn't trying to "win" it's merely trying to hold on to old-time values against the ever-continuing erosion caused by the left.
Does this make sense?
--------------------------------------
Replay Media - The best source for board games, card games and miniatures on the web! http://www.replaymedia.com
posted on January 20, 2005 06:02:39 PM new
replay - Yep...make sense to me and was what I was trying to express.
fenix - For me I've seen more articles about making more moral choices than those that were occurring during the clinton administration. Teens thinking oral sex wasn't really sex...because it was so stated by a very amoral president whose behavior shamed this Nation with his promiscious behavior with several women....until those young people found out with any unprotected sex....deseases can and do occur. Thus this administration has been putting more emphasis on 'abstinence' than the previous one ever did.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 06:30:01 PM new
So are we still believing that the entire "moral values campaign" was what caused Bush to win the election?
We shall see what will take place in three years when the economy still has not improved and the war is still taken place in Iraq and Osama Bin Laden has not been captured. The American people will not stand for another Republican candidate that lies.
Maggie: I repeat.. tell them what they want to hear, do what you have to, lie, cheat, steal.. to win the election.. just like Bush did..
Exactly my thoughts. How many of Bush's campaign promises from 2000 did he keep? Bush already has backed down on his promises from the 2004 campaign.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on January 20, 2005 07:03:40 PM new
still only one democrat who professes that dems are lying to get what they want....hillary. No other's willing to even admit that a person they might support for the US Presidency could possibly be a democrat who supports faith-based groups.
logansdad - So are we still believing that the entire "moral values campaign" was what caused Bush to win the election?
WE? You mean the democratic party? I would guess that's who you're referring to since they're the only one's re-evaluating their positions on 'moral issues' and how to get more votes? Our side....already knows what it thinks and is working towards. Maybe your side will figure it out before 2006 and the next set of elections.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 20, 2005 07:10:08 PM newthe committee stated that they need to improve the morals.
Libra, I'm not sure what your statement here means. Did you mean to say the Democrats need to improve their morals? Or, did you mean the Dems had said they needed to better communicate that they shared similar moral values with the people who voted for Bush? In other word, get their message out better.That's in fact what they said...might seem like a picky point, but it's really a pretty big deal. I don't think for a minute that Hillary's trying to "improve the morals", she's trying to communicate the fact that Democrats already share similar feelings with those who consider themselves morally superior to them, ie; the Bushies.
A case could be made, that Hillary's doing the same sort of pandering to the religious right that the Republicans did so well. It remains to be seen how many of his promises to the RR Bush will actually fulfill. I sure didn't hear much about abortion or the marriage amendment in today's speech. Betcha they weren't real happy about that.
edit to fix tags
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
[ edited by profe51 on Jan 20, 2005 07:11 PM ]
posted on January 20, 2005 08:17:14 PM new
Here is part of the DNC committee meeting
"Candidates called for fresh talent, better communication with voters, new ways to campaign on values and a strategy for attracting support in rural areas. Democrats must become a more tenacious rival to the GOP, they said.
I guess I should have said values instead of morals..sorry
My projection is that it will most likely be 'oh-so-different' when hearing all the 'God' and religious statements coming from a progressive they'd support....while they've criticized the every bit of the same position that has come from this President.