A Message From Lucianne  







S-G1




























ST-GC


   
 
Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute | Register | Rules & FAQs
Privacy Policy | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password | Search Using Google


One-third of Americans reject
evolution, poll shows

Reuters, by Chris Francescani

Original Article

Posted By:mitzi, 12/30/2013 2:47:48 PM

One-third of Americans reject the idea of evolution and Republicans have grown more skeptical about it, according to a poll released on Monday. Sixty percent of Americans say that "humans and other living things have evolved over time," the telephone survey by the Pew Research Center´s Religion and Public Life Project showed. But 33 percent reject the idea of evolution, saying that "humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time," Pew said in a statement. Although this percentage remained steady since 2009, the last time Pew asked the question, there was a

Comments:
I´m with the 1/3.

      


Post Reply  

Reply 1 - Posted by: beth, 12/30/2013 3:02:31 PM     (No. 9673136)

The idea that man evolved over millions of years from a one celled creature defies logic. It´s obvious that the human body has been designed. The real question should be who designed it?

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    18 persons like this.


Reply 2 - Posted by: Ruhn, 12/30/2013 3:04:48 PM     (No. 9673138)

Pew Research Center would better serve their respondents and the point of the poll if they would define what exactly they mean by the term ´evolution´.

If Pew just defines evolution as ´change over time´, most people would agree that life forms do change over time. But if you precisely define evolution as the common descent of all life from a single organism as a result of natural selection and random mutation (the textbook definition of Darwin´s theory of evolution), then perhaps there would be even more of a divergence of opinion in the poll.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    17 persons like this.


   

 

R-G1
  
R-VAR_AD


 
Reply 3 - Posted by: SpeedMaster, 12/30/2013 3:09:33 PM     (No. 9673143)

I believe God chose to start with a one cell organism which evolved over time per his design, thus this is not an argument about creationism vs evolution but about the recipe.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    17 persons like this.


Reply 4 - Posted by: 4Justice, 12/30/2013 3:19:45 PM     (No. 9673150)

#1, the idea that complex biological entities--living, breathing and thinking--exist at all defies all logic. I don´t think that evolution is impossible but that doesn´t mean that Darwin´s theories were necessarily 100% right either. I think there is some sort of evolution that takes place simply because creatures DO adapt to changing environments and there is lots of evidence for this. However, to show any sort of direct chain of events from one-celled animals to multi-celled and eventually complex life forms has not and probably can never be demonstrated--even if it did happen. And MORE importantly, even if we did all evolve from a simple life form to what we all are today, that doesn´t mutually exclude the possibility of a Higher Power/Creator either. Does any of it really matter? Or is it just our curiosity that needs to be satiated? What matters right now is that we DO exist now. And what matters is that there is more likely, than not, some sort of greater power behind it. That doesn´t mean there is something that looks like a man behind it all. All I can say is there are forces so great that it makes all the genius, creativity and accomplishments of man look insignificant and smaller than a one-celled animal. And more likely than not, there is a great intelligence, wisdom and knowledge within it. No living being really knows (or will ever know with certainty) what this great power/creating force really is. But I do know that without it, not only would there be no meaning to life, but the idea of life itself would be completely absurd.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    15 persons like this.


Reply 5 - Posted by: msjena, 12/30/2013 3:23:26 PM     (No. 9673156)

And where did the one-celled creature come from? And assuming that question can be answered, how many zillions of years would it take for complex organisms such as humans too have evolved from essentially nothing? Too bad the orthodoxy of the scientific community doesn´t allow these kinds of questions.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    9 persons like this.


Reply 6 - Posted by: hammondb3, 12/30/2013 3:31:25 PM     (No. 9673164)

Those who believe that the first living organism formed from the result of mindless random forces must answer the following question...

Why would a randomly formed set of chemical structures sufficient to be labeled a living thing, even of the simplest kind, end up with the ability to reproduce? In a mindless world there is no need to reproduce because there is no concept of what is to come from a purely materialistic non-living state.

The ability to reproduce would have to also be a purely random attribute which, in a mindless world, would have to have been arrived at by nothing more than luck.

However, in a world in which a mind existed before LIFE did, reproduction makes perfect sense. It is forward-looking, but the one doing the looking is not the created thing, it is the creator.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    9 persons like this.


Reply 7 - Posted by: toddh, 12/30/2013 3:33:00 PM     (No. 9673165)

Kludges, counter-kludges, bad ideas, mistakes - if designed, designed by a complete and utter imbecile. Better to believe in chance than an SOB who cripples children.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


   

 

  


 
Reply 8 - Posted by: Quigley, 12/30/2013 3:56:28 PM     (No. 9673182)

If you want some insight into the state of science behind evolutionary theories, go to

www.whyevolutionistrue.com

Sarcasm off.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 9 - Posted by: Hazymac, 12/30/2013 3:57:25 PM     (No. 9673183)

"Evolution" is a conveniently nebulous term, and that´s where Reuters, muddying the waters of reason, loses me. Microevolution can be described as fact. Children are not precise copies of either parent. Dark colored moths can evolve into light colored moths if predators are too successful in predation. Necessity alters things, albeit usually slowly.

Macroevolution, in which, say, a monkey eventually evolves into a human, a reptile evolves into a bird, or a dog evolves into a cat, requires a jump between species and genus, which has never been definitively demonstrated in the fossil record. It takes great faith to believe that the universe is governed by accidental processes, and that we are mere flukes of nature.

Michael Behe´s Darwin´s Black Box explores the irreducible complexity of things like eyes, dependent on millions of interdependent processes, to work. How did they evolve? Or did they evolve at all?

Humanity might even possess that spark of divinity that at some deep (if not conscious) level seeks the Creator. But humanity and the human body is complicated enough that scientific understanding of everything that makes us tick will never be complete. Not in this world. Every theory should be questioned, and if found to be faulty, abandoned. Even Darwinianism. It´s a nice, plausible tale if you don´t look at it too closely.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    22 persons like this.


Reply 10 - Posted by: banal_resentive, 12/30/2013 4:07:20 PM     (No. 9673189)

I´m with #7, though I say it more humorously. Do you believe in free will (God-given or not)? If so, even God has to be surprised sometimes! That means there is such a thing as random chance - which is what drives evolution. Our cellular machinery is just too "Rube Goldberg Device"-like to suggest intelligent design - it really looks like something that was thrown together through a lot of trial-and-error. And boy, it certainly likes to break down! I´d like to think that an omniscient and omnipotent being could have done a lot better if he/she really cared about the result...

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.


Reply 11 - Posted by: Mass Minority, 12/30/2013 4:07:47 PM     (No. 9673191)

I always get exasperated when this subject comes up. What drives me nuts is that most people are not even aware of what they are arguing about.

If one believes that science is simply the observational interpretation of the world around us, that fossils are real and that at one time the earth did not support life, human or otherwise then one believes that somehow life got here, changed and ended up with us.

A belief in God or the teaching of the Bible doesn´t change that. No belief in any type of driving force other than brute statistics and indefinite periods of time doesn´t change it either.

Evolution is simply the observation that earthly things can change in response to changes around them. But what is being argued is not evolution, it is Darwinism. Darwin was an atheist and it clouded everything he saw. To Darwin, his theory proved beyond any doubt that God did not exist. He was consumed by this as were many around him. It was this insistence that God could not exist in a world that could evolve that has generated so much heat since the voyage of the Beagle.

But to put it in perspective, I offer you the theory of gravity. For centuries we knew we stayed put on earth because angels held us down. We now know that gravity is a very strong physical force completely determined by the mass of the two adjoining bodies and their spatial relationship to each other. We know how it works and can understand how it is a force holding atoms together and galaxies in place. Does that prove God does not exist? Has anyone ever been silly enough to argue it does?

Evolution is no different.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    13 persons like this.


Reply 12 - Posted by: Videodrone, 12/30/2013 4:24:40 PM     (No. 9673211)

what sort of intelligent designer puts the recreation center as part of the waste treatment facility?

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.


   

 

B-G1


 
Reply 13 - Posted by: ruready?, 12/30/2013 4:27:23 PM     (No. 9673213)

#10, while acknowledging that the human DNA is pretty beat up, that level of damage is also consistent with the fall. And even in the damaged state, man has yet to create a new organism from scratch - albeit Craig Ventor is giving it a shot.

Belief in evolution is not unlike global warming - the science has been established (if you get my drift. Furthermore, the universities control who gets a PhD in evolution). Here is a challenge. Since our DNA is 98% like chimpanzees, where in the DNA of chimps and humans is the place or places that control brain size so dramatically as human brains are over 300% larger than chimps? If we don´t know, maybe there is a place for humility (which I have never seen) in the evolutionary camp.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    23 persons like this.


Reply 14 - Posted by: jackburton, 12/30/2013 4:29:44 PM     (No. 9673217)

I think the problem is in the question.

All muffins come from the Tastee Kitchens (inc.) or

All Muffins appear by magic.

What? No other possibilities. Evolution as taught by people with an agenda, 100%, all ´settled science´ or something you deride as magic?

Choice C) get the heck off my porch.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    15 persons like this.


Reply 15 - Posted by: hammondb3, 12/30/2013 4:31:56 PM     (No. 9673218)

Comparing the ´law of evolution´ to the law of gravity is like comparing the ´law of spontaneous works of Shakespeare appearing in an unpopulated desert´ to the law of ´charcoal can make a mark´.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    14 persons like this.


Reply 16 - Posted by: JHBoatwright, 12/30/2013 4:52:56 PM     (No. 9673247)

"One-third of Americans reject evolution"

And I am assured that about the same percentage reject the proposition that the Earth goes around the Sun.

Some people will believe anything that brings in the money......

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.


Reply 17 - Posted by: Mass Minority, 12/30/2013 4:55:33 PM     (No. 9673252)

#15, if the works of Shakespeare appeared in the desert tomorrow would that prove beyond argument God exists, does the Fact charcoal makes a mark prove God does not exist?

The point is that none of the laws under discussion have any bearing whatsoever on the questions of Faith or the existence of God.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


   

 

R_DBL_B
  


 
Reply 18 - Posted by: DocH, 12/30/2013 4:58:52 PM     (No. 9673258)

It´s non sequiturs all the way down...

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 19 - Posted by: EQKimball, 12/30/2013 4:59:08 PM     (No. 9673259)

Although I believe in creation followed by evolution, I do find the mental image of Grandfather Adam and Grandmother Eve a more edifying description of roots of the family tree than an Uncle Bonzo and Aunt Cheetah. I think God probably studied the apes and then decided on a redo.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    14 persons like this.


Reply 20 - Posted by: GringoinQuito, 12/30/2013 5:35:44 PM     (No. 9673300)

And the earth is flat. Do people really believe that God, all of a sudden pointed a finger and man appeared? Man, as well as all of the other creatures evolved over time. Fossils prove this. I believe that God had ah and in this through intelligent design.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    12 persons like this.


Reply 21 - Posted by: virbots, 12/30/2013 5:58:40 PM     (No. 9673338)

I don´t think, as many do, that the theory of evolution and the creation story in Genesis are at odds. It´s not either or, but both and.

Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth vegetation: every kind of plant that bears seed and every kind of fruit tree on earth that bears fruit with its seed in it." Gen 1:11.

Let the *earth* bring forth vegetation.
Not much different than what the theory of evolution says.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    13 persons like this.


Reply 22 - Posted by: mitzi, 12/30/2013 6:15:57 PM     (No. 9673348)

#20 - the only thing a fossil record proves is that a certain creature existed at one time.


  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


   

 



 
Reply 23 - Posted by: Rumblehog, 12/30/2013 6:19:39 PM     (No. 9673351)

In order to argue with a hard-core evolutionist, you must take them back to the time in which the Darwinian fiction was first published in 1859.

1) Science held to a "Steady State Universe" which posited the universe has, and will always exist.
2) DNA had not been discovered
3) The complexities of even a single-celled organism were not understood.
4) The fossils of a preceding diverse, complex plant, and animal lifeforms had not yet been discovered.

Evolution is connect the dots, "This came from that," sort of academic parlor game, not far removed from the Ouija Board, and about as legitimate, scientifically.

Evolutionists look at the "hardware," and in computer terms, they might observe a 1 Terabyte USB Memory Stick and conclude it evolved into a Winchester 30/30 Hard Drive, due to its sheer size, and complexity. (An Engineer would know it was the other way around!)

Evolution cannot begin to explain the "software/programming" of creatures. Why does the Monarch Butterfly travel thousands of miles to hibernate in the exact same tree in Central Mexico?

http://www.monarch-butterfly.com/index.html#Life-Cycle

The list goes on and on of such cases, yet the evolutionist merely does a hand-wave followed by the invective, "You´re a religious idiot."
(cont´d)

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 24 - Posted by: Rumblehog, 12/30/2013 6:20:13 PM     (No. 9673353)

(cont´d)
Eventually, in our "debate" with the evolutionist, it becomes clear, even to them, that there is an existent force, which drives amino acids to be created, to miraculously bond to form proteins, that proteins combine in certain ways and cells are produced, that these things continue to rise in complexity and purpose, with little residual "waste" along the way. We don´t live in a biological cesspool of evolutionary mistakes. Even they must admit there must be a Force for change in the best direction. And so the closing question is, "What does the evolutionist call this, ´Force´?"

I predict that evolution will be crushed in the next 10 years by the sheer volume of scientific evidence.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 25 - Posted by: qr4j, 12/30/2013 6:47:00 PM     (No. 9673377)

One can believe God created the universe and all that is therein without excluding evolution. I believe God created the universe AND things have evolved.

In many ways, things have DEVOLVED, i.e., they´ve gotten worse. And that is the result of evil´s presence in the cosmos. Evil is a perversion of the good.

I completely reject the notion that evolution occurred without God. I affirm as take-it-to-the-bank truth the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed. In them, I find expressions of God´s love.

"Who for us and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was made man."

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 26 - Posted by: Bohallx, 12/30/2013 7:03:43 PM     (No. 9673396)

The most advanced thinkers have moved well beyond the Evo/Creo debate into panspermia, and what´s that all about hunh?

Craig Ventor is working on his man-made test bed model for the purpose of testing what the gazllions of different DNA strands found in the top 1 foot of the ocean can do ~ or are supposed to do.

My money is on there being some biobased intergalactic cruisers in there, and maybe some intragalectic transmitters.

Given enough time the stuff the big boys use ´out there´ should have crashed into Earth, and their wreckage and trash could be turned into our most advanced science. We just don´t know that yet.





  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 27 - Posted by: mws50, 12/30/2013 7:04:01 PM     (No. 9673398)

If evolution is real, why isn´t it happening right now? Why aren´t monkeys continuing to evolve into human-like forms? Why aren´t birds continuing to evolve into the next creation?

Or was it intelligent design that completed its chosen design?

Of course the human race may be evolving into libtards and will eventually die out...

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    7 persons like this.


Reply 28 - Posted by: mitzi, 12/30/2013 7:10:13 PM     (No. 9673409)

Why are there still single cell organisms?

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.


Reply 29 - Posted by: hammondb3, 12/30/2013 8:33:01 PM     (No. 9673490)

Panspermia...

1. The belief that since there is no plausible mechanism that even the simplest life form could have developed from purely natural means on this planet, it must have first developed someplace ELSE then sent here... somehow.

2. A term used by evolutionists to rid themselves of the pesky issue that if life cannot be shown through experimentation to be possible outside of the existence of an intelligent source, then it had to have happened in some place where experimentation cannot even be attempted.



  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.


Reply 30 - Posted by: chance_232, 12/30/2013 8:49:49 PM     (No. 9673501)

Evolution and creationism are not mutually exclusive. In fact, a smart creator would create something that can automatically change and adapt to its ever changing environment and to make better use of lessons learned overtime.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.


Reply 31 - Posted by: Skeptical1, 12/31/2013 12:28:04 PM     (No. 9674246)

You have to wonder how meaningful this is. They called 2,000 people and asked them to pick one response from a list.

First of all, who talks to pollsters when they call? Probably just lunatics and college kids. But if you don´t hang up on them, and if you have doubts about the standard model of evolution, what response are you supposed to pick? This issue is more subtle than "who do you plan to vote for."

I personally wouldn´t say that "humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time," but I love it that so many people would throw that back in the pollsters faces.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    8 persons like this.



Post Reply   Close thread 766458




Below, you will find ...

Most Recent Articles posted by "mitzi"

and

Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)




Most Recent Articles posted by "mitzi"



Poll: Franken and Dayton
Losing Support Among
Minnesota Voters
Breitbart Big Government, by Kerry Picket    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/13/2014 1:22:19 PM     Post Reply
Support appears to be crumbling among constituents of Senator Al Franken (D-MN) and Minnesota Democratic Governor Mark Dayton, according to new poll data posted from Public Opinion Strategies this week that the Minnesota GOP is touting. The statewide survey of 600 likely Minnesota voters, conducted between March 3 and 5, shows "fewer than half of Minnesotans (48%) want Al Franken to remain their US Senator." The data also shows that only a "slim majority of Minnesotans" (51%) want Dayton to remain as their governor. Both Democratic politicians lost considerable support among independent voters. Only 43% percent of independents think that

Kerry in Last-Minute Effort to
Stop Crimea From Voting to
Join Russia
Cybercast News Service, by Patrick Goodenough    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/13/2014 12:05:38 PM     Post Reply
As Secretary of State John Kerry prepares to meet his Russian counterpart in London for last-ditch talks Friday aimed at averting a rushed referendum on Crimea’s reincorporation into Russia, neither Russia nor the separatist authorities in Crimea show any sign of backing down. President Obama’s decision to send Kerry comes just two days after the State Department said Kerry would only meet with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to discuss the Crimea situation “if and when we see concrete evidence that Russia is prepared to engage on these proposals.”

Missing Malaysia Plane ´Debris´
Images Released
Sky News, by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/12/2014 9:43:14 PM     Post Reply
Satellite images of possible debris from the missing Malaysia Airlines plane have been released by a Chinese government agency. The pictures taken on Sunday appear to show three floating objects of varying sizes. The report includes coordinates of a location that was part of the original search area in the sea off the southern tip of Vietnam and east of Malaysia. According to the Chinese news agency, Xinhua, the largest of the suspected pieces of debris is about 79 feet (24 metres) by 72 feet (22 metres). The objects identified by a Chinese satellite were spread across an area with

Sheila Jackson Lee Thinks the
Constitution is 400 Years Old
Washington Free Beacon, by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/12/2014 4:54:15 PM     Post Reply
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D., Texas) declared the U.S. Constitution to be 400 years old Wednesday on the House floor, which would mean it was signed in 1614. “Maybe I should offer a good thanks to the distinguished members of the majority, the Republicans, my chairman and others, for giving us an opportunity to have a deliberative constitutional discussion that reinforces the sanctity of this nation and how well it is that we have lasted some 400 years, operating under a constitution that clearly defines what is constitutional and what is not,” she said. That would be seven years after

Big Move Against Harvard
Being Plotted in Congress
By House Republicans
New York Sun, by Ira Stoll    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/10/2014 3:44:55 PM     Post Reply
House Republicans are plotting a $1.7 billion tax increase aimed at America’s most elite colleges and universities. The tax increase is buried on page 879 of Congressman Dave Camp’s 979-page tax reform bill. The bill is considered unlikely to become law, but Mr. Camp is chairman of the powerful, tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and his draft legislation is likely to provide a road map for tax reformers in years ahead. The tax, as outlined in Section 5206 of the legislation, is called an “excise tax based on investment income of private colleges and universities.” It begins, “there is hereby imposed on each applicable institution for the

Satoshi Nakamoto’s Silence
New York Sun, by Editorial    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/10/2014 2:35:18 PM     Post Reply
One of our favorite japes is about the group of scientists who figure out the secret to life — a way to make a human being from nothing but dirt. When they’ve worked it all out, they are so excited they go directly to God to announce their discovery that He is no longer necessary. He appears a bit surprised, but they offer to demonstrate. He nods. One of the scientists bends down and scoops up a fistful of dirt. “Oh, no,” God exclaims. “You’ve got to make your own dirt.” This is how we feel about bitcoins. The idea

California Seeks to Redefine
Consensual Campus Sex as Rape
Legal Insurrection, by Hans Bader    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/10/2014 9:00:58 AM     Post Reply
How does classifying most consensual sex as rape help rape victims? As a lawyer who has handled rape and sexual harassment cases, I can’t imagine how. But this radical result is what some want to happen in California. In endorsing a bill in the California legislature that would require “affirmative consent” before sex can occur on campus, the editorial boards of the Sacramento and Fresno Bee and the Daily Californian advocated that sex be treated as “sexual assault” unless the participants discuss it “out loud” before sex, and “demonstrate they obtained verbal ‘affirmative consent’ before engaging in sexual activity.” Never

NYPD Union To Join Lawsuit
Against NFL Gun Ban
Beitbart Sports, by Awr Hawkins    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/9/2014 11:25:26 PM     Post Reply
The New York Police Department´s Sergeants Benevolent Association (SBA) will join Minnesota police unions´ lawsuit against NFL gun ban. According to the New York Post, SBA president Edward Mullins said the NFL´s policy barring off-duty officers from carrying guns into games "is a violation of any state laws that allow off-duty cops to carry their guns in public places." Mullins added: "The NFL is telling us that highly trained law enforcement officers shouldn´t be allowed to enter stadiums with their guns." On February 18th Breitbart News reported that the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association (MPPOA) was suing over the

ABC´s Jonathan Karl: ´Bizarre´
for Ted Cruz to Think
Obamacare Can Be Repealed
Breitbard Big Journalism, by Tony Lee    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/9/2014 8:38:27 PM     Post Reply
ABC News´s Jonathan Karl mocked Sen. Ted Cruz´s (R-TX) belief that Obamacare could be repealed while President Barack Obama is in office if the law and the president should get even more unpopular. Cruz, who tried to defund the Obamacare law even before the disastrous rollout and the multiple waivers that have since been granted, said he believed "every single word" of the law could be repealed in an interview that aired on ABC´s This Week on Sunday. When Karl said that it was safe to assume that the law cannot be repealed while Obama was in office, Cruz did

Pelosi Claims Anonymous
Republican Told Her Poor
Hungry Children Are ´Invisible´
to ´Indifferent´ GOP
Breitbart TV, by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/9/2014 6:00:40 PM     Post Reply
During House Minority Nancy Pelosi´s address at the 2014 California Democrats State Convention on Saturday in Los Angeles, she told a story about an unnamed House Republican telling her the GOP does not care about hungry children in America. Pelosi claimed the unnamed "friend" called the poor and hungry "invisible". Pelosi used that same exact same rhetoric in early February at her weekly press briefing only then instead of friend it was the rock band U2 that gave her the "invisible" line... Pelosi on Saturday: "I asked a Republican friend why his party remains so opposed to extending the vital

The Ground Zero Cross suffers
for the sins of atheists
Daily Caller, by David Lawrence    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/8/2014 5:31:17 PM     Post Reply
Hey, why am I reading in the New York Post about a group called American Atheists? I mean, I was born in 1947 and was an atheist by the time I was seven. I was a long-term predecessor to these ingrates. The difference between me and the clowns at American Atheists is that I have always had respect for the religious. I feel they are more a part of the fabric of this country than I am, and that I have no right to belittle their beliefs. In fact I wish I could share in their faith.

Breitbart London Editor at
Embassy Bash: ´We´re Going
to Take Over the World´
Breitbart Big Journalism, by Tony Lee    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 3/8/2014 11:49:55 AM     Post Reply
David Webb, of The David Webb Show on Sirius XM Patriot channel 125, broadcasted his nightly program on Friday live from the annual CPAC bash at the Breitbart Embassy in Washington, D.C. and stated that the Breitbart News team is a tribute to the late Andrew Breitbart´s vision. An exuberant James Delingpole, who is Breitbart London´s executive editor and one of the newest additions to the team, said this was his first time at the "Embassy," and he knew immediately that he was at the perfect home. "I´ve found my people," Delingpole declared. "We´re going to take over the world."



Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)



Sam Adams pulls support from Boston
St. Patrick´s parade over gay rights

52 replie(s)
Associated Press, by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 3/14/2014 1:53:07 PM     Post Reply
The maker of Sam Adams beer announced Friday that it is withdrawing its sponsorship of Boston´s St. Patrick´s Day parade because organizers exclude gay groups. Boston Beer Co.´s decision came a day after a bar in Boston´s South End said it would no longer serve Sam Adams beer because of the brewer´s affiliation with the parade, which is scheduled for Sunday. Mayor Martin Walsh and U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch have been trying to broker a deal that would have allowed a gay group to march, but those negotiations broke down. "We were hopeful that both sides of this issue would

President Obama warns youth:
Sign up for Obamacare or we
will charge you a penalty

47 replie(s)
Washington Examiner (DC), by Charlie Spiering    Original Article
Posted By: JoniTx- 3/15/2014 5:30:09 AM     Post Reply
President Obama warned young people that if they don´t sign up for Obamacare by March 31, they will face a penalty -- if they can afford it. During an interview with radio host Ryan Seacrest, Obama explained that young people might be charged a fine if they don´t get insured. "If you can afford it — you just decide you don´t want to get it because your attitude is ´nothing´s ever going to happen to me´ — then you´ll be charged a penalty," Obama explained. Obama was careful to specify that people who can´t afford Obamacare will not suffer a

Why millennials have abandoned Obama
39 replie(s)
Washington Post, by Dana Milbank    Original Article
Posted By: LittleHoodedMonk- 3/14/2014 7:04:50 PM     Post Reply
The day before the Iowa caucuses in 2008, I wrote about the massive crowds of young people at Barack Obama rallies, noting that his candidacy would collapse “if they don’t show up.” The next night, after Obama’s victory celebration in Des Moines, Obama strategist Steve Hildebrand spotted me in a crowd. “The kids showed up!” he said fiercely. They did. But where are they now? An army of 15 million voters under 30 swept Obama past Hillary Clinton and John McCain and to the presidency in 2008. More than 12 million helped him return in 2012. But now his presidency is on the line — and the Obama youth are abandoning him in

Ted Cruz not so popular back home
38 replie(s)
Washington Post, by Jennifer Rubin    Original Article
Posted By: JoniTx- 3/15/2014 12:04:47 PM     Post Reply
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) may be popular among hard-line conservatives nationally, but back home he’s in some hot water. According to an Emerson College poll, his favorability is underwater, by a margin of 43 to 48 percent. Moreover, his favorable/unfavorable rating with women is 39 to 50 percent. I asked the poll director for further detail and found: Republicans: 74 percent favorable, 18 percent unfavorable ~Democrats: 8 percent favorable, 82 percent unfavorable ~Independents: 38 percent favorable, 50 percent unfavorable

Obama Says He´s Been ´Unfairly Maligned´
About Wearing Dad Jeans (AUDIO)

36 replie(s)
TPM Media, by Igor Bobic    Original Article
Posted By: JoniTx- 3/14/2014 1:01:43 PM     Post Reply
President Barack Obama lamented on Friday that he´s been unfairly criticized for wearing loose jeans. “I’ve been unfairly maligned about my jeans,” he joked in a radio interview with Ryan Seacrest. “The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans." One fashion faux pas at the 2009 MLB All-Star baseball game was a costly learning experience, he added. "There was one episode like four years ago in which I was wearing some loose jeans mainly because I was out on the pitcher’s mound and I didn’t want to feel confined while I was pitching and I think I’ve paid

Obama wants people to quit
bashing his jeans

34 replie(s)
CNN, by Staff*    Original Article
Posted By: JoniTx- 3/14/2014 9:29:36 PM     Post Reply
President Barack Obama hit back at critics calling him out for his "mom jeans. "I´ve been unfairly maligned about my jeans," Obama said Friday in an interview with radio host Ryan Seacrest. "The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans. There was one episode like four years ago in which I was wearing some loose jeans, mainly because I was out on the pitcher´s mound and I didn´t want to feel confined while I was pitching, and I think I´ve paid my penance for that. I got whacked pretty good. Since that time, my jeans fit very well."

US Philosophy Professor: Jail ´Denialist´
Climate Scientists for Criminal Negligence

32 replie(s)
Breitbart London [UK], by James Delingpol    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 3/14/2014 3:26:11 PM     Post Reply
Scientists who don´t believe in catastrophic man-made global warming should be put in prison, a US philosophy professor argues on a website funded by the UK government. Lawrence Torcello - assistant professor of philosophy at Rochester Institute of Technology, NY, writes in an essay at The Conversation that climate scientists who fail to communicate the correct message about "global warming" should face trial for "criminal negligence". (H/T Bishop Hill) The Conversation - no relation of Breitbart´s blogging chatroom - is a website promoting articles by academics and funded by nineteen of Britain´s leading universities, as well as several government agencies, including the

How five Colorado Democrats may
have paved the way for Congress
to sue the administration

30 replie(s)
Daily Caller, by Elizabeth Price Foley & David Rivkin    Original Article
Posted By: StormCnter- 3/15/2014 4:59:04 AM     Post Reply
Last week, the U.S. Tenth Circuit decided a case that should reverberate on Capitol Hill. In Kerr v. Hickenlooper, five Colorado legislators sought “standing” to challenge a state constitutional amendment. The three-judge panel — consisting of Carter and Clinton appointees — ruled in favor of the legislators’ standing. This decision should embolden members of Congress who correctly believe that President Obama has encroached upon Congress’ constitutional authority. Indeed, Congress should do no less in defending its authority than the five Colorado state legislators. Many members of Congress believe that numerous presidential actions — delaying various provisions of the Affordable Care

Rand Paul: GOP Must ‘Agree
to Disagree’ on Social Issues in
Order to Expand Party

28 replie(s)
Mediaite, by Andrew Kirell    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 3/14/2014 2:15:25 PM     Post Reply
In an interview with Vocativ.com, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) expressed a desire for factions within the Republican Party to “agree to disagree” on hot-button social issues so that the GOP tent may expand to include more young people and alternative viewpoints. Asked whether the general consensus at last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference was that the party must butt out of social issues, Paul replied: I think that the Republican Party, in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues. The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people

Astonishing poll shows 38-year
Democratic congressman down 14 points

28 replie(s)
Washington Examiner, by Michael Barone    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 3/15/2014 7:31:10 PM     Post Reply
Here´s an astonishing poll: David Freddoso at Conservative Intelligence Briefing links to a report by the Washington Post´s Aaron Blake that West Virginia 3rd district incumbent Rep. Nick Rahall trails Republican challenger state Sen. Evan Jenkins by a 54-percent to 40-percent margin. The poll was conducted by the Tarrance Group, a Republican firm which, like several Democratic and other Republican firms, has had a good record for reliability over the years. This is astonishing for several reasons. Rahall, first elected in 1976, is now the seventh most senior member of the House, with three of the more senior members retiring

Top Republican: U.S. needs 1 million
more immigrants, not less

26 replie(s)
Washington Examiner, by Paul Bedard    Original Article
Posted By: mikkins2- 3/15/2014 9:05:57 PM     Post Reply
A top Republican campaigning for immigration reform is warning that America needs at least 1 million more immigrants every year just for basic farming and construction jobs, not ban like some in the party are advocating. Carlos Gutierrez, Commerce secretary under former President George W. Bush, said that without more immigrants, businesses won´t be able to grow because there aren´t enough workers available. And helping them could boost the Republican Party, added the former Kellogg Co. executive. Speaking at a Republican confab, he said that comprehensive immigration reform passed in the Senate and rejected by

Election 2014: Lindsey Graham challenger
calls SC senator "ambiguously gay"

25 replie(s)
The State [Columbia, SC], by James Self    Original Article
Posted By: LittleHoodedMonk- 3/14/2014 8:48:20 PM     Post Reply
Columbia, SC - Four of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham´s announced challengers in June´s Republican primary pledged support for each other Thursday if any of them end up in a runoff with the Seneca incumbent. But a news conference announcing their alliance on the State House steps took an unexpected turn when the most minor of the candidates, Dave Feliciano of Spartanburg, took the podium and called Graham "ambiguously gay." Feliciano said, "It´s about time that South Carolina (says) hey, We´re tired of the ambiguously gay senator from South Carolina. We´re ready for a new leader to merge the Republican Party.


Post Reply   Close thread 766458





Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute | Register | Rules & FAQs
Privacy Policy | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password | Search Using Google



© 2014 Lucianne.com Media Inc.

FS