Maybe they are undecided about having what they earned taken from them and given to those who didn’t earn it…you know…spreading the wealth around…MARXIST DOCTRINE. But that’s the LEFTY LIB philosophy, let’s try and GUILT them into voting. Idiots.
Or better yet maybe Colin Powell could tell the undecideds that he didn’t vote for Obama based on race and they shouldn’t either (hahahahahahahaha…deep breath…hahahahahaha…wiping tears of laughter..hahahahahaha) and then they could make their minds up on his politics. Oh wait, then they would be right back where they started, being undecided whether they want a MARXIST for President or not. Hmmm…I can see a point to Biden’s plan, the truth hurts so wants to use the lie of false guilt.
Next Please!

NATHAN,
I don’t dispute the temporary Marxist intervention of CONGRESS and BUSH, is it any wonder he is at historical lows in his approval ratings. However, without money to loan many of these major institutions would likely have to great an adverse effect on not just our economy but the world’s economy.
I agree some restructuring is needed but it certainly isn’t MORE MARXISM!!!!!!!!
Next Please!

Conservatives cry when companies go out of business.
But they don’t give a $hit when children go to bed hungry at night or their families lose their homes.
So the next time a conservative tells you what a good Christian they are, tell them they’re good at worshiping something opposite. And ask them if they’ll enjoy spending their afterlife someplace…warmer.

EG,
Hey dig bat…not all Christians are conservatives and not all conservatives are Christians. You treat the words synonymously…they aren’t.
Next Please!

Amazing undecided voters still exist, but it’s good to know what’s going on in their heads: http://www.236.com/news/2008/10/17/thought_process_flowchart_the_1_9608.php
Anything to keep them away from the Nader non vote.

But they don’t give a $hit when children go to bed hungry at night or their families lose their homes.
snort…
Please check out the comparison of giving in “red vs. blue”.

snort…
Please check out the comparison of giving in “red vs. blue”.
Um…
Christians only give charity to to other Christians.
If you aren’t one, you’re out of luck.

Really.
I can name Christian organizations that I have worked with that have no such requirement.
ICCF
CRWRC
Mel Trotter Ministries
Crisis Pregnancy Center
Forgotten Man Ministries
I have not personally worked for Habitat for Humanity, but is an article about HFH building homes for Muslims.
I think that if you cannot find Christian organizations who only give to Christians, you are not looking very hard.

ah, yes, the over-referenced and hugely flawed “generosity index” (www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/natl/generosity_index/2006.html). i have to stifle the laugh anytime i see a right-winger throw that one out there. clearly those who reference the “index” think simplistically enough to compare a state-wide breakdown of “generosity” by state into 2 categories, “least” and “most” charitable to a map of “red” states and “blue” states as if generosity works anything like the electoral college.
first of all, the index is on a range of least charitable to most charitable, not just red and blue, so the map is a joke by itself. secondly, it’s overly simplistic in its analysis. it doesn’t consider what “generosity” is, but measures based on charitable contributions reported to the IRS by way of itemized charitable contributions. it doesn’t capture goods donated to family or friends or charities that either aren’t reported or aren’t itemized. it doesn’t consider charitable time. it doesn’t consider cost of living in the state. it doesn’t consider how much people of each state pay in taxes. and it certainly doesn’t break down the demographics within each state to show any breakdown by ideology. for example, in texas, a breakdown shows that there was 38% vote for kerry and 61% for bush.
but here’s the real kicker!! it pits states’ “having” (average resident income) to their “giving” and ranks that against other states. (rank each state by “having” column, then rank each state by “giving” column, then rank the difference between those two for each state.) this give a built-in bias against wealthier states and in favor of poorer states. for a simple example, in 2004 arkansas was ranked #1 most generous. however, if arkansas residents stopped giving completely while all other data stayed the same, the state would still be ranked no worse than 26th, simply because of it’s high ranking in the “having” column (meaning that it’s one of the poorest based on IRS reported average incomes). go figure.
in 2006, the boston college center on wealth and philanthropy did another study, removing the bias (www.bc.edu/research/cwp/features/givingindices.html) and found that the most giving states are actually ranked as follows:
1. New York
(d.c. ranks second most giving)
2. Utah
3. California
4. Connecticut
5. Maryland
6. New Jersey
7. Georgia
8. Massachusetts
9. Hawaii
10. South Carolina

i must have missed the post about colin powell endorsing obama for president, and chastising mccain for his negative campaign and his choice of palin.

Anonymous, you just can’t get a grip on the humanity of conservatives, can you?

but here’s the real kicker!! it pits states’ “having” (average resident income) to their “giving” and ranks that against other states.
You know…that reminds me of story in Scripture.
You know, the one about the rich men who came into the temple all proud of themselves because they even tithed on their spices. Yep…they gave a lot…
And then in came the widow, who only had two coins to put into the collection; it was all that she had.
Here’s the punch line:
“As He looked up, Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. ‘I tell you the truth,’ He said, ‘this poor widow has put in more than all the others. All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.” Luke 21:1-3 NIV.
New York gave out of their wealth. Arkansas gave out of their poverty.

Nathan wrote:
“you know…spreading the wealth around…MARXIST DOCTRINE.”
When the government takes $750 billion and gives it to Wall Street, is that also Marxist?
Or is it only Marxist when the government takes a smaller amount of money and gives it to the struggling families that have been hurt the most by this financial crisis?
I notice the CEOs of Wall Street expect to distribute $70 billion in bonuses this year (reported by Times UK) but I guess that $70 billion is coming from their own money, not the $750 billion bailout.
____________________________
The dems and their (utterly dishonest) compassion for the “poor” are at the root of the current crisis. But by all means, let’s have some more – shall we? Especially someone whose intimately connected with and has taken massive amounts of money from the perpetrators – ACORN and FANNIE MAE.
Orson Scott Card, “Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn on the Lights?”
http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html

When the government takes $750 billion and gives it to Wall Street, is that also Marxist?
Socialist, yes. That is the problem with it.

ellen, i don’t doubt the humanity of conservatives (don’t forget, i come from a family of conservatives, and i’m surrounded by them in this red district of a purple state).
i just laugh at the morons who use that “generosity index” as some sort of proof that red states (infer “conservatives”) are more generous than blue states (infer “liberals”). it’s laughable. sorry if the math and number game is too difficult to grasp, but if the simple example doesn’t spell it out for you at how ridiculous the index is, then you’ll never understand.
“New York gave out of their wealth. Arkansas gave out of their poverty.”
you still don’t get it. the index is a sham.
“As He looked up, Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. ‘I tell you the truth,’ He said, ‘this poor widow has put in more than all the others. All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.” Luke 21:1-3 NIV
thanks for supporting the case for progressive tax.

morons
More name-calling. I’m done on this thread.

HFH is comprised of many liberal Christians who don’t put a litmus test on who gets help.
I guarantee that if a Jew or Muslim showed up at an evangelical charity needing help they wouldn’t get jack without being forced to listen to sermons trying to convert them.
I don’t know much about Muslims but I’m pretty positive evangelicals wouldn’t lift a finger for a Jew without there being a chance of converting them. No sermon = no food.

scott, if you’re ever hungry, you’ve got a warm meal waiting at my house (liberal secular christian).
“I’m done on this thread.”
bye!

AR, thank you. I have known many liberal Christians (and even a few conservative Catholics) to who a person IS a person first, not potential brownie points for heaven.

sure, i know what you mean. the way people like you and i are treated by many of the religious right probably isn’t so different.
i suppose that i live my life with the understanding that i cannot hide my actions from god, so it doesn’t matter how i say i live, it matters how i live.
and for what it’s worth, i know of many, many more loving liberal christians even if the conservative christians scream louder. conservative christians have found their voice through people like james dobson, jerry falwell, pat robertson, judge roy moore. liberal christians continue to find theirs in the teachings of christ.