Obama as Americas President, is it all over but the counting.....

[BobRyan]

I agree that when the catastrophic world wide events arrive that drive us to Sunday legislation -- it won't matter which party is in the White House.

Remember the simple point that SDAs never argue that flunky accidental political party affiliation is what drives the end-time Sunday laws. We argue that catastrophic calamities drive the religious elements in America to press the Government (no matter what party it is ) to take immediate action.

That is why Ellen White was so happy to vote WITH the pro-Sunday legislators on issues of MORALS -- when it came to the value of human life and morals about temperance.

And that is why there will be no "blessings handed out in heaven" for those simply blindly voted for the most godless candidate they could find. Those wrongheaded ideas will be greeted with no more contorted rambling Rigious Liberty arguments in defense of them - once we reach those pearly gates.

in Christ,

Bob

[fccool]

On top of that, SDAs argue that Sunday laws come about by appearance of false messiah that comes to destroy the enemies of Israel and set up earthly kingdom. It's not a government or even Pope that spearheads these. I believe it will be the appearance of the false messiah that people will take for Christ. I know that many of my Baptist friends are waiting for Jesus to return in the midst of calamities and settles in Jerusalem.

Keep in mind that this is what majority of the evangelicals believe today... and they'll get what they want, I believe.

I just hope I will not live to see the day of my best friends hunting me down as a heretic. This would hurt more than anything.

[Dr. Shane]

I guess the big question is if Obama will have Reverend Wright to the White House for spiritual counsel like Bill Clinton did.

[Bravus]

Bill Clinton was advised by Jeremiah Wright? I know they called him 'the first black president', but wow!

[Bravus]

Republicans historically are far more likely to legislate their religious beliefs on people than Democrats.

[fun2believe]

Republicans historically are far more likely to legislate their religious beliefs on people than Democrats.

How true it is.

But why is that so?

Are democrats less religious?

Or are they less likely to pass legislation regarding religion?

[Bravus]

Bit of both, I think. Certainly there have been strong ties between the Republican party and the 'religious right' for the past couple of decades. I think typically Democrats tend to either be secular or to believe that religious faith is something that is private to the individual and not to be enforced in the public sphere.

[Neil D]

That is why Ellen White was so happy to vote WITH the pro-Sunday legislators on issues of MORALS -- when it came to the value of human life and morals about temperance.

in Christ,

Bob

I take it that we have a voting record of EGW when she was here? If not, how do you know how she voted?

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

Republicans historically are far more likely to legislate their religious beliefs on people than Democrats.

How true it is.

But why is that so?

Are democrats less religious?

Or are they less likely to pass legislation regarding religion?

Republicans are ONE group of people in the US...Democrates have a series of smaller groups that bring thier concerns to there leaders who hash it out...Democrates seek a solution between thier groups before it gets to the public...

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Quote:

Sunday laws would come if either would be a president. The contingency planning is not done by the presidents, but by the security advisers who has been in Washington for ages.

There are number of contingency planning procedures in existence that cover various situations. Some of these situations address the US debt default and subsequent economic collapse... which Government has obviously been planning for a while. The people in Washington are not clueless. They know what's coming, they just don't know when it is coming.

Hi fccool,

The Sunday law will be brought in by the Democrats. Here's why I believe this. Who orignially brought in the first Sunday observance law. Constantine, What was his motive? To bring together to unite to make as one two groups of people. The Christians of which he had just become one and the pagans of which he was one.

We have the same situation here with Obama the pagan trying to unite everyone (all in order to get elected mind you - just like constantine) Why do I call him a pagan? Because he has pagan values and beliefs. He has no problems with the death of innocent life and he has no problem with samesex relationships and he has no problem teaching that to kids under 10 years old. Tolerance I believe he called it, but it's more condoning than anything else.

The Sunday law was orginally brought in by a liberal ruler and likewise we have a very liberal man wanting to rule. YOu must realize that in the past Republicans were more conservative and religious and democrats were more conservative as well. Things have changed and now republican have moved away from their conservative roots and democrats have become so liberal that they make no sense.

Picture this; a man who has no godly morals (only morals according to the world), like Obama get's into power and then you have the Democrats in the majority in both houses of goverment.

Now add one more ingredient to this scenario; terrorists attacks the US (which according to Joe Biden will happen)or an economic breakdown as a result of an attack or the policies put into place by Mr Obama. You have fertile ground for a Sunday law of which the legeslative and judicial branches will be the backers and then who will stand in the way of this? Not the republicans. Obama or Biden will sign it into law and the contitution of the US will be altered and that will be the end.

In the past two years the republicans could do very little and even when they were in power because the democrats would not stnad with them on anything. Their whole purpose was to make the republicans look bad so when it came election time they could blame Bush for all that has gone wrong in the US when 90% of the time it was congresses fault.

So if the republicans even tried to bring in a Sunday law it would never get passed the 1st stages or even considered because the democrats would never ever support that. But now in order to get in power and maintain power and try to unite every one in a false sense of oness by lies, they will easily make and pass a Sunday law when the time comes.

We are told to pray for time to reach those we have not taken the time to reach before. To vote for a man that has no godly morals and has no problems with abortion and other issues that God would not condon is just sealing your own fate and cutting short the time you will wish you had when things turn for the worse.

Anyone with even a hint of reasoning ability and not led by emotions can see that what I am saying very possible and most likely will happen.

Obama is going to ruin this country for ever. I have a bigger fear though. That is, if something bad happens to him. I don't wish that on him. But the greater threat is to have a fool with this much power. And that is Biden.

Norman

[Tom Wetmore]

Such an incredibly warped and bizzare perspective...

[olger]

A very strong possibility exists that the environmentalist movement will result in the demand to take a day off to conserve resources. Guess which day will likely emerge as the rest day of earth?

regards,

oG

[Neil D]

Hi fccool,

The Sunday law will be brought in by the Democrats. Here's why I believe this. Who orignially brought in the first Sunday observance law. Constantine, What was his motive? To bring together to unite to make as one two groups of people. The Christians of which he had just become one and the pagans of which he was one.

We have the same situation here with Obama the pagan trying to unite everyone (all in order to get elected mind you - just like constantine) Why do I call him a pagan? Because he has pagan values and beliefs. He has no problems with the death of innocent life and he has no problem with samesex relationships and he has no problem teaching that to kids under 10 years old. Tolerance I believe he called it, but it's more condoning than anything else.

[snip]

Obama is going to ruin this country for ever. I have a bigger fear though. That is, if something bad happens to him. I don't wish that on him. But the greater threat is to have a fool with this much power. And that is Biden.

Norman

OOOooh good night! [sigh]

For this one post, Norman...I will change the date of your appology...from 4 years to 1 ....The logic of this is just too fantastic for the imagination....

I will be awaiting your appology...in ONE year...

[Dr. Shane]

Republicans historically are far more likely to legislate their religious beliefs on people than Democrats.

Unless we classify radical environmentalism as a religion. Democrats are more than willing to force their environmental beliefs on others.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Quote:

OOOooh good night! [sigh]

For this one post, Norman...I will change the date of your appology...from 4 years to 1 ....The logic of this is just too fantastic for the imagination....

I will be awaiting your appology...in ONE year...

1 year lol.

Well I do have a good imagination. I honestly believe Monsier Obama is a fake and has fleeced a lot of people. That, we will see in a year, if he gets in.

There are some, probably many who have changed their minds just within this last week. I have seen it with my own eyes. A die hard Obama man realized what he stood for and just dropped the O man like a hot tator.

The more who do that the better. More time for us to bring the Gospel and do what we ought to be doing.

Norman

[carolaa]

I think the Republicans have to bear the blame for this backlash against the Bush Doctrine and administration. Obama would not be doing nearly so well if people were happy with the way things are going.

[Neil D]

Quote:

Obama would not be doing nearly so well if people were happy with the way things are going.

Hmmmmm.....ya think?

[Dr. Shane]

It isn't just Bush. Since Newt Gingrich left Congress the Republican party has had weak leadership. The Democrats have been very successful obstructionists and prevented Bush from accomplishing anything significant. Contrast that with Clinton who jumped on the Republican agenda and by working with them got a lot accomplished after Republicans won control of Congress in 1994.

[rush4hire]

Obama is like "The Rock". Sounds just like him, imo. I'm sure black and mixed people everywhere are just glowing. (I can't help thinking that). I'm happy. It's a good thing.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

He forgot about the party of Abraham Lincoln.

[rush4hire]

This is one of the best presidential speeches I ever heard.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Quote:

I think the Republicans have to bear the blame for this backlash against the Bush Doctrine and administration. Obama would not be doing nearly so well if people were happy with the way things are going.

Carolaa,

I honestly don't see it this way. I am a Canadian and moved here in Nov 99 and I followed the elections for the 1st time. Gore vs. Bush. I was for Gore and I liked Clinton. Why? Because in Canada they treated Clinton and Gore like Rock stars in the media. Nothing bad was ever said about them. Even the Waco horror was made to look like the Branch Davidians were loonies. During those days I made sure to tell people that he was not an SDA.

While I am here I started to listen to the radio and heard some things that I had never thought of before. As time went on I realized, because of the evidence that I saw, that the media was biased and were supportive of Democrats.

This was an observation made by an outsider and I could see it clearly. After most senators and congress voted for the war in Iraq there was still some love for Bush. During this time Bush was very open about his faith in Jesus Christ and it seemed at every opportunity spoke of Him.

Shortly after that I noticed how they started to disrespect him and then open hostility. He was criticized for things and still is that Democrats voted for and passed.

To get back to Clinton and Gore in Canada, the Media built them up and in the US the Media tore Bush down day after day and night after night and so after hearing all this negative talk of coarse people are going to start to believe it because they don't follow up on what they hear.

I'm not saying he is perfect what I am saying is the main reason McCain lost is because of the constant hammering on Bush and then equating McCain to Bush. It was a good plan to win the presidency. But as with all things there is a price to pay. And the price is this. You can mark my words, if the media built you up they own you. They have power and they will use it if you don't give them what they want.

They loved McCain before he ran against Obama but not after the fight was on. Now Obama is going to have to keep his end of the bargain and he better not pull anything that they don't like.

The way things are going, have been blamed on Bush but the economy is not his fault, this is global. Gas prices are global. Corruption is a sign of the times and greed has its price to pay, as is seen in many other countries. The housing market is not his fault. The war in Iraq is something he asked for and was granted permission by congress; that made their decision based on Colin Powel's testimony and other information. The US went in with their allies and are now winning. Why is none of the Media praising him or at least acknowledging the victories?

Carolaa, I am only telling you what I observe. Don't take it personally; I am not trying to say anything against anyone. I am pointing out that the media had the biggest part (not all) in turning the people away from the Republican Party and causing them to be discontent. Instead of blaming Bush for things he has no control over, they could have pointed out the areas in the country that are doing well.

It was very convenient to blame Bush and even if he would have had opportunity to assure the people and give his side of events, it would have not been covered in a way that would have meant much or reached many people. The Media had their man picked and this was in play for a long time ever since they said he stole the election in 2000. That's the way I see it and if I saw it any other way, I'd tell you because I'm not into lying.

Norman

[carolaa]

I think the media is to blame for not pressing Bush sooner and letting him get away with too many shenanigans, particularly about the war. I think when it came out finally how he had lied and created scenarios from nothing just to get into Iraq, people finally started wising up. Colin Powell resigned in disgust when he realized how he had been used like a chess pawn.

Probably the reason the media doesn't talk about our "winning" in Iraq is because there is no proof that we are winning. There might be peace, for now. But why? Perhaps because so many people have left that there's no one left to fight. There are no lights on at night in some neighborhoods because people have left. And as soon as we leave, they will probably start fighting again. Saddam is the one who kept a tight rein on things, and he is gone because of us. Maybe the media is not acknowledging our "victories" because they are tired of hearing all the propaganda and tired of soldiers dying, and no one really knows why we are still over there except that Bush won't let us leave.

Actually, the Republicans didn't "love" McCain. Most were not very excited about the idea of him being President. Obama didn't have anything to do with a change, because there was no change.

[Dr. Shane]

The media has never given Bush a break and Bush didn't lie. My goodness, some people need to read the 9/11 report and lay off the kool-aid.

[carolaa]

Excerpt from 9/11 Commission report Overview of the Enemy:

"We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."