Tuesday, January 27, 2009

More Good News

I can't help it. Even on a cold morning like today, I go out and pull the newspaper out of the snow, bring it into the house and open it up and see a story like this and it makes me feel all warm inside.
President Obama announced a series of new policies yesterday intended to reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, capping a week of widespread changes aimed at reversing the legacy of George W. Bush.

In his first seven days in office, Obama has banned the use of controversial CIA interrogation tactics, ordered the closure of the U.S. military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and begun planning for the drawdown of troops in Iraq. He also imposed stringent limits on lobbyists, unveiled an $825 billion stimulus plan, and ordered a halt to any last-minute rules and regulations put in place by his predecessor.

The moves are part of an effort by Obama to follow through on his campaign promise to forge a new direction in Washington, administration officials said. "What you have seen in the first week is rapid change and a resetting of our global agenda," said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. "The president believes we can't afford to continue what we are doing. We can't afford to slow down." The Effort to Roll Back Bush Policies Continues

Hee -hee! See how good that feels?

42 Comments:

Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Obama's going to go a long ways towards repairing the damage George Bush did to the U.S.'s reputation around the world.

January 27, 2009 12:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Around the world?

Let's look at Canada.

He said during the campaign that he would rewrite NAFTA to favor American workers.

He was lying, of course, but how would that go over in Canada if he was telling the truth?

January 27, 2009 2:12 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Show me where he said that.

January 27, 2009 2:26 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

A poll just before the election showed that people around the world favoured Obama over Mccain by 85% to 15%. Obama represents the humility so sorely lacking in Republicans. Democrats acknowledge and learn from the U.S.'s mistakes. Republicans try to cover them up with arrogant shouting about how great the U.S. is.

January 27, 2009 2:29 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7606100.stm

The poll also showed that globally people had a persistently poor image of the U.S.


http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Obama_The_Preferred_Candidate_Around_The_World_Poll

January 27, 2009 2:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Obama represents the humility so sorely lacking in Republicans."

You mean like when he bombed certain locations in Pakistan last week over the objections of its democratically elected government and without notifying them?

Pakistan, btw, is an ally of the U.S..

January 27, 2009 3:07 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

He may not be perfect, but he's a far cry from Bush who started a war under false pretences that's killed hundreds of thousands of innocent individuals.

January 27, 2009 3:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Priya

This weekend, Iraqis will vote on choosing their own leaders. All sides are participating in the election and insurgent violence has disappeared.

Insurgents and Iranian and al Quaeda are the ones who killed hundreds of thousands. Iran has suffered defeat as they tried futilely to stop the democratic process. al Quaeda, once a hero of the Arab street, has been completely discredited.

Iran will now have a democratic Shiite nation next door to remind their populace what civilization looks like.

All this is thanks to George Bush and would not have been possible if Barry Obama had gotten his way.

Sometime, in the not-too-distant future, Iraq's history books will identify George Bush as a hero.

January 27, 2009 3:44 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

LOL, thanks Bad anonymous, that was a good one! Your distortion of reality knows no bounds. "insurgent violence has disappeared" - ha ha ha haha...."history books will identify George Bush as a hero." - ha ha ha ha ha... Stop! You're killing me! LOL!

January 27, 2009 3:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, we don't want to kill you, Priya.

We need you to stay alive so you can continue to make the opposition to TTF look good.

Look for the Iraqi election reports this weekend. The Iranians will.

January 27, 2009 4:44 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Iraq - A car bomb attack targeting a Sunni politician who heads a Baghdad Islamic university killed four students on Wednesday, underscoring a recent surge of violence here, officials said.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gHR__yJUkS1c6YnSWaY87h-daygA

"insurgent violence has disappeared"

And Huckabee is president.

January 27, 2009 4:45 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "OK, we don't want to kill you, Priya.".

I've heard your lies before. Since the overthrow of Saddam things have gotten desperate for Iraqi LGBTs. Government death squads hunt them and kill them with impunity. This is the wonderful world you're so happy has prevailed in Iraq. Fortunately you'll never get your way in true democracies.

January 27, 2009 4:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You gotta understand that Iraq is not a Judeo-Christian society. They have an intolerant attitude toward gays.

You'll find that gays are generally only tolerated in countries with a Judeo-Christian heritage.

Oh, people don't like homosexuality anywhere but you'd be safe in a place like America, only suffering social disapproval, whereas in places without a Judeo-Christian heritage you'd need to stay on the run just to survive.

January 27, 2009 5:04 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

You've presented this false dichotomy before. Your suggestion that gays should be happy with the oppression of Christianity because Islam would be worse is nonsensical. Actually gays are the most accepted in the countries with the least religion. Those that have thrown off the shackles of religion like Canada, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Its the countries where religion has the strongest influence where gays are treated the worst. Its no coincidence that gays can get married in relatively irreligious Canada but not in the much more religious U.S.

Gays choices aren't limited to the choices of societies dominated by Christianity or Islam. Christianity may be the lesser of two evils because Christians have largely rejected the total domination of religion since the enlightenment. Fortunately society isn't limited to those two evils and best of all for gays are societies where no religion dominates.


The less religion there is the better off gays and society are:

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

January 27, 2009 5:25 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "in places without a Judeo-Christian heritage you'd need to stay on the run just to survive.".

False. Gays are well accepted in Japan and increasingly so in China. Prior to the Christian influence in India and Africa gays had well respected social roles in India and Africa. Prior to the arrival of the white man in North America gays had particular places of honour amongst native american tribes as shamans, healers and were recognized as a spiritual bridge between the sexes. These were the honoured Two-spirited individuals.

January 27, 2009 5:32 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I should add that Christians universally print and distribute a book they use to indoctrinate children that calls for the death of gays. Christian reconstructionists still lobby for the death penalty for gays. Christians are no friends of gays.

January 27, 2009 5:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you'd be safe in a place like America, only suffering social disapproval

That's a disgusting lie, easily refuted with facts.

From 2006-2007, the overall number of hate crimes decreased by 1% in the USA according to the FBI. During that same period, hate crimes based on sexual orientation increased 6%.

Tell the loved ones of these victims of hate crimes here in the USA and the thousands more like them, that it was just some "social disapproval" that caused them to die.

Lawrence King

Steven Domer

Satender Singh

Philip Walsted

Sakia Gunn

Ronnie Antonio

Richie Phillips

Jason Gage

Scotty Weaver

January 27, 2009 6:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They aren't friends of homosexuality but are compassionate to those who have fallen into this sin and simply desire to convert them.

To not try is more of an offense.

Observers of bizarre behavior will not that Priya and her multiple personalities have posted 5 of the last 6 comments.

January 27, 2009 6:13 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...

Oh yeah, they love us so much that they destroy the credibility of their own religion through the lies they spread about us via Paul Cameron, John R. Diggs and the psuedo experts of organizations such as the Family Research Council.

I can live without THAT kind of love.

January 27, 2009 9:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We were talking about safety, Alvin.

Where do you feel safer?

A place with a Judeo-Christian heritage like Columbia, New York or Paris OR a place with a non-Christian heritage like Tripoli, Tehran, Mumbai or Jakarta?

I think gays are safer in countries with a Christian heritage but we have a dissenter from Canada who feels danger lurks around every corner.

January 28, 2009 8:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They aren't friends of homosexuality but are compassionate to those have fallen into this sin and simply desire to convert them.

Martin Luther desired to convert the Jews to Christianity, or expel them. He even found a way to pay them to help set up their new lives once they'd been "sincerely converted."

I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us an they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest.

...But if we are afraid that they might harm us or our wives, children, servants, cattle, etc., if they had to serve and work for us -- for it is reasonable to assume that such noble lords of the world and venomous, bitter worms are not accustomed to working and would be very reluctant to humble themselves so deeply before the accursed Goyim -- then let us emulate the common sense of other nations such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc., compute with them how much their usury has extorted from us, divide, divide this amicably, but then eject them forever from the country. For, as we have heard, God's anger with them is so intense that gentle mercy will only tend to make them worse and worse, while sharp mercy will reform them but little. Therefore, in any case, away with them!


Do you think he was being "compassionate" to the Jews?

January 28, 2009 9:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's always funny when anonymous maligns Priya for commenting too much.

Do we know any other type of person who attacks others for things they do or feel themselves? Gosh golly, how can that be?

January 28, 2009 10:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bea

You have enough trouble understanding your own time without going back 500 years to make some point.

January 28, 2009 10:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea-not anon
My daily message

PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! I can't hear it,see it or say it too much.

January 28, 2009 2:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

let's just say, Go Barry O!

how's that, Andreary?

January 28, 2009 2:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't speak for Andrea, but I think it's perfect. From now on I'll call you "Barry 0" since you are so fond of the name.

January 28, 2009 2:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

makes no sense but it sure will confuse alot of folks who rely on this blog for entertainment

Go, Barry O!

Keep up what you're doing to make sure the Republicans have good shot in 2010.

January 28, 2009 3:09 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "Where do you feel safer? A place with a Judeo-Christian heritage like Columbia, New York or Paris OR a place with a non-Christian heritage like Tripoli, Tehran, Mumbai or Jakarta?".

Again a false dichotomy. The only choices aren't christian and Islamic countries. Gays are safest and have the most equality in those countries with the least religious influence like Canada, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Its the countries where religion has the strongest influence where gays are treated the worst. Its no coincidence that gays can get married in relatively irreligious Canada but not in the much more religious U.S. If there was any truth to your suggestion that a christian heritage is responsible for the safety and equality of gays, gays would be able to get married in religious U.S. and not irreligious Canada. Clearly the opposite of your suggestion is true - the less religious a society is (Islamic or Christian) the better off gays are.

January 28, 2009 7:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We're discussing safety not social status, Priya.

January 28, 2009 9:41 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...

That's an extremely xenophobic point of view. And America has never been a Christian nation in deed or action. The idea of "Judeo-Christian heritage" is just a needless talking point.

January 28, 2009 10:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is a Judeo-Christian nation in heritage. Our system of government is based on four principles that come straight out of Judeo-Christianity.

btw, guys, every time you don't want to talk about something, you dismiss it as a "talking point" but the point is that you've given up at that point because you know your point of view is indefensible.

Get the point?

January 28, 2009 11:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/160337824?z00m=19341654

Support the Unplanned Pregnancy Prevention Bill

January 29, 2009 11:41 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "We're discussing safety not social status, Priya.".

So was I. Gays are safer in Canada, Sweden, the netherlands, etc. than they are in the U.S.

Bad anonymous said "It is a Judeo-Christian nation in heritage. Our system of government is based on four principles that come straight out of Judeo-Christianity.".

It is not Christian in heritage. The imigrants to the U.S. formed their own country because of the stiffling nature of British religion. The specifically were rejecting religion that's why the U.S. constitution makes no mention of it and is an entirely secular document. As we discussed in the other thread the four principles you claimed come out of Christianity are contradicted by the dictates of the bible and your imaginary god - the biblical examples I gave you demonstrate Christianity is about the opposite of those four principles.

January 29, 2009 12:49 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Exploding Bad anonymous's myth that gays are safe in Christian countries is the Christian bible itself. It calls for the death of gays and Christians proudly print and distribute it widely and use it to indoctrinate children in their war on gays.

January 29, 2009 1:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Priya

You sad fool.

The first we did when we declared independence was invoke the Judeo-Christian ideal that all men are equal before God:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,"

The Constitution, while not quite as blatant, also is based on three other Judeo-Christian concepts:

1. servant leadersship
2. seperation of church and state
3. imperfectability of man requiring checks and balances on those in power

January 29, 2009 1:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Gays are safer in Canada, Sweden, the netherlands, etc. than they are in the U.S."

Doubtful.

We began talking about how dangerous Iraq is for gays.

I pointed out that this is because they are not a tolerant society as those countries with Judeo-Christian heritage are.

If you compare Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the U.S with Iraq, there is really no difference in safety between the four.

Those four countries have a Judeo-Christian heritage.

Iraq doesn't.

That's the difference!

January 29, 2009 1:33 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad Anonymous the declaration of independence referred to the Deist god, not the Christian one. It is no more a bow to the concept of an actual god than was Einsteins references to god whom he defined as nature itself.

As to the rest of your BS about the constitution being based on Christian concepts your own bible demonstrates that those concepts are NOT Christian:

1. all men are equal before God".

You couldn't have more profoundly contradicted the bible if you'd have tried to intentionally do so. The bible makes it clear that all are not equal

1. Jews are this god's "chosen people".

2. Your god commanded the Jews to invade peaceful people's lands, make no convenant with them even if they wanted peace and to "utterly destroy them" - all men, women, children, babies, and animals. Obviously your god didn't consider all men equal.

3. Not only didn't your god consider all men equal he didn't consider men and women equal. The bible values women at half the sheckles of men, and babies under one year old at no sheckles at all. Women are to remain silent in places of worship and not to usurp authority over men nor to teach them. Your god created woman to be a servant to Adam.

Bad anonymous said "Furthermore, our founding documents are based on four basic concepts that were introduced to the world by Judeo-Christianity:

2. servant leadership"

You couldn't be more wrong. Your imaginary god is defined as an unchallenged leader to be worshipped and feared, not as any sort of servant. Man is subservient to god, man is to serve god, not vice versa.

Bad anonymous said "Furthermore, our founding documents are based on four basic concepts that were introduced to the world by Judeo-Christianity:

3. seperation of church and state

4. checks and balances through seperation of powers ".

There is neither concept in the bible. The bible clearly states that god's law is superior to man's law and one is to follow god's law and ignore man's law. This trumps the statment by Jesus to "give to Ceaser what is Ceaser's". There is no checks and balances through seperation of powers either - the imaginary god is the supreme dictator of all.

January 29, 2009 1:53 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I pointed out "Gays are safer in Canada, Sweden, the netherlands, etc. than they are in the U.S."

Bad anonymous said "Doubtful. We began talking about how dangerous Iraq is for gays.".

Not quite. I raised the point first that despite your cheering about how successful the war in Iraq was and how "safe" it is there now that things are much worse for LGBTS there than they were under Sadam.

Bad anonymous said "I pointed out that this is because they are not a tolerant society as those countries with Judeo-Christian heritage are.".

Its all relative. Christians are less religious than Islamists, the less religion there is the less oppression of gays there is. It is not that Christianity is tolerant of gays, it isn't, it calls for the death of gays - its that Christians since the enlightenment have rejected total religious control over their lives and Islamists have not. Less religion means less intolerance of gays. It is the lower religiosity of Christians that makes them less intolerant of gays, not their Christianity itself.

Bad anonymous said "If you compare Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the U.S with Iraq, there is really no difference in safety between the four. Those four countries have a Judeo-Christian heritage.".

Hate crimes against gays in the U.S. have increased markedly since religionists implemented their campaign against equal rights for gays - Irreligious Canada, Sweden, and the netherlands are have much lower levels of crimes against LGBTS than the religious U.S.

But...

For the sake of arguement lets say you're correct and that gays are just as safe in each of these four countries. That then destroys your argument that Christianity is responsible for the tolerance of gays. If that were the case gays would be much safer in the more religious U.S. than in the less religious Canada, Sweden, and the neteherlands. They are not by your own admission so it is clear that Christianity itself does not result in increased tolerance of LGBTs.

January 29, 2009 2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's confusing you, Priya, is that I said countries with a Christian heritage not countries with the most devout Christians. All four countries are very safe for sexual deviants because of their Christian heritage.

Christianity emphasizes conversion through moral suasion rather than forcible conversion and thus keeps sinners safe so they will be available for evangelization and conversion.

While some of these countries have forsaken religious practice, their roots are still Judeo-Christian, hence the tolerance for the presence of deviants in the larger secular society.

That's just the plain old facts.

Notice you can't find a pattern of violence against gays be devout Christians.

That's not a coincidence. Violence is not compatible with Christianity.

Ever read what happened when Peter got out his sword and tried to stop the Romans from arresting Jesus. Jesus told him to put away his sword and he healed the wounds Peter had inflicted.

Why would a Christian try to harm a gay?

January 29, 2009 5:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why would a Christian try to harm a gay?

Because their holy book, The Bible, contains Leviticus, a book that calls for the death of gays.

January 29, 2009 11:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It also calls for the death of liars, adulterers, thieves, blaspemers and anyone else who commits sin.

Are all those people at danger from Christians too? Because that would include everyone including Christians.

In Romans 3, you can read "all have sinned" and in Romans 6, you can read "the wages of sin is death".

You've misinterpretted scripture. The Bible doesn't call for the death of just gays. It calls for the death of everyone. And as you know, that's not the end of the story either.

I've asked to show me any story of an active, believing, traditional Christian who has committed any violence against gays and you've obviously searched and failed.

That's because have no reason for Christians to commit violence against gays. They are potentials for conversion and their names may be written in the Book of Life for all we know.

That's the thing about Christianity. It holds that only God knows who will eventually be saved. Therfore, everyone needs to be seen as valuable.

January 29, 2009 11:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let' not mention Jamaica, where mobs rend queer people limb from limb; or Lithuania and Russia, where they throw feces and rotten food; or many parts of sub-saharan africa, where being gay is punishable by death; or Virginia, where, until a court ruling by Supreme Court activist justices, being gay was punishable by 5 years in jail.

Or let's just talk about DC where there has been a run on murders and assaults on gay men in the past year, and where transgender people have a terrific rate of being victims of homicide.

Priya, I would stop arguing with this fool. He specializes in nonsense anti-lgbt arguments, and I think it's a waste of electrons. But on the otherhand, he is kind of entertaining in a three stooges/marx brothers sort of way.

January 30, 2009 11:44 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home