ThinkFast: December 23, 2008
ThinkFast: December 23, 2008
President-elect Obama’s team has announced that on Jan. 20, Obama “will take the oath of office using the same Bible upon which President Lincoln was sworn in at his first inauguration.” He “will be the first President sworn in using the Lincoln Bible since its initial use in 1861.”
According to enforcement data released Monday, “Internal Revenue Service audits of large corporations fell for the third straight year” in 2008. The IRS audited just 15.3 percent of returns of corporations with assets of $10 million or more, which is “the lowest audit coverage level since 2003 and down from a 20% coverage rate in 2005.”
Yesterday, President Bush “made what is expected to be his final trip as commander in chief to Walter Reed Army Medical Center…where he visited soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan and also had a personal medical appointment.” Despite the facility’s problems widely publicized problems, Bush said that “every time I come here, I get amazed at the quality of care, the professionalism and the courage of our troops.”
Though the Supreme Court stated that the decision in Bush v. Gore — which was issued eight years ago this month — was “limited to the present circumstances” and did not set a precedent, legal experts say that the ruling “is turning out to have lasting value after all.” “You’re starting to see courts invoke it,” said NYU law professor Samuel Issacharoff. “And you’re starting to see briefs cite it.”
Today, the Minnesota Canvassing Board will award votes from 5,000 challenges that were withdrawn by both campaigns. “Based on a draft report released yesterday by the secretary of state’s office, once those votes are awarded, Franken will have 48 more votes than Coleman.”
Benjamin Ginsberg, the Bush–Cheney counsel during the 2000 recount, has been “quietly advising” Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) in his recount with Al Franken. “Ginsberg was forced to resign from the Bush-Cheney team in 2004 after it was revealed that he was also advising the controversial Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.”
In “a significant overture to the incoming Obama administration,” European nations “have begun intensive discussions” on whether to resettle detainees from Guantanamo Bay. Previously, “repeated requests from the Bush administration that European allies accept some Guantanamo Bay detainees received only refusals.”
Police departments across the country are saying that “shoplifting arrests are 10 percent to 20 percent higher this year than last.” With the economy weakening, “much of the increase has come from first-time offenders” who make “rash decisions in a pinch.”
And finally: President-elect Obama caused a stir on the Internet yesterday, when photos popped up showing him shirtless at the beach. According to the Washington Post, the photographer who snapped the pictures is a contractor who lives in Hawaii and whose family has a house near where the Obamas are vacationing.
Sign up here to receive our daily e-newsletter, The Progress Report.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I wish he’d swear in on the Constitution rather than a heavily edited and translated collection of ancient fairy tales
———————————————
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:04 am‘ere – Atlanta’s Progressive Jazz
(yes that’s me on the piano)
Find us at ReverbNation.com/ere
———————————————
“Though the Supreme Court stated that the decision in Bush v. Gore — which was issued eight years ago this month — was “limited to the present circumstances” and did not set a precedent, legal experts say that the ruling “is turning out to have lasting value after all.” “You’re starting to see courts invoke it,” said NYU law professor Samuel Issacharoff. “And you’re starting to see briefs cite it.”
Actually, the ruling stated that the differences in counties recount practices was un-constitutional, which then naturally flows to the voting practices themselves, and to the state to state variances. I have always thought that it is in the nation’s interest to see a mandated voting method across the 50 states, such that one in hawaii, would vote the exact same way as one in Maine. If we then plug some electroninc convenience in, it should be that within a state, EVERY polling place should be able to reconfigure the electroninc polling booth for ANY citizen, and allow voting at ANY polling palce for any citizen.
“Oh you live in distrcit 14,” so the issues and candidates for you are then loaded and whole new screen appears upon which that person votes upon.
That would AGGHHH (the rightwing chokes) mean MORE people could/would vote. Making it easier to vote is the ANTITHESIS of the GOP. If this were to happen they would be shrunk to a party of Greedy Old People, Hey….
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 amPresident-elect Obama’s team has announced that on Jan. 20, Obama “will take the oath of office using the same Bible upon which President Lincoln was sworn in at his first inauguration.” He “will be the first President sworn in using the Lincoln Bible since its initial use in 1861.”
Wadda buncha CRAP!
I’d feel a lot better about “St. Barry, the changer,” if he’d decided to declare his oath without “benefit” of swearing it upon the collected myths of a bunch of bronze-age shepards…
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:13 amBecause, if the last six months taught us nothing else, it clearly demonstrated that corporations are so trustworthy, they need no oversight.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:14 amIf we then plug some electroninc convenience in, it should be that within a state, EVERY polling place should be able to reconfigure the electroninc polling booth for ANY citizen, and allow voting at ANY polling palce for any citizen.
Yeah, then to steal the elections, they’d only have to write one program, not 50.
So much easier…
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:15 amI’d feel a lot better about “St. Barry, the changer,” if he’d decided to declare his oath without “benefit” of swearing it upon the collected myths of a bunch of bronze-age shepards…
Who are you to decide what religious beliefs Obama should or should not hold and use as a basis for his committment to uphold the Constitution? I don’t see this as any better than the right-wing calling him a Muslim.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:23 amI don’t see this as any better than the right-wing calling him a Muslim.
the explanation for that particular idiocy resides in the last part of your nym, so I’ll let it pass…
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:27 amOT.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/23/business/23auto.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
Make sure you remember: Its the unions at fault for the problems at US Auto makers. That’s why its so important to break them.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:29 amPersonally, I don’t care if Obama swears his oath on the Bible, the Qu’ran or the Collected Writs of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, just as long as he leads us out of the abyss that Dubya led us into….
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:30 amNo No No No No NO!
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:30 amThe evil terror supporting socialist will be sworn in using the Koran, all the while facing Mecca!
Isn’t that what president elect Obama’s opponents argued during the elections?
Maybe he should swear in using a science book
If there was a god, there’d be no religion
———————————————
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:32 am‘ere – Atlanta’s Progressive Jazz
(yes that’s me on the piano)
Find us at ReverbNation.com/ere
———————————————
Did you guys miss the part about Obama being a Christian? Besides, it’s tradition. I think it’s cool he’s using the Lincoln Bible.
And it looks like he’s been working out. rowr.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:33 am^ This
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:35 amPersonally, I don’t care if Obama swears his oath on the Bible, the Qu’ran or the Collected Writs of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
. . . just as long as he keeps his shirt on at the beach.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:36 amIf there was a god, there’d be no religion.
Never heard it put put more succinctly. Mencken or Parker-worthy! Nice…
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:53 amBased on a draft report released yesterday by the secretary of state’s office, once those votes are awarded, Franken will have 48 more votes than Coleman.
It’s kind of funny that Coleman’s fading hopes now rest largely on counting improperly rejected absentee ballots that he originally fought to keep from being counted. Conversely, Franken faces the possibility (not likely but possible) that he could lose because of those votes he fought to get counted.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:54 amChimpy made his “last” trip to Walter Reed Army Medical Hospital to gawk at the horror he has created. Its unfortunate that Chimpy the “commander-in-chief” never saw fit to present himself at a single funeral for any of the kids he killed with his lies in Iraqnam. Further, I wish this story was turned around. I wish that soldiers were going to Walter Reed to see an injured (armless, legless, – he’s already brainless) George W laying there mangled. Maybe in his next life that can come true.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:57 amnoone is throwing a hissy fit
just pointing out that it is irrational to swear in using an ancient book of fairy tales
———————————————
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:09 am‘ere – Atlanta’s Progressive Jazz
(yes that’s me on the piano)
Find us at ReverbNation.com/ere
———————————————
RantingTommy Says:
noone is throwing a hissy fit
OK, a ranting, then
just pointing out that it is irrational to swear in using an ancient book of fairy tales
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:16 amOK, we’ve gotten the message – over and over and over and over and over and over… Move on.
One more trip with free federal healthcare for Bush. Republicans love to deny healthcare to Americans but love to use it any chance they get. How about a constitutional amendment that requires all three legislative branches to have to negotiate and pay for their own healthcare the way the rest of us do?
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:22 amtokin librul Says:
I don’t see this as any better than the right-wing calling him a Muslim.
the explanation for that particular idiocy resides in the last part of your nym, so I’ll let it pass…
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:26 am#24 stupid fingers! Here’s MY comment:
Darryl and bitblt don’t consider me a Christian. You seem to think I’m a fundamentalist. Apparently, I’m hitting the mark I’ve been shooting for.
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:26 amI find it interesting that there are those here who claim to be “liberal” “progressive” and “tolerant”, yet feel the need to constantly criticize those of us that believe in Christianity.
Being called stupid, idiotic, and unintelligent for being a Christian has become par for the course here.
There is even 1 poster here whose vile posts against all Christians is constant. Even I have been attacked by him(?) for expressing my faith (hint: ROTFL!)
Seriously, how would everyone here feel if I constantly posted nothing by degrading and malicious remarks to the non believers, the agnostics, or the non Christians?
But I don’t, because I do believe in tolerance, acceptance, and respect. No matter what the gender, no matter what the color, no matter what the religion (or lack thereof).
Obama is a man of faith. He should not be criticized for following in that path, especially when it comes to being sworn in as president. If he denies the separation of Church and State is where I will gladly join in the criticism.
Okay, I’m off my soap box. I do wish everyone Happy Holidays. Spending blessed time with family is what is important this time of year!
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:34 amThe purpose of swearing-in is that the person making the oath make it upon something that he or she respects enough to make the oath meaningful. If Obama is a Christian, then swearing upon the bible (thus swearing by his religious belief) IS a relevant action. Whether sworn on anything or nothing at all, an oath is till an oath — and ALL oaths are purely personal matters. You could swear an oath on the koarn, but if you are not muslim that actually means LESS than swearing just upon your honor. Swearing on the constitution is meaningless, unless you view the constitution as a sacred document of some kind. Accepting ANY position of public servant assumes that you respect the constitution (and in the case of the president it is what he swears to uphold: he cannot swear on it that he will uphold it: as an oath that makes little sense). So, I don’t care what he swears upon, as long as he remains faithful to that oath.
And WTF is the buzz about him not wearing a shirt at the beach? I someone REALLY making a fuss about that? REALLY?
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:38 amDJxJ
I share your sentiments completely.
I’ll even go out on a limb and say “Merry Christmas” to you and all. Of course, I’ll be tolerant of those who want to have a “Miserable Thursday”.
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:40 amAmen (oops, that’s gonna set off the resident atheists again)DRxJ. I don’t care what Obama swears on as long as he actually upholds the Constitution like he pledges to do. Personally, I see a lot of significance in the use of the Lincoln bible (on lots of levels — Lincoln’s own beliefs or lack thereof are an interesting study in and of themselves) that has nothing to do with theology but I was a history major so maybe that’s just me. Anyway, to those Christians on the board, Merry Christmas, to those practicing other faiths, happy holidays, and to the atheists, enjoy your day off.
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:42 amRantingTommy Says:
just pointing out that it is irrational to swear in using an ancient book of fairy tales
I cannot accept that comment. It would be irrational for you, or I to swear upon the christian bible (or the koran, or torah, or what have you, as appropriate). But it is NOT irrational for a christain to swear upon the christian bible, if that is what they hold sacred. Understand that the purpose of swearing an oath on or by something is that the something sworn upon has a sacred (not necessarily “holy”) value. If one were agnostic or athiest then some other thing would need to be the foundation of the oath. One CAN swear on one’s honor, but most people, regardless of faith, tend to fell that honor (in this day and age) is a valueless thing to swear upon — that it is not compelling enough to substantiate an oath. While it OUGHT to be sufficient, it is not deemed so (and this is true for non-religious types as well: we do not have a firm concept of pesonal honor, nor do we, as a culture, have all that much respect or belief in personal honor).
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:45 amGood morning, everyone! I’d like to offer a slight clarification, if I could, with regard to my own atheism and “Christian-bashing.”
I have nothing but respect for REAL Christians – who not only talk the talk, but walk the walk. In fact, there are times that I find myself envious of their faith; sometimes the universe can be a hugely empty place, you know?
My atheism is the end-product of the last 8 years of the Bush administration: watching avowed faithful “Christians” bomb, torture and kill millions of innocent people – all the while proclaiming their love for Jesus, and claiming His stamp of approval on their actions.
And that said, I think I can speak for some of the others here when I say that I reserve my deepest scorn for them: the faux-Christians (the ones like Bush, Cheney, Dobson, Warren, Robertson et. al) who are all about talking the talk AS LOUDLY AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN – and who don’t even take baby steps when it comes to walking the walk.
I’m sure I’ve been guilty of over-generalization and lumping the good Christians in with the evil fakes – for which I apologize.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:07 amGO Al
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:11 amLeftside Annie, I can’t recall any comments you’ve made that can be called “Christian bashing”. If there were, it certainly hasn’t been a pattern. So, nothing to apologize for in my opinion.
I share your disdain for the faux-Christians. I refer to them as “Christian Pharisees” since they mirror the attitudes and behaviors that Jesus complained about with the Jewish Pharisees. This is my way to set them apart and I would encourage others to do the same.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:16 amThank you, PLC.
Happy Holidays, eh? *wink*
~A
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:19 amPerhaps he could add Thomas Jefferson’s Koran to the mix, side-by-side. That would make a statement!
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:20 amI’ve never heard anybody complain about a white man having his shirt off at the beach.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:24 amI’m not Christian but I agree with DRxJ says completely.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:29 amLeft side Annie,
I certainly share your resentment. It’s the pseudo-(c)hristians that have made a mockery of His true teachings.
I, too, loathe them.
I look forward to (hopefully) 8 years of tolerance and respect.
Shayne,
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:45 amHappy Holidays!
I’ll be in your neck of the woods Jan 17th as me and the boys take in a Bulls game (and a night on Chi-town!)
President-elect Obama’s team has announced that on Jan. 20, Obama “will take the oath of office using the same Bible upon which President Lincoln was sworn in at his first inauguration.” He “will be the first President sworn in using the Lincoln Bible since its initial use in 1861.”
Resident trolls: B. Hussein Obama is going to carve out the pages of the Lincoln bible, and put in a Koran! He’s a Muslim!!
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:57 am**runs screaming from the room, while pissing in pants**
President-elect Obama caused a stir on the Internet yesterday, when photos popped up showing him shirtless at the beach.
Ohhhhhh, baby.
That’s what I want for Christmas. ;)
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:59 amHappy Holidays, everyone!!
Merry Christmas, DRxJ & PLC!
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 pmHey Annie, I agree completely. It seems the faux Christians have Thrown the driver out the door and shoved the real Christians to the back of the bus. I really enjoy your NO BS comments. Stay Cool.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 pmLincoln was a righteous dude, so by all means use his bible or whatever.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:04 pmZooey,
Happy Holidays to you as well – especially Happy New Year and may 2009 be wonderful us all.
Oh, and I hope you get what you want for Christmas, even if you have to return it! :)
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:14 pmI personally think it is fitting that Obama use the Lincoln bible, and the nod to Lincoln historically by this gesture is cool.
To the bashers, there is freedom of religion in this country, that same freedom that lets you (and me ) NOT believe also protects everyones religious beliefs no matter their faith ( or non faith ).
Now I have debated quite a bit about religion here, but I have always stood by each persons right to believe what they want to believe, no matter if I believe it or not.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:23 pmAnd finally: President-elect Obama caused a stir on the Internet yesterday, when photos popped up showing him shirtless at the beach. According to the Washington Post, the photographer who snapped the pictures is a contractor who lives in Hawaii and whose family has a house near where the Obamas are vacationing.
And the tabloid Politico is making a big deal about is it appropriate for our new President to be seen without a shirt on. I guess they think he should be on the beach in a three-piece suit.
Politico has become a cross between Fixed News and the National Inquirer. And the sad thing is that blogs like the Huffington Post constantly quote them.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:44 pmI think it’s time that they change the “swearing in” to the President putting his hand on the constitution rather than a bible.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:46 pmO.T Sorry,…My local new’s just had a short clip on the holiday shopping or rather lack of…Said the sale’s are at a 40 year low….Hummm..”Show me the money” from the movie Jerry mcguire would apply here…Guess the fat cat’s that got the first 350 billion for the bank’s and stock market aren’t big spender’s…Maybe when they are all booted out, take their money and run there will be enough for all of the poor and working class to have a Christmas in July…Blessings
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:02 pmI find it interesting that there are those here who claim to be “liberal” “progressive” and “tolerant”, yet feel the need to constantly criticize those of us that believe in Christianity.
You can believe any stupid, bronze-age superstition you want.
No skin off my ass…until you start to impose it into the public sphere…
that’s when it gets to be problematic.
Obama could swear on his gramma’s death-certificate, if he wants to make clear his good faith. It would mean a LOT more than ’swearing’ on a compilation of silly stories and the biographical information of a bunch of dead shepards…
The default condition is SUPPOSED to be “god-less,” since there is considerable difficulty in identifying what that is, to whom., and when, and reference to “god” is n ecerssarily exclusive of and for those who are skeptics.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 pmGenau!
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:09 pmThough the Supreme Court stated that the decision in Bush v. Gore — which was issued eight years ago this month — was “limited to the present circumstances” and did not set a precedent, legal experts say that the ruling “is turning out to have lasting value after all.”
Life is imitating The Onion again.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:11 pmYou can believe any stupid, bronze-age superstition you want.
Gee, how generous and respectful of you to grant me such. Thank you, master
No skin off my ass…until you start to impose it into the public sphere…that’s when it gets to be problematic.
Agreed, as I often posit right here on TP
Obama could swear on his gramma’s death-certificate, if he wants to make clear his good faith. It would mean a LOT more than ’swearing’ on a compilation of silly stories and the biographical information of a bunch of dead shepards…
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:11 pmHe could but of course it might mean more to HIM if he makes his vow to his god. No skin off anyone’s ass, no imposition on anyone. Just not what YOU want. Which is tough – unless you are not the god we have to follow.
“are not the god” should be “are the god”.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:13 pmHappy Holidays, tokin librul.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:17 pmtokin librul Says:
You can believe any stupid, bronze-age superstition you want.
No skin off my ass…until you start to impose it into the public sphere…
that’s when it gets to be problematic.
How exactly is a President taking the Oath of Office on a religious text of his choosing, “imposing superstition into the public sphere?” It’s not like he’s going to start reading scripture to people and forcing them to convert or face damnation. It’s a private sentiment in a public arena, that’s all.
You seem to think that religion and faith should only be exist in private and secret places, where nobody else can be poisoned by such hideous ideas.
Kinda like what people of “faith” say about homosexuals.
The default condition is SUPPOSED to be “god-less,” since there is considerable difficulty in identifying what that is, to whom., and when, and reference to “god” is n ecerssarily exclusive of and for those who are skeptics.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
_____________
Wrong. One person’s belief in the God or Gods of his or her choosing does not negate another person’s disbelief in any or all Gods. Nor does that person publically discussing it.
If your belief in no God is so fragile that simply hearing someone else talk about religion so deeply offends you, then perhaps you need to reevaluate your own faith and decide if it’s really the right one for you.
December 23rd, 2008 at 2:21 pmTo swear on a bible again. First of all with all the nasty religious influence over the past years, swearing anything with a bible is useless.
You can have good and rational people and a good government without religion. That is why our being secular has been so good and so successful. We have managed to avoid what has been so bad. I refer to other country’s where everything stems from religion. The whole world is full of that kind of government. Can you say fundamentalism?
The example of fundamentalism as a form of government produces country’s like Iran. It produces the Saudi government. They all believe in God and yet look what they produce. A religion that hates and demeans women. It produces police that kill someone for the lack of a beard, or for seeing a woman’s face or ankle. You can do anything in the name of religion.
Swearing on a bible never made a difference. Look at the history both past and recent. A prayer or bible will not make a difference if the intention for good is not there. It is simply another form of hypocrisy.
If swearing on a bible meant what it said, there would be no Reagan and Contra, no Nixon and Watergate. And certainly no Cheney and Bush and war and treason. They all swore on a bible to protect the Constitution and America. So what happened?
December 23rd, 2008 at 4:00 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
I agree PLC. I have seen nothing of the type from Leftside. I see some Xian insults that make me a bit uncomfortable and just put it down to frustration from the Dobsons and Robertsons of the world. When I point out I am a Christian I dont get anything pointed said to me.
I agree with you toasterhead. I am never offended that someone else talks about their Atheism or Agnosticism. I cant see where anyone ought to be offended that I say I believe in God as for how people of faith talk about gays. I AM a person of faith and have given NOTHING but support to the gay community from the time I was a teenager when it was FAR less acceptable than today. I doubt any Atheist on this board has given more vocal support to the gay community than I have so that is a non sequitur. As with MANY issue people of faith do not speak with one voice.
December 23rd, 2008 at 4:03 pmWe could double-dog-dare the president to abide by the rules of his office and it would have as much power as swearing on something.
December 23rd, 2008 at 8:50 pmtokin librul Says:
If we then plug some electroninc convenience in, it should be that within a state, EVERY polling place should be able to reconfigure the electroninc polling booth for ANY citizen, and allow voting at ANY polling palce for any citizen.
Yeah, then to steal the elections, they’d only have to write one program, not 50.
So much easier…
I would not think that the present private un-published software model would exist in this system. This system would have massive checks and balances, and the software would have published code, and there would be paper receipts. Any manipulatation would be evident on its face.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:15 pm