|
flea dip
|
Sep 12 2008, 05:31 PM
Post #1
|
Rock Star From Mars
- Posts:
- 35,793
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- June 2, 2005
|
Update, March 2009: there is now a mention of Goldberg in the Democrats who hate Obama thread.
I take it that the following is in reference to McCain's appearance on "The View," of which Whoopi Goldberg is a member - I'll have to do some googling to see.
Whoopi Goldberg asks McCain.. “Do I need to worry about becoming a slave again?” -see first post for link to video clip with Goldberg
This guy had the right answer in his follow-up post: - Well, seeing as the democrat party wanted to keep slavery alive and has properly put your community in it’s place - on the plantation of dependency and ignorance, that would be a negative, dumbsh*t. But you should worry about the men in white coats coming to get you.
Another good reply: - [Whoopi Goldberg to Republican Presidential hopeful McCain]: "“Do I need to worry about becoming a slave again?”
My first reply would be: “You were before?”
She better stay out of certain Muslim countries.
Whoopi Asks McCain: 'Do I Have To Be Worried About Becoming a Slave Again?'- By Justin McCarthy
September 12, 2008
The legalization of slavery is a big campaign issue.
Just ask Whoopi Goldberg. Republican nominee John McCain appeared on the Septemeber 12 edition of "The View."
Answering a question about his opposition to Roe v. Wade, McCain insisted that he would support judges who strictly interpret the Constitution.
This must have set alarms for Whoopi Goldberg who asked "do I have to worry about becoming a slave again?"....
If Goldberg -- who in the past has shown clear ignorance about the Constitution -- would actually read the Constitution, she would know a strict constructionist would not return America to slavery.
The 13th Amendment to the Constitution states that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except for punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Initially Senator McCain ignored Goldberg's question, but Whoopi expressed her enslavement anxiety again adding "there are certain things in the Constitution that you had to change."
The "View" co-host should know that, unlike the legalization of abortion, slavery was abolished through a constitutional amendment, not a Supreme Court decision.
[visit their site to read the transcript of the show]
Related (Whoopi Goldberg) links:
Whoopi Goldberg dumb on separation of Church & State - By Grant Swank Friday, September 12, 2008
On “The View” Whoopi Goldberg continued to press John McCain on whether or not he and Sarah Palin were for “separation of church and state.”
Goldberg does not realize that that phrase means this: no denomination is sanctioned as the “state church” as in England the Anglican Church is same.
Americans have never supported one denomination as the “state church” and they never will.
But Americans do support religion in public life for it has always been that way. Settlers came to America for religious freedom of expression. That religion happened to be Judeo-Christian—not Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim or Satanism or New Age or atheism or agnosticism.
It was the belief in the God of the Bible. Preachers delivered sermons from the Bible. Students were taught biblical morality in classrooms. Communities centered their faith on the power of prayer to the God of the Bible.
Goldberg does not get any of that.
For admiring herself as such an intellectual liberal, she is liberal but not intellectual. Goldberg would be so delighted to set in place the secularization of the Republic.
Joy Behar on “The View” applauds Goldberg’s position.
The two [Whoopi Goldberg and Behar] are given to the cause of wiping out Judeo-Christian heritage from America’s past, present and future. In fact, they are rudely aggressive on this issue.
John McCain responded masterfully. He spoke of America’s forefathers believing in God, His providence, citizens’ desires to live in the divine will and his own personal reliance upon the Christian faith.
John McCain referred to the Judeo-Christian heritage in particular. He spoke of God’s support in his own soul while confined as a prisoner of war. He spoke of his family’s leaning upon divine support.
In all of his response to Goldberg, John McCain set forth a venue in which all Americans can find religious balance.
At the same time, John McCain stated his support for those who have no religion or other religions. But his accent was that this particular nation has a particular heritage—Judeo-Christian—that should be honored and kept intact.
Goldberg was left with her jaw hanging on the floor, a position which she rightfully deserved for asking a worn question to which she should have long ago known the accurate answer to.
Likewise Joy Behar was left mute. Thank God.
FOOTNOTE: THE TRUTH ABOUT ‘SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE’
Liberals have run off with this phrase, prostituting it per usual.
The matter is simple. It’s this: America does not want a state church. England has a state church — the Anglican Church. America does not want one denomination considered The Nation’s Church.
On the other hand, America has a religious heritage. It’s not Muslim. It’s not Hindu. It’s not Shinto. It’s not animism. It’s not New Age. It’s not Paganism. It’s not Voodoo. It’s Judeo-Christian.
America, while not desiring a state church, does desire religion in life. That includes religious expression in everyday exchange.
Because Judeo-Christian is America’s heritage, most citizens honor that heritage expressed and honored. Its expression then should not be thwarted. It should not be belittled. It should not be erased in the name of “separation of church and state.”
Unhampered religious expression is promised in the First Amendment.
Further, America, having a Judeo-Christian heritage and the right to present-tense expression, permits freedom of religious expression to other religions. Therefore, there are those of other religious persuasions who practice without fear their religions in America.
What the liberals want to do is redefine the phrase “separation of church and state” to exclude Judeo-Christian religious expression in America. They want not only “separation of church and state” defined on their terms but the exclusion of the Judeo-Christian religion and anything coming close to that particular religious expression—period.
Liberals believe that if they continue harping on the “separation of church and state” phrase, brainwashing the public with their prostituted definition, especially indoctrinating the next generation with their prostituted definition, then they will have won secularism for America’s future.
They, in other words, want not only separation but exclusion of religion — completely so. Note however that the chief religion they want excluded is Judeo-Christian.
They will even tolerate other religions, as they are presently doing with the Muslim infiltration, but it is Judeo-Christian that they want cleansed from America. In other words, it’s a religious cleansing they desire for this nation — the extinguishing specifically of the Judeo-Christian faith.
Therefore, if tolerating another religion such as Islam helps wipe out Judeo-Christianity, then so be it. Islam is far better a tolerance than the American heritage of Judeo-Christian.
Therefore, there are school districts hiring Muslims to speak to teachers on how to give Muslim students honor and space.
No such invitation, of course, has been extended to Judeo-Christian specialists speaking to public school educators on how to give Judeo-Christian adherents honor and space.
In a nearby high school, a prayer room was set aside for Muslim students. No such prayer room or any other respect has been presented those of the Judeo-Christian heritage.
Liberals, in other words, will do whatever it takes to obliterate America of its rightful Judeo-Christian heritage. This is accented every year particularly during the Christmas season.
Any other so-called “religious expression” can come to the fore but the Christian particulars must be silenced at all costs. So we hear throughout the Christmas season, not Christian hymn carols, but “separation of church and state.”
Once again, liberals have taken language to serve their own twisted purposes. They took “homosexual” and made it “gay.” They took “pro-choice” and made it “protecting females.” They take “separation of church and state” and make it “wiping out America’s Judeo-Christian heritage.”
What those of the Judeo-Christian heritage must do — and far more concertedly than they have ever done in the past — is to make clear to the public what “separation of church and state” really means. This must be put in print in magazines and journals. It must be preached from pulpits. It must be taught in religion classes. It must be spelled out in letters to the editor.
Unfortunately, this simply has not been done. The church in particular has permitted the liberals to carry on with their prostitution of the phrase.
I have been appalled over the years to note that the church specifically has not risen to expose the liberals’ misuse of that phrase.
Therefore, the young have taken quickly to the liberals’ definition while the church has sat, in the main, silent, allowing the enemy to win out.
Whoopi Goldberg Airs False Claims about Voting Rights Act
|
|
flea dip
|
Jul 12 2010, 07:15 PM
Post #2
|
Rock Star From Mars
- Posts:
- 35,793
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- June 2, 2005
|
Whoopi Goldberg defends herself for defending Mel Gibson
Whoopi defends Mel Gibson: 'I know he's not a racist'- by Ree Hines
Although Goldberg made no effort to deny that it was Gibson’s voice heard using a racial slur on one of the tapes , she did point to her personal experience with the star to counter public opinion.
“I don’t like what he did here, but I know Mel and I know he’s not a racist,” Goldberg told unconvinced co-host Joy Behar.
Rather than calling him racist, Goldberg repeatedly referred to Gibson a “bonehead” for his supposed bad behavior.
“I have had a long friendship with Mel,” the actress-comedian stated. “You can say he’s being a bonehead, but I can’t sit and say that he’s a racist, having spent time with him in my house with my kids. … I don’t like what he’s done. Make no mistake.”
When challenged by Behar and reminded of Gibson’s infamous anti-Semitic rant, Goldberg blamed the past problems on booze, but added that she believed he was a sober bonehead this time.
“This rant, I don’t think he’s drunk on this rant,” Goldberg admitted.
Sticking up for Gibson isn’t exactly out of character for controversy-courting Goldberg. In the past, “The View” co-host has made headlines for her unexpected defenses of Michael Vick, Jesse James and Roman Polanski.
|