Barack-nophobia

Barack-nophobia: Noun. Fear of what a President Obama might do. Symptoms and signs: high anxiety, palpitations, selling of assets before he can tax them into non-existence, depression, fatigue, excessive sleeping or insomnia, excessive consumption of refined sugar products, cold sweats, and generalized nervousness.

The latest to contract Barack-nophobia? The Iraqi government.

So fearful are they of what Obama might do in terms of precipitous U.S. troop withdrawals that they just rushed approval of a longer-term security pact between Iraq and the United States----which would keep the United States in Iraq through the end of 2011.

As long as the much-maligned George Bush was president, the Iraqis had the luxury of complaining about the American presence there, whining about troop levels, insisting that we leave. The catch? They didn't mean it. They knew they were safe to do so because they also knew President Bush would not bolt. He would retain significant troop levels there, helping provide security and ensuring the Iraqis could continue on a path toward stability and decent, representative government.

Once Obama was elected, however, the Iraqis began to fret that Obama might withdraw rapidly and thus destabilize the country and the region. They were afraid he might fulfill his campaign pledge and call their bluff about wanting the Americans out.

Which, of course, they do not.

So the Iraqi Cabinet voted overwhelmingly today to approve the security agreement and lock in that end-of-2011 deadline, so Obama can't freelance an earlier withdrawal without a total renegotiation of the deal. And given how much the Iraqis want a continued American presence, Obama will have to stay in country----or risk having Iraq seriously damage his presidency too.

Comments

[M/M]

I never believed Obama would take the troops from Iraq as quickly as he promised in his campaign.

I am afraid that Obama will not adopt a shelter dog in favor of some elitist breed. Monica's brother-in-law, Alan Colmes, believes that it is possible to give his daughters an opportunity to rescue a shelter dog without putting his daughter, who suffers from allergies, at risk.

http://www.alan.com/

Alan Colmes has an opportunity to redeem himself by lobbying for the shelter dog. I would lobby for the shelter dog myself, but I am a Republican and a voter(in name only) and who cares what I think.

Oh look, Alan is also bringing to his reader's attention how differently Eliot Spitzer was treated from the prostitutes he busted...

[M/M]

Monica is opposed to the auto bailout, as is MY HERO, Senator Shelby (R-AL). If you missed him on "Meet the Press" as I did, here he is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27751850#27751850

Free Republic posted sample letters to your "elected weasels" (the idiots who didn't listen to us about the bank bailout) and to the editor" if you want to protes the auto bailout.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2133055/posts

[Ree]

New Poll, Meet the Real Sarah Palin, should people be concerned about the issue of Barack Obama’s official records Birth Certificate and Selective Service Record. Poll Here.

http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/

[mjfell]

Obama: Government Will Do 'Whatever It Takes' to Revive Economy:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid#20601087&sid#aOl_Qn1.A4Dw&refer#worldwide

Aw, what the heck. It's only money. It'll all be paid back in a generation...or twelve.

[mjfell]

Stop Obama's amnesty and citizenship plans for the millions of illegal aliens swarming across this country:

Donate as much money as you can to the candidicy of Walter Moore for Mayor of Los Angeles.

http://web.mac.com/waltermoore/WalterMooreForMayor/Home.html

Antonio Villaraigosa, the current Mayor of Los Angeles, was among those standing behind Obama Friday during his economic press conference.

Villaraigosa is one of the most pro-illegal invasionist in this country. His sanctuary city policies have resulted in Los Angeles becoming a cesspool of gangs, graffitti and violence. You should never have to press one for English when you call a Mayor's office within the United States of America.

As Mayor of the second largest city in the United States, he's also a very high visibility politician.

A defeat of Villaraigosa in this coming March mayoral election will send a very strong signal to Washington DC, House Representatives, Senators and Barack Obama that amnesty for illegal aliens is opposed by American citizens and will come at the ultimate price...their being kicked out of office.

Donate as much money as you can to the candidicy of Walter Moore for Mayor of Los Angeles.

http://web.mac.com/waltermoore/WalterMooreForMayor/Home.html

[mjfell]

Obama reiterated his intention to close the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and ban torture during interrogation of suspected terrorists as part of ``an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world.''

He said that after he takes office, he will begin executing a plan to draw down U.S. troops in Iraq and send some to Afghanistan, ``which has continued to worsen.''

[mjfell]

Sure slick Barry, the affirmative action president-elect, it's more important to posture in an effort to "regain America's moral stature in the world" than it is to keep American citizens safe from these radical islamist terrorists.

Columbia and Harvard must have had quotas to fill...

[mjfell]

PollingPoint:

http://surveyg2.pollingpoint.com/v1DV7LCqhlZ196

Vote on the mainstream media's bias.

[mjfell]

FIRST, WE GET RID OF GOD - Then everything is permitted.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/orwells_children.html

Liberals are off to a good start.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-weho-protest-pg,0,937229.photogallery?index=13

[mjfell]

Monica is opposed to the auto bailout, as is MY HERO, Senator Shelby (R-AL). If you missed him on "Meet the Press" as I did, here he is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27751850#27751850

Free Republic posted sample letters to your "elected weasels" (the idiots who didn't listen to us about the bank bailout) and to the editor" if you want to protes the auto bailout.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2133055/posts

Posted by: M/M | November 16, 2008 at 06:54 PM

M/M--

Thanks for the posting. I've been opposed to the bailout since it was first suggested by Paulson with his three page "bill".

I missed Senator Shelby on "Meet the Press" because I can't stomach watching NBC or MSNBC any longer. The only time I watched recently was when they had Senator McCain on...the only time I've watched Saturday Night Live in many years was when Govenor Palin and Senator McCain were on.

I boycott anything that will put money in the pocket of GE. They continued to do business with Iran after it had been proven that Iran was smuggling IEDs into Iraq that were killing American soldiers.

The Democratic congress voting to guarantee $139 billion in loans to GE is just one more reason to oppose the Democratic party...as if I needed any more.

[mjfell]

GOP Senator: Paulson may have given bailout money 'to his friends'!

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20081116_16_A1_hHecri880405

[mjfell]

*Seeks 'freeze on any remaining bailout funds':

http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a527339b-802a-23ad-4d93-9721777cb403&Region_id=&Issue_id=

[M/M]

MJ,

I don't watch NBC either, but I'll make an exception for Senator Shelby, a TRUE Republican. I googled him because I heard a clip of something he said on the news. Check him out on the link I posted.

Good articles in today's NY Post:

1) "Why We Shouldn't Bailout the Big Three Automakers"
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11162008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/why_we_shouldnt_bail_out_the_big_three_a_138991.htm?&page=5

2) Amity Shlaes is the author of "The Forgotten Man", an excellent book about how FDR's policies prolonged the Great Depression. In this article, she talks about how the economic crisis will give Democrats the opportunity to push through their agendas.

[FK]

FIRST, WE GET RID OF GOD - Then everything is permitted.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/orwells_children.html

Liberals are off to a good start.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-weho-protest-pg,0,937229.photogallery?index=13

Posted by: mjfell | November 17, 2008 at 12:28 AM

Too bad we can't. If we could get rid of religion (all of them), then real progress could start.

[Account Deleted]

Inhofe is smoking something. The allocation of TARP funds is well known and available on Treasury's web site.

Here is $125 B of capital purchases (preferred stock with warrants) closed on 10/28/08:

Bank of America Corporation, $15 B
Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, $3 B
Citigroup, $25 B
Goldman Sachs, $10 B
JPMorgan Chase, $25 B
Morgan Stanley, $10 B
State Street Corporation, $2 B
Wells Fargo & Company, $25 B
Merrill Lynch & Co., $10 B

$40 B has also been offered to AIG, but the AIG terms keep changing and have not been settled. It could reach $125 B.

Treasury must report to Congress for the first $250 B at $100 and $150 tranche thresholds. The balance of the $700 B cannot be released without Congress approving.

What is curious, and where Congress should concentrate their effort, is why healthy banks are getting the capital injections. Further, even though they have new capital they are still not lending. Perhaps Treasury and the Fed should examine an inter-bank loan guarantee program which would run cheaper than outright equity purchases and start money flowing again.

The bailout has failed. Congress should not release the balance ... but they will, to GM and Ford which are not TARP's intended purpose.

Instead, the Fed should increase money supply in the general economy. Where is Milton Freidman when we need him? Would anyone even listen?

[Account Deleted]

Fred,

I have to disagree. A society would crumble without moral standards. I do not believe any serious philosophy is founded on the theory that man is innately good. Religion provides an ethical framework.

[eaglewings]

This is where Bush went wrong during Barack's World Tour when Maliki played Obama off Bush during the negotiations and gave more credibility to Obama than he deserved. When Maliki stated he agreed with Obama and that force levels could be scaled down because everything was honky dory in Iraq, Bush should have called his bluff and stated to Maliki. Ok, Maliki, you think the Iraq forces are up to snuff. I don't believe they are, but as a gesture to you and the Iraqi people, I will advise my generals to draw up plans so that in 30 days time the US will hand over all security operations in the seven remaining provinces to Iraqi security, and the US will withdraw to its bases within Iraq, pending further discussions as to the SOF Agreement. Maliki would have crapped in his pants and immediately retracted his statements. His loss of face and backtracking would have exposed Obama for the foreign policy charlatan he is. Instead, Bush kept his cojones in a box and allowed Maliki to take Obama's foreign policy creds off the table.

[FK]

Fred,

I have to disagree. A society would crumble without moral standards. I do not believe any serious philosophy is founded on the theory that man is innately good. Religion provides an ethical framework.

Posted by: Michael Avari | November 17, 2008 at 10:17 AM

Religion has failed, and too many people think they are "moral" just because they go to church (or synagogue or mosque). Religion is a convenient forum for people to justify their prejudices and close their minds.

[Account Deleted]

Yet so much good is done by organized religion.

The fact that people are imperfect in spite of attending service is not an indication of the failure of the service but a confirmation of the imperfection of man.

Isn't society without religion called paganism? Where will that take us?

[FK]

The failure of religion outweighs any of its successes.

I don't know much about pagans, but I thought they either worshipped many gods or idols.

My ideal is not paganism, if I understand it correctly, but atheism. Ayn Rand was an atheist. As a true conservative, I assume you appreciate her.

[M/M]

Oops, I forgot to post the Amity Shlaes article.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11172008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/crisis_lets_dems_push_old_agendas_139106.htm

I haven't read Ayn Rand in awhile but I liked her books. I have friend who are pagan and I have attended pagan ceremonies. It seems like a religion to me.

There are liberal churches. I have a friend who was raised agnostic and she goes to church every Sunday because she is in the choir. Religion also offers people a sense of community and tradition.

[Angela]

There are liberal churches. I have a friend who was raised agnostic and she goes to church every Sunday because she is in the choir. Religion also offers people a sense of community and tradition.

Posted by: M/M | November 17, 2008 at 12:00 PM

M/M, for once we can agree on something. Wishing for an athiest America is wasted energy, rather it is more important to find a way to respect what people value in religions, which often conflict with one another, while maintaining a commitment to protect individual freedoms. Contrary to popular belief, liberalism is not synonomous with agnosticism or atheism. While many liberals do gravitate towards non-demonational churches, there are plenty of those who are practicing Catholics, Jews, and Muslims, among other creeds. Separation of church & state is for good reason.

The liberal threat to core Christian values is a farce. One can merely look at the moral shortcomings of Newt Gingrich, Bill O'Reilly, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, and Rush Limbaugh (among others) to see the transparent hyprocrisy of conservatives' very own failure to practice what they preach.

[Account Deleted]

Fred,

The other aspect of paganism is hedonism -- belief in no god.

Rand's literature celebrates man's reliance on himself -- which I appreciate as a conservative, but morality and standards of behavior are not generated inside man alone. I can't prove that ... it is a matter of personal faith.

Our system of government was the first to codify what the Judeo-Christian tradition tried to teach for centuries: an individual's dignity and worth are birthrights, not granted by another man.

I have doubts about whether without that tradition and standards of morality, the United States might have been formed.

[Account Deleted]

Good article on Phil Gramm and the history of deregulation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/economy/17gramm.html?_r=3&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[Account Deleted]

This is good:

"Obama tries to soothe Wall Street's nerves -
Denies he favors 'heavy-handed' regulation"

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Obama-tries-soothe-Wall-Streets/story.aspx?guid={6B2EDFEE-8382-4011-A28E-BB2BC6FB3FBE}

[Account Deleted]

Angela,

Welcome back.

I agree with you and that is why I argue that by associating too closely with "social conservatives" Conservatives have allowed harm to be done to the movement.

Here is Goldwater:

"On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

"I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?
And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.' "

And more colorfully:

"I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the a*s." [when he tried to oppose the nomination of Sandra Day O'Connor]

Cheers,

[Angela]

I do not believe any serious philosophy is founded on the theory that man is innately good. Religion provides an ethical framework.

Posted by: Michael Avari | November 17, 2008 at 10:17 AM

I agree that religion provides a necessary framework, I just don't believe it is the only framework. The belief that divine intervention is necessary to save us from "original sin" because man is inherently evil (yet we are created in the image of God!) never set right with me nor did Catholicism altogether.

I disagree mostly on your first point though. Whether you believe another philosophy is "serious" is obviously subjective. Confucious, Thoreau and Rousseau were arguably important and influential philosophers; Rousseau believed man is inherently good but corrupted by society. For many, modern Humanism is an acceptable alternative to organized religion and rests on many valuable philosopies, one of which is that man is innately good. The Humanism ideal is "a world without wars, and based on non-violence, the convergence of diversity, and progress for all human beings." Should we not take ideas like these seriously?

[Angela]

...by associating too closely with "social conservatives" Conservatives have allowed harm to be done to the movement.
Posted by: Michael Avari | November 17, 2008 at 12:57 PM

Agreed. I believe the biggest mistake made by Republicans in the past decade has been to allow ideological extremists to represent conservativism.

[mjfell]

Our system of government was the first to codify what the Judeo-Christian tradition tried to teach for centuries: an individual's dignity and worth are birthrights, not granted by another man.

I have doubts about whether without that tradition and standards of morality, the United States might have been formed.

Posted by: Michael Avari | November 17, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Michael---

A very good point.

Some people cherish the thought that man, risen so majestically from a single cell in the promordial ooze, is the spearhead of evolution and therefore the only god that his universe knows.

Everywhere we see people filled with anger and fear, society breaking up into warring fragments. Each fragment say to the others, "We are right and you are wrong." Every such pressure group, if it's strong enough, self-righteously imposes its will upon the rest. Ane everywhere the same thing is being done on an individual basis. The sum of all this mighty effort is less peace and less brotherhood than before. The philosophy of self-sufficiency is not paying off. Plainly enough, it is a bone-crushing juffernaut whose final achievement is ruin.

[mjfell]

Yet so much good is done by organized religion.

The fact that people are imperfect in spite of attending service is not an indication of the failure of the service but a confirmation of the imperfection of man.

Isn't society without religion called paganism? Where will that take us?

Posted by: Michael Avari | November 17, 2008 at 10:57 AM

Michael---

An athiest friend of mine spent 6 months in southern Mississippi immediately following Katrina, working in the recovery effort. He came home amazed at how much help was offered to victims by the Catholic Church...in the absence of government help.

He made a specific point of mentioning the volume, quality and breadth of the help and relief that came from religious groups in general and the Catholic Church in particular.

He was impressed.

[Angela]

Every such pressure group, if it's strong enough, self-righteously imposes its will upon the rest... The philosophy of self-sufficiency is not paying off. Plainly enough, it is a bone-crushing juffernaut whose final achievement is ruin.

Posted by: mjfell | November 17, 2008 at 01:28 PM

I find this to be a silly argument. How often do you find "self-sufficient" agnostics or atheists attempting to forcefully inflict godless philsophies on entire nations? Quite the contrary; war is often waged for religious reasons. The "juggernaut" is more often than not, an attempt to force one's religion upon us all.

[mjfell]

I find this to be a silly argument. How often do you find "self-sufficient" agnostics or atheists attempting to forcefully inflict godless philsophies on entire nations? Quite the contrary; war is often waged for religious reasons. The "juggernaut" is more often than not, an attempt to force one's religion upon us all.

Posted by: Angela | November 17, 2008 at 01:41 PM

Try the ACLU...

[Angela]

Try the ACLU...

Posted by: mjfell | November 17, 2008 at 01:44 PM

Funny, tried checking my history books for wars caused by the ACLU and couldn't come up with any, but I did find plenty mention of Christians, Catholics and Muslims. The ACLU lobbies for the protection of everybody's individual right to religious freedom, no matter how unpopular that might sit with the majority. It is not, as you seem to be implying, an attempt to promote atheism.

[mjfell]

Murdoch to media: You dug yourself a huge hole:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10787_3-10098194-60.html

"The complacency stems from having enjoyed a monopoly--and now finding they have to compete for an audience they once took for granted. The condescension that many show their readers is an even bigger problem. It takes no special genius to point out that if you are contemptuous of your customers, you are going to have a hard time getting them to buy your product. Newspapers are no exception."

[mjfell]

http://electronictimes.net/wp/?p=15

A.C.L.U. Atheist, Communist, Liberal, Union.
It should be, ACLUE, Because they haven’t a clue to what the American

people want.

96% of Americans believe in some God, yet the ACLU wants to remove,

IN GOD WE TRUST FROM AMERICAN CURRENCY.

[mjfell]

Atheist, ACLU, Rules Illinois Not Citizens and Their Representatives

http://thestateofamericasfamily.wordpress.com/2008/04/13/atheist-aclu-rules-illinois-not-citizens-and-their-representatives/

[Account Deleted]

Angela,

I believe that Rousseau's "good" did not mean "moral", but "whole". And if man is corrupted by society, and society is a group of men, then corruption must originate in man, no?

Further, Rousseau was against private property and representative government. Some interpreters view his work as a precursor to socialism, some to anarchy, some to libertarianism.

I am not familiar with Confucianism.

Cheers,

[mjfell]

Court rules against ACLU, atheist on San Diego cross

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53179

The court also reversed a $275,000 attorney fee award received by an ACLU-backed lawyer for plaintiff Phillip Paulsen, an atheist who died last month.

[mjfell]

After sucking city dry, ACLU 'hate machine' to be honored?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59836

"The American Civil Liberties Union has done everything possible to destroy Christianity in the American culture and government. From tearing down crosses on public property to removing crosses and the Ten Commandments from governmental buildings, there has been no greater hate machine against our constitutional right to free religious expression in America than the ACLU!" Hartline said.

[mjfell]

The ‘Anti-Christian Liberties’ Union (ACLU)

http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/ACLU.pdf

The American Civil Liberties Union claims to be dedicated to protecting the freedoms
of all Americans. But its legacy is one of defending pornographers, child molesters,
abortionists, and stripping our nation of its Judeo-Christian heritage.

[mjfell]

ACLU-thrilled-by-anti-immigrant-laws-stopped:

http://www.thepiratescove.us/2008/05/30/aclu-thrilled-by-anti-immigrant-laws-stopped/

As usual, they take the disengenuous line that it is against immigrants as a whole, rather then against illegal immigrants, who, the last time I checked, were not American citizens

[mjfell]

Atheist Group Sues To Remove Highway Patrol Memorials!

http://www.oblogatoryanecdotes.com/2005/12/atheist-group-sues-to-remove-highway.html

An Atheist group that calls itself “American Atheists” are suing the Utah Highway patrol to force them to remove roadside memorials of fallen troopers killed in the line of duty, because they say the cross shaped memorials are a state endorsement of religion

[mjfell]

Legion fights ACLU to preserve WWI Veteran monument:

http://www.calegion.org/html/legion_fights_aclu.html

“For God And Country” has been the motto of the 2.7 million members of the American Legion since its 1919 founding by WWI GI’s in Paris. Today, Legionnaires with the courage to live by those words are standing up against attacks on American freedom and values not only by fanatic terrorists overseas, but against fanatic terrorem litigation attacks from within by the American Civil Liberties Union, which has become the Taliban American liberal secularism.

[mjfell]

God And The Activist Judges

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2004/sept04/04-09-29.html

In Nebraska, an anonymous ACLU atheist sued the city of Plattsmouth to remove a Ten Commandments monument (that he claims "alienates" him) which is situated in an isolated corner of a large city park, and an Eighth Circuit panel narrowly ruled for the ACLU.

[mjfell]

The ACLU Con Game

http://www.vetsforjustice.com/aclu_fraud1.htm

The American Civil Liberties Union fraudulently claims that it "Protects" Civil Liberties in America. Yet this self-proclaimed "Civil Rights Group" is extremely selective as to the "Rights" it will defend, and the individuals it will assist.

[Account Deleted]

Angela,

Many early wars were started in the name of religion, but by those misguided in their interpretation of what religion asked of them. These primitive sins have been atoned for by the many works of charity, per MJ's example.

Recent wars were started almost solely for economic reasons. One exception: it is interesting to note that the world is split between those who interpret the war in Iraq as an economic war and those who view it as a religious or cultural war. Only a few in US still believe it was a war of self-defense or preemptive defense.

Cheers,

[Angela]

Most Americans Believe in Higher Power, Poll Finds
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html

"The study detailed Americans' deep and broad religiosity, finding that 92 percent believe in God or a universal spirit ...And only about one-quarter of those surveyed believe there is only one way to interpret their religion's teachings."

By the way what *actual* litigation exists -not urban legends- to support your claim that the ACLU is *actively* seeking to changing US currency? Just because I'll defend the ACLU on principle doesn't mean I am personally going to agree with all of its decisions, but that's half the point to respecting individual freedoms. Regardless, what's your point? Should the ACLU not protect the rights of the other 8%, or are you asserting that because a majority believes in one thing, it must be right and/or the only way? 75% of Americans are white, should we do away with teaching black history? More than 50% of Americans still believe in creationism, so should we reject evolution too?

[FK]

Posted by: Michael Avari | November 17, 2008 at 12:57 PM [See Michael's post above; I'm not reprinting it.]

Michael --

I looooooooooooooove the Goldwater quote. Great!!! Too bad the Republicans got away from that kind of thinking. What made Goldwater sick also makes me sick.

[mjfell]

Funny, tried checking my history books for wars caused by the ACLU and couldn't come up with any, but I did find plenty mention of Christians, Catholics and Muslims. The ACLU lobbies for the protection of everybody's individual right to religious freedom, no matter how unpopular that might sit with the majority. It is not, as you seem to be implying, an attempt to promote atheism.

Posted by: Angela | November 17, 2008 at 01:56 PM

Angela---

It seems I'm not the only one who disagrees with your view.

[FK]

96% of Americans believe in some God, yet the ACLU wants to remove,

IN GOD WE TRUST FROM AMERICAN CURRENCY.

Posted by: mjfell | November 17, 2008 at 02:04 PM

Assuming the 96% is true (which I doubt -- many people keep their atheism to themselves, not wanting to deal with people's reactions; atheists and agnostics may be 10-15% of the population), that does not mean that that 96% is right and it does not even mean that every one of them is a good person.

People who do not believe should not be subjected to your belief just because you are in the majority. America is more than just about "majority rules", it's also about protection of the minority.