Reformed Chicks Blabbing

Reformed Chicks Blabbing


Dead bear cub covered in Obama signs found at a NC university

posted by Susan Johnson

And now for something completely different:

A dead bear cub draped in Barack Obama posters has been found at the entrance to a university in North Carolina, police said today.
Police and wildlife officials are investigating the incident at the Western Carolina university.
[...]
“We cannot speculate on the motives of the people involved, nor who those people might be,” she added.

She might not be able to but we can. Who do you think did it? I’m betting the bear is either Obama or his supporters. I’m sure you guys think only Republicans have guns so you’ll blame us.
Update: OMH! Sorry, Obamanites, if you thought I was implying that this was an Obama supporter, I was actually saying the opposite! I guess I shouldn’t have written this so early in the morning :-) What I was trying to say was that the bear was supposed to symbolize Obama or his supporters (which would imply it was shot by a McCain supporter).



Advertisement
Comments read comments(34)
post a comment
kelly

posted October 21, 2008 at 10:23 am


This only goes to show you how sick people are and how ugly the citizenry has become. Why shouldn’t we blame Republicans? Republicans in NC were heckling voters who voted early. This is AMERICA people. Everyone has the right to vote for who ever they want. I really wish this country could be divided into two. Republicans have really shown an ignorant and ugly side of humanity. I don’t want to be associated with them anymore.



report abuse
 

Larry Parker

posted October 21, 2008 at 10:55 am


Honestly, this blog is more hateful (and I refer to the totality, not just this post) toward Obama even than Rod Dreher’s — which is saying something.
Not very “Christian,” IMO.



report abuse
 

yelladawgNC

posted October 21, 2008 at 11:02 am


You really are a piece of work, Michele, I have to admit. Blaming the Democrats for shooting a bear cub and covering it with Obama signs is almost as good as accusing Colin Powell of endorsing Obama merely because he’s African American. (If that was the only reason, how come he didn’t endorse from the get-go? It’s not like either one of them just turned black.)
I guess the Democrats hung the effigy of Obama from a tree at that Christian college out in Oregon back in September. And slashed the tires of 30 cars outside the arena where Obama was holding a rally a week or so ago.



report abuse
 

anonymous reincarnate

posted October 21, 2008 at 11:31 am


lame post. pathetic premise.



report abuse
 

JPL

posted October 21, 2008 at 12:15 pm


…so as not to increase your hit count unduly, but honestly, enough is enough.
Is there no depth to which you won’t sink? No hateful, mean-spirited act which you won’t twist to fit some partisan agenda? Nothing that isn’t grist for the mill for your endless axe-grinding in the political process?
If what we see of you here is the extent of your being, you’re a disgrace as a human being, a blogger, and most certainly as a Christian. You dishonor the historical line of faith you claim to represent by your utter lack of decency, honesty, or civility. If Beliefnet had the slightest sense of truly supporting spiritual growth, they would yank this space from you and give it to someone, anyone more worthy.



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 21, 2008 at 12:28 pm


Are you actually stupid enough to say that Obama supporters shot a bear cub then stapled Obama signs to it in order to blame it on the Republicans? My God. You’re just a pathetic excuse for a human being, aren’t you?
So much for you being a Christian, or “Reformed” or anything remotely resembling a compassionate person. No, you had to turn the act of some jerks killing a bear cub for no reason into a Democratic conspiracy against your side.
How pathetic, Michele. You’ve really hit a new low here, and that’s saying something.
This blog is a disgrace to Beliefnet, and to anyone who considers themselves a decent Christian person. I hope that someday, the editors and publishers of this site come to their senses and get rid of it. It serves no purpose on this site, offers no religious insight into the politics of the blogger (unlike Rod Dreher’s blog, which is very clearly grounded in his faith), and brings absolutely no intelligent discourse to the table, as this post by Michele proves.



report abuse
 

Michael

posted October 21, 2008 at 12:59 pm


Why does Steven Waldman allow this blog to remain on his site?



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 21, 2008 at 1:20 pm


Why does Steven Waldman allow this blog to remain on his site?
That’s a darn good question, particularly when you consider the quality of the other blogs on this site.
Every other blog author on this site, both liberal and conservative, offers well written, intelligent, rational posts. What does Michele offer? The suggestion that Obama supporters killed a bear cub then stapled campaign signs on it and dumped it on a university campus so they could blame it on the Republicans. Unbelievable.
This sad excuse for a blog is a disgrace to the rest of Beliefnet, and is a stain on an otherwise fantastic site. It has no redeeming value at all, and the site owners should seriously consider ditching it in favor of something else. Heck, if they want a Reformed blogger, find a better one. Surely there’s more than one Reformed blogger on the internet. Maybe Beliefnet should look for them.



report abuse
 

Scott R.

posted October 21, 2008 at 3:07 pm


Why is this blog allowed?
Who owns Beliefnet?
Think about it.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 21, 2008 at 3:38 pm


Minnie, you are hardly an example of tolerance.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 21, 2008 at 3:47 pm


Who owns Beliefnet?
Maybe somebody who actually believes that freedom of political speech is a good thing and that having a different opinion does not make one an “idiot.”



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 21, 2008 at 4:22 pm


Minnie, you are hardly an example of tolerance.
And exactly why should anyone tolerate this pathetic excuse for a blog? Explain that to me. There is no redeeming value at all to this blog. None. Michele is by far the worst columnist here at Beliefnet, and this blog is a stain on an otherwise great site.
I read both liberal and conservative blogs both here and elsewhere, and this is easily one of the worst out there. It offers nothing intelligent, nothing of substance, and no religious underpinning or context to any of the posts despite Beliefnet being a religion site. In Michele’s world, it’s all Obama/Democrat bashing all the time with nothing else of value to offer. Isn’t she supposed to be a seminarian? Why not talk about that as well?
Honestly, there has to be a better example of a Reformed blogger somewhere on the internet. I hope that the editors and publishers of Beliefnet take the time to look around and find one, then hire them instead. It would certainly be an improvement.



report abuse
 

Michael

posted October 21, 2008 at 5:09 pm


I think we should all contact Beliefnet and encourage them to consider whether this is a worthwhile blog to continue. The level of blogging–down to grammar and spelling and goofy emoticons–is far below what you see elsewhere on the site.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 21, 2008 at 6:43 pm


Explain that to me.
Free speech. It’s in the Constitution.
The beliefnet TOS says, “We will not censor members for expressing an opinion, within the limits of these Rules of Conduct”
It appears that perhaps the party of the liberals is not the party of tolerance after all.
If you think that this blog goes beyond the limits of the TOS, feel free to make your case. Being conservative is not outside the limits, nor is “bad grammar” or emoticons.
If you find the open sharing of conservative opinions, disturbing, there are many liberal blogs out there.



report abuse
 

Michael

posted October 21, 2008 at 7:01 pm


It’s not about conservative voices, it’s about vapid voices that are poorly articulated. If a liberal blogger or any other blogger was so consistently bad at what they are supposed to do, I’d be suggesting they don’t have a place on a website with Beliefnet’s fine reputation. It’s a wasted space that another conservative or Reformed voice could have.



report abuse
 

MH

posted October 21, 2008 at 8:00 pm


My guess is that knuckle heads did it who think killing an animal for no reason is funny. Obviously people I wouldn’t want to meet.
I think it is wrong to accuse supporters of either group without any evidence. However, Michele is pretty tolerant of people expressing opinions I’m pretty sure she doesn’t like, so I certainly wouldn’t complain to Beliefnet about a blog entry I didn’t like.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 21, 2008 at 8:12 pm


MH…it’s not like the behavior of those on the left in this entry is an exception. Far from it.



report abuse
 

Scott R.

posted October 21, 2008 at 8:30 pm


Fox owns Beliefnet. Enough said.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 21, 2008 at 9:02 pm


I guess that does explain it. I would be surprised if a “MSM” allowed such freedom of expression.



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 21, 2008 at 10:00 pm


Free speech. It’s in the Constitution.
Please go back and read the Constitution again. The First Amendment doesn’t give anyone in this country the explicit rights to any of the rights it enumerates, including free speech. It only prevents the government from passing laws that would take those rights away.
Also, my objections about this sad, pathetic excuse for a blog is not about liberalism. And it’s not that Michele is a conservative, either.
It’s that she articulates the dumbest, most low-information nonsense I’ve ever had the misfortune of reading at *any* political blog outside of the crazies over at Free Republic. Just look at this post. She’s actually dumb enough to suggest that a group of Obama supporters shot and killed a bear cub, stapled Obama signs to it, then dumped the bear’s corpse on a college campus just so they could blame it on the Republicans.
Sure, it’s free speech. But it’s also stupid, mind-blowingly ignorant speech. What kind of rational person believes something like that? It makes no sense. And compared to the rest of the bloggers here at Beliefnet, it’s an amazingly blinkered and uneducated point of view that’s being articulated.
It’s an insult to the other, more intelligent columnists on this site, liberal and conservative alike, to have Michele’s dreck associated with the same website they write for. Beliefnet seriously needs to find a much better Reformed blogger than the one they’ve got.



report abuse
 

Robert

posted October 21, 2008 at 11:28 pm


No, no Minnie. Michelle is the quintessential American Reformed Christian, she really is. She provides a tremedous public service by keeping us all mindful of what being a Reformed Christian is really about.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 22, 2008 at 1:35 am


Robert, different opinions are not evil.
The First Amendment doesn’t give anyone in this country the explicit rights to any of the rights it enumerates, including free speech.
It also doesn’t give YOU the deem who is worthy of being heard.
The First Amendment doesn’t give anyone in this country the explicit rights to any of the rights it enumerates, including free speech.
Then don’t read it.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 22, 2008 at 1:38 am


Minnine if your treatment of Michele is what conservatives are in for under Obama’s administration, it would be very tempting to start an ACORN of our own.
It is going to be a very dark time for those who dare to be conservative.



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 22, 2008 at 3:24 am


My criticism of Michele is based on the pathetic state of this blog. It *could* be an interesting discussion, grounded in Reform theology and with more substance, but she’s clearly incapable or uninterested in doing that despite supposedly being a seminarian. I say supposedly because none of her posts show any evidence that she’s got any sort of seminary training at all.
Instead, she relies on the dumbest, most low-information, lamest posting style I’ve seen. She’d rather link to another right wing blog and say some version of “Me Too!” than really explore a subject or even talk about anything of relevance. Why should anyone who reads this blog give her any more of an effort in commenting than she puts into posting?
Also, should Obama be elected, I would hope that the conservatives and the Republicans spend the next eight years figuring out what the heck they even stand for anymore instead of worrying about the left.
Are Republicans the party of fiscal conservatism and smaller government? The last eight years– six of them with a Republican White House and Republican Congress, BTW– suggest otherwise.
Are they a party that values reason and intelligence as a grounding for their conservatism, or are they going to keep going with the ignorant, anti-intellectual, anti-science, jingoistic, and incurious road they’ve been on for decades and which is coming out more blatantly in this election?
Are they going to be a party that runs on ideas, or will they continue to run on fear and mistrust?
The GOP needs a few years in the political wilderness to sort themselves out. And it’s ironic that it’s another Senator from Arizona that will send them there.



report abuse
 

clasqm

posted October 22, 2008 at 3:42 am


Dear Ms McGinty.
You have lost your grip on reality. You need professional help. Please take the next two weeks off from blogging and go get it. When you get back, it will be all over.



report abuse
 

anonymous reincarnate

posted October 22, 2008 at 4:15 am


ALRIGHT… don’t make me have to do this ever again. while i agree with those of you who complain about the quality of the blog, and the total lack of substance within nearly all of michele’s posts, and its near complete dedication to liberal bashing and obama hate, i will come to her defense on this one and only case. she has every right to print whatever pointless, baseless drivel she cares to. as ellen said, if you don’t like it, don’t read it. but, i have a better take on it. if you don’t like it, leave a short note thanking michele for her typical, pointless or baseless drivel, then move on.
i for one, enjoy that she and guy arthur thomas are becoming the voice of those here who share those views. i also very much enjoy participating in this forum. it’s good to know how others think.
however, considering that the religious right has set the precident for boycotting, telephoning, emailing, and harassing supporters and creators of views that they disagree with (pbs, mcdonald’s, volvo, ford, ge, and too many more to list here) i guess i couldn’t stop you from exercising your first amendment rights to express your views to beliefnet, now could i?



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 22, 2008 at 4:17 pm


Why should anyone who reads this blog give her any more of an effort in commenting than she puts into posting?
That’s a good question…why do you?
Instead, she relies on the dumbest, most low-information, lamest posting style I’ve seen.
In other words, she posts links to conservative information and stories that reveal liberal issues.
In other words, she’s a conservative and you don’t like it.
Are there any other conservative blogs that you frequently comment on, where you are a little more tolerant and kind?



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 22, 2008 at 7:02 pm


Are there any other conservative blogs that you frequently comment on, where you are a little more tolerant and kind?
I’m much harsher here than I am anywhere else because Michele’s ignorance and spectacularly bad posting style warrants it.
What kind of person believes that a bunch of Democrats shot and killed a bear cub, stapled Obama posters to it, then dumped the body on a college campus just so they could blame it on the Republicans?
A hyper-partisan low information voter who’s not interested in reason, that’s who.
I don’t care one whit that she or anyone else is a conservative. Most of my family and friends are conservatives and Republicans and I get along with them just fine unless they say something stupid, like “Obama’s a terrorist!” or “Liberals hate America!” or some other idiotic nonsense like that.
Honestly, it’s like the far right wing hasn’t learned anything from their demonization of Clinton from the 90’s. They spent so many years accusing Clinton of everything from cocaine addiction (including Arkansas state troopers to get the drugs for him) all the way up to rape and having his political opponents murdered that by the time Clinton was impeached, he ended up being MORE popular after the fact rather than less because it finally shut the loonies up.
The same thing is happening now with Obama. All the idiotic whispers of him being a terrorist, or a Marxist, or a Communist, or an anti-American radical who hates this country are just laughable when you look at the man, and will only serve to engender sympathy for Obama as most sane people on the left and the right just roll their eyes at the far right wing loonies going insane over a Democratic president again.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 22, 2008 at 10:24 pm


My instinct is to believe that anybody who comes to a different conclusion than you come to might earn similar treatment. I’ve seen no indication otherwise.
different opinion = ignorant?



report abuse
 

Minnie

posted October 22, 2008 at 11:09 pm


different opinion = ignorant?
No. Uninformed opinion = ignorant.
For example, when one of my more conservative uncles said that liberals hated America, I simply pointed out that I’m a liberal and asked if he thought that I hated this country. He said no, apologized, and conceded that he was wrong to make a blanket statement like that.
He made an uninformed statement based on ignorance, but changed his tune when confronted with evidence to the contrary. That’s how it works.
People can disagree and have different opinions. The key is being able to stand up for your opinions in an educated, reasoned manner instead of just spewing out whatever convenient talking points someone else puts out there first. Pointing only at blogs or sources that reinforce your side and holding that up as proof that you’re right is a dumb thing to do.
Speaking personally, I don’t link to sites like Daily Kos when making an argument because they’re very obvious liberal partisans. What good does that do me in using them in a debate? I’m more inclined to use the BBC or some other objective news source rather than a blog.
The same standard applies for conservatives. It does no good to point to RedState, or World Net Daily, or Newsmax, or Michelle Malkin, or any other obviously slanted conservative pundit or blogger to bolster an argument since you’re just using material aimed at the already converted. It’s not objective. It’s just partisan talking points.
Either present and defend your views based on objective data (i.e, partisan blogs don’t count), or expect to get called on it. It’s that simple.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 23, 2008 at 12:00 am


What I see Michele doing is more like simply linking to stories with a little bit of commentary. Some of my favorite websites are nothing but links to stories.
I’m still not getting your assumption that Michele is “uninformed”. I see that she doesn’t buy into your theories and that’s a problem for you.
With the name calling and belittlement, why would she be tempted to interact very much?



report abuse
 

anonymous reincarnate

posted October 23, 2008 at 12:03 am


i like you already minnie! nice fire and spunk! welcome aboard… hopefully you’ll stay around for some banter.



report abuse
 

LloydBoy

posted October 23, 2008 at 1:31 am


I have to say that I found Ms. McGinty’s post barely comprehensible. I’m still trying to parse out what the heck she was trying to say between her initial post and then her correction.
I find Minnie’s comments to be right on the mark. We need more conversation that reflects fair, thoughtful conversation marked by reference to reliable media sources, not just more reverberations from the media echo chamber. It is not a question of different opinions being wrong, it is a question of whether an opinion is persuasive based on logic and reference to factual information.



report abuse
 

MzEllen

posted October 23, 2008 at 7:02 am


LloydBoy…
There are lots of places that will agree with you in politics…
There are lots of places that will agree with you in politics…
There are lots of places that will agree with you in politics…
Mabye you’ll be able to understand them, if they agree with you. AR…I’m saddened and frustrated that you are one of those who believe that name-calling and belittling those who interact with you on a personal level and disagree with you is “fire and spunk”.
I used to listen to Michael Savage, but don’t anymore because of the way he interacts with callers who disagree with him.
I will continue to back out of conversations where I am insulted and belittled because (honestly) I do not wish to be tempted to take on those tactics. I can do that easily and I don’t want to be like you.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

Another Blog To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Reformed Chicks Babbling. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Inspiration Report Happy Reading!!!

posted 3:05:14pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

One Final Word
My dear friend Michele slipped into eternity on Wednesday, February 1.   She was a remarkable woman who left a legacy of faith, determination, and love. For three years she courageously battled the ovarian cancer that eventually robbed her of her life.  A few days before she died, one of her docto

posted 8:43:41pm Feb. 10, 2012 | read full post »

The rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated
My husband told me that there are rumors that I've died. I'm happy to report that I'm still very much alive. My cancer has gone to stage four but we are controlling it with chemo, the cancer numbers are currently in the normal range. I've stopped blogging to concentrate on my daughters and writing a

posted 7:07:55pm Aug. 23, 2010 | read full post »

An update and a prayer request
Several people have asked about Michele's condition, and have promised to pray for her. On her behalf, I thank you for that. I spoke with her a little while ago, and she asked that I come here and tell you what's going on, and to ask you to pray for her. She isn't able to post here herself right

posted 4:55:36pm Apr. 06, 2010 | read full post »

Rest in peace, Internet Monk.
A man known in the cyber world as The Internet Monk, has died. Michael Spencer lost his battle with cancer tonight. My prayers go out for his family and for all those who loved and will miss him. :(

posted 11:52:00pm Apr. 05, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.