Bluegrassrivals

I'm sorry about the title of the thread, I hit the wrong key by mistake.

The follwing was inserted into the stimulus bill, it prohibits stimulus monies being spent on facilities that allow religous worship.


The provision bans money designated for school renovation from being spent on facilities that allow "religious worship." It has ignited a fury among critics who say it violates the First Amendment and is an attempt to prevent religious practice in schools.
According to the bill, which the Democratic-controlled House passed despite unanimous Republican opposition, funds are prohibited from being used for the "modernization, renovation, or repair" of facilities that allow "sectarian instruction, religious worship or a school or department of divinity."


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/...ar-prayer/


Your thoughts?

Old School Wrote:I'm sorry about the title of the thread, I hit the wrong key by mistake.

The follwing was inserted into the stimulus bill, it prohibits stimulus monies being spent on facilities that allow religous worship.


The provision bans money designated for school renovation from being spent on facilities that allow "religious worship." It has ignited a fury among critics who say it violates the First Amendment and is an attempt to prevent religious practice in schools.
According to the bill, which the Democratic-controlled House passed despite unanimous Republican opposition, funds are prohibited from being used for the "modernization, renovation, or repair" of facilities that allow "sectarian instruction, religious worship or a school or department of divinity."


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/...ar-prayer/


Your thoughts?

My thoughts are that you got fooled again by those idiots at fox. That isnt exactly what the bill states, its just what some mouthpiece for the GOP told fox it siad. If what Neil claims is true, then no school in the country would receive any funds to renovate. But since this came from fox, we all know its just a bunch of bull. What the bill really states is that funds will not be given to a school whose primar

Who knows whats in this bill? It's over 1000 pages and Pelosi is not going to allow a 48 hour window for study before voting on it. Many reps and senators are not aware of what they are voting for! It may be the greatest bill in the history of the republic, but we won't know until after the fact.

Old School Wrote:I'm sorry about the title of the thread, I hit the wrong key by mistake.

The follwing was inserted into the stimulus bill, it prohibits stimulus monies being spent on facilities that allow religous worship.


The provision bans money designated for school renovation from being spent on facilities that allow "religious worship." It has ignited a fury among critics who say it violates the First Amendment and is an attempt to prevent religious practice in schools.
According to the bill, which the Democratic-controlled House passed despite unanimous Republican opposition, funds are prohibited from being used for the "modernization, renovation, or repair" of facilities that allow "sectarian instruction, religious worship or a school or department of divinity."


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/...ar-prayer/


Your thoughts?

Nothing new, accurate or controversial about it -- except for The Stupidest People In The World. The same language can be found in the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2006. Of course, that introduced by a Republican congressman, was passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by the Republican president, so at the time it was apparently perfectly acceptable to Fox News and the wingnutosphere.

Section 9302 prohibits the use of funds for "modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities ... used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity ... or in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission." It does not prohibit money being spent on facilities that allow religious worship, so long as those facilities also have a primarily non-religious purpose. So chapters of Campus Crusade for Christ or Fellowship of Christian Athletes can still meet in buildings on public college campuses and they can even offer prayers there.

I don't know what happened to my previous post, but TSH pretty much took the words out of my mouth. Nothing in this is new, its just something for those idiots at fox to feed to the masses of lost conservatives that wont challenge anything they say.

You people who think Fox News is the only one ridiculing this stimulus bill need to wake up.

With groups like the Americans United for Separation of Chuch and State and The American Civil liberties Union defending the bill's provision, means to me that it can't favorable to the religious community.


"Civil liberty groups like the Americans United for Separation of Church and State vehemently defend the stimulus bill's provision, arguing that it in no way violates the Constitution."



"The American Civil Liberties Union also defends the constitutionality of the restriction, which they say has been the law since 1972."

"It's almost a restatement of what the Constitution requires so there's nothing novel in what the House did in its restriction," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel to the ACLU. "For 37 years, the law of the land is that the government can't pay for buildings that are used for religious purposes."

Old School Wrote:With groups like the Americans United for Separation of Chuch and State and The American Civil liberties Union defending the bill's provision, means to me that it can't favorable to the religious community.


"Civil liberty groups like the Americans United for Separation of Church and State vehemently defend the stimulus bill's provision, arguing that it in no way violates the Constitution."



"The American Civil Liberties Union also defends the constitutionality of the restriction, which they say has been the law since 1972."

"It's almost a restatement of what the Constitution requires so there's nothing novel in what the House did in its restriction," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel to the ACLU. "For 37 years, the law of the land is that the government can't pay for buildings that are used for religious purposes."

And fox publishing this story tells me that its probably a lie.


Go read the bill, the way fox betrays it, and the way it actually reads are completely different. Many different bills have had the same language, but when its passed by republicans it's ok.

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:And fox publishing this story tells me that its probably a lie.


Go read the bill, the way fox betrays it, and the way it actually reads are completely different. Many different bills have had the same language, but when its passed by republicans it's ok.

Have you read the stimulus bill? I really doubt it. Not one of the Senators who voted on or for this bill read it either, so what does that tell you.

Since so many other bills (as you say) have had the same language, it would be nice to see which ones they are. Why don't you share which bills those are?

After two years of you and I, arguing over many different subjects, you still don't know me. I would condem anyone, Republican or Democrat who voted to stifle ones right to pray or conduct religious worship services.

Old School Wrote:Have you read the stimulus bill? I really doubt it. Not one of the Senators who voted on or for this bill read it either, so what does that tell you.

Since so many other bills (as you say) have had the same language, it would be nice to see which ones they are. Why don't you share which bills those are?

After two years of you and I, arguing over many different subjects, you still don't know me. I would condem anyone, Republican or Democrat who voted to stifle ones right to pray or conduct religious worship services.

I didnt read the whole bill, but I did read the section that was brought up on fox, and they lied about what the bill said, which isnt suprising.

Also, I did share one of the bills, go back and look at my previous post, I even posted a link to it.

jetpilot Wrote:You people who think Fox News is the only one ridiculing this stimulus bill need to wake up.

The people who actually listen to fox seriously are the ones who need to wake up, the hatred spit out on that station is really hurting this country. Did anyone not see Billdo talk about the drunk, drug addict Appalachians who don't deserve help? It's hilarious that people actually listen to the idiots at fox.

no one said that fox is the only station that airs criticism of the stimulus package, but fox is the only major station that pushes blatant lies about the package. The link Old school posted was a fox news site, so I dont see anything wrong with ridiculing them. CNN, MSNBC, ABC or CBS weren't mentioned in his post, if you want to bring their criticism up, post some links to it.

FOX is hurting this country. That's hilarious! Thanks!:thatsfunn

jetpilot Wrote:FOX is hurting this country. That's hilarious! Thanks!:thatsfunn

The post you make are prime examples of how fox his mislead its viewers.

Just mock the other side, without ever posting any real support for your failed logic.

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:The post you make are prime examples of how fox his mislead its viewers.

Just mock the other side, without ever posting any real support for your failed logic.

No, that's your deal. By calling the people at Fox idiots, the joke is squarely on you. You have 100 other media outlets out there spewing liberal garbage, and you have no problem with that. One network reports the other side, and they are idiots in your book. Just keep it on the liberal channels and you will stay in a lot better mood. Of course, you will still be in the dark, but obviously that doesn't bother you.

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:I didnt read the whole bill, but I did read the section that was brought up on fox, and they lied about what the bill said, which isnt suprising.

Also, I did share one of the bills, go back and look at my previous post, I even posted a link to it.

Since you at least read that section. Why don't you give us abridged version of what you read?

Oh really.:eyeroll: Which post are you referring to? The only two links in this entire thread are the ones TSH and I posted. So in which post did you provide a link? Once again you accuse Fox News of misleading and outright lying to the public, and once again you were caught doing the samething you accused others of doing. :dontthink

Old School Wrote:[/COLOR][/B]

Since you at least read that section. Why don't you give us abridged version of what you read?

Oh really.:eyeroll: Which post are you referring to? The only two links in this entire thread are the ones TSH and I posted. So in which post did you provide a link? Once again you accuse Fox News of misleading and outright lying to the public, and once again you were caught doing the samething you accused others of doing. :dontthink

I forgot that the post I had put the links in was cut short.

Here is what the section of the bill that fox twisted really says.

"PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS- No funds awarded under this section may be used for --

(A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1);

(B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;

© modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities --

(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or

(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission;

No where in that does it say that schools who allow religous groups on campus will be denied money, it states that money can not be given to any facilitly whose primary use is for religious purposes. Nothing in that is taking away rights for groups like the Fellowship of Christian athletes (Which I was a member of in high school) to meet on campuses.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1/text

This is what that idiot neil had to say about it on his show.

"CAVUTO: I bet, I bet. It goes back and forth here. But what's this religion thing about?

DeMINT: Well, this morning, I went to the National Prayer Breakfast. Barack Obama spoke about the importance of faith. Tony Blair spoke about the importance of faith. It was a great experience -- over 3,000 people from all over the world.

Then, I get back here, and we're working on this so-called stimulus bill that would prohibit any religious activity in any college or university facility that uses any of these funds for modernization or renovation.

It is just a phrase that I think the ACLU had stuck in this bill -- because they are the real proponents of keeping it in there -- that would really take advantage of religious freedom, Bible studies, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, whether it is on a student center, a dorm, an auditorium where prayers might be offered. The Supreme --

CAVUTO: So what does it stop? It doesn't allow these areas to be upgraded, renovated, expanded? Am I getting that right, or what?

DeMINT: No. If they are -- if they use these funds to be modernized or renovated, then there can be no prayers, religious activities, no teaching of religious history. So, it discriminates against anyone of faith and would affect the things that are going on now. Just normal meetings by religious groups can no longer be held in a student center, which the Supreme Court has given them that right.

But if these funds are used on that student center for renovation, it can't be used. I mean --

CAVUTO: That doesn't even sound legal."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200902080007?f=s_search

lol, they actually let people get on TV and spit out garbage like this, and viewers like old school just eat it up as truth. It's quite funny.

jetpilot Wrote:No, that's your deal. By calling the people at Fox idiots, the joke is squarely on you. You have 100 other media outlets out there spewing liberal garbage, and you have no problem with that. One network reports the other side, and they are idiots in your book. Just keep it on the liberal channels and you will stay in a lot better mood. Of course, you will still be in the dark, but obviously that doesn't bother you.

I like how you just assume that I watch this "liberal" tv that you speak of. My TV is something that gets very little use, unless im playing my 360. Im usually too busy with homework to watch what those nuts on TV try to tell me what to think. And I really don't care what you think of my views on anything, because as most of your post have shown, you're just as lost as you claim me to be.

Im perfectly happy being in the "dark", as long it means I don't think like you do.

Also, I never said that they weren't idiots on other networks, because they are. The world is full of idiots, but IMO fox has a larger majority of idiots working for them than most other news outlets.

P.S. Instead of insinuating that other networks blatantly lie and twist stories, show some evidence.

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:I like how you just assume that I watch this "liberal" tv that you speak of. My TV is something that gets very little use, unless im playing my 360. Im usually too busy with homework to watch what those nuts on TV try to tell me what to think. And I really don't care what you think of my views on anything, because as most of your post have shown, you're just as lost as you claim me to be.

Im perfectly happy being in the "dark", as long it means I don't think like you do.

Also, I never said that they weren't idiots on other networks, because they are. The world is full of idiots, but IMO fox has a larger majority of idiots working for them than most other news outlets.

P.S. Instead of insinuating that other networks blatantly lie and twist stories, show some evidence.

Turn your 360 off and learn something for yourself.

jetpilot Wrote:Turn your 360 off and learn something for yourself.

Is that all you have to say, turn my 360 off and learn something, lol. If you feel you know so much more than me, then why dont you bless me with your wisdom?

But to be honest, I really don't need it, I would to think ive learned a lot, seeming that im graduating with a 3.6 GPA (Could be better) in Biology. The 360 just keeps me entertained, all that studying gets really boring, and I wouldnt want to waste my time watching TV, and end up lost like most people.

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:I forgot that the post I had put the links in was cut short.

Here is what the section of the bill that fox twisted really says.

"PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS- No funds awarded under this section may be used for --

(A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1);

(B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;

© modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities --

(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or

(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission;

No where in that does it say that schools who allow religous groups on campus will be denied money, it states that money can not be given to any facilitly whose primary use is for religious purposes. Nothing in that is taking away rights for groups like the Fellowship of Christian athletes (Which I was a member of in high school) to meet on campuses.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1/text

This is what that idiot neil had to say about it on his show.

"CAVUTO: I bet, I bet. It goes back and forth here. But what's this religion thing about?

DeMINT: Well, this morning, I went to the National Prayer Breakfast. Barack Obama spoke about the importance of faith. Tony Blair spoke about the importance of faith. It was a great experience -- over 3,000 people from all over the world.

Then, I get back here, and we're working on this so-called stimulus bill that would prohibit any religious activity in any college or university facility that uses any of these funds for modernization or renovation.

It is just a phrase that I think the ACLU had stuck in this bill -- because they are the real proponents of keeping it in there -- that would really take advantage of religious freedom, Bible studies, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, whether it is on a student center, a dorm, an auditorium where prayers might be offered. The Supreme --

CAVUTO: So what does it stop? It doesn't allow these areas to be upgraded, renovated, expanded? Am I getting that right, or what?

DeMINT: No. If they are -- if they use these funds to be modernized or renovated, then there can be no prayers, religious activities, no teaching of religious history. So, it discriminates against anyone of faith and would affect the things that are going on now. Just normal meetings by religious groups can no longer be held in a student center, which the Supreme Court has given them that right.

But if these funds are used on that student center for renovation, it can't be used. I mean --

CAVUTO: That doesn't even sound legal."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200902080007?f=s_search

lol, they actually let people get on TV and spit out garbage like this, and viewers like old school just eat it up as truth. It's quite funny.

I'm sure it was :eyeroll: lol

According to the Fox News report which states:
funds are prohibited from being used for the "modernization, renovation, or repair" of facilities that allow "sectarian instruction, religious worship or a school or department of divinity."

According to your link from Media Matters:

(3) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS- No funds awarded under this section may be used for --[INDENT](A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1);[/INDENT]

[INDENT](B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;[/INDENT]

[INDENT]© modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities --[INDENT](i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or[/INDENT]

[INDENT](ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or[/INDENT]
(D) construction of new facilities.

The only difference is that Fox News used the words "that allow" instead of "used for" which is in the Bill. I could really see where that would throw you off there coach lol

So again tell me how is Fox News twisting, misleading or lying to everyone?

Here are a few questions to think about.

1) What is the definition of Religious Worship?
a) Could it be the singing of gospel hymms?
b) Could it be reading the bible?
c) Could it be discussing the bible with others?
d) Could it be praying?
e) Basically anything glorifying God could be considered as worship.
f) IMO we can worship when were alone, or in small groups of 2 or 3, or in larger groups it makes no difference.

2) Where could Religious Worship take place on any campus?
g) Could it take place in a dorm room?
h) Could it take place in a student center/auditorium?
i) Could it take place in a class room?
j) Could it take place in the lobby of any building?

I'm sure if stimulus money were spent on dorm rooms, student centers, class rooms etc. and any of the above activites were ongoing in these buildings groups like the ACLU and Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State could and would push for banning of these activites.

BTW my answer to uestions a-d and g-j would be yes.

Show me. Where did I say, "Schools who allow religious groups on campus will be denied money"? I don't believe I did!

You have bashed Neil Cavuto through out this thread, in one post you said, "if what Neil claims is true then no school in the country would recieve any funds to renovate." below is everything that Neil said in his interview with Senator DeMint. Now tell me what did Neil say that would make you think that?

CAVUTO: Well, a Senate vote on the stimulus bill could come down tonight; both sides fighting over the spending and the tax cuts. Now there seems to be a battle over something else: religion.

CAVUTO: I bet, I bet. It goes back and forth here. But what's this religion thing about?

CAVUTO: So what does it stop? It doesn't allow these areas to be upgraded, renovated, expanded? Am I getting that right, or what?

CAVUTO: That doesn't even sound legal.

CAVUTO: But -- but that doesn't even sound legal.

CAVUTO: All right, because this one has, like you say, nothing to with costs at all. It seems like a concerted effort to focus on religion.

CAVUTO: Senator, all right, crazy stuff. I know a lot of amendments are coming fast and furious. Good seeing you.

CAVUTO: Man, oh, man. All right, thank you, sir.

Several times during this thread you have said that Fox News has lied, but you have yet to prove it! Where's the proof?



[/INDENT]

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:Is that all you have to say, turn my 360 off and learn something, lol. If you feel you know so much more than me, then why dont you bless me with your wisdom?

But to be honest, I really don't need it, I would to think ive learned a lot, seeming that im graduating with a 3.6 GPA (Could be better) in Biology. The 360 just keeps me entertained, all that studying gets really boring, and I wouldnt want to waste my time watching TV, and end up lost like most people.

A 3.6 isn't too bad. Good for you. I graduated with a 3.5. I can honestly say i thought i knew alot about the world too. But to be honest i didn't learn nearly as much in college as i did in the army. Not about life anyways.

Old School Wrote:I'm sure it was :eyeroll: lol

According to the Fox News report which states:
funds are prohibited from being used for the "modernization, renovation, or repair" of facilities that allow "sectarian instruction, religious worship or a school or department of divinity."

According to your link from Media Matters:

(3) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS- No funds awarded under this section may be used for --[INDENT](A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1);[/INDENT]

[INDENT](B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;[/INDENT]

[INDENT]© modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities --[INDENT](i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or[/INDENT]

[INDENT](ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or[/INDENT]
(D) construction of new facilities.

The only difference is that Fox News used the words "that allow" instead of "used for" which is in the Bill. I could really see where that would throw you off there coach lol

So again tell me how is Fox News twisting, misleading or lying to everyone?

Here are a few questions to think about.

1) What is the definition of Religious Worship?
a) Could it be the singing of gospel hymms?
b) Could it be reading the bible?
c) Could it be discussing the bible with others?
d) Could it be praying?
e) Basically anything glorifying God could be considered as worship.
f) IMO we can worship when were alone, or in small groups of 2 or 3, or in larger groups it makes no difference.

2) Where could Religious Worship take place on any campus?
g) Could it take place in a dorm room?
h) Could it take place in a student center/auditorium?
i) Could it take place in a class room?
j) Could it take place in the lobby of any building?

I'm sure if stimulus money were spent on dorm rooms, student centers, class rooms etc. and any of the above activites were ongoing in these buildings groups like the ACLU and Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State could and would push for banning of these activites.

BTW my answer to uestions a-d and g-j would be yes.

Show me. Where did I say, "Schools who allow religious groups on campus will be denied money"? I don't believe I did!

You have bashed Neil Cavuto through out this thread, in one post you said, "if what Neil claims is true then no school in the country would recieve any funds to renovate." below is everything that Neil said in his interview with Senator DeMint. Now tell me what did Neil say that would make you think that?

CAVUTO: Well, a Senate vote on the stimulus bill could come down tonight; both sides fighting over the spending and the tax cuts. Now there seems to be a battle over something else: religion.

CAVUTO: I bet, I bet. It goes back and forth here. But what's this religion thing about?

CAVUTO: So what does it stop? It doesn't allow these areas to be upgraded, renovated, expanded? Am I getting that right, or what?

CAVUTO: That doesn't even sound legal.

CAVUTO: But -- but that doesn't even sound legal.

CAVUTO: All right, because this one has, like you say, nothing to with costs at all. It seems like a concerted effort to focus on religion.

CAVUTO: Senator, all right, crazy stuff. I know a lot of amendments are coming fast and furious. Good seeing you.

CAVUTO: Man, oh, man. All right, thank you, sir.

Several times during this thread you have said that Fox News has lied, but you have yet to prove it! Where's the proof?



[/INDENT]

Neil agreed with the senator that this stimulus package would not allow money to be given to any schools allowing religous worship on campus. He never gave any points to counter the senator, or any facts to prove what the senator was saying was true. He even said the stimulus package was a concreted effort against religion, which isnt true. He was just agreeing with the RW bs look Ailes and Murdoch tell him too.

The guest on Neils show lied about what the bill said, and Neil never corrected him, I would call that lying. The proof is in the link.

Matman Wrote:A 3.6 isn't too bad. Good for you. I graduated with a 3.5. I can honestly say i thought i knew alot about the world too. But to be honest i didn't learn nearly as much in college as i did in the army. Not about life anyways.

Yeah I could do better than a 3.6, but chemistry is my weak point, and it has kept my gpa from being higher (Ive gotten a B in Gen chem - organic - and bio chem.) There is a lot in life I have yet to learn as im still pretty much just a kid. But just becuase there are things in life I have yet to experience doesnt mean I cant tell BS when I hear/see it. I can look up facts and statistics, that has nothing to do with the wisdom gained in life.

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:Neil agreed with the senator that this stimulus package would not allow money to be given to any schools allowing religous worship on campus. He never gave any points to counter the senator, or any facts to prove what the senator was saying was true. He even said the stimulus package was a concreted effort against religion, which isnt true. He was just agreeing with the RW bs look Ailes and Murdoch tell him too.

The guest on Neils show lied about what the bill said, and Neil never corrected him, I would call that lying. The proof is in the link.

Where are you getting your information? I have yet to find anything in the report that supports your claim.

The quotation below was taken from the media matter article you referenced to in your link.
CAVUTO: So what does it stop? It doesn't allow these areas to be upgraded, renovated, expanded? Am I getting that right, or what?
DeMINT: No. If they are -- if they use these funds to be modernized or renovated, then there can be no prayers, religious activities, no teaching of religious history. So, it discriminates against anyone of faith and would affect the things that are going on now. Just normal meetings by religious groups can no longer be held in a student center, which the Supreme Court has given them that right.
But if these funds are used on that student center for renovation, it can't be used. I mean --

The interview between Neil Cavuto and Senater Jim DeMint was held on either February 5th or 6th during which time the senate was debating the bill itself. The stimulus bill was passed by the senate on February 13th a week after the interview. Now tell me how could have Neil given points to either counter or support the what the Senator is saying when he not had a chance to see the bill himself?

He did not say the stimulus package was a conserted effort againt religion, but that the phrase that was added to the bill was.

DeMINT: --this doesn't have any place in the stim --
CAVUTO: But -- but that doesn't even sound legal.
DeMINT: No, I don't think it is constitutional. It's not. I don't think it is constitutional. The -- the ACLU is arguing that it is, and they're encouraging all their Democrat friends to vote against my amendment.
But I have an amendment to strip it out. It has nothing to do with jobs; it has nothing to do with our economy. It is just an effort to slip one more thing in with a political agenda, and we are finding these things spread throughout this bill.
CAVUTO: All right, because this one has, like you say, nothing to with costs at all. It seems like a concerted effort to focus on religion.

Again, it seems to me that you are the one who is trying to twist and mislead everyone else, you remind me of a teacher I once had, he too was a strong democrat whatever the democrats would say or do was right and whatever the republicans would say or do was wrong.