Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I am not a Trump hater. Not being a Trump cheerleader doesn't make me a hater. I am simply telling the truth, he is an insulting person, he is abusive, and he is arrogant. This conclusion is based solely on his own words.

Saying this doesn't in any way say that previous presidents weren't liars, cheats, and disingenuous. This is not a binary choice, Trump being arrogant doesn't require that Obama be a saint and vice versa.

"As for women and wimps in the locker room" we are seeing that with the Democrats (Pelosi, AOC, Omar and Clinton). They are disintegrating right in front of our eyes. AOC's blunder with Amazon.com, trying to be tough and instead got body slammed. I would be stunned if she lasts more than 1 term. Likewise with Omar, giving the Democrats a major black eye that will not go away. And how wimpy is Pelosi. Saying that "Trump is not worth impeaching". That is the total cowards way out. She wants to claim he has done things worthy of impeachment but somehow it isn't worth impeaching him. Do your job. If he has done things worthy of impeachment, then your job is to impeach him. If on the other hand the entire thing has been a political witch hunt and you have been exposed, your lies and cowardice are simply continuing to dig the hole you will be buried in.

AOC never got "body slammed." In fact, most Democratic hopefuls have taken up her Green Deal. Have you forgotten, "she's the boss?"

Omar too won a great victory. Instead of censure for despicable comments, and removal from the Foreign Relations Commitee, like King of Iowa, she got "much needed anti-hate legislation."

I think ZNP and others here got a "technical knockout" for supporting Muller's Witch Hunt in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Instead of rightly admitting the coup d'etat, you clamor about "Trump is rude, Trump is arrogant." That's like complaining about "foul-mouthed" American politicians as Pearl Harbor was being attacked.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Hey ... Jonathan Cahn is preaching and teaching how Trump was prophesied in the Bible to be president. According to Cahn, he's a modern day King Jehu.

And then there's all the claims that he's King Cyrus.

Methinks that Christians are making him bigger than the media does. They're making him out to be a Bible hero. It doesn't get any bigger than that.

I guess I missed that CNN report about King Cyrus or King Jehu in the White House.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

No brother. It's all over the Christian Prophecy sites. Look it up. They believe God is controlling history, and it's further development.

Christians believe God is controlling history?

Perhaps the weather too?

Appalling!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Christians believe God is controlling history?

Perhaps the weather too?

Appalling!

I know. If God is controlling history, He's doing an appalling job. I stand against vilifying God like that.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

AOC never got "body slammed." In fact, most Democratic hopefuls have taken up her Green Deal. Have you forgotten, "she's the boss?"

What you don't see in politics is far more important than what you do. The fact that she is receiving very mild rebukes in public is simply because the democrats don't want to offend her supporters. They understand that as foolish and idiotic some of the things she has done are, she still represents a number of people who would walk away from the Democratic party if they publicly rebuke her.

That said "money talks and BS walks" in politics. Amazon.com has money, they do the talking, Comey and Diblasio are listening, two very important democrats. No doubt Clinton and others are also listening. So let's see if AOC is opposed in the next election by a very well funded candidate who wins the Democratic nomination. That is when you will realize they put the knife in her back.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Omar too won a great victory. Instead of censure for despicable comments, and removal from the Foreign Relations Commitee, like King of Iowa, she got "much needed anti-hate legislation."

Again, the issue is will she be reelected? The democrats cannot risk offending Muslims, they are critical in elections decided by less than 3%. But that doesn't mean that behind the scenes they have already decided she must go. Again, let's see if she gets reelected? You might think that Muslims would rally behind her, but I doubt it. Her reelection will be very high profile and if she were funded by Islamic organizations it would become a major campaign issue, stir up more heated rhetoric, and bring negative publicity to a minority that does not want negative publicity.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I think ZNP and others here got a "technical knockout" for supporting Muller's Witch Hunt in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Instead of rightly admitting the coup d'etat, you clamor about "Trump is rude, Trump is arrogant." That's like complaining about "foul-mouthed" American politicians as Pearl Harbor was being attacked.

I guess I need to do a post mortem, why could I not see it, what was blinding my eyes?

I like your analogy to Pearl Harbor, that is very personal for me. My dad was 12 at the time and spent the day rowing sailors (mostly dead ones) from the Arizona. His house was less than 100 feet from where it was anchored (his old house is now a historical site). Of course he is not the heroic figure Trump is with his phony 4F, nor would I liken my grandfather to Trump either, both my father and grandfather were in the military and recognized a war hero even if he was captured or killed.

So why would we as a family become so naive, able to fall for this Fake news coup? Pretty insulting when you think about it, especially since my Dad got forced out because he refused to let the CIA set up shop in UPI. Fake news has been a very critical force to our family since 1977. Later he disagreed with the NYT handling of the reporting on JFK assassination, and again left. Fake news has been a very big deal in our family and yet here I am, so naive?

I get it, we have had Fake news since 1977 yet it takes CNN saying mean things about Trump for others to see it. So I am happy about that. It has been 42 years, but at least you can now see what I see and know that it matters.

Likewise the coup d'etat. That took place in 1963, so I am glad you finally figured that out. No one cared about the Box 13 scandal when I brought it up, but how do you think the CIA controls Johnson? Do what we say or we'll expose you are a fraud. That is one reason why I welcome the Mueller investigation, because no one is going to be able to bring down the whole "fruitless works of darkness" if they are a fraud.

But that is not the only reason. In the 60s my uncle's house was bombed by the KKK (Robert Kochtitzky). This was because he was standing with the black churches in Jackson, Ms. So our family has been in the center of the civil rights movement for virtually my whole life. I have seen many people approach this issue, most of them with the ministry of condemnation which does not yield righteousness, which is why 50 years later we still see bombings and shootings in churches, mosques, etc. My uncle understood the ministry of righteousness which includes reconciliation. If I hadn't been given a TKO I could tell you the difference, guess you'll have to google it for yourself. But one thing I do know from my experience, the ministry of condemnation is full of those who set themselves up as the judge and jury, deciding who is knocked out and who isn't.

We saw the Black Panthers, they went down a failed path of an eye for an eye, of being conquered by the evil. But who knows 50 years later you would think people would finally figure out this is not a path that leads to righteousness. But I also saw Martin Luther King Jr. and his "coarse jesting" and infidelity was detrimental to the movement. The NT says "be perfect" and he wasn't. Trump isn't either. So yes, I point this out because I know it will undermine anything else he wishes to do. For example Bill Belichik is a family friend, he went to the same university as my cousins and they would have him over to their house. Still I will point out that spygate and deflategate were both unrighteous and will damage his legacy, giving his haters ammunition.

But going back to your Pearl Harbor analogy, one outcome of that attack was the internment camps. No doubt people thought that was the patriotic thing to do. My dad didn't. Instead they figured out who the spy was. He was a butcher. All the admirals would call ahead when they were gonna be in port to order steaks. As a result the butcher (who was Japanese) knew when every ship was going to be in port. Rather than throw every Japanese in jail, find out the traitor and deal with him. Likewise with Trump, instead of falsely accusing him of being a traitor, lets be more precise in our dealing with sin. So since we both agree that the internment camps were unrighteous and foolish, and that they were similar to the false accusations made against Trump why did I support the Mueller investigation? Well, Warren was governor of California and supported the internment camps. That error no doubt influenced his being chosen for the Supreme Court (figured he'd be tough on the commies) yet that error no doubt shaped his opinion and his court ruled on transformative civil rights decisions.

Is it hypocritical that I am not concerned about the most powerful man, a billionaire, a man who has sued thousands of people and stiffed countless number of workers, that I don't empathize with him being unjustly examined? Let me tell you what I am concerned about. My brother was one of the lawyers who recently took the Habeus Corpus case to the Supreme Court. This was where the CIA was locking up "bad guys" in Guantanamo without telling us their names or their crimes. Why? Because our "allies", countries run by despots and tyrants, were cleaning house of political opponents and sending them to Guantanamo. They couldn't tell their names or charges because it would be an outrage. You still don't know them because they were discreetly released and sent abroad as a result of that trial. So when the CIA helps some despot take a peon, toss them in the dungeon and throw away the key without so much as telling us why, then yes, I see that as unrighteous. I do empathize. Sorry if I don't have empathy for some billionaire 4F who insults POWs and families of those KIA, who stiffs common workers, sues everyone he can think of, and is surrounded by thugs and scam artists.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

What you don't see in politics is far more important than what you do. The fact that she is receiving very mild rebukes in public is simply because the democrats don't want to offend her supporters. They understand that as foolish and idiotic some of the things she has done are, she still represents a number of people who would walk away from the Democratic party if they publicly rebuke her.

That said "money talks and BS walks" in politics. Amazon.com has money, they do the talking, Comey and Diblasio are listening, two very important democrats. No doubt Clinton and others are also listening. So let's see if AOC is opposed in the next election by a very well funded candidate who wins the Democratic nomination. That is when you will realize they put the knife in her back.



Again, the issue is will she be reelected? The democrats cannot risk offending Muslims, they are critical in elections decided by less than 3%. But that doesn't mean that behind the scenes they have already decided she must go. Again, let's see if she gets reelected? You might think that Muslims would rally behind her, but I doubt it. Her reelection will be very high profile and if she were funded by Islamic organizations it would become a major campaign issue, stir up more heated rhetoric, and bring negative publicity to a minority that does not want negative publicity.

I often hear from Trump voters that they voted for him because they thought Washington was broken and Trump would shake it all up ; drain the swamp and all.

And now they're criticizing AOC and Omar for doing that very same thing. Right for one, wrong for the other.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

I often hear from Trump voters that they voted for him because they thought Washington was broken and Trump would shake it all up ; drain the swamp and all.

And now they're criticizing AOC and Omar for doing that very same thing. Right for one, wrong for the other.

Trump limits regulations and creates jobs.


AOC loves regulations and ends jobs.


Aren't they the same thing?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

I often hear from Trump voters that they voted for him because they thought Washington was broken and Trump would shake it all up ; drain the swamp and all.

And now they're criticizing AOC and Omar for doing that very same thing. Right for one, wrong for the other.

It is good to be outside of the system, you are less compromised. But this is like fighting for the heavyweight title, you better be well trained.

AOC and Omar are idiots. They think that they alone are right and everyone else is wrong, everyone else is compromised, so they alone can speak the hard truths.

So AOC would have tens of thousands of Americans lose their jobs for her green plan which will not be a solution to anything. They don't deny it isn't a solution, yet she justifies it by saying "at least I want to do something". Fine, if that is how she feels she should be the first one to lose her job.

Omar is very clearly biased against Jews. She may not be "anti semitic" but instead of simply focusing on the law and trying to move US policy away from strongly supporting Israel, which is our ally, she chose instead to cast aspersions on virtually everyone in the US. If you do that you have no right to complain when they do it to you.

This is why I say they are idiots. They have stepped into the ring with heavyweights and made idiotic mistakes.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I guess I need to do a post mortem, why could I not see it, what was blinding my eyes?

I like your analogy to Pearl Harbor, that is very personal for me. My dad was 12 at the time and spent the day rowing sailors (mostly dead ones) from the Arizona. His house was less than 100 feet from where it was anchored (his old house is now a historical site). Of course he is not the heroic figure Trump is with his phony 4F, nor would I liken my grandfather to Trump either, both my father and grandfather were in the military and recognized a war hero even if he was captured or killed.

So why would we as a family become so naive, able to fall for this Fake news coup? Pretty insulting when you think about it, especially since my Dad got forced out because he refused to let the CIA set up shop in UPI. Fake news has been a very critical force to our family since 1977. Later he disagreed with the NYT handling of the reporting on JFK assassination, and again left. Fake news has been a very big deal in our family and yet here I am, so naive?

I get it, we have had Fake news since 1977 yet it takes CNN saying mean things about Trump for others to see it. So I am happy about that. It has been 42 years, but at least you can now see what I see and know that it matters.

Likewise the coup d'etat. That took place in 1963, so I am glad you finally figured that out. No one cared about the Box 13 scandal when I brought it up, but how do you think the CIA controls Johnson? Do what we say or we'll expose you are a fraud. That is one reason why I welcome the Mueller investigation, because no one is going to be able to bring down the whole "fruitless works of darkness" if they are a fraud.

But that is not the only reason. In the 60s my uncle's house was bombed by the KKK (Robert Kochtitzky). This was because he was standing with the black churches in Jackson, Ms. So our family has been in the center of the civil rights movement for virtually my whole life. I have seen many people approach this issue, most of them with the ministry of condemnation which does not yield righteousness, which is why 50 years later we still see bombings and shootings in churches, mosques, etc. My uncle understood the ministry of righteousness which includes reconciliation. If I hadn't been given a TKO I could tell you the difference, guess you'll have to google it for yourself. But one thing I do know from my experience, the ministry of condemnation is full of those who set themselves up as the judge and jury, deciding who is knocked out and who isn't.

We saw the Black Panthers, they went down a failed path of an eye for an eye, of being conquered by the evil. But who knows 50 years later you would think people would finally figure out this is not a path that leads to righteousness. But I also saw Martin Luther King Jr. and his "coarse jesting" and infidelity was detrimental to the movement. The NT says "be perfect" and he wasn't. Trump isn't either. So yes, I point this out because I know it will undermine anything else he wishes to do. For example Bill Belichik is a family friend, he went to the same university as my cousins and they would have him over to their house. Still I will point out that spygate and deflategate were both unrighteous and will damage his legacy, giving his haters ammunition.

But going back to your Pearl Harbor analogy, one outcome of that attack was the internment camps. No doubt people thought that was the patriotic thing to do. My dad didn't. Instead they figured out who the spy was. He was a butcher. All the admirals would call ahead when they were gonna be in port to order steaks. As a result the butcher (who was Japanese) knew when every ship was going to be in port. Rather than throw every Japanese in jail, find out the traitor and deal with him. Likewise with Trump, instead of falsely accusing him of being a traitor, lets be more precise in our dealing with sin. So since we both agree that the internment camps were unrighteous and foolish, and that they were similar to the false accusations made against Trump why did I support the Mueller investigation? Well, Warren was governor of California and supported the internment camps. That error no doubt influenced his being chosen for the Supreme Court (figured he'd be tough on the commies) yet that error no doubt shaped his opinion and his court ruled on transformative civil rights decisions.

Is it hypocritical that I am not concerned about the most powerful man, a billionaire, a man who has sued thousands of people and stiffed countless number of workers, that I don't empathize with him being unjustly examined? Let me tell you what I am concerned about. My brother was one of the lawyers who recently took the Habeus Corpus case to the Supreme Court. This was where the CIA was locking up "bad guys" in Guantanamo without telling us their names or their crimes. Why? Because our "allies", countries run by despots and tyrants, were cleaning house of political opponents and sending them to Guantanamo. They couldn't tell their names or charges because it would be an outrage. You still don't know them because they were discreetly released and sent abroad as a result of that trial. So when the CIA helps some despot take a peon, toss them in the dungeon and throw away the key without so much as telling us why, then yes, I see that as unrighteous. I do empathize. Sorry if I don't have empathy for some billionaire 4F who insults POWs and families of those KIA, who stiffs common workers, sues everyone he can think of, and is surrounded by thugs and scam artists.

I hope you feel better now.

And how many wrongs does it take to make it all right?

So . . . since all politicians are crooks and liars, even draft dodgers like Clinton and Trump, we need endless Special Prosecutors to undermine our duly elected Presidents. So there's nothing wrong with a deep state coup d'etat because Trump was a draft dodger? Now I get it!

There's just way too many generalizations here to make a decent case. Like Trump insults POW's and GoldStar families. No, he pushed back on one of each. Obviously if Trump hated the military like the Dems do, they would not support Trump. Obviously if McCain was not integral to the Russian Hoax, Trump would not have punched back at him either. Obviously if that one Muslim GoldStar dad had not spoken against Trump at the DNC, he would have been off limits.

Your post is so indicative of identity politics. Talk about drugs coming across the border, and Trump must be an evil racist and xenophobe. Talk about Trump's 4F deferment, and he is disqualified from the office. But how many other politicians had deferments? Hush! Don't talk about that! And Trump "stiffs" workers, but let's not talk about other Politicians who never ran a business in their life, or talk about all the workers who had jobs because of Trump. Must we then elect ones like AOC who has no record at all except bartending?

ZNP, too many tangents to reply to here. And I have no interest in discussing your family, lest I run the risk of insulting any of them. I'm sure they are all wonderful people. Let's not make this personal.

Remember for me it's all about policy. And justice. All the men of the Bible were seriously flawed sinners, but I still love them because of their message. I support Trump because I believe in his policies, not because he kisses babies. This media has put all of Trump's warts under the microscope, but never get the impression that other politicians were better because there was no microscope.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

It is good to be outside of the system, you are less compromised. But this is like fighting for the heavyweight title, you better be well trained.

AOC and Omar are idiots. They think that they alone are right and everyone else is wrong, everyone else is compromised, so they alone can speak the hard truths.

So AOC would have tens of thousands of Americans lose their jobs for her green plan which will not be a solution to anything. They don't deny it isn't a solution, yet she justifies it by saying "at least I want to do something". Fine, if that is how she feels she should be the first one to lose her job.

Omar is very clearly biased against Jews. She may not be "anti semitic" but instead of simply focusing on the law and trying to move US policy away from strongly supporting Israel, which is our ally, she chose instead to cast aspersions on virtually everyone in the US. If you do that you have no right to complain when they do it to you.

This is why I say they are idiots. They have stepped into the ring with heavyweights and made idiotic mistakes.

Yes they are idealistic idiots. But they hold office and unlike you and me they wield power. And therefore they are forces to be dealt with.

And they will be dealt with. AIPAC will see to it by lining the pockets of the heavyweights. They're after those 3 stooges : AOC Omar, and the other Muslim congresswoman. If they're against Jews, Jews are against them.

And we know what the Jews are capable of. Just look at what they are doing to the Palestinians. Read your Bible. It's not uncommon for the Jews to be on the wrong side of God. Most of the Jews today are of the synagogue of Satan ... if Revelation holds true.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Remember for me it's all about policy.

Fine. The policy is moving forward from a world ruled by emperor's with the divine right to a constitutional democracy with an electorate that is educated, informed and led by their conscience. We are obviously somewhere between these two ends on a bridge. If you look where we started you can see that we have come a very long way indeed, on the other hand if you look at where we are headed we still have a long way to go.

However, the way is very clear -- Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. No one arrives there but by Him. If he was unjustly tried, then we should not expect anything different.

Yes, our presidents do not meet the standard, but they still need to be given the first chance. Just like David, the father let all the other sons appear before Samuel first, only after they had been given every chance did he bring in David.

If Trump is claiming to clean up the situation, then I am all for that. It is a very bold and ambitious claim. If it turns out he is completely incapable of cleaning up the situation it demonstrates that he was arrogant and a fool. You cannot run for office on a platform that the situation is corrupt and needs to be cleaned up ("drain the swamp") and then when you are elected complain that the situation is corrupt. I agree completely that the situation is corrupt. I agree completely that it needs to be cleaned up. I think I am the only one on this forum who has claimed 911 was an inside job. So as corrupt as you might claim it is, I obviously feel it is more corrupt. I blame the CIA for Fake news since 1977, so there is nothing new there. I blame the CIA for JFK's assassination and the coup d'etat. Now I can see a reasonable basis for debate 40 years ago, but not today. Documents have since been declassified from Nixon's administration which prove this was the case and they explain why Nixon had to resign rather than let his henchman take the fall.

The only value I see in what has happened with Trump is that the situation is becoming clearer for many more people to see.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If Trump is claiming to clean up the situation, then I am all for that. It is a very bold and ambitious claim. If it turns out he is completely incapable of cleaning up the situation it demonstrates that he was arrogant and a fool.

I cannot believe a learned man can say something like this. How many in history have only pointed us in the right direction, unable to move the masses one inch. Do we call them arrogant fools? For example, JFK was the first to see the dangers of Deep State, after watching the CIA show him up at the Bay of Pigs. Did history condemn him as an arrogant fool for attempting to bring the CIA under control? Yet his death has awakened many.

You cannot run for office on a platform that the situation is corrupt and needs to be cleaned up ("drain the swamp") and then when you are elected complain that the situation is corrupt. I agree completely that the situation is corrupt. I agree completely that it needs to be cleaned up.

Trump was elected to fill Scalia's seat. Even you have agreed to that. Some have said that in two years Trump has accomplished an incredible amount. Just look at the courts. Thank you Harry Reid!

When I look at what has happened in the DOJ and the FBI, turning over entrenched Progressives, replacing them with honest constitutional professionals, I am amazed what he has done so far. We may yet see justice for Clinton, Comey, Lynch, McCabe, Baker, Strzok, and others. At this point we don't know who will face justice. How could Trump ever foresee what he was up against, until the players played their cards? How could Trump know that Sessions would be deceived into recusing himself, thus permitting the "Insurance Policy" to be exercised? Having never waded thru the swamp, how could Trump know how deep it was?

Trump moved the embassy to Jerusalem. Reduced red tape regulations. The US is energy independent! I could go on and on. In my mind Trump's biggest accomplishments are what he has actually done, after only hearing endless promises from other Presidents.

I think I am the only one on this forum who has claimed 911 was an inside job. So as corrupt as you might claim it is, I obviously feel it is more corrupt.

My wife and brother told me that for years, long before you did. But you added detail. Nice job. I should have listened to my brother about the Bush's too. You helped there too.

I blame the CIA for Fake news since 1977, so there is nothing new there. I blame the CIA for JFK's assassination and the coup d'etat. Now I can see a reasonable basis for debate 40 years ago, but not today. Documents have since been declassified from Nixon's administration which prove this was the case and they explain why Nixon had to resign rather than let his henchman take the fall.

Fake News seemed to effect only certain news stories because the facts were hidden from the Press. Watergate became news because Mark Felt got slighted by Nixon, otherwise we would never have lived thru it. Maybe Trump is still alive based on what was learned from the Kennedy's deaths.

The only value I see in what has happened with Trump is that the situation is becoming clearer for many more people to see.

And with this comment, we can both agree.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yes they are idealistic idiots. But they hold office and unlike you and me they wield power. And therefore they are forces to be dealt with.

And they will be dealt with. AIPAC will see to it by lining the pockets of the heavyweights. They're after those 3 stooges : AOC Omar, and the other Muslim congresswoman. If they're against Jews, Jews are against them.

And we know what the Jews are capable of. Just look at what they are doing to the Palestinians. Read your Bible. It's not uncommon for the Jews to be on the wrong side of God. Most of the Jews today are of the synagogue of Satan ... if Revelation holds true.

...said the Serpent with one fork of his tongue.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

...said the Serpent with one fork of his tongue.

Well Mel Porter did tell the saints to stay away from me because, I was a serpent that would bite them and poison them. Your post reveals that, you clearly were one that he told. So ... I've been a serpent for a long time ... but maybe lost that epithet when Mel passed (RIP) epitaph : Naming of Serpents.

But it did make me bust out laughing. Thanks for that. Ur a peach. You've been bitten ... er ah, wormed.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

Well Mel Porter did tell the saints to stay away from me because, I was a serpent that would bite them and poison them. Your post reveals that, you clearly were one that he told. So ... I've been a serpent for a long time ... but maybe lost that epithet when Mel passed (RIP) epitaph : Naming of Serpents.

But it did make me bust out laughing. Thanks for that. Ur a peach. You've been bitten ... er ah, wormed.

You went deep on that one bro. I thought you would merely find it funny. I must have struck a nerve. I was referring to what I thought was your use of irony and reductio ad absurdum in the post I was responding to. Maybe I was mistaken and you really believe all you said.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

You went deep on that one bro. I must have struck a nerve. I was referring to what I thought was your use of irony and reductio ad absurdum. Maybe I was mistaken and you really believe all you said.

More the latter, than former. AIPAC is gunning for them. And history of modern Israel reveals they can be ruthless.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

More the latter, than former. AIPAC is gunning for them. And history of modern Israel reveals they can be ruthless.

Let's not forget that you called the congresswomen "idiots" and "stooges" for making essentially the same observations and claimed they were against the Jews. Are those criticisms better, smarter or truer when they come from you? Or are you an idiot, stooge and against the Jews too? Porter's gone. There's nobody here but us chickens.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

Let's not forget that you called the congresswomen "idiots" and "stooges" for making essentially the same observations and claimed they were against the Jews. Are those criticisms better, smarter or truer when they come from you? Or are you an idiot, stooge and against the Jews too? Porter's gone. There's nobody here but us chickens.

I like them. But it's hard so far but to conclude that they are young and idealistic ... therefore idiots by that standard. Sorry if I offended your sensibilities for them.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

I like them. But it's hard so far but to conclude that they are young and idealistic ... therefore idiots by that standard. Sorry if I offended your sensibilities for them.

Yeah I couldn't follow a few stitches in your tapestry of self-contradiction. Should I have known immediately that you liked the congresswomen when you called them idiots and stooges? Based on what they've said so far I don't agree that those congresswomen are against the Jews. I mean is anybody that criticizes America against it? Maybe they're trying to help by criticizing to call for improvement. Why then would the fact that someone criticized Israel and the AIPAC mean they're against the Jews? Or were you just doing your surreptitious worming thing. Sometimes I can't tell.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

Yeah I couldn't follow a few stitches in your tapestry of self-contradiction. Should I have known immediately that you liked the congresswomen when you called them idiots and stooges? Based on what they've said so far I don't agree that those congresswomen are against the Jews. I mean is anybody that criticizes America against it? Maybe they're trying to help by criticizing to call for improvement. Why then would the fact that someone criticized Israel and the AIPAC mean they're against the Jews? Or were you just doing your surreptitious worming thing. Sometimes I can't tell.

No worming, at least concerning this. As I have seen it, bringing up anything that Israel is doing wrong, is defended by branding it anti-semitic.

And as far as I can determine they're just calling for equal human rights for all, including the Palestinians. But to speak for the Palestinians is considered to be speaking against Israel. It's interesting that it's seen that way, it indicates that what Israel is doing is wrong.

Israel is willing to use the Torah to claim the land, but they look away when the Torah tells the to love their neighbor.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

No worming, at least concerning this. As I have seen it, bringing up anything that Israel is doing wrong, is defended by branding it anti-semitic.

And as far as I can determine they're just calling for equal human rights for all, including the Palestinians. But to speak for the Palestinians is considered to be speaking against Israel. It's interesting that it's seen that way, it indicates that what Israel is doing is wrong.

Israel is willing to use the Torah to claim the land, but they look away when the Torah tells the to love their neighbor.

Equal rights for all? Why is it that Palestine provides no jobs for Israelis, yet Israel provides so many jobs to them?

Why is it that Palestine allows Hamas to use their homes to shoot rockets at Israel?

Why is it that the only jobs in Palestine are digging tunnels to attack Israel?

You sure have a crooked sense of justice. The Torah never commanded them to invite their enemies to rape their wives and kill their children. The Palestinians who act like real neighbors, get treated very well by Israel. Unfortunately, their own people kill them for acting like neighbors.

Awareness, you are a victim of Palestinian propaganda. So sad. It would be better for you to remain neutral towards Israel, than to side with Palestine.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Equal rights for all? Why is it that Palestine provides no jobs for Israelis, yet Israel provides so many jobs to them?

Why is it that Palestine allows Hamas to use their homes to shoot rockets at Israel?

Why is it that the only jobs in Palestine are digging tunnels to attack Israel?

You sure have a crooked sense of justice. The Torah never commanded them to invite their enemies to rape their wives and kill their children. The Palestinians who act like real neighbors, get treated very well by Israel. Unfortunately, their own people kill them for acting like neighbors.

Awareness, you are a victim of Palestinian propaganda. So sad. It would be better for you to remain neutral towards Israel, than to side with Palestine.

Yeah, love your neighbor. Trap them in in Gaza, and pluck them off at will, even killing children. That's the way to treat them neighborly.

That's not propaganda. And by the way, you prove my point. Say something for the Palestinians and you are against Israel. I don't know, but, you must be a Christian Zionist.

And I'm for both the Palestinians and Israel. There's wrong on both sides, but who has the overwhelming power? and who is the underdog?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yeah, love your neighbor. Trap them in in Gaza, and pluck them off at will, even killing children. That's the way to treat them neighborly.

That's not propaganda. And by the way, you prove my point. Say something for the Palestinians and you are against Israel. I don't know, but, you must be a Christian Zionist.

And I'm for both the Palestinians and Israel. There's wrong on both sides, but who has the overwhelming power? and who is the underdog?

It's Israel who is trapped behind walls. Walls they had to build to keep murdering animals out. But the walls have doors for good people.

The Palestinians are connected to 2 Billion Muslims who hate Israel, and who have vowed to exterminate them all. The U.N. is filled with Muslam countries, and is very anti-Israel. So I would say that Muslams have all the power. Israel is just a spec on the map surrounded by a sea of enemies.

Palestine belongs to Israel because they had it for thousands of years. The Gaza Muslams are occupying their land just as Istanbul Muslams are occupying Constantinople in Asia Minor, the long-time center of Orthodox Christianity. Today Muslams are illegally occupying all the Bible lands once owned by Christians. They stole the lands and murdered its occupants. Case in point was the Turkish genocide of Armenia, the first Christian country.

The real truth is that Muslams have long been eliminating Jews and Christians all over the Mideast, Africa, and Asia. They are a slaughtering people, forcing their captives to convert or be killed. These murders regularly occur in Egypt, Pakistan, Syria, Nigeria, Indonesia, etc. Nearly every Muslam country murders Jews and Christians. Their only hope is to trust in God.

I would suggest you read a little world history before you make naive comments on this forum. Skip the propaganda sections in the MSM.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yeah, love your neighbor. Trap them in in Gaza, and pluck them off at will, even killing children. That's the way to treat them neighborly.

That's not propaganda. And by the way, you prove my point. Say something for the Palestinians and you are against Israel. I don't know, but, you must be a Christian Zionist.

And I'm for both the Palestinians and Israel. There's wrong on both sides, but who has the overwhelming power? and who is the underdog?

In 1948 the Palestinians could have made a wonderful peace treaty in which they completely shared Israel as equals. Instead they chose to fight. It seemed at the time that Israel would not have a chance. All the way to 1967 the Palestinians seemed to have an overwhelming position, Israel surrounded by enemies more powerful than them. The Palestinians should have chosen to be reconciled, but they chose violence.

Today Israel is in the overwhelming position, this is the best opportunity for them to have a negotiated reconciliation, but instead they have taken the same route as the Palestinians. To be fully fair to the Israelis they could point out that if they did negotiate peace there would still be terrorists who were not happy with the outcome. But the Palestinians were in that same boat in 1948.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

In 1948 the Palestinians could have made a wonderful peace treaty in which they completely shared Israel as equals. Instead they chose to fight. It seemed at the time that Israel would not have a chance. All the way to 1967 the Palestinians seemed to have an overwhelming position, Israel surrounded by enemies more powerful than them. The Palestinians should have chosen to be reconciled, but they chose violence.

Today Israel is in the overwhelming position, this is the best opportunity for them to have a negotiated reconciliation, but instead they have taken the same route as the Palestinians. To be fully fair to the Israelis they could point out that if they did negotiate peace there would still be terrorists who were not happy with the outcome. But the Palestinians were in that same boat in 1948.

Had they "shared their country" as you suggest, they would now have rocket launchers on the balconies in Tel Aviv.

If there is one lesson that Israel has learned during her long history, it's that there can be no negotiations with terrorists. The PLO was a terrorist organization only to be replaced by Hamas, something far worse. Where is the condemnation on Iran for being the worst state sponsor of terror? Today Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, and the West Bank are not run by Palestinians, but by the Ayatollah of Iran.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It's Israel who is trapped behind walls. Walls they had to build to keep murdering animals out. But the walls have doors for good people.

The Palestinians are connected to 2 Billion Muslims who hate Israel, and who have vowed to exterminate them all. The U.N. is filled with Muslam countries, and is very anti-Israel. So I would say that Muslams have all the power. Israel is just a spec on the map surrounded by a sea of enemies.

Then I guess you are happy that we have made Israel one of the most powerful nations in the world, even letting them have nukes.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Palestine belongs to Israel because they had it for thousands of years.

No, before the British Mandate the Palestinians were there for 900 years. More than once I've showed the maps of Israel taking more and more land since 1948. As I stated, they follow their Torah to claim the land, but ignore the Torah when it says love God and your neighbor.

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Gaza Muslams are occupying their land just as Istanbul Muslams are occupying Constantinople in Asia Minor, the long-time center of Orthodox Christianity. Today Muslams are illegally occupying all the Bible lands once owned by Christians. They stole the lands and murdered its occupants. Case in point was the Turkish genocide of Armenia, the first Christian country.

There's not one bad side and one good side. Both sides have both. If all 1.2 billion Muslims were bad we, and Israel, would be in big trouble. Not all Muslims are bad, and not all Jews are good ... and neither are all Christians, so called.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Then I guess you are happy that we have made Israel one of the most powerful nations in the world, even letting them have nukes.

Happy? False conclusion. As usual.

I long for the day coming soon when all nukes will be gone, eliminated by the King of kings.

No, before the British Mandate the Palestinians were there for 900 years. More than once I've showed the maps of Israel taking more and more land since 1948. As I stated, they follow their Torah to claim the land, but ignore the Torah when it says love God and your neighbor.

The Palestinian Muslams stole the land of Israel by slaughtering her original inhabitants. They even build their Mosques on the ruins of her Temple.

Sorry bro, but you never seem to mention all the good that Israel does for the Palestinians. You ought to read those stories too. But you won't find these stories in your British rags, like Daily Mail.

Since you don't like the way Jacksonian Democrats drove Native Indians from their lands, you should be doubly upset with what these Muslams did to the original inhabitants of Judea and Jerusalem.

There's not one bad side and one good side. Both sides have both. If all 1.2 billion Muslims were bad we, and Israel, would be in big trouble. Not all Muslims are bad, and not all Jews are good ... and neither are all Christians, so called.

If I break into your house and attack you, and you then beat me up, are we now both bad?

Ever hear of something called the right of self-defense?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Had they "shared their country" as you suggest, they would now have rocket launchers on the balconies in Tel Aviv.

If there is one lesson that Israel has learned during her long history, it's that there can be no negotiations with terrorists. The PLO was a terrorist organization only to be replaced by Hamas, something far worse. Where is the condemnation on Iran for being the worst state sponsor of terror? Today Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, and the West Bank are not run by Palestinians, but by the Ayatollah of Iran.

The PLO does not represent all Palestinians and did not exist in 1948. It was founded in 1964. The use of terrorism didn't begin until it was clear they were not going to overpower Israel.

When the Jews were given Israel by the UN there was no mention of kicking out the inhabitants or making them non citizens. Allowing everyone to continue living there as citizens was an option, it could have happened and had they known the way of peace they might have avoided 70+ years of war, terrorism, and bloodshed. However, the choice for war was first made by the Palestinians who did not want to share the land with the Jews.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The PLO does not represent all Palestinians and did not exist in 1948. It was founded in 1964. The use of terrorism didn't begin until it was clear they were not going to overpower Israel.

When the Jews were given Israel by the UN there was no mention of kicking out the inhabitants or making them non citizens. Allowing everyone to continue living there as citizens was an option, it could have happened and had they known the way of peace they might have avoided 70+ years of war, terrorism, and bloodshed. However, the choice for war was first made by the Palestinians who did not want to share the land with the Jews.

Exactly. Proving that Israel was never given the opportunity for peace. Their only chance for peace was to all die, as they did in Poland at Nazi furnaces.

Terrorism existed in Israel long before Yes Sir Arafat came along with the PLO. There have been insiders working with foreign powers since the days of the first Zionist Kibbutzim early in the 20th century.

Go read the whole story please.

And Israel has every right to build their new temple on the site of the original temple.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Exactly. Proving that Israel was never given the opportunity for peace. Their only chance for peace was to all die, as they did in Poland at Nazi furnaces.

Terrorism existed in Israel long before Yes Sir Arafat came along with the PLO. There have been insiders working with foreign powers since the days of the first Zionist Kibbutzim early in the 20th century.

Go read the whole story please.

And Israel has every right to build their new temple on the site of the original temple.

You are obviously confusing me with someone else.

However, I disagree with the idea that they were "never given an opportunity for peace". Peacemakers are likened to "sons of God". It is a very difficult thing to do, just ask Nelson Mandela. They have an opportunity today for peace.

[ZNPaaneah]

The Siena College poll of registered voters in New York state found that 67 percent of those surveyed said the internet retailer's decision last month was detrimental to New York.

AOC does not speak for New Yorkers. Let this marinate for another year and let's see if anyone votes for her again.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

You are obviously confusing me with someone else.

However, I disagree with the idea that they were "never given an opportunity for peace". Peacemakers are likened to "sons of God". It is a very difficult thing to do, just ask Nelson Mandela. They have an opportunity today for peace.

Perhaps you are mistaken to believe that all such "peace" is of God?

The peacemakers in Matt 5 are likened to "sons of God," that is true. This message is to the church, to us as brothers of our heavenly Father.

But His message to Israel in not the same, especially with those sworn to destroy them. Israel abides by the Law and the Prophets. We abide by the Gospels and the Epistles.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The Siena College poll of registered voters in New York state found that 67 percent of those surveyed said the internet retailer's decision last month was detrimental to New York.

AOC does not speak for New Yorkers. Let this marinate for another year and let's see if anyone votes for her again.

Perhaps AOC now only cares that she speaks for Millennial Socialists.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps AOC now only cares that she speaks for Millennial Socialists.

Well let's see if NY continues to pay for her to speak for them at the next election.

[zeek]

Meanwhile in the demon-haunted world...

http://deadstate.org/pat-robertson-y...rses-upon-you/

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

Meanwhile in the demon haunted world...

http://deadstate.org/pat-robertson-y...rses-upon-you/

Originally Posted by From Article

“But nevertheless, a statue of a false god in your garden — I don’t think that’s appropriate,” Robertson said. “Yes, it’ll bring curses upon you, alright?”

Robertson is either ignorant or his religious prejudices have gotten the better of him. Buddha never claimed to be a god. Buddha wasn't a Jesus, a Savior figure, or anything like that.

In fact, he's wasn't even smart. It took him 30 odd years to realize that life is a suffering. Other than that, I think Jesus and Siddhārtha Gautama would get along just fine. And ironically some Buddhists act more Christian than some fanatic self righteous Christians ... of which, from what I've seen out of Robertson over the years, includes him.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Here is a sample of the LCM teaching on politics and the church:




According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

Robertson is either ignorant or his religious prejudices have gotten the better of him. Buddha never claimed to be a god. Buddha wasn't a Jesus, a Savior figure, or anything like that. -- Awareness referencing Post by Zeek

I thought this thread was about the NT teaching concerning Christians working in government. If the thread is about what it means to "Act unchristian" shouldn't that be a different thread? What does Robertson's views on idolatry have to do with this thread?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Robertson is either ignorant or his religious prejudices have gotten the better of him. Buddha never claimed to be a god. Buddha wasn't a Jesus, a Savior figure, or anything like that.

In fact, he's wasn't even smart. It took him 30 odd years to realize that life is a suffering. Other than that, I think Jesus and Siddhārtha Gautama would get along just fine. And ironically some Buddhists act more Christian than some fanatic self righteous Christians ... of which, from what I've seen out of Robertson over the years, includes him.

Never thought I would see "Christians" standing up for Buddha idols.

I guess that's what we get when some posters love to read their anti-Christian rags.

And "some Buddhists act more Christian ..." awareness, have you really made this your life goal -- to point out Christian "bad behavior?"

Being a Christian is to acknowledge your own bad behavior.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Never thought I would see "Christians" standing up for Buddha idols.

I guess that's what we get when some posters love to read their anti-Christian rags.

And "some Buddhists act more Christian ..." awareness, have you really made this your life goal -- to point out Christian "bad behavior?"

Being a Christian is to acknowledge your own bad behavior.

You talk like all Christians are perfect. Or, they can sin, confess, do it again and confess, do it again and confess, over and over again.

You speak like a true Catholic. But aren't they 50% dreaded liberals?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

You talk like all Christians are perfect. Or, they can sin, confess, do it again and confess, do it again and confess, over and over again.

You speak like a true Catholic.

You talk like non Christians are "better Christians"?!

[awareness]

BREAKING NEWS: Trump says U.S. should recognize Golan Heights as part of Israel as Netanyahu accuses Iran of trying to set up terror network there — and prepares for White House visit Monday

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-Israel.html

[zeek]

Pompeo suggests God sent Trump to save Israel
"As a Christian, I certainly believe that's possible," the secretary of state said when asked whether the president had an explicitly divine mission. "I am confident that the Lord is at work here."

Trump's recognition of Israel's Sovereignty over the Golan Heights was a smart political move since the largest constituency of his base are white Evangelical Christians who favor Zionism because of the way they read Bible prophesies.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...israel-n986136

[ZNPaaneah]

Mexicans Are Stealing Border Wall Materials, Using Them For Home Security

This doesn't make sense, if Mexico is paying for the wall how can this be stealing?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Pompeo suggests God sent Trump to save Israel
"As a Christian, I certainly believe that's possible," the secretary of state said when asked whether the president had an explicitly divine mission. "I am confident that the Lord is at work here."

One thing that continually amazes me about Trump is that all the opposition only deepens his resolve to stay true to his convictions. All recent Presidents (Clinton, Bush, Obama) gave lip service to their support of Israel, e.g. moving our Embassy to Jerusalem, only to wilt when faced with the actual decision.

Trump's recognition of Israel's Sovereignty over the Golan Heights was a smart political move since the largest constituency of his base are white Evangelical Christians who favor Zionism because of the way they read Bible prophesies.

Once again zeek puts himself at odds with Evangelical Christians, going so far as to suggest that support for Trump is racially motivated.

I would suggest to the contrary, that Evangelical Christian support for Trump is based on his policies. Evangelical Christians, like myself, were highly skeptical of Trump's conservatism until he put forth his source list for SCOTUS nominations. Never have I seen a President (since Ronald Reagan) fight so hard for the security and safety of the American people, especially at the Southern border.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

One thing that continually amazes me about Trump is that all the opposition only deepens his resolve to stay true to his convictions. All recent Presidents (Clinton, Bush, Obama) gave lip service to their support of Israel, e.g. moving our Embassy to Jerusalem, only to wilt when faced with the actual decision.

That is an accurate assessment.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Once again zeek puts himself at odds with Evangelical Christians, going so far as to suggest that support for Trump is racially motivated.

I would suggest to the contrary, that Evangelical Christian support for Trump is based on his policies. Evangelical Christians, like myself, were highly skeptical of Trump's conservatism until he put forth his source list for SCOTUS nominations. Never have I seen a President (since Ronald Reagan) fight so hard for the security and safety of the American people, especially at the Southern border.

I also found it shocking to think that only now, with Trump, are Evangelical Christians being represented even though they represent the single biggest block of voters in this country. The assertion that there is something wrong with a very large block of voters being represented in a democracy is an astounding assertion from Zeek.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I also found it shocking to think that only now, with Trump, are Evangelical Christians being represented even though they represent the single biggest block of voters in this country. The assertion that there is something wrong with a very large block of voters being represented in a democracy is an astounding assertion from Zeek.

I find the continual media claim that "Trump is dividing the country" to be both laughable and disingenuous.

This single most divisive issue of this generation is the Democrats unceasing support for unlimited abortions. The new Chair of the DNC Perez even stated their Party would never again support a pro-life candidate. It is the protection of the most vulnerable members of society that divides us.

Since Roe was thrust upon us, I have never nor would I ever vote for a Democratic candidate, regardless of how qualified he/she was, or how bad the Republican candidate was. It's all about principle for me, and if the slaughter of the unborn doesn't bother a candidate, that's quite telling to me about his/her character. In this regard I am definitely not alone.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I find the continual media claim that "Trump is dividing the country" to be both laughable and disingenuous.

This single most divisive issue of this generation is the Democrats unceasing support for unlimited abortions. The new Chair of the DNC Perez even stated their Party would never again support a pro-life candidate. It is the protection of the most vulnerable members of society that divides us.

Since Roe was thrust upon us, I have never nor would I ever vote for a Democratic candidate, regardless of how qualified he/she was, or how bad the Republican candidate was. It's all about principle for me, and if the slaughter of the unborn doesn't bother a candidate, that's quite telling to me about his/her character. In this regard I am definitely not alone.

I agree with this.

[ZNPaaneah]

Mueller's report concludes that there is no evidence that Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians.

Wow, I bet all those people who were so sure that Mueller was going to find something, even if he had to make something up, bet they feel pretty sheepish now.

I am happy. I suspect the great secret in Trump's tax return is that he is not nearly as wealthy as he claims and that could jeopardize some of his loans with his banks. I feel better knowing that we checked to see if there was some kind of collusion and I am relieved there wasn't.

As for political fallout I will reserve that for whatever the Democrats do over the next 2 years.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow, I bet all those people who were so sure that Mueller was going to find something, even if he had to make something up, bet they feel pretty sheepish now.

Based on what I have seen so far, I don't think that would be a safe bet for you.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Based on what I have seen so far, I don't think that would be a safe bet for you.

I was being facetious. It looks like political mudslinging about to go ballistic.

[ZNPaaneah]

Mueller Was Trump’s Nemesis—Now He’s His Greatest Asset

[ZNPaaneah]

The Democrats are in a very weak position. Many ran on a platform of examining, prosecuting, and impeaching Trump. If they do not fulfill that promise they will completely turn off those that voted for them.

On the other hand the more they pursue a political agenda of mud slinging the more the swing voters will despise the Democrats.

It is a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation.

[zeek]

William Barr has given us his own spin on Mueller's report. He should release it to the American people so that we can make up our own minds. Even from what he gave us, Mueller did not exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice issue. Of course Trump has already lied about that saying that the report was a complete and total exoneration. Anyway I'm withholding judgment till I actually get a chance to read the report for myself. If Barr won't release it I assume he's hiding something to protect Trump

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

William Barr has given us his own spin on Mueller's report. He should release it to the American people so that we can make up our own minds. Even from what he gave us, Mueller did not exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice issue. Of course Trump has already lied about that saying that the report was a complete and total exoneration. Anyway I'm withholding judgment till I actually get a chance to read the report for myself. If Barr won't release it I assume he's hiding something to protect Trump

You clamored on Mueller's behalf for months. If Muller had evidence of obstruction of justice against Trump, he would have filed charges. Now that it came out, you still are not satisfied.

Let me guarantee that when Barr releases more information, you won't be satisfied with that either.

You have believed a mountain of lies, my friend, from the media. I have been trying to tell you that for months. Perhaps you might have listened were I not one of those dreaded "evangelical Christians." Perhaps not.

What Muller did, by not exonerating Trump, is prosecutorial misconduct. Muller and his team, especially Andrew Weissman, have a long history of such misconduct. Don't believe me, look into it for yourself.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

William Barr has given us his own spin on Mueller's report. He should release it to the American people so that we can make up our own minds. Even from what he gave us, Mueller did not exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice issue. Of course Trump has already lied about that saying that the report was a complete and total exoneration. Anyway I'm withholding judgment till I actually get a chance to read the report for myself. If Barr won't release it I assume he's hiding something to protect Trump

The Democrats are in power, Congress ordered the investigation, they should have complete access to the report and to Mueller. However, just like the fiasco with Kavanaugh, I don't agree with the total report being made public. If the Democrats see something that is "impeachable" then pursue it and that will be released to the public. If they see something that is indictable once he is no longer president then pursue that when he is no longer president. But if they begin with a goal of looking for collusion and then turn it into an opportunity to throw mud, that would be a very ugly use of taxpayer money akin to the McCarthy hearings.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by zeek

William Barr has given us his own spin on Mueller's report. He should release it to the American people so that we can make up our own minds. Even from what he gave us, Mueller did not exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice issue. Of course Trump has already lied about that saying that the report was a complete and total exoneration. Anyway I'm withholding judgment till I actually get a chance to read the report for myself. If Barr won't release it I assume he's hiding something to protect Trump

If there's no matters of national security to protect, for transparency sake it should be. What's in the dark should be brought into the light.
However if there's still nothing to be seen, I would expect the House Majority not to be satisfied. The next two years will be spent with investigation after investigation. Collusion has now pivoted to obstruction. Even then where's the obstruction.
Do you want to continue going down the road of making tax returns an issue? I'd sure like to see it for all of congress. How do politicians with a $170,000+ a year salary parlay that into becoming multi millionaires?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Terry

If there's no matters of national security to protect, for transparency sake it should be. What's in the dark should be brought into the light.
However if there's still nothing to be seen, I would expect the House Majority not to be satisfied. The next two years will be spent with investigation after investigation. Collusion has now pivoted to obstruction. Even then where's the obstruction.
Do you want to continue going down the road of making tax returns an issue? I'd sure like to see it for all of congress. How do politicians with a $170,000+ a year salary parlay that into becoming multi millionaires?

It is not simply a matter of national security. Do we really want Congress to authorize a $12 million dollar investigation with no other national interest other than to try and dig dirt on a political rival. If they allow that then you can be sure congress will devolve into a mud slinging contest. Doesn't matter who gets elected to what.

Think about Kavanaugh. If the woman had a concern she should definitely have brought it to the committee, but if it was simply "he said, she said" without any additional evidence it should have been done closed door and not become the circus that it did.

This entire investigation appears to be payback for Whitewater, which in turn appears to have been payback for Watergate.

[Ohio]

Is there some divine justice here?

At the same time Trump is with P.M. Netanyahu recognizing the Golan Heights, creepy porn lawyer Michael Avenatti is busted for attempting to extort $Millions from Nike over the pay-to-play "Varsity Blues" scandal. Many of those indicted in the scandal, like Felicity Huffman, were vocal critics of Trump.

Pretty incredible turn of events to fulfill Jehovah's prophetic words:

"I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you." -- Genesis 12:3

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

If there's no matters of national security to protect, for transparency sake it should be. What's in the dark should be brought into the light.
However if there's still nothing to be seen, I would expect the House Majority not to be satisfied. The next two years will be spent with investigation after investigation. Collusion has now pivoted to obstruction. Even then where's the obstruction.
Do you want to continue going down the road of making tax returns an issue? I'd sure like to see it for all of congress. How do politicians with a $170,000+ a year salary parlay that into becoming multi millionaires?

Good question! Clinton? Obama?

And what about that not-so-secretive Congressional "Slush Fund" to pay off the victims of sexual abuse.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

It is not simply a matter of national security. Do we really want Congress to authorize a $12 million dollar investigation with no other national interest other than to try and dig dirt on a political rival. If they allow that then you can be sure congress will devolve into a mud slinging contest. Doesn't matter who gets elected to what.

Think about Kavanaugh. If the woman had a concern she should definitely have brought it to the committee, but if it was simply "he said, she said" without any additional evidence it should have been done closed door and not become the circus that it did.

This entire investigation appears to be payback for Whitewater, which in turn appears to have been payback for Watergate.

That's the direction the house of Representatives will be taking the next two years. Try to dig up dirt on President Trump through various committees. Surely if they go back far enough, there is bound to be jaywalking in there somewhere. But at what cost?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Good question! Clinton? Obama?

And what about that not-so-secretive Congressional "Slush Fund" to pay off the victims of sexual abuse.

By the time Obama left office his wealth was estimate at 20 million. Based on presidential salary alone it would have been 3.2 million.
Mr No Name his wealth was estimated around 200 million before passing last August.
Former Speaker Ryan in the tens of millions
Senator Feinstein much the same in the tens of millions.
I think the question is who isn't a millionaire? I was surprised to learn Senator Graham wasn't. As for the newcomers to senate and the house, give them a term or two and they'll become millionaires in hardly any time at all.

[Weighingin]

They are always coming up with allegations or
presenting things that look like Trump or family
members have done bad stuff. It always seem
to come to nothing. So they will continue this
and save “bomb shells” as it is close to election
similiar to the Kavanaugh caper.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Terry

That's the direction the house of Representatives will be taking the next two years. Try to dig up dirt on President Trump through various committees. Surely if they go back far enough, there is bound to be jaywalking in there somewhere. But at what cost?

He is a real estate developer, pretty sure you'll find more than jaywalking, especially given the proclivity of his associates to commit felonies.

I am not in any way suggesting that if Trump were investigated thoroughly we wouldn't find actions that were embarrassing.

What I am saying is I don't want this to be part of the gauntlet every President has to run, a 2 year special counsel investigation with a price tag above $10 million.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

He is a real estate developer, pretty sure you'll find more than jaywalking, especially given the proclivity of his associates to commit felonies.

And you have just bought into the deception. It goes like this . . .

My next door neighbor went to jail for drugs and gun charges resulting from an opioid addiction. Then some hater comes along and casts suspicions on my reputation saying, "these allegations must be true especially given the proclivity of Ohio's neighbors to commit felonies."

There you have it, folks! Time to leak another story about Ohio to the Press!

Take Manafort for example, who apparently was Muller's biggest "prize." Manafort was convicted of tax fraud for 15 years before he ever worked for Trump. During "normal" times, IRS auditors force tax cheats like Manafort to pay back taxes, along with substantial penalties and interest. No reason to crowd the prisons, folks, when the IRS can give out extra bonus checks.

How is Trump supposed to vet someone like Manafort who has issues with back taxes? Manafort worked with the Podesta brothers for years, and came on board with campaign experience. Trump never had the well-slicked apparatus that Hillary had, and he bungled thru numerous miscues. Every new business has the same issues. Do you think the Podesta's paid all of their taxes? Any CPA can tell you that every business owner can be audited knowing how complicated tax law is.

I'm all for people paying their taxes. But lets apply the law fairly. Blind justice eh? How about Roger Stone? 21 agents with night vision and automatic weapons to wake him in a pre-dawn raid? They took out Osama Bin Hiding with less tactical gear!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And you have just bought into the deception. It goes like this . . .

My next door neighbor went to jail for drugs and gun charges resulting from an opioid addiction. Then some hater comes along and casts suspicions on my reputation saying, "these allegations must be true especially given the proclivity of Ohio's neighbors to commit felonies."

There you have it, folks! Time to leak another story about Ohio to the Press!

I'm sorry, didn't realize you lived in a drug den.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Take Manafort for example, who apparently was Muller's biggest "prize." Manafort was convicted of tax fraud for 15 years before he ever worked for Trump. During "normal" times, IRS auditors force tax cheats like Manafort to pay back taxes, along with substantial penalties and interest. No reason to crowd the prisons, folks, when the IRS can give out extra bonus checks.

Good thing his friend is President of the US who has the power to pardon.

Originally Posted by Ohio

How is Trump supposed to vet someone like Manafort who has issues with back taxes? Manafort worked with the Podesta brothers for years, and came on board with campaign experience. Trump never had the well-slicked apparatus that Hillary had, and he bungled thru numerous miscues. Every new business has the same issues. Do you think the Podesta's paid all of their taxes? Any CPA can tell you that every business owner can be audited knowing how complicated tax law is.

Hence my point that I don't want congress to be able to do these special prosecutor investigations of presidents unless it is a matter central to the US govt.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm all for people paying their taxes. But lets apply the law fairly. Blind justice eh? How about Roger Stone? 21 agents with night vision and automatic weapons to wake him in a pre-dawn raid? They took out Osama Bin Hiding with less tactical gear!

That's not true, they had two very sophisticated stealth helicopters. Where were the helicopters in the Stone arrest?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I'm sorry, didn't realize you lived in a drug den.

The Lord commanded us to love our neighbors.

Only with God are such things possible.

That's not true, they had two very sophisticated stealth helicopters. Where were the helicopters in the Stone arrest?

Stealth Helicopters broke down because of Obama's Sequestration. Some were abandoned in Pakistan.

So they drove new ELECTRI-SWAT Hum-Vee's to Stone's place and charged them while he got his pajamas on.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Lord commanded us to love our neighbors.

Only with God are such things possible.

Stealth Helicopters broke down because of Obama's Sequestration. Some were abandoned in Pakistan.

So they drove new ELECTRI-SWAT Hum-Vee's to Stone's place and charged them while he got his pajamas on.

I will concede that the two operations were both handled with comparable hardware reflecting the importance the democrats placed on them for their own future success. It may be that ever since Carter and Dukakis they don't want to mess up these operations and appear weak.

That said I can understand SWAT being concerned about a guy with a large tattoo of Nixon, obviously unstable.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I will concede that the two operations were both handled with comparable hardware reflecting the importance the democrats placed on them for their own future success. It may be that ever since Carter and Dukakis they don't want to mess up these operations and appear weak.

That said I can understand SWAT being concerned about a guy with a large tattoo of Nixon, obviously unstable.

What? That explains everything. Who would do such a thing?

Takes Tattoo's to another level! Kind of freaky. Not a bad resemblance though. He even has a Nixon bong! Probably was using it at the time.




I suppose only a Trump Tat is missing!

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Lord commanded us to love our neighbors.

Only with God are such things possible.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I suppose only a Trump Tat is missing!

Fake news opportunity! Make an April Fools press release about a tattoo parlor giving out Trump Tats for free as a Grand Opening Sale, and show a long line of MAGA hatted people. You will probably make the 6:30 news.

[ZNPaaneah]

I tell you what, this AOC is doing a great job fund raising for the GOP.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I tell you what, this AOC is doing a great job fund raising for the GOP.

Kinda like what Obama did for gun sales when he was Pres?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I tell you what, this AOC is doing a great job fund raising for the GOP.

She got them all thinking about life without hamburgers, three times a day.

Even the Democrats have turned on her. Not a single vote for her "groundbreaking" legislation.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

She got them all thinking about life without hamburgers, three times a day.

Even the Democrats have turned on her. Not a single vote for her "groundbreaking" legislation.

Too soon to laugh, could be a brilliant plan to promote a new bar, "The green deal" where you can go and complain about capitalism while you get drunk. Besides, owning a bar could be much more profitable to her than being a congresswoman. She could put it in the neighborhood that didn't get the Amazon.com business, probably a lot of unemployed people who want to go somewhere, get drunk, and complain.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Too soon to laugh, could be a brilliant plan to promote a new bar, "The green deal" where you can go and complain about capitalism while you get drunk. Besides, owning a bar could be much more profitable to her than being a congresswoman. She could put it in the neighborhood that didn't get the Amazon.com business, probably a lot of unemployed people who want to go somewhere, get drunk, and complain.

I'm sure there's money in the future for AOC. Too bad she got a degree from a prestigious university, with all that debt, and never learned a thing about economics, business, or life in general. Her downfall was not just stupidity, but hypocrisy. She'll marry some rich Democrat and live out her life promoting misguided causes. She'll begin 2020 with a book deal. Maybe run for mayor like Weiner.

And btw, people never give Donald Trump enough credit for his convictions against alcohol and drugs. That's one of the things Evangelicals / conservatives respect. Trump works tirelessly to protect Americans against its dangers. Love him or hate him, that's what Trump is now all about. Protecting Americans. Build the wall!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm sure there's money in the future for AOC. Too bad she got a degree from a prestigious university, with all that debt, and never learned a thing about economics, business, or life in general. Her downfall was not just stupidity, but hypocrisy. She'll marry some rich Democrat and live out her life promoting misguided causes. She'll begin 2020 with a book deal. Maybe run for mayor like Weiner.

And btw, people never give Donald Trump enough credit for his convictions against alcohol and drugs. That's one of the things Evangelicals / conservatives respect. Trump works tirelessly to protect Americans against its dangers. Love him or hate him, that's what Trump is now all about. Protecting Americans. Build the wall!

If we are talking about lack of appreciation, what about Gillibrand. I'd like her to do my taxes. Her talents are being wasted in congress.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If we are talking about lack of appreciation, what about Gillibrand. I'd like her to do my taxes. Her talents are being wasted in congress.

Explain? You know her better than I.

She has flip-flopped on many issues. Each 2020 hopeful is fighting to become the LEFT-most of all.

Poor Joe Biden is now apologizing for being old, for being white, and for being a man. Such conviction!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Explain? You know her better than I.

I was impressed that she made close to $250,000 and only paid about 1/10th of that in taxes.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I was impressed that she made close to $250,000 and only paid about 1/10th of that in taxes.

I'm more impressed with Kamala Harris who got her best friend Justin Smollett off with a $10K fine and 15 hours community service stuffing envelopes for Jesse Jackson.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm more impressed with Kamala Harris who got her best friend Justin Smollett off with a $10K fine and 15 hours community service stuffing envelopes for Jesse Jackson.

Whoa! I mean Whoa! She is singing my song! No one says a bad word about Kamala!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm more impressed with Kamala Harris who got her best friend Justin Smollett off with a $10K fine and 15 hours community service stuffing envelopes for Jesse Jackson.

I am very angry over the Smollett situation. According to the Bible if a false witness tries to frame someone else for a crime, they should be charged with that crime and get the full penalty possible. Smollett tried to frame MAGA hat wearers with a hate crime. The only righteous response is to try him for a hate crime. Also, he should be given the max penalty that someone else might get had they been convicted of the crime.

Imagine two poor schmucks with MAGA hats who might have been at a bar after 12 getting picked up and convicted for this. They probably would have gotten 5-10 years. Their life in prison would have been hell. The idea that this guy get walk away with a fine and might be able to continue his acting career is outrageous. The idea that this is a "he said, they said" case is baloney. His claim that he was paying for services rendered could easily be verified or refuted. The story of the two men clearly and unequivocally has been verified. If Smollett's account were true it would be incredible, whereas their account is very reasonable. Put him in front of a jury.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I am very angry over the Smollett situation. According to the Bible if a false witness tries to frame someone else for a crime, they should be charged with that crime and get the full penalty possible. Smollett tried to frame MAGA hat wearers with a hate crime. The only righteous response is to try him for a hate crime. Also, he should be given the max penalty that someone else might get had they been convicted of the crime.

Imagine two poor schmucks with MAGA hats who might have been at a bar after 12 getting picked up and convicted for this. They probably would have gotten 5-10 years. Their life in prison would have been hell. The idea that this guy get walk away with a fine and might be able to continue his acting career is outrageous. The idea that this is a "he said, they said" case is baloney. His claim that he was paying for services rendered could easily be verified or refuted. The story of the two men clearly and unequivocally has been verified. If Smollett's account were true it would be incredible, whereas their account is very reasonable. Put him in front of a jury.

In my analysis of the events, both hoaxes -- the Russian collusion and the polar vortex lynching -- are the same. Smollett is Hillary and Trump is that poor schmuck.

Smollett and Hillary were both caught red-handed and publicly excoriated by law enforcement officials. Their guilt was on full display. Smollett by the Chicago Chief of Police and Hillary by Director Comey. Their crimes were made public. But Smollett and Hillary knew people in power -- prosecutors who could over-rule the cops, as in A.G. Lynch with Comey, and Illinois State's Atty. Kim Foxx with the Chicago Police. The root of corruption for both cases is in Chicago.

Behind the scenes in both cases were friends of the Obama's to protect them. There were also unsuspecting victims of the Obama Apparatchik -- directly Trump and that nameless schmuck. But subsequently and collectively in both cases, the endgame was to smear all white "supremacist" conservative straight Christian Republican males. Or anybody with MAGA hats.

[ZNPaaneah]

AOC

NYers have already found another candidate to challenge AOC. She hasn't been in office for 2 months before the challenge for her seat began.

Dems totall and completely rejected her plan, a big fat public rebuke.

Democratic big contributors are also slamming her.

Again, the best move for her is to cash in on her publicity and start a bar for the disaffected socialists. Give it a happy name suggesting the overconsumption of alcohol -- "The Green Party".

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

AOC

NYers have already found another candidate to challenge AOC. She hasn't been in office for 2 months before the challenge for her seat began.

Dems totall and completely rejected her plan, a big fat public rebuke.

Democratic big contributors are also slamming her.

Again, the best move for her is to cash in on her publicity and start a bar for the disaffected socialists. Give it a happy name suggesting the overconsumption of alcohol -- "The Green Party".

‘Her heart is not in The Bronx’: Ocasio-Cortez’s constituents turn against her

With such an horrific track record, on full display nationally with AOC and Abedin/Weiner, NY Dems ought to try a Republican for a change. Definitely can't get any worse for them.

When will NYers ever learn that the high taxes of Socialism signal the end of the Middle Class.

Will BREXIT become Bronx-Exit as wealthy NYers leave the city-state of NY.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

‘Her heart is not in The Bronx’: Ocasio-Cortez’s constituents turn against her

With such an horrific track record, on full display nationally with AOC and Abedin/Weiner, NY Dems ought to try a Republican for a change. Definitely can't get any worse for them.

Hold it, what about Trump and Clinton, they are both NYers.

[Ohio]

Welcome back, Joe!



It seems like both Donald Trump and Joe Biden have become victims of the Bernie Sanders' Left.

Perhaps Trump can offer Joe support, like few others can.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Welcome back, Joe!



It seems like both Donald Trump and Joe Biden have become victims of the Bernie Sanders' Left.

Perhaps Trump can offer Joe support, like few others can.

Maybe he'll put his hand on his shoulder and kiss him on the neck.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Maybe he'll put his hand on his shoulder and kiss him on the neck.

Yeah, who knows what he will provoke him to do to him.

[awareness]

Joe can't feel the warm touch of a human anymore, Robert Kraft can't get a rub and tug any more, maybe Joe can give Robert a happy ending, and all can find happiness.

[awareness]

This is from HuffPo so it has to be fake news :

Michele Bachmann Hails ‘Godly’ Trump: We’ll Never See A More Biblical President

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/miche...b098b9a2d91706

[Ohio]

Poor Hillary ...

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Poor Hillary ...

Let's impeach Hillary.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Let's impeach Hillary.

[Ohio]

Dr. Lee Edwards details how he and his colleagues on Sen. Barry Goldwater’s 1964 campaign for president were under FBI and CIA surveillance ordered by President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Watch how Edwards, then in his early 30s and serving as communications director for the Goldwater campaign, recalls the slow, creeping realization they were being watched and listened to by the free world’s most powerful intelligence services. LBJ also had well-placed spies in the Goldwater Campaign.

Yet it's always Democratic operatives who scream "collusion" and "voter fraud" to dissemble misinformation about their own corruption.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Yet it's always Democratic operatives who scream "collusion" and "voter fraud" to dissemble misinformation about their own corruption.

Hey I've heard Trump scream voter fraud, and accuse Demmies of collusion.

Seems both brands are tossing it at the other brand.

Like you here.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Hey I've heard Trump scream voter fraud, and accuse Demmies of collusion.

Seems both brands are tossing it at the other brand.

Like you here.

The Dems had Muller investigate the Trump WH for two years, with millions of documents, hundreds of subpoenas, etc. and they found ZERO collusion.

Obviously, you can't trust the Dems on anything. It kind of makes sense don't it, for those who are willing to slaughter both the unborn and the born, for gain?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Dems had Muller investigate the Trump WH for two years, with millions of documents, hundreds of subpoenas, etc. and they found ZERO collusion.

Obviously, you can't trust the Dems on anything. It kind of makes sense don't it, for those who are willing to slaughter both the unborn and the born, for gain?

I don't think that is a fair representation of what happened. The Mueller report does not conclude there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Not the same as "ZERO collusion".

In my opinion I think it would be a mistake for the Democrats to press on with impeachment, but I would be sympathetic to those who disagree with that conclusion.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I don't think that is a fair representation of what happened. The Mueller report does not conclude there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Not the same as "ZERO collusion".

In my opinion I think it would be a mistake for the Democrats to press on with impeachment, but I would be sympathetic to those who disagree with that conclusion.

Absurd! Have you lost your mind? Sometimes you sound like you been drinking at AOC's bar.

The entire Muller Special Prosecutors Office was PREDICATED on actual evidence of collusion with the Russians. If none exists, then Trump was completely right to be outraged, threaten to fire Muller, call Comey a dirty cop and fire him, etc.

Where's the evidence? Of course what I said was a fair representation of what happened.

They spied on the Trump admin, they attempted to plant spies, they ran a sting operation to setup the Trump staff, they leaked classified info, they claimed evidence existed, they framed Flynn and Papadopolous, etc.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Absurd! Have you lost your mind? Sometimes you sound like you been drinking at AOC's bar.

The entire Muller Special Prosecutors Office was PREDICATED on actual evidence of collusion with the Russians. If none exists, then Trump was completely right to be outraged, threaten to fire Muller, call Comey a dirty cop and fire him, etc.

Where's the evidence? Of course what I said was a fair representation of what happened.

They spied on the Trump admin, they attempted to plant spies, they ran a sting operation to setup the Trump staff, they leaked classified info, they claimed evidence existed, they framed Flynn and Papadopolous, etc.

Where is the evidence:

1. Democrats email was hacked by the Russians

2. Russians used Social media to influence the election.

3. Donald Trump called on the Russians publicly to release Hillary Clinton's emails.

4. High level associates of Donald Trumps election campaign met with Russians who claimed to have incriminating evidence against Hillary Clinton.

To my opinion that is more than enough evidence to warrant an investigation (not an indictment).

Anyone who would not want to investigate knowing that is the one who is drinking Kool Aid.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Where is the evidence:

1. Democrats email was hacked by the Russians

2. Russians used Social media to influence the election.

3. Donald Trump called on the Russians publicly to release Hillary Clinton's emails.

4. High level associates of Donald Trumps election campaign met with Russians who claimed to have incriminating evidence against Hillary Clinton.

To my opinion that is more than enough evidence to warrant an investigation (not an indictment).

Anyone who would not want to investigate knowing that is the one who is drinking Kool Aid.

The Mueller report clearly shows obstruction. And Trump is still at it. With all his law suits to stop any investigation of his taxes -- breaking a law -- and banking records, he's obstructing because he obviously has something to hide.

But Jesus said it would be shouted from the rooftops.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

The Mueller report clearly shows obstruction. And Trump is still at it. With all his law suits to stop any investigation of his taxes -- breaking a law -- and banking records, he's obstructing because he obviously has something to hide.

But Jesus said it would be shouted from the rooftops.

If there was "clear" obstruction, they would have arrested Trump for a crime. Instead Muller got to write a dishonest smear report where none of his claims were challenged by Trump in a legal proceeding. Trump had no defense, nor chance to cross-examine. It's too bad you guys never heard of something called "due process."

The Dems used Romney's taxes to smear him, and Obama won a second term. It has nothing to do with breaking laws, because the IRS surely has access to all of Trump's tax info. It's all politics. These people have no principles. They would even use Barron's allowance to smear his dad. Look what the iRS did to the Tea Party.

How does the Trump Admin "obstruct justice" when there was no underlying crime? Look at how they framed Mike Flynn. When did Muller know that there was no collusion? Why did he drag out the investigation thru the mid-term elections in order to affect the elections? Did not Muller do more to interfere with our democratic process than the Russians? Why did the Obama Admin do nothing when the Russians hacked the DNC?

Just watch the next few months. Several investigations will be concluding. Criminal referrals have been made to the DOJ. Hidden things WILL be shouted from the housetops, and it won't be Trumps' business transactions from the last century.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Where is the evidence:

1. Democrats email was hacked by the Russians

2. Russians used Social media to influence the election.

Why is Trump responsible for what Russia did, and the Obama people did not stop?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If there was "clear" obstruction, they would have arrested Trump for a crime. Instead Muller got to write a dishonest smear report where none of his claims were challenged by Trump in a legal proceeding. Trump had no defense, nor chance to cross-examine. It's too bad you guys never heard of something called "due process."

The Dems used Romney's taxes to smear him, and Obama won a second term. It has nothing to do with breaking laws, because the IRS surely has access to all of Trump's tax info. It's all politics. These people have no principles. They would even use Barron's allowance to smear his dad. Look what the iRS did to the Tea Party.

How does the Trump Admin "obstruct justice" when there was no underlying crime? Look at how they framed Mike Flynn. When did Muller know that there was no collusion? Why did he drag out the investigation thru the mid-term elections in order to affect the elections? Did not Muller do more to interfere with our democratic process than the Russians? Why did the Obama Admin do nothing when the Russians hacked the DNC?

Just watch the next few months. Several investigations will be concluding. Criminal referrals have been made to the DOJ. Hidden things WILL be shouted from the housetops, and it won't be Trumps' business transactions from the last century.

With over 10,000 lies since taking office Trump is not only asking for it it, but is begging for it ... #pathological.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

With over 10,000 lies since taking office Trump is not only asking for it it, but is begging for it ... #pathological.

Trump said 10,000 times that there was "NO COLLUSION," and after his exhaustive investigation, Muller proved he was right. What is it you don't get?


"And because of this, God sends them an operation of error that they might believe the lie."

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why is Trump responsible for what Russia did, and the Obama people did not stop?

How many times do we have to go over this?

Convicted = responsible

Indicted = implicated

Investigation = crime was committed and we want to know if he was involved. It does not imply Trump was responsible. It was predicated on evidence of a crime being committed (no one denies that), that Trump benefitted from that crime (can be debated, but certainly cannot be denied) and that there is a basis to be concerned that Trump might have been involved (meeting, his own comments).

Only an idiot would argue that the US government, realizing their election was hacked by a foreign power, should not investigate.

Mueller's report did not exonerate Trump, it merely showed he was so stupid that he could not have coordinated this. Why do I say he was stupid? He brought the entire investigation on himself. He went on public TV asking Russia to commit a crime, hack the DNC, and then publish that for his benefit. That is the definition of stupidity. In addition his campaign officials were so stupid they had this very questionable meeting with the Russians, and by that time should have known that either the meeting was bogus or else the Russians were offering something that was obtained criminally. Top level officials were in this meeting and had it in Trump tower. Again, the definition of stupidity. They brought this investigation on themselves.

[Ohio]

Joseph diGenova is the former U. S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and a former legal counsel to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. He has also been a frequent commentator on Fox News and Washington’s WMAL Radio. Throughout the Trump-Russia collusion fiasco and Team Mueller’s investigation of the president, diGenova has proven to be a reliable source of information as to what was happening behind the scenes. His pronouncements and predictions have consistently proven to be true.

On April 24, 2019, diGenova appeared on the Ingraham Angle and made his most explosive predictions yet. Here’s the link to the video. What follows below is a partial transcript of his remarks starting at 27 seconds into the broadcast.

It has been evident from day one that there was a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary Clinton illegally, and then, if she lost the election, to frame Donald Trump. This [Steele] dossier was a knowing part of that. It was created by Hillary Clinton. It was created knowingly by [former CIA Director] John Brennan as part of a scheme to do everything they could to harm Donald Trump.

The problem for Brennan and [former Director of National Intelligence] Clapper and [former FBI Director] Comey and [former FBI General Counsel] Baker and all of them now is, is that the FISA Court has already communicated with the Justice Department about its findings. And their findings are that from more than four years before the election of Donald Trump, there was an illegal spying operation going on by FBI [private] contractors — four of them — to steal personal information, electronic information about Americans and to use it against the Republican Party.

There are going to be indictments. There’s going to be grand juries. John Brennan isn’t going to need one lawyer. He’s going to need five!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

How many times do we have to go over this?

Convicted = responsible

Indicted = implicated

Investigation = crime was committed and we want to know if he was involved. It does not imply Trump was responsible. It was predicated on evidence of a crime being committed (no one denies that), that Trump benefitted from that crime (can be debated, but certainly cannot be denied) and that there is a basis to be concerned that Trump might have been involved (meeting, his own comments).

Only an idiot would argue that the US government, realizing their election was hacked by a foreign power, should not investigate.

Mueller's report did not exonerate Trump, it merely showed he was so stupid that he could not have coordinated this. Why do I say he was stupid? He brought the entire investigation on himself. He went on public TV asking Russia to commit a crime, hack the DNC, and then publish that for his benefit. That is the definition of stupidity.

Obama was in power. They should have investigated him. Why did he do nothing? Why did he not inform the Trump Campaign Team about the Russian activities? Why were Democratic operatives meeting with that Russian lawyer before and after she met with the Trump Campaign officials in that infamous meeting?

ZNP, you really need to get better sources for your info. Your post indicates you are still in a 2016 mindset.

Since when does a prosecutor need to exonerate any American citizen? Are we not all INNOCENT by law until proven guilty? Why are you now demanding that Trump be EXONERATED by a prosecutor? Since when does he need to have his innocence proven?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Obama was in power. They should have investigated him.

Then the President of the US (Trump) should instruct his AG to do that.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why did he do nothing? Why did he not inform the Trump Campaign Team about the Russian activities? Why were Democratic operatives meeting with that Russian lawyer before and after she met with the Trump Campaign officials in that infamous meeting?

These are good questions and every US citizen should want them answered. I see no reason why Trump cannot instruct his AG to look into it. One of his campaign slogans was "Lock her up". Hence many people thought that voting for Trump would involve an investigation into Hillary. I would gladly support that.

Originally Posted by Ohio

ZNP, you really need to get better sources for your info. Your post indicates you are still in a 2016 mindset.

Since when does a prosecutor need to exonerate any American citizen?

The point is when some claim that Mueller's report exonerated Trump that is erroneous. It did not exonerate him, it simply did not advise indicting him.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Are we not all INNOCENT by law until proven guilty? Why are you now demanding that Trump be EXONERATED by a prosecutor? Since when does he need to have his innocence proven?

I did not demand that, I simply pointed out that saying the prosecutor exonerated Trump is not accurate. Finding evidence that could convict Trump beyond a reasonable doubt is a much higher standard. They did not meet that standard. That is all that can be concluded.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Joseph diGenova is the former U. S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and a former legal counsel to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. He has also been a frequent commentator on Fox News and Washington’s WMAL Radio. Throughout the Trump-Russia collusion fiasco and Team Mueller’s investigation of the president, diGenova has proven to be a reliable source of information as to what was happening behind the scenes. His pronouncements and predictions have consistently proven to be true.

On April 24, 2019, diGenova appeared on the Ingraham Angle and made his most explosive predictions yet. Here’s the link to the video. What follows below is a partial transcript of his remarks starting at 27 seconds into the broadcast.

It has been evident from day one that there was a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary Clinton illegally, and then, if she lost the election, to frame Donald Trump. This [Steele] dossier was a knowing part of that. It was created by Hillary Clinton. It was created knowingly by [former CIA Director] John Brennan as part of a scheme to do everything they could to harm Donald Trump.

The problem for Brennan and [former Director of National Intelligence] Clapper and [former FBI Director] Comey and [former FBI General Counsel] Baker and all of them now is, is that the FISA Court has already communicated with the Justice Department about its findings. And their findings are that from more than four years before the election of Donald Trump, there was an illegal spying operation going on by FBI [private] contractors — four of them — to steal personal information, electronic information about Americans and to use it against the Republican Party.

There are going to be indictments. There’s going to be grand juries. John Brennan isn’t going to need one lawyer. He’s going to need five!

Someone should tell the president so that he could have the AG investigate and then "lock her up" like he promised. Oh, wait, it was on Fox news so Trump does know. Why hasn't he followed through on his promise to "lock her up"?

[ZNPaaneah]

It seems from all the whining from the Trump camp that Trump was not president these last two years, that he did not have the most powerful Justice department in the world working for him, nor could he follow through on his promise to "lock her up". It seems he wants to blame Clinton for 4 years without actually investigating, indicting and convicting her. Why?

He was elected with the mandate to "drain the swamp" and "lock her up". What has he done?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Joseph diGenova is the former U. S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and a former legal counsel to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Oh! A deep state dude!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Then the President of the US (Trump) should instruct his AG to do that.

These are good questions and every US citizen should want them answered. I see no reason why Trump cannot instruct his AG to look into it. One of his campaign slogans was "Lock her up". Hence many people thought that voting for Trump would involve an investigation into Hillary. I would gladly support that.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Someone should tell the president so that he could have the AG investigate and then "lock her up" like he promised. Oh, wait, it was on Fox news so Trump does know. Why hasn't he followed through on his promise to "lock her up"?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

It seems from all the whining from the Trump camp that Trump was not president these last two years, that he did not have the most powerful Justice department in the world working for him, nor could he follow through on his promise to "lock her up". It seems he wants to blame Clinton for 4 years without actually investigating, indicting and convicting her. Why?

He was elected with the mandate to "drain the swamp" and "lock her up". What has he done?

*** NEWS FLASH *** *** NEWS FLASH *** *** NEWS FLASH ***

Trump did NOT have an Attorney General his first two years of Presidency.

Jeff Sessions was deceived by Rosenstein into recusing himself when Rosenstein was far more conflicted than he was. Soon Rosenstein will be gone, the report by IG Michael Horowitz will be finished, and A.G. Barr has promised to investigate the origins of the Russian Collusion Delusion with the FBI Spygate scandal.

The swamp will slowly be drained. Many indictments will be handed down. Who knows how far up the food chain it will go, and whether it will include Hillary or Obama. One thing is certain. The crimes here are ten-fold worse than WaterGate ever was.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Oh! A deep state dude!

Being in the know is far different than being in the swamp.


*******************************************


It's truly incredible to watch all these haters when they learn that their President was not a Putin Puppet.

It's got to be a little disheartening to wake up and learn that the entire Media has been lying to you . . .

. . . . and you believed them!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Being in the know is far different than being in the swamp.


*******************************************


It's truly incredible to watch all these haters when they learn that their President was not a Putin Puppet.

It's got to be a little disheartening to wake up and learn that the entire Media has been lying to you . . .

. . . . and you believed them!

No, I believe Trump. His first words when he found out Mueller had been appointed were : "I'm F***ed."

Mueller is not the end, his report is just beginning of that. Or Trump wouldn't be doing all he can to keep it all hidden.

From the housetops is next. Let him who has ears to hear listen up. And that's not you bro Ohio. Your ears are closed ... except to Fox and Breitbart.

[awareness]

'The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office's work and conclusions,' Mueller wrote.

'There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...re-report.html

[Ohio]

If America is going to survive in the 21st century . . . It must learn to laugh at Robert Mueller..

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

*** NEWS FLASH *** *** NEWS FLASH *** *** NEWS FLASH ***

Trump did NOT have an Attorney General his first two years of Presidency.

Jeff Sessions was deceived by Rosenstein into recusing himself when Rosenstein was far more conflicted than he was. Soon Rosenstein will be gone, the report by IG Michael Horowitz will be finished, and A.G. Barr has promised to investigate the origins of the Russian Collusion Delusion with the FBI Spygate scandal.

Recusing himself from an investigation does not mean "you don't have an AG". Second, having a "special prosecutor" does not take away from the work any of the normal prosecutors are doing, hence the Mueller investigation should not have impacted on any investigations that the AG saw fit to pursue, nor did being investigated impact Trump's ability to talk to the AG about other potential investigations.

Originally Posted by Ohio

The swamp will slowly be drained. Many indictments will be handed down. Who knows how far up the food chain it will go, and whether it will include Hillary or Obama. One thing is certain. The crimes here are ten-fold worse than WaterGate ever was.

Yes, when the Box 13 scandal is not dealt with you can be sure the crimes will be ten times worse. When the JFK assassination is not dealt with you can be sure the crimes will be ten times worse. Watergate simply proved that the JFK assassination was not dealt with, Nixon was simply collateral damage from that. When 911 is not properly dealt with you can be sure the crimes will be ten times worse. Which of course is why some people voted for Trump to "drain the swamp". How is anyone surprised that those who would perpetrate 911 would also lie and have the power to control the media? No one is going to think they can get away with 911 unless they control the media.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Recusing himself from an investigation does not mean "you don't have an AG". Second, having a "special prosecutor" does not take away from the work any of the normal prosecutors are doing, hence the Mueller investigation should not have impacted on any investigations that the AG saw fit to pursue, nor did being investigated impact Trump's ability to talk to the AG about other potential investigations.

Yes, when the Box 13 scandal is not dealt with you can be sure the crimes will be ten times worse. When the JFK assassination is not dealt with you can be sure the crimes will be ten times worse. Watergate simply proved that the JFK assassination was not dealt with, Nixon was simply collateral damage from that. When 911 is not properly dealt with you can be sure the crimes will be ten times worse. Which of course is why some people voted for Trump to "drain the swamp". How is anyone surprised that those who would perpetrate 911 would also lie and have the power to control the media? No one is going to think they can get away with 911 unless they control the media.

Without Sessions being conned into recusal, there would be no Mueller. Probably the House would not have flipped in 2018.

ZNP, your views create an enigma of untold proportions. You understand the dangers and corruption of the deep state, perhaps better than 99.9% of the population, yet you still dislike Trump for all his many warts.

Perhaps you are waiting for this perfect ruler to finally take control? Me too.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If America is going to survive in the 21st century . . . It must learn to laugh at Robert Mueller..

I did! When I saw all the black in the report I busted out laughing. I saw two lying clowns. Barr is a Trump puppet. Like Sarah Huckster Sanders he had to agree to lie for Trump. He can't be trusted.

But the circles of liars gathering ever more -- if it wasn't bad from the get-go -- Black Manafort, and Stone --around Trump is becoming more than a laughing matter.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Barr is a Trump puppet.

And I could make all sorts of claims about whom you are a puppet of.

These types of accusations serve no purpose.

For 2 years we heard that Trump was a Putin puppet. Then we find it was all a lie. But who then apologizes? And why then are there no consequences for these false accusations from these false witnesses? Or from yours?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Without Sessions being conned into recusal, there would be no Mueller. Probably the House would not have flipped in 2018.

ZNP, your views create an enigma of untold proportions. You understand the dangers and corruption of the deep state, perhaps better than 99.9% of the population, yet you still dislike Trump for all his many warts.

Perhaps you are waiting for this perfect ruler to finally take control? Me too.

In my experience it is foolish to ignore glaring deficiencies and lies. I don't know anyone who likes warts.

I would not characterize my opinion of him as "dislike". I like his stance on Israel. I like his stance on abortion. I am indifferent to his desire to "build the wall". And as much as I critique Trump I also critique the Democrats and have been quite critical of them. I have called AOC an idiot, etc.

I applaud Trump for wanting to "drain the swamp" but have been fair in my assessment that his pretense at being a "heavy weight fighter" has to this point only been backed up with whining and complaining about the refs.

I agree that there are some who will twist everything he says to have the worst possible connotation, but that is simply par for the course for a high profile politician. I think some of the comedians have been cruel in their mockery, but I simply turn them off and ignore them.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And I could make all sorts of claims about whom you are a puppet of.

These types of accusations serve no purpose.

For 2 years we heard that Trump was a Putin puppet. Then we find it was all a lie. But who then apologizes? And why then are there no consequences for these false accusations from these false witnesses? Or from yours?

Our country is being run by a bunch of scumbags. I thought we avoided that by not electing Hillary. But not.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I applaud Trump for wanting to "drain the swamp" but have been fair in my assessment that his pretense at being a "heavy weight fighter" has to this point only been backed up with whining and complaining about the refs.

I agree that there are some who will twist everything he says to have the worst possible connotation, but that is simply par for the course for a high profile politician. I think some of the comedians have been cruel in their mockery, but I simply turn them off and ignore them.

Athletes like LeBron James epitomize "whining and complaining" to the refs. If Trump only complained and whined about biased Press coverage, then you might have a case.

My case for Trump is not based on that. The case is based on crooked "refs" in the CIA/FBI/NSA/DOJ. I have mentionaed their names. You have mentioned the JFK assassination. Many Christians I know are praying for Trump's safety with that in view. You don't seem to understand what "draining the swamp" entails. Trump is waging a battle on multiple fronts. He must make Americans aware of media bias, he must have active supporters, he must have an honest DOJ/FBI, he must have Congressional support, he must have a loyal staff in the White House, etc. You seem to imply that he asks too much, and ought to be able to do it all alone. Seriously? Try to consider the opposition. Even the Bush clan opposed him.

If Trump were a "dictator" as the Left charges, then he would be able to do everything himself, with fiat and military backing. Fact is, an effective Presidency requires so much more than that. It surprises me that you don't understand that US existence is being undermined by an open border. Anyways, thanks for replying as you did.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Athletes like LeBron James epitomize "whining and complaining" to the refs. If Trump only complained and whined about biased Press coverage, then you might have a case.

My case for Trump is not based on that. The case is based on crooked "refs" in the CIA/FBI/NSA/DOJ. I have mentionaed their names. You have mentioned the JFK assassination. Many Christians I know are praying for Trump's safety with that in view. You don't seem to understand what "draining the swamp" entails. Trump is waging a battle on multiple fronts. He must make Americans aware of media bias, he must have active supporters, he must have an honest DOJ/FBI, he must have Congressional support, he must have a loyal staff in the White House, etc. You seem to imply that he asks too much, and ought to be able to do it all alone. Seriously? Try to consider the opposition. Even the Bush clan opposed him.

If Trump were a "dictator" as the Left charges, then he would be able to do everything himself, with fiat and military backing. Fact is, an effective Presidency requires so much more than that. It surprises me that you don't understand that US existence is being undermined by an open border. Anyways, thanks for replying as you did.

A typical strategy in a case like this is not to catch Trump in collusion since that would be very difficult to prove, but rather in obstruction. It seems clear that the Democrats are very upset that the case for obstruction was not stronger and more solid.

But I am not interested in all that, not interested in those that cry foul, or claims of crookedness, etc. What I would like to know is what is the solution? How do you establish a government of the people, by the people and for the people that does not devolve into this?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

A typical strategy in a case like this is not to catch Trump in collusion since that would be very difficult to prove, but rather in obstruction. It seems clear that the Democrats are very upset that the case for obstruction was not stronger and more solid.

But I am not interested in all that, not interested in those that cry foul, or claims of crookedness, etc. What I would like to know is what is the solution? How do you establish a government of the people, by the people and for the people that does not devolve into this?

Catch Trump in obstruction??? Yes, that was the plan. So first a fake and absurd crime investigation needed to be launched by which Trump people might be caught "obstructing." Flynn was first. They put him at ease, claiming a fact-finding national security issue, deceiving him into waiving his Miranda rights. They set him up, trapped him, and framed him. Success! Not for America, but for their team!

Back to your question, after one gets lost, the first step is to retrace your steps back to the trail, and identify what went wrong. It seems that AG Barr and other investigators are attempting to do just that -- determine who and what initiated this collusion narrative. Recent reports point to former CIA Director Brennan. Perhaps not. Maybe it was in the "People's House."

The American experiment of governance is predicated on honest, God-fearing, law-abiding, men of integrity. The Founders have acknowledged this. Our "devolved" decline is the result.

[awareness]

Trump says he leaned on God to survive Mueller probe

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...-probe-1298656

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Back to your question, after one gets lost, the first step is to retrace your steps back to the trail, and identify what went wrong. It seems that AG Barr and other investigators are attempting to do just that -- determine who and what initiated this collusion narrative. Recent reports point to former CIA Director Brennan. Perhaps not. Maybe it was in the "People's House."

The American experiment of governance is predicated on honest, God-fearing, law-abiding, men of integrity. The Founders have acknowledged this. Our "devolved" decline is the result.

So lets trace back -- 911 -- Watergate -- JFK assassination -- Box 13 scandal -- Teapot dome scandal -- Broken Indian treaties -- Justification of slavery -- etc.

When were these politicians law abiding citizens?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So lets trace back -- 911 -- Watergate -- JFK assassination -- Box 13 scandal -- Teapot dome scandal -- Broken Indian treaties -- Justification of slavery -- etc.

When were these politicians law abiding citizens?

I am not familiar with all of these, but IIRC events like JFK and Watergate were both what I would call "Deep State" operatives. Save for Nixon's paranoia, Watergate was a 2 bit political scandal.

Broken Indian treaties and Justification of slavery were, sorry to say, Democratic programs. Jacksonian Democrats perpetuated the worst of these atrocities. Lincoln and his new Republican Party was instrumental to end slavery, but unfortunately Indian Treaties became "western" territorial issues.

Many have said that our worst scandal in history was Watergate, and if that is true, SpyGate is far worse, but that's only because the Media bought into the "single bullet theory."

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I am not familiar with all of these, but IIRC events like JFK and Watergate were both what I would call "Deep State" operatives. Save for Nixon's paranoia, Watergate was a 2 bit political scandal.

You haven't listened to the tapes. Nixon explains why he can't let one of his henchman take the blame and has to resign himself "because of that whole JFK thing". The guy who ran the Watergate operation was the same CIA operative who ran the JFK assassination. This is why I say Nixon was collateral damage. Also, look at why Gerald Ford was assigned to replace Nixon, the same guy who was on the Warren Commission.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Broken Indian treaties and Justification of slavery were, sorry to say, Democratic programs. Jacksonian Democrats perpetuated the worst of these atrocities. Lincoln and his new Republican Party was instrumental to end slavery, but unfortunately Indian Treaties became "western" territorial issues.

I'm sorry but when I read history I do not see any one party having a monopoly on corruption and greed. Do we really need to get into Iran Contra? 911 was clearly done under a Republican administration.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Many have said that our worst scandal in history was Watergate, and if that is true, SpyGate is far worse, but that's only because the Media bought into the "single bullet theory."

Watergate was simply the tip of the iceberg.

[Ohio]

ZNP, we have now learned that Robert Mueller and his Democratic Staff of Prosecutors long ago learned that there was no evidence of collusion or conspiracy between the Trump Admin and the Russians. Did he not owe it to the American people to provide this much needed information as soon as it became apparent? Did not foreign governments, both friend and foe, need to know this? Was not national security dependent on this?

Yet Team Mueller dragged this out as long as possible. Instead of just focusing on the actual task, rather they spent much time racking up unrelated prosecutions, like a pinball wizard racking up (political) points. Who cares about "collusion," when he can take down the Trumposphere with perjury traps and old tax filings. Many witnesses are now informing us that Team Muller coerced them to "sing and compose." Cohen did, and it neither helped him nor hurt Trump.

Another reason for the delay was to flip the House of Reps. Mueller kept the "cloud of treason" hanging over Trump's head throughout the Midterm elections. Was not this the plan all along? Then, with the Democrats in control, he passed on his investigation to them. Many have called the Mueller Dossier a roadmap for impeachment hearings.

Several things happened to thwart the Mueller Plan . . .

• Actual investigative journalism exposed FISA abuse, spying, leaking, biased Gov't officials, etc.
• Senate remained Republican allowing Trump to nominate officials and get them confirmed
• AG Barr seems immune to Democratic/Media mudslinging
• Trump says we have had enough of this nonsense

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

ZNP, we have now learned that Robert Mueller and his Democratic Staff of Prosecutors long ago learned that there was no evidence of collusion or conspiracy between the Trump Admin and the Russians. Did he not owe it to the American people to provide this much needed information as soon as it became apparent? Did not foreign governments, both friend and foe, need to know this? Was not national security dependent on this?

Yet Team Mueller dragged this out as long as possible. Instead of just focusing on the actual task, rather they spent much time racking up unrelated prosecutions, like a pinball wizard racking up (political) points. Who cares about "collusion," when he can take down the Trumposphere with perjury traps and old tax filings. Many witnesses are now informing us that Team Muller coerced them to "sing and compose." Cohen did, and it neither helped him nor hurt Trump.

Another reason for the delay was to flip the House of Reps. Mueller kept the "cloud of treason" hanging over Trump's head throughout the Midterm elections. Was not this the plan all along? Then, with the Democrats in control, he passed on his investigation to them. Many have called the Mueller Dossier a roadmap for impeachment hearings.

Several things happened to thwart the Mueller Plan . . .

• Actual investigative journalism exposed FISA abuse, spying, leaking, biased Gov't officials, etc.
• Senate remained Republican allowing Trump to nominate officials and get them confirmed
• AG Barr seems immune to Democratic/Media mudslinging
• Trump says we have had enough of this nonsense

I agree that this was dragged on longer than it should have been. I suspect it could have been closed six months sooner but then both parties would have been calling foul due to the election. I also agree that at this point it seems like a very nasty game of politics and I expect it to blow up in the face of the Democrats. I also agree that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so exposing FISA abuse, biased govt officials, etc are examples of that.

[Ohio]

Two years ago the Democrats decided that they would never support another pro-life candidate.

Today the Democrats have decided to no longer support the nation of Israel, even when under attack.

Not One Democrat Presidential Candidate Defended Israel During Rocket Attacks

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Two years ago the Democrats decided that they would never support another pro-life candidate.

Today the Democrats have decided to no longer support the nation of Israel, even when under attack.

Not One Democrat Presidential Candidate Defended Israel During Rocket Attacks

Well, if it comes down to it these will be great selling points for the Republicans. Trump has a lot of credibility when he says he'll support Israel and pro life. Therefore he should pick up a large portion of the Christian vote.

[awareness]

News Flash !!!

STATEMENT BY 375 FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

News Flash !!!

STATEMENT BY 375 FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1

So then impeach him. Why are the Democrats such cowards? For two years they have been saying he is guilty of terrible crimes and should be impeached. The whole thing is repulsive. Instead of impeaching him they say "if he were anyone else". Maybe what they should say is "if we were anyone else".

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

News Flash !!!

STATEMENT BY 375 FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1

Sounds like the situation of James Comey on July 4th weekend of 2016, when he said that "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring charges against Hillary . . .

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So then impeach him. Why are the Democrats such cowards? For two years they have been saying he is guilty of terrible crimes and should be impeached. The whole thing is repulsive. Instead of impeaching him they say "if he were anyone else". Maybe what they should say is "if we were anyone else".

Silly boy. Do you really expect anything out of the demmies? They're all talk no teeth. When in power the pubbies had no will to do anything about Trump -- emoluments -- now the demmies don't either.

Dysfunctional. No checks and balances. We're being duped by Washington. While we have a twitter deranged president,

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Silly boy. Do you really expect anything out of the demmies? They're all talk no teeth. When in power the pubbies had no will to do anything about Trump -- emoluments -- now the demmies don't either.

Dysfunctional. No checks and balances. We're being duped by Washington. While we have a twitter deranged president,

They have no teeth because many of them are also guilty of something. They know it will be quid pro quo. The idea that Trump is some great criminal compared to them is laughable. This is the biggest problem with the whole political system. They just passed a bill concerning climate change. Is it a solution? No. Simply requires that we stay in Paris. Big deal.

If they had any kind of foresight they would be pushing another great leap forward -- fusion.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Silly boy. Do you really expect anything out of the demmies? They're all talk no teeth. When in power the pubbies had no will to do anything about Trump -- emoluments -- now the demmies don't either.

Dysfunctional. No checks and balances. We're being duped by Washington. While we have a twitter deranged president,

The Dems have only false accusations, and little to no crimes to investigate. That's why they have no teeth.

I doubt Trump is using his office to make money. If so, Mueller would have found it. But I'm sure every wealthy American is vulnerable to tax fraud. Dems ought to be careful, what goes around will come around to bite them too.

The Biden and Clinton families, however, are on record for literally $Billions from Russia and China. We may have more FBI investigations "stealing" the 2020 election from the Dems. But you don't have to believe them.

[Ohio]

And they condemned the Republicans for having 17 candidates in 2016 . . .

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And they condemned the Republicans for having 17 candidates in 2016 . . .

Better than last time. When they had only one ; the Hildabeast.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Better than last time. When they had only one ; the Hildabeast.

Actually there were 5 Democratic candidates in 2016.

For 3 years they have been accusing Trump of "stealing" the election, but the facts of history clearly reveal that Hillary and the DNC colluded to steal the Democratic nomination.

Poor Bernie got stiffed, and some of his voters picked Trump instead. Crooked Hillary won't tell you that!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Dems have only false accusations, and little to no crimes to investigate. That's why they have no teeth.

I doubt Trump is using his office to make money. If so, Mueller would have found it. But I'm sure every wealthy American is vulnerable to tax fraud. Dems ought to be careful, what goes around will come around to bite them too.

The Biden and Clinton families, however, are on record for literally $Billions from Russia and China. We may have more FBI investigations "stealing" the 2020 election from the Dems. But you don't have to believe them.

I always suspected his reticence at releasing his tax returns was less about criminal behavior and more about ego. After all if he is continually trumpeting that he is being audited the IRS would look very shameful if the tax returns reveal criminal behavior.

But, if he has been telling people he is a billionaire, if he has gotten loans based on inflated estimates of wealth and assets, then this could be very tough on him, not just ego wise (no longer invited to party with the rich?) but also his creditors could demand more assets, higher interest rates, or threaten to sue for fraudulent loan applications.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Actually there were 5 Democratic candidates in 2016.

For 3 years they have been accusing Trump of "stealing" the election, but the facts of history clearly reveal that Hillary and the DNC colluded to steal the Democratic nomination.

Poor Bernie got stiffed, and some of his voters picked Trump instead. Crooked Hillary won't tell you that!

The irony is that, Trump is president BECAUSE of the Hildabeast.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

The irony is that, Trump is president BECAUSE of the Hildabeast.

This is brilliant! But . . .

Carter was President because of Nixon.
Reagan was President because of Carter.
G H W Bush was President because of Reagan.
Clinton was President because of Perot.
G W Bush was President because of Clinton.
Obama was President because of Bush.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

This is brilliant! But . . .

Carter was President because of Nixon.
Reagan was President because of Carter.
G H W Bush was President because of Reagan.
Clinton was President because of Perot.
G W Bush was President because of Clinton.
Obama was President because of Bush.

Very funny! Trump was president not because he won the election but because Hillary lost it. I guess Tiger Woods didn't win all those tournaments, it was the other golfers who lost. Likewise with the Patriots and Brady, they didn't win, their opponents lost. This takes whininess to a whole new lower level.

[ZNPaaneah]

CNN ran a story likening the new abortion laws to Hitler (except for). So the exception was that Hitler executed the doctors and imprisoned the women forcing them to become pregnant. Now those "exceptions" are the true Hitleresque actions that we associate with a monster. So this story just reinforces the entire "fake news" version of news aka 1984.

[Ohio]

Let's see who cuts the first deal with the prosecutors and starts spilling the beans . . . .

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Let's see who cuts the first deal with the prosecutors and starts spilling the beans . . . .

At least someone is spilling the beans. Hopefully all of them, including the ones locked up, Mueller, Hicks, and the rest. Including the banks, and the IRS.

[ZNPaaneah]

Pro-choice groups lost in Alabama despite outspending the pro-life side by 100-to-1

Regardless of how you think about Alabama's law, if you don't live in Alabama why should we care? It seems like those who oppose this law also oppose the principle of democracy.

I asked one woman who was being very vocal that if NY outlawed abortion but it was legal in New Jersey how inconvenient would that be? She agreed that going to NJ would not be an issue at all. Same is true of Conn. If the polls actually do favor abortion then what is the fuss, at least half, maybe 2/3 of the US states will not pass any laws. These people are very vehement about their right to an opinion on this issue, yet somehow don't think the citizens of Alabama have a right to theirs.

I see lots of signs from pro lifers saying "Its not your body". Well, it isn't theirs either.

In contract law you have the right to sign or not sign a contract. Complete freedom. But once you have signed you are obligated to that contract. This doesn't violate your freedom, it doesn't violate your rights. Why isn't it the same with a woman having sex. You have the right to refuse, you have the right to use various forms of contraceptives. But once you are pregnant how is that any less sacred than signing a contract?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Pro-choice groups lost in Alabama despite outspending the pro-life side by 100-to-1

Alabama has a history of controlling the sovereignty of other peoples bodies.

Such laws will not stand, any more than the Federal Fugitive Slave Act was able to stand. Alabama was big on that law to control peoples bodies too ; black bodies. Nothing new. But this time it's the sovereignty of women's bodies.

https://eji.org/history-racial-injus...ive-slave-acts

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Alabama has a history of controlling the sovereignty of other peoples bodies.

Such laws will not stand, any more than the Federal Fugitive Slave Act was able to stand. Alabama was big on that law to control peoples bodies too ; black bodies. Nothing new. But this time it's the sovereignty of women's bodies.

Remember it was the Alabaman Democrats who obstructed Lincoln's formation of the Republican Party and his work of emancipation.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Pro-choice groups lost in Alabama despite outspending the pro-life side by 100-to-1

Regardless of how you think about Alabama's law, if you don't live in Alabama why should we care? It seems like those who oppose this law also oppose the principle of democracy.

I see lots of signs from pro lifers saying "Its not your body". Well, it isn't theirs either.

I would like to hear from one unborn child that they support the "pro-choice" movement.

Thank God for all those, both men and women, who are fighting against a mother's "inconvenience," and for the life of unborn children.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Remember it was the Alabaman Democrats who obstructed Lincoln's formation of the Republican Party and his work of emancipation.

Funny how it's flipped since then. Can we get that Republican party back again? I thought they wanted gov'ment out of our lives. Now they want the gov'ment in the most intimate of our lives. Republicans bragging about their past virtues while not holding them today is a sad joke.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I would like to hear from one unborn child that they support the "pro-choice" movement.

That's another joke, obviously. Fetuses in the first 10 weeks have the neural system of a shrimp, and can't speak or think.

I rescued one out of a toilet at about 8 or 10 weeks. It was smaller than a shrimp. And it didn't say anything at all. God was the abortion doctor. Maybe He needs to be imprisoned for life.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Alabama has a history of controlling the sovereignty of other peoples bodies... But this time it's the sovereignty of women's bodies.

https://eji.org/history-racial-injus...ive-slave-acts

Wow, are you saying that women don't have the right to vote in Alabama?! That is disturbing. I thought the majority of voters were women and they had the right to vote in every state.

How many times do the pro abortionists make it seem like men want to control women's bodies, ignoring the fact that this law could never pass without women supporting it.

The arrogance that they assume everyone has to support them except for a few old fossils from 150 years ago. Instead of lying continuously, why not try and listen to what others are saying.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow, are you saying that women don't have the right to vote in Alabama?! That is disturbing. I thought the majority of voters were women and they had the right to vote in every state.

How many times do the pro abortionists make it seem like men want to control women's bodies, ignoring the fact that this law could never pass without women supporting it.

The arrogance that they assume everyone has to support them except for a few old fossils from 150 years ago. Instead of lying continuously, why not try and listen to what others are saying.

25 men :

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/15/polit...ted/index.html

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

25 men :

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/15/polit...ted/index.html

Why are they called "representatives"?

Could those men ever be elected if a very large number of women didn't vote for them?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

That's another joke, obviously. Fetuses in the first 10 weeks have the neural system of a shrimp, and can't speak or think.

There is strong evidence that these unborn, who can't yet speak or think, have a soul which will live forever. What do you think they will then say?

If thinking or speaking is required, do you now agree that babies under two years can also be slaughtered?

I could also make a strong case that many on the Left have never learned to properly think or speak. What do you propose that we do to them?

[Weighingin]

When an embryo is first formed, is that a "living soul?"

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

When an embryo is first formed, is that a "living soul?"

I believe so.

[countmeworthy]

Hello

When Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit..was He not GOD the Son and God Man at the very instant He was a Seed? Was HE not a living Soul?

When sperm and egg connect and produce a seed, that seed is fully a human being based on Jesus being conceived as a SEED.

Originally Posted by Weighingin

When an embryo is first formed, is that a "living soul?"

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

When an embryo is first formed, is that a "living soul?"

Gen_2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

Hello

When Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit..was He not GOD the Son and God Man at the very instant He was a Seed? Was HE not a living Soul?

When sperm and egg connect and produce a seed, that seed is fully a human being based on Jesus being conceived as a SEED.

Exactly.

Every other definition of life or humanity or personhood fails. Every conception is a miracle -- a man, a woman, and God. The Law may define a person by birth, by a heart beat, or by some other metric, but American Law is not the same as the truth of God.

Of course, the conception of Jesus was exceptionally unique, but every conception is also miraculous. Just because a human body cannot live outside the womb, does not make it less a person, or worse, just a "part" of its mother's body. God gives an everlasting soul to each at conception.

Every unborn child is absolutely unique -- with its own unique face, fingerprints, and DNA. The unborn never were part of its mother, and the mother has no right to murder this unborn person, created by the breath of God.

I believe the "Great cloud of witnesses" in Hebrews 12 includes the murdered unborn. One day justice will be served upon all of those who have supported abortion in any way, including legislators, doctors, judges, activists, and of course, mothers.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

When an embryo is first formed, is that a "living soul?"

Everyone, including all those who have legalized abortion, realize there is a line at which after that point the baby has rights independent of the mother.

Some use "viability" as the line. Alabama uses "heartbeat" as the line. But regardless, everyone realizes that any justification for the woman to be able to terminate the pregnancy decreases with every day that the embryo develops.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

Hello

When Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit..was He not GOD the Son and God Man at the very instant He was a Seed? Was HE not a living Soul?

When sperm and egg connect and produce a seed, that seed is fully a human being based on Jesus being conceived as a SEED.

And hello to you sis CMW.

First, there's a lot of Roman Catholic in your conception (no pun intended). Jesus wasn't declared both 100% man and God until the synods, by imperial decree, starting with the First Council of Nicaea, (325AD). Such a conception is not found in the Bible.

Second, a seed isn't produced at conception. It takes two seeds to do that. In that case, by your reckoning, life begins at erection and ovulation.

And finally, if what you say is true, why didn't the wise men come when Mary conceived? If Jesus was God, and that doesn't have strong exegetical Biblical grounding, he would have been God at that point, and the star would have guided them then, to the seed of God. In short, even the the books of Matthew and Luke recognized that Jesus was a living soul at birth.

Gen. 2:7 clearly states it takes the breath to become a "living soul."

And by our constitution, and laws, that's when a person have legal rights, and it's murder to kill them. But still, the parents have sovereignty over that little body until it's grown, as the pregnant mother does while carrying it.

Moreover, even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade it won't hold. Women have sovereign rights over their body. Not only can they use a coat hanger, there's also chemical means for abortion they can use, and they will use them because we can't stop them. Abortion was happening thousands of years before Roe.

Why don't we make laws against men that produce unwanted pregnancies? Oh, I forget. Men make the laws, and they aren't going to make laws against themselves ... only against women.

I blame this whole uproar on the Christian Dominionists. Who want to take us back to the Old Testament days. When women were property.

[Ohio]

So much misinformation here, I thought it best to respond line by line . . . .

Originally Posted by awareness

First, there's a lot of Roman Catholic in your conception (no pun intended). Jesus wasn't declared both 100% man and God until the synods, by imperial decree, starting with the First Council of Nicaea, (325AD). Such a conception is not found in the Bible.

Our faith and views of scripture have little to do with Councils, which are often in error, kind of similar to this post of yours.

Luke 1.26-56 makes it very clear that the angel Gabriel, sent by God, informed Mary that the child conceived in her womb, who shall be named Jesus, was both God and man, "He will be great, called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to Him the throne of David His Father."

Second, a seed isn't produced at conception. It takes two seeds to do that. In that case, by your reckoning, life begins at erection and ovulation.

This is merely wordplay. What we are referring to at conception is an embryo, which technically develops from a zygote.

And finally, if what you say is true, why didn't the wise men come when Mary conceived?

The Wise Men from the east actually began their journey when they saw His star at conception. (Matt 2.1-12) Unfortunately these not so Wise Men got distracted and went to Jerusalem, where Herod got involved. Since they arrived late, they were not at the manger worshiping with the Shepherds, but found Jesus a few days later in a "house," where they worshiped Him with gifts. Obviously God never wanted these inspired guests to worship His Son in the womb of Mary, as that might appear to be God-sanctioned "Mary-worship," which, of course, the real church would never do.

If Jesus was God, and that doesn't have strong exegetical Biblical grounding, he would have been God at that point, and the star would have guided them then, to the seed of God.

The Bible plainly states that Jesus was regularly worshiped as God, both at birth, during His ministry, and after His resurrection. So sad to see that your extensive online reading list has caused you to give up on this priceless truth.

In short, even the the books of Matthew and Luke recognized that Jesus was a living soul at birth. Gen. 2:7 clearly states it takes the breath to become a "living soul."

The Bible states we are souls, and we have a soul. Jesus as Son of Man was the same. Your demand that a person needs to breathe, based on this verse, is laughable. All scripture is also "God-breathed." Does that mean my Bible must also be "breathing?"

And by our constitution, and laws, that's when a person have legal rights, and it's murder to kill them. But still, the parents have sovereignty over that little body until it's grown, as the pregnant mother does while carrying it.

Sovereignty over one's children does not provide the right to take the child's life.

Moreover, even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade it won't hold. Women have sovereign rights over their body. Not only can they use a coat hanger, there's also chemical means for abortion they can use, and they will use them because we can't stop them. Abortion was happening thousands of years before Roe.

Yes, women have "rights" over their own body. And for that matter, no woman has ever been prosecuted for taking her own life.

But the unborn baby within a woman is not her own body. It's not even a part of her body. It does not have her DNA. She has no "right" over the life of this baby. Whether babies were aborted before Roe has nothing to do with it. Should we legalize other forms of murder since Cain killed his own brother back at the dawn of man? What kind of logic is that?

Why don't we make laws against men that produce unwanted pregnancies? Oh, I forget. Men make the laws, and they aren't going to make laws against themselves ... only against women.

In a Constitutional Republic, our representatives make our laws. Male representatives have made laws against men since the beginning. Ever been stopped for speeding? An elected "man" probably has written that law.

I blame this whole uproar on the Christian Dominionists. Who want to take us back to the Old Testament days. When women were property.

There you go again! Always blaming Christians for all of this world's ills.

[Weighingin]

Just to let all know why I asked the "living soul" question.
In post 5656, Awareness states that fetuses in the first have the neural system of a shrimp and can't speak or speak in the first 8 to 10 weeks. That verse came to me after I read it. I believe that it's a human life, but in its most rudimentary form. There are situations where abortions may be performed such as health of the mom, incest, rape (even though there are testimonies of those whose moms decided to carry full term).
As far as I know, the Bible doesn't mention terminating pregnancies, but it does say you shall not kill. So that would mean terminating a human life, no matter what stage its in.
Certainly, with wanting to allow late abortions, it's has clearly come to the point to the point of murder.

[Weighingin]

Just to let all know why I asked the "living soul" question.
In post 5656, Awareness states that fetuses in the first have the neural system of a shrimp and can't speak or speak in the first 8 to 10 weeks. That verse came to me after I read it. I believe that it's a human life, but in its most rudimentary form. There are situations where abortions may be performed such as health of the mom, incest, rape (even though there are testimonies of those whose moms decided to carry full term).
As far as I know, the Bible doesn't mention terminating pregnancies, but it does say you shall not kill. So that would mean terminating a human life, no matter what stage its in.
Certainly, with wanting to allow late abortions, it's has clearly come to the point to the point of murder.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So much misinformation here, I thought it best to respond line by line . . . .

Our faith and views of scripture have little to do with Councils, which are often in error, kind of similar to this post of yours.

Luke 1.26-56 makes it very clear that the angel Gabriel, sent by God, informed Mary that the child conceived in her womb, who shall be named Jesus, was both God and man, "He will be great, called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to Him the throne of David His Father."

This is merely wordplay. What we are referring to at conception is an embryo, which technically develops from a zygote.

The Wise Men from the east actually began their journey when they saw His star at conception. (Matt 2.1-12) Unfortunately these not so Wise Men got distracted and went to Jerusalem, where Herod got involved. Since they arrived late, they were not at the manger worshiping with the Shepherds, but found Jesus a few days later in a "house," where they worshiped Him with gifts. Obviously God never wanted these inspired guests to worship His Son in the womb of Mary, as that might appear to be God-sanctioned "Mary-worship," which, of course, the real church would never do.

The Bible plainly states that Jesus was regularly worshiped as God, both at birth, during His ministry, and after His resurrection. So sad to see that your extensive online reading list has caused you to give up on this priceless truth.

The Bible states we are souls, and we have a soul. Jesus as Son of Man was the same. Your demand that a person needs to breathe, based on this verse, is laughable. All scripture is also "God-breathed." Does that mean my Bible must also be "breathing?"

Sovereignty over one's children does not provide the right to take the child's life.

Yes, women have "rights" over their own body. And for that matter, no woman has ever been prosecuted for taking her own life.

But the unborn baby within a woman is not her own body. It's not even a part of her body. It does not have her DNA. She has no "right" over the life of this baby. Whether babies were aborted before Roe has nothing to do with it. Should we legalize other forms of murder since Cain killed his own brother back at the dawn of man? What kind of logic is that?

In a Constitutional Republic, our representatives make our laws. Male representatives have made laws against men since the beginning. Ever been stopped for speeding? An elected "man" probably has written that law.

There you go again! Always blaming Christians for all of this world's ills.

Goodness brother. Methinks you need to rethink this post, or at least reword it in some way. Please. Pretty Please.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

Just to let all know why I asked the "living soul" question.
In post 5656, Awareness states that fetuses in the first have the neural system of a shrimp and can't speak or speak in the first 8 to 10 weeks. That verse came to me after I read it. I believe that it's a human life, but in its most rudimentary form. There are situations where abortions may be performed such as health of the mom, incest, rape (even though there are testimonies of those whose moms decided to carry full term).
As far as I know, the Bible doesn't mention terminating pregnancies, but it does say you shall not kill. So that would mean terminating a human life, no matter what stage its in.
Certainly, with wanting to allow late abortions, it's has clearly come to the point to the point of murder.

The Bible talks about having your son or daughter pass through the fire, and also about having your seed pass through the fire. It describes this as an offering to Moloch or Baal. The two primary reasons to abort a baby is that it is a product of fornication, or that it would interfere with the woman's career.

When a baby is aborted they then throw it out like medical waste and it is incinerated. (Though one state just passed a law that these aborted babies need to be buried/cremated).

God considers an aborted baby to be an offering to Moloch or to Baal.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Goodness brother. Methinks you need to rethink this post, or at least reword it in some way. Please. Pretty Please.

What do you mean "rethink this post or reword it in some way?"

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The Bible talks about having your son or daughter pass through the fire, and also about having your seed pass through the fire. It describes this as an offering to Moloch or Baal. The two primary reasons to abort a baby is that it is a product of fornication, or that it would interfere with the woman's career.

When a baby is aborted they then throw it out like medical waste and it is incinerated. (Though one state just passed a law that these aborted babies need to be buried/cremated).

God considers an aborted baby to be an offering to Moloch or to Baal.

Reading the book of Jeremiah, Judah sacrificed to Baal in the valley outside of Jerusalem. The Lord was so upset with this idolatrous practice, that He warned them that this valley will be filled with those killed by the Babylonians, and none of their bodies would be buried.

Today the same atrocities are being commited to America's children.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Reading the book of Jeremiah, Judah sacrificed to Baal in the valley outside of Jerusalem. The Lord was so upset with this idolatrous practice, that He warned them that this valley will be filled with those killed by the Babylonians, and none of their bodies would be buried.

Today the same atrocities are being commited to America's children.

Not only so but in the books of Moses the Lord makes it clear that abortion and infanticide (sacrificing their sons, daughters and seed to Moloch and Baal) are the reason he is dispossessing the nations from Israel.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Not only so but in the books of Moses the Lord makes it clear that abortion and infanticide (sacrificing their sons, daughters and seed to Moloch and Baal) are the reason he is dispossessing the nations from Israel.

Jeremiah continually mentions the Queen of Heaven, (Babylonian Ishtar, Canaanite Ashteroth) the goddess of fertility, whom the Israelite women worshiped with incense, drink offerings, etc. (Jer 44)

History informs us that God judged the nations for this practice, and then judged Israel for the same practice. Israel was so blind during the days of Jeremiah that they even credited their well-being to her. (v.17)

The Left is clueless as to how disturbing this is to the Lord. The darkness and blindness of their ideology and evil practices even deludes some of the children of God.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What do you mean "rethink this post or reword it in some way?"

Well okay brother. I was just being considerate.

Originally Posted by awareness

First, there's a lot of Roman Catholic in your conception (no pun intended). Jesus wasn't declared both 100% man and God until the synods, by imperial decree, starting with the First Council of Nicaea, (325AD). Such a conception is not found in the Bible.

Those verses don't apply to 100% man and God. If I'm wrong please point it out ; chapter and verse.

Originally Posted by awareness

Second, a seed isn't produced at conception. It takes two seeds to do that. In that case, by your reckoning, life begins at erection and ovulation.

You're a smart guy, and have had children, so surely you looked into the development post-fertilization. It starts out with two "seeds" meeting ; life meets life. There's no "beginning of life."

Originally Posted by awareness

And finally, if what you say is true, why didn't the wise men come when Mary conceived?

I must be blind. Where do those verses say that? I saw a lot of "born" in the verses, but not conception.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Obviously God never wanted these inspired guests to worship His Son in the womb of Mary, as that might appear to be God-sanctioned "Mary-worship," which, of course, the real church would never do.

lol ... No! The church would never do that! Then they would conjure Mary ... and she'd be showing up everywhere. Why would we want to hear from a double-agent of God?

Originally Posted by awareness

If Jesus was God, and that doesn't have strong exegetical Biblical grounding, he would have been God at that point, and the star would have guided them then, to the seed of God.

Jesus may have been worshiped, but not as God the Father, nor even God the Son, in those precise words ... and you know it. You are clearly seeing what you want to see.

Originally Posted by awareness

In short, even the the books of Matthew and Luke recognized that Jesus was a living soul at birth. Gen. 2:7 clearly states it takes the breath to become a "living soul."

Silly question. But some believe it breaths.

Not laughable. Our laws as to sovereign rights to the privacy of our own body starts at our first breath, generally speaking ... technically, when we exit the womb.

Originally Posted by awareness

And by our constitution, and laws, that's when a person have legal rights, and it's murder to kill them. But still, the parents have sovereignty over that little body until it's grown, as the pregnant mother does while carrying it.

The unborn is not legally considered to be a child.

Originally Posted by awareness

Moreover, even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade it won't hold. Women have sovereign rights over their body. Not only can they use a coat hanger, there's also chemical means for abortion they can use, and they will use them because we can't stop them. Abortion was happening thousands of years before Roe.

This is backward thinking. 2000 yrs backward in fact. 2000 yrs ago they did think that the woman was just an incubator; where the mans seed grew within. Today we know better. And they should have know too. I've cut three umbilical cords. I saw my son cut out of his mother. I've seen close up and clearly how much the baby within is part of the mothers body. The woman is not an incubator.

Originally Posted by awareness

Why don't we make laws against men that produce unwanted pregnancies? Oh, I forget. Men make the laws, and they aren't going to make laws against themselves ... only against women.

We're talking about laws to stop abortion. Men can do that with a condom. They are the ones creating unwanted pregnancies. If we're gonna make laws to stop abortion, make a law against that.

Originally Posted by awareness

I blame this whole uproar on the Christian Dominionists. Who want to take us back to the Old Testament days. When women were property.

Well ya got me. I blamed the Christian Dominionists. Are you defending them? If so, you may not know anything about them. Or, you may know about them, and support them. You obviously believe in controlling women's bodies. Aren't you married? Aren't you divorced? By now you surely know that you can't control a woman. So let's hear it : LOCK 'EM UP !!! LOCK 'EM UP !!! LOCK 'EM UP !!!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Reading the book of Jeremiah, Judah sacrificed to Baal in the valley outside of Jerusalem. The Lord was so upset with this idolatrous practice, that He warned them that this valley will be filled with those killed by the Babylonians, and none of their bodies would be buried.

Today the same atrocities are being commited to America's children.

Well I do see in the news mothers and fathers killing their own children. There's some presently in court and jail for doing it.

But I've never read in the Bible that fetuses were being sacrificed to Baal. Maybe I missed it. Verse please.

I have read of God telling to use a bitter drink to abort the unborn of an unfaithful wife.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

You obviously believe in controlling women's bodies.

So let's hear it : LOCK 'EM UP !!! LOCK 'EM UP !!! LOCK 'EM UP !!!

I control no one. I am only trying to protect the lives of the innocent. Sorry if that is too hard for you to understand. Folks like you are their biggest danger, as they say, "The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing."

But keep digging. You have almost reached 6 feet.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Jesus may have been worshiped, but not as God the Father, nor even God the Son, in those precise words ... and you know it. You are clearly seeing what you want to see.

More games here, bro?

In Matthew, the Magi worshiped the child Jesus as King of the Jews.

In Luke, the angels and shepherds worshiped Him as the Savior, who is Christ the Lord, and all who heard them marveled at what they said.

You obviously refuse to see what you don't want to know.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

More games here, bro?

Nothing but games with Awareness. Where exactly is the line that he would draw? He has an issue with Alabama drawing the line at a heart beat. Does he have an issue with the SCOTUS drawing the line at viability?

Enough with the vague, ridiculousness. Awareness needs to tell us where should the line be drawn and why? Also, why is it that Alabama does not have the right to draw the line at the heart beat? Finally, why does Awareness' view of abortion trump America's constitution and principal of democracy?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

More games here, bro?

In Matthew, the Magi worshiped the child Jesus as King of the Jews.

In Luke, the angels and shepherds worshiped Him as the Savior, who is Christ the Lord, and all who heard them marveled at what they said.

You obviously refuse to see what you don't want to know.

Okay, King, Savior, Christ the Lord. But not as God.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Nothing but games with Awareness. Where exactly is the line that he would draw? He has an issue with Alabama drawing the line at a heart beat. Does he have an issue with the SCOTUS drawing the line at viability?

Enough with the vague, ridiculousness. Awareness needs to tell us where should the line be drawn and why? Also, why is it that Alabama does not have the right to draw the line at the heart beat? Finally, why does Awareness' view of abortion trump America's constitution and principal of democracy?

No games. My position is that women have sovereign rights over their own body. And they decide where the line is drawn. Not you.

And the constitution, according to the 7/2 decision of the supreme court in 1973 supports the sovereignty of women's right to their own body. As it should be.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

No games. My position is that women have sovereign rights over their own body. And they decide where the line is drawn. Not you.

And the constitution, according to the 7/2 decision of the supreme court in 1973 supports the sovereignty of women's right to their own body. As it should be.

So a viable baby has no rights. Baby 8 1/2 months, no rights.

The woman had the right over her own body when she conceived.

She had the right over her own body 2 months later when she knew she was pregnant. But she decided to wait another 6 1/2 months before terminating because that is her sovereign right.

By this logic we give more rights to unborn deer and geese than we do to babies. At least with them we regulate when the hunter can and can't kill them because they might be pregnant.

The US government can imprison you for a year and give you a $50,000 fine for killing an animal on the endangered species list, but they cannot protect babies?

The US government and every single state government has many laws and regulations protecting baby animals and pregnant animals from having the pregnancy terminated, but they can't do the same for human babies?

Finally, why does a 7-2 decision by 9 old people trump the principal of democracy and the US constitution?

There is nothing in the US constitution about abortion, the Supreme court has no authority to make laws. Their decision said that a woman had a right to privacy as long as the baby wasn't viable. So in their "interpretation" the right to privacy does not trump the right of a baby to live. They have clearly deemed there are two competing interests involved in this issue and both have a standing in the eyes of the court.

So the court did not decide that a woman decides where to draw the line.

The problem with drawing the line at "viability" is that this has changed as medical care has improved. The heartbeat by comparison has not changed over the same period of time so as a unit of measurement is far more reliable. For example, "one month after the detection of a heartbeat" would be the same today as it was in the 70s. So why choose an arbitrary time of "viability" when that will continually change? My guess is that once you use the heartbeat as a basis the question then becomes why are you waiting a month after this baby is a living being with a heartbeat?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

No games. My position is that women have sovereign rights over their own body. And they decide where the line is drawn. Not you.

Agreed. I have said this repeatedly. Women have rights over their own body. In fact, they can even take their own life, and they will not be prosecuted.

But the unborn is NOT the woman's body. The unborn has its own body, with its own unique DNA.

Why is this concept too difficult for you to understand? Yer a smart guy, you can understand this.

[ZNPaaneah]

The US constitution is very clear, no law legalizing or forbidding religion.

The Bible calls abortion "sacrifice to Baal" (when a woman sees the baby as interfering with her career) and/or a sacrifice to Moloch (worship of fornication).

Therefore the Supreme court should have declared they have no jurisdiction on this issue and it is up to each individual state.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The US constitution is very clear, no law legalizing or forbidding religion.

The Bible calls abortion "sacrifice to Baal" (when a woman sees the baby as interfering with her career) and/or a sacrifice to Moloch (worship of fornication).

Therefore the Supreme court should have declared they have no jurisdiction on this issue and it is up to each individual state.

Many legal experts, having examined Roe, have declared it the worst juris prudence in the history of he republic.

It just baffles me that christians, like awareness, could support abortion at the expense of the most innocent and vulnerable of all life.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Many legal experts, having examined Roe, have declared it the worst juris prudence in the history of he republic.

It just baffles me that christians, like awareness, could support abortion at the expense of the most innocent and vulnerable of all life.

The fact that we are here almost 50 years later still debating it is, in my mind, proof of how bad a ruling it was.

You don't see that with Brown vs board of ed, or any other controversial ruling.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So a viable baby has no rights. Baby 8 1/2 months, no rights.

Ouch! Now you're hitting a little too close to home. I was 2 1/2 months premature. Doctors told my mom and dad that it wasn't likely I'd live. Obviously, I did.

Your appeal provokes strong emotional response. I'm glad that your standing for my right to be here.

But this conversation is happening not because states are banning abortions at 8.5. How about 6 weeks? When most women aren't even sure if they are preg. or having a cycle disruption. And there isn't even a heart beat.

We know what's going on, all of us. All these states see an opportunity to overturn Roe V Wade, with the new republican supreme court configuration.

I remember when Republicans were all up in arms about judicial activism. But I guess that was when they weren't able to do it. They painted it then that it was very wrong. But what does McTurtle care about right and wrong? Merrick Garland is a prime example.

So now they think they've got it all set up ... to finally find a way to control women, using their very own fetuses as hostages. Then women will belong to the state, and even belong to their fetus, not the other way around.

Like it or not, Roe v. Wade or not, women own the fetus within them. The fetus does not own the woman carrying it.

I'm against abortion, but the last thing I want to see is a government that violates the sovereignty of our bodies, male or female.

Pubbies are famous for wanting gov'ment out of our lives ... so they've preached ... but they lie.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Pubbies are famous for wanting gov'ment out of our lives ... so they've preached ... but they lie.

Roe v Wade is the government in our lives, in an unwanted way, overstepping their bounds.

The issue is simple -- SCOTUS declares this is an issue that is for the States to decide. If Alabama draws the line at the heartbeat and a woman in Alabama is raped, use the morning after pill. Go to the police, go to the hospital, and deal with it immediately. If for some reason that is not a possibility and she has passed the line where it is no longer legal in Alabama, go to Georgia.

I am not interested in telling Alabama what laws and regulations they should have, nor do I care that much about the other 48 states. I'll vote in NY and leave it to the other Americans to do what they think is right. I have no issue with you doing the same in your state, which I am led to understand is not Alabama.

Otherwise the federal govt is lying to us. The constitution does not give SCOTUS the grounds to decide this.

Everyone is lying. You can't claim that the issue is that many women don't know they're pregnant at this time and then use incest and rape as your examples. The woman didn't know she was sexually assaulted? What it takes 2 months before a woman realizes she has been sexually assaulted?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

We know what's going on, all of us. All these states see an opportunity to overturn Roe V Wade, with the new republican supreme court configuration.

I remember when Republicans were all up in arms about judicial activism. But I guess that was when they weren't able to do it. They painted it then that it was very wrong. But what does McTurtle care about right and wrong? Merrick Garland is a prime example.

So now they think they've got it all set up ... to finally find a way to control women, using their very own fetuses as hostages. Then women will belong to the state, and even belong to their fetus, not the other way around.

Like it or not, Roe v. Wade or not, women own the fetus within them. The fetus does not own the woman carrying it.

I'm against abortion, but the last thing I want to see is a government that violates the sovereignty of our bodies, male or female.

Pubbies are famous for wanting gov'ment out of our lives ... so they've preached ... but they lie.

Sovereignty of our bodies? What does that mean? There is no such thing. Just move, or talk, or maybe do nothing at all, and you may have just committed a crime.

Roe defined judicial activism. Overturning Roe in not judicial activism. Apparently you don't understand what that means. Overturning Roe simply puts the states in charge of their own people. That is constitutional.

No one is controlling women. We are only trying to protect the unborn. They are not hostages, they are human lives. Can't you understand that? Since when do parents "own" their kids, and have the "right" to murder them?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sovereignty of our bodies? What does that mean? There is no such thing.

Arguments:

1. Dodge the constitutional issue

2. Dodge the judicial activism issue

3. Dodge the democratic issue

4. Dodge the State's rights issue

5. Feigned outrage over hypothetical rape victim who didn't realize they had been raped until it was too late to get one of those Alabama abortions, forced to go to the 2nd rate Georgia abortionists.

6. So what is the only defense they have for taking away state's rights, having 9 men make laws that they have no authority to make, and deciding that the people of Alabama need to listen to others about how to run things? Sovereignty of a woman's body. Trumps the killing of a baby.

[awareness]

Went down with the flu. Nailed me. Not out of the woods yet, but better. Be back to give y'all all hell soon. haha.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sovereignty of our bodies? What does that mean?

That's a darn good question. One that has been debated since the ancients. Personally I think it has to do with "unalienable rights" mentioned in the Dec. of Independence.

Originally Posted by Ohio

There is no such thing.

Oh but there is. Google - 'constitutional sovereignty' spend some time on it and see for yourself.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Roe defined judicial activism. Overturning Roe in not judicial activism. Apparently you don't understand what that means.

But you can bet that McTurtle knows what it means. That's why he wants his judges to do it.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Overturning Roe simply puts the states in charge of their own people. That is constitutional.

So you say. But you're not on the court.

Originally Posted by Ohio

No one is controlling women. We are only trying to protect the unborn. They are not hostages, they are human lives. Can't you understand that? Since when do parents "own" their kids, and have the "right" to murder them?

You're obfuscating, and conflating living children outside a woman's body, with unborn's that's in a woman's body.

Cutting to the chase, overturn Roe will only create the rise in black market RU486, Mifepristone, that's presently legal in all 50 states, and in Europe, and many countries; in other words, the cat is out of that bag. And there are other natural Abortifacients, like Mugwort, that grows wild in America.

All this info is available on the web. And if Roe is overturned, will we become like China and censor all that off the web? I doubt it.

Turns out that, women are independent agents. Abortion like prostitution goes way back in human history. And making either one illegal hasn't stopped either one, and won't.

Sorry all you male prigs ... best idea for you is to keep it in your pants.

And my advice to all the women in these slave holding states, is, to cut all the male prigs off. Then they'll learn that women have control over their own bodies.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Went down with the flu. Nailed me. Not out of the woods yet, but better. Be back to give y'all all hell soon. haha.

Do you get the flu shot?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Cutting to the chase, overturn Roe will only create the rise in black market RU486, Mifepristone, that's presently legal in all 50 states, and in Europe, and many countries; in other words, the cat is out of that bag. And there are other natural Abortifacients, like Mugwort, that grows wild in America.

All this info is available on the web. And if Roe is overturned, will we become like China and censor all that off the web? I doubt it.

Turns out that, women are independent agents. Abortion like prostitution goes way back in human history. And making either one illegal hasn't stopped either one, and won't.

Sorry all you male prigs ... best idea for you is to keep it in your pants.

And my advice to all the women in these slave holding states, is, to cut all the male prigs off. Then they'll learn that women have control over their own bodies.

You are comparing Alabama's law with Prohibition and the sale of moonshine. That is a bad analogy. If the States are able to regulate and limit the practice the proper analogy would be the blue laws passed by some states prohibiting the sale of alcohol at certain times. This does not lead to moonshine. Rather, people go across the border and buy alcohol at those prohibited times.

Leaving your hypothetical nightmare scenario that has no connection to the current situation lets talk about what women's options would be.

1. Anyone raped could go to the hospital or police and get a morning after pill, or get tested to see if she is pregnant and then get the operation within 6 weeks of the event. Everyone knows that this is the safest and best time. So unlike the dark recesses of your imagination, this would make everyone safer.

2. If the woman decides to get an abortion later than that she could drive or take a bus to the border. For virtually everyone in Alabama that would be trip of less than an hour.

So once again, the constitutional solution to this issue is to leave it up to the States. It is safer and it respects the principal of democratic rule and State sovereignty. Once again, the arguments made by the pro abortionists are bogus scare tactics.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

But you can bet that McTurtle knows what it means. That's why he wants his judges to do it.

Doesn't it violate your liberal value system to mock people based on their birth-appearance?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Doesn't it violate your liberal value system to mock people based on their birth-appearance?

Only if they are LGBTQ

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Doesn't it violate your liberal value system to mock people based on their birth-appearance?

Don't know that I hold to liberal values. That's a label that you want to pin on me, based upon your need to put others in boxes. Is that conservative values, according to your boxes?

But good point bro Ohio. Just because Mitch resembles a turtle, doesn't mean that he is one. But if he was, I would that he'd be a post turtle.

Based upon what he did to people here in Kentucky, between the rivers, the man is a liar and cheat. Calling him a turtle doesn't come close to what he deserves.

But I know, from what I've seen, those qualities, or lack thereof, doesn't bother modern day Christian evangelicals, who seem to have lost track of Jesus, and any modicum of Christian values.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

But I know, from what I've seen, those qualities, or lack thereof, doesn't bother modern day Christian evangelicals, who seem to have lost track of Jesus, and any modicum of Christian values.

What is a "Christian" value as opposed to common values that all people hold?

I have expressed outrage over the way the JFK assassination was handled, but I don't see that as a "Christian" value, simply a human value of respecting life and being responsible to make sure the killers are brought to justice.

I have expressed outrage over the way the Box 13 scandal was ignored, but again, not a "Christian value" simply the human value of objecting to lying and cheating in Congress and the Senate.

I have expressed outrage over the way 911 was investigated, not a "Christian" value, but simply the outrage over the inept, ridiculous and insulting way they have investigated this and treated the American people.

I am quite concerned about the implications of the Snowden affair and the prosecution of the Wiki Leaks leader Asange.

My brother took the habeas corpus case to the Supreme court pro bono, again, not a Christian value, simply the human value of being offended at the abuse of the common man by the rich and powerful.

So enlighten us, what is Mitch McConnells crime against Kentucky? Help us all to find our way back to Jesus.

[ZNPaaneah]

Americans tend much more toward the middle on abortion than the polarized debate on the issue would suggest, according to a new a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll.

Almost half the public, 47 percent, supports strict bans on abortion that would allow a mother to procure one only for a serious reason. About 9 percent say abortion should never be permitted under any circumstance, another 9 percent say it should be allowed only to save the life of the mother, and 29 percent say the procedure should be permitted only in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother’s life is at stake.

That is my issue with the pro abortionists in a nutshell. They lie. They portray those who want strict regulations on abortion as though they were religious nut jobs when in reality we represent 47% of the US population.

Now those 47% hold that view despite being portrayed as right wing nut jobs, I wonder if some of the 53% are only on that side simply because they don't want to appear as some kind of nut. When information like this gets out I suspect you will find the 53% shrinks by several percentage points. If you look at the categories not one was as lenient as Alabama. Add in any woman could get an abortion prior to the heartbeat of the fetus and you will surely increase this number. This makes me utterly disgusted with hollywood and these immoral actors and actresses who make it seem like Alabama's law is some outrageous affront, when in reality it is highly likely that 50% of the US population supports it. So what is wrong with one state out of 50 having such a law? What is the fear? That all the fear mongering about what will happen is shown to be a big fat lie.

Also, please note, if 50% of the US population supports Alabama's law then surely significantly less than 50% supports the legalization of all abortions in every state up until viability (5 months?) Hence the law as it has been is undemocratic and was forced upon us by 9 judges.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Americans tend much more toward the middle on abortion than the polarized debate on the issue would suggest, according to a new a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll.

Almost half the public, 47 percent, supports strict bans on abortion that would allow a mother to procure one only for a serious reason. About 9 percent say abortion should never be permitted under any circumstance, another 9 percent say it should be allowed only to save the life of the mother, and 29 percent say the procedure should be permitted only in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother’s life is at stake.

That is my issue with the pro abortionists in a nutshell. They lie. They portray those who want strict regulations on abortion as though they were religious nut jobs when in reality we represent 47% of the US population.

Now those 47% hold that view despite being portrayed as right wing nut jobs, I wonder if some of the 53% are only on that side simply because they don't want to appear as some kind of nut. When information like this gets out I suspect you will find the 53% shrinks by several percentage points.

So well said. Public shaming, manipulation, and gaslighting -- some of the same ingredients that have been so objectionable at LSM -- are used to promote this insidious slaughter of the weakest, the most innocent, and absolutely the most vulnerable of mankind.

How is abortion any different from the extermination of "undesirables" exterminated by Hitler and Stalin? Together they only reached 30 million innocent victims, whereas our abortion numbers have doubled that.

Yet the media portrays the Left as compassionate, and the right as neo-nazi supremacists. Talk about deception and the blind leading the blind!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Don't know that I hold to liberal values. That's a label that you want to pin on me, based upon your need to put others in boxes. Is that conservative values, according to your boxes?

The difference between our two approaches could not be more evident.

You like to characterize all Christians by the poor actions of individual isolated Christians over the centuries. This is definitely a troubling liberal tendency. You have demeaned all evangelicals simply because they have supported Trump, who has been vilified for years in the worst possible way. Any citizen or politician who has ever supported Trump, like Senator McConnell, is also caricatured in the worst possible way.

I, however, have no issue with being described as an evangelical or conservative. That doesn't mean that I support every single teaching or policy, but close enough for having a conversation. It's no secret that I subscribe to conservative sites like Federalist, Am. Spectator, Am. Thinker, Breitbart, Atkisson, or Citizen Free Press. I quote from them.

You, however, quote from the British tabloid Daily Mail, and have mentioned how much you like them. Like much of MSM, those who subscribe to these sites consider themselves liberals. I don't see why you would resist such a label for communication purposes, since you have never, at least to my recollection, supported a conservative, a conservative policy, or a conservative news site.

So, on the one hand, you resist labels or boxes, yet your views check off all of the liberal descriptors of the Left. Then, on the other hand, you willingly ascribe the worst of the so called "Alt-Right" on every evangelical and conservative. I don't mind labels if they fit. But I do protest characterizations of criminal actions on all. That would be like me accusing you of all the violent actions of Antifa and Occupy, though I would prefer that you not be silent on their violent ways.

Why is it that the Left never disowns their violence like campus protests against all conservatives, yet all conservatives, including Trump repeatedly, reject any and all association with KKK supremacists? Read the transcripts. Trump said there are "good people on both sides" of the confederate monument debate.

Almost a half century of pro-life anti-Roe peaceful protests have never had an incident. That is why the Left had to manufacture one using that Covington Catholic student.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

But you can bet that McTurtle knows what it means. That's why he wants his judges to do it.

Roseann Barr had her career destroyed for comparing Jarrett to a chimpanzee, yet no one suffers for caricaturing McConnell as a turtle.

Didn't we supposedly evolve from chimps? So shouldn't that be less offensive than turtles? Double standard?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So enlighten us, what is Mitch McConnells crime against Kentucky? Help us all to find our way back to Jesus.

Mitch double-crossed the people from between the rivers with the LBL Protection Act, promising them one thing and delivering another. In other words he lied.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Roseann Barr had her career destroyed for comparing Jarrett to a chimpanzee, yet no one suffers for caricaturing McConnell as a turtle.

Didn't we supposedly evolve from chimps? So shouldn't that be less offensive than turtles? Double standard?

Barr's career was already down the drain. She was trying to recover it by being outlandish. It backfired. Good riddance. I never liked her.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Mitch double-crossed the people from between the rivers with the LBL Protection Act, promising them one thing and delivering another. In other words he lied.

So you are comparing a 170,000 acre plot of land with the assassination of JFK and the biggest terrorist attack on US soil?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Barr's career was already down the drain. She was trying to recover it by being outlandish. It backfired. Good riddance. I never liked her.

She was a comedian. They are all "outlandish." Did you never watch a comedy show? You, the minister of "laughter?" Sounds strange to me, bro. 95% of the comedians are liberals. Why don't you like her? Her ratings were #2. What did she ever do to you?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Mitch double-crossed the people from between the rivers with the LBL Protection Act, promising them one thing and delivering another. In other words he lied.

You told me it was JFK who stole that Land Between the Lakes from the citizenry. JFK flew over and said it would make a great national park. You told me that the Feds demolished homes when the owners went to church or shopping.

What did MMc promise, and why could he not deliver? Did the Dems block him like they do on everything else?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

You told me it was JFK who stole that Land Between the Lakes from the citizenry. JFK flew over and said it would make a great national park. You told me that the Feds demolished homes when the owners went to church or shopping.

What did MMc promise, and why could he not deliver? Did the Dems block him like they do on everything else?

You've got a keen memory bro Ohio. And yes, JFK was behind driving the folks off their lands to make Land between the Lakes National Recreation Park. I think we should do the same for the Kennedy compound.

I short, TVA was used because they had the power of eminent domain. TVA sold the idea to congress by promising a demonstration of how a natural park would be a boon to all business outside the park ; that there would be no commercial businesses inside the park. The demonstration failed.

So TVA was planning on selling it to Japan, and Disney was going to put one of its parks there. The folks from between the rivers rose up, and TVA got the boot and the Forest Service took over the park.

The LBL Protection Act was negotiated between Mitch (R-Ky), congressman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky) -- since forced to resign over ethics violations -- and the people from between the rivers. What was crucial to the people between the rivers was the keeping of what was termed "The Promise." The promise was that there would be no commercial enterprise in LBL. That was important to them because if a profit was going to be made in LBL they should be they ones profiting.

Mitch and Whitfield agreed that The Promise would be part of the LBL protection Act. It wasn't. The Forest Service says they never made such a promise. And since commercialization of LBL has been growing, and people from between the rivers can't stop it.

But at least Japan didn't get it, and Disney didn't setup, no thanks to Mitch and Whitfield, only to the people that rose up against it.

In short bro Ohio, it wasn't the pubbies that took the land from my family on both sides, but that damn demmie JFK. Still, it's been a bi-partisan screwing. And I suppose that's one good reason that politically I'm a mugwump.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Mitch and Whitfield agreed that The Promise would be part of the LBL protection Act. It wasn't. The Forest Service says they never made such a promise. And since commercialization of LBL has been growing, and people from between the rivers can't stop it.

In short bro Ohio, it wasn't the pubbies that took the land from my family on both sides, but that damn demmie JFK. Still, it's been a bi-partisan screwing. And I suppose that's one good reason that politically I'm a mugwump.

Thanks for reply. While I disagree with you about a "keen memory," you seem to have enough ammo from the LBL takeover to hate all politicians. Sounds like you have the makings to be a libertarian mugwump. One of the reasons why we both like an outsider like Trump, who at least is trying to drain the swamp.

Liberal Politicians seem to love making national parts though. Obama did some of this recently out west. Seems like an easy sell to the rest of the country when we can save some endangered species and provide them with another vacation destination for their Daystar mobile home. But what about the locals, like your people in the LBL, who got screwed? I guess they were supposed to be happy with LBJ's welfare programs.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Thanks for reply. While I disagree with you about a "keen memory," you seem to have enough ammo from the LBL takeover to hate all politicians. Sounds like you have the makings to be a libertarian mugwump. One of the reasons why we both like an outsider like Trump, who at least is trying to drain the swamp.

Don't forget that one reason we don't like Trump is that he himself has also screwed people in a similar fashion. 2,000 lawsuits. Claims that contract workers don't get paid and can't fight it in court, and of course the people in Scotland are not thrilled with how he got his golf course built.

Not that any of that would be a reason to have voted for Clinton.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Don't forget that one reason we don't like Trump is that he himself has also screwed people in a similar fashion. 2,000 lawsuits. Claims that contract workers don't get paid and can't fight it in court, and of course the people in Scotland are not thrilled with how he got his golf course built.

Not that any of that would be a reason to have voted for Clinton.

Reminds me of a story my uncle told me. He was a union electrician building Jacobs Field in Cleveland in the early '90's. Bill Clinton threw out the first pitch. Life was good for the rich and famous.

Most of the sub-contractors on that huge project, however, never got paid in full. Many went bankrupt. Nasty business. I'm sure NYC skyscrapers were worse. Politicians and Developers each greasing each others palms.

Like I have repeatedly said. They're all crooks and liars. Both politicians and developers. My concern is their policy. Do they line their pockets selling our strategic uranium to Russia? Do they go soft on China's military ambitions to enrich their kid's hedge fund? Do they bribe Ukrainian officials to fire prosecutors looking into their own family? Do they start wars to enrich their empire? Do they cave into actresses and flip-flop on policy? Do they undermine our way of life by introducing failed socialistic policies? Do they advance political agenda by using use our intelligence? Stuff like that concerns me more.

[Ohio]

Recent events in the little town of Oberlin, west of Cleveland, are a show window into the current politicization of our Universities. When newly saved I used to visit a Christian coworker for a game of Chess and fellowship in that lovely little town.

This article explains how bad things have become. In the aftermath of Trump's election win, underage black youths got caught shoplifting wine at a neighborhood bakery. Instead of an isolated arrest, forcing our youth to be accountable for their criminal action, the College threw the shop owners under the bus, and broadcast this as racial profiling, citing historical slavery and every other crusade of our modern day social justice warriors.

Here's a snapshot from the article showing how horribly misinformed College officials had become . . .

A longtime Oberlin resident, Emily Crawford, who also worked in the school’s communications department, sent out an email to her bosses and then it was forwarded to senior members of the college’s administration. The email read:

“I have talked to 15 townie friends who are poc (persons of color) and they are disgusted and embarrassed by the protest. In their view, the kid was breaking the law, period (even if he wasn’t shoplifting, he was underage). To them this is not a race issue at all and they do not believe the Gibson's [store owners] are racist. They believe the students have picked the wrong target … “I find this misdirected rage very disturbing, and it’s only going to widen the gap (between) town and gown.”

Tita Reed, special assistant to the president for community and government relations, wrote back: “Doesn’t change a damn thing for me.”

Many are throwing out the “Woke and Broke” designation on this case – and though some may see this as a larger issue of the conservatives winning over liberals — that wasn’t really what was going on here. The judge kept politics out of this case, and the jury was actually deciding not so much on what the college did do, but what it did not do.

One of things they did not do is listen to the people who have been in Oberlin awhile and understand things like this. So, it’s not “Woke and Broke,” so much as “Dumb and Dumber.”

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But what about the locals, like your people in the LBL, who got screwed? I guess they were supposed to be happy with LBJ's welfare programs.

The folks living between the rivers didn't like Native American Indians, until they learned their American government could do to them what it did to the First Nation Peoples.

As a result those driven out from between the rivers, and later generations, don't tend to trust or like government.

Christians should be that way. I know Paul said all governments are ordained of God. But writing to Rome, I think he said that to keep the Roman authorities from getting riled at him for converting the pagans away from worshiping their gods.

Besides, maybe God ordained governments back then, but not now, here in America, where our democratic system of government determines who our leaders are.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

The folks living between the rivers didn't like Native American Indians, until they learned their American government could do to them what it did to the First Nation Peoples.

As a result those driven out from between the rivers, and later generations, don't tend to trust or like government.

Christians should be that way. I know Paul said all governments are ordained of God. But writing to Rome, I think he said that to keep the Roman authorities from getting riled at him for converting the pagans away from worshiping their gods.

Besides, maybe God ordained governments back then, but not now, here in America, where our democratic system of government determines who our leaders are.

In the days of Daniel Boone anyone could try to live in a world disconnected from human government. Those days are gone. We have billions of people. Not thousands or millions. You cannot live apart from an organized society, and regardless of the structure of that organization there will be a "government".

Unbeknownst to most people they leave over 200 digital footprints each day. There is no anonymity, no independence.

Government is essential, yet look how disappointing most leaders are. Dictators manufacture a story, so they may seem like a "great leader" at the time, only for historians to later reveal the little man behind the curtain.

The real problem we have is not designing the constitution, but finding the leaders. We assume that if we have a good enough constitution then the people don't matter, yet the last 200 years has proved this is false.

This of course is the point of the NT. In the gospels we learn who the Lord is, and in the epistles we learn who the servants are.

[ZNPaaneah]

I think we would be better off if instead of dividing the state up into districts that vote for different representatives every person in the State should get to vote and the 2 Senators that get the most votes, as well as the 10 representatives that get the most votes (if the State is electing 10) get in. Doing this would effectively weaken the two party system because it would be easier for people with a specific agenda like environment, balanced budget, or abortion to get elected. It would make it easier to get the government to work because creating temporary coalitions over various legislation would be easier. It also means people would feel like their vote is being counted.

Their is no reason to do it the way we do now other than to establish a two party system. That two party system is the cause of all kinds of rancor and it makes it easier for the corporate oligarchy's an opportunity to control our govt.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

In the days of Daniel Boone anyone could try to live in a world disconnected from human government. Those days are gone. We have billions of people. Not thousands or millions. You cannot live apart from an organized society, and regardless of the structure of that organization there will be a "government".

Unbeknownst to most people they leave over 200 digital footprints each day. There is no anonymity, no independence.

Government is essential, yet look how disappointing most leaders are. Dictators manufacture a story, so they may seem like a "great leader" at the time, only for historians to later reveal the little man behind the curtain.

The real problem we have is not designing the constitution, but finding the leaders. We assume that if we have a good enough constitution then the people don't matter, yet the last 200 years has proved this is false.

This of course is the point of the NT. In the gospels we learn who the Lord is, and in the epistles we learn who the servants are.

Seems the worse people in politics always succeed.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I think we would be better off if instead of dividing the state up into districts that vote for different representatives every person in the State should get to vote and the 2 Senators that get the most votes, as well as the 10 representatives that get the most votes (if the State is electing 10) get in. Doing this would effectively weaken the two party system because it would be easier for people with a specific agenda like environment, balanced budget, or abortion to get elected. It would make it easier to get the government to work because creating temporary coalitions over various legislation would be easier. It also means people would feel like their vote is being counted.

Their is no reason to do it the way we do now other than to establish a two party system. That two party system is the cause of all kinds of rancor and it makes it easier for the corporate oligarchy's an opportunity to control our govt.

The two party system is just a tag-team.

[ZNPaaneah]

Keith Raniere Nxivm trial: Why it's so hard to stop a cult

There is a trial in NY for a sex cult. One of the key pillars holding this thing up is legal abortions. Women enslaved and abused were also required to get abortions. Clearly abortion should not be "no questions asked". Anyone who has pushed that idea needs to feel responsibility for enabling this kind of abuse.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Keith Raniere Nxivm trial: Why it's so hard to stop a cult

There is a trial in NY for a sex cult. One of the key pillars holding this thing up is legal abortions. Women enslaved and abused were also required to get abortions. Clearly abortion should not be "no questions asked". Anyone who has pushed that idea needs to feel responsibility for enabling this kind of abuse.

Why women would fall for Raniere to the point of being branded with a wood burning tool.

With cults of all kinds out there, it makes me very concerned for the young ones growing up in this world today. Specially those growing up in cults, like the local church.

It's no surprise to me that Raniere forced the women he impregnated to get an abortion. Even those legislating against abortion do that to their mistresses.

[ZNPaaneah]

I figured out a Christian way to resolve the entire death penalty debate. Every single person convicted of a crime that gets a life sentence should be given the option to choose the death penalty. That would be consistent with the golden rule -- do unto others as you would have them do to you. I would want the option.

If I was ever convicted of a crime falsely and given life imprisonment I would definitely choose the death penalty. Once you are on death row you are given many more appeals, free legal help and generally scientists and others will assist in your defense pro bono as well. It would give you the best chance to exonerate yourself.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I figured out a Christian way to resolve the entire death penalty debate. Every single person convicted of a crime that gets a life sentence should be given the option to choose the death penalty. That would be consistent with the golden rule -- do unto others as you would have them do to you. I would want the option.

If I was ever convicted of a crime falsely and given life imprisonment I would definitely choose the death penalty. Once you are on death row you are given many more appeals, free legal help and generally scientists and others will assist in your defense pro bono as well. It would give you the best chance to exonerate yourself.

From a Christian Biblical literalistic point of view, if the death penalty was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for anybody.

[Ohio]

Great article exposing untold lies about Palestine.

The Myth and Fraud That There Ever Was an Arab Country or People Called ‘Palestine’

(Part One of Two)

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Great article exposing untold lies about Palestine.

The Myth and Fraud That There Ever Was an Arab Country or People Called ‘Palestine’

(Part One of Two)

The real myth is that there never was a Palestine :

Joel 3:4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of Palestine? will ye render me a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I return your recompence upon your own head;

[awareness]

2020 Dems appeal to an 'imaginary god created in their own minds,' Robert Jeffress says

"it is a “godless party” looking to an “imaginary God.”"

“But the truth is that when you talk about righteousness and unrighteousness. It is becoming clearer and clearer that the Democrat Party has truly become a godless party. It is a godless party.”

“You have seen lately, in fact even this week, that the Democrats are realizing that they have a God problem in connecting with voters,” he continued. “They don’t want to completely write-off faith voters, so they have hired this week a faith outreach director.”

Speaking about Harkins, Jeffress called him a “Trump-hating pastor” that comes from a “liberal seminary that is filled with liberal professors who couldn’t find God if their life depended on it.”

https://www.christianpost.com/news/2...ress-says.html

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

2020 Dems appeal to an 'imaginary god created in their own minds,' Robert Jeffress says

"it is a “godless party” looking to an “imaginary God.”"

“But the truth is that when you talk about righteousness and unrighteousness. It is becoming clearer and clearer that the Democrat Party has truly become a godless party. It is a godless party.”

“You have seen lately, in fact even this week, that the Democrats are realizing that they have a God problem in connecting with voters,” he continued. “They don’t want to completely write-off faith voters, so they have hired this week a faith outreach director.”

Speaking about Harkins, Jeffress called him a “Trump-hating pastor” that comes from a “liberal seminary that is filled with liberal professors who couldn’t find God if their life depended on it.”

The Democratic Party which gave us slavery, resisted emancipation, protect the slaughter of the unborn, the KKK, the extermination of the innocent unborn, took the Bible out of schools, promoting trans-non-binary genders, etc. wants to have an "appearance of godliness?"

Preacher Buttigige is not working for them? Their own constituents are so easily fooled, they must think the same of all Christians. Hey, look folks, Trump may not be a Putin Puppet, but he's still a sinner!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Democratic Party which gave us slavery, resisted emancipation, protect the slaughter of the unborn, the KKK, the extermination of the innocent unborn, took the Bible out of schools, promoting trans-non-binary genders, etc. wants to have an "appearance of godliness?"

Preacher Buttigige is not working for them? Their own constituents are so easily fooled, they must think the same of all Christians. Hey, look folks, Trump may not be a Putin Puppet, but he's still a sinner!

AOC is calling the camps on the Mexican border "concentration camps" and likening them to the death camps created by Hitler. Why? Because they are overcrowded and not sufficiently stocked and staffed.

So for 2 years we see the Democrats kick and scream that there is no need for any additional funds for the border, and then they swing from that position to they are overcrowded concentration camps. This is not governing.

We are now listening to 16+ wannabe candidates and their key policies. Has any of them discussed our education system in this country? We are now 40th in a comparison of other school systems. How is anyone going to take this country seriously when we are 40th? We have learned from the countries who are in the top 5 what works. Finland and Poland have both risen to the top by doing one thing, requiring very high standards for anyone wishing to be a teacher. In order to get these teachers they have to pay more in salaries, but they don't pay more per kid than we do in the US. Instead we pay all our money for computers, smart boards and other electronic gadgets.

No, the big issue for the Democrats is to complain about the border without any solution recommended. They also make a lot of noise about climate change again without a solution. If the US made a major push for Fusion similar to our space program or effort to build the highways, then that could be seen as a solution. But no, the only ones willing to make suggestions are recommending firing 80,000 people and changing the lightbulbs.

[Ohio]

What goes around comes around.

Biden attacked Trump as a racist, white supremacist.

Kamala Harris attacked Biden, perhaps landing a death blow, for not supporting busing policies and working with Southern Democrats who supported segregation laws.

Now we learn that Kamala Harris G-Grandpa was a serious slave owner.

Oh the hypocrisy!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What goes around comes around.

Biden attacked Trump as a racist, white supremacist.

Kamala Harris attacked Biden, perhaps landing a death blow, for not supporting busing policies and working with Southern Democrats who supported segregation laws.

Now we learn that Kamala Harris G-Grandpa was a serious slave owner.

Oh the hypocrisy!

The more you know about them the less you like them. Biden's name recognition was high, he scored very well on early polls, but misstep after misstep and some polls have him 4th already.

Bernie was the flavor du jour last election, now he's third. Why? People know him better.

Kamala Harris has meteoric rise, but as we get to know her will that be a meteoric fall?

Warren looked stellar last election, but after learning of her bogus claim of being a native american and using that to get into Harvard, I have soured on her. I suspect many others will sour on her as well if she is put under intense scrutiny.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The more you know about them the less you like them. Biden's name recognition was high, he scored very well on early polls, but misstep after misstep and some polls have him 4th already.

Bernie was the flavor du jour last election, now he's third. Why? People know him better.

Kamala Harris has meteoric rise, but as we get to know her will that be a meteoric fall?

Warren looked stellar last election, but after learning of her bogus claim of being a native american and using that to get into Harvard, I have soured on her. I suspect many others will sour on her as well if she is put under intense scrutiny.

On top of all that is the "woke" LEFT constantly looking for their next take down on TwitterVerse.

If the economy continues its steady course, Trump will win. If the economy crashes like 2008, we will get a hard-core socialist with House and Senate Dems. This time there will not be enough Quantitative Easement to save the world.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

On top of all that is the "woke" LEFT constantly looking for their next take down on TwitterVerse.

If the economy continues its steady course, Trump will win. If the economy crashes like 2008, we will get a hard-core socialist with House and Senate Dems. This time there will not be enough Quantitative Easement to save the world.

"Hard core socialist" the only one campaigning would be Bernie Sanders (can we restrict our discussion to the candidates getting double digits in the polls). I am all for his Medicare for all and free college tuition.

High school was made free because we realized no one could get a job without it. Sending kids to high school has paid for itself many times over in higher tax revenue. Well, if you needed a HS education in the 50s today you need a college education. We have fallen 2-3 years behind the rest of the world in education and are now 40th in the world. Free college would be an overnight way to level the playing field.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

"Hard core socialist" the only one campaigning would be Bernie Sanders (can we restrict our discussion to the candidates getting double digits in the polls). I am all for his Medicare for all and free college tuition.

So you draw the line when it comes to guaranteed income, new green deal, open borders, abolishing ICE/CBP, releasing half the prisoners, eliminating income inequality, reparations for blacks, ending all fossil fuels, free health care for illegal aliens but not white people, etc.

Bernie is not a "Hard core socialist" but a dyed in the wool commie. Check his history. Others are fast becoming wannabee clones.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So you draw the line when it comes to guaranteed income, new green deal, open borders, abolishing ICE/CBP, releasing half the prisoners, eliminating income inequality, reparations for blacks, ending all fossil fuels, free health care for illegal aliens but not white people, etc.

Bernie is not a "Hard core socialist" but a dyed in the wool commie. Check his history. Others are fast becoming wannabee clones.

Which of the 4 (Biden, Harris, Warren or Sanders) supports any of these things?

Did it ever occur to you that having 24 people running for the Democratic nomination is not something the Democrats want but rather something the Republicans want? Having someone argue for reparations is something the Republicans will support knowing it will scare a large amount of the population to vote for the Republican. AOC is the best thing that could happen for Trump. Likewise some of the crack pots running for office -- clearly scaring people into voting for Trump.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Which of the 4 (Biden, Harris, Warren or Sanders) supports any of these things?

To varying degrees, they all support all of these policies. Biden, the so-called moderate, has given up on Obama era policies to "catch up with the pack" or be shamed into oblivion. Note how he flip-flopped a few times over the Hyde Amend. The Twitter Mob runs the Democratic Party.

Did it ever occur to you that having 24 people running for the Democratic nomination is not something the Democrats want but rather something the Republicans want? Having someone argue for reparations is something the Republicans will support knowing it will scare a large amount of the population to vote for the Republican. AOC is the best thing that could happen for Trump. Likewise some of the crack pots running for office -- clearly scaring people into voting for Trump.

4 years ago the Dems mocked the Republicans for having 17 candidates. So how could that be an issue?

The cry for reparations is growing as each candidate vies for the beloved Al Sharpton endorsement.

AOC is simply the voice of the Left. Some say she is running the Party. She is the big city pretty face that the Left loves. If you see her as being a Democratic anomaly, then you are missing the message. Look at her recent visit to the border. She lies, gets away with smearing border agents, fabricates stories, and distorts the situation. But she gets a free pass from the media. She is hardly a "crack pot." She is the ambassador for the deceptive Media/Democrats/Leftists. How is she any different from those who lied about and smeared Trump as a Russian agent for 2 years and running. Then when the truth emerges, they have no ears to hear.

Did you hear about all the death threats aimed at that 8 year old "Mini AOC" from YouTube? Lie and mock Trump OK, but mock AOC and we will dox you, and threaten your family.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

To varying degrees, they all support all of these policies. Biden, the so-called moderate, has given up on Obama era policies to "catch up with the pack" or be shamed into oblivion. Note how he flip-flopped a few times over the Hyde Amend. The Twitter Mob runs the Democratic Party.

None of those "issues" is going anywhere. It is nothing but hot air.

Originally Posted by Ohio

4 years ago the Dems mocked the Republicans for having 17 candidates. So how could that be an issue?

I suspect that the republicans are supporting some of the Democratic candidates to help bloody the frontrunners. Even the chairman of the Democratic committee said the same.

Originally Posted by Ohio

The cry for reparations is growing as each candidate vies for the beloved Al Sharpton endorsement.

Because they are fools. Nothing scares the middle class more than idiotic suggestions like that. Already there is serious push back on having quotas for colleges.

Originally Posted by Ohio

AOC is simply the voice of the Left. Some say she is running the Party. She is the big city pretty face that the Left loves. If you see her as being a Democratic anomaly, then you are missing the message. Look at her recent visit to the border. She lies, gets away with smearing border agents, fabricates stories, and distorts the situation. But she gets a free pass from the media. She is hardly a "crack pot." She is the ambassador for the deceptive Media/Democrats/Leftists. How is she any different from those who lied about and smeared Trump as a Russian agent for 2 years and running. Then when the truth emerges, they have no ears to hear.

Yes, compared to Pelosi, Clinton, and Mitch she is definitely a pretty face. Other than that she has been carried away with her fame confusing being a media darling with being a representative of the people. I'll tell you her approval in NY has taken a hit. I doubt she'll be reelected.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did you hear about all the death threats aimed at that 8 year old "Mini AOC" from YouTube? Lie and mock Trump OK, but mock AOC and we will dox you, and threaten your family.

Nope, didn't hear.

[ZNPaaneah]

Politics
AOC Releases Plan to Address Immigration Crisis

https://www.yahoo.com/news/aoc-relea...221711165.html

This is why I say she is an idiot.

Her plan:

1. Reinstate humanitarian aid -- So it is too expensive to build a wall, but you have unlimited funds for humanitarian aid?

2. Refugee crisis is tied to climate change -- oh that is great. So before we can address thousands of refugees coming across the border the last few months we need to first solve global climate change?

3. Repeal the laws criminalizing illegal entry into the US -- does she work for the cartels? ISIS? who does she represent? I bet Texas, New Mexico and California are going to love someone from NY telling them this.

4. Finally, lets get a jobs creation program going. Wow, people in NY are going to love this. You put the kibosh on the local jobs creation program in your district but now you want to get huge tax funds to create jobs for immigrants.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Politics
AOC Releases Plan to Address Immigration Crisis

https://www.yahoo.com/news/aoc-relea...221711165.html

This is why I say she is an idiot.

Her plan:

1. Reinstate humanitarian aid -- So it is too expensive to build a wall, but you have unlimited funds for humanitarian aid?

2. Refugee crisis is tied to climate change -- oh that is great. So before we can address thousands of refugees coming across the border the last few months we need to first solve global climate change?

3. Repeal the laws criminalizing illegal entry into the US -- does she work for the cartels? ISIS? who does she represent? I bet Texas, New Mexico and California are going to love someone from NY telling them this.

4. Finally, lets get a jobs creation program going. Wow, people in NY are going to love this. You put the kibosh on the local jobs creation program in your district but now you want to get huge tax funds to create jobs for immigrants.

Who does AOC represent? The growing progressive wing of the Democratic Party. What used to be a lone voice named Bernie Sanders has grown fast, fueled by Trump hate, manufactured racism, income inequality, white guilt, and a false belief in the benefits of socialism/communism.

ZNP, she is not an idiot. She represents the future. Her popularity is growing. Many believe what she says, and hang on her every word. One day her demagoguery will be leading the Party. Forget about any notions of honesty or integrity, she is the face and voice of the future. Pelosi is hanging on with her finger nails.

Obviously you don't agree with her, but you don't belong to her generation.

Long-time Democrats, asleep at the remote, believing ancient maxims like "the party of the working man," are complicit. All we need is the economic collapse at the end of this credit super-cycle, and totalitarianism comes home.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Who does AOC represent? The growing progressive wing of the Democratic Party. What used to be a lone voice named Bernie Sanders has grown fast, fueled by Trump hate, manufactured racism, income inequality, white guilt, and a false belief in the benefits of socialism/communism.

ZNP, she is not an idiot. She represents the future. Her popularity is growing. Many believe what she says, and hang on her every word. One day her demagoguery will be leading the Party. Forget about any notions of honesty or integrity, she is the face and voice of the future. Pelosi is hanging on with her finger nails.

Obviously you don't agree with her, but you don't belong to her generation.

Long-time Democrats, asleep at the remote, believing ancient maxims like "the party of the working man," are complicit. All we need is the economic collapse at the end of this credit super-cycle, and totalitarianism comes home.

Let's assume you are correct. This would be a result of the majority of Americans "hanging on her every word". This is the strongest argument I can imagine for treating the education gap seriously.

[awareness]

News Flash !!!!

Marianne Williamson's White House bid is inspired by a new-age, mystical 'scripture' written by a Manhattan doctor in the 1960s who thought she was channeling revelations from Jesus

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ical-text.html

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

News Flash !!!!

Marianne Williamson's White House bid is inspired by a new-age, mystical 'scripture' written by a Manhattan doctor in the 1960s who thought she was channeling revelations from Jesus

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ical-text.html

News Flash !!!!
24 candidates are a sure sign of 15+ bogus candidates. To reduce the unnecessary aggravation that these bogus candidates are designed to induce can we all agree to not discuss the bogus ones. Any candidate that is not getting at least 10% on a Democratic poll are clearly not on a path that leads to nomination.

The US was suckered in the last election, are we really incapable of learning from that?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

News Flash !!!!

Marianne Williamson's White House bid is inspired by a new-age, mystical 'scripture' written by a Manhattan doctor in the 1960s who thought she was channeling revelations from Jesus

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ical-text.html

I like her. I was feeling the love. Marianne for Prez.

I'm sure bro. awareness will vote for her too!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I like her. I was feeling the love. Marianne for Prez.

I'm sure bro. awareness will vote for her too!

Not if she's guided by the Course in Miracles, which she claims.

In Ft. Lauderdale I was friends with a group dedicated to the Course in Miracles. They hounded me to get into it. I read the first volume. But I recognized that they were acting like Bonobo monkeys, including freely jumping around into adultery and fornication between each other.

But since the Course emphasizes forgiveness, I guess they were putting it into practice, by forgiving each other. Haha

I didn't see any miracles. So I don't think much of the corny Course in Miracles ... nor this loony New Ager Marianne.

I'm not sure if you really like her, or if you're just being hyperbolic. She's a crazy lefty.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

I didn't see any miracles. So I don't think much of the corny Course in Miracles ... nor this loony New Ager Marianne.

I'm not sure if you really like her, or if you're just being hyperbolic. She's a crazy lefty.

All Democrats are crazy Lefty's, even creepy Uncle Joe. Did you see? He did it again.

But with Marianne I feel the love. Let's call her Miracle Marianne. They gave Trump no chance in the last election, so don't write her out. They said Biden was a shoe-in for this election, and he is fading fast.

Marianne is honest and speaks from the heart, a couple of traits sorely lacking with the other 2 dozen candidates, and btw Trump's strongest feature. I'm thinking about registering Democrat so I can vote for her.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

All Democrats are crazy Lefty's, even creepy Uncle Joe. Did you see? He did it again.

But with Marianne I feel the love. Let's call her Miracle Marianne. They gave Trump no chance in the last election, so don't write her out. They said Biden was a shoe-in for this election, and he is fading fast.

Marianne is honest and speaks from the heart, a couple of traits sorely lacking with the other 2 dozen candidates, and btw Trump's strongest feature. I'm thinking about registering Democrat so I can vote for her.

In the last election the Russians and others manipulated the naive to divide the US against each other. Trying to portray "All Democrats are crazy lefty's" is just more of the same. Are we really so naive to fall for the same thing again?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm thinking about registering Democrat so I can vote for her.

But aren't the democrats to blame for Trump saying that the Continental Army grounded the airports back during the Revolution?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

In the last election the Russians and others manipulated the naive to divide the US against each other. Trying to portray "All Democrats are crazy lefty's" is just more of the same. Are we really so naive to fall for the same thing again?

By voting for the Democrats they will get a socialist/communist, whether they realize it or not. What I find to be really stupid is all the wealthy liberals -- academia, sports and hollywood stars, coastline elites, silicon valley, etc. -- promoting progressive ideology like income equality. Don't they realize that means they lose everything? What do you think happened to Cuba. Venezuela, Ussr amd her satellites, etc?

With capitalism, we have rich and poor, and everything in between. With socialism, there is only poor -- true income equality! They will look back and long for the good old days of Trumpism.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

By voting for the Democrats they will get a socialist/communist, whether they realize it or not. What I find to be really stupid is all the wealthy liberals -- academia, sports and hollywood stars, coastline elites, silicon valley, etc. -- promoting progressive ideology like income equality. Don't they realize that means they lose everything? What do you think happened to Cuba. Venezuela, Ussr amd her satellites, etc?

With capitalism, we have rich and poor, and everything in between. With socialism, there is only poor -- true income equality! They will look back and long for the good old days of Trumpism.

Yeah, just look at Canada and Britain, and all the other very happy democratic socialistic nations.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

By voting for the Democrats they will get a socialist/communist, whether they realize it or not. What I find to be really stupid is all the wealthy liberals -- academia, sports and hollywood stars, coastline elites, silicon valley, etc. -- promoting progressive ideology like income equality. Don't they realize that means they lose everything? What do you think happened to Cuba. Venezuela, Ussr amd her satellites, etc?

With capitalism, we have rich and poor, and everything in between. With socialism, there is only poor -- true income equality! They will look back and long for the good old days of Trumpism.

If you look at the thread on the education gap we don't have "equality". We have a system designed for a class system. 30 years ago you might be able to argue that it was done through ignorance. Not anymore. The system is clearly designed to take the money earmarked to educate kids and instead build up our computer industry. The result is to have a nice looking school that is populated and administered by the poorly educated. That is only true of the inner city, the suburbs and private schools don't get away with that. They are judged by results.

But the inner city has immigrant parents and parents who never went to college and single parent mothers and basically just a whole lot of parents intimidated by school and afraid to respond or lacking the fundamental understanding to respond. So we have parents who will make a big complaint about a kid failing, but don't care that the kids are being given an elementary school education.

So these kids go through this system and then discover they can't go to college, they can't get a job that pays a living wage, and so inherently they know something is wrong, just don't know what it is. Now either those of us who do know what the problem is will solve it, or else these uneducated masses will become the majority and elect AOC.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If you look at the thread on the education gap we don't have "equality". We have a system designed for a class system. 30 years ago you might be able to argue that it was done through ignorance. Not anymore. The system is clearly designed to take the money earmarked to educate kids and instead build up our computer industry. The result is to have a nice looking school that is populated and administered by the poorly educated. That is only true of the inner city, the suburbs and private schools don't get away with that. They are judged by results.

But the inner city has immigrant parents and parents who never went to college and single parent mothers and basically just a whole lot of parents intimidated by school and afraid to respond or lacking the fundamental understanding to respond. So we have parents who will make a big complaint about a kid failing, but don't care that the kids are being given an elementary school education.

So these kids go through this system and then discover they can't go to college, they can't get a job that pays a living wage, and so inherently they know something is wrong, just don't know what it is. Now either those of us who do know what the problem is will solve it, or else these uneducated masses will become the majority and elect AOC.

We will never have equality. That is science fiction. Look at children from the same family. They don't have equality, yet they had the same parents, same home, same opportunities, same education, yet often have vastly different outcomes. " Equality" is the opium of the Left. And the only way so-called "equality" can occur is in a totalitarian regime, where the state decides your life, and those who don't like it get sent to Siberia or one of Kim's prison cities. These are the "lucky ones" who get to live.

What we should strive for is freedom -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Look at Dr. Ben Carson. He rose from the ghetto to pioneer neuro-surgery. So-called "equality" would have suppressed him.

Busing and affirmative opportunity were supposed to solve this problem in America. It may have opened doors for some, but the problems got worse. The real problem is broken homes and broken souls. Their kids will nearly always be disadvantaged. Inner city schools fail because inner city homes have failed.

AOC and her ilk will always deceive the masses with their utopian promises. Their tactics just enhance their own gains. Does AOC practice what she preaches? Of course not. Did Al Gore? Obama? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? This list is endless. All of them profiting off the plight of others.

What we really need is Jesus. On a personal level. On a family level.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

We will never have equality. That is science fiction. Look at children from the same family. They don't have equality, yet they had the same parents, same home, same opportunities, same education, yet often have vastly different outcomes. " Equality" is the opium of the Left. And the only way so-called "equality" can occur is in a totalitarian regime, where the state decides your life, and those who don't like it get sent to Siberia or one of Kim's prison cities. These are the "lucky ones" who get to live.

What we should strive for is freedom -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Look at Dr. Ben Carson. He rose from the ghetto to pioneer neuro-surgery. So-called "equality" would have suppressed him.

Busing and affirmative opportunity were supposed to solve this problem in America. It may have opened doors for some, but the problems got worse. The real problem is broken homes and broken souls. Their kids will nearly always be disadvantaged. Inner city schools fail because inner city homes have failed.

AOC and her ilk will always deceive the masses with their utopian promises. Their tactics just enhance their own gains. Does AOC practice what she preaches? Of course not. Did Al Gore? Obama? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? This list is endless. All of them profiting off the plight of others.

What we really need is Jesus. On a personal level. On a family level.

OK, so you didn't read the thread on education gap, got it.

Poland has all of the problems that our inner cities have and yet they have completely turned their schools around from worst to the first tier. They did that without paying more money than we pay.

There is no deceptive utopian promise, simply follow in the steps of those who have already paved the way.

Since you don't like the term equality, lets use your term of freedom. Putting 15 million kids in public school into a system that is programmed into creating working drones with absolutely no prospect to being anything more than a person who works at the minimum wage doing the jobs no one else wants, that is not freedom, that is slavery.

[Ohio]

Best of Mini AOC final video

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

OK, so you didn't read the thread on education gap, got it.

Poland has all of the problems that our inner cities have and yet they have completely turned their schools around from worst to the first tier. They did that without paying more money than we pay.

There is no deceptive utopian promise, simply follow in the steps of those who have already paved the way.

Since you don't like the term equality, lets use your term of freedom. Putting 15 million kids in public school into a system that is programmed into creating working drones with absolutely no prospect to being anything more than a person who works at the minimum wage doing the jobs no one else wants, that is not freedom, that is slavery.

Have you read the "dumbing down of America?" The quality of our educational system is inversely proportional to the amount of money we spend.

Read some of those who say the same thing, like Thomas Sowell or D'Nish D'Sousa. Our educational system is working exactly as planned. It is designed to produce slaves. Like I said, working as planned.

Poland is doing the right things, which includes rejecting the EU leftist policies.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Best of Mini AOC final video

She gave herself 20 likes.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Have you read the "dumbing down of America?" The quality of our educational system is inversely proportional to the amount of money we spend.

Read some of those who say the same thing, like Thomas Sowell or D'Nish D'Sousa. Our educational system is working exactly as planned. It is designed to produce slaves. Like I said, working as planned.

Poland is doing the right things, which includes rejecting the EU leftist policies.

Yes. The correlation between spending money and the dumbing down is because greedy corporations have attached themselves to the school system like blood sucking leeches. Yes it is designed to produce slaves.

It is time for those of us who are aware of this to do something about it.

[Weighingin]

Originally Posted by Ohio

By voting for the Democrats they will get a socialist/communist, whether they realize it or not. What I find to be really stupid is all the wealthy liberals -- academia, sports and hollywood stars, coastline elites, silicon valley, etc. -- promoting progressive ideology like income equality. Don't they realize that means they lose everything? What do you think happened to Cuba. Venezuela, Ussr amd her satellites, etc?

With capitalism, we have rich and poor, and everything in between. With socialism, there is only poor -- true income equality! They will look back and long for the good old days of Trumpism.

As I read the comments here, a thought occurred to me that perhaps the wealthy libs see socialism as inevitable. They are hoping to make a deal to keep their riches when the socs come into power. So they react when there's a complaint from lefties. I believe we're aware of these examples:
1. Nike withdrew shoes because CP said the flag on them represents oppressive times.
2.Laura Ingraham makes fun of that anti-gun student. Companies withdraw their sponsorship.

Apparently, they feel they will lose a lot of customers which affect their bottom line.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Yes. The correlation between spending money and the dumbing down is because greedy corporations have attached themselves to the school system like blood sucking leeches. Yes it is designed to produce slaves.

It is time for those of us who are aware of this to do something about it.

I seem to remember a song, "I fought the law, and the law won."

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I seem to remember a song, "I fought the law, and the law won."

I recall when some felt their widows were being neglected in the daily ministration the church rectified that.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

News Flash !!!!
24 candidates are a sure sign of 15+ bogus candidates. To reduce the unnecessary aggravation that these bogus candidates are designed to induce can we all agree to not discuss the bogus ones. Any candidate that is not getting at least 10% on a Democratic poll are clearly not on a path that leads to nomination.

The US was suckered in the last election, are we really incapable of learning from that?

Surprise, surprise -- Trump reaches career-high approval, yet faces a range of re-election risks: Poll

As the democratic party trots out 24 looney candidates proposing $1,000 a month per person, opening wide the border, green new deal, reparations, or racist policies designed to help blacks and no one else, guess what, Trump's approval rating goes up.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The US was suckered in the last election, are we really incapable of learning from that?

Other than being fooled by all the pre-election polls, how was the US suckered in the last election?

Or are you referring to the midterms, when pending Collusion Indictments from the Mueller investigation skewed the results? Real election tampering I might add!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Other than being fooled by all the pre-election polls, how was the US suckered in the last election?

Or are you referring to the midterms, when pending Collusion Indictments from the Mueller investigation skewed the results? Real election tampering I might add!

Fake news abounded in the last election, often propagated on these social media sites like Facebook. This in turn has riled up the populace creating a much bigger divide than would otherwise exist. Lefties accusing conservatives of being fascists. Conservatives accusing lefties of being communists.

I think Russia had two objectives -- foment discontent, and attack Hillary Clinton.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Fake news abounded in the last election, often propagated on these social media sites like Facebook. This in turn has riled up the populace creating a much bigger divide than would otherwise exist. Lefties accusing conservatives of being fascists. Conservatives accusing lefties of being communists.

I think Russia had two objectives -- foment discontent, and attack Hillary Clinton.

It makes no sense that Russia would attack either Bill or Hilary Clinton.

Secretary Hilary spearheaded (remember the "reset" button) the Uranium One transfer of 20% of our Uranium reserves to Russia. The entire Deep State was willing to commit multiple crimes in order to protect Hilary and get her elected.

Your conjecture is not supported by any facts, other than Putin himself wanted to see Trump elected because he is a "businessman" -- standard KGB dissembling.

[awareness]

Only racists are fine with a racist president.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Only racists are fine with a racist president.

Not sure I would agree, but Obama definitely was the most racist president ever. He made a person's color, not the content of their character, the most important feature about them.

20 Reasons Why Obama Was the Most Divisive President In History


Obama 'most racist president' in American history

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Not sure I would agree, but Obama definitely was the most racist president ever. He made a person's color, not the content of their character, the most important feature about them.

20 Reasons Why Obama Was the Most Divisive President In History


Obama 'most racist president' in American history

Yeah, but Trump isn't divisive when he drags out the four horsewomen of the apocalypse against four congresswomen of color.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...51068431294464

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yeah, but Trump isn't divisive when he drags out the four horsewomen of the apocalypse against four congresswomen of color.

Since when did the white Euro-American man abrogate his responsibility to challenge the stupid ideas of Democratic Socialist politicians, these so-called "women of color?"

This is what politics and the media have made America today . . .

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Since when did the white Euro-American man abrogate his responsibility to challenge the stupid ideas of Democratic Socialist politicians, these so-called "women of color?"

This is what politics and the media have made America today . . .

But he really didn't challenge their ideas. He just demeaned them personally. Implied that they were not really from here and told them to "go back."

Well, I don't think any of us are "from here." I admit to having something like 1/16th Cherokee, but that hardly counts. More like a bunch of English, Scottish, Irish, and German.

And how do you conclude that the "responsibility" to challenge the ideas of anyone was exercised in our Twitter-in-Chief's nasty outburst? I read nothing in it explaining what was wrong with their positions. Only a bunch of ad hominems.

I will be the first to say that I am no fan of their positions. But I am not much of a fan of Trump's either. At this point, there are no conservatives. Both sides are happy to spend our great-grandchildren's life savings on a better meal today. The only difference is what kind of meal to buy. A right-wing meal or a left-wing meal. Spending deficits are neither increased by the Democrats nor reduced by the Republicans. They both spend beyond today's budget on things that will not last to the end of the year. They only banter about what to borrow and spend on.

I'm looking for someone who will at least admit that the deficit spending has to stop. I might consider voting for someone with the ideals of that Democratic squad if they would at least attempt to do it without continuing the race toward bankruptcy. Of course they will not. And the Republicans (of which I am still tentatively a part) seem to be doing no better. Just spending too much on the kinds of things that right-wing people would like to have.

Someone (a conservative) has suggest that in 10 years the Republican party will look back to this time and say "what the #3|| were we thinking?!?!?"

[Ohio]

These are the ideas Trump challenged.

Perhaps you just missed them.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I'm looking for someone who will at least admit that the deficit spending has to stop. I might consider voting for someone with the ideals of that Democratic squad if they would at least attempt to do it without continuing the race toward bankruptcy. Of course they will not. And the Republicans (of which I am still tentatively a part) seem to be doing no better. Just spending too much on the kinds of things that right-wing people would like to have.

Excuse me ... hmmm ... have you been to Venezuela lately?

Until Hugo Chavez and folks like the "Squad" took over, Venezuela was the jewel of Central and South America.

Their message is simple -- Capitalism is evil because of income inequality.

They are right about one thing -- Capitalism has rich folks.

What they don't tell you is that Capitalism's "Poor" are still far richer than Socialism's "Rich."

Poor people in the USA can still own iPhones, designer shoes, guns, cars, and eat fast food.

Rich people in socialist countries spend all day in line to get a loaf of stale bread.

But you "might consider voting for someone with the ideals of that Democratic squad."

Get to know Beto!

[Ohio]

[ZNPaaneah]

Glad to see we are all wiser than we were a couple years ago, not going to let wedge issues and much ado over nothing divide us. Nope, older and wiser, that is who we are.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Well at least "Lock her up" has been replace with "Send her back." Lock her up was worn out and outdated long ago.

But that reveals how ignorant his cult followers are. Cuz all the 4 horsewomen of color are citizens (Omar longer than Melania - send her back to her dung hole communist country!). So where is back? Ocasio is from NY, same as Trump.

All this reveals that not only are his cult followers ignorant, but so is their personality cult leader.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Glad to see we are all wiser than we were a couple years ago, not going to let wedge issues and much ado over nothing divide us. Nope, older and wiser, that is who we are.

Your "wisdom" is only aimed in one direction.

Wedge issues? Accusing Trump of being a Russian agent. Accusing Trump of obstructing Justice? Accusing Trump of being a Nazi? Accusing Trump of being an anti-semite? This list goes on for 3 years.

Why don't you use your wisdom to stop the Left of their endless false accusations?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your "wisdom" is only aimed in one direction.

Wedge issues? Accusing Trump of being a Russian agent. Accusing Trump of obstructing Justice?

I have said repeatedly I supported the Mueller investigation, and if it concludes that these accusations are not based in verifiable facts, then I support that as well.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Accusing Trump of being a Nazi?

Are you referring to AOC saying the detention camps are "concentration camps". I have called her an idiot and also a hypocrite for saying this and then voting against more money. Or are you referring to the big stink that arose from him claiming he didn't know David Duke? Either a lie or indicative of him being unbelievably naive. Or is this a response to his "good people on both sides"? I consider this a very, very clumsy comment on his part. A murderous jerk had just driven his car into a crowd of people. Sorry, if you want to run for President you have to have certain skills, like how to respond to a PR nightmare.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Accusing Trump of being an anti-semite? This list goes on for 3 years.

Oh, the list goes on a lot longer than 3 years, don't kid yourself. The guy has insulted anyone and everyone throughout his life. You have to expect that what goes around comes around.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why don't you use your wisdom to stop the Left of their endless false accusations?

I am, my point is to stop being played.

Do you really think playing the race card is going to be an effective strategy to beating Trump in 2020? Do you really think having these 4 democrats acting as the face of the party is going to help them win a national election? All of their false accusations just lead to entrenching Trump's base and seriously frightening the swing voters.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I have said repeatedly I supported the Mueller investigation, and if it concludes that these accusations are not based in verifiable facts, then I support that as well.

I just read that Muller took his cell phone into the oval office with Rosenstein the day before he was appointed Special Prosecutor.

He left it there to record Trump and his response when they left. Mueller's entire investigation was predicated on illegal surveillance. He was a prosecutor and a witness in the same case. Standard recusal protocol.

But you supported it. I have a problem with that. Especially after all we have learned.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Are you referring to AOC saying the detention camps are "concentration camps". I have called her an idiot and also a hypocrite for saying this and then voting against more money. Or are you referring to the big stink that arose from him claiming he didn't know David Duke? Either a lie or indicative of him being unbelievably naive. Or is this a response to his "good people on both sides"? I consider this a very, very clumsy comment on his part. A murderous jerk had just driven his car into a crowd of people. Sorry, if you want to run for President you have to have certain skills, like how to respond to a PR nightmare.

I prefer a President who is honest, has the right policies, and fights to accomplish the right things. Obviously your standard was set by Obama, the communicator extraordinaire with a teleprompter in tow.

Trump said there were "good people" on both sides of the confederate monuments debate. That is a perfectly neutral comment to diffuse tension. But the media wants tension, chaos, unrest, violence.

David Duke? If I once heard his name once, does that mean I "know him" too?

But you say nothing about Obama's intimate connections with Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, "I am the true Jesus," and Bill Ayers, Weather Underground, Communist revolutionary.

I rest my case. You hate an honest Patriot, who speaks coarsely to his attackers, and love the "polished" communist muslam orator. OK.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I prefer a President who is honest, has the right policies, and fights to accomplish the right things. Obviously your standard was set by Obama, the communicator extraordinaire with a teleprompter in tow.

Trump said there were "good people" on both sides of the confederate monuments debate. That is a perfectly neutral comment to diffuse tension. But the media wants tension, chaos, unrest, violence.

David Duke? If I once heard his name once, does that mean I "know him" too?

But you say nothing about Obama's intimate connections with Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, "I am the true Jesus," and Bill Ayers, Weather Underground, Communist revolutionary.

I rest my case. You hate an honest Patriot, who speaks coarsely to his attackers, and love the "polished" communist muslam orator. OK.

All just a pile of Roger Ailes bunkum.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I prefer a President who is honest, has the right policies, and fights to accomplish the right things. Obviously your standard was set by Obama, the communicator extraordinaire with a teleprompter in tow.

This is the kind of wild apologetics we saw for WL and Titus Chu. I prefer an honest assessment. I don't make excuses for bullies, or insulting and abusive people. Trump is clearly a bully and an insulting and abusive person. Now if someone is honest but decides they want to vote for him because of his policies I fully support their right to do so.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Trump said there were "good people" on both sides of the confederate monuments debate. That is a perfectly neutral comment to diffuse tension. But the media wants tension, chaos, unrest, violence.

Actually had he said that there were "good people on both sides of the confederate monuments debate" it would have been much less incendiary. That is his problem, he is so vague that people are forced to interpret what he meant. He leaves the door open for the left to put words in his mouth and then those on the right, like you have just done, are also forced to put words in his mouth. That is a major failing for "the leader of the free world".

Originally Posted by Ohio

David Duke? If I once heard his name once, does that mean I "know him" too?

Donald Trump was running for president of the US, he was publicly endorsed by the grand wizard of the KKK, David Duke. He does not have the right to feign ignorance and then wonder why he is being attacked for refusing to denounce the KKK. The KKK is a terrorist organization. If Obama had been endorsed by Osama bin Laden and then claimed to have no knowledge of who that is you would be screaming in outrage. My family was bombed by the KKK. Your comments here are extremely offensive.

Originally Posted by Ohio

But you say nothing about Obama's intimate connections with Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, "I am the true Jesus," and Bill Ayers, Weather Underground, Communist revolutionary.

When it was relevant I did say plenty. The fact that I didn't mention any of it in my last post about the campaign in 2019 is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I rest my case. You hate an honest Patriot, who speaks coarsely to his attackers, and love the "polished" communist muslam orator. OK.

You haven't even made a case that I hate Trump, nor do you have anything to base the assertion that I love Obama. But both points are completely irrelevant. My post was pointing out the stupidity of these 4 democrats to allow themselves to become the face of the Democratic party. Trump is not running against Sanders, or Biden, or Harris, he is running against these 4 trivial congress people, we don't even know if any of them will be reelected.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Actually had he said that there were "good people on both sides of the confederate monuments debate" it would have been much less incendiary. That is his problem, he is so vague that people are forced to interpret what he meant. He leaves the door open for the left to put words in his mouth and then those on the right, like you have just done, are also forced to put words in his mouth. That is a major failing for "the leader of the free world".

This is exactly what he said. Go back and listen to Trump's actual words, rather than the media distortions. Actually Trump was not vague on this subject. The distortions may be, but he was not.

The reason for the discrepancy is simple. I prefer someone who speaks from the heart. You prefer polished script written by expert speech writers, vetted by political experts. Trump says what he means and means what he says. You call that offensive and a major failure.

I prefer his blunt style to the doublespeak demagoguery which tickles the ears. Obama made us endless promises, none of which he ever intended to fulfill because, of course, he was just reading off the teleprompter.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Donald Trump was running for president of the US, he was publicly endorsed by the grand wizard of the KKK, David Duke. He does not have the right to feign ignorance and then wonder why he is being attacked for refusing to denounce the KKK. The KKK is a terrorist organization. If Obama had been endorsed by Osama bin Laden and then claimed to have no knowledge of who that is you would be screaming in outrage. My family was bombed by the KKK. Your comments here are extremely offensive.

Who cares who endorses Trump. Are you serious? How is there a connection with KKK? Have you not studied history? Every KKK official was a Democrat. Your outrage is absurd. That's like condemning me for Hitler's atrocities since my g-father came from Berlin.

I don't care if bin Laden endorsed Obama. Did Obama take his money. Did Obama meet with him. Did Obama endorse him?

Harvey Weinstein was a sleaze who endorsed every Democratic candidate. They took his money. They partied with him. They protected him. What a difference.

Jeffrey Epstein is a pedophile who also endorsed every Democratic candidate. I just read that he is prolly a high-level intelligence source, which explains why he has escaped prosecution for years. Former federal prosecutor Alexander Acosta was apparently told to stand down in order to protect the rich and powerful. Robert Muller and the FBI protected Whitey Bulger the same way.

Sorry, bro, you are making this way too personal.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

My post was pointing out the stupidity of these 4 democrats to allow themselves to become the face of the Democratic party. Trump is not running against Sanders, or Biden, or Harris, he is running against these 4 trivial congress people, we don't even know if any of them will be reelected.

I don't think this is stupidity on their part. These 4 in the "squad" are now defining the Left. They gave us the New Green Deal. AOC's chief of staff made it clear it is not about the environment, but about remaking America. They have the endorsement of almost every candidate, the media, Pelosi, and the DNC. AOC is powerful enough to shame Cuomo and DiBlasio over the Amazon deal.

Trump is right to identify this Squad as the enemy of the American people. Sorry if you can't understand this. Coming from NYC, it should be readily apparent to you.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Who cares who endorses Trump. Are you serious? How is there a connection with KKK? Have you not studied history? Every KKK official was a Democrat. Your outrage is absurd. That's like condemning me for Hitler's atrocities since my g-father came from Berlin.

I don't care if bin Laden endorsed Obama. Did Obama take his money. Did Obama meet with him. Did Obama endorse him?

Harvey Weinstein was a sleaze who endorsed every Democratic candidate. They took his money. They partied with him. They protected him. What a difference.

Jeffrey Epstein is a pedophile who also endorsed every Democratic candidate. I just read that he is prolly a high-level intelligence source, which explains why he has escaped prosecution for years. Former federal prosecutor Alexander Acosta was apparently told to stand down in order to protect the rich and powerful. Robert Muller and the FBI protected Whitey Bulger the same way.

Sorry, bro, you are making this way too personal.

Wow, I never thought this would happen but it is as though the alternate views side of the forum and the regular side have fused into one.

I'm taking this from a post from Aaron #8 my hands are against the false prophets:

It was a clever back-door ruse. "No opinions" meant only my opinion ever got heard. "No Pastor" meant I got to direct everything. "No culture" meant only my culture set group norms. "No ambition" meant only my ambition got validated.

I've mentioned before, how remarkable it was that one speaker gave hundreds and hundreds of messages in front of thousands, and at the end of every message they'd line up at the microphones to congratulate the speaker on his brilliant insights, but did anyone ever come up to the mike and say, "Hey Brother Lee - your point A(2)b doesn't seem to line up with what you taught last winter in the Ezekiel Training"? Or, "Watchman Nee said something quite different here"? No - critique never came out of the assembly, post-message. It was all, validation, validation, validation - what a revelation, that God has given to [us] His people!


Change Trump to WL and it is the same thing! No opinions. Line up at the mic to congratulate Trump. Otherwise we are "absurd" and are one with "pedophiles" and people who protected Whitey Bulger. And when we have an opinion then "we are making this way too personal".

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I don't think this is stupidity on their part. These 4 in the "squad" are now defining the Left. They gave us the New Green Deal. AOC's chief of staff made it clear it is not about the environment, but about remaking America. They have the endorsement of almost every candidate, the media, Pelosi, and the DNC. AOC is powerful enough to shame Cuomo and DiBlasio over the Amazon deal.

Trump is right to identify this Squad as the enemy of the American people. Sorry if you can't understand this. Coming from NYC, it should be readily apparent to you.

I agree that Trump is quite smart to focus his attack on them. It splits the Democratic party and the 4 irrelevant congresspeople become the face of the party. I call them irrelevant because which of them will still be there after 2020? We will see, but if they are all voted out then they are powerless, no longer defining anything, and surely not remaking anything.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I agree that Trump is quite smart to focus his attack on them. It splits the Democratic party and the 4 irrelevant congresspeople become the face of the party. I call them irrelevant because which of them will still be there after 2020? We will see, but if they are all voted out then they are powerless, no longer defining anything, and surely not remaking anything.

We don't know whether 2020 will bring these Four to an end, or whether more will be added to the "squad."

There was a time, not too long ago, when Bernie the communist socialist was a total outlier, but today in the Democratic Party he has pretty much become the norm, albeit an old-white-man, hence he now has three strikes against him. Biden also has the same three strikes against him, and soon will be history.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

We don't know whether 2020 will bring these Four to an end, or whether more will be added to the "squad."

There was a time, not too long ago, when Bernie the communist socialist was a total outlier, but today in the Democratic Party he has pretty much become the norm, albeit an old-white-man, hence he now has three strikes against him. Biden also has the same three strikes against him, and soon will be history.

Medicare for all is a very reasonable solution to the question of how to economically provide all people with health care.

Tuition free college is not nearly as expensive as many assume.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/19/b...e-college.html

The program would surely pay for itself in higher tax revenues over the life of the college graduates.

Do you have an issue with those two policies or is there some other policy he is pushing you have an issue with?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Medicare for all is a very reasonable solution to the question of how to economically provide all people with health care.

Tuition free college is not nearly as expensive as many assume.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/19/b...e-college.html

The program would surely pay for itself in higher tax revenues over the life of the college graduates.

Do you have an issue with those two policies or is there some other policy he is pushing you have an issue with?

Free education cannot guarantee basic literacy, as proven by current HS education. The cost and benefits of free education must be provided to every child on earth, since open borders accompanies these programs.


Same with Medicare for all. Open borders extends these benefits to all mankind. Any projected cost must be multiplied by a couple orders of magnitude. I can't afford health insurance, but it is now available to all immigrants.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Free education cannot guarantee basic literacy, as proven by current HS education. The cost and benefits of free education must be provided to every child on earth, since open borders accompanies these programs.

Education in this country is improving. I work as inner city as you can get and our kids are extremely motivated to go to college. The fact that the inner city education is worse than the suburbs is transparent to all, that is the first step in remedying the problem, identifying it. Likewise, US education as a whole is worse than 40 other countries that don't spend as much as us per capita. That is an issue that can be fixed without costing more money. Finally, if you look at my kids they scored in the top 7% of all NYC schools. That includes schools like Stuyvesant, Bronx HS of science and other nationally ranked schools. But if you look a little deeper, for example let's just look at schools where the kids improved off of their Living Environment Score (the test they take prior to Earth Science) my kids scored in the top 2%. But look a little deeper, anyone can improve their mean average by keeping the poorest performing kids from taking the exam. So if you include the % of kids who took the test in your assessment my kids were #1 in all of NYC. These kids are 25% English Language learners and 25% special education. They go to the same building as the kids at the very bottom of NYC. At some point during the school year about 25% of them are homeless in any given year. Yet, give them a chance and they can compete with the best and brightest in the US, even though those kids start the year with scores 20% higher in Math, English, and Living Environment.

So I completely repudiate the snide remark about literacy. Likewise, the bogus claim of we can't educate our kids because we'll have to educate the whole world. Those the two lamest arguments I have ever heard.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Same with Medicare for all. Open borders extends these benefits to all mankind. Any projected cost must be multiplied by a couple orders of magnitude. I can't afford health insurance, but it is now available to all immigrants.

So you are saying the issue you have with Sanders is not Medicare for all or Free college education at a State school. No, the issue with him is enforcement of laws concerning immigration? Has he proposed changing the laws or opening the borders?

[Ohio]

You can manipulate statistics any way you like. You see improvement every where yet we are now like 40th in the world, and getting worse.

Never is your statistical sleight of hand so evident as with these socialist policies. Only a few conservative news sites even mention the tremendous societal deteriorations in these scandanavian countries with mandatory open borders. Soon these countries will reach the breaking point.

The Democratic platform already rejects all pro-life candidates. It now is pushing to espouse post birth abortion, open borders for all, free health care for illegals, free college for all, guaranteed living wage, income equality, green new deals, elimination of fossil fuels, private vehicles, cows, and planes.

But Im sure we can save some money here without making lame arguments.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

You can manipulate statistics any way you like. You see improvement every where yet we are now like 40th in the world, and getting worse.

Never is your statistical sleight of hand so evident as with these socialist policies. Only a few conservative news sites even mention the tremendous societal deteriorations in these scandanavian countries with mandatory open borders. Soon these countries will reach the breaking point.

The Democratic platform already rejects all pro-life candidates. It now is pushing to espouse post birth abortion, open borders for all, free health care for illegals, free college for all, guaranteed living wage, income equality, green new deals, elimination of fossil fuels, private vehicles, cows, and planes.

But Im sure we can save some money here without making lame arguments.

College graduates less likely to be in poverty

https://www.thirdway.org/report/ripp...e-dropout-rate

This study shows that if we could raise the college graduation rate to be equal to that of the HS graduation rate it would result in an additional $90 billion in tax revenue. There would also be decreased poverty and unemployment, hence a lower burden on government programs.

also, this is one effective way to close the education gap. Although many countries have a more effective high school education, if the US has a higher rate of college graduates we can catch up. It is a marathon, not a sprint. We are 12th worldwide, and the four leading countries are all around 55%. High school graduation rate is 84%. 38% of kids drop out of college because of financial pressure. Simply removing that pressure can immediately vault us into the top tier of educated countries in the world. We can eliminate it without it costing us anything, it is a proven fact that college educations pay for themselves.

http://www.duck9.com/College-Student-Drop-Out-Rates.htm

I thought the goal was to make America great again. Raising our college graduation rate to 55% of US citizens is one cost effective way to do that.

Also consider this -- if tuition in State schools is free to residents then 100% of the government money is spent in the US, virtually all of it for jobs and 40% of that money will come back to the US as tax revenue the first year (income tax, etc). The other 60% will go into the community (grocery stores, mortgages, cars, etc), and those recipients will also be paying tax. So another 20% returns to the government as tax revenue in the very first year. The government can pay for tuition and get 60% back the very first year.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I can't afford health insurance, but it is now available to all immigrants.

Can you please possibly provide links of this claim about heath insurance being provided to all immigrants?

I've been keeping up with the news for a long time. Have read lots on the immigrants, and haven't come across these claims.

[Ohio]

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Ralph Kramden : "Alice, one of these days, to the moon."

[ZNPaaneah]

Elizabeth Warren Wants to Transfer $640 Billion in Student Loan Debt to Taxpayers

It is against the law to buy votes, so how is this legal? There are 44 million people in the US with student loan debt. Most likely a very high percent of them is eligible to vote.

[ZNPaaneah]

Trump calls Baltimore "a rodent infested mess" where "no human being would want to live".

The Wire creator calls Trump "Racist moron".

Now this is the perfect example of the hypocrisy of these TV producers. If you are not familiar with the Wire it portrays the drug war in the 90s. Baltimore is the central character. But in addition to drug gangs and a bureaucratic nightmare of a police department they portray every single politician as a liar and a fraud, likewise the school system is portrayed similarly, with the bureaucracy being the main reason for a failed system that is little more than baby sitting. A local dock union is shown to be in league with drug smugglers and killers. This TV show portrayed the city as a rat infested mess, either literally or figuratively. So this man made his fortune portraying Baltimore as a "rat infested mess" and when someone actually internalizes it he calls them a "racist moron". The show is famous for "telling the truth", and "telling it like it is".

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Trump calls Baltimore "a rodent infested mess" where "no human being would want to live".

The Wire creator calls Trump "Racist moron".

Now this is the perfect example of the hypocrisy of these TV producers. If you are not familiar with the Wire it portrays the drug war in the 90s. Baltimore is the central character. But in addition to drug gangs and a bureaucratic nightmare of a police department they portray every single politician as a liar and a fraud, likewise the school system is portrayed similarly, with the bureaucracy being the main reason for a failed system that is little more than baby sitting. A local dock union is shown to be in league with drug smugglers and killers. This TV show portrayed the city as a rat infested mess, either literally or figuratively. So this man made his fortune portraying Baltimore as a "rat infested mess" and when someone actually internalizes it he calls them a "racist moron". The show is famous for "telling the truth", and "telling it like it is".

Meanwhile, Mar-a-Logo has had over 70 sanitary violations due to infestations. I take it from your post that you're concerned about hypocrisy.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Meanwhile, Mar-a-Logo has had over 70 sanitary violations due to infestations. I take it from your post that you're concerned about hypocrisy.

Yes, good point. Also Kushner owns rat infested properties in Baltimore, another excellent example of hypocrisy.

[ZNPaaneah]

The poverty rate is over 22%, and the population is shrinking. The city’s politics are riven with endemic corruption — former Mayor Catherine Pugh resigned in disgrace this May. She's the third Baltimore mayor in a row to leave in the wake of intense scandal. Baltimore is dotted with thousands of vacant buildings, and as for rodents, exterminator Orkin listed Baltimore in the top 10 of its annual survey of “rattiest cities.” The 1970s promotional nickname “Charm City” is as ironic as ever.

Also, to continue with the hypocrisy you can look at Bernie Sanders comments on Baltimore while blasting Trump for making similar remarks.

The entire fracas erupted when Cummings was attacking homeland security officials about the conditions at the border. It seems like a very reasonable point that Cummings seems to care less about the people he represents than he does about people who have entered the US illegally.

Other hypocrisy is to blame Trump for the problem because he is President the last two years and give Cummings a pass who has been the Baltimore representative for decades.

[ZNPaaneah]

Al Sharpton on the Trump vs Cummings debate

"He’s not mature enough to take criticism"

Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy here? Cummings criticized Trumps handling of immigrants, Trump criticizes Cummings handling of Baltimore and then the whole world erupts over Trump's criticism while silent about Cummings criticism.

"It is an abomination to me that he would attack Cummings who has the moral courage to question how the immigrants are being treated."


Seriously? Cummings has the moral courage to question how immigrants are being treated but it is an abomination if Trump questions how people of Baltimore are being treated?

[ZNPaaneah]

If Cummings says it — moral courage.

If Trump says it — an abomination

If Bernie Sanders says it — no problem

If Trump says it — racist

If Cummings criticizes Trump — needed to be said

If Trump criticizes Cummings — doesn’t have the maturity to take criticism

If HBO produces a 5 season docudrama about corruption in Baltimore — They get nominated for a variety of different awards including two Primetime Emmy Awards, fifteen NAACP Image Awards, two Edgar Awards (one win), three Writers Guild of America Awards (one win), one Directors Guild of America Award, and has also won a Peabody Award.

If Trump says the same thing — The creator of the Wire calls him a racist moron.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If Cummings says it — moral courage.

If Trump says it — an abomination

If Bernie Sanders says it — no problem

If Trump says it — racist

If Cummings criticizes Trump — needed to be said

If Trump criticizes Cummings — doesn’t have the maturity to take criticism

If HBO produces a 5 season docudrama about corruption in Baltimore — They get nominated for a variety of different awards including two Primetime Emmy Awards, fifteen NAACP Image Awards, two Edgar Awards (one win), three Writers Guild of America Awards (one win), one Directors Guild of America Award, and has also won a Peabody Award.

If Trump says the same thing — The creator of the Wire calls him a racist moron.

The worst thing about Political Correctness is that persons of any so-called "minority" status can no longer be held accountable for their actions.

How can we have leaders like this??

If Cummings is challenged, Trump a racist.

If Hilary is challenged, Trump a misogynist.

If Omar is challenged, Trump an islamophobe.

If border policies in the House are challenged, Trump is a xenophobe.

How can we have leaders like this?? And this is why I will guarantee than "old, white, men" like Biden and Bernie cannot win the Democratic ticket.

[ZNPaaneah]

Immigrants are being scapegoated.

Why the big deal about immigrants and the wall? People are losing their jobs and they assume it is to lower wage immigrants. The truth is they are losing their jobs to technology -- robots, AI, automated tellers, etc.

Simple smoke and mirrors -- point at the border and let everyone huff and puff about that until it is too late and there is nothing to be done about it anymore.

I got a coffee at a McDonalds the other day and they have 4 automated kiosks. You simply pick out what you want, pay for it with a card, and then pick it up at the take out window. Instead of 4 cashiers they had 1.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Immigrants are being scapegoated.

Why the big deal about immigrants and the wall?

Simple smoke and mirrors -- point at the border and let everyone huff and puff about that until it is too late and there is nothing to be done about it anymore.

No one is against immigrants who come here legally, only those who cheat. Many of those who cheat do so for nefarious reasons. MS-13 anyone?

Talk to officials from DHS/ICE/CBP. They are screaming for help. All they get are lies, distortions, and fabrications from the likes of AOC and other Dem politicians. Elijah Cummings screams about the border as if he cares, yet his own district is a rat-infested nightmare compared to the border.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

No one is against immigrants who come here legally, only those who cheat. Many of those who cheat do so for nefarious reasons. MS-13 anyone?

Talk to officials from DHS/ICE/CBP. They are screaming for help. All they get are lies, distortions, and fabrications from the likes of AOC and other Dem politicians. Elijah Cummings screams about the border as if he cares, yet his own district is a rat-infested nightmare compared to the border.

Think of the total hypocrisy. Trump asked for a couple of billion dollars to build this "wall" (more of a very, very good fence). I heard we spent 1.5 trillion so far on the war that began with Bush in the middle East. No complaints, no grandstanding, no complaints that this is racist, xenophobic, etc. Every president, Democrat or Republican, has been for better border security. Everyone agrees (now) that it is reaching crisis levels. So why the big, big debate over a couple of billion dollars?

I have already explained that 40% will be returned to the US the very first year in taxes from those paid to build the wall. At the very least it will be a jobs program. The cost is trivial. The purpose for the debate is not about money, the purpose is to distract the US citizens. People who are losing their jobs can think the Republicans are doing something about it, but the reality is they are losing jobs to technology, not immigrants.

[ZNPaaneah]

Today, Aug 4 -- I count 56 mass shootings in the US since July 1, 2019

[ZNPaaneah]

Bernie Sanders has a plan to wipe out college debt and make state colleges tuition free. My youngest son is going into 12th grade. He has my vote.

[ZNPaaneah]

Question

Since 1994 the rate of violent crime in the US has

A. Tripled

B. Stayed the same

C. Decreased by 70%

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

No one is against immigrants who come here legally, only those who cheat. Many of those who cheat do so for nefarious reasons. MS-13 anyone?

I'm all for immigration. That's how my wife and nieces were able to come here. Not only them but friends and co-workers.
Not one should begrudge someone from making a better life for themselves here, but there's a process to go through.
Why are people needing to cross the border where there is no crossing? Like you say Ohio it seems to be for nefarious reason whether it be drugs, human trafficking.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Question

Since 1994 the rate of violent crime in the US has

A. Tripled

B. Stayed the same

C. Decreased by 70%

It has gone down. Not sure the percentage. But not in Chicago.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

I'm all for immigration. That's how my wife and nieces were able to come here. Not only them but friends and co-workers.
Not one should begrudge someone from making a better life for themselves here, but there's a process to go through.
Why are people needing to cross the border where there is no crossing? Like you say Ohio it seems to be for nefarious reason whether it be drugs, human trafficking.

Every day all day the media lies to us that Trump hates immigrants.

Nothing could be further from the truth, but you would never know that listening to them. Their twisted goal is to distort the issue.

Trump wanted legal immigrants. It's a law and order matter. Every country in the world has secure borders, except the USA. That's the Left's goal to destroy us.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It has gone down. Not sure the percentage. But not in Chicago.

Yes, decreased by 70%. I think the most logical explanation is that catching and convicting the actual perpetrator of a crime has a real impact on crime. If we could continue to make headway with that we could continue to see these dramatic improvements.

Originally Posted by Terry

I'm all for immigration. That's how my wife and nieces were able to come here. Not only them but friends and co-workers.
Not one should begrudge someone from making a better life for themselves here, but there's a process to go through.
Why are people needing to cross the border where there is no crossing? Like you say Ohio it seems to be for nefarious reason whether it be drugs, human trafficking.

“Terrible things are happening outside. At any time of night and day, poor helpless people are being dragged out of their homes...Families are torn apart: men, women and children are separated. Children come home from school to find their parents have disappeared s..”

-Anne frank
She and her family were denied asylum in the us...

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

“Terrible things are happening outside. At any time of night and day, poor helpless people are being dragged out of their homes...Families are torn apart: men, women and children are separated. Children come home from school to find their parents have disappeared s..”

-Anne frank
She and her family were denied asylum in the us...

Denied asylum in 170 other countries too! Do you also condemn all of them?

Open borders and free welfare, health insurance, guaranteed income, food stamps, etc. means that 7 billion more people want to come here. At what point then do people here all want out?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Excuse me ... hmmm ... have you been to Venezuela lately?

Until Hugo Chavez and folks like the "Squad" took over, Venezuela was the jewel of Central and South America.

Irrelevant.

My point was not to agree with the far left of the Democratic party. It was to point out that the one of the biggest problems is the constant increase in deficit spending. I am sure that there being any of the Democrats really being willing to reign in overall spending while trying to implement any of these new proposals is roughly zero.

But while we (conservatives) like what the conservative side is spending too much money on, they are overspending just as much as the other side. We have roughly 3 decades of recent history to show this to be true. Deficit spending has increased steadily under all regimes.

My problem is that conservatism has failed to actually be conservatism, but has been usurped by reactionary dreamers (I could elaborate, but don't want to inflame anyone). Conservatism used to be seen as slow change with fiscal responsibility. But now it has turned into no change (or reverse course) but with little or no fiscal responsibility.

But when I look at the country, I see that there must be change. Not like AOC and the far left want. But simply digging-in and turning isolationist — and mean — is not the answer. I have so far been unable to go to the left of middle to find a moderate. Partly because there appears to be no moderates on either side (at least that are willing to step up and take part in the process).

I cannot stomach the way that the border is being politicized. There is something un-Christian in taking the position that people made in the image of God are simply to be vilified for seeking something better. Neither opening the border nor closing it or ranting about it is the answer. Opening it is not wise for purposes of economics and security. But speaking about and treating illegal immigrants (people, not vermin) in the way we are should be embarrassing to any Christian.

Something has to change. Neither Trump nor Bernie/Joe/Kamala, etc., are the answer. It is going to require something different. The recognition that guns and prisons are not the answer. That exorbitantly expensive universities that don't really focus on the students is not the answer. That cheap universities that can't hire qualified professors is not the answer. That neither open borders nor closed borders are the answer.

And that for the Christian, loving your neighbor as yourself is not found in protests against any of it — Trump, Bernie, Kamala, immigrants, the border, Islam, gays, etc.

Politically, something not on either fence — nearer to the middle —is needed to reignite something that even might resemble the America that so many are pining for. It is not in fighting for a "Christian" America, creating a socialist utopia, or returning to some kind of "good old days" (that probably never existed). It is solving a border issue, finding things that we do not need to spend tax dollars on, reorganizing what we do spend our tax dollars on, etc.

And for the Christian, it is doing and saying whatever we do or say in love. Not just for ourselves, but for anyone who is hearing it or on the receiving end of the actions.

(And saying it in love is not like the old joke about nicknames for missiles. . . . "Hallmark, when you care to send the very best.")

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by OBW

Irrelevant.

My point was not to agree with the far left of the Democratic party. It was to point out that the one of the biggest problems is the constant increase in deficit spending. I am sure that there being any of the Democrats really being willing to reign in overall spending while trying to implement any of these new proposals is roughly zero.

But while we (conservatives) like what the conservative side is spending too much money on, they are overspending just as much as the other side. We have roughly 3 decades of recent history to show this to be true. Deficit spending has increased steadily under all regimes.

My problem is that conservatism has failed to actually be conservatism, but has been usurped by reactionary dreamers (I could elaborate, but don't want to inflame anyone). Conservatism used to be seen as slow change with fiscal responsibility. But now it has turned into no change (or reverse course) but with little or no fiscal responsibility.

This is a corporate oligarchy whose marketing campaign is aimed at "conservatives" vs "progressives" but the reality is whoever pays to get the President, Senate and Congress elected gets the government laws and grants that they wanted.

This is why I reject the notion that it is your responsibility to vote. If everyone votes it legitimizes the process. The corporations decide which two candidates you get to vote for, it doesn't matter to them, and we are left with the illusion of a democracy.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Irrelevant.

I cannot stomach the way that the border is being politicized. There is something un-Christian in taking the position that people made in the image of God are simply to be vilified for seeking something better. Neither opening the border nor closing it or ranting about it is the answer. Opening it is not wise for purposes of economics and security. But speaking about and treating illegal immigrants (people, not vermin) in the way we are should be embarrassing to any Christian.

These comments are so naive on so many fronts. Why is it so easy to blast Christians these days? Just watch the media, and ammo up! I find it so oxymoronic that you hate the way the "border is being politicized," yet you take the political position pushed by the Left.

Here are some facts and questions:

• Politicking entered into high gear with the picture of kids behind chain-link fences. Trump was condemned 24/7 throughout the media. Did anyone care to note that the pic was from 2014 under the Obama admin?
• All of last winter, Trump clamored for Congressional help to address the border. He was willing to shut down the G-ment to get their attention. Dems and the Media dismissed Trump as a crazed lunatic manufacturing a crisis. Come Spring time, they changed their story and began to condemn Trump for the "crisis."
• Why is it evil to treat "illegal immigrants" as criminals? Have we lost all sense of law and order? Who is treating these criminals as vermin? Obviously you have not been hurt by an illegal alien.
• Why are Christians in the US not commended for having the most generous immigration policies in the history of mankind?
• Why is it evil to demand vetting? Why is it un-Christian to suspect that sex-traffickers are using girls and boys for gain? Why is it xenophobic and unloving to investigate young males crossing the border?
• Why even have rules and laws and waiting lists for those those who abide by the law?
• What is the limit the US can provide? When immigrants are provided with welfare, free health care, food stamps, housing, etc. there is incentive for 5 Billion others to also come here. Congress placed limits on immigration for a reason, so now we throw out all of those limits?
• Do you really think that this kind of "Christian charity" is sustainable?
• Do you really think that open borders will stop the media, the Dems, you, and awareness from thinking that all of us Christians are "mean-spirited" for wanting border security?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This is a corporate oligarchy whose marketing campaign is aimed at "conservatives" vs "progressives" but the reality is whoever pays to get the President, Senate and Congress elected gets the government laws and grants that they wanted.

This is why I reject the notion that it is your responsibility to vote. If everyone votes it legitimizes the process. The corporations decide which two candidates you get to vote for, it doesn't matter to them, and we are left with the illusion of a democracy.

If the corporate oligarchy really does provide our candidates, thus delegitimizing our democratic process, then you should be somewhat happy with Trump's presidency. Obviously, the entire DC swamp state hates him. He was never their choice.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If the corporate oligarchy really does provide our candidates, thus delegitimizing our democratic process, then you should be somewhat happy with Trump's presidency. Obviously, the entire DC swamp state hates him. He was never their choice.

I consider Trump to be an excellent campaigner. Putting AOC plus 3 as the face of the Democratic party, excellent. Dragging out the tariff war with China so that it will be a major campaign issue, also brilliant.

Bernie Sanders doubling down on "medicare for all" is lame. Who doesn't have health insurance? The unemployed and under employed. This group rarely votes, particularly in primaries. In contrast the whole "forgiving the college debt" that Warren is pushing, now that will be huge if she is to be believed. Why hasn't she already submitted a bill? Why do we need to elect her to president before she'll submit this bill?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I consider Trump to be an excellent campaigner. Putting AOC plus 3 as the face of the Democratic party, excellent. Dragging out the tariff war with China so that it will be a major campaign issue, also brilliant.

Bernie Sanders doubling down on "medicare for all" is lame. Who doesn't have health insurance? The unemployed and under employed. This group rarely votes, particularly in primaries. In contrast the whole "forgiving the college debt" that Warren is pushing, now that will be huge if she is to be believed. Why hasn't she already submitted a bill? Why do we need to elect her to president before she'll submit this bill?

There's no way past student debt will be forgiven by Congress. Why should expensive Oberlin College tuition be forgiven for someone whose only ambition was to be a Social Justice Warrior taking down a local sweet shop? They could have gone to the Community College for 1/10th the cost, and got a useful degree.

Warren's plan is just a novel campaign strategy. Everyone knows that college age kids have more time and energy than the working class and the elderly. Sander's people may make the most noise, and be the most proficient on social media, but these kids can't even support themselves. Their small donations are Daddy's money anyways.

[OBW]

Why is it so easy to blast Christians these days?

I wasn't blasting Christians. I was noting something that should be considered un-Christian. However, I do hear Christians using that rhetoric and therefore find them to be Christians worthy of the moniker "un-Christian."

I find it so oxymoronic that you hate the way the "border is being politicized," yet you take the political position pushed by the Left.

Which position "pushed by the left" did I take? I really spoke concerning two things:

1) The inhumane treatment of those who have, or want to, enter the US, but coupled with an admission that a more rational approach to securing the border and fixing immigration policy (however that turns out). While I have an opinion as to how that turns out, I am less concerned about that than the hateful way that the whole situation is being handled.

2) The inability of either party to work within a budget that will cease increases to the national debt. I recognize that there may be economic reasons to have strategic deficit spending for temporary periods, though I doubt that could possibly be anywhere approaching the levels of the past several years. I admit that if there is going to be deficit spending, I am more likely to prefer that the money goes to something other than Medicare for all or school debt termination. But if the choice is between ever-increasing deficit spending that will be spent in a "conservative"/Republican way or a federal budget without any addition to the deficit that tries to take on some part of either of those, I will vote with the liberals. Why? Because for me, it is more important to operate within the fiscal means of the government no matter which ideology is in charge than to overspend on the "right" things.


I'll pick on a few of your so-called "facts"

[*]Why is it evil to treat "illegal immigrants" as criminals? Have we lost all sense of law and order? Who is treating these criminals as vermin? Obviously you have not been hurt by an illegal alien.

What makes them criminals? That they crossed the border? Have you gone over the speed limit in the past year? Slipped through a light on "pink?" . . . .

No, I have not been hurt by an illegal alien (that I know of).
Or a legal alien.
Or a second generation of immigrant heritage (that I know of).

But I have been T-boned by a WASP kid running a red light so he could deliver his pizza faster. I guess I should be clamoring for the round up and deportation of WASPs.

Those kinds of positions are how racism comes to be. One of a particular group does something and all others are immediately equated and put on a "hate list" or "hit list." At this point, I should be horribly afraid to get on an airplane on which any other white people have boarded because one of them might be the next Timothy McVey.

I know. That is ridiculous. But what has any illegal alien done to you to make you want them rounded up and deported? I recognize that ICE can, and probably should, deport more. But they should do it in some consistent and rational manner. Not just flashy raids to make news. In the mean time, if the guy mowing my lawn (well, who used to mow my lawn since I do it myself now), turns out to be illegal, I am not sure how I am harmed, or harming anyone else if I just ignore it. If he is identified and deported, I know it is a risk the man (or members of his crew?) took to be here. But I do not see anyone else offering to mow my yard, even at higher prices. It seems to be a business otherwise lacking interest, or only willing to be done at a price I would not pay anyone for.

So while I recognize that it behooves us to either get everyone in-country registered or deported, I am not seeing anything more than a photo-op to make the kind of hay out of it that is happening at the moment. And I know that the Democrats are doing the same. It is part of the horribly broke government we currently have. One that doesn't even work when all parts are allegedly controlled by the same party.

[*]Why are Christians in the US not commended for having the most generous immigration policies in the history of mankind?

The only immigration policies that matter are the ones that the government has. While some of those may align with what some Christians would want, other parts of those policies may not. And between Christians, there is difference of opinion as to what the policies should be. So I am not sure how to respond to a request to commend "Christians in the US" for their generous immigration policies.

I do think that the Christian should be generous to the alien no matter what the nation's policies are. That does not mean that I think they should directly oppose the legal policies where they disagree (although some think that Christians should be more "civilly disobedient" in some cases — I have some problems with that). But I do agree that Christians — especially in our democratic (republican?) government should encourage policies that reasonably balance a need for security and economic stability with a desire to continue to live according to that old "give me your tired, your poor" ideal.

And I do not have a problem with Christians who actually do business with, or otherwise provide assistance to illegal aliens. My wife works for a clinic that only sees those who are covered by Medicaid, CHIPs (state health insurance), or have no insurance. Within that population there are many immigrants, both illegal and legal. There is even a nurse's aid that would be what you call a "dreamer." She was not born here but does not remember anything but the DFW area. Since she has a SS number, the government will have to figure it out. Meanwhile, she is working and paying taxes and is treated as a legal alien. I have no problem with that.

Should the government actually do something to either deport or otherwise eliminate the "dreamer" issue? And create immigration policy that recognizes legitimate asylum issues, and our own economic appetite for immigrants? Surely. And meanwhile, we need to make the border more secure. I personally do not think that billions for a fence is the answer except in specific places. But that is only an opinion and I would be glad to have an overall border/immigration strategy that deals with that. But simply shutting it down and putting people on this side of the border in the equivalent of WWII internment camps as used on those of Japanese descent along the West coast is not a viable answer.

[*]Why is it evil to demand vetting? Why is it un-Christian to suspect that sex-traffickers are using girls and boys for gain? Why is it xenophobic and unloving to investigate young males crossing the border?

Never said any such thing. In fact, I did not discuss these particular situations at all. In effect, this is a strawman argument.

I have no problem with vetting. Otherwise everyone will be able to find some bogyman that they can argue should grant them asylum.

There is nothing un-Christian in thinking that sex traffickers are doing anything particular. The very label "sex traffickers" makes the rest of your question irrelevant. If they are sex traffickers, then what they do with anyone of any age is something that is illegal in the US.

[*]Why even have rules and laws and waiting lists for those those who abide by the law?

huh? Laws are required to clarify what and how those who do not abide by the law will be dealt. And they also help to make the unthinking think a little before they act in just any manner. But it does nothing to those who would not violate the law.

[*]What is the limit the US can provide? When immigrants are provided with welfare, free health care, food stamps, housing, etc. there is incentive for 5 Billion others to also come here. Congress placed limits on immigration for a reason, so now we throw out all of those limits?

And simply making the amount of immigration unlimited and without any consideration would be counter-productive. But if we are willing to take people seeking asylum, then we accept that those often will not be the most economically viable.

And is has been noted that part of the ever-growing US economy is the ever-increasing population. (I'm not sure how related the two are, but there have been studies and articles about it.) And with the decrease in the overall population growth of the country (without immigration), then immigration could bolster that. But immigration policy in the past couple of decades has actually been decreasing. So it could be argued that it is, in part, the increase created by the illegals that has helped to bolster the economy. (Again, I am not sure how far this can be taken, so don't just jump on me about it.)

Surely to have immigration that is entirely reliant on government largess would be relatively useless. But when you argue that use of government benefits is the reason to reduce or eliminate immigration, you oversimplify the complex rationale for having particular policies and then how those policies will be applied in particular cases.

[*]Do you really think that this kind of "Christian charity" is sustainable?

Government benefits are not "Christian charity," even though it could be argued that this is what God would require of us (the Christians, not the nation as a whole) to the extent that any of these are reasonably our "neighbor." And while I live in a suburb with a relatively high socioeconomic average, my middle-to-upper-middle-class neighborhood is only 3 blocks from a trailer park. Assuming some of those there are illegal, they are my neighbor.

[*]Do you really think that open borders will stop the media, the Dems, you, and awareness from thinking that all of us Christians are "mean-spirited" for wanting border security?

Strawman. I never proposed open borders. And I did not say that Christians are mean-spirited to want border security. I want border security. The mean-spirited comment (however I made it) would be related to how we talk about the people who are already across the border or who have come to it to request entrance. The problem with the border is US policy (and implementation of that policy), not immigrants. To speak of the people using the words that are constantly plastered in the media — things like referring to them and their countries as S#|+#0]3 — is very un-Christian. But even if it is decided to absolutely close the borders to anyone for some period of time, the people who want in (or are already in) do not deserve those comments. Or any other ethnically-derogatory remarks.

* * * *

Please support the immigration policies you think are best — from political, social, economic, security, and Christian perspectives. They do not have to agree with what I would support. But the whole process should not find those who are Christian speaking in such a way about any of the people involved (including the participants in the policy-making, the policy implementation, and those seeking to take advantage of whatever policies there are to come into the country).

And it could be argued that the general government policy for the past 30 years has been somewhat hidden in that it has relied on turning a blind eye to infractions so that it could be more open to southern-border immigration without actually removing any of the written policies. If that is the case, then it is probably obvious that they should have returned to enforcement some years ago. And they should have long ago dealt with what to do with those who got in during periods of non-enforcement. But that is yet a different discussion.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

There's no way past student debt will be forgiven by Congress. Why should expensive Oberlin College tuition be forgiven for someone whose only ambition was to be a Social Justice Warrior taking down a local sweet shop? They could have gone to the Community College for 1/10th the cost, and got a useful degree.

Warren's plan is just a novel campaign strategy. Everyone knows that college age kids have more time and energy than the working class and the elderly. Sander's people may make the most noise, and be the most proficient on social media, but these kids can't even support themselves. Their small donations are Daddy's money anyways.

Total US Student debt carried by the government is $1.5 trillion. That is about 1/3 of our budget. Total US debt is 22 trillion. Wiping out this debt would increase our overall US debt by 6.8%. However, for every single person that had the debt forgiven it would improve their balance sheet tremendously, which in turn would enable them to borrow $2 trillion or more, most likely for mortgages and cars. It would be the biggest jobs program and stimulus package ever given to the US. Obama's stimulus package was about half of that ($720 billion).

You could see it as an investment in college graduates. So one possible way to roll it out would be to wipe out half. But realize this, if this resulted in $2 trillion in new purchases 40% of that returns to the US the first year in taxes.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Total US Student debt carried by the government is $1.5 trillion. That is about 1/3 of our budget. Total US debt is 22 trillion. Wiping out this debt would increase our overall US debt by 6.8%. However, for every single person that had the debt forgiven it would improve their balance sheet tremendously, which in turn would enable them to borrow $2 trillion or more, most likely for mortgages and cars. It would be the biggest jobs program and stimulus package ever given to the US. Obama's stimulus package was about half of that ($720 billion).

You could see it as an investment in college graduates. So one possible way to roll it out would be to wipe out half. But realize this, if this resulted in $2 trillion in new purchases 40% of that returns to the US the first year in taxes.

Using the language of the Dems, your plan is RACIST!

It gives money to the rich and takes from the poor!

But like Joe Biden says, "poor people are just as smart as white people."

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Using the language of the Dems, your plan is RACIST!

It gives money to the rich and takes from the poor!

But like Joe Biden says, "poor people are just as smart as white people."

By definition no one with a college debt is rich. I define rich as someone who can live off of their investment income. In most cases it would be foolish to have that kind of money and carry a college loan.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

By definition no one with a college debt is rich. I define rich as someone who can live off of their investment income. In most cases it would be foolish to have that kind of money and carry a college loan.

Your definition is short-sighted and not accurate. It does not take into account potential earnings. I am "poor" living off investment income, when my son graduated with college loans he was quite "rich." It just took a few years to prove where we both were at. Putting his student debt on my back would be a gross injustice.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your definition is short-sighted and not accurate. It does not take into account potential earnings. I am "poor" living off investment income, when my son graduated with college loans he was quite "rich." It just took a few years to prove where we both were at. Putting his student debt on my back would be a gross injustice.

True, this is why I consider it an investment. Who completes college that isn't planning on working which will most likely result in a career 40 years long of paying taxes back to the government. If we spend $1.5 trillion and get $5 trillion back in taxes it is a good investment. Why shouldn't the government invest in people? The government is in the business of collecting taxes, people with college degrees on average will pay more in their lifetime in taxes than those without. It is a good investment.

Also, in this case "a higher tide will lift all boats" is appropriate.

[ZNPaaneah]

Greenland is about 300 times bigger than Puerto Rico and has a population 1/60th that of Puerto Rico.

The country has a population of 50,000, that isn't even a large city in the US, more of a small city.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

True, this is why I consider it an investment. Who completes college that isn't planning on working which will most likely result in a career 40 years long of paying taxes back to the government. If we spend $1.5 trillion and get $5 trillion back in taxes it is a good investment. Why shouldn't the government invest in people? The government is in the business of collecting taxes, people with college degrees on average will pay more in their lifetime in taxes than those without. It is a good investment.

Shouldn't it be the US taxpayer that decides what kind of "investment" we put into college?

I have neighbor kids, seniors in HS, picked up in front of their house and transported a few hundred yards to school. Will we now provide free busing for college? Just how long will society delay the maturity of our kids?

What makes college valuable is making it optional, and paying for it yourself. We already have high schools who are not allowed to flunk kids who refuse to pass. Now we will have college kids who can't do math either. What's next, a Master of Science for the illiterate?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Greenland is about 300 times bigger than Puerto Rico and has a population 1/60th that of Puerto Rico.

The country has a population of 50,000, that isn't even a large city in the US, more of a small city.

Sounds like a bargain. Buy it!

And sell Puerto Rico! It has become just a corrupt money pit.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Shouldn't it be the US taxpayer that decides what kind of "investment" we put into college?

No. In this form of democracy, a democratic republic, it is the voters who are supposed to select representatives. So, the voters get to decide.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I have neighbor kids, seniors in HS, picked up in front of their house and transported a few hundred yards to school. Will we now provide free busing for college? Just how long will society delay the maturity of our kids?

That may be true, but what is also true is that the world has been transformed since the day that 13 year olds were independent bread winners, getting married, getting their own house, etc.

Originally Posted by Ohio

What makes college valuable is making it optional, and paying for it yourself. We already have high schools who are not allowed to flunk kids who refuse to pass. Now we will have college kids who can't do math either. What's next, a Master of Science for the illiterate?

Providing free public school education for everyone has not increased illiteracy, on the contrary the average american is far more educated today than they were in 1850.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sounds like a bargain. Buy it!

And sell Puerto Rico! It has become just a corrupt money pit.

First we have to get rid of all that ice!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

First we have to get rid of all that ice!

Sell it. Worth millions!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sell it. Worth millions!

There are 766 quadrillion gallons of pure water, surely it is worth a whole lot more than millions.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

There are 766 quadrillion gallons of pure water, surely it is worth a whole lot more than millions.

If Trump buys Greenland, the Dems will call it Donald's dottiness.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If Trump buys Greenland, the Dems will call it Donald's dottiness.

When they say it is "rich in minerals" you should understand that water is a mineral. Regardless what else it has, that water is hugely valuable. Imagine beer, soft drink, and bottled water businesses.

It is already a military base and with ice melting out of the shipping lanes its value as a port increases dramatically.

It makes as much sense as Guam and Hawaii being part of America.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

When they say it is "rich in minerals" you should understand that water is a mineral. Regardless what else it has, that water is hugely valuable. Imagine beer, soft drink, and bottled water businesses.

It is already a military base and with ice melting out of the shipping lanes its value as a port increases dramatically.

It makes as much sense as Guam and Hawaii being part of America.

And think about all that beach front property!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And think about all that beach front property!

I don't think it is a joke. Greenland has a population of 50,000, our military base must be a significant portion of their economy. If the US bought this island it would be very likely that the industry would double, the tourism would double, and the population would double.

2nd, Russia is already carving up the Arctic, Greenland makes an excellent base from which the US can lay a claim alongside Europe. If the Europeans want us side by side with them what better place than Greenland?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I don't think it is a joke. Greenland has a population of 50,000, our military base must be a significant portion of their economy. If the US bought this island it would be very likely that the industry would double, the tourism would double, and the population would double.

2nd, Russia is already carving up the Arctic, Greenland makes an excellent base from which the US can lay a claim alongside Europe. If the Europeans want us side by side with them what better place than Greenland?

Yes, Thule AFB in Greenland was an incredible deterrent during the Cold War. It is without question that US military activity around the globe has been a force for peace and safety for the last century. The US has never operated as a colonial power like the Europeans have in the past 4 millennia. While I disagree with using the military for "neo-con democratization," such as in Iraq, who can imagine what the world might be like without the US? Unfortunately much of the US intelligence community (e.g. CIA) has not been so responsible.

[Sons to Glory!]

Brothers discussing politics - now there's a life-giving proposition!

Just curious, has the book "Blinded by Might - Why the Religious Right can't Save America" ever been discussed on here? The authors, Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson were deeply involved with politics, Reagan and the Moral Majority. But then they got light.

An excerpt from the Amazon summary of the book:

Former insiders with the Moral Majority, they share never-reported information on a movement they helped shape in order to show why it could not and did not succeed. And they tell what it will really take to stem the ungodliness that is sweeping our nation. 'Whenever the church cozies up to political power, it loses sight of its all important mission to change the world from the inside out,' writes Thomas. In blurring the lines between politics and Christianity, the Religious Right has traded the only power that can truly change America - the Gospel's power to transform hearts - for the methods of a kingdom that is of this world. What, then, is the alternative? Given such critical issues as abortion, gay activism, are Christians to simply disengage from the political process? Hardly. uninvolvement is not the answer, say the authors, but a shift in perspective. As Christians, they insist we must realize that God's agenda does not rise or fall with political causes; and that we must rediscover our most potent influence is not the ballot booth, but lives that extend God's grace in the home, in the workplace, and in all spheres of our culture. Blinded by Might calls us to realign ourselves with a kingdom infinitely more powerful and certain than politics, that advances initially through changed hearts that inevitably must change and impart government."

Anyone read this or has it been brought up on here? It was an eye-opening book for many believers who were all wrapped around the political axle, and thought that was how things were to be changed.

As Jesus famously said, "Apart from Me, you can do NOTHING!"

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Brothers discussing politics - now there's a life-giving proposition!

Just curious, has the book "Blinded by Might - Why the Religious Right can't Save America" ever been discussed on here? The authors, Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson were deeply involved with politics, Reagan and the Moral Majority. But then they got light.

An excerpt from the Amazon summary of the book: Anyone read this or has it been brought up on here? It was an eye-opening book for many believers who were all wrapped around the political axle, and thought that was how things were to be changed.

As Jesus famously said, "Apart from Me, you can do NOTHING!"

But plenty has been going on nonetheless.

Just look at the many paradigm shifts has been going on the last 2000 years, since the early church.

In the 4th c. Christianity became the state religion. That created the dark ages (to say the least). That held sway for more than a millennium.

Then came Luther and the Protestant movement. Oh boy! Christianity exploded. We now have over 33,000 sects of Christianity.

Meanwhile Copernicus happened, and Galileo and Kepler. Suddenly the earth was not the center of the universe. Christianity fought it and lost.

And they've been losing ever since. The age of science took it over. And now the age of technology has eclipsed Christianity. Facebook wins, or social media.

But hey, we can go to church on the web. We don't even need to get dressed up, like it was for church for so long ... wearing our Sunday best.

Or skinny ties and wingtips, like the local church.

I don't know how it is today. But when I was in the LC politics hardly came up. I'd be surprised if the LC jumped on the Evangelical train, and are attending meetings wearing MAGA hats.

The moral majority was neither. And the Cal Thomas types are a dying breed.

Millennial's are eschewing the churches. With Christianity becoming a political party, it's no longer attractive. They've lost track of Jesus. What else can be expected?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

But plenty has been going on nonetheless.

Just look at the many paradigm shifts has been going on the last 2000 years, since the early church.

In the 4th c. Christianity became the state religion. That created the dark ages (to say the least). That held sway for more than a millennium.

Then came Luther and the Protestant movement. Oh boy! Christianity exploded. We now have over 33,000 sects of Christianity.

Meanwhile Copernicus happened, and Galileo and Kepler. Suddenly the earth was not the center of the universe. Christianity fought it and lost.

And they've been losing ever since. The age of science took it over. And now the age of technology has eclipsed Christianity. Facebook wins, or social media.

But hey, we can go to church on the web. We don't even need to get dressed up, like it was for church for so long ... wearing our Sunday best.

Or skinny ties and wingtips, like the local church.

I don't know how it is today. But when I was in the LC politics hardly came up. I'd be surprised if the LC jumped on the Evangelical train, and are attending meetings wearing MAGA hats.

The moral majority was neither. And the Cal Thomas types are a dying breed.

Millennial's are eschewing the churches. With Christianity becoming a political party, it's no longer attractive. They've lost track of Jesus. What else can be expected?

Awareness, you sure have no shortage of wild ideas.

Cal Thomas used to argue politics with Bob Beckel. Years ago Cal called for an end to all Mosques in America. You prolly hated Cal Thomas for that since you are so partial to Muslims and biased against them darn Christians.

I liked Beckel too. And his ex-wife Leland Keyser. When Christine Lousy-Ford fabricated her hoax to smear Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the SCOTUS, she called on Bob's ex to corroborate her story. Bob's ex told her she was crazy. And a liar. Which she was.

I never heard much about politics until I joined the LC in Cleveland. Ole Titus Chu hated Jimmy Carter. Seems like every meeting he would go off on "Peanuts" Carter. He hated the guy.

Sounds like you're still bitter about Crooked Hilary losing the election. Next time Brennan, Clapper, Obama, Comey, and Lynch will have to do a better job to knock off the Trump.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I never heard much about politics until I joined the LC in Cleveland. Ole Titus Chu hated Jimmy Carter. Seems like every meeting he would go off on "Peanuts" Carter. He hated the guy.

Carter was at least 10 times the man TC could ever dream to be.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Carter was at least 10 times the man TC could ever dream to be.

Did you ever meet either of them? Why is it that when Dem Presidents are criticized you dislike the criticizer, but when Republican Presidents are criticized, then you dislike the President?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did you ever meet either of them? Why is it that when Dem Presidents are criticized you dislike the criticizer, but when Republican Presidents are criticized, then you dislike the President?

I said "the man," not the democrat. It is you that sees in black and white, not me.

[Sons to Glory!]

........

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

I said "the man," not the democrat. It is you that sees in black and white, not me.

Black and white? Then why do I still get the Blue Screen of Death?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Cal

Calvin is the kid. Hobbes is the cat (tiger). Hobbes is actually really a stuffed tiger who Calvin imagines is alive. So Hobbes is actually part of Calvin's personality. Calvin is the impulsive, emotional one; Hobbes is the more mature, thoughtful one. It was the best comic ever. Here's one of my favorites:

Perhaps a more recent parody to update ... Let me present Donald and Hobbes ...

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps a more recent parody to update ... Let me present Donald and Hobbes ...

Glad to see you have a sense of humor.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by awareness

Glad to see you have a sense of humor.

You have to have a sense of humor when dealing with politics! The whole thing - this country & the whole world - is such a mess . . .

Last night at my little brothers fellowship dinner, we were talking about how everything is going toward socialism. One of the bros suggested that the US maybe needs to go way socialistic, and perhaps that's the Lord's plan that will cause many to turn to Him. He said therefore he was thinking of voting for the most far left person available! He was joking of course (again - gotta have a sense of humor with this stuff) and we all had a good laugh.

Speaking of humor, I was in Canada last week and a lawyer (BTW - called "solicitors" up there) friend though this was the funniest lawyer joke. (doubly good because my friend said lawyers have seriously contributed to this whole mess).

So what's black and looks really good on a lawyer?

[awareness]

I've said over and over, in different ways, that when Christians become politically active they become a turnoff.

The Christian Right Is Helping Drive Liberals Away From Religion

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...from-religion/

[Ohio]

Where is that article about ...

"Liberals Are Driving Christians to Vote for Trump"

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Where is that article about ...

"Liberals Are Driving Christians to Vote for Trump"

Well certainly the Hildabeast did that. But still, she won by 3 million votes.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Well certainly the Hildabeast did that. But still, she won by 3 million votes.

What did she win?

Give her a red star!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Speaking of humor, I was in Canada last week and a lawyer (BTW - called "solicitors" up there) friend thought this was the funniest lawyer joke. (doubly good because my friend said lawyers have seriously contributed to this whole mess): So what's black and looks really good on a lawyer?

Guess no takers on guessing the answer to this funny joke . . .

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Guess no takers on guessing the answer to this funny joke . . .

I have no problem with lawyers, just that 98.3% of them give the rest a bad name.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I have no problem with lawyers, just that 98.3% of them give the rest a bad name.

HA! Me neither . . . at least not anybody specifically.

So let's try this one more time: What's black and looks really good on a lawyer?

(HINT: any guesses or give up?)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

HA! Me neither . . . at least not anybody specifically.

So let's try this one more time: What's black and looks really good on a lawyer?

(HINT: any guesses or give up?)

How about "supplemental grizzly bears" on the lawyers?

Do they look good?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

How about "supplemental grizzly bears" on the lawyers?

Do they look good?

Not sure exactly what a "supplemental grizzly bear" is, but the answer is "A Rottweiler." (however, a grizzly bear would work too)



Okay, I feel a little guilty now, so I must say that lawyers just need Jesus like everyone else . . .

[Ohio]

For 3 years I said that the RUSSIAN COLLUSION HOAX was all a Deep State hit job. I presented numerous articles on this thread debunking the claim. Like the entire Leftist establishment, all the posters here piled on Trump, demanding his impeachment, or worse. Only ZNP was slightly more moderate, wanting Mueller to finish his investigation. Well he did, and he found nothing.

Unfortunately, as is so typical for liberal hysterics, none of these posters has come clean about their charges against Trump. Where's the apologies? Retractions? Clarifications? Nothing! Your intense hatred for the Prez, fueled by the media, has been exposed repeatedly, yet still remains, waiting for the next "scandal" to hit the news.

Every week there are new hysterics and new accusations coming from the Left against Trump. Like a paper fire, they look ominous and frightening, occupying all the news outlets 24/7. Impeachment! We got him now! Then the fire quickly burns out ... anonymous sources ... short of facts ... no evidence ... but a great story for a week or so. Just another smear job from the Dem propaganda empire and the Deep State.

I'd like to say that sooner or later you guys will see thru this nonsense, but there's just no educating an angry mob.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

For 3 years I said that the RUSSIAN COLLUSION HOAX was all a Deep State hit job. I presented numerous articles on this thread debunking the claim. Like the entire Leftist establishment, all the posters here piled on Trump, demanding his impeachment, or worse. Only ZNP was slightly more moderate, wanting Mueller to finish his investigation. Well he did, and he found nothing.

Unfortunately, as is so typical for liberal hysterics, none of these posters has come clean about their charges against Trump. Where's the apologies? Retractions? Clarifications? Nothing! Your intense hatred for the Prez, fueled by the media, has been exposed repeatedly, yet still remains, waiting for the next "scandal" to hit the news.

Every week there are new hysterics and new accusations coming from the Left against Trump. Like a paper fire, they look ominous and frightening, occupying all the news outlets 24/7. Impeachment! We got him now! Then the fire quickly burns out ... anonymous sources ... short of facts ... no evidence ... but a great story for a week or so. Just another smear job from the Dem propaganda empire and the Deep State.

I'd like to say that sooner or later you guys will see thru this nonsense, but there's just no educating an angry mob.

There are "angry mobs" on both the left and right. I saw much the same thing when Obama was in office from the right. Hypocrisy definitely goes both ways, because the flesh is not exclusive to one side or the other. Since Clinton, the hate on both sides has ratcheted up significantly, with each new president. Both sides are "disquieted in vain."

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Cal

Calvin is the kid. Hobbes is the cat (tiger). Hobbes is actually really a stuffed tiger who Calvin imagines is alive. So Hobbes is actually part of Calvin's personality. Calvin is the impulsive, emotional one; Hobbes is the more mature, thoughtful one. It was the best comic ever. Here's one of my favorites:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps a more recent parody to update ... Let me present Donald and Hobbes ...

Are we suggesting that the mature, thoughtful version of the Donald is imaginary?

[OBW]

Just completed my "Congressional District Survey" which ended with a request for monetary support for the RNC. They need to read my responses. Pro-Republican but not supporting Trump.

I hate political polling because the questions and the false dichotomy of answers available do not paint a correct picture of my positions. In any case, it is clear that they will not listen because I will not be including a donation with it.

[OBW]

On a different note, I have lately been pricked a little concerning my thoughts toward Trump and the chaos that follows in his wake. That does not mean I think my considerations of his positions and even person are not justified. But I have been holding an unhealthy animosity toward him that should not be.

This is my confession of sins "one to another" on the subject. I have resolved let the Spirit lead me away from that.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

On a different note, I have lately been pricked a little concerning my thoughts toward Trump and the chaos that follows in his wake. That does not mean I think my considerations of his positions and even person are not justified. But I have been holding an unhealthy animosity toward him that should not be.

This is my confession of sins "one to another" on the subject. I have resolved let the Spirit lead me away from that.

Let's talk about "the chaos that follows in his wake." The facts overwhelming confirm that the "wake" surrounding Trump has been manufactured by the media propagation machinery of the Democratic Party for the last 4 years.

Don't look at the wake as a whole because it is composed of tens of thousands of unsubstantiated accusations. Rather examine each accusation individually, and dismiss it. Remember "Putin's Puppet?" Extermination of Muslims? Starting the next nuclear war? Etc.

Remember that Trump denied collusion with the Russians thousands of times, meanwhile the Democratic "fact-checkers" tallied them into the thousands. When Mueller confirmed Trump was accurate, they kept counting how Trump denied these new accusations. Unending.

The Democratic Media is presenting a false narrative: Trump chaos or peace. The real choice is socialism or freedom. Lawlessness or rule of law.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

On a different note, I have lately been pricked a little concerning my thoughts toward Trump and the chaos that follows in his wake. That does not mean I think my considerations of his positions and even person are not justified. But I have been holding an unhealthy animosity toward him that should not be.

This is my confession of sins "one to another" on the subject. I have resolved let the Spirit lead me away from that.

Amen bro. I had that sort of thing going on in me during the Clinton and Obama administrations and after Obama was elected the 2nd time, many of us could just not believe it and I went into something of a tailspin. This showed me that I was putting my trust in man! And then there was some sharing that I got light from, concerning praying for our presidents. My darkness was exposed and I changed my thinking. They are all just fallen men, and need our prayers. My unhealthy addiction to keeping an overly close eye on all things political was also exposed. These days I focus much, much less on such things, and pray for the whole mess more.

I also remember a brother then, who was so anti-Obama and very vocal about it, and he couldn't hardly accept that he should pray for him in any way (other than Obama should fail). It became very apparent that this was something not of the Lord in him (and the rest of us).

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Let's talk about "the chaos that follows in his wake." The facts overwhelming confirm that the "wake" surrounding Trump has been manufactured by the media propagation machinery of the Democratic Party for the last 4 years.

Don't look at the wake as a whole because it is composed of tens of thousands of unsubstantiated accusations. Rather examine each accusation individually, and dismiss it. Remember "Putin's Puppet?" Extermination of Muslims? Starting the next nuclear war? Etc.

Remember that Trump denied collusion with the Russians thousands of times, meanwhile the Democratic "fact-checkers" tallied them into the thousands. When Mueller confirmed Trump was accurate, they kept counting how Trump denied these new accusations. Unending.

The Democratic Media is presenting a false narrative: Trump chaos or peace. The real choice is socialism or freedom. Lawlessness or rule of law.

We need to consider that the spin on the news is a two-sided problem.

I can read his tweets and see his press conferences, then hear CNN and Fox discuss it. And surely both have a spin. But while I like the conservative side of things, I see less spin in CNN than in Fox. There have been times that the things that Fox says are so out of touch with reality that I regret ever thinking that they were reasonable as a primary source for news. They are little more than Rush Limbaugh (and the others) 24/7. CNN actually takes the "left" to task for a lot of their errors. Fox just piles on in increasing the errors of the "right."

I worry about whether there will be a Republican party when this is all over. And maybe that is a good thing. Maybe something less extreme can emerge.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I also remember a brother then, who was so anti-Obama and very vocal about it, and he couldn't hardly accept that he should pray for him in any way (other than Obama should fail). It became very apparent that this was something not of the Lord in him (and the rest of us).

Never hope for any president to fail. Maybe fail at accomplishing certain goals, but not fail overall. For them to fail is for America to fail. I hope they all succeed at being the best president they can.

Even Trump. Unfortunately, I see him working very hard at failure.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Never hope for any president to fail. Maybe fail at accomplishing certain goals, but not fail overall. For them to fail is for America to fail. I hope they all succeed at being the best president they can.

Even Trump. Unfortunately, I see him working very hard at failure.

How about some example?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

We need to consider that the spin on the news is a two-sided problem.

I can read his tweets and see his press conferences, then hear CNN and Fox discuss it. And surely both have a spin. But while I like the conservative side of things, I see less spin in CNN than in Fox. There have been times that the things that Fox says are so out of touch with reality that I regret ever thinking that they were reasonable as a primary source for news. They are little more than Rush Limbaugh (and the others) 24/7. CNN actually takes the "left" to task for a lot of their errors. Fox just piles on in increasing the errors of the "right."

I worry about whether there will be a Republican party when this is all over. And maybe that is a good thing. Maybe something less extreme can emerge.

Fox News is all over the Map.

Some are Trump haters -- Shep Smith, Wallace, Brazell, Juan Williams, etc.

Some are Trump neutral -- Brett Bair, Carlson, MacCallum, etc.

Some are Trump supporters -- Hannity, Ingraham, Perrino, Hilton, etc.

But shortly Rupert Murdock will pass into the after life, and your heart can be cleansed of listening to all Trump support.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Amen bro. I had that sort of thing going on in me during the Clinton and Obama administrations and after Obama was elected the 2nd time, many of us could just not believe it and I went into something of a tailspin. This showed me that I was putting my trust in man! And then there was some sharing that I got light from, concerning praying for our presidents. My darkness was exposed and I changed my thinking. They are all just fallen men, and need our prayers. My unhealthy addiction to keeping an overly close eye on all things political was also exposed. These days I focus much, much less on such things, and pray for the whole mess more.

Great words of wisdom. Thanks.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

How about some example?

Not going to bother. I like you too much to get into a detailed political debate with you. The truth is that politics, from both sides, is full of problems. And full of hope and promise. Neither side is God's. And neither side is simply a disease. You and I both like the right, though we disagree on Trump, and I am probably not as far right as some might like me to be.

Let's leave it at that.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Fox News is all over the Map.

Some are Trump haters -- Shep Smith, Wallace, Brazell, Juan Williams, etc.

Some are Trump neutral -- Brett Bair, Carlson, MacCallum, etc.

Some are Trump supporters -- Hannity, Ingraham, Perrino, Hilton, etc.

But shortly Rupert Murdock will pass into the after life, and your heart can be cleansed of listening to all Trump support.

Many years ago (early 2000s) I began to get disenchanted with the pundits that otherwise spoke the things I "believed" in. They became more and more mean-spirited. Nastier and nastier. I stopped watching Fox News back around the time Colmes left. Not because I liked Colmes. I always thought they needed a more forceful liberal to make the discussions better. It was more like Hannity and milque toast. And Hannity was just as mean as the radio people I had quit listening to.

I have this problem. I like conservative positions, but I can't stand the people who speak up for them. It embarrasses me to be thought of in the same sentence as that kind of person.

No matter now much you might dislike CNN, I have found that some (not all) of the evening line-up is as even-handed as anyone could hope for. Sure they are liberal. But they don't hide that fact. And they are willing to call-out their own people for stupid statements, bad responses, etc. I just never could say that about Fox. And there really is no one else except wannabes.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

Many years ago (early 2000s) I began to get disenchanted with the pundits that otherwise spoke the things I "believed" in. They became more and more mean-spirited. Nastier and nastier. I stopped watching Fox News back around the time Colmes left. Not because I liked Colmes. I always thought they needed a more forceful liberal to make the discussions better. It was more like Hannity and milque toast. And Hannity was just as mean as the radio people I had quit listening to.

I have this problem. I like conservative positions, but I can't stand the people who speak up for them. It embarrasses me to be thought of in the same sentence as that kind of person.

No matter now much you might dislike CNN, I have found that some (not all) of the evening line-up is as even-handed as anyone could hope for. Sure they are liberal. But they don't hide that fact. And they are willing to call-out their own people for stupid statements, bad responses, etc. I just never could say that about Fox. And there really is no one else except wannabes.

This is much how I am! Sure, I'm conservative/libertarian, but more than that I am a son of the living God. So the mean-spirited divisiveness, to me, is just a worldly, fleshly thing that is quickly passing away (and not too soon).

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

This is much how I am! Sure, I'm conservative/libertarian, but more than that I am a son of the living God. So the mean-spirited divisiveness, to me, is just a worldly, fleshly thing that is quickly passing away (and not too soon).

I'm a Mugwump. As far as I'm concerned we're being tag-teamed.

And political parties becoming religious makes me want to become a 'none.'

[OBW]

Originally Posted by awareness

And political parties becoming religious makes me want to become a 'none.'

Worse than political parties becoming religious is churches becoming political. I am on the verge of emailing our pastor to consider removing the American flag from the sanctuary. Seems too much like an idol for a foreign god in the temple. Like an Ashteroth pole.

Fortunately, other than the presence of the flag, this assembly avoids overt political involvement. But listening to some of the people talk makes me think that removing the flag will cause a minor uproar for some.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

Worse than political parties becoming religious is churches becoming political. I am on the verge of emailing our pastor to consider removing the American flag from the sanctuary. Seems too much like an idol for a foreign god in the temple. Like an Ashteroth pole.

Fortunately, other than the presence of the flag, this assembly avoids overt political involvement. But listening to some of the people talk makes me think that removing the flag will cause a minor uproar for some.

Yes. Seems like a Romans 14:20 thing regarding not stumbling your brother over minor things . . .

Contending over politics is something akin to arguing about who will be first in the kingdom!

BTW - does anybody know what an Asheroth pole actually looked like?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

BTW - does anybody know what an Asheroth pole actually looked like?

https://www.google.com/search?q=Ashe...h=517&dpr=1.13

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Yes. Seems like a Romans 14:20 thing regarding not stumbling your brother over minor things . . .

Contending over politics is something akin to arguing about who will be first in the kingdom!

BTW - does anybody know what an Asheroth pole actually looked like?

I agree that arguing over politics is a minor thing.

But when we come to worship, bringing anything to which we "pledge allegiance to" other than God is a problem. The church, especially at worship, is of the kingdom of God, not the earthly kingdom in which the particular assembly is located. Giving attribution to that earthly kingdom is problematic. Especially when so many grant it something akin to theocracy status.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

I agree that arguing over politics is a minor thing.

But when we come to worship, bringing anything to which we "pledge allegiance to" other than God is a problem. The church, especially at worship, is of the kingdom of God, not the earthly kingdom in which the particular assembly is located. Giving attribution to that earthly kingdom is problematic. Especially when so many grant it something akin to theocracy status.

I'm saddened when I see people worship the flag or country. The American Dream has been a very high thing for mankind, in fact, I believe the best form of government, etc. that man has come up with. People get very caught up in it. I love this country, but that's the rub - anything we love besides God can quickly become an idol to us, that can seemingly then do no wrong.

But that's just the flesh being prideful of what it has. It always strikes me a little funny when I see signs that say something like, "I'm proud to be Polish" or "I'm proud to be an American," etc. As if we had any control over where we were born! Scripture asks why we are all proud of something we've been given . . .

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I'm saddened when I see people worship the flag or country. The American Dream has been a very high thing for mankind, in fact, I believe the best form of government, etc. that man has come up with. People get very caught up in it. I love this country, but that's the rub - anything we love besides God can quickly become an idol to us, that can seemingly then do no wrong.

But that's just the flesh being prideful of what it has. It always strikes me a little funny when I see signs that say something like, "I'm proud to be Polish" or "I'm proud to be an American," etc. As if we had any control over where we were born! Scripture asks why we are all proud of something we've been given . . .

The Lord never said it was wrong not to have other loves, only that He would be our first. Your comment seems extreme. I heard it too in the LC. Brothers could not even love their wives and kids fearing they could become an idol. That's crazy. Without healthy loves in our life, we become vulnerable to loving "the ministry" and only "the ministry."

Worshiping idols is not the same as love in my book. I heard this nonsense for years, i.e. "Anything we love can be an idol." I'm not buying it any more. I don't see that in the scripture.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I agree that arguing over politics is a minor thing.

But when we come to worship, bringing anything to which we "pledge allegiance to" other than God is a problem. The church, especially at worship, is of the kingdom of God, not the earthly kingdom in which the particular assembly is located. Giving attribution to that earthly kingdom is problematic. Especially when so many grant it something akin to theocracy status.

Not buying this. All jobs require a pledge of allegiance. The LC was great at condemning brothers for thei commitment to their employer. TC would regularly go on rants about how every company was "bankrupt to be." But then he would challenge us to be successful like the gentiles, by extolling the successful ones.

Many Christians support and pray for the nation of Israel. And that is wrong too? Sounds to me too heavenly minded and no earthly good. We already have enough people bad-mouthing our country as evil, than for you to expect this from Christians too.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Lord never said it was wrong not to have other loves, only that He would be our first. Your comment seems extreme. I heard it too in the LC. Brothers could not even love their wives and kids fearing they could become an idol. That's crazy. Without healthy loves in our life, we become vulnerable to loving "the ministry" and only "the ministry."

Worshiping idols is not the same as love in my book. I heard this nonsense for years, i.e. "Anything we love can be an idol." I'm not buying it any more. I don't see that in the scripture.

My response to the bolded above - yes, that is extreme!

"Can be an idol" is the key - you certainly don't have an idol if you don't love it, is my thought. I said "I love my country" and I do. Do you think this can be taken too far?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

My response to the bolded above - yes, that is extreme!

"Can be an idol" is the key - you certainly don't have an idol if you don't love it, is my thought. I said "I love my country" and I do. Do you think this can be taken too far?

Loyalty to a sports team is an idol ... even more so loyalty to a political party. It depends on how far you take it.

I've attended churches here were the preacher has to cut it short for a game. And going to lunch with them finds all they talk about is sports. Nothing about Jesus.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

I've attended churches here were the preacher has to cut it short for a game. And going to lunch with them finds all they talk about is sports. Nothing about Jesus.

Probably because you were there ... armed with questions.

[HERn]

In our One Another Groups (home meetings) at my community church we have been strongly urged not to talk politics so that we don't get derailed into arguments. I think its a good idea. I will discuss politics when one on one or with a couple of brothers during interpersonal interactions. For the most part we are a center-right church, but some of the brothers place conservative politics on the same level as orthodox theology and can become quite vocal taking over conversations. I'm sure the early church had similar tensions with the Herodians, Zealots, Pharasees, and Essenes all breathing the same air in close proximity!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by HERn

In our One Another Groups (home meetings) at my community church we have been strongly urged not to talk politics so that we don't get derailed into arguments. I think its a good idea. I will discuss politics when one on one or with a couple of brothers during interpersonal interactions. For the most part we are a center-right church, but some of the brothers place conservative politics on the same level as orthodox theology and can become quite vocal taking over conversations. I'm sure the early church had similar tensions with the Herodians, Zealots, Pharasees, and Essenes all breathing the same air in close proximity!

My sister is a long time member of a nearby Southern Baptist church. But she doesn't attend. Why? Because she was told she had to be a republican and had to wear dresses. She won't do either. She don't own a dress, and she's a Yellow-Dog Democrat.

I shy away from discussing politics with believers. I'd rather talk Bible stuff. But me and my JW friend get into it. He hates Trump. We also get into Bible stuff; they have their own translation. I have given him, and the big guns he brings to my door, an unbelievable hard time, many, many times ; epic indisputable bring downs. He keeps coming back. I like him. He gives me cut up wood for my winter heat. He's in my phone. We talk from time to time. He has no problem talking politics. And I've learned a bunch about JW's.

[HERn]

We moved back to our previous home with my wife's 91 year old dad and are attending our old community church. we were in a SB church but they had no dress restrictions and did not openly support any political party. they did create a huge food distribution program, a live in recovery program, and a program to help single moms and babies.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by HERn

some of the brothers place conservative politics on the same level as orthodox theology and can become quite vocal taking over conversations.

Yes, and I was there once! As I've shared, it's when Obama got elected the 2nd time that I got exposed how much I was putting my trust in some man-made system! The Lord is far above all this man-made stuff (yet He still does care for our stuff). Sure, the country had a great foundation with men who acknowledged God and His role in human affairs. But just as the Jews doggedly held onto a system given by God years ago above all else, the book of Hebrews exhorts them that they should move on to the reality in Christ and not go back to the shadow.

I have strong conservative/libertarian leanings, but in the end, having the best government system ever devised doesn't bring life to it's participants! We need to major on the major and minor in the minors.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I said "I love my country" and I do. Do you think this can be taken too far?

I agree with you on both parts. I love my country. It is far from perfect, but hard to beat.

But can it be taken too far? I'm sure it can. When we start singing to the country as part of our worship of God, then something is surely gone wrong in our priorities in love. I think that within the context of worship, it is best to think of it like what Jesus said about love of money v love of God. It needs to be one or the other. And within worship, it needs to be love for God and no room for love of country.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I agree with you on both parts. I love my country. It is far from perfect, but hard to beat.

But can it be taken too far? I'm sure it can. When we start singing to the country as part of our worship of God, then something is surely gone wrong in our priorities in love. I think that within the context of worship, it is best to think of it like what Jesus said about love of money v love of God. It needs to be one or the other. And within worship, it needs to be love for God and no room for love of country.

Perhaps we should then be regularly burning our flag just to prove that we admit that our country is "far from perfect," that the white man is truly evil, and that we Americans are "really free." Now I get it!

And how dare those misguided evangelicals vote their freedoms! Should they even be allowed to vote? Not for them sinful candidates! They can only vote for these sanctimonious virtue-signalers, who prove themselves worthy. Yeah Beto!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps we should then be regularly burning our flag just to prove that we admit that our country is "far from perfect," that the white man is truly evil, and that we Americans are "really free." Now I get it!

And how dare those misguided evangelicals vote their freedoms! Should they even be allowed to vote? Not for them sinful candidates! They can only vote for these sanctimonious virtue-signalers, who prove themselves worthy. Yeah Beto!

Silly talk. You are no doubt trying to do what Rush used to do (and maybe he still does): demonstrate absurdity by being absurd.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Silly talk. You are no doubt trying to do what Rush used to do (and maybe he still does): demonstrate absurdity by being absurd.

Not silly talk. Just being honest with the absurdity I get hit with.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Not silly talk. Just being honest with the absurdity I get hit with.

By then being absurd.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

By then being absurd.

So you then have exclusive rights to all absurdity?

That's not fair!

But I'll let you have this one, cause I'm such a great guy.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps we should then be regularly burning our flag just to prove that we admit that our country is "far from perfect," that the white man is truly evil, and that we Americans are "really free." Now I get it!

And how dare those misguided evangelicals vote their freedoms! Should they even be allowed to vote? Not for them sinful candidates! They can only vote for these sanctimonious virtue-signalers, who prove themselves worthy. Yeah Beto!

Did you intentionally misunderstand my post? You are surely talking about something entirely different than what you quoted from me. Sort of like a politician who is asked a question on one thing, says "I'm glad you asked that," then spends the whole time talking about something else.

I was not talking about what kind of politics I do or don't like. It wouldn't matter if we all agreed on politics and they were as pure as the driven snow. What I said would still stand. In the context of our time of worship, other than praying for wisdom for our leaders, the country is not part of worship. Nor is its flag. My point is not to denigrate the flag, or the country, or any of its citizens, but to narrow the focus of worship to the kingdom of God. And revering secular days (4th of July, mother's day, etc.), singing about our country, and placing a flag in a prominent place within the worship environment are all things foreign to the kingdom of God and our worship of Him. For that period of time they should not be present.

This has absolutely nothing to do with burning the flag or protesting against any political ideology. Don't get so caught up in your zeal for things political that you can't read what is said before going off on your own private tirade.

The worst thing is that even in other posts where I was talking about politics, I never said anything even close to the things you mocked. On this topic, you are getting to be a bit of a jerk.

[Sons to Glory!]

Is on the political thread where we take the "kid gloves" off with each other and let our "real selves" come through (aka let the flesh have free rein)?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Is on the political thread where we take the "kid gloves" off with each other and let our "real selves" come through (aka let the flesh have free rein)?

That's what I dislike politics, the zeal for party. Like the Texas pastor Robert Jeffress claiming civil war if Trump is impeached.

So we're going to kill each other over politics? ; the Trump supporters are going to kill liberals. That's how politics becomes.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Not buying this. All jobs require a pledge of allegiance. The LC was great at condemning brothers for thei commitment to their employer. TC would regularly go on rants about how every company was "bankrupt to be." But then he would challenge us to be successful like the gentiles, by extolling the successful ones.

Many Christians support and pray for the nation of Israel. And that is wrong too? Sounds to me too heavenly minded and no earthly good. We already have enough people bad-mouthing our country as evil, then for you to expect this from Christians too.

You are completely missing my point. I am not saying that we should not pledge allegiance to our country. I did not call our country evil. I merely stated (indirectly) that it is part of the kingdom of the world within which we are left to dwell. But as citizens of another kingdom (God's kingdom), there is a time and place to set aside our connection with anything of this world and worship the King of kings. And he doesn't like sharing focus with the kingdoms of this world.

I am saying that once we are within the corporate act of worship, all those other attachments should be left outside. We render to Caesar what is Caesar's. But nothing within our time of worship is (or should be) Caesar's.

I in no way said anything against America, or Israel, or your job (or mine). I said that once we come together to worship God corporately, we should leave all those things outside. Nothing more.

Leave the flag outside. Pledge to it elsewhere. Sing to it elsewhere. Just not within the worship of God.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by OBW

Leave the flag outside. Pledge to it elsewhere. Sing to it elsewhere. Just not within the worship of God.

Considering what Matthew(?) has Jesus saying on the mount, concerning taking oaths : not to 'heaven, earth, or even Jerusalem,' I don't know if we should take our patriotism that far. The JW's take it literally, so they won't salute the flag.

Like most of us, I grew up saying the pledge of allegiance, hand on heart. But I grew up and found it silly. I was born on the earth, not Mars, so why pledge to just a small section of geography? I resented that I was made to do it.

Now I don't. But at least I can quote Jesus.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by awareness

Considering what Matthew(?) has Jesus saying on the mount, concerning taking oaths : not to 'heaven, earth, or even Jerusalem,' I don't know if we should take our patriotism that far. The JW's take it literally, so they won't salute the flag.

Like most of us, I grew up saying the pledge of allegiance, hand on heart. But I grew up and found it silly. I was born on the earth, not Mars, so why pledge to just a small section of geography? I resented that I was made to do it.

Now I don't. But at least I can quote Jesus.

While we typically compel the young to recite the pledge at least periodically (it was not daily in my youth, but at times), we require it somewhat as part of the oath an alien must recite to become a citizen. As long as we consider it as a lesser love, devotion, etc., to that of Christ, it is not a problem.

On a related issue — the US invovlement in various military conflicts around the world — some go so far as to be pacifist due to their understanding of the command not to kill. Others follow a "just war" theory. And others have no particular thought on the matter as long as the country is involved. I probably tend toward the latter, but with reservations, especially when the "war" is not strongly supported and declared by Congress rather than just the Administration. And remote financial interests are hard to use as justification, though there are arguably other justifications in the recent undertakings.

But I do think that the status of the US as the global police force is a bit beyond what our role should be. NATO and the UN are not our rubber stamps for what we want. If they don't want to get involved in every conflict, we should listen, not just force ourselves. We need a balance between global involvement and isolationism and I think we are too far to the global involvement side at the present.

[Sons to Glory!]

Hard to figure out how it should all look exactly in this age! Someone recently suggested to me that we perhaps should vote people in that are globalists, so as to usher in the one world thing, and then this would facilitate Christ's 2nd coming. Who knows - hard to tell without His leading in such matters!

But our trust is in Him and when the King returns He will set it all straight! In the mean time, the swamp is a funky and confusing place . . .

[Sons to Glory!]

I read something yesterday that my (very conservative) dad sent it to me, about how impeaching Trump would be a good thing. It talked about how when formal impeachment proceedings occur, Trump's team would then have wide latitude to subpoena anybody they want. So, as the piece went, they could bring to light all the rumors about supposed underhanded dealings against Trump.

As most seem to agree, it went on to reiterate that the Republican Senate would never vote to remove Trump. But all this shadowy stuff from the left would have been brought into the light, which potentially could be very damaging to democrats - and would thereby insure Trump's reelection.

Politic is like an evil chess game . . .

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I read something yesterday that my (very conservative) dad sent it to me, about how impeaching Trump would be a good thing. It talked about how when formal impeachment proceedings occur, Trump's team would then have wide latitude to subpoena anybody they want. So, as the piece went, they could bring to light all the rumors about supposed underhanded dealings against Trump.

As most seem to agree, it went on to reiterate that the Republican Senate would never vote to remove Trump. But all this shadowy stuff from the left would have been brought into the light, which potentially could be very damaging to democrats - and would thereby insure Trump's reelection.

Politic is like an evil chess game . . .

After being in the local church cult, I want nothing to do with any other cult ... including the cult of Trump :

The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control

https://www.amazon.com/Cult-Trump-Le...s%2C138&sr=8-1

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I read something yesterday that my (very conservative) dad sent it to me, about how impeaching Trump would be a good thing. It talked about how when formal impeachment proceedings occur, Trump's team would then have wide latitude to subpoena anybody they want. So, as the piece went, they could bring to light all the rumors about supposed underhanded dealings against Trump.

As most seem to agree, it went on to reiterate that the Republican Senate would never vote to remove Trump. But all this shadowy stuff from the left would have been brought into the light, which potentially could be very damaging to democrats - and would thereby insure Trump's reelection.

Politic is like an evil chess game . . .

Ahh ... But at least chess games have rules which both sides agree to. This Current impeachment "inquiry" is not following any rules. No House vote. Not led by Judiciery Committee. Meetings held in secret. Manuscrpts not available to Minority. "Whistle blower" working with House Committee. Etc.

As I watch the media propaganda in operation, I now understand how totalitarian regimes can use the Press to control the minds of its people.

The good thing is we still have alternative sources to find the truth. I have concluded long ago that nearly without exception everything the Trump admin is accused of is exactly what the Left is doing. The current events surrounding Ukraine is a classic example of this. Romans 2.1 has always defined evil.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

After being in the local church cult, I want nothing to do with any other cult ... including the cult of Trump :

The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control

https://www.amazon.com/Cult-Trump-Le...s%2C138&sr=8-1

Sorry Bro, but you have joined the Progressive Cult, the biggest Cult there is.

Their chief tenet of faith is globalism and planet earth. They worship and serve the creation rather than the Creator.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sorry Bro, but you have joined the Progressive Cult, the biggest Cult there is.

Their chief tenet of faith is globalism and planet earth. They worship and serve the creation rather than the Creator.

Yes, there's lots of cults out there. We exLCers shouldn't in any of them.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yes, there's lots of cults out there. We exLCers shouldn't be in any of them.

Right! Choose your "cult" wisely.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Ahh ... But at least chess games have rules which both sides agree to. This Current impeachment "inquiry" is not following any rules. No House vote. Not led by Judiciery Committee. Meetings held in secret. Manuscrpts not available to Minority. "Whistle blower" working with House Committee. Etc.

As I watch the media propaganda in operation, I now understand how totalitarian regimes can use the Press to control the minds of its people.

The good thing is we still have alternative sources to find the truth. I have concluded long ago that nearly without exception everything the Trump admin is accused of is exactly what the Left is doing. The current events surrounding Ukraine is a classic example of this. Romans 2.1 has always defined evil.

One thing about the current state of American politics is it reminds me so much of the Local Churches I left behind.
Talk about rules and how the current House changed the rules back on August 12. Ironically the same day the whistleblower sent in her/his letter.
Much the same was the local churches in the mid to late 80's when LSM co-workers changed the rules by which many elders had operated by for years. They felt undermined and manipulated. I'm sure many of those GOP in the House ore Representatives are voicing much the same.
Just as the left is accusing Trump of what they're doing, the LSM co-workers accused Ingalls, So, Mallon, etc of doing what they the LSM co-workers were doing.
Whenever Speaker Pelosi is declaring Trump as being lawless, I say "mirror". She, Schiff, etc are projecting exactly what they are doing. When there was talk about investigating into Ukraine, why the backlash? What is there to hide? Crowdstrike? Nepotism? Just like the LSM, the liberals in power of US Government have something they are desperate to keep hidden.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

One thing about the current state of American politics is it reminds me so much of the Local Churches I left behind.
Talk about rules and how the current House changed the rules back on August 12. Ironically the same day the whistleblower sent in her/his letter.
Much the same was the local churches in the mid to late 80's when LSM co-workers changed the rules by which many elders had operated by for years. They felt undermined and manipulated. I'm sure many of those GOP in the House ore Representatives are voicing much the same.
Just as the left is accusing Trump of what they're doing, the LSM co-workers accused Ingalls, So, Mallon, etc of doing what they the LSM co-workers were doing.
Whenever Speaker Pelosi is declaring Trump as being lawless, I say "mirror". She, Schiff, etc are projecting exactly what they are doing. When there was talk about investigating into Ukraine, why the backlash? What is there to hide? Crowdstrike? Nepotism? Just like the LSM, the liberals in power of US Government have something they are desperate to keep hidden.

Yes, the similarities of lawlessness are seen everywhere.

Many comparisons between today's Impeachment and the Whistler Quarantine Kangaroo Court.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Terry

One thing about the current state of American politics is it reminds me so much of the Local Churches I left behind.
Talk about rules and how the current House changed the rules back on August 12. Ironically the same day the whistleblower sent in her/his letter.
Much the same was the local churches in the mid to late 80's when LSM co-workers changed the rules by which many elders had operated by for years. They felt undermined and manipulated. I'm sure many of those GOP in the House ore Representatives are voicing much the same.
Just as the left is accusing Trump of what they're doing, the LSM co-workers accused Ingalls, So, Mallon, etc of doing what they the LSM co-workers were doing.
Whenever Speaker Pelosi is declaring Trump as being lawless, I say "mirror". She, Schiff, etc are projecting exactly what they are doing. When there was talk about investigating into Ukraine, why the backlash? What is there to hide? Crowdstrike? Nepotism? Just like the LSM, the liberals in power of US Government have something they are desperate to keep hidden.

If you don't want to impeach Trump, and toss him out of office, you aren't part of the 51% of the recent Fox poll.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

If you don't want to impeach Trump, and toss him out of office, you aren't part of the 51% of the recent Fox poll.

Never trust a Fox poll. But if right, so what? Do we allow the latest mood of the tyranny of the majority to guide us?

I live by convictions, not what everybody in the majority happens to think. Or not.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Never trust a Fox poll. But if right, so what? Do we allow the latest mood of the tyranny of the majority to guide us?

I live by convictions, not what everybody in the majority happens to think. Or not.

So again, impeachment is not a bad thing and doesn't mean removal, which the Senate will likely never do. But the whole thing will bring many things into the light of day - shenanigans done by those on both sides.

[OBW]

I live by convictions, not what everybody in the majority happens to think. Or not.

I can agree. But I also recognize that a government of the people will necessarily respond to the majority. It is through reliance on the decency of people that the majority doesn't just jail everyone else (at a hyperbolic extreme). But it requires a majority to do anything. And sometimes it takes compromise between two or more minorities to achieve a majority.

If there is no majority — by a single group or a collection of groups — then nothing happens. But with a majority, things can, and often do, happen.

And when we are in the majority, we like what happens. But when we are in the minority, we don't like what happens.

But either way, we are not the only ones who comprise the right (correct) or only reasonable course of action. And we are not the only reasonable people on the continent. And all of the reasonable persons do not agree on everything. And, unfortunately, the unreasonable (and ignorant) are part of what helps make almost any group into the majority on any particular issue at any particular moment.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I can agree. But I also recognize that a government of the people will necessarily respond to the majority. It is through reliance on the decency of people that the majority doesn't just jail everyone else (at a hyperbolic extreme). But it requires a majority to do anything. And sometimes it takes compromise between two or more minorities to achieve a majority.

If there is no majority — by a single group or a collection of groups — then nothing happens. But with a majority, things can, and often do, happen.

And when we are in the majority, we like what happens. But when we are in the minority, we don't like what happens.

But either way, we are not the only ones who comprise the right (correct) or only reasonable course of action. And we are not the only reasonable people on the continent. And all of the reasonable persons do not agree on everything. And, unfortunately, the unreasonable (and ignorant) are part of what helps make almost any group into the majority on any particular issue at any particular moment.

But what all sides require, regardless of party or policy, is a "somewhat" fair, honest, and unbiased Press. Unfortunately this has slowly deteriorated over the years. Without an honest Press, all we have is unprincipled propaganda. Forget about the two sides working together. We have one side who refuses to admit that the President was democratically elected. Without this, there is no democracy. The people have no ability to peacefully express their will.

Now we have one side, using the power of the Press, and the power of our intelligence community, continually demagoguing every news event. We are constantly subjected to one outrageous accusation after another. Like a revolving door, every day brings fresh charges, and forgotten defenses of old charges. Except for some Trump-polemic websites, there is no way to even know that these endless accusations have been constantly debunked.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Never trust a Fox poll. But if right, so what? Do we allow the latest mood of the tyranny of the majority to guide us?

I live by convictions, not what everybody in the majority happens to think. Or not.

Must still be LC slooshing around in there somewhere. In that case, there's a new wave in the Trump cult. Now it's :

Lock Him up! Lock Him up! Lock Him up! Lock Him up! Lock Him up! Lock Him up! Lock Him up!

Oddly, the left agrees.

[Ohio]

Just amazing how the Left elects idiots . . .

[Ohio]

And they want to see Trump's taxes . . .

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But what all sides require, regardless of party or policy, is a "somewhat" fair, honest, and unbiased Press. Unfortunately this has slowly deteriorated over the years.

What we like to think about the near past ignores the more distant history. At the time of the founding of our nation, most newspapers were owned by the wealthy. Generally one wealthy person per paper. His thoughts drove how that paper wrote and reported. There was no such thing as an unbiased press.

To get the news, you had to understand the bias of the owner of each newspaper. Of course, there were many newspapers in those days. It has only been in the past 100 or s years that it began to consolidate into 1 or 2 broadly-published local papers. And even there it was often that one was more to one side of things than the other. That is the way it was in Dallas until the Times Herald folded into the Morning News (in the 90s?). Neither was strongly to either side, but now there is only one. (And depending on the side you are on, you swear it leans to the other.)

So what it really requires is an educated population that is not easily swayed by fake news. And despite my leaning to the right on things, I find much more truly fake news to come from the right (especailly FOX News) than from the others. I may not always like where the editorial content of the others goes, but I trust their basic reporting far above that of FOX. FOXy gets a failing grade from me.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

What we like to think about the near past ignores the more distant history. At the time of the founding of our nation, most newspapers were owned by the wealthy. Generally one wealthy person per paper. His thoughts drove how that paper wrote and reported. There was no such thing as an unbiased press.

To get the news, you had to understand the bias of the owner of each newspaper. Of course, there were many newspapers in those days. It has only been in the past 100 or s years that it began to consolidate into 1 or 2 broadly-published local papers. And even there it was often that one was more to one side of things than the other. That is the way it was in Dallas until the Times Herald folded into the Morning News (in the 90s?). Neither was strongly to either side, but now there is only one. (And depending on the side you are on, you swear it leans to the other.)

So what it really requires is an educated population that is not easily swayed by fake news. And despite my leaning to the right on things, I find much more truly fake news to come from the right (especailly FOX News) than from the others. I may not always like where the editorial content of the others goes, but I trust their basic reporting far above that of FOX. FOXy gets a failing grade from me.

We don't have cable, so I usually only see the cable news channels when I go to the gym. And like you, I lean right (somewhat libertarian), but I get tired of Fox News. They usually have Fox, CNN and MSNBC all playing side by side on screens at the gym, and it is amusing to see how biased they all are! It makes me wish for an outlet that you didn't have to filter constantly, but that's Adam for you - always expressing bias in some way . . .

And to your point about just taking the bias into consideration. I've subscribed to The Week magazine for years, because it gives both sides, quoting sources from left and right news outlets. I've turned various conservative people on to it, but they won't read it any more because it leans too far left. In actuality, though The Week does give both sides, it still skews to the left on many things. One way they do this is in an article, the last word quoted is almost always from a left-leaning source. But I'm aware of this and can filter accordingly.

[TLFisher]

All this talk about Eric Ciaramella being whistleblower. Consider this if he wasn't don't you think he would have filed a defamation lawsuit by now?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

All this talk about Eric Ciaramella being whistleblower. Consider this if he wasn't don't you think he would have filed a defamation lawsuit by now?

I don't see this as defamation since half the country would consider him a hero, and the other half just wants to see him questioned under oath.

Hillary's comments about Tulsi Gabbard being a Russian agent, however, are definitely defaming. I also think they are dissembling, in other words, she is accusing Tulsi of what she has probably become. Standard practice for the intelligence community. Kind of like Putin telling us that he wanted Trump to win because he is a "business man," after Putin was discovered buying our uranium from Hillary for huge cash donations to her "humanitarian" foundation.

[Ohio]

A picture is worth a thousand words ...




It's coming folks! Justice that is.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

. . . it is amusing to see how biased they all are! . . . .

I can agree with the bias. They like their positions. But I do not see in some of the CNN reports/commentators the same kind of attitude that turns a blind eye to everything that contradicts their position. I can't just listen to them all . . . or even the better ones for too long. But I can't stomach the Hannity/Beck/etc view that has any kind of disagreement with them as a mental disorder. I can't find a "quality" "right" commentator that speaks with any serious integrity like I find at CNN.

I had the opportunity to watch some of the hearings a week ago. When the sound bites started up at the lunch break and at the end of each day, I could not figure out if the guys at Fox were actually talking about the same hearing I had watched. Of course, that was probably because the Republican committee members did not actually ask any questions that were relevant to the topic or those providing testimony. Mostly just trying to discover the name of a protected person or rehash tired, old, and disproven conspiracy theories.

I will leave it at that.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

I can agree with the bias. They like their positions. But I do not see in some of the CNN reports/commentators the same kind of attitude that turns a blind eye to everything that contradicts their position. I can't just listen to them all . . . or even the better ones for too long. But I can't stomach the Hannity/Beck/etc view that has any kind of disagreement with them as a mental disorder. I can't find a "quality" "right" commentator that speaks with any serious integrity like I find at CNN.

I had the opportunity to watch some of the hearings a week ago. When the sound bites started up at the lunch break and at the end of each day, I could not figure out if the guys at Fox were actually talking about the same hearing I had watched. Of course, that was probably because the Republican committee members did not actually ask any questions that were relevant to the topic or those providing testimony. Mostly just trying to discover the name of a protected person or rehash tired, old, and disproven conspiracy theories.

I will leave it at that.

It's all just mostly a big display of the flesh - right, left or center! Adam at full blossom, old, tired and dying . . . and hallelujah - FADING AWAY!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

It's all just mostly a big display of the flesh - right, left or center! Adam at full blossom, old, tired and dying . . . and hallelujah - FADING AWAY!

Perhaps then I should stop reading the Bible, since it also can be perceived as "a big display of the flesh ... Adam at full blossom, old, tired, dying."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps then I should stop reading the Bible, since it also can be perceived as "a big display of the flesh ... Adam at full blossom, old, tired, dying."

Are you comparing the Bible with TV news?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Are you comparing the Bible with TV news?

Huh?

I was wondering how I could pass thru life applying your standards.

Don't you agree that nearly every page of the Bible is a display of the flesh, old Adam in plain sight?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Huh?

I was wondering how I could pass thru life applying your standards.

Don't you agree that nearly every page of the Bible is a display of the flesh, old Adam in plain sight?

Sure, but there's one little difference - like, it's the word of God dude!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And yes bro, please try harder to live up to my HIGH expectations (it is my express mission in life to set those for you)!

[Ohio]

Without their DOUBLE STANDARDS these folks would have no standards at all . . .

[Sons to Glory!]

Hate speech.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Hate speech.

I saw a news clip that some guy got 15 years for burning a gay flag, but burning the American flag is a "constitutional right" protected by the 1st Amendment.

Such is hate speech hypocrisy and demagoguery.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I saw a news clip that some guy got 15 years for burning a gay flag, but burning the American flag is a "constitutional right" protected by the 1st Amendment.

Such is hate speech hypocrisy and demagoguery.

Even though there may be doubts, is it possible for liberals to be saved? And what about conservatives - could even they possibly be saved?

Of course those are absurd questions, but as Rush used to say (I don't know if he still says it, as I rarely listen to him any more), "Demonstrating absurdity by being absurd."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Even though there may be doubts, is it possible for liberals to be saved? And what about conservatives - could even they possibly be saved?

Of course those are absurd questions, but as Rush used to say (I don't know if he still says it, as I rarely listen to him any more), "Demonstrating absurdity by being absurd."

The topic here is politics or culture wars, not salvation. But I understand that you are following Rush's pattern and posting absudities.

Folks use Trump's flaws to condemn him, but it's like using General Eisenhower's or General Marshall's flaws to condemn them. There is a battle of ideas in the US and the world that has been raging for a century. You could partly describe it as left v right, socialism v capitalism, globalism v nationalism, atheism v beliefs, totalitarianism v liberty, progressivism v conservatism, etc. Despite Trump's many flaws, he does fight for what is right. The alternative is frightening. The US still leads some of the world. If the US collapses under the old illusions of socialism, global lawlessness will consume it.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Cthe topic here is politics or culture wars, not salvation. But I understand that you are following Rush's pattern and posting absudities.

Folks use Trump's flaws to condemn him, but it's like using General Eisenhower's or General Marshall's flaws to condemn them. There is a battle of ideas in the US and the world that has been raging for a century. You could partly describe it as left v right, socialism v capitalism, globalism v nationalism, atheism v beliefs, totalitarianism v liberty, progressivism v conservatism, etc. Despite Trump's many flaws, he does fight for what is right. The alternative is frightening. The US still leads some of the world. If the US collapses under the old illusions of socialism, global lawlessness will consume it.

Going back to my "Hate speech" comment, the bottom line in all of this is "they" are just lost . . . so how should we expect them to act? (the question now is, does this apply to liberals or conservatives?)

[OBW]

I saw a news clip that some guy got 15 years for burning a gay flag, but burning the American flag is a "constitutional right" protected by the 1st Amendment.

I agree that the disparity is ridiculous. Neither should be punishable except to the extent that there is a problem with the fire itself.

But at the same time, firing up the tar and gathering the feathers is also a kind of hate speech.

As long as we don't actually use tar and feathers, it should be constitutionally protected.

But as Christians, even what is constitutionally protected is not the same as being righteous. Or as Paul would say "not expedient." If our guide for righteous living is the constitution, there is a lot of allowance for unrighteousness — even protection for it. The Bible (which I am being chastised for dismissing "inerrancy" of in the main forum) has a higher standard.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Going back to my "Hate speech" comment, the bottom line in all of this is "they" are just lost . . . so how should we expect them to act? (the question now is, does this apply to liberals or conservatives?)

And the answer is, we are all lost if we are engaged in this kind of thinking. As long as we think of "us v them," no matter which side "we" are on, we are lost relative to our higher calling. We should expect less of anybody but ourselves. In other words, if I can't apply it to me, how do I apply it to anyone else?

Of course, this is the question for the Christian, no matter what side of the political spectrum they may lean toward. (And despite the insistence of some of our Evangelical leaders, God does not vote Republican. Or Democrat. Or anything.) For the rest, it is just a question of equitably applying the constitution.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I agree that the disparity is ridiculous. Neither should be punishable except to the extent that there is a problem with the fire itself.

But at the same time, firing up the tar and gathering the feathers is also a kind of hate speech.

As long as we don't actually use tar and feathers, it should be constitutionally protected.

But as Christians, even what is constitutionally protected is not the same as being righteous. Or as Paul would say "not expedient." If our guide for righteous living is the constitution, there is a lot of allowance for unrighteousness — even protection for it. The Bible (which I am being chastised for dismissing "inerrancy" of in the main forum) has a higher standard.

Apparently my point was lost in the translation.

I did not mention this flag-burning case to provide license for Christians, rather to display how the laws of our land have become so biased in favor of activist minorities who owe their identity to the sins of Sodom.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Apparently my point was lost in the translation.

I did not mention this flag-burning case to provide license for Christians, rather to display how the laws of our land have become so biased in favor of activist minorities who owe their identity to the sins of Sodom.

The laws of our land have changed such that they are less restrictive on otherwise private behavior. That this behavior is contrary to Christian morality and values is quite clear.

But even at that, in the NT the call is to tolerance concerning the actions of sinners while holding ourselves to a higher standard. I am not saying that we should drop our personal/Christian stand against certain sins, but that holding it up as a "must" standard for the world is beyond the scope of our calling. Not saying that we should never try to improve things even in the world. But at what cost? At the cost of leaving our "love" for neighbor in the closet while we beat them up rhetorically?

That is a little like demeaning all intelligence reports that don't fit your personal feelings, then trotting one out to justify a drone attack. Not saying either position is entirely wrong, but that the hypocrisy of cherry-picking the good v bad intelligence (or places to apply love) based on my personal feelings is entirely without merit and leaves every decision in question.

And leaves our Christian testimony in question, if not in shambles.

The problems are enormous in these political discussions.

Are the Democrats out to get Trump? It is hard to argue otherwise. But that does not make the issues that they found bogus or irrelevant.

Does Donald Trump lie almost constantly? The evidence seems to bear that out. But that doesn't mean that in any particular case he is simply lying ("because his lips are moving."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Does Donald Trump lie almost constantly? The evidence seems to bear that out.

Donald Trump has "lied" for almost 4 years that claims of him being a Russian asset were lies and fake news. Liberal "fact-checkers" faithfully counted every one of these denials as "lies."

Robert Muller had months and months with dozens of top prosecutors working with dozens and dozens more government FBI agents and unlimited resources ... and then concluded that there was not a single shred of evidence that A-N-Y American had colluded with the Russians.

Yet, still today, millions of Americans believe in their heart of hearts that Trump was and still is Putin's White House Puppet who interfered with the 2016 election.

Sounds like you might still be one of these "believers."

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Donald Trump has "lied" for almost 4 years that claims of him being a Russian asset were lies and fake news. Liberal "fact-checkers" faithfully counted every one of these denials as "lies."

Robert Muller had months and months with dozens of top prosecutors working with dozens and dozens more government FBI agents and unlimited resources ... and then concluded that there was not a single shred of evidence that A-N-Y American had colluded with the Russians.

Yet, still today, millions of Americans believe in their heart of hearts that Trump was and still is Putin's White House Puppet who interfered with the 2016 election.

Sounds like you might still be one of these "believers."

Cherry-picking one topic on which you think Trump is not lying does not gloss over the constant repetition of conspiracy theories, including those originated by the Russian propaganda machine. And just constant false statements on a whole host of issues.

Look, I don't think Trump is actively some Russian asset. But he is apparently too stupid to realize when he is acting in their interest by repeating lies that they created (whether or not Trump realizes the source). He was happy to use US intelligence to order a drone strike, but ignores reams of paper full of US intelligence when he brown-noses Putin and simply declares Russia did not meddle in the 2016 US election. And ignores more of that intelligence (which he almost never reads anyway) by asserting that it was really Ukraine that was doing the meddling. Another lie which he has repeated so much that the mooing cows now believe it to be the truth. (I am assuming that you are not among that particular herd.)

And even when he makes a mistake — like the hurricane threatening Alabama — he can't admit he had some faulty information, but doubles-down and draws up a fake map to support his stupidity.

I know it is a dangerous position to take, but he is approaching the mythical "it's a lie because his lips are moving (or thumbs are typing)" level of distrust in anything he says. I desperately want to vote for a Republican. But as long as he is on the ticket, I am leaning toward a scorched-earth policy with regard to any politician who blindly supported him these 3 years. We survived 8 years of Obama. Maybe the Republican party can find an intelligent version of itself during 4 to 8 years wandering in the desert. It is becoming clear that the promised land that so many thought we were entering was really the entry hall for Hell. I'll take the Sinai peninsula over that any day.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Cherry-picking one topic on which you think Trump is not lying does not gloss over the constant repetition of conspiracy theories, including those originated by the Russian propaganda machine. And just constant false statements on a whole host of issues.

One topic? Russian collusion was THE TOPIC!

Conspiracy theories? Like Trump's claim that he was being spied on? Have you not read anything about this beyond CNN? The Horowitz report?

On this matter Trump was completely right. The FBI was spying on him. Have you not read that it was Adm. Mike Rogers who tipped off Trump concerning the illegal spying? Trump immediately moved his campaign from Trump Tower to New Jersey. The media mocked him in unison over it. Trump was right, but was the media laughing stock for weeks. Meanwhile, the "Trump Lies" Geiger counter kept racking up the hits.

Sorry, OBW, but I thought you were better educated. Apparently you are still affected by TDS. Few have actually recovered from it.

Hey, since you still watch CNN, did you hear that they secretly gave an 8-figure cash payment to Nick Sandmann, the Covington HSer? Talk about "Crooked News Network."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

And even when he makes a mistake — like the hurricane threatening Alabama — he can't admit he had some faulty information, but doubles-down and draws up a fake map to support his stupidity.

The entire hurricane tracking community also thought that hurricane might hit Alabama. And you blame Trump for this, as if he lied and tried to deceive us, and now needs to repent?


If TDS has got you thinking like this, why are you not out condemning every meteorologist in the world? This is so crazy!

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The entire hurricane tracking community also thought that hurricane might hit Alabama. And you blame Trump for this, as if he lied and tried to deceive us, and now needs to repent?


If TDS has got you thinking like this, why are you not out condemning every meteorologist in the world? This is so crazy!

It might have been at the extremes of a very early forecast, but had been eliminated long before Trump repeated it. And they never had a map that looked like that. It was a fabrication.

I never once said the word "repent." But it is clear that even if there was a remote possibility in tracking toward Alabama when the thing was actually many days away from even hitting the east coast, that had long been abandoned when Trump started talking about it. And it would suggest how little he actually keeps up with much of anything. It is almost like someone said this hurricane in the mid-Atlantic might even hit Alabama. Trump says, "Got it. Don't bother me with any updates now." And that, as they say, is the end of the story.

Reminds me of my dad's talk about weather forcasting at Carswell AFB in Ft Worth back in 1957-58. The Canadian or Pacific Northwest activity suggests a cold front with likely snow to reach the DFW area in a few days. It even seems to be tracking along at the projected speed. Then it slows down or even stops before reaching the area. And even if the cold front eventually makes — though a day or two late — the snow just stops 30-60 miles north of DFW. There is no way to assert that it will happen that way, though it is likely. But not because of anything concrete known at the time.

Even today, they do better at it, but the same delays or stops continue to occur. They just hedge their bets now and say it might make it and it might not. But I don't know what it is like where you live, but a 5 to 10-day forecast is often not even reliable in the always-hot summer in DFW. And if there are expected changes, it is even less reliable. So hunkering down on a very early (and very large range of possibilities) forecast as something to go with while ignoring what is now actually happening just underscores Trump's lack of concern for facts. Facts just get in the way.

This argument is pointless anyway. You are sold on the guy no matter what he says or does while I cab find no redeeming value to his leadership. His moral and social behavior are different from, but definitely not better than that of Hilary Clinton. And despite all about her that I do not like, I think that she would have been a better president. It would have been better if we could have chosen between Clinton and Kasich, or one of the other governors. (Unfortunately, my opinion of Pence is clouded by his association with Trump.) I think I could even take Cruz over Trump and that is quite a stretch for me.

I just cannot fathom how Christians can refer to such a man as Trump as their Cyrus.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

It might have been at the extremes of a very early forecast, but had been eliminated long before Trump repeated it. And they never had a map that looked like that. It was a fabrication.

I just cannot fathom how Christians can refer to such a man as Trump . . .

I'll concede that Trump has no business in Meteorology. But for you to buy into this part of the media smear job displays more about your judgment.

I'll skip by your preference for Hilary Clinton.

Your last comment defies all common sense. Trump is pro-life. He is against abortion. On this matter alone, Trump gets the support of real Christians.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Your last comment defies all common sense. Trump is pro-life. He is against abortion. On this matter alone, Trump gets the support of real Christians.

That is a significant issue. But it is not the entirety of morality.

And even yet another conservative judge on SCOTUS is not going to end abortion. It is engrained in the minds of people as a legitimate option. They do not agree that life begins at conception. If they did, they could not simply declare it to be a "choice." Or a "right." The most that SCOTUS could do is remove some of the federal-level control on the issue. So it reverts to the states where people have generally ceased thinking of abortion as a basis for voting for or against particular persons. As long as there is major support, we are just moving the issue downhill. And the result will be, at best, that there is more restriction on late-term abortions. And that might happen anyway. But it will not go away — even in the most conservative states.

The need is not for heightened criminalization, but changes in the thinking of the people who somehow think they have no other choice (thus elimination the perception of choice in the matter). They need support and help from loving people, not angry shouts from the Pharisees who think this is a theocracy and are trying to avert God's banishing us to a new Babylon.

And what did we get for our compromise? For our trading of one moral issue for all others? Mostly meaningless support for an issue that will probably not be impacted at the levels imagined anyway. No matter what the justices personally think, they tend to reject taking on cases that involve decided issues. So even the hotly-contested Cavenaugh will likely have no impact on the issue.

And on the flip side, we accepted a man worse than the one we tried to impeach 20+ years ago for just being a philanderer and trying to hide it. We declare him to be our Cyrus. Really? More like Jezebel. And we invite him into our churches. We are doing exactly what the church did when Constantine came along. Accepting state invovlement so we can dictate how things will be.

Blessed are those who gain access to the power of the state for they shall be able to bring in the kingdom of God quicker than God could without it.

Blessed are they who demonize everyone who is not like them or come from s#!t#0l3 nations.

Blessed are they who praise filth in the hopes that they might gain the right to punish sinners in this age rather than allowing them to wait for whatever punishment is to come in the next age.

I'm sorry. That part of the beatitudes is missing from my Bible!

And vilifying certain non-Christians just because some of their numbers might be terrorists doesn't fit with loving your neighbor as yourself. From where I sit, it suggests either some extreme self-loathing . . . or rejection of that particular command as just being over. As Lee would say, because the law has ended.

I likely won't return on this topic, so save your breath (and electrons). Mark Galli was absolutely right. There are a lot of evangelicals that need to rethink what it means to be spiritual.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

That is a significant issue. But it is not the entirety of morality.

And even yet another conservative judge on SCOTUS is not going to end abortion. It is engrained in the minds of people as a legitimate option. They do not agree that life begins at conception. If they did, they could not simply declare it to be a "choice." Or a "right." The most that SCOTUS could do is remove some of the federal-level control on the issue. So it reverts to the states where people have generally ceased thinking of abortion as a basis for voting for or against particular persons. As long as there is major support, we are just moving the issue downhill. And the result will be, at best, that there is more restriction on late-term abortions. And that might happen anyway. But it will not go away — even in the most conservative states.

The need is not for heightened criminalization, but changes in the thinking of the people who somehow think they have no other choice (thus elimination the perception of choice in the matter). They need support and help from loving people, not angry shouts from the Pharisees who think this is a theocracy and are trying to avert God's banishing us to a new Babylon.

And what did we get for our compromise? For our trading of one moral issue for all others? Mostly meaningless support for an issue that will probably not be impacted at the levels imagined anyway. No matter what the justices personally think, they tend to reject taking on cases that involve decided issues. So even the hotly-contested Cavenaugh will likely have no impact on the issue.

And on the flip side, we accepted a man worse than the one we tried to impeach 20+ years ago for just being a philanderer and trying to hide it. We declare him to be our Cyrus. Really? More like Jezebel. And we invite him into our churches. We are doing exactly what the church did when Constantine came along. Accepting state involvement so we can dictate how things will be.

And vilifying certain non-Christians just because some of their numbers might be terrorists doesn't fit with loving your neighbor as yourself. From where I sit, it suggests either some extreme self-loathing . . . or rejection of that particular command as just being over. As Lee would say, because the law has ended.

I likely won't return on this topic, so save your breath (and electrons). Mark Galli was absolutely right. There are a lot of evangelicals that need to rethink what it means to be spiritual.

OBW, your arguments are so flawed in the minds of his supporters, evangelical or otherwise, but I'm starting to think that you, like Galli, are more upset with Christians who dare to support Trump, than Trump himself. A sure sign of the deleterious effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome. And Galli is now "spiritual" because he rejects President Trump?

How interesting that you dismiss all of Trump's judicial appointments, some saying his greatest accomplishment to date, because they are "not going to end abortion." Conservatives have witnessed the eroding of civil and religious liberties for centuries, and Trump is attempting to reverse that, by ending judicial activism. Obviously, by siding with the atheistic and amoral Left, you don't think any of Trump's appointments are beneficial. Glad to hear that you are not a Pharisee in this matter! Regarding the slaughter of the unborn, at least you are "compassionate" towards the abortion industry.

Only you could think that Trump is worse than the one impeached 20 years ago. Trump threw Jeffrey Epstein out of MaraLago, Clinton however joined him, enabled him, played with him, and protected him. Epstein had a huge painting of Clinton in a blue dress. The two of them mocked the impeachment affair. Dozens of underage pretties have identified Clinton at his island parties. Is there some moral equivalency here? Forget about the actual crimes Clinton was impeached for, (perjury, witness tampering, obstruction of justice, etc.) he raped numerous women, seduced interns, and corrupted minors. Some of it in the White House! Real Christians see some differences here.

Interesting that you refer to Brett Kavanaugh as "hotly contested." Obviously you believed some of his accusers. That alone discredits your ability to discern false witnesses and unrighteousness.

Seems like you got issues with those who refer to Trump as Cyrus. Are you serious? Was Cyrus a holy and godly man? His notable feature was the support of Israel, permitting the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple. Has not God promised to bless those who bless Israel? Trump moved the embassy. More than any president in history, Trump has blessed Israel. Ask them, they will tell you. But you tend to fault-find and curse those whom God blesses. I'm not excusing anyone's sins, but neither am I going to side against God.

Your comments about "vilifying certain non-Christians" are straight from the democratic talking points. Before Trump was elected, Obama said the same things about illegal aliens. Hey did you see that Trump locked kids in cages? Oops, that pic was during the Obama administration. Don't let facts get in the way of your Trump hate! But when Obama did the same, no one accused him of "not loving his neighbor as himself."

Anyways, this is America, and you are free to believe whatever the media tells you about Evangelical Christians, but don't expect me to not push back occasionally on the disinformation and deception.

[OBW]

. . . but I'm starting to think that you, like Galli, are more upset with Christians who dare to support Trump, than Trump himself. A sure sign of the deleterious effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Trump derangement syndrome is really a delusion that Trump is the god that he thinks he is. I do not necessarily disagree with the politics of people who decided that Trump was the lesser evil in the 2016 election. But I disagree that the whole of Christian morality and action should be in ranting about abortion and LGBQ?? issues in a manner that is more like the heathen we claim to be trying to stop.

And once again you conflate disagreement with the manner of how evangelicals have gone about trying to force their morality on the heathen (and once again gotten into bed with the world of politics) with agreement with the other side of the issues in question. Just one more proof that your head is stuck in the same mire that those Christian leaders are stuck in.

Conservatives have witnessed the eroding of civil and religious liberties for centuries, and Trump is attempting to reverse that, by ending judicial activism.

And is it the Christian thing to do to force Christian morality on the world, and insist on our "right" to have it better than anyone else in the entire world? I am not sure what Bible you have been reading.

Obviously, by siding with the atheistic and amoral Left . . .

Do you see everything so harshly black-and-white that disagreeing on anything is to side with the opponents? Do you suppose that every Republican who does not go along with the Jack-booted, xenophobic, racist nonsense of the most extreme right-wing of the party must be bleeding liberals? If you do then . . . well, we are not supposed to talk about others on the forum in such derogatory terms. Do you presume that every issue is simply divided between "righteous Republicans" and "communist/socialist liberal Democrats?" Then you deserve the narcissistic buffon that turns every issue into one about himself.

My complaint is not just that Jeffress and the rest are supporting Trump, but that they are going all-in on forcing some kind of theocratic law of morality that we would never allow for if it was Islamic law or Buddhist law. We even go so far as to assert that Islamic regimes should simply be overthrown and turned into democratic republics.

The sin of abortion does not reflect on you. America is not going to return to some nation "blessed by God" if we manage to brow-beat all the lawyers into changing the laws. The church should be finding a way to take stands that encourage change in the minds and hearts of the people, preferably resulting in bringing them into the kingdom of light. We have taken the moniker of "Christian soldiers" much farther than was ever intended. Paul never intended to unleash a gang of political thugs on the nations of the world (of which America is just one of many) to force them to act like the kingdom of God without actually being in the kingdom of God.

We are to be salt and light, not battering ram and noose.

I don't like Trump. I honestly believe that he has committed crimes worthy of impeachment. I don't care whether you agree with me on that. I don't care whether Republicans or Democrats agree or disagree with me on it.

But no matter what, until he is removed from office by election or impeachment (which is also what Galli said) I believe that the country will survive. Even 4 more years. But I do believe that allowing things to stand as they are will damage this republic much more greatly than impeaching a president will. My opinion. Not influenced by Nancy, Cooper, Cuomo, or any of the others who also oppose him.

Only you could think that Trump is worse than the one impeached 20 years ago. Trump threw Jeffrey Epstein out of MaraLago, Clinton however joined him, enabled him, played with him, and protected him.

Only me? You haven't been paying attention. Whether or not impeachment is justified or succeeds, many, if not most, people think that. To say that "ony I" could think that is nothing short of a lie. Or evidence that you are only getting your news from one source.

Interesting that you refer to Brett Kavanaugh as "hotly contested." Obviously you believed some of his accusers. That alone discredits your ability to discern false witnesses and unrighteousness.

Saying it was hotly contested did not make any comment on the quality of the contest other than its problems. However, as poor and questionable as some of the stories that surfaced were, they were neven simply dismissable because of the way they were introduced or the questions raised about the events mentioned. I would admit to having reservations given the nature of what he DID somewhat admit to, but was also inclined to allow for a length of time with a completely different demeanor and a decent body of legal and judicial work to indicate that the person being considered was not (or at least no longer) that youthful fool that was being charged.

But I also took note of some of the testimony concerning questions by both sides trying to get some kind of "litmus" read on him, and unless he was lying, do not see him as ready to overturn Roe v Wade or so many other rulings since.

Your comments about "vilifying certain non-Christians" are straight from the democratic talking points.

I have never heard any Democrats say anything like that. It is my own observation as a human and moderate/conservative Republican. Go lie about someone else.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Trump derangement syndrome is really a delusion that Trump is the god that he thinks he is. I do not necessarily disagree with the politics of people who decided that Trump was the lesser evil in the 2016 election.

Trump is a god? Trump thinks he is a god? The most hated man in this country, daily fueled by vile media lies, and he is a god? Wow, first you blasted Christians for saying Trump is Cyrus. Sorry bro, the only political "deity" in America was Obama. Numerous claims I have read/heard over the years that he was the Messiah.

But I disagree that the whole of Christian morality and action should be in ranting about abortion and LGBQ?? issues in a manner that is more like the heathen we claim to be trying to stop.

Abortion is murder. Murder of the most innocent of all. Dogs have more rights. If standing against it is "ranting" then count me in.

But you sound just like CNN. They smeared those Covington kids for ranting, and then called them racists, and worse. Sorry OBW, but you missed the fact that the only person at that pro-life rally who behaved as an adult, and was praying the whole time, was Nick Sandmann.

God judged Sodom, and Paul wrote against it. But you condemn Christians who stand against it. Sorry, but you are on the wrong side of these issues.

And once again you conflate disagreement with the manner of how evangelicals have gone about trying to force their morality on the heathen (and once again gotten into bed with the world of politics) with agreement with the other side of the issues in question. Just one more proof that your head is stuck in the same mire that those Christian leaders are stuck in. And is it the Christian thing to do to force Christian morality on the world, and insist on our "right" to have it better than anyone else in the entire world? I am not sure what Bible you have been reading.

I don't see you fighting for anything good. At least give other Christians the right to fight for the truth on behalf of succeeding generations. And I think you got Christians mixed up with the Muslams, it is they who force their morality on the rest of the world.

Do you see everything so harshly black-and-white that disagreeing on anything is to side with the opponents? Do you suppose that every Republican who does not go along with the Jack-booted, xenophobic, racist nonsense of the most extreme right-wing of the party must be bleeding liberals?

There you go parroting leftist media lies. I see no racist Republicans. All the racists I see are those who constantly accuse others of racism. They also scream a whole litany of smears, without a shred of evidence. Too bad your head is stuck in fake media. Did you say "mired?"

If you do then . . . well, we are not supposed to talk about others on the forum in such derogatory terms. Do you presume that every issue is simply divided between "righteous Republicans" and "communist/socialist liberal Democrats?" Then you deserve the narcissistic buffon that turns every issue into one about himself.

I never said Republicans are all righteous, but yes, as a matter of fact, I do presume that nearly all media reporting is sourced in communist/socialist liberal Democrats. On a case-by-case basis, they have to prove me wrong. I can dissect every major political story of the last 3 years into facts and lies. And all the lies come from the left.

My complaint is not just that Jeffress and the rest are supporting Trump, but that they are going all-in on forcing some kind of theocratic law of morality that we would never allow for if it was Islamic law or Buddhist law. We even go so far as to assert that Islamic regimes should simply be overthrown and turned into democratic republics.

Haven't heard that. Sounds more like the NeoCon Bushes. But Trump can choose his own pastor, right? Obama had Jeremiah Wright and Al Sharpton, and preached in all the black churches, didn't he? Where's your outrage? Jeffress is better than that Paula White, however, who married that Journey keyboardist who wrote "Don't stop believin."

I don't like Trump. I honestly believe that he has committed crimes worthy of impeachment. I don't care whether you agree with me on that. I don't care whether Republicans or Democrats agree or disagree with me on it. But no matter what, until he is removed from office by election or impeachment (which is also what Galli said) I believe that the country will survive. Even 4 more years.

Helluva democracy when you get to impeach a duly elected President that you don't like. Can't you accept the will of those who elected him? Won't the country survive 8 years of Trump. Perhaps with fewer abortions, and fewer wars, and fewer illegal aliens? Is that so bad?

Why don't you take an honest and fair approach to Trump. Go back and examine all the many claims against him and see which ones were true, and which were lies. Add up the columns. Do some accounting work, with asset and debit columns. Perhaps you will find something good in Trump.

For example, we heard endlessly for 3 years that Trump was a Russian asset, a Putin Puppet. Those were all lies. Muller and his team proved that conclusively. Do you still believe Trump is a Russian traitor? You really need to examine how many of your "beliefs" are based on falsehoods. You got the skills. You did that with LC teachings, didn't you?

[Ohio]

Concerning the Kavanaugh accusations ...

Originally Posted by OBW

Saying it was hotly contested did not make any comment on the quality of the contest other than its problems. However, as poor and questionable as some of the stories that surfaced were, they were never simply dismissable because of the way they were introduced or the questions raised about the events mentioned. I would admit to having reservations given the nature of what he DID somewhat admit to, but was also inclined to allow for a length of time with a completely different demeanor and a decent body of legal and judicial work to indicate that the person being considered was not (or at least no longer) that youthful fool that was being charged.

OBW, this statement above was quite telling. It shows just how effective biased media propaganda can be to influence the public. Kavanaugh was a public servant in the Bush administration and a distinguished judge. His life record was perfectly flawless. He was acclaimed with multiple accolades from those of both parties, but was now viewed as a dangerous addition to the high court because Trump had appointed him.

You, however, seem to have given him no benefit of the doubt in the face of these wild accusations. Kavaaugh admitted to nothing, yet you apparently saw incriminating evidence. You call him a "youthful fool," yet his academic accomplishments during his youth were exemplary. Everything he did had the highest honors. Perhaps your anti-Catholic bias is on display, who knows? But this Kavanaugh character, at least in your mind, deserved everything he got because Trump appointed him. Merely guilt by association and guilt by accusation.

Perhaps you might want to remember his chief antagonist during this time -- Michael Avenatti. Some of the media saw him as a savior of sorts, and even the leading candidate for the 2020 Democratic nomination. Except for your anti-Trump attitudes, my how things have changed in the last year and a half!

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Concerning the Kavanaugh accusations ...


OBW, this statement above was quite telling. It shows just how effective biased media propaganda can be to influence the public. Kavanaugh was a public servant in the Bush administration and a distinguished judge. His life record was perfectly flawless. He was acclaimed with multiple accolades from those of both parties, but was now viewed as a dangerous addition to the high court because Trump had appointed him.

You, however, seem to have given him no benefit of the doubt in the face of these wild accusations. Kavaaugh admitted to nothing, yet you apparently saw incriminating evidence. You call him a "youthful fool," yet his academic accomplishments during his youth were exemplary. Everything he did had the highest honors. Perhaps your anti-Catholic bias is on display, who knows? But this Kavanaugh character, at least in your mind, deserved everything he got because Trump appointed him. Merely guilt by association and guilt by accusation.

Perhaps you might want to remember his chief antagonist during this time -- Michael Avenatti. Some of the media saw him as a savior of sorts, and even the leading candidate for the 2020 Democratic nomination. Except for your anti-Trump attitudes, my how things have changed in the last year and a half!

That's it. Shoot the messenger.

As I recall, BK did not admit to the serious charges, but did admit to issues with drinking — even underage. And some of his friends said that there was something that occasionally almost went off the rails when he was drinking. I think that would qualify as youthful foolishness, at a minimum.

And you really didn't read what I said, because I did not say he was unqualified or that he had done anything since college other than live and act in a very sound and professional manner. And I did not say he would be a bad judge. I did mention that both sides were looking to pigeon-hole any nominee as either for or against certain things — abortion issues being predominant — and that he did not really give cause for either side to think they had him in their pocket. And for that I respect him. We will see how well he actually lives up to the ideal of a constitutional scholar, though if he does, it will not make either side as happy as they might like.

It is clear that there was something amiss in the way opponents waited to spring the charges. But that does not prove anything to be untrue. And there were a variety of eye-witness accounts that suggested problems with both the charges as stated, and with claims of purity in the matter. I give both sides the benefit of the doubt and concluded that he would make a good judge. I just wished that it would have been without a cloud over character. Trump had the opportunity to move on to another nominee that might have a better record.

But if they really believed that they had someone who would truly rule to overturn aspects of Roe v Wade, then they had private conversations indicating that he would simply rule in certain ways without reference to rules of precedence or law, or to the constitution. The constitution does not simply lean conservative or liberal. It is not a sword that favors Republicans over Democrats (or the other way around for those looking in from the left). It is a sound framework in which the government has limitations and guidelines within which it must operate. It has less to say about the people who the government "rules." Therefore it should be understood more a limiter on how rules restrict the people and a block against excessive restriction against the people.

And abortion is a problematic issue. Most Christians accept that the Bible establishes life at conception. Under the constitution, you cannot deprive anyone of life without due process. And if we all (believers and unbelievers) accepted that life begins at conception, then that would mean that a separate determination (judicial proceeding) would be required to cause the death of any fetus. No blanket law could be understood as due process. Neither could a single prior court ruling. It would be like trying a murderer and seeking the death penalty.

But we do not have a nation-wide consensus on the point at which a fetus becomes a separate life subject to its own claims under the constitution. Maybe we are sufficiently there on the 3rd trimester. But less likely on the 2nd trimester. And depending on which poll you accept, there might be a slim majority that would even say the 1st trimester. But at "slim majority" you tend to fail with respect to other aspects of constitutional bounds.

But more important is that our calling should not just to be to "speak for the voiceless" by demanding that there be an end to all abortion as we hurl insults at those who disagree, but more importantly that we seek to help those who might otherwise feel compelled to take the route of abortion, whether just to change their mind on that issue, or even to find their hope in Christ. And also to help those who live on under a personal cloud because of past actions.

I agree that we need to speak for the voiceless. But somehow we need to find a way that is not simply to demonize or criminalize everyone on the other side of the issue.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

That's it. Shoot the messenger.

As I recall, BK did not admit to the serious charges, but did admit to issues with drinking — even underage. And some of his friends said that there was something that occasionally almost went off the rails when he was drinking. I think that would qualify as youthful foolishness, at a minimum.

Well . . . I can't imagine what messenger I shot.

Kavanaugh admitted to liking beer. Lots of guys like beer. (I don't.) Not sure what you mean when his friends said "he went off the rails." I never heard any of that. Do you have an article I could read? Otherwise it's fake news.

Kavanaugh did have a HS friend who succumbed to adult alcohol problems. BK tried to help him. Blousey Ford said he was present at the incident. He remembers nothing. CBF also cited her friend Leland Ingham, ex-wife of pundit Bob Beckel, as a witness. Unfortunately, she also remembered nothing of the alleged incident.

And you really didn't read what I said, because I did not say he was unqualified or that he had done anything since college other than live and act in a very sound and professional manner. And I did not say he would be a bad judge. I did mention that both sides were looking to pigeon-hole any nominee as either for or against certain things — abortion issues being predominant — and that he did not really give cause for either side to think they had him in their pocket. And for that I respect him. We will see how well he actually lives up to the ideal of a constitutional scholar, though if he does, it will not make either side as happy as they might like.

It is the President's prerogative to choose a Justice, none of which ever made everyone happy.

It is clear that there was something amiss in the way opponents waited to spring the charges. But that does not prove anything to be untrue. And there were a variety of eye-witness accounts that suggested problems with both the charges as stated, and with claims of purity in the matter. I give both sides the benefit of the doubt and concluded that he would make a good judge. I just wished that it would have been without a cloud over character. Trump had the opportunity to move on to another nominee that might have a better record.

Here your bias and lack of discernment is on full display. The Senate Democrats broke all the rules, hoping to smear BK in the public. So many lies were exposed in Ford's testimony to completely discredit her witness. The benefit of the doubt was completely wasted on her. Trump was definitely right to stand up for BK, and time has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that "Anita Hill Act 2" was just another disingenuous case of a "Jussie Smollett."

But if they really believed that they had someone who would truly rule to overturn aspects of Roe v Wade, then they had private conversations indicating that he would simply rule in certain ways without reference to rules of precedence or law, or to the constitution. The constitution does not simply lean conservative or liberal. It is not a sword that favors Republicans over Democrats (or the other way around for those looking in from the left). It is a sound framework in which the government has limitations and guidelines within which it must operate. It has less to say about the people who the government "rules." Therefore it should be understood more a limiter on how rules restrict the people and a block against excessive restriction against the people.

You are obviously obsessed with Roe. The SCOTUS judges on a wide range of appeals. But apparently OBW can read minds, and knows that "private conversations" must have occurred, otherwise Trump should nominate another RBG, which would "please both sides." (According to CNN anyway)

But more important is that our calling should not just to be to "speak for the voiceless" by demanding that there be an end to all abortion as we hurl insults at those who disagree, but more importantly that we seek to help those who might otherwise feel compelled to take the route of abortion, whether just to change their mind on that issue, or even to find their hope in Christ. And also to help those who live on under a personal cloud because of past actions.

So those who are pro-life merely "hurl insults" at those who disagree. Sounds like CNN. Didn't they make the snap decision that Nick Sandmann was to blame? Of course, Sandmann was guilty of hurling insults at that Viet Nam Vet Native American drummer. Isn't that what all pro-life people do? They all hurl insults! That's what they do! So says OBW.

I agree that we need to speak for the voiceless. But somehow we need to find a way that is not simply to demonize or criminalize everyone on the other side of the issue.

Someone needs to speak up for conservative, God-fearing men, women, and children! That would be me on this forum, since these same folks are regularly demonized or criminalized here.

[OBW]

Wow! The knowledge of what I was thinking and meaning is mindboggling for someone who . . . well . . . hasn't a clue.

But I will return to my primary reason for stepping into the mud pit that you have made your home for the past few years. That is that too many Christian leaders have been wallowing in that pit for decades as it has grown deeper and deeper. They do it in the hopes that they can convince the government to bring the sword of law against all those evildoers who are sexually mixed-up, or want an abortion, or think that any level of socialism is an acceptable course of action.

And I guarantee you that if that is what Christianity is about, then Gandhi was too kind to them when he said "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

But I guess that somewhere in the Bible is a place where it says that while Jesus was a friend of sinners, it is the duty of his followers to either force them to repent or execute judgement on them on behalf of God. The RCC abandoned that method of conversion centuries ago, yet evangelicalism is still trying to replicate the Spanish inquisition. And they are happy to use their worship services to support one of the most immoral presidents of the entire history of the nation to force their will on everyone else. There is clearly nothing Christian about what they are doing in their support of the man. This is just doubling down on using the world and its governments to achieve what only Christ can do — give us peace, even in the midst of turmoil.

* * * *

• God is not Republican, nor Democrat
• God is not capitalist, nor socialist
• God is not white American male, nor poor Guatemalan (though he commands us to love both in the same way that we love ourselves)
• God did not charge us with the responsibility of enacting laws against anything that those who do not follow him find acceptable

Vengeance is not ours. It is His. Let him undertake to punish as he sees fit. We might be surprised at what it is that he punishes. We may have some of it wrong.

[Ohio]

Apparently you can no longer discuss political ideas, so you tell me my home is a "mud pit."

But your home is "clean" apparently, because you hate Trump, hate Evangelicals who support him and Christians who stand against abortion, and those who reject media lies, yada yada

And you are right, vengeance is not ours . . .

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Apparently you can no longer discuss political ideas, so you tell me my home is a "mud pit."

But your home is "clean" apparently, because you hate Trump, hate Evangelicals who support him and Christians who stand against abortion, and those who reject media lies, yada yada

And you are right, vengeance is not ours . . .

Before you accuse me . . . .

[Sons to Glory!]

Caption: "Yer half black!" "Oh yeah!? Well yer half white!"

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Caption: "Yer half black!" "Oh yeah!? Well yer half white!"

Which one is Ralph Northam, the Governor of Virginia?

[Ohio]

A little spoof on a political issue of the day . . .

After Senseless Murder Of Goliath, Philistines Call For Ban On Fully Automatic, High-Capacity Slings

VALLEY OF ELAH—After local homegrown terrorist David slew Goliath with a fully automatic, high-capacity sling, Philistine activists began calling for common-sense bans on the dangerous weapons of mass destruction.

"Nobody needs a sling that holds five rocks just to go hunting or protect their sheep," said one Philistine woman with pink hair and several face piercings. "This tragedy could have been avoided if only David were forced to use one of the old bolt-action model slings."

Investigators believe the shepherd boy, radicalized by religious texts, built up an arsenal of approximately five hollow-point, armor-piercing rocks, "a deadly stockpile."

"Can you imagine if he had opened fire in a crowded market or around the village well?"

Many Philistines offered "thoughts and prayers" to Dagon, but activists continue to insist "your thoughts and prayers are not enough."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Which one is Ralph Northam, the Governor of Virginia?

Okay, that was a pretty funny response!

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Yet, still today, millions of Americans believe in their heart of hearts that Trump was and still is Putin's White House Puppet who interfered with the 2016 election.

Sounds like you might still be one of these "believers."

what is in an L? Liberal narrative I often cannot distinguish from LSM narrative. They're so much alike. Both very dismissive to contrarian thoughts. Liberal narrative rejects the contrarian views as being "Russian puppet" or "Russian assets" much like the LSM narrative would reject contrarian views as "opposers".
Now we have Democratic Presidential candidate taking a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for her words calling Tulsi a "Russian asset". Shouldn't there be accountability?
Much like the LSM narrative, I see the liberal narrative as a lot of projecting. Accusing Trump what they're doing themselves. There was Russian collusion. There was Ukrainian collusion, there was British collusion, and there was Italian collusion, but it was not coming from Trump's campaign.
Just like in the LSM there was collusion to undermine brothers in the late 1980's. It wasn't the brothers that were eventually quarantined that were doing the colluding.
Facts and evidence trumps narrative. Much like in the late 80's turmoil and the Great Lakes turmoil, all I was hearing was narrative. No facts. No evidence. Just like the current Impeachment going on. House managers had presented a lot in narrative, but nothing in facts and evidence unless they're able to provide proof in their abilities to discern thoughts, intent, and motive.
A sort of substituting "feeling" for facts. As is the case in the LC.
Providing the "opposers" (meaning Trumps legal team) has the facts and evidence on their side, just take the L.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

what is in an L? Liberal narrative I often cannot distinguish from LSM narrative. They're so much alike. Both very dismissive to contrarian thoughts. Liberal narrative rejects the contrarian views as being "Russian puppet" or "Russian assets" much like the LSM narrative would reject contrarian views as "opposers".
Now we have Democratic Presidential candidate taking a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for her words calling Tulsi a "Russian asset". Shouldn't there be accountability?
Much like the LSM narrative, I see the liberal narrative as a lot of projecting. Accusing Trump what they're doing themselves. There was Russian collusion. There was Ukrainian collusion, there was British collusion, and there was Italian collusion, but it was not coming from Trump's campaign.
Just like in the LSM there was collusion to undermine brothers in the late 1980's. It wasn't the brothers that were eventually quarantined that were doing the colluding.
Facts and evidence trumps narrative. Much like in the late 80's turmoil and the Great Lakes turmoil, all I was hearing was narrative. No facts. No evidence. Just like the current Impeachment going on. House managers had presented a lot in narrative, but nothing in facts and evidence unless they're able to provide proof in their abilities to discern thoughts, intent, and motive.
A sort of substituting "feeling" for facts. As is the case in the LC.
Providing the "opposers" (meaning Trumps legal team) has the facts and evidence on their side, just take the L.

Great connections here Terry.

LSM has become every bit a political organization as the Democratic Party. Same tactics, same dissembling, same accusing and excusing, projecting their own unrighteous actions upon their enemies. (Romans 2 spells some of this out.) Compare what LSM did to the Casteels to the Media's mischaracterizations of the Covington Catholic boys.

The Whistler Kangaroo Court impeachment trial of TC mirrored Schiff's secret impeachment inquiry in the House SCIF. The hoax perpetrated on the Recovery about so-called "rebellions" duplicates the so-called "Russian collusion." The claims that ex-members have been poisoned by "internet lies," corresponds to Hilary's on going "vast right wing" conspiracy by Trump's many "deplorables."

These days the casual reader might ask "who is lying here." Let me point something out. Who is more apt to lie? The guy in the White House under unbelievable scrutiny 24/7/52, or a guy like VP Joe Biden who got a free pass from every media outlet for decades, except for Fox?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

These days the casual reader might ask "who is lying here." Let me point something out. Who is more apt to lie? The guy in the White House under unbelievable scrutiny 24/7/52, or a guy like VP Joe Biden who got a free pass from every media outlet for decades, except for Fox?

Question is who is objecting to transparency?
In the same breath I say I want Trump's tax returns disclosed, I want the same from every Senator and House Rep. Of course that cannot happen. Remember the phrase "cover the brothers"? Same applies to those practicing graft while a public servant.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Question is who is objecting to transparency?
In the same breath I say I want Trump's tax returns disclosed, I want the same from every Senator and House Rep. Of course that cannot happen. Remember the phrase "cover the brothers"? Same applies to those practicing graft while a public servant.

I agree with you on transparancy.

When it comes to personal tax returns, however, I think of how Romney was smeared in 2012 by the media for his taxes. His taxes were clean, but as a successful investor, the media smeared Romney's success for evil. The IRS obviously can scrutinize their taxes via audits, and that should be sufficient. Both Clinton and Obama both used the power of the IRS to attack their enemies. That provides me with enough "transparency."

I prefer a Candidate who could "buy" the presidency than one who would "sell" it, as bad as that sounds. In other words, the power of the presidency is far more dangerous in the hands of a "community organizer" with no accomplishments, than a seasoned and successful entrepreneurial CEO, whose goal was to "give back" to his country in the sunset of his life.

Compare Trump to Obama or the Clinton's. They used their great power for personal gains. They left office with a stack of IOU's. They peddled their influence. Clinton's even rented out the Lincoln bedroom! Does anyone think that Joe Biden and family were unique in this regard? Obama left his 450K per year job at the Whit House and somehow had amassed millions. I want to see his taxes! Supposedly the Clinton's left office broke, yet quickly were worth close to a billion. How does the math work here?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Obama left his 450K per year job at the Whit House and somehow had amassed millions. I want to see his taxes!

Could be legitimate or could be payoff from Penguin Random House for Common Core in form of "a book deal"?

[Sons to Glory!]

In light of the senate apparently saying that "quid pro quo" in itself is not a crime and the president's specific actions do not rise to the level of an impeachable offence, upon hearing it my wife was a bit appalled. I think she see's the president's interaction with the Ukrainian officials as detestable and those of a morally bankrupt person, and a rotten example to make as the president of this country. I'm inclined to agree in part, but am not sure if it does rise to the impeachable level.

We humans often tend to excuse those who line-up with us in some way, and therefore are guilty of Machiavellian motives (i.e., ends justify the means) - those on both sides of the aisle do this all the time (yes, ol' Adam is a major hypocrite)! This has been strongly exhibited, and increasingly so, with the last several presidents and the two parties' view of them.

What do you think oh Christian?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

In light of the senate apparently saying that "quid pro quo" in itself is not a crime and the president's specific actions do not rise to the level of an impeachable offence, upon hearing it my wife was a bit appalled. I think she see's the president's interaction with the Ukrainian officials as detestable and those of a morally bankrupt person, and a rotten example to make as the president of this country. I'm inclined to agree in part, but am not sure if it does rise to the impeachable level.

The Quid Pro Quo was about the past, the 2016 election. It was the Democrats who twisted the facts to make it about the future, the 2020 election.

How is Trump's request to examine past Biden/Burisma corruption "appalling," while the impeachment of Trump by the House can not be construed as election interference in the 2020 election? Does this not then acknowledge that the Biden's business dealings are corrupt? If the Biden's are innocent, then what should they fear? Are they afraid of witnesses? Are they above the law? What do they have to hide?

Have you seen the video clip where Joe Biden bragged about firing the Ukranian Prosecutor General who was investigating Hunter Biden and Burisma at the time? Joe Biden leveraged a $Billion to get this official fired. Check it out. It tells you everything you need to know -- the corruption, the arrogance, and how Biden used Congressionally authorized American foreign aid to prevent prosecutorial "sunshine" from exposing his lucrative "cash cow."

Have you seen Peter Schweizer's new book Profiles in Corruption? It has a chapter on Biden. His corruption enriched his family for decades.

In conclusion, it behooves you and others to discover just how corrupt the Media really is. There are millions of Americans who currently believe that Trump is a Russian agent. The Media has used this propaganda on a daily basis for nearly 4 years. Lots of very "smart" people are convinced it is absolute "gospel" truth. But Robert Muller and his team of DOJ prosecutors and FBI agents took two years, endless subpoenas and witnesses, millions of documents, unlimited funds, surveillance taps, etc. and NEVER FOUND ONE IOTA OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS EVIL ACCUSATION, neither by Trump or any of his staff. Should not this tell you something about today's political climate.


Hilary paid for this rotten and mythical Steele Dossier to influence the 2016 election. Shouldn't your level of "appall" concerning her be a thousand times greater?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Have you seen the video clip where Joe Biden bragged about firing the Ukranian Prosecutor General who was investigating Hunter Biden and Burisma at the time? Joe Biden leveraged a $Billion to get this official fired. Check it out. It tells you everything you need to know . . . .

The problem is that the prosecutor was not investigating anything. Not even Burisma. The guy fired was at least somewhat tied back to the prior regime and had no desire to uncover anything. If anything, getting a new prosecutor put Burisma in the crosshairs. And no matter how questionable Hunter Biden's "job" there may have been, what they were wanting to have investigated was what went on prior to the time that he was even there. Doesn't mean he wouldn't be investigated.

My father-in-law is here right now and Fox News is running in the background. I noted that there are several snippy remarks made concerning any Democrat. One I heard was something about playing tired old themes. But if you suggest that the Biden/Burisma thing is a yawn, they just start ranting about how it was just like Trump. So what is it? Is it just like Trump and therefore needs to be investigated? Thing is, it is nothing like Trump.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

The problem is that the prosecutor was not investigating anything. Not even Burisma. The guy fired was at least somewhat tied back to the prior regime and had no desire to uncover anything. If anything, getting a new prosecutor put Burisma in the crosshairs. And no matter how questionable Hunter Biden's "job" there may have been, what they were wanting to have investigated was what went on prior to the time that he was even there. Doesn't mean he wouldn't be investigated.

My father-in-law is here right now and Fox News is running in the background. I noted that there are several snippy remarks made concerning any Democrat. One I heard was something about playing tired old themes. But if you suggest that the Biden/Burisma thing is a yawn, they just start ranting about how it was just like Trump. So what is it? Is it just like Trump and therefore needs to be investigated? Thing is, it is nothing like Trump.

Read Peter Schweizer's book "Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite." He is Presidemt of the Government Accountability Institute. His books are thorough, well-documented, and never disputed. Rather they just smeared as conspiracy theories.

Anyways, check out your facts. Biden bragged about getting the Ukrainian Prosecutor General fired, using a Billion of US guaranteed loans.

Total Quid Pro Joe. Impeach the right guy! Or should I say Impeach the bad guy?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Read Peter Schweizer's book "Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite." He is Presidemt of the Government Accountability Institute. His books are thorough, well-documented, and never disputed. Rather they just smeared as conspiracy theories.

Anyways, check out your facts. Biden bragged about getting the Ukrainian Prosecutor General fired, using a Billion of US guaranteed loans.

Total Quid Pro Joe. Impeach the right guy! Or should I say Impeach the bad guy?

You did not actually say anything about my point. I never said that Biden didn't get the guy fired. It was a point of US policy that required it. I guess you are still stuck on the ignorant notion that using the aid as leverage to enforce US policy at the direction of the president is the same as using aid as leverage to at least get the announcement of an investigation into a political rival. Didn't even require that there ever be an actual investigation. He just wanted the statement that one was to be undertaken as something to point back at during the next election.

So actual US policy v personal political advantage are the same? Only in the power-addled mind of Trump. Personal gain v requirement of US policy. One has the backing of the US government. Yes, it is a "this for that" requirement. But there is no "all quid pro quos are created equal" clause in the constitution. Where the government legitimately stipulates a requirement, then following through is required. Where an individual, even the president, stipulates a private requirement for his/her personal benefit, then it is a misuse of power and constitutes a request for a bribe.

That someone writes well researched and documented books does not make anything I said incorrect. Especially when there was nothing posted that even responded to what I said. It is a sad day when the level of discussion has stooped to appeals to authority that don't even address the issue. It doesn't matter if Biden bragged about actually carrying out the mandate he was legitimately given.

And I have watched that clip. It was blunt, factual, and rather low-key for the kind of "brag" that everyone mesmerized by Trump seems to read into it. But it really wouldn't matter if he had bragged in the outlandish way that Trump so often does since it would have been a legal — even required — action on his part. Unlike the abuse of power that Trump continues to brag was "perfect."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

You did not actually say anything about my point. I never said that Biden didn't get the guy fired. It was a point of US policy that required it. I guess you are still stuck on the ignorant notion that using the aid as leverage to enforce US policy at the direction of the president is the same as using aid as leverage to at least get the announcement of an investigation into a political rival. Didn't even require that there ever be an actual investigation. He just wanted the statement that one was to be undertaken as something to point back at during the next election.

US policy requires that Biden get the Prosecutor General of Ukraine fired? When the same Prosecutor General of Ukraine is investigating your son Hunter and his boss, the most corrupt oligarch in that country?

Wow! You really should think about this some more.

So actual US policy v personal political advantage are the same? Only in the power-addled mind of Trump. Personal gain v requirement of US policy. One has the backing of the US government. Yes, it is a "this for that" requirement. But there is no "all quid pro quos are created equal" clause in the constitution. Where the government legitimately stipulates a requirement, then following through is required. Where an individual, even the president, stipulates a private requirement for his/her personal benefit, then it is a misuse of power and constitutes a request for a bribe.

The whole impeachment debate boils down to this: Did Trump request an investigation in Ukraine for past crimes or for future elections? That point was never proven in court.

Thus your hypothesis of "personal gain" is purely speculative. Trump's own words points to the past not the future. Trump had just been cleared of Muller's Russian Collusion investigation, and he wanted others to be investigated. There was plenty of other indications, by those in the media and the State Dept, that warranted this.

I actually find this kind of funny that you would believe that Trump was so scared of Biden in the 2020 election, that he would stoop to this. Joe Biden appears to have dementia. He can't even string together a whole coherent sentence. Even Obama refuses to back him, and told him not to run. Biden is the weakest candidate in the field.

That someone writes well researched and documented books does not make anything I said incorrect. Especially when there was nothing posted that even responded to what I said. It is a sad day when the level of discussion has stooped to appeals to authority that don't even address the issue. It doesn't matter if Biden bragged about actually carrying out the mandate he was legitimately given.

Where is your proof that VP Biden had a mandate and the legal authority to fire a prosecutor in another country?

And I have watched that clip. It was blunt, factual, and rather low-key for the kind of "brag" that everyone mesmerized by Trump seems to read into it. But it really wouldn't matter if he had bragged in the outlandish way that Trump so often does since it would have been a legal — even required — action on his part. Unlike the abuse of power that Trump continues to brag was "perfect."

With Trump's supposed Quid Pro Quo, nothing ever happened! Aid was given. Lethal aid at that, which Obama and Biden had refused while Russia annexed Crimea.

With Biden, however, real action was taken. The Prosecutor General was fired. Biden extorted the President of Ukraine by leveraging guaranteed loans to protect his own son from criminal investigation. Biden acted as a mob boss, using American taxpayer money.

[TLFisher]

[QUOTE=Ohio;91344]

How is Trump's request to examine past Biden/Burisma corruption "appalling," while the impeachment of Trump by the House can not be construed as election interference in the 2020 election? Does this not then acknowledge that the Biden's business dealings are corrupt? If the Biden's are innocent, then what should they fear? Are they afraid of witnesses? Are they above the law? What do they have to hide?

Is there fear of transparency? Bidens are just small fish in a pond. Could it be there is much more than just the Bidens? Could this expalin the vehement protesting against looking into anything Ukraine.

In conclusion, it behooves you and others to discover just how corrupt the Media really is. There are millions of Americans who currently believe that Trump is a Russian agent. The Media has used this propaganda on a daily basis for nearly 4 years. Lots of very "smart" people are convinced it is absolute "gospel" truth. But Robert Muller and his team of DOJ prosecutors and FBI agents took two years, endless subpoenas and witnesses, millions of documents, unlimited funds, surveillance taps, etc. and NEVER FOUND ONE IOTA OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS EVIL ACCUSATION, neither by Trump or any of his staff. Should not this tell you something about today's political climate.

I see the media in the same light I see LSM. Each a narrative and a propaganda to spread. Just as in any LC turmoil, I asked for proof to support the accusations. Just as the recent impeachment, if there was evidence of any crime, I would have supported the impeachment. Yet all I saw were straining gnats.
As nothing turned up, millions claim a coverup by the GOP. I don't know.
By comparison after decades of turmoils have passed in the LC, many still believe the quarantined brothers conspired to take over the recovery though there was nothing of substance.
As this relates to the current political climate, no proof is needed to declare Trump as guilty.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I see the media in the same light I see LSM. Each a narrative and a propaganda to spread. Just as in any LC turmoil, I asked for proof to support the accusations. Just as the recent impeachment, if there was evidence of any crime, I would have supported the impeachment. Yet all I saw were straining gnats.

As nothing turned up, millions claim a coverup by the GOP. I don't know.
By comparison after decades of turmoils have passed in the LC, many still believe the quarantined brothers conspired to take over the recovery though there was nothing of substance.

As this relates to the current political climate, no proof is needed to declare Trump as guilty.

Great points! And exactly my point. When the flow of information is controlled by those in power to coverup criminal activity, and what is released thru the governing media to the willing masses is deception, then all these media sources must be viewed as nothing more than propaganda.

Read about the reaction in the Chinese media over the Corona Virus outbreak. The initial Wuhan whistle blowers, one of which who just died, was publicly shamed and forced to issue a public retraction. The reaction on social media in China matches today's political TwitterVerse and LSM's public relations arm -- attacking and shaming those who speak or think differently from the officially sanctioned version of events, regardless of whether they speak the truth or have the best interests of their peers in view.

Both the Recovery, the Democratic apparatus, and the Communist Party have one prevailing theme: We are the best, and all others are evil. They are not just wrong, with bad ideas, or misinformed, no. They are evil, akin to Hitler or John Ingalls or your worst imaginable nightmare! How dare anyone express a differing opinion! You must be silenced! You will be disciplined and quarantined!

As we recently learned, "We must sent these conservatives to reeducation camps," -- paraphrased from Bernie Sanders field worker caught by Project Veritas undercover.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Both the Recovery, the Democratic apparatus, and the Communist Party have one prevailing theme: We are the best, and all others are evil. They are not just wrong, with bad ideas, or misinformed . . .

Sounds a little like the kind of propaganda that adds demeaning nicknames for everyone that disagrees with Trump. (In other words, you forgot the Republican apparatus.) The group that declares non-conservatives to have mental disorders (and they gave a medal to the guy who coined that phrase). Or declares them to be a "waste of skin." Or "animals" from "s**thole countries."

Somehow those kinds of statements don't reflect our command to love our neighbor. Not saying all Republicans have to act like Christians. But those of us who are Christian should.

Truth is that there is no difference in terms of rhetoric concerning the "others." Second verse, same as the first. Meet the new boss — same as the old boss. Once we get grips on this, we can admit all of our faults and start to see that no one has a lock on the right way to go and no one is simply wrong because they are not "us." Right now, the guns are all out and no one is blinking.

Yes, Bernie is a nut. Reminds me of Doc from Back to the Future. "Great Scott!!" But Socialism is not the same as Communism. Yeah, some of those "Democratic Socialists" are pretty rabid. But they are not the majority — even of the Democratic party. So don't get your panties in a wad about them. And everything to the left of the far-right is not "liberal" or socialist.

[Ohio]

Interesting study which confirms everything I have said about recent anti-God bias on the Left.

Pew Survey: The Democrat Party Has a Serious God Problem

"Americans do not consider the leading contenders for the Democrat presidential nomination to be very religious, reveals a new survey from the Pew Research Center.

This most recent Pew report underscores the Democrats’ continuing “God problem,” a phenomenon that seems to be growing more acute with the years.

Last fall, Pew revealed that more than twice as many Americans view the Democrat Party as “unfriendly” toward religion than the Republican Party, while fewer than one in five U.S. adults said the Democrats are “friendly” toward religion.

Last year, Professor Peter Beinart of the City University of New York, a liberal political commentator, noted with concern that white Democrats are invoking God far less than their predecessors and tend to refer to religious faith negatively rather than positively.

Democrats’ reluctance to mention God reflects a new demographic reality in the party, Beinart suggested. Since more and more white Democrats claim no religious affiliation, God talk is no longer met with approval.

In his analysis of the 2016 election results, the former director of Barack Obama’s faith-outreach efforts, Michael Wear, said that the Democrats have become tone-deaf toward religion, which explained why people of faith voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump.

Wear argued that the Democrats’ alienation of believers was tied to the party’s close partnership with the abortion industry.

“Reaching out to evangelicals doesn’t mean you have to become pro-life,” Wear said. “It just means you have to not be so in love with how pro-choice you are, and so opposed to how pro-life we are.”

“The Democratic Party used to welcome people who didn’t support abortion into the party. We are now so far from that, it’s insane,” he added."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

“Reaching out to evangelicals doesn’t mean you have to become pro-life,” Wear said. “It just means you have to not be so in love with how pro-choice you are, and so opposed to how pro-life we are.”

“The Democratic Party used to welcome people who didn’t support abortion into the party. We are now so far from that, it’s insane,” he added.

This was telling! Here's a direct link to Pew research on the subject. Pew: Belief in God - Religion in America (Have to go at least 3/4 of the way down to find the ones pertaining to political affiliation.)

[zeek]

I don't know about you but on Easter I plan to join thousands of others in a packed mega-church.

[Ohio]

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by zeek

I don't know about you but on Easter I plan to join thousands of others in a packed mega-church.

The Lord is with you regardless . . . So where did the word "Easter" come from?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

The Lord is with you regardless . . . So where did the word "Easter" come from?

St. Bede did the first etymological study on the word.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

St. Bede did the first etymological study on the word.

I know he was about trying to nail down the date for the resurrection, so maybe it makes sense that he did a study of the word too. Most think the word came from the goddess Eostre who was worshiped and celebrated in spring. So as was typical for the Romish minded, it seemed like it (springtime) fit with the resurrection, and they took that pagan practice and incorporated it right into the Christian faith.

I would prefer calling it Resurrection Day, however, to me it's really just another man-made day (like Christmas & Halloween).

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I know he was about trying to nail down the date for the resurrection, so maybe it makes sense that he did a study of the word too. Most think the word came from the goddess Eostre who was worshiped and celebrated in spring. So as was typical for the Romish minded, it seemed like it (springtime) fit with the resurrection, and they took that pagan practice and incorporated it right into the Christian faith.

I would prefer calling it Resurrection Day, however, to me it's really just another man-made day (like Christmas & Halloween).

Every day of the week is named after some pagan god. With such an iconoclastic view of name etymology, how can anyone live their life? Don't forget you can't name today because of the origins with the god Thor.

Isn't this then just a religious analogy to the cancel culture social justice warriors who want to "un-name" every city, state, building, or monument which had association with a former slave owner?

But if you prefer Resurrection day, Lord's Day, Founder's Day, the "First President's Monument," or even calling our U.S. capital "First President D.C.", is fine with me.

Btw, have a great 5th day of the week!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Every day of the week is named after some pagan god. With such an iconoclastic view of name etymology, how can anyone live their life? Don't forget you can't name today because of the origins with the god Thor.

Isn't this then just a religious analogy to the cancel culture social justice warriors who want to "un-name" every city, state, building, or monument which had association with a former slave owner?

But if you prefer Resurrection day, Lord's Day, Founder's Day, the "First President's Monument," or even calling our U.S. capital "First President D.C.", is fine with me.

Btw, have a great 5th day of the week!

You forgot to mention the names of the months being named after Roman gods! But to me, it's the naming of something that is specifically pertaining to the Lord, such as Easter and Christmas. But you know me bro - we've had similar etymological discussions around good ol' "church" too! Bottom-line is we will likely have these names until the Lord returns (soon?), and He decides what He wants to do with them - who knows, maybe He'll just say, "Whatever - it's not important!"

[OBW]

Originally Posted by zeek

I don't know about you but on Easter I plan to join thousands of others in a packed mega-church.

Have you ensured that they have invited at least one person that has just flown in from Wuhan so they can tell us how evil the Chinese regime is? That would be the event to attend!

[Ohio]

[Sons to Glory!]

Good post Ohio! It seems all the news outlets are "in the tank" for one cause or another. Even my ultra-conservative dad said this week that he's sick of his constant diet of Fox News! I'm really glad for his realization, as a steady diet of news - no matter the source (still manmade) - is just not good for a person, and especially the overly-sensationalized stuff that's so predominate these days. Now he's enjoying watching things like the History and Nature channels and even some food shows.

When I listen to too much news or talk radio, I'm reminded of the verse, "Surely are they disquieted in vain!" Psalm 39:6

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Good post Ohio! It seems all the news outlets are "in the tank" for one cause or another. Even my ultra-conservative dad said this week that he's sick of his constant diet of Fox News! I'm really glad for his realization, as a steady diet of news - no matter the source (still manmade) - is just not good for a person, and especially the overly-sensationalized stuff that's so predominate these days. Now he's enjoying watching things like the History and Nature channels and even some food shows.

When I listen to too much news or talk radio, I'm reminded of the verse, "Surely are they disquieted in vain!" Psalm 39:6

What a great blessing to still have your Dad!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What a great blessing to still have your Dad!

Yes, amen! He's 89 and just prayed with me a few months ago to receive Christ!

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

For 3 years they have been accusing Trump of "stealing" the election, but the facts of history clearly reveal that Hillary and the DNC colluded to steal the Democratic nomination.

If there had been voter ID in 2016, would Hillary had won the popular vote?
For the same reason is why there will be staunch rebelling against voter id for 2020.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Good post Ohio! It seems all the news outlets are "in the tank" for one cause or another. Even my ultra-conservative dad said this week that he's sick of his constant diet of Fox News! I'm really glad for his realization, as a steady diet of news - no matter the source (still manmade) - is just not good for a person, and especially the overly-sensationalized stuff that's so predominate these days. Now he's enjoying watching things like the History and Nature channels and even some food shows.

When I listen to too much news or talk radio, I'm reminded of the verse, "Surely are they disquieted in vain!" Psalm 39:6

It's been said 6 companies control 90% of the news outlets. If there's truth to it or not, I don't know. I cannot watch Fox, CNN, MSNBC. I consider myself a Libertarian Conservative yet my dad is even more conservative than I at 77. Not being able to do carpenter work any more it's much of the same. Typically my visits are during the summer. Baseball games are the preferred programming.
That's been our bonding since my childhood. Baseball was a way to disengage from pressures of life for a few hours. It was one of the few things we did together. Neither of us are much for crowds, but for a baseball game we didn't mind.

[Sons to Glory!]

Hey - would Jesus wear a mask?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

If there had been voter ID in 2016, would Hillary had won the popular vote?
For the same reason is why there will be staunch rebelling against voter id for 2020.

No Hilary would not have won the popular vote. When I saw statistics from the 2016 election that in some Philadelphia voting precincts there was 100% voter turnout and 100% vote for the Democrats, that my friend, BY DEFINITION, is rampant voter fraud. Even the so-called "Republican" watchdogs, employed to provide voter integrity at the precincts, voted 100% Democrat.

The latest $3 Trillion "Heroes Bill" demands all mail in voting. That's like outlawing every door lock in the country, including homes, stores, and banks!

Is that not what some of these governors/mayors tried to do? Did they not release convicted criminals from jail only to try to refill the empty jails with those trying to earn a living?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

It's been said 6 companies control 90% of the news outlets. If there's truth to it or not, I don't know. I cannot watch Fox, CNN, MSNBC. I consider myself a Libertarian Conservative yet my dad is even more conservative than I at 77.

Fox News is at least 50% accurate.

The big 7: ABC, CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC are nearly 100% biased and skewed against the truth. They have all become nothing more than propaganda for the leftist deep state globalists.

Recently Fox fired a slew of people for calling out the lies surrounding this Chinese Virus pandemic.

We as Christians, especially in these final days, should be weary of any suspicious reporting endorsed by 98% of those in the media who deny the existence of God.

I am way more apt to trust someone who has something to lose for reporting the truth.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Hey - would Jesus wear a mask?

Of course not. Have you not read about all the lepers He touched and healed?

This pandemic is a manufactured hoax. Caught early, cheap generic drugs used to treat malaria are available all over the world to treat covid-1984.

Watch this video about another doctor who is going against the system.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Of course not. Have you not read about all the lepers He touched and healed?

This pandemic is a manufactured hoax. Caught early, cheap generic drugs used to treat malaria are available all over the world to treat covid-1984.

Watch this video about another doctor who is going against the system.

If the government decreed masks be worn, would He?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

If the government decreed masks be worn, would He?

If the government demanded that He quarantine Himself every Sabbath, would He?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If the government demanded that He quarantine Himself every Sabbath, would He?

Of course that's a dodge, bro (albeit not a completely bad one). And I asked first. Again, Would Jesus wear a mask if it was dictated by government?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Of course that's a dodge, bro (albeit not a completely bad one). And I asked first. Again, Would Jesus wear a mask if it was dictated by government?

Only Jesus can answer this. Have you asked Him?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Only Jesus can answer this. Have you asked Him?

Well then, I cannot answer your question. (and what an answer for ages it would have been! )

BTW - you were in a dream last night, bro. Someone introduced us at a meeting as I didn't recognize you.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Well then, I cannot answer your question. (and what an answer for ages it would have been! )

BTW - you were in a dream last night, bro. Someone introduced us at a meeting as I didn't recognize you.

I remember your face. You were giving a testimony in Columbus.

Btw, had a great talk with Barnabas last week. I remember him too, but not sure if he remembered me. I told him how he really helped me in 1978 at some Anaheim training hospitality when he shared with me about the Bible.

It's amazing what we remember and what we forget; but there's a lot of junk I wish I could forget.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Of course not. Have you not read about all the lepers He touched and healed?

This pandemic is a manufactured hoax. Caught early, cheap generic drugs used to treat malaria are available all over the world to treat covid-1984.

How is this pandemic different from other pandemics the past ten years?
Media pushing panic. Hoax is in the media's spin. Hoax is in the faulty tests. How can a fruit as in the pawpaw fruit test positive for covid?
As more information becomes available, it isn't more deadly that the seasonal flu.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

No Hilary would not have won the popular vote. When I saw statistics from the 2016 election that in some Philadelphia voting precincts there was 100% voter turnout and 100% vote for the Democrats, that my friend, BY DEFINITION, is rampant voter fraud. Even the so-called "Republican" watchdogs, employed to provide voter integrity at the precincts, voted 100% Democrat.

The latest $3 Trillion "Heroes Bill" demands all mail in voting. That's like outlawing every door lock in the country, including homes, stores, and banks!

Is that not what some of these governors/mayors tried to do? Did they not release convicted criminals from jail only to try to refill the empty jails with those trying to earn a living?

On the surface it looks good, but ODNI is in the driver seat to control 2020 election security.
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsro...rity-briefings

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

How is this pandemic different from other pandemics the past ten years?
Media pushing panic. Hoax is in the media's spin. Hoax is in the faulty tests. How can a fruit as in the pawpaw fruit test positive for covid?
As more information becomes available, it isn't more deadly that the seasonal flu.

I've made an interesting discovery. I walk a lot. Talk a lot with friends and neighbors. Made a simple conclusion a while ago, which has been true with almost no exception -- the more liberal, the more afraid; and the more conservative, the less afraid.

Perhaps this is because of the news they watch. Perhaps because the conservatives tend to be God-fearing and God-trusting. Perhaps other reasons. Many of the liberals are just spooked irrationally. Many of the conservatives view it as a hoax.

Perhaps it's nothing more than a self-reinforcing prophecy -- some tend to believe what they want to be true.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I've made an interesting discovery. I walk a lot. Talk a lot with friends and neighbors. Made a simple conclusion a while ago, which has been true with almost no exception -- the more liberal, the more afraid; and the more conservative, the less afraid.

Perhaps this is because of the news they watch. Perhaps because the conservatives tend to be God-fearing and God-trusting. Perhaps other reasons. Many of the liberals are just spooked irrationally. Many of the conservatives view it as a hoax.

Perhaps it's nothing more than a self-reinforcing prophecy -- some tend to believe what they want to be true.

I too, have done my "walk-a-bouts" and have wondered about this some thing - the God fearing right and the not-so-God fearing left and how they view things like the current situation. As I've said before, I really do see major hypocrisy in BOTH the left and the right (even though my leanings are conservative/libertarian), big time! However, real born-agains break strongly for the GOP it seems, so I've long suspected that those on the right have a little more insight and light into what's really going on.

Christians on the right can certainly go off on some moral high-ground issues that I think are mostly devoid of Christ! And I have to tell ya, even in my close little group of Scottsdale bros, I've seen some real double-mindedness and flip-flops on this virus thing. Which I guess just goes to show how new and unique it all is - people have little in the the way of experience and comfortable norms to help them reason this all out. (which is the perfect situation for Faith to come in . . .)

But, on the whole, I do think the GOP has the edge in the truth department, only because there are more born-agains in that camp . . .