Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
July polls: 66% of Americans view Obama favorably, Palin now at 40%
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Fishermage,
Do you believe this stuff, or do you just say it? I really do not know. You repeatedly attack "the left" (dehumanizing) and then say they cannot "behave like decent human beings."
It is like you repeatedly attack people personally, then run into a corner and say, "Help! Help! I am being attacked."
You, Sir, are the aggressor.
Bull. I am attacking no one, nor am I running into any corners. I am merely commenting on the shabby debating tactics exercised by a few leftist bullies on these forums.
Commentary is not aggression.
To return to the topic, however, your system does not work. Even if we had a pure form, deregulated health care system.
The current for profit model requires
And then you have to make a profit somewhere, somehow in that. It does not, and cannot, work. Health care is not oil.
The current socialist system does not work, neither do all the other socialist systems anywhere. Time to embrace the future of free minds and free markets.
health care is not oil, no one said that it is. However it is a service that needs to be provided by someone in exchange for something else. One does not requite guns top extract health care from others.
You have two choices: profits of force. Profits is the better choice for everything but those things that in their very nature require force: protecting individual rights from people who would take them away by force or by fraud. Those few things are the province of government.
Health care is not one of those.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Look at that book... sweet Palin..
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
Worth ten thousand words. Too bad they'll never admit the truth.
Worth ten thousand words. Too bad they'll never admit the truth.
Judging people buy the book they have in their hand at a particular point in time. Wow! Now that's what I call pathetic desperation. I wonder if any of you even read either one of those book to even know what they are about or are simply making an assumption based on the covers alone.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Here's the truth:
Palin is reading a book written by a conservative radio talk show host, Mark Levin who once served as advisor to members of Reagan's cabinet. He is a lawyer by trade.
President Obama is reading a book by Fareed Zakaria, the journalist who hosts "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on CNN and was once a supporter of President Ronald Reagan in the 80s, but who came to his senses in the 1990s and is now a centrist.
One book talks about world issues and changing economies, markets and America's role while the other is typical conservative flag-waving propaganda.
Someone had no idea what the two books were about. Someone has been doing what they usually do; judging books by their covers. How ironic.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Here's the truth:
Palin is reading a book written by a conservative radio talk show host, Mark Levin who once served as advisor to members of Reagan's cabinet. He is a lawyer by trade.
President Obama is reading a book by Fareed Zakaria, the journalist who hosts "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on CNN and was once a supporter of President Ronald Reagan in the 80s, but who came to his senses in the 1990s and is now a centrist.
One book talks about world issues and changing economies, markets and America's role while the other is typical conservative flag-waving propaganda.
Someone had no idea what the two books were about. Someone has been doing what they usually do; judging books by their covers. How ironic.
One book talks about world issues and how the leftist mindset has failed us, leading us down the road to tyranny. It then gives some ideas for how to reclaim the ideal set forth by our founders.
The other is typical left wing, anti-American propaganda. In this case you CAN judge two books by their covers.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Here's the truth:
Palin is reading a book written by a conservative radio talk show host, Mark Levin who once served as advisor to members of Reagan's cabinet. He is a lawyer by trade.
President Obama is reading a book by Fareed Zakaria, the journalist who hosts "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on CNN and was once a supporter of President Ronald Reagan in the 80s, but who came to his senses in the 1990s and is now a centrist.
One book talks about world issues and changing economies, markets and America's role while the other is typical conservative flag-waving propaganda.
Someone had no idea what the two books were about. Someone has been doing what they usually do; judging books by their covers. How ironic.
One book talks about world issues and how the leftist mindset has failed us, leading us down the road to tyranny. It then gives some ideas for how to reclaim the ideal set forth by our founders.
The other is typical left wing, anti-American propaganda. In this case you CAN judge two books by their covers.
Typical. You see what you want to see again. Time to take of your Darth Vader mask and see the world and it's people as it really is Fish.
I don't understand why Palin is still an issue with you guys, she's OUT. She stepped down after she was swamped with ethics probes and high costs in legal bills. She did what she thought was best for Alaska and resigned. Maybe Alaska will be better off without her. It's too early to say for sure.
I'm not going to attack her and say she's a moron or anything, but her day is gone. She resigned, it's over. Republicans would be much better off putting their support in someone like Romney or Huckabee, people who would actually have a chance of winning in 2012. This is all imo, of course.
And judging someone by a book they read is not a good idea. If Obama was reading "The Shining" by Stephen King, would that make him a supporter of guys who try to kill their family with an ax? Bush, Palin, Obama, all of them. Let them read whatever they want. Commenting on crap like that is almost as dumb as commenting on what they're wearing.
Fareed Zarakia is not writing about left wing, anti-American propaganda, lol!
Once again, you are making opinion claims without any proof as usual Fish. You hardly ever provide proof for things you say, you just wingnut them off the cuff.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Fareed Zarakia is not writing about left wing, anti-American propaganda, lol!
Once again, you are making opinion claims without any proof as usual Fish. You hardly ever provide proof for things you say, you just wingnut them off the cuff.
Evidently my assessment is in accordance with others, at least from the evidence you've provided. Thanks for prividing what you consider to be "proof," meaning someone else share's your opinion (that is nonsense however). Either way it seems a great many people, including Forbes, agrees with me.
I have decided he is an anti-American leftist from years of reading his writing in Newsweek and the web, and having read quite a bit of his book. In that I found little or nothing new in it -- it's really in a way regurgitated things he has written and said elsewhere -- I didn't finish it.
Same thing with Levin's book.
You are certainly entitlted to your own opinion based upon the opinions of those you choose to believe.
I make my own choices and form my own opinions.
It is amusing however that what I did in my response shot right over your head
fishermage.blogspot.com
It's good you are able to pleasure yourself, although I'm sure that's not what everyone is interested in.
Again, its your opinion which I stated, one few who ever watched Fareed's show would share. Fareed considers himself a centrist and even said so. You fancy yourself as some type of Liberty superhero on these forums which hardly anyone else would agree with, so maybe you have a point after all.
Certainly few here are impressed by your ability to evade and answer rhetorically with the usual, liberty, freedom, socialism, blah blah blah.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Almost all leftists call themselves "centrists" for two reasons. One, if they admitted what they are no one would listen to them or buy their books; and two, they really think they are in the center, and from their own left wing circle of friends and media elite, they ARE in the center of a very left wing segment of society.
Conservatives succeed by being what they are; liberals succeed by hiding what they are.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Watch Bill Mahr's show. He has 4-5 leftists on every night and all they do is talk about republicans, Bush and Palin. The ball is in the democrat's court, Obama is president, the economy is still tanking and they're talking about republicans. Small people didn't build this country.
My youtube MMO gaming channel
"TO MICHAEL!"
I used to date a girl related to Bill Maher... Every one of that family were loons to the left.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
Didn't even know she was still in the picture, since last election atleast on dutch news/tv we never saw her again, so I am quite suprised that she even got 40%.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history
Wonder if his advisers are still smiling?
Not really.
Try having a discussion on say, gay marriage. You'll find a storm of excuses presented by conservatives as they try to hide their real motivation: religion.
Conservatives also love to hide that many of the founding fathers they use in their argument aren't christian at all. Christian Conservatives have been trying to rewrite American history for a very long time, trying to make it seem as if the US is a christian nation.
If anybody is being dishonnest, it's christian conservatives.
Not really.
Try having a discussion on say, gay marriage. You'll find a storm of excuses presented by conservatives as they try to hide their real motivation: religion.
Conservatives also love to hide that many of the founding fathers they use in their argument aren't christian at all. Christian Conservatives have been trying to rewrite American history for a very long time, trying to make it seem as if the US is a christian nation.
If anybody is being dishonnest, it's christian conservatives.
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough for you. Very few people are honest about everything. My point is that when conservatives put forth anything, they say, "I am a conservative," and then explain how and why what they do and believe fits with their notion of conservatism.
However, when a liberal tries to do the same thing; they can't. A liberal can't admit to being a LIBERAL. If they do they will lose; or no one will buy their books.
No one sells a book by saying "noted liberal bestseller." However, one does talk about the many notable conservative bestsellers. Once again. conservative is a selling point. Liberal loses you sales and points in popularity. Had Obama declared on a regular basis "I am a liberal" he would not be in the white house.
Even now he tries to hide it.
Now on to your mention of gay marriage: I have never met a conservative person opposed to gay marriage who tries to hide that his views stem from his religion. He may give all sorts of parrallel reasons but I have never seen them hide what they are. Even those parrallel rasons openly come from his religious beliefs about family, society, etc., so I don't really know what you are talking about there.
Most of the founding fathers were Christians, even if many were Christian Universalists -- those that were deists also considered themselves Christians after a fashion -- even Jefferson. His Unitarian Universalism was a OUTGROWTH of enlightenment Christianity; as were all the Unitarians and Universalists at the time. It meant to them they followed the teachings of Christ. If that is the case than we do live in a nation founded on Christian PRINCIPLES.
Therefore it is appropriate to call such men Christians even if they were not fundamentalist ones. If they consiedr themelves Christians that's good enough for me -- even if I might have disagreements with their theological ideas.
It is not up to YOU to decide who is a Christian and who is not one. It's a funny kind of arrogance that declares people incorrect about what they themselves say they are.
Either way, no one is hiding their conservatism -- they are merely including people in THEIR group that you don't think belong there. That's a difference of opinion, not wholesale dishonesty, as is the case when liberals try and hide what they are so they won't lose votes or sales in their books -- or ratings on their news show.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Not really.
Try having a discussion on say, gay marriage. You'll find a storm of excuses presented by conservatives as they try to hide their real motivation: religion.
Conservatives also love to hide that many of the founding fathers they use in their argument aren't christian at all. Christian Conservatives have been trying to rewrite American history for a very long time, trying to make it seem as if the US is a christian nation.
If anybody is being dishonnest, it's christian conservatives.
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough for you. Very few people are honest about everything. My point is that when conservatives put forth anything, they say, "I am a conservative," and then explain how and why what they do and believe fits with their notion of conservatism.
However, when a liberal tries to do the same thing; they can't. A liberal can't admit to being a LIBERAL. If they do they will lose; or no one will buy their books.
No one sells a book by saying "noted liberal bestseller." However, one does talk about the many notable conservative bestsellers. Once again. conservative is a selling point. Liberal loses you sales and points in popularity. Had Obama declared on a regular basis "I am a liberal" he would not be in the white house.
Even now he tries to hide it.
Now on to your mention of gay marriage: I have never met a conservative person opposed to gay marriage who tries to hide that his views stem from his religion. He may give all sorts of parrallel reasons but I have never seen them hide what they are. Even those parrallel rasons openly come from his religious beliefs about family, society, etc., so I don't really know what you are talking about there.
Most of the founding fathers were Christians, even if many were Christian Universalists -- those that were deists also considered themselves Christians after a fashion -- even Jefferson. His Unitarian Universalism was a OUTGROWTH of enlightenment Christianity; as were all the Unitarians and Universalists at the time. It meant to them they followed the teachings of Christ. If that is the case than we do live in a nation founded on Christian PRINCIPLES.
Therefore it is appropriate to call such men Christians even if they were not fundamentalist ones. If they consiedr themelves Christians that's good enough for me -- even if I might have disagreements with their theological ideas.
It is not up to YOU to decide who is a Christian and who is not one. It's a funny kind of arrogance that declares people incorrect about what they themselves say they are.
Either way, no one is hiding their conservatism -- they are merely including people in THEIR group that you don't think belong there. That's a difference of opinion, not wholesale dishonesty, as is the case when liberals try and hide what they are so they won't lose votes or sales in their books -- or ratings on their news show.
So if they don't put "THIS IS A LIBERAL BOOK!" on the cover, that means they are being dishonest? That's plain silly.
Also, Liberal books are selling.
www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/14/liberal_authors_triumphant_as_us_bookshelves_lean_left/
If you haven't seen any conservative person trying to hide they are against it because of religious motivations, you clearly haven't spend a lot of time following debates. Even on this very forum christian conservatives attempt to hide their religious motivations and will only admit to it if you shoot down all of their excuses and push them into a corner.
So in the sense nobody is hiding their conservatism as in calling themselves conservatists, you're right, but conservatives certainly love to hide some of their conservatives aspects.
Many of the "leading" founding fathers were Deists. Not Christians, this includes Thomas Jefferson.
Not really.
Try having a discussion on say, gay marriage. You'll find a storm of excuses presented by conservatives as they try to hide their real motivation: religion.
Conservatives also love to hide that many of the founding fathers they use in their argument aren't christian at all. Christian Conservatives have been trying to rewrite American history for a very long time, trying to make it seem as if the US is a christian nation.
If anybody is being dishonnest, it's christian conservatives.
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough for you. Very few people are honest about everything. My point is that when conservatives put forth anything, they say, "I am a conservative," and then explain how and why what they do and believe fits with their notion of conservatism.
However, when a liberal tries to do the same thing; they can't. A liberal can't admit to being a LIBERAL. If they do they will lose; or no one will buy their books.
No one sells a book by saying "noted liberal bestseller." However, one does talk about the many notable conservative bestsellers. Once again. conservative is a selling point. Liberal loses you sales and points in popularity. Had Obama declared on a regular basis "I am a liberal" he would not be in the white house.
Even now he tries to hide it.
Now on to your mention of gay marriage: I have never met a conservative person opposed to gay marriage who tries to hide that his views stem from his religion. He may give all sorts of parrallel reasons but I have never seen them hide what they are. Even those parrallel rasons openly come from his religious beliefs about family, society, etc., so I don't really know what you are talking about there.
Most of the founding fathers were Christians, even if many were Christian Universalists -- those that were deists also considered themselves Christians after a fashion -- even Jefferson. His Unitarian Universalism was a OUTGROWTH of enlightenment Christianity; as were all the Unitarians and Universalists at the time. It meant to them they followed the teachings of Christ. If that is the case than we do live in a nation founded on Christian PRINCIPLES.
Therefore it is appropriate to call such men Christians even if they were not fundamentalist ones. If they consiedr themelves Christians that's good enough for me -- even if I might have disagreements with their theological ideas.
It is not up to YOU to decide who is a Christian and who is not one. It's a funny kind of arrogance that declares people incorrect about what they themselves say they are.
Either way, no one is hiding their conservatism -- they are merely including people in THEIR group that you don't think belong there. That's a difference of opinion, not wholesale dishonesty, as is the case when liberals try and hide what they are so they won't lose votes or sales in their books -- or ratings on their news show.
So if they don't put "THIS IS A LIBERAL BOOK!" on the cover, that means they are being dishonest? That's plain silly.
Also, Liberal books are selling.
www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/14/liberal_authors_triumphant_as_us_bookshelves_lean_left/
If you haven't seen any conservative person trying to hide they are against it because of religious motivations, you clearly haven't spend a lot of time following debates. Even on this very forum christian conservatives attempt to hide their religious motivations and will only admit to it if you shoot down all of their excuses and push them into a corner.
So in the sense nobody is hiding their conservatism as in calling themselves conservatists, you're right, but conservatives certainly love to hide some of their conservatives aspects.
Many of the "leading" founding fathers were Deists. Not Christians, this includes Thomas Jefferson.
So when Jefferson called himself a Christian, he was lying? Or that he didn't see a contradiction in being BOTH. I say it is far more likely the latter.
I said that many were Deists -- however, almost all those Deists also considered themselves Christians. In tyhat no one has pronounced High Lord of Theology, I'll take Jefferson's word for it, not yours. The fact is that regardless of his beliefs about the deity of Christ, he was a practicing Christian as well. He certainly wasn't a born-again or a fundamentalist Christian, but he was a Christian by his own words and actions.
Again, I know, since YOu are the High Lord Annointed by His Emminence the Lord Himself as the arbiter of what person belings in which little box of yours, Jefferson was a Deist and NOT a Christian. Sorry. that's nonsense.
Am I a Christian or a Taoist? I am BOTH. I am also a Deist, a Universalist, and a great many other things that do not contradict one another.
Plus, I've been following these debates abut gay rights and such for longer than you've been alive, my young friend. Please, prove your case, Show me an example of a conservative christian hiding that he is a conservative christian to argue against gay marriage. If you are going to make these statements, prove them. I want to see the quotes that lefd you to this point of view.
As for conservatives hiding some of their "conservative aspects," well, when you have to leave the entire context I was carefully drawing, I think that shows you can't actually argue what you were arguing in the first place.
My statement stands and has been untouched by you: Conservatives succeed when they ARE what they say they are. Liberals succeed when they can HIDE what they are.
fishermage.blogspot.com
One thing's for sure... if Jefferson was indeed a Christian, he's going straight to Hell on the express for cutting and pasting the Bible and making his own version. Doesn't seem like a wise thing for a "self professed" Christian to do, so sounds like he was more of a Deist than a "true believer".
"TO MICHAEL!"
So when Jefferson called himself a Christian, he was lying?
One thing's for sure... if Jefferson was indeed a Christian, he's going straight to Hell on the express for cutting and pasting the Bible and making his own version. Doesn't seem like a wise thing for a "self professed" Christian to do, so sounds like he was more of a Deist than a "true believer".
Evidently he "cut up the bible" to present the teachings of Jesus, sans the supernatural elements, to the Native Americans (at least that's what I have read on the subject). I doubt very strongly he's going to go to hell for that. Christians have been cutting up and paraphrasing the Bible for thousands of years. If he is going to Hell, so is every publisher of Bible stories for Children.
Plus Rev 22:19 is speaking ONLY of John's seven letters to the seven churches (THIS book of prophesy). There was no "new testament" in book form when that book was written, so he could not have been talking about the gospels. That's what they call taking a quote way out of context.
Either way, your evidence shows what I am saying: he considered himself a Christian in his own sense -- he believed the teachngs of Jesus were worth following. he did not believe in the Divinity of Jesus -- so he was not an orthodox Christian by any means -- but to me, anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus is in some way, at least that way, a Christian.
He was also a Deist, and and Unitarian Universalist.
Again what I was taking issue with was Gameloading claiming authority over what is a Christian and what is not, then deciding that Jefferson was not according to Gameloading's idea of what a Christian must believe in order to be considered a Christian. Imagine the audacity of someone who is anti-Christian to claim the right to define Christians for everyone on earth.
It doesn't matter that Jefferson called himself a Christian, was married in Christ, regularly attended mainstream Christian worship service. No, what Jefferson thought, did and claimed is of no importance as long as gameloading has declared it to be so.
fishermage.blogspot.com