Ted;1517439 wrote: Something happened in Jesus life and so "That the prophesy might be fulfilled" that is how the story was written up.. You can find the story of Jesus completely copied from the OT. That is not prophesy fulfilled it is a style of writing(midrash)
That's not true. Those things really happened. Could Jesus have picked where He was born? Manner of death? Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver? When He was born? Plus over 100 other things if He weren't God? God knew ahead of time and then it happened. "That the Scripture might be fulfilled" could mean that God caused it to happen to fulfill scripture or it could be just the way it was written or phrased.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ted;1517447 wrote: Oh? Sorry but when I talk with you you interpret what I said and its the same the other way. Those writing the Bible did exactly the same thing.
Those writing the Bible were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit They couldn't make a mistake, but yes you can see their personality coming out in their writings. In most cases in the Bible, there is only one correct way to interpret it. When Jesus says "I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but by me". I think He means just what it says, He doesn't mean that all roads get to God, He means that He is the only way to the Father. But so many liberals would deny that the Bible says this or that Jesus said this. They would try and discount it.
Those writing the Bible were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit They couldn't make a mistake, but yes you can see their personality coming out in their writings. In most cases in the Bible, there is only one correct way to interpret it. When Jesus says "I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but by me". I think He means just what it says, He doesn't mean that all roads get to God, He means that He is the only way to the Father. But so many liberals would deny that the Bible says this or that Jesus said this. They would try and discount it.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517507 wrote: Those writing the Bible were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit They couldn't make a mistake, but yes you can see their personality coming out in their writings. In most cases in the Bible, there is only one correct way to interpret it. When Jesus says "I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but by me". I think He means just what it says, He doesn't mean that all roads get to God, He means that He is the only way to the Father. But so many liberals would deny that the Bible says this or that Jesus said this. They would try and discount it.
What about all the jews and muslims that dio not believe he is the son of god or the only way to the father do you think they are liberals?
What about all the jews and muslims that dio not believe he is the son of god or the only way to the father do you think they are liberals?
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
gmc;1517454 wrote: posted by xfrodobagginsx
certainly herod seems the type who would have ben capable of such an atrocity but actually the only evidence for what herod is suipposed to have done to the first born is in the bible there is no other historical evidence to back it up. Only one verse in Matthew mentions it the event is notably absent from the other gospels.
If you think it all holds together with no contradictions maybe you should sit down and read it for yourself. As you may have gathered I am an atheist I have yet to see any evidence that would confrim there is indeed a god and the bible no matter how much you wish to believe it is the word of god is not in itsefef proof of god. To claim it is inerrantbecause it is the word of god is so patently ridiculous I find it hard to credit any reasonable hiuman being would believe it to be so. Yet we are told we must respect religious belief no matter how ridiculous. In the 21st centiry that relgion should be the cause of so much misery and oppression is sad.
I could sit down and go through it pointing out all the contradictions and arrant nonsense but it's better if you study it for yourseld.
From what I understand there IS evidence of Herod and that he died somewhere around 4 bc, but perhaps not the event it's self. The Gospels are 3 different accounts of it happening though. I don't think it's recorded in John. I have read it and see no reason not to believe it. Point out the contradictions if you would.
certainly herod seems the type who would have ben capable of such an atrocity but actually the only evidence for what herod is suipposed to have done to the first born is in the bible there is no other historical evidence to back it up. Only one verse in Matthew mentions it the event is notably absent from the other gospels.
If you think it all holds together with no contradictions maybe you should sit down and read it for yourself. As you may have gathered I am an atheist I have yet to see any evidence that would confrim there is indeed a god and the bible no matter how much you wish to believe it is the word of god is not in itsefef proof of god. To claim it is inerrantbecause it is the word of god is so patently ridiculous I find it hard to credit any reasonable hiuman being would believe it to be so. Yet we are told we must respect religious belief no matter how ridiculous. In the 21st centiry that relgion should be the cause of so much misery and oppression is sad.
I could sit down and go through it pointing out all the contradictions and arrant nonsense but it's better if you study it for yourseld.
From what I understand there IS evidence of Herod and that he died somewhere around 4 bc, but perhaps not the event it's self. The Gospels are 3 different accounts of it happening though. I don't think it's recorded in John. I have read it and see no reason not to believe it. Point out the contradictions if you would.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Herod was a very evil man. He murdered his own family members, his own sons, his wife and regretted killing her, so preserved her in pure honey. It's not a stretch to believe that he put out a decree to kill the babies.
Here is an interesting read on the topic:
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/ ... -bethlehem
Here is an interesting read on the topic:
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/ ... -bethlehem
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517548 wrote: From what I understand there IS evidence of Herod and that he died somewhere around 4 bc, but perhaps not the event it's self. The Gospels are 3 different accounts of it happening though. I don't think it's recorded in John. I have read it and see no reason not to believe it. Point out the contradictions if you would.
What do you mean from what you understand? Do you just read the bible and nothing else or something? Herod was a real person there are copious records of his doings and his willingness to slaughter members of his own family not to mention he also killed john the baptist. If he had ordered theb slaughter of male children it seems rather unlikely that it wouldn't be recorded somewhere it's hardly somethingb that would shock the romans who were not averse to a little onfanticide when it suited them.
I have read it and see no reason not to believe it.
Is there reason why you should when the event is not mentioned anywhere else apart from the bible and this the action of a man for whom there is plenty of corroborating evidence as to how he behaved?
There is little point me pointing out contradictions since you believe in an inerrant bible. That is not a reasonable starting point as it is more than likely that you will discount anything you don't like. You turn common sense on it's head just because there is no evidence it didn't happen doesn't mean that it did.
What do you mean from what you understand? Do you just read the bible and nothing else or something? Herod was a real person there are copious records of his doings and his willingness to slaughter members of his own family not to mention he also killed john the baptist. If he had ordered theb slaughter of male children it seems rather unlikely that it wouldn't be recorded somewhere it's hardly somethingb that would shock the romans who were not averse to a little onfanticide when it suited them.
I have read it and see no reason not to believe it.
Is there reason why you should when the event is not mentioned anywhere else apart from the bible and this the action of a man for whom there is plenty of corroborating evidence as to how he behaved?
There is little point me pointing out contradictions since you believe in an inerrant bible. That is not a reasonable starting point as it is more than likely that you will discount anything you don't like. You turn common sense on it's head just because there is no evidence it didn't happen doesn't mean that it did.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
gmc;1517469 wrote: Where on earth does that one come from what do you mean by liberal? Are fascists somehow more believeable? You have a major problem in that a liberal is by definition someone willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas. The very antithesis of a religious person. If you can be liberal in your rsearch and still decide you believe in god or a relgion that is fine vbut to not even be prepared to test your faith rather begs the question what are you afraid of? Most of the problems in the world stem from intolerance of others you do not make a good case for religion.
I am speaking from an American standpoint. Not sure exactly how it is in Europe because I don't live there. By "Liberal" I mean one who does not take the Bible literally. One who does not believe that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and the only way to the Father. One who allegorizes the Bible even when it's obvious that it's not meant to be allegorizes. To a Liberal, there are no absolutes. All is trivial and left up to the interpretation of the individual. Fascists would be more in line with Liberal scholars because they pretty much do the same thing. I just explained what Liberal means to me in theology. Religion is ritual and not from the heart. Jesus Christ was anti Religion. The very antithesis of a Christian is one who tries to interpret what Christ says to mean what they wish it said, rather than what it actually says. I am not afraid to research what I believe and see that it's true. I do it all of the time when I debate and it always proves it's self true. I agree that most of the problems come from intolerance from people like Liberals who claim to be tolerant and loving, yet they are the "Antithesis" of what they claim to be. Conservative Christians are tolerant. We believe in living peaceably with all men as much as possible, but there comes a time when it's time to fight back. Liberals in general on the other hand believe in violence and anger to further their cause, while accusing the conservatives of being violent and angry.
I am speaking from an American standpoint. Not sure exactly how it is in Europe because I don't live there. By "Liberal" I mean one who does not take the Bible literally. One who does not believe that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and the only way to the Father. One who allegorizes the Bible even when it's obvious that it's not meant to be allegorizes. To a Liberal, there are no absolutes. All is trivial and left up to the interpretation of the individual. Fascists would be more in line with Liberal scholars because they pretty much do the same thing. I just explained what Liberal means to me in theology. Religion is ritual and not from the heart. Jesus Christ was anti Religion. The very antithesis of a Christian is one who tries to interpret what Christ says to mean what they wish it said, rather than what it actually says. I am not afraid to research what I believe and see that it's true. I do it all of the time when I debate and it always proves it's self true. I agree that most of the problems come from intolerance from people like Liberals who claim to be tolerant and loving, yet they are the "Antithesis" of what they claim to be. Conservative Christians are tolerant. We believe in living peaceably with all men as much as possible, but there comes a time when it's time to fight back. Liberals in general on the other hand believe in violence and anger to further their cause, while accusing the conservatives of being violent and angry.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517564 wrote: I am speaking from an American standpoint. Not sure exactly how it is in Europe because I don't live there. By "Liberal" I mean one who does not take the Bible literally. One who does not believe that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and the only way to the Father. One who allegorizes the Bible even when it's obvious that it's not meant to be allegorizes. To a Liberal, there are no absolutes. All is trivial and left up to the interpretation of the individual. Fascists would be more in line with Liberal scholars because they pretty much do the same thing. I just explained what Liberal means to me in theology. Religion is ritual and not from the heart. Jesus Christ was anti Religion. The very antithesis of a Christian is one who tries to interpret what Christ says to mean what they wish it said, rather than what it actually says. I am not afraid to research what I believe and see that it's true. I do it all of the time when I debate and it always proves it's self true. I agree that most of the problems come from intolerance from people like Liberals who claim to be tolerant and loving, yet they are the "Antithesis" of what they claim to be. Conservative Christians are tolerant. We believe in living peaceably with all men as much as possible, but there comes a time when it's time to fight back. Liberals in general on the other hand believe in violence and anger to further their cause, while accusing the conservatives of being violent and angry.
That's not what liberal means on either siude of the atlantic
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/liberal
liberal
adjective
1Willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.
‘liberal views towards divorce’
1.1 Favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms.
‘liberal citizenship laws’
1.2 (in a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform.
‘a liberal democratic state’
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal
a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts
liberal education
b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a : marked by generosity : openhanded
a liberal giver
b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way
a liberal meal
c : ample, full
3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : licentious
4 : not literal or strict : loose
a liberal translation
5 : broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism
b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
— liber
You live in a liberal democracy that's why your right to practice your religion as you wish is protected in your constitution. Freedom of speech and of religion are two of the base base elements liberalism. The problem with many religious people is they seem to think freedom of religion means they should not be criticised or challenged either in their beliefs or in their demand that they have the god given right to impose their beliefs on others. It is impossible for someone deeply religious to be liberal in the sense that they are incapable of being tolerant of others who choose a differemnt life style or belief system to live by. We have seen the tolerant conservative christians demand their right to discrominate against lbgt people try and prevent women having acces to contraceptives and prevent science education in schools. Stone age ideology still holds firm. Liberalism terrifies the religious authorities because they don;t wanmt reason to get in the way of faith.
To a Liberal, there are no absolutes. All is trivial and left up to the interpretation of the individual.
That would apply to protestants - those who believe in a personal path to jesus. I take it you are a follower of catholicism then. Shia and sunni have the same conflict - find your own way to god read the koran for yourself or follow the teachings of an imam.
What are you fighting back against? Who is stopping you going to church or following your religion.
That's not what liberal means on either siude of the atlantic
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/liberal
liberal
adjective
1Willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.
‘liberal views towards divorce’
1.1 Favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms.
‘liberal citizenship laws’
1.2 (in a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform.
‘a liberal democratic state’
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal
a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts
liberal education
b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a : marked by generosity : openhanded
a liberal giver
b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way
a liberal meal
c : ample, full
3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : licentious
4 : not literal or strict : loose
a liberal translation
5 : broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism
b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
— liber
You live in a liberal democracy that's why your right to practice your religion as you wish is protected in your constitution. Freedom of speech and of religion are two of the base base elements liberalism. The problem with many religious people is they seem to think freedom of religion means they should not be criticised or challenged either in their beliefs or in their demand that they have the god given right to impose their beliefs on others. It is impossible for someone deeply religious to be liberal in the sense that they are incapable of being tolerant of others who choose a differemnt life style or belief system to live by. We have seen the tolerant conservative christians demand their right to discrominate against lbgt people try and prevent women having acces to contraceptives and prevent science education in schools. Stone age ideology still holds firm. Liberalism terrifies the religious authorities because they don;t wanmt reason to get in the way of faith.
To a Liberal, there are no absolutes. All is trivial and left up to the interpretation of the individual.
That would apply to protestants - those who believe in a personal path to jesus. I take it you are a follower of catholicism then. Shia and sunni have the same conflict - find your own way to god read the koran for yourself or follow the teachings of an imam.
What are you fighting back against? Who is stopping you going to church or following your religion.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
gmc;1517514 wrote: What about all the jews and muslims that dio not believe he is the son of god or the only way to the father do you think they are liberals?
Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat (Liberal) and mysteriously so do muslims. You've got it! Personally, I think it's because of spiritual reasons that non Christians tend to vote Democrat (Liberal), at least in the USA, probably everywhere else too.
Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat (Liberal) and mysteriously so do muslims. You've got it! Personally, I think it's because of spiritual reasons that non Christians tend to vote Democrat (Liberal), at least in the USA, probably everywhere else too.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
gmc;1517555 wrote: What do you mean from what you understand? Do you just read the bible and nothing else or something? Herod was a real person there are copious records of his doings and his willingness to slaughter members of his own family not to mention he also killed john the baptist. If he had ordered theb slaughter of male children it seems rather unlikely that it wouldn't be recorded somewhere it's hardly somethingb that would shock the romans who were not averse to a little onfanticide when it suited them.
Is there reason why you should when the event is not mentioned anywhere else apart from the bible and this the action of a man for whom there is plenty of corroborating evidence as to how he behaved?
There is little point me pointing out contradictions since you believe in an inerrant bible. That is not a reasonable starting point as it is more than likely that you will discount anything you don't like. You turn common sense on it's head just because there is no evidence it didn't happen doesn't mean that it did.
That information wasn't all from the Bible. So, maybe you shouldn't say things like unless you know what you're talking about. I already said those things, so you haven't added anything. You already mentioned lots of good reasons to believe the Biblical account that he ordered the slaughter of the children. It was FULLY within his character. It's not much of a stretch to believe it. Common sense says it's very much within his character to do what the Bible said he did.
Is there reason why you should when the event is not mentioned anywhere else apart from the bible and this the action of a man for whom there is plenty of corroborating evidence as to how he behaved?
There is little point me pointing out contradictions since you believe in an inerrant bible. That is not a reasonable starting point as it is more than likely that you will discount anything you don't like. You turn common sense on it's head just because there is no evidence it didn't happen doesn't mean that it did.
That information wasn't all from the Bible. So, maybe you shouldn't say things like unless you know what you're talking about. I already said those things, so you haven't added anything. You already mentioned lots of good reasons to believe the Biblical account that he ordered the slaughter of the children. It was FULLY within his character. It's not much of a stretch to believe it. Common sense says it's very much within his character to do what the Bible said he did.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
gmc;1517570 wrote: That's not what liberal means on either siude of the atlantic
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/liberal
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal
a
You live in a liberal democracy that's why your right to practice your religion as you wish is protected in your constitution. Freedom of speech and of religion are two of the base base elements liberalism. The problem with many religious people is they seem to think freedom of religion means they should not be criticised or challenged either in their beliefs or in their demand that they have the god given right to impose their beliefs on others. It is impossible for someone deeply religious to be liberal in the sense that they are incapable of being tolerant of others who choose a differemnt life style or belief system to live by. We have seen the tolerant conservative christians demand their right to discrominate against lbgt people try and prevent women having acces to contraceptives and prevent science education in schools. Stone age ideology still holds firm. Liberalism terrifies the religious authorities because they don;t wanmt reason to get in the way of faith.
That would apply to protestants - those who believe in a personal path to jesus. I take it you are a follower of catholicism then. Shia and sunni have the same conflict - find your own way to god read the koran for yourself or follow the teachings of an imam.
What are you fighting back against? Who is stopping you going to church or following your religion.
Are you saying that the American Liberals don't know how anti Liberal that they are? They are very intolerant, while claiming to be tolerant. They are angry and violent. They don't respect other's right to their opinions. They try to shut down free speech and anyone who disagrees with them, but they call themselves Liberal. The Conservatives are the ones who respect the views of others and fit the definitions that you are attributing to Liberalism. I can answer this more later. It's been a long day.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/liberal
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal
a
You live in a liberal democracy that's why your right to practice your religion as you wish is protected in your constitution. Freedom of speech and of religion are two of the base base elements liberalism. The problem with many religious people is they seem to think freedom of religion means they should not be criticised or challenged either in their beliefs or in their demand that they have the god given right to impose their beliefs on others. It is impossible for someone deeply religious to be liberal in the sense that they are incapable of being tolerant of others who choose a differemnt life style or belief system to live by. We have seen the tolerant conservative christians demand their right to discrominate against lbgt people try and prevent women having acces to contraceptives and prevent science education in schools. Stone age ideology still holds firm. Liberalism terrifies the religious authorities because they don;t wanmt reason to get in the way of faith.
That would apply to protestants - those who believe in a personal path to jesus. I take it you are a follower of catholicism then. Shia and sunni have the same conflict - find your own way to god read the koran for yourself or follow the teachings of an imam.
What are you fighting back against? Who is stopping you going to church or following your religion.
Are you saying that the American Liberals don't know how anti Liberal that they are? They are very intolerant, while claiming to be tolerant. They are angry and violent. They don't respect other's right to their opinions. They try to shut down free speech and anyone who disagrees with them, but they call themselves Liberal. The Conservatives are the ones who respect the views of others and fit the definitions that you are attributing to Liberalism. I can answer this more later. It's been a long day.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517598 wrote: Are you saying that the American Liberals don't know how anti Liberal that they are? They are very intolerant, while claiming to be tolerant. They are angry and violent. They don't respect other's right to their opinions. They try to shut down free speech and anyone who disagrees with them, but they call themselves Liberal. The Conservatives are the ones who respect the views of others and fit the definitions that you are attributing to Liberalism. I can answer this more later. It's been a long day.
Right, we Liberals are the violent and intolerant ones.
OooKay.
Right, we Liberals are the violent and intolerant ones.
OooKay.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Weren't liberals called "bleeding hearts" not too long ago?
I no longer consider myself liberal because I refuse to associate myself with this current hawkish attitude liberals have adopted.
I no longer consider myself liberal because I refuse to associate myself with this current hawkish attitude liberals have adopted.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517609 wrote: Weren't liberals called "bleeding hearts" not too long ago?
I no longer consider myself liberal because I refuse to associate myself with this current hawkish attitude liberals have adopted.
Examples of "Hawkish Liberals" please?
I no longer consider myself liberal because I refuse to associate myself with this current hawkish attitude liberals have adopted.
Examples of "Hawkish Liberals" please?
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517600 wrote: Right, we Liberals are the violent and intolerant ones.
OooKay.
In America they are. They go to Republican Political rallies and start riots. They riot when Conservatives speak on College Campuses and try to shut them down and or shout them down. They can't handle hearing anyone give an opposing view to them without taking it as a gross insult rather than a discussion. They are very intolerant of any view that doesn't agree with theirs, while claiming to be tolerant and accepting. I didn't say that European liberals were like that because I have honestly never been to Europe. I really hope Europe isn't like that. I have a friend that lived in Europe for 12 years and, although she is very liberal, I don't think she is like that. So maybe European Liberals aren't like that.
OooKay.
In America they are. They go to Republican Political rallies and start riots. They riot when Conservatives speak on College Campuses and try to shut them down and or shout them down. They can't handle hearing anyone give an opposing view to them without taking it as a gross insult rather than a discussion. They are very intolerant of any view that doesn't agree with theirs, while claiming to be tolerant and accepting. I didn't say that European liberals were like that because I have honestly never been to Europe. I really hope Europe isn't like that. I have a friend that lived in Europe for 12 years and, although she is very liberal, I don't think she is like that. So maybe European Liberals aren't like that.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517620 wrote: Examples of "Hawkish Liberals" please?Some more prominent liberal hawks:
Wikipedia wrote: People who have been described as liberal hawks include:
Hillary Clinton, former First Lady of the United States, former U.S. Senator from New York, former US Secretary of State, 2008 Democratic Presidential Candidate,[4] 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee
Richard Holbrooke, former Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, former Ambassador to Germany, former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, former Ambassador to the United Nations, and former special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ronald D. Asmus, scholar at the German Marshall Fund of the United States[2]
Paul Berman, contributing editor to Dissent and The New Republic (described as a 'Philosopher King' of liberal hawks)[2]
Larry Diamond, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution[2]
Joe Lieberman, United States Senator representing Connecticut from 1989 to 2013;[5] liberal on social issues, but in favor of strong national defense.
Michael McFaul, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution[2]
Kenneth Pollack, former Clinton administration advisor and senior fellow at The Brookings Institution[2]
Michael Tomasky, Editor of Guardian America[2]
Michael Ignatieff, former Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, former Professor at Havard's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy
Henry "Scoop" Jackson, United States Senator who represented Washington from 1953 to 1983.[6]
Jonathan Chait, self-described liberal hawk[7]
Bernard-Henri Lévy, a French intellectual who espouses liberal interventionist tendencies.
Christopher Hitchens, British-American journalist, essayist, critic and writer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_hawk
Wikipedia wrote: People who have been described as liberal hawks include:
Hillary Clinton, former First Lady of the United States, former U.S. Senator from New York, former US Secretary of State, 2008 Democratic Presidential Candidate,[4] 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee
Richard Holbrooke, former Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, former Ambassador to Germany, former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, former Ambassador to the United Nations, and former special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ronald D. Asmus, scholar at the German Marshall Fund of the United States[2]
Paul Berman, contributing editor to Dissent and The New Republic (described as a 'Philosopher King' of liberal hawks)[2]
Larry Diamond, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution[2]
Joe Lieberman, United States Senator representing Connecticut from 1989 to 2013;[5] liberal on social issues, but in favor of strong national defense.
Michael McFaul, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution[2]
Kenneth Pollack, former Clinton administration advisor and senior fellow at The Brookings Institution[2]
Michael Tomasky, Editor of Guardian America[2]
Michael Ignatieff, former Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, former Professor at Havard's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy
Henry "Scoop" Jackson, United States Senator who represented Washington from 1953 to 1983.[6]
Jonathan Chait, self-described liberal hawk[7]
Bernard-Henri Lévy, a French intellectual who espouses liberal interventionist tendencies.
Christopher Hitchens, British-American journalist, essayist, critic and writer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_hawk
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517623 wrote: In America they are. They go to Republican Political rallies and start riots.
"Republican" political rallies such as the White Supremecists who came carrying torches? Since rethuglican rallies are based on hatred, they qualify as riots already.
They riot when Conservatives speak on College Campuses and try to shut them down and or shout them down.
American Nazi Party speakers deserve to get shouted down. Heck, they deserve to be jailed.
They can't handle hearing anyone give an opposing view to them without taking it as a gross insult rather than a discussion.
That's bcause Liberals stand for what's right. Equality, respect for women, and tolerance. Opposing views such as racism, misogyny, and hatred are gross insults.
(See: Birtherism, Pu$$y Grabbing)
The GOP May Rebuke Trump's Hateful Words But They Continue to Enable Him
"Republican" political rallies such as the White Supremecists who came carrying torches? Since rethuglican rallies are based on hatred, they qualify as riots already.
They riot when Conservatives speak on College Campuses and try to shut them down and or shout them down.
American Nazi Party speakers deserve to get shouted down. Heck, they deserve to be jailed.
They can't handle hearing anyone give an opposing view to them without taking it as a gross insult rather than a discussion.
That's bcause Liberals stand for what's right. Equality, respect for women, and tolerance. Opposing views such as racism, misogyny, and hatred are gross insults.
(See: Birtherism, Pu$$y Grabbing)
The GOP May Rebuke Trump's Hateful Words But They Continue to Enable Him
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
By the way, the title of this thread is "How to get to Heaven When You Die" Being Republican is NOT one of those ways...
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
We have found ourselves in a world where the likes of Barry Goldwater, William F Buckley, and George Will have been called "Liberal".
Somehow, I am not sure that liberal means what many think it means.
And "Hawk" seems to defy almost any definition of Political Liberal I have ever encountered, as it implies seeking a military application to political problems.
So, either "Liberal", or "Hawk" is being misapplied.
Somehow, I am not sure that liberal means what many think it means.
And "Hawk" seems to defy almost any definition of Political Liberal I have ever encountered, as it implies seeking a military application to political problems.
So, either "Liberal", or "Hawk" is being misapplied.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517633 wrote:
Somehow, I am not sure that liberal means what many think it means.Tell that to the people on the list, it's they and their ilk who've polluted the label.
Would you call Obama a liberal knowing he not only kept us in the wars he inherited and escalated them but also got us involved with more of them under the guise of "regime change" and "humanitarian intervention"?
Somehow, I am not sure that liberal means what many think it means.Tell that to the people on the list, it's they and their ilk who've polluted the label.
Would you call Obama a liberal knowing he not only kept us in the wars he inherited and escalated them but also got us involved with more of them under the guise of "regime change" and "humanitarian intervention"?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Saint_;1517631 wrote: By the way, the title of this thread is "How to get to Heaven When You Die" Being Republican is NOT one of those ways...Haha! That's true!
We might as well hijack fraudo's threads anyway. They are senseless unless they're hijacked.
We might as well hijack fraudo's threads anyway. They are senseless unless they're hijacked.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517636 wrote: Tell that to the people on the list, it's they and their ilk who've polluted the label.
Would you call Obama a liberal knowing he not only kept us in the wars he inherited and escalated them but also got us involved with more of them under the guise of "regime change" and "humanitarian intervention"?
I don't recall ever referring to Obama as a liberal. Though he is far more liberal than the people he was running against.
Would you call Obama a liberal knowing he not only kept us in the wars he inherited and escalated them but also got us involved with more of them under the guise of "regime change" and "humanitarian intervention"?
I don't recall ever referring to Obama as a liberal. Though he is far more liberal than the people he was running against.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Okay so we know about Jesus when he's a baby, and when he's an adult, but does the bible ever mention his rebellious teenager years?
'Jesus, go feed the donkey.'
'YOU'RE NOT MY REAL FATHER!'
The ground shakes a little and a voice comes down from the sky
'Do what your stepfather says, you little 5hit.'
'Jesus, go feed the donkey.'
'YOU'RE NOT MY REAL FATHER!'
The ground shakes a little and a voice comes down from the sky
'Do what your stepfather says, you little 5hit.'
Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517609 wrote: Weren't liberals called "bleeding hearts" not too long ago?
I no longer consider myself liberal because I refuse to associate myself with this current hawkish attitude liberals have adopted.
Are you speaking of American Liberalism or European? What do you mean by "Hawkish".
I no longer consider myself liberal because I refuse to associate myself with this current hawkish attitude liberals have adopted.
Are you speaking of American Liberalism or European? What do you mean by "Hawkish".
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517620 wrote: Examples of "Hawkish Liberals" please?
In America, the Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. .
In America, the Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. .
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517655 wrote: In America, the Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. .
That was the plan.
That was the plan.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517655 wrote: In America, the Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. .
No...that can't be right. If it was Hillary Clinton would be president because she won the popular (people's ) vote.
No...that can't be right. If it was Hillary Clinton would be president because she won the popular (people's ) vote.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Saint_;1517661 wrote: No...that can't be right. If it was Hillary Clinton would be president because she won the popular (people's ) vote.Speaking of which, what do you make of just another poor decision on HRC's part not to fire her misogynist womanizing campaign guy?
She would have been a disaster as president. That, btw, is not any kind of endorsement or defense of Trump.
She would have been a disaster as president. That, btw, is not any kind of endorsement or defense of Trump.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517666 wrote: Speaking of which, what do you make of just another poor decision on HRC's part not to fire her misogynist womanizing campaign guy?
She would have been a disaster as president. That, btw, is not any kind of endorsement or defense of Trump.
Funny you should mention that.
I was just reading:
clinton-regrets-not-firing-adviser-accused-harassment/
She would have been a disaster as president. That, btw, is not any kind of endorsement or defense of Trump.
Funny you should mention that.
I was just reading:
clinton-regrets-not-firing-adviser-accused-harassment/
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517672 wrote: Funny you should mention that.
I was just reading:
clinton-regrets-not-firing-adviser-accused-harassment/It was easy to see when the Monica Lewinsky thing was happening that HRC sees men womanizing as 'boys being boys'. Then there's the way she chided Trump during the debates saying sh1t like "see, this is what Donald does...." She was sounding like a mother figure with the attitude of 'boys will be boys'.
This is what a lot of males resented in her.
Her past relationships with males must have been something.
I was just reading:
clinton-regrets-not-firing-adviser-accused-harassment/It was easy to see when the Monica Lewinsky thing was happening that HRC sees men womanizing as 'boys being boys'. Then there's the way she chided Trump during the debates saying sh1t like "see, this is what Donald does...." She was sounding like a mother figure with the attitude of 'boys will be boys'.
This is what a lot of males resented in her.
Her past relationships with males must have been something.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517674 wrote: It was easy to see when the Monica Lewinsky thing was happening that HRC sees men womanizing as 'boys being boys'. Then there's the way she chided Trump during the debates saying sh1t like "see, this is what Donald does...." She was sounding like a mother figure with the attitude of 'boys will be boys'.
This is what a lot of males resented in her.
Her past relationships with males must have been something.
You seem to enjoy obsessing over Hilary.
Maybe we can get her to run again, so you can have a few more years of hating Hilary.
This is what a lot of males resented in her.
Her past relationships with males must have been something.
You seem to enjoy obsessing over Hilary.
Maybe we can get her to run again, so you can have a few more years of hating Hilary.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517675 wrote: You seem to enjoy obsessing over Hilary.
Maybe we can get her to run again, so you can have a few more years of hating Hilary.Oh well. I thought we were going to actually have an adult conversation.
Maybe we can get her to run again, so you can have a few more years of hating Hilary.Oh well. I thought we were going to actually have an adult conversation.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517676 wrote: Oh well. I thought we were going to actually have an adult conversation.
About Hilary?
Sorry. Don't really see the point.
About Hilary?
Sorry. Don't really see the point.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517627 wrote: Some more prominent liberal hawks:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_hawk
So then you are referring to liberals who interfere in foreign affairs?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_hawk
So then you are referring to liberals who interfere in foreign affairs?
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Saint_;1517630 wrote: "Republican" political rallies such as the White Supremecists who came carrying torches? Since rethuglican rallies are based on hatred, they qualify as riots already.
American Nazi Party speakers deserve to get shouted down. Heck, they deserve to be jailed.
That's bcause Liberals stand for what's right. Equality, respect for women, and tolerance. Opposing views such as racism, misogyny, and hatred are gross insults.
(See: Birtherism, Pu$$y Grabbing)
The GOP May Rebuke Trump's Hateful Words But They Continue to Enable Him
Don't know anything about anyone carrying torches, but I do know that the Democrat rally had Antifa racists there causing trouble too. Both parties were there, but not all people were racist on the Republican side or the Democrat side. There was a group of Neo Nazis that came and there were the Antifa group there and those two racist groups were clashing.
The Antifa crowd deserves to get shouted down too and jailed. Liberals don't stand up for what's right. If they did, they would be equally outraged when one of their own committed crimes and atrocities, but they aren't. They claim to oppose racism, sexism, ect. all while perpetuating it.
Maybe California will succeed from the US and the Liberals can have their own Utopia hell on earth there.
American Nazi Party speakers deserve to get shouted down. Heck, they deserve to be jailed.
That's bcause Liberals stand for what's right. Equality, respect for women, and tolerance. Opposing views such as racism, misogyny, and hatred are gross insults.
(See: Birtherism, Pu$$y Grabbing)
The GOP May Rebuke Trump's Hateful Words But They Continue to Enable Him
Don't know anything about anyone carrying torches, but I do know that the Democrat rally had Antifa racists there causing trouble too. Both parties were there, but not all people were racist on the Republican side or the Democrat side. There was a group of Neo Nazis that came and there were the Antifa group there and those two racist groups were clashing.
The Antifa crowd deserves to get shouted down too and jailed. Liberals don't stand up for what's right. If they did, they would be equally outraged when one of their own committed crimes and atrocities, but they aren't. They claim to oppose racism, sexism, ect. all while perpetuating it.
Maybe California will succeed from the US and the Liberals can have their own Utopia hell on earth there.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Saint_;1517631 wrote: By the way, the title of this thread is "How to get to Heaven When You Die" Being Republican is NOT one of those ways...
Neither is being Democrat. It's not a question of either of those things. It's about do you place your faith in Jesus Christ for salvation, believing in your heart that He died on the cross and rose from the dead for your sins. There are both Republicans and Democrats alike who have done that.
Neither is being Democrat. It's not a question of either of those things. It's about do you place your faith in Jesus Christ for salvation, believing in your heart that He died on the cross and rose from the dead for your sins. There are both Republicans and Democrats alike who have done that.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
I agree with xbaggofroddyinsx on this one. It doesn't matter whether you're voting Democrats or Republican. So long as you're voting Jesus, you know what you're doing, NOT.
Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517633 wrote: We have found ourselves in a world where the likes of Barry Goldwater, William F Buckley, and George Will have been called "Liberal".
Somehow, I am not sure that liberal means what many think it means.
And "Hawk" seems to defy almost any definition of Political Liberal I have ever encountered, as it implies seeking a military application to political problems.
So, either "Liberal", or "Hawk" is being misapplied.
The Truth of the matter is that the Liberals (Democrats) of the 1960s were more Conservative than the most Conservatives (Republicans) are today. I think most liberals today are socialists and far left. Socialism is a bad thing.
Somehow, I am not sure that liberal means what many think it means.
And "Hawk" seems to defy almost any definition of Political Liberal I have ever encountered, as it implies seeking a military application to political problems.
So, either "Liberal", or "Hawk" is being misapplied.
The Truth of the matter is that the Liberals (Democrats) of the 1960s were more Conservative than the most Conservatives (Republicans) are today. I think most liberals today are socialists and far left. Socialism is a bad thing.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517749 wrote: The Truth of the matter is that the Liberals (Democrats) of the 1960s were more Conservative than the most Conservatives (Republicans) are today. I think most liberals today are socialists and far left. Socialism is a bad thing.
Democrats of the mid 20th century in the South were not the same as Democrats in the Industrial North.
In the South they were far more conservative, and yes, may have been even more conservative that your average Republican of the day. They strove to maintain the segregation and exploitation of the coloreds and kept the Unions at bay.
In the 60s, the Northern Dems began to work at taking over the political machinery of the Democratic Party to force integration and help Unions get a foothold in the South.
In the 1968 Election, we saw the conservatives begin to separate from the Democratic Party, first my trying to form the more conservative Southern Democrats. by the mid 70s most conservatives began turning to the Republican Party who was happy to get a real foothold in the South.
This Southern faction quickly began driving the Republicans deeper into the the Conservative Spectrum.
Of Course this forced the Democrats to move to the right, as well. We now have the political center far to the right of what it was in the 60s.
Democrats of the mid 20th century in the South were not the same as Democrats in the Industrial North.
In the South they were far more conservative, and yes, may have been even more conservative that your average Republican of the day. They strove to maintain the segregation and exploitation of the coloreds and kept the Unions at bay.
In the 60s, the Northern Dems began to work at taking over the political machinery of the Democratic Party to force integration and help Unions get a foothold in the South.
In the 1968 Election, we saw the conservatives begin to separate from the Democratic Party, first my trying to form the more conservative Southern Democrats. by the mid 70s most conservatives began turning to the Republican Party who was happy to get a real foothold in the South.
This Southern faction quickly began driving the Republicans deeper into the the Conservative Spectrum.
Of Course this forced the Democrats to move to the right, as well. We now have the political center far to the right of what it was in the 60s.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517636 wrote: Tell that to the people on the list, it's they and their ilk who've polluted the label.
Would you call Obama a liberal knowing he not only kept us in the wars he inherited and escalated them but also got us involved with more of them under the guise of "regime change" and "humanitarian intervention"?
Interestingly when Obama did it, the Liberals were silent.
Would you call Obama a liberal knowing he not only kept us in the wars he inherited and escalated them but also got us involved with more of them under the guise of "regime change" and "humanitarian intervention"?
Interestingly when Obama did it, the Liberals were silent.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517640 wrote: I don't recall ever referring to Obama as a liberal. Though he is far more liberal than the people he was running against.
Obama was as Liberal as you can get. He was a champion of Liberal issues. The gay agenda, Abortion, Big Government, Big Spending and much MUCH more! LoL
Obama was as Liberal as you can get. He was a champion of Liberal issues. The gay agenda, Abortion, Big Government, Big Spending and much MUCH more! LoL
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517779 wrote: Obama was as Liberal as you can get. He was a champion of Liberal issues. The gay agenda, Abortion, Big Government, Big Spending and much MUCH more! LoL
And there you have it, in a nutshell. Nobody really seems to know what a Political Liberal really is. And if big spending is the definition of a liberal, that bill that the GOP in Congress is pushing will boost the national debt by a trillion bucks. Guess the GOP are a bunch of liberals, too.
And there you have it, in a nutshell. Nobody really seems to know what a Political Liberal really is. And if big spending is the definition of a liberal, that bill that the GOP in Congress is pushing will boost the national debt by a trillion bucks. Guess the GOP are a bunch of liberals, too.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Fuzzy;1517642 wrote: Okay so we know about Jesus when he's a baby, and when he's an adult, but does the bible ever mention his rebellious teenager years?
'Jesus, go feed the donkey.'
'YOU'RE NOT MY REAL FATHER!'
The ground shakes a little and a voice comes down from the sky
'Do what your stepfather says, you little @#$.'
No and Jesus was perfect so He wasn't rebellious because He had no sin nature.
'Jesus, go feed the donkey.'
'YOU'RE NOT MY REAL FATHER!'
The ground shakes a little and a voice comes down from the sky
'Do what your stepfather says, you little @#$.'
No and Jesus was perfect so He wasn't rebellious because He had no sin nature.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Jesus like the rest of us was a very human being. Though we do see in this Jesus something of the nature of God if y6ou so believe. H was murdered for disturbing the Roman authorities. He was killed for subversive activities. That being said he was also a very skilled with his knowledge. Those who want to make him God should read some history. Imagine Jesus praying in Gesthemanie. If he was God he was talking with himself.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517812 wrote: No and Jesus was perfect so He wasn't rebellious because He had no sin nature.
That is all true. He was perfect, he wasn't rebellious and he wasn't committing any sins. All because he never existed. You just can't get more perfect than that.
BTW, baggyfrodo, sin is just a religious concept. It doesn't exist either. There are only errors and mistakes. We all make them and Jesus would have too, if he existed.
That is all true. He was perfect, he wasn't rebellious and he wasn't committing any sins. All because he never existed. You just can't get more perfect than that.
BTW, baggyfrodo, sin is just a religious concept. It doesn't exist either. There are only errors and mistakes. We all make them and Jesus would have too, if he existed.
Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
LarsMac;1517657 wrote: That was the plan.
But Socialism is of the Government, by the Government and For the Government. I am glad Trump is turning America back to Capitalism.
But Socialism is of the Government, by the Government and For the Government. I am glad Trump is turning America back to Capitalism.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517830 wrote: But Socialism is of the Government, by the Government and For the Government. I am glad Trump is turning America back to Capitalism.
America has never gone away from Capitalism.
However, unregulated Capitalism is the worst possible economy. And you Stormtrumpers have no clue what that even means.
I hope you never have the opportunity to find out just how wrong you are. I would not wish that on anyone.
America has never gone away from Capitalism.
However, unregulated Capitalism is the worst possible economy. And you Stormtrumpers have no clue what that even means.
I hope you never have the opportunity to find out just how wrong you are. I would not wish that on anyone.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Saint_;1517661 wrote: No...that can't be right. If it was Hillary Clinton would be president because she won the popular (people's ) vote.
It is a Republic because pure Democracy can lead to very bad things happening, like Hillary Clinton becoming President for instance.
It is a Republic because pure Democracy can lead to very bad things happening, like Hillary Clinton becoming President for instance.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
xfrodobagginsx;1517847 wrote: It is a Republic because pure Democracy can lead to very bad things happening, like Hillary Clinton becoming President for instance.
Like most uninformed people, you confuse the political and the economic structures of the country.
I suggest that you go to your local junior college and sign up for a course in political science before you continue this conversation.
Like most uninformed people, you confuse the political and the economic structures of the country.
I suggest that you go to your local junior college and sign up for a course in political science before you continue this conversation.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
xfrodobagginsx
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:27 am
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
Ahso!;1517666 wrote: Speaking of which, what do you make of just another poor decision on HRC's part not to fire her misogynist womanizing campaign guy?
She would have been a disaster as president. That, btw, is not any kind of endorsement or defense of Trump.
I wholly agree. She would have been a total disaster as President. I agree with you on that. Where we disagree is on Trump. Trump is doing a great job of turning America back in the right direction.
She would have been a disaster as president. That, btw, is not any kind of endorsement or defense of Trump.
I wholly agree. She would have been a total disaster as President. I agree with you on that. Where we disagree is on Trump. Trump is doing a great job of turning America back in the right direction.