IDBillzFan Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Reading is important. I didn't say I didn't believe in Christ at all. In fact I said quite the opposite. So you believe in Christ? You believe the Bible is God's holy word, and that He sacrificed His only son for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) So you believe in Christ? You believe the Bible is God's holy word, and that He sacrificed His only son for us? My faith is personal and not for a message board. I believe in Christ, yes. I do not believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible nor that religion has any place in governance. In fact, I think it's dangerous because faith can blind us as much as it can guide us. Again, READ what I wrote. You did a terrible job the first time. Edited June 16, 2014 by GreggyT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 My faith is personal and not for a message board. I believe in Christ, yes. I do not believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible nor that religion has any place in governance. In fact, I think it's dangerous because faith can blind us as much as it can guide us. Again, READ what I wrote. You did a terrible job the first time. So you believe in your own interpretation of God's holy word, you are among a majority of Americans who believe in your interpretation, and because of this, you stopped being a Republican? And those who don't believe as you believe are kooks. Am I following this right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 So you believe in your own interpretation of God's holy word, you are among a majority of Americans who believe in your interpretation, and because of this, you stopped being a Republican? And those who don't believe as you believe are kooks. Am I following this right? :lol: No. You're still missing 90% of it. It's hilarious now, you must be messin' with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Again, not what I said. I said they "doubled down", which they did. Would you like to list how many moderate Republicans have been primaried since the rise of the Tea Party? No, that's not what you said. You said "Now, mainly, because of the influence of the tea-party, you have a GOP that's conservative and religious right." It's not "mainly" because of the influence of the Tea Party - if anything, it's more likely the opposite: the swing of the Republican base against "RINOs" over the past couple decades ultimately begat the Tea Party. My faith is personal and not for a message board. I believe in Christ, yes. I do not believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible nor that religion has any place in governance. In fact, I think it's dangerous because faith can blind us as much as it can guide us. Again, READ what I wrote. You did a terrible job the first time. Any Bills fan who doesn't believe in God is an idiot. There's got to be some higher power !@#$ing with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 :lol: No. You're still missing 90% of it. It's hilarious now, you must be messin' with me. Sadly I'm repeating back to you what you've written. But yeah...I'm the one missing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Tgreg do you reject satan and all his empty promises? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) Sadly I'm repeating back to you what you've written. But yeah...I'm the one missing it. You are missing it because you so far have yet to repeat back anything I've actually said. All you've done is misrepresented what I've said. You're dealing in absolutes when I did no such thing.Even then you're dealing in the wrong absolutes. Reading is fundamental but reading comprehension is king. You're smarter than this. Edited June 16, 2014 by GreggyT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) No, that's not what you said. You said "Now, mainly, because of the influence of the tea-party, you have a GOP that's conservative and religious right." It's not "mainly" because of the influence of the Tea Party - if anything, it's more likely the opposite: the swing of the Republican base against "RINOs" over the past couple decades ultimately begat the Tea Party. Today's GOP make up, which is more conservative and more Christian than ever before (at least in modern-ish history), is that way largely because of the Tea Party. The usurpation of the base by the religious right didn't start with the Tea Party but certainly was strengthened by its emergence. I would also argue that a case could be made that swing of the base against the RINOs stemmed (and continues to stem) largely from the religious base and political dollars they spend on the social policies for which they care the most about: pro-life, traditional marriage et al. Republicans who were pro-choice, pro-gay marriage were run out by the religious base because of those views. They were targeted and money was poured into defeating them in primaries and replacing them with more socially conservative candidates. The fact that the republican senators and congressmen who were targeted by the base were also the moderate voices of the party was no coincidence. Two birds with one stone, it was a win for the conservative segment of the party and the religious right. Two against one. But when you're forced to only draw candidates from a pool that meets the approval of religious fundamentalists and evangelicals it's absolute suicide politically. If anything, it's the opposite of what this country is supposed to stand for. It's rigid and unchanging because the evangelical and fundamentalists who believe the literal word of the Bible are inflexible by the definition of their faith. You're right this didn't start with the Tea Party, and I haven't been arguing it did, but it certainly has been reinforced by its emergence. Any Bills fan who doesn't believe in God is an idiot. There's got to be some higher power !@#$ing with us. Ain't that the truth. Tgreg do you reject satan and all his empty promises? http://youtu.be/EfbYp9oaIT8 :lol: That makes me want to watch that movie again. Edited June 16, 2014 by GreggyT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 while this piece is mostly about journalistic blind spots http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/business/media/eric-cantors-defeat-exposed-a-beltway-journalism-blind-spot.html?_r=0, it also illustrates the power of people like mark levin, glenn beck and laura in graham among the portion of the electorate responsible for this upset primary campaign. from a liberal perspective, this is a good thing in many ways. these extreme views have no chance whatever of winning in a national election. just ask mitt romney who kissed the rings of these bozos on almost every issue in the primaries and had no way to return to right center in the general election. it will play out this way repeatedly in conservative districts that for the most part were always untouchable to liberals. but give it time. there will be some future brat like disciple that will say something blatantly cookoo about women or equal rights or race in a sincere and unfiltered moment and he'll lose one of these districts to a dem. and while it plays out this way, there will be no republican president. the numbers just aren't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 while this piece is mostly about journalistic blind spots http://www.nytimes.c...-spot.html?_r=0, it also illustrates the power of people like mark levin, glenn beck and laura in graham among the portion of the electorate responsible for this upset primary campaign. from a liberal perspective, this is a good thing in many ways. these extreme views have no chance whatever of winning in a national election. just ask mitt romney who kissed the rings of these bozos on almost every issue in the primaries and had no way to return to right center in the general election. it will play out this way repeatedly in conservative districts that for the most part were always untouchable to liberals. but give it time. there will be some future brat like disciple that will say something blatantly cookoo about women or equal rights or race in a sincere and unfiltered moment and he'll lose one of these districts to a dem. and while it plays out this way, there will be no republican president. the numbers just aren't there. Some brat disciple? So what is a brat disciple and what makes you think he is prone to say something in regards to women, equal rights or race that would be cookoo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 You are missing it because you so far have yet to repeat back anything I've actually said. All you've done is misrepresented what I've said. You're dealing in absolutes when I did no such thing.Even then you're dealing in the wrong absolutes. Reading is fundamental but reading comprehension is king. You're smarter than this. In the end, what is all too clear, is that you feel a certain way about your faith, customized to fit your ideal, and anyone who doesn't feel as you do is simply wrong or, in some cases, extreme, and in either case, it was just too much for you to vote Republican anymore. . If I were genuinely smarter than this, I would have avoided this discussion with you in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Some brat disciple? So what is a brat disciple and what makes you think he is prone to say something in regards to women, equal rights or race that would be cookoo? don't you remember these triple bogies as the repub strategist in this piece termed them? http://bigstory.ap.org/article/gaffe-prone-candidates-hurt-gops-senate-chances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 don't you remember these triple bogies as the repub strategist in this piece termed them? http://bigstory.ap.o...-senate-chances Try to focus, and for once, answer the damn the question. What is a Brat disciple? And what makes you think he is prone to say something cookoo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Try to focus, and for once, answer the damn the question. What is a Brat disciple? And what makes you think he is prone to say something cookoo? perhaps, "fellow tea partier" would be more appropriate but you got the point. being opaque doesn't change your argument. the things said by these other bozo's are their actual beliefs and those of many of their "disciples". they just aren't regularly said on the campaign trail. but you can't change a leopard's spots. they eventually become visible. fortunately, most of the electorate vehemently disagrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 perhaps, "fellow tea partier" would be more appropriate but you got the point. being opaque doesn't change your argument. the things said by these other bozo's are their actual beliefs and those of many of their "disciples". they just aren't regularly said on the campaign trail. but you can't change a leopard's spots. they eventually become visible. fortunately, most of the electorate vehemently disagrees. In other words, you got nothing. You just made **** up to fit your narrow viewpoint, and when called out on it, and I do that to you often, in which you NEVER have a substantive answer, EVER, you dodged and deflected and came up with some six degrees of separation excuse believing that somehow it bolstered your argument. The only thing you bolstered is that you are a twit who knows no other way of making his case other than creating bogeyman arguments. Weak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 In other words, you got nothing. You just made **** up to fit your narrow viewpoint, and when called out on it, and I do that to you often, in which you NEVER have a substantive answer, EVER, you dodged and deflected and came up with some six degrees of separation excuse believing that somehow it bolstered your argument. The only thing you bolstered is that you are a twit who knows no other way of making his case other than creating bogeyman arguments. Weak it's amazing to me that someone with a fair measure of intelligence can't see the futility of a group that largely holds extreme social views, far removed from the mainstream and from a majority of the electorate. but carry on. this republican civil war is just the tonic for liberals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 it's amazing to me that someone with a fair measure of intelligence can't see the futility of a group that largely holds extreme social views, far removed from the mainstream and from a majority of the electorate. but carry on. this republican civil war is just the tonic for liberals. Well they need a tonic, because the country views the liberals as a bunch of overreaching incompetent goobs. Point to me Brat's "extreme social views". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Well they need a tonic, because the country views the liberals as a bunch of overreaching incompetent goobs. Point to me Brat's "extreme social views". "called for slashing social security, medicare and education and says "rich" nations don't have to fear climate change..." http://themoderatevoice.com/195796/david-brats-views-on-economics-and-religion/. since i'm confident a link to a mother jones article will ber blown off, here's another link with that piece included: http://themoderatevoice.com/195796/david-brats-views-on-economics-and-religion/. and while it appears he's yet to make a major gaffe on social issues and he may well be an outlier among tea partiers in this regard, that's kinda the point, non? how bout this: http://news.yahoo.com/brat-campaign-manager-scrubs-facebook-page-after-election-173536113.html. only his campaign manager, one of 2 paid staffers on his campaign. it doesn't take much looking cuz these dudes are mostly looney. it is what it is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 since i'm confident a link to a mother jones article will ber blown off, here's another link with that piece included: http://themoderatevo...s-and-religion/. Originally posted at Liberal Values Nice unbiased source. Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts