PDA

View Full Version : How Gingrich won South Carolina...



StoopTroup
1/22/2012, 12:26 PM
Dude seems to have the right recipe....

http://www.johncoxart.com/EYEofNEWT302.jpg

soonerhubs
1/22/2012, 12:32 PM
Religious bigotry played a role. However, the candidate I actually endorse (Paul) doesn't pander to insiders so in his case, it was voter ignorance that played a role.

StoopTroup
1/22/2012, 12:50 PM
I think Newt is faking the eye thing and he gave those Witches his Ex-Wife's eye. I mean....no way he has a surgical procedure until he repeals Obamacare. :D

LiveLaughLove
1/22/2012, 02:20 PM
Let's see, religious bigotry, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, islamophobia, arachnophobia, claustrophobia, hating the poor, hating the media, hating the unions, hate for illegal immigrants, hate for the environment, hate for women, hate of atheists, hate of the government, hate of those not in the government, hate of those that hate those in the government, hate of those that hate those not in the government, anti-communism, antifacebook, and antisemitism all won it for him.

Did I leave any strawmen out?

Oh wait, I got Gingrich mixed up with Paul on the antisemitism thing. My bad.

soonerhubs
1/22/2012, 08:34 PM
Let's see, religious bigotry, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, islamophobia, arachnophobia, claustrophobia, hating the poor, hating the media, hating the unions, hate for illegal immigrants, hate for the environment, hate for women, hate of atheists, hate of the government, hate of those not in the government, hate of those that hate those in the government, hate of those that hate those not in the government, anti-communism, antifacebook, and antisemitism all won it for him.

Did I leave any strawmen out?

Oh wait, I got Gingrich mixed up with Paul on the antisemitism thing. My bad.

Aren't you clever? Would a source regarding exit polls? http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/21/lessons-from-the-south-carolina-exit-polls/

Turd_Ferguson
1/22/2012, 08:57 PM
Aren't you clever? Would a source regarding exit polls? http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/21/lessons-from-the-south-carolina-exit-polls/

Aren't you clever? I'm sure the NY Times gave Newt a fair shake...

soonerhubs
1/22/2012, 10:23 PM
Aren't you clever? I'm sure the NY Times gave Newt a fair shake...

Speaking of a strawman argument. :D

I'm not very clever though. Apparently I needed to do better on my proofreading.

I honestly just thought it was interesting that some voters pointed out that they weren't comfortable with someone from another religion. Instead they would rather support an adulterer. Also, they felt that ethics violations were much less troubling. I.E., I see that some voters have wavering principles in their dogmatic stance against some religions.

I don't support Romney as the nominee, but that's because I prefer a Baptist who will actually reduce the government and quit pandering to the insiders. I'd support Paul if he was Hindu. However, some bigots in the South see things another way.

Oh well. Carry on!

cccasooner2
1/22/2012, 10:27 PM
Aren't you clever? Would a source regarding exit polls? http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/21/lessons-from-the-south-carolina-exit-polls/

Wow, an exit poll with 98% white. ROFLMAO

soonerhubs
1/22/2012, 10:29 PM
Wow, an exit poll with 98% white. ROFLMAO

Fair enough. That is quite the skewed sample. Not very representative.

MR2-Sooner86
1/23/2012, 12:28 AM
The GOP can never again claim to be the "family values party." Their hatred for Obama has blinded them from using reason and logic. I mean these people booed the Golden Rule and cheered for NDAA. If I were a Christian I'd be embarrassed to have these bloodthirsty bigots representing me on national television right in the middle of the Bible Belt.

The GOP hated Clinton for being a draft-dodger and cheating on his wife so what do they do? The Evangelicals voted in massive numbers for the most lowlife son of a bitch in the race. Newt cheated on his wife while she had cancer. Not only that, he had the divorce papers delivered to her while she was in the hospital. Then, he dodged the Vietnam draft and had the balls to say, "it was the right war to fight but I wouldn't have made a difference had I gone" trying to defend himself skipping out.

This is coming from a party that just within the past year were ready to chase Weiner out of town with pitchforks and torches for taking nude photos on his iPhone while cheating on his wife. Not to mention the whole "we support the troops" yet they elect a guy who spit in their face with his actions while ignoring the guy the troops actually support.

Also, Newt has said that it wasn't wrong when he smoked marijuana but now it's "morally wrong" so people should go to prison for it but when he did it it "wasn't that bad."

Not only that, while Newt was trying to nail Clinton to the wall for his "immoral behavior," he was doing the exact same thing cheating on his ex-wife with his now current wife.

He might be a lowlife POS but to the GOP, "he's OUR lowlife POS! At least God forgave him! God still hates Clinton!"

What Newt being elected tells me is that the "good ole boy, religious-right GOPers" are lying hypocrites who don't care about values, morals, or their own self image. Newt is no conservative, he has no morals, and he's nothing more than a politician looking out for his only interest, himself.

bigfatjerk
1/23/2012, 01:52 AM
The GOP can never again claim to be the "family values party." Their hatred for Obama has blinded them from using reason and logic. I mean these people booed the Golden Rule and cheered for NDAA.

If you want to really look at the history of the republican party go back it's original president who was probably morally the most bankrupt individual to ever take the presidency and the first progressive president as we know it. You look at his acts and you would think you were talking about Woodrow Wilson, FDR, or Obama.

The republican party tries to at times legislate morality which is how we get DADT, NCLB, the Drug War, the Patriot Act. But really none of these are any different from the myriad of big spending programs democrats have passed like the New Deal, all the Omnibus and spending bills under Obama/Bush, the health care act. All of these have good reasons behind them but just end up adding to our spending, adding to our debt, and adding to our deficit.

Eventually all these acts will just keep on forcing the spending upward. What we need to do is start suffocating the government. I'm not even sure the federal government should be getting any more tax dollars till it proves it can spend responsibly.

I don't see much of a difference between Romney and Gingrich as far as how they will govern. The only difference to me is that Gingrich has the personal baggage. The republican party may claim to be the family values party but family values are pretty much bs in the country anyway.

Ton Loc
1/23/2012, 09:24 AM
What Newt being elected tells me is that the "good ole boy, religious-right GOPers" are lying hypocrites who don't care about values, morals, or their own self image. Newt is no conservative, he has no morals, and he's nothing more than a politician looking out for his only interest, himself.

Come on now, you already knew that - him being elected would just be another nail in the coffin.

I'm still hoping for Ron just for entertainment purposes and the fact the rest of those guys couldn't be more slimy.

cleller
1/23/2012, 09:27 AM
Why don't his detractors just come out and say it:

"Newt won because the Republican voters of South Carolina are more ignorant and less intelligent than I perceive myself to be."

Newt himself may be hard for some to swallow, but intelligence is not one of his low points.

Ton Loc
1/23/2012, 09:46 AM
Why don't his detractors just come out and say it:

"Newt won because the Republican voters of South Carolina are more ignorant and less intelligent than I perceive myself to be."

Newt himself made be hard for some to swallow, but intelligence is not one of his low points.

I'm guessing because it would be easier, faster, and smarter to say, "I'm smarter than South Carolina voters." Your version had too many words. Less intelligent people use more words than needed. Like sports announcers that say "National Football League" instead of NFL because they are scared of silence and aren't smart enough to fill the time with anything else.

badger
1/23/2012, 09:56 AM
Newt himself made be hard for some to swallow, but intelligence is not one of his low points.

Word. If I were Newt, I'd probably be assuming the fetal position after that ex-wife report, because it is likely true, and it just sounds horrible, doesn't it?

Instead, Newt turned around and made it part of his campaign against the "elite media" (again, media people are more lowly paid than teachers from what I've heard, without the public pensions and unions to boot, lol).


I'm guessing because it would be easier, faster, and smarter to say, "I'm smarter than South Carolina voters."
South Carolina, IMHO, was making a statement that they were gonna go their own way and not the way people were telling them to go... which means, they likely just chose their first losing candidate in a long time. I forgot how often they chose the eventual nominee, but I think it was a lot. No idea.


Less intelligent people use more words than needed.
People who hate my posts probably think this... but I can't help that I type so fast :D

Ton Loc
1/23/2012, 10:01 AM
I was being jerky.
Dang, badger always trying to keep it civil in here.

badger
1/23/2012, 10:13 AM
I was being jerky.
Dang, badger always trying to keep it civil in here.

and funny. I try to keep it light hearted too :)

Here... have some "Newt wins SC" funnies:
http://www.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/100/2012/01/20/104812_600.jpg
http://www.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/46/2012/01/20/104807_600.jpg
http://www.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/152/2012/01/19/104790_600.jpg
http://www.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/73/2012/01/18/104686_600.jpg
http://www.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/89/2012/01/17/104636_600.jpg
http://www.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/73/2012/01/10/104302_600.jpg

More here. (http://www.cagle.com/topics/newt-gingrich/page/4/)

Amazing how you can find so many ways to criticize and poke fun at Newt... there's plenty to work with, heh. Here, let me try:
http://1-2knockout.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/05/21/witch.jpg
How do you know she's a witch?
http://sparks.brushfireoffreedom.org/image.axd?picture=2011/12/HolyGrail027.jpg
She turned me into a Newt!
http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsB/1801-12885.jpg
http://sparks.brushfireoffreedom.org/image.axd?picture=2011/12/HolyGrail027.jpg
http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsB/1801-12885.jpg
http://sparks.brushfireoffreedom.org/image.axd?picture=2011/12/HolyGrail027.jpg
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/newt-yodels.jpg
I got better.

Ike
1/23/2012, 12:31 PM
http://londoninklings.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/slide1.jpg

CarolinaSoonerFan
1/23/2012, 01:19 PM
I'm just glad someone besides Romney won......I voted for Santorum

Ton Loc
1/23/2012, 01:24 PM
The South Carolina people cheering and giving standing ovations to Newt while he is talking about cheating on his wife.
Highest of High Comedy.

http://davidmixner.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c90b153ef015437bfcd15970c-450wi

ictsooner7
1/23/2012, 09:11 PM
The South Carolina people cheering and giving standing ovations to Newt while he is talking about cheating on his wife.
Highest of High Comedy.

http://davidmixner.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c90b153ef015437bfcd15970c-450wi

Please do not try to ascertain any logic on the part of the right, just remember, if a republican does it, it's ok, if a democrat does it impeach him.

Bourbon St Sooner
1/24/2012, 11:53 AM
Or it could be that Mitt is a spineless empty suit. A choice between him and Obama would be like selecting between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum.

Midtowner
1/24/2012, 12:07 PM
The problem with everyone in the 'pub field 'cept for Ron Paul is that every single one of them are empty suits spouting kid-tested/mother-approved B.S. solely because of what they've found in focus groups. Gingrich has catered to the class warfare Republicans, Santorum to social conservatives and Romney to whatever Republicans are just too embarrassed to vote for anyone else in that field. I don't see a lot of promise from any of these guys where it comes to defeating the incumbent. It may well be that whoever emerges from this field (unless it's Paul), I'll be voting for a Demoncrat President for the first time in my life.

TUSooner
1/24/2012, 12:35 PM
The GOP can never again claim to be the "family values party." Their hatred for Obama has blinded them from using reason and logic. I mean these people booed the Golden Rule and cheered for NDAA. If I were a Christian I'd be embarrassed to have these bloodthirsty bigots representing me on national television right in the middle of the Bible Belt.

The GOP hated Clinton for being a draft-dodger and cheating on his wife so what do they do? The Evangelicals voted in massive numbers for the most lowlife son of a bitch in the race. Newt cheated on his wife while she had cancer. Not only that, he had the divorce papers delivered to her while she was in the hospital. Then, he dodged the Vietnam draft and had the balls to say, "it was the right war to fight but I wouldn't have made a difference had I gone" trying to defend himself skipping out.

This is coming from a party that just within the past year were ready to chase Weiner out of town with pitchforks and torches for taking nude photos on his iPhone while cheating on his wife. Not to mention the whole "we support the troops" yet they elect a guy who spit in their face with his actions while ignoring the guy the troops actually support.

Also, Newt has said that it wasn't wrong when he smoked marijuana but now it's "morally wrong" so people should go to prison for it but when he did it it "wasn't that bad."

Not only that, while Newt was trying to nail Clinton to the wall for his "immoral behavior," he was doing the exact same thing cheating on his ex-wife with his now current wife.

He might be a lowlife POS but to the GOP, "he's OUR lowlife POS! At least God forgave him! God still hates Clinton!"

What Newt being elected tells me is that the "good ole boy, religious-right GOPers" are lying hypocrites who don't care about values, morals, or their own self image. Newt is no conservative, he has no morals, and he's nothing more than a politician looking out for his only interest, himself.

Spek. I'd say the "christian" GOP voters of SC like Newt because he's a hypocrite just like they are. He is one shameless arrogant SoB, but he pushes all the right buttons of the Proud-to-be-an-Idiot Right.

MR2-Sooner86
1/24/2012, 02:41 PM
Spek. I'd say the "christian" GOP voters of SC like Newt because he's a hypocrite just like they are. He is one shameless arrogant SoB, but he pushes all the right buttons of the Proud-to-be-an-Idiot Right.

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e2016760f4a90f970b-550wi

Remind me again why gays getting married is evil?

cleller
1/24/2012, 09:42 PM
Spek. I'd say the "christian" GOP voters of SC like Newt because he's a hypocrite just like they are. He is one shameless arrogant SoB, but he pushes all the right buttons of the Proud-to-be-an-Idiot Right.

You may be right about Newt being arrogant, but is there some Democrat how-to manual that trains to always equate Christians as hypocrites, and right wingers as idiots? It seems less imaginative that your typical posts. The lumping and labeling of people you've never met is just too convenient, and below your standards. (meant as the standard backhanded compliment of a worthy opponent)

I'm a Christian and some time right winger, but I don't believe that all atheist liberals are smug, worthless fools. But then, I'm a hypocrite and idiot, so I must be wrong, right?

Is printing money you don't have and then giving it away intelligent? Are people that rely on the government to feed, clothe, and house them society's chosen class? I think the Republicans of South Carolina are sick of it, and this is the way they choose to demonstrate it.

Ton Loc
1/25/2012, 09:16 AM
You may be right about Newt being arrogant, but is there some Democrat how-to manual that trains you to always equate Christians as hypocrites, and right wingers as idiots? It seems less imaginative that your typical posts. Really, the lumping and labeling of people you've never met is just too convenient.

I'm a Christian Right Winger, but don't believe that all atheist liberals are smug, worthless fools. But then, I'm a hypocrite and idiot, so I must be wrong, right?

Is printing money you don't have and then giving it away intelligent? Are people that rely on the government to feed, clothe, and house them society's chosen class?

Unless you are a Christian right winger from SC that voted for Gingrich I think you're outside of that label...

TUSooner
1/25/2012, 01:05 PM
You may be right about Newt being arrogant, but is there some Democrat how-to manual that trains to always equate Christians as hypocrites, and right wingers as idiots? It seems less imaginative that your typical posts. The lumping and labeling of people you've never met is just too convenient, and below your standards. (meant as the standard backhanded compliment of a worthy opponent)

I'm a Christian and some time right winger, but I don't believe that all atheist liberals are smug, worthless fools. But then, I'm a hypocrite and idiot, so I must be wrong, right?

Is printing money you don't have and then giving it away intelligent? Are people that rely on the government to feed, clothe, and house them society's chosen class? I think the Republicans of South Carolina are sick of it, and this is the way they choose to demonstrate it.
I'm a Christian, too, and generally believe in conservative principles of limited government. I don't take my cues from any Demo handlers. I may paint with an unfairly over-broad brush here on the interwebs, but when I talk about shallow, hypocritical, RW "political" Christians, I do so from years of experience and personal knowledge and interaction - including maybe having once been one. While most are well-intentioned and personally decent, a great many are nonetheless merely "political" Christians, giving lip-service to the gospel while keeping its less convenient "liberal" teachings clearly subservient to the easier-to-grasp conservative political commands they get from their RW radio handlers. I.e., It's much easier to just "hate them liberals" than to love your neighbor. Sadly, many are Christian in name only. They vicariously compensate for a lack of personal devotion by voting for the candidate who invokes Jesus most fervently. I also refer to the hypocrisy of deriding a liberal for apparently lacking "character" but conveniently overlooking the rank hypocrisy of a Newt Gingrich.
EDIT: Were you giving me a backhanded insult or a backhanded compliment? Which is which? Either way, I'll take it as fair shot! :biggrin:

Midtowner
1/25/2012, 03:14 PM
You may be right about Newt being arrogant, but is there some Democrat how-to manual that trains to always equate Christians as hypocrites, and right wingers as idiots?

It stands to reason that anyone who actually believes the Earth is around 6,000 years old and that Jesus Christ coexisted with dinosaurs is, indeed, an idiot. I think that's totally fair. Not all right-wingers are idiots, but those who unthinkingly parrot talk radio talking points.. yeah, they're kind of idiots. Mark Twain said this about such individuals: "In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing."

Other right-wingers? I actually identify quite a bit with the Ron Paul Republicans. I can understand where the Chamber of Commerce folks are coming from, I just tend to mostly disagree with them and recognize the double-speak in their talking points.


I'm a Christian and some time right winger, but I don't believe that all atheist liberals are smug, worthless fools. But then, I'm a hypocrite and idiot, so I must be wrong, right?

Labels don't really become us going either direction. That's why we all prefer to have a nice discussion with someone I completely disagree with on any issue than to have to put up with the likes of the poster formerly known as Dale Ellis, who doesn't just disagree with those he opposes, he deeply hates them.


Is printing money you don't have and then giving it away intelligent? Are people that rely on the government to feed, clothe, and house them society's chosen class? I think the Republicans of South Carolina are sick of it, and this is the way they choose to demonstrate it.

And it's not really fair to paint the entire left side o' the aisle with that broad a brush either. I mean, to some extent, I think we're all in favor of some social programs, only to different degrees. Ultimately, IMHO, starvation is a terrific motivator, and instead of subsidizing parents who have kids they cannot afford, I'm fully in favor of the state finding newer/better families who can afford to take care of their own children.

Even in an 8.5% unemployed workforce, work can be found. I see it first hand every day. I have some criminal clients who, despite poor personal appearance and little/no education, are able to secure pretty decent work. For those who say it can't be done, I say bull****.

You'd probably conclude based upon that that I'm a Republican... but being Republican these days means that instead of just being against big government and massive social programs, you're also in favor of crony capitalism, tax policies which increasingly favor the wealthy (like dropping the capital gains tax), big military spending, and being automatically opposed to social programs on principle, even when they make a lot of sense and fix a real problem.

In short, neither party really has the answer. To be 100% Republican or 100% Democrat either means you're a partisan hack with some vested interest in which party is in power or you're a non-examiner of the challenges facing this country, a low-information-decider.

cleller
1/25/2012, 05:08 PM
That's (above) is too much to deeply examine for internet battle; but I have to add that being Christian does not mean you believe the Genesis story is literal down to every cubit. Obviously Jesus' life is documented, and not at a time when dinosaurs walked the earth.

Anyway, lumping all of one group with your favorite derogatory term lacks objectivity. Are all democrats Occupy Wall Streeters, or radical hippie communists? Nah.

Glad to hear someone else that believes in starvation as motivation. Has worked for centuries. Perpetual welfare handouts without any expectations breeds a segment of society that does not believe it has the brains or ability to provide for itself. To foster that is not only wasteful, its cruel and unfair.

Midtowner
1/25/2012, 05:24 PM
Well certainly, there are different sorts of Christians. Unfortunately, I think the extremist shoe fits here in Oklahoma. I mean, what else can we conclude when we keep electing nutters like Sally Kern and Ralph Shortey to public office? Surely not all Christians are like that, but I know an individual pretty well who is going to be announcing for the Oklahoma legislature very soon. His website practically hides the fact that he's a lawyer and it's full of the same "faith/family/freedom" pablum that all of the other candidates are using. The guy's actually a reasonable moderate, but he has to run as a tinfoil hat-wearing loon to get elected in his district.

My favorite of all time was the comic book produced by the Brent Rinehart campaign a few years ago:

http://downloads.newsok.com/documents/rinehartcartoon.pdf

TUSooner
1/25/2012, 05:57 PM
Well certainly, there are different sorts of Christians. Unfortunately, I think the extremist shoe fits here in Oklahoma. I mean, what else can we conclude when we keep electing nutters like Sally Kern and Ralph Shortey to public office? Surely not all Christians are like that, but I know an individual pretty well who is going to be announcing for the Oklahoma legislature very soon. His website practically hides the fact that he's a lawyer and it's full of the same "faith/family/freedom" pablum that all of the other candidates are using. The guy's actually a reasonable moderate, but he has to run as a tinfoil hat-wearing loon to get elected in his district.

My favorite of all time was the comic book produced by the Brent Rinehart campaign a few years ago:

http://downloads.newsok.com/documents/rinehartcartoon.pdf

Please tell me Rinehart was not elected; but I fear he was. That's spooky-weird.

Midtowner
1/25/2012, 06:43 PM
Please tell me Rinehart was not elected; but I fear he was. That's spooky-weird.

He was the incumbent, and I think the good people of his district shot him down in a primary contest. He had been involved in some petty infighting with the other commissioners and the Oklahoma County "budget board," which was/is a board of county officials, which included the county clerk, court clerk, etc.

He's just the most notorious (and most easily lampooned) Oklahoma County tard who has been elected to public office. I mean, we have Sally Kern, who has said that he homosexual agenda is the worst threat this country faces as well as that minorities earn less than white people and women earn less than men because they don't work as hard and have less initiative (on the House floor, no less). Then we have Charles Key, who still believes that the Murrah Building bombing was an inside job. There's also of course, Shortey, who has filed all of this anti-science nonsense related to stem cells...

I guess y'all have Rep. Ritze up there in Tulsa who championed that 10-Commandments monument for the capitol lawn which was voted for, passed, etc., but never built.

Even the Oklahoman, a very conservative paper has started calling these people a separate caucus, the "ideologue caucus." They're very real, very embarrassing, and we keep reelecting them. At some point, yes I do question the intelligence of our voters. Of course, in their defense, Kern's Democrat opponent during the last go-round was a post-op transsexual. Nice lady, but I don't think that'll fly in Warr Acres.

cleller
1/25/2012, 07:30 PM
Now that I've assumed the defender of the Christians role:

It does bother me when politicians use religion as a main platform of their candidacy. Jesus made his views known about men that called attention to their piety in "the lesson of the widow's mite".

Their is plenty of opportunity to live your faith without campaigning on it. Politicians should be obligated only to their whole constituency.

This reminds of something I read about 15 years ago in, of all places, a financial magazine. It touches on the issue of religion and probabilities.

I'm thinking of TUSooner and Midtowner in particular here, but anyone interested in some smarty pants head scratching might like it. The hypothesis:
The benefits of living a Christian life, and being wrong outweigh the risks of living a pagan life and being wrong. Don't get worked up at me, its Blaise Pascal's idea.

http://www.buckingham.coop/images/E0047601/pascal.pdf

SoonerPride
1/25/2012, 08:07 PM
I'm thinking of TUSooner and Midtowner in particular here, but anyone interested in some smarty pants head scratching might like it. The hypothesis:
The benefits of living a Christian life, and being wrong outweigh the risks of living a pagan life and being wrong. Don't get worked up at me, its Blaise Pascal's idea.

http://www.buckingham.coop/images/E0047601/pascal.pdf

ah, the old "I might go to hell, so why not play along" routine.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is no god.

Therefore there is no heaven or hell or angels or demons or any other such nonsense.

And I'm willing to bet my eternal "soul" on it.

Period.

Turd_Ferguson
1/25/2012, 10:05 PM
ah, the old "I might go to hell, so why not play along" routine.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is no god.

Therefore there is no heaven or hell or angels or demons or any other such nonsense.

And I'm willing to bet my eternal "soul" on it.

Period.Yeah, and your the smartest mother ****er on earth at your ripe ol' age...ain't ya.

SoonerPride
1/25/2012, 10:52 PM
.
Yeah, and your the smartest mother ****er on earth at your ripe ol' age...ain't ya.

I'm smart enough to know there ain't invisible spirits, ghosts and gods floating about.

Fairy tales are for children.

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 12:02 AM
.

I'm smart enough to know there ain't invisible spirits, ghosts and gods floating about.

Fairy tales are for children.

No, you just believe that everything came from nothing by nothing. No fairy tale there for sure.

Some scientist that you don't even know tells you a theory and you jump on it. Has that scientist ever been wrong in his life?

Have you ever been wrong in your life? Yet, you are so positive that there is no creator for all of this creation.

And you smuggly say you will bet your "soul" on it. Good luck with that. Being intelligent doesn't make you wise.

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools - Romans 1:22 NIV

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 12:02 AM
Sorry dreaded dbl post

Ike
1/26/2012, 01:34 AM
I'm thinking of TUSooner and Midtowner in particular here, but anyone interested in some smarty pants head scratching might like it. The hypothesis:
The benefits of living a Christian life, and being wrong outweigh the risks of living a pagan life and being wrong. Don't get worked up at me, its Blaise Pascal's idea.

http://www.buckingham.coop/images/E0047601/pascal.pdf

Pascal, bright as he was, did not however realize that his wager wrongly assumed a binary proposition. God is, or God isn't. If you answer the question in the affirmative, you are now faced with a second choice that can be equally damning to your everlasting soul. Which god? At first it may seem that this is not such a difficult choice. There aren't that many out there to choose from. But is that right? At first glance, one might say the Catholic and the Baptist are worshipping the same god. But I've heard Baptists say that Catholics are going to hell for a multitude of reasons, and I've heard Catholics say the same thing about Baptists. If the differences between any two churches are such that church A would claim that members of church B are hellbound, and vice versa, then as far as Pascals wager is concerned, they are worshipping 2 different gods. Thats not to mention all the other gods that are out there that are explicitly different gods. Could be any one (or more!) of them too. If anything but the correct guess sends you to hell, then your odds of guessing correctly diminish rapidly. And in that case, the believer carries the same risk of being wrong as the non-believer.


Probability and statistics are tricky things. Even for one of the founders of the field.

cleller
1/26/2012, 09:15 AM
I've heard Baptists say that Catholics are going to hell for a multitude of reasons, and I've heard Catholics say the same thing about Baptists.


And I suppose it is just coincidence that I was raised a Baptist, and my wife is Catholic? :twinkies:

Risk and probabilities might be a good South Oval topic.

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 09:37 AM
Pascal, bright as he was, did not however realize that his wager wrongly assumed a binary proposition. God is, or God isn't. If you answer the question in the affirmative, you are now faced with a second choice that can be equally damning to your everlasting soul. Which god? At first it may seem that this is not such a difficult choice. There aren't that many out there to choose from. But is that right? At first glance, one might say the Catholic and the Baptist are worshipping the same god. But I've heard Baptists say that Catholics are going to hell for a multitude of reasons, and I've heard Catholics say the same thing about Baptists. If the differences between any two churches are such that church A would claim that members of church B are hellbound, and vice versa, then as far as Pascals wager is concerned, they are worshipping 2 different gods. Thats not to mention all the other gods that are out there that are explicitly different gods. Could be any one (or more!) of them too. If anything but the correct guess sends you to hell, then your odds of guessing correctly diminish rapidly. And in that case, the believer carries the same risk of being wrong as the non-believer.


Probability and statistics are tricky things. Even for one of the founders of the field.

Yet studying the different religions reduces any guess down to probabilities. Then being silent in prayer to God and listening for the Holy Spirits guidance further reduces this guess.

I personally don't believe in denominations. They are prideful men's work. I believe in the virgin born sinless Son of God. Him crucified and risen on the third day. He now sits at the right hand of God and none will come to the Father except through him.

Anyone of any denomination that believes that will enter Heaven. I don't care what denomination they are.

As for other religions, it's easy to find falsehoods with 95% of them. So the guess you speak of becomes a fairly educated one.

SoonerAtKU
1/26/2012, 10:40 AM
We're not talking about denominations only. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all worship the same idea of "God" with different names, different rituals, and different requirements for getting into heaven/going to hell. This is not to mention the hundreds or thousands of other religions, many of whom have as a tenet of faith that they are the chosen people and that non-believers would be dismissed or denied heaven.

I'm tempted to post the famous essay on the Thermodynamics of Hell as it appears to be appropriate in it's premise.

SoonerPride
1/26/2012, 10:54 AM
Zeus is not very amused right now.

SoonerAtKU
1/26/2012, 03:47 PM
I'll just leave this here:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/time-traveler-from-the-year-1998-warns-nation-not,27178/

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 04:10 PM
We're not talking about denominations only. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all worship the same idea of "God" with different names, different rituals, and different requirements for getting into heaven/going to hell. This is not to mention the hundreds or thousands of other religions, many of whom have as a tenet of faith that they are the chosen people and that non-believers would be dismissed or denied heaven.

I'm tempted to post the famous essay on the Thermodynamics of Hell as it appears to be appropriate in it's premise.

Since I spoke to the other religions, I understood we weren't just talking about hristianity.

Islam has so many falsehoods easily read in the Quran that it's always laughable to include it as an equal religion worshipping the same God of the Bible. No one that truly studies it believes that to be so. It's easily proven a false religion, but it's un-pc to say it out loud, lest they behead you.

Christians see the fulfillment of the messiah in the Old Testament. Jews simply do not. Not too complicated to understand if you really want to. I suspect you really dont however. But maybe someone else reading this might be interested.

Midtowner
1/26/2012, 04:16 PM
Since I spoke to the other religions, I understood we weren't just talking about hristianity.

Islam has so many falsehoods easily read in the Quran that it's always laughable to include it as an equal religion worshipping the same God of the Bible. No one that truly studies it believes that to be so. It's easily proven a false religion, but it's un-pc to say it out loud, lest they behead you.

Christians see the fulfillment of the messiah in the Old Testament. Jews simply do not. Not too complicated to understand if you really want to. I suspect you really dont however. But maybe someone else reading this might be interested.

In a battle to establish factual accuracy of everyone's holy books, only the atheist can emerge from such a competition untarnished.

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 05:01 PM
In a battle to establish factual accuracy of everyone's holy books, only the atheist can emerge from such a competition untarnished.

Well I guess if you say it, it must be so. I'm sure you know best.

Silly me, I'll just keep listening to the creator over your sage advise. No offense.

Ton Loc
1/26/2012, 05:25 PM
Since I spoke to the other religions, I understood we weren't just talking about hristianity.

Islam has so many falsehoods easily read in the Quran that it's always laughable to include it as an equal religion worshipping the same God of the Bible. No one that truly studies it believes that to be so. It's easily proven a false religion, but it's un-pc to say it out loud, lest they behead you.

Christians see the fulfillment of the messiah in the Old Testament. Jews simply do not. Not too complicated to understand if you really want to. I suspect you really dont however. But maybe someone else reading this might be interested.

Yikes, those are such broad strokes you could paint the Sistine Chapel in under an hour.
Seriously, to deny all other religions and say they are laughably false while undeniably being 100% sure you of your religion is admirable in a fantastically small minded way. A frightening majority of the world’s largest and oldest religions are based on a Messiah rising again and/or a chosen people. The major difference being only in the name of said Messiah or People. To take Christianity as the one true way when it shares so many similarities to other religions (that happen to be much older) is a great testament to your faith.

Disclosure: I'd consider myself a Christian leaning heavily towards agnostic. (I know it doesn't make any sense)

Also: what this has to do with Newt Gingrich - I don't know

Midtowner
1/26/2012, 05:29 PM
Well I guess if you say it, it must be so. I'm sure you know best.

Silly me, I'll just keep listening to the creator over your sage advise. No offense.

Are you claiming to hear voices?

SoonerAtKU
1/26/2012, 05:31 PM
I'll bite, what exactly are the falsehoods you speak of in the 95% of other world religions? Bear in mind, they have to be objectively false, not just false when compared to the Bible.

SoonerAtKU
1/26/2012, 05:33 PM
...admirable in a fantastically small minded way.

The only people 100% sure of themselves are the devoutly religious and serial killers. A healthy curiosity and willingness to admit to not being certain are very positive traits.

Ike
1/26/2012, 05:45 PM
Also: what this has to do with Newt Gingrich - I don't know



Just yesterday, Newt claimed he was the second coming of Christ.

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 10:15 PM
Are you claiming to hear voices?

Since Jesus is the Word made flesh, all I have to do is read his word and pray to "hear" him. So yeah, I guess I hear his voice all of the time.

So did Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elisha, Elijah, Enoch, Adam, David, Samuel, Paul, Peter, Billy Graham, and most every Christian that reads the Bible.

I don't claim to hear him to the exclusion of anyone else. You could too.

Midtowner
1/26/2012, 10:25 PM
Since Jesus is the Word made flesh, all I have to do is read his word and pray to "hear" him. So yeah, I guess I hear his voice all of the time.

So did Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elisha, Elijah, Enoch, Adam, David, Samuel, Paul, Peter, Billy Graham, and most every Christian that reads the Bible.

I don't claim to hear him to the exclusion of anyone else. You could too.

Right... so like you can do magic and stuff? Neato frito.

Love the list too... Abraham, Isaac . . . Billy Graham? Why not Oral Roberts and Benny Hinn? Whiskey tango foxtrot on that one.

And why is the "Word" capitalized? What you're saying here does nothing to prove the proposition that Christianity is as provable as Islam or Shinto.

Midtowner
1/26/2012, 10:26 PM
Just yesterday, Newt claimed he was the second coming of Christ.

That's actually pretty astute. Gingrich is saying absolutely whatever it takes to win voters. Does he believe any of it? Does it even make sense? Hell no. Of the men left on the stage, Paul is the only one who is not just saying whatever his focus groups tell him to say. I can't really understand why anyone watches these debates, let alone bases their decisions on them. It's pure theater.

LiveLaughLove
1/26/2012, 10:33 PM
The only people 100% sure of themselves are the devoutly religious and serial killers.

Hmm, I thought atheists are 100% sure. They certainly are devout.

47straight
1/26/2012, 11:01 PM
The only people 100% sure of themselves are the devoutly religious and serial killers. A healthy curiosity and willingness to admit to not being certain are very positive traits.

You sure do sound sure of yourself, painting with that big ole brush of yours.

47straight
1/26/2012, 11:01 PM
Right... so like you can do magic and stuff? Neato frito.

Love the list too... Abraham, Isaac . . . Billy Graham? Why not Oral Roberts and Benny Hinn? Whiskey tango foxtrot on that one.

And why is the "Word" capitalized? What you're saying here does nothing to prove the proposition that Christianity is as provable as Islam or Shinto.

LiveLaughLove's a nasty theocrat! Lock 'em up!

Midtowner
1/26/2012, 11:43 PM
LiveLaughLove's a nasty theocrat! Lock 'em up!

Huh? We're white, Christian and middle class! We're being oppressed! (that about sum it up?)

sappstuf
1/27/2012, 07:15 AM
http://www.mersenneforum.org/images/smilies/extra/direction.gif

SoonerAtKU
1/27/2012, 09:54 AM
You sure do sound sure of yourself, painting with that big ole brush of yours.

Did you not know I'm a serial killer?

Sorry, I thought that was clear around here.

47straight
1/27/2012, 02:49 PM
Did you not know I'm a serial killer?

Sorry, I thought that was clear around here.

Pics or it didn't happen!

SoonerAtKU
1/27/2012, 02:55 PM
I don't take trophies. That's how you get caught.

Posting about it on the internet is fine, though.