Does Anybody Support Trump?

[Serenity Now]

Its snivel nose, of course it makes no sense LOL

Pray for me.

You can fvck off you old arsehole!

[olevetonahill]

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2011/09/16/friday-funny-god-tells-prayer-warriors-to-stop-saying-just/

I've been a Treasurer. I've worked in the technical side of the church. I've taught youth Sunday School and I've gone on youth mission trips to build little houses in Mexico. But, because I'm a Dem I'm not a Christian. Nice!

No one said you wernt a Christian, Just said your comment dint make sense

[olevetonahill]

Pray for me.

You can fvck off you old arsehole!

Well now thats a Fine Christian attitude, Sounds Like you mite need some prayers.

[Serenity Now]

Well now thats a Fine Christian attitude, Sounds Like you mite need some prayers.

And, that's why I requested prayer. The attitude is addressed to the snivel comment not the rest of the crap.

[olevetonahill]

And, that's why I requested prayer. The attitude is addressed to the snivel comment not the rest of the crap.

:cheerful:

[REDREX]

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2011/09/16/friday-funny-god-tells-prayer-warriors-to-stop-saying-just/

I've been a Treasurer. I've worked in the technical side of the church. I've taught youth Sunday School and I've gone on youth mission trips to build little houses in Mexico. But, because I'm a Dem I'm not a Christian. Nice!---I didn't say that I just said your response made no sense----I said nothing about you being a Christian

[olevetonahill]

---I didn't say that I just said your response made no sense----I said nothing about you being a Christian

Yea, I dint see where you said anything about his Politics or Christianity, Maybe we should hold a Pentecostal Prayer meetin and drive the demons out of him!:kiwi-fruit:

[TAFBSooner]

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2011/09/16/friday-funny-god-tells-prayer-warriors-to-stop-saying-just/

I've been a Treasurer. I've worked in the technical side of the church. I've taught youth Sunday School and I've gone on youth mission trips to build little houses in Mexico. But, because I'm a Dem I'm not a Christian. Nice!

You're not a real Christian if you laugh at anything religious.

[dwarthog]

I missed the part in the 1st amendment where it says to use public funds and property for religious purposes.

Don't you have enough churches?

Please provide some details on what public funds are being used in the support of religion.

Thanks.

[Serenity Now]

The implication from 77 was that if you support the Democratic party you might think you're a Christian....but...

While we're on language in amendments...what does "a well-regulated militia" mean? LOL

[Serenity Now]

Please provide some details on what public funds are being used in the support of religion.

Thanks.

Placing a religious monument on public grounds utilizes public resources. So, the 10 Commandments monument opens the door for this: http://www.vice.com/read/heres-the-first-look-at-the-new-satanic-monument-being-built-for-oklahomas-statehouse

Is he doing "guns up!"?

[dwarthog]

Placing a religious monument on public grounds utilizes public resources. So, the 10 Commandments monument opens the door for this: http://www.vice.com/read/heres-the-first-look-at-the-new-satanic-monument-being-built-for-oklahomas-statehouse

Is he doing "guns up!"?

The question still stands, what public funds are being spent? Where in the budget is there a line item associated to the expenditure?

[olevetonahill]

The implication from 77 was that if you support the Democratic party you might think you're a Christian....but...

While we're on language in amendments...what does "a well-regulated militia" mean? LOL

Twist, Spin and Deflect! You're the one who just now mentioned Language :cheerful:

[Serenity Now]

And why would we expect anything less from the left and Democrats? I mean they attack religion (mostly Christians) at every opportunity, spending countless hours filing lawsuits about a cross here or there offending someone, or wanting "In God we Trust" taken off of our currency. Crazy upset over a Manger scene on the Courthouse lawn. Their buddies in the ACLU devoting immeasurable time, resources and effort enforcing the bogus "Separation of Church and State" paradigm that is bankrupt of any truth, at least as it relates to the ideas and principles of our Founding Father.

First Amendment - Religion and Expression. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances


Must make for a lot of uneasy, conflicted Democrats that also consider themselves Christians to be allied with a political party that has been infiltrated and commandeered by secular progressives intent on removing any vestiges of Religion from the American landscape. The part of the First Amendment that states "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" seems pretty clear to me.

This guy brought up the language. I was having fun with the other one. That's why there's a "guns up" reference.

[REDREX]

Typical Liberal

[Serenity Now]

Typical Liberal

Typical conservative.

[FaninAma]

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2011/09/16/friday-funny-god-tells-prayer-warriors-to-stop-saying-just/

I've been a Treasurer. I've worked in the technical side of the church. I've taught youth Sunday School and I've gone on youth mission trips to build little houses in Mexico. But, because I'm a Dem I'm not a Christian. Nice!

Do you support abortion? Do you support tax funds going to PP?

[REDREX]

Do you support abortion? Do you support tax funds going to PP?---Don't try an get a straight answer out of him ---He is a proud Liberal

[champions77]

You know when you see the left give tacit approval of the slaughter of babies, when you see their party adopt a platform that endorses this activity in the name of "choice", and then embarks on a phony campaign of the "Republican's War on Women", when you see Democratic Party supporters attack the US Constitution, having a particular problem with the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and send their attack dogs out to find instances where they can be "offended" by someone praying before a football game, or freaking someone out because a Bible was spotted on a teacher's desk, where any references to God or Jesus is met with a lawsuit by some pinhead secular progressive goofball that is offended by such language, but fbombs, and GD's are ok, never mind the folks that are offended by their language, and when the Democratic Party's heir apparent for the candidacy of the President of the United States is a corrupt, vile, unethical, mean spirited hack who is perfectly comfortable of stripping Americans of their rights and freedoms, as long as it's for "the common good", then folks what we have is a Party that is morally bankrupted, plain and simple. Any self respecting political Party would have run her out of politics with the trail of lies, misinformation and deception that she has engaged in over the years.
But apologists continue to follow along, lock step with the Party's every move.

Makes you wonder how much further to the left, or radical this bunch of leftists could go. Hate to think of it.

[hawaii 5-0]

Do you support abortion? Do you support tax funds going to PP?

Only 3% of what Planned Parenthood provides is abortion. Most goes to cancer screening. Breast Cancer, Cervical cancer, HPV prevention.

Are you against Women's Health ?

BTW, no tax funds at Planned Parenthood goes to abortions. That specific funding is already illegal.

5-0

[yermom]

You know when you see the left give tacit approval of the slaughter of babies, when you see their party adopt a platform that endorses this activity in the name of "choice", and then embarks on a phony campaign of the "Republican's War on Women", when you see Democratic Party supporters attack the US Constitution, having a particular problem with the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and send their attack dogs out to find instances where they can be "offended" by someone praying before a football game, or freaking someone out because a Bible was spotted on a teacher's desk, where any references to God or Jesus is met with a lawsuit by some pinhead secular progressive goofball that is offended by such language, but fbombs, and GD's are ok, never mind the folks that are offended by their language, and when the Democratic Party's heir apparent for the candidacy of the President of the United States is a corrupt, vile, unethical, mean spirited hack who is perfectly comfortable of stripping Americans of their rights and freedoms, as long as it's for "the common good", then folks what we have is a Party that is morally bankrupted, plain and simple. Any self respecting political Party would have run her out of politics with the trail of lies, misinformation and deception that she has engaged in over the years.
But apologists continue to follow along, lock step with the Party's every move.

Makes you wonder how much further to the left, or radical this bunch of leftists could go. Hate to think of it.

Could you come down off the cross for minute?

Back to the topic at hand... Any thoughts on Trump's comments here?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/27/republicans-are-going-to-hate-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-to-rich-people

[Tear Down This Wall]

Could you come down off the cross for minute?

Back to the topic at hand... Any thoughts on Trump's comments here?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/27/republicans-are-going-to-hate-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-to-rich-people

You do realize that he's trying to gain an audience larger than the GOP base, right?

This is where he is smarter than all of the Democratic and GOP candidates combined. He's like Bill Clinton in this way: whether he really believes what he is saying or not, he's going to say it.

Right now, the GOP is whipped up about immigration, so he's satisfied them. He knows Democrats get whipped up about "taxing the rich." So, he'll go down that road to get those votes.

What he doesn't have that the other candidates do have is political baggage. Whatever any other candidate, Republican or Democrat, says can be matched up against a voting or legislative record.

Not so with Trump.

[okie52]

Could you come down off the cross for minute?

Back to the topic at hand... Any thoughts on Trump's comments here?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/27/republicans-are-going-to-hate-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-to-rich-people

I'll be interested to see what he actually proposes. Obviously hedge fund managers are in his sights but I'm not sure what tax he is proposing on them.

One thing about Trump is he is all over the board...or appears to be anyway.

[champions77]

Could you come down off the cross for minute?

Back to the topic at hand... Any thoughts on Trump's comments here?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/27/republicans-are-going-to-hate-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-to-rich-people

I don't know of anyone that thinks Trump is a conservative. I take issue with his position that increasing taxes on the wealthy will help the middle class. The top 10% already pay about 70% of all Federal income taxes. I'm not one that feels that increasing their taxes will provide more jobs for the middle class. I'm more in the camp that feels that reducing some of the red tape and regulations on businesses will be the catalyst for hiring more workers.
Trump's appeal is more of not being PC. and his throwing the establishment politicians under the bus than anything else. He is playing to the millions of Americans that are sick and tired of professional politicians.
When being asked how do you deport 11 million people, Trump will not answer. Disappointing. The only answer can be institute a stiff fine for employers that choose to hire illegals. When the jobs are no longer there, they will leave on their own.

[Serenity Now]

Do you support abortion? Do you support tax funds going to PP?

I'm somewhere on the spectrum between sic'em and plan b. I support women's right to make their decisions.

I think PP should get out of abortions. It's only 3% of their business. I support 96% of their business.

[champions77]

Only 3% of what Planned Parenthood provides is abortion. Most goes to cancer screening. Breast Cancer, Cervical cancer, HPV prevention.

Are you against Women's Health ?

BTW, no tax funds at Planned Parenthood goes to abortions. That specific funding is already illegal.

5-0
Your 3% number is bogus. PP performed about 329,445 abortions last year. 51% of their yearly clinic income comes from these abortions.
Are you against females health? Those tens of thousands of females that are aborted is the real war on women. Or how about the millions of women that have been sent to the welfare rolls due to your hero's crappy economy? You know we are one screwed up mess of a country when this incompetent goof we have as Prez wins re-election in 2012 with almost 50 million Americans on food stamps. That number would have normally resulted in a landslide defeat. Not anymore. My have our standards fallen.

[Serenity Now]

Your 3% number is bogus. PP performed about 329,445 abortions last year. 51% of their yearly clinic income comes from these abortions.
Are you against females health? Those tens of thousands of females that are aborted is the real war on women. Or how about the millions of women that have been sent to the welfare rolls due to your hero's crappy economy? You know we are one screwed up mess of a country when this incompetent goof we have as Prez wins re-election in 2012 with almost 50 million Americans on food stamps. That number would have normally resulted in a landslide defeat. Not anymore. My have our standards fallen.So when statistics don't match perceptions they're lies?

[FaninAma]

I'm somewhere on the spectrum between sic'em and plan b. I support women's right to make their decisions.

I think PP should get out of abortions. It's only 3% of their business. I support 96% of their business.
At what point does the unborn infant's right to live supercede the mother's right to convenience? Be a man and take a stand. 6 weeks? 12 weeks? 16 weeks? 20 weeks?

[hawaii 5-0]

Planned Parenthood’s abortive services are funded separately from all other services. Legally, they have to be. According to the 1976 Hyde Amendment, federal funds and grants (such as Medicaid) cannot be used for abortions. No tax dollars are used for PP abortions.


Don't let the Law get in the way of your political misconceptions.

5-0

[FaninAma]

Planned Parenthood’s abortive services are funded separately from all other services. Legally, they have to be. According to the 1976 Hyde Amendment, federal funds and grants (such as Medicaid) cannot be used for abortions. No tax dollars are used for PP abortions.


Don't let the Law get in the way of your political misconceptions.

5-0
So are you saying their abortion services are totally separate from their other services and are self-funding(i.e. requires no funds from PP's other divisions to meet shortfalls)? If so , how does it do that? Since PP get taxpayer funds shouldn't we be able to audit their finances?

[champions77]

Nice condescension. I'm a Christian who doesn't want to hear a baptist prayer at a school event. Wonder how strongly Jesus would support trump?

Interesting, perplexing, but interesting. I would say that Jesus, upon hearing a prayer based on Biblical principles, would not think of it as a "Baptist" prayer. And why, as a Christian, would you mind hearing a prayer at a school event? Is it because you self-identify yourself as a liberal, and liberals are not supposed to be for prayer in school? And if so, then that can only mean that that makes your Christianity subservient to you being a liberal? I would say if so, that is probably not a good thing.
I don't know that Jesus would support Trump, or wouldn't support him. That would be between Trump and God.

[Serenity Now]

At what point does the unborn infant's right to live supercede the mother's right to convenience? Be a man and take a stand. 6 weeks? 12 weeks? 16 weeks? 20 weeks?
I've had a 27 week kid. 20 is way too close to that. I treat this issue like you guys treat Reagan and Iran - I put it in a box of things I don't like to think about. If I had to be a "man" and put a time on it I'd say 8-10 weeks.

[hawaii 5-0]

A link to the Lies being spread.

http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/anti-abortion-group-admits-falsifying-latest-video/

5-0

[FaninAma]

Interesting, perplexing, but interesting. I would say that Jesus, upon hearing a prayer based on Biblical principles, would not think of it as a "Baptist" prayer. And why, as a Christian, would you mind hearing a prayer at a school event? Is it because you self-identify yourself as a liberal, and liberals are not supposed to be for prayer in school? And if so, then that can only mean that that makes your Christianity subservient to you being a liberal? I would say if so, that is probably not a good thing.
I don't know that Jesus would support Trump, or wouldn't support him. That would be between Trump and God.

Didn't you get the memo? A true Christian will never pray in public or testify about his faith in a place where others may not want to hear it. Of course some of the Desciples who were martyred doing exactly that would have appreciated the heads up sooner. (No pun intended).

[Serenity Now]

Interesting, perplexing, but interesting. I would say that Jesus, upon hearing a prayer based on Biblical principles, would not think of it as a "Baptist" prayer. And why, as a Christian, would you mind hearing a prayer at a school event? Is it because you self-identify yourself as a liberal, and liberals are not supposed to be for prayer in school? And if so, then that can only mean that that makes your Christianity subservient to you being a liberal? I would say if so, that is probably not a good thing.
I don't know that Jesus would support Trump, or wouldn't support him. That would be between Trump and God.Because I respect the right of non Christians under the constitution.

[Serenity Now]

So are you saying their abortion services are totally separate from their other services and are self-funding(i.e. requires no funds from PP's other divisions to meet shortfalls)? If so , how does it do that? Since PP get taxpayer funds shouldn't we be able to audit their finances?
A. They're not audited? Whatevs.
B. I'd expect that they could offer them as a cost based service.

[FaninAma]

I've had a 27 week kid. 20 is way too close to that. I treat this issue like you guys treat Reagan and Iran - I put it in a box of things I don't like to think about. If I had to be a "man" and put a time on it I'd say 8-10 weeks.

OK. Thanks for the answer. The way I look at this issue is if I were face to face with Christ and I were explaining my position on this issue how, in my heart of hearts, do I think He would respond to my explanation. If you think he would approve of the explanation of your position then I guess I have nothing more to add to this particular line of discussion because it is not my place to question your sincerity.

[hawaii 5-0]

So are you saying their abortion services are totally separate from their other services and are self-funding(i.e. requires no funds from PP's other divisions to meet shortfalls)? If so , how does it do that? Since PP get taxpayer funds shouldn't we be able to audit their finances?

Women getting abortions at Planned Parenthood are paying out of pocket, so Planned Parenthood has a network of private and individual donors who specify that they want their money used in that way - much like the Komen grants, which are specifically used only for underwriting breast-cancer screenings.

I'm not an accountant for Planned Parenthood. I suggest you contact them for their money distribution accountabilities.

5-0

[FaninAma]

A. They're not audited? Whatevs.
B. I'd expect that they could offer them as a cost based service.

Unsubsidized by selling organs and tissue I assume.

I'm pretty sure they hide behind their non-profit status and do not allow outside(government) audits.

[hawaii 5-0]

OK. Thanks for the answer. The way I look at this issue is if I were face to face with Christ and I were explaining my position on this issue how


I think Jesus might ask you who made you the judge of other people.

5-0

[SicEmBaylor]

As a non-Christian conservative, I'm always conflicted when these religious debates come up. I'm not entirey sure whose side I'm supposed to be on. ;)

[champions77]

Because I respect the right of non Christians under the constitution.

So much that you would dismiss Christians in doing so? Because that is what you are doing. You are a Secular Progressive trapped in a Christian body.

Gosh makes you wonder how it came to be that the President is sworn in with his left hand on the Bible. Hate to "disrespect" the rights of non-Christians in attendance.

[Serenity Now]

So much that you would dismiss Christians in doing so? Because that is what you are doing. You are a Secular Progressive trapped in a Christian body.

Gosh makes you wonder how it came to be that the President is sworn in with his left hand on the Bible. Hate to "disrespect" the rights of non-Christians in attendance.

It's the Constitution that you guys hold so near/dear.

[FaninAma]

I think Jesus might ask you who made you the judge of other people.

5-0

Christ never said to not judge others. The verse I know you are going to refer to is singled out of a rather long explanation of how Christ expected us to treat others. The Epistles of Paul pretty much give detailed instructions on how the Church is supposed to act and handle it's followers especially when they stray from Christ's instructions.

Does it really make sense that Christ would teach us how to act and then tell us to ignore the bad behavior in others and in our society? If so, why did most of His Desciples and early followers end up martyred?

[REDREX]

It's the Constitution that you guys hold so near/dear.---Too Bad Liberals don't

[SicEmBaylor]

So much that you would dismiss Christians in doing so? Because that is what you are doing. You are a Secular Progressive trapped in a Christian body.

Gosh makes you wonder how it came to be that the President is sworn in with his left hand on the Bible. Hate to "disrespect" the rights of non-Christians in attendance.

Technically, the President can swear his oath on whatever he damned well pleases whether it be the Bible, Constitution, a Playboy magazine, or nothing. Most choose the Bible for political reasons.

[Serenity Now]

Christ never said to not judge others. The verse I know you are going to refer to is singled out of a rather long explanation of how Christ expected us to treat others. The Epistles of Paul pretty much give detailed instructions on how the Church is supposed to act and handle it's followers especially when they stray from Christ's instructions.

Does it really make sense that Christ would teach us how to act and then tell us to ignore the bad behavior in others and in our society? If so, why did most of His Desciples and early followers end up martyred?

I tend to like St. Francis of Assisi's quote: Go and spread the gospel. When necessary, use words. I take issue with Paul. Typical "new convert". :)

[Serenity Now]

Technically, the President can swear his oath on whatever he damned well pleases whether it be the Bible, Constitution, a Playboy magazine, or nothing. Most choose the Bible for political reasons.

So, what would Trump use? A modern Playboy? A "classic" version? I'm thinking he's more of a Jugs or a Penthouse guy.

[champions77]

Technically, the President can swear his oath on whatever he damned well pleases whether it be the Bible, Constitution, a Playboy magazine, or nothing. Most choose the Bible for political reasons.

Yes, but the point is if following today's secular progressive dictums of the so called "Separation of Church and State" No religious symbols, books etc., could be allowed at such an event right?
It gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that leftists out there are agitated when seeing the Holy Bible being used in the swearing in ceremony of the President.

[Serenity Now]

Yes, but the point is if following today's secular progressive dictums of the so called "Separation of Church and State" No religious symbols, books etc., could be allowed at such an event right?
It gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that leftists out there are agitated when seeing the Holy Bible being used in the swearing in ceremony of the President.

This secular progressive has no problem with The Bible being used for swearing in. I have no problems with historical things like the Supreme Court having the Christian branding that has been there for years left as is. I'm not a fan of new things such as the new 10 Commandment monuments erected to show how Christian we are. Hell, I take issue with "under God" in the songs and pledge of allegiance because it is in response to the horrible McCarthy era. Thanks Reagan! I don't take issue enough to not sing/recite but it seems silly to me. I also don't want to move to Utah and have to have my kids deal with Morman stuff in the classroom.

[SicEmBaylor]

Yes, but the point is if following today's secular progressive dictums of the so called "Separation of Church and State" No religious symbols, books etc., could be allowed at such an event right?
It gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that leftists out there are agitated when seeing the Holy Bible being used in the swearing in ceremony of the President.

Correct. Also, I prefer/demand a government that acknowledges a power greater than itself. If government fails to acknowledge the existene of God (in whatever form or version that may manifest itself as) then all rights have to come from somewhere -- without God, those rights are entirely determined by man; therefore, those rights are subject to change by man. It undermines the inalienable nature of our most cherished rights.

Having said that, do I want Judeo-Christian statutes and symbols adorning court house and capitol grounds? No. It comes too close to violating the establishment clause, and it opens the jurisidiction up to the possibility of having fringe religions demanding their own little plot of ground. It's better to avoid that entirely.

[champions77]

Correct. Also, I prefer/demand a government that acknowledges a power greater than itself. If government fails to acknowledge the existene of God (in whatever form or version that may manifest itself as) then all rights have to come from somewhere -- without God, those rights are entirely determined by man; therefore, those rights are subject to change by man. It undermines the inalienable nature of our most cherished rights.

Having said that, do I want Judeo-Christian statutes and symbols adorning court house and capitol grounds? No. It comes too close to violating the establishment clause, and it opens the jurisidiction up to the possibility of having fringe religions demanding their own little plot of ground. It's better to avoid that entirely.

I think it a huge stretch for some to associate a religious symbol with the actual establishment of a religion. That's the excuse to diminish religious expression the left uses all the time.

[Serenity Now]

I think it a huge stretch for some to associate a religious symbol with the actual establishment of a religion. That's the excuse to diminish religious expression the left uses all the time.

Then you'll have no problem with the proposed satanic statue? I find that statue so out there that it's laughable.

[dwarthog]

Then you'll have no problem with the proposed satanic statue? I find that statue so out there that it's laughable.

Satanism is not a religion, it's a cult. Huge difference.

[TAFBSooner]

Constitutionally, the President can swear his oath on whatever he damned well pleases whether it be the Bible, Constitution, a Playboy magazine, or nothing. Most choose the Bible for political reasons.

FIFY

He can also affirm instead of swearing. Right there in Art. II Sect. 2., last paragraph. To affirm was a pretty big deal in the time of the Founders - you were committing your own sense of self and humanity, which during the Enlightenment meant a lot.

There's nothing about So Help Me God in there either. We have George Washington to thank for that tradition (not legal requirement). Now it would take big hueveos to leave it out.

US House members don't put their hand on any holy book for their official swearing-in, which is a mass ceremony. Many later have a recreation of the oath (actually a photo op) with the Speaker of the House. We once had a Muslim Representative take his "souvenir" oath (http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/ellison.asp)on Thomas Jefferson's Quran.

[TAFBSooner]

And why, as a Christian, would you mind hearing a prayer at a school event? Is it because you self-identify yourself as a liberal, and liberals are not supposed to be for prayer in school?

I'm a liberal, and I am against school-organized prayer. (As long as there are tests, there WILL be prayer in school.) However, I believe in gun rights (for example), and in general do not feel constrained to accept any particular position just because it's considered to be part of the liberal platform, for lack of a better term.

The wall between Church and state is there for the benefit of the churches as well as the state.

[Serenity Now]

Satanism is not a religion, it's a cult. Huge difference.

A religion is what the worshiper claims within reason. And, the fact that the Christian faith has utilized fear and the satanic boogie monster in efforts to convert people over the last centuries, the "religion" is, ironically, validated to the reasonable man level by the Christian doctrine. Aggressive atheists actually use satanic stances to prove points, I believe.

This one: http://www.venganza.org/

Not so much.

[TAFBSooner]

Gosh makes you wonder how it came to be that the President is sworn in with his left hand on the Bible.

Because and only because George Washington did it that way.

[champions77]

Because and only because George Washington did it that way.

The Senate has had a Protestant Chaplin since I believe the 1780's.

I could go on.

You lefties try ad naseaum to diminish the influence of God on the Founders in the creation of this Nation.
An exercise in futility based on what our history is.

[Serenity Now]

The Senate has had a Protestant Chaplin since I believe the 1780's.

I could go on.

You lefties try ad naseaum to diminish the influence of God on the Founders in the creation of this Nation.
An exercise in futility based on what our history is.
Just because God was a beacon to our founding fathers doesn't mean we should ignore the constitution that the established. The living, breathing document has evolved and been interpreted to fit more modern situations.

[olevetonahill]

Satanism is not a religion, it's a cult. Huge difference.

Unfortunately It really is Bro!!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Interesting, perplexing, but interesting. I would say that Jesus, upon hearing a prayer based on Biblical principles, would not think of it as a "Baptist" prayer. And why, as a Christian, would you mind hearing a prayer at a school event? Is it because you self-identify yourself as a liberal, and liberals are not supposed to be for prayer in school? And if so, then that can only mean that that makes your Christianity subservient to you being a liberal? I would say if so, that is probably not a good thing.
I don't know that Jesus would support Trump, or wouldn't support him. That would be between Trump and God.Liberalism IS a religion, although intentionally not recognized as such.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Quote Originally Posted by SicEmBaylor
Correct. Also, I prefer/demand a government that acknowledges a power greater than itself. If government fails to acknowledge the existene of God (in whatever form or version that may manifest itself as) then all rights have to come from somewhere -- without God, those rights are entirely determined by man; therefore, those rights are subject to change by man. It undermines the inalienable nature of our most cherished rights.

Having said that, do I want Judeo-Christian statutes and symbols adorning court house and capitol grounds? No. It comes too close to violating the establishment clause, and it opens the jurisidiction up to the possibility of having fringe religions demanding their own little plot of ground. It's better to avoid that entirely.
I think it a huge stretch for some to associate a religious symbol with the actual establishment of a religion. That's the excuse to diminish religious expression the left uses all the time.EXACTAMUNDO! and your point is the most poignant one I can think of regarding the establishment of a religion by our government. Acknowledging the possibility/likelihood of some sort of higher power(God) by government is in no way establishing an official government religion.

[SicEmBaylor]

Quote Originally Posted by SicEmBaylor
Correct. Also, I prefer/demand a government that acknowledges a power greater than itself. If government fails to acknowledge the existene of God (in whatever form or version that may manifest itself as) then all rights have to come from somewhere -- without God, those rights are entirely determined by man; therefore, those rights are subject to change by man. It undermines the inalienable nature of our most cherished rights.

Having said that, do I want Judeo-Christian statutes and symbols adorning court house and capitol grounds? No. It comes too close to violating the establishment clause, and it opens the jurisidiction up to the possibility of having fringe religions demanding their own little plot of ground. It's better to avoid that entirely.EXACTAMUNDO! and your point is the most poignant one I can think of regarding the establishment of a religion by our government. Acknowledging the possibility/likelihood of some sort of higher power(God) by government is in no way establishing an official government religion.

The problem is that it actually does come close to violating the establishment clause. There's a difference between government acknowledging a higher power/God in an abstract generalized form and what we're talking about here. The problem is that the 10 Commandants, for example, are specific to the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). That rules out a lot of non-Abrahamic religions. In effect, it validates those religions over competing religions.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

one nation under God

In God we trust

BFD. These just shouldn't be allowed, in our PC horsesh*t new America

[SicEmBaylor]

one nation under God

In God we trust

BFD. These just shouldn't be allowed, in our PC horsesh*t new America

Exactly. And 'God' in that context is very generalized and open to interpretation. In a sense, even Buddha could be interpreted as 'God' in that particular context (although he isn't considered a God per se).

There's a distinct difference between referring to God in the abstract and erecting monuments specific to certain religions.

[dwarthog]

Unfortunately It really is Bro!!

Hmmm. I'm skeptical Bro.

For what it's worth I did some poking around and found some interesting stuff.

There are two main branches of Satanism.

Theistic Satanists who view Satan not a omnipotent but more of a patriarch. This doesn't seem to fit the mold of a religion very well.

The other main branch is atheistic Satanists. So they are Atheists. A quick look at the American Atheist web page and they clearly state they are not a religion.

IMHO, I think they fall into the cult, snake oil category.

[BoulderSooner79]

Many religions view other religions as cults, including different factions of Christians. Go ask a group of southern Baptist about Mormons. Some Sunnis and Shiites are willing to kill each other as infidels even though they worship the same god. Keeping religion out of government except at a general level is just common sense in a diverse country like the US. We are *not* a Christian nation - we are a majority Christian nation with no small number of non-Christians.

[Serenity Now]

one nation under God

In God we trust

BFD. These just shouldn't be allowed, in our PC horsesh*t new America

Great job McCarthy! I'm sure Jesus is happy with your strong utilization of the "F".

[Serenity Now]

Many religions view other religions as cults, including different factions of Christians. Go ask a group of southern Baptist about Mormons. Some Sunnis and Shiites are willing to kill each other as infidels even though they worship the same god. Keeping religion out of government except at a general level is just common sense in a diverse country like the US. We are *not* a Christian nation - we are a majority Christian nation with no small number of non-Christians.

My mother in law considers Catholicism a cult. She doesn't acknowledge that her "hard shell" Baptist doctrine originally came from that branch. [note: My mother insists that the church that they go to in the bojacks is a hard shell Baptist church. I still haven't been able to get her to explain it to me properly, I just find the description entertaining. I know that we got a really good hellfire/damnation sermon on Christmas Day.]

[SoonerProphet]

Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.

[champions77]

The problem is that it actually does come close to violating the establishment clause. There's a difference between government acknowledging a higher power/God in an abstract generalized form and what we're talking about here. The problem is that the 10 Commandants, for example, are specific to the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). That rules out a lot of non-Abrahamic religions. In effect, it validates those religions over competing religions.

So you are all in when it comes to concerns about the "establishment clause" being violated, but you and your ilk ignore routinely the words of the First Amendment that states "OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF"
It is so clear that the Framers had no intentions of keeping religious expression out of sight, out of the main stream. You see it in their words, you see it in the monuments around DC that cite scripture, you see it with the Senate Chaplain. Big difference in keeping the Government out of religion, versus keeping religion out of the government.
The Danbury Baptist's letter to Thomas Jefferson dated October 7, 1801 was asking for reassurance from Jefferson that the federal government would not interfere with them practicing their religion. Jefferson's response on January 1st, 1802 did just that, assuring the Baptists that the government could not come between them and their religion, and thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. What the Supreme Court did later was took Jefferson's words completely out of context, to mean exactly the opposite of what his letter intended.
Why this portion of the First Amendment "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" was ignored in subsequent Supreme Court rulings is a travesty, as they became a tool of the seculars in this nation to remove religious influence in America.

[champions77]

Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.

Bingo, you are the winner of the silliest statement made on this forum all week. Congrats!

[SoonerProphet]

Bingo, you are the winner of the silliest statement made on this forum all week. Congrats!

That is quite a stretch coming from the likes of you.

Wasn't the under God part added in 1953?

[Serenity Now]

a well regulated militia....

mic drop

[Serenity Now]

That is quite a stretch coming from the likes of you.

Wasn't the under God part added in 1953?

I read some rambling screed about how stupid we liberals are on about page 12 of this thread on my phone. I didn't know who it was and was about to scroll left to see and then I realized that I didn't really need to...

[FaninAma]

Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.

Some of the FFs, like Jefferson and Thomas Paine, were Deists but they knew they needed the pious fundamentalist Christians in the original 13 Colonies to take up the cause of the Revolution against the British. That is why Thomas Paine alluded to Christian principles in so many of his publications before and during the Revolutionary War appealing to Chrisitians on religious grounds to join the cause. Without those early American Chrisitians there would be no United States of America....at least not in its present form. We would probably be more like Canada or Australia.

To assert this country's founding was not heavily influenced by Chrisitanity is nothing more than revisionist history.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Quote Originally Posted by SoonerProphet
Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.
Bingo, you are the winner of the silliest statement made on this forum all week. Congrats!Dang it, he's? on iggy. Now do you see why?

[SicEmBaylor]

So you are all in when it comes to concerns about the "establishment clause" being violated, but you and your ilk ignore routinely the words of the First Amendment that states "OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF"
I'm not stopping anyone at all from exercising religion.


The Danbury Baptist's letter to Thomas Jefferson dated October 7, 1801 was asking for reassurance from Jefferson that the federal government would not interfere with them practicing their religion. Jefferson's response on January 1st, 1802 did just that, assuring the Baptists that the government could not come between them and their religion, and thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. What the Supreme Court did later was took Jefferson's words completely out of context, to mean exactly the opposite of what his letter intended.
Why this portion of the First Amendment "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" was ignored in subsequent Supreme Court rulings is a travesty, as they became a tool of the seculars in this nation to remove religious influence in America.
Who on Earth is suggesting that Baptists shouldn't be free to practice their religion? Of course, and obviously, the Federal government cannot and should not prevent the free exercise of religion. That isn't what we're talking about here.

[champions77]

I'm not stopping anyone at all from exercising religion.


Who on Earth is suggesting that Baptists shouldn't be free to practice their religion? Of course, and obviously, the Federal government cannot and should not prevent the free exercise of religion. That isn't what we're talking about here.


What are you talking about? Sure the government, led by the watchdog ACLU, files lawsuits everyday about religious symbols being displayed on government property. I am making the point that since the Supreme Court rulings, based on the phony "Separation of Church and State" ruling, that religious expressions are limited all the time. Any of you walk around the DC mall, look at the monuments, read the inscriptions, and come back and tell me why and how this Nation could erect such monuments on Federal Government property if that indeed is what they meant? If this was their intent, why wasn't it addressed that way in the First Amendment? Again "OR PROHIBITNG THE FREE EXERCISE THEROF" So why doesn't the First Amendment go on and state....as to private property?

[Serenity Now]

What are you talking about? Sure the government, led by the watchdog ACLU, files lawsuits everyday about religious symbols being displayed on government property. I am making the point that since the Supreme Court rulings, based on the phony "Separation of Church and State" ruling, that religious expressions are limited all the time. Any of you walk around the DC mall, look at the monuments, read the inscriptions, and come back and tell me why and how this Nation could erect such monuments on Federal Government property if that indeed is what they meant? If this was their intent, why wasn't it addressed that way in the First Amendment? Again "OR PROHIBITNG THE FREE EXERCISE THEROF" So why doesn't the First Amendment go on and state....as to private property?

well regulated militia

[olevetonahill]

well regulated militia

Keep trolling I think you might get a nibble soon.:satellite:

[Serenity Now]

Keep trolling I think you might get a nibble soon.:satellite:

You guys ignore that one. It's classic.

[olevetonahill]

You guys ignore that one. It's classic.

Not ignoring, thats been discussed so many times here its a boring topic. We mainly just ignoring YOU.:gary:

[Serenity Now]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/28/politics/donald-trump-church-member/index.html

Liar.

Two things the right ignores here: 1. The Reagan/Iran connection. 2. The words "well regulated"

[SoonerProphet]

Some of the FFs, like Jefferson and Thomas Paine, were Deists but they knew they needed the pious fundamentalist Christians in the original 13 Colonies to take up the cause of the Revolution against the British. That is why Thomas Paine referred Christian principles in so many of his publications before and during the Revolutionary War appealing to Chrisitians on religious grounds to join the cause. Without those early American Chrisitians there would be no United States of America....at least not in its present form. We would probably be more like Canada or Australia.

To assert this country's founding was not heavily influenced by Chrisitanity is nothing more than revisionist history.

The same Paine who wrote in his Age of Reason wrote,

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turk church, or by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

"All institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

I agree the FF were diests and perhaps more influenced by the tenets of Freemasonry than Christianity. The only folks engaging in revisionism are those who refuse to deal with the fact that in God we trust and the insertion of under God in pledge in the 1950s. The simple fact remains that there is no mention of god or christmin our founding document. A document influenced by common law more than anything else btw.

[SoonerProphet]

Quote Originally Posted by SoonerProphet
Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.Dang it, he's? on iggy. Now do you see why?

Ah yes, the head up anus approach political discourse. Very effective.

[olevetonahill]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/28/politics/donald-trump-church-member/index.html

Liar.

Two things the right ignores here: 1. The Reagan/Iran connection. 2. The words "well regulated"

http://media.makeameme.org/created/my-name-is-6d2jsz.jpg

[champions77]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/28/politics/donald-trump-church-member/index.html

Liar.

Two things the right ignores here: 1. The Reagan/Iran connection. 2. The words "well regulated"

Iran/Contra was a mistake. On one hand, supporting the freedom fighters was a good thing. The manner in which the Reagan Administration went about it...not so good.

Well regulated? This has been brought up before the US Supreme Court many times, and their rulings have been consistent. I know you lefties entrust the government to behave themselves, but even if they did, what do you propose, that all honest citizens turn in their firearms, because they would be the only ones to turn them in.

Since we are on the subject, why is it that libs like you NEVER hold people responsible for their actions? If a lunatic kills ten people, it was the guns fault. If a person (and there are millions) sits around, doing nothing, wasting his life away, taking no initiative, doing nothing to help himself, and subsists on government payments, paid for by hardworking folks that do take responsibility for their actions, then it's not the welfare recipients fault either. To libs, the state is responsible for you, you are NOT responsible for yourself. I've seen that for decades and I never could understand the mindset associated with it. I guess I never will.

I do know this, personal responsibility, along with self reliance, are bedrocks of a free society, are the virtues that made us great. And the Democratic Party, along with an assist by spineless Republicans, have created this mess we have today, where millions have no hope, are angry, have no future, and I don't think it bothers liberals one iota. If it did, they wouldn't go along with the teacher's unions over vouchers to provide an escape for inner city kids from lousy schools. That's when their true colors show through. And that is sick.

[Serenity Now]

Quote Originally Posted by SoonerProphet
Wasn't "One Nation Under God" added in like 1953. The notion that this nation is a "Christian" nation is a fabrication by statist social conservatives who want to monitor the private lives of people.Dang it, he's? on iggy. Now do you see why?

If you put the Prophet on ignore then you really have a problem with the whole idea of critical thinking.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Not ignoring, thats been discussed so many times here its a boring topic. We mainly just ignoring YOU.:gary:He displays the powerful religious zeal of a leftist. Will he martyr if he has to?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

If you put the Prophet on ignore then you really have a problem with the whole idea of critical thinking.He displays the powerful religious zeal of a leftist. Will he martyr if he has to?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

http://media.makeameme.org/created/my-name-is-6d2jsz.jpgOwn it, leftists.

[Serenity Now]

Iran/Contra was a mistake. On one hand, supporting the freedom fighters was a good thing. The manner in which the Reagan Administration went about it...not so good. No one seems to want to admit that. Or, why the 52 hostages were released the day that Reagan was inaugurated. Interesting...


Well regulated? This has been brought up before the US Supreme Court many times, and their rulings have been consistent. I know you lefties entrust the government to behave themselves, but even if they did, what do you propose, that all honest citizens turn in their firearms, because they would be the only ones to turn them in.
I'm sure the first amendment that you keep clarifying for us all has also been addressed more than once in the Court. I'm made no proposals for anyone to turn anything in...ever.


Since we are on the subject, why is it that libs like you NEVER hold people responsible for their actions? If a lunatic kills ten people, it was the guns fault. If a person (and there are millions) sits around, doing nothing, wasting his life away, taking no initiative, doing nothing to help himself, and subsists on government payments, paid for by hardworking folks that do take responsibility for their actions, then it's not the welfare recipients fault either. To libs, the state is responsible for you, you are NOT responsible for yourself. I've seen that for decades and I never could understand the mindset associated with it. I guess I never will.

I do know this, personal responsibility, along with self reliance, are bedrocks of a free society, are the virtues that made us great. And the Democratic Party, along with an assist by spineless Republicans, have created this mess we have today, where millions have no hope, are angry, have no future, and I don't think it bothers liberals one iota. If it did, they wouldn't go along with the teacher's unions over vouchers to provide an escape for inner city kids from lousy schools. That's when their true colors show through. And that is sick.
You brought up a Constitutional amendment of which you disagree with the Court. I brought up one that I get a kick out of. IF the intent of the 2nd amendment is to allow the people to stay "strong" to be able to defend themselves from a militaristic state then it has outlived itself. Until every Tom, Dick and Harry can have militarized drones and Apache helicopters, the state is going to be stronger. Whether you and I have weapons or not it's immaterial. The issues that I have are with the mind set of the NRA where they won't give an inch on anything. They're really no different than the ACLU. There's also the paranoid nutjobs who tell us that things like Newtown actually didn't happen and/or they're only a "false flag" by Obama to come for your guns. A. I do trust the gubmit (both parties) to not turn on the people. B. I trust my military to not enact orders that are counter to common sense.

[SoonerProphet]

The political stakes in this debate are high, so polemics and hyperbole abound. For many a certain national identity is at stake. As with most debates I'm sure a common ground could be sought. They are not radical libertine freaks painted by leftist secular egg heads nor were they born again Billy Grahams that the religious right wants us to believe.

[FaninAma]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/28/politics/donald-trump-church-member/index.html

Liar.

Two things the right ignores here: 1. The Reagan/Iran connection. 2. The words "well regulated"
1. Reagan told the mulahs and imams that the day he took office that if they still had our hostages he would consider them prisoners of war and he would unleash hell on earth on them and their families.....much like he did Khadafi after the Lockerbee Pan Am bombing.
2. You have no clue what the FF's meant by the term "well regulated militia". You're just parroting the intellectually bankrupt progressive talking point. None of the FFs advocated for a standing army under the control of the federal government. The militia referred to armed citizens who could be called to defend the state. In order to do that the citizenry needed to be armed.

[FaninAma]

The same Paine who wrote in his Age of Reason wrote,

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turk church, or by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

"All institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

I agree the FF were diests and perhaps more influenced by the tenets of Freemasonry than Christianity. The only folks engaging in revisionism are those who refuse to deal with the fact that in God we trust and the insertion of under God in pledge in the 1950s. The simple fact remains that there is no mention of god or christmin our founding document. A document influenced by common law more than anything else btw.
Did I say Paine was a Christian? No I did not. He was a politician who used Christians to help him accomplish his and other FFs' goals. Be that as it may please don't insult us by repeating the absurd claim that Christiantity didn't play a very central role in the formation and development of this country.

[SicEmBaylor]

Paine was, like me, very much a fellow brother of the tribe. By 'tribe' I mean he was a fellow deist. Arguably the most Deist of all the founding fathers.

I've considered starting the world's first Deist church (tax free of course) so that I can build a monument to 'Common Sense' and have it placed on the grounds of the state capitol.

[Serenity Now]

1. Reagan told the mulahs and imams that the day he took office that if they still had our hostages he would consider them prisoners of war and he would unleash hell on earth on them and their families.....much like he did Khadafi after the Lockerbee Pan Am bombing.
2. You have no clue what the FF's meant by the term "well regulated militia". You're just parroting the intellectually bankrupt progressive talking point. None of the FFs advocated for a standing army under the control of the federal government. The militia referred to armed citizens who could be called to defend the state. In order to do that the citizenry needed to be armed.Or he begged them to keep the hostages until he was inaugurated and he'd pay them back with arms. One of those makes sense.

[Serenity Now]

I'm enlightened to know that you have a pipeline to the founders. Tell 'em goober said "hey".

It's not really a talking point. I can read the 2nd Amendment.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Or he begged them to keep the hostages until he was inaugurated and he'd pay them back with arms. One of those makes sense.

He didn't have to beg them. A beta male like yourself was voted out and a Alpha male was voted in. They knew the difference.

[FaninAma]

I'm enlightened to know that you have a pipeline to the founders. Tell 'em goober said "hey".

It's not really a talking point. I can read the 2nd Amendment.
Well, hang in their slugger.Maybe the SCOTUS will see it your way at some point over the next 240 years since they haven't the past 240 years.

[Serenity Now]

Well, hang in their slugger.Maybe the SCOTUS will see it your way at some point over the next 240 years since they haven't the past 240 years.Until the nra gets out of the GOP'S Pockets this is the Wild West that we live in. I just wish we would allow crazy people as much acces to mental health as we do to firearms.

[olevetonahill]

Until the nra gets out of the GOP'S Pockets this is the Wild West that we live in. I just wish we would allow crazy people as much acces to mental health as we do to firearms.

I agree SN we should ban ALL guns. Thats how we Got Meth and other drugs off the street!

[SoonerProphet]

Did I say Paine was a Christian? No I did not. He was a politician who used Christians to help him accomplish his and other FFs' goals. Be that as it may please don't insult us by repeating the absurd claim that Christiantity didn't play a very central role in the formation and development of this country.

Nice repetitive dodge of the pledge and currency issue, keep up the solid work. Well done on ignoring no mention of Christ in our founding document. So what are you saying, the colonial flock engaged in willful gullibility w/ regards to scripture and republicanism? Sure it played a role, but the idea this is a Christian nation is what is absurd. It was republic free from the dogma of religion. When rationalism met religion, the founders more often than not differed to rationalism.

[Serenity Now]

I agree SN we should ban ALL guns. Thats how we Got Meth and other drugs off the street!

Not at all. Please show me where I said that. I would just like to see the NRA of the 1970s come back that supported logical gun rules and marksmanship. I would also like to see mental health more accessible. Don't know why that's revolutionary.

[olevetonahill]

Not at all. Please show me where I said that. I would just like to see the NRA of the 1970s come back that supported logical gun rules and marksmanship. I would also like to see mental health more accessible. Don't know why that's revolutionary.

Theres more than enough "Logical Gun Rules" what we have is an Over abundance of Crazy and a Small amount of treatment options for those Crazy mother ****ers.

[FaninAma]

Nice repetitive dodge of the pledge and currency issue, keep up the solid work. Well done on ignoring no mention of Christ in our founding document. So what are you saying, the colonial flock engaged in willful gullibility w/ regards to scripture and republicanism? Sure it played a role, but the idea this is a Christian nation is what is absurd. It was republic free from the dogma of religion. When rationalism met religion, the founders more often than not differed to rationalism.
Oh c'mon now. The only dodge in our discussion was you trying to divert the focus on Thomas Paine's regiligious beliefs. Heck, some historians think he may have been an antheist. But he was a politician and he understood the most powerful social force in the country was fundamentalist Christianity so, like any good politician he set about trying to harness that force to help his cause.

Almost every major social change or foreign endeavor this country undertook through WWII was done largely through mobilizing Christians in this country behind that effort from the Revolutionary War to the Westward expansion/ manifest destiny, to the Civil War to WWII against the non-Christian Japanese/Nazis to the Civil Rights movement. Even the country's roots of pushing an educated public has its rootsin the Church's roll in the Old and New worlds of combining missionary work with the education of populations they were reaching out to.

Again, any claim that this country wasn't founded largely on Christian principles/efforts is revisionist dribble. And watch what happens now when the progressives try to mobilize the country behind an issue without getting the support of the Christian community. Without a spiritual core a country is just a hollow shell without any will to do difficult things.

[yermom]

He didn't have to beg them. A beta male like yourself was voted out and a Alpha male was voted in. They knew the difference.

so he just gave them arms for no reason?

[REDREX]

Until the nra gets out of the GOP'S Pockets this is the Wild West that we live in. I just wish we would allow crazy people as much acces to mental health as we do to firearms.---Talk to the ACLU about how hard they have helped make it to force people into mental health facilities so they can be helped---- http://mentalillnesspolicy.org/myths/aclu-mental-health-liberties.html

[olevetonahill]

so he just gave them arms for no reason?

Yer right. Iran had so much trust ina wannabe President that they went against a Sittin Pres to Make Reagan look good so that he He would Give them weapons, After he was elected.
WTH ! You smoking some strange stuff in yer peace Pipe Bro.

[SicEmBaylor]

While I agree we need better mental healthcare in this country, I can't think of a single mass-shooting occurrence where greater mental healthcare would have made a difference. Adam Lanza comes close. The problem is that you have to legally demonstrate a person is a threat to themselves or society. None of these shooters met that definition prior to their rampage -- again, Lanza came close. You can't just deprive someone of their constitutional right to own a firearm or deny them their liberty because they have some sort of mental health problem. You also can't force them into treatment; they have to recognize they have a problem and want to be treated.

The fact is, we have a Constitutional right to own firearms. Here's the truth of the situation: We live in a free country (ostensibly) with 320 million people. These sort of mass shooting events seem more frequent than they are because of the media attention they get. It's actually incredibly rare, and the chances of being shot in such an event are minuscule. You have to accept the fact that these sorts of things are going to happen in any free society -- there's no way to prevent it. You can ban guns and have the best mental facilities in the world, but this would still happen in some shape, form, or fashion. Suggesting Americans be deprived of one of their most sacred Constitutional rights, because of the actions of a very small percentage of the population, is simply unjust.

The real problem is a growing lack of respect for the sanctity of human life and a culture that is increasingly narcissistic.

[yermom]

I think that slightly misses the point of the mental health aspect of the argument, but in the end I agree.

If someone wants to kill some people they will find a way

And then media outlets will make them a household name for a few months, just like they wanted.

[SicEmBaylor]

And then media outlets will make them a household name for a few months, just like they wanted.

They give the bastards exactly what they could never have otherwise, fame and notoriety. That goes back to my point about a narcissistic culture. Everyone has to have that fame and some people do whatever they can to get it. What's interesting is that there were mass shootings before Columbine, but Columbine really seems to be case-zero in all of this. The Columbine shooters, I believe, had what they believed were legitimate beefs with classmates. They were seeking retribution not necessarily fame. So many shootings after that weren't really about how the shooters were treated at school or by the community -- it was all about garnering fame.

People are ****ed up. I keep hoping these people will eat a bullet alone in a basement somewhere and stop taking dozens of innocents with them.

[Soonerjeepman]

While I agree we need better mental healthcare in this country, I can't think of a single mass-shooting occurrence where greater mental healthcare would have made a difference. Adam Lanza comes close. The problem is that you have to legally demonstrate a person is a threat to themselves or society. None of these shooters met that definition prior to their rampage -- again, Lanza came close. You can't just deprive someone of their constitutional right to own a firearm or deny them their liberty because they have some sort of mental health problem. You also can't force them into treatment; they have to recognize they have a problem and want to be treated.

The fact is, we have a Constitutional right to own firearms. Here's the truth of the situation: We live in a free country (ostensibly) with 320 million people. These sort of mass shooting events seem more frequent than they are because of the media attention they get. It's actually incredibly rare, and the chances of being shot in such an event are minuscule. You have to accept the fact that these sorts of things are going to happen in any free society -- there's no way to prevent it. You can ban guns and have the best mental facilities in the world, but this would still happen in some shape, form, or fashion. Suggesting Americans be deprived of one of their most sacred Constitutional rights, because of the actions of a very small percentage of the population, is simply unjust.

The real problem is a growing lack of respect for the sanctity of human life and a culture that is increasingly narcissistic.

abortion? I know, it's just a blob of goo until X amount weeks...but you don't think that 90% of people think "a baby" when someone says they are pregnant? Then I go back to your point of respecting life. Not just of the unborn but of anyone.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Back to the original question at hand: has Megan Kelly disproved Trump's assertion yet?

[Serenity Now]

Back to the original question at hand: has Megan Kelly disproved Trump's assertion yet?

Which assertion? I think Kelly came out looking good on this thing.

[FaninAma]

abortion? I know, it's just a blob of goo until X amount weeks...but you don't think that 90% of people think "a baby" when someone says they are pregnant? Then I go back to your point of respecting life. Not just of the unborn but of anyone.
When a mother can end the life of her unborn child it does make it easier for the secularists to rationalize other forms or euthanasia and life terminations.

[dwarthog]

Which assertion? I think Kelly came out looking good on this thing.

She was looking just fine before this too, IMHO.

[champions77]

I think that slightly misses the point of the mental health aspect of the argument, but in the end I agree.

If someone wants to kill some people they will find a way

And then media outlets will make them a household name for a few months, just like they wanted.

You are exactly right. Absent a gun, then a knife? A bomb? A car driven into a group of people? With 300 million guns and rifles in this country, confiscating someone's guns would make rounding up 11 Million lawbreakers look easy. So they next time some nutjob kills someone, Mr. President, let's not use that as a political tool to push your agenda. Let's free up some funds for mental health by putting non-violent offenders in some type of community service, or a fine, and begin to institutionalize the mentally ill, at least the ones that are prone to violent behavior, like the crazy nut son that stabbed his Dad to death at the Braum's in OKC a week or so ago. He was acutely insane, and everyone knew it. But he was allowed to roam the streets and now Oklahoma has a dead Labor Commissioner to show for it.
With the billions we spend on illegals in this country every year, it would be nice to spend that money on mental health, instead of educating, incarcerating and providing medical treatment to those breaking our laws.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Which assertion? I think Kelly came out looking good on this thing.

That she was on the rag that particular evening.

[Serenity Now]

With the billions we spend on illegals in this country every year, it would be nice to spend that money on mental health, instead of educating, incarcerating and providing medical treatment to those breaking our laws. Good point.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

That she was on the rag that particular evening.sez you.That was the interpretation of those who want to take Trump out. Who is your candidate?

[Serenity Now]

That she was on the rag that particular evening.

She simply confronted Trump for stuff that some of you were already critical of him regarding. In short, he says crap that gets him in trouble. Look at the blowup that he had with the Univision journalist. In three minutes he had mis-remembered what had happened in the blow up. I think they were both a little out of line. I don't think Kelly asked him anything that a public person like himself, who's done TV as much as he has, should be able to ask.

[Tear Down This Wall]

sez you.That was the interpretation of those who want to take Trump out. Who is your candidate?

None. I don't register to vote anymore. I work for a living, so none of them want anything to do with me.

[okie52]

She simply confronted Trump for stuff that some of you were already critical of him regarding. In short, he says crap that gets him in trouble. Look at the blowup that he had with the Univision journalist. In three minutes he had mis-remembered what had happened in the blow up. I think they were both a little out of line. I don't think Kelly asked him anything that a public person like himself, who's done TV as much as he has, should be able to ask.

I guess Ramos couldn't remember his own name because it was never called.

The videos showed what happened in the Ramos incident. Ramos thought he was "entitled" cut in front of other journalists and then continue to speak over the other journalists while being disruptive to the press conference. Thank goodness security showed him the door.

Ramos can hardly be described as a journalist...activist would be a better fit.

[champions77]

I guess Ramos couldn't remember his own name because it was never called.

The videos showed what happened in the Ramos incident. Ramos thought he was "entitled" cut in front of other journalists and then continue to speak over the other journalists while being disruptive to the press conference. Thank goodness security showed him the door.

Ramos can hardly be described as a journalist...activist would be a better fit.
Amen 52. You know there is something wrong when an "activist" like Ramos can come to a press conference and exude a self righteous, indignation of Donald Trump's position, all the while he supports millions that have come here, disrespecting our laws, fully aware of the US laws they were breaking, knowing the potential existed for them to be deported, and somehow Trump is the bad guy in all of this? Ramos has transitioned the wrongdoers from the illegals to those that would choose to enforce US Laws. Amazing when you think of it. Ramos should be operating from a position of weakness, not strength. But our wonderful media, and of course the left, makes him out to be the good guy somehow.

Deport 11 million? No problem, they will leave on their own? How? Employers in the US that knowingly hire illegals are in my mind "accomplices" in the crime, and therefore should be dealt with as criminals. If an employer is found to employ someone here illegally, then they will be subject to a huge fine, say $10,000. I would increase the number of Border patrol agents, and cycle them on and off the border. While not on the border, they can check on businesses to see if they are in compliance. You would not have to fine many businesses in order for employers to learn that the US Government is serious for a change about border enforcement. They would cease hiring illegals and would lay them off, not choosing to take that risk. This could be done in phases over time that would allow employers to find replacement employees.

Before this is set into motion, build that fence!!

[Serenity Now]

I guess Ramos couldn't remember his own name because it was never called.

The videos showed what happened in the Ramos incident. Ramos thought he was "entitled" cut in front of other journalists and then continue to speak over the other journalists while being disruptive to the press conference. Thank goodness security showed him the door.

Ramos can hardly be described as a journalist...activist would be a better fit.

That's why I give him part blame. It's not like Trump was going to call on him. And, I wouldn't blame Trump for not calling on him.

[okie52]

That's why I give him part blame. It's not like Trump was going to call on him. And, I wouldn't blame Trump for not calling on him.

But Trump later let him back into the news conference and did take questions from ramos. I wish he hadn't have let ramos back into the meeting. He didn't deserve it.

[okie52]

Amen 52. You know there is something wrong when an "activist" like Ramos can come to a press conference and exude a self righteous, indignation of Donald Trump's position, all the while he supports millions that have come here, disrespecting our laws, fully aware of the US laws they were breaking, knowing the potential existed for them to be deported, and somehow Trump is the bad guy in all of this? Ramos has transitioned the wrongdoers from the illegals to those that would choose to enforce US Laws. Amazing when you think of it. Ramos should be operating from a position of weakness, not strength. But our wonderful media, and of course the left, makes him out to be the good guy somehow.

Deport 11 million? No problem, they will leave on their own? How? Employers in the US that knowingly hire illegals are in my mind "accomplices" in the crime, and therefore should be dealt with as criminals. If an employer is found to employ someone here illegally, then they will be subject to a huge fine, say $10,000. I would increase the number of Border patrol agents, and cycle them on and off the border. While not on the border, they can check on businesses to see if they are in compliance. You would not have to fine many businesses in order for employers to learn that the US Government is serious for a change about border enforcement. They would cease hiring illegals and would lay them off, not choosing to take that risk. This could be done in phases over time that would allow employers to find replacement employees.

Before this is set into motion, build that fence!!

Absolutely Champs!!!

[okie52]

http://i.imgur.com/Ul8H6B1.jpg

[okie52]

https://i.imgur.com/KoIAnGb.jpg

[champions77]

Another thing, when does it become an embarrassment for the Mexican government for their people to want to leave their country?

It seems like the patriotic ones are already here, waving Mexican flags in our face. A school in California raises a Mexican flag over the American flag on the flagpole?

Obey our damn laws!!!!!!

Strength in numbers. Used to be they were in the shadows, working, getting paid, laying low, because they recognized that they were breaking our laws. Through pinheads like Ramos and some in the left, have they gotten brazen with their demands.

I didn't hear what was discussed when Trump let him back in, but Trump could have really questioned him about breaking our laws, and asking Ramos if it was true that he was for open borders? Trump has the position of strength, not Ramos.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

But Trump later let him back into the news conference and did take questions from ramos. I wish he hadn't have let ramos back into the meeting. He didn't deserve it.You can COUNT ON the Left not appreciating that Trump did let him back in AND answered his questions.

[Turd_Ferguson]

I didn't hear what was discussed when Trump let him back in, but Trump could have really questioned him about breaking our laws, and asking Ramos if it was true that he was for open borders? Trump has the position of strength, not Ramos.Horgay never asked questions, he was doing nothing but making statements.

[okie52]

Horgay never asked questions, he was doing nothing but making statements.

But he was "entitled" to make those statements.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Another thing, when does it become an embarrassment for the Mexican government for their people to want to leave their country?

It seems like the patriotic ones are already here, waving Mexican flags in our face. A school in California raises a Mexican flag over the American flag on the flagpole?

Obey our damn laws!!!!!!

Strength in numbers. Used to be they were in the shadows, working, getting paid, laying low, because they recognized that they were breaking our laws. Through pinheads like Ramos and some in the left, have they gotten brazen with their demands.

I didn't hear what was discussed when Trump let him back in, but Trump could have really questioned him about breaking our laws, and asking Ramos if it was true that he was for open borders? Trump has the position of strength, not Ramos.

Never. The answer here is, never.

All over the world, people from sh*tty countries are trying to get into countries which have been run properly. Look at the immigration problem they are having now in Europe with the Syrians and Libyans.

These people do not fight for their rights. Many, many decades ago, we would have come to their aid. That all ended after we saved half of Korea, then sent military to Vietnam without declaring war.

We carry the biggest stick, but have become p*ssies. Ditto the majority of Europe. And, when you become a p*ssy, then tend to get f*cked over. These other counties - Mexico, Syria, etc. - they could care less. They don't care that our economy is paralyzed by the influx of their ignorant masses.

Mexico is the poster country for "We Don't Give A Sh*t About Our People - Never Have, Never Will." They may as well write it on their worthless pesos.

[champions77]

Never. The answer here is, never.

All over the world, people from sh*tty countries are trying to get into countries which have been run properly. Look at the immigration problem they are having now in Europe with the Syrians and Libyans.

These people do not fight for their rights. Many, many decades ago, we would have come to their aid. That all ended after we saved half of Korea, then sent military to Vietnam without declaring war.

The carry the biggest stick, but have become p*ssies. Ditto the majority of Europe. And, when you become a p*ssy, then tend to get f*cked over. These other counties - Mexico, Syria, etc. - they could care less. They don't care that our economy is paralyzed by the influx of their ignorant masses.

Mexico is the poster country for "We Don't Give A Sh*t About Our People - Never Have, Never Will." They may as well write in on their worthless pesos.

Bravo. Well stated.
obeying the rule of law. Why that is not so important any more is part and parcel why we've lost our way. Why we no longer have politicians that can be trusted, because they are accomplices to this lawlessness. How a radical goof like Ramos can show up and defend his position, a position of supporting law breakers, would have not been tolerated 20 years ago. He would have been arrested 20 years ago, and deported.
How anyone, on the left or right, could see this situation, the innocents that are murdered, or maimed, robbed, the cost they inflict on already overburdened budgets at all levels, and we do nothing.
Have you heard one politician echo my solution to the problem? After an adequate warning, fine businesses that hire illegals. If jobs are the carrot, then take away the carrot. Make it too risky to hire an illegal. It would not take but a few fines per community for the word to spread, and the employers would let them go, knowing that if caught, then the fines may very well bankrupt the company. That's how you rid the country of a majority of illegals.
But first build that damn wall!!!!!

[okie52]

Never. The answer here is, never.

All over the world, people from sh*tty countries are trying to get into countries which have been run properly. Look at the immigration problem they are having now in Europe with the Syrians and Libyans.

These people do not fight for their rights. Many, many decades ago, we would have come to their aid. That all ended after we saved half of Korea, then sent military to Vietnam without declaring war.

The carry the biggest stick, but have become p*ssies. Ditto the majority of Europe. And, when you become a p*ssy, then tend to get f*cked over. These other counties - Mexico, Syria, etc. - they could care less. They don't care that our economy is paralyzed by the influx of their ignorant masses.

Mexico is the poster country for "We Don't Give A Sh*t About Our People - Never Have, Never Will." They may as well write in on their worthless pesos.

But Mexico certainly gives a **** about it's people in the US.

[Tear Down This Wall]

But Mexico certainly gives a **** about it's people in the US.

Of course...their crappy economy depends on the remittances.

Mexico gets more in remittances than it does from direct foreign investments: http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Rising-Remittances-Surpass-Foreign-Investment-in-Mexico-20150604-0013.html

Pathetic.

[okie52]

Of course...their crappy economy depends on the remittances.

Mexico gets more in remittances than it does from direct foreign investments: http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Rising-Remittances-Surpass-Foreign-Investment-in-Mexico-20150604-0013.html

Pathetic.

Agreed.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

All over the world, people from sh*tty countries are trying to get into countries which have been run properly. Look at the immigration problem they are having now in Europe with the Syrians and Libyans.

These people do not fight for their rights. Many, many decades ago, we would have come to their aid. That all ended after we saved half of Korea, then sent military to Vietnam without declaring war.

We carry the biggest stick, but have become p*ssies. Ditto the majority of Europe. And, when you become a p*ssy, then tend to get f*cked over. These other counties - Mexico, Syria, etc. - they could care less. They don't care that our economy is paralyzed by the influx of their ignorant masses.

Mexico is the poster country for "We Don't Give A Sh*t About Our People - Never Have, Never Will." They may as well write it on their worthless pesos.Unfortunately true. We are being invaded, and aren't responding to it.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Unfortunately true. We are being invaded, and aren't responding to it.

Respond to it? We are inviting it!

Chamber of Commerce and RINO's of all stripe support illegals being given a "pathway" to citizenship. It's a given that Democrats want it because these are the type of immigrants who get on welfare, CHIP, housing vouchers, and a host of other things that they peddle on the taxpayer's dime.

All Trump has done is tapped into the deep vein of resentment it has caused. He's not affiliated with either party, so he can draw from those on both sides who are fed up with it; and, particularly GOP-types who are tired of the Bushes, Doles, McCains, and Romneys being thrown at them - total wet rag candidates who fold at the first sight of a journalist who might write something or say something bad about them.

Trump doesn't care with the half-witted journalists ask, say, or write. He knows they are simply as pumped full of the same Capitol Hill crap as the Republicans and Democrats.

Plus, Trump isn't a total dickfutz like a Green Party or Libertarian candidate. In other words, he can actually carry on a conversation that normal people across a broad range of backgrounds can understand.

In other words, Trump is not a man with a vagina, like a Ralph Nader or Rand Paul...two complete prisses who can only be understood by their hopelessly sexless followers who couldn't get laid if you spotted them Bill Cosby's jar of magic quaaludes and Sebastian Janokowski's last bottle of GHB!

[champions77]

I tell you the politicians, employers, Chamber of Commerces, news media, all who have hand in this lawlessness, and then attack those that call them out for it.....you sorry sobs. If they had their way, we would look like a third world country. Where do they see this going? How can they think that ignoring our laws is good?

My first act as President would be to cut off ALL federal funds to sanctuary cities, every dime, every one. That would be on day one of my administration. Next I would call a press conference and would tell the Nation that I was going to push forward new legislation that invoked a fine for employers that chose to disregard the laws in their hiring of employees. Next I would meet with Congressional leaders to devise the very best way to enforce our border, utilizing fencing, drones, rapid response teams, satellite imagery, and land mines. Next would be meeting with the Presidents of nations who citizens have been violating our laws. Any countries that are not assisting in this endeavor, will have any foreign aide payments abated immediately. Continuing to see their citizens in the US illegally would be met with trade restrictions.

I don't get it, never will.

[SicEmBaylor]

Immigration is a national and social cancer that needs to be cut out before it kills its host. It isn't enough to protect the border and end sanctuary cities. All immigration, legal or otherwise, must be stopped. End immigration including the student visa program. Treat illegal immigration as an aggressive invasion by a foreign power and act accordingly -- with the military if necessary. Not another illegal step on our soil.

[champions77]

Immigration is a national and social cancer that needs to be cut out before it kills its host. It isn't enough to protect the border and end sanctuary cities. All immigration, legal or otherwise, must be stopped. End immigration including the student visa program. Treat illegal immigration as an aggressive invasion by a foreign power and act accordingly -- with the military if necessary. Not another illegal step on our soil.

+1 . Most countries treat people there illegally as invaders, or worse spies. You recall the three knuckleheads that ventured into I believe Iran. They were treat initially as spies, and there were fears that they would be executed as such. In Mexico, they file felony charges on you if you are there without proper documentation. You recall how they treated the Marine that accidentally took the wrong turn. Put him in some crappy jail cell for what six months?
So how do we treat our invaders? Shower them with government benefits, education, welfare, medical care and jobs.
If the US is not the most stupid country in the world today, I would like to know who is?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I tell you the politicians, employers, Chamber of Commerces, news media, all who have hand in this lawlessness, and then attack those that call them out for it.....you sorry sobs. If they had their way, we would look like a third world country. Where do they see this going? How can they think that ignoring our laws is good?

My first act as President would be to cut off ALL federal funds to sanctuary cities, every dime, every one. That would be on day one of my administration. Next I would call a press conference and would tell the Nation that I was going to push forward new legislation that invoked a fine for employers that chose to disregard the laws in their hiring of employees. Next I would meet with Congressional leaders to devise the very best way to enforce our border, utilizing fencing, drones, rapid response teams, satellite imagery, and land mines. Next would be meeting with the Presidents of nations who citizens have been violating our laws. Any countries that are not assisting in this endeavor, will have any foreign aide payments abated immediately. Continuing to see their citizens in the US illegally would be met with trade restrictions.

I don't get it, never will.Send that post to Trump, Cruz, Carson, Fiorina and Walker.

[champions77]

Send that post to Trump, Cruz, Carson, Fiorina and Walker.

No comment on my "land mines"?

[olevetonahill]

No comment on my "land mines"?

This been my response for years LOL

http://www.flashrolls.com/shooting-games/Border-Patrol-Flash-Game.htm

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Quote Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
Send that post to Trump, Cruz, Carson, Fiorina and Walker.
No comment on my "land mines"?I sorta glossed over that part. You might want to scrub it in the forwarded message.

[champions77]

Quote Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
Send that post to Trump, Cruz, Carson, Fiorina and Walker.I sorta glossed over that part. You might want to scrub it in the forwarded message.

Oh gosh I was just kidding. Wanted to see if anyone would catch it. I'm afraid the ranchers along the Rio Grande would have a problem with it.

[Serenity Now]

Oh gosh I was just kidding. Wanted to see if anyone would catch it. I'm afraid the ranchers along the Rio Grande would have a problem with it.

I think the issue is that no one thought you were kidding and it didn't raise any eyebrows. The trumping down of America. :)

[yermom]

That's the thing though. The only way to keep Mexicans out would be the kinda wall that keeps North Koreans in.

[olevetonahill]

That's the thing though. The only way to keep Mexicans out would be the kinda wall that keeps North Koreans in.

Do you see a horde trying to ESCAPE the US?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Quote Originally Posted by champions77
Oh gosh I was just kidding. Wanted to see if anyone would catch it. I'm afraid the ranchers along the Rio Grande would have a problem with it.
I think the issue is that no one thought you were kidding and it didn't raise any eyebrows. The trumping down of America. :)No, Sparky, I actually did just gloss over that, didn't really notice it. You are a broken person.

[Serenity Now]

Quote Originally Posted by champions77
Oh gosh I was just kidding. Wanted to see if anyone would catch it. I'm afraid the ranchers along the Rio Grande would have a problem with it.No, Sparky, I actually did just gloss over that, didn't really notice it. You are a broken person.
A. Learn how to use the internets and quote right. You're better than that.
2. You are merely one of many here who glossed over it. I didn't mention you. The lady doth protest too much me thinks.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

A. Learn how to use the internets and quote right. You're better than that.
2. You are merely one of many here who glossed over it. I didn't mention you. The lady doth protest too much me thinks.Please just stop. Post less.

[TAFBSooner]

Immigration is a national and social cancer that needs to be cut out before it kills its host. It isn't enough to protect the border and end sanctuary cities. All immigration, legal or otherwise, must be stopped. End immigration including the student visa program. Treat illegal immigration as an aggressive invasion by a foreign power and act accordingly -- with the military if necessary. Not another illegal step on our soil.

Fixed it for the Chief

[Serenity Now]

Fixed it for the Chief

7/32 of me is laughing at that. 25/32 doesn't think you're that funny. :|

I love the "Fighting Counter-terrorism since 1492" shirts.

[TAFBSooner]

Do you see a horde trying to ESCAPE the US?

More Mexican citizens left the US than entered during the years after the 2008 recession. But not quite a horde of them; just about 900,000 (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/04/23/net-migration-from-mexico-falls-to-zero-and-perhaps-less/).

[Tear Down This Wall]

Do you see a horde trying to ESCAPE the US?

Thank you. Lefties forget this point. Nephew #2, who goes to University of Chicago and thinks he's smarter than everyone else, constantly bitches and moans about U.S. involvement in Vietname, Middle East, etc.

I always ask him whether the South Koreans think we were improperly involved in letting the communist completely take over their country. That clams him up for a few seconds.

You are correct, wall in Korea has a completely different function that wall between U.S. and Mexico does. We're trying to keep more Mexicans out, not trap Americans in. Anyone with a firm grasp of history instead of their pecker would know that comparison is apples and oranges.

[SoonerProphet]

Thank you. Lefties forget this point. Nephew #2, who goes to University of Chicago and thinks he's smarter than everyone else, constantly bitches and moans about U.S. involvement in Vietname, Middle East, etc.

I always ask him whether the South Koreans think we were improperly involved in letting the communist completely take over their country. That clams him up for a few seconds.

You are correct, wall in Korea has a completely different function that wall between U.S. and Mexico does. We're trying to keep more Mexicans out, not trap Americans in. Anyone with a firm grasp of history instead of their pecker would know that comparison is apples and oranges.

Talk about apples and oranges. South Korea requests involvement, Iraq...not so much.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Talk about apples and oranges. South Korea requests involvement, Iraq...not so much.

Of course not...how many dictators do you know that asked to be overthrown?

[okie52]

More Mexican citizens left the US than entered during the years after the 2008 recession. But not quite a horde of them; just about 900,000 (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/04/23/net-migration-from-mexico-falls-to-zero-and-perhaps-less/).


This just proves illegals will self deport.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Trump and all the other R candidates signed with the GOP to not go 3rd party if they don't win the R candidacy.(I hope that included Rand Paul)! Talk amongst ourselves...

[SicEmBaylor]

Oh gosh I was just kidding. Wanted to see if anyone would catch it. I'm afraid the ranchers along the Rio Grande would have a problem with it.

You may be kidding about placing land mines on the southern border, but I'm not.

[TAFBSooner]

You may be kidding about placing land mines on the southern border, but I'm not.

SicEm, IIRC you are against all immigration, legal or illegal, even from Europe. And you base this on protecting ideals we inherited from the Enlightenment. Don't European countries have a similar heritage of Enlightenment ideals?

[SoonerProphet]

Trump sounded like an idiot in his interview with Hewitt. Doesn't know the difference between Quds or Kurds, nor the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. He is Prez Camacho from Idiocracy.

[Serenity Now]

Trump sounded like an idiot in his interview with Hewitt. Doesn't know the difference between Quds or Kurds, nor the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. He is Prez Camacho from Idiocracy.

He can't say anything that hurts him. He is an article from The Onion.

[olevetonahill]

Trump sounded like an idiot in his interview with Hewitt. Doesn't know the difference between Quds or Kurds, nor the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. He is Prez Camacho from Idiocracy.


He can't say anything that hurts him. He is an article from The Onion.

He would still make a better Pres. than this thing !
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NJxmpTMGhU0/hqdefault.jpg

[SicEmBaylor]

SicEm, IIRC you are against all immigration, legal or illegal, even from Europe. And you base this on protecting ideals we inherited from the Enlightenment. Don't European countries have a similar heritage of Enlightenment ideals?

Yes. Conservatism, in my view, has always been about preserving and protecting those original European/Scottish Enlightenment principles that birthed the nation. Classical liberalism. However, Europe has progressed well beyond those original principles. I've always said we should protect the heritage of the Enlightenment, but I never said we should continue to adopt European social and political change.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

He would still make a better Pres. than this thing !
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NJxmpTMGhU0/hqdefault.jpg
"I don't feel no ways tired"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRoEpYuHwI

[Serenity Now]

"I don't feel no ways tired"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRoEpYuHwI

Lordy, Lordy, Ms. Scarlett...I don't know nothing 'bout birthin' no babies!

[hawaii 5-0]

"Ya puts a knife unda de bed and it cuts de pain."

5-0

[FaninAma]

I read about Trump's interview with Rolling Stone in which he essentially called Fiorina ugly. I really want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt and listen to what he says but he just keeps sticking his foot in his mouth. Eventually a lot of his supporters will find another candidate who supports the same things as most of Trump's supporters without coming off as a bufoon.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I read about Trump's interview with Rolling Stone in which he essentially called Fiorina ugly. I really want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt and listen to what he says but he just keeps sticking his foot in his mouth. Eventually a lot of his supporters will find another candidate who supports the same things as most of Trump's supporters without coming off as a bufoon.Who was it that wrote the review about Trump's interview? IOW, did he REALLY look like a bufoon, or was that the slant of the reviewer? Those that want to take him out will try to do it often and any way they can think of. I'm not saying I will vote for him, but I'm sure not saying I won't, either. Just keep an open mind and take in as much info as you see and hear. His fianancial independence is a VERY big deal.

[Serenity Now]

I read about Trump's interview with Rolling Stone in which he essentially called Fiorina ugly. I really want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt and listen to what he says but he just keeps sticking his foot in his mouth. Eventually a lot of his supporters will find another candidate who supports the same things as most of Trump's supporters without coming off as a bufoon.

On Fiorina: The magazine reported that Trump, leading in the polls among the Republican contenders, made the remarks while watching Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard Co chief executive, on television.

"Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?" Trump is quoted as saying. "I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?"

http://news.yahoo.com/trump-slights-rival-fiorinas-looks-look-face-020045190.html

He's WAY TOO concerned with looks. We all may think it but he has no filter. It's kind of scary.


My personal favorite: "I will be so good at the military, your head will spin" http://www.vox.com/2015/9/4/9260463/donald-trump-foreign-policy-hugh-hewitt

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/us/politics/donald-trump-likens-his-schooling-to-military-service-in-book.html?_r=0 "Mr. Trump said his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”

The folks I know that went to "Military Academy" were rich, spoiled little turds (no offense, Turd) who got into a butt load of trouble.

[FaninAma]

Who was it that wrote the review about Trump's interview? IOW, did he REALLY look like a bufoon, or was that the slant of the reviewer? Those that want to take him out will try to do it often and any way they can think of. I'm not saying I will vote for him, but I'm sure not saying I won't, either. Just keep an open mind and take in as much info as you see and hear. His fianancial independence is a VERY big deal.
He's just a product of modern culture. I am starting to question his temperment and ability to make smart choices. He doesn't need to say this garbage. I think he has ADHD and seems very impulsive like he can't control saying whatever fleeting thought enters his brain. If he would fine tune his message and attack people only on issues he would probably win. I don't think he can do that.

[Serenity Now]

He's just a product of modern culture. I am starting to question his temperment and ability to make smart choices. He doesn't need to say this garbage. I think he has ADHD and seems very impulsive like he can't control saying whatever fleeting thought enters his brain. If he would fine tune his message and attack people only on issues he would probably win. I don't think he can do that.

I'm gonna screw up your street cred...but, I agree with you.

[hawaii 5-0]

It's simple. Trump has no filter.

He never went to Politician Clown School.

He just went to Regular Clown School.

and was Summa Cum Laude.


5-0

[FaninAma]

I'm gonna screw up your street cred...but, I agree with you.
We probably agree on a lot of things in principle. Where I think we differ is that I refuse to allow my ideologic agreement with a person/candidate to blind me to the enormous character flaws that that person exhibits.

Bernie Sanders seems like an honest guy so I could see how a progressive could support him. Hillary is obviously dishonest and a liar. How any progressive could support her is beyond me. Trump is a clown and a liar. He has tapped into the anti-establishment anger in the GOP and some independents but he is untrustworthy. I tried to consider his current positions but I can't trust him. If I can't trust a person I am certainly not going to support him/her.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

We probably agree on a lot of things in principle. Where I think we differ is that I refuse to allow my ideologic agreement with a person/candidate to blind me to the enormous character flaws that that person exhibits.

Bernie Sanders seems like an honest guy so I could see how a progressive could support him. Hillary is obviously dishonest and a liar. How any progressive could support her is beyond me. Trump is a clown and a liar. He has tapped into the anti-establishment anger in the GOP and some independents but he is untrustworthy. I tried to consider his current positions but I can't trust him. If I can't trust a person I am certainly not going to support him/her.so Hillry or Bernie Sanders> Trump?......(snicker)

[FaninAma]

so Hillry or Bernie Sanders> Trump?......(snicker)
You're smarter than that. I won't support either candidate but I can at least see how a progressive who supports Sander's socialistic policies could vote for him since he seems to have some semblance of an ethical core.

I will not vote for Trump regardless. I will not cast my vote for an ADHD-afflicted, egotisitcal, opportunisitc buffoon who may very well turn around and start instituting the progressive principles he espoused as recently as a few years ago.

BTW, a recent poll revealed that 25% of GOP voters would not support Trump. 22% said they would not support Jeb. There is no way in hell that Trump could win the general election with that kind of negative sentiment from his own party.

[Turd_Ferguson]

http://utmbs8iu6w2vs3oz2ez0dj16.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Bernie.jpg

[yermom]

You're smarter than that. I won't support either candidate but I can at least see how a progressive who supports Sander's socialistic policies could vote for him since he seems to have some semblance of an ethical core.

I will not vote for Trump regardless. I will not cast my vote for an ADHD-afflicted, egotisitcal, opportunisitc buffoon who may very well turn around and start instituting the progressive principles he espoused as recently as a few years ago.

BTW, a recent poll revealed that 25% of GOP voters would not support Trump. 22% said they would not support Jeb. There is no way in hell that Trump could win the general election with that kind of negative sentiment from his own party.

Thanks for your vote for Sanders :)

[Turd_Ferguson]

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/62933040.jpg

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You're smarter than that. I won't support either candidate but I can at least see how a progressive who supports Sander's socialistic policies could vote for him since he seems to have some semblance of an ethical core.

I will not vote for Trump regardless.
BTW, a recent poll revealed that 25% of GOP voters would not support Trump. 22% said they would not support Jeb. There is no way in hell that Trump could win the general election with that kind of negative sentiment from his own party.I used to think you were smarter than THAT.

[FaninAma]

I used to think you were smarter than THAT.

Rush, there are several polls showing that anywhere from 20 to 30% of Republican voters will not support Trump if he gets the nomination. He can't win the election with those kinds of negative ratings. He may win the GOP nomination but he will lose a lot of needed support in the general election. He may pick some of that back up in an anti-Hillary vote if she is the candidate. If Biden is the candidate I think he cleans Trumps clock and will beat Trump by more than Obama beat McCain.

You and others have rightfully criticized the GOP establishment for saying one thing and doing another yet you are willing to give Trump a complete pass on his previous statements and record.

"Oh, sure Donald, I believe you this time when you say you are a changed person and have changed your opinions on just about everything. I just know you won't spuge in my mouth this time because as long as you tell me again how stupid the GOP leadership is and how ugly Carly Fiorina is I absolutely believe you. I love it when you whisper sweet nothings to me."

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

1) that poll is now. The election in november 2016. If Trump wins the nomination, we will know MUCH MORE a bout him then than we do now.
2)try to remember who will be opposing him from the D. They are all completely unacceptable.
3) get calm and quit trying to take out people long before it's time to vote.

Trump is so different and saying so many desirable things, it's far too soon to pretend you know for certain he's fraudulent. Also, the fact he's financially independent and not subject to monetary blackmail is indeed BIG!

[FaninAma]

1) that poll is now. The election in november 2016. If Trump wins the nomination, we will know MUCH MORE a bout him then than we do now.
2)try to remember who will be opposing him from the D. They are all completely unacceptable.
3) get calm and quit trying to take out people long before it's time to vote.

Trump is so different and saying so many desirable things, it's far too soon to pretend you know for certain he's fraudulent. Also, the fact he's financially independent and not subject to monetary blackmail is indeed BIG!

He has been in public life for 25 years. He will not reduce his negatives significantly with 9 more months of being a loud-mouthed insulting blowhard in public. Most resonable people, even if they like some of the things that he is saying, will get tired of his abrassiveness and the support he has now will start to fall. I really don't think he will ever poll above 45% in general election polls. If he gets the GOP nomination it will be a disaster and will probably even hurt the GOP in down the ballot races because he will motivate Democrats to go to the polls.

And one of the worst things he has done is to give Jeb an opening to remake himself as the anti-Trump candidate. Jeb's campaign waas dead in the water and all of the anti-establishment venom was directed at him. Now, voters who are turned off by Trump may be willing to hold their nose for Jeb if he can actually pull off the anti-Trump switch. Watch and see if this doesn't happen. I've already seen the media coming out with stories about how Jeb seems like the only candidate willing to confront Trump directly.

[okie52]

You're smarter than that. I won't support either candidate but I can at least see how a progressive who supports Sander's socialistic policies could vote for him since he seems to have some semblance of an ethical core.

I will not vote for Trump regardless. I will not cast my vote for an ADHD-afflicted, egotisitcal, opportunisitc buffoon who may very well turn around and start instituting the progressive principles he espoused as recently as a few years ago.

BTW, a recent poll revealed that 25% of GOP voters would not support Trump. 22% said they would not support Jeb. There is no way in hell that Trump could win the general election with that kind of negative sentiment from his own party.

The last polls I saw had Jeb's unfavorability numbers much higher than Trumps.

No doubt Trump's bombastic style is at times unnecessary. But I would vote for him any day over jeb, rubio, kasich, pataki, graham, christie, fiorina, huckabee, or perry...in fact I wouldn't for those people in the general election, either. Of course I wouldn't vote for the dems either.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Unlike some folks here, I am willing to let the candidacies play out. And, even if a freakin' RINO leads somehow, am not going to badmouth (at least not very much)the R candidates, since even the worst of them is better than any of the democrats, and I don't want to play even a small part in trying to personally destroy any candidate.

BTW, the D's are going to bring it bigtime to the polls for the presidential election, regardless of who the R's have for a candidate.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

If Trump gets the GOP nomination it will be a disaster and will probably even hurt the GOP in down the ballot races because he will motivate Democrats to go to the polls.

And one of the worst things he has done is to give Jeb an opening to remake himself as the anti-Trump candidate. Jeb's campaign waas dead in the water and all of the anti-establishment venom was directed at him. Now, voters who are turned off by Trump may be willing to hold their nose for Jeb if he can actually pull off the anti-Trump switch. Watch and see if this doesn't happen. I've already seen the media coming out with stories about how Jeb seems like the only candidate willing to confront Trump directly.pimpin' for Jeb are you?..bold move haha

(as if Trump is the enemy rather than Hilry, bernie, dunce biden or pocahantas)

[SicEmBaylor]

Unlike some folks here, I am willing to let the candidacies play out. And, even if a freakin' RINO leads somehow, am not going to badmouth (at least not very much)the R candidates, since even the worst of them is better than any of the democrats.

This is textbook brain dead stupidity and representative of the sort of voter that led the Founders to create a Republic with limited suffrage rather than a democracy with universal suffrage.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

This is textbook brain dead stupidity and representative of the sort of voter that led the Founders to create a Republic with limited suffrage rather than a democracy with universal suffrage.I'm not at all surprised that drew you out-one who believes in the electability of a third party candidate. haha. Sorry tiger, the universal suffrage types will be out in full force(likely over 100%) to vote for their gravy train candidate, the democrat.

[yermom]

I'm ready to vote for President Camacho

[Serenity Now]

I'm ready to vote for President Camacho
Of all of the people we have discussed, who's the most like CamoCho?