1 - 10 Next
The key sentence in this article was, "The head of the Sarasota Republican Party sided with the hysterical reactions and dissociated the Republican Party from my remarks." I expect our enemies to attack us. OF COURSE when they don't have rational arguments they will resort to lies and ridicule! The only other alternative is to concede the debate. What's depressing is how consistently and how quickly Republicans cave in to leftist rants. When conservatives attack liberals, fellow liberals defend him to the death. When liberals attack conservatives, other conservatives promptly abandon him, and usually join in the attack.
In response to:

WWJT: Who Would Jesus Torture?

mjohansen Wrote: Dec 16, 2014 5:10 PM
If Jesus would have been against waterboarding because it is contrary to God's love, then that means that opposition to waterboarding is a religious issue. So opposition to waterboarding is a violation of the principle of separation of church and state. If you're opposed to waterboarding, that's fine, but don't try to impose your religious beliefs on the rest of us.
In response to:

WWJT: Who Would Jesus Torture?

mjohansen Wrote: Dec 16, 2014 5:08 PM
I love it when liberals tell me that Jesus Christ never even lived, and then in the next sentence proceed to tell me what he thinks about this or that issue. If he didn't exist, then he didn't think anything about any issue.
In response to:

Ph.D.'s and other False Gods

mjohansen Wrote: Dec 16, 2014 5:01 PM
Hmm. If everyone followed the 10 Commandments, I don't see how we could end up not having a very good world. Given human nature, I don't see how that could happen without divine intervention, but Prager didn't say it could.
In response to:

Ph.D.'s and other False Gods

mjohansen Wrote: Dec 16, 2014 4:57 PM
Umm, it's a metaphor. I don't suppose that someone who is, say, consumed with greed, has made money his god in the literal sense that he believes that a dollar bill create the universe, inspired prophets, performs miracles, or will someday judge all people. But he can be said to have made it his god in the sense that he devotes his life to pursuing it, he believes that it has the power to make his life happy and unfulfilled, and he respects and honors it in a way that is an awful lot like the worship that Jew and Christians believe is due only to God. A Bible command not to worship other gods cannot possibly be understood to be referring to other actual, real gods, as the Bible clearly says that no such other gods exist. It must be talking about things that take the place of God.
In response to:

Tortured Reasoning

mjohansen Wrote: Dec 16, 2014 11:46 AM
"When people who volunteer to put their lives on the line in the military to defend this country ... see some headstrong politician in the White House throw away everything they fought for ... that can be galling to them and a deterrent to others who might otherwise take their place in the future." Of course. And that's why they do it. That's the goal. These people hate America and everything that it stands for, and they are trying to work from within to undermine it. Either that or they are complete raving lunatics who have no idea what they are doing. Give me any other rational explanation for their actions. It's one thing to say, "I think the means used by the military or the CIA were excessive and unacceptable, and we should never do that again." That's a reasonable conversation to have in a democracy. It's quite another thing to give away national security secrets, and to call for the arrest of people who did those things you don't approve of to protect the country, including your sorry hide. Especially when you voiced no objection at the time it was done, when you were cowering in fear in your bunker while they were out there on the front lines risking their lives to protect you.
I think the gimmick here is a little silly, but yes, I certainly get the point. It's mostly realistic and plausible. But that got me to thinking: If a liberal wrote this story, how would his fantasy scenario go? I'd guess it would include a lot of silly stuff: Red America rounding up homosexuals and executing them, re-instituting slavery (of course given that the Republican Party was founded on opposition to slavery while the Democrats went to war to preserve slavery, if the Republicans ever achieved sufficient power the first thing they would do would obviously be to re-instate slavery), etc. There'd surely be something about a war on women: legalizing rape or something. But on the more serious side, what would they suggest would be the great benefits of a true Blue America? Shut down all those terrible coal plants and convert to pure green energy? Do they really suppose that's practical? A foreign policy based on non-militarism, assuming that if we were just more trusting and less assertive that the rest of the world would just naturally respond in kind, and an era of universal peace love would inevitably and immediately follow? More generous welfare and unemployment benefits, a minimum wage of $25 an hour, and a redistributionist tax policy, naturally leading to an end to poverty and an economic golden age? I'm hard pressed to see how they think any of the policies they pursue would work in practice. Meanwhile Red America drowning in pollution, exploited by corrupt big business, etc? Well, I guess if all these policies made sense to me, by definition I'd be a liberal.
Who gets the most back in federal dollars and who is mooching off the system are not entirely the same thing. For example, I would put money paid in veterans' benefits in a very different category from welfare benefits to able-bodied people who have been receiving them for over 20 years. I'd put money paid to defense contractors who build weapons actually used to defend the country in a different category from subsidies green energy companies or bailouts to Detroit. (Not to say there isn't a lot of pork in defense contracts, but at least it's not ALL pork, there is some beef in there.) Etc. I freely admit that I have not studied the underlying numbers to see if such considerations change the results. Oh, and also, the fact that some number of people in a state live off government handouts does not mean that the people of the state as a whole favor such handouts. One company in a state that gets a huge subsidy because of the political shenanigans of a handful of people could seriously distort the numbers for that state, even if 99.99% of the people agree it's outrageous.
It's about time conservatives rejected these absurd attacks, rather than cowering and making excuses whenever a liberal shouts "racist" or "Nazi".
Any WW2 Nazi would have to be in their 80s or older by now. And someone who was an 18-year-old Nazi in WW2 probably wasn't a decision-maker, more likely he was a mindless follower. How many of these people are still alive? And meanwhile, people who owned slaves before the Civil War are still living the good life!
1 - 10 Next