Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

TEA PARTY: What we’re terrified by

Letter by Don Wilbur, University Place on Oct. 7, 2011 at 1:54 pm with 164 Comments »
October 7, 2011 1:54 pm

The Democrats’ character assassination has been recently practiced by Leonard Pitts. He states that the tea party has moved from annoying to outright “terrifying” (column, 9-28) and that it is a radical anti-government group.

I’m an 80-year-old tea party person who loves my government and demands fairness from my fellow citizens. The tea party and thinking citizens are terrified by character assassinations by sanctimonious media pundits; President Obama’s frivolous spending creating deficits of trillions leading to near bankruptcy; the Democrats’ war against business with spurious regulations leading to unemployment; secret and costly Obamacare and plans for more expensive liberal programs; Longview longshoremen’s terrorism;Wisconsin’s teachers costly trashing of their capital; open borders enabling illegal drugs, guns and people traffic; control of citizens by dictating light bulb use, etc.; and more taxes and fees.

In introducing President Obama recently, Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa Jr. stated we are at war with S.O.B.s (meaning the tea party). The tea party will continue its peaceful demonstrations with patriot songs and hymns and quietly derail Hoffa’s war in the voting booth.

 

Leave a comment Comments → 164
  1. Number of TEA Party participants arrested: 0

    Number of Wall Street protesters arrested: 800

    And who is the danger to law and order?

  2. Hey,
    I thought the tea party was made up of democrats, republicans, conservatives, liberals, and any other name you could come up with. Has this changed?

    If this is true, I would change the first sentence to Leonard Pitts’ character assassination of the tea party politicians and members. But come on, so few of our “leaders” in these parties have any character.

    I do find it interesting how there is some people out there who imply or even believe our borders only became a problem in 2008.

  3. tacoman1 says:

    If you look at Mr. Pitt’s column you will see that it is primarily the tea party and conservative republicans whom resort to character assassination to the point of not even showing a simple civil courtesy of calling the president by his own name. The public comments are there for all to see.
    Another think about Mr. Pitt’s column that you failed to point out that it was about the divisive nature and near violent tendencies that the extreme has shown. You comments do not address what was the true meaning and what was actually written.
    Regarding deficits it should be pointed out that in the first decade of this century the united states had a surplus.
    That surplus was squandered by the self proclaimed fiscal conservatives whom told us they knew how to create wealth and jobs. As history has shown that turned out to be a lie.
    Regarding regulations that hinder business for the most part regulations and the tax code allowing corporations to benefit have not changes and the simple truth is corporations are now sitting on record profits and cash reserves.
    Regarding regulations are you talking about the regulations that were put in place to stop wall street and the banks from further damaging our economy. Just a few short years ago we were literally at the edge of a complete and total melt down of the united states economy and a fast response was needed to stop the banks and wall street thieves from killing us.
    Regarding border control the issue existed prior to President Obama taking office and partisan politics on both sides has stopped any meaningful discussion on the issue.
    About light bulbs , really ? is that any different than the government banning leaded paint or gasoline.
    You mention union labor as a problem , but do not mention the anti union Kock brothers whom support conservative causes to the tune of millions of dollars.
    It really is time that all of us true Americans not just self proclaimed patriots stop the partisanship games and work together. Having said that if the ultra fiscal conservatives / republican tea party do not want to or for that matter the democrats than there will continue to be a divisive dirty little war amongst the citizenry.

  4. beerBoy says:

    And who is the danger to law and order?

    NYPD

  5. “I’m an 80-year-old tea party person who loves my government and demands fairness from my fellow citizens.”

    Until you corral some fairness for yourself, you have no right to demand it of others. You are truly living in a glass house, Mr Wilbur. Your letter is partisan goat tripe.

    Tacoma1: Your post was right on. Don’t mind Vox’s inane attempt to divert the attention from the content of your post, to grammar. Its a common tactic for conservative ideologues to flood the floor with extraneous information whenever their positions take a beating, or when they can’t understand an issue.

  6. bobcat1a says:

    When fascism comes to America, it will arrive wearing the flag and carrying a bible.

  7. aislander says:

    Actually, bobcat1a, fascism has arrived on Wall Street wearing filthy knit caps (left-wing movement that it is…).

    And there is no doubt that the TEA Party movement has been slandered. It is populated by the people who make America work, NOT a cadre of envious, destructive, rabble and their handlers…

  8. taxedenoughintacoma says:

    Great letter, best of the month.

    Think I will join the tea party instead of the wall street kooks

  9. Don I couldn’t agree more. You’ve managed to lift the lid so that the liberals can crawl out of their slime pit and attack your message. Tacom man 1 decries the point that conservatives do not show any respect to the current occupant of the White House. I would ask them, where was all of this concern when Bush was attacked by the media and all of the lefties on a daily basis, what goes around comes around. Obama has racked up more debt in three years than all other presidents combined, how is that Bush’s fault? When that mob in Times Square is asked “why are you here” most of them have no answer. Hispanics can’t even read the signs they are carrying. Some people have tried to draw and equivalency between the Tea Party and this bunch of losers. There are no similarities between the two.

  10. bobcat1a, when fascism comes to America it will occupy Wall Street and get a pass from the president.

    I have never been more proud to identify with the Tea Party.

  11. LarryFine says:

    This latest creation of George and Michael is going to be the sword in the side of “the one”…

  12. This may be a little off the track but I would include Comcast as a participant in most of this anti-American crap. They are major share holders in MSNBC and through that outlet, provide financial support for the rants of socialists such as Sharpton, O’Donnell, Matthews, Ratigan, and the rest of those commies. I for one am looking for an alternative to Comcast and have already cancelled my phone service with them.

  13. GHTaxPayer says:

    Mr. Wilbur is under-stating the obvious. The Dems and leech Libs are scared of the Tea Party becuase we took 93 seats in Congress away from them last November and we’ve been able to slow down the pain and misery being wrought on private business by Barack Obama and his Liberal scumbags.

    Barack Obama has accepted a RECORD HIGH amount of campaign bribes from Wall St. banks and he rewarded them with Dodd/Frank regulation which gave the big banks more power and less regulation with promise of more bailouts.

    So the “Occupy Wall St.” protesters should march to Wash DC and surround the White House. The real villain who has pushed more middle class into poverty & food stamps and who is killing the private sector resides there under the name of Barack Hussein Obama.

  14. Dave98373 says:

    The reality is both the right and the left despise the Tea Party because it is one more entity that which they must now deal with. Providing a fresh new approach by anything other than the usual elected suspects of both parties is indeed welcomed. If career politicians chose to demonize those folks in the Tea Party then they do so at their own risk. Because if the Tea Party gains more seats come next year, they (donkeys and elephants) will have no choice but to make room at the table for them. Especially if the economy continues to slide. As for Mr. Pitts…no one (even his own collegues) would ever consider his journalism as being anything remotely fair and honest.

  15. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Bb- please explain where the NYPD has shown anything but professionalism to these hippies looking for an excuse to protest anything?

    They say they hate Wall St. Why? Because of bailouts? The govt has basically broken even on money loaned to WS. Neither the taxpayer or the investor lost on TARP. If you are mad at croney capitalism, protest at GM, the UAW, or GE.

    Unemployment rate of college grads is less than 5%. Tons of govt money is available for the poor.

    They have no clear message, only excuses for not contributing to society. And people here look for a villain in the police. Pathetic. Ironically you find fault in the blue collar man working to support hid family and keep the community safe.

  16. Don et al – time to adjust your tin foil hats or you might miss the next conspiracy theory.

  17. beerBoy says:

    ct7 – there are several documented cases (with very clear video footage) showing cops pepper spraying, batoning, etc, protestors and members of the press who were already peaceful and contained – do a quick google search and you will find them.

    aislander – again with the knit hats caricaturing. You must be very afraid of this protest movement that is growing without the supplemental funding of the Koch Brothers

    The rise of the silver protester: Now senior citizens and veterans take to the streets in Occupy Wall Street demonstrations
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2046314/Occupy-Wall-Street-The-rise-silver-protester.html#ixzz1aC33SF30

  18. Flanagan says:

    Dying of laughter here…Vox…thank you for the who, whom lesson…to whom it may concern(tacoma1)….your misuse of th world was driving me going crazy !!!

  19. A bunch of my friends wanted to go to the demonstration and protest the Democratic National Convention in 1968. I took a look at the situation and declined.

    Then they all wanted to go to a Rolling Stones concert at Altamont Speedway. I heard that the Hells Angels were providing security and I declined.

    I was a naive 20 year old liberal opposed to the draft because my rear was on the line. I could articulate the unfairness of the draft and surprise, the country ended up agreeing with me. My brain still worked at the basic levels. What excuse do these “occupiers” have?

    Sorry, this is just a bunch of people who are too lazy to support themselves and don’t think they have to try. I cut my teeth on the protests of Berkeley and these bums down there using the streets as a crash pad wouldn’t know a real cause if it bit them on their noses.

  20. denismenis says:

    Don, you’re such a riot!

    Standard fare of propaganda – accuse the others of nefarious intent assume the role of victim, then launch into that very tactic.

    Textbook stuff, but quite shopworn.

    If the folks currently protesting start to pack heat to demonstrate their “freedom”, then I’ll agree with you.

  21. gerry0416 says:

    The Tea Party is nothing but a bunch of greedy old fools who want to make sure that everyone sacrifices so that their benefits (Social Security and Medicare)nwill not be touched.

  22. LarryFine says:

    A ‘friend” of mine once said something to the effect of ‘providing editied out of context video as proof of (fill in the blank) only adds to the fog of controversy’… hmmm
    … Koch ??? … no, Soros.

  23. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    …your misuse of th world was driving me going crazy !!!

    Might have been a typo, but that was pretty funny too, Flan – and so appropriate!

  24. KARDNOS says:

    Number of Wall Street protestors arrested on phone trumped up “trespassing” charges to have something to write about……800

  25. KARDNOS says:

    Oh…make that “phoney”

  26. KARDNOS says:

    80 year old TEA Party member……

    Hmmm…keep the government out of your Social Security and Medicare, right?

  27. KARDNOS says:

    pgroup says:
    October 8, 2011 at 8:06 am
    A bunch of my friends wanted to go to the demonstration and protest the Democratic National Convention in 1968. I took a look at the situation and declined.

    Then they all wanted to go to a Rolling Stones concert at Altamont Speedway. I heard that the Hells Angels were providing security and I declined.

    Since the two were about 2,000 miles apart…that was a good idea… unless you have really good shoes or lots of time on your hands

  28. KARDNOS says:

    How many guns were brought to the Wall Street Protests?

  29. Even if the tea partiers were trying to protect their benefit checks, what’s wrong with that? Is there really some doubt that those checks could continue AND the system get reformed?

    Lets get real here. The donkey party does not care about the next generation. If we had the foresight God gave us, we could have seen this coming because of their attitude towards the unborn. Regardless, they cannot be trusted with other people’s money.

    As far as the GOP goes, they think its more important to have the donkey party like them than to stand on thier platform planks.

    Nothing is left for the people except the tea party which is why it keeps growing (faster than the number of benefit check recipients is growing). The tea party will take over the GOP because the idiots in charge of the GOP haven’t got the sense God gave a snail. If they did, they would have refrained from the spending spree of the last decade trying to buy votes like the donkey party does.

    Now the tea party will do the job. The only question is how much damge will these dinosaur losers cause before they are ousted. If experience is any guide, they are like an embittered couple in a divorce who would each rather burn the house down than sell it and divide the profit.

    If the tea party inherits ashes, so be it. We’re Americans and building wealth from scratch is what we do.

  30. klthompson says:

    At least the Tea Party folks have the good sense to hold their demonstrations in the summer. One good cold snap will send these juveniles back to their dorms.

  31. aislander says:

    kitthompson: Sometime in June, I heard Van Jones tell Ed Schultz (yeah, I listen in on the enemy from time to time) to be on the lookout for “shock ‘n August,” and he was referring to what finally came about in October. These things are about as spontaneous as a sunset. Their inability to plan effectively is the only constant. So, this was MEANT to take place in summer, but…

  32. aislander says:

    I must agree with Flanagan: the left HAS misused the world…

  33. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Protesting Vietnam vs protesting general unhappiness that the govt does not give them everything they need to include a living wage. Not exactly the same.

    These are clowns. Go shave, take a shower, get an education if they do not have one, and get a job.

    Scholarships and loans for education are readily available. Admit it, these dirty, destructive losers are simply lazy and want material wealth handed to them.

    Bb- stop watching selective clips of the police reacting to these losers breaking the law and pushing the police to act. What motive does the NYPD have to act violent vs some d-bag gaining courage from the other d-bags pushing them to break the law? The police are protecting themselves and the public. The losers are just out for a good time and rebelling against daddy.

    Once again, odd that you choose the unemoyed losers with no excuse over a working man.

    And why Wall St bs GM or GE? The govt made money on WS to pay for more hand outs. The union involvement is front and center.

    Finally, in NYC you get more people lined up for the release of a new iPhone then these protests get. This story is overblown

  34. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    assassignation LMAO, I like that one too!

    Are you hittin’ the sauce a little early today, Kardy? Or are you intentionally misspelling as a means of drawing attention to yourself since your tactic of plastering separate post replies to individual right-thinkers is so laughably… astroturfed?

  35. aislander says:

    Medusa: Don’t patronize, you insufferable twerp. I know the history and the meaning of fascism far better than you do. It began as a coercive left-wing movement and it remains a coercive left-wing movement…

  36. aislander says:

    Vox: An assassignation is a portmanteau word meaning an appointment to perform an assassination, but is not as much fun as an ordinary assignation. I guess…

  37. bB, if you gave that simple-minded answer “NYPD” to the same question on any test of mine, I’d flunk you back to the third grade.

  38. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    LOL, thanks ai, one must never stop learning… I guess.

    And you get double gold stars for correct as well as contextual use of the word “portmanteau”. That should send our resident overly-imbibed hipstellectuals scrambling for the dictionary!

  39. Vox…there is a big difference between a typo and arguing decimal mathmatics

    The embarrassment got to you, huh?

    Here…..work on this one with your Conservative friends…

    “your” “you’re”

    or maybe “xx’s” favorite…..”Their”….

    You know…”their is a reason he misuses “their”…..

  40. I do it so you can find a reason to correct me karnos… their ya go…

  41. “assassignation?”, portmanteau?”, overly-imbibed histellectuals?”

    How’s about a little more content and a little less flowery lingo?

  42. tellnolies says:

    “I know the history and the meaning of fascism far better than you do. It began as a coercive left-wing movement and it remains a coercive left-wing movement..”

    Aparently yuu don’t.
    The Italians who created the coined the term were opposed to the leftists of their time, and considered Fascism, and themselves to be on the right. “Italian Fascists described fascism as a right-wing ideology in the political program The Doctrine of Fascism, stating: “We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the ‘right,’ a fascist century.”.[14][15] The majority of scholars generally consider fascism to be on the far right.[37][38][39][40]”

    You have every right to your opinion, but the facts remain what they are.

  43. aislander says:

    Fascism WAS the right wing…of socialism. Mussolini was editor of the socialist newspaper “Avanti” right up to the time of the schism with the communists over nationalism and WWI.

    The truth is, though, that fascism isn’t truly about ideology; it is about empowering the State to do what it wants to do, to make the trains run on time. To the extent, though that fascism WAS ideological, it hinged on national identity rather than internationalism. You know who accused Mussolini of being rightist? That would have been the communists, and they considered everyone who opposed them for any reason of being rightists.

    If Americans of the right are in favor of limiting the power of government, how–exactly–does that comport with the all-powerful government desired by fascists, communists, American progressives, and other leftists?

  44. aislander says:

    cirrus: “Assassignation” was a howler created by your coreligionist. Vox and I were merely having a little fun with it…

  45. aislander says:

    That should have read “…to be rightists.”

  46. tellnolies says:

    That is true, it is primarily concerned with nationalism. But they did proclaim THEMSELVES as on the right.

    Is there REALLY such a thing as a “RINO” :)

    Labelling right/left is sort of an excercise in futility, because the one’s definitioin of another is always based on one’s own perspective.

    As to “limited government”, most conservatives when they talk about limited government are only referring to the economy. Not all, of course, but that again points out the limited truth of broad brushing/labelling.

  47. aislander says:

    It is not true that fascists referred to themselves of being rightists. Mussolini always referred to himself as either a socialist or a fascist. Stalin (who also accused Trotsky of being of the right), as well as the Italian communists, made the accusation. In this country, interestingly enough, the socialist Norman Thomas was accused of being a rightist by American communists.

    Economic freedom is important, but I am also in favor of all freedoms that don’t result in someone’s fist contacting my nose…

  48. The Tea Party at one time may have been interested in fiscal responsibility, but no more. It has been coopted by the social conservatives, and it deals mainly with castigating anyone who is not a fundamentalist Christian as the enemy (including Mormons), passing laws to restrict freedom to vote for citizens, especially minorities and elderly voters, building up huge government bureaucracies to restrict citizens from having freedom of choice in medical procedures or recieving equal benefits of citizenship in the laws, and increasing spending on police-state procedures to try to catch a few illegal immigrants.

    Smaller government is just a smoke screen for restricting freedoms for those who are not Evangelical Christian, white and fianancially-connected in society.

  49. aislander says:

    I don’t really like the term “RINO,” tellnolies. If Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are part of the coalition that make Harry Reid the minority leader, I shall consider that a net plus and a big one. If primarying either or both ensures the election of a Dem, I shall consider that a bad strategy.

    However, if there is a safe choice between a more conservative candidate and a less conservative one, I’ll ALWAYS support the former, the point being to move the party and then the country in the direction of our founding principles…

  50. aislander says:

    Oh, tuddo: get outa here, you knucklehead…

  51. aislander says:

    …and I say that in the warmest possible way…

  52. tellnolies says:

    Benito Mussolini. Fascism: doctrine and institutions. Rome, Italy: Ardita Publishers, 1935. Pp. 26. Quote from the Doctrine of Fascism: “We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the ‘right,’ a fascist century.”

  53. tellnolies says:

    “I don’t really like the term “RINO,” tellnolies.”

    good….It says more about the person using it than it does the target, IMO

    I was really only using it to illustrate my point on labels and perspective

  54. If some of the people complaining about seniors collecting Social Secutity would look at how the Government saw that there was a lot of money that wasn’t being used,so they decided to put that money into the General fund so they could spend it however they chose.When S.S.was started,the average life span was for a man was 60 years and benefits didn’t start until he was 62 years of age!Any one else get the picture?Man has supprised the Government by out living the original estimates.The Govt.,I believe, will try to solve the problem,by raising the retirement age until no one,or very few will live long enough to be able to collect Of course,Congress will be exempted from this program and their situation will remain unscathed!

  55. aislander says:

    Nice find, tell! 1935 was a long time after the schism, though, and plenty of time for a “new normal” (like ten percent unemployment?) to be instituted. And there is no doubt that fascism, communism, and progressivism all sprang from common roots…

  56. beerBoy says:

    If Americans of the right are in favor of limiting the power of government, how–exactly–does that comport with…

    their support of Blue laws, enhanced “security” measures that infringe upon privacy, bigger and bigger military, etc.?

  57. aislander says:

    The most important vote a congressman or senator will cast is for leader of his particular body. That’s why it is possible to tolerate a Jim Jeffords, Arlen Specter, or Lincoln Chafee. “RINO” is accurate only in hindsight, since it is now obvious that the word pertains to all three of these gentlemen, none of whom remain Republicans.

    Party labels, though, don’t define ideology. It is up to the members of the party to remake it in the image they prefer. The Dems have done this, moving their party far to the left (moderate Dems are merely chameleons, in my opinion), and now the Republicans are remaking their party…

  58. aislander says:

    So…blue laws are enforced by the Federal government, are they beerBoy?

    There is a difference between “limited government” and “small government.” The Anti-Federalists were in favor of the latter, while the Federalists preferred the former. The Federalists won the argument. (With thanks to “Imprimus”)

    If one of the roles to which government is limited is national security–and it is–I would prefer that the role be fulfilled effectively…

  59. KARDNOS says:

    tellnolies says:
    October 8, 2011 at 12:38 pm
    “I know the history and the meaning of fascism far better than you do. It began as a coercive left-wing movement and it remains a coercive left-wing movement..”

    Aparently yuu don’t.

    You have every right to your opinion, but the facts remain what they are.”

    Tell……aislander thinks if he paints stripes on a horse, he owns a zebra

  60. aislander, the entire nation has moved to the right, including Dems. That party’s policies are right in line with Eisenhower, Rockefeller, Reagan’s policies (as opposed to his rhetoric – he ballooned the national debt, repeatedly raised taxes, signed abortion rights legislation and negotiated with terrorists in Iran), even Goldwater in his last two decades in the Senate.

    It is only in comparison to the extreme right of the current Republican party that the moderate Dems look vaguely “left”.

  61. Dave98373 says:

    The obvious and clear answer to helping Obama and his programs is to cut social security and medicare. The 60+ crowd have bilked us for way too long. The old timers need to wake up and realize that they are not immune to budget strains like the rest of America.

  62. aislander says:

    Dave98373: I agree that all Americans should share in cutting the deficit, both in the burden of taxation borne by each group, and in the number of cuts in government services they incur, but I also believe it does no good to pit one group of Americans against another. It is much better to persuade than insult…

  63. aislander says:

    …and it is much better to persuade than to incite hatred.

  64. “coreligionist?”

    You got lotsa schoolin, eh?

  65. beerBoy says:

    So…blue laws are enforced by the Federal government, are they beerBoy?

    DEA, ATF…..

  66. In reply to Daves comment,As a senior that paid into the S.S.system for 56 years,I was working at age 16 and retired at 67,I would like the income tax set at 10% on all your income,with no deductions for anything.This would take all of your income,No taking money under the table and give 10% to our thrifty Government,then I feel that would be fair to every taxpayer.One example would be,if a congress person made $175,000.00 their taxes to be paid would be $17,500.00.If a seniors total income was $25,000.00,their tax would be $2500.00.See how fair that is to all taxpayers?

  67. aislander says:

    beerBoy: As long as the drugs can’t be sold on Sunday, I guess those agencies are enforcing blue laws…

    cirrus: Hey, he’s lefty; you’re a lefty. Coreligionists…

  68. tacoman1 says:

    I find it somewhat sad that so many commenter’s in this section are not actually commenting on the letter to the editor or the article referenced , but rather on items that push their personal political agenda.
    The irony is that they confirm the premise of Mr. Pitts column.

  69. sincere, $100,000 is peanuts for a person who makes $1 million per year. What, we can’t afford to fly around the world in first class this year because we spent our $900,000 on diamonds and paid cash for our third house?

    To a senior $2,500 out of a meager $25,000 is devastating. It takes about $20,000 per year just for necessary basic food and shelter. That does not consider any medical needs, transportation or utilities. Your scheme would be “fair” in mathematical sense, but would force the elderly and poor into homeless encampments.

  70. sincere, maybe if we exempted the cost that it would take to house a person who failed to pay their taxes in prison from a flat tax, I might be willing to consider it. using another letter’s figures at about $40,000 per year.

    If we did that, at least half of the US population would pay no taxes, about the number that don’t pay federal taxes now since the average is $44,000. Half of families in the USA make less than 39,900, and half of individual wage earners in the usa make less than 29,000.

  71. jtarleton says:

    good luck

  72. romamar says:

    The letter writer lists a bunch of half truths and/or exaggerations that are terrifying:
    “character assassinations by sanctimonious media pundits”
    I agree this is terrifying, however both sides practice it.

    “President Obama’s frivolous spending creating deficits of trillions leading to near bankruptcy”
    Seems to me the near bankruptcy was the fault of congress not being able to come to an agreement on the debt ceiling. Obama seems to be willing to cut spending, that doesn’t seem “frivolous” but it’s never enough.

    “the Democrats’ war against business with spurious regulations leading to unemployment”
    Wasn’t it was the absence of regulations on the banks that led to the housing market collapse and the resulting unemployment, mostly of construction workers?

    “secret and costly Obamacare and plans for more expensive liberal programs”
    What’s so secret about it? Has Obamacare really cost us anything yet? What new expensive programs are planned?

    “Longview longshoremen’s terrorism”
    I agree they were out of hand but nothing was blown up, no one died.

    “Wisconsin’s teachers costly trashing of their capital”
    Seems a little exaggerated, don’t recollect any trashing being done.

    “open borders enabling illegal drugs, guns and people traffic”
    I heard that Obama has tightened the borders

    “control of citizens by dictating light bulb use, etc.”
    OMG! what about energy requirements on refrigerators and other large appliances, let’s go back to iceboxes. Oh and what about control of citizens by requiring them to stop at red lights!

    “and more taxes and fees.”
    Hmm… no new taxes have been allowed by Congress so far and when Obama wants to reduce taxes on middle class Congress is opposed to it.

  73. beerBoy says:

    aislander – I guess, with you, one needs to be very, very specific on the use of words lest you respond to specific words with a rebuttal that is very specific.

    “Blue laws” – I was using it in a larger sense than prohibition of drug sales on the sabbath rather, prohibition of drug sales on every day.

  74. Tacoma1,
    In other words Vox cannot refute your statements so is reduced to character assassination.

    Bobcat1,
    As will gun controlled which will be sold as a temporary but necessary national security move.

    Beerboy,
    The main targets of the NYPD was those with video cameras to prevent the truth from coming out.

    To the conservatives:
    Never have I seen so many been so passionate about being wrong and ill informed.

  75. The correct context from the actual quote by Hoffa:

    “Everybody here’s got to vote. If we go back & keep the eye on the prize, let’s take these sons of bitches out”

    Since there is no official “TEA Party” elected officials, i.e. candidates that ran as “TEA Party” candidates (they ran as Republicans), the letter writer is playing the martyr card.

    Hoffa’s intent was simple. Any elected official that is attacking the working class needs to be voted out.

  76. make that “there are no”….

    we must watch our grammar…..

  77. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Kard- there is a Tea Party caucus. The Tea Party is not a mythical beast.

  78. tuddo, when you write things like this “Smaller government is just a smoke screen for restricting freedoms for those who are not Evangelical Christian, white and fianancially-connected in society. ” you betray your personal bias to such an extent that it’s hard to take you seriously.

    Each of us has a frame of reference that skews our ability to see things with absolute clarity. Your bad history with conservative Christianity seems to have really done a number on yours.

  79. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    make that “there are no”….

    we must watch our grammar…..

    LOL

  80. LarryFine says:

    tacoman1 says:
    October 8, 2011 at 4:13 pm
    “I find it somewhat sad that so many commenter’s in this section are not actually commenting on the letter to the editor or the article referenced , but rather on items that push their personal political agenda…”

    bwaahaha … and you ?

  81. ItalianSpring says:

    Don- A GREAT letter. I know that it could have been pages long considering ALL the reasons there is a TEA party and that simple fact horrifies the marxists in charge today.

  82. sozo, please show me what the Tea Party is currently espousing that would not enlarge government’s role in private decisions? I applaud Libertarians for their efforts to reduce government intrusion into private lives by support for gay marriage, support for women’s right to choose their medical procedures and support for other ways to get government out of the lives of people and increase freedom in this country. I think this is why Ron Paul keeps winning polls.

    I do not see the Tea Party doing the same. They are over there arguing about whether or not Mormons are true Christians, proclaiming (against the Constitution) that we are a Christian nation and should follow their version of the Bible, trying to take other religious groups freedom to worship away from them, and arguing that condoms should be considered murder weapons.

    Please stop trying to psychoanalyze and look at the actual actions of the Tea Party. Start reacting to real facts and issues and not your own obsessions.

  83. theglovesRoff says:

    condoms should be considered murder weapons

    Every sperm is sacred….

    ;-)

  84. xx98411 says:

    tuddo – you are not talking about the Tea Party

    You are talking about an individual pastor…

    It is not against the Constitution to state the American is a Christian Nation, it falls under freedom of speech…

    Follow thier version of the bible… they have that right as you have the right to tell tell to stuff that bible where the sun dont’ shine… if you so choose…

    No body is taking any religon from anybody else…

    Condoms, murder weapons – a little much but you are free to laugh at them. If you artistically inclined please create a federally funded art piece…

    Please take your own advice to sozo…

  85. aislander says:

    Saying that America is a Christian nation (especially in a historical context) is not imposing religion on anyone. It is merely acknowledging reality. But that doesn’t really matter, does it, unless officials of the Federal government are trying to establish a state religion?

    But if you are SO worried about someone’s proclaiming one religion or the other to be the source of law, I’m certain that you support the outlawing of sharia…

  86. beerBoy says:

    Saying that America is a Christian nation (especially in a historical context) is not imposing religion on anyone. It is merely acknowledging reality.

    Pray tell……it may be acknowledging there is a revisionist history being put forward by certain fundamental sects but it is hardly acknowledging reality.

  87. xx and aislander, saying it and doing it are two different things. Many times I ask for logical reasons behind such things as a ban on gay marriage, and what I get are Bible verses. Passing laws based on a religious belief against freedom and Constitutional guarantees of equality under the law is what I am talking about.

    A recent Pew poll showed that 25% of Americans could not vote for a Mormon for president, with 44% of Republicans saying they could not. I imagine the number is much higher for the Tea party. So, it is not just one pastor who bases a vote on religion rather than issues.

    I think any attempt to impose laws based on religious beliefs rather than facts and science, including Sharia, Mosaic or Christian is against our Contitutional values. There is little evidence that any Sharia laws have crept into our legal system, but plenty of evidence that far right Christians want to impose their beliefs on all of us.

  88. jerryman47 says:

    I agree with ItalianSpring and others Don, yours was a great letter. Don’t let anybody’s posts discourage you in any way. I agree also with others saying that your letter could have been about 10 pages long on all what has happened in the last 3 years.
    The Tea Party wants smaller government. Every liberal post on your letter does not want that. I think you know why Don.
    The Tea Party knows that raising taxes removes revenue from the private sector, which suppresses economic growth and job creation. Cutting taxes increases revenue in the private sector, which promotes economic growth and job creation.
    Again Don, a great letter. Thank you.

  89. xx98411 says:

    Tuddo – as far as gay marriage is concerned, I have no clue who you talk to nor do I care. There are people who are for traditional marriage and it is not always based on religious beliefs… don’t know what to tell except watch out for that broad brush…

    Homicide in the First Degree… killing someone just because, is not a cool thing to do, hence the law against it and the consequences for doing it… This is the charge you will face for killing someone in this state… cool with me. As I read the RCW, it does not have a whiff of God, Moses, nor do I see Thou in it. It really is a lot of “legalize”…

    My view is when Moses went up the Mount, it was to get away from those people… you try hanging with the same crowd for 40 years and see if you don’t get a little grumpy. So he goes up the mount, tries to relax and hears a voice. Thinking the mushrooms were a bad idea, he realizes that it is indeed the big cheese in the sky… fast forward to the 10 Commandments and the tablet…

    God dictated the following:

    Murder in the first degree.
    (1) A person is guilty of murder in the first degree when:
    (a) With a premeditated intent to cause the death of another person, he or she causes the death of such person or of a third person

    Moses chisled:

    Thou Shall not Kill

    God got a little pissed and told Moses to write as he said. Moses said as a union worker God needed to supply a heavier duty hammer and chisel, etc… God was not amused, got pissed and hence the burning bush.. a little attention getter.

    Anyway Moses pissing in his pants and hair turning white convinced God that the short version is better for now and he will explain the Commandments – the details – to the flock… God agreed.

    So Tuddo, the RCW is actually the religious version that God transcribed, the 10 Commandments via the Tablet is nothing more than the a lazy man’s version of what God said… If you revert to – Thou Shall not Kill – then you actually will be using the secular version of it ain’t cool to kill a person.

    Too late dude, we are a Christian nation.

  90. larsman says:

    Regarding the recurrent force-fed inaccuracy –

    “When S.S.was started,the average life span was for a man was 60 years”, i.e. “We are living Loooonger”

    There are some numismatic agenda-junkies utilizing the “averaging” differentiation between 74.8 years with 76.8 years as “proof” (we must..we must euthanize before the planet gets a flat tire).
    We have always had war, disease and starvation. we’ve merely substituted subsequent diseases for previous cures and no one is satisfied with their own resources while observing wanting what others currently possess.

    From approx. 1420 BC we can still comprehend:

    “The days of our years are threescore years and ten (70) ; and by reason of strength they be fourscore (80)…So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom.”……….Psalm 90 ( this one’s by Moses)…

  91. xx,
    I agree that some of our laws are based on the traditions of the peoples of the Sanai and other Middle East tribes and governments. That hardly makes our nation “Christian”. Also, just because a majority of our people profess Christianity does not make our nation Christian. So says our founding fathers to Jews and to Arabs in very famous writings and court rulings.

    Laws that protect society, the weak, children, etc. have been a fixture of many codifications. The Supreme Court Building has a whole host of them enshrined in its art, not just the Ten Commandments.

    Citing the Ten Commandments no more makes us a Christian nation than citing the code of Hammurabi, which many courts have said is the foundation of our laws, especially those that deal with deeds, conveyances, bonds, receipts, accounts and independent judicial decisions, makes us Babylonian.

    We are a secular nation that decided through the will of the people to take a little bit of this and a little bit of that from a wide range of legal traditions, and a whole lot from Enlightenment philosophers who looked toward far eastern thoughts, like Buddhism and others, to develop the best nation the world has ever seen.

    Sharia even has a large number of laws that we would all agree are in the best interest of society. About 90% of them have an equal partner in Mosaic laws.

  92. xx98411 says:

    Ok brother, if you don’t wanna believe that we are a Christian nation… don’t.

    In this country you can believe whatever you wanna believe… the Constitution codifies that right…

    I can believe whatever I wanna believe… you nor you using the law can interfere with that belief I hold…

    I believe we are a Christian Nation… you ???

    What’s the big deal if I believe that?

  93. KARDNOS says:

    “Christian Nation”……

    Our nation is not governed by religion…therefore NO….we are not a Christian nation.

  94. xx98411 says:

    Your opinion and you are entitle to it…

  95. KARDNOS says:

    Now it really gets fun when you want to discuss the religious affiliation of Americans.

    Take “Christian” for instance. By the time you get done with the Christians arguing over who is really Christian……you probably have a minority of the population…..inclusive of those that will say they are “Christian” but know absolutely nothing about the faith.

  96. KARDNOS says:

    We’ll get a real lesson in Christianity if Romney actually is nominated. I can’t wait to see the Southern Baptists embrace a Mormon.

  97. xx98411 says:

    You don’t need to be a scholar to have faith…

  98. KARDNOS says:

    Actually….being a scholar gets in the way of faith…..

  99. KARDNOS says:

    KARDNOS says:
    October 9, 2011 at 7:20 pm
    “Christian Nation”……

    Our nation is not governed by religion…therefore NO….we are not a Christian nation.”

    This is not an opinion….unless one can prove that the church runs our country

  100. xx98411 says:

    I said I have a belief that we are a Christian Nation. It is a belief I hold.

    If you have a “belief” that we are not then more power to you…

  101. xx98411 says:

    I could give you a smart “fillet migon” answer or just simply ask…. ok, true statement, what is your point?

  102. To use the word Christian as an adjective for our nation does not have to mean that we are a theocracy. It can mean, and I believe this is how it was intended here, that our fundamental moral values are derived from Judeo-Christian teachings, which they are. I notice that many liberal folks on these threads LOVE to use Jesus as their back-up when it suits them, including Tuddo if I remember correctly. They only object when conservatives cite Christian principles as the reason for their positions. Cherry-picking the things Christ said to suit your political beliefs is actually pretty easy to do if you are so inclined. Satan himself used scripture (edited) to try and tempt Jesus.

    Tuddo, call in psychoanalysis if you like, but please, have the integrity to recognize your demons. The broad brushstrokes you use to paint the Tea Party folks betray your prejudices. Own it.

  103. beerBoy says:

    Many of the Founders were Deists and others were Masons – while both belief systems can find ways to “practice” Christianity, neither is Christian by a long shot.

    Christianity is the dominate religion in America. Many polticos “practice” Christianity publicly, the same way the “practice” fidelity to their wives.

  104. KARDNOS says:

    “I notice that many liberal folks on these threads LOVE to use Jesus as their back-up when it suits them”

    Yeah….guilty as charged. I use quotes from The Bible to remind so-called Christians of what The Bible really says, as opposed to the bastardized version that the Right Wing Sound Machine quotes.

    Funny, though…..I sort of thought that Christianity wasn’t liberal nor conservative….in fact…most of what Jesus said was “liberal” in philosophy…..

    Additionally….Jesus was anything but a follower of his times…..He would have probably been leading the Occupy Wall Street protests….or at least turning a few tables over.

    Isn’t it wonderful that I don’t need a magic decoder to read what’s on the pages of The Bible?

  105. KARDNOS says:

    “our fundamental moral values are derived from Judeo-Christian teachings, which they are”

    Maybe sozo can share which “moral values” are “Judeo-Christian”

  106. KARDNOS says:

    As to “broadbrushes to paint TEA Party”……

    Isn’t that what their platform is all about? I thought the TEA Party WANTED Americans to understand what they are……

  107. KARDNOS says:

    bB – “Christianity is the dominate religion in America.”

    I wish there was a way to get a break out on a census that stipulated how many people practice Christianity and how many identify “Christian” for lack of an answer.
    I’m betting that when you get down to practicing Christians, they are a minority of the total population of the country. Unfortunately, I can’t find data.

  108. KARDNOS says:

    Webster’s dictionary defines a Liberal as one who is open
    minded, not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional
    or established forms or ways. Jesus was a pluralist Liberal
    who taught that one need not conform to strict and orthodox
    views of God, religion, and life. He rejected greed, violence,
    the glorification of power, the amassing of wealth without
    social balance, and the personal judging of others, their
    lifestyles and beliefs.

    Jesusisaliberal.org

  109. sozo, if you think that Evangelical Christians think that only our moral values are derived mainly from Judeo-Christian teachings, you are deluding yourself. Over and over I hear that our laws are based on Christian beliefs, and even xx “believes” that to be true. They are not, and history proves that they are not.

    Our history is very plain for anyone to see. There was a big fight among Deists, and Agnostics on one side and what we now call “fundamental” Christians on the other, and the Deists got their way in our Constitution.

    Christians wanted to ensconce Christianity into our Constitution. Christians wanted states to be able to establish a state religion. Deists and Agnostics believed that reason and observation of the natural world, without the need for organized religion, can determine what is best for a society.

    The deist philosophy and understanding of the way a society develops rational laws won out. All you need to do is look at the early court cases that tested the Constitution on this. That is why we allow scientific findings in our laws and courts and we do not allow “beliefs”. Facts must be rigorously tested against the natural world to see if they hold up or they are not allowed to prevail.

    It is not a “belief” that we are a secular nation, it is written history, which is a very different thing than xx uses when he states he “believes” we are a Christian nation. He has a right to believe that, even as history proves him wrong. Some people glory in ignorance. That is their right, but it certainly doesn’t help a democracy thrive when there are too many people like that.

    The “beliefs” of the Tea party are plain to see in polls that ask their opinions and in what their leadership does.

    I know the Tea Party faithful hate Thomas Jefferson, but, I just wish they could heed his vow:

    “I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.”

  110. Tuddo…..I might add that Judeo-Christian teachings are nothing unique. Many other religions from millenia of time share the same “moral values”.

    Those that profess Christianity’s lessons to be unique are those that amuse me the most.

  111. Alas, the inflated multi-poster affords us with his self description :

    “but know absolutely nothing about the faith.”

    He wants us to apparently consider him a “Dr.” in that he continuously refers to his magic D-coder Ring. Hence the previous sentence is his self-definition…

    Bb- The vast majority of the signators of both the D of I and the Constitution were theologically orthodox Christians, not a few were actually pastors. Yes, Franklin was a Rosicrucian. That by no means equivocates to the majority nor mentionable minority as being atheist. Nice try…

  112. Tuddo misconspires –

    “I know the Tea Party faithful hate Thomas Jefferson,”

    And at which rally did you conduct your “scientific” poll?

    You don’t make the cut as a stand-up comic yet…I have to sit down to laugh at this one…nice try…

  113. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Look at the papers of our Founding Fathers, look at the churches that can be found in every town, usually more than one.

    I am not a particularly religious guy, but I cannot deny the fact that Christianity was a large part of how our country came to be. This is a fact. Islam, Native beliefs, etc while accepted in general terms were not a big part of OUR nation’s founders beliefs.
    I also cannot deny that the morals set forth by their beliefs have not led to the US becoming the greatest nation on Earth.

    Hate religion, the Constitution affords you that right. But to deny Christianity’s contributions to OUR nation’s success is ignorant.

  114. Tuddo – I am going to jump ahead considering your subsequent post and replies…. Ditto on the thoughtful replies…

    From some of the definitions I have read we are a “secular nation”… the difference in perspective between you and I appears to be that I see the inclusion of religion into the lives of American and their freedom to practice it.

    Sorry I went off on a tangent, considering the RCW for homicide as an example, that definition seems pretty “secular” to me and seems to have come a long way in the deliberative process from “Thou shall not kill”. When you talk about laws that protect society, they seem to be based on some moral foundation…. From somewhere…

    I have every right to believe we are a Christian Nation and you have every right to believe we are not as well as I am “ignorant”…

    Isn’t this a great nation… GOD bless you and God bless the United States of America…

  115. I meant to add … do you have some aggregious example of religious intrusion, state sponsored religion.. or whatever your issue is…?

  116. “dominant” not “dominate”

    aggregious? Not an egregious error but still enough to provoke the spelling police

    ;-)

    :::::::::fully expecting a quote to emerge from the archives:::::::::::

  117. ummm…..larsman…..signatures are not the only thing that makes a Founder a “Father”:

    Who were the Founding Fathers? American historian Richard B. Morris, in his 1973 book Seven Who Shaped Our Destiny: The Founding Fathers as Revolutionaries, identified the following seven figures as the “key” Founding Fathers:

    * John Adams
    * Benjamin Franklin
    * Alexander Hamilton
    * John Jay
    * Thomas Jefferson
    * James Madison
    * George Washington

    Of these, only John Jay can be considered an orthodox Christian. As Congress’s Secretary for Foreign Affairs, he argued (unsuccessfully) for a prohibition forbidding Catholics from holding office. On October 12, 1816, Jay wrote, “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” It is John Jay that the modern Christians have in mind when they talk about the Founding Fathers. Luckily for the rest of us, and all freedom-loving Americans, he was not in the majority.
    http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

  118. “I am not a particularly religious guy, but I cannot deny the fact that Christianity was a large part of how our country came to be.”

    Yes…Christianity played a large part…..it was the reason that Pilgrims left England in search of religious freedom as opposed to religion running the government.

  119. “Thou shall not kill” is not exclusive to Judeo-Christian. The concept of not killing precedes religion. It’s called “rational thought”.

  120. larsman is the perfect example of the pomposity of right wing politics blended with Christianity. Note that he won’t touch the definition of Jesus as per “Jesuswasaliberal.org”

  121. “Of these, only John Jay can be considered an orthodox Christian. As Congress’s Secretary for Foreign Affairs, he argued (unsuccessfully) for a prohibition forbidding Catholics from holding office.”

    A great example of things to come….when one Christian sect designates another as wrong or “non-Christian”

  122. “Right to believe” is not necessarily “right”

    I could believe cancer isn’t a disease and call it a sin….but that wouldn’t make me right….

  123. Are you trying to convince “us, me, whoever” that we are a secular nation?

    or

    Are you trying to convince “us, me, whoever” that we are not a “Christain Nation?

    or

    Convince me to change “mine, our” beliefs that we are a “Christian Nation”?

    One of them for the sake of working together in the hallowed Halls of TNT Discussion Board Congress, is a non-issue, lets move forward and do what is best for this great nation…

    The other two… why…? they are my beliefs and in no way interfere with the work we are doing here in these hallowed halls.

    and the problem is…?

  124. So there is agreement on the founding of this great nation, a search for religious freedom, a god start….

    Thou shall not kill – chicken… egg…. It’s a kool commandment, very concise, that RCW about homicide, though a little verbose, is a pretty good law to have on the book and is also clear in its meaning… wherever it originated…

    What example of things to come, we do not have a state sponsored religion and it appears we never will…

    What harm to you does my belief that we are a “Christian Nation” cause you? It’s my “delusion” why can’t I own it in peace? So you think I am wrong… ok, now what?

  125. a search for religious freedom…..

    AKA freedom FROM religion

    “What harm to you does my belief that we are a “Christian Nation” cause you?”

    Strawman….no one said it caused anyone harm

  126. a search for religious freedom… didn’t they set up churches here in the good olde US to be A… sounds more like freedom OF religon… you know to worship as they pleased without the state breathing down their backs…

    I’m just asking a question, you are free to ignore it if you so choose…

  127. Just how many of those Ten Commandments are the basis for American laws?

  128. LarryFine says:

    :::::::::fully expecting a quote to emerge from the archives:::::::::::

    … we’ll take that as an admition that you don’t play by your own rules….

  129. basis – dont’ know…

    You can find correlations between the Commandment “thou shall not kill” and the RCW for homicide in the first degree… as well as others, thou shall not steal vs burglary/robbery… thou shall not covet thy neighbors hot smoking wife vs adultery laws…

    It doesn’t mean the lawyer who wrote the RCW was using the Bible or the 10 Commandments as a basis for articulating the law.

    Our moral foundations come from somewhere,

    Sometimes a burning bush is just a burning bush…

  130. xx….you are asking a strawman question….as pointed out….you are welcome to ignore your hand in the cookie jar….

  131. rules against killing are not solely Christian philosophy.

  132. I’m psychic!!!!

    An evangelical pastor cast Mitt Romney in a spooky light Friday by calling Mormonism a cult and urging good Christians to vote for his rival, Texas Governor Rick Perry.

    The Rev. Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Church in Dallas was introducing Perry to conservatives at the Values Voters Summit when he dissed Romney, saying that, as a Mormon, he isn’t really Christian and, thus, isn’t competent to run the country.

    “I think Mitt Romney’s a good, moral man, but those of us who are born again followers of Christ should prefer a competent Christian,” Jeffress told the crowd in Tiffin, Iowa.

    Romney is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as Mormons. – NY Daily News and other sources

  133. strawman…. strawman…??? sorry don’t see it but am open to your view as to why it is a strawman arguement.

    an individual raised concern about the use of “Christain Nation”, cases were presented but I still choose to believe.. faith that we are a Christian Nation… so I asked a simple question – why my belief etc… etc.. etc…

    I could have asked about the tooth fairy… now that would have been a straqnge argument….

    like I said I am all pixels awaiting your response….

  134. the most hilarious yet in a pitiful sort of way is that you chide me for a strawman response as you present an article abot Mitt Romney…

    classic karnos…

  135. aislander says:

    beerBoy writes: “….it may be acknowledging there is a revisionist history being put forward…”

    Says the arrant revisionist…

  136. xx, if you are using “Christian nation” as sozo described, as an adjective that shows where some of our moral values are derived, then I would agree, if you would agree that we are also a Buddhist nation, an agnostic nation a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Deist nation, Theosophile nation and others, even atheist nation.

    All of those beliefs and many more have contributed to the moral fiber of this nation

  137. LarryFine says:

    What’s the thread topic ???

  138. aislander says:

    LarryFine: Don Wilbur wrote a letter defending the Tea Party and then some lefty posted that it is trying to impose moral judgments on the nation. That led to an exploration of morality and its sources.

    So…tuddo…we derive a large part of our culture from islam, do we? Aside from algebra, I can’t think of much that would support that. Unless, of course, you’re baiting with the shopworn lefty red herring that there is NO particular American culture…

    Another cliche is that Europeans emigrated to America to escape religious oppression. The truth is that most came here so that they could more strictly practice their religions. The people on the Mayflower, for example, believed Britain to be debased and degenerate…

  139. Says the arrant revisionist…

    Snappy comeback….did you used to read Mad Magazine?

    But it was hardly anything other than ad hominem – I have provided support for the non-revisionist history.

    Gotta love the b.c.w.s (big college words) you throw out…..looking them up their definition I actually learn something from your posts.

    “This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.”
    —not Churchill, but maybe some anonymous government official, or maybe no one at all

  140. but then, one could say that your use of b.c.w.s is just you practicing onanism (another b.c.w. I learned from you!)

  141. “The people on the Mayflower, for example, believed Britain to be debased and degenerate… “

    Things sure haven’t changed in the good olde UK…

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2046884/Binge-drinking-Why-intelligent-women-drink-oblivion-night.html

  142. aislander says:

    Two syllables is a big word to you, beerBoy? As for Onanism, I prefer a hands-on approach but if I find a woman is paying only lip service–I’m okay with that, too…

  143. BlaineCGarver says:

    Decent values could identify any religion, with obvious exceptions: Radicle Muznoids for one….

  144. “what is the thread topic?”

    How the Tea Party proclaims it is for something to fool the masses to buy into it, and then does exactly the opposite.

    All we have seen from them is more intrusion and less freedom. Elimination of voting rights for our soldiers overseas, elimination of the ability of the elderly, minorities and the poor to get registered to vote, instrusions into women’s right to choose medical care, and all of these caused huge increases in government bureacracies – just the opposite of what people say the Tea Party is for.

    Libertarians on the other hand seem to be gathering converts because they are actually for smaller government, more freedom and less instrusions into peoples lives.

  145. Just because someone wants a Christian in office does not mean they want to replace our current system of government with a theocracy.

    If I want a woman in office, does that mean I want to convert our entire system of government to amazoniamism?

    Did those of you who object to someone hoping for Christian president object to African Americans hoping for an African American president?

    On another note, let me be clear. I believe we are now a post-Christian nation. I believe our nation was founded on Christian principles, but it’s pretty clear that we are now a pluralist culture, essentially secular.

    Kardnos, perhaps you could thoroughly explore everything Christ said before you slap absurd labels on him?

  146. Did those of you who object to someone hoping for Christian president object to African Americans hoping for an African American president?

    Being Christian implies a set of beliefs which might (should?) impact behavior.

    Being Black is a genetic thing.

  147. aislander – Perhaps arrant isn’t a bcw, just obscure and rarely used, somewhat anachronistic to contemporary society.

  148. “sozo says:
    October 10, 2011 at 2:10 pm
    Just because someone wants a Christian in office does not mean they want to replace our current system of government with a theocracy.”….

    Tell me which president hasn’t alleged their faith in Christianity.

    “Kardnos, perhaps you could thoroughly explore everything Christ said before you slap absurd labels on him?”

    The absurdity is your inability to read the comment which was attributed to a website whose sole purpose was to study the philosophy of the legendary Jesus – much more than I’m certain you’ve done to date.

  149. Last time I heard, Barack Obama was a Christian. If a Christian president is what you seek….you’ve got one.

  150. “LarryFine says:
    October 10, 2011 at 11:57 am
    What’s the thread topic ???”

    Reading skills are required. Once that is accomplished, then follow the thread to it’s logical position.

  151. “xx98411 says:
    October 10, 2011 at 11:26 am
    strawman…. strawman…??? sorry don’t see it but am open to your view as to why it is a strawman arguement.

    First you must know what a “strawman” is…….

  152. “First you must know what a “strawman” is……. “

    You are the expert in strawman arguments… I could only wish to be as good as you…

    The issue was raised earlier in the thread, hence my question…

  153. An example of “vague-ing –
    “Yes…Christianity played a large part…..it was the reason that Pilgrims left England in search of religious freedom as opposed to religion running the government. ”

    I rather enjoy specifics, myself.
    It was not “religion” (the vague part) running the “government” (another vague expression) . Rather, it was the specific collusion between the Church of England and the King of England (a monarchy…not a representative republic)
    in , among other things, assigning the “Seal of Imprimatur” (read commercial favoritism) and insisting upon state sanctioned religious worship, while outlawing “non-conformity” (read Wesley, Tyndale and Bunyan).

    Oh, and Bb…the PC clinical term ,relating to onanism, is “monosexualism.
    have fun…

  154. theglovesRoff says:

    “KARDNOS says:
    OCTOBER 10, 2011 AT 3:01 PM
    “LarryFine says:
October 10, 2011 at 11:57 am

    What’s the thread topic ???”

    Reading skills are required. Once that is accomplished, then follow the thread to it’s logical position.”

    Thread drift is not allowed unless Sum one deems it so.

    LMFAO twice…

    I hope Sum one got paid well today for his contributions. The DNC must be proud…..

  155. “attributed to a website whose sole purpose was to study the philosophy of the legendary Jesus – much more than I’m certain you’ve done to date. ”

    Ah, Kardnos (chuckling as I write) this is rich. Why is it NO surprise that your primary sources are what they are? No surprise at all.

    Try opening a Bible and reading it yourself, all the way through, then get back to me on your liberal, inclusionist Jesus.

  156. Always appreciate the thoroughness of your knowledge of church history, larsman. Thanks.

  157. LarryFine says:

    “Last time I heard Barack Obama” was going to close Gitmo… all the other nations would love us again (huh Cheryl?) , and unemployment wouldn’t go over 8%… Kooky

  158. Try opening a Bible and reading it yourself, all the way through, then get back to me on your liberal, inclusionist Jesus.

    Because we all know that he was being sarcastic with that Sermon on the Mount….

  159. No, he wasn’t being sarcastic, bBoy, but if you study the Beatitudes with depth of understanding, you will find layers of meaning beyond the literal. Further, if you read everything Jesus said, you will find him talking about throwing sinners on a slag heap AND saying that the only way to the Father is through Him (Jesus). Pretty exclusionary stuff. Are YOU prepared to say who’ll end up on that slag heap. I’ll bet Kard thinks HE knows.

  160. you will find layers of meaning beyond the literal.

    Now I’m confused. I thought you ascribed to the literal, rather than metaphoric, truth of the Bible.

  161. You did huh? Ask me if I think Jonah was REALLY swallowed by a big fish. Go ahead.

  162. Sozo,
    Which version of the Bible should we be reading?

    Glad to see you accept the non-literal view of the Bible. Born Again Evangelical Christian, and numerous churches only believe the Bible contains only literal truth – i.e. old Jonah really truly spent three days in the belly of a fish.

  163. I certainly believe that the Bible contains “the truth,” but many people confuse truth and fact. That said, let me be very clear. I did not say I don’t believe Jonah spent those three days in the whale. I said, ask me if I believe it. Here’s my answer.

    I don’t know and I don’t care. God can do all sorts of things I cannot fathom and it doesn’t trouble me a bit to think of this as a factual account. On the other hand, it doesn’t trouble me to think of it as metaphor. IF FOLKS COULD GET PAST THIS SILLY debate and seek out the point of the story…well, wouldn’ that be nice?

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0