-
Downton’s Class System — and Ours
May 20, 2013 | 9 comments
-
The Mexican Kleptocracy: July 1989
April 19, 2013 | 0 comments
-
The Mexican Kleptocracy
April 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Black Plight: In Conflict With Unions
April 6, 2013 | 0 comments
-
An Assist from the Press
March 16, 2013 | 0 comments
Capitol Ideas
Culture versus Economy
Conservatives prevail when the economy is the issue — but not when it comes to what used to be called “social issues.”
(Page 2 of 2)
In Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age, Kay Hymowitz reported that “it is largely low-income twenty-somethings who are having a baby without a wedding ring.” The women forgoing husbands “are precisely the ones who can least afford to do so.” She also said that “virtually all” children whose families earn more than $75,000 a year “are living with both parents.”
The culture war presses on with undiminished zeal. The FRC’s “Index” has not been reported by the major media, who focus obsessively on “the drop in teen births.” It is not the age but the marital status of parents that matters-but try telling that to Rob Stein of the Washington Post.
FOR SOME YEARS, there has also been an organized pretense that male/female differences are more acculturated than real. With good training and propaganda it is imagined that such differences can be eliminated. Hence the push to house college students without regard to gender — not just on the same dorm but in the same room. The earlier goal, to thrust women into combat, was similarly motivated.
The feminist ideologues will certainly fail in their campaign to homogenize gender. Male and female will remain starkly differentiated, as always. It’s remarkable, though, that the attempt has been made, showing the fanaticism of the feminists. They have gone so far as to play into the hands of promiscuous men who have long embraced sex without consequences, otherwise known as the Playboy Philosophy. With a few exceptions, feminists have reinforced the sexual revolution rather than countered it. They see inequality of any description as an abomination and as something that must be stamped out.
Homosexual activists show a comparable fanaticism. They won’t rest until their goal — moral approval by the pope — has been achieved. Feeble as the Catholic hierarchy has been since the Second Vatican Council, especially on sexual matters, such a surrender in Rome is not in the cards. The repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” may itself have unintended consequences. Some of those who engage in homosexual activity fear being “outed” by other gays more than they fear “straight” disapproval. The pretense is that “openness” is the desideratum where gays are concerned, but the whole subject remains fraught with taboos. We’ll see what happens. It may well be that not much will happen, as those urging DADT repeal have said. The inborn male-female attraction is so strong that those who do not experience it at all are few — certainly far less than the touted 10 percent of the population. Homosexuals may well pose more of a threat to each other than to society at large.
The agenda of some culture warriors seems to be to apply the principle of consent to all human action. Exchange by consent — goods for money, or goods for other goods — is the great free-market principle, and the unstated social goal of non-socialists in the West now may be to reduce all relations to the principle of consent: divorce by consent (omitting the children of course, because they are likely to be under the age of consent); military service by consent, suicide by consent, sodomy by consent; abortion… well, wait a minute, that’s unilateral because the little critter inside the womb isn’t a human being yet so doesn’t have to be consulted.
To the godless, all things may seem possible without God, but Western Civilization will not be possible. We’ll get a different God, and Mohammed is his prophet.
About the Author
Tom Bethell is a senior editor of The American Spectator and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity Through the Ages, and most recently Questioning Einstein: Is Relativity Necessary? (2009).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (157) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Tom Bethell
More Articles From Capitol Ideas
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/22/culture-versus-economy
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
gsr| 2.22.11 @ 7:51AM
Culture is of course, influenced by PEOPLE. The United States was, whether one admits it or not, was founded on Judeo-Christian, English-speaking and yes, Caucasian values, standards, traditions, etc. Other cultures influenced us but only around the margins.
Today, because of mass immigration for two decades (at least), has brought third-world people here in huge numbers - mainly Mexican-"Indians", Muslims, Hindi, etc. People from these cultures do not share the West European, mainly British "enlightenment" philosphy of individual based liberty, small-ish central government, free enterprise/capitalism, etc.
Due to the overwhelming numbers of said third world "migrants", the future of the USA is bleak. Bleak if one values our historic traditions. Quite good if one is for a huge population, "group rights", mass demonstrations by grade school educated peasants, Marxism, bi-lingualism, etc.
The USA just may be kaput. People (immigration) is the key. It must be reduced or our future is sealed. Big, central government, nearly everyone working for the government, getting their government healthcare, their government pension, etc.
Great, just great.
loulou| 2.22.11 @ 9:55AM
Actually, Indian Hindus from India assimilate very well. They're highly intelligent, educated, speak better English than most Americans and do not go on welfare. This is the kind of immigrant we want.
Now, if it's a Muslim from India that's a different story. And the Mexican indigenous people who are being dumped on us do not share our values. We do not need any more dumbing down.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 11:04AM
Yeah, and they tend to be anti-capitalist, lean toward socialism, do not respect the traditions or history of this nation, and quietly believe that this country is militaristic and imperialistic. How do I know this? I have come to know dozens of these "immigrants" and they have told me just that! They have also shared with me several newspaper publications that are printed here in the US for their own Indian community. I was shocked at the brazen, out there in the open articles about how they were going to throw the election for Obama and "fix" this country and set it right or should I say LEFT. Many of these immigrants have openly told me to my face that they think we are stupid as hell and most Americans are very dumb. They are assimiliating very well..right in with our own home bred anti-American Blame America First crowd.
Radegunda| 2.22.11 @ 12:50PM
I would have asked them: If Americans are so stupid and Indians are so smart, why did they leave a country built by Indians in favor of one built by Americans? Hmmm?
gsr| 2.22.11 @ 1:18PM
Exactly........I hear that all the time from Arab/Muslims here in Dearbornistan, Michigan. "Americans are dumb" (well maybe these days, thanks for public schools) but Americans of previous generations were most certainly not.
I ask Muslims, if Arab/Muslims, if Islamic culture is so superior, why don't you guys have INDOOR PLUMBING everywhere in the Middle East?
Enough said.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:43PM
Because India is a dump.
BackToBasics| 2.22.11 @ 5:05PM
The dumbest of all are the Americans who give preferential hiring to foreigners OVER that of American-born individuals.
And for those on the left as well as CEO-types looking only at eh bottom line earnings, don't give me the argument that there are not enough educated Americans to fill positions in industry and private business.
There are literally MILLIONS of underemployed Americans as well as millions who are unemployed but have good to excellent education and skills.
And at the lower levels of employment, especially entry-level jobs and fast food jobs, the majority of the workers in them are of Spanish descent and this is in a metro area that is still mostly white.
I've heard whites who have teenage children say that once a person of Spanish descent gets into a managerial position in a concern that has entry-level type jobs, they hire only other people of Spanish descent in that location. And of course the policy of many companies is to artificially promote people of color, especially Spanish speaking people, to management and so the cycle feeds on itself. And surprise guess who is getting left out and cannot find entry level jobs; not only WHITES but BLACKS as well.
No, the discrimination goes all the way from the lowest skills to the highest.
But hey, ALL Indians and Asians are geniuses, right? So, let's hire them at lower wages. As for the younger ones who need entry-level jobs, hey they're young, they've got all the time in the world to get a job, right; or maybe join a gang. America's strong and resourceful, right? This won't hurt a bit for our Great nation.
I'm all for equal rights but lets get back to hiring the most qualified first for any position. Maybe this sounds like a pipe dream but this is more the way it was years ago than it is today, to our detriment as a nation. We could get back to this over time and the employment rates would likely increase under a more fair system.
And again, for those on the left, the quota systems in this country now have 2 races in the lowest 2rungs. Blacks are getting hurt the worst and whites the second worst. Your quota systems will NEVER work as you expected or intended.
Fair hiring by merit always has been and is STILL the BEST way to go!
Seek| 2.23.11 @ 1:09PM
Actually, blacks are benefiting the most -- that's why they demand the quotas continue. It is whites who are getting burned.
Time to tap into your inner Sam Francis.
BackToBasics| 2.23.11 @ 5:08PM
Not true, youthful black unemployment is the highest percentage of any group.
Blacks have benefited some from quota hiring but not enough to offset the need.
I am not a white nationalist as you infer, but I am a realist. But I am opposed, and righfully so, to the artificial attempts to dilute the infuence of whites in America. Discrimination by any other name would smell as bad.
If I were nt a Christian I might be a white nationalist. But the Word of God tempers my judgement. I see a danger in white nationalism and that danger is abject hatred towards others of color. One cannot really blame people of color for taking the "candy" that is so freely offered to them.
My issues are more towards our leaders, most of whom are white, Except Obam of course, who are willfully weakening America. They do this because they think is necessary to bring about a globalist government. And this includes not only Democrats but many of ther mushy, RINO Republicans, such as Bush I and Bush II. I am tierd of such weakness from Repubs and I am hoping for astrong conservative to rise up in 2012. I do not see anyone yet in the 2012 Repub possiblesvwho really inspires. I'll wait and see who gets nominated.
BackToBasics| 2.23.11 @ 5:13PM
typos - if I were not a Christian
many of the mushy, RINO Republicans
gsr| 2.22.11 @ 1:14PM
"Highly intelligent" is highly dependent on who is coming here. We do not see the "dumb", the lazy, etc. People who come here from far away tend to, not always but tend to, be more motivated partly because of the difficulty of getting here.
Nevertheless, Hindi, Muslims, Buddhists, etc do not for the most part, share in the cultural history, traditions of the United States. Also, it is a trivial point.
Roughly three out of four "immigrants" into our country over the past twenty years or so are grade school educated Latino-"Indians". Other immigrants are a mere fraction of the Latino exodus.
One of the "separating" questions to define people is this - does the United States exist merely as a place for half the world to come to? One's answer to that question is very telling. Another one is - Is the United States a "nation of immigrants"? Or - Are we all immigrants?
Telling questions.....
Claypoole| 2.22.11 @ 8:16AM
What we tolerate, we will get. What we tolerate and subsidize, we will get a lot of.
The death of shame and the growth of government welfare are the cause of the explosion in out-of-wedlock births.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 1:08PM
If we are getting nostalgic here, and the syrupy blather is running thick on this string....then you must have nostalgia for all of it, that means taxing the rich, segregating the races, subjugating women and providing the means for a white man to provide for his family with one income thus permitting his white mare to push out as many episcopalians as possible.
Start there, rather than blaming the nameless, faceless immigrant for our current states of affairs.
Immigrants made this country from it's beginnings and it has always been natural born real um-ericans that have screwed it up with their senses of entitlement and warped world-views.
Unless and until you convince your breeding stock to ramp it up, the browns and blacks will continue to "infest" your yards.
1 in 4 US counties are "dying" per the latest census, move there and start the insemination process.
gsr| 2.22.11 @ 1:20PM
Sorry Canuckistani.......your knowledge of US history is sorely lacking. "Immigrants didn't build this country" - what university-inspired nonsense.
At no time in US history, was the level of immigration more than about 10%. Furthermore, the Founders were mostly people who were born here as were their parents and even their grandparents.
Facts are stubborn things, when they conflict with your views, eh?
da monk| 2.22.11 @ 7:56PM
GSR: You say: "At no time in US history, was the level of immigration more than 10%..." 10% over what period time? Be specific. Are you also claiming that after the settlers of Jamestown and Plymouth came here, the amount of immigrants to America amounted to only 10% of those surviviors in Jamestown and Plymouth and,again in what period of time. Your math eludes me
gsr| 2.22.11 @ 1:38PM
The average immigrant (legal or illegal) uses more govt subsidy than the average native born American.
The average immigrant(legal or illegal) pays far less in income tax than the average native born American.
Immigration is not a "natural phenomena" or a force of nature. It is in fact, the result of political policy. Policies can be changed. They are man made.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:03AM
Exactly, GSR!
It's amusing that the author who claimed that conservatives were better at economic policies nonetheless bought into a claim by the left that immigrants are necessary to pump up earnings and government revenue to keep ponzi pension plans going. Germany and France thought that too. Look at how it worked out for them! Better yet: Look at the amnesty that Reagan agreed to for hispanic farm workers in the 80's. How many of them or their children are still picking strawberries in California?
On the culture side, the author fails to notice the effect of hyperchivalry working for the left. If a woman has a child out of wedlock, she's rewarded with welfare and the state goes looking for the "deadbeat dad" to foot the bill. This paradigm requires that working class men be irresponsible enough to impregnate a woman out of wedlock but responsible enough to pay his child support even when he has several children by several women.
Most of the readers here will even agree they are fine with equal employment rights out of sentiment or fear of being labeled a bigot, but they fail to notice that women don't want equality with men in marriage. So as women find it harder to find a man who earns more than they do, they have children out of wedlock and then blame the state and men for her problems as an unwed mother.
Gay marriage is a Stalingrad issue and mostly one that the right cannot win. The real battle, that the right is just letting the left's panzers drive over by default, is that of making marriage a lose-lose prospect for men. It already was a bad deal in the 1950's but culture and the workplace helped reinforce women's commitment to marriage to retain the father as a breadwinner. Affirmative action, VAWA, and high child-support payments practically beg wives and mothers to make false claims of abuse and then throw the father out the door. A woman attorney friend of mine had a client who wore clothes from goodwill, even after she had thousands a month in alimony, in order to elicit sympathy from the court to get more "child" support. She drives a Lexus.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:46PM
Let's see..."Canuckstani"...So you come from some back-water, 3rd-rate Craplakistan, you depend on a a first-world country, Canada, for your sustenance, and you see fit to make idiotic, critical statements about the USA??
Do us and the Canadians a favor: Pack-up your magic carpet and get back to the hell-hole that birthed you.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:48PM
Additionally, the "immigrants made this country" statement is a joke.
Go back far enough in history and you'll find that "immigrants" made every nation.
And if the west is so bad, why is it that people from your part of the world feel the need to come here?
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 6:51PM
The problem with Buchanan is that he fails to see what our true battle is; the battle against Islamo-fascism. He dawdles and sabotages that fight, fool that he is.
This destroys his ability to communicate about the necessity of proper parenting and stable homes, coupled with an appropriate faith.
Clint| 2.22.11 @ 7:52PM
Pat Buchanan worked for President Nixon, President Ford & President Reagan.
He understands that Our U.S. Military is not to be used as cannon fodder to force feed democracy & act as world policemen around the world,nor allow The Foreign Agendists' Tail to wag the American Big Dog.
Buchanan understands that Deconstructionist Agendists are attempting to tear down American Traditions, Affiliations,Traditions & Our Economy and fronting with A Diversity Agenda.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 2:44PM
Thank you. You have just proved my point.
AngloSaxon| 2.25.11 @ 1:15AM
Frankly, Canuckistani, I believe history will show that America's decline began with the end of segregation. Can anyone really point to a single school, neighborhood, or city that got better by going from white to black? Sixty years ago when we were this "awful, racist" country we were at the height of our power. Schools were good and pop culture was cleaner. And everyday you didn't see some self-hating white woman with her mulatto progeny in tow. Yep, May 17, 1954, the day America's decline truly began.
bee bop| 2.22.11 @ 8:22AM
"Through overwhelming Third World immigration
we hope to destroy English culture beyond repair
within a couple of decades."
-Tony Blair
(leaked interview as quoted by Alan Watt online)
Something similar is well underway here
with the unofficial (and probably accurate)
est. for ILLEGAL immigrants now reaching beyond
30 MILLION. And all this in an economy in
collapse.
Globalist-collectivist finance, having destroyed
the Third World with no accountability whatsoever
(take a good long look at Mexico for starters)
---now make use of Social Darwinism, once again,
on home ground.
SO, keep following the usual fronts (Buchanan, Gingrich, McCain, the Bushes, FOX News et al).
------They'll take GOOD care of you.
----RRRRRRRIGHT!
Peter Skurkiss| 2.22.11 @ 8:29AM
Tom Bethell sums it up nicely when he writes:
"To the godless, all things may seem possible without God, but Western Civilization will not be possible. We'll get a different God, and Mohammed is his prophet."
The only things I'd modify, and I'm sure Tom would agree, is that the god in question must be the Christian God of the Bible.
BackToBasics| 2.22.11 @ 11:20PM
And all of the left, even the Godless left likes any god who is not the God of Christianity and the Bible.
They will at least tolerate those gods and often will fully defend and embrace them, especially if in the embracing, they can hurt America and Christianity in the process.
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 8:37AM
It is genuinely possible that Christians have been fighting on the wrong front since the forming of the Christian Coalition.
Our work is not in the halls of government. It is in the homes and our neighborhoods. If we want Christian legislators, we cannot expect them to become so after they reach governmental offices.
The culture war is not won by passing laws, but by spreading the Gospel. We expect to substitute legally forced moral behaviour with evangelism.
Len | 2.22.11 @ 10:53AM
You are correct. As the scriptures say, the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty to the pulling down of strongholds.
That is why this article is frankly confusing, is it a call to people and churches to pray and fast, or go down to Egypt and lobby your legislator to bring about the kingdom of God?
As for consent, yes abortion is murder, and no one had received consent from the child concerning his life, but in other areas government is supposed to protect the right of people to make their own decisions so long as those decisions are not violating other's rights.
I remind those who claim to be on God's side, that he has told believers very clearly that matters such as sexual sins are not their concern, except to preach the gospel to people that they would turn from them as they come under the lordship of Yeshua the Messiah.
1 Cor. 5
What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”
It's not a culture war, it's a spiritual war, and those who are only disparaging others rather crying out to God that he would bring them to know Him are fighting against God.
Matt. 5
But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you
Luke 6
Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:52PM
I think you're mistaking the meaning of 1 Cor 5.
It's not the "business" of Christians to judge those "outside" the Church because they're already condemned. It's not about being self-righteous, it's about not having to waste your time.
Len| 2.22.11 @ 2:18PM
I'm not mistaking anything. I didn't say anything about being self-righteous. It is not self-righteous judging being spoken of in the passage, but legal (God's law)judging. This is why a disciplinary action follows in that passage.
My point was that those who follow God are in error to cry out to for earthly governments to enforce spiritual matters. When one in a local body of believers sins in a grievous manner then the government of that church has the responsibility to not allow such a thing to go on. Outside of the church, such conduct is not a matter that believers are to attempt to discipline or have proxies do so. Believers are to preach the gospel which informs people that they are in rebellion against God and will have to give account one day, but that it is God's desire to forgive and have people enter His kingdom.
BackToBasics| 2.22.11 @ 11:37PM
"But he that is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." 1 Cor 2:15
Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. Matt 5:13
It is a mistake to think that we cannot make judgments about evil or sin in others as well as ourselves. We are to be salt and light to the world. In the book of Jude it says some are saved through compassion but others through fear.
Part of loving your enemies is to point out their sins. Jesus did this often to the religious leaders who laid heavy burdens on others but would not so much as lift a single one of these same burdens with their small fingers. --- "For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." Matt 23:4
David T| 2.22.11 @ 2:06PM
Ryan--Spreading the Gospel is fine, but I would contend that it's just as important (maybe more so) for the Church to form its members and teach them how to live according to the moral law. We have failed miserably in that arena.
Len| 2.22.11 @ 2:24PM
There is no moral law to be followed. Paul deals with this in Romans 6-8, I suggest you read this through until it sinks in.
That you speak of following a moral law seems to indicate you don't understand the gospel, and that outward actions come as a result of an inner life given to God. Jesus quite thoroughly rebuked the Pharisees for using a moral law to actually defy God.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 3:09PM
Man, you are a real piece of work. Jesus rebuked the pharisees because they focused on man made laws and customs and not the laws and moral instruction given by God. The pharisees worhiped the form of the law rather than the spirit of those laws. The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath...ring a bell? That did not mean he was saying you did not need to follow the sabbath. ..nor moral law. You are still bound to follow the commandments and all moral instruction given by God. You will not be solely judged by the law alone however as Chritians believe that Christ pay'd the price for violation of the law (sin) and can receive redemption and forgiveness if they confess their sins and accept him as their savior. That's not a get out of hell free card nor a green light to not following moral laws. You are correct in your point that christains believe that they must settle disputes among themselves and the breaking of moral laws within the community first before appealing to outside authorities. It is also believed that if christians break criminal laws and the laws established by society and government they also are responsible to report those in violation to government and authority.
Len| 2.22.11 @ 3:18PM
I'm a piece of work? I never claimed that one is free from moral law, but that it is not moral law we follow. Paul made this clear in Romans, we don't preach the law, we preach Christ and Him crucified. The gap is wide, and yes misunderstood. To preach grace is not to preach license. One who is under grace does not follow a moral law, but lives out righteousness as a result of loving God and man. Moral law is concerned with externalities, one who follows Yeshua concerned with pleasing God and bringing men to the knowledge of God. This is something that is evidently not a concern to you, for you insulted me up and down previously in your comments to me before. I truly don't see how you have any place commenting on such matters when you spew forth hatred to others.
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 3:22PM
The problem there - as I pointed out below - is that your statement about moral law was an oversimplification that HAS to have an explanation alongside it. Simon reacted against it because it was incomplete, and maybe he misinterpreted, but you also didn't fully explain what needed to be explained.
I suspect we all have similar views on the matter.
David T| 2.22.11 @ 3:38PM
And I suspect you are right. But there is a great deal of confusion on the matter of the relationship of Christians to the moral law. The Ten Commandments were never abrogated.
Len| 2.22.11 @ 4:06PM
I'm not contending that the Ten Commandments were done away with. I'm not contending that there is not a "moral" law. However it is very clear that the moral law is not what we follow, but the Messiah, and yes we preach against sin and we preach the cross where we die to sin but more we see the Messiah who died for our sin and respond to His love by no longer living to please ourselves.
This is what Paul said in Romans 6-8, attempting to follow the law leaves us frustrated because we have our eyes on what we must do in debt, but putting our eyes on the Messiah shows us grace and love which is the generosity of God and seeing that generosity we are generous.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 4:16PM
Look ,I can only go on what you write..I can not read your mind. When someone writes, "There is no moral law to be followed," I think it is a reasonable interpretation that they are saying there is no moral law and it should not be followed. These are your words not mine. What does live out righteousness mean? What is righteousness but following the moral laws given by God and the moral instruction given by Christ? You are a very strange person. You have this incredible lack of self awareness and a know it all attitude that seems to just dismiss anything that does not fit your machinations. Spew forth hate to others? Really? You have thrown some real sny and insulting remarks in a lot of these threads. Yes, you get on my nerves and wear out my patience...I can admit that with full honesty...but spew hate? Me thinks you just love to argue and it feels a need in you that makes you feel better about yourself. You do not listen very well nor express your ideas clearly. We may have indeed misunderstood you..it is a possiblity..but this is your burden not ours.
Len| 2.22.11 @ 3:34PM
“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[e] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[f] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[g] There is no commandment greater than these.”
32 “Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
When one loves God and man, one does not go about saying I will not steal, or I will not covet, but what can I do to please God?, what can I do to reveal God to that person?, how can I lift up my messiah? So NO!!! there is no moral law to be followed, there is the law of love that when followed ensures that the moral law is not broken.
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 4:58PM
I think that even though we agree on certain matters, stating "there is no moral law to be followed" is still wrong, or just a BAD way to word the thought.
We were Hell-bound because we broke the moral law. I think Paul put it better when he stated that we are no longer under law, but under grace. He's not stating that it's not there to follow, he's stating that it's consequences - death - no longer apply for those who are in Christ.
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 3:20PM
Ugh, that's a MASSIVE oversimplification that is overreaching.
If your first sentence were correct, then murder and stealing and adultery would be okay.
It HAS to be quantified with the matter that the Gospel changes our hearts so that we follow the "moral law" WITHOUT the need for it to be written. We don't murder, because it is no longer in our hearts. We don't steal, because we are content with what we have. We don't commit adultery, because we are given self-control and love our spouses.
As Paul stated, "Shall we go on sinning? May it never be!"
Len| 2.22.11 @ 3:49PM
Didn't I reference Romans 6-8?
I go back to the main point that when so called Christians seek to have earthly governments enforce moral laws, such as sexual immorality, or doing drugs they are going to counter to what God has given the believer to bring about His righteousness. I see many social conservatives claiming to be of God yet wanting the sinner to be held responsible by earthly governments for spiritual sins. This is going down to Egypt and seeking to have Pharoah deliver Israel rather than crying out to God to deliver men from sin.
I hear more concern about people doing wrong than that those people are lost and going to hell if they don't repent, and it often done in disparaging remarks and judgementally so. So when one speaks of a culture war, what is one going to do? Have the government enforce God's laws? Where did God say that such a thing could be or was going to be in the scriptures? With Israel God approached the people as one people and as one people they entered into a covenant with Him. He further gave them such things as sacrifices and the temple where prayers were offered up from the priests who were the government. God does not speak of doing this with another people until the Messiah comes from heaven and establishes His kingdom on heaven.
Len| 2.22.11 @ 4:07PM
oops..kingdom on earth.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 3:15PM
David..you are correct. It is very disconcerting when you are looking at a web site for a so-called christian university and you notice that they proudly advertize their admissions policy and general policy as accepting of all people with whatever sexual orientation that they may have and that is just cool with them.
Pelligrino| 2.22.11 @ 3:49PM
Simon, you are correct to point this out.
How bizarre that a so-called Christian institution of any kind would have in its baseline statements/admissions policies that there is no bias or distinction made according to gender (think the modern transgender) and sexual orientation.
Clear thinking/wording: THAT thing calling itself a Christian institution is NOT. Move to find one that truly is.
The Bruce| 2.22.11 @ 11:49PM
Very true, Ryan. Our government (of the people) is a garbage in, garbage out system.
It all starts in the home. If you ultimately want to reform government, you have to start with raising your children properly.
Our country's greatest generation, unfortunately, produced our country's worst, the very ones in power now. They're running our schools, running our media, and entrenched in our government at all levels.
I don't see our country really getting back on track until the "sixties" generation expires. Hopefully by then the rest of us will have produced a generation to replace their idiotic and sophomoric notions of social utopia.
chris haynes| 2.22.11 @ 9:05AM
Republicans , what have you done for me lately?
Or in the last 50 years?
We've had 50 million abortions the greatest holocaust in history. Thanks, republicans, for Stewart, Blackmun, Berger, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter. Too bad about Harriet Myers.
You say fnancial matters are more important. For 50 years. That's Mitch Daniels point. So to be fair, I give you repeublicans credit where credit is due. Take a bow for for the conditon of the federal budget. Well done.
gearjammer| 2.22.11 @ 1:26PM
Had those 50 million been born along with the compounding via their offspring we have 100 million more loyal democrat voters. You would be jailed as an anti government traitor. Wake up dope-God would not save you. God does not care if the USA becomes a commie hell hole.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 1:27PM
It is amusing to read people rationalize their views so badly that they fail to conceive that their own saints began the bamboozling right in front of them.
Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children. Married Nancy Davis who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.
Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.
Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.
Dick Armey - Former House Majority Leader - divorced
Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced
Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced
Former Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced
George Will - divorced
Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced
Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act."
The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob Barr, WHICH marriage are you defending?"
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced
Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor)
Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorced
Henry Kissinger - divorced
Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced
Sen. John McCain of Arizona - divorced
Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced
Rep. Susan Molinari of New York (2000 Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker) - divorced
Seek| 2.22.11 @ 1:46PM
I'm a divorced right-winger, too -- and loving it.
About Rushbo, I think you're a little behind the times. He and his "current" wife, Marta, got divorced several years ago. He just got remarried last year, with Elton John providing the music.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 2:40PM
Oh, good point, forgot about the fornicator performing for the er uh the fornicator......
I am a happily married fiscal right-winger (kids in parochial school, wife took my name, regular church-goer) who has no truck with people seeking liberties in a civil society.
Equal protection means some unsavory things must be tolerated - and I can turn off the boobtube when I like, and ensure my children are given facts and not suppressio veri, suggestio falsi.
If my daughter ever got into "trouble", she really didn't, we would have been there for her and given her all of the support she needed without judgment.
She thanked us both recently, that as an adult now, she realized we exposed her to facts and theories from all sides of the spectrum. It informed her to the point that she was not afraid of sex, embraced it, linked it to strong relationships and above all, was intensely private and nobody's business but hers.
She and I disagree on many things, but we respect eachother nonetheless. When we argue, we use facts and do not manufacture positions from the ether.
I may embellish a little here to get a rise out of the inert.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:18PM
Eric Cantor---married once. John Bolton---married once. Allen West---married once. Sarah Palin--married once. Herman Cain---married once. Charlton Heston---married once---1944-2008. (Age 21 to 84). John Boehner---married once. Rick Perry married his childhood sweetheart and is still married to her.
Some past Conservatives: Gen Curtis LeMay---married once. Jimmy Stewart, Brigadier General AND Movie Actor---married once, until his wife's death. Gen Ulysses Grant---married once. And, of course, the Ur_Republican married once and was separated from her only by assassin's bullet.
So, Canuckustani, get stuffed. (By the way, I've been married just once, too---my wife and I have been married for 15 years.)
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:19PM
Oh, by the way, everyone I mentioned above is still married or was separated by death only.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:13AM
"Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children. Married Nancy Davis who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage."
This is an outright lie. Jayne Wyman divorced RR saying she was bored with him and he was devastated.
Indeed, this particular example demonstrates that even as most divorces are initiated by women, they are still considered victims of it.
da monk| 2.22.11 @ 9:17AM
GSR, CLAY POOLE, BEE BOP, PETER SKURKISS, RYAN, CHRIS HAYES: AS PER BOB DYLAN:
"TIME'S ARE A'CHANG'N". WE ARE NO LONGER IN IN THE 18TH, 19TH AND EARLY 20TH CENTURIES OUR CULTURES ARE CHANGING AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 10:02AM
And they change with the capslock key off.
Petronius| 2.22.11 @ 9:24AM
The Culture War is lost because all cultural institutions are in the hands of the fornicators who cannot be voted out. Those people are Federal Judges and bureaucrats who rule this country. I will also reprise my comment of last week on this same subject. The total cost of immoral behavior is paid by those of who are not, in treasury, property, and blood. Where's Oliver Cromwell when we need him? This brings the economic issue back into play. For those who never learned any history, he deposed and facilitated the execution of a duplicitous monarch who bankrupted His Kingdom and then taxed his subjects beyond ability to pay. Culture may be a "herd thing", but Money Talks.
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 10:03AM
Ummm..I think that you're talking about "governmental institutions," not cultural. Cultural institutions - like churches - still have a substantial population that are NOT in the hands of the leftist elite....as we could see by the last election.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 1:30PM
Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children. Married Nancy Davis who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage. ONLY.PRESIDENT.EVER
Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.
Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.
Dick Armey - Former House Majority Leader - divorced
Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced
Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced
Former Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced
George Will - divorced
Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced
Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act."
The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob Barr, WHICH marriage are you defending?"
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced
Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor)
Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorced
Henry Kissinger - divorced
Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced
Sen. John McCain of Arizona - divorced
Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced
Rep. Susan Molinari of New York (2000 Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker) - divorced
Fred| 2.22.11 @ 2:34PM
Canukistani, the argument from hypocracy is a particularly stupid form of ad hominem. If a smoker tells you "Don't smoke; it will kill you" he or she may be a hypocrite, but he or she is also absolutely right. Our culture is falling apart at the seams, European culture has already largely fallen apart, and Europeans and European-Americans are in the process of committing demographic suicide. This is largely due to the victory of the left in the culture war. Anyone who points this out is correct regardless of his/her marital status or personal moral behavior.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 3:09PM
Demographic suicide in Europe begins and ends with two world wars and their aftermath....and the failure of colonial powers to see the forest for the trees when they prodigally pillaged these exotic locales in centuries prior.
Abortion and laciviousness has little to do with Europe's lessening whiteness, and more with a cultural swing away from large broods of children. Education and lower birth rates are directly correlated, ain't they? So if being educated means being left, what are you?
Fred| 2.22.11 @ 3:38PM
The demographic collapse is not just a swing from having large broods of kids but from even having kids at replacement rate, which IIRC is 2.something. Now "large brood" is subjective, but I don't know many who would call 2 or 3 kids a "large brood." The failure to reproduce at replacement rate is, in fact, at least in large part a result of cultural factors like selfishness, materialism, abortion, etc. As for any necessary correlation between intelligence (if not formal education) and being on the left, the merest glance at the comment threads on Kos or CNN (not to mention your own comments here) will quickly disabuse anyone of that notion.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:23AM
There's a key difference in right winger cultural hypocrisy versus left wingers: Right wingers don't flaunt their hypocrisy as if they're above it.
Consider Al "the sky is falling" Gore who preaches the evils of plane travel and A/C while running all of his homes on A/C and flying around in a private jet. This isn't a few single instances of bad judgment such as a divorce or having an affair or even secretly doing drugs while preaching against them. He openly engages in such behavior while bashing the right as hypocrites.
Then there's the sublime Orwellian doublespeak hypocrisy of the left where they take it to the level of paradox: Preach that racism and sexism are the most evil things of all and can only be "addressed" by bashing white males. They dream of a Swedish or German utopia via "diversity" even as these cultures are not racially diverse. They bash the left as racist hypocrites while they live in the suburbs or white enclaves in major cities. This is precisely why leftist white elitists have embraced "diversity": Because their self-hating ideology is literally killing them off. Check out the Shaker religion sometime. They made real great furniture!
Seek| 2.22.11 @ 1:50PM
It is not for you to establish a moral police force to punish "fornicators." (The Muslims do a better job of that anyway.). Our tradition of liberty applies to sex and not just to economics.
What's your next move, chief? Call upon Cromwell? I'm sure the Irish will love you for that.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 2:16PM
Good one.
AngloSaxon| 2.25.11 @ 1:21AM
Well, if Cromwell had done a more thorough job in Ireland we might have been spared the Kennedys.
Derek Leaberry| 2.22.11 @ 9:33AM
Sadly, many who call themselves "conservative" are on the wrong side of the culture war. Half the Republican Party and the entire Democratic Party are on the enemy side of the cultural war. Many on the cultural left even write for American Spectator and National Review.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 2:27PM
Clarenden code II being prepped?
Pelligrino| 2.22.11 @ 4:08PM
Mr. Leaberry, you are correct. Three decades of observing tells me that real, down-to-earth, heart & soul faith-based conservatives are not to be found in the media world. (all forms of media)
And this applies internationally in the West.
Sure, you can find a lone stalwart here or there.
But the staff working behind the scenes (the ones doing the stats, research, photography, music, even make-up) at a place, for example, as big as Fox in NYC.....they're all practically card-carrying liberals snickering away at silly notions like family values, marriage fidelity, the sanctity of marriage before God as that of one man and one woman, chastity (a word they do not know), actually living Christian values, the idea of personal sin, etc.
We're losing because these influence peddlers who run our information and free-time culture zones, they seek these soft jobs. And they bring their perverted world views to our airwaves, homes, and living rooms daily.
Denver Todd| 2.22.11 @ 9:35AM
Why would we exchange the Christian deity for the Islamic one willingly? The Islamic one isn't going to be any more friendly toward things like homosex and abortion. The switch will take place by stealth or trickery or default to fill the vacuum.
Bob Miller| 2.22.11 @ 10:15AM
I can't see much hope for a culture that worships money and material pleasure. If conservatives as a group buy into that attitude, we're in trouble.
I Survived Arlen Specter| 2.22.11 @ 10:44AM
Bingo! Thanks Bob for hitting the nail on the head. Unfortunately, as the economy continues to sour many self described conservatives are losing faith in GOD as their provider & buying into the very attitude your post described. A Holy GOD will not bless a nation that turns a blind eye to the immorality of that nation. Fiscal & social issues go hand in hand. Anyone who claims to be conservative & looks to separate fiscal conservatism from social conservatism or vice versa is by no means even remotely conservative. A serious conservative can walk & chew gum at the same time. Conservatism to Mitch Daniels & the "tea party", are you listening? Take care Bob & GOD bless!
Brian Mc| 2.22.11 @ 10:32AM
"If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned."
I find myself considering these words whenever I witness groups demanding their god, the government, step in and fight for them. I, for one, will never put my trust in Man. Is it godlessness that has brought us to this epochal moment in our history?
I Survived Arlen Specter| 2.22.11 @ 10:51AM
I couldn't have put it better. Take care & GOD bless Brian!
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 11:12AM
I don't accept Mr. Bethell's premise.
If we are losing the culture war, it's because we have failed to stand firm on our principles and convictions. We have allowed the rules of the debate to be set by Liberals, and we have cowered in the face of political correctness.
We elect too many gutless Republicans who are afraid of their own shadows and afraid of the press. On most of these issues, including "Don't ask, don't tell", the American people support the Conservative position, and this has been amply demonstrated in polls.
Watch how Congressman Allan West publicly dispatches the liar from C.A.I.R. in a recent video clip to see how Republicans in general need to respond to Liberals. West doesn't cower, or back-track, or hem-and-haw. He stands by his position, proves his mastery of the subject, and tells Mohammed Hamzde to "Stop blowing smoke up my butt, put down the microphone, and go home".
THAT is how we need to respond to Liberal idiocy, including the "dreaded" social issues.
Anthony| 2.22.11 @ 11:16AM
I think the majority of Americans are still socially conservative, nowhere near thirty years ago, but still conservative. The problem is that democrats run as social moderates and Americans fall for their lies. You get a phony like Casey in Pa, you get Pelosi lying about Catholic doctrines, even Obama an outright communist in my view, lies about being pro-family and anti-gay marriage. Then you get republicans, many of whom are good, solid conservatives, who roll over on every social issue in the hopes that the boys in the media will buy them a drink. McCain was against an amendment to the Constitution that would preserve traditional marriage, McCain! The republican candidate for president. Looking back through history I can't find a single nation that accepted homosexuality surviving very long. Where is the real conservative candidate? Put him up for a vote and I believe he'll win.
Bob Miller| 2.22.11 @ 11:27AM
Some truly despicable societies have lasted a long time, so appeals to longevity are second best. You do the right, moral thing because it's right.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 11:34AM
Excellent points Anthony..points often overlooked. If we truly have lost it..then why do they play to these family values every election. Good eye, Anthony!
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 1:32PM
Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children. Married Nancy Davis who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.
Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.
Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.
Dick Armey - Former House Majority Leader - divorced
Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced
Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced
Former Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced
George Will - divorced
Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced
Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act."
The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob Barr, WHICH marriage are you defending?"
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced
Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor)
Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorced
Henry Kissinger - divorced
Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced
Sen. John McCain of Arizona - divorced
Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced
Rep. Susan Molinari of New York (2000 Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker) - divorced
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:42PM
As usual, you have a very SHALLOW grasp of the facts.
Ronald Reagan did NOT want to divorce his first wife, Jane Wyman. Wyman wanted the divorce. She was a die-hard liberal to the end of her life, and could not stand her husband's conservative politics. It's common knowledge that Raeagnw as devastated by the divorce, and deeply depressed for some time after it. He meant Nancy Davis when, in his official capacity as President of the Screen Actor's Guild, she came to him to clear her name. In a case of mistaken identity with another actress by the name of Nancy Davis who had belonged to the Communist Party USA, Davis had been subpoenaed by HUAC. Reagan intervened on Davis' behalf to clear-up the mistake. The two became friends, fell in love and got married.
Susan Molinari's husband cheated on her and committed felonous crimes, so she divorced him. Big deal.
As for the rest of them, you seem to be operating under the mistaken impression that Cultural Conservatism = Republican. What an idiotic assumption.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 2:14PM
I am a fiscal conservative, but it has pained me enormously over my adult life to see the party of business, science, reason and strong national pride to bamboozle voters with this social-engineering schtick.
If we truly are different from Islamists and other undesirables, then we must separate the people's business from the ladies of the temperance movement. Our chosen slate of GOP representatives fails miserably and we try to condemn the other side?
We have even lionized people that are simply not up to snuff on the impossible piety scale.
I was once asked if I hate anything, my answer: hypocrites and murderers.
When my local GOPer attempts to speak about abortion, gays or even guns, I choose the next name down the list or none of the above, because we all know distilling these issues down to a billboard does nobody any good.
Cultural Conservatism begins and ends at home, not in civil institutions and definitely not in government.
If you examine the social conservatism rankings, what we write about and condone here as remedies are very similar to Islamist and central African states. Think about that before we try to imbue the country with our moral suasion.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 3:15PM
"If you examine the social conservatism rankings, what we write about and condone here as remedies are very similar to Islamist and central African states."
Completely idiotic statement, demonstrating a staggeringly ignorant POV.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 3:39PM
Well, I really doubt that you are even a fiscal conservative as you claim. The style of your argument and your lame attacks on social conservatives really smells like a liberal troll posing as a fiscal conservative. Loved the classic..you social conservatives are just like the Islamist! Social conservatives are not attempting to social engineer anything..it is the social engineering that the Left has imposed on the nation the last 40 years is what they object to and the use of our courts to push their agenda on the majority by circumventing the legislative process that should be used to set laws not the courts. Your use of false premises, historical revision, and faulty equations stink of a socialist troll. But the classic of classics was the hypocrisy charge..my god, that the oldest one in the book and the lamest. Think about your moral suasion when it comes to guns, abortion, and homosexuality...and why you feel the need to demand and push your 'morality" on the rest of us through maipulation our federal courts rather than our legislatures.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 3:59PM
If we had left all of these issues to our legislatures, we would still have Jim Crow and the sundry anti sodomy laws peppering our landscape, and women would still be bound to their "keepers". Thankfully KKK license plates and the odd Montana flourishes of medievalism are all we have to worry about.
The courts are as important as the legislature when freedom is the subject.
I choose to live under the rule of law, not men - you?
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 4:28PM
Oh..you mean the law established by a few men on a court not the ones established by the will of a majority of a self governing people? Some more historical revision? We do not have Jim Crow because there was a civil war fought and subsequent ammendment to our constitution by our legislative branch and a civil rights movement that resulted in the pasage of another legislative act. Anti-sodomy laws were struck down by legislatures at the local levels. Women would still be bound to their keepers, KKK, and Montana slurs? You give your self away too easily.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:21PM
I seem to recall Roger Taney was a Democrat.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:34AM
[violin playing]
"If we had left all of these issues to our legislatures, we would still have Jim Crow and the sundry anti sodomy laws peppering our landscape, and women would still be bound to their "keepers"."
Hahaha! Is that you George Clooney! George, you weren't accepting a nobel peace prize! It was just an academy award although both committees seem to have a liberal bias nowadays...
Seriously though: we still have Jim Crow laws but they've just been reversed against white males. When the left started out, they appealed to working class white male unionized workers. That was back in the days when the USA still made cars and televisions. Then... the environmental wackos took over and the left decided they would stab their traditional constituency in the back and the rest is history.
Continuing with Jim Crow, ever since the so-called civil rights act more black men are in jail than ever before. But like smug self-important white male elitists, black men still haven't figured out that the left didn't do them any real favors.
Same thing with most white women really. Sure, they have escaped their "keepers" and now get to pay all the bills as real wages have fallen and the cost of living skyrocketed. Welcome to equality, LADIES! Hahaha! Enjoy paying half your salary on a 30 year mortgage for a 2 bedroom condo?
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:27AM
"I am a fiscal conservative..."
Ah, someone's trying to play the wolf in sheep's clothing game. He's trying to "help" the conservative cause by advising them to be more like liberals.
Nice try!
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 11:30AM
We have lost the culture war to some extent because we are part to blame..all of us. I actually do not believe we have completely lost this war and see many signs that the progressives may be actually losing ground in this area each day. There have been a number of solid studies, if you remember, that have come out in the last ten years around issues ranging from abortion, feminism, and sexuality that show a growing number of people, especially young women, who are rejecting the feminist dogma and increasingly do not think of themselves as "feminist." nor identify with the old Gloria Steinem generation. There have been serious gains by the pro-life movement as well...and more Americans are increasingly becoming very uncomfortable about abortion as science and technology has given us a window into the womb. All is far from not being lost. Planned Parenthood is becoming exposed for the hell hole that it is. The welfare state has been exposed as the destroyer of black families. The home schooling movement is growing by leaps and bounds. Hollywood is bending to pressure by profamily groups to create more films that favor traditional family values.
I have said this before...we are all part to blame because we will not do what is necessary to change this...and it could be changed literally over night. Cancel the cable subscription..turn it off! We are the majority and we give consent to this madness by silence and consent through indecisive action. The power is in your remote control and wallet.
gearjammer| 2.22.11 @ 1:20PM
Yes yes yes ! Cancel the cable and insist it be replaced with choose what you want only service options ! What a blow against the DPPM=democratic part political machine=this would be ! And, no movies as well-hit em in the pocketbook.
Seek| 2.22.11 @ 7:33PM
I see a new movie a week and have no intentions whatsoever to stop. The Religious radical trope about "immoral Hollywood" is as overdone as it is absurd.
gearjammer| 2.22.11 @ 8:56PM
It is about the money dude. Money Hollywood uses to fund the left wing agenda that is destroying our nation, and if you starve the beast you weaken and eventually kill it.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 1:50PM
Focus on the family:
President George H.W. Bush had an affair with British-born Jennifer Fitzgerald that lasted at least two decades, all while married to Bar, who said, “He didn’t even notice when I stopped coloring my hair.”
Sen. John McCain, 2008 Republican presidential frontrunner, and admitted adulterer and alleged philanderer. Extramarital Affair with Cindy Ended His Friendship with Reagans in the 1970s - that's rich.
Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of New York City and another GOP 2008 presidential contender, betrayed his second wife, TV presenter Donna Hanover, with his “very good friend” Judith Nathan, whom he has since married. Hanover also publicly accused Rudy of having an affair with a staffer, Cristyne Lategano-Nicholas.
Rush Limbaugh, comedian, (a.k.a. “Rusty Sharpe”) dated Marta Fitzgerald while she was married to someone else. Marta later became his third wife.
Bill O’Reilly, propagandist, who is married to Maureen McPhilmy, tried to have phone sex with Andrea Mackris, who sued him for sexual harrassment.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, is probably the most audacious serial adulterer in any political party.
Rep. Bob Barr’s notoriety as an adulterer was one of many ironies around the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DoMA) which he wrote, and which was passed with the leadership of fellow adulterers Sen. Majority Leader Bob Dole and House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
Rep. Henry Hyde, who served as chairman of House Mangers in the adultery-related impeachment of President Clinton, was a home-wrecker himself. Hyde had an affair when he was a young and foolish man of 41 while he and his girlfriend were both very much married. Her husband later said Hyde broke up his family.
Gary Bauer, professional moralizing Christian nationalist, experienced a mutiny when he was running for president when actual Christians on the staff of his 2000 presidential campaign quit in protest over Bauer’s “inappropriate” behavior with a 26-year-old deputy campaign manager. Euww.
Neal Horsley, and rightwing religious nut, freely admitted to a kinky sex life
Rep. Bob Livingston, the man who would have been House Speaker after Newt if Larry Flynt hadn’t uncovered some very kinky dirt on Livingtston.
It is true that Nancy Reagan was pregnant when she married Ronnie, but neither of them was married to anyone else at the time. By Republican standards of “abstinence only,” Nancy clearly did not say “no.”
A definite top 10 contender is the Wall Street Journal’s John Fund, a sanctimonius Clinton-hater, who, had a fling with the DAUGHTER of someone he was having an affair with and then arranged for (or at least condoned) the abortion of their child.
Back-bencher Rep. Don Sherwood of Pennsylvania, whose adultery with a younger woman was revealed after he tried to strangle her, didn’t make the cut.
Rep. Jim Nussle of Iowa, who used his wife and autistic child as family values props then left them for a high-powered lobbyist after he was elected.
Swaggart
Haggard
Rekers
Scaife
Morris
Craig
Sanford
Ensign
Vitter
Bakker
and on and on and on......
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:58PM
Kennedy? Clinton? Kennedy? Frank? Kennedy? Studds? Kennedy? Dodd? Kerry? Wright? Robinson? Kennedy? Hays? Lance? Gore? Byrd? Fulbright? Maddox?...
The list goes on and on and on...
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 1:59PM
Oh, and don't forget Mohammed...He liked little girls.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:22PM
9 years old. Aisha.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:22PM
9 years old. Aisha.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 2:47PM
I do not recall any of these philanderers introducing legislation that tried to control people's love lives, civil or otherwise......that seems to be the province of conservative philanderers only.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 3:14PM
Obeying the Law is not "controlling people's lives"...That's for violent, misogynistic philosophies like Islam.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 3:48PM
No one is controlling anybodys sexual practices, jack ass. The next part of this thread should contain your arguments that the founding fathers were secular atheist that believed that morality and religion had no place in the public sector. Have I jumped ahead? IT'S BORING...HEARD IT SO MANY TIMES BEFORE AND AGAIN AND AGAIN..I COULD WRITE YOUR PART OF THIS THREAD IN MY SLEEEEEP!
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 4:03PM
Actually, Simon, the Founding Fathers were Hindus.
'Cuz Hindusim has such a long association with freedom, liberty, and enlightenment.
Don't tell me you didn't get the memo?
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 4:09PM
My point is that successive societies have failed when they attempt to control the legitimate desires of the populace.
It is a losing proposition when behaviors are suggested to be "better" than another's within the law.
To your point, the founding fathers were a mixed bag - just like we are today. Some atheists, some con artists, profiteers, slave owners, pious followers of Christ and to a man - educated opportunists.
The country is evolving. Washington's election had a total vote of 39,000 - no women, no blacks, likely no Jews or Catholics either. Hmmm.
We celebrate that election as a victory for liberty over tyranny - I suggest that was just step one in the prusuit of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness for an evolving country. Those who stand in the way of the truthful quest of another citizen might as well be wearing a red coat, in my view.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:43AM
You forgot to mention children. What about their right to vote? Are they citizens on a truthful quest?
The age restriction on the right to vote is as arbitrary as any other including gender. Did you ever see the show "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?" Plenty of those kids know more about civics than half the adult population!
Yet, the state uses a rule of thumb to determine that by the age of 18, they PROBABLY are competent to vote.
Now let's address the myth of the free leftist culture. You can do anything you like such as be gay, or Jewish, etc. right? WRONG! In all leftist countries, they have strict speech and thought codes. The left made the workplace into a sterile anti-sexual zone where a man can be fired for telling a woman she looks pretty. And don't try to put up any Christmas decorations at work, wear a crucifix to church or display them in a public place!
But the left will certainly allow displays of Islamic religion in all these places. It's hypocritical but ok since it suits their reactionary knee-jerk agenda against GW Bush. Good going GW! You got the left to hug radical Islam!
How do you think the new Islamic Left is going to put up with equal rights for women? hahahaha!
The left is morally, economically, and even intellectually bankrupt on all things other than saying or doing whatever it takes, and stabbing whomever in the back, just to keep from admitting they were wrong and made a mistake because that's the only thing that matters to them. You don't care about the precious women, or the blacks, or the gays but rather about being so superior to those who disagree with you. There's a place for that attitude: It's called CHURCH! And at least with churchgoers, they KNOW it's a RELIGION!
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 4:10PM
My point is that successive societies have failed when they attempt to control the legitimate desires of the populace.
It is a losing proposition when behaviors are suggested to be "better" than another's within the law.
To your point, the founding fathers were a mixed bag - just like we are today. Some atheists, some con artists, profiteers, slave owners, pious followers of Christ and to a man - educated opportunists.
The country is evolving. Washington's election had a total vote of 39,000 - no women, no blacks, likely no Jews or Catholics either. Hmmm.
We celebrate that election as a victory for liberty over tyranny - I suggest that was just step one in the prusuit of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness for an evolving country. Those who stand in the way of the truthful quest of another citizen might as well be wearing a red coat, in my view.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 3:41PM
So, whats your point?
gearjammer| 2.22.11 @ 8:58PM
They raise and pay for their kids_unlike the democrat base. Let it go you dummy.
George LeS| 2.22.11 @ 12:54PM
Thank you, simon templar, for adding some perspective. Things aren't quite so hopeless as Bethel & most of the posters here believe. Why, even when the cultural Left was in full Blitzkrieg mode, the ERA did fail, after all.
Not that things aren't pretty grim; I just don't think that counsels of despair are correct. (Although I do admit I tend that way, myself.)
@Bob Miller:
"I can't see much hope for a culture that worships money and material pleasure. If conservatives as a group buy into that attitude, we're in trouble."
What you say is, strictly, correct, but that is no reason to lose heart. The disease which afflicts us in the 21st C was just as virulent in the 1st. It's a malady we know we will never cure. The most we can do is limit the damage.
ronlsb | 2.22.11 @ 1:12PM
Nice job of analyzing the consequences to America if eternal truths are not defended and ultimately upheld as the norm for our society. Thanks.
Joie de Vevre| 2.22.11 @ 3:06PM
Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) are right there with the Catholics and Orthodox Jews as a principle upholder of the Judeo-Christian belief in a God-centered, moral culture. We've never forgotten that we're in a war for the hearts and souls of mankind. Sadly, too many others have surrendered.
Ryan| 2.22.11 @ 3:27PM
Except for the whole multiple wives thing, for which there was never a positive result in the OT or NT.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 4:04PM
...Or the whole Joseph Smith thingie-dingie...But hey, why focus on details?
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 4:33PM
"Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) are right there with the Catholics and Orthodox Jews as a principle upholder of the Judeo-Christian belief in a God-centered, moral culture."
I'm not an expert but isn't there quite a few contradictions twixt the Catholics, Mormons, and Orthodox Jews.
The first being I don't believe the Mormons and Jews believe in the enabling and covering up for church leaders so they can continue to rape children.
Or am I wrong there?
Doctor Right| 2.23.11 @ 11:12AM
So much for that whole Warren Jeff's story, right??
Nice try. Mormonism's entire history began when Joseph Smith got the hots for underage girls. Smith's first wife was none-too-pleased, either.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 3:57PM
"Conservatives prevail when the economy is the issue"
God you people are stupid.
Conservatives just 3 years ago led us into the worst economy since the great depression.
And how long did the depression last? We're just getting started fixing what you dumbasses have done to the economy.
And what will ObamaCare do the economy?
Reduce the deficit by $230 billion and allow me to buy private health insurance for my deaf daughter?
And you have a problem with that?
You people are idiots.
Doctor Right| 2.22.11 @ 4:07PM
You suffer from a SEVERE knowledge deficit, although your ability to recite Liberal talking-points is without equal.
You're in so far over your head that your idiocy is REALLY not worth addressing.
Needless to say, you have everything EXACTLY backwards...Like a good Liberal.
Rather than tell you to leave this page and troll no more, I'd encourage you to stay, and read TAS-Online regularly. You might learn something.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 4:21PM
I'll defend on this point, it wasn't conservatives that got us into this mess, but faux-fiscal conservatives like Reagan and Bush 1 and Junior that successfully paid back their benefactors but did nothing to the government outlay. Government grew on each of these men's watches.
A true fiscal conservative would self-impose a balance-budget, require a 2/3 majority for tax increases and mandate war bonds for armed expeditions. Farm subsidies would end, "small business" would be redefined for small businesses and tax loopholes for outsourcers ended completely.
If the Fed survives a sober evaluation of its contribution to the country, then it would be reworked to be a buffer against usury and reckless acts by banks and wall street.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 4:29PM
"I'll defend on this point, it wasn't conservatives that got us into this mess"
And you are an idiot. Conservatives and their leaders cheered and encouraged both Reagan and Bush. And got both of them elected.
Are you trying to tell me that conservatives were against the Iraq invasion?
That alone was $3 trillion. All borrowed.
God you people are stupid.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 4:51PM
Whoa - I'm with you jharp,
True conservatives are not the Kristols or Perles of the world, in fact much of the opposition to the Iraq folly came from the adults in the real conservative movement - you know the talk softly and carry a big stick gang?
I was against it, as I am against unpaid "anything" governments do.
Fannie and Freddie and even Clinton were enablers that doubled-down on Reagan's deregs of the 80's. Banks are amoral by nature, saw a vacuum and went to town. Sachs and bond raters are the true criminals with their putting lipstick on financial pigs world-wide, and like cattle at the slaughter, we lapped it up wholesale.
Ma Bell was broken up on Reagan's watch, could you imagine such intervention today?
Healthcare is not care, it is a rigged system that needs to be gutted, and if government can do it more cheaply with equal outcomes, I don't fear it.
But prove it rationally and hacks on here will have to fall back on fake nostalgia.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 5:05PM
"Whoa - I'm with you jharp,"
No you're not. Not with moronic statements like this one "it wasn't conservatives that got us into this mess"
And this "much of the opposition to the Iraq folly came from the adults in the real conservative movement"
Name one.
"Ma Bell was broken up on Reagan's watch"
Wrong again. It was Carter that broke up Ma Bell.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 5:06PM
More Chris Matthew's talking points? Troll.
You write,
"Healthcare is not care, it is a rigged system that needs to be gutted, and if government can do it more cheaply with equal outcomes, I don't fear it."
No conservative on this planet would ever say that the government can do it more cheaply. Troll. Skip back to the Huff. Fiscal conservative. LOL.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 10:27PM
"No conservative on this planet would ever say that the government can do it more cheaply."
That is because conservatives are stupid and will only say what Rush Limbaugh tells them they can say.
And I suppose our police and fire would be be cheaper, or the coast guard, or the SEC, or the CSPC, or the CDC, or the FBI, or the Interstate Highway system, or the airtraffic controllers, or the U.S. Military, or our Land Grant Universities, or our locks and damns on our rivers.
You f*cking idiots need to get a clue.
God you people are stupid.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:47AM
Another cute leftist word game is with "deregulation". Everything bad is caused by "deregulation" such as Freddie and Fannie. Oh, wait, that was due to Congress requiring them and banks buy bad loans from women and minorities. That's "deregulation". And California requiring utilities to "buy" energy including green energy while not having the right to raise rates or cut power to save costs, that's also "deregulation".
In this manner, the left can continue to blame all their failures on republicans and conservatives either in the form of "deregulation" or calling any republican who makes ANY political compromise a moderate or faux conservative.
In the meantime, the left rides around in cars and private jets preaching the evils of global warming...
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 4:52PM
Yeah, and your Messiah has a solution. Spend even more money and increase the national debt to 13 trillion. Do you even have a clue as to what is happening or what happened? This is not about Conservatives...its about RINO's and progressive liberal democrats that have been destroying this country for the last 80 years. You write,
"Reduce the deficit by $230 billion and allow me to buy private health insurance for my deaf daughter?" That one really left me speechless..I just do not know where to begin. Sometimes a person ignorance is so deep you just do not know where to begin. I am not a columnist but just a blogger..and do not have neither time nor space to answer. To be honest, your ignorance has made me sad as I really want your fantasy to come true for the sake of your daughter. There is a group called the Heritage Foundation..google it. It will provide you with the information you seek. It has been around a long time and it is a well respected, research institution dedicated to study of social issues and government. Look, you got to understand that we are not against health care reform and we would like to see that you and your daughter can buy affordable insurance. I need it myself and am paying for my own..and paying a lot for it.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 5:15PM
""Reduce the deficit by $230 billion and allow me to buy private health insurance for my deaf daughter?" That one really left me speechless..I just do not know where to begin."
Begin with the part of my assertion that is false. And then tell us why it is false. And provide data to support your claim.
You can't jackass. The CBO, the non partisan CBO that everyone agrees id the bible to score bills has been quite clear.
ObamaCare reduces the deficit by $230 BILLION.
And even the dumbest teabagger knows that pre existing conditions can no longer be a reason to deny access to insurance.
God you people really are stupid. Just when I think you can't get any dumber someone does.
Seek| 2.22.11 @ 7:37PM
Do you specialize in ideas or just in insulting and threatening anyone you disagree with?
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 8:20PM
I have threatened no one.
You are a liar.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:50AM
"You can't jackass. The CBO, the non partisan "CBO that everyone agrees id the bible to score bills has been quite clear. ObamaCare reduces the deficit by $230 BILLION."
Yeah yeah yeah. And the conservatives can just direct the "non partisan" CBO to predict that their anti-Obama Care bill reduce it by twice that amount.
Oh, and I have a 12 inch penis. (If we can just make up stats, let's go with that one!)
Really? You really believe the CBO is an accurate predictor of the cost of a program and it's effect on the deficit? Really? Do you REALLY believe that?
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:25PM
JHarp---the Dems were in control of the House and controlled the purse strings in 2006, which is when things started downhill.
Your deaf daughter will be covered by private insurance after 6 months. Sorry. My son was covered by my health insurance, and he has right sided ear microtia and required a BAHA. I know about deaf kids. Shuddup.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 8:19PM
"JHarp---the Dems were in control of the House and controlled the purse strings in 2006, which is when things started downhill."
God you people are stupid. My daughter was denied coverage in 1999.
"Your deaf daughter will be covered by private insurance after 6 months."
And even more idiocy. No she won't. No insurer will accept her due to her pre existing condition.
You are a liar. And you are stupid.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 4:17PM
"You might learn something."
OK. I'll bite.
What is wrong with reducing the deficit by $230 billion and allowing me to buy private health insurance for my deaf daughter?
Which is exactly what ObamaCare does.
Just what is it that this will do to the economy?
God you people are stupid.
canuckistani| 2.22.11 @ 4:33PM
You focus on heathcare, but I agree with you - it is stupid for a country like ours to spend almost double on services other developed countries pay for with similar or even lower outcomes.
Notwithstanding the government component, I fail to understand why this fact alone has not tweaked the attention of true conservatives?
How is reducing cost for similar outcomes a marxist takeover? Dunno.
I think BHO erred when he tried to play both sides and kept the insurance industry - and that's what it is, an industry - in the game.
By clearly illustrating costs and its effects on our national security would have won over conservative minds. I would hate to suggest the messenger was an aggravating factor for cons, but it is likely true.....sad.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 5:00PM
Jharp, This guy is not a conservative..and I would suggest you not listen to a word he says. We get a lot of trolls out here posing as such trying to confuse and misrepresent conservativism. If you truly want to learn and are seeking the truth about what is happening and why conservatives are objecting to this Obamacare you really will have to do some research and find out what is exactly in it and what the objections are. You can not come out to a blogging site and expect to get the whole story.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:26PM
Canada has us as it's safety valve---we are overloaded by 3rd world immigrants in our health system because of our borders.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 4:39PM
"Notwithstanding the government component, I fail to understand why this fact alone has not tweaked the attention of true conservatives?"
Because conservatives are stupid and only support what Rush Limbaugh tells them to support.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 5:01PM
Now...have I just wasted my time with another socialist troll?
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 5:09PM
That is your call to do with your time how you see fit.
Let's hear the conservative solution to healthcare reform.
I've been waiting for 25 years.
You've got nothing. I know it and you know it.
l5j6| 2.22.11 @ 6:35PM
There is not "conservative solution" to healthcare because there is not "crisis" in healthcare. Never was.
Some 85% of Americans have health insurance. 100% have "healthcare" (see ER's). There isn't 30, 40, 50 million uninsured people. There is perhaps 10-12 million uninsured Americans. The rest have reasons why they don't have insurance at a particular point in time when a poll/survey was taken.
Furthermore, millions of hte uninsured are illegal aliens (read future Democrat voters), that's why our Marxist-Moooslim in Chief, aks, "The Genius" desperately wants to pass one size fits all, top down, government healthcare. And that's why Genius Boy's approval rating am0ng white registered middle class voters is in the mid-30s.
Ouch. Barry Hussein "Jimma" Obama. Another one term mistake.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 8:01PM
l5j6,
Only dumbass dittohead Limbaugh sheep believe that our health care system, that we spend 2 to 3 times what the rest of the modern world spends for the same level of care, isn't broken.
And Obama was elected by promising to do something about it. And in spite of the teabagging retard's shout downs got a fairly decent bill passed.
God you people are stupid.
PolishKnight| 2.24.11 @ 11:53AM
Actually, I agree with you. The health care system IS broken but Obamacare doesn't fix it. It doesn't do anything about the trial lawyers and defensive healthcare, reducing healthcare premiums and costs for the middle class, and bringing in more doctors to address staffing shortages.
It actually makes these matters worse!
But you don't care about that do you? I would go even further to say you don't care about your deaf daughter. Just as Abraham was asked by God to sacrifice his son most liberals would happily toss their babies up on an altar and cut out their hearts in order to protect their sacred religion. Either that, or the sky will fall down due to global warming!
Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 7:32PM
Set up State sponsored group health insurance cooperatives to cover people who have been turned down by two health insurers; means test it for cost of coverage---it should be set higher than private insurance for those who can afford it, so that people will buy insurance before they get sick. Allow insurers to compete across state lines. Eliminate coverage of illegal aliens so that more American citizens can be covered under Medicaid or Medicare (1/2 of all babies born in LA County---2 % of all Babies in the Country---are illegal aliens. 1 COUNTY!) Tort reform on malpractice lawsuits---loser pays like every other country. No caps on damages---Loser pays will do the trick.
That would do it. By the way, I'm an expert on British style NHS systems---I worked as a senior consultant in one. I know their flaws. Be VERY careful what you ask for, JHarp.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 7:49PM
"By the way, I'm an expert on British style NHS systems"
You are an idiot and a liar.
The UK's health care system is unique. No one else uses that model you lying idiot.
And health insurers can sell insurance in whatever state they would like. Moron.
And malpractice accounts for less than 1% of health care costs. Check to see how the caps worked out in Texas, the state with the most uninsured.
God you people are stupid. And liars as well.
In closing I am curious. Why didn't the GOP enact all of these changes whilst in power?
It would have been all fixed and Obama wouldn't have won the election as his major platform was the reform of our health care system.
You are the worst America has to offer. Ignorant lying scum.
simon templar| 2.22.11 @ 9:27PM
Why didn't the GOP enact all of these changes whilst in power?
Because liberal socialist useful idiots (now that we are calling names) like you threw a fit and accused him of killing old people and families when he tried to privatize just a small speck of the medicare program and social security. Every attempt to rid these programs of corruption, reform them, examine them, or offer private sector solutions was met with virulent, slanderous, hateful resistance. Like the jack asses in Wisconsin. I tell you what jharp, pay your own f*cking way and stop leaching off the rest of us. I do not owe you shit. That's it in a nutshell. If you still insist on it then move to the People's Republic of China. I have had just enough of your bullshit for today and your troll friends.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 10:00PM
"Because liberal socialist useful idiots (now that we are calling names) like you threw a fit"
Ahh. It's our fault for objecting to the GOP ideas. God you people are stupid.
"and accused him of killing old people and families"
You are an idiot. That was Palin and the teabaggers accusation when Congress passed a law that all Americans get equal access to private health insurance (ObamaCare).
"when he tried to privatize just a small speck of the medicare program and social security."
Aagin. You are a liar and an idiot. No one has proposed privatizing Medicare. And forcing taxpayers to but a product (ala ObamaCare and ala privatizing Social Security) I thought was unconstitutional according to you teabagging dumbasses anyways.
"Every attempt to rid these programs of corruption, reform them, examine them, or offer private sector solutions was met with virulent, slanderous, hateful resistance."
Yes. The teabaggers were quite repulsive, slanderous, and hateful when Obama tried to cut the fraid and waste from Medicare. I was especailly repulsed by the teabagger spitting on our black Congressmen.
"I tell you what jharp, pay your own f*cking way and stop leaching off the rest of us."
I have worked for myself for nearly 30 years. And have paid my own way throughout.
And I'd like to be able to buy health insurance for my deaf daughter. But maybe you're right. To hell with buying her insurance. She's 18 now. Maybe I'll just put her on the welfare train.
God you people are stupid.
emo| 2.23.11 @ 7:59PM
I love the work TeaBagger. It shows how intellectually bankrupt the left is. They cannot defend Obama's dispicable policies or attack successfully free market economics. So they call names. We could ask for more vapid pathetic enemies.
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 11:25PM
"I have had just enough of your bullshit for today and your troll friends."
It's always nice to see one of you idiots wave the white flag and run and hide.
What's that term you used to use? Surrender monkeys?
Maybe we'll meet again.
I hope so. I thorughly enjoyed pointing out your lies and idiocy.
I dare you to challenge me again.
Loser.
simon templar| 2.23.11 @ 1:57AM
I love to meet you again..in person..and your fictitious deaf daughter. I would kick your ass from here to Sunday. You are probably a little twerp that sits in his basement getting kicks out of writing liberal tripe on conservative web sites and ending every post with " God you people are stupid." Very original. Yes, it is getting very boring responding to your continual fantasies, lies, and distortions. Bam Bam did not lift a finger to cut fraud and waste in Medicare nor the spitting on the congressmen ever happened. Most sane people know that that was a media fabrication and there is no evidence of it, jack ass. Challenge you? You are a waste of space. Privitization of social security has nothing to do with forcing people to buy anything..another lie from a liar who call others liars. Once again you want health insurance, then go buy some. You are not getting any on my dime. Leach. The majoriy of Americans are moving rapidly towards conservativism each day. That's why you are in a little desperate tantrum throwing snitch and posting on conservative web sites. Your losing, little boy! America is waking up. You exhibit all the classic signs of the mental disorder of liberalism particularly calling everyone stupid. Then again by your post..perhaps I am being a bit unfair to liberals. I really think you might be suffering from some serious mental and emotional problems. Seek help. This will be indeed my last post..otherwise I could be charged as an enabler of your sickness.
jharp| 2.23.11 @ 12:02PM
"Once again you want health insurance, then go buy some. You are not getting any on my dime."
I will soon be able to thanks to President Obama and ObamaCare.
And it ain't on your nickel you dumbsh*it.
Amazing how conservatives object to ObamaCare yet are completely ignorant as to what it's all about.
God you people are stupid.
emo| 2.23.11 @ 7:57PM
no you wont be "Able" to buy health insurance thanks to Obamacare, youll be FORCED to.
Obamacare cant be too good given that literally hundreds of waivers have been given to corporations and unions. What do you love about Obamacare that the CWA hates?
Also try and not use profanity. Leftists have a tendency to use profanity instead of speak intelligently
jharp| 2.22.11 @ 7:51PM
"1/2 of all babies born in LA County---2 % of all Babies in the Country---are illegal aliens. 1 COUNTY!) "
You are an incredible dumbass.
Babies born in L.A. county are American citizens.
Good God you people are stupid.
PCP Smoker| 2.22.11 @ 6:57PM
Laying the groundwork for "my man Mitch", ehh?
Imagine if we had a conservative in California, who instead of apologizing for being white and conservative, actually blasted homosexual marriage, including anal sex, drug use, corporatism, and called abortion murder?
I guarantee you the majority of blacks and 'panics would be pulling the lever for you, including the illegal aliens.
Keep pushing a wuss like Daniels, who is refusing to back a right to work bill in Injunana by the way, and it will be McCain all over again. All subservient respect and no backbone. Fuck Mitch Daniels.
Mike| 2.23.11 @ 4:18PM
Your moniker says it all.
emo| 2.23.11 @ 7:54PM
Buchanan said "We are in a religious war" that is far worse than saying we are in a culture war. One reason social conservatives have been so unsuccessful and economic conservatives so successful is so many social issues have been taken away from the legislative and popular vote process and taken over by the courts. Such has not happened with economic issues. Thus the Tea Party was more successful in 18 months than the Pro-Life movement has been in 40 years.
The left knows this and that is why they want to put as many economic issues outside the realm of popular opinion and into the courts. Thus far they havent figured out a way.
Vita Men| 2.23.11 @ 9:29PM
"America better watch it or in a couple of decades
we're ALLL going to be a minstrel show for Red China."
-Gore Vidal
1985
(the 'heyday' of Reagan 'conservatism')
---Buchanan is a front and a con.
He's on board with the CNP (Rockefeller
front, a CFR for the Globalist 'Right').
Aside from pitching demoralizing talking
points viz a viz the Globalist enabling of
the awesomely genocidal RED Chinese,
he's also directly connected to the ground
zero of sellout --NIXON/MAO 1972.
-------PLEASE, HURL ---- A S A P----
Reebok | 8.11.11 @ 3:06AM
is good
العاب | 4.11.12 @ 5:31PM
Excellent points Anthony..points often overlooked. If we truly have lost it..then why do they play to these family values every election. Good eye, Anthony!