Message
Anonymous wrote:I am a liberal and I think this is funny!Anonymous wrote:
+1. I nearly busted my liberal gut laughing.
Anonymous wrote:+100 palin is big with evangelist and tea partiers. The governor of Iowa(big time establishment republican guy) just came out against Cruz, but did not endorse anyone. Cruz attacked him by calling him something like an establishment republican who lives on off special interest handout. The reporters quickly asked Cruz if he would support Farm subsidies and ethanol fuel programs. Cruz did not answer. Cruz is being attacked by both the tea partiers and the establishment republicans. This will hurt him.Anonymous wrote:Palin endorsement of Trump is a major blow to Cruz's claim to the Radical right wing Tea Party voters. He may start to deflate rapidly now, like Ben Carson.
Palin did not attack Cruz. She mentioned liking several candidates other than Trump and noted that she had supported some in previous races. Cruz was one of these, and he responded to her endorsement of Trump by saying he still has high regard for her and is grateful for the help she gave him in his Senate primary.
Anonymous wrote:He is also half white.
So were lots of slaves; it didn't buy them freedom. In this country, black is the dominant gene! That's hyperbole, not science.
Anonymous wrote:Where do see he might lose NH? Every poll I've seen he's crushing in NH. He could easily lose Iowa. His biggest problem will be if it becomes a two-man race early on, Then, many think, the establishment will solidify behind his single opponent.
Even if that opponent is Cruz???
Anonymous wrote:Major snowstorm with potential blizzard conditions forecasted for Friday-Saturday.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/01/19/forecasts-converging-on-serious-friday-saturday-snowstorm/?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_cwg-1115am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Sounds like God has spoken against the march
I checked the website http://marchforlife.org/mfl-2016/. It says "Despite the winter storm prediction, the March for Life will not be cancelled."
Concerning the citizenship issue: Cruz is clearly a citizen by birth, but not a native born citizen. The Constitutional term "natural born" citizen has never been adjudicated by the Supreme Court. Until that happens, or someone like Cruz sets a precedent by slipping into the Presidency without a legal challenge, whether it means native born or citizen by birth, or even, as suggested last night by Cruz, whether it includes both parents being citizens, is not determined. I don't agree with Trump on many things, but getting a definite ruling on this seems like a good idea for Cruz and all of us.
Anonymous wrote:....Is the yellow star a Muslim symbol?Anonymous wrote:Interesting to me that the very prominent yellow stars worn by the Muslims look surprisingly similar (not identical) to the Star of David. Ironic, to say the least.
The yellow star is a symbol of the Nazi persecution of Jews, drawing a parallel with Trump's plan to register all Muslims.
Anonymous wrote:I saw another clip where two people were thrown out of a Trump rally for holding up signs that said "America Is Already Great" - like the Muslims in the clip above, they weren't being loud, unruly, abusive, and weren't disturbing anyone. It was everyone else causing a huge ruckus. And yet security throws them out instead of the ones who are actually being abusive.
To be stoical in the face of derision by a mob is soooo PC. No wonder they were tossed out!
Aren't there different concepts being confounded here? At one extreme is a man with several wives, each in a separate household, and at the other is a single household shared by three or more people, of any combination of genders, having sex in any combinations they choose. The first is basically one guy engaged in several one-man-one-woman relationships, while the second is the more general form of the idea of consenting adults not being told what to do by the state.
Think of all the gossip if HRC had been alone with a top MO'M adviser!
Am I the only one that thinks the Cruz ad with the kids is absolutely sickening, and will eventually do him more harm than the silly cartoon can alleviate?
I'm perplexed by the four examples OP gave us. If I'm repeating, I apologize -- it's a long thread.
In the first one, witnesses heard an argument, heard shots, and saw someone running away. The fleeing man was apprehended, but no charges have been filed.
In the second, someone driving erratically crashed into a gas line, and shot at EMS coming to help. After much back and forth gunfire, the guy passed out and was taken to the hospital.
In the third case, a guy with a toy gun was shot several times, kicked in the face, and required surgery.
In the fourth case, a sixteen year old robber was killed.
I apologize, but I don't see any of these cases as a clear-cut improvement over what might have happened if the "victims" had not been armed. In the first, there was no robbery, just an armed drunk in a car. In the second, there may or may not have been a robbery attempt. Even in the other two, it's not clear to me who were the real victims.
In the first one, witnesses heard an argument, heard shots, and saw someone running away. The fleeing man was apprehended, but no charges have been filed.
In the second, someone driving erratically crashed into a gas line, and shot at EMS coming to help. After much back and forth gunfire, the guy passed out and was taken to the hospital.
In the third case, a guy with a toy gun was shot several times, kicked in the face, and required surgery.
In the fourth case, a sixteen year old robber was killed.
I apologize, but I don't see any of these cases as a clear-cut improvement over what might have happened if the "victims" had not been armed. In the first, there was no robbery, just an armed drunk in a car. In the second, there may or may not have been a robbery attempt. Even in the other two, it's not clear to me who were the real victims.
It's not really germane to the conversation, but as a non-believer I am curious what goes on within one during such a conversion. Do your beliefs actually change as to the Trinity, the virgin birth, immaculate conception, resurrection, transubstantiation, etc?
I am really not trying to be snarky. I have a friend who was a Jewish convert to Catholicism, and I was surprised when he made it clear to me that the conversion of wafer to flesh of Jesus is very real to him. I am just curious to what extent conversion extends, from accepting the rituals and raising the kids in the religion at one end, to complete acceptance of Church doctrine at the other.
I suspect it varies with the individual, but I would like to hear how it is for the various posters here. No nasty feedback from me, I promise.
I am really not trying to be snarky. I have a friend who was a Jewish convert to Catholicism, and I was surprised when he made it clear to me that the conversion of wafer to flesh of Jesus is very real to him. I am just curious to what extent conversion extends, from accepting the rituals and raising the kids in the religion at one end, to complete acceptance of Church doctrine at the other.
I suspect it varies with the individual, but I would like to hear how it is for the various posters here. No nasty feedback from me, I promise.
Anonymous wrote:Oh, please don't call it Christian terrorism. I'm a Christian (Episcopalian) and my rector accompanied me to the (unnamed DC hospital) where I had my "medical termination" due to an anencephalic fetus. When I was a member of another mainline Protestant church, as a teenager, I met an elder from my church at Planned Parenthood, where he prescribed birth control to my friends and I. So....please...this is right wing fanaticism. It has NOTHING to do with Christianity. Kind of like Islam and the jihadists, you know?takoma wrote:Jeff, I commend you for your restraint in not calling for Christian terrorism to be named and for all Christians to be barred from entering the District.
I was being facetious, trying to make a parallel pointing out the unfairness of the demand that the President use the term "Islamic terrorism". I figured that the idea of banning Christians from entering DC was outlandish enough to tip off my sarcasm.
Jeff, I commend you for your restraint in not calling for Christian terrorism to be named and for all Christians to be barred from entering the District.