Donald Trump

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Decent people, including Christians, do not pick and choose horrible, abusive, lying sexual predators to spread the good word. So yes, I agree some Christians do indeed go with the "by any means necessary" tactic. When that includes facilitating the likes of Trump, that tells me they are Christians who actively go against everything their so-called faith stands for to get there. I see no reason to just accept that and let them off the hook "because they're human" - everyone is, and lots and lots of them don't compromise their morals as they drive towards impinging their beliefs on others (via politics in this case). Why should I be cool with them doing it just because they claim to be Christian? To me, that is kind of like calling someone a good vegan even though they raise veal in their backyard. It doesn't make sense to me. IMO, there is nothing wrong with holding people up to their self-declared moral standards.

Yeah, I have a hard core Born Again cousin, and she is absolutely appalled by Trump... She would also never in a million years tell me I'm going to Hell for my Atheism. She's a very good Christian.

I would imagine their justification is that he will enact policies that fall in line with their religious philosophies, and that he is merely a vessel. 

again, I'm not defending trump or his supporters, I just find it incredibly naive to just say "all of them are horrible people". 

I've stopped treating people like they are on some pedestal when they've put themselves there. that seems odd to me. a religious leader? sure. 

our version of good christian and their versions can be very different. there are many christians that take the bible literally, and that you aren't a good christian if you aren't trying to convert every last soul, and yes, that includes conversion by fear. 

Right, that is their justification... Them wanting their religious philosophies embedded into government and law is not sweetening the deal for me, lol. Fuck that. That they are willing to make a deal with the Devil just makes it that much worse, and that is why I'm so critical of it. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I don't think expecting people not to support and facilitate and sexual predator who can't go 24 hours without lying through his teeth while in the most powerful position on the face of the planet is very much to ask at all. Not a pedestal. A totally basic level of decency is where I'm placing my expectations. No amount of "yeah, but it will help my cause"ing will change my view of that. It's not naivety IMO. It's simply having basic standards of morality, and mine aren't even particularly high in the scheme of things - certainly not in the scheme of Jesus's teachings! Holding Christians and non-Christians alike up to that is hardly unreasonable IMO. But yes, when people do it while they claim to have Jesus in their court as well, it certainly puts a spotlight on them! I'm not a fan of not walking the talk, and I don't that's naivety at all. I'm not prepared to lower my standards to what often appears to be the new normal.

(BTW, when I say "good Christian" I am simply talking about abiding by the basic rules of decency that Christian believe are the basic teachings of Jesus and the simple behavioural expectations for a kind, moral person. I think it's fair to say that helping to raise a sexual predator who sexualizes his daughter and who lies and cheats regularly and who literally causes harm to needy people and who supports racists to be leader of a nation "under God" does not apply)

calling him the Devil is the same as 30 calling Trudeau "little boy", btw. 

I'm not saying your expectations are too much to ask. the point here is being missed. I'm saying your have grander expectations of some because of the pedestal they put themselves on, which, in effect, legitimizes that pedestal. 

Lol, it is not the same at all. I was using a well-known figure of speech that was completely appropriate to the topic of conversation. That isn't what's going on with someone calling Trudeau "little boy" for no justifiable reason.

HughFreakingDillon

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Decent people, including Christians, do not pick and choose horrible, abusive, lying sexual predators to spread the good word. So yes, I agree some Christians do indeed go with the "by any means necessary" tactic. When that includes facilitating the likes of Trump, that tells me they are Christians who actively go against everything their so-called faith stands for to get there. I see no reason to just accept that and let them off the hook "because they're human" - everyone is, and lots and lots of them don't compromise their morals as they drive towards impinging their beliefs on others (via politics in this case). Why should I be cool with them doing it just because they claim to be Christian? To me, that is kind of like calling someone a good vegan even though they raise veal in their backyard. It doesn't make sense to me. IMO, there is nothing wrong with holding people up to their self-declared moral standards.

Yeah, I have a hard core Born Again cousin, and she is absolutely appalled by Trump... She would also never in a million years tell me I'm going to Hell for my Atheism. She's a very good Christian.

I would imagine their justification is that he will enact policies that fall in line with their religious philosophies, and that he is merely a vessel. 

again, I'm not defending trump or his supporters, I just find it incredibly naive to just say "all of them are horrible people". 

I've stopped treating people like they are on some pedestal when they've put themselves there. that seems odd to me. a religious leader? sure. 

our version of good christian and their versions can be very different. there are many christians that take the bible literally, and that you aren't a good christian if you aren't trying to convert every last soul, and yes, that includes conversion by fear. 

Right, that is their justification... Them wanting their religious philosophies embedded into government and law is not sweetening the deal for me, lol. Fuck that. That they are willing to make a deal with the Devil just makes it that much worse, and that is why I'm so critical of it. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I don't think expecting people not to support and facilitate and sexual predator who can't go 24 hours without lying through his teeth while in the most powerful position on the face of the planet is very much to ask at all. Not a pedestal. A totally basic level of decency is where I'm placing my expectations. No amount of "yeah, but it will help my cause"ing will change my view of that. It's not naivety IMO. It's simply having basic standards of morality, and mine aren't even particularly high in the scheme of things - certainly not in the scheme of Jesus's teachings! Holding Christians and non-Christians alike up to that is hardly unreasonable IMO. But yes, when people do it while they claim to have Jesus in their court as well, it certainly puts a spotlight on them! I'm not a fan of not walking the talk, and I don't that's naivety at all. I'm not prepared to lower my standards to what often appears to be the new normal.

(BTW, when I say "good Christian" I am simply talking about abiding by the basic rules of decency that Christian believe are the basic teachings of Jesus and the simple behavioural expectations for a kind, moral person. I think it's fair to say that helping to raise a sexual predator who sexualizes his daughter and who lies and cheats regularly and who literally causes harm to needy people and who supports racists to be leader of a nation "under God" does not apply)

calling him the Devil is the same as 30 calling Trudeau "little boy", btw. 

I'm not saying your expectations are too much to ask. the point here is being missed. I'm saying your have grander expectations of some because of the pedestal they put themselves on, which, in effect, legitimizes that pedestal. 

Lol, it is not the same at all. I was using a well-known figure of speech that was completely appropriate to the topic of conversation. That isn't what's going on with someone calling Trudeau "little boy".

lol. ok. 

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Decent people, including Christians, do not pick and choose horrible, abusive, lying sexual predators to spread the good word. So yes, I agree some Christians do indeed go with the "by any means necessary" tactic. When that includes facilitating the likes of Trump, that tells me they are Christians who actively go against everything their so-called faith stands for to get there. I see no reason to just accept that and let them off the hook "because they're human" - everyone is, and lots and lots of them don't compromise their morals as they drive towards impinging their beliefs on others (via politics in this case). Why should I be cool with them doing it just because they claim to be Christian? To me, that is kind of like calling someone a good vegan even though they raise veal in their backyard. It doesn't make sense to me. IMO, there is nothing wrong with holding people up to their self-declared moral standards.

Yeah, I have a hard core Born Again cousin, and she is absolutely appalled by Trump... She would also never in a million years tell me I'm going to Hell for my Atheism. She's a very good Christian.

I would imagine their justification is that he will enact policies that fall in line with their religious philosophies, and that he is merely a vessel. 

again, I'm not defending trump or his supporters, I just find it incredibly naive to just say "all of them are horrible people". 

I've stopped treating people like they are on some pedestal when they've put themselves there. that seems odd to me. a religious leader? sure. 

our version of good christian and their versions can be very different. there are many christians that take the bible literally, and that you aren't a good christian if you aren't trying to convert every last soul, and yes, that includes conversion by fear. 

Right, that is their justification... Them wanting their religious philosophies embedded into government and law is not sweetening the deal for me, lol. Fuck that. That they are willing to make a deal with the Devil just makes it that much worse, and that is why I'm so critical of it. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I don't think expecting people not to support and facilitate and sexual predator who can't go 24 hours without lying through his teeth while in the most powerful position on the face of the planet is very much to ask at all. Not a pedestal. A totally basic level of decency is where I'm placing my expectations. No amount of "yeah, but it will help my cause"ing will change my view of that. It's not naivety IMO. It's simply having basic standards of morality, and mine aren't even particularly high in the scheme of things - certainly not in the scheme of Jesus's teachings! Holding Christians and non-Christians alike up to that is hardly unreasonable IMO. But yes, when people do it while they claim to have Jesus in their court as well, it certainly puts a spotlight on them! I'm not a fan of not walking the talk, and I don't that's naivety at all. I'm not prepared to lower my standards to what often appears to be the new normal.

(BTW, when I say "good Christian" I am simply talking about abiding by the basic rules of decency that Christian believe are the basic teachings of Jesus and the simple behavioural expectations for a kind, moral person. I think it's fair to say that helping to raise a sexual predator who sexualizes his daughter and who lies and cheats regularly and who literally causes harm to needy people and who supports racists to be leader of a nation "under God" does not apply)

calling him the Devil is the same as 30 calling Trudeau "little boy", btw. 

I'm not saying your expectations are too much to ask. the point here is being missed. I'm saying your have grander expectations of some because of the pedestal they put themselves on, which, in effect, legitimizes that pedestal. 

Lol, it is not the same at all. I was using a well-known figure of speech that was completely appropriate to the topic of conversation. That isn't what's going on with someone calling Trudeau "little boy".

lol. ok. 

If you disagree say why. What I just said makes sense. You're doing the false equivalency thing.

I don't have grander expectations of Christians than I do of anyone else actually. They separate themselves from the rest with the higher level of hypocrisy that they place themselves at.

ikiT

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

ikiT

AND "F these communists."

The Juggler

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

Go Beavers

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

Bentleyspop

Here's  another "good" christian.....

Coffee shop refuses to serve white man because he was “being very racist,” video shows
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/8xeabp/coffee-shop-refuses-to-serve-white-man-because-he-was-being-very-racist-video-shows

mcgruff10

Go Beavers said:

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

It is the same on both sides. A lot of liberals don’t know absolute shit about anything. Look no furthet than the occupy Democrats And the other 98% pages on Facebook. 

oftenreading

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Decent people, including Christians, do not pick and choose horrible, abusive, lying sexual predators to spread the good word. So yes, I agree some Christians do indeed go with the "by any means necessary" tactic. When that includes facilitating the likes of Trump, that tells me they are Christians who actively go against everything their so-called faith stands for to get there. I see no reason to just accept that and let them off the hook "because they're human" - everyone is, and lots and lots of them don't compromise their morals as they drive towards impinging their beliefs on others (via politics in this case). Why should I be cool with them doing it just because they claim to be Christian? To me, that is kind of like calling someone a good vegan even though they raise veal in their backyard. It doesn't make sense to me. IMO, there is nothing wrong with holding people up to their self-declared moral standards.

Yeah, I have a hard core Born Again cousin, and she is absolutely appalled by Trump... She would also never in a million years tell me I'm going to Hell for my Atheism. She's a very good Christian.

I would imagine their justification is that he will enact policies that fall in line with their religious philosophies, and that he is merely a vessel. 

again, I'm not defending trump or his supporters, I just find it incredibly naive to just say "all of them are horrible people". 

I've stopped treating people like they are on some pedestal when they've put themselves there. that seems odd to me. a religious leader? sure. 

our version of good christian and their versions can be very different. there are many christians that take the bible literally, and that you aren't a good christian if you aren't trying to convert every last soul, and yes, that includes conversion by fear. 

Right, that is their justification... Them wanting their religious philosophies embedded into government and law is not sweetening the deal for me, lol. Fuck that. That they are willing to make a deal with the Devil just makes it that much worse, and that is why I'm so critical of it. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I don't think expecting people not to support and facilitate and sexual predator who can't go 24 hours without lying through his teeth while in the most powerful position on the face of the planet is very much to ask at all. Not a pedestal. A totally basic level of decency is where I'm placing my expectations. No amount of "yeah, but it will help my cause"ing will change my view of that. It's not naivety IMO. It's simply having basic standards of morality, and mine aren't even particularly high in the scheme of things - certainly not in the scheme of Jesus's teachings! Holding Christians and non-Christians alike up to that is hardly unreasonable IMO. But yes, when people do it while they claim to have Jesus in their court as well, it certainly puts a spotlight on them! I'm not a fan of not walking the talk, and I don't that's naivety at all. I'm not prepared to lower my standards to what often appears to be the new normal.

(BTW, when I say "good Christian" I am simply talking about abiding by the basic rules of decency that Christian believe are the basic teachings of Jesus and the simple behavioural expectations for a kind, moral person. I think it's fair to say that helping to raise a sexual predator who sexualizes his daughter and who lies and cheats regularly and who literally causes harm to needy people and who supports racists to be leader of a nation "under God" does not apply)

calling him the Devil is the same as 30 calling Trudeau "little boy", btw. 

I'm not saying your expectations are too much to ask. the point here is being missed. I'm saying your have grander expectations of some because of the pedestal they put themselves on, which, in effect, legitimizes that pedestal. 

Lol, it is not the same at all. I was using a well-known figure of speech that was completely appropriate to the topic of conversation. That isn't what's going on with someone calling Trudeau "little boy".

lol. ok. 

You’re joking, right? 

mcgruff10

Example:

josevolution

you can feel it , his behavior has started to be seen in a normal light by sympathizers Ryan was the 1st to say oh don't worry he's learning on the job talking about orange baffoon ..

Go Beavers

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

It is the same on both sides. A lot of liberals don’t know absolute shit about anything. Look no furthet than the occupy Democrats And the other 98% pages on Facebook. 

All both sides! rebuttals aside, it’s not about who’s informed, it’s about being guided by blind allegiance to trump. Not only are a lot not informed, they’re acting like they care about something just because trump has included it into his act. 

mcgruff10

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

It is the same on both sides. A lot of liberals don’t know absolute shit about anything. Look no furthet than the occupy Democrats And the other 98% pages on Facebook. 

All both sides! rebuttals aside, it’s not about who’s informed, it’s about being guided by blind allegiance to trump. Not only are a lot not informed, they’re acting like they care about something just because trump has included it into his act. 

But it is the same exact thing for trump haters, they also just follow along blindly just to prove that trump is terrible. Look at my meme bud. 

Go Beavers

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

It is the same on both sides. A lot of liberals don’t know absolute shit about anything. Look no furthet than the occupy Democrats And the other 98% pages on Facebook. 

All both sides! rebuttals aside, it’s not about who’s informed, it’s about being guided by blind allegiance to trump. Not only are a lot not informed, they’re acting like they care about something just because trump has included it into his act. 

But it is the same exact thing for trump haters, they also just follow along blindly just to prove that trump is terrible. Look at my meme bud. 

That meme’s not a good equivalency example. You’d have to go back to Obama and how people didn’t care about an issue until he brought it up, and then started acting like experts in the field.  

mcgruff10

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

It is the same on both sides. A lot of liberals don’t know absolute shit about anything. Look no furthet than the occupy Democrats And the other 98% pages on Facebook. 

All both sides! rebuttals aside, it’s not about who’s informed, it’s about being guided by blind allegiance to trump. Not only are a lot not informed, they’re acting like they care about something just because trump has included it into his act. 

But it is the same exact thing for trump haters, they also just follow along blindly just to prove that trump is terrible. Look at my meme bud. 

That meme’s not a good equivalency example. You’d have to go back to Obama and how people didn’t care about an issue until he brought it up, and then started acting like experts in the field.  

Do you do the same for trump supporters then?  Do you go back to Obama and show how people didn't care about an issue until he brought it up and then started acting like experts in that field?
The point about the meme is that the majority of the people don't accept the fact that Obama did the same thing, only that Trump is a pos etc etc.  the comments are great.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Memes...

mcgruff10

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Memes...

Love that dab!

mrussel1

RYME said:

The Juggler said:

RYME said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

RYME said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

RYME said:

I don't listen to Rush or Hannity lol.
I like Larry Elder out of LA, Jay Weber, Dan O'Donnell, Vicki McKenna, Mark Belling, (Milwaukee) gave you a few names for starters.    I forgot to mention to James T Harris out of Phoenix.  The national conversation good s***.
Former Congressman Joe Walsh has a good Show too out of Chicago.

the only name I recognize out of that list is Joe Walsh, and he's as big a piece of shit as Trump is. 

Fair enough.  The people I listen to do not fawn over Trump 24/7.  I don't listen to Rush or Hannity because that's all they do.
Give those other guys a shot, see what you think of them.  Pick one and listen to them for a week so you can have an honest assessment.  Joe Walsh I listen to the least mainly because he shouts into the microphone all day, stutters a lot, and says the same s*** over and over and over again.  Talks like at Chicagoan.  I said good, he's interesting for about 10 minutes once in a while.
But seriously give James T Harris a try.
http://jamestharris.com/mediacenter/radio

besides this thread, I try to stay away from american politics as much as I can these days. it was causing me too much anger/stress/anxiety. 

I understand.
But this thread is not the best place to get fair, balanced, and accurate information about American politics.

Nor are your conservative radio talkers....

I listen to a lota of people from a lot of different angles.  The shows I listen to don't even talk politics all day long. 
About 15 years ago I listened to nothing but music stations.  Finally after hearing Stairway to Heaven for the 999th time, great song but I'd had enough and had to go to a.m. to see what was there.
Sometimes it's sports I like Dan Patrick's Show, sometimes it's about school referendums whatever.
Everyone has to get the're news and talking points from somewhere.
Read this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/05/16/the-gullible-trump-finally-finds-out-kim-jong-un-isnt-honorable/
You know from the headline where the writer is coming from.  The media doesn't even try to hide their biases anymore.  Sure they hope the meeting falls through so that they can say Trump couldn't do it either.

This is an opinion writer.   That's not evidence of media bias. 

Go Beavers

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

The Juggler said:

Tiki said:

"I've tried to understand this whole net neutrality thing, and it really is hard to understand. So, I based my opinion of it this way: what does Obama want regarding net neutrality, and do the opposite."

You can't make this shit up.

What is this?

I don’t know if he’s quoting an actual person, but it’s the logic of a lot of trump supporters. Many don’t know boo-squat about the Iran nuke deal or Israel and now suddenly they give a rip. 

It is the same on both sides. A lot of liberals don’t know absolute shit about anything. Look no furthet than the occupy Democrats And the other 98% pages on Facebook. 

All both sides! rebuttals aside, it’s not about who’s informed, it’s about being guided by blind allegiance to trump. Not only are a lot not informed, they’re acting like they care about something just because trump has included it into his act. 

But it is the same exact thing for trump haters, they also just follow along blindly just to prove that trump is terrible. Look at my meme bud. 

That meme’s not a good equivalency example. You’d have to go back to Obama and how people didn’t care about an issue until he brought it up, and then started acting like experts in the field.  

Do you do the same for trump supporters then?  Do you go back to Obama and show how people didn't care about an issue until he brought it up and then started acting like experts in that field?

I’m open to the fact my confirmation bias might be clouding my judgment, but  I couldn't think of situations where it happened to this degree.