Do Dems Have New Ideas?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

BB,

I’m having a hard time discerning their message. The dems appear to be in disarray. I hear that there is serious friction between dean and, well, everyone. I heard that reid and rodham’s camps were at loggerheads yesterday. nancypelosi, well, there’s not much to say.

Who speaks for them?

Is it the tarnished bill “if you deny me attention, I shall die” clinton?. Is it al “today I’ll take my meds” gore? john “I’m for everything and nothing at the same time” kerry? Is it barak “God, I love to hear myself talk” obama? Can it be harold “the three stooges” ford?

Who is it?

As liftus stated, times have changed. No longer can the monopoly of the MSM cover up and minimize the deep philosophical and personal differences within the democratic party.

In November, people are going to ask themselves, “Which party is SERIOUS about PROTECTING my family?”

As of now, the answer is clearly the Republicans.

If they dems cannot overcome their inconsistencies and squabbling, they can forget it. As my friend pointed out, more people will vote FOR something, than against it.

See 2004.

JeffR

42

[quote]deanec wrote:
You are certainly correct in saying that Jesus condemned the religious establishment of his time. The reason they did not like him was because he constantly confronted them with their hypocrisy and self-righteousness. He threatened their power base, which is why he was eventually killed. He was “liberal” in the sense he was no respector of persons; he taught that rich and poor, male and female could have the same standing in his kingdom. He pretty much stayed out of politics except to say that it was correct to pay taxes to civil government, which was ultimately established by God. Beyond that, it is hard to pigeonhole a person who says “I am the way” as particularly liberal.[/quote]

The right have done a fine job of pigeonholing him. It’s time to split him in half… he’s used to a bit of abuse anyway.

Look, the government of today is bought and paid for by big business and their special interest groups. This means that government is about the rich, not the people.

Guess how Jesus feels about rich people looking after themselves and not their neighbors.

I’ll give you a hint, he doesn’t look fondly on that.

Anyway, I said liberal, not democrat, so don’t freak out.

43

[quote]JeffR wrote:
In November, people are going to ask themselves, “Which party is SERIOUS about PROTECTING my family?”

As of now, the answer is clearly the Republicans.[/quote]

Hey Jerffy,

The answer seems to be neither. The republicans are happy to ignore all kinds of domestic security issues… though they do like to rattle the specter of attack a lot.

Keep us vulnerable at home to have the populace back military action abroad. If we get attacked while we are vulnerable, all the better, conscript people if you have to and attack someone else you don’t like.

I’m sure Bush is saddened that another attack hasn’t made it in through the porous borders. It would have cemented his ability to do whatever the hell he wants.

That’s all he cares about. Exercise his power and his self-stated mission from God.

Open your eyes Jerffy, you are simply a puppet.

44

[quote]vroom wrote:
deanec wrote:
You are certainly correct in saying that Jesus condemned the religious establishment of his time. The reason they did not like him was because he constantly confronted them with their hypocrisy and self-righteousness. He threatened their power base, which is why he was eventually killed. He was “liberal” in the sense he was no respector of persons; he taught that rich and poor, male and female could have the same standing in his kingdom. He pretty much stayed out of politics except to say that it was correct to pay taxes to civil government, which was ultimately established by God. Beyond that, it is hard to pigeonhole a person who says “I am the way” as particularly liberal.

The right have done a fine job of pigeonholing him. It’s time to split him in half… he’s used to a bit of abuse anyway.

Look, the government of today is bought and paid for by big business and their special interest groups. This means that government is about the rich, not the people.

Guess how Jesus feels about rich people looking after themselves and not their neighbors.

I’ll give you a hint, he doesn’t look fondly on that.
[/quote]

Can you elaborate on this point? What did Jesus say about this?

[quote]
Anyway, I said liberal, not democrat, so don’t freak out.[/quote]

I fail to see how my comment causes you to believe I am freaked out about anything.

45

[quote]deanec wrote:

Can you elaborate on this point? What did Jesus say about this?
[/quote]

Matthew 19:24

24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

46

[quote]Professor X wrote:
deanec wrote:

Can you elaborate on this point? What did Jesus say about this?

Matthew 19:24

24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
[/quote]

You’re reading a lot into that. One could easily interpret that as a simple message concerning the love of money and a message not to put material things ahead of God in your life, combined with an observation that a lot of rich people find that difficult to do.

47

[quote]Professor X wrote:
deanec wrote:

Can you elaborate on this point? What did Jesus say about this?

Matthew 19:24

24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

[/quote]

Context:

Mat 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
Mat 19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
Mat 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Christ was testing this man’s sincerity as it related to following him. The problem was not that he commanded him to give it to the poor, but that the man was unwilling to leave his wealth in order to obtain something far greater.

I am not arguing with you that we are to take care of the poor or that was not what Jesus taught, I just don’t think this is a good passage to prove it.

Besides, I asked Vroom :slight_smile:

48

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Professor X wrote:
deanec wrote:

Can you elaborate on this point? What did Jesus say about this?

Matthew 19:24

24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

You’re reading a lot into that. One could easily interpret that as a simple message concerning the love of money and a message not to put material things ahead of God in your life, combined with an observation that a lot of rich people find that difficult to do.[/quote]

That is exactly what I DO read into it. Somehow, you think this does not apply to people in Washington? Wow.

49

It doesn’t matter who you asked… it’s the same passage I’d have quoted.

50

[quote]Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Professor X wrote:
deanec wrote:

Can you elaborate on this point? What did Jesus say about this?

Matthew 19:24

24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

You’re reading a lot into that. One could easily interpret that as a simple message concerning the love of money and a message not to put material things ahead of God in your life, combined with an observation that a lot of rich people find that difficult to do.

That is exactly what I DO read into it. Somehow, you think this does not apply to people in Washington? Wow.[/quote]

No it’s not – you applied it to the a different way, at least if you accepted vroom’s premise in his question – he was asking about what Jesus said about rich folks looking after themselves and not others - and given his whole liberal premise, apparently equating not wishing to pay taxes to the government with not wanting to help others. With many otehr moral assumptions, of course…

From what depths of your colon did you pull out the Washington idea?

51

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

No it’s not – you applied it to the a different way, at least if you accepted vroom’s premise in his question – he was asking about what Jesus said about rich folks looking after themselves and not others - and given his whole liberal premise, apparently equating not wishing to pay taxes to the government with not wanting to help others. With many otehr moral assumptions, of course…

From what depths of your colon did you pull out the Washington idea?[/quote]

He wasn’t just talking about taxes but how big business now runs the entire country and “the little guy” can now easily be stepped on. It seems to be almost applauded to get rid of social programs and cheer on oil companies raising gas prices to the point that Ice Cream truck drivers in New York need to find other work. The “Christian Right” seems to scream about morals but has lost all focus on individuals who aren’t doing so well. Perhaps sweeping them under the carpet is the Godly thing to do. Honestly, you think Jesus would be applauding the current direction we are headed in? As long as we don’t let gays marry, right?

52

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
No it’s not – you applied it to the a different way, at least if you accepted vroom’s premise in his question – he was asking about what Jesus said about rich folks looking after themselves and not others - and given his whole liberal premise, apparently equating not wishing to pay taxes to the government with not wanting to help others. With many otehr moral assumptions, of course…

From what depths of your colon did you pull out the Washington idea?[/quote]

Now you are the one making a huge stretch. Nowhere did I mention taxes. I am talking about the party in power, you are talking about the populace.

Face it, Jesus needs to be split, he is not a child of either party alone.

53

[quote]vroom wrote:

Face it, Jesus needs to be split, he is not a child of either party alone.[/quote]

No, I agree with this – I was just wondering how you were bringing him in on the liberal side, implying favoring big government tax-and-spend programs that claim to help, but often hurt, the poor.

54

Wow, Jesus’ quote on rich men and heaven is a lesson on big oil having too much power in this country? My oh my, I must have missed that one – well, there is that camel reference, but still…

I don’t like trying to pull in Jesus as authority for any particular political position.

55

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

I don’t like trying to pull in Jesus as authority for any particular political position.
[/quote]

And I don’t like an entire group of people in this country acting as if they “speak for Jesus” in the laws they make and the decisions trumpeted in Washington. Surely you aren’t about to claim that the Republicans have avoided using religion and Christianity as if it is THEIR OWN personal agenda and that those who disagree lack the same spiritual fortitude. You wouldn’t dare pretend this…would you?

56

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
No, I agree with this – I was just wondering how you were bringing him in on the liberal side, implying favoring big government tax-and-spend programs that claim to help, but often hurt, the poor.[/quote]

It doesn’t imply tax-and-spend because that is just a characterization of what some republicans feel liberals represent.

You may be talking about Democrats, which is still arguable, but there is a difference Mr Kool-Aid drinker.

57

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Wow, Jesus’ quote on rich men and heaven is a lesson on big oil having too much power in this country? My oh my, I must have missed that one – well, there is that camel reference, but still…

I don’t like trying to pull in Jesus as authority for any particular political position.
[/quote]

You don’t feel that the government is run by the rich for the rich?

LOL.

You’d have to be blind to believe otherwise. I’m not necessarily saying that will change if the Democrats are in power, but the Republicans are a bit more aligned with big business.

Things like environmental concerns, taking care of the welfare of God’s creations, which are costly to business, are also issues that Jesus would be unpopular for.

And yes, environmental concerns (let’s ignore global warming) are indeed things that affect both people and other species. Asbestos, lead, mercury, xenoestrogens, and so on, all have effects on biology. Having laws to control abuses in these areas are resisted by business, in the worship of profits.

The Dem’s can certainly talk about things like this.

However, it is very possible to go overboard, I won’t say it isn’t.

58

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
Wow, Jesus’ quote on rich men and heaven is a lesson on big oil having too much power in this country? My oh my, I must have missed that one – well, there is that camel reference, but still…

I don’t like trying to pull in Jesus as authority for any particular political position.

vroom wrote:
You don’t feel that the government is run by the rich for the rich?

LOL. [/quote]

That’s entirely irrelevant to the point, which is that you’re reading a whole lot more into the quote than is there if you’re reading in stuff about the power of business in government.

Let’s consider the context: he’s talking about a rich guy getting in to heaven.

Time period: Roman empire, post-Republic.

I think if he wanted to speak about corrupt governments not looking out for the downtrodden, he could have made that point.

Now, to jump to an implication that it’s a quote on corporate power? Please.

[quote]vroom wrote:
You’d have to be blind to believe otherwise. I’m not necessarily saying that will change if the Democrats are in power, but the Republicans are a bit more aligned with big business.

Things like environmental concerns, taking care of the welfare of God’s creations, which are costly to business, are also issues that Jesus would be unpopular for.

And yes, environmental concerns (let’s ignore global warming) are indeed things that affect both people and other species. Asbestos, lead, mercury, xenoestrogens, and so on, all have effects on biology. Having laws to control abuses in these areas are resisted by business, in the worship of profits.

The Dem’s can certainly talk about things like this.

However, it is very possible to go overboard, I won’t say it isn’t.[/quote]

All completely irrelevant to the quote. YOu can speculate all you’d like, but then you really shouldn’t get mad at the social conservatives for doing the same, now should you?

59

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:

I don’t like trying to pull in Jesus as authority for any particular political position.

Professor X wrote:
And I don’t like an entire group of people in this country acting as if they “speak for Jesus” in the laws they make and the decisions trumpeted in Washington. Surely you aren’t about to claim that the Republicans have avoided using religion and Christianity as if it is THEIR OWN personal agenda and that those who disagree lack the same spiritual fortitude. You wouldn’t dare pretend this…would you?[/quote]

No, I don’t like it either – so why are you trying to do the same thing from the other side?

60

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
That’s entirely irrelevant to the point, which is that you’re reading a whole lot more into the quote than is there if you’re reading in stuff about the power of business in government.[/quote]

No, you are choosing to characterize my statements in a way that you feel comfortable addressing. That’s fine, I mean, that is how politics is played.

Nonetheless, a government that looks after the needs of the rich, as opposed to the poor, is not one that Jesus would approve of.

You can twist that any way you like, but at the core, Jesus was about looking after his fellow man. That’s hard to argue with.

[quote]Let’s consider the context: he’s talking about a rich guy getting in to heaven.

Time period: Roman empire, post-Republic.[/quote]

The context matters? Oh my, you are going to piss off a lot of fundamentalists if you aren’t careful here. My guess is that a lot of people in the upper echelons of big business are exceedingly rich. These are generally the people that prefer a Republican government.

You connect those dots. You spin it. You do whatever you want. The writing is on the wall and the fundamentalist Christian right will see it when it is pointed out to them.

Oh, I take it you think I was talking about corrupt government in particular because that’s a common talking point? Sorry. You keep going down roads that have prepared talking points… but I’m afraid they aren’t going to help you here.

Corporate power? It’s the unholy affinity between the rich, who aren’t going to heaven, and the Republicans, who are WELL KNOWN for being more popular amongst big business (a good stand in for the wealthy). They are more willing to pander to profits, for the rich, and everyone knows this.

Maybe you haven’t figured out what I’m talking about yet? I’m talking about the fact that Jesus will also side with liberals on some issues. You might want to get your head out of the talking points and take note of that.