[quote]ZEB wrote:
giving [Iran] the right to build nuclear arms[/quote]
The JCPOA does not give Iran “the right to build nuclear arms”. Quite to the contrary, the agreement reaffirms Iran’s nonproliferation obligations under international law. Under Article II of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Iran is barred from manufacturing or otherwise acquiring nuclear weapons.
That is demonstrably and irrefutably correct, and you are demonstrably and irrefutably full of shit. That begs the question: why post on topics you don’t have even a rudimentary grasp on? Why make shit up?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Obama…never one time quotes or says anything good about the founding fathers
[/quote]
Never one time, eh? Never one time. Let’s take a look at this. Should take about eight seconds on the old Google machine.
– Though Jefferson’s personal history complicated his idealism (hardly an original or controversial thought and, in fact, echoed often by our resident Founder-lovin’ Conservative Patriots), “as one of our Founding Fathers, the person who drafted our Declaration of Independence, somebody who not only was an extraordinary political leader but also one of our great scientific and cultural leaders, Thomas Jefferson represents what’s best in America.”
– “As we read [the Constitution, Federalist Papers, and Bill of Rights], they seem so incredibly right that it’s easy to believe they are the result of natural law if not divine inspiration.”
So Jefferson “represents what’s best in America” and, along with the other Founders, did such remarkable work as to make one suspect that they were channeling the very will of god.
[This is what I mean when I ask you if you ever get tired of being full of shit. It’s perfectly possible for you to be a conservative and highly critical of Obama – without ever being provably wrong. But this never seems to suit you. It’s like a pathology.][/quote]
smh stumbling around his little room: “I have to find a way to get to Zeb with my attacks. I hate the man. Hey I have it! I’ll just stick my nose in the middle of one of his debates with another poster that will surely draw him out. Then we can call each other names for pages and pages. I love the Internet it allows me to be everything that I will never be in my real life.”
LOL Go away man you are pathetic.
[/quote]
Good post brah, totally defended your claim and cleaned all the egg off your face.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Obama…never one time quotes or says anything good about the founding fathers
[/quote]
Never one time, eh? Never one time. Let’s take a look at this. Should take about eight seconds on the old Google machine.
– Though Jefferson’s personal history complicated his idealism (hardly an original or controversial thought and, in fact, echoed often by our resident Founder-lovin’ Conservative Patriots), “as one of our Founding Fathers, the person who drafted our Declaration of Independence, somebody who not only was an extraordinary political leader but also one of our great scientific and cultural leaders, Thomas Jefferson represents what’s best in America.”
– “As we read [the Constitution, Federalist Papers, and Bill of Rights], they seem so incredibly right that it’s easy to believe they are the result of natural law if not divine inspiration.”
So Jefferson “represents what’s best in America” and, along with the other Founders, did such remarkable work as to make one suspect that they were channeling the very will of god.
[This is what I mean when I ask you if you ever get tired of being full of shit. It’s perfectly possible for you to be a conservative and highly critical of Obama – without ever being provably wrong. But this never seems to suit you. It’s like a pathology.][/quote]
smh stumbling around his little room: “I have to find a way to get to Zeb with my attacks. I hate the man. Hey I have it! I’ll just stick my nose in the middle of one of his debates with another poster that will surely draw him out. Then we can call each other names for pages and pages. I love the Internet it allows me to be everything that I will never be in my real life.”
LOL Go away man you are pathetic.
[/quote]
Good post brah, totally defended your claim and cleaned all the egg off your face.[/quote]
“Wah boo hoo argue with me ZEB I’m a lonely man. My real life isn’t so much fun”
It appears the guy’s primary mission is indoctrination and proselytization, and not providing for the national defense.
Bamford is probably not an unbiased author, but I do share his concerns on this particular issue.
I have a big problem with deeply held a-priori prejudices affecting an accurate perception of reality that should be the driving force on issues as important as defense. It’s my main criticism of both the left and the right.
[/quote]
If true, helps explain at least in part why Carson is so godawful and Palinesque (credit Hewitt with the comparison) on foreign policy. And will never be president, for that and other reasons involving his general dull kookiness.
It appears the guy’s primary mission is indoctrination and proselytization, and not providing for the national defense.
Bamford is probably not an unbiased author, but I do share his concerns on this particular issue.
I have a big problem with deeply held a-priori prejudices affecting an accurate perception of reality that should be the driving force on issues as important as defense. It’s my main criticism of both the left and the right.
[/quote]
Unlike you I’m just not worried about a Christian spreading his beliefs in his workplace and his sphere of relationships.
Christianity is not a faith that is to be kept to oneself. It doesn’t work that way. I said “this is good news” for a reason. The definition of “gospel” is “good news.”[/quote]
When the workplace is the United States government and the spreading violates the Establishment Clause, you should worry. Or are you no longer a libertarian? No other explanation for wanting Dominionists in the White House. Or for not actively condemning them. Don’t know if he really is one, but we’re talking about whether or not it would be “good” if he is.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
If you and I worked for the DoD and we met at the water cooler one day and you started telling me about some problems you were having at home with the little woman and I said, “Hey, smh, mind if I tell you about the good news of Jesus Christ?” someone’d be hard pressed to convince anyone outside of Atheists for Aggressive Action that somehow I’d violated “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
[/quote]
Agreed. Unfortunately, that’s not what “Dominionism” refers to. I assume you have no problem with the term itself, and none with the way it’s used.
As Gotquestions has it, “Christian Dominionists believe that God desires Christians to rise to power through civil systems so that His Word might then govern the nation.” The Bible governing the nation – this, of course, running diametrically and clearly counter to that pesky old Establishment Clause.
I could name at least 10 famous white left-wing types who share the same views that Obama has exhibited, amd they aren’t racist against white people.[/quote]
Therefore, you claim Obama is not racist I see. The problem however is that you are not paying attention (this has become a real problem with you). I said that it was his views and…are you ready mister attention deficit disorder? It is also his actions that leaves one with the impression that he is racist. And for a list of those actions please reread my previous posts carefully. If you want to address each and every action that I posted that would be fun. Of course I have many more that I did not post which must be discussed as well.
Also, thank you for posting a picture of yourself. Not many people on the Internet are willing to go that far. I think it shows some real character on your part. It also clears up a few things for me regarding your weak political analysis.
[/quote]
You can claim Obam is racist all you want - but for these claims to be believable, you have to have evidence. Your evidence is weak, as demonstrated by my constant refrain and rebuttal that many, many white people think and say the exact same things and they are clearly not racist. Meaning, the evidence you provide doesn’t provide solid inferences of racist beliefs or intent. Such evidence does show Obama is of a left-wing political persuasion - as are all the white people with identical beliefs - but not racist.
Occam’s Razor, and all that. The simplest - indeed, obvious - explanation is Obama is left-wing. To say such beliefs amounts to a hatred of white people isn’t supported by the nature of the beliefs at issue. Why? Because you can hold all these beliefs and not be a racist at all. They are unconnected to racial animosity.
Reasonable people understand how this works. You…make shit up as you go. And as we have seen in posts to me and others, that appears to be your signature.
So claim all day long Obama is racist - but with every post you do, you show us all how amateur you are.
Oh, and keep remarking on the “weakness” of my “political analysis” - yeah, you’re scoring a lot of points with that.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
If you and I worked for the DoD and we met at the water cooler one day and you started telling me about some problems you were having at home with the little woman and I said, “Hey, smh, mind if I tell you about the good news of Jesus Christ?” someone’d be hard pressed to convince anyone outside of Atheists for Aggressive Action that somehow I’d violated “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
[/quote]
Agreed. Unfortunately, that’s not what “Dominionism” refers to. I assume you have no problem with the term itself, and none with the way it’s used.
As Gotquestions has it, “Christian Dominionists believe that God desires Christians to rise to power through civil systems so that His Word might then govern the nation.” The Bible governing the nation – this, of course, running diametrically and clearly counter to that pesky old Establishment Clause.
Edited.[/quote]
Is that what Christian Dominionism purports to do? If so, I’ll need to find my local Ben Carson protest group.
I have no interest in anyone exchanging the No Religious Test Clause of the Constitution with the First Commandment.
EDIT: I read the article about Carson’s adviser. Good Lord. We have a country of amazingly talented and experienced people - why do we have to keep settling for this steady diet of clowns running for President?
I could name at least 10 famous white left-wing types who share the same views that Obama has exhibited, amd they aren’t racist against white people.[/quote]
Therefore, you claim Obama is not racist I see. The problem however is that you are not paying attention (this has become a real problem with you). I said that it was his views and…are you ready mister attention deficit disorder? It is also his actions that leaves one with the impression that he is racist. And for a list of those actions please reread my previous posts carefully. If you want to address each and every action that I posted that would be fun. Of course I have many more that I did not post which must be discussed as well.
Also, thank you for posting a picture of yourself. Not many people on the Internet are willing to go that far. I think it shows some real character on your part. It also clears up a few things for me regarding your weak political analysis.
[/quote]
You can claim Obam is racist all you want - but for these claims to be believable, you have to have evidence. Your evidence is weak, as demonstrated by my constant refrain and rebuttal that many, many white people think and say the exact same things and they are clearly not racist. Meaning, the evidence you provide doesn’t provide solid inferences of racist beliefs or intent. Such evidence does show Obama is of a left-wing political persuasion - as are all the white people with identical beliefs - but not racist.[/quote]
We have plowed this soil before my friend. It’s not just Obama’s words but his deeds as well referenced in my previous posts.
I understand your argument and I am sure that you hold the majority opinion. But, after watching his deeds in office, not just what he wrote in two books and what he fails to say, or should say, but his actual deeds I maintain my original point.
Then point out what I have made up regarding the debate we are having now regarding Obama’s racism (which I allege). Please be specific. If you don’t respond with specifics then it is you that is “making shit up” about me.
Amateur? Yes, I am an amateur at posting on T Nation as I have never been paid. And you have not been able to refute my claim of Obama’s racism. I laid specifics regarding what he has said and done. Your rebuttal amounted “I have white friends who agree with him are they racists too.” You are not very convincing TB. Your argument is rather weak in Obama’s defense.
I will be very honest with you TB. I have read your posts on this site for about a decade now and have always admired your analysis on a number of various topics. In fact, I have agreed with you far more times than I have disagreed. Over all I would say that you are one of the smartest guys on this site.
But to be quite honest when it comes to political analysis you are rather weak. Claiming Joe Biden would be a great negotiator really caught my eye. Dismissing Donald Trump as an idiot and a buffoon simply because you dislike the man, even though he’s built a multi-billion dollar empire. You sometimes cannot separate your emotion from fact when it comes to this one area. And sometimes you project those feelings toward others as well. One more example would be you accusing me of liking Trump as a Presidential candidate when I never said such a thing. I simply defended him as an exceptionally good business man and promoter.
There are other examples but you get the idea. And I think you are better than this. When I point out this one weakness of yours it is not with the idea of name calling I am simply giving you my opinion. That’s pretty much part of what we all do around here.
Oh and I think Obama is a lousy President! Ha ha I thought I’d throw that in just for you as you accuse me of doing that with every post. I didn’t want you to be wrong again
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I’m thinking the “dread” that some see in this dominionism has probably got more to do with secularists rabidly insisting the Establishment Clause reigns over the Free Exercise clause like an ace of spades does a three of clubs.[/quote]
With respect to establishing a theocratic government with “His Word” as governing principle and legal instrument, it does. Unarguably.
The alternative would be ahistorical (the relevant intent is crystal clear and, indeed, textually explicit) and logically nonsensical (the Amendment would essentially read “no law respecting the establishment of religion…but wait lolz nevermind”). We know that the FE clause does not allow for a Biblical government because such is explicitly prohibited a couple words prior.
I know you don’t think what Gotquestions described above is constitutional, because I know you’ve read the First Amendment. So maybe you’re saying you want to dash out part of the Bill of Rights? You can join Elizabeth Warren in that quest.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I googled it and even with the very obvious anti-Christian slant to the Wikipedia article I just don’t see a boogeyman in Christian Dominionism.[/quote]
I can be of some service:
“…ruling over the rest of society based on their understanding of biblical law”
Compare with:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”
Oh, and a Dominionist government would violate the free exercise rights of non-Christians, too. So it would violate both religious clauses of the First Amendment. A stupid idea from toe to head. And an unamerican one.
