I kept saying this and the Libs, here, denied it.

[2minkey]

yeah, but to me and billions of others, it don't mean nothing.

 

[catocom]

To me it's sound doctrine if nothing else.

The thing is IMO...
one needs (some) sound, proven doctrine to use as a base.
If you go any which way the wind blows on a given day, there No way to figure What to believe in.

If you don't believe it something (and stick to it), you'll fall for anything.

Personally I don't respect anyone any less for a different belief, just when
reasoning together is stifled.

 

[MrBishop]

 

[Gotholic]

yeah, but to me and billions of others, it don't mean nothing.

So, it means something?

 

[2minkey]

yes, it means that from time to time i use dissimulative affect, and that you're awfully clever.

 

[valkyrie]

You really think a guy preaching Black Liberation Theology that Obama has been going to see for 20 years is a non-issue?

Prez. Obama isn't going to this guy's church anymore, and from what I understand, he had not attended for a while. Did the reverend know Obama? Of course he did. How could he not know the members of the congregation.

You could say similar things about me given the circumstances. I went to a church (back when I was still going through the motions of being a Christian) where the priest would give homily after homily about the evils of birth control and attempting to (lamely) link it to the destruction of society, the confusion of women and their place in that society (kitchen and bedroom making more Catholic babies) and thus the slow and steady decline of America into anarchy. (I am not making this shit up!)

I finally stopped going, but it took a long time. I retained hope for quite a while that this guy would STFU or die and leave his position to someone else.

Did attending this church mean I supported the priest's views? No, it did not. I most certainly did not support any of his views.

 

[valkyrie]

Jim, I read the article... not sure what this has to do with anything. When I went to vote there were big, angry people shouting with Palin/McCain signs. Some of them were dressed in hunting clothes (camo) and looked like they were ready to hunt down the libs. I passed them by and went in to vote. Does this mean that Palin associates herself with angry bullies? According to you, it does.

The guy with the night stick needs to be punished. He broke the law.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

So you are saying that now you're an anti-christ?

Obama references his pastor as an influence on him while he too was pretending to be christian.

 

[valkyrie]

So you are saying that now you're an anti-christ?

Obama references his pastor as an influence on him while he too was pretending to be christian.

Am I saying I'm the anti-christ? Uh... no. If I was saying I'm the anti-christ then that would be saying I believe in all that mythology. I don't.

Being a christian does not matter in a politician. That card is only pulled out to sway the religious to vote for them. "Look at me! I believe just like you! Therefore I represent you!" It's all a bunch of malarkey that you bite down hard on, hook, line and sinker.

 

[catocom]

of coarse there are liars, and misguided politicians, but
in some cases those who proclaim it aren't necessarily using it merely
as a "look at me, I'm holy" type thing.
There are a set of values that are common among Christians, and so
it's a quick way to know what they SAY they stand for.

Now if they start saying "I've never done X" look out.

 

[Cerise]

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Am I saying I'm the anti-christ? Uh... no. If I was saying I'm the anti-christ then that would be saying I believe in all that mythology. I don't.

Being a christian does not matter in a politician. That card is only pulled out to sway the religious to vote for them. "Look at me! I believe just like you! Therefore I represent you!" It's all a bunch of malarkey that you bite down hard on, hook, line and sinker.

Judeo-Christian values are the foundation on which this nation was created. Like it or not its a fact. There are many great Americans who do not believe in Christ but value the the moral guidance this nation is based upon.

God Bless You!

 

[Cerise]

So other than shut down FoxNews, the progressive socialists don't know how to deal with them....

Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News

In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.

In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”"

“You know, at the risk of violating Godwin’s law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts?” asked Bloomberg’s Ryan Donmoyer. “Esp. Now that it’s getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s.”

Richard Yeselson, a researcher for an organized labor group who also writes for liberal magazines, agreed. “They want a deficit driven militarist/heterosexist/herrenvolk state,” Yeselson wrote. “This is core of the Bush/Cheney base transmorgrified into an even more explicitly racialized/anti-cosmopolitan constituency.

Why? Um, because the president is a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. But it’s all the same old nuts in the same old bins with some new labels: the gun nuts, the anti tax nuts, the religious nuts, the homophobes, the anti-feminists, the anti-abortion lunatics, the racist/confederate crackpots, the anti-immigration whackos (who feel Bush betrayed them) the pathological government haters (which subsumes some of the othercategories, like the gun nuts and the anti-tax nuts).”

“I’m not saying these guys are capital F-fascists,” added blogger Lindsay Beyerstein, “but they don’t want limited government. Their desired end looks more like a corporate state than a rugged individualist paradise. The rank and file wants a state that will reach into the intimate of citizens when it comes to sex, reproductive freedom, censorship, and rampant incarceration in the name of law and order.”

When the writer Victor Davis Hanson wrote an article about immigration for National Review, for example, blogger Ed Kilgore didn’t even bother to grapple with Hanson’s arguments. Instead Kilgore dismissed Hanson’s piece out of hand as “the kind of Old White Guy cultural reaction that is at the heart of the Tea Party Movement. It’s very close in spirit to the classic 1970s racist tome, The Camp of the Saints, where White Guys struggle to make up their minds whether to go out and murder brown people or just give up.”

“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “I hate to open this can of worms,” he wrote, “but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”

But Zasloff stuck to his position. “I think that they are doing that anyway; they leak to whom they want to for political purposes,” he wrote. “If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”

This confirms everything we thought about the librul press.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

rugged individualist paradise.

Hell Yeah!

We need this, let the sissy's forage for survival.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Fucking RATS, Spikes short list for news and commentary.

THE VAST LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY.

1. Spencer Ackerman – Wired, FireDogLake, Washington
Independent, Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect
2. Ben Adler – Newsweek, POLITICO
3. Mike Allen - POLITICO
4. Eric Alterman – The Nation, Media Matters for America
5. Marc Ambinder - The Atlantic
6. Greg Anrig – The Century Foundation
7. Ryan Avent – Economist
8. Dean Baker - The American Prospect
9. Nick Baumann – Mother Jones
10. Josh Bearman – LA Weekly
11. Steven Benen - The Carpetbagger Report
12. Jared Bernstein – Economic Policy Institute
13. Michael Berube - Crooked Timber (blog), Pennsylvania State University
14. Lindsay Beyerstein - (blogger)
15. Joel Bleifuss - In These Times
16. John Blevins – South Texas College of Law
17. Sam Boyd - The American Prospect
18. Rich Byrne - Playwright and freelancer
19. Ta-Nehisi Coates - The Atlantic
20. Jonathan Chait – The New Republic
21. Lakshmi Chaudry - In These Times
22. Isaac Chotiner – The New Republic
23. Michael Cohen – New America Foundation
24. Jonathan Cohn – The New Republic
25. Joe Conason – The New York Observer
26. David Corn – Mother Jones
27. Daniel Davies – The Guardian
28. David Dayen - FireDogLake
29. Brad DeLong – The Economists’ Voice, University of California at Berkley
30. Ryan Donmoyer - Bloomberg
31. Kevin Drum – Washington Monthly
32. Matt Duss – Center for American Progress
33. Eve Fairbanks – The New Republic
34. Henry Farrell – George Washington University
35. Tim Fernholz – American Prospect
36. James Galbraith - University of Texas at Austin (professor)
37. Todd Gitlin – Columbia University
38. Ilan Goldenberg - National Security Network
39. Dana Goldstein – The Daily Beast
40. Merrill Goozner - Chicago Tribune
41. David Greenberg - Slate
42. Robert Greenwald - Brave New Films
43. Chris Hayes – The Nation
44. Don Hazen - Alternet
45. Michael Hirsh - Newsweek
46. John Judis – The New Republic, The American Prospect
47. Michael Kazin - Georgetown University (law professor)
48. Ed Kilgore – Democratic Stategist
49. Richard Kim – The Nation
50. Mark Kleiman - The Reality Based Community
51. Ezra Klein - Washington Post, Newsweek, The American Prospect
52. Joe Klein - TIME
53. Paul Krugman – The New York Times, Princeton University
54. Lisa Lerer - POLITICO
55. Daniel Levy – Century Foundation
56. Alec McGillis – Washington Post
57. Scott McLemee - Inside Higher Ed
58. Ari Melber - The Nation
59. Seth Michaels – MyDD.com
60. Luke Mitchell – Harper’s Magazine
61. Gautham Nagesh – The Hill, Daily Caller
62. Suzanne Nossel – Human Rights Watch
63. Michael O’Hare - University of California, Berkeley
64. Rick Perlstein – Author, Campaign for America’s Future
65. Harold Pollack – University of Chicago
66. Foster Kamer – The Village Voice
67. Katha Pollitt – The Nation
68. Ari Rabin-Havt - Media Matters
69. David Roberts - Grist
70. Alyssa Rosenberg – Washingtonian, The Atlantic, Government Executive
71. Alex Rossmiller – National Security Network
72. Laura Rozen – Politico, Mother Jones
73. Greg Sargent – Washington Post
74. Thomas Schaller – Baltimore Sun
75. Noam Scheiber – The New Republic
76. Michael Scherer - TIME
77. Mark Schmitt – American Prospect
78. Adam Serwer – American Prospect
79. Thomas Schaller - Baltimore Sun (columnist), University of Maryland, Baltimore County (professor), FiveThirtyEight.com (contributing writer)
80. Julie Bergman Sender - Balcony Films
81. Walter Shapiro – PoliticsDaily.com
82. Nate Silver - FiveThirtyEight.com
83. Jesse Singal – The Boston Globe, Washington Monthly
84. Ben Smith - POLITICO
85. Sarah Spitz – NPR
86. Adele Stan – The Media Consortium
87. Kate Steadman – Kaiser Health News
88. Jonathan Stein – Mother Jones
89. Sam Stein - The Huffington Post
90. Jesse Taylor – Pandagon.net
91. Steven Teles – Yale University
92. Thoma - The Economist's View (blog), University of Oregon (professor)
93. Michael Tomasky – The Guardian
94. Jeffrey Toobin – CNN, The New Yorker
95. Rebecca Traister - Salon (columnist)
96. Cenk Uygur - The Young Turks
97. Tracy Van Slyke - The Media Consortium
98. Dave Weigel - Washington Post, MSNBC, The Washington Independent
99. Moira Whelan – National Security Network
100. Scott Winship – Pew Economic Mobility Project
101. Kai Wright - The Root
102. Holly Yeager – Columbia Journalism Review
103. Rich Yeselson – Change to Win
104. Matthew Yglesias – Center for American Progress, The Atlantic Monthly
105. Jonathan Zasloff – UCLA
106. Julian Zelizer - Princeton professor and CNN contributor
107. Avi Zenilman – POLITICO

​

Including but not limited to.......

• The Guardian
• Bloomberg
• Chicago Tribune
• Newsweek
• The New York Times
• Harper’s Magazine
• The Nation
• TIME
• Baltimore Sun
• The Boston Globe
• POLITICO
• NPR
• Mother Jones
• The Huffington Post
• The Guardian
• The New Yorker
• Salon
• Washington Post
• MSNBC
• The Atlantic Monthly
• CNN

Look at this box of crackers!

We need FULL disclosure, the complete transcript of this listserv.

 

[spike]

Judeo-Christian values are the foundation on which this nation was created. Like it or not its a fact.

Bullshit. The nation was founded on values that most religions since the dawn of time have espoused. They never mentioned any specific religion.

Not sure what your point was anyway. Most christians haven't been emulating christ for quite a long time.

 

[spike]

So other than shut down FoxNews, the progressive socialists don't know how to deal with them....

In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.

In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”"

Similar to how a lot of conservatives (even on this board celebrated when Ted Kennedy died). Seems fair. Shit Winky's even promoted assassinating the pres.

“You know, at the risk of violating Godwin’s law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts?” asked Bloomberg’s Ryan Donmoyer. “Esp. Now that it’s getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s.”

Makes a good point. Definitely some parallels.

Richard Yeselson, a researcher for an organized labor group who also writes for liberal magazines, agreed. “They want a deficit driven militarist/heterosexist/herrenvolk state,” Yeselson wrote. “This is core of the Bush/Cheney base transmorgrified into an even more explicitly racialized/anti-cosmopolitan constituency.

Why? Um, because the president is a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. But it’s all the same old nuts in the same old bins with some new labels: the gun nuts, the anti tax nuts, the religious nuts, the homophobes, the anti-feminists, the anti-abortion lunatics, the racist/confederate crackpots, the anti-immigration whackos (who feel Bush betrayed them) the pathological government haters (which subsumes some of the othercategories, like the gun nuts and the anti-tax nuts).”

Good point.

“I’m not saying these guys are capital F-fascists,” added blogger Lindsay Beyerstein, “but they don’t want limited government. Their desired end looks more like a corporate state than a rugged individualist paradise. The rank and file wants a state that will reach into the intimate of citizens when it comes to sex, reproductive freedom, censorship, and rampant incarceration in the name of law and order.”

Well said. I mean just look at what the Texas GOP is advocating.

“the kind of Old White Guy cultural reaction that is at the heart of the Tea Party Movement. It’s very close in spirit to the classic 1970s racist tome, The Camp of the Saints, where White Guys struggle to make up their minds whether to go out and murder brown people or just give up.”

Good point.

“shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

Interesting. Supposed news organizations should certainly be held accountable for purposely deceiving the public and libel.

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA

That doesn't sound like he's press.

 

[spike]

Fucking RATS, Spikes short list for news and commentary.

Never heard of most of them. You make up stuff just like Fox does huh?

But if you're recommending them I'll keep a look out.

 

[Cerise]

Look at this box of crackers!

They've all got that lib-look. I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it. Or hear it. That mosquito-like noise.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Filthy lefty's. I hope they all get unemployment for the next 2 years.

Bullshit. The nation was founded on values that most religions since the dawn of time have espoused. They never mentioned any specific religion.

Like the Paganism and Islamic religions, right? I didn't know Judeo-Christian was a specific religion by name.

Not sure what your point was anyway. Most christians haven't been emulating christ for quite a long time.

Well, you are most certainly going to hell no matter what form of energy you passoff into. Sleep well my friend.