ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
47, I think their safe districts like them well enough, as a pure la-la-land version of Conservative -- you know, with 9 9 9 plans, birth certificate silliness, inability to maintain even the lowest bar of civility ("you lie!"), etc. There are some pockets where people will keep shouting "yee haw" no matter what comes out of their addled pates.
But in terms of general support? Nah it's in the tank.
As to OWS changing the conversation, if you're not in your echo chamber, you'll notice nobody's talking about pooping in police cars. What they are talking about is deciles and quintiles of wealth and income distribution, as IC shows above, when he cleverly points out that the 1% didn't make out as well as the top 20% of late.
This kind of thinking wasn't even on the table in 2010. I don't think it's the dominant mode of analysis in American politics these days, but it's among them.
Remember, eating and regurgitating your own hermetically sealed vomit bag is what lost you the 2012 elections, righties. Get out of the bubble.
My point was a little off topic I guess. With all the talk of mandates going on I was questioning whether or not the 51-48 percent Obama win was evidence of a nation rejecting the Tea Party. Obviously that wasn't what you were saying.
I think the birther Tea Party types are like the OWSers talking about trashing public property. They aren't what the movements are all about but partisans will insist they are indeed defined so. So, I think generally, that is what everyone is rejecting. I think the rank and file members mean well and aren't the whack-jobs they're made out to be. I think The nation at large has the wrong impression of both movements. The ideologies of both groups have legitimate points. They are being exploited by the leaders.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
2012, was not a good year from the right.
They did hold the house, which gives them some say moving forward.
I have yet to hear from an OWS candidate. You may not like the tea party, but they do have people who are actually running for office. You can't change the rules from a tent in a park.
Although I am not sure if he calls himself a teaparty member, but I do know
that Chris Christie is a Tea party favorite.
I am not sure if he will run in 2016, but I am saving room on my lawn for a
Please let me know when a OWN member "not called Ketchup", steps out
of the tent and becomes leader.
Without sounding mean, I think Mr Christie would need to drop at least 100 lbs. before he could run for POTUS.
Part of me wants to quit smoking, start walking every day, lose weight, and generally get healthy, so that when I'm old I can be one of those cranky retired folks that shows up at the younguns events and passes out granola bars and shlitz or something. I can see myself specifically retiring to Washington state or Colorado at the moment, but there are years to go... I hope Starbucks is still in business by then. "I'll have the low blood-pressure Maui Chai latte..."
"Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"... Matthew 6:12
This verse is not meant to reference debts of a financial nature. The word "debts" in this verse is referencing "sins" or "trespasses." This Chapter is where The Lord's Prayer comes from (i.e. Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us). I know you're not Catholic, so I wasn't sure if you were aware if that.
If everyone believed all financial debts everywhere should be forgiven, then nobody would ever loan anybody money anywhere ever again. Is that really what you want, Darryl?
The Bible, whether the little part at the end in Greek or the TANAKH, is not an extension of something written in the 1770s by Adam Smith. It's the bible.
There is some doubt as to whether the Jubilee Year was ever practiced, but there were numerous other socialist features to the ancient theocracy.
The fact that "nobody would ever lend money" if we followed the teachings of Jesus is particularly irrelevant, given the thoroughly apocalyptic nature of early Christianity.
When Jesus says there are people still living who will see his return at the end of days, that's what he means. It only gets interpreted into people being around in spirit or somesuch later on.
The fact that Jesus' teachings are radicalizations of preexistent Jewish teachings is occasioned by the belief of his followers that they were living in the end times -- so you start to "live as if there's no tomorrow" radically aligned to the moral teachings of your people, hoping that in the coming apocalypse you'll be one of the elect.
Forgiving debt, in a more urbanized society where the landowners are considered corrupt, is Jesus' little OWS moment. He does this often, taking preexistent formulae (for example, "forgive us our trespasses,") and radicalizing via a rhetorical extension.
The Torah says love your neighbor; I say love your enemy. The Torah says forgive others their trespasses; I say forgive them their debt.