What a sad little existence, to waste so much of it on self-righteously admonishing others as to whether they are going to mythological heaven or mythological hell. Dare to take your blinders off, Mr. Orr. It's quite liberating to see the Bible for the book of fairy tales that is and to think for yourself.
Doggone it, Mr. Lindley, you are one smart dude. We libs thought we could sneak it past you guys by calling it free and not talking about the tax thing. But obviously you're on to us. Yep, taxes do indeed pay for things like contraceptives and "free" lunches for school kids. We're sorry. We know it's better for the rich and everybody else not to have to pay taxes for those things, that way the rich can get richer while the kids go hungry and more women get pregnant and then seek out abortions. Damn taxes! Outright stealing from the rich to pay for things like infrastructure, our national parks, fire and police protection, education, the health and well-being of our citizens. But who needs that, right? Better for everybody to keep their money and live in a banana republic than to pay for having a well functioning society, eh? After all, this nation was founded on the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of money, was it not?
Edna Bogue, I think your choice of adjectives to describe Americans after WW2 is completely wrong: "Smug and invincible??" Hardly! I think that, first and foremost, Americans were joyous and relieved that the war was over. Beyond that, proud and confident...and rightly so.
As for the prosperity that followed, what's wrong with that?? For the next 3 decades following the war more Americans were able to share in the American Dream than at any time prior or since. Then what happened? Reagan came on the scene with his massive deregulation and huge tax cuts for the wealthy; and to go along with that, the "Christian Coalition" started puffing up its chest and talking like you, inserting itself into politics and preaching how America needed to return to God and prayer. It has been downhill ever since.
No, we do not need more prayer and a return to God. We need zealous evangelicals like you to simply shut up and stay the hell out of government and politics. America is NOT, nor was it ever intended to be, a Christian nation. So pray at home and at your church all you want to, but the problems we face today need sane, serious minded people of reason and logic to confront them with sane, rational solutions.
If I were to pray at all, I would pray for the Rapture to come quickly and whisk all you evangelicals away, to get you out of our politics once and for all, so that we might get some sanity back in our government and society.
aae1049...so Robin said a prayer on the phone for you, eh? Well, let's give her the Mother Theresa award for compassion and for being and all around good Samaritan! Look, I'm sure Mrs. Smith is a decent person, maybe even a perfect angel, to family and to anybody in her close circle of friends, but it is her politics that I cannot stomach and that is what I focus my comments on. Whether you think some of the attacks on here are mean-spirited or not is irrelevant. I'm sure that Mrs. Smith can handle whatever is thrown at her.
As for being a coward and hiding behind fake names...I have stated my name several times on here - Rick Armstrong. I've got nothing to hide. All I know about you is that some commenters on here refer to you as April. I have never seen you provide your full name. Personally I don't even care to know what your real name is, but don't be so quick to call anybody a coward if you're going to continue to hide behind your own screen name.
Timbo, you righties are so tightly wound in your tighty-whities, calling liberalism a disease and spewing out your bile against our socialistic ways, that you don't even hear what we're saying. There is not one liberal I know who does not have respect for socially conscious business owners who treat their employees decently and pay them a decent living wage. Nor do I know of any libs who are calling for a purely socialistic state. Yes, there are some socialists who advocate that, but they are a definite minority. Most libs believe in a balance between socialism and free market practices. However, you righties and libertarians call any and every aspect of socialism evil and liberalism itself a disease. Any halfway intelligent person knows that capitalism without restraints is as bad as socialism without restraints. Either road leads to fascism. We can have corporate fascism or we can have socialistic fascism. The trick is to balance the two so that the interests of the most number of people are served. You certainly can keep calling liberalism a disease if you want to, and keep whining about how we libs just want a "nanny state," but you are only being a reactionary, knee-jerk a-hole when you do so.
BTW, that example of your former gf was silly and meaningless. That has nothing to do with what we libs are calling for. You righties like to portray yourselves as manly and rugged individualists, don't you? But your pretense and your obvious insecurities are laughable.
And one other thing...if we keep going down this road of favoring corporations over people, with little or no regard for the environment and the resources we are soon going to deplete, total socialistic fascism will surely be our only recourse. And fascism of any kind is something that nobody in their right mind wants. But I guarantee you we will get it if you keep thinking of socialism in all its forms as evil and do not accept the good things that it can do.
"ibshame, you're a racist. In keeping with the long line of liberal/ democrat racists who don't like when blacks wander off of your plantation. Calling Thomas Sowell an Uncle Tom proves you're a racist." - zableedwhatever
I don't know what figurative plantation you are talking about, but it's a fact that Uncle Toms Sowell and Walter Williams are snugly ensconced in the cushy confines of the rich old white men's county club. If that's where they want to be, then that is their prerogative and they should certainly have the freedom to think, act, and talk like old rich white farts if they want to. I do not begrudge them that freedom. It's just a shame that they have sunk so low as to let themselves become like their "massas" in order to be accepted into that rich old white man's environment. You honestly think that Republicans would accept them if they acted and thought any way other than like rich old white men? Not hardly.
"...Even if I do disagree with you about Hillary being pro-Wall Street. LOL." - ibshame
Ibshame, I will gladly eat humble pie if I am proven wrong. This is a case where I would much rather be proven wrong than right. I really do hope she takes a much stronger stand against corporate greed and self-interest than I'm presently thinking she will.
"You libs want to wrap your hands around a big oversized cup of cocoa, have mommy pat you on the head. Like those footy pajamas don't you?" - zableedwhatever
What an idiotic thing to say. We libs love our freedom just as much as any conservative or libertarian. You guys don't have a monopoly on the "individual freedom" thing. Just because we believe in strong safety net programs and a government that is pro-active in protecting the environment and the rights of the average citizen against runaway corporate greed and self-interest doesn't mean that we want a "nanny state."
America has worked best for the most number of people whenever we have had a sensible blending of free market practices with some socialistic policies. Not everything should be handled by private business. Those things that serve the public interest and that pertain to the health and wellbeing of the citizenry should not be privatized but put in the hands of government, where profit is not the main concern. We libs are not calling for a purely socialistic state but rather a balance between a free market and a government that reasonably restrains that free market from veering off into pure self-interest.
You righties like to say that we hate profits, business owners, and the free market in general, but that is a blatant lie. We respect business owners who have a social conscience and who treat their employees fairly. We know that profits are necessary for a business to be successful and we do not begrudge business owners their profits. But when those profits far exceed the miserly poverty-level wages they pay to their employees, then, yes, we despise those greedy bastards and they deserve to be called out for their greed.
You call liberalism a "disease" but we do not call conservatism a disease and in fact we acknowledge that conservatism can sometimes be a good and necessary thing. But you on the other hand have sunk into a cesspool of visceral hatred of all things liberal and you have forgotten how liberalism has been responsible for every major step forward this nation has made. Without liberalism there would never even have been a United States of America. You can keep on childishly calling liberalism a "disease" if you want to, and keep on whining about how we libs just want a "nanny state," but you only call attention to your idiocy and immaturity when you do so.
I am not pro-Hillary. She is a neo-liberal and even more of a corporate lackey than Obama. America has become an oligarchy and that suits Hillary fine. She will do nothing but sell out to big business at every opportunity. We need someone like Elizabeth Warren who is not afraid to stand up to Wall St. and the corporate fat cats, but Ms. Warren does not have nearly the commanding oratorical powers that Hillary does. Hillary is a great speaker and tough as nails. She is unflappable. She will most likely win hands down against any Democratic opponent. As for the Republicans, the only chance they have of beating her is for them to run a smart, savvy, woman or a black or Latino man, and there is no such contender that I know of.
As for the Republicans digging up any dirt on Hillary, they will come up with nothing but past peccadilloes (and that's all she has in her closet; nothing of a serious nature that could harm her) and they will look like fools for even bringing them up.
As for foreign policy, she will be even more hawkish than Obama and her hawkish tone will come across clearly in all of her speeches. Republicans won't be able to out-hawk her on foreign policy, not even with the Benghazi incident (again, a mere peccadillo, at worst).
She will most likely win the women's vote, the youth vote, the minority vote, and the vote of every moderate Democrat, PLUS the vote of every independent who votes purely emotionally, simply thinking it's time that we had a woman president.
An added advantage for her is that she will have hubby Bill stumping fiercely for her and he is presently riding a wave of popularity, coupled with the fact that he is a powerful and persuasive speaker himself.
You guys claiming that Hillary is history or "toast" or washed up, don't know what you are talking about. The only way Hillary is going to lose in 2016 is if she slips up majorly between then and now, and that is not likely to happen. Brace yourselves for President Hillary Clinton in 2016, you Republicans, teabaggers, and haters of liberals in general. Ready or not, like it or not, she WILL be our next President.
Spot on, Ki. I call BS on this article. It's pure fluff. Mrs. Smith speaks of the positive aspects of religion, even going so far as to mention the Golden Rule, but most of her articles have little to do with the Golden Rule but rather the “tough love” of a militant God and Jesus who she seems to think are Republican and rabidly conservative like her. Instead of practicing the Golden Rule towards the poor and minorities and anyone who hasn't achieved success as she defines it she scoffs at them and groups them all together as moochers and takers. She is a corporate boot licker who does not acknowledge the oligarchy and corporate fascism that exist in America, and her attitude in general is …”I've got mine, now what's wrong with you that you haven't got yours?”
I am indeed always “on the lookout for authenticity,” Mrs. Smith, and I'm sure as heck not seeing it here in this article.