Obama dispises liberty

[McCulloch]

Obama's election could be punishment for an evil nation.

Or a reward to a nation coming to its senses.

Only if you despise liberty and support socialism.

Does Obama despise liberty and support socialism? Is he one of those Godless communists?

[Cmass]

Micatala wrote:

Not only do the democrats ruin the economy, then they try to fix it by 'redistributing the wealth.'

This is an utterly absurd statement.
This nonsense spouted by McCain and Palin (my GOD what a joke) after hooking up with Joe The (not!) Plumber displays unbelievable ignorance and lack of thinking. One of the jobs of Government IS to redistribute the wealth! In a non-redistributive system we would all pay exactly the same amount of tax. In a perfectly non-redistributive system there would be NO tax at all because taxation redistributes wealth from you to the government in order to pay for armies and infrastructure. People would raise armies and pay for infrastructure by volunteering.

The rich pay pay more. Large corporations pay more. The poor pay less. That is the way it is set up - and I doubt - if you thought about it - you would want it changed. What is generally argued is the AMOUNT of the redistribution. And lets face it, Obama is not radically different in this regard. His radical departure has more to do with his ability to think deeply about issues, his curiosity about the world, his ability to see the complexity in issues and the fact that he is articulate. Even if he got all of his tax changes passed (not guaranteed) we would hardly see socialism.

BTW: Didn't Jesus advocate redistribution of the wealth from you to the poor? I am constantly amazed how incredibly greedy, unjust and immoral Christians become when it comes to policy. They spit in the face of their savior in pursuit of and support of a non-sustainable consumer culture obsessed with buying unnecessary junk, raping the land, polluting our beds and empowering the rich. They are blinded by this culture. This is the very reason I sought out this forum in the first place. I wanted to know why there was such a huge number of Christians that favor hostility over peace and trickle down economics. It makes no sense. I should be the one arguing for letting the economy take it's course so the rich can provide us jobs, no you.

[bernee51]

Micatala wrote:

Not only do the democrats ruin the economy, then they try to fix it by 'redistributing the wealth.'

This is an utterly absurd statement.
This nonsense spouted by McCain and Palin (my GOD what a joke) after hooking up with Joe The (not!) Plumber displays unbelievable ignorance and lack of thinking. One of the jobs of Government IS to redistribute the wealth! In a non-redistributive system we would all pay exactly the same amount of tax. In a perfectly non-redistributive system there would be NO tax at all because taxation redistributes wealth from you to the government in order to pay for armies and infrastructure. People would raise armies and pay for infrastructure by volunteering.

The rich pay pay more. Large corporations pay more. The poor pay less. That is the way it is set up - and I doubt - if you thought about it - you would want it changed. What is generally argued is the AMOUNT of the redistribution. And lets face it, Obama is not radically different in this regard. His radical departure has more to do with his ability to think deeply about issues, his curiosity about the world, his ability to see the complexity in issues and the fact that he is articulate. Even if he got all of his tax changes passed (not guaranteed) we would hardly see socialism.

BTW: Didn't Jesus advocate redistribution of the wealth from you to the poor? I am constantly amazed how incredibly greedy, unjust and immoral Christians become when it comes to policy. They spit in the face of their savior in pursuit of and support of a non-sustainable consumer culture obsessed with buying unnecessary junk, raping the land, polluting our beds and empowering the rich. They are blinded by this culture. This is the very reason I sought out this forum in the first place. I wanted to know why there was such a huge number of Christians that favor hostility over peace and trickle down economics. It makes no sense. I should be the one arguing for letting the economy take it's course so the rich can provide us jobs, no you.

Perhaps you didn't see (sarcasm) tag....

[Cmass]

Micatala wrote:

Not only do the democrats ruin the economy, then they try to fix it by 'redistributing the wealth.'

This is an utterly absurd statement.
This nonsense spouted by McCain and Palin (my GOD what a joke) after hooking up with Joe The (not!) Plumber displays unbelievable ignorance and lack of thinking. One of the jobs of Government IS to redistribute the wealth! In a non-redistributive system we would all pay exactly the same amount of tax. In a perfectly non-redistributive system there would be NO tax at all because taxation redistributes wealth from you to the government in order to pay for armies and infrastructure. People would raise armies and pay for infrastructure by volunteering.

The rich pay pay more. Large corporations pay more. The poor pay less. That is the way it is set up - and I doubt - if you thought about it - you would want it changed. What is generally argued is the AMOUNT of the redistribution. And lets face it, Obama is not radically different in this regard. His radical departure has more to do with his ability to think deeply about issues, his curiosity about the world, his ability to see the complexity in issues and the fact that he is articulate. Even if he got all of his tax changes passed (not guaranteed) we would hardly see socialism.

BTW: Didn't Jesus advocate redistribution of the wealth from you to the poor? I am constantly amazed how incredibly greedy, unjust and immoral Christians become when it comes to policy. They spit in the face of their savior in pursuit of and support of a non-sustainable consumer culture obsessed with buying unnecessary junk, raping the land, polluting our beds and empowering the rich. They are blinded by this culture. This is the very reason I sought out this forum in the first place. I wanted to know why there was such a huge number of Christians that favor hostility over peace and trickle down economics. It makes no sense. I should be the one arguing for letting the economy take it's course so the rich can provide us jobs, no you.

Perhaps you didn't see (sarcasm) tag....

Hey, I thought that was just part of a signature and didn't notice it!!

I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks. I also request a public stoning old-school style so I can pay for and be rid of my guilt.

I did not read the last line and thus was absolutely dumbfounded (emphasis on "dumb") that Micatala would/could so starkly contradict everything I've read from him in the last few years. Beyond the fact that I broke a cardinal rule and didn't read the whole thing carefully, there are 2 reasons I had a knee jerk (emphasis on "jerk") reaction to this:

1) I have 2 close friends who are right wing Christians and up until GW's ratings fell below 30% they fully supported everything including the war: An action that resulted in countless deaths and agony for children my son's age - something that gives me nightmares. These friends are moral, ethical people in their everyday lives and yet have this incredible disconnect when it comes to policy that is not in their backyard.
While I don't agree with the anti-choice crowd at all, I can fully comprehend why they are pushing their agenda. It is consistent. While I also don't find the "no sex before marriage" argument very compelling, it too is consistent. So is stem cell research objections. While I could make the case that their view is actually harming people and strongly disagree with their definition of human life, I do not find the argument particularly contradictory. Same with many other issues.

But when they present themselves as a moral authority on these and other topics and then turn around and march off to a war they claim is supported by god....I get rather testy.

The second reason I'm rambling and not being careful is that despite maximum doses of Tylenol and Ibuprofen my fever has now climbed to 103 and I feel like I've been worked over by a baseball bat. I can't sleep and am looking for distraction. Lashing out at everyone in here is the best I can do at this point.

Sorry.

Hmmm....now who else can I blast...

[Cathar1950]

Micatala wrote:

Not only do the democrats ruin the economy, then they try to fix it by 'redistributing the wealth.'

This is an utterly absurd statement.

BTW: Didn't Jesus advocate redistribution of the wealth from you to the poor? I am constantly amazed how incredibly greedy, unjust and immoral Christians become when it comes to policy. They spit in the face of their savior in pursuit of and support of a non-sustainable consumer culture obsessed with buying unnecessary junk, raping the land, polluting our beds and empowering the rich. They are blinded by this culture. This is the very reason I sought out this forum in the first place. I wanted to know why there was such a huge number of Christians that favor hostility over peace and trickle down economics. It makes no sense. I should be the one arguing for letting the economy take it's course so the rich can provide us jobs, no you.

Perhaps you didn't see (sarcasm) tag....

I thought he was joking.
As one of my friends pointed out the other day, the rich will get rich no matter how much money we take from them. That is what they do. They are in no danger of losing everything. What the middle and lower classes need to understand is we are in this together and the difference between the really poor and the middle and working class is a job or a personal disaster.
Some think that they should protect the unborn while ignoring the 38,000 children that die from poverty. Joblessness rises and so does crime yet we make more prisons and tougher laws instead of jobs.
Single people living alone use more resources while they fight same sex unions.

I am happy about the turn the country wants to take and it is about time.
It is nice to see someone inspire younger people as my generation has become cynical and disillusioned. After the last 8 years I was wondering how long it was going to take us to see the light and was wondering if we had to be brought to our knees before we made some changes.

[Cmass]

After the last 8 years I was wondering how long it was going to take us to see the light and was wondering if we had to be brought to our knees before we made some changes.

My fear is that we have NOT seen any light. People are no more engaged, wise, or thoughtful than they were when they elected GW twice. They have grown weary of the war and are worried about their financial picture - that is all. The vast majority do not think any further than this. The repubs are now encouraging Joe The Plumber to run for Congress. If things were a bit better in the country, a Palin/Plumber ticket would win.
Over the past decade I have concluded that if we make it as a country and a species, it will be dumb luck.

[Cathar1950]

After the last 8 years I was wondering how long it was going to take us to see the light and was wondering if we had to be brought to our knees before we made some changes.

My fear is that we have NOT seen any light. People are no more engaged, wise, or thoughtful than they were when they elected GW twice. They have grown weary of the war and are worried about their financial picture - that is all. The vast majority do not think any further than this. The repubs are now encouraging Joe The Plumber to run for Congress. If things were a bit better in the country, a Palin/Plumber ticket would win.
Over the past decade I have concluded that if we make it as a country and a species, it will be dumb luck.

I have to agree.
A Paline/Plumber ticket would be a step backwards and if it happened you could only wonder if we didn't deserve it. Of course we can't blame children.
Maybe stupid has to be fixed.

[micatala]

Micatala wrote:

Not only do the democrats ruin the economy, then they try to fix it by 'redistributing the wealth.'

This is an utterly absurd statement.
This nonsense spouted by McCain and Palin (my GOD what a joke) after hooking up with Joe The (not!) Plumber displays unbelievable ignorance and lack of thinking. One of the jobs of Government IS to redistribute the wealth! In a non-redistributive system we would all pay exactly the same amount of tax. In a perfectly non-redistributive system there would be NO tax at all because taxation redistributes wealth from you to the government in order to pay for armies and infrastructure. People would raise armies and pay for infrastructure by volunteering.

The rich pay pay more. Large corporations pay more. The poor pay less. That is the way it is set up - and I doubt - if you thought about it - you would want it changed. What is generally argued is the AMOUNT of the redistribution. And lets face it, Obama is not radically different in this regard. His radical departure has more to do with his ability to think deeply about issues, his curiosity about the world, his ability to see the complexity in issues and the fact that he is articulate. Even if he got all of his tax changes passed (not guaranteed) we would hardly see socialism.

BTW: Didn't Jesus advocate redistribution of the wealth from you to the poor? I am constantly amazed how incredibly greedy, unjust and immoral Christians become when it comes to policy. They spit in the face of their savior in pursuit of and support of a non-sustainable consumer culture obsessed with buying unnecessary junk, raping the land, polluting our beds and empowering the rich. They are blinded by this culture. This is the very reason I sought out this forum in the first place. I wanted to know why there was such a huge number of Christians that favor hostility over peace and trickle down economics. It makes no sense. I should be the one arguing for letting the economy take it's course so the rich can provide us jobs, no you.

Perhaps you didn't see (sarcasm) tag....

Well, sorry for leaving the gaping hole for someone to fall into. We'll reduce the penalty on Cmass for being semi-delerious. If he insists on being stoned I will oblige him, as soon as I can figure out how to get my fingers on a gall stone.

Maybe next time I'll use orange lettering or something.

[Cmass]

Well, sorry for leaving the gaping hole for someone to fall into. We'll reduce the penalty on Cmass for being semi-delerious. If he insists on being stoned I will oblige him, as soon as I can figure out how to get my fingers on a gall stone.

While in fact I don't drink, smoke or take illicit drugs, this fever/flu is making me so miserable at this point I may make an exception and take you up on your offer to get me stoned.

[kal-el]

A Paline/Plumber ticket would be a step backwards and if it happened you could only wonder if we didn't deserve it. Of course we can't blame children.
Maybe stupid has to be fixed.

Tell me about it. When will these Republicans learn, and stop supporting redneck politicians. Sarah Palin is cut from the same mold as Jeff Foxworthy, and since when are we in the habit of caring about one's opinion when they show their buttcrack on a daily basis. Those 2 only appeal to rednecks who reside in trailer parks.

[micatala]

Moderator Intervention

A Paline/Plumber ticket would be a step backwards and if it happened you could only wonder if we didn't deserve it. Of course we can't blame children.
Maybe stupid has to be fixed.

Tell me about it. When will these Republicans learn, and stop supporting redneck politicians. Sarah Palin is cut from the same mold as Jeff Foxworthy, and since when are we in the habit of caring about one's opinion when they show their buttcrack on a daily basis. Those 2 only appeal to rednecks who reside in trailer parks.

I realilze this thread has been dormant for a while and was getting a bit flippant before that, but I will ask kal-el to refrain from this kind of editorial rambling. It could be considered both insulting and inflammatory, if even only on a mild basis. I can, for example, think of quite a number of non red-neck celebrities that show parts of their bodies that some of us would rather not see.