My (Very) Early Predictions for GOP 2012

April 14, 2010 at 12:47 pm 112 comments

Inspired by a comment I made in one of my comment threads, fellow blogger Alfie prognosticated about whether or not Barack Obama will be challenged in 2012 by a Democrat. I thought I would return the favor by conjecturing on the GOP side of the 2012 Presidential race.

What follows in no particular order are some of the names already being bandied about for Republican nominees. I’ll grade them on likelihood of winning nomination if they decided to run and likelihood of beating Obama on a five point scale. 5 = Extremely likely, 1 = there’s a better chance of finding Nicole Simpson’s “real” killer.

Sarah Palin

We might as well get the elephant in the room over with. Palin is comparatively young, extremely savvy about controlling the media which she claims to disdain, and very charismatic as evidenced by the huge crowds she attracts on a regular basis. It is very hard to tell how brave her fellow Republicans will be in challenging her in the primaries should she choose to run. If they attack her too sharply they will alienate a major contingent of the dissatisfied electorate. She has proven that she will not buckle down and become knowledgeable on the issues. Still, I’m not sure this would seal her doom during primary season. In the general election, Obama (or any other Democrat for that matter) will clean her clock.
Nomination: 4
Election: 1

Tim Pawlenty

Watching paint dry is a more exciting experience than watching Pawlenty. With more interesting characters from which to choose, Pawlenty does not stand a chance.
Nomination: 2
Election: 1

Bobby Jindal

Bobby’s Republican response to one of Obama’s early Congressional addresses in 2009 was so awkward and embarrassing that it is hard to believe he could be a compelling challenger. He has been accurately compared to Kenneth the page in the sitcom “30 Rock”. This is another non-starter.
Nomination: 2
Election: 1

Dick Cheney

While the former Vice President has sworn he will not seek higher office, his nomination would present a choice of polar opposites for the American people. A Venn diagram depicting Cheney’s views vs Obama’s views would be two circles side by side with zero overlap. Cheney would get 100% of registered Republicans, Obama 100% of registered Democrats and then the fascinating exercise would be to see where the independents line up. For sheer drama, I’d pick Cheney as the next GOP candidate. One interesting question would be how much would his health play a role in his electability?
Nomination: 4
Election: 3

Mitt Romney

Since it is highly unlikely that we will have a booming economy in late 2011 and early 2012, Mitt Romney is the GOP’s economy pinch hitter. Romney, a successful businessman who saved the 2002 Winter Olympics games from financial ruin can claim some dollars and cents credibility. He also does very well in every GOP straw poll that has been conducted recently (CPAC and SRLC to name two). He has two major problems from my perspective. If health care reform is as polarizing in 2012 as it is now, Romney has some explaining to do since he championed a similar health care plan in Massachusetts while he was Governor. The “I was for it before I was against it” approach has not fared well in American politics. It also falls into Romney’s reputation as flip-flopper, firmly established during the 2008 primaries. In the general election, I think his Mormonism will definitely hurt him. My guess is that atheists find Mormonism the most detestable of faiths based on their history of racism. I suspect a good many Christians also don’t consider Mormonism a legit religion.
Nomination: 4
Election: 2

Ron Paul

Ron Paul does not stand a snowball’s chance in hell of getting nominated much less elected. There is a simple reason why. He is truly the only one on the GOP side bucking the status quo. While America talks a good line about wanting change, the truth is the average American is change-averse. The further we get into Barack Obama’s presidency the more convinced I am of this. The change that Americans wanted to believe in when they elected Obama was really just a desire to return to normalcy (Warren Harding anyone?), i.e. getting back to work. That’s not real change. That’s just restoration of the status quo. Among Ron Paul’s more radical ideas is to bring virtually all our military forces home. He claims we currently are acting like an empire with troops installed all over the world. I have to tell you I like Paul if for no other reason than that he says stuff that is unpopular with the establishment. He also has a strong base among conservative youth. Still I don’t think he can galvanize enough support to be successful.
Nomination: 1
Election: 1

Newt Gingrich

It seems Newt wants to resurrect 1994′s Contract with America. While Newt is capable of the dumbass statement, such as when he told Jon Stewart that shoe bomber Richard Reid was an American citizen (he was not), overall Newt presents an intelligent alternative to an otherwise dullard bunch. One suspects that if Newt ran he would come to the table with concrete ideas. On the other hand, Newt has a bit of Hillary Clinton disease. When Hillary ran for the Democratic nomination she reminded everyone of the 90′s and there was a sense of been there done that. I think Newt has the same problem. He’s not fresh. Since Republicans have no problem with hypocrisy, the fact that he cheated on his wife while trying to get Bill Clinton impeached for fellatio will not hurt him in the primaries. However in the general election, I’m not sure various independent liberal groups will be so kind.
Nomination: 3
Election: 2

Jeb Bush

A good many people say that Jeb was the Bush son who should have been President. I can only base my opinion of him on the few times I’ve seen him speak and the fact that he was a very popular Florida Governor. He also speaks fluent Spanish, America’s second language. I’m impressed with what I’ve seen of Jeb so far. He is soft-spoken which gives him an air of intelligence. He lacks the dumbass swagger of his older brother George W. However he has one major obstacle — his brother George W. If the sour taste of Bush has faded from the American tongue or been replaced by the sour taste of Obama, then I truly think Jeb has a shot at it. He would have to walk the delicate line of “I’m not my brother” while not outright dissing his kin. If he can get past that obstacle, I think he has a chance. (Let’s not forget America’s infatuation with making history. If elected, Jeb would make George 41 the only President to have two sons become President.)
Nomination: 4
Election: 3

Tom Coburn

I haven’t heard anyone talk about Tom Coburn, Republican Senator from Oklahoma as a Presidential hopeful but I’m tossing his hat in the ring anyway. When Obama held his health care summit this winter, only two Republicans came to the table with intelligent sounding talking points. One was Paul Ryan, a numbers wonk. The other was Tom Coburn who at least appeared to be there to suggest alternatives and carve out a solution. Recently Coburn made waves at a town hall meeting when he accused Fox News of sensationalizing the health care debate and defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In an age of brain-dead partisan politics, Coburn impresses me as a “fair and balanced” solution man. His having been an anti-abortion obstetrician and Baptist deacon should only improve his cred among Republicans. Despite my general liking for the man, I’m not sure he has the charisma to survive a Republican primary or general election.
Nomination: 2
Election: 2

Now, I must reiterate that I would not vote for any of the above. Now it’s your turn. Which of these candidates would get your vote in either the primary or the general?

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

About these ads

Entry filed under: Politics, Social commentary, Wordpress Political Blogs. Tags: , , , , , , , , .

More Headlines in the Age of Insanity The Big Scam and the Real Boss

112 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Tex Taylor  |  April 14, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    I don’t even think you’ve got the right potential candidates listed as choice. While you hope for a Sarah Palin candidacy, there is no way she will be chosen as candidate, much to your chagrin.

    In the Spring of 2006, Barack Obama was but a Jr. Senator in a bankrupt and criminal state, with a record of voting “Present.” Oh that Obama was still voting “Present.” You’re still under the impression of Obama’s greatness, when it reality it has become abundantly clear Obama was nothing but the candidate of serendipity, protest and personal blunder. It is hard to imagine Obama falling faster and lower with regard to respect than he already has. How much more can he fail?

    The people who actually do waffle in choice or ride the fence called Independents have made their declaration of dissatisfaction of the current administration clear. And we haven’t made it to the Fall election yet. Obama is persona non grata x 2. I expect this disdain and mistrust of Obama and his lackeys (like you) to be cubed by the summer of 2012.

    Your list includes no governors other than Jeb (no chance), no Mark Rubio, nor John Bolton, nor David Petraeus.

    While your post meant to provoke, your clarity blackened (no pun intended) by your innate bias and inherent personal weakness. I read this post and laughed at you, as just today, I saw this:

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2012/election_2012_barack_obama_42_ron_paul_41
    :lol: :lol:

    Being I think the chances of Ron Paul, who was last amongst the ten Republican finalists in 2008, slim and none, I think you are in great denial about the collective loathing of the former Chosen One. By some supernatural miracle or bad fortune, it is possible for Obama to recover his black magic (no pun intended), I feel pretty confident in continuing failure of the Dimocratic party as a whole. Those that pay no federal tax while leeching from the system (the 47%) and vote (Far Less), you’ve got locked. NARAL, NAMBLA, Code Pink, draft dodgers and the disenfranchised (Wally types), 95% of blacks, union members who’ve been corrupted with promises of over extended pensions, their a lock to pull the ‘D’ lever. The rest of America finds Obama a sham and reprehensible.

    While incredibly effective at lying, conniving, stealing, voter fraud, getting innocents killed, bowing to enemies and alienating allies, immorality, cowardice, philandering, sloth, and welfare fraud, when asked to perform, the Dimocratic party has been an utter failure. Every 16 years, the cycle repeats itself.

    Welcome back Jimmy Carter. Might be LBJ – but I feel Obama’s swelled head could not admit imminent defeat, so this is a more remote possibility.

  • 2. LOL  |  April 14, 2010 at 1:52 pm

    Rutherford picking GOP candidates is worth about as much as Obama picking college hoops.

    The only difference is that Rutherford is able to correctly spell all of his picks.

  • 3. Tex Taylor  |  April 14, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    Rutherford picking GOP candidates is worth about as much as Obama picking college hoops.
    :lol: Better for Obama to be picking hoops where he has a chance than to see Obama making the lame attempt at throwing a baseball to the plate. Next year, Obama would be better to throw it underhanded like a grenade.

    “Wet Noodle” Soetoro plastered on the back of his phony jersey.

    By the way, mistake from above – their should be they’re from the previous post.

  • 4. Rutherford  |  April 14, 2010 at 3:32 pm

    So encouraging to see intelligent constructive reaction to a post. :-)

    Buried deep within the Obama bashing, Tex actually had some suggestions.

    Your list includes no governors other than Jeb (no chance), no Mark Rubio, nor John Bolton, nor David Petraeus.

    LOL First Tex I absolutely love your attempt to anglicize Mr. Rubio’s name. His name is Marco … reminds me of a thug character from “One Life To Live” (Marco Dane) from way back in the day. Marco is currently a media darling of sorts among GOPhers but I don’t see how he gets enough traction by late 2011 to be a contender. I could be wrong.

    John “Got milk?” Bolton makes Nixon a contender for the Mr. Congeniality award. He stands zero chance.

    David Petraeus is currently a loyal foot soldier of Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama. His sense of military duty will prevent him from challenging Obama in 2012.

    Still, I give you credit for sneaking in a couple of your own ideas in an otherwise trite comment about the failures of Obama.

    I’m a bit surprised by “LOL” who is usually reliable for critical analysis. Today he sounds like a slightly more clever version of Elric. ;-)

    Perhaps the moral in all of this is that you boys have no one to run in 2012. Kinda sucks doesn’t it? Another four years of Obama! :-D

  • 5. Tex Taylor  |  April 14, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    Did I get his name wrong? :lol: I guess I was impressed enough with “Marco” to have missed the O, not wanting confuse it with Zero for the feckless, shuffling Obama.

    You know who you kind of remind me of Rutherford? Henry Waxman.

    You’re both cocky as hell without apparent reason, irrelevant, and look like fruit bats. :wink:

    Yeah, Petraeus is so loyal to Noodle Arm he’s been seen gallivanting around New Hampshire recently. I think the moral of the story really is Obama sucks so bad, his performance so pathetic, not only will Noodle Arm take down the cocksucking Dims in Congress this fall, it won’t matter who runs against him, if that Ron Paul poll any indicator.

    Tells me Noodle ain’t worth a shit… :wink:

  • 6. Alfie  |  April 14, 2010 at 4:47 pm

    Can I chime in how done I am with the GOPher moniker? Anyway I have to say to Rutherford that at least you have that its early still going for you.
    So on your picks I say:
    I hear you on Palin although she is more like a 4/3.
    Pawlenty showed some promise but is now clearly a B lister who is easily eclipsed by some folks you didn’t list (or probably even imagined)
    Jindal???? Is this ingrained in one of your liberal genes or what?
    Cheney???? See above but I’ll throw ya a 2/2
    Romney. My bias shines. Until I see better plus a potential VP choice for him he is a 4/4 by your scale.
    Paul. I never understood him or the fascination that “Paulists” numbers and dedication never jive with reality. He is a 0/0 but you can throw him in my post as a potential 3rd party spoiler ala Nader. 0/0
    Gingrich. I likes the Newt but he is a 1/4 at best. He’s got an odd mix of energy and ADD going for him. He pumps out ideas but then moves on.
    Bush See my post on Hillary and add that America is in no mood for legacies. 1/3
    Coburn is actually a pick that shows some spirited gambler Rutherford,good for you. I think you’ve nailed the score too! Coburn and a couple of others like him are the GOP version of Biden,a potential worthy candidate that nobody looks twice at.
    As for the Tex toss ins. I say Rubio is a good future player and shows another side of the latino/hispanic demo that the dems are always going on about being an anti GOP thing.
    Bolton in the big chair? I don’t know if I can see it being in him. I won’t question his dedication to public service but I don’t think I can see him even wanting the Oval. And Petreaus,I don’t see him as a loyal foot soldier but he is also not in the best position to initiate a campaign. I have actually heard some chatter he’d explore it so 2012 would be the time.1/3

  • 7. Rutherford  |  April 15, 2010 at 12:04 am

    Gingrich. I likes the Newt but he is a 1/4 at best

    First Alfie, thanks for the well thought out answer.

    Do I understand you correctly that you think Newt doesn’t stand a chance of getting nominated, but if nominated he has a good chance of winning the general?

  • 8. Alfie  |  April 15, 2010 at 10:16 am

    Basically yes. More fully is that I see no reason to think Obama can do better in the next election as he did in the last one. So I think anyone can get going out of the gate against Pres. obama,they just need to get in the gate. I personally still hold some distaste for Newts previous draft me theme.

  • 9. Tex Taylor  |  April 15, 2010 at 10:23 am

    Off Topic, but it looks to me like Obama has come out the ObamaCare version of the

    ObamaPAD!

    Wally Curator, Hippie, and Rutherford were the first three in line!

  • 10. Tex Taylor  |  April 15, 2010 at 10:27 am

    By the way Wally Curator, about that economic recovery?

    That’s two weeks in a row your genius macro economists from the gubmint have been stung with a major surprise of big uptick in weekly jobless claims.

    Congratulations on your foresight! :smile:

  • 11. Rutherford  |  April 15, 2010 at 1:26 pm

    Of course, Tex, we’ll ignore the Dow topping 11,000. Puhleeze. You’ll pick the economic indicators you like to bash Obama. There will always be something you can point to.

    Hey Tex, after that sad suggestion of Rubio, Petraous and Bolton, care to opine on the bunch I presented or are you ready to admit you’ve got no real ammo yet for 2012?

    Bwahahahahahahahahaaha!

  • 12. Tex Taylor  |  April 15, 2010 at 2:09 pm

    Rutherford Waxman,

    Of course, Tex, we’ll ignore the Dow topping 11,000. Puhleeze. You’ll pick the economic indicators you like to bash Obama.

    Well, if we want to use the DOW as measuring stick, George Bush was an economic frickin’ genius, right sport? 14,200 rube and Zero has a long way to go. :wink:

    Hey Tex, after that sad suggestion of Rubio, Petraous and Bolton, care to opine on the bunch I presented or are you ready to admit you’ve got no real ammo yet for 2012?

    As usual, you misinterpreted, misconstrued, miscalculated, and misunderstood. It’s the story of your life, so I’ll try explaining it simply in even a fashion you might understand.

    Just as 2008 was a referendum on Bush, 2012 will be a referendum on the failures of Zero – only Zero is sinking to the bottom with a uranium weight tied to his noodle arm. There doesn’t need to be a candidate of choice now, nor do we need any ammo.

    Zero shoots himself in the foot so often, we just provide the ammo to his toadies like you and watch the fratricide. Wait until his health care becomes null and void – you’ll really soil yourself. :smile:

  • 13. LOL  |  April 15, 2010 at 2:24 pm

    “Of course, Tex, we’ll ignore the Dow topping 11,000. Puhleeze. You’ll pick the economic indicators you like to bash Obama. There will always be something you can point to.”

    It’s no different with your side. How come only now do you see the Dow as an economic indicator? (obviously rhetorical).

    It seems that you have forgotten your own advise.

    Wash off the Wall Street Stink
    This one is easy. Americans hate fat cat wall street veterans with a passion right now. Corzine’s history as head of Goldman Sachs might not have hurt him in his first run, but now it is virtually the kiss of death unless you have a very good story to tell in the “now”. With a very low approval rating, Corzine’s current story couldn’t wash away the Wall Street stink.

    Kind of difficult to wash off the stink of something you are now willing to bask in.

    But since you are now willing to claim the glory of Wall St., the rest of us get to ask…why are Obama’s policies only benefitting Wall St.? The rest of us are still unemployed, still loosing our homes, and still starving, while Wall St. gets the fattest it has ever been since….ever

    I thought Obama and his fellow Democrats were going to focus on Main St. recovery. How come, after more than a year, it’s only Wall St. that is recovering?

    Don’t think that question won’t come up in Novermber. Better start thinking up a good answer.

    “Hey Tex, after that sad suggestion of Rubio, Petraous and Bolton, care to opine on the bunch I presented or are you ready to admit you’ve got no real ammo yet for 2012?

    Bwahahahahahahahahaaha”

    Give us a break with this childish giddyness, please. Go look back to the Spring before the 2006 midterms and see how many times you find references to “Barack Obama” and “President” in the same sentance.

  • 14. LOL  |  April 15, 2010 at 3:03 pm

    Foreclosure rates surge, biggest jump in 5 years

    LOS ANGELES – A record number of U.S. homes were lost to foreclosure in the first three months of this year, a sign banks are starting to wade through the backlog of troubled home loans at a faster pace, according to a new report.

    RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday that the number of U.S. homes taken over by banks jumped 35 percent in the first quarter from a year ago. In addition, households facing foreclosure grew 16 percent in the same period and 7 percent from the last three months of 2009.

    More homes were taken over by banks and scheduled for a foreclosure sale than in any quarter going back to at least January 2005, when RealtyTrac began reporting the data, the firm said.

    “We’re right now on pace to see more than 1 million bank repossessions this year,” said Rick Sharga, a RealtyTrac senior vice president.

    Jobless claims rise for second straight week

    WASHINGTON – The number of newly laid off people signing up for unemployment benefits rose sharply for the second straight week, suggesting that jobs are still hard to come by even as the economic recovery gains traction.

    The Labor Department reported Thursday that first-time requests for jobless benefits rose by 24,000 last week to a seasonally adjusted 484,000, the highest level since late February. Economists had predicted claims would fall.

    It marked the second week that claims took an unexpected leap. In the prior week, claims rose by 18,000 to 460,000.

    Six in 10 Americans Expect Their Taxes to Increase

    PRINCETON, NJ — Sixty-three percent of Americans believe their taxes will increase in the next 12 months, while 4% expect a change that will reduce their taxes. Majorities of all income groups share this view, though it is more common among Americans in upper-income households.

    But let’s talk about Wall Street’s recovery because that is what is really important in this election year.

  • 15. Curator  |  April 15, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    So the monthly numbers from last month were good, so instead you have to go to weekly reports in order to find something bad with which to bash Obama? If the next two weeks are good does that mean you take your underwear off your head again?

  • 16. Tex Taylor  |  April 15, 2010 at 6:07 pm

    This is specifically for Waxman, Wally and Hippie, who continually tell us that our taxes have been lowered under Zero. Make sure to watch the whole thing, so that when you tell us that again, we aren’t forced to rewind the video. :wink:

  • 17. Curator  |  April 16, 2010 at 9:38 am

    This is specifically for Tex.

    The median tax cut was approximately $600 for 98% of all working families and individuals.

    Game over…..play again?

  • 18. Alfie  |  April 16, 2010 at 11:28 am

    Not a tax cut you’re playing the wrong game.

  • 19. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 11:28 am

    This is specifically for Wally, who obviously flunked simple arithmetic and division, possibly explaining why he resides in a low paying but well compensated burden of a dead end state job – all the while actively pursuing a Master’s Degree in Lord only knows what on the G.I. bill (but it better not be in math, economics, finance, or accounting):

    The median tax increase listed from the video was approximately $13,406.82 per family on average, working or not. So that you can verify, that is $670.341B divided by approximately 50MM American families :smile:

    And we haven’t even talked about stimulus, TARP, or the coming VAT.

    Enjoy your $600 tax cut…

    No need to try again – with you, the game was over before you started. :smile:

    Zero’s stimulus plan, TARP, and health care, in conjunction with those taxes provided by video, amount to

  • 20. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 11:41 am

    I think Wally’s response really does convey the problem with Leftists. Forgetting for one moment their false sense of intellectual superiority, their depraved degree of self-importance, their amorality, their moral relativity, and their constant demand for entitlements disguised as social justice, progressives really don’t understand basic finance or underlying risk associated with money.

    It is easy to hypothesize and correlate why so many educated progressives continually find themselves in dire straights financially by Wally Curator’s answer alone. I believe this in large part helps to explain the housing bubble, the need for governmental assistance, and their jealousy and hostility toward business, large and small.

  • 21. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 11:50 am

    Yes Wally, Obama and your majority Democratic Congress do indeed continue to lead us to “greener” pastures. I”m sure you are confident we are now in the best of hands.

    http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/us-cities-in-free-fall

    We could do each other a favor. Why don’t we agree to amicably and peacefully to go our separate ways, with the agreement (in writing) that whatever happens from this day forward, each of us not responsibility for the others well being? We can divvy up the debt equally per capita and I and millions of brain dead Conservatives and Libertarians will agree to leave you completely alone. You can bask yourselves in the sunshine of President Obama and company without criticism (for as long as it lasts).

    Should we proceed? Rutherford Waxman feels confident you will win this Civil War too, so I can not imagine either of you not feeling this would be in you and your family’s best interest. :wink:

    Do we have a deal?

  • 22. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 11:55 am

    Ohhh…What a huge surprise. :shock:

    It seems one of the Dimocratic party’s most powerful advisers and chum, in fact so well thought of that they make up a large part of President Obama’s inner circle, seems to have a small problem on their hands:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/SEC-accuses-Goldman-Sachs-of-apf-1523020722.html?x=0

    Tsk tsk…but I’m confident the Honorable Obama will note this is just a simple mistake.

  • 23. LOL  |  April 16, 2010 at 2:18 pm

    Oh boy! 12 whole dollars a week!!!

    Let us all bow in thanks.

  • 24. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 2:30 pm

    LOL, :lol:

    Now let’s not begrudge Wally Curator his two Happy Meals a week thanks to Master Obama. It may be the only joy he gets from life, outside of finding fault with George Bush.

  • 25. Curator  |  April 16, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    Tex the Liar.

    Chris Edwards, Director of Tax Policy Studies at the conservative Cato Institute. “The only tax I think that has been put in place so far is an increase in the federal cigarette tax. I can’t think of another Obama tax that has gone in place so far.”

    Center for Budget and Policy Priorities reported on Wednesday that “Middle-income Americans are now paying federal taxes at or near historically low levels.” How low? The average family of four right now is paying 4.6 percent of its income in federal income taxes — the second lowest percentage in 50 years.

    In Oklahoma, that state threatening to declare war on overtaxation, the average tax cut was -$1,098

    The Right-wing sycophants like Tex know he is lying about taxes, as does anyone with even a passing familiarity with issues. The lies don’t have to make sense and they don’t have to withstand scrutiny.  It just has to be repeated by these idiots, endorsed by conservative media, and embraced by right-wing activists whose ignorance is easily exploited, and then neatly fed into the discussions of the American mainstream.

  • 26. Curator  |  April 16, 2010 at 3:31 pm

    It seems one of the Dimocratic party’s most powerful advisers and chum, in fact so well thought of that they make up a large part of President Obama’s inner circle, seems to have a small problem on their hands:

    It’s good news, though not for those who complain about the Obama administration being a tool of Wall Street. This a prime example of why we need accountability from Wall Street. This is far better than if the Obama administration had gone on a fishing expedition early on but been unable to make the charges stick. ‘The wheels of justice grind slow, but they grind exceeding fine’.

    BTW Matt Taibbi gave a serious asskicking to Goldman Sachs.

  • 27. Rutherford  |  April 16, 2010 at 4:12 pm

    It seems one of the Dimocratic party’s most powerful advisers and chum, in fact so well thought of that they make up a large part of President Obama’s inner circle, seems to have a small problem on their hands:

    Care to elaborate? I read the article and I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

    BTW Matt Taibbi gave a serious asskicking to Goldman Sachs.

    Curator, you are right. I read most of Taibbi’s article in Rolling Stone. It was stunning.

  • 28. Curator  |  April 16, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    All 41 Wall Street lackeys signed a letter delivered to Harry Reid expressing opposition to the financial regulatory reform bill..

    I guess it appears Republicans are prepared to link arms and take their chances, fighting to protect Wall Street from accountability.

  • 29. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 5:05 pm

    Curator, :roll:

    You’re so full of shit. You didn’t deny one thing from that video, including the amounts. Prove me wrong and lay your bets on the board. Then you can Zero can go get reamed by your good friends Goldman Sachs that Bongo uses for economic counsel.

    Hopefully, this simple example will be clear enough that even to an uneducated dumb ass like you to understand.

    From the Treasury…

    Debt 2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
    Debt 2008 10,024,724,896,912.49

    Difference = 1,885,104,106,599.30
    Population of U.S. = 305,529,237
    Incurred Debt per person for 2009 = $6,170

    Last year, Obama and his cronies laid on the typical American family a debt of almost $25K, after every tax you paid, after every reimbursement you received. And what did you get for your troubles script writer? Unemployment 2.3% higher than when dickhead took office and 3.2 million jobs lost. That’s what Zero did for you.

    I don’t give a damn what horseshit you post about lowering our taxes or which lie you are trying to sell, here is one immutable truth even you can’t be in denial. You, your wife, and your son just went $20,000 in the hole for which you assholes are personally liable.

    Take your bullshit elsewhere maggot. You don’t even lie well anymore. You parasites from the Left living off the dole have been busted and you’re going to start paying the piper come November.

  • 30. Alfie  |  April 16, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    I am honestly enjoying my two location dialog with Rutherford and I don’t care if it sounds pussyish for me to admit it.
    With that said I am literally pulling my hair out over the myth of “tax cuts” and Obama.
    Although the opposition (my peeps) are going too far on some points the other side is just full of it.
    There is some glimmer of hope if you are a small business or corporation. I say small in that stimulus related CREDITS,DELAYS ETC. are good things. However it must be admitted that many of these things are only temporary and will in no way offset things like health care and cap and trade expenses. Conservatives with vision should not be confused with those folks that are the jabbering anti government rabble that somehow gets listened too.
    Individual tax cuts on the other hand is where Obama and his fans are clearly snorting too much pixie dust. There are literally no cuts. The 95% thing was a temporary deal financed via SS. There is no cut. The rates are the same for filers. There is no cut. For some taxpayers the rates are increasing,again far from a cut. Most of the individual level stuff is in the form of credits. The problem here is that for the most part credits,no matter the party affiliation of the Oval occupant, require the expenditure of substantially more money than the credit “offsets” or whatever other term you want to use. Credits such as the EIC is also nothing to be happy about or to point to as a star.
    The USA needs to have an intelligent discussion on taxation and spending. We are not having it any time soon and that really really sucks since it is almost too late.

  • 31. Alfie  |  April 16, 2010 at 5:08 pm

    Curator do you seriously think the financial reform chatter is anything other than weak populism?

  • 32. Alfie  |  April 16, 2010 at 5:43 pm

    And as for your Dem shill tax rate nonsense.
    T-A-X-E-S Plural baby!
    That nonsense is just that. i personally demonstrate that being a fam o’ 4 my total tax burden is over 20% and that goes to hell quick if I want to twist the knife and use my AGI’s

  • 33. Alfie  |  April 16, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    Kind of curious about the Goldman Sachs Bash here at RLB.
    Any of the GOP bashers think it kind of screwy that John Paulson is getting over? I just looked at some pol donations he made. no Obama but Dodd,Reid etc. yeah he plays both sides but really….makes my comment @ 31 seem more solid by the second.

  • 34. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

    Rutherford Waxman – you should give me congratulations like I do you when you jump ahead of the curve defending the indefensible charlatan for President.

    My viral video I presented to lame ass Curator was mentioned on O’Reilly tonight as proof Obama and Curator world class liars about the supposed “tax cuts” from President.

    Prove my post wrong if you can…

    Buwahahahahahaha…

  • 35. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 8:24 pm

    More proof of Obama’s being sheltered for effect. What a coward…

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/16/msnbc-space-reporter-no-nasa-workers-allowed-at-obamas-speech-yesterday/

  • 36. Curator  |  April 16, 2010 at 8:38 pm

    This is specifically for Tex….AGAIN!

    You’re claim that our taxes have NOT been lowered this year is based on a un-sourced video that was laughably simple to disprove.

    The “Cadillac” tax would not be imposed until 2018.

    There is no employer mandate and the excise tax for employers are only for those with 50 or more full-time employees…. (first 30 FTEs are excluded ) fancy that!

    Medicare tax on wages are for those incomes above $200,000 (individual) and $250,000 (joint)…. (Rich people) not starting till 2013.

    I grew tired but the whole video is bullshit much like your arguments. How do the three thing I posted affect your 2009 or 2010 taxes?

    You == FAIL

  • 37. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 8:50 pm

    Curator,

    Oh, I’m so glad you’re still around – this couldn’t be timed better from your pathetic post from above skewering those evil, evil Republicans. What was that about reforming Wall Street again?

    “Hedge fund manager in Goldman Sachs case is major Dem donor”

    http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/92775-hedge-fund-manager-at-center-of-goldman-allegations-is-a-major-democratic-donor-

    YOU==FRAUDULENT LIAR

    And you still haven’t proven one point misstated yet from the video goon. I’m glad I’m not holding my breath.

    So far, you’ve had your puny ass burned twice in one thread. Should we go for the trifecta Script? :twisted:

  • 38. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 9:08 pm

    More Ignorant Speech from former Democratic President (and serial rapist):

    http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/apr/16/clinton-alludes-to-1995-bombing-says-words-matter/

    Yeah Billy Bob, you’re right. Words do matter. So does government goons who carried out the deaths of the 74 men, women and children who died in the inferno at Waco on April 19, 1993.

    Funny how quickly Dims forget…

  • 39. Tex Taylor  |  April 16, 2010 at 10:47 pm

    Wally and Waxman,

    Tex wishes to thank you too for my “HUGE TAX CUT”

    Buwahahahahaha….

    Spoken from the truly wise…

  • 40. Carmelo Junior  |  April 16, 2010 at 11:16 pm

    Jeb Bush has zero chances…America is tired of the Bushes, the Clintons and the Kennedys.

    Sarah Palin is like 4/5 because if wins the nomination it would be so historic and huge that she will carry that momentum right till election day!

  • 41. Curator  |  April 17, 2010 at 12:18 am

    So a tax that wont be imposed for 8 years somehow has an effect on your 2009 or 2010 tax return?

    One point of many proven FALSE.

    LIAR!!

  • 42. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 10:44 am

    Hey Curator. Did progressive philosophy or stupidity come first with you?

    It’s difficult to explain anything to you, because you already have admitted without realizing it that taxes went up, not down. And you apparently have forgotten the gist of your argument. You said, “that our taxes have been lowered under Obama.” I said, “bullshit Curator, our taxes have been raised substantially under Obama.”

    I have never mentioned a time frame, other than my example of showing Zero’s quadrupling of the federal deficit last year. So let’s review it and see if I can explain it in even terms you can understand. Like maxed out credit cards. I’m sure that is a subject you are familiar with.

    ===============================

    You and your “lovely” wife have max out the credit card and pay 14.99% interest. You make $500 a month in payments toward the ever increasing balance. You receive a “special offer” in the mail from Diversified Obama Sachs to transfer your burgeoning balance account at an initial offer of 10.99% interest, lowering your payment you make each month to $450.00.

    Being it’s Diversified Obama Sachs and its offer of free miles to fly you and your “lovely” wife to Mecca, you figure you will have saved yourself $50.00 a month, so you jump at the chance to switch. Besides, Diversified Obama Sachs greases the skids of your employer, even assisting with your cheap health insurance.

    Unfortunately, hidden in the microscopic paragraph 2B.3C of the 2,700 page brochure that Diversified Obama Sachs sent, is a small clause that is unfortunately backloaded with huge fees, services, and penalties, but not due and payable until 2018. You, of course, don’t bother reading the 2,700 pages because it saved you $50.00 a month. No worries Wally.

    You and your “lovely” wife are also unaware, but in 2011 it lowers your shared credit score 200 points and adds $13,000 per year, every year to your balance starting immediately – and the interest rate jumps to 19.99% interest at the end of 2010. BUT HEY, WHO CARES! The additional $600 you didn’t pay in 2009 allowed you to buy a big screen TV so you can watch your hero Keith Olbermann every night on MSNBC – and you’re accumulating free points to fly the family to Mecca on Obama Airlines!!.

    So your personal liability went down under ObamaCare and ObamaStimulus?

    It’s a great deal!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

    I hope and pray you are in a position of absolutely no importance, which I am almost sure the truth explaining your pursuit of the fruitless Master’s Degree you brag. Because if there are too many like you Curator, we are surely doomed as a country.

  • 43. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 11:39 am

    :lol: :lol: :lol:

    I have never seen a better graph explaining the confusion over Obama’s successes. Yes, things certainly are looking up and we are in the best of hands:

    http://geoff82.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/initial-unemployment-filings-apr15shortandquotes.gif

    This should have been constructed by the three amigos of progressive thought that reside here frequently: (1) Rutherford “Waxman”, (2) “Wally” Curator, (3) Jerry Garcia Hippie Professor.

    Too good…

  • 44. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  April 17, 2010 at 12:00 pm

    Yeah, geoff enjoys making his charts.

  • 45. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 12:04 pm

    Rutherford,

    In a moment of weakness, and because you are weak, I am going to give you some friendly advice for this November. I shouldn’t, as I should be encouraging you to continue standing on the soapbox for the most miserable President in U.S. history, but since you have been a man of your word about the 1st Amendment (at least part of it), let me introduce you to maybe the only two sane Democrats left in the entire populace.

    Now I know these men would not be your cup of tea, as they are actually reasonable. But unless you now consider the Washington Post a conservative hack, you would be best to reconsider BongoCare, repeal it and your switch from your inane positions.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/15/AR2010041504131.html?nav=hcmoduletmv

  • 46. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 12:06 pm

    BiC,

    Geoff deserves two gold stars for that beauty! Excellent work, excellent humor.

    And this time, there is no arguing about the merits of President Kiss of Death.

  • 47. Rutherford  |  April 17, 2010 at 2:25 pm

    Tex you can call it a shell game if you like but you seem to have a major problem telling the past from the future. Obama has said people got a tax break and he speaks the truth and you can’t refute it by citing what will happen eight years from now.

    It’s like saying the Roaring 20′s never happened because the bubble burst in ’29. Things happen in a time frame. As of this moment we are in a better spot tax wise than in a long time. Simple fact. See me in 2018 if you want to argue what happens then.

  • 48. LOL  |  April 17, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    Yeah, because in 2018 you can blame it on another administration.

    For a president that has spent the last 15 months crying about the shitty deal he inherritted, Obama sure is willing to lay debt and taxes off on others that come after him.

  • 49. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 3:16 pm

    What’s the shell game Rutherford, besides your Chicago Messiah a world class scam and liar? We got no tax break, and in fact are being loaded up with tax debt. You are a propagandist Waxman, but not a very good one.

    You can assuage your buyer’s remorse by covering for Obama and excusing his deceit, but it is sleight of hand to simply front load a minuscule tax break for a far larger tax burden – and most of this debt comes due far sooner than 2018 sport.

    To make an analogy, its your variable APR with no points to walk in the front door. Real cheap up front, but back breaking debt each passing year as they throw you to the street when the bill comes due. And of course, you’ll claim foul because you can never admit you’re wrong.

    The fact that you continue to attempt to deceive and cover for this sham has greatly lowered my opinion of you. There was a time I had a margin of respect believing you to be the honest fool, but once I started seeing your Tweets and recognized you a backstabbing SOB who plays to the audience and attempts to rig the game, I have since reneged in opinion. Fool me once, shame on you…

  • 50. Curator  |  April 17, 2010 at 3:24 pm

    Come to think of it I assume Tex and his wife may be pulling in a quarter million a year since only couples filing jointly with an income more than $250,000 a year will see a tax increase on earned income. And where did he get this 210 Billion from…

    .9% on earned income above 200k (single)/250k (joint) unindexed, 3.8% surtax on investment income in excess of 200k (single)/250k (joint). 1.3 Billion for 2012, 20.5 billion for 2013, 16.6 Billion for 2014, 29.3 Billion for 2015, 32.7 billion for 2016, 34.8 Billion for 2017, 36.6 Billion for 2018, 38.5 Billion for 2019. About 210 billion over 10 years.

    OVER 10 YEARS!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

    I also found out the 2.3 excise tax on medical devices actually replaces the medical device fee with this excise tax (yielding the same revenue) that starts in…wait for it …… 2013.

    I don’t know if this refutes Pastor Tex at all but with the prescription drug thing: companies receive a tax-free subsidy for drug benefits for retirees. That subsidy is not only tax free, but they can also deduct the amount from the rest of their income, basically getting double tax benefit from it. The President just changed that they can no longer claim the deduction for their tax-free subsidy. Which seems extremely reasonable.

    I looked up the 60.1 billion tax claim on health insurance. There is an annual fee on health insurance providers starting in 2014. 8 Billion in year 1, 11.3 Billion for 2015-16, 13.9 Billion for 2017, 14.3 Billion for 2018, indexed to inflation after 2018. 60.1 Billion over 10 years. Tex’s bullshit 60.1 Billion tax claim that effects this years taxes are for the entire 10 year period.

    10 YEARS!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Tex…Do you own a time machine?

  • 51. Rutherford  |  April 17, 2010 at 4:33 pm

    BTW, Hippie Professor as Jerry Garcia … that cracked me up. :-D

  • 52. Alfie  |  April 17, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    Rutherford you haven’t read any of my comments??

  • 53. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    Curator, you can’t be this dumb. I am beginning to think you are unteachable, or maybe a rabid dog who needs to be shot. I need some real answers to something before I go further…because you have a huge gulf in your knowledge base. I think the stored data was marked for deletion and somebody ordered your database packed along with other anatomy.

    ==================

    The top 50% of the wage earners in this country pay 97% of the federal income taxes. The other 50% generally vote for Democrats when they vote, because Democrats are much more generous with other people’s money, pander for votes, and steal from one to buy another’s services. This is how Democrats win, because they can’t win on the playing field of ideas. People run to the suburbs to get away from your ilk, but you continue follow. This is the story of virtually every urban center in America.

    SO>>>>

    Question #1. Do you not understand the concept of liability?

    With all of the new “stimulus” spending of 1.7 trillion, with new health care with 31MM new people on the health rolls (which I believe will be found unconstitutional and most will be revoked), and since federal revenues are down substantially…

    (2) Who exactly is paying for the new burden and how are they doing so?

    The thing I can not understand about progressives is that they fail to understand not everyone can be a public lackey – you don’t create wealth or growth in your state job Curator. You are by definition an administrative burden – maybe necessary for operation, maybe not.

    Question #3 If you raise corporate taxes, and you raise capital gains taxes, and raise small business taxes by declaring the small business owner wealthy, and threaten to raise FICA taxes to meet the shortcomings of SS and Medicaid, what are the incentives in the private industry for corporations large and small to hire?

    Can you answer these questions for me, or is debt just a figment of my imagination which can be ignored so Obama can further “reduce” my taxes?

  • 54. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 6:13 pm

    Curator,

    Now remember, 2009 is but a moment in time. You have assured me under Obama my taxes will be reduced.

    Is Robert Samuelson of the Washington Post and Newsweek too “conservative for you” to voice an opinion of whether our taxes are going up or going down?

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/236383

    P:.S. – You didn’t answer my very serious question from the previous, so I will summarize this time. Why do you need me as fellow citizen?

    Why can’t we amicably and peacefully agree to separate ourselves, split the liabilities per capita, and move forward without bothering each other anymore? Wouldn’t it be better for you if you and I weren’t considered citizens under the same flag?

  • 55. Curator  |  April 17, 2010 at 9:32 pm

    Wouldn’t it be better for you if you and I weren’t considered citizens under the same flag?

    Let me know your new address to send the Christmas card.

  • 56. Tex Taylor  |  April 17, 2010 at 10:21 pm

    Well now, I might take up a new address if it meant being done with supporting you. How much will it cost me? You got me there. Since you don’t believe in Jesus, maybe you can send me one of those public service cards that your livelihood depends? See how reasonable I can be Wally?

    I didn’t think you capable of answering the questions because I knew you weren’t that stupid. You might risk being exposed as the underachieving dimwit – something I figured out by your third post on Waxman’s blog and a perusing of your own unattended work of art. :wink:

  • 57. Rutherford  |  April 18, 2010 at 12:09 am

    To address a point I think Alfie was making … Goldman Sachs and the like are in every congressman’s pocket, Dem or Republican. So the notion that we should be surprised that Dem’s get political contributions from Wall Street is absurd. One of the biggest problems in this country is that our Congress is bought and sold lock stock and barrel.

    Aside to Tex, I don’t know why but Waxman is becoming one of my favorite Tex-created-pejoratives for me. Awww shucks, I shouldn’t have said that. Now you’ll move on to something you hope will offend me. :-)

    Also, did I miss something? When did Curator say he didn’t believe in Jesus? I honestly don’t recall him self identifying as atheist.

  • 58. LOL  |  April 18, 2010 at 12:31 am

    Just a little FYI, there’s a BIG difference between not believing in Jesus and atheism.

    Ask a Jewish person. ;)

  • 59. Tex Taylor  |  April 18, 2010 at 1:20 am

    Just a little FYI, there’s a BIG difference between not believing in Jesus and atheism.

    Ask a Jewish person.

    Or a Muslim :wink:

  • 60. Curator  |  April 18, 2010 at 1:18 pm

    I believe in Jesus and his teachings. I have far too many unanswerable questions to have faith in God. To believe the creation story requires faith, and I simply support the natural origins of what exists today.

  • 61. Tex Taylor  |  April 18, 2010 at 2:11 pm

    I believe in Jesus and his teachings. I have far too many unanswerable questions to have faith in God. To believe the creation story requires faith, and I simply support the natural origins of what exists today.

    Curator, that response is so theologically wrong and simply can not be true, I’m not even sure how to explain the obvious shortcomings. So instead of chastising your dishonesty, let me ask you a few questions.

    =======================

    I assume if you believe in Jesus and His teachings, you also believe all of this about Jesus and can answer “YES” to all?

    (1) He was born of a virgin birth which was prophesied at least 1,000 years before His birth.
    (2) His claims to being divine are absolutely true.
    (3) That He alone is the one true God.
    (4) He was resurrected from death after three days.
    (5) That He died for your sins and mine, and that He was without sin.
    (6) That only those who believe in Him and His resurrection are saved through grace.
    (7) He ascended to Heaven.
    (8) He will return to rule the earth for a millennium.
    (9) That He and He alone is worthy of worship.
    (10) You are aware the Jesus said very clearly He is God?

  • 62. Curator  |  April 18, 2010 at 4:14 pm

    You assume incorrectly.

    I believe he was born in Bethlehem, lived in Nazareth, was baptized by John the Baptist, and began his ministry when he was about 30 years of age and was around 42 when he was crucified having been found guilty of blasphemy. He would have been buried in a public graveyard and denied placement in a tomb. In fact, the siting Jewish council would have insisted on a dishonorable burial, something that the Romans would have been inclined to anyway. I believe he had many, many converts “believers” at the time of his death, maybe in the 10′s of thousands. Any reference to rising from the dead, the empty tomb, or son of God, is simply using symbolism.

    Some of his beliefs I find troubling, such as his beliefs on violence, wealth, and compassion I think are unrealistic and can’t strictly be adhered to, but are non the less important.

  • 63. LOL  |  April 18, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    From a purely historical perspective, Jesus had relatively few followers by the time of his death (probably better measured in dozens instead of thousands). It was the apostles who did the real legwork of spreading the message of Christianity to the masses, which took place after his death (described in the Book of Acts). To the extent that the first group to actually call themselves “Christians” were in the city of Antioch (Acts 11:26) and after the death of Jesus.

  • 64. Tex Taylor  |  April 18, 2010 at 6:06 pm

    Curator,

    Then you assume Jesus was a liar and simply mortal man.

    If you can’t answer “YES” without hesitation to any one of the ten questions I posed, you might as well deny everything, because Christ would not or could not have made His claims and simply been a sane, mortal man. I don’t know why you feel the need to obfuscate about your answer to “NO” to any of the questions.

    Also, your history is faulty even from the simple historical perspective, so much so that you didn’t even get the age of Christ’s crucifixion right. For somebody who uses the Bible as a quote of choice, your knowledge of even the Gospels is not that of even a small child who would attend Sunday School regularly. Since I don’t really think you stupid, I must assume your knowledge of this particular subject incredibly limited in scope.

    About the only thing you did get right in your last post was the age of Christ’s ministry. It did indeed start at 30 as that biblically accurate. The Bible says little or nothing of Christ’s life between the ages of 12-30.

    Christ’s ministry lasted exactly 3 and 1/2 years, and He was executed at the age of 33. If you are to believe any of the Bible, it is very provable that Christ would not have simply been buried in a public graveyard as that is not the custom of Jews or Jewish Law.

    All four Gospels mention the name of Joseph of Arimathea, apparently a man of wealth, and probably a member of the Sanhedrin, who took Christ’s body and laid the body in a tomb purchased by Joseph.

    In addition, if you are to believe Christ was executed on authority of the ruling High Council (Pharisees), and being that upon Christ’s entrance to Jerusalem was the waving of palms (hence, Palm Sunday), Christ most certainly would have been looked upon as threatening to the Jewish High Council, and indeed he was as His being sentenced to death shows. After all, the waving of Palms itself was itself an act of rebellion against the High Council and and Rome finally convinced as much as well.

    I find it hard to believe as controversial as Christ’s execution was, and being that it was carried out by the Roman Empire, and being that the act of blasphemy included whispers of a resurrection, the Pharisees would not have demanded the tomb be guarded, preventing Jesus followers from “stealing the body”.

    Moreover, after the resurrection there were 500 people who claimed eye witness to Christ being alive. This scenario of Christ’s body being eaten by dogs or destroyed fails, due largely to lack of a sound rationale. Both the Jewish leadership and the Roman government had every interest in laying to rest, not further perpetrating the controversy surrounding Jesus. By simply producing the body of Christ, all reports of His resurrection could have been quickly nullified. To deliberately and finally destroy such evidence would have forever eliminated that possibility, and served only the purposes of Jesus’ followers and cause.

    Curator, you have as strange a belief in Christ as I have ever read. But it does help explain to me why you and I so diametrically opposed in our thinking about the Christian faith, which for most purposes leads us to drawing completely differing conclusions about anything of real importance.

    I find you a very troubled and confused man, possibly searching for answers. It is my own personal weakness of those who mock Christ that has made me unduly harsh towards you on occasion.

  • 65. LOL  |  April 18, 2010 at 7:43 pm

    If only the Romans knew what they were brewing, they might have written some of it down.

  • 66. Tex Taylor  |  April 18, 2010 at 8:24 pm

    If only the Romans knew what they were brewing, they might have written some of it down.

    Why would they? Judea was but an out of the way backwater place to the Romans, off little consequence other than a tax collection full of rabble rousers – what they considered pains in the ass.

    Being the Romans hung Jesus between two thieves, they certainly did not think Christ a real threat, most certainly no messiah.

    No, Jesus was a Jew and the faith had to come from the Jews just as the Old Testament said I’m afraid.

    However LOL (Red Pill), the Greeks most certainly did, including penning two of the greatest books of the New Testament. :wink:

  • 67. LOL  |  April 18, 2010 at 9:21 pm

    I agree. It still would be nice as far as history to have some official Roman ink on the subject.

  • 68. Curator  |  April 18, 2010 at 11:14 pm

    From a purely historical perspective, Jesus had relatively few followers by the time of his death (probably better measured in dozens instead of thousands).

    The 1000′s he fed at the Sermons don’t count?

    What about these?

    Mark 11:8 :Many people spread their cloaks on the road, while others spread branches they had cut in the fields.

    Mark 15:41: When He was in Galilee, they used to follow Him and administer to Him; and there were many other women who came up with Him to Jerusalem.

    What historical perspectives do you reference?

    Then you assume Jesus was a liar and simply mortal man.

    I’m saying those who wrote the bible took a lot of liberties with symbolism, but yes I do think he was a mortal man.

  • 69. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 12:38 am

    I’m saying those who wrote the bible took a lot of liberties with symbolism, but yes I do think he was a mortal man.

    Then to make my final point, the discuss was already moot because you believe that Christ a liar and his followers misled. And you believe Christianity a religion based on a lie.

    Fair enough. I give you kudos for your honesty Curator.

  • 70. LOL  |  April 19, 2010 at 1:18 am

    I don’t have any historical reference I can personally point to. I have to assume my professor did.

    I can’t argue against what you have pointed out. But I do think those passages are certainly open to interpretation, as far as numbers go. “Many” is a relative word that can mean a lot of things.

    But I can’t argue the point, so I won’t.

  • 71. Curator  |  April 19, 2010 at 7:43 am

    Tex I’m just saying that I don’t believe that all things in the Bible are true and those who wrote it embellished.

    Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him. Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours. (Mark 11:24)

    Should I pray for God to remove some dead trees from my backyard, or dig a a foundation for my patio?

    I think the authors of the Bible tended to add things to the actual words to make them say something else. If you honestly and truthfully read this quote, without adding to it, it is very easy to see that Jesus is not saying that God will think about your prayers. He says God will grant all your prayers if you believe.

  • 72. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 10:59 am

    Curator,

    You and Rutherford share much more than you realize; more than just politics. When you read the Bible, with out recognizing it, you always place yourself in the role of the authority. You have it backwards.

    I’ll use Rutherford as example because of the flippancy of your analogy from above. It’s really an insult towards God, but you are not the first to tempt fate, and won’t be the last.

    To use my buddy Rutherford as example, Rutherford continually asks me how a loving God could allow bad things to happen to good people. Seems simple enough, right?

    But in doing so, Rutherford works under at least three false pretenses. First, Rutherford assumes anyone is good. We are not – not one of us. Second, in making these charges, Rutherford treats man as he is the one who is sovereign. How dare God not invoke His power for me! Finally, Rutherford fails to recognize one immutable truth – brokenness is the only valid answer in God’s response. Our imperfections separate us from our Maker, and brokenness is required to join us with our Creator.

    So Curator, I would ask you this.

    Is the purpose of your prayer to glorify God’s works or your works? Is the purpose of your prayer to share in a relationship, or treat God as a genie in a bottle? Are you a “slave” for Christ, or do you treat Christ as a “slave” for you? Because if you were to answer these questions truthfully, I believe you would honestly determine that your approach perverted, your heart wicked, and your motives arrogant and sinful. There is no power in your prayer.

    I am absolutely sure that you find my response pure hokum. Many, if not most, do. I am not capable of fully explaining the power of prayer and I am not capable of answering all of your questions. But I do believe life itself is a miracle, that God’s handwriting all over everything you see and everything you’ll ever experience. From life and its incredibly complexity, to a single living cell, to your every heart beat, to the robin which made its nest on my window ledge this weekend. You and I have very different “opinions” of the why, and the how, and the who.

    With all that is wrong with the world, and recognizing what I do from what I’ve learned, and what I have read, and what I’ve been taught, and what I know in my heart, the end of the age of grace is imminent. And my faith is the only thing that gives me hope for a better tomorrow.

    It is a paradox that an Almighty God gives man the gift of free will, including man’s rejection of striving for a relationship or even believing in a Creator.

    But it has been my personal experience when my motives pure, my own prayers have been answered. Most of the time, I am so limited, I don’t even recognize it until long after that fact. :wink:

  • 73. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 11:20 am

    I wish our talented blogger Rutherford Lawson would write a post about the new strategy of tying Tea Party types with the OKC bombing and Timothy McVeigh wannabees. Curator should jump in and add his opinions, being he posted as much at his blog.

    It seems to be the new paradigm of the left-wing of the Democratic party in order to demonize and silence the opposition, more particularly Bill Clinton, NBC, MSNBC, and the rectum gazers of the mainstream media.

    Ironic how the reddest state in the nation has now become a matter of concern from the bluest of the blue power brokers. What’s strange is the blue crowd never makes mention of that which enticed McVeigh into such a rage to end in the massacre 168 innocent people.

    I can tell Rutherford one thing for sure. The strategy is not working in Oklahoma City. And it is insulting to most of the people of the great state of Oklahoma.

  • 74. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    Not for nothing, but haven’t I seen in these threads (backed up by stuff I’ve read elsewhere) that both Muslims and Jews believe Jesus lived … they just don’t believe in the resurrection? I’m referring to comments 58 and 59.

    Then you assume Jesus was a liar and simply mortal man.

    OK, help me again for perhaps I am too blind to see.

    Is there a book in the New Testament called “The Gospel According to Jesus”? I’m familiar with Matthew, Mark Luke, John and some others. Why would Curator be calling Jesus a liar when he did not write the scripture himself? Perhaps Matthew and others used allegory to prove their points? And I guess then Tex that you are calling the various Indian tribes of North America who prayed to different Gods all mislead or worse liars?

    Moreover, after the resurrection there were 500 people who claimed eye witness to Christ being alive.

    In Jonestown almost twice that many died voluntarily believing in the divine attributes of a mortal psychotic. One of the key ingredients of fanaticism is numbers. No one bats an eye at 3 fanatics. It is when hundreds of them make claims that folks take notice. Seriously Tex, I am not mocking you. Lots of people swear that Jim Morrison, Elvis Presley and for a while there, even Adolf Hitler were still alive. Fanatics refusing to accept the death of their icons is nothing new and citing how many of them there were really does not prove the point.

    If you honestly and truthfully read this quote, without adding to it, it is very easy to see that Jesus is not saying that God will think about your prayers. He says God will grant all your prayers if you believe.

    I think Curator perhaps inadvertently has touched on an idea that transcends religion. Belief is a strong contributor to making things happen for oneself. Why do you think folks are told if you don’t believe in yourself, no one else will? There is a great power to belief

  • 75. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 12:46 pm

    OK Tex, you’ve said this enough times that I now think I can summarize your stance.

    Timothy McVeigh was justified in his act of domestic terrorism because of Waco.

    Do I have that right? Sure sounds close to what you are saying. Interestingly, since I mentioned Jim Jones’ compound of lunatics in a prior comment, let’s not forget that David Koresh was another religious nutjob. Why don’t you spend less time making excuses for McVeigh and target your anger toward Koresh who perverted your religion and ultimately cost those people their lives, regardless of Janet Reno’s competence. I don’t think one can say the government was impatient when they waited 51 days to finally take action.

  • 76. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 1:47 pm

    Yes, Rutherford you are mocking me, which there is no harm. I expect and deserve it.

    Unfortunately, you then willingly add to the insult by invoking Elvis, Jim Jones, David Koresh and others in the same paragraph as Jesus. You’re not very good at hiding your deceit – or your disdain of your Creator. A very foolish man, you are.

    But I couldn’t help but notice contrary to those you listed, Christ didn’t ask you to share in His sacrifice, did He? The most unjust act in human history, yet Christ instructed us that He an He alone would bear the ultimate price – and in the most brutal of executions He was left completely alone. How ironic you can’t distinguish that simple fact.

    Timothy McVeigh was justified in his act of domestic terrorism because of Waco.

    No, I don’t think that is what I said. That is what you and Butch Madcow wished I said, as you insinuate as much. It is a contemptible attempt to stifle dissent from Obama’s detractors by tying domestic terrorism for those who don’t support Obama, and have the unmitigated gall to question his political wisdom and his greatness. To not vote for Obama, to not lend support to his every whim a matter of sedition. Tea Party types, 2nd Amendment defenders and the NRA, particular demographics all sharing the common cause with a mass murderer named McVeigh. Not very clever.

    Just as ironic is how you don’t recognize the veiled attempt to deify Obama, believing he is worthy of being above criticism. You have your own religion to defend of a sort.

    History repeating itself as Bill Clinton took a national tragedy and used it as a tool to gain sympathy for the cause. It was just about the same place as Obama finds himself now. Down in the polls, held up by a corrupt media but unpopular with the perceived serfs and intellectual inferiors. Clinton was effective for a time until he slipped during his second term and was exposed as a complete fraud. George Bush Sr. was right and Clinton was wrong – character really did matter.

    The attempt for the most part is not working now, and most Oklahomans are offended that Butch Madcow would choose the 15th anniversary of the OKC bombing to initiate her propaganda. Unfortunately for you and Ms. Madcow, most see right through the machinations.

    While the approach is reprehensible, it should not come as a surprise. Desperate men (and women) and desperate acts in conjunction with baseless insinuations, in support of a lost and dangerous cause facilitated by the willingly and woefully blind.

  • 77. LOL  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    “I wish our talented blogger Rutherford Lawson would write a post about the new strategy of tying Tea Party types with the OKC bombing and Timothy McVeigh wannabees. Curator should jump in and add his opinions, being he posted as much at his blog.”

    He will be getting his talking points about it from Maddow tonight, when she cherry-picks segments of the McVeigh Tapes for a special she is hosting.

  • 78. LOL  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    “It is a contemptible attempt to stifle dissent from Obama’s detractors by tying domestic terrorism for those who don’t support Obama…”

    C’mon Tex. It’s simple logic.

    Obama = government
    Detractors = Anti-Obama

    Therefore, Detractors = anti-government

    McVeigh = anti-government

    Therefore, Detractors = Mcveigh

    It’s right there in front of you, Tex.

    /sarcasm

  • 79. Curator  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:26 pm

    It is a contemptible attempt to stifle dissent from Obama’s detractors by tying domestic terrorism for those who don’t support Obama,…

    But it is easy to tie those who think McVeigh was smart and had balls as some kind of hero for the anti-government extremist who fly planes into IRS buildings.

    Or did you forget praising McVeigh a couple threads back?

  • 80. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:29 pm

    Well Tex, this may seem a meager clarification but I was not comparing Jesus to Elvis, Morrison, or Hitler … or Koresh or Jones. I was comparing Jesus’ followers to any bunch of folks who elevate a man to godly status out of admiration, sometimes tinged with a bit of insanity. And yes, there are those who have done that with Obama.

    I also fully understand and appreciate your distinction that unlike Jones and Koresh, Jesus went to his death alone. Although, again I wouldn’t mind some instruction from you. Did not Jesus tell a gathering of his followers that one of them would betray him? Does that not imply that Jesus did expect some loyalty and was informing his disciples that one of them was going to fall out of line? Doesn’t that suggest he viewed himself as the leader of a movement? Was he a leader (a very mortal concept) or was he God’s manifestation on Earth? I find it all a bit confusing.

    It’s a shame you didn’t listen to Saturday night’s “radio” show. I got into a bit of a disagreement with Sandi in that I said Obama was going down a dangerous path to say he was “amused” by the Tea Party protesters. It’s fine for me to demean them when I’m in a bad mood, but the fact is Obama is their President and he must listen to them and embrace them to whatever degree he can. He cannot appear to dismiss them with arrogance and condescension. Palin and Limbaugh are fair game. Average citizens, some of whom are expressing reasonable concerns are not fair game. Of course, Sandi disagreed arguing that no one batted an eye when the Bush admin called anti-Iraq folks “unAmerican”.

    I know hero worship gone berserk when I see it. No man is worth killing someone else over …not Obama, and I’m sorry to tell you, not Jesus either.

  • 81. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    Well “LOL” you can be as sarcastic as you like. If folks are anti-Obama and not anti-Fed gov, then their gripe is nothing more than personal … not political. So yes, let’s hope anti-Obama does equal anti-government otherwise the anti-Obama movement has no political legs. Just plain hate. You’re not ready to concede that are you?

    I don’t know who among us is the oldest. I was too young during the 60′s to testify but I think it’s fair to say there was “something in the air” back then that fueled riots, violence and division. So the question now is, is there something in the air right now that is similar? Unfortunately this cannot be proved until someone gets hurt. So I actually hope that Maddow, etc. will be proven wrong by what goes down in the near future.

  • 82. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:38 pm

    Tex what do you think about Hannity calling his audience “McVeigh wanna-be’s” and them cheering? Not the least bit disconcerting to you?

  • 83. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    Also Tex, while I know it is wild to ask you to speak for Jesus, to use an old tired phrase, “what would Jesus think” about all the people who have killed and died in his name? Is that what he expected?

  • 84. LOL  |  April 19, 2010 at 3:12 pm

    “Well “LOL” you can be as sarcastic as you like. If folks are anti-Obama and not anti-Fed gov, then their gripe is nothing more than personal … not political.”

    I never thought of PUMAs as anti-federal government. Are you saying their gripe with Obama’s far-left campaign promises were purely personal, and had no political basis? (I am well aware that you think all white people are subconsciously racist, but try to stick to verifiable facts on this one, OK?)

    Also, being against the people who make up the current federal government is not the same as being anti-government.

    Anarchists don’t care who is in charge of the government.

  • 85. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:03 pm

    Also Tex, while I know it is wild to ask you to speak for Jesus, to use an old tired phrase, “what would Jesus think” about all the people who have killed and died in his name? Is that what he expected?

    Killed? Not so much. Dying in his name? Yes, and he said as much:

    16 “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. 17 But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues. 18 You will be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they deliver you up, do not worry about how or what you should speak. For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; 20 for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.
    21 “Now brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. 22 And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. 23 When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
    24 “A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. 25 It is enough for a disciple that he be like his teacher, and a servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub,[d] how much more will they call those of his household! 26 Therefore do not fear them. For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.

    Matthew 10:16-26

    34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’[e] 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

    Matthew 10:34-39

  • 86. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:13 pm

    “LOL”, methinks you are rewriting history a wee bit regarding PUMA. They were a bunch of feminists who wanted Hillary Clinton to win the nomination at all costs. With that said, your example still falls apart in that they did not oppose, Obama the President, or even Obama the Senator. They opposed Obama the candidate, so no, their gripe was not with government. Their gripe was with anyone who stood in the way of an historic election of the first female President. So your PUMA argument is a non-starter.

    As for anti-current fed gov’t” vs “anti-gov’t” I think you’re playing semantic games here. I’d be surprised if 1% of Tea Party folks are anarchists. When I say they are anti-gov, I am implying anti-current gov. And many of them, despite the Hitler signs, are as angry, if not more angry at Pelosi/Reid as at Obama.

    Now again, one is left wondering why it took a black Democrat in the White House to wake these people up to the spending practices of their government but so be it.

    More on the Tea Party in my next post.

  • 87. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:19 pm

    LOL,

    He will be getting his talking points about it from Maddow tonight, when she cherry-picks segments of the McVeigh Tapes for a special she is hosting.

    Excellent use of logic from above tying Tea Partiers to McVeigh. I don’t think I could have said that better. :wink:

    And I concur completely as to why the post hasn’t been seen yet. I’ll get ahead of the curve this time and actually tune into Maddow tonight, so that I will already know what the post reads tomorrow. :shock:

  • 88. Curator  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:26 pm

    And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.

    So if bad people came to my door who wanted to rape and murder my daughter said I have a choice, I either hand over my daughter to them, or instead I renounce Jesus, God, and the Bible, Jesus would want me to choose him and give up my daughters life?

    How about breaking one of his commandments?

    Thou shalt not lie.

    If Nazi’s broke down my door in 1942 and wanted to know if I was hiding Jews in my basement…and I was indeed hiding Jews…should I lie to them and break one of Gods commandments, or let them take away the Jews to be slaughtered?

  • 89. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:26 pm

    Tex what do you think about Hannity calling his audience “McVeigh wanna-be’s” and them cheering? Not the least bit disconcerting to you?

    Not in the least, as it should be obvious Hannity was mocking your attempt to tie McVeigh to us.

    I would have laughed and cheered at the same thing.

    I do find it puzzling that somebody I believe sane (that would be you) could possibly be that paranoid. Tell me not.

    And by the way, you say perhaps 1% of tea partiers are anarchists. I’d be interested if you can show me one example of an anarchist affiliated with the tea party crowd. Have I missed something?

  • 90. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    Rutherford,

    Shouldn’t your asking me a question about the rule not be W.W.J.D., but W.W.J.W.D.?

    As in What Would Jeremiah Wright Do? :smile:

  • 91. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:45 pm

    Curator, I let BiC address your hypothetical about Nazis killing your daughter or you renouncing God, but I do know this. Abraham was once faced with a situation of sacrificing his only child. He made his choice. God intervened – but the test of faith was none the less rendered.

    Rutherford,

    I was comparing Jesus’ followers to any bunch of folks who elevate a man to godly status out of admiration, sometimes tinged with a bit of insanity.

    Jesus followers did elevate a man to godly status. Jesus elevated a man to godly status by birthrite. Your logic is flawed. So you are again faced with a choice. Either Jesus was a lunatic and liar, or He was indeed God. You choose.

  • 92. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:48 pm

    HA, well Jeremiah Wright is not dead so we can get some idea of what he might do in any particular situation. I’m always kinda interested in the WWJD notion because so many mere mortals do believe they can speak on his behalf.

    There’s a great scene in Monty Python’s “Life of Brian” where Brian tells a bunch of fanatics that he is not the messiah. They reply that his humility proves that he is the messiah. So, he switches gears and tells them he is the messiah. They switch gears right along with him and basically say “see, he IS the messiah.”

    As I said in some variation in my earlier comment, all you need to do is look at the screaming crazed girls at a Beatles concert to understand fanaticism.

    Speaking of which …. the Pope “forgave” the Beatles for saying they were more important than Jesus Christ (actually Lennon said it). I loved Ringo’s comment to the effect of “wow did Benedict pull from the bottom of the complaint basket for that one! Doesn’t he have much bigger things to worry about right now than the Beatles?”

    I’m sure John Lennon is up there laughing his head off.

    Imagine there’s no Heaven
    It’s easy if you try
    No hell below us
    Above us only sky
    Imagine all the people
    Living for today

    Imagine there’s no countries
    It isn’t hard to do
    Nothing to kill or die for
    And no religion too
    Imagine all the people
    Living life in peace

    You may say that I’m a dreamer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us
    And the world will be as one

  • 93. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    BTW, it isn’t lost on me that I made a reference to John Lennon being “up there” and then followed it with “Imagine there’s no heaven” LOL life is full of contradictions. :-)

  • 94. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:02 pm

    Again, Tex … a lunatic cannot be a liar because he is incapable of seeing the truth. I say what I said before (you’re just dying to get me to call Jesus a liar/lunatic) I won’t hold a man responsible for the things written about him.

    Now, I will go so far as to call Joseph Smith Jr. a liar or a lunatic. I don’t think that’s too far a stretch. (Sorry Mitt Romney,) Funny thing Tex is, I think you agree with me on that.

    Tex, here is the real test of your religion. I can state with 99% certainty that if Jesus came back today, in human form of course, he would be straight jacketed and locked up faster than you can say Jackie Robinson. You see, no one REALLY believes when we get right down to it that he is coming back. So if any man claimed to be Jesus, he would be assumed to be a loony tune. For that reason alone, I do hope he does not come back because he is in for some serious hardship. And I bet hard core Christians would be the first to cry BS if anyone claimed to be Jesus.

  • 95. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:02 pm

    Sorry, I missed this beauty:

    But it is easy to tie those who think McVeigh was smart and had balls as some kind of hero for the anti-government extremist who fly planes into IRS buildings.

    I don’t believe I did that. I think my example was that you Curator are the only one on this board who has a shared personality with McVeigh: some pent up hostility about being ex-military, imbalanced and atheistic. I did comment that it appeared to me about the only thing you lacked in persona was McVeigh’s brains and balls. :wink:

    Or did you forget praising McVeigh a couple threads back?

    Well, if my pointing out McVeigh was smart enough to blow up a building, brave enough to carry it through, and evil and vile enough to tell us “to get over it”, which I am now reverting back to old Tex so be forewarned – and I believe the only thing I just listed is you share with McVeigh is the capacity to say “get over it”, I stand convicted.

    Curator, my old friend, I was pointing out when accused of having McVeigh tendencies (your words, not mine), I didn’t seem to share many qualities with the man, unless mouthing off at you on Rutherford’s blog makes me equitable and synonymous with Timothy. Is there something you’re aware of that I’m not or fail to recognize?

    To put your argument to rest, I’ll tell you what I really think of McVeigh. He was drifter, a loser, and loner who was set off by what he perceived tyranny, and picked 168 completely innocent victims to carry out his conviction. Janet Reno’s screw up and the jackboots who carried out the Branch Dividian massacre gave the madman all the ammunition McVeigh needed for excuse. McVeigh was a wicked SOB who now resides with the rest of murdering despots throughout human history.

    And I would add Curator, you do realize there is only one hell?

  • 96. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:04 pm

    Ahhhh yes, Hannity was mocking when he called the audience “McVeigh wanna-be’s” and Limbaugh was using satire when he used the word “retarded”.

    WOW I’ve grossly underestimated the sophisticated humor of these conservatives! :-D

  • 97. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:08 pm

    And I would add Curator, you do realize there is only one hell?

    Man, or God, take your pick, has done a fine job of creating quite a hell right here on Earth.

    To quote an old bluesman “I know I’m going to Heaven cos I’ve done my time in hell.” :-)

  • 98. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:13 pm

    Rutherford,

    I won’t hold a man responsible for the things written about him.

    I’m a little confused now. And bye the way, the sentence I addressed to you should have read:

    Jesus followers did “NOT” elevate a man to godly status.

    Okay, so Jesus was just a figment of fertile imagination, didn’t exist, lunatic, or a liar? Which one?

    So what I am to believe is that all of the Old and New Testament authors were liars? That Judaism is made up legend, that Christianity’s mass following is a ruse, that Jesus may have existed but made some dubious claims, which didn’t include anything of divinity and that all of the Judeo-Christian history is bunk?

    Okay.

    But if I am going to use that standard, shouldn’t I discount almost all of history, because most historical figures were not documented by their own hand? And to the best of my knowledge, we have nothing first hand of anything written first person that is more than 1,000 years old and I will now immediately discount all of that too?

  • 99. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:17 pm

    Man, or God, take your pick, has done a fine job of creating quite a hell right here on Earth.

    That is not what Jesus said. :smile:

    WOW I’ve grossly underestimated the sophisticated humor of these conservatives!

    Yes, I believe you have. You don’t understand the meaning of “success”, as in individual initiative, the power of free enterprise, and why debt is a bad thing.

  • 100. Alfie  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:28 pm

    Wow if I didn’t own a blog called in2thefray I would seriously have to just leave this thread alone,but I do so I guess I should jump in.
    In no particular order:
    First off a question for Curator:
    I’m curious do you consider yourself a Christian and if so is it in a religion way or a spiritual philosophical way???
    I see things like comment #88 and imagine you can’t possibly be a believer.

    Now for Rutherford:
    Hannity and McVeigh ; poor use of the word that I believe was indeed meant to serve as a link to the Lefts blossoming desire and need to attack the Tea Party.

    As for humor….did you throw out your collectors item issue of the New Yorker?

    The Tea Party has learned and evolved over its brief lifespan and this is clearly sending the Left over the cliff.

    Smith was neither a liar or a lunatic. Depending on who you are and where you stand theologically he as well as Mohammed and a ton of others are: Prophets,false prophets, charlatans, swindlers,wise folks,caring leaders of people,and on and on.

    Seriously man I told you before to lay off the Jesus stuff but here you go again. I’m wondering if Jesus is in ya, working on you?

  • 101. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    Rutherford, I need to correct you on a few more things:

    You see, no one REALLY believes when we get right down to it that he is coming back.

    I do. And I’ll bet I’m safe to include Wickle and BiC in the “yes he is” category.

    So if any man claimed to be Jesus, he would be assumed to be a loony tune.

    Yes he would. Because when Jesus does come back, whoever remains will be on their knees. You’ll most definitely know the time is at hand. So if you are on your knees Rutherford, and you don’t know why, look up! Your answer will be standing before you. :wink:

    For that reason alone, I do hope he does not come back because he is in for some serious hardship.

    That would be a Nyet. It won’t be Jesus that is for the hardship – trust me.

    And I bet hard core Christians would be the first to cry BS if anyone claimed to be Jesus.

    Please see my answer from above.

    So Rutherford, I leave you with this about Jesus:

    I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

    KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

    Yes Rutherford. I am absolutely sure all of us will know when Jesus returns…

    This is my Jesus. By definition He is self-sustaining and needs nothing. But I need Him.

  • 102. Curator  |  April 19, 2010 at 6:36 pm

    @Alfie

    I’m a freethinker. My opinions are formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and are not influenced by anything else. You could say I’m irreligious but I don’t hold any hostility towards religion unless it is forced on me by those from the right, or my government.

  • 103. An800lbGorilla  |  April 19, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    And yet, you’re not appalled by the Messiah or the cult of idiots parroting the man-child…

  • 104. An800lbGorilla  |  April 19, 2010 at 6:53 pm

    Actually R, you have grossly under estimated them and couldn’t hold a candle in a one on one debate- period.

    Tell me R, why is the One still selling healthcare and why have the numbers gotten worse over the weeks?

  • 105. Curator  |  April 19, 2010 at 7:58 pm

    The more I read your comments Gorilla the more I become skeptical you were ever in the military. You show utter contempt for the CIC.

  • 106. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 9:01 pm

    Ironic Curator,

    The more I read your comments Gorilla the more I become skeptical you were ever in the military. You show utter contempt for the CIC.

    Because I thought the same thing of you during the Bush Presidency. And though I’m not military, Gorilla is a patriot in my book. I think you would very surprised at the number of active military that do hold Obama in contempt.

  • 107. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 10:42 pm

    Hey Rutherford,

    Don’t use Butch Madcow’s show for you post. I’ve now watched 100 minutes of useless information I already knew – except I was about 25 feet from the guy who yelled at McVeigh coming out of the Perry County Courthouse, “Hey Mother Fucker, look me in the eye baby killer!!” I’m famous!

    They should have let McVeigh go in that crowd. Not only would it have saved the taxpayers a bunch of money, but we could have proved to you that McVeigh wasn’t very popular with the future Tea Party crowd. :eek:

  • 108. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 11:27 pm

    But if I am going to use that standard, shouldn’t I discount almost all of history,

    BINGO

    I have an old saying, probably not original with me but I don’t know where I’ve heard it before:

    History = His Story

    I have never in my adult life taken history to be truth. It is someone’s version of what happened. The fact that reasonable people cannot agree on the details of current events tells me that history and accuracy don’t necessarily go hand in hand. I once had a fascination with Presidential history. I’ve forgotten much of what I read growing up, but I used to love it. Other parts of history, not so much. I think one reason is that I always felt I wasn’t getting the whole story.

    Now look at what is happening in Texas as we speak. Their school board doesn’t think Texan students are getting a legit version of history. Out with Jefferson and in with Reagan. As a liberal, I find the turn of events disturbing but then let’s get real. Why should the history taught in our schools have a liberal slant? According to you, all the civil rights acts really did was create a dependent class of citizen. Many agree with you. It’s not taught in school, is it?

    So to circle back to your original statement … you’re damn right. I view ALL history through a lens of skepticism. And the further back the history goes, the more skeptical I become.

  • 109. Rutherford  |  April 19, 2010 at 11:31 pm

    P.S. One of the benefits of the TV age is that we can witness some of history. I know for a fact that someone killed Jack Kennedy. I know for a fact that Ruby killed Oswald. It was there in black and white.

    To paraphrase some of you guys …. we don’t know if anyone called John Lewis the “N” word because it wasn’t on YouTube. ;-)

  • 110. Tex Taylor  |  April 19, 2010 at 11:55 pm

    Rutherford,

    So to circle back to your original statement … you’re damn right. I view ALL history through a lens of skepticism. And the further back the history goes, the more skeptical I become.

    Double Dare Dog Bingo. And the perfectly explains why you epitomize the moral relativist – there are no absolutely truths in your bag except what you determine truth to be. That makes you a skeptic, but it doesn’t make you edgy or rational like you think. It just makes you a fool.

    P.S. – You need to get a video of a segment of the Bill O’Reilly show tonight. You hero, one Mr. Jon Stewart, who likes to take pot shots at Fox News because “he’s fair and all”, got absolutely shredded by Bernie Goldberg. And I do mean shredded with some suggestions as to how to improve his phony baloney act. Stewart is an intellectual lightweight in much the same capacity as Bill Maher. Made for good T.V. I haven’t seen that much of a dressing down of a hypocrite since Bill Ayers called the cops for harassment. :wink:

    P.S.S. – you need to stay off the liberal blogs. That garbage about T. Jefferson being left out of the history books in Texas is just that – garbage.

  • 111. Tex Taylor  |  April 20, 2010 at 12:08 am

    Now Rutherford, did you watch the Butch Madcow special about Timothy McVeigh tonight. I watched the whole rerun. I viewed or heard absolutely nothing I didn’t already know. Did you glean that Tea Party folk could be linked to McVeigh? Did you gain insight and complete truth about domestic terrorists roaming free in your neighborhood, carrying pictures of Obama with the Hitler mustache? No?

    Your comment about John Lewis being called any racial epithet is pretty easily proven bogus, if you assume as you claim about innocent until proven guilty. Suddenly old John seemed to have had his memory fogged. He doesn’t apparently want to appear on any of the talk shows to talk of his initial charges (cough, cough).

    You know who a bunch of those old Civil Rights Activists remind me? Dancing with the stars attendants and Charles Barkley. For all their achievements or heroic acts of days gone bye, all of the sudden the glamor of the limelight gets in their blood and they have to find something stupid or exaggerated to say or do to stay relevant.

    Thinking they are special and not realizing life has passed them bye, they believe they are granted the right of immunity to anyone saying something critical of their abject stupidity. They feel free to lie and bloviate about anything or everything.

    Most people now look at John Lewis as Great Grandpa MacDaddy. Kind of black Robert Byrd or Fritz Hollings, who appear deluded when speaking. Maybe he’s hit the sauce, or something on the way to the Congressional Building.

  • 112. An800lbGorilla  |  April 20, 2010 at 7:41 pm

    Blow me.

    Respect is earned, and if you had ever served- I mean really served- you’d know that. I honor the office, but that sack of shit isn’t worthy of wiping my ass…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


April 2010
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
Bookmark and Share

Categories

Rutherford on Twitter

The Rutherford Lawson Blog is a member of

WordPress Political Blogger

My Sister Site

Town Called Dobson Daily Preview
AddThis Feed Button
http://www.blog4mobile.com/

Recent BlogCatalog Readers

View My Profile View My Profile View My Profile

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 713 other followers

%d bloggers like this: