The Seriously? Theatre of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts V

[Ebsy]

The two of you represent the moral and intellectual bankruptcy that plagues liberalism. Things like integrity mean nothing to you. For you it is all about the short term win.

Liberals today are driven by hate. Hatred of conservatism. What conservatives stand for, liberals reflexively oppose. A great example is the Ex-Im bank. Something liberals opposed for 30 years until conservatives also started opposing Ex-Im. Then liberals decided Ex-Im was important for American jobs. Their real motivation was to oppose conservatives.

[Ebsy]

Statements without a track record are pointless. She's pandering at its finest. She doesn't actually care about black people.

[Ebsy]

It's a tend that's only likely to continue, something pretty strongly evidenced by election results elsewhere in the advanced democracies. Without anything resembling a real political left existing in the US today, political trends are going to necessarily imitate the extreme identitarianism that has substituted itself for meaningful politics since at least 1947. When Taft-Hartley was enacted, the unions and civil society purged of the left, and left-wing organizations banned or proscribed, political struggle moved from the realm of multiracial, multiethnic, multinational class politics to hyper-individualized identity politics. The fact that this remains unchallenged even on the left is why you're going to see America increasingly resemble South Africa in terms of political coalitions and outcomes.

The Democratic Party may emerge as the majority party over the course of the next generation, but it won't do so as a 'progressive' party in the traditional sense. Much like the ANC, the Democrats will become (even moreso than they already are) a party with a progressive veneer enacting more and more pro-capitalist policies. The trend has existed within the Democratic Party since the 1960s (Kennedy was the first more or less post-New Deal president), and has gained steam as the traditional class coalition that underpinned the old Democratic Party collapsed and was replaced by a frankenstein coalition of ultra-rich financiers and tech magnates and the utterly destitute. As the Republicans play up their own identity politics (white, male, Christian, rural, and suburban identity politics), the Democrats will respond with their own and the coalitions will be increasingly racially, rather than socioeconomically, based.

I'd say we can expect the Republicans to start winning an overwhelming majority of the white vote at some point in the future. Granted, they already win a majority of it, but I'm talking about 2/3rds of it, which may very well doom the Democratic Party to another four decades in opposition, as was the case between the 1970s and now. Barring the re-emergence of a left committed to class politics, we will continue to slide down the identitarian rabbit hole, where politics is less about who should be commanding and controlling the economy (capitalists or the rest of us) and more about things like whether or not video games are anti-feminist, or whether or not the Democrats are planning 'white genocide' or whatever the lunatic far-right identitarians are going off on these days.

[Ebsy]

 ...well, after having a week to think about it; thank God dubya was president during the 911 era and we already knew what we know now about the Obama Iraq war, The Last Supper.

[Ebsy]

A CEO was forced out of his job for the "crime" of engaging in the political process by donating to the campaign for California's Proposition 8.   Bakers are being forced to bake cakes with messages in support of something they vehemently disagree with.   Some "progressives" label anyone who has legitimate religious objections to gay marriage as "bigots" and "haters", instead of engaging in debate, and try to ruin opponents' lives and job prospects. 

If you don't see that as gun pointing by SSM proponents, I don't know what to tell you.  If you dare disagree with SSM, you are evil incarnate to "progressives".

That's because there's no such thing as a legitimate religious objection to gay marriage.

It's 2015. Religion should evolve alongside people. Also, because this is a secular nation, run on, wait for it, secular values, prohibiting or denying SSM on religious grounds would be going against separation of church and state.

You're more than welcome to move to someplace like Iran though if you want a country run on religious grounds.

Newsflash:  The Bible is not changing.  Religion should not get with the times.  It is time society stops trying to rip pages out of the Bible.  I sincerely hope the Supreme Court is smart and does NOT impose same-sex marriage in all 50 states.  It threatens America's churches, especially the most conservative ones.  It also threatens Christian schools.  Liberal progressives seriously want to see pastors thrown in jail for life for preaching against same sex marriage and they want to take away tax exempt status for those who refuse to go along with gay marriage.  The denominations who are allowing same sex marriage now are 100% WRONG on that issue.  The Bible clearly states Adam and Eve.  The Bible clearly prohibits a man sleeping with a man.  It is not a slippery slope to other forms of "marriage", but it is a slippery slope to which all voices of opposition will be discriminated against, by the loss of jobs, the loss of their business, imprisonment.

However, there is one thing that is an ABSOLUTE FACT that NO one can deny.  Jesus reigns.  What He says goes.  It doesn't matter if you're an atheist or a member of another religion.  What Jesus says goes.  He will stamp out ALL same sex relationships and marriages.  He will get rid of all sin.

Furthermore, the Bible clearly says no one is born gay.  Being gay is absolutely positively a choice.  The Bible is the rule book on all human life, so no one can legitimately deny its teachings.

Just because we Christians hate gay marriage does not mean we hate gay people or are bigots.  We love gays, but are just trying to uphold traditional, conservative values that liberal progressives are trying so hard to get rid of and replace.

Gay activists should not force everyone to accept their marriage.  They want open mindedness, so why aren't they open minded to conservative, Biblical values?

Sorry for the rant, but it is a topic I have come to the correct realization on.  Christianity reigns and gay marriage loses in eternity.  Pure and simple.

I'm not sure your highlights are even the most absurd parts.

[Ebsy]

Suffering is suffering is suffering is suffering.

[Ebsy]

In response to "Was Calvin Coolidge a good President?"

Yes he was.

He was very much a gilded age President in hindsight.  Not much lauded or loved by most of his day but he was very successful. A lot like Chester Arthur was, but Coolidge was way more successful than most people credit him for. In terms of accomplishments he was majorly successful and deserves to be in the high regard among GOP Presidents.

He was the epitome of the laissez faire attitude. He didn't care about interfering with things he let them play out and that proved the right decision. By lowering the tax rates and letting industry grow the nation prospered for it. Sure he made mistakes but to blame him solely for the depression? That's ridiculous.  If anyone in particular to blame for the depression Presidency wise it's Hoover because he made the situation far worse with the tariff and tax rate increases.

Coolidge's character outshines everything. Unlike Billy C or Obama who were social and media butterflies Coolidge was to use a cheesy phrase "the OG of the Cool cats.." He didn't care for the life of the President, in fact he was probably one of our more Private Presidents. He lost a lot of his wind out of his sails due to the death of his son. If that hadn't have happened who knows what would have happened with him he could have easily ran again if he wanted too. The death made his depression much worse and his attitude more dim. It would have been interesting seeing him handle the depression.

Harding was a fine President too but the weaker second choice was in hindsight the star move the Republicans made in '20.

[Ebsy]

An own goal:

What's to stop us from wildly speculating? It's just as serious as an actual bid by Donald Trump or Carly Fiorina or indeed most the lot.

Sad!

Props for owning up to it though.