Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
A thread for Democrats Only
Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:12 PM
JEWELSTAITEFAN
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: If people believe that Trump is substantially lying about something so easy to uncover, it has the potential to flip people who are merely giving him a pass, though it won't change the minds of true fans.
Friday, February 16, 2018 7:04 AM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: If people believe that Trump is substantially lying about something so easy to uncover, it has the potential to flip people who are merely giving him a pass, though it won't change the minds of true fans.
Friday, February 16, 2018 12:12 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: If people believe that Trump is substantially lying about something so easy to uncover, it has the potential to flip people who are merely giving him a pass, though it won't change the minds of true fans.I could admit that I'm not sure Trump really understands enough to "substantially lie"
Friday, February 16, 2018 2:39 PM
JO753
rezident owtsidr
Monday, February 19, 2018 5:26 PM
THGRRI
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 6:58 AM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: nytimes This is where you fail.
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 7:57 AM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Quote:Originally posted by THGRRI: Trump ranks as worst president in poll of scholars The survey was conducted among 170 current and recent members of the Presidents & Executive Politics Section of the American Political Science Association, which is a group of scholars dedicated to studying the American presidency. These experts were asked to rank each president on a scale from zero (worst) to 100 (best) based on their overall performance in office. With this, Mr. Trump came in last place with an average score of 12.34. Even among Republican respondents, Mr. Trump still ranked extremely low, earning the 40th spot for presidential greatness. These Republicans labeled James Buchanan -- whose presidency saw the secession of seven states before the Civil War -- as the all-time worst and George Washington as the best. Coming in first place is Abraham Lincoln, who scored an average of 95.03 between both Democrats and Republicans surveyed. The top seven presidents have remained the same since the poll was last conducted in 2014: Lincoln, George Washington, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, Harry Truman, and Dwight D. Eisenhower. In this round of questioning, former president Barack Obama moved up in the rankings to 8th best president, whereas in 2014 he came in at 18th. Scholars identifying as Republican, however, ranked Obama 16th. Ronald Reagan, who also moved up from his previous ranking, trails behind Obama in 9th place. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-ranks-as-worst-president-in-poll-of-scholars/ar-BBJlf3a?ocid=spartanntp T
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 8:47 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: LOL. The "Rotten Tomatoes" of American Presidents. Do Right, Be Right. :)
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 8:57 AM
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 9:09 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx. Do Right, Be Right. :)
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 12:38 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx. Do Right, Be Right. :)29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans. https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicalscience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pdf
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:16 PM
Wednesday, February 21, 2018 4:08 AM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans. https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicalscience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pdfOf the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative. 57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates. This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives. This comingled group ranked Obama 16th Greatest President? Yep, they were Commies. And these esteemed "political Scientists" were so clueless that, when asked which President should be ADDED to Mt. Rushmore, 5 of the 170 respondents voted for Washington, T Roosevelt, Lincoln. Hint: they are already there.
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans. https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicalscience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pdf
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:57 AM
Quote:Originally posted by THGRRI: It's funny to watch trolls challenge our best and brightest. Who actually believe when they are doing so, that they are perceived as smart, and that they are not perceived as trolls who are, well trolling. Reality eludes the likes of Jack, JSF, Rappy, sig and kiki. Lost to them, is the fact that their being trolls makes them losers.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018 1:25 PM
Wednesday, February 21, 2018 1:29 PM
Wednesday, February 21, 2018 2:29 PM
Thursday, February 22, 2018 5:12 AM
Thursday, February 22, 2018 9:29 AM
Friday, February 23, 2018 7:27 AM
Friday, February 23, 2018 10:39 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania says Impeachment of Judges Who Struck Down Gerrymandered Map Is “A Conversation That Has to Happen” https://theintercept.com/2018/02/22/toomey-pennsylvania-gerrymandered-map/ A Republican legislature in Pennsylvania drew the congressional lines back in 2011, which led to the GOP winning 13 of the state’s 18 districts in the 2016 election. The new map from the judges is intended to restore fairness. The 4 million registered Democrats in the state outnumber the 3.2 million registered Republicans. The GOP map had given Republicans a nearly 3-1 congressional majority in a state that leans Democratic; the court’s new map will still give Republicans a significant advantage, but slightly less of one. For Senator Pat Toomey, that amounted, he said, to a “blatant, unconstitutional, partisan power grab that undermines our electoral process.” In the wake of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court order that struck down a Republican congressional map as unconstitutionally gerrymandered, Sen. Pat Toomey said that impeachment of the justices is “a conversation that has to happen.” “I think state House members, state senators, are going to be speaking among themselves and their constituents,” Toomey said. “Does that rise to the level of impeachment? That’s ultimately their decision but it’s a conversation that has to happen.” The new map means several Republican incumbents now risk losing their seats, and a half-dozen competitive Republican-held congressional districts move left. Toomey’s floating of impeachment drags what had been a fringe position into the GOP mainstream. And the rhetoric is already intense. The Pennsylvania House Republican spokesman Wednesday morning called the judges “unaccountable despots” after drawing the new lines. It’s one of the most consequential events yet in the Democrats’ effort to retake the House. There are now at least five plausible opportunities to pick up a seat in the commonwealth, including the seat held by Rep. Pat Meehan, who is retiring after a sexual harassment case. Besides the districts that have all been shifted away from Republicans, the only other notable change is for Rep. Lloyd Smucker, a Republican moving into a more conservative 11th district. But even there, activists in his Lancaster district say they are still determined to beat him, even if the hill is steeper. State lawmakers are expected to sue to overturn the new maps and President Donald Trump gave Republicans his blessing to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court “if necessary,” arguing that the original version the court ruled unconstitutional was actually “correct.” Legal experts, however, note that the issue is about state law and Republicans probably won’t find much help in federal courts. “It’s unfortunate that the only way the Republican Party can win elections is to dismantle democracy, relying on unconstitutional gerrymandering and calling for the impeachment of judges that have been elected by the voters of Pennsylvania,” said Greg Edwards, a Democratic candidate for Congress running in the Lehigh Valley. “It shows Democracy is nothing more than an accessory to put on and take off when most convenient to the Republicans.”
Friday, February 23, 2018 1:40 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans. Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative. 57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates. This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives. One thing to notice with this survey, there is no weighted balance, which Libtards hate to do when they have 82% of their respondents as Liberals, and 5% Conservatives. Although they were able to obfuscate the actual figures for the 5% Conservatives, enough data is exposed that we can extrapolate and interpolate data to find a more accurate ranking. The list below shows the resulting balanced Rank, and then balanced Rating, for the first 2 columns. The next 2 columns of Rank and Rating are results if we pretend that PoliSci experts who self-identify as "Moderates" are really not Liberals (and those results are not used in weighted balancing). In the 5th column I included the Rank presented in the Report. Then the Name and sequence number.
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans. Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative. 57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates. This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.
Quote:-1.32 #1 93.71 #1 93.92 #1 95.03 Lincoln 16 +0.80 #2 93.39 #2 93.48 #2 92.59 Washington 1 -5.57 #3 83.52 #3 84.36 #3 89.09 FDR 32 -3.09 #4 78.30 #4 78.39 #4 81.39 T Roosevelt 26 -2.48 #5 77.06 #5 77.46 #5 79.54 Jefferson 3 +5.30 #6 74.54 #6 73.36 #9 69.24 Reagan 40 -0.78 #7 73.25 #8 72.78 #7 74.03 Eisenhower 34 -2.50 #8 72.65 #7 73.05 #6 75.15 Truman 33 +3.26 #9 64.16 10 63.53 17 60.90 Bush 41 +0.44 10 62.60 14 62.09 15 62.16 Jackson 7 -8.69 11 62.44 #9 63.99 #8 71.13 Obama 44 -0.85 12 62.39 13 62.59 14 63.24 Adams 2 -2.13 13 62.35 12 62.93 12 64.48 Madison 4 -6.90 14 62.16 11 63.41 10 69.06 LB Johnson 36 +6.63 15 62.12 18 60.55 19 55.49 McKinley 25 -2.36 16 61.89 15 62.00 13 64.25 Clinton 42 +0.49 17 61.23 17 61.36 18 60.74 Monroe 5 -6.46 18 60.94 16 61.43 11 67.40 Wilson 28 +3.36 19 57.45 19 56.35 20 54.09 Polk 11 +4.63 20 56.59 21 56.08 22 51.96 Taft 27 -6.36 21 55.50 20 56.26 16 61.86 Kennedy 35 +2.77 22 53.78 22 52.76 24 51.01 Cleveland 22 & 24 +10.09 23 52.32 24 51.44 28 42.23 Coolidge 30 -0.19 24 51.71 23 51.96 23 51.90 JQ Adams 6 -2.11 25 50.77 25 50.78 21 52.88 Grant 18 +2.65 26 49.93 26 49.13 25 47.28 Ford 38 +6.61 27 47.03 27 46.09 30 40.42 Bush 43 +0.27 28 44.54 28 44.25 27 44.27 Van Buren 8 +2.68 29 44.18 29 43.79 29 41.50 Hayes 19 +3.16 30 43.06 30 43.19 31 39.90 Arthur 21 +4.59 31 41.77 31 41.90 33 37.18 Nixon 37 -5.73 32 39.31 32 39.38 26 45.04 Carter 39 +2.34 33 39.03 33 38.60 34 36.69 Garfield 20 +0.95 34 38.58 34 38.04 32 37.63 B Harrison 23 +4.43 35 37.70 35 36.84 36 33.27 Hoover 31 +2.24 36 35.58 36 34.98 35 33.34 Taylor 12 +1.51 37 32.97 37 32.93 37 31.46 Tyler 10 +2.10 38 29.81 38 29.79 38 27.71 Fillmore 13 +3.50 39 28.76 39 29.05 39 25.26 Harding 29 -1.87 40 23.04 40 22.79 40 24.91 A Johnson 17 -0.83 41 22.42 41 22.42 41 23.25 Pierce 14 +0.61 42 19.63 42 19.41 42 19.02 WH Harrison 9 +6.79 43 19.13 43 18.51 44 12.34 Trump 45 -0.89 44 14.20 44 14.23 43 15.09 Buchanan 15 GOP red, Democrat blue, Whig buff.
Friday, February 23, 2018 2:08 PM
Friday, February 23, 2018 2:29 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JO753: Cow lady Hukubee shoud not be allowed to uze the word 'clear' ever agen. She uzed up her lifetime alotment a long time ago and iz alwayz lying wen she sez it.
Saturday, February 24, 2018 7:21 AM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: She means clear to those with a brain. Sorry you feel excluded, but that is likely common in ChicagoLand.
Saturday, February 24, 2018 7:37 AM
Saturday, February 24, 2018 9:56 AM
Saturday, February 24, 2018 2:59 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Speaking at the 2018 Conservative Political Action Conference in Oxon Hill, Maryland, on Friday, President Donald Trump announced a policy idea that at a normal time would have dramatically moved financial markets. But nothing of the sort happened. He said that unless he can get Mexico and Canada to agree to sweeping changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement that would eliminate the US-Mexico bilateral trade deficit, he “will terminate the deal and we’ll start over again.” Specific companies that depend on the ability to easily import goods from Mexico to the United States should have seen their share prices plummet while firms that compete with Mexican imports should have seen prices soar. Instead, it was a blah day on financial markets, with the Dow up slightly and no particularly surprising moves from individual companies. Corporate America just shrugs off his various pronouncements on trade policy. Trump also promised to eliminate the bilateral deficits with China and Vietnam, and nobody in the business world took note. His rhetoric has nothing to do with the actual conduct of the Trump administration. And Trump’s CPAC speech was filled with such moments — moments that would be blockbuster news from a normal president but that are largely irrelevant given Trump’s marginal role in the Trump administration. He’s a Potemkin president who riles up crowds at rallies but has no real role in governing the country. “We have ended the war on beautiful, clean coal,” said Trump, “one of our great natural resources.” Coal exports increased, but in fact, US coal consumption dropped in 2017 as natural gas and renewables continue to displace it, and Trump’s own Federal Energy Regulatory Commission appointees killed Trump’s proposed bailout of US coal-burning electric generating plants. Trump offered a desultory announcement of new sanctions on North Korea: "I appreciate everything you’ve done. I do want to say, because people have asked, North Korea, we imposed today the heaviest sanctions ever imposed on a country before. And frankly, hopefully something positive can happen. We will see. Hopefully something positive can happen. But that just was announced, and I wanted to let you know. We have imposed the heaviest sanctions ever imposed." Trump doesn’t even appear to be particularly supportive of the new policy, just saying blandly that “hopefully something positive can happen.” Most strikingly of all, he says that the new policy “was just announced” when he himself just announced it.
Sunday, February 25, 2018 6:31 AM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: This does point out an interesting thing. Does the Market always go up when Trump has a speech?
Sunday, February 25, 2018 8:55 AM
Sunday, February 25, 2018 3:35 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: For all the talk of Kremlin puppetry and intelligence operations, the heart of the offenses that Mueller has laid out involves the normal aspects of American politics, The Russian effort echoed themes that were already a factor in the election: the Internet Research Agency allegedly paid someone to dress up as Clinton in a prison uniform; the Trump campaign sold “Clinton for Prison” gear on its Web site, and American PACs have been paying for ads calling her a criminal since Bill Clinton’s Administration. Which way did the influence run? www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/05/robert-muellers-distinctly-american-indictments s
Sunday, February 25, 2018 4:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: golly gee whiz. Are those actions as bad as hiring thugs to infiltrate peaceful gatherings and instgate riots, as Hilliary/Obama did? And did not the Russians amplify or aid this discord?
Sunday, February 25, 2018 7:33 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: golly gee whiz. Are those actions as bad as hiring thugs to infiltrate peaceful gatherings and instgate riots, as Hilliary/Obama did? And did not the Russians amplify or aid this discord?Tell me about that "riot", you lying sack of shit.
Sunday, February 25, 2018 8:07 PM
Monday, February 26, 2018 6:59 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: golly gee whiz. Are those actions as bad as hiring thugs to infiltrate peaceful gatherings and instgate riots, as Hilliary/Obama did? And did not the Russians amplify or aid this discord?Tell me about that "riot", you lying sack of shit. lol... It's "riots", plural. This happened all the time before the election. It's common knowledge.
Monday, February 26, 2018 7:09 AM
Quote:Originally posted by JO753: I hav herd several politicianz and commentatorz say 'its inexplicable why Trump haznt acted on the Russia sanctionz'. Its completely explicable: He iz doing the job he wuz hired to do by Putin. Maybe its a virus going around Washington that flips sum key neuronz connected to vocabulary. That woud explain why 'clear' now meanz 'murky, undefined, obtuse or obscure' to everybody in Trump's orbit and most Republicanz.
Monday, February 26, 2018 7:28 AM
Monday, February 26, 2018 8:32 AM
Monday, February 26, 2018 12:18 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Quote:Originally posted by second: Speaking at the 2018 Conservative Political Action Conference in Oxon Hill, Maryland, on Friday, President Donald Trump announced a policy idea that at a normal time would have dramatically moved financial markets. But nothing of the sort happened. He said that unless he can get Mexico and Canada to agree to sweeping changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement that would eliminate the US-Mexico bilateral trade deficit, he “will terminate the deal and we’ll start over again.” Specific companies that depend on the ability to easily import goods from Mexico to the United States should have seen their share prices plummet while firms that compete with Mexican imports should have seen prices soar. Instead, it was a blah day on financial markets, with the Dow up slightly and no particularly surprising moves from individual companies. Corporate America just shrugs off his various pronouncements on trade policy. Trump also promised to eliminate the bilateral deficits with China and Vietnam, and nobody in the business world took note. His rhetoric has nothing to do with the actual conduct of the Trump administration. And Trump’s CPAC speech was filled with such moments — moments that would be blockbuster news from a normal president but that are largely irrelevant given Trump’s marginal role in the Trump administration. He’s a Potemkin president who riles up crowds at rallies but has no real role in governing the country. “We have ended the war on beautiful, clean coal,” said Trump, “one of our great natural resources.” Coal exports increased, but in fact, US coal consumption dropped in 2017 as natural gas and renewables continue to displace it, and Trump’s own Federal Energy Regulatory Commission appointees killed Trump’s proposed bailout of US coal-burning electric generating plants. Trump offered a desultory announcement of new sanctions on North Korea: "I appreciate everything you’ve done. I do want to say, because people have asked, North Korea, we imposed today the heaviest sanctions ever imposed on a country before. And frankly, hopefully something positive can happen. We will see. Hopefully something positive can happen. But that just was announced, and I wanted to let you know. We have imposed the heaviest sanctions ever imposed." Trump doesn’t even appear to be particularly supportive of the new policy, just saying blandly that “hopefully something positive can happen.” Most strikingly of all, he says that the new policy “was just announced” when he himself just announced it. Plagiarize much? I see everything you copied was from a vox.com article posted at 1:10pm on Friday. Trump's speech at CPAC was reportedly 75 minutes long, don't see when it started. Stock Market started the day with a half percent gain and mostly stayed there for hours. Then the last 90 minutes of trading all 3 major indices started climbing, each gaining about 3/4 of a percent in 90 minutes. Perhaps the Market will continue this climb on Monday. This does point out an interesting thing. Does the Market always go up when Trump has a speech? The Market dropped when the Jobs Report showed too many jobs, and then higher interest rates. How to make money from this info? With Obama it was easy. His speeches about how he explained how he would destroy the economy would drop the Market, at a period it was trying to grow, and did grow when Obama wasn't speaking. So I would sell out of the Market the day before his speech and immediately schedule a buy-in the day after his speech. I recall gaining 12% in a 3-day span, plus many lesser gains of 8%, 6%, 4%, etc. But making $ off Trump speech schedule could be trickier.
Monday, February 26, 2018 4:14 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Do your own research, Second.
Monday, February 26, 2018 6:05 PM
Monday, February 26, 2018 11:52 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Question: Why do you and the people on your "side" here feel the need to start every reply with a personal attack? Answer: That is what people who are losing the argument do. Do Right, Be Right. :)
Tuesday, February 27, 2018 7:32 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Question: Why do you and the people on your "side" here feel the need to start every reply with a personal attack? Answer: That is what people who are losing the argument do.
Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: I can't even figure out what is the tangential connection between the first dozen words of second's quoted topic, and the diversionary topic he shoehorns in next. Half the time I assume he thinks he's in a different thread.
Tuesday, February 27, 2018 8:02 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Question: Why do you and the people on your "side" here feel the need to start every reply with a personal attack? Answer: That is what people who are losing the argument do.6ix, this is not about me persuading you. I am not into saving souls like a door-to-door minister who is distributing literature for the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch_Tower_Bible_and_Tract_Society_of_Pennsylvania Do you remember that story I told you about me being raised as a Jehovah's Witness, but I vote while they don't? You said you didn't understand that story either. They are the finest people on Earth and I am not. There is a little key in that story to unlock what is going on here. It boils down to Armageddon. The bible version of Armaggedon has the bad people (the Republican voters) and the lukewarm people (the Independent voters) outnumbering the good (the Democratic voters). In the Bible the lukewarm people think they are good. Unsurprisingly, the bad people think they are good, too. www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation3:15-17 You might need to read the book of Revelations to find out how that movie ends, but the bad and the lukewarm people truly can't understand why God would judge them harshly.
Tuesday, February 27, 2018 10:51 AM
Tuesday, February 27, 2018 11:09 AM
Tuesday, February 27, 2018 12:07 PM
Tuesday, February 27, 2018 1:15 PM
Wednesday, February 28, 2018 6:38 AM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL