+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 46

Thread: Not a good day for a Republican Dawg

  1. #31
    Champ turbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond repute turbodawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    2,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg80
    He does, however, care about the 5th Commandment.
    Thou shalt not kill.*

    *Unless you've got a really good reason, like maybe a war for oil, or you convict (doesn't matter whether they're truly guilty or not)someone in our flawed judicial system of a crime deemed worthy of killing them for. :?

    Dawg80 -- I'm not going to get in an abortion debate. That's a real, real, real touchy one with me -- and I really do appreciate your stance on the issue. And I'm probably not too far away from your position...

    But, do you think that the Republican leadership is:

    Really concerned with good, old fashioned, strong morality.

    OR

    Really concerned with getting votes from people with good, old-fashioned, strong morals?

    And, just for converstation's sake: if you discounted the abortion issue, what tenets of the current Republican agenda really represent a true Christ-like attitude? I just don't see how they portray or have a corner on the market for the type of 'morality' that they would have us believe they do. (And I'm not asking to prove any points, I'm really asking for your opinion.)

    I will say this, however -- Honestly, as passionate as some are about the abortion issue -- maybe I feel as passionately about things like GATT/NAFTA/WTO/IMF/MAI/"globalization" if you will -- that allow the biggest of the big coportations to send the manufacturing jobs of hard working middle class Americans two miles south of the border (or other places where human rights aren't a top priority..) to take advantage of 50 cent/hour labor. And that's a Republican thing that I can not support.

  2. #32
    Administrator AustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to behold AustinDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    South Austin
    Posts
    2,479
    Quote Originally Posted by turbodawg
    maybe I feel as passionately about things like GATT/NAFTA/WTO/IMF/MAI/"globalization" if you will -- that allow the biggest of the big coportations to send the manufacturing jobs of hard working middle class Americans two miles south of the border (or other places where human rights aren't a top priority..) to take advantage of 50 cent/hour labor. And that's a Republican thing that I can not support.
    That would be a real powerful statement--IF it hadn't been a democrat who enacted it (at the time when he had a democratic congress).

    C'mon, let's not get too caught up with our jingoism and "talking points" that we lose sight of the topic.

  3. #33
    Champ markay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant future markay714's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ruston
    Posts
    5,042
    Gotta say that the abortion issue is enough for me to vote Republican, but certainly I think the Republican approach to government is much more closely aligned to biblical principals than the Democratic one. The proliferation of welfare is not a biblical concept - the faith based initiative is much more closely related to what the Bible says. And, certainly reading the Old Testament a strong military is not in opposition to biblical principals. But, if I disagreed with the Republicans on everything else, their stand on abortion would be enough. As I've said here before Proverbs says "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people". I do not want us to tolerate killing innocent children!

  4. #34
    Champ Champ967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond repute Champ967's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Dogtown, AR
    Posts
    13,483
    Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.
    Markay ... I dont doubt your sincerity. I think you are a good person who always wants to do the right thing. That said ...

    What would it take to convince you that the biblical understanding of "nation" is significantly different from the modern meaning?

    The "nation" of America exists only on earth. It is NOT recognized as a "nation" by God. The American "nation" is built on men's laws and belongs wholly to Satan, the "Prince of the Earth".

    I know that you mean well, but you are mis-applying the scripture you cite.

    ................................

    And even if that were not the case, and your interepretation of the passage were correct, are you insinuating that the Republican party is COMPLETELY righteous and sin-free? Of course not. Then why do you single out abortion as your litmus-test for righteousness? I think you know that the Bible does not rank sins.

    Let's take drunkeness for example. Let's say I get exessively sloppy drunk. Who is repsonsible for my sin? The political party that allowed the liqour store to stay open past 9? Or me?

    Let's say I cussed up a storm and took the Lord's Holy Name in vain today. Who is responsible for my sin? The writers of the laws that allow free speech? Or me?

    Bring it back to abortion. Let's say I get an abortion. Who is repsonsible for that sin? The political party that legalized it? Or me?

    Let's say I choose not to get an abortion. Who has made that godly, prayerful decision? The political party that opposes abortion? Or me?

    ...........................

    Markay, I respect that you loathe abortion. I admire you for wanting to do everything you can to fight sin.

    Believe me .... you will make more difference with one prayer than have all the votes and elections ever cast by anyone anywhere.

    You may think you are "doing your part" by voting against abortion. You are not. The human political process can do NOTHING to cure sin. Neither America, democracy, the Constitution, the GOP, nor any election will ever do a darn thing to turn the tide of sin.

    All you can do is pray. And love. Any other efforts are futile.

  5. #35
    Champ CARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond reputeCARTEK has a reputation beyond repute CARTEK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Kingwood, Texas
    Posts
    7,117
    Only in Louisiana can Republicans snatch defeat from the jaws of victory! Clyde Hollaway and his ilk should have their collective asses kicked for failing to be good losers...now, they look like real LOSERS!

    The block voting of blacks is racist! If you look at Caddo Parish returns there are precincts that had 600 votes cast with 598 going to the lesbian Democratic candidate...and yes, I can back that statement up on both the vote count and sexual orientation of the vote getter. If a predominately white precinct voted in those percentages for the Republican candidate there would be outrage in the media and an investigation as to whether votes had been bought. The double standard is overwhelming and the outcome is more than distasteful.

  6. #36
    Champ Soonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond reputeSoonerdawg has a reputation beyond repute Soonerdawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    9,584
    "The block voting of blacks is racist!" - Cartek

    Amen - but don't you know you're a racist for merely pointing out this truth?

  7. #37
    Champ markay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant future markay714's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ruston
    Posts
    5,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Champ967
    What would it take to convince you that the biblical understanding of "nation" is significantly different from the modern meaning?
    Don't think you can. I don't believe I can add bit of anything to scripture and it be ok, so guess we'll have to agree to disagree there. There are plenty of examples in scripture where the Lord blessed groups of people or a nation based on their returning to Him - and curses went with disobedience.


    Quote Originally Posted by Champ967
    I know that you mean well, but you are mis-applying the scripture you cite.
    According to you? I checked out the Hebrew on nation in that passage and it clearly refers to a groups of people - perhaps only recognized here on earth, but that's where I am for now!

    Quote Originally Posted by Champ967
    And even if that were not the case, and your interepretation of the passage were correct, are you insinuating that the Republican party is COMPLETELY righteous and sin-free? Of course not. Then why do you single out abortion as your litmus-test for righteousness? I think you know that the Bible does not rank sins.
    Yes you're right, the Bible does not rank sins and I'll be the first to admit that the Republicans are made up 100% of sinners just as the Democrats are. To me abortion cannot be tolerated as its one of those urgent priority 10 - the Ten Commandments. So, I'm starting with what I think is important and we'll work down from there. You, me, we are all responsible for our sin individually, but we do not have to allow killing in our midst and say that it is tolerable in our society. Next, will it be acceptable to kill old people?

    The book of Judges in scripture is all about everyone doing what was right in their own eyes - and it was not a pretty picture. Prayer is important, but taking a moral stand is as well.

    I'm FAR FAR FAR from perfect and I do pick my battles. I don't drink alcohol and as I said during the Ruston alcohol debate, I would've voted "no". And, that was because if I was a resident I would've had that right to not have it around me. BUT, I don't have a problem with that at all being tolerated in our land because I believe the biblical mandate is to not be drunk (not to not drink). So, take your own personal responsibility for drinking too much if you only hurt yourself. If you hurt somebody by driving drunk or something, well, the punishment should be severe. And, I won't add that to any party's responsibility.

  8. #38
    Champ Champ967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond repute Champ967's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Dogtown, AR
    Posts
    13,483
    Hebrew on nation in that passage and it clearly refers to a groups of people
    The Hebrew understanding of nationhood was based on a shared lineage. Whenever God would bless the nation of Isreal, he was blessing the descendants of Jacob. That is the Biblical understanding of a "nation", and a bunch of folks rallied around a Constitution is only a "nation" in the eyes of man. What you consider a nation is more accurately desribed as a "state".

    In Biblical times, all states were nations. All the "nations" fo the world were basically extended families. But today, there are few true "nation-states" remaining. Ireland is one. So is Mongolia. But America is not. Nor is modern Isreal, for that matter.

    So, I'm starting with what I think is important and we'll work down from there
    Well then i guess there's no need for the Second Coming nor the Kingdom of Heaven. We Americans can simply vote against sin till we kill it all off. We'll focus on one sin at a time till its all gone!

    So thanks for the kind offer Jesus! But we have everything under control down here! We can save ourselves from sin through Holy Democracy!

  9. #39
    Champ turbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond repute turbodawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    2,270
    Quote Originally Posted by AustinDawg

    That would be a real powerful statement--IF it hadn't been a democrat who enacted it (at the time when he had a democratic congress).
    Indeed. First, though, let me ask that you not interpret my contempt for the RNC, as an outright endorsement or strict observation of the beliefs of the Democratic Party. They suck too.

    And yes, a D President got enough D supporters to push the original NAFTA through. Just goes to show to what extent big money and political dealing is entrenched in our legislative system...

    But, make no mistake where these deals are coming from. Remember NAFTA was a Republican baby from waaay back... And still is, as are its predocessors/compliments. And who benefits? The biggest-big-richest-of-the-rich. How do they vote? Hmm... And who calls the shots in Washington? Those people that can pay for legislation.

    Multi-national corporate globalization's proliferation is continuing to increase in forms of legislation and trade agreements. Who is it benefitting? Is it the average person? Hell, even the average R voter? Or is it the top of the top of the top (back to those ~13,000 Americans that have money...)

    Who gets screwed? Average, middle class American manufacturing employees (ergo, the backbone of our nation's economy...), the cheap labor workers in other countries, the environment...

    Pretty recently, GWB has actually said that, due to all this "free trade", the average American family's income has increased X # of $ ( I think he says ~1,000/1500 -- I'll have to look that up) but I'm not so sure.


    Take it with a grain of salt, but have a look-see:

    http://www.citizen.org/trade/forms/search_taa.cfm

  10. #40
    Champ markay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant futuremarkay714 has a brilliant future markay714's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ruston
    Posts
    5,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Champ967
    [Well then i guess there's no need for the Second Coming nor the Kingdom of Heaven. We Americans can simply vote against sin till we kill it all off.
    'Fraid thats not going to happen - we've got all of us sinners voting. Thats why moral leadership is critical. When leaders lead, people follow - for good or for bad. Look at history and see how that has been repeated. I don't expect heaven on earth, but following Judeo Christian principals would clearly make for a more orderly society and family system regardless of the faith of those following it. God set up His law not to hinder our enjoyment of life, but to make it better. But, of course, we are much smarter than Him and want to do things our way and it sounds like you think we should just all do our thing - and those of us that disagree should just pray about it. Suffice it to say that I don't see it that way - of course we both already knew that.

  11. #41
    Champ Champ967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond reputeChamp967 has a reputation beyond repute Champ967's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Dogtown, AR
    Posts
    13,483
    Actually, I was being sarcastic. Thought you'd catch it. Perhaps that was out-of-line and you were just out-classing me there. Fine. I apologize. I have a bad habit of communicating through saracasm. I need to be more careful, especially considering the subject matter.

    we should just all do our thing - and those of us that disagree should just pray about it.
    Not quite. But I am convinved that people are gonna do what they're gonna do. No matter who is elected or what laws are passed, people are going to sin freely.

    If we, as Christians, are really concerned about the state of the world, we will do far more for our fellow man by praying for him and witnessing/ministering to him. This is how Jesus lived His life, and if a someone wishes to be Christ-like, so will they.

    Jesus did NOT run for office, form a party, or propose a law. So why bother with these things if you want to be like Jesus?

    These are the kinds of wordly activities that Judas (and likely others) were erroneously expecting of Jesus. But Jesus tried to make clear again and again that the Kingdom does NOT work that way. When Christians try to prepare the way of the Lord by voting for candidates and passing laws and donating to parties, they are following the same flawed thinking as did Judas.

    If you want to be like Jesus, pray, witness, & minister. Faith, hope, and love. Your heart is (correctly) convicted that abortion is abominable. But you could do infinitely more good as a mentor, counselor, foster parent, friend, prayer-chain coordinator, etc than as a voter.

    A vote isnt taking a stand against sin. It's not even a pittance. It is not even the right thing to do. It is nothing. The power of democracy is utter nothing next to the power of the Holy Spirit manifesting Himself through Christian service.

  12. #42
    Administrator AustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to beholdAustinDawg is a splendid one to behold AustinDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    South Austin
    Posts
    2,479
    Hey, I wasn't disavowing republican enthusiasm for NAFTA. Personally, I'm not too against NAFTA myself. Without NAFTA, you are artificially propping up less efficient business practices over the short term, and over the long term the result is going to be the same as with NAFTA (the jobs moving to cheaper countries). I think that it relates to the steel tariffs Bush enacted about 6 months ago. I think it was a bad idea. Its protectionism that is falsely propping up a failing business model. But he thought he needed to make a conciliatory gesture to the Big Labor Chiefs. Which he screwed himself with because now the Euros are completely apoplectic about it and it's not like the Labor Unions are going to start voting for Bush because he enacted steel tariffs.

    To show my consistency, I also think GWB was wrong for giving huge bailout payments to the major air carriers after 9/11. All these companies (with the exception of Southwest) were HEMMORAGHING money on September 10 and on September 12, they had something to blame it on. Again, it was another case of throwing money to TEMPORARILY prop up bad business models. Kinda like the JUCO, the only airline that didn't get to pull off the government teat was Southwest because they had been doing it right all along.

    Personally, there really isn't a nickel's worth of difference between the two anymore IMHO. People can talk all they want about the abortion issue (which I personally despise), but they are kidding themselves if they think the Republican party is somehow magically the Pro-Life party. Bush himself has said that he is not going to use that as a litmus test for Bench replacements (and I bet he makes sure that it is not overturned in his first term). Probably at least half of Republicans anymore are Pro-Choice and the other half are too scared to talk about it for fear of not being elected.

    Myself, I tend to lean more Libertarian. Were it not for the abortion issue, national defense and the fact that I don't think we need to hand out crack and needles to everyone, I would probably Lib. more often.

  13. #43
    Champ TechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant futureTechDAG has a brilliant future
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    2,812
    Cartek, the election math in Louisiana is pretty clear. 30% of the vote is locked up, paid for and hauled to the polls for the Dems. that is what Cleo and Edwin say the money that Cleo was stuffing in pnats was for- to pay for vote hauling. It may not be pretty, but it is not illegal.

    That leaves 70% of the population (the white vote) available to republicans. 20% of the white vote is yellow dog democrat, union, etc. that wouldn't vote republican even if they were paid. If they go vote, then 44% of the vote is in the demo pocket. That means they need only 10% of the rest of the white vote (7% of of the total) to win. That is why it is so crucial for idiots like holloway and Cooksie to not pout after they lose.

    Of course what swings all this is whether the vote turns out. The only cards the blacks have is to threaten to stay home if they don't like the demo. A little pork and some soft money usually works.

  14. #44
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    57,423
    I heard Fox McKeithen say in an interview that voter hauling even without the fives and tens was illegal. He said he would be watching the election closely and that all the reports they had had in the past about voter hauling were unproven. :roll:

  15. #45
    Champ turbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond reputeturbodawg has a reputation beyond repute turbodawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    2,270
    Quote Originally Posted by AustinDawg
    Personally, I'm not too against NAFTA myself. ... Without NAFTA, you are artificially propping up less efficient business practices over the short term, and over the long term the result is going to be the same as with NAFTA (the jobs moving to cheaper countries). ... Its protectionism that is falsely propping up a failing business model.
    That is an arguable point. And really, I guess you're right. Do what it takes, evolve to suit the bottom line.

    But...

    Well, for instance -- I drive a S10 pickup built in Shreeeport (by damn) Looziana.

    If GM wanted to build those same pickups in Matamoras, or hell I'll go one better and say somewhere like Honduras --

    Could they build them cheaper?

    Tons of dirt-cheap labor to exploit, no labor laws, no OSHA hassles about working conditions, lower taxes, no worries about any types of environmental regs concerning land use or air or water quality...

    Probably so, huh? I bet that'd knock a couple thousand easy off the sticker price (while at least keeping GM's profit on it equal).

    I guess my question is where is the line drawn between 'propping' companies up, and looking out for our own economy and jobs?

    Is it worth paying more for something if it's being manufactured by our own people (and their paychecks being turned over in our economy), in safe conditions, and in an environmentally responsible manner?


    Personally, there really isn't a nickel's worth of difference between the two anymore IMHO.

    Totally agree. I think we're all caught up in squabbling over some issues, while both the parties are getting further and further away from the reality of the average American. We need to make other parties viable options...


    By the by -- looking back at my earlier post -- I hope I didn't come off pissy. I can go into rant-mode pretty quick sometimes. If I can't have a civil conversation with a Libertarian I should probably just shut up.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts