Thursday, August 1, 2013

Indicating Once Again Why the Republican Party Will Become Irrelavent...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


E.W. Jackson (Credit: AP/Jacquelyn Martin)

And they wonder why their membership is declining. This is just one reason among many.

SALON
- In a local radio interview this morning, Virginia Republican lieutenant governor nominee E.W. Jackson said the Democratic Party is “anti-God” and that Christians should leave it.

Jackson has said in the past that he thinks believing in God and voting Democratic are fundamentally incompatible, so WLEE host Jack Gravely asked if he still believes it. Gravely explained that he’s a Christian and tends to vote Democratic, just like his parents and family. Jackson didn’t back down.

“You are saying for us, we’re all wrong, leave that party. And all I’m saying to you is, if you said it before, you still have to believe it, why did you say it?” Gravely asked. “Oh, oh, oh I do believe it,” Jackson responded.

He continued: “I said it because I believe that the Democrat Party has become an anti-God party, I think it’s an anti-life party, I think it’s an anti-family party. And these are all things I think Christians hold to very dearly.”{Read More}

Find the audiohere.

Oy Vey, the republican fundie hyperbole.

Via: Memeorandum

42 comments:

  1. That rant shows the worst of the "Religious Right". I think that term is over-used a lot of the time, and sometimes in a way that smacks of religious bigotry by those who use it. But here.... it fits.

    As for his point, that is refuted by the many devoted, devout, and faithful Christians who are staunch liberals and Democrats. A shout out to Dave Miller and his "The Mission" blog

    ReplyDelete
  2. Also, a shout out to the leader of this country, Barack Hussein Obama, who has shown by his example as a devoted husband, father, and Christian, that Democrats are most certainly capable of holding family values.

    Jackson is the worst sort of demagogue who brings nothing but divisiveness and anger to the table. His labeling of Democrats as anti-everything this country hold dear shows his lack of decency and humanity, and willingness to smear anyone he disagrees with.

    IMO, the worst sort of politician.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Shaw: Might surprise you, but yes I know he is a Christian and defend him against claims that he is not. And even if he were a Muslim, something 10% of Democrats believe (but I do not), so what. It would not matter to me at all.

    And you describe the President well in the next part of that paragraph.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A different angle on what Shaw said:

    Obama is the worst sort of demagogue who brings nothing but divisiveness and anger to the table. His labeling of Republicans as anti-everything this country hold dear shows his lack of decency and humanity, and willingness to smear anyone he disagrees with.

    "Jackson" replaced with Obama; Democrats replaced with Republicans.

    Funny how Shaw's critique also fits Obama perfectly, isn't it?

    Who's doing more damage to this country, Shaw? Or are you too blind-partisan to see it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Sword of TruthFri Aug 02, 05:52:00 PM EDT

      Judging the situation absence prejudice one would have to say the answer to your inquiry of Shaw would be, about a toss up.

      Delete
    2. Except, LCR, none of it is true. When you call the president who has tried to work with the GOP divisive and angry, you're wrong; and when you say Mr. Obama has no decency or humanity, you're wrong. And tell us all with a link to back it up, whom he has "smeared."

      You got your jollies by writing that, now prove it. Mr. Jackson actually said those things. Show us where Mr. Obama has smeared anyone.

      You claim Mr. Obama is divisive? Of course. You're a partisan!

      Delete
    3. Shaw; the only people who see partisanship on only one side are those who agree with the partisanship on their own side. From my point of view, on him "smearing", I see Obama doing this no more and no less than other party leaders/Presidents.

      I repeat my support for your earlier paragraph, Shaw, on Obama's decency and humanity (family man, etc). Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Jersey. I would tell the Col. to do the same, but his pipe is full of something whacky already.

      Delete
    4. You are irreconcilable, Shaw.

      Open your eyes - Obama is precisely the kind of character of the GOP hacks and charlatans you loathe so much (and I do too).

      Trouble is, I loathe the Republicat party pols that are dragging down this nation as much as I do the Democrat pols. Both parties are bi-partisan in tearing apart our national fabric in their own self-serving interests.

      It's quite liberating when one awakes from the false Dem/Repub dichotomy and is able to see this for what it is.

      You are no different than fire-breathing right-wingers like the guy Les's post is about; you and your ilk are just the flip side of the same coin.

      -- shakes his head that so many in this nation could be so clueless.

      Delete
  5. How exactly does that describe the President, dmarks?

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jersey are you phoning it in again? Knee-jerk responses?

      It's Shaw's paragraph, anyway (the first, in her first, and only so far comment here). I agreed with it. If you want to rip it apart, go after her. She is reading these, after all. I think she will be as puzzled as I am.

      Delete
    2. Dennis proposed the replacement done by Left Coast Rebel when he said "you describe the President well in the next part of that paragraph". Then Jersey responds to the person who proposed the replacement and Dennis says he is "puzzled" and insults Jersey... Who is "phoning it in"?

      Delete
    3. The Sword of TruthFri Aug 02, 10:26:00 PM EDT

      WTF Dervish Sanders? Have you excess time on your hands to burn?

      Delete
    4. I think WD is on lean....

      "Dennis proposed the replacement done by Left Coast Rebel"

      I was referring to Shaw. I even said so. I hardly paid attention to what Left Coast Rebel said.... which was AFTER my comment in support of Shaw.

      Colonel, the insult on Jersey was mild... and he can defend himself. He did come across addle-brained as if he had not read what he was commenting on. What is your excuse?

      Lean, forward...

      Delete
    5. Again, looking this over. What ARE you smoking, WD?

      " Then Jersey responds to the person who proposed the replacement"

      I proposed nothing. I just agree with what Shaw said. Are you trying to turn this blog, too, into a crapfest?

      Delete
    6. dmarks, I've been quite reasonable in letting wd/DS post his rather disjointed yet amusing remarks. However, I assure you I will stop wd/DS short of turning this site into a crapfest like his.

      Delete
    7. WOW. Look at the crap you let dmarks print and he has no facts just his delusional bullshit.

      Delete
    8. We welcome your rebuttal with the facts Anon. The facts ma'am, just the facts.

      Seems I just posted your crap. Now, come up with the facts.

      Delete
    9. Why bother? Dmarks never uses facts, just his manure mouth. Give me facts to rebut, not just bullshit. What facts has Dennis used on this thread, or any thread? Show me.

      Delete
    10. You challenge, but won't post my reply. Thank you for proving me right.

      Delete
    11. The Sword of TruthSat Aug 03, 04:00:00 PM EDT

      Appears RNat is allowing enough rope to hang yourself.

      Delete
    12. Hang nothing, give me the facts to rebut. Seems the coward just wants to play games.

      Delete
    13. He won't post my comment to Dennis that he is wrong that I'm the Nazi anon. So let him have his dishonest fun. Again proving that I am right and he is just a dishonest SOB.

      Delete
    14. "So let him have his dishonest fun."

      Like the Anon who falsely accused RN of antisemitism, you are incorrect in most everything you say, relying on bigotry, not facts.

      I presented the facts. Seems you can't bother.

      Delete
    15. The Sword of TruthSat Aug 03, 05:13:00 PM EDT

      Anonymous: "Hang nothing, give me the facts to rebut..."

      Perhaps I am in error, please forgive, however you stated the info. or opinion dmarks presented was BS. Perhaps it is. RNat properly suggested you rebut the BS and provide facts you are in possession of so me may all be aware of said facts.

      You decline. Why? If you fail to respond as RNat suggested who then is the one "playing games?"

      Delete
    16. That's the point pal, his opinions, not/not facts. Present them and I will reply, if RN posts it.

      Delete
    17. Oh I'll post it Anon. But what I anticipate is your continuing evasions as you always do.

      Delete
    18. I did present facts, such as on the Bush middle class tax cuts, and Obama's wars.

      The only opinion I presented was that Obama was a good family man, and agreement with the rest of what Shaw said. Jersey and WD expressed disagreement with my opinion.

      You do know the difference between facts and opinions, don't you Anon? I doubt it. You have blustered for several comments now and haven't attempted to refute anything.

      Sword: Your blade is keen, my son...

      Delete
    19. "I did present facts, such as on the Bush middle class tax cuts, and Obama's wars."

      Where? On this thread? I don't see them. I see no numbers from empirical sources, or reference materials. I knew you have been drinking.

      Delete
    20. No cop out, you have presented no facts, just your biased opinion. I'm still waiting.

      Delete
    21. I presented the facts already. I don't need to do so again just because you are too lazy. You apparently disagreed with what I said, but show yourself incapable of forming any coherent counter argument... even incapable of even saying what you disagreed with.

      Given ample opportunity and prodding, you strongly resist the rebuttal opportunity RNat granted you. You keep on and on with what RNat correctly described as "your continuing evasions".

      Delete
  6. Yes, Shaw, Obama is a good and decent family man but then again so, too, was Bush. Time for philanderer perhaps.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, they both care/cared very much about their own families, but there were/are families each one did/does not take care to not destroy. Bush is certainly the worse of the two, as poor American families suffered when Bush sided against them via his tax policies that favored the wealthy (typical R). And the families of soldiers who were killed in his unnecessary wars in Middle Eastern countries -- he was willing and eager to sacrifice their lives (blood for oil and political capital). But both are willing to destroy the families of some people with missiles launched from drones (creating more terrorists then they kill). Not time for a philanderer but time for a president who isn't resigned to the status quo (approve war crimes and cut taxes for the wealthy).

      Delete
    2. "Bush is certainly the worse of the two, as poor American families suffered when Bush sided against them via his tax policies that favored the wealthy (typical R)."

      Most of the people affected by the tax cuts were middle class, and most of the money kept (not taken by government) were middle class.

      "And the families of soldiers who were killed in his unnecessary wars in Middle Eastern countries"

      In the case of Afghanistan, the deaths of soldiers accelerated a lot under Obama. So you can't really make this comparison.

      " he was willing and eager to sacrifice their lives (blood for oil and political capital). "

      `Blood for oil` is a brainless slogan, a myth. Like saying that WW2 was for beer and sushi.

      "....approve war crimes...."

      Hasn't happened yet. And the tax cuts you are discussing were really mostly for the middle class.

      Delete
    3. Any idiotic excuse true, or not to protect Bush from any consequences of his acts and just blame Obama for everything. What a putz.

      Delete
    4. The Sword of TruthSat Aug 03, 12:53:00 PM EDT

      Mirrors Anon, mirrors. As the sage Free Thinke valiantly pointed out. Lost on you we see.

      Delete
    5. I only blame Obama for what he is responsible for, and blame Bush for what he is responsible for. Sorry, Hitler Baby Anon.

      And you can't name "crap" that I like to print. Just facts.

      Delete
    6. Will said; "Time for philanderer perhaps."

      Look at Weiner. On second thought, avert your eyes there. Anyway... him and Sanford. The philanderers are decidedly low quality too, agree?

      Delete
  7. How does the right wing propose purging itself of this element or is the party just going to drift to irrelevance?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ask someone from the "right wing" ducky. I assume you're referring to the extremes in the GOP. FYI, I wouldn't have a clue how the party plans to "purge" (as in soviet union and red china style) that element of THEIR party.

      I am an INDEPENDENT libertarian actually.

      Delete
    2. Ducky: they can count on the left-wing making itself irrrelevant too. Les documents examples of that here. The two parties are on a race to something, and it is not good.

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.