SPECIAL EVENING MEETING – Tuesday, September 27 – 6:30 pm
Horsemen’s Club – 10600 Bubbling Wells Rd., G.V.
A CIVIL DISCUSSION. Paul Emery (KVMR News Director) & George Rebane (Systems Scientist and Conservative Commentator) meet for a civil discussion of today’s issues.
The rest is here.
(Update 8/16: Note a Paul Emery response below – via an email – and my response to it).
Filed under: Uncategorized
I look forward to attending this meeting.
If some parameters or an agenda of this discussion become available, please post them Jeff.
Also, I trust that George will have learned from his experience with Steve Frisch that early-sliming will not be the best approach.
Should be an eye-opening evening.
Barry Pruett was nowhere to be found at the Rotary Booth.
Wow! I was working at the Knights of Columbus booth yesterday until 6pm. Should you like to find me today, I will be at the Republican booth in the afternoon.
The evening will be presented for free.
Probably worth every cent.
Here’s the latest “insight” that Rebane contributes in his submitted article to the The Union:
It is titled “Our painfully uninformed young people”:
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2011/08/our-painfully-uninformed-young-people-addended.html
“So today’s overwhelming fraction of young enter the job markets under-skilled for the available work. Many of them instinctively become sucklings at the public trough, looking for this or that government job where skills are optional. Or they simply join the angry unemployed living on some public transfer payment. What will they do when they learn that their check may no longer be in the mail?”
Then the “painfully uninformed” Rebane adds:
“There Labor Prime Minister Cameron has attempted to sweep it all under the “pure criminality” rug, but when such criminality quickly spread from London to other big cities like Birmingham, Bristol, and Liverpool, then wiser heads know that there is something more than spontaneous hooliganism going on.”
But George, Cameron was elected from the conservative party, not labor.
FYI: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/david_cameron/index.html
When will The Union wise up to this ongoing embarrassment?
Interesting take in The Atlantic about the rioting in England (note: it was England not Great Britain, no rioting in Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales)
http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/anarchy-and-austerity-why-london-wont-be-the-last-city-to-burn/243435/
And for the “Rebanes” of the world to attempt to foist the riot onto “people of color” is laughable and contemptible on its face. After viewing the riots and looting on YouTube its laughable how positively ruddy, white and middle class caucasian most of this criminality was. Toward businesses of color primarily. It looked like a football game threw up in the heart of London. For Gods sake, Get right and get real. Kate
It behooves The Union financially to rationalize Rebane’s ignorance–just like Cameron and his conservatives were blind to the most obvious anger toward them by most of England for 1. The rot in Camerons cabinet, including the collusion, crimes and Rupert Murdoch’s blackmail tentacles and slimy apparatus reaching into the highest halls of Camerons police state and government cabinet…including hacking into dead girls voice mails illegally. 2. And while engaged in this wholesale depravity and criminal activity, Cameron and cronies then beating the whole of England with austerity measures and lavishing themselves with gilded luxury like some ancient pharoanic Tut dynasty. This rot BEGAN at the top and oiled its way down. When Englands government stops feeling “entitled” to something other than English laws and tyrannical order then the English working class might take them at their word. In other words, its not real effective to say one thing and behave in another. Rebane. Kate
Do you think Paul will ask George about:
1) his continued use of the term ‘raghead’
2) his contention that Islam is a religion of hate and thus must be resisted by American ‘patriots’
3) his contention that western civilization faces a threat the equal of the invasion of Europe by Muslims beginning in the 9th century and his comparison of modern times to the Crusades
4) his use of racial stereotypes to describe and refer to the President of the United States
5) his condoning the use of the term ‘jiggaboo’ on his web site
6) his believe in and promotion of separatism through the advancement of the concept of ‘the great divide’
7) his characterization of anyone who does not accept his radical right wing philosophy as a communist
8) his use of ‘dog whistle’ messages to relay one thing to true believers while appearing to be rational to the uninitiated
9) precisely what he means by “The right of a culture to endure and thrive in its homeland.”
Let me make one thing perfectly clear, I am an American, I do not have a Fatherland, I have a country that I have worked for and love, not a belief system that must predominate over others in order to cement my identity.
I fear that civil means ‘kid-glove’.
WE CAN NOT keep treating these people with kid gloves. They are promoting a radical agenda, that is antithetical to core American values, that will lead to the destruction and dissolution of our nation.
They are not Patriots. They do not own that word.
I hate that friggin’ automatic smiley face.
Well said.
I’d also like to know in what way(s) Rebane’s views differ from the Tea Party party line; and from Russ Steele’s views.
(i.e., does the attack on diversity extend to his peer group’s views)
I’m actually wondering why Paul would do this with George rather than a board member or officer?
Here are the board members:
Stan Meckler – President
Nancy Garcia – Vice President
Donna Burley – Secretary
Jodi Davis – Treasurer
Lou Wilson – Events
Randi Briggs – Mail/Phone
David Swift – Communications
Shelly Rose – Next Generation
Rick Briggs – Phone Tree
Sue McGuire – Volunteers
Elaine Meckler – At Large
Eddie Garcia – At Large
Jerry Cadick – At Large
My guess is that George will be able to shield the impact of his statements on the broader group, should there be a ‘macaca moment’, by stating up front that he is not speaking on behalf of the NCTPP.
In which case this is just window dressing bullshit.
I want the KVMR news director to do some old fashioned NEWS.
You know, hard news; like what is the real agenda of the TPP relative to Mark Meckler’s 40 year plan that is available on You Tube? where did the $1 million the California TPP’s get come from? What is the relationship between Don Blankenship, Massey Energy and Verizon and the TPP? How about Freedom Works?
If the Tea Party movement is all about transparency in government why do they maintain a distributed network (kind of like terrorist cells) that make it impossible to understand the relationship between the groups?
Or issues like what is their tax status and can we see their 990′s and audited financial statements? if they are a 501c-4, how can they say they are not a political organization since the intent of a c-4, or ‘social welfare organization’ is to engage in politics? if they are ‘non-partisan’ why do they only endorse Republicans? how can they say they are not a political organization when the definition of powers for a c-4 is: “501(c)(4) organizations may lobby for legislation, and unlike 501(c)(3) organizations they may also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as campaigning is not the organization’s primary purpose.” Can they honestly say that the organizations primary purpose is not campaigning? how can we see that?
Hey Tea Party, do you share George’s desire for a culturally pure homeland?
How about a little less commentary from a wanna be intellectual and some more hard friggin’ hard NEWS?
For his Friday evening show, Paul Emery interviewed Stan Meckler at the Tea Party booth at the county fair, and he also interviewed Don Conan, Chairman of the Nevada County Libertarian Party.
What most interested me was the overlap between those two parties, at least in their avowed principles such as “fiscal conservatism” and “smaller government,” opposition to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc.
This may be the basis for the Rebane/Tea Party/Steele intersection?
Well said
Paul Emery?
Here is good example of the attack on diversity found on George’s blog:
“British social scientists are quietly starting to ascribe the cause of the ongoing riots in the UK to multi-culturalism (gasp!). It seems that there is insufficient reason to suspect deprivation of this sort or that since Great Britain is one of the most socially generous and culture-compliant countries in the world. The rioters have been mostly black Africans who have attacked the shops and businesses of other ethnic groups in UK’s major cities. (The police shot one of their gang members.) In response, the target ethnics – Pakistanis, Sikhs, Turks, … – have coagulated into defensive ethno-centric vigilante platoons since police protection is sparse and late. Prime Minister Cameron and other European leaders have already gone public with their assessments of how mulikulti affects their respective countries. Tough reporting job for the leftwing press.”
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2011/08/ruminations-11aug2011.html#comments
Notice there is no reference to which ‘British social scientists’ are ascribing the cause of the rioting to multiculturalism. Notice that George discounts “deprivation” as a cause, even though numerous British sources have pointed directly at the austerity plans, and anger over them, as a cause (call me on it and I will cite sources). Notice that George implies that European leaders are ascribing these riots to race, when in reality David Cameron has been quite clear that he ascribes them to criminality. Notice that George calls protecting ones property “defensive ethno-centirc vigilante platoons”; one wonders if, as a property rights advocate, he would define white middle-class residents the same way? Notice that George ignores the fact that MANY of the rioters arrested were white, middle class, opportunists, rather than people motivated by some multicultural revenge agenda.
This is once again an example of how George engages in dog whistle racist political messages.
I know a racist, a religious bigot, and an intellectually dishonest propagandist, when I see one.
It must be hard to be so close in your raging delusions to an assassin in Norway and white, English, middle and working class “hooligans in hoodies.” It turns out racist thuggery isn’t quite as “American as Apple pie” as some in the right-wing would like to think. It seems the stink of it is all over the world and there is nothing “exceptional” about it. Kate
Here’s my best guess on the outcome of the irrelevant Ames Straw Poll today:
1) Bachmann (big winner)
2) Paul (well organized)
3) Perry (as a surprise write in making him an overnight sensation)
4) Pawlenty (effectively killing him)
5) Cain (who cares)
6) Romney (Iowa does not matter)
7) Santorum (effectively killing him)
8: Gingrich (effectively killing him)
9) Huntsman (Iowa does not matter)
10) McCotter (he’s dead already but he hangs on to continue the joke)
Steven,
I think you are close, but my guy will beat Bachmann in the end.
John
Which guy is that?
Must be Paul!
Stoos is picking Paul. He is an unknown quantity for the voters, and something completely different, and if the economy really tanks before the conventions, I’d say he has a good shot.
Good call Steve! Latest reports are showing Bachmann the big winner.
(Is this a great country or what!)
“Michele Bachmann wins the Iowa straw poll; Ron Paul finishes second”
http://www.cnn.com/
Yeah, I was kind of wrong on the second tier candidates though. I thought Perry would do better as a write in.
Michele Bachmann is featured in the latest New Yorker magazine. Yikes!
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_lizza?currentPage=all
“Bachmann belongs to a generation of Christian conservatives whose views have been shaped by institutions, tracts, and leaders not commonly known to secular Americans, or even to most Christians. Her campaign is going to be a conversation about a set of beliefs more extreme than those of any American politician of her stature, including Sarah Palin, to whom she is inevitably compared. Bachmann said in 2004 that being gay is ‘personal enslavement,’ and that, if same-sex marriage were legalized, ‘little children will be forced to learn that homosexuality is normal and natural and that perhaps they should try it.’ Speaking about gay-rights activists, that same year, she said, ‘It is our children that is the prize for this community.’ She believes that evolution is a theory that has ‘never been proven,’ and that intelligent design should be taught in schools.”
I am very glad she is running. It will be interesting to learn who supports her around here.
Michael,
Perhaps she is a bit of a prophet since California law now requires teaching what she said!
Also, are you suggesting that the theory of evolution is now a fact that has been proven? I guess I missed a few of those scientific journals.
John
Sorry John, I’m not going there with you.
My fingers just told me that it would be a waste of typing energy, and I had to agree with them.
Smart guys, my fingers.
Michael, please tell where in the California State Education Standards we have to teach anything she said?
The above comment was addressed to John Stoos, not Michael Anderson, talking with wife while typing, sorry.
Let’s hear it for “teaching both sides” of the “debate:”
* Flat earthers and round earthers
* Big Enders and Little Enders (hat tip to Jonathan Swift)
* Creationists — whoops, Intelligence Designers — and Evolutioners
* Climate change deniers and climate change affirmers
* …
It isn’t really ‘both ends of the debate’ when the overwhelming majority of the evidence is on one side; except for the Blefuscans, who were clearly right from my former experience as a chef.
More Kooky News from Kooky Land:
Frank Bruni, reporting from Iowa for the New York Times:
“Santorum was saying that when you speak of two men or two women as married, you indulge in a fiction. An impossibility. ‘This is a napkin,’ he announced in an angry voice, abruptly ripping one from a dispenser and holding it high. ‘I can call this napkin a paper towel. But it is a napkin. Why? Because it is what it is.’
So while someone might assert that ‘marriage could be between fathers and daughters,’ he added, ‘It doesn’t make it marriage.’ Agreed. It makes it a crime, and to mention that in the same breath as same-sex couples is nothing short of appalling.”
Does Senator “Spreading” (http://blog.spreadingsantorum.com/ Note: NSFW) need a 5150? Inquiring minds want to know.
Gunfight at the Horseman’s Corral.
So what exactly are they putting in that fried butter on a stick or have they all started smoking the tea rather than drinking it? Kate
John, God is coming:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/keachie/6039015491/in/photostream/lightbox/
He was last sighted over North San Juan.
If Bachman wins the nomination, she will be an even bigger joke than Palin, for 65% of the American populace. Landslide to the Dems.
She is very well dressed though…and Marcus’s black pantsuit was very pretty and slimming…Kate
And the crazy one wins by a march hare…
Kate
You mean the one at Alice’s Tea Party?
So does anyone know where and when the two conventions will be held?…and, more interestingly, where the tea party and libertarians will land…Kate
Dems are in Charlotte N.C., Reps are in Tampa FL.
I knew that, I just couldn’t remember!
John
I had to look it up. My steel trap is rusty.
Michelle Bachman was quite deft in her responses to media this morning. She certainly is poised and largely unflappable, but is not really getting the hard ball questions yet.
Pawlenty, making a very pragmatic decision, is out.
I wonder what is up with Herb Cain’s sunglasses? I did a little search and found that he wore sunglasses for his announcement speech as well, and shows up at almost every event with sunglasses. He did an interview a few weeks ago where he bungled the ‘right of return’ in Palestine question, demonstrating his lack of depth on foreign policy, and wore sunglasses. When asked about it, he said he did not know it was going to be so bright and he wears polarized glasses.
There is something about not being able to see someones eyes while they are being interviewed on national television claiming 5th place is just great that does not inspire confidence.
Looks like the battle to be the ‘anti-Romney’ is down to Bachman, Perry and Paul.
Nice ground for the Republican party to begin to engage in its internecine fight for its soul.
Steven,
I would also choose the same four candidates as the major players in the coming months.
John
John, what I find amazing is that it really is a fight to be the anti-Romney.
Romney, who would have been considered conservative 20 years ago, represents the moderate wing of the Republican party and the other 3 the conservative (or Tea) wing.
This despite the fact that many of the policies supported by the conservative wing are clearly out of step with the American people. On the environment and climate, debt vs. jobs (which is actually a false choice, it should be job creation and debt reduction), social issues like abortion and civil rights (particularly for homosexuals), the role of government, and more, the conservative wing of the Republican party is propelled more by energy and high quality organizing skills than compatibility with the expressed values of American voters.
That cannot last forever; more important it is almost impossible to maintain through multiple electoral cycles. Already members of the Tea Party caucus in the House are splitting over fiscal issues, with many joining the Republican establishment.
It really seems to me that this fight between moderate and conservative in the Republican party runs the risk of pulling the party so far to the right that it is impossible to win a national election.
Look at the most recent Gallup poll on generic congressional voting: 51% prefer a Democrat compared to 44% preferring a Republican. Before the 2010 mid-terms Republicans enjoyed a 10 point spread.
By a 2:1 margin voters said a Tea Party endorsement actually had a negative impact on their voting preference. But most important Independents are less likely to vote from a Tea Party endorsed candidate by more than 10 points, 38% saying less likely versus 25% more likely (the remainder expressing no impact).
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148964/Democrats-Enjoy-Slight-Edge-2012-Congressional-Ballot.aspx
Looking at the Republican primary schedule it bodes well for the Democrats, who have everything to gain from internecine warfare in the Republican party; with a likely split in the primaries and caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire, a conservative win in South Carolina, a big fight in Florida where the Tea Party is increasing disfavored due to the behavior of Governor Rick Scott, and then a probable big split on super Tuesday, where the big delegations favor a moderate.
We could easily see a Republican race that comes down to the end of the schedule rather than being over early; entirely dependent on Romney winning New Hampshire.
As an at times purely wonky political observer, this is going to one of the most fascinating election years in recent history.
Steven,
For obvious reasons I do not have the time this morning for the kind of response this post deserves: But here are a couple of quick thoughts.
IF you go back twenty years as you suggest both Romney and Perry were what we could consider liberals today: Mitt running to the left of Kennedy and Perry as the Texas chair for Gore in 1988. Both have obviously changed down through the years and I think most conservatives believe that Mitt has been less than honest with his shifts. The jury is still out on Perry.
If we took the various issues that you mention, I think all of them, even the abortion question, has the voting public on the conservative side, but when you put the Republican label on them they tank: I content that this is more the fault of the “stupid” party than the issues themselves!
John
John, when I referred to Romney and Perry’s political orientation on the current scale I was referring to their ideas, not the men. Romney’s currently stated ideas would have been considered conservative 20 years ago.
As far as your contention that the voting public is on the ‘conservative side’, that is anti-abortion, I cite:
Gallup Poll. May 5-8, 2011. N=1,018 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 4.
“Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?”
Legal: 27%
Sometimes legal: 50%
Illegal 22%
I could cite about 30 other polls, but don’t see the point.
But I do agree with you that, regardless of the fact the some of my best
friends are Republicans, they are “the stupid party”.
Steven,
I would grant that abortion is our toughest issue, but even there it is hard to say the public is all for it.
I bet you don’t care for the rest of M. Stanton Evans’ quote on the political parties
John
My comment was that the Republiban party was clearly ‘out of step’ with the American people on abortion, not that they were ‘all for it’, which is what the most recent polling I cited would indicate.
I believe the remainder of the Evan’s quote is that the Democrats are the ‘evil’ party; which I believe is illustrative of how conservatives would like to frame this debate.
I am not a Democrat, although I usually vote as one, reserving my dissenting votes for the occasional Republican or Green who makes sense, like Ben Emery.
I believe a more accurate characterization is that both the Republicans and theDemocrats can be both stupid and evil; which is why I prefer to pursue pragmatism, and let the partisan chips fall where they may.
I would certainly tend to agree with your last paragraph, though as your Congressman often said after using that quote, he never had to tell folks which was which.
On the issue of abortion: What do you think the percentages would be IF the question were asked this way:
Which of the following statements would reflect your personal views on the question of abortion?
1) Abortions should be legal through all nine months of pregnancy for any reason and government funds should be available to those who cannot afford to have the procedure.
2) Abortions should be illegal in all cases except where the mother’s life is in imminent danger from the pregnancy.
Would your views be represented by #1, #2 or neither?
A good survey would then ask a follow-up question about which position is closer to their personal views.
Would this not be a more honest survey since number one represents current law and the position of the President and number two represents the Biblical position which is considered extreme.
John
Rick Perry: Texan Dubya deux deux…brought to you by Exxon. Kate
Kate,
I think you meant Valero.
John
You say Valero, I say Tesaro…Fukishima, whatever. Corporations aren’t people John. But they sure bought themselves one in the black hole of cash named Perry…Kate
Perry?
That guy has the same chance as Richard Simmons (dressed in his red & white striped workout suit) of being nominated for VP!
Do I need, or want a guy to run this country who’s platform is built on religious principles?
I want someone who can run this country and create jobs. We don’t need no-stinking-pope, we need someone who can fix the economy and create jobs!
I wish Obama would use all of the manners that are still out there including charging all of the companies and financial institutions that are stockpiling money in the Federal reserve.
We need money spread out to businesses that cannot (right now) get these loans, as these businesses are the backbone of our economy.
Brad,
The principles that my candidate is running on are also built religious foundations so I think it is appropriate to ask you a question, as serious one.
While I can agree that we don’t want a president who thinks or acts as if he is the Pope, how can a president who does not champion God as our true sovereign, the right to life, property rights and the application of laws against theft, fraud [bearing false witness] and coveting create an atmosphere that would encourage job creation?
We have not had a president who even approaches this standard since the early 1920′s so my obvious follow-up question will be how are we doing on that jobs and prosperity front?
John
Which god are you talking about John?
Let’s see in our country there’s Budda, Allah, Bagwaan, Elohim, Jesus (son of god) and there are 101 others on this list of religious figures….
So many gods, so many more very creative stories, and not one of these “gods” us supported by any type of scientific proof that they exist… Why is that?
One of my favorite quotes that seem applicable here:
So what’s more likely? That an all-powerful, mysterious God created the Universe, and decided not to give any proof of his existence? Or, that He simply doesn’t exist at all, and that we created Him, so that we wouldn’t have to feel so small and alone?
As someone who has a scientific background, I tend to beleive the later…..
Brad,
There is only one Lord of lords and King of kings who has not been silent. And it is interesting that in His revelation, the Bible, He never ignores or those hundreds of idols that we have created. You would find Isaiah chapters 40-44 a good primer to see why you would be wise to see that God is the only God and there are no others.
Otherwise you are like the man pictured there who with all of his science does great things with half of the wood that he harvested and then bows down and worships the other half.
John
John, so who exactly gave your god the title of Lord of lords and King of kings?
I find it hard to beleive that the following religious groups would take this talk seriously and that’s the problem as this country may have been started by people who beleived the Christian faith, but it’s not the “only game in town anymore.”
If you look historically the problems that the Islamic faith is now having with radial fundimentalism, these are the same problems that the Christian faith had a couple hundred years ago.
Islam: 1.5 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha’i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 4 million
Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
Tenrikyo: 2 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
Scientology: 500 thousand
Brad,
You forgot the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans and pretty much all the communists: They have past into the dust bin of history and Jesus is still on His throne.
There are still hundreds of millions of men in this world [many are in the various groups that you mentioned] who think that they are far superior to women: Treating the even a chattel property in some cases.
Does that prevent you and I from believing that men and women are equal and even more importantly does that mean such a thing could not be true?
As for the title: That is His title because that is what He is no matter what any of His creatures might think.
John
Stoos, those are living breathing members of non mainstream Christian churches who are alive today. Nothing was forgotten.
I think Brad, Doug and J Cutter are obliquely bringing up another interesting point. There is a pretty solid base of mainstream Christian activists and voters that John’s strongly held, but clearly radical, Christian theology does not talk to. Even amongst committed Christians John’s views on social issues are on the radical fringes of the church.
http://religions.pewforum.org/
Looking at the PEW study on religion and American Society, it is amazing that atheists and agnostics actually know more about religion and religious belief than evangelical Protestants do, and that Mormons and Jews score higher than Protestants do.
Although America remains a largely religious country, the number of atheists and agnostics is growing; and the number of people participating in religion who would consider themselves moderate to liberal within their chosen faiths is growing.
I think I know what it is about John’s stated opinions that makes me uncomfortable, it is the implication that religious belief should have any role in governing a secular nation that values freedom of religion and from religion.
J Cutter brings up a salient point, and perhaps one that many of us have overlooked; if a man brings up the idea that “there is only one Lord of Lords and King of Kings” and that that belief should have any preferred place in ruling a secular nation, then their religious belief, and its radicalism, is fair game.
Steven,
Good information as usual! Your conclusion is the proper one: Whether Jesus is who He claims to be does make a difference and it has made those in power nervous since the Roman Empire.
However, IF you go back and read my first post to Brad that raised all of this discussion, I did say that we don’t want the President to be the Pope. There are proper roles for the state and the church and confusing them has caused no end of trouble down through history. My simple point is that neither can ignore the fact that Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
That means I should question a civil authority who wants to build a foundation of civil government on any other ground, secular or religious. I would argue that both the French revolutionaries and Muslim radicals produced the same results for the same reason from seemingly opposite views.
It also means that I should question much of what the Pope and other Christian leaders are doing when they too wonder from God’s Word which is the only standard by which to judge such things. Again you could look at the Catholic inquisition and the crazy Baptists in Kansas doing very similar things for seemingly opposite reasons.
Hope this makes sense because it is early!
John
“My simple point is that neither can ignore the fact that Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
That means I should question a civil authority who wants to build a foundation of civil government on any other ground, secular or religious.”
That sure sounds like a theocracy to me. I can think of a lot of good reasons to question government, but the sovereignty of the savior is not one of them in a secular state.
Steven,
Now we come down to definitions: IF by theocracy you mean a civil government run by the church, as most use it today, I could not be more against it. If you mean a civil government that acknowledges Jesus as the ultimate sovereign in the sense given in Psalm 2, then I am all for it.
If by secular you mean a nation like our own that simply acknowledges the Biblical principles but not Jesus, there can be many freedoms under such liberty, but a lot of tension, as we see on this list. As with most nations, things will be in flux and the question is what direction is it moving?
IF however, you mean secular in the tradition of the French or Russian revolutions who rejected the Bible completely then you will have little tension and no freedom with people living under the tyranny of man’s law..
John
By theocracy I mean not just a state run by the church, but also a state or ruler that recognizes in any way ruling with divine guidance because by recognizing any divine guidance one elevates the clergy the chosen church or philosophy of the chosen religion as supreme.
Here is a link to Psalm 2:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+2&version=NIV
To me. Psalm 2 proposes a theocratic state, because it requires the state to serve the Lord, and is thus both unconstitutional and theocratic.
I believe this position shows how out of step you are with the mainstream of Christianity, and fundamental American values, as described by our founders.
I’ve not heard such extreme rw, tea party, fundy, dominionist, untrue hogwash in all my born days. This kind of Elmer Gantry Norquist candy coated crap is ALL about the dollar bill as God. If Christ came back as a black, homeless carpenter all of these wackadoodles wouldn’t cross the street for him. Jesus himself wouldn’t and Didn’t agree with this whacko twaddle so don’t delude yourself preacher man. Kate
Kate,
Surely you can see that unless we obey the two great commands: To love God and our neighbor, that we can never really help the poor and needy.
That is all I have said above.
John
No, John. The rw extremist fundamental dominionists need to realize that Jesus did not want them to financially, politically, sociologically and religiously take over the world…that was Hitler or the Borgias or Bin Ladin. They need to step off and check their power crazy. Leave the second coming to Him…He’s got that. Kate
Kate,
Again, I said nothing about taking over the world, it already belongs to Jesus.
What I am talking about is what He expects us to do and since one of His major priorities is helping the poor and helpless perhaps you should pay attention to ALL that the Bible has to say.
John
That’s the “jesus” with basically no historical proof of actually having existed?
The crap that you spout as facts are just that: crap.
Earth and any of its inhabitants don’t belong to any individual – and never will.
But, thanks for being a textbook example of all that is wrong with fundamentalist thought and behavior.
It’s too bad that sometimes this board gets highjacked and degrades to these types of discussions.
Peter,
Just to be clear, I never said that the earth or any of its inhabitants belong to any “individual.”
As for that evidence I did a message on that a few weeks ago, so you can check it out there if you are interested so Chris won’t think I am trying to hijack the list.
John
John, You’re full of manure: You just posted above that the world “belongs to Jesus.” (Check your 1:35 p.m. post)
Then you go on to post that you never said the Earth belongs to any individual. (at 3:46 p.m.)
You are bush league liar and charlatan.
Jeff – Continued allowance of John to hijack this blog has detracted, rather than enhanced, the “dialogue.”
Echoing my earlier sentiments…
It was written off as ‘personal attack’ by the more blindly sensitive when, as a relative newcomer here, I raised Stoos’ record in retort to his dogmatic approach to all things – but every bit I stand behind – including that about compensation for participation on this blog (which can obviously be sidestepped through semantics, as Stoos did).
His ideology is a real danger, so much that even the most extreme in the relevant political world have felt need to distance from his belief system that relies on the born again reformist (read radicalized) biblical distortions by those, including the founders of his ‘church’, that people in the know consider hate groups.
I did alright ignoring him for a bit, but he dominates the threads so often with the drivel that I just could not take it; to the point now that I have lost all interest in engaging because I know my search for reasoned logic will devolve into the simplistic exploitation of faith, spun to fairy tale by the repentant sinner as justification for their relevancy.
Too bad, because I came around to really flesh out issues impacting my life and relative to our shared experience, but this spoils that.
J Cutter & Steven,
I would remind you that the Lord does say, “come let us reason together” so perhaps you are not up for the dialog.
Peter’s cheap shot is a good example: I suspect that he knows his Bible well enough to know that Jesus claimed to be the Incarnate Son of God which means that He is no mere “individual” in the sense that he was using the term to accuse me of a position that I do not hold.
John
Well, perhaps if we had not suppressed the alternative history of Jesus at the council of Nicea we could point to some texts to discount the idea that Jesus was not an individual 8)
J, I hope you will post more often. If you come to flesh out issues impacting your life I think the posters here are thoughtful enough that they can ignore of topic sidetracks and focus on your issues. Perhaps you will have to hold our feet to the ‘topic’ fire on occasion.
I think Paul Emery (because he’s a genuinely good human being) can’t see how evil and hateful the Tea Party, Rebane and his crowd really are.
There is a “Great Divide” and it exists because the right wing has created it and continues to nurture its nefarious growth.
But it isn’t just the Tea Party that’s getting “pissed off”.
There’s a whole group of folks that are really angry as well and they might not be as generous as Paul is.
Mike,
I was not invited so I don’t know how diverse they really are!
However, with this new “power” group having 8 views I am trembling.
John
That’s just a video that nobody really knows exists, John.
The real issue is what’s happening on the streets.
Just to score keep on this thread. Total number of posts as of 4:56, 8/15.
Steve Frisch 15
John Stoos 14
Kate 11
Kiechie 9
Michael Anderson 5
Brad Glasse 3
Jeff Pelline
Anna Haynes
Don Pelton
Peter Barry 2
Steve Willer 1
cb 1 (now 2)
Steve Frisch had 6 comments that were talking points (a thought on the topic). All of JS’s posts are responses to someone else. 6 of JS’s posts reference religion. I count 20 posts responding to JS. Hijacking?
Chris,
I prefer to just leave thoughful posts, and not just put up a response to support my stupidity! LOL!!!!
Like many of us Paul is all over the map on issues. Most people do not fit 100% into a right or left grouping, myself included. Within my little correspondence with Mr Rebane he seems to be more ingrained ideologue which isn’t always a bad thing but I do have an issue with inability to see how his positions and some of his commentary aren’t discriminatory in nature. He seems to be a straight forward individual so I kind of want to believe him when he says he doesn’t think his remarks are racist or classist. This doesn’t mean they are not but that he truly believes the general theme of his positions are justified.
It should be interesting meeting
With all due respect Ben, I think George is very smart, he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be received, thus he harbors the most dangerous kind of prejudice, prejudice shielded below a veneer of civilization.
Steve,
I know George is smart but I also know some people truly believe in what they are saying, which blinds them to the bigger picture. I think Anders Behring Breivik in Olso was totally misguided and misinformed but truly thought he was acting in what was good for the country not out of fear and hatred. I’m not putting George in that category but the written message between the two are very similar.
Since you have done something along these lines with George before I value your judgment on his character. Deep down I probably would agree with you but I have a softspot for believing in peoples humanity before their political leanings. I grew up almost every summer living with party line republicans and know their political alliances do not show their willingness to help anyone in a time of need, including those from India who follow the religion of Hinduism despite their endless racist rants about the people and the religion. I don’t have any real experiences with George to allow me to not believe in his humanity first.
All we know of a person is what they say and how they act. When a man uses racist and bigoted rhetoric, serially insults and devalues the ideas and opinions of others, and dishonestly twists information to influence the ideas of others, he is probably a racist, bigot, egoist, and propagandist.
Steve,
As I said before; I respect your opinion because you have gone one on one publicly with Mr Rebane. I only heard a couple of minutes of that debate, I was coaching a game down in Sacramento area that night and caught the last few minutes driving home. I know if someone purposely breaks the agreed upon ground rules or is a bully I have zero tolerance for it. It sounds like that is exactly what happened. I have the personality to treat others the way they treat me. So far George has been cordial with me. On his blog I have a different approach at corresponding with him. I mainly make observations and ask questions when directly interacting with George. With the others I go more into debate mode. The best way to beat those like George is to let them beat themselves, as I said above he is an ingrained ideologue no matter what evidence is put in front of him. He is eager to show that he is the smartest guy in the room. He has put out a couple of statements to me that I think he wishes he could retract. Since then he has stopped interacting in depth with me on almost any issue.
I post this graph all the time and watch how people interpret the causes. http://z.about.com/d/uspolitics/1/0/m/G/096.png
Hmmmm….Chris I certainly share your desire for points to be on topic, but I think we have been wandering a bit with Jeff taking a short breather. I’m sure he would have posted on the Iowa straw poll, and the fallout.
I do agree that John kind of shifted to abortion. I was merely bringing abortion up as an example of how the Tea Party, and by extension its neglected child the Republican party, is out of touch with the ‘real’ America.
Steven,
You may be misreading my point. I’m defending you.
You posted early and often on the topic of the post. JS jumps in a day late, starts arguing with everyone and then starts throwing in biblical references. He does this on almost every thread.
Then, the rest of the thread is people arguing with him. It’s tiring, beyond productive, and may ultimately bring this board down if it’s not curtailed.
As they say, “don’t feed the trolls”! Which IMO JS is.
I completely agree with Peter Barry. Just because he’s polite doesn’t make him a valuable member of this, or any other board. He is intellectually void and dishonest. Why he is held in regard, here, is beyond me.
Hmmm….again. I appreciate the defense.
I tire rapidly of the religious banter. There is no reasoning with faith.
Chris,
Just so you know, I am not a troll, nor on Congressman McClintock’s payroll as others have suggested.
I have expressed my appreciation to Jeff for how he handles the discussions on this blog and it is the only one that I have ever participated in with more than an occasional comment.
If Jeff expresses a concern about the number or content of my posts I will be all ears.
As I have said a few times, I enjoy this blog, I have certainly been challenged and learned a few things and trust that I have at least given folks something to think about at times.
John
Can I just say that I think (for at least some of you) this kinda sounds like a bunch of academics analyzing an interesting theoretical concept or perhaps even dissecting an insect. However there are actually millions of people in the US that are getting stomped out of existence by the policies the Rebanes of the world are promulgating and the racism they are fomenting.
While I know that many of you are good folks who mean well, I sometimes don’t think you get the real life consequences of what these folks are doing, because you’re actually kinda insulated from the head of the spear.
Sorry for the rant.
I agree Mike. Norway wasn’t “theoretical”…Rebane’s kind of rhetorical anger, racism, and revisionist history propaganda has real world life or death consequences. Every day. Employment, Housing, medical care, never mind paranoid nuts with guns–rural and urban. There’s nothing polite or “humane” about it. Kate
Michelle Bachman’s new found status as a Presidential candidate intrigues me:
It should be like the scene in which Arnie lights the aviation fuel leaking from the 747 as it rolls down the runway to take off….and then explode.
All of which, as Americans, should be responded to with a collective “face palm”, “back of the hand” and a resounding “Hell No” that can be heard from sea to shining sea…Kate
Perhaps Paul can ask george whether he thinks Ben Bernanke is guilty of treason or if the President of the United States “loves” America.
http://news.yahoo.com/rick-perry-wants-ugly-ben-bernake-053900247.html
Just Say No to the dominionist “Pope Perry” or “Bishop Bachmann”. Leave the papacy to the Vatican, thanks…
Kate
Hello,
Could we stick to the topic at hand.
Thanks.
BTW, while I was on vacation, Paul Emery sent me an email stating:
“I would appreciate it if you would set the record straight that I am appearing as an individual at the Tea Party event and that my appearance has nothing to do with and was never intended to be associated with KVMR.”
“Nothing to do with and was never intended to be associated with KVMR”? Then why did you let them bill you as “the news director of KVMR?” I asked. You could have asked them to bill you as an individual (resident of Nevada City, e.g.) or as a music producer, which also is your occupation, for that matter.
•I invited Paul to make his comment here, but he declined.
•I also told him that if he wanted to be seen as appearing as an “individual,” then his quibble was with the tea party for allowing himself to be billed as “KVMR news director” and that he should be held accountable for saying it was “OK.” I also inquired as to KVMR’s policy for its journalists to be appearing at a political event.
•Though I posted his email here, I notice that the tea party has not clarified anything about Paul’s involvement in this meeting.
It still reads ” Paul Emery (KVMR News Director) & George Rebane (Systems Scientist and Conservative Commentator) meet for a civil discussion of today’s issues.
NO CHARGE — ALL POLITICAL PERSUASIONS WELCOME!”
http://nctpp.org/5-lunch/
I don’t see how Paul can take a pass here. He and KVMR have given Rebane a platform and their relationship has been publicly established. Paul will not be perceived as an ‘individual’ and that perception is the reality.
Of the Tea Party Patriots Steven Frisch says, “They are not Patriots. They do not own that word.” Well Steven, they’re the ones that rose up and made us realize that our “Bill of Rights” (human rights) is the one thing capable of bringing all Americans together…again. Thousands of people gave their lives to make freedom possible, and the Tea Party Patriots are reminding us of how important it is. Consequently, they’re the ones now being stoned and spit on by the political status quo, just as Jesus Christ and all the human rights advocates have always been treated.
Thanks “Bonnie M.,” but please sign your full name next time.
Bonnie, it’s really nice that the one thing capable of bringing you TPP folks “all together” is the funding by the historically largest fined United States enviromental polluters! It’s so “American” that you can all toot your horns because you use corporate money from such a respected pair! It this was such a respected group then how come you guys are driving their program?
No matter how hard you all want to give yourself a little “pat on the back”, you’re all so disillusioned with what the reality of this situation actually is….
Face it, the TPP is a group of Americans (not all TPP members) who are upset with the fact that they’ve had a really good time for the past 20+ years, and now they (with the rest of us) are being asked to pay for that party!
Let’s leave the religious wackiness out of these discussions as that’s always what people who have nothing else to fall back on. Next time try to fall back on what you stand for and what you’ve done!
Let’s look at what the TPP has done in possibly raising the Federal Rates, which will most likely cost the Federal government $500 billion dollars (but you guys want to “save us all money” right?).
Good ideas, but it seems to us that excuting these “good idea’s” seems to be problematic!
Brad,
This post makes almost no sense or at best is very confusing.
Are you saying the Tea Party are all the corporate whores who have gamed the system for the past twenty years, or are they those who are opposed to such things?
You say that we must leave religious “wackiness” out of the discussion but then you ask Bonnie to look to what she stands for?
And finally, you blame the group that wanted deficit reduction, which is what the ratings agencies wanted to prevent a down-grade, for the down-grade: How does that compute???
John
John, I think you need to check you facts, Standard and Poor’s has clearly stated that the downgrade was a result of frozen governance, not the debt itself. It was a result on not being able to reach an agreement to reduce the debt.
http://nationaljournal.com/economy/text-s-p-press-release-announcing-downgrade-20110806?page=1
President Obama put a $4 Trillion debt reduction plan on the table, and Republicans rejected it because it would have included a 4:1 cuts to taxes margin.
Standard and Poor’s reduced our bond rating because Republicans refused to let the top 5% of wage earners in America to go back to a pre 9-11 tax rate.
Steven,
Taking your “fact-checks” just a bit deeper, it was the Democrats who revolted over the suggested reforms in the social programs and the ratings agencies are concerned about the deficits NOT the current debt level.
John
John,
Direct quote from S & P
“We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.”
I think the raised hands of every Republican candidate for President against a 10:1 ratio of cuts to taxes says it all.
Well Bonnie, I have been a stalwart believer in and defender of human rights and our bill of rights my entire life. A bunch of grown men wearing Paul Revere costumes and armchair patriots playing with photoshop to make the President of the United States look like a pic-a-ninny are not going to rile my blood and cause me to rediscover a history I have neither ever forgotten, nor ever stopped studying. I have never needed to be reminded of what it means to be an American.
And if you think this false patriot movement is bringing ‘all Americans’ together again’ you are not just sadly mistaken, I suspect you are stubbornly and proudly ignorant.
The House of Representatives, flooded with their new vocal minority of Tea People, is enjoying its lowest popularity amongst American citizens in its recent history. That is largely because the obstructionist tactics and lack of respect for democratic institutions, the creation of our founders, that the Tea caucus represents, has ground governance on our country to a halt.
That gives rise the the seminal question, who is the Tea Party really? What do they believe, while they are saying they are the party of small government and less taxes?
A recent study by the PEW research center shows us pretty clearly:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1903/tea-party-movement-religion-social-issues-conservative-christian
“A new analysis by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life finds that Tea Party supporters tend to have conservative opinions not just about economic matters, but also about social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. In addition, they are much more likely than registered voters as a whole to say that their religion is the most important factor in determining their opinions on these social issues. And they draw disproportionate support from the ranks of white evangelical Protestants.”
I will let you, and readers, dig into the other findings of the study; that Tea People are white, Protestant, evangelical, anti-immigrant, social conservatives who want to drown government in the bathtub, who are willing to hide behind the skirts of Mark Meckler’s claim to be a patriot movement.
As far as fighting and dying, you don’t have me there either; members of my own family fought and died for this country, first in the Civil war to preserve the Union, then in WWI were my grandfather proudly served our country and was wounded in action, and in WWII where one members served in North Africa and Italy and one lost his life on Tarawa. Even today members of my family have done multiple tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, and serve very high in the the US Navy. My German immigrant American family has seen its share of fighting, and dying, and living, and working and leaving a legacy for its children.
Finally, I have never spat on anyone in my life; but I will call an unpatriotic, ignorant, revisionist, know-nothing, xenophobic movement exactly what it is.
Your movement is not going to cow Americans into laying down for the right wing, corporatist, libertarian revolution you are advancing. We will resist you every step of the way.
By comparing your movement to Christ, I think you have finally ht at the nub of who the Tea Party really is. While claiming to be bi-partisan, or non-partisan, the Tea Party is really a stalking horse for an evangelical led seizure of our secular state and a transition to a theocracy, led by slicked back hooligans, like Michele Bachman and Rick Perry.
I am totally with Brad Glasse here: you have enjoyed a big party for 30 years. The party is over. Its time to pay the piper, and your backers are going to have to pay their fair share; perhaps not in this election, but soon, and in full. If not, you will tear this country that we all love down.
That is why I call you un-patriotic and un-American; you serially seek to shift the burden of pain on those less fortunate. That is antithetical to American values. You philosophy, madame, is the problem, not the solution.
Steven,
You really should attend some of the larger Tea Party gatherings and try giving that speech: It would be fun to see the reaction.
I am thankful that these folks are open to the concerns that I have about the social issues rather than just being secular libertarians like Mr. Greenspan, but I can assure you that they are not a front group for the Evangelical Right. LOL
John
They are not a front group, they ARE the evangelical right, in sheep’s clothing.
I will debate the NCTPP any day. Of course I require a fair venue, fair process, and an official position on their part, not an informal sit down with green tea and canned questions.
And even though he is much more polished than I could ever hope to be in the ways of debate, I would take Meckler on in a heartbeat. No one is really asking the Tea Party the tough questions. We have the head of a national movement in our county and our media is prostrate it its feet. It makes me sick.
Well I’m sure, John, that if Steve did attend such a rally, and did attempt to give that speech, all the members of the Tea Party would listen respectfully and quietly until he had finished,….. right?
Steven,
You would really lose that debate if you tried to have it with Mark.
Yes, he might get interrupted because the claims are so outlandish, but I would hope they would be polite and hear him out.
John
“so outlandish” interesting choice of phrase…
Have you forgotten, “This land is your land, this land is my land, from California, to the New York island…” ?
The Tea Party no more “owns” the USA than the Chrysler Corporation owns Plymouth Rock.
John, you missed my point: I know Mr. Meckler is both quite intelligent and quite polished, but I would be willing to lose that debate to get our community talking about the ISSUES that the Tea Party stands for.
By the way, did you read the PEW study? Outlandish? I could come up with dozens of connections between the Tea Party and corporate and evangelical advocacy groups.
Face it John, the Tea Party is just a new wing of the Republican Party, hiding behind their 501 c 4 status to engage in politics without transparency.
By the way, can you name one Democratic or Independent member of the Senate or House Tea Party caucuses?
So now I get it… “Tea Party Patriots” and “Jesus Christ” are the same… as are “human rights advocates”.
Yikes!
Steve,
Just because they are all persecuted does not mean they are all the same, just that they are all persecuted.
You still have to ask yourself that important question when it comes to human rights: Are you more French & Russian or English and American?
I know which side most of the Tea Party folks are on: Which side are you on?
John
On a planet that is rOund, many, many sides are possible.
Tea Party: Special, SPECIAL Victims Unit…
Kate
Kate,
Here is one for you to think about: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/08/16/is-karl-rove-afraid-of-being-marginalized/
Is the enemy of your enemy your friend?
John
Funny how the current crop of GOP snakes-in- the-grass sound like Rupie and Droopie Murdoch & Co. when confronted with the cold, hard facts. Their small “integrity muscle” is showing. So is Koch’s and Rove’s…while Perry’s seems to be flappin in the wind. Kate
Come on Steve, let’s leave any type of religious refernce out otherwise John will have another 20+ posting tyrade trying to justify some of his interesting perspectives.
Brad,
You know that I don’t like religion! Who else on this list has recommended this book: http://www.amazon.com/Against-Christianity-Peter-J-Leithart/dp/1591280060
John
Ok, so that’s like me recommending a book written by Thomas Friendman…..
Brad,
If I posted an article that unfairly disparaged this man’s work or claimed that he said things he had not said, then yes it would be very appropriate for you to make such a suggestion and if I just continued to make those unfair attacks without checking the facts, then folks would know what kind of person I really was.
john
John, I honor your commitment to be here and discussing these issues with us, as most people (of the somewhat conservative persuation) do not take well to the banter from us (as we’ve all be called the Ultra liberal with Jerry Garcia Tye dyed T-shirts types who want peace, flowers and flying Unicorns. (My only association with Jerry Garcia is that I like his Ice Cream from Ben & Jerrys – LOL).
Thanks and I enjoy the chance to discuss things with you and get your incite on issues.
The problem is that none of the candidates, including Ron Paul, or the sitting President are dealing with the new reality of sky high energy prices, an expanding global population, a much more educated global population, such that 1st world goods are readily made at 3rd world prices in 3rd world places, and that this is destroying the standards of living, those in the first world, have become used to.
From the standpoint of the 1st world überrich, they are now saddled with surplus useless whiney home populations, who have the audacity to no longer be able to afford the goods the überrich have gone to the trouble of having made so cheaply abroad. “Must sell to third world employees instead, not too much of a problem, better beef up our gated communities. Do we have a plan for the National Guard to be employed “protecting” them?” This quote is from a figment of my imagination, and not GG.
From the standpoint of the former middle and working classes, the überrich are stealing the heritage and defense secrets of the nation, and shipping them willy-nilly abroad, and hoarding all the profits, as they reduce the USA economy to shambles. The decisions to export the economy lock, stock, and factory plans and patents abroad, were made in the boardrooms of America’s corporations, not by Union leaders or the rank and file.
As soon as the Chinese figure out how to track and destroy the nuke missile subs, the USA is over. No defense works forever. Fort Point fell to the rifled round, the Maginot Line to the maneuverable tank, Japan’s Kamakazi’s to the nuke bomb, and so on.
How soon will it be before China lands a man/woman on Mars? The überrich have sold out the country for the next quarter’s profits, and sadly lack vision and will to provide the “guidance” ascribed to them by so many of those who tout their leadership of the Republic.
Douglas Keachie, August 2011
One final comment, from highly respected researchers, showing the Tea Party is not only not what they say they are, they are damn proud of it :
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-tea-party.html?_r=1
Get a load of the hateful tone of this post:
http://sierradragonsbreathe.blogspot.com/2011/08/maxine-waters-bloviator-supreme-why.html
Without even linking there I know that Todd felt the heat from Maxine’s suggested vacation spot. Is there a special cleaning solution for removing brain tissue from the underside of patio umbrella?
Doug, I think it’s sold undern the brand name “Righty Tiddy Cleaner”
RL Crabb’s response to Todd’s rant “I don’t see much in here that doesn’t ring true.”
I’m glad we’ve been able to shine a light on RL Crabb’s “middle of the road” status. Yikes!
Now RL , having seen the comment he made in print, is getting cold feet. They don’t call them “The Shifters” for nothing. LOL.