jakee

Then how come everything you said after this is stuff you hadn't said yet? How is it a process if there isn't even anything to tell you what the process is? Huh? If I didn't want to find out I wouldn't be asking the question. What could possibly be bad about finding out? How do you know there's any such thing as a saved soul? So now you do know what scripture really says? Cool, could you go back and re-answer the earlier questions? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

You said you don't pretend to know what other people think. (Right before telling me what someone else thinks). I was asking what you think. i got the impression that you were a Christian. So what's the point? Because if someone truly believes in a soul, and heaven, and that eternal life is more important than this existence, then it follows that obeying biblical commands not to kill people is more important than protecting anyone or any country in this reality. Why would you jeopardise your immortal soul to save a fallen colleague in a fallen world? No-one told me about the bit where Jesus said "Turn the other cheek, unless you're in a uniform." Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Classy. Care to explain? Because that's a complete non-sequitur from the rest of your post. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

it looks like you are saying that if someone has different positions on issues than you you assume they are stupid. That's an unwarranted blanket statement. Sometimes people say things which are stupid, and suggest courses of action which are stupid. Pointing out the stupid things things people say does not for a second equate to assuming everything one disagrees with is stupid. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

You view him as your counsellor? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

You're not stupid. You just choose not to think. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No one here is doing that. You're arguing against your own strawman. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Trump isn't a conservative Republican and has shown no inclination to reduce spending. On the contrary, he wants to increase spending. So why do you support him? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Oh Ron. You're always so keen on saying that liberals behave like adolescents and then you come out with stuff like this. The only people I know who can be forgiven for basing their decisions only on what they're angry about and afraid of are toddlers. And you know what, even then their parents try and teach them to be better Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No it isn't. I'll demonstrate that by addressing the next thing you said Ya, especially after they lost their jobs, homes and healthcare as they've known it. That shit was real, not some bullshit lie Trump put into their head. There you go. Nothing to do with how good the Dems campaign was. Nothing to do with whether the Dems talked about the issues these people care about. Nothing to do with party unity. Like what? Without an example that question is impossible. I will say that as far as I can see Trump's campaign was quite clearly the most dishonest I've ever seen, by a distance. To say otherwise is nothing but one-eyed partisanship. Let me ask you this: if the next election involves two people both talking like Trump - lying, making things up, proposing impossible policies, constantly mocking opponents and threatening opposing activists with violence - do you think that would represent a decline in the standards of American politics, or would it be no better or worse than any campaign before it? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

i struggle to see how anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus and truly believes in the soul can reconcile it with joining the military and going to war. Using wolfriverjoes's logic, it's an evolutionary benefit influenced by the mass slaughter of early Christians. Only those that fought survived. . . And you disagree with him, so what do you think? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

How are they trying to steal it and who is helping? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Well that runs counter to everything else you've been saying about party unity and whatever. It's just fundamentally easier to convince people things aren't good than to convince them they are. Everyone wants more, all the time. No one has lied like Trump the campaigner lied. Not just twisting or misrepresenting, but outright lies. To claim everyone else does it too is true bullshit. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

i struggle to see how anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus and truly believes in the soul can reconcile it with joining the military and going to war. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I have not heard this. Citation? That's an easy Google Search. Its always difficult to tell with Rush because he's functionally illiterate, but it sounds to me like he's saying all of Kavanaugh's accusers have been referred or admitted to lying. This is absolutely not true. If he's saying that Skydekker believed all of the subset of accusers who have admitted lying or are under investigation for lying then I don't believe that's true either. There were accusers who were credible, and accusers who were not credible. The existence of the non-credible accusers does not change the likelyhood that the original, credible accusers are telling the truth. No matter how much Rush wants it to be so. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

it seems to me that a band Republic would be something that accepts that without any evidence. Umm, I don't think that has anything whatsoever to do with what a Banana Republic is. Regardless, there is evidence. There is the original video, and the video the White House copied from a site and journalist known for promoting conspiracy theories and publishing intentionally false information. You can play the two videos side by side and see the apparent difference. That is the evidence. What other evidence could there be? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Consider that may be the truth. And it doesn't bother you? All right D'Artagnan Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I wonder if Trump is going to apologise for defending Lewandowski after he forcefully and unambiguously laid hands on a young woman just trying to do her job? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Nevermind that he'd never address the implication that he's putting more trust in what he claims Obama said than in Trump's statements that US elections absolutely can be, and are, rigged. I don't think his brain even lets him contemplate it, his thought process just slips off it like ice. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

In the states I was talking about like Michigan she got almost 300,000 less votes than Obama. In Ohio, she got almost 450,000 less votes than Obama. Pennsylvania wasn't as bad, but still. In Wisconsin, Trump got about the same amount of votes as Romney, but Hillary had about 240,000 less votes than Obama. She said that those democrats either switched, voted 3rd party, or just stayed home. Pennsylvania was a wash. But again, the question is what does 'the base' mean? Is it staunch Democrats, or people that have at some point voted Dem? When you expand the definition of 'the Republicans' and 'the Democrats' to include every single left or right leaning voter it becomes nonsensical to talk about what those groups will allow. At that scale they're simply not unified, homogenous blocks. It may be that you're correct, and right leaning voters are more likely to ignore every other factor in an election and vote Party, no matter the candidates or issues than left leaning voters... but what can you do about that? And if you could change it, should you? I worked on a campaign years ago that nationally was going down to the wire and an old timer said to me "We won't get a hung parliament! Too many people remember the chaos of the last one, they won't let it happen." I said that was bollocks, 30M voters can't possibly coordinate with each other to get a result that's good for the country, they'll do whatever they individually think is best. The same applies above, the entire mass of Democrat or Republican voters don't decide to let anything happen, they vote how they think is best. (And yeah, we ended up with a hung parliament.) Well, tomorrow you might find if they've done that. Trying to draw a long term trend from one freakishly wierd election is crazy. Again, in the weeks leading up to the 2016 election people were prophecying the death of the Republican party as we know it. One election goes badly and suddenly it's the Democrats who are supposedly lost without a clue. Have some patience! The Republicans lied through their asses about what was possible to fix it. You might think that's a pragmatic strategy worth emulating, I don't. Nothing good can come of it in the long term. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

When you get to extreme northern latitudes does time zone really matter that much? After all, there's only a small part of the year that will have 'sensible' sunrise and sunset times anyway. (I've never spent much time that far up, so I don't know. ) Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Right, but that still doesn't support the point. Scribe is blaming the Democrats for being unable to hold onto their base. But the swing of voters away from the Dems, even in those battleground states, was fairly small. So unless you define the base as everyone who has ever voted Dem (which would make it a term so broad as to be entirely useless) you don't have any evidence that the Democrat base abandoned the party's candidate. In reality you're probably mostly looking at moderates and independents. Second, you have to remember that the Republicans ran the longest, most successful character assassination campaign there has ever been. They'd been attacking Clinton ferociously, non-stop, for nearly 3 years before the main election campaign even began. You can't purely ascribe the 3rd party votes detracting from Clinton's total to a failure of the Democrats to engage those moderates, since we know that the Republican's long running smear campaign was very effective at damaging Clinton's personal approval ratings among those moderates. You could say that Benghazi, emails, and the emergence of a populist, demagogic opponent with no morals, scruples or regard for the truth made the 2016 election a kind of perfect storm. One that makes it impossible to judge the effectiveness or popularity of the Democrats' actual platform at that time. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

So you don't think any soldiers are real christians? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Of course you could just (crazy I know) do things at a different time in winter vs summer The need for DST has always amused me. The 24 hour clock was invented to measure and represent the time of day. But now we're so wedded to what the clock says rather than what the day is doing that instead of changing the stated time at which we do things to fit the season, we have to make the clock wrong so we can keep doing things at the same stated time. In the UK there's growing support for making DST (GMT +1) the time all year round. Making it so that midnight is never midnight and midday is never midday because people can't just decide on their own to go to start an hour earlier and finish an hour later. There must be a whole branch of sociology dedicated to studying that Do you want to have an ideagasm?

According to a humanist worldview, sure that isn't true. According to a biblical worldview, that is absolutely true. Biblical history is wrong. We know that for an absolute fact. Garden of Eden, Original Sin as described in the bible - Never. Happened. The world has always worked the way it does now. According to the bible, we deserve to die because we have sinned, yes. This is not intended as an insult however. Oh, really? Again, use your own analogy and listen to the way it plays. Listen to yourself tell a person with cancer that they're sick, then listen to yourself tell that person that because they're sick, they deserve to die of cancer. That's a joke, right? They're probably just too polite to tell you. Do you want to have an ideagasm?