CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

(This is going to be a big project, so I'm just going to jump right in and pray everyone helps out.)

CONGRESS

(Wow, lots of elections to cover. Every single one is being disputed. Threads about congress.

For now I'm going to focus on the candidates that are most deserving of our prayers and contributions. The list so far: )

George Hutchins See also his Website

GOVERNORS

Lots here too.

SENATE

Incumbent Democrats to defeat:

Alaska Mark Begich
Arkansas Mark Pryor
Massachusetts John Kerry
Montana Max Baucus
New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen
Virginia Mark Warner

Incumbent Republicans to defend:

Georgia Saxby Chambliss
Idaho Jim Risch
Kansas Pat Roberts
Kentucky Mitch McConnell
Tennessee Lamar Alexander
Wyoming Mike Enzi

[Cranky Old Man]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

PRESIDENT 2016: Jack Fellure

Perhaps he can win a senate seat in 2014 to warm up a little.

[GAY AND STUPID]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

*** potty language removed***

[Zechariah Smyth]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

*** potty language removed***

Watch the potty-mouth, please.

YiC,

Zech

[H.P. Lovecraft]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

For the Republicans -- how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical 'American heritage'...) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

For the Republicans -- how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical 'American heritage'...) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.

And I suppose that you claim by some undefined unctuous solipsistic standard to tell the rest of us how to manage resource distribution, and what to do with the efforts of our time on this earths given to us by Jesus, labor, and products of our intelligence. Yes, bow to your little Obama doll that squanders the hard labor of ordinary Americans and makes "investments" in a string of bankruptcy failures, and if he had his way would turn every American city into Detroit. Yes, bring back the soviet gulags of central planning - or perhaps you prefer the Juche socialist workers paradise of North Korea.

You can choose to conveniently ignore the fact that Christian Republicans contribute more to charity than their Democrat counterparts - with more than likely the excuse that the Democrats would rather confiscate the wealth of others and redistribute it according to their own morally bankrupt vote buying agendas.

Let's not forget "science" here, where your own LIEberal nigra hero Neil deGrasse Tyson publicly admits that "science" is better funded by Republican administrations than the DEMONcrats.

Of course we can't leave this subject without talking about the end result of all these "progressive" Marxist utopian schemes (clearly articulated by the socialist George Bernard Shaw) - death panels.

[WWJDnow]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

For the Republicans -- how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical 'American heritage'...) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.

Was there a verb stuck somewhere in the middle of that morass of adjectives and adverbs? If so, I missed it sometime after my eyes glazed over on page 314 of your missive. Would you mind restating your point in plain English so I can refute it for you?

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

Was there a verb stuck somewhere in the middle of that morass of adjectives and adverbs? If so, I missed it sometime after my eyes glazed over on page 314 of your missive. Would you mind restating your point in plain English so I can refute it for you?

I don't think he will be responding - as the "real" H.P. Lovecraft is dead. His post was copied with no attribution - as are a number of his others.

[Donovan A. Mordecai]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

For the Republicans -- how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical 'American heritage'...) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.

You seem confused, perhaps this little chestnut will straighten you out


James 1:5-9
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
9 Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted:

[H.P. Lovecraft]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

And I suppose that you claim by some undefined unctuous solipsistic standard to tell the rest of us how to manage resource distribution, and what to do with the efforts of our time on this earths given to us by Jesus, labor, and products of our intelligence. Yes, bow to your little Obama doll that squanders the hard labor of ordinary Americans and makes "investments" in a string of bankruptcy failures, and if he had his way would turn every American city into Detroit. Yes, bring back the soviet gulags of central planning - or perhaps you prefer the Juche socialist workers paradise of North Korea.

You can choose to conveniently ignore the fact that Christian Republicans contribute more to charity than their Democrat counterparts - with more than likely the excuse that the Democrats would rather confiscate the wealth of others and redistribute it according to their own morally bankrupt vote buying agendas.

Let's not forget "science" here, where your own LIEberal nigra hero Neil deGrasse Tyson publicly admits that "science" is better funded by Republican administrations than the DEMONcrats.

Of course we can't leave this subject without talking about the end result of all these "progressive" Marxist utopian schemes (clearly articulated by the socialist George Bernard Shaw) - death panels.

I don't see a great deal of difference on the surface from the politicians of this era, compared to the ones in my time, back in the 1800's and early 1900's. There are scandals, cronyism, people screaming at one another without ever really listening. One thing I noticed is that in democracy, and all of it's flaws, it is largely taken for granted. People like you and I will scream about tyrannies and enormities. But for the most part, elections happen, politicians pander, and there is not a great sense that the whole thing could collapse at any moment. In my era, democracy was not an assured thing. It was being challenged by fascism, communism, and there were people who tried to make us live in nature and grow beards, but I think they were safely put down. The taking of democracy for granted is in some ways a blessing, for both sides. It keeps us safe and enshrined. As long as we don't vote in odious types. Don't worry, whether we agree on political positions or not, I'm sure things will work out in the end.

[Donovan A. Mordecai]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

For the Republicans -- how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical 'American heritage'...) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.

Yes but you see, the Republicans are God's Party. They freed the darkies, while the dems wanted to keep them as their rightful property. So cut to now 150 years later both Whites and lesser races are more or less equal. A vote for any other party is a vote for slavery, is that what you want? Because the Good Christians here don't tolerate that kind attitude.

[ThomasPayne]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

Politics - Scripture in Hand

Posted by www.euradvisor.eu Mar 01, 2013 22:45

As many as one million people attended Barack Obama’s second inauguration on January 21st 2013. Countless others followed the official reinstatement of the 44th president from their television screens across the planet. Although the presidential race itself had been settled in November 2012 I could not help feeling very relieved by seeing Mr. Obama formally accept stewardship for a second period. Had it been his adversary standing on that podium it would have boded very ill for people with a preference for pragmatism, rationalism and informed decisions. Indeed the mere thought of allowing a man, who believes in magic underwear and the cynical and unintelligent rants of the illiterate and fraudulent Joseph Smith, exert any kind of power over others is almost too much to bear. A person making decisions by consulting any of the scripture that the Abrahamic religions have inspired whether it be the Bible, the Book of Mormon or the Quran should not be considered fit to head a nation.

Although Mr. Obama proclaims himself a practicing and devout Christian his actions and opinions do not appear to spring from a desire to comply with dogmas or doctrines put forth in religious texts. This is encouraging and in every way a step forward from his predecessor who openly referenced religious raison d'être when arguing a position. Indeed Mr. Bush seems to have been highly influenced by what was said and done 2000 years ago in a backwater part of the world when the Earth was still flat and the centre of the universe. To me this seems utterly ridiculous and not very conducive for achieving success. I suppose Mr. Romney’s beliefs should not be considered any more ridiculous. The basics in his holy book are by and large identical. Yet to me it seems reasonable to assume that anyone who deems the manic and nonsensical ramblings of the self-proclaimed prophet known as Joseph Smith to be divinely inspired, will have a poorer sense of judgment than most other professed Christians. While we have almost no credible eyewitness accounts of the life of Jesus of Nazareth or Moses we have quite a few that decry the author of the Book of Mormon as a liar, a convicted conman and a blatant opportunist. By lending most of his content from the Bible, Joseph Smith also displayed an awkward lack of imagination and the final product is a bizarre read, which was dubbed “chloroform in print” by Mark Twain. Because of this alignment with commands in holy books, it is clear to me that neither Mr. Romney nor Mr. Bush should be considered sound choices for office. However, to many Americans their religious views and the importance that they assign to them is exactly what makes them electable. Indeed one can scarcely imagine a professed atheist succeeding in winning even a primary election in the US of A. This may help explain why Mr. Obama assigned such importance to touching the Bible while taking his oath. He underlined the gravity of the ritual by carefully selecting a total of three different versions of the holy book. Perhaps as a safeguard in case one should prove unable to convince the almighty of his sincerity.

It troubles me that the president of the most powerful country on the planet is compelled to pay tribute to ancient fairy tales littered with immoral prescriptions when accepting his role as head of state. Although he shows no visible signs of opinions formed on the basis of its dogmas I still do not see why religion of any sort should play any role in government. The founding fathers went to great lengths to ensure that religion did not play an active role in state and legislative matters. Why not honor the labor of these early pioneers of reason by breaking with the tradition of being sworn in with a hand on an outdated, self-contradictory and immoral piece of fiction?

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

Politics - Scripture in Hand

Posted by www.euradvisor.eu Mar 01, 2013 22:45

As many as one million people attended Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s second inauguration on January 21st 2013. Countless others followed the official reinstatement of the 44th president from their television screens across the planet. Although the presidential race itself had been settled in November 2012 I could not help feeling very relieved by seeing Mr. Obama formally accept stewardship for a second period. Had it been his adversary standing on that podium it would have boded very ill for people with a preference for pragmatism, rationalism and informed decisions. Indeed the mere thought of allowing a man, who believes in magic underwear and the cynical and unintelligent rants of the illiterate and fraudulent Joseph Smith, exert any kind of power over others is almost too much to bear. A person making decisions by consulting any of the scripture that the Abrahamic religions have inspired whether it be the Bible, the Book of Mormon or the Quran should not be considered fit to head a nation.

Although Mr. Obama proclaims himself a practicing and devout Christian his actions and opinions do not appear to spring from a desire to comply with dogmas or doctrines put forth in religious texts. This is encouraging and in every way a step forward from his predecessor who openly referenced religious raison d'être when arguing a position. Indeed Mr. Bush seems to have been highly influenced by what was said and done 2000 years ago in a backwater part of the world when the Earth was still flat and the centre of the universe. To me this seems utterly ridiculous and not very conducive for achieving success. I suppose Mr. Romney’s beliefs should not be considered any more ridiculous. The basics in his holy book are by and large identical. Yet to me it seems reasonable to assume that anyone who deems the manic and nonsensical ramblings of the self-proclaimed prophet known as Joseph Smith to be divinely inspired, will have a poorer sense of judgment than most other professed Christians. While we have almost no credible eyewitness accounts of the life of Jesus of Nazareth or Moses we have quite a few that decry the author of the Book of Mormon as a liar, a convicted conman and a blatant opportunist. By lending most of his content from the Bible, Joseph Smith also displayed an awkward lack of imagination and the final product is a bizarre read, which was dubbed “chloroform in print” by Mark Twain. Because of this alignment with commands in holy books, it is clear to me that neither Mr. Romney nor Mr. Bush should be considered sound choices for office. However, to many Americans their religious views and the importance that they assign to them is exactly what makes them electable. Indeed one can scarcely imagine a professed atheist succeeding in winning even a primary election in the US of A. This may help explain why Mr. Obama assigned such importance to touching the Bible while taking his oath. He underlined the gravity of the ritual by carefully selecting a total of three different versions of the holy book. Perhaps as a safeguard in case one should prove unable to convince the almighty of his sincerity.

It troubles me that the president of the most powerful country on the planet is compelled to pay tribute to ancient fairy tales littered with immoral prescriptions when accepting his role as head of state. Although he shows no visible signs of opinions formed on the basis of its dogmas I still do not see why religion of any sort should play any role in government. The founding fathers went to great lengths to ensure that religion did not play an active role in state and legislative matters. Why not honor the labor of these early pioneers of reason by breaking with the tradition of being sworn in with a hand on an outdated, self-contradictory and immoral piece of fiction?

That's nice. Why not introduce yourself HERE so we can greet you properly! You can read all kinds of helpful information ON THIS THREAD for newcomers like yourself. If you’d like to share your opinion, kindly provide the Scriptural Support where we can see how wonderfully God said it first. Finally, your rights on our forum can be found HERE.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

But for the most part, elections happen, politicians pander,.

That's where you are wrong. Republican politicians do not pander. I explained that in this thread:

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=92492

[Alvin Moss]

Re: CHRISTIAN VOTERS GUIDE 2014

Pomposity does not become you, fellow.

You think yourself a sophistocate, but you are going to Hell. There's always room there for smart intellectuals like you. You can get in the section with Jimmy Carter and talk philosophy until the end of time.

On another note, I believe this listing should include Brother President Vladimir Putin, now that he has thrown his hat into the ring, so to speak.