You keep voting her in.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:15 pm Show me the post where I said I was good with everything she does. In fact I said the opposite.
Actually as early as the early 80s.As per the Christian Right modus operandi, political resources promoted by the Coalition include voter tools and voter guides for targeted school boards in 17 Colorado communities. One of these, for their home town of Woodland Park (near Colorado Springs) includes a slate of four conservative candidates in a field of nine, all vying for four open seats on a five-member board. If three of them win, they would gain control of the board. The voter guides are available in both English and Spanish.
The voter guide features just five issues: “Critical Race Theory,” “Parental Rights,” “Boys Playing Girl’s Sports,” “Sex Education,” and “Gender Identity Pronouns.” The guide, like those pioneered by Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition in the 1990s, are intended for distribution in churches on the Sunday before the Tuesday election.
Much more in Link. Fredrick Clarkson used to run Talk2Action, still a good resource done by expert scholars on the New Apostolic Reformation, Seven Mountains dominionism, and other aspects of the current Christian right. http://www.talk2action.org/Charis held another academy in May to prepare Christians to run for office, particularly school board races, and perhaps to participate in the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, a new national Christian Right bill mill and legislative network that Wommack helped to found, which was designed to “bring lawmakers together in support of clear biblical principles.”
The Coalition held a large two-day conference in September which sought to “empower citizens” to change the country with biblical values and “to educate, unify and mobilize Christians to stand for biblical truth in the public square.”
This event featured Wommack, Republican U.S. Reps. Doug Lamborn and Lauren Boebert (who has, just this week, been identified as a liaison with the organizers of the January 6 assault on the US Capitol); evangelist Mario Murillo, Pastor Duane Sheriff, Christian Right activist Bishop E.W. Jackson and Coalition executive director, Richard Harris. (Videos of their presentations are available here.)
About a thousand attendees, including many students, participated in training workshops on such Christian Right priorities as “reaching ethnic communities” (which has been a key part of the strategy of the Christian Right and the GOP for more than a decade, including in 2020); how to start a Culture Impact Team (church-based political committees of the Family Research Council and its state affiliates); and “election integrity,” based on the conspiracist notion that there’s widespread election fraud. (For those more professionally inclined, they recommend an online course produced by former Rep. Bill Redmond (R-NM), a former top official of Citizen Link, now called the Family Policy Alliance).
Nice post, Carmen. Of course, Joe will ignore this, because there is no defense, so he'll pretend it's not there. "oh yes," he says. "I'm 100% for religious freedom, I don't support that at all" but he'll vote for it every dayum time!carmenjonze wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:36 pm “IF EVERY CHURCH SAID, ‘WE WILL TAKE OVER OUR COMMUNITY'”: THE (CHRISTIAN RIGHT) REVOLUTION STARTS SMALL AND LOCAL - Religion Dispatches
Actually as early as the early 80s.
Much more in Link. Fredrick Clarkson used to run Talk2Action, still a good resource done by expert scholars on the New Apostolic Reformation, Seven Mountains dominionism, and other aspects of the current Christian right. http://www.talk2action.org/
JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:02 pmI support people who reflect most of the policies I would like
JoeMemphis is just another irrational white-conservative extremist who votes for irrational white-conservative extremists.
Be honest and admit I didn’t say the things you claim I said.gounion wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:25 pm Be honest, you don't pay any attention to how she or anyone else votes. And her policy position is she'd like to make this country a religious theocracy. So it would seem that's the broad policy position you'd like to see enacted, right?
And on judges - the Federalist Society isn't about judges that will follow the law, it's about developing far-right ideologues that want to legislate from the bench. The Federalist Society develops political and ideological warriors that will use the judiciary to cement their views into law where it can't be overturned by any legislation. Fuck democracy.
That's because the nutjobs were a minority. But, because of underhanded GOP actions (refusing to allow Obama to make a nomination, ramming through a last-second Trump nomination) the nuts are now the majority.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:00 pm Be honest and admit I didn’t say the things you claim I said.
And no. I don’t long for a religious theocracy and don’t and wouldn’t support such a thing. I also don’t support a whole range of progressive liberal policies.
You and others have predicted gloom and gloom on the judicial side for years. And yet gay marriage is still here. ACA is still here. Roe is still here. I admit the bench is more conservative but I don’t think we are anywhere close to a religious theocracy.
Gay marriage has only been legal for six years. Your politicians have never stopped trying to eliminate it.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:00 pm Be honest and admit I didn’t say the things you claim I said.
And no. I don’t long for a religious theocracy and don’t and wouldn’t support such a thing. I also don’t support a whole range of progressive liberal policies.
You and others have predicted gloom and gloom on the judicial side for years. And yet gay marriage is still here.
Your politicians are trying to dismantle it.ACA is still here.
Stop trying to diminish and downplay the religion-based conservative-Christian supremacism that motivates your politicians.Roe is still here.
Well I don’t speak for all conservatives. I never claimed to. I haven’t heard any conservative I know suggest that religious theocracy is the desired endgame. I know that’s not something I support. I also don’t support or desire a wide range of liberal policy initiatives that I believe would weaken this country and bankrupt the nation. So I find myself having to choose which side comes closer to what I think is the right overall direction for the country. According to the polling, most folks don’t think we are headed in the right direction. Also they don’t have much confidence in either party to figure it out. I’m just one vote of millions. We’ll find out next November who people choose.gounion wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:02 pm That's because the nutjobs were a minority. But, because of underhanded GOP actions (refusing to allow Obama to make a nomination, ramming through a last-second Trump nomination) the nuts are now the majority.
A religious theocracy is the endgame plan your side wants, and one you are voting for, whether you admit it or not. That's why you're pretending it isn't happening.
^JoeMemphis's only real argumentation style is solipsism.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:20 pm Well I don’t speak for all conservatives. I never claimed to. I haven’t heard any conservative I know suggest that religious theocracy is the desired endgame. I know that’s not something I support. I also don’t support or desire a wide range of liberal policy initiatives that I believe would weaken this country and bankrupt the nation. So I find myself having to choose which side comes closer to what I think is the right overall direction for the country. According to the polling, most folks don’t think we are headed in the right direction. Also they don’t have much confidence in either party to figure it out. I’m just one vote of millions. We’ll find out next November who people choose.
I ducked from the deflection. Fairly and without fraud, yes or no.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:14 am Hi Bird
I don’t own the Republican Party. I’m an independent conservative. Most of the candidates I support are in fact Republicans.
I don’t know if you have much influence in your party, but in case you haven’t noticed, it’s policy has shifted to the hard left.
So perhaps that explains why little gets done. The country is pretty much split down the middle and party policy seems driven by the extremes.
That being said, I don’t see that anybody is forcing you or Marin to do a thing. You are free to believe what you like.
As far as your last question, I will give the same answer I gave when the election was called in GA. Biden won the election. I never thought it should have been contested and said as much on this board.
The ONLY reason you haven't heard it is that you don't listen for it. And you say you don't support Trump, but Blackburn was his biggest supporter. She's also a Christian Nationalist.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:20 pm Well I don’t speak for all conservatives. I never claimed to. I haven’t heard any conservative I know suggest that religious theocracy is the desired endgame. I know that’s not something I support. I also don’t support or desire a wide range of liberal policy initiatives that I believe would weaken this country and bankrupt the nation. So I find myself having to choose which side comes closer to what I think is the right overall direction for the country. According to the polling, most folks don’t think we are headed in the right direction. Also they don’t have much confidence in either party to figure it out. I’m just one vote of millions. We’ll find out next November who people choose.
irrelevant. Judges are the issue and the SCOTUS in particular. Lawyers follow whatever case law supports their position. Judges, in particular the SCOTUS justices, bring into judgement their several beliefs. Either you are naive which I think is obviously not the case or you simply choose to ignore the impact of personal belief structures on judgement particularly when it comes to the SCOTUS because it suits your belief structure.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:21 am In my career, I have dealt with a number of attorneys. I can tell you outside of court they have no problem telling you what they believe. However, in court and on legal matters, those same lawyers follow the law. You wouldn’t and couldn’t tell who they vote for. So I have a different view on whether or not people can silo their personal beliefs when making determinations based on the law and facts presented in a case.
C'mon, Joe. You are better than that. Did Biden win fairly without fraud?
Well perhaps you can post something where she advocated for a religious theocracy. I don’t think claiming that this is a Christian nation is the same as saying that we need religious laws contrary to the constitution.
Oh. Didn’t understand the question. I always said Biden won fairly. I also said that those folks who thought differently should make their case in the courts or in the voting booth. I never advocated or supported challenging the election.
Yeah well judges go to the same law schools as lawyers. They usually start out as lawyers. So in my experience their training as professionals teaches them to check their personal bias at the door and deal objectively. The same holds true of CPAs. I understand human beings all have certain biases. I also understand that professionals are taught and trained to look at things as objectively as possible. I don’t always agree with their opinions but I do think they operate in good faith.bird wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:29 pm irrelevant. Judges are the issue and the SCOTUS in particular. Lawyers follow whatever case law supports their position. Judges, in particular the SCOTUS justices, bring into judgement their several beliefs. Either you are naive which I think is obviously not the case or you simply choose to ignore the impact of personal belief structures on judgement particularly when it comes to the SCOTUS because it suits your belief structure.
So it really doesn't matter at all what she believes or what she does. You'll vote for her anyway. Got it.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:33 pm Well perhaps you can post something where she advocated for a religious theocracy. I don’t think claiming that this is a Christian nation is the same as saying that we need religious laws contrary to the constitution.
As I said. I don’t care much for Blackburn. I also really don’t care for the policies of Pelosi,Schumer or Biden. Why would I vote for someone who supports those policies?
It's a dishonest, Christian-supremacist lie to claim that "this is a Christian nation," but I am not surprised to see a guy from the Slavedriver Baptist Convention falling for it. This is a secular, nonsectarian nation.JoeMemphis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:33 pm Well perhaps you can post something where she advocated for a religious theocracy. I don’t think claiming that this is a Christian nation is the same as saying that we need religious laws contrary to the constitution.
And you dutifully vote for it, because she represents you.“The way I look at this culture war is you’ve got the left and those that are pushing towards Marxism,” Blackburn told Breitbart News Washington Political Editor Matthew Boyle, framing the dynamics of the culture war. “They are lined up on one side. You have those that are more constitutionalists and traditionalists who want to preserve our American values of faith, family, freedom—preserve free markets—they are on the other side.”
Blackburn personally attributed her political grounding as being rooted in faith and family.
“Faith is very important to me, that Judeo-Christian ethic is very important. If we stepped into the den to where my piano is you would see the Baptist hymnal that is there,” she said during the interview at her home just outside of Nashville. “I played for my church growing up. I still have that. And it reads into your life—it kind of becomes your centering, those values that you realize that you are not one unto yourself but you are part of a community.”
When has that ever stopped you from sending her back to Congress over and over?As I said. I don’t care much for Blackburn.
Pelosi, Schumer, and Biden aren't politicians in your state. They are irrelevant to your vote for Marsha Blackburn.I also really don’t care for the policies of Pelosi,Schumer or Biden. Why would I vote for someone who supports those policies?
We all get it. As long as they have an R behind they're name, you'll vote for them, and you won't pay a bit of attention how they vote. For you, ignorance is a weapon.
It's plain as day, so there's nothing to get. You are a Marsha Blackburn supporter and voter.
Oh I pay attention. I’m not willing to put people in charge of the senate or the house who attempt to legislate like they have a mandate when they clearly don’t.
