2009-8-8 03:19:00
[Compiler's Note: The "Local Posts" series of articles found here in "The Archives" are a collection of exchanges between JJ Dewey and others participating on a local online newspaper blog. These exchanges were subsequently re-posted by JJ Dewey on The Keys Of Knowledge discussion group prior to being archived here.]
"ConservoDem" wrote:
"Freedom is anathema to religion. Democracy and religion are incompatible."
JJ:
And where did the greatest bastion a freedom the world has ever seen originate? In one of the most concentrated religious centers in history, the USA.
And where has the greatest centers of repression come from? Atheists such as Stalin, Mussolini Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Jong-Il, etc. Christianity is not perfect, but critics have to go back hundreds of years to find truly repressive acts in its name whereas repression of atheistic and socialistic systems are alive and well in the present.
"Grandjester" (GJ) wrote:
"Right now, today, in America, Christians are trying to deny equal rights to other Americans, pretty repressive."
JJ:
Maybe about 10% as much as Leftists are. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
GJ:
"Less than fifty years ago, Christians were working to keep civil rights from Blacks, and prevent interracial marriage."
JJ:
You are stereotyping again. Many were also working for civil rights. These people you speak of interfering with civil rights were largely Democrats.
GJ:
"Less than 200 years ago, Christians were using the bible to justify slavery."
JJ:
Stereotyping again. Many Christians were also working to free the slaves. Harriet Beecher Stowe perhaps did more to free the slaves than anyone but Lincoln and she was very religious and married to a Christian minister.
GJ:
"Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot were all educated by the church, and they obviously learned the lessons of genocide, repression and control well there."
JJ:
You're really stretching here. To blame church attendance during youth (that everyone does) for later atrocities is ridiculous.
GJ:
"Where do you get the idea that America, either in 1776 or today is 'one of the most concentrated religious centers'? It's not Mecca or Medina, not the Vatican City, not Jerusalem, nor Dharamsala."
JJ:
I wasn't taking about cities but countries. If you read about the early history of this country you will discover that there were many religious communities, movements and thinking among the people as a whole. Much more than anywhere in Europe.
JJ:
Here are some examples of "Lefty Logic":
George Washington and his group who fought for smaller government, fewer taxes and the right to worship God as they please were really Democrats.
The Founder of the Republican Party was really a closet Democrat.
The Democrats during the [USA] Civil War period were really Republicans.
The Democrats who founded the KKK [Ku Klux Klan - US hate group] were really Republicans.
The Democrats who resisted civil rights were really Republicans.
Any good Republican was really a Democrat in disguise.
In a few more years Reagan will be seen as a Democrat.
In 50 years after historians judge the War in Iraq to have been a good thing Bush will be claimed to be one of their own.
JJ:
The Democrats have always been of a similar mindset as today except they call themselves liberal and progressive when they are really ultra conservative in many areas and regressive instead of progressive.
They are ultra conservative as far as the environment is concerned. They want to conserve every shovel of dirt unturned and every tree uncut.
They are very conservative about Social Security and not open to improving it.
They are not progressive about the space program and criticized Bush for his moves forward. They are not progressive about the much needed missile shield. They are not progressive about women's rights in the Muslim world or in liberating people from tyrants.
What in the world makes them think the progressives of the Revolutionary War would have anything in common with them? These revolutionaries were more like NASCAR [National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing] fans meeting in bars having a good time and planning victory.
JJ:
Obama, Pelosi, Reed, Gore and most Democratic leaders believe that global warming is man made through the release of CO2 [carbon dioxide]. Because CO2 emissions are increasing they believe we are facing a grave crisis and civilization, maybe even life on this planet is at stake.
You would think that someone with this belief would support the two most productive and proven carbon free power sources -- nuclear and hydro.
They do not.
Instead they want to tear down the hydro and support solar and wind instead. Even with their resistance nuclear supplies about 300 times the power as solar. Wind doesn't fare that much better.
Less than 10% of the stimulus is directly or indirectly spent on green energy and the rest for pet political projects. If we are in such a crisis why not spend half or more on green energy?
It sounds like the real motive here is not to save the planet at all.
It sounds like they have no concern about global warming.
The question is then, what is their real agenda?
"ConservoDem" wrote:
"The sad thing here is that 'Cap & Trade' truly is a scam."
JJ:
We finally agree on something.
"CD" wrote:
"But using the Bible to oppose science...."
JJ:
No one writing today is doing that.
"CD"
"And the other scam is 'cheap nuclear power.' There is no such thing."
JJ:
Lawsuits from "flat earth" environmentalists have tripled nuclear costs in some instances. Nuclear could be our cheapest energy. Germany, who is moving away from nuclear, comes begging to France for energy where they get about 78% of their energy from nuclear. Their green energy is just too expensive and does not provide for their energy needs. China is building nuclear plants providing cheap power, lower than anything we have here.
"Boiseriver" wrote:
"People like 'joseph732' [JJ] and contributors to today's 'Letters' will continue to deny that we have a growing energy problem."
JJ:
I get tired of Lefties making up false beliefs and projecting them on me. I believe we have a tremendous energy problem. We need to muffle the "flat earth" lawsuits and develop nuclear energy and electric cars.
"Boiseriver":
"At the same time, this crowd yells 'drill, baby drill' as a means of reducing our energy dependence."
JJ:
Every gallon of gas you put in your car is drilled somewhere. You don't want to drill but you buy gas. How hypocritical can you get? If we are going to drill we might as well drill here and decrease our dependence on foreign oil and avoid disastrous oil spills.
"Boiseriver":
"How short sighted."
JJ:
You're the one who is short sighted for not having the vision to push nuclear. To bite your fingernails over global warming and then not support nuclear is insane.
"Boiseriver":
"We need to tax oil, gas, and coal consumption in order to make alternative energy sources more attractive."
JJ:
This has got to be one of the dumbest things that has been posted here. Higher transportation costs makes the price of everything go up and could destroy what little economy we have left. Take the shackles off nuclear and we can develop unlimited cheap electrical energy and even electric cars would be best sellers.
"Boiseriver":
"But we need to do so quickly in order to head off the coming disaster that 'joseph732' [JJ] and company deny is coming."
JJ:
And I suppose you are also wetting your pants over the possibility of a comet hitting the earth and want to tax rocket fuel so we can make a better rocket fuel so we can make a better rocket to smash the comet.
"Antisavior" wrote:
"The reason Christians have such a hard time accepting global warming (and yes, you can bet your paycheck a nay-sayer will be Christian) is because they want it to be God that does it, not humans."
JJ:
Many scientists who do not accept that the sky is falling are not religious. And what does religion have to do with global warming? Nothing except in your wild imagination. I have drawn all my conclusions by studying the science -- science you have evidently not looked into.
"Antisavior":
"If something does not agree with the Bible, it is not true."
JJ:
Your ignorance of the Bible is amazing. Global warming is not mentioned in the good book.
JJ:
So Peggy thinks [the cartoon strip] Mallard Fillmore is hateful whereas Doonesbury making fun of conservatives is just good clean fun? Talk about having blinders on. Mallard Fillmore on the Right is about as hateful as Andy Rooney on the Left.
Fillmore provides a much needed balance to Doonesbury and if anything is a kinder gentler strip. Unfortunately, balance isn't enough for the left. Instead they demand no opposing view at all and try to eliminate all opposition by falsely labeling it as hate.
"Gimmeshelter" wrote:
"'Joe732' [JJ] - No, the difference is that Doonesbury is actually funny."
JJ:
Actually, I used to enjoy Doonesbury. Then after he took the hiatus he seemed to lose his edge. He's always been Left, but when he gained a mission in life to promote his people and attack conservatives he lost the little humor he had left. I don't know how long it has been since his strip made me laugh.
Mallard isn't not a "ha-ha" funny strip but has humorous insights which are fun to read.
The Left cannot just not read Mallard as many in the Right do with Doonesbury. Instead their intolerance surfaces and they call it hate for giving a mild opposing point and would have it eliminated if possible.
They need to take a clue from me. I'm not threatened to let Doonesbury stay if enough readers enjoy it.
Replying to "ConservoDem," "Thesavior" wrote:
"Big, dumb, Christian, conservative fools.
"That's not fair!
"Some of them aren't all that big." LOL.
"I suppose I'm in danger of the fires of hell now for calling them fools!"
JJ:
If there were such a thing as your version of the Christian God you would indeed burn in hell just for getting up in the morning let alone calling yourself "the savior." Fortunately, you do not get to decree what God is.
What you really need to fear is karma, cause and effect. What goes around comes around -- or as the Bible says "what ye sew so shall ye reap."
JJ:
Yes, it was a pleasant surprise to wind up with a representative independent enough to vote what he thinks is right instead of what he is told is right.
However the Democratic party does not look kindly on rebellion or the slightest deviation from the norm.
For instance, James Traficant has been in jail since 2002 for charges that wouldn't have even surfaced if he had towed the party line.
Lieberman was pushed out of the party and had to run as an independent because he resisted cooperation on just one issue. And remember he was once good enough to be Vice President.
Zell Miller was so ostracized from the party that the only people that would listen to him were Republicans. The interesting thing is he compared his stand as being close to Hubert Humphrey who was about as Left as you could get for a politician back in the Sixties [1960s].
I wish Minick luck and godspeed in standing his ground against the storms that may come. Hopefully he will not compromise.
JJ:
If average Americans are deserving of the same Health Care that Congress receives does this mean we will also get their same salaries and office expenses? If I am indeed deserving of what they receive as many Lefties preach, then I will expect to receive a salary of $174,000 a year plus about $4 million in office expenses.
Of course this would bankrupt the country but what the heck. We all deserve it.
JJ:
Mr. Kibble thinks we will save 31% on overhead by the government taking over health care when we waste about that much on fraud alone with Medicare. If he really believes this then I have a bridge to sell him down by the Boise River.
"Blarney" wrote:
"Our 'public servants' like John McCain and Voldemort Cheney gripe forever about socialism and apparently don't understand what it even means. Mr. McCain has been on the government dole his entire life. Oh, they who will not see...."
JJ:
So according to you George Washington was a socialist because he took a salary. Really an expanded and convoluted definition of Socialism you have there.
Then he indicates the "Right to Life" in the US Constitution means we are entitled to free health care. Another convoluted use of logic. By extension this also means I am entitled to free vitamins, health spa membership, free home gym, and free Victoria's Secret items for my wife to make my life more exciting.
"Blarney" wrote:
"Yes Joseph, when you live off of the taxpayers (the bane of 'R's' everywhere) that's pretty much socialism. Of course, that's okay only for some of us. The rest of us are called Welfare Queens (Reagan) and lazy leeches (various loudmouths). Duh."
JJ:
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines Socialism as:
"Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods."
Where does it say in any definition that payment for services rendered is Socialism?
By your definition George Washington would be a Socialist since he did draw a salary from the government.
"Grandjester":
"You miss the point, you were trying to tie Washington to McCain, totally different situations. Washington was reluctant to take the money and took none while serving in the Army. McCain gets THREE government checks a month, Senate Salary, Military Pension and Social Security, he needs NONE since his wife is a multimillionaire. McCain has been on government dole literally since the day he was born. No comparison to General Washington at all."
JJ:
McCain received a salary for services rendered and Social Security and any retirement are part of that compensation.
Washington was also married to a wealthy woman. Before Washington drew a salary he loaned the country his own money and then drew it back later -- kind of like we do with Social Security, but no one ever accuses him of being a Socialist.
-- End Of Part One --
Go To:
Next article in series: Local Posts #29, Part Two
Previous article in series: Local Posts #28, Part One
Copyright © 2009 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved