Robert, Robert, Robert, Robert, Robert, Rob, Rob, Rob, Bobby, Bobby, Bobby, Robbie, Robbie, Robbie, Bob, Bob, Bob...

Which God did the Democratic party "successfully voted to remove"?

...Robert, Robert, Robert, Robert, Robert, Rob, Rob, Rob, Bobby, Bobby, Bobby, Robbie, Robbie, Robbie, Bob, Bob, Bob...

2012 The Democratic party convention in Charlotte NC successfully voted to remove GOD from the party platform. Google it for your self. And look at the morality of the Democrat party today.

Funny I don't see this kind of language your using on any CNN or late night clips .

The Crybaby's are from the left. Day after day night after night doom and gloom and wipers of hope that they finally got dome dirt on Trump. Day after day they end up with egg on their face.

CNN and Lanny Davis -- recent prime example CNN going with the lie -- even after Lanny Davis corrected them-- FAKE CNN

24/7/365 anti trump propaganda and still Trump polls # stay steady.

All the media fake stories about Trump helping Conservative get stronger in their resolve.

All the Antifa protest and hard left stories just are just turning liberals away from the democrat party.

Democrat represent everything wrong with America.

Surely the solution should rather be to fix the real problem of unequal opportunity in primary education?

Even given disagreement on this, surely the left(you?) can acknowledge that reasonable good minded people could disagree? Surely it's an over-reaction to call people racist for believing that choosing students based upon performance and not race is a good thing? One has to acknowledge that the counter example, of using race before merit as a selection criteria is in fact the very definition of racism?

More importantly to the Democratic party though, allow me to gift them moral justice and rightness on the issue. Even given that, practicality dictates that spending many years with a policies that choose certain people over more qualified others based upon race will create tensions. If you made that policy against say whites, or males, they might develop resentment. One might predict that they may even vote against those imposing that policy, arguably even willingly voting for a kind of racist orange haired loud mouth that they hope will end the policy discriminating against them based upon their race.

You might even argue it's starting to happen already...

That being said, I don't think Christians should mix politics with their faith. It mostly breeds hate and the gospel of Jesus Christ is never mentioned. I have moral objections to some things which are legal in the United States, but that isn't my focus. The Israelites when they were taken captive by Babylon were told by God to pray for the prosperity of the nation so they would live peaceful lives there. Babylon was a pagan nation, much worse morally than the United States. I think Christians should do more praying and less talking about the political situation.

I love America, and God has blessed it from its founding. I don't love the moral direction it has been heading and frankly I think it is in big trouble. God will eventually turn America over to its enemies if it continues down this path with no repentance.

As far as left and right, I am independent politically. I agree with some things on both sides, and disagree with much on both sides. The democrat party has become more and more secular so I don't agree with them as much anymore but the republican party worships God with their lips and not with their heart. I don't care for the cutthroat politics of either party, or the goading of their supporters, working them into a constant state of outrage and fervor and hatred of the other. Politics are poisoning this country and choking out civilized discourse. A Christian should never drink from that well but share the living water of Christ and speak the truth with love, sincerely caring about the other person regardless of their political affiliation.

Blinded by truth and you own ignorance.

Every generation is to try to make their next generation better. Every generation takes a step forward.

So Every color in America strides for this. But only 1 seem not to get ahead. Go figure. Last 50 years there have been great strides for the Blacks that are being depressed by Democrats. Once they figure that out then freedom will be obtained.


post-depression America FDR American Housing ACT.. Democrat policy that lent money to whites but not blacks. Yea Democrat party is the friend to the black. NOT.

Civil Rights ACT of 58 and 64. Zero Democrat support but push through to the Democrat POTUS and forces to pass it.

It clearly says "He could appear" as in he hasn't said it, but could say it. It is following his own example of how he said he could shoot somebody. I know reading compression isn't his strong point, hell, we all know he can only read comfortably about a 4th grade level (though I have no doubt he could read at the typical 9th grade level with a bit more effort on his part), but I'd expect more from some others...

Trump won because Christians hate Democrats, despite the fact the Democratic party is closer to Christ's teachings than the Republicans are. Hell, we almost got a child molester as a Senator because the Christians didn't care if he was a child molester being true, they'd vote for him over the Democrat, who is also notably a Christian man... just doesn't act inappropriately around little girls. The only reason Roy More lost in the end, was because he went the extra mile to say America was last great when we had slaves, and we should get rid of all the amendments but the first 10, like the ones that allowed women and blacks to vote. Now they'll soon have the ability to persecute others for sinning differently than they do, which is modern Christian's goals. "How dare that person be gay, my sin is nothing, their sin is gross, and I don't give a fuck what Jesus said about loving one another, or not tossing stones, or treating others the way I'd want to be treated, I'll treat them with bigotry and hatred, but I'll tell them I love them, I just hate everything about them, because I'm Christian after all, love the sinner, hate the sin." Again, not a direct quote, just what one has to be thinking when they say they don't want equal rights under the law for LGBTQIA+ people, and won't bake them a cake for a wedding, because there can be no other thought process to ignore the golden rule and everything else Jesus taught. Recall, I used to be a hardline Fox news, GOP voting fool, but couldn't reconcile the teachings of Jesus with the GOP... and eventually, because only I seemed to have had that revelation, lost faith in the ass, and even if he is real, I'd still rather burn in hell than be around my family and the rest of the far right for all eternity.

It also has to do with a severe lack of education. 40 some percent of American's believe the universe is 6,000-10,000 years old because their Bible says so. A large number doesn't accept the science of climate change... too many idiots believe Fox news is honest and truthful, because they don't care to learn how to properly vet news and information.

Also has to do with greed. Pure unadulterated greed. People caring more for their pocket books, their job situation, than what will do the most good for the most number of people.

No, it makes them like the Democratic Party who don't have any problem simultaneously touting their position on women's rights and supporting Bill Clinton who was a serial groper and philanderer... in the same way that they condemn Trump for a lack of respect for the rule of law while they worshiped Barrack Obama who didn't feel it was necessary to enforce (or even recognize) immigration law or drug laws.

I don't really think either party has a monopoly on hypocrisy...

Being held accountable for what we do is a good thing, but ignoring degrees and distinctions can turn it bad.

Weinstein out of a position of power, out of a job, and quite possibly into jail: good. Deserved, and sends an important message to those that might want to abuse their power in similar ways in the future. Precedent set -- however things worked before, we won't stand for that shit anymore.

Louis CK out of favor, and on record for doing creepy things which reduces opportunity to continue doing said creepy things. Also removed from positions where he could exert pressure to "consent" to said creepery where consent likely wouldn't be granted if the threat of job repercussions wasn't implied or patently stated. Again, good outcome -- in my opinion including the fact that he likely won't face criminal charges while Weinstein may.


Franken, on the other hand, was held accountable for actions in a way that I found troublesome for two reasons:

1) He was under scrutiny for past actions, yet placed under the judgement of current (bleeding edge current, even) behavioral standards. That is trending towards ex-post-facto law. I can't pass a law in December making it illegal to wear white shirts, then throw you in jail for having worn a white shirt in November before the law was in effect.

It isn't the same thing because sexual harassment has been illegal all along, and because he wasn't really facing legal trouble, just professional / political trouble -- where "ex-post-facto" judgments aren't prohibited. Still, it seems like when standards change we should try to limit judgement under current standards to current behavior. There's a reason why it works that way in law.


2) Furthermore, a lot of the scrutiny Franken was under completely stripped the behavior from context. Context is extremely important. That's why Weinstein "asking" women to "consent" to his rapey behavior wasn't OK, even though asking for consent is sort of the baseline "good"/expected behavior -- they weren't actually completely free to tell him to shove it.

Ignoring the context of Franken's behavior means that it is immaterial that he was working for the USO at the time, where on-stage suggestive stuff and raunchiness was/is pretty much the whole idea. Immaterial that on-stage "groping and kissing" stuff may well have been scripted as such, and basically consented to by the actors -- part of the show.

Combine that with ignoring degrees of offense, and we're listing Franken's name in the same sentence with Louis CK and Harvey Weinstein, which is ridiculous. Franken "had to" be a sacrificial lamb to demonstrate that Democrats are willing to walk the walk as well as talk the talk on this issue -- but did he really?

If more Democrats were willing to "tell it like it is", as I'd argue Maher is doing here, Franken could have said that the photo where he mimed groping a sleeping Karri Turner was a mistake, a joke in poor taste done in the context of an entire tour that seems in poor taste by modern standards, and that could have been the end of it. He could still be in office, and the Democrat party at large would have been better off, as would the net balance in Congress with regards to women's issues.

But nope. Context, distinction, and degrees are all meaningless, so Franken's name is in that same list of dirty sleazeball asshole men, no asterisks or footnotes necessary. I don't think the outcome of that game goes in a favorable direction.

Wait...your post didn't contain your argument? ;-)

If you read that as a mere partisan argument, you fail to grok my position.
As I wrote, I do not choose terrible vs less terrible, but for those who do, I suggest it's clear which is which.

As I often reiterate, finance reform is the number one issue that must be tackled in order to make any other political reform. That's why I backed Sanders, and still do but less so. I just wish he would leave the democratic party.

It's more about the democratic party being corrupt is why the younger generation of progressives have zero loyalty to it. Its either batshit crazy corrupt party #1, or corrupt as hell party #2 rigging as much as they can to keep being corupt

I'm not at all convinced of that (Clinton's political career being over).

It would be the sane response. And yet, clearly the DNC (and US politics in general) aren't reined in by trivialities like sanity. I think that unless the fickle public gets really riled up over this, the DNC would swing just as hard for Clinton or some other corporate-friendly type over anybody like Sanders or Warren in 2020.

Sanders being an Independent in the Senate was held against him hard by party bigwigs. Somewhat understandably. That being said, Sanders' brand of "Independent" was/is a fantastic guide to what the Democrat party should be working to become.

Politics is all bullshit, all the time. As a result, a huge percentage of voters are quite disenfranchised and don't really see any candidate as being on their side. Sanders turned that on its head. And old, rather-eccentric, Jewish dude got people excited (me too!). Massive gold-plated opportunity, with giant fucking neon signs pointing at it saying "pounce on this NOW", and the DNC took a big shit on it instead because they can't fathom a world without being 99.9% funded by massive corporations in return for congressmen, vetoes, and judges being bought and paid for.

I think that's what the guy is talking about with regards to "taking over the party". The "Justice Democrats" thing is about progressive candidates funded by actual goddamn people instead of laundered corporate money. I'm not real optimistic about their chances of really shaking up the status quo, but by god I sure hope they do.

$40-$60 million more in undisclosed payments to Manafort surfaced last week....but Trump has nothing to do with the Trump for president campaign, does he?....and did I say collusion, or even Trump? Nope, but a guilty conscience hears accusations that never happened.
The Russians today are doing exactly what you do, pretending to be right wing nutjobs on left leaning sites, and lefty snowflakes on right leaning sites, pushing the narrative to all that the other guy is a total nut by making ridiculous, ignorant claims like you do. If you aren't being paid by Putin, you're working for him for free.

Jesus fucking Christ, Bob. Can you be more deluded and ignorant? Once again, your Russian text book of American history is 100% ass backwards.

Southern strategy: In American politics, the southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the Civil Rights Movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South to the Republican Party that had traditionally supported the Democratic Party.[4] It also helped push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]
Not Nixon courting the black vote.

Troll: Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement.
Definitely you, Dimitri. It's almost time to have lucky investigate your ip address to see if you're in Kiev or Moscow.

I think it's safe to say that in 2020 the Democratic party will not be running her up the flagpole again. The last time they did that half the party saluted and the other half, kinda saluted, but it's not kind of salute one would find encouraging.