Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Town Quixote's

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Yes.

    And you want to ban McDonald's.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Comment


    • The sad truth is this: you don't have to be a violent, white supremacist to support this president, but it doesn't appear to be an impediment either.
      You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

      Pro-Life






      Comment


      • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
        The sad truth is this: you don't have to be a violent, white supremacist to support this president, but it doesn't appear to be an impediment either.
        'Know what? I'm on "the Train" now. I wasn't before, but this ride is just too wild for me to pass up. I Love this guy as President of my country. I cannot get enough of him, and I hope to God in heaven above that he is reelected and serves out his second term in the full health and vigor that he's given to us, We the People of the United States of America, since his inauguration.

        I've Never seen a President get more done, I've never seen a President be like a dog with a bone on So Many issues, all at the same time. And this is with at least half his cabinet and staff in a constant state of flux. If any other president had this kind of church among those who need to assist him most, we would obviously give them a pass on any failure to deliver on promises, but President Trump feels more like he actually takes the job seriously, and literally every other one has in some form or other rested on his laurels.

        Going back to Lincoln.

        Maybe JFK an exception---maybe. 'Of course, the tragic cut-shorted-ness means our dataset is limited, but so is President Trump's right now, so I'll still give the nod to President Trump over JFK, understanding that JFK was negotiating to prevent WWIII. We all know President Trump isn't dealing with anything like that.
        "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

        @Nee_Nihilo

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Idolater View Post
          'Know what? I'm on "the Train" now. I wasn't before, but this ride is just too wild for me to pass up. I Love this guy as President of my country.
          On the plus side, I'm not a breakfast eater. So that was a lucky break.

          I've Never seen a President get more done
          So, your first president then.

          And this is with at least half his cabinet and staff in a constant state of flux.
          That's not how you spell criminal indictment.

          President Trump feels more like he actually takes the job seriously
          Yeah, I was feeling that feeling had to be like somewhere between 100% and 110% of this.

          and literally every other one has in some form or other rested on his laurels.
          Whereas this one tends to lean more heavily on his hardys.

          Going back to Lincoln.
          Oh, I think he'd rather go just a smidge further back.

          I'll still give the nod to President Trump over JFK
          After the assassination?

          We all know President Trump isn't dealing with anything like that.
          And that's before we count the cards.
          You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

          Pro-Life






          Comment


          • Apparently, the Colts are officially out of Luck.
            You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

            Pro-Life






            Comment


            • Someone posted a meme that read, "Trump didn't bring division. Trump was brought by it."

              I said, "Bring it? I'm not entirely sure he can even do it.
              You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

              Pro-Life






              Comment


              • I'm developing a Magic Christian 8 Ball. It just has the one answer (John 3:16), but you can still shake the crap out of it, which is satisfying.
                You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                Pro-Life






                Comment


                • My father likes to order new things when we go out to eat together. Tonight, after a large plate of something was set in front of him at a local Mexican restaurant, he asked me, "What did I order?"

                  I answered, "The senior special."

                  A few bites in he stopped, then, without looking up, said, "Very funny."
                  Last edited by Town Heretic; September 6th, 2019, 08:53 PM.
                  You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                  Pro-Life






                  Comment


                  • By serendipity or purpose?
                    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
                    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
                    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
                    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
                    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
                    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

                    ? Yep

                    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

                    ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

                    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                      A friend of mine responded to the recent shootings with a Ronald Reagan meme/quote that read: "We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions."

                      My response?

                      "To see those, those monkeys from those African countries — damn them, they're still uncomfortable wearing shoes!" Ronald Reagan

                      Or, the statute of limitations on using him as a moral authority has run.
                      I've a couple of problems with this:

                      1) Context. It was not calling all blacks names. It was calling specific UN members backwards for recognizing China during the Nixon years. It was an expression of frustration not intended to become or be anywhere near racist. Was it? Only in the limited sense. I'm not arguing propriety, I'm arguing the blatant misquote many have jumped on, imho, as lemmings. One does not equal the other. You are a lawyer, I think you'd have to take Reagan if you were appointed and ensure justice is done.

                      2) I do see Reagan's flaws, but we don't put our hope in trust in any but God. Psalm 20:7

                      Not to you in particular: 3) We are bashing Obama and bashing Trump as if they are the problem. This is incorrect. These were voted by representation of values or lack thereof. As Christians, we pray, believe, hope, cry, and pray some more. We can talk about what is being done against our faith and values, but your tack here (now to you personally), was to call Reagan a racist 'monkey.' While you may argue no, it is indeed the 'counter' to 'monkey's wearing shoes.' Think: You simply went to character bashing instead of weighing the value of the previous comment AND out of context to include all or many of a certain race. However Reagan meant it, is Reagan's alone. The media went with the trash bin approach. We believers need to look more closely. We believers need to grace more (back to Politics participants in general on TOL). We need to ensure we are very different from the world and how it equally responds. If not, then the pastors of the past were right: Being no different, we should probably stay out of politics but for voting as best we can and praying. Somehow, we've got to be and look different than the world and understand the larger picture of God's world and the spirits and principalities behind, not the flesh and blood in front. Nothing in bashing Obama did or would do anything. Nothing in bashing Trump will either.

                      4) A little off topic, but for the need to remember our Christian calling: There are only two masters in government as part of the world. This is never taught in law school. Justice is God's. It is 'blind' when it executes according to God's goodness. Without it, it cannot favor man equitably and a secular (godless) government cannot be 'good.' Mark 10:18
                      It means, I believe, neither Trump nor Obama were 'good.' Obama used the Lord's name in vain just as Trump has. Which side is God on? Neither (better said they are not on God's to date, as far I understand their beliefs respectively). We as believers need to remember the bigger picture, we get caught up in politics and the media push (else we'd not start all these threads off of what was said in the news). We (I, included) need to spend more time reflecting the Savior.

                      None of this was prompted particularly by your post but it was something I've been praying about and dwelling on for the past two weeks in reading Paul's epistles. It just happened that what I've been thinking and praying on, happened to be represented in this particular instance.

                      In Him -Lon
                      My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
                      Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
                      Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
                      Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
                      No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
                      Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

                      ? Yep

                      Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

                      ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

                      Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Lon View Post
                        I've a couple of problems with this:
                        I only have one: it's racist.

                        1) Context. It was not calling all blacks names.
                        So I can call a nation of blacks monkeys who can barely stand to wear shoes and it is only racist if I make sure I include every black, without exception?

                        I don't believe that works out, Lon.

                        When you're comfortable describing a large number of black people as monkeys, you're comfortable with a racist sentiment/thinking.

                        I'm arguing the blatant misquote many have jumped on, imho, as lemmings.
                        It's not a misquote. I literally heard him say it word for word. I don't care if frustration brought it to the surface, supra.

                        One does not equal the other. You are a lawyer, I think you'd have to take Reagan if you were appointed and ensure justice is done.
                        This isn't a court and I owe him nothing more or less than an honest acceptance of an uncomfortable truth. This was a part of who he was, much as I wished it weren't.

                        2) I do see Reagan's flaws, but we don't put our hope in trust in any but God. Psalm 20:7
                        Who argued otherwise? No, this attempt to mitigate doesn't impact what I'm speaking to. I had thought him a better man than it turns out he was...that's not very shocking when it comes to politicians, but it's still disappointing.

                        Not to you in particular: 3) We are bashing Obama and bashing Trump as if they are the problem.
                        I think different people attack those two for vastly different reasons. I'm not sure how that applies to Reagan though.

                        As Christians, we pray, believe, hope, cry, and pray some more.
                        I hope that as Christians we first do, then pray, while hoping, and ultimately trusting God to use our efforts as He will toward the end He desires.

                        your tack here (now to you personally), was to call Reagan a racist
                        No. I didn't actually do that. Read the quote again.

                        What I did was quote him, word for word, and proffer that the idea of resting on his thinking as a moral foundation had run, statutorily. You gleaned the racist part of that simply by reading his words and you understood that to be the objection, because as much as you want to rewrite and mitigate this, you know better.

                        You simply went to character bashing instead of weighing the value of the previous comment AND out of context to include all or many of a certain race.
                        No, I didn't. I noted his words and then drew a conclusion, that resting on his words for moral authority was problematic. If setting out his thinking is bashing then he has himself for an enemy.

                        But let's accept your proffer in terms of what led to the remark, made in private, to Nixon. It's no different than my getting cut off in traffic by some black guy and dropping an N-bomb. Stress may reveal us, frustration may reveal us, but it doesn't create who we are, what we believe, and what we're comfortable with.

                        However Reagan meant it,
                        It's not veiled. It's not a mystery. It's not even original, as racist nonsense goes.

                        The media went with the trash bin approach.
                        I'm not the media. And I'd say his words belonged in a trash bin. Now you can blame frustration, you can blame the media, heck, you can blame me, but the only one who is responsible for what he said is the man himself. And I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that he'd tell you that.

                        We believers need to look more closely. We believers need to grace more (back to Politics participants in general on TOL). We need to ensure we are very different from the world and how it equally responds.
                        I think you're confusing two very different things. We shouldn't be less intelligent than the world. We should, however, be forgiving of anyone who makes that sort of mistake and asks to be. We shouldn't revel in or enjoy the failure of men, understanding our nature.

                        Nothing in bashing Obama did or would do anything. Nothing in bashing Trump will either.
                        I didn't bash Obama. I differed with him. I was disappointed by some of the promises he made and then failed to keep, especially relating to my area of the nation. So he lost my support. This president...well, I'm on record before he was put in the position to be, writ large, exactly what he was (and wasn't) before taking office. I think noting the corruption and other issues attending his administration is productive, in that it may lead to the absence of a second act, politically speaking.

                        neither Trump nor Obama were 'good.' Obama used the Lord's name in vain just as Trump has.
                        Trump and Jimmy Carter have both lusted. Leaving off the rest they're darn near identical. But then, the devil is in the details, isn't he.

                        You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                        Pro-Life






                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I only have one: it's racist.
                          Against two people. A problem for others? "IF" you insist it is, the burden of that proof is upon you and the unscrupulous media. Scruples demand one rethink this. Simply doubling down isn't worth anything. I've read the article and the context. Further, it is JUST as bad to use this as it was for Reagan to say it. Why? Because you simply dug something meaningful Reagan said and attempted to compromise it with a moment of poor judgement. Should I dismiss all Town Heretic says as worthless based off of one (1) poor thing Town ever said??? Think about this some more, please.
                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          So I can call a nation of blacks monkeys who can barely stand to wear shoes and it is only racist if I make sure I include every black, without exception? I don't believe that works out, Lon.
                          No, but if you were ONLY talking about two, "I" certainly cannot apply that poor thing said to the larger populace. There were only a couple of UN delegates talked about. Bad? Sure. Applied to all? No. That is what someone without scruples would say to sling mud. Patti Davis said her father taught her differently. It means, regardless of what this looks like, it is in-congruent with a value Reagan held/taught to his daughter.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          When you're comfortable describing a large number of black people as monkeys, you're comfortable with a racist sentiment/thinking.
                          Two. You've NO idea if he meant all blacks because, and specifically, the two he was talking about voted 'ineptly' by his reckoning, to allow China into the UN. THAT is the context of the quote. If you and media, without scruples, without caring whether you are right or wrong, apply it to the greater representation, this is on the media and you. Alone. Worse? It was a cheapshot of your memory work to try and discredit by association. It amounts to character maligning and is a poor debate tactic. Why not simply address the comment without digging for completely unrelated mud? Why?


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          It's not a misquote. I literally heard him say it word for word. I don't care if frustration brought it to the surface, supra.
                          Sure you did, but there is a line problem between your ears and your interpretations at times. It is a 'convenience.' I'll say it again, you've no idea how far Reagan intended this particular quote to go. He was frustrated with only those delegates that voted a communist country into representation in the UN. Wrong? Yes! But to apply it to "All Blacks" for instance, it and can be very wrong. I've heard Chris Rock talk about hating a "N-word." He never means "All Blacks." Its not what he means. It'd be wrong, to apply it so.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          This isn't a court and I owe him nothing more or less than an honest acceptance of an uncomfortable truth. This was a part of who he was, much as I wished it weren't.
                          I'm glad you added 'honest' in there. Yes. Yes you do owe that. It doesn't matter if you are in court. It matters how Christ is our Lord and what He's called us to. Gossip (unfounded OR unfound-able) accusation is out. The Christian rule is simple: Give the benefit of the doubt. The court system isn't too far behind "proven" guilty otherwise innocent.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          Who argued otherwise? No, this attempt to mitigate doesn't impact what I'm speaking to. I had thought him a better man than it turns out he was...that's not very shocking when it comes to politicians, but it's still disappointing.
                          Patti Davis said her father's legacy should not be weighed by his inappropriate comment while a governor, but to remember he grew in wisdom and stature when she suggested we look at his legacy and life, merely than one quote. I've heard some things about Lincoln, but have grown to ignore a little bit and allow him to be human. I think holding this against Reagan is out of balance. He wasn't perfect. I've a few problems with his presidency but I believe he was a very good president, and I believed he truly loved his God and country.


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I think different people attack those two for vastly different reasons. I'm not sure how that applies to Reagan though.
                          At these points, it is more a reflection on the opposition of the public values, than the men who happen to also hold those values. Both men reflected well, the values of a good part of their voters. Obama very much catered to his constituents and partisan politics when he said "...you don't like it, beat us!" Trump also is as partisan. He represents a good portion of the people who voted him in office.


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I hope that as Christians we first do, then pray, while hoping, and ultimately trusting God to use our efforts as He will toward the end He desires.
                          MUST pray first. "Do" is last. We need guidance and to know we are doing the right actions.


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          No. I didn't actually do that. Read the quote again.

                          What I did was quote him, word for word, and proffer that the idea of resting on his thinking as a moral foundation had run, statutorily. You gleaned the racist part of that simply by reading his words and you understood that to be the objection, because as much as you want to rewrite and mitigate this, you know better.
                          No, I didn't. I noted his words and then drew a conclusion, that resting on his words for moral authority was problematic. If setting out his thinking is bashing then he has himself for an enemy.
                          It has to be seen as 'racist' for anyone to read what you are saying as anything that would be discrediting. Whether or not I read 'racist' or 'unworthy', or whatever discrediting intent isn't but a discredit. For some, one or the other will be more damaging, but to me, reading this next to "We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions."
                          There is a clear intent at dismissal. Better? It'd have been to take the quote, at its premise, and simply say "he didn't say 'every time.' It'd have made your point AND left Reagan intact on whatever good he'd tried to do and say for this country. I hope and pray I don't read the poor comment from now on, every time I'd bring up something Reagan said. It'd really disappoint me if that's all now, left of his legacy. It surely isn't for me.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          But let's accept your proffer in terms of what led to the remark, made in private, to Nixon. It's no different than my getting cut off in traffic by some black guy and dropping an N-bomb. Stress may reveal us, frustration may reveal us, but it doesn't create who we are, what we believe, and what we're comfortable with.
                          Absolutely agree, but in context, I'd not say you were a racist for it. When and if someone would try to make your quote apply to all people of color, or all who drive certain cars, when clearly (or not) such wasn't your intent (even obliquely), then I'm falsely accusing over what I'm not capable of delivering on, let alone its problematic for those who believe all things and hope all things. It DOES in fact make me look naive, but I think its good to be purposefully naive. It doesn't mean, unaware.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          It's not veiled. It's not a mystery. It's not even original, as racist nonsense goes.
                          The problem, as I see it, is this means "Reagan is a racist" still. "However he meant it" is up still, for the scope of application. If you called a man a word, you certainly don't mean that men of that color, caliber, hair color, demeanor are all referred to by the statement. We are in an age where "N" is mostly taboo, but apparently not for those of a certain color and possibly not when it applies. I simply don't. About the worst I've said is "Guy! That could have killed us!" whether he hears me or not in the other car.


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I'm not the media. And I'd say his words belonged in a trash bin. Now you can blame frustration, you can blame the media, heck, you can blame me, but the only one who is responsible for what he said is the man himself. And I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that he'd tell you that.
                          See, if you took that bet, then we'd both say using it against his other words, then, would be inappropriate, knowing the man as best as two citizens possibly can.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I think you're confusing two very different things. We shouldn't be less intelligent than the world.
                          This might be a sad admission: I've thought we are two reasonably intelligent men who aren't less intelligent, (now the admission) so I'm not catching the context of your statement nor what prompts it...

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          We should, however, be forgiving of anyone who makes that sort of mistake and asks to be. We shouldn't revel in or enjoy the failure of men, understanding our nature.
                          Not quite capturing your intent on this either or the context. It may then mean you'll have to travel the rest of the intelligence road by yourself if I can't catch up.


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I didn't bash Obama. I differed with him. I was disappointed by some of the promises he made and then failed to keep, especially relating to my area of the nation. So he lost my support. This president...well, I'm on record before he was put in the position to be, writ large, exactly what he was (and wasn't) before taking office. I think noting the corruption and other issues attending his administration is productive, in that it may lead to the absence of a second act, politically speaking.


                          Trump and Jimmy Carter have both lusted. Leaving off the rest they're darn near identical. But then, the devil is in the details, isn't he.

                          Again, this was concerning more of 'our' behavior than those who are clearly below moral standard. We don't have to turn blind eyes, but we do have to be careful with our comments. Infidelity had been and continues to be a problem from the days of King David. My concern is yet about how 'we' respond rather than how 'they act.' Those in office who are not believers will have a hard time emulating love for the Savior or our values. As I said, this portion was more to the thread than to you personally but I appreciate your input on it for my concern (one reason why I differentiated and yet kept it to you: to get your further comments which I appreciate (thank you). In Him -Lonnie
                          My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
                          Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
                          Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
                          Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
                          No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
                          Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

                          ? Yep

                          Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

                          ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

                          Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

                          Comment


                          • Town is racist.
                            Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                            E≈mc2
                            "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                            "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                            -Bob B.

                            Comment


                            • I'm going to keep my response to essentials.

                              On the notion of numbers controlling more than numbers.
                              Originally posted by Lon View Post
                              Against two people.
                              One would be sufficient. It's not volume that defines racism.

                              A problem for others? "IF" you insist it is, the burden of that proof is upon you and the unscrupulous media.
                              The proof was right in front of you. The rest is just a matter of how far you're willing to go to attempt to mitigate the fairly obvious.

                              Scruples demand one rethink this
                              No, they don't. I get that it bothers you. It should. It bothered me. But the response to grandpa comparing a black man to an animal, especially a monkey, isn't to try to find a way to say he really didn't mean it. Sorry, Lon, but he really did. The only real question involves how that sentiment influences action, or if it does.

                              Simply doubling down isn't worth anything. I've read the article and the context.
                              I heard the tape. There's no context that magically transforms the racially charged rhetoric he used into the innocuous. It is what it is.

                              Patti Davis said her father taught her differently. It means, regardless of what this looks like, it is in-congruent with a value Reagan held/taught to his daughter.
                              Lots of people know better and teach better than they do. I'm glad that he was at the very least one of those. You know Mencken? He left a diary.

                              Two. You've NO idea if he meant all blacks
                              Immaterial provided he meant it about any. Because at that point the only distinction between one or a hundred was his level of personal frustration. Volume doesn't control racism. My grandfather on my mother's side was Faulkner's racist. Every black person he knew was the exception to a larger, horrible belief regarding the race. How many black people you're willing to dehumanize and how many exceptions you allow has nothing to do with being a racist or believing racist nonsense.

                              I'll say it again, you've no idea how far Reagan intended this particular quote to go.
                              And I'll note, again, that it doesn't matter. If I call you a N... and you're a black man, I can't say, "But it was just the one! And he really irked me. I'm not racist."

                              You were comfortable enough to use the rhetoric. And he wasn't even in the room. If it was one guy, two guys, any number of them and they were literally in front of him maybe, maybe you could argue he was trying to reach for the most insulting thing he could find. He'd still have a character issue, but maybe, just maybe a different one...but that's not what happened here. Here, he was on phone to another white guy with his own racial issues, and he felt comfortable enough to speak his mind.

                              I'm glad you added 'honest' in there. Yes. Yes you do owe that. It doesn't matter if you are in court. It matters how Christ is our Lord and what He's called us to. Gossip (unfounded OR unfound-able) accusation is out. The Christian rule is simple: Give the benefit of the doubt. The court system isn't too far behind "proven" guilty otherwise innocent.
                              People without racial issues don't compare blacks to monkeys, Lon.

                              I think holding this against Reagan is out of balance.
                              I think holding him accountable is important.

                              MUST pray first. "Do" is last. We need guidance and to know we are doing the right actions.
                              So you believe and so you said. I said what I believe. And there it stands.

                              You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                              Pro-Life






                              Comment


                              • One is sufficient.
                                Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                                E≈mc2
                                "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                                "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                                -Bob B.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X