A Godly Political Process

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
A Godly Political Process

This is the show from Tuesday, July 10th 2012.

SUMMARY:

* Sunday Morning Coming Down: Hear Bob and co-host McBurney talk about why Matt Drudge controls America's news cycle and about the Matt Coulter and Ann Drudge crush on Romney.

* Buzz-Kill: Israeli researchers have put the lie to the medical marijuana industry’s insistence that pot is mostly used as “medicine” by inventing a THC free strain. Needless to say the lying corrupting pot dispensary owners are NOT beating a path to their door for it…

* The Big Picture: Want to understand the storyline of the Bible better? Doug recommends you read The Plot! The Bible can be confusing if you don’t know the plot. So what better gift to give to a loved one (or to a pastor) than Bob’s life’s work, "The Plot".

* The Personhood Cure Period Has Begun: Please call 303-456-2800, or go to PersonhoodColorado.com to turn in your signatures and pick up a blank petition. The final push is here and we have ‘till the end of July to gather the signatures we need to put Personhood on the ballot!

* Personhood Signature Resource: Find out about events all over Colorado at which you can gather signatures for Colorado’s Personhood Initiative at the Colorado Personhood Coalition Events Calendar!

Today's Resource:Meet the Apostle Peter in this important Bible study. Have you considered why Peter addresses his letters to no well-known recipients? Rather, similarly to James, John, and Jude, he sends them generically to the circumcision believers scattered abroad. Why? Meanwhile, Peter mentions the Apostle Paul, who addresses his epistles to many well-known leaders and specific regional churches. Teacher Bob Enyart demonstrates that understanding the big picture of the Bible, its plot, helps to see even such small books as First Peter and Second Peter in their proper perspectives. Such biblical observations go a long way toward explaining the differences between Peter and Paul. For as Peter himself wrote of, "our beloved brother Paul" who "has written to you as also in all his epistles… in which are some things hard to understand…"

This fascinating Bible study is available in a 6-DVD set, on MP3-CD or MP3 download. You can click to order online or call us at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278).
 

GuySmiley

Well-known member
Uh, what?
I inferred that you dont think monarchists should talk about proper American politics. Am I wrong? I appologize. When you said "Can't make this up", I thought you were implying that it is weird for a monarchist to have opinions about proper American politics and therefore shouldn't speak about it. Is there something wrong with a monarchist speaking about proper American politics?
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
I inferred that you dont think monarchists should talk about proper American politics. Am I wrong? I appologize. When you said "Can't make this up", I thought you were implying that it is weird for a monarchist to have opinions about proper American politics and therefore shouldn't speak about it. Is there something wrong with a monarchist speaking about proper American politics?

"Wrong"? I'd say there's something asinine and hypocritical about a monarchist pontificating about American politics. Given Enyart's contempt for this country and its constitution I can't decide if his opinions on the process here are laughable or dangerous. He enjoys the right to run his mouth (though I doubt he'd ever return the favor, given a chance) and I defend his right to spout his nonsense, but the last kind of person who should be taken seriously in a discussion about American politics is a monarchist.
 

GuySmiley

Well-known member
"Wrong"? I'd say there's something asinine and hypocritical about a monarchist pontificating about American politics. Given Enyart's contempt for this country and its constitution I can't decide if his opinions on the process here are laughable or dangerous. He enjoys the right to run his mouth (though I doubt he'd ever return the favor, given a chance) and I defend his right to spout his nonsense, but the last kind of person who should be taken seriously in a discussion about American politics is a monarchist.
Is it just Enyart, or is it any monarchist? Who can speak about American politics without being asinine and hypocritical? If its a long list, just list the people who are asinine and hypocritical.

Is it asinine and hypocritical for a socialist to pontificate about American politics for instance?

Specifically, what is hypocritical of a monarchist (or just Enyart) pontificating about American politics?
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Is it just Enyart, or is it any monarchist? Who can speak about American politics without being asinine and hypocritical? If its a long list, just list the people who are asinine and hypocritical.

Well here's the problem, Guy: we're a nation specifically founded in rebellion against a monarchy, and in direct opposition to the concept. That some Americans think dialing back the clock a few centuries is preferrable to our system--and who, indeed, question the wisdom of our system, and even the wisdom of rebelling against Britain--strikes me as beyond absurd. It's insulting. It's ridiculous. It's laughable. It's as directly, and deliberately, anti-American a concept as I can imagine. To think a monarchist has anything worthwhile to say about American politics is as rational as believing an Apollo denier can intelligently comment on lunar geography.

Is it asinine and hypocritical for a socialist to pontificate about American politics for instance?

No, if only because a "socialist" (whatever you mean by the word) isn't looking to dismantle the very backbone of this nation. And please: spare me your hyperbole to the contrary.

Specifically, what is hypocritical of a monarchist (or just Enyart) pontificating about American politics?

I think I've answered that question.
 

GuySmiley

Well-known member
Well here's the problem, Guy: we're a nation specifically founded in rebellion against a monarchy, and in direct opposition to the concept. That some Americans think dialing back the clock a few centuries is preferrable to our system--and who, indeed, question the wisdom of our system, and even the wisdom of rebelling against Britain--strikes me as beyond absurd. It's insulting. It's ridiculous. It's laughable. It's as directly, and deliberately, anti-American a concept as I can imagine. To think a monarchist has anything worthwhile to say about American politics is as rational as believing an Apollo denier can intelligently comment on lunar geography.
Ok, I just thought you didn't like Enyart. I've never known of anyone to dislike monarchy as much as you do. We all have our issues that set us off I guess.

No, if only because a "socialist" (whatever you mean by the word) isn't looking to dismantle the very backbone of this nation. And please: spare me your hyperbole to the contrary.
Socialist

Some socialists might want to dismantle the very backbone of the nation and some may not. You never know. Notice an antonym is capitalist.

I think I've answered that question.
I dont see whats hypocritical of it.
 

This Charming Manc

Well-known member
I am equally concerned that any Christian who has read sameul 8 should seriously consider goes pro monarchy.

Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”

10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day. ”

19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Ok, I just thought you didn't like Enyart. I've never known of anyone to dislike monarchy as much as you do. We all have our issues that set us off I guess.

It's well known here that I'm no Enyart fan. His advocacy of a monarchy in this country is just one of several reasons. I also got into it frequently with Samstarret, in the brief time he posted on TOL.

I dont see whats hypocritical of it.

How could anyone who by definition seeks to destroy this country be taken seriously? Why indulge the fantasies of a nutter who enjoys the liberties guaranteed by the Constitution, then proposes replacing it? That's hypocrisy in my book.
 

OMEGA

New member
Da 4:17 This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones:

to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men,

and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
No. And that is all the response that should be made for you. Don't answer a fool (you) according to his folly.

You're a real tool, Nick. Take cues from Guy: he made an attempt to engage and make actual conversation. You could learn something from an adult.

If you have an issue with my opposition of monarchial government, explain. If you're just another Bob Enyart sycophant, say so. But if you're going to do nothing more than offer these little pathetic hit and runs you're nothing better than a troll. Maybe you can't hold your own in an actual argument (interestingly enough, you rarely try; you prefer these wimpy little one-off posts). You have zero to contribute to TOL, your massive ego notwithstanding.

P.S. On the other hand when you do try to string together a halfway coherent post you consistently get your facts so completely wrong it's like you're deliberately trying to step on as many rakes as possible, so on second thought, keep trying to look smart. It's amusing.
 
Top