Reagan Tied The Republican Party To White Christians, Now They Are Trapped

[Cecilie1200]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Another attempt at retreating while pretending you're not from Mr. "I don't care at all about this message board". Interesting.

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

How is it relevant to the discussion that someone agreed with you?

It was relevant that he saw this back then. It was an acknowledgment of something he saw happening in the future. It was posted as part of the discussion. The topic was the religious right and and it’s influence regarding the GOP.

Well, I'm sure it's relevant to YOU that there have been other bigots in history. Just shows me how unevolved you are.

Is that supposed to be another insult?

 

[Cecilie1200]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

I just called you out on your racist shit, and you are the one that got nothing to defend yourself with.


Loser.

Thanks for proving my signature correct.

White flag accepted.

Wow, are you still trying to pretend you did something other than run like a scalded bitch? Give it up and just accept that you embarrassed yourself as a coward.

LOL.

Not at all, I can’t be bothered with people who just want to fire off false narratives and insults. Want to have a discussion, I’m all ears.

"LOL" You ran away because you got called on being a racist and a religious bigot, and you couldn't find someone else's words to quote to defend yourself.

And the more you try to scramble your way on top of your humiliating rout, the more obvious it becomes.

Not at all. Keep firing away. I think it’s excellent that my quote garnered such attention.

"I'm thrilled that people have noticed what a bigot I am. No, REALLY!"

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Another attempt at retreating while pretending you're not from Mr. "I don't care at all about this message board". Interesting.

Correct. If I want to respond I do. If I don’t I don’t.

See how that works?

 

[NoBueno]

, Republican lawmakers have introduced more than 165 bills in 33 states to limit voter fraud.

FIFY (Fixed It For You)

 

[Cecilie1200]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Still not a "straw man" to point out that what you said was bigoted.

You still need to learn that "straw man" has an actual meaning.

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

I just called you out on your racist shit, and you are the one that got nothing to defend yourself with.


Loser.

Thanks for proving my signature correct.

White flag accepted.

Wow, are you still trying to pretend you did something other than run like a scalded bitch? Give it up and just accept that you embarrassed yourself as a coward.

LOL.

Not at all, I can’t be bothered with people who just want to fire off false narratives and insults. Want to have a discussion, I’m all ears.

"LOL" You ran away because you got called on being a racist and a religious bigot, and you couldn't find someone else's words to quote to defend yourself.

And the more you try to scramble your way on top of your humiliating rout, the more obvious it becomes.

Not at all. Keep firing away. I think it’s excellent that my quote garnered such attention.

"I'm thrilled that people have noticed what a bigot I am. No, REALLY!"

Here’s where I say “prove I’m a bigot” and you can’t.

 

[bodecea]

GOP leaders and the conservative media ecosystem have spent the last few weeks focused on inflaming the culture wars. They’ve railed against the decision to stop publishing six Dr. Seuss books, falsely claiming that the childhood classics have fallen victim to liberal cancel culture, and complained about changes to the Potato Head line of toys.

Simultaneously, Republican state lawmakers have continued waging a war on democracy, passing new laws that would eliminate vote-by-mail and early voting programs that were popular with Democrats in 2020, especially among minority communities. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, Republican lawmakers have introduced more than 165 bills in 33 states to limit ballot access.

On the surface, these topics seem disconnected, but in reality, they share a crucial commonality that shapes today’s Republican Party — one that dates back to the 1984 Republican National Convention held in Dallas. It was there that Republicans cemented an alliance with evangelical White Protestants, in the process creating a demographic and generational time bomb that is now exploding in their face.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/03/22/reagan-tied-republicans-white-christians-now-party-is-trapped/

A dangerous cancel culture to the country, and themselves.

The whole Evangelical/Moral Majority/Right to Life movement was really about keeping minorities and women down.

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Still not a "straw man" to point out that what you said was bigoted.

You still need to learn that "straw man" has an actual meaning.

And someone keeps throwing around the word “bigot” when it’s not even applicable.

 

[Cecilie1200]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

"I don't have a problem with religious people. I just think it was really prescient of him to say bad things about religious people. How could you think that makes me a religious bigot?"

Uh huh. Do tell.

 

[Cecilie1200]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

I just called you out on your racist shit, and you are the one that got nothing to defend yourself with.


Loser.

Thanks for proving my signature correct.

White flag accepted.

Wow, are you still trying to pretend you did something other than run like a scalded bitch? Give it up and just accept that you embarrassed yourself as a coward.

LOL.

Not at all, I can’t be bothered with people who just want to fire off false narratives and insults. Want to have a discussion, I’m all ears.

"LOL" You ran away because you got called on being a racist and a religious bigot, and you couldn't find someone else's words to quote to defend yourself.

And the more you try to scramble your way on top of your humiliating rout, the more obvious it becomes.

Not at all. Keep firing away. I think it’s excellent that my quote garnered such attention.

"I'm thrilled that people have noticed what a bigot I am. No, REALLY!"

Here’s where I say “prove I’m a bigot” and you can’t.

Here's where I say, "Correll already proved it, and you started running away while shouting over your shoulder that you were just too lofty to dignify his completely correct assessment of you."

Please refer back to the post that you were so terrified to answer.

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

"I don't have a problem with religious people. I just think it was really prescient of him to say bad things about religious people. How could you think that makes me a religious bigot?"

Uh huh. Do tell.

A false narrative. Let’s disabuse you of that. The quote was mentioned because it was an OP about the religious right and the GOP. Goldwater made a comment regarding the religious right and the Republican Party. It’s germane to the discussion.

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

I just called you out on your racist shit, and you are the one that got nothing to defend yourself with.


Loser.

Thanks for proving my signature correct.

White flag accepted.

Wow, are you still trying to pretend you did something other than run like a scalded bitch? Give it up and just accept that you embarrassed yourself as a coward.

LOL.

Not at all, I can’t be bothered with people who just want to fire off false narratives and insults. Want to have a discussion, I’m all ears.

"LOL" You ran away because you got called on being a racist and a religious bigot, and you couldn't find someone else's words to quote to defend yourself.

And the more you try to scramble your way on top of your humiliating rout, the more obvious it becomes.

Not at all. Keep firing away. I think it’s excellent that my quote garnered such attention.

"I'm thrilled that people have noticed what a bigot I am. No, REALLY!"

Here’s where I say “prove I’m a bigot” and you can’t.

Here's where I say, "Correll already proved it, and you started running away while shouting over your shoulder that you were just too lofty to dignify his completely correct assessment of you."

Please refer back to the post that you were so terrified to answer.

Terrified? Of what? LOL

 

[Correll]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

How is it relevant to the discussion that someone agreed with you?

It was relevant that he saw this back then. It was an acknowledgment of something he saw happening in the future. It was posted as part of the discussion. The topic was the religious right and and it’s influence regarding the GOP.

So, Goldwater found it hard to compromise with religious right?


How open are you modern lefties to compromise? Or is everything a "holy war" to you where anyone that opposes you is a "wacist" or a "heretic"?

 

[Agit8r]

The way they carry on about Cardi B reminds me of Tipper Gore

Hope they carry smelling salts around with them

 

[Correll]

The way they carry on about Cardi B reminds me of Tipper Gore

Hope they carry smelling salts around with them

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[lennypartiv]

Actually, the thread is about how the Republicans are now tied to a shrinking base, that will continue to shrink, and cost them elections. There is no scenario, in which Republicans win with only white Christians.

It can be successful. All we need to do now is keep people from shit hole countries out of America.

 

[Jets]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

How is it relevant to the discussion that someone agreed with you?

It was relevant that he saw this back then. It was an acknowledgment of something he saw happening in the future. It was posted as part of the discussion. The topic was the religious right and and it’s influence regarding the GOP.

So, Goldwater found it hard to compromise with religious right?


How open are you modern lefties to compromise? Or is everything a "holy war" to you where anyone that opposes you is a "wacist" or a "heretic"?

I cannot speak for “modern lefties”, considering my politics are more centrist. That being said, I happen to be open to compromise and finding common ground. People can disagree with one another to their hearts content. Why label someone with silly names because they do not see eye to eye?

 

[struth]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

How is it relevant to the discussion that someone agreed with you?

It was relevant that he saw this back then. It was an acknowledgment of something he saw happening in the future. It was posted as part of the discussion. The topic was the religious right and and it’s influence regarding the GOP.

well if people are religious, their religion is going to have some sort of influence on their daily lives, including their politics. This is rather common sense.

The problem is that the left has no tolerance religion...or anything really that impacts or gets in the way of the left's religion...the state.

Judeo-Christian values in particular...they have long got in the way of left's power conquest....Judeo-Christian values sparked the ideas from the Enlightenment, the concept that people are born free, the freedom comes from the individual and rights not from the State....this lead to the massive Revolution and then the American experiment....and then within America, helped end Slavery, and Jim Crowe....leftist around the world noticed this, and that's why folks like Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Iran etc attempted to crush religion, or put some sort of state control of religion in place. It's why Dems today always look to attack religion...in particular Judeo-Christian faiths.

 

[Correll]

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

― Barry Goldwater

Barry Goldwater also thought that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea. Do you think that the 1964 civil rights bill was a bad idea, because BARRY said so?

Agree with the prescience of his quote, disagree with his stance on the Civil Rights bill.

So, he's not an Authority we should defer to, just some guy that happened to agree with you on one thing.


So, why you sharing this with us?

It was an apropos quote based on the OP. You don’t agree with it. :shrug:

Some guy agrees with hte op. So? I disagree with the op. I am also some guy. We are at an impasse.


oh no, what to do.


What is this thread about, other than your anti-Christian bigotry?

Nice Straw man, please point out where I supported anti-Christian bigotry?

In your posts where you act as though being supported by a Christian group is a bad thing.


That's anti-Christian bigotry.


If some white guy just talked about the dems being supported by blacks, as though it was inherently bad, you would be able to see that that was racist.


Such things work BOTH WAYS.


I know that is an alien concept to you, but it is true.

Got it, so you got nothing but a fallacious opinion with the intent of picking a fight.

Dismissed

My, that was a quick tail-tucked retreat, even for you. And your attempt to hide that you're running was really lame.

Correll answered the question, and you responded with what was clearly a pre-chosen dismissal that had nothing to do with his post, just to try to give yourself an excuse to stop talking to someone who punctured your little balloon.

Really?

I don’t cavil with people who use straw men to create a false narrative. Posting a quote that was germane to the OP topic doesn’t translate into someone espousing “anti Christian bigotry”. That poster had nothing but a puerile insult because we were at a “impasse” (His words)

So yes, I dismiss peevish displays of hyperbole that attempt to serve as an actual argument.

THE op topic is presenting the support of the gop by white Christians as though it is inherently bad, for reasons that are not clearly presented.


That is anti-Christian bigotry.

Oh, so now it’s the topic. This back and forth started when you accused me of “anti-christian bigotry”.

Which is it?

Both, Mensa Boy. That was the OP's topic, and that was also what you said in response to the OP's topic.

Did you somehow think you couldn't both be racist religious bigots?

More puerile insults. Another one who proves my sig correct.

Bless your heart.

Being dishonest and playing dumb, as you are doing, is very rude.


Civility is something you earn by being civil to people.


You stopped doing that, when you started trolling.

Irony....

Err, no, it's not. It is just the facts.


We were discussing the topic, and your posts on teh topic, and I crushed you, and you started playing troll games.

With a strawman fallacy. You fired off an insult and kept piling on. That’s not crushing anything but a decent discussion.

Reread Post 11.

By all means keep giving yourself props...

Nope. I explained what was wrong with your post, adn then pointed out that it was a form of bigotry in the slim hope that that would bother you, since libs are supposedly so anti-ism and phobes.


It is something I do. I have done it for several decades. I have yet to find a single lib that seemed at all bothered by the fact that their actions do not match their stated principles.


I have come to the conclusion that all liberals who talk about wacism or phobias, are just pretending to care about such things, only in so far as they can use them as weapons to smear and marginalize their enemies.

And here’s where you are incorrect.

First off, I’m not liberal. And if you said it to bother me it was meant as an insult. Let’s not play games of semantics here.

Secondly, I brought up the quote because Barry Goldwater foresaw what the OP was discussing. Speaking as a Catholic, I have no issue with anyone of faith. Note where I said I agreed with the prescience of his quote. Discussing how that was germane to the discussion was my intention, not to insult Christians.

How is it relevant to the discussion that someone agreed with you?

It was relevant that he saw this back then. It was an acknowledgment of something he saw happening in the future. It was posted as part of the discussion. The topic was the religious right and and it’s influence regarding the GOP.

So, Goldwater found it hard to compromise with religious right?


How open are you modern lefties to compromise? Or is everything a "holy war" to you where anyone that opposes you is a "wacist" or a "heretic"?

I cannot speak for “modern lefties”, considering my politics are more centrist. That being said, I happen to be open to compromise and finding common ground. People can disagree with one another to their hearts content. Why label someone with silly names because they do not see eye to eye?

You have no problem speaking on Goldwater or the religious right, but suddenly you can't speak about modern lefties?


How wonderfully convenient for you.