Comments for THE POLITICIZER

Comment on Autiello: Will True Christianity Please Stand Up? by Old & Decrepit

Old & Decrepit — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:58:49 +0000

You candy-ass gay marriage supporters(How do you call it? “marriage equality?… Hah!!!) gotta be chuffing this morning with the news of North Carolina, where even gay judges can’t overturn the will of the people. Add to that Colorado, which I’m sure you thought you owned(all those young stupes and greenies), whose legislators threw your stupid bill out in the middle of the night, even when some impassioned “marriage equality” partisan cussed those dirty right-wingers from the gallery.
You guys(and gals!) are something else!
You pushed it too far…no, WAY too far, and now you can’t handle the pushback.
Go back and drool over your Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow pinups.

Comment on Autiello: Will True Christianity Please Stand Up? by Old & Decrepit

Old & Decrepit — Fri, 04 May 2012 11:03:39 +0000

How?

Comment on Autiello: Will True Christianity Please Stand Up? by Nick Autiello

Nick Autiello — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:08:49 +0000

Yes.

Comment on Autiello: Will True Christianity Please Stand Up? by Old & Decrepit

Old & Decrepit — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 19:11:47 +0000

So, for purposes of instruction let’s try a “morality what-if?”

I have two different nephews. The first comes to me and says “Uncle, I approach you instead of my parents because you seem understanding, in these matters more so than my parents. Now that I’m 15, and I’ve reached the age where it’s normal to think about sex things, I think I like boys more than girls. Can you give me any advice?

And my second nephew comes to me and says “Uncle, I approach you instead of my parents because you seem understanding, in these matters more so than my parents. Now that I’m 16, and I’ve reached the age where you start to make some money of your own, and spend it on things when it’s not your parents’ or anyone else’s, I’ve been tempted to steal other kid’s money in school. Can you give me any advice?”

To the first nephew I said:”Since homosexuality has traditionally carried a taboo, I would watch very carefully before I succumbed to the temptation to have any sexual contact or experience with any other man or boy. To say nothing of the possible detrimental health risks. There are risks with girls, too, but more with boys. And I would resist the temptation to have any homosexual sex as it is, and is treated as being, a sinful behavior. And I counsel young people, no, people of any age, against sin in all circumstances. If you find you must live a life without sex for this reason, well that’s better. There are people who can’t see who live full lives doing plenty of other things. There are people who can’t sing, but they write good poetry. For that reason, resist the sin of homosexual sex.”

To the second nephew I said, “In these things, I counsel you to resist the temptation to steal. If you feel you must have more money to spend, better to earn more, so that you can spend more. Resist the temptation to steal–others succumb; some get away with it; some don’t. There are adverse consequences to stealing, even if you aren’t caught. It’s against God’s stated law, its justifiably a sin and carries a social stigma. A life lived without stealing is a better life than one lived after even one theft. I know people, some old and gray, who’ve successfully resisted the temptation to steal their whole lives long. They’re just as happy as the people disinclined to steal.”

Anything the matter with this good uncle’s logic, or advice?

Comment on CIOCCI: A Foolish Consistency by Old & Decrepit

Old & Decrepit — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:40:22 +0000

Before this site closes down permanently, I shall be taking apologies from all of you who’ve seen with your own eyes, over the last three years, that this president(I won’t capitalize it for him)is what I warned that he was. He’s a Muslin hiding as a Christian; he’s a Kenyan hiding as an American; he’s a communist hiding as a community organizer; he’s a black man hiding as a white man; he’s a white man hiding as a black man; he’s a resentful man hiding as a cheerful man; he’s a lazy man hiding as a hard worker, he’s a divider hiding as a uniter; he’s an unintelligent man hiding as an advanced-degree holder; he’s the highest apex of the contemptible, un-American policy of affirmative action ; he may well be a gay man hiding as a straight man; he’s a viciously aggressive man hiding as a Ghandi-clone.
He’s a dissembler, and those who fret publicly about him being the anti-Christ, they might not be far off.
And he won’t go easily: one wonders if he loses in a landslide whether he’ll get into the car sent for him to take him away next January: we’ll see how much the central American bossman president has respect for the law(ours), or whether his book is power first; argue the law later.
These are edgy times thanks to you weak-minded do-gooders who thought you’d cleanse America of its “original sin” by electing a known revolutionary.
This man does not love America; he wants it down, and he’s succeeded very well.
He has forsaken Israel, as well.
G’ bye.

Comment on CIOCCI: A Foolish Consistency by Barry

Barry — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 03:17:41 +0000

Andrew,I believe you are practicing the same art…..you like most American’s prefer a Leader that will lie. When it comes to the abortion topic, Obama stated his beliefs on abortion (though I strongly disagree with his) and unfortunately it’s one of the few things that he actually followed through on since being elected. It was the 1st act that he signed into action. I know where Obama stands, I know where Newt stands, I know where Ron Paul stands….but you have more respect for Leaders like Romney….that’s OK….at some point most of us have played the role of all three, if you have raised any children like the author stated this becomes very apparent.

Comment on CIOCCI: A Foolish Consistency by Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:51:47 +0000

I find the logic here leading to support a conclusion you have pre-decided.

There is an assumption that the self-serving nature of Romney’s flip-flopping is bad, while that of Gingrich is good. I don’t see it this way at all. Romney wants to get elected, and he is saying what he believes he needs to say to get elected – you acknowledge this. I wouldn’t call this flip-flopping, I’d really call it lying. While I’m not a fan of lying in general, I’m not sure that lying is all that terrible compared with the failures of other candidates (of any political persuasion). If the only reason Romney is lying is to get elected, and I have faith that he will act prudently when elected (which I’m not sure that I do have), perhaps that’s not such a bad fault.

Gingrich, it seems to me, doesn’t flip-flop for the reason you assert. He doesn’t change his mind because of new information. He simply doesn’t seem to have the ability to assimilate all the information that he has in a constructive way, especially considering that he lets his conservative idealism frequently trump facts. His self aggrandizement also doesn’t seem to allow him to see this failing and work to resolve it. You may consider Newt to be smart because he knows a lot of facts, but I consider him foolish because he can’t make reasonable decisions based on those facts.

Ron Paul just refuses to learn. He thinks we live in a black and white world, but we don’t. Until he comes to understand this most important aspect of reality, he doesn’t stand a chance of learning much else. But he’s 76, so I don’t hold out much hope.

Comment on SWEATTE: Pioneer Palin for President by WhoCares

WhoCares — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 19:25:03 +0000

If Palin is the president in 2012, then we know the apocalypse is coming. Many of your points aren’t actually things implemented by Palin. Polices such as the resource profit sharing with citizens was implemented before she was in office. Furthermore, if you want someone in the White House they probably should have some sense of Geopolitics right? I mean we don’t live in an isolationist world. The keys to American prosperity going forward, are reducing inequality, reinvesting in education, establishing a health care system that isn’t based on private insurance, shifting the US economy from its heavy dependency on oil, ending the military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, closing a large percentage of our over 700 foreign bases, prosecuting the crimes that occurred in the lead up to the financial crisis. These things Sarah Palin won’t do, so I don’t know how you think her administration would turn out profitable.

Comment on SASSO: The 99% Rising by Old & Decrepit

Old & Decrepit — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 03:14:27 +0000

Check the 19 th century, when your precious “income inequality” was much MUCH wider than it is now, and recognize how much progress technology, civilization, and America made, and you will have to recognize that there are worse things than “income inequality” and if you make that society’s goal, you turn your future over to quislings, and prostitutes.
Where we find ourselves now.
Where are Commodore Vanderbilt, Jay Gould, and J.P. Morgan when we need them?

Comment on SASSO: The 99% Rising by James Sasso

James Sasso — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 02:21:25 +0000

While I agree that the benefits bestowed on the poor are not counted enough as income (see the recent numbers from the CBO on the subject), I disagree that they would make the analyses behind my argument “disappear.” No matter how one counts it, or analyzes it, income inequality has skyrocketed since 1970, and especially since 1980.

I don’t think it’s good for democracy and I think it’s terrible for all Americans except those at the top of the income ladder.