Are you ready?
This…
Or this…
Tough choice, don’t you think? Both posters are educated, intelligent and, on most topics. rational and responsible. Yet the first has posted a viewpoint that can only emanate from a communist or confirmed socialist: Unlimited health care and food assistance for “the poor”? It exudes the kind of hyperbole that earned Donald Trump the reputation for lying: “destroy” the educational system by getting rid of the wasteful and inept Department of Education and telling colleges that they can no longer enable anti-Semitism and practice racial discrimination? “Abuse desperate <cough> illegal immigrants? And who said that the United States “believes in Christianity” or any faith, when the Constitution explicitly prohibits a national religion?
The second, however, was initially circulated by a group protesting MSNBC’s firing of Joy Reid, a virulent anti-white racist, and the level of cognition it demonstrates shows it. The thing revels in apples vs. oranges comparisons, and its primary concern is that Trump dared to criticize the wonderful President whose only claim to anything but destructive mediocrity is his color. Finally, it appeals to the authority of un-named Presidential rankings regardless of the evaluator, when such ranking have been dominated by liberal and progressive historians since I was six.
Please let me know which you think is worse and why. And if your genuine reaction is, “Both sound about right to me!,” somehow you got here when you really want to be here.
__________________
Incidentally, I fully intended to put up a substantive post as well as two or more Comments of the Day, but I made the mistake of checking Facebook, had successive head explosions, and this was the best I could muster…
Ethics Alarms 
My feeling is that the first was much worse. I think because it has such blatantly false claims, not to mention that some of those are things Democrats have done.
Crops rotting in the field? That sounds like FDR’s administration. Sound perhaps like corn subsidies.
Abuse desperate immigrants? Isn’t that what Biden did?
Refuse to protect the Earth? I’m thinking that is what the IRA did.
But I’m just one of the deplorables, so what could I possibly know? I do, however, know how to code (or I did).
“I do, however, know how to code (or I did).”
No Hope-n-Change Green Jobs in your area…?
PWS
:snicker:
Nah, I prepare taxes and sell books. At my age, that’s all the keyboard ready jobs I need.
This is the crap that kept getting on my feed. I dumped FB just for that reason.
Nothing in the first is a factual statement and the second uses out of context data or subjective evaluations. The number of golf rounds mean little when you live on a golf course while the other does not. Comparing the number of EO’s is irrelevant the issue should be what were the orders. Moreover, EO’s that are required to force the progressive deep state bureaucracy to act differently will customarily require more than if the bureaucracy does not require orders to follow a progressive president. Covid and H1 N1 outbreak had existing protocols while COVID was novel. Moreover many deaths were attributed to covid as the cause instead of people who died with it. The protocol treatment using intubation led to more deaths than necessary and we won’t mention the fact that covid patients were placed in with vulnerable aging populations.
Crops rotting in the fields? He just took office in January, and now it’s early April. It’s going to be a bit before we have any potential for rotting crops.
“And who said that the United States “believes in Christianity” or any faith, when the Constitution explicitly prohibits a national religion?”
I believe that the reference to Christianity has to do with the massive numbers of evangelical Christian nationalists who have been backers of this administration and its policies, and whose repulsive version of Christianity the administration has used to justify much. The statement misspeaks when it says that the country “pretend[s] to believe in Christianity while perverting and debasing its tenets.” It ought to read “Would a civilized country… have leaders who use a perverted and debased version of Christianity to justify actions and programs so wholly foreign to the tenets of that faith…”
And please… before someone tries to lecture me as though I am a “newbie” here who doesn’t “get it” — You might not recognize my ID because I do not have the time to comment often, but I have been around this blog since its inception and oh boy do I get it. I am a loyal opposing voice, crying in the wilderness.
“So wholly foreign” by what measure? Do you mean the socialist standard, that it is government’s job to ensure no-one goes without? While I can understand the thought process behind it, and even agree in a VERY limited way, I do not believe Christianity is incompatible with capitalism. The Parable of the Talents comes to mind. As does 2 Thessalonians 3:10: “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.” And prospective immigrants would do well to remember “Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” There was an article I saw a long time ago that’s stuck with me ever since: “It’s not the government’s responsibility to take care of the poor, it’s yours.” Charity and looking after your neighbor is a commandment for the individual, who shouldn’t shirk their duty to their fellow man by assuming some distant government bureacracy will take care of it.
Or are you referring to Trump’s abrasive personality, his immoral ways of living, etc.? I wouldn’t hold him up as a role model (aside from his tenacity), but imperfect rulers can still do good, and even seemingly perfect rulers can fall. The biblical history of Israel shows as much. Even with pagan rulers, the office itself deserves a certain level of respect. Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar “Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.” (Daniel 2:38).
“Charity and looking after your neighbor is a commandment for the individual, who shouldn’t shirk their duty to their fellow man by assuming some distant government bureacracy will take care of it.”
No, of course not. But poverty as a societal issue is systemic and requires a systemic response. No individual can fix it.
and there is room for debate to what these responses are.
In this country, poverty is a function of poor choices. This is not some third world nation that treats women as chattel and limit their education. Men do not need to sell drugs to earn a living if they prepare for being productive as children. We feed every kid in school and at in their homes but what they eat is their decision. You do not need a computer to learn I did not own one until I graduated from college.
Poverty may be systemic but the root causes of such poverty is a reliance on the beneficence of government and an attitude that one is a perpetual victim.
Maybe the systemic response is telling people to go to school, don’t decide to have babies and go on public assistance. Education is not a “white” thing so when parents have their kids spend more time studying using our public libraries than spending their days on social media maybe they will learn to read, write and be able to make some change without the register telling them how to do it.
Maybe you should start evaluating at what progressive policies have wrought since the well intentioned great society programs and then you can start criticizing what worked in the past to make this country what it once was.
You may think you are a loyal opposing voice but only because your folks are not in power now. In fact, in my estimation it is the collective voices like yours that drive systemic want and desire which leads to economic poverty and poverty of mind and spirit.
What is your definition of a “Christian nationalist”?
Ah, this is why I should read all the comments before commenting.
What’s a Christian Nationalist?
The “Trump criticized” graphic is on there twice.
Not any more…
It seems from here – https://oceanstatecurrent.com/the-public-radio-journalists-view-of-the-united-states/ – that the first is actually from 2018 during Trump’s first term. I don’t know who Paul Haacker is or why I should care what he thinks or says. For all I know he has a 75 IQ and rants about lizards people in front of his local Walgreens.
Regardless of the timing, the first is worse. It is nothing but straw men, half truths, and misleading statements. “Reproductive rights” – AKA the “right to kill an unborn baby”. “Destroy the educational systems” – AKA restrict federal government’s intrusion in local schools. “Refuse to protect the earth from destruction” – AKA don’t destroy the economy and our way of life on tenuous “science”.
As a Christian, I would like to know what tenets are being perverted. I find that most people who make statements like this are wildly confused about what Christianity is truly about.
When a progressive says conservatives are perverting the tenets of Christianity they mean that “conservatives are bad when they oppose progressivism”
Same as when a socialist says conservatives pervert the tenets of Christianity, they mean that “conservatives are bad that they oppose socialism”