PDA

View Full Version : Why Is Karl Rove Against Christine O'Donnell?




anaconda
09-15-2010, 02:57 PM
She appears to be essentially supportive of neocon ideology. So why is ripping on her on Hannity's show? Is this possible disinformation by Rove? Is Rove actually a frigging evil genius? Is it possible that he realizes that he and the old GOP are so despised that now he's criticizing her with the idea of planting the idea that she is a counter culture hero? So that the rank and file GOP voters will vote for her, thinking they are voting for "change" when in fact O'Donnell would play right into the Rove agenda?

I need a reality check. Thanks.

KCIndy
09-15-2010, 03:03 PM
Yeah, I caught a replay of part of the Rove interview. I don't know much about O'Donnell, but it was abundantly clear that Rove detests her.

I have never seen a grown man come so close to breaking down and bawling like a little kid. He essentially blamed her for blowing any chance the Republicans had of taking back the Senate.

The whole thing was bizarre.

DirtMcGirt
09-15-2010, 03:06 PM
She has given some zany interviews back in the day about AIDS and masturbation.

low preference guy
09-15-2010, 03:09 PM
I think Karl Rove's ideology is more closely aligned to Democrats than Conservatives. Recall that he supported no child left behind, expansion of Medicare, and the bailouts. He is a big RINO who is just pissed that a fellow RINO (a supporter of cap and trade, restrictions on free speech, ambivalent about repealing obama) was defeated.

Xchange
09-15-2010, 03:13 PM
In short...She just jeopardized a Senate seat for the GOP

and she's crazy as hell

Xchange
09-15-2010, 03:13 PM
She has given some zany interviews back in the day about AIDS and masturbation.

that's just the beginning

Jordan
09-15-2010, 03:15 PM
From another thread:


It's good for republicans that she's going to lose.

The Republicans will have control of the House, but not the Senate. They can come up with some wickedly popular but unworkable bill in the House (killing the IRS without reducing spending, for instance), shoot it over to the Senate and let the Democrats vote it down. If not the Senate, then Obama vetoes it.

Either way, Republicans don't need the Senate. Nor should they want it. Being off by 1 vote in the Senate could mean much bigger gains in 2012 for the GOP. Political compound interest, so to speak.

For this thread: She's an easy one to cut off.

Humanae Libertas
09-15-2010, 03:17 PM
The only thing I agree with Rove is that she doesn't have a shot at winning the seat. Are people forgetting. She ran last election against Biden, and LOST...BIG TIME. She then went around lying to to people on how the race was almost a tie. She's already acting like a politician...

I don't support necons.

Aratus
09-16-2010, 08:00 AM
ms. christine o'donnell is tracking as a "momma grizzly" and he wants to dodge her claws...?

erowe1
09-16-2010, 08:21 AM
The Republicans will have control of the House, but not the Senate. They can come up with some wickedly popular but unworkable bill in the House (killing the IRS without reducing spending, for instance)

You're in dream land if you think the Republican controlled House would do anything like that.

Pericles
09-16-2010, 08:21 AM
This illustrates three themes at work here:

1. Washington depends on most of the Reps. and Sens. being "reasonable" - meaning no matter what it is that you want to do, negotiation and compromise are how the system works. People who become "unreasonable", and actually insist on their programs being put in place interfere with the smooth operation of "government".

2. "Tea Party" candidates are those who intend to do something, whether or not the party leadership want that particular thing - thus a threat to good order and the ability to work out deals with the various interest groups who represent the money for campaign contributions. This puts the party leadership in the position of either trying to "freeze out" those who don't go along, and in the process of not "vetting" candidates, voters are selecting some candidates with personal histories that may not be "attractive" in a mass media environment.

3. A substantial part of the electorate is "mad as Hell, and not going to take it anymore", and are willing to take the risks that party leaders are not going to take, because that precludes the possibility of making deals with political opponents. Voters want their priorities enacted - in the case of those candidates representing the "Tea Party" movement, that means actual repeal of programs at the federal level and really shrinking government - it is not just useful rhetoric to get elected, they really intend to do that stuff.

AlexMerced
09-16-2010, 08:23 AM
I think he's more pissed that she won after he tried to talk her into dropping out and they don't him to bug off.

A bit of a humbling experience for someone like Rove, last thing he wants is to be proven wrong and that the party can survive without him.

erowe1
09-16-2010, 08:24 AM
She appears to be essentially supportive of neocon ideology. So why is ripping on her on Hannity's show? Is this possible disinformation by Rove? Is Rove actually a frigging evil genius? Is it possible that he realizes that he and the old GOP are so despised that now he's criticizing her with the idea of planting the idea that she is a counter culture hero? So that the rank and file GOP voters will vote for her, thinking they are voting for "change" when in fact O'Donnell would play right into the Rove agenda?

I need a reality check. Thanks.

I think it's not just about ideology. It's about being a member of the club. Castle and Rove are members of the club, and members of the club support one another and do what they can to keep the door closed to people who would knock them from their pedestals regardless of party and ideology. I think Rove is also more interested in the party winning than anything ideological. So he wants nominations to go to candidates whom he considers most electable.

Feenix566
09-16-2010, 08:33 AM
I think Karl Rove's ideology is more closely aligned to Democrats than Conservatives. Recall that he supported no child left behind, expansion of Medicare, and the bailouts. He is a big RINO who is just pissed that a fellow RINO (a supporter of cap and trade, restrictions on free speech, ambivalent about repealing obama) was defeated.

This.

Rove, Bush, Cheney, McCane, Romney, Graham, and their ilk will all have their panties in a wad because Castle was one of their homeboys, and now he's unemployed.

erowe1
09-16-2010, 08:36 AM
I think Karl Rove's ideology is more closely aligned to Democrats than Conservatives. Recall that he supported no child left behind, expansion of Medicare, and the bailouts. He is a big RINO who is just pissed that a fellow RINO (a supporter of cap and trade, restrictions on free speech, ambivalent about repealing obama) was defeated.

Supporting those things doesn't make Rove a RINO, it just makes him a regular Republican. It's the conservatives who went against their party and opposed those items who are the Republicans in Name Only.

dean.engelhardt
09-16-2010, 08:36 AM
The republican party really doesn't want limited government. They want their cake and eat it too.

I think the O'Donnell nomination is a wake up call. Conservatives want the federal government to stop bankrupting us but the party wants the power to put us in the poor house.

The message is; we'll elected almost anybody if they'd get out of our wallet.

Aratus
09-16-2010, 09:10 AM
This.

Rove, Bush, Cheney, McCain, Romney, Graham, and their ilk
will all have their panties in a wad because Castle was
one of their homeboys, and now he's unemployed.

i happily agree. they all are in total shock...

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 09:33 AM
In short...She just jeopardized a Senate seat for the GOP

and she's crazy as hell

Is this based on past knowledge of her, or just based on recent information?

Heard that opinion echoed all over right-wing talk radio yesterday. It's amazing the influence of Carl Rove and the neo-cons.

The media can character assassinate almost anyone they want at any time. And cover up for people for years, such as the Clintons.

georgiaboy
09-16-2010, 09:43 AM
Interesting contrast that we didn't see this kind of schism when Rand defeated Trey.

Even with everyone's comments on this thread, I'm still not sure I understand why Rove et al are so disturbed by the O'Donnell win and didn't express similar concerns with Angle, Paul, etc.

Is this the straw that is breaking the establishment's back?

klamath
09-16-2010, 09:46 AM
In short...She just jeopardized a Senate seat for the GOP

and she's crazy as hell

And the people around here aren't?:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 10:05 AM
Interesting contrast that we didn't see this kind of schism when Rand defeated Trey.

Even with everyone's comments on this thread, I'm still not sure I understand why Rove et al are so disturbed by the O'Donnell win and didn't express similar concerns with Angle, Paul, etc.

Is this the straw that is breaking the establishment's back?

Yeah, this may have been the last straw. It's been building, although they have found Rand and Buck to be pretty acceptable. It's the Left that goes crazy over Rand.

It's interesting that the exact same people who will overlook all of Sarah Palin's flaws are attacking Angle and O'Donnell with a vengeance.

silentshout
09-16-2010, 10:14 AM
I don't like rove, but no, i do not put Rand in the same category as someone like O'donnell. She preaches fiscal responsibility, but her own financial affairs are a mess. She also strikes me as unhinged and uneducated. Rand does not.

libertarian4321
09-16-2010, 01:03 PM
In short...She just jeopardized a Senate seat for the GOP

and she's crazy as hell

Rove would rather have a "moderate" Republican like Castle who has a chance to win in a state like DE than a wild-eyed crazy extremist like O'Donnell who has little chance of winning.

Aratus
09-16-2010, 01:16 PM
in 2006 i do presume mr. castle was the cat's meow...

this is 2010 and we are inside our great recession...

kahless
09-16-2010, 01:26 PM
Greta Van Sustern gave Rove a platform again last night to bash her. At least Hannity wimply showed a little back bone questioning Mr. big government on his BS attack the night before.

CableNewsJunkie
09-16-2010, 02:25 PM
Hey Rove! All your base are belong to us!

anaconda
09-16-2010, 02:38 PM
Interesting contrast that we didn't see this kind of schism when Rand defeated Trey.

Even with everyone's comments on this thread, I'm still not sure I understand why Rove et al are so disturbed by the O'Donnell win and didn't express similar concerns with Angle, Paul, etc.

Is this the straw that is breaking the establishment's back?


This is a most astute observation.

anaconda
09-16-2010, 02:41 PM
Greta Van Sustern gave Rove a platform again last night to bash her. At least Hannity wimply showed a little back bone questioning Mr. big government on his BS attack the night before.

Hannity actually surprised me a bit. In a good way. I give his interview with Rove a Four Snowball rating.

Xchange
09-16-2010, 05:15 PM
Is this based on past knowledge of her, or just based on recent information?

Heard that opinion echoed all over right-wing talk radio yesterday. It's amazing the influence of Carl Rove and the neo-cons.

The media can character assassinate almost anyone they want at any time. And cover up for people for years, such as the Clintons.






O'Donnell warned of "orgy rooms" in college dorms
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/15/odonnell_orgy_rooms/index.html

Does Christine O'Donnell Think Dinosaur Bones Are Fake?
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-vine/77707/odonnell-carbon-dating-bogus

Christine O'Donnell in 1995: Women In Military Colleges Damage National Security
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/3340/christine_o%27donnell_in_1995:_women_in_military_c olleges_damage_national_security/

She also says smoking pot is immoral, masturbation is akin to adultery

She against pre-martial sex...Yet, at 41 she's not married
???

An associate in her camp released an ad calling Castle Gay and insinuated that he was cheating on his wife with a man
http://www.youtube.com/user/beachd652

She wants US troops in Iraq till their Gov is "stable" and wants to bomb Iran

Christine O’Donnell: How to Live on Less Than $13.00 A Day
http://www.delawaretomorrow.com/christine-odonnell-how-to-live-on-less-than-13-00-a-day/

Reporters Question O'Donnell about Princeton Grad School Claim
http://www.theweeklystandard.com/blogs/reporters-question-odonnell-about-princeton-grad-school-claim

Condoms spread Aids
http://vodpod.com/watch/4449663-christine-odonnell-circa-1997-aids-gets-too-much-govt-money?video_path=homepage?u=talkingpointsmemo&c=tpmtv?video_path=homepage

Ex-aide: Christine O'Donnell a 'complete fraud'
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42141.html

oyarde
09-16-2010, 05:30 PM
Yeah, I caught a replay of part of the Rove interview. I don't know much about O'Donnell, but it was abundantly clear that Rove detests her.

I have never seen a grown man come so close to breaking down and bawling like a little kid. He essentially blamed her for blowing any chance the Republicans had of taking back the Senate.

The whole thing was bizarre.

I have never seen Rove pout . I am leaning toward the evil genius thing .

oyarde
09-16-2010, 05:32 PM
The only thing I agree with Rove is that she doesn't have a shot at winning the seat. Are people forgetting. She ran last election against Biden, and LOST...BIG TIME. She then went around lying to to people on how the race was almost a tie. She's already acting like a politician...

I don't support necons.

Was about two to one if I recall .

cindy25
09-16-2010, 05:39 PM
1) Coons is no Biden
2) Obama is no longer popular
3) Delaware might be socially liberal but is fiscally conservative with no income tax
4) she is a bit nutty but this is 2010. anything can happen

erowe1
09-16-2010, 05:41 PM
O'Donnell warned of "orgy rooms" in college dorms
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/15/odonnell_orgy_rooms/index.html

Does Christine O'Donnell Think Dinosaur Bones Are Fake?
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-vine/77707/odonnell-carbon-dating-bogus

Christine O'Donnell in 1995: Women In Military Colleges Damage National Security
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/3340/christine_o%27donnell_in_1995:_women_in_military_c olleges_damage_national_security/

She also says smoking pot is immoral, masturbation is akin to adultery

She against pre-martial sex...Yet, at 41 she's not married
???

An associate in her camp released an ad calling Castle Gay and insinuated that he was cheating on his wife with a man
http://www.youtube.com/user/beachd652

She wants US troops in Iraq till their Gov is "stable" and wants to bomb Iran

Christine O’Donnell: How to Live on Less Than $13.00 A Day
http://www.delawaretomorrow.com/christine-odonnell-how-to-live-on-less-than-13-00-a-day/

Reporters Question O'Donnell about Princeton Grad School Claim
http://www.theweeklystandard.com/blogs/reporters-question-odonnell-about-princeton-grad-school-claim

Condoms spread Aids
http://vodpod.com/watch/4449663-christine-odonnell-circa-1997-aids-gets-too-much-govt-money?video_path=homepage?u=talkingpointsmemo&c=tpmtv?video_path=homepage

Ex-aide: Christine O'Donnell a 'complete fraud'
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42141.html

What's the big problem with all that stuff? I don't know enough about her policies to know if I'd be much of a supporter of hers or not. But doesn't the fact that Castle would vote for Cap and Trade and she wouldn't make up for all those things put together a hundred times over? And couldn't the same be said about probably a number of other important votes the winner of the election will cast? Plus, there's something to be said for giving the GOP establishment a black eye, and in some ways the more eccentric the candidate to do it, the better.

oyarde
09-16-2010, 05:42 PM
What's the big problem with all that stuff? I don't know enough about her policies to know if I'd be much of a supporter of hers or not. But doesn't the fact that Castle would vote for Cap and Trade and she wouldn't make up for all those things put together a hundred times over? And couldn't the same be said about probably a number of other important votes the winner of the election will cast? Plus, there's something to be said for giving the GOP establishment a black eye, and in some ways the more eccentric the candidate to do it, the better.

Yes , Cap and Tax , cannot get much worse than that .

oyarde
09-16-2010, 05:43 PM
Orgies and masturbation are still free and untaxed . :)

erowe1
09-16-2010, 05:47 PM
Orgies and masturbation are still fee and untaxed . :)

If anything, one might infer from all those claims about her, that she'd be less likely to support taxpayer funding for condoms, college, scientific research, and women in the military, all of which would be wonderful positions for a senator to take.

Xchange
09-16-2010, 05:53 PM
If anything, one might infer from all those claims about her, that she'd be less likely to support taxpayer funding for condoms, college, scientific research, and women in the military, all of which would be wonderful positions for a senator to take.

she supports federal funding for education

Xchange
09-16-2010, 05:56 PM
What's the big problem with all that stuff? I don't know enough about her policies to know if I'd be much of a supporter of hers or not. But doesn't the fact that Castle would vote for Cap and Trade and she wouldn't make up for all those things put together a hundred times over? And couldn't the same be said about probably a number of other important votes the winner of the election will cast? Plus, there's something to be said for giving the GOP establishment a black eye, and in some ways the more eccentric the candidate to do it, the better.

don't get me wrong the I love sticking to the man

but she's a loon...seriously
if one says dino bones are fake/Carbon dating is a farce or I'm going to hell for beating off and supports bombing Iran/occupation of Iraq...

I'm out

erowe1
09-16-2010, 05:59 PM
she supports federal funding for education

That's a major flaw. I don't doubt it. But got a link?

HOLLYWOOD
09-16-2010, 06:00 PM
Christine O'Donnell and Sarah Palin mocked the sociopath Rove... it's not Carl Rove, It's MC Rove.

PS: Notice the good ole press of all sides love their chummy shindigs along with the Aristocracy. Birds of a feather... look at these idiots at their black tie parties... I'm sure at the taxpayers expense. Absolutely Embarrassing & Ridiculous

I would address him as MC Rove for the rest of his life.

YouTube - Rapping Rove (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln5RD9BhcCo)

Xchange
09-16-2010, 06:03 PM
That's a major flaw. I don't doubt it. But got a link?

Christine O`Donnell on Education
Republican Challenger


Federal funding provides better continuity
Christine will work to ensure that our children do not suffer from funding crises and swings, by exploring Federal solutions to provide continuity.
http://grid.ontheissues.org/Social/Christine_O%60Donnell_Education.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Christine_O%60Donnell.htm

erowe1
09-16-2010, 06:05 PM
Christine O`Donnell on Education
Republican Challenger


Federal funding provides better continuity
Christine will work to ensure that our children do not suffer from funding crises and swings, by exploring Federal solutions to provide continuity.
http://grid.ontheissues.org/Social/Christine_O%60Donnell_Education.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Christine_O%60Donnell.htm

Thanks. That's way worse to me than anything she says about dinosaur bones.

Xchange
09-16-2010, 06:07 PM
Thanks. That's way worse to me than anything she says about dinosaur bones.

word...I'm a Christian

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 06:33 PM
O'Donnell warned of "orgy rooms" in college dorms
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/15/odonnell_orgy_rooms/index.html

Wednesday, Sep 15, 2010


Does Christine O'Donnell Think Dinosaur Bones Are Fake?
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-vine/77707/odonnell-carbon-dating-bogus

September 15, 2010


Christine O'Donnell in 1995: Women In Military Colleges Damage National Security
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/3340/christine_o%27donnell_in_1995:_women_in_military_c olleges_damage_national_security/


September 15, 2010

Ok, so this is the new "information" on her, not old stuff. No doubt the Left will be coming out with all kinds of stories like this. Rove may even help them. I don't see a whole lot of substance in them.

How many GOP candidates have said they believe in creation rather than evolution?


She also says smoking pot is immoral, masturbation is akin to adultery

She against pre-martial sex...Yet, at 41 she's not married
???

Yeah, she's on record with her puritan positions when she was 18. No doubt she has changed some stances since then (23 years later).

Frivolous and lucrative (for her) lawsuits are one thing. A lot of these new charges have no substance at all.

Xchange
09-16-2010, 06:53 PM
Wednesday, Sep 15, 2010




How many GOP candidates have said they believe in creation rather than evolution?



Yeah, she's on record with her puritan positions when she was 18. No doubt she has changed some stances since then (23 years later).

Frivolous and lucrative (for her) lawsuits are one thing. A lot of these new charges have no substance at all.

I digress...she was never 18 when she made these statements...
Your correct alot of the GOP believes in creation...they also believe dino bones are real..give me a break


The Christine O'Donnell campaign has paid at least $3,500 in consulting fees to a woman who appears to be O'Donnell's mother, FEC filings show.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/beltway-beast/christine-odonnells-mother-on-campaign-payroll/

You Can Legislate Morality
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/christine-odonnell-slams-_n_719201.html


O'Donnell Campaign Operated Without A Treasurer, Despite FEC Rules
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/odonnell_may_have_broken_fec_law_by_taking_cash_wi .php



all this is just the tip of the iceberg...
She's 41 never had a job and reported 5,800$ of earned income for 15 months??

something is not right

oyarde
09-16-2010, 06:55 PM
I digress...she was never 18 when she made these statements...
Your correct alot of the GOP believes in creation...they also believe dino bones are real..give me a break


The Christine O'Donnell campaign has paid at least $3,500 in consulting fees to a woman who appears to be O'Donnell's mother, FEC filings show.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/beltway-beast/christine-odonnells-mother-on-campaign-payroll/

You Can Legislate Morality
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/christine-odonnell-slams-_n_719201.html


O'Donnell Campaign Operated Without A Treasurer, Despite FEC Rules
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/odonnell_may_have_broken_fec_law_by_taking_cash_wi .php



all this is just the tip of the iceberg

:) For the record , I have always thought Dino bones to be real .

Xchange
09-16-2010, 07:00 PM
:) For the record , I have always thought Dino bones to be real .

me to:)

nate895
09-16-2010, 07:09 PM
:) For the record , I have always thought Dino bones to be real .

And where has any major creationist said they weren't?

This is typical of this forum (not against you, oyarde): Christine O'Donnell clearly shares our values on a wide range of issues, at least as many stated as Rand Paul and Ken Buck, but because her last name isn't Paul and she makes her Christian morals known, she must be a typical neocon and probably stupid at that. Just because someone happens to disagree with you on something doesn't make them stupid or a part of some sort of global conspiracy.

Oh, and, apparently John Dennis has a chance at winning in San Francisco, but O'Donnell's hopes in Delaware are non-existent.

Edit: I don't know about the education quote. Her positions on Wikipedia seem to be just as conservative, at least, as Rand Paul's.

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 07:16 PM
I digress...she was never 18 when she made these statements...
Your correct alot of the GOP believes in creation...they also believe dino bones are real..give me a break


Can you quote where she said that Dinosaur bones are not real? I didn't see that. She disputed the accuracy of carbon dating, which was probably fed to her in some pseudo-science way by some kind of religious evangelical. She doesn't sound a whole lot different than a lot of other people. If you are going to attack her based on her religious belief, you need to start one of those infamous red-herring threads on creation vs. evolution.

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 07:18 PM
Oh, and, apparently John Dennis has a chance at winning in San Francisco, but O'Donnell's hopes in Delaware are non-existent.



Hey now, they both have a chance! ;)

(and I'll support them both!)

oyarde
09-16-2010, 07:20 PM
And where has any major creationist said they weren't?

This is typical of this forum (not against you, oyarde): Christine O'Donnell clearly shares our values on a wide range of issues, at least as many stated as Rand Paul and Ken Buck, but because her last name isn't Paul and she makes her Christian morals known, she must be a typical neocon and probably stupid at that. Just because someone happens to disagree with you on something doesn't make them stupid or a part of some sort of global conspiracy.

Oh, and, apparently John Dennis has a chance at winning in San Francisco, but O'Donnell's hopes in Delaware are non-existent.

Edit: I don't know about the education quote. Her positions on Wikipedia seem to be just as conservative, at least, as Rand Paul's.

It would be most excellent to see Dennis win .

Xchange
09-16-2010, 07:21 PM
Can you quote where she said that Dinosaur bones are not real? I didn't see that. She disputed the accuracy of carbon dating, which was probably fed to her in some pseudo-science way by some kind of religious evangelical. She doesn't sound a whole lot different than a lot of other people. If you are going to attack her based on her religious belief, you need to start one of those infamous red-herring threads on creation vs. evolution.

You misunderstand me my friend...I use dino bones to show her stupidity
I have 7 or so more links of her suspect behavior


I won't say dino bones if you look at the checks she wrote to her mom the consultant while living on 13 dollars a day
http://www.delawaretomorrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ODonnell_2010_PFD.pdf

A second payment, dated July 13, 2010, lists $3,000 for "financial consulting services."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/beltway-beast/christine-odonnells-mother-on-campaign-payroll/

and she don't share a majority of my values...she's a neo-con war monger

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 07:27 PM
And how about her Democrat competition?

From 5/3/10:


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36726.html

Coons took 'bearded Marxist' turn

By ALEX ISENSTADT | 5/3/10 10:52 PM EDT

An article Democrat Chris Coons wrote for his college newspaper may not go over so well in corporation-friendly Delaware, where he already faces an uphill battle for Vice President Joe Biden’s old Senate seat.

The title? “Chris Coons: The Making of a Bearded Marxist.”

Xchange
09-16-2010, 07:28 PM
And how about her Democrat competition?

From 5/3/10:

he's a Marxist....quite the conundrum


it's our fault for letting it get this bad

nate895
09-16-2010, 07:28 PM
It would be most excellent to see Dennis win .

That might be true, but wishful thinking does not change the likelihood it is going to happen.


and she don't share a majority of my values...she's a neo-con war monger

We simply do not know that. Her most recent statements on the issue were from mid-2008. Many people have changed their minds, particularly within the GOP, on the issue since then. We have to remember that this movement started as an * or maybe 1 in early 2007. We are going to have to accept people who have changed their mind if we are going to hope to have any success whatsoever.

paulitics
09-16-2010, 07:34 PM
This illustrates three themes at work here:

1. Washington depends on most of the Reps. and Sens. being "reasonable" - meaning no matter what it is that you want to do, negotiation and compromise are how the system works. People who become "unreasonable", and actually insist on their programs being put in place interfere with the smooth operation of "government".

2. "Tea Party" candidates are those who intend to do something, whether or not the party leadership want that particular thing - thus a threat to good order and the ability to work out deals with the various interest groups who represent the money for campaign contributions. This puts the party leadership in the position of either trying to "freeze out" those who don't go along, and in the process of not "vetting" candidates, voters are selecting some candidates with personal histories that may not be "attractive" in a mass media environment.

3. A substantial part of the electorate is "mad as Hell, and not going to take it anymore", and are willing to take the risks that party leaders are not going to take, because that precludes the possibility of making deals with political opponents. Voters want their priorities enacted - in the case of those candidates representing the "Tea Party" movement, that means actual repeal of programs at the federal level and really shrinking government - it is not just useful rhetoric to get elected, they really intend to do that stuff.



This. She is probably a neocon, but a loose cannon at the same time. They can't control her, therefore she won't fit nicely into any template that have predesigned.

She may be a wildcard, when certain bill s come up...and throw the whole thing off, causing stagnation.

She is a monkey wrench to smooth government, and we don't want smooth government.

So far I don't like her, but I can see why Rove, or Rove's handlers are scared of her.

oyarde
09-16-2010, 07:36 PM
he's a Marxist....quite the conundrum


it's our fault for letting it get this bad

Yes another Marxist , which means if I lived there , no matter how nutty she might be , I would probably have to vote for her . Time for the Marxists to come out of power .

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 07:56 PM
You misunderstand me my friend...I use dino bones to show her stupidity

Ok, so you were exaggerating, and she never said she doesn't believe in dinosaur bones. You really don't seem to like her. Karl, is that you? ;)


and she don't share a majority of my values...she's a neo-con war monger

Well, no one here will agree with her if she wants to continue the nation building and policing of the world. If she is a true fiscal conservative, she will eventually see that it's a waste of money, and a failed, counter-productive policy.

The other choice is a guy who calls himself a Marxist, the choice is clear, even if some compromises have to be made on certain issues.

Xchange
09-16-2010, 08:01 PM
Yes another Marxist , which means if I lived there , no matter how nutty she might be , I would probably have to vote for her . Time for the Marxists to come out of power .

I hear ya



but one has to keep an eye out,,,when Sarah Palin acting as kingmaker tweets and a war monger social misfit lunatic like O'Donnell wins the primary and collects 1 mil$$$ overnight...

Thats treading in dangerous territory...imo

Xchange
09-16-2010, 08:02 PM
she will eventually see

stop

nate895
09-16-2010, 08:03 PM
I hear ya



but one has to keep an eye out,,,when Sarah Palin acting as kingmaker tweets and a war monger social misfit lunatic like O'Donnell wins the primary and collects 1 mil$$$ overnight...

Thats treading in dangerous territory...imo

I'm sorry, but I read the same kind of comments at the HuffPo.

Xchange
09-16-2010, 08:12 PM
I'm sorry, but I read the same kind of comments at the HuffPo.

is it not true


do you agree with Sarah playing kingmaker with the Tea Party?


Sarah who was for Amnesty
for the bailout
wants to bomb Iran
wants to continue the occupation in Iraq
wants to surge in Afghanistan

that a dangerous kingmaker...no?

cindy25
09-16-2010, 08:48 PM
they don't trust O'Donnell, or Palin, or Angle; and certainly don't trust Paul (Ron or Rand)

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 09:20 PM
stop

Krautenhammer? Is that you? I just saw your spot on O'Reilly, still attacking O'Donnell...

Brian4Liberty
09-16-2010, 09:21 PM
do you agree with Sarah playing kingmaker with the Tea Party?


So is this a Palin issue for you? What's your angle?

nate895
09-16-2010, 10:09 PM
is it not true


do you agree with Sarah playing kingmaker with the Tea Party?


Sarah who was for Amnesty
for the bailout
wants to bomb Iran
wants to continue the occupation in Iraq
wants to surge in Afghanistan

that a dangerous kingmaker...no?

Sarah Palin is not a "kingmaker." Jim DeMint is more of a "kingmaker" than she is. Sarah Palin has endorsed both winning and losing candidates, and some of those losing candidates lost pretty bad. Furthermore, Sarah Palin has endorsed non-interventionists, such as Clint Didier, who came in third behind Democrat Patty Murray and DeMint-endorsed Dino Rossi in our state's top two primary. He got in between 1/4 and a 1/3 of the GOP vote. Sarah Palin does not even have the ability to anoint herself; She hasn't even received 30% in a poll for the GOP nomination for President. Generally, a candidate's endorsement is a lot less powerful than what they can muster as a candidate themselves. The only possible exception to that rule is someone like Ron Paul.

anaconda
09-16-2010, 10:37 PM
Now Karl is taking a different tone...

YouTube - Rove Walks Back His O'Donnell Diss (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-9eU6wdLIM&feature=player_embedded)

Xchange
09-17-2010, 08:15 AM
So is this a Palin issue for you? What's your angle?

I have posted 10 or so links of O'Donnell's suspect behavior
If You choose to look past them...that's your choice



here's just one more

What the world has learned about Christine O'Donnell
http://www.salon.com/news/tea_parties/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/09/16/christine_odonnell_post_primary



The truth will come out soon enuff...

For me I don't support neo-con flat earthers who claim to make 5,800 a year while living in her campaign headquarters and paying her mom 3000$ consultant fees...

libertarian4321
09-17-2010, 08:32 AM
I have posted 10 or so links of O'Donnell's suspect behavior
If You choose to look past them...that's your choice



here's just one more

What the world has learned about Christine O'Donnell
http://www.salon.com/news/tea_parties/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/09/16/christine_odonnell_post_primary



The truth will come out soon enuff...

For me I don't support neo-con flat earthers who claim to make 5,800 a year while living in her campaign headquarters and paying her mom 3000$ consultant fees...

Holy crap, this woman is no Ron Paul, that's for sure. I thought her neocon foreign policy and bizarre social conservative standards against masturbation and the like were bad enough, but that stuff pales in comparison to some of her antics. Her stance on not allowing co-ed dorms in college was also extremely ridiculous.

A gender discrimination suit against a Conservative non-profit group for $6.9 million for mental anguish because she didn't get a promotion. Really? Good Lord. That sounds like the kind of crap I'd expect from Hillary Clinton or Gloria Allred.

Donnelly is an erratic and unstable mess, at best. A scam artist at worst.

Either way, I don't see any reason it would be "good" to have her in Congress.

I'll say it again, she's no Ron Paul.

klamath
09-17-2010, 08:32 AM
I have posted 10 or so links of O'Donnell's suspect behavior
If You choose to look past them...that's your choice



here's just one more

What the world has learned about Christine O'Donnell
http://www.salon.com/news/tea_parties/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/09/16/christine_odonnell_post_primary



The truth will come out soon enuff...

For me I don't support neo-con flat earthers who claim to make 5,800 a year while living in her campaign headquarters and paying her mom 3000$ consultant fees...

Wow, Salon. nice unbiased source there. The truth may come out on you as well.

Brett85
09-17-2010, 08:35 AM
Holy crap, this woman is no Ron Paul, that's for sure. I thought her neocon foreign policy and bizarre social conservative standards against masturbation and the like were bad enough, but that stuff pales in comparison to some of her antics. Her stance on not allowing co-ed dorms in college was also extremely ridiculous.

A gender discrimination suit against a Conservative non-profit group for $6.9 million for mental anguish because she didn't get a promotion. Really? Good Lord. That sounds like the kind of crap I'd expect from Hillary Clinton or Gloria Allred.

Donnelly is an erratic and unstable mess, at best. A scam artist at worst.

Either way, I don't see any reason it would be "good" to have her in Congress.

I'll say it again, she's no Ron Paul.

Who cares if she's against masturbation personally. Those are just her own personal, religious values. She never said that she wanted the government to ban masturbation.

libertarian4321
09-17-2010, 08:40 AM
From Brian's TNR link above, O'Donnell (who had no college degree) speaking on why carbon dating doesn't work:


CHRISTINE O'DONNELL: Now, he said that it's based on fact. I just want to point out a couple things. First of all, they use carbon dating, as an example, to prove that something was millions of years old. Well, we have the eruption of Mt. Saint Helens and the carbon dating test that they used then would have to then prove that these were hundreds of millions of years younger, when what happened was they had the exact same results on the fossils and canyons that they did the tests on that were supposedly 100 millions of years old. And it's the kind of inconsistent tests like this that they're basing their 'facts' on.

I think Palin is supporting O'Donnell because O'Donnell makes Palin look rational and intelligent by comparison.

Can someone post something good about O'Donnell, because everything I've seen coming out about her makes her look like a complete nut?

libertarian4321
09-17-2010, 08:46 AM
Who cares if she's against masturbation personally. Those are just her own personal, religious values. She never said that she wanted the government to ban masturbation.

Regarding banning masturbation, co-ed dorms, pre marital sex, etc. You're right, I haven't as yet seen anything where she stated she wants government action to prevent these "evil" acts (I'm just starting to learn more about Ms. O'Donnell).

However, I have not seen anything to indicated that she wouldn't use the power of government to stop them, either- if she has, I'd love to see the link to allay my fears.

She seems to be an extremist social conservative zealot, and those are the kinds of people who love to use the government to legislate morality.

Brett85
09-17-2010, 08:46 AM
From Brian's TNR link above, O'Donnell (who had no college degree) speaking on why carbon dating doesn't work:



I think Palin is supporting O'Donnell because O'Donnell makes Palin look rational and intelligent by comparison.

Can someone post something good about O'Donnell, because everything I've seen coming out about her makes her look like a complete nut?

Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution either. I guess that makes him a nut in your eyes as well.

klamath
09-17-2010, 08:55 AM
From Brian's TNR link above, O'Donnell (who had no college degree) speaking on why carbon dating doesn't work:



I think Palin is supporting O'Donnell because O'Donnell makes Palin look rational and intelligent by comparison.

Can someone post something good about O'Donnell, because everything I've seen coming out about her makes her look like a complete nut?
Most of congress is nuts and a good portion of the posters here are nuts so I think I will go with the strategy of a nutty republican senate to gridlock a nutty President and frusterate nutty Obama voters.

libertarian4321
09-17-2010, 09:04 AM
Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution either. I guess that makes him a nut in your eyes as well.

It's one of the few things about Ron Paul that gives me pause. I've often wondered if he really believes this or if it's one of the few times he's bent to political pressure to say what Republicans want to hear.

In any event, I never said Ron Paul was perfect, but he is, in general, a rational, honest, intelligent, and principled law maker. Ron Paul has never allowed that to affect the way he legislates. For example, Ron Paul has never tried supported a Federal bill pushing "intelligent design" (or whatever they're calling creationism this week).

O'Donnell, on the other hand seems neither rational nor honest nor intelligent. She may be principled, but her principles seem to be that of an extremist theocrat rather than a Constitutionalist.

Now I'm reading that she doesn't pay her campaign bills and lied about her college degree. What other skeletons does this woman have in her closet?

Although of all the crazy things O'Donnell has done, the one I find the most appalling is her "Gender Discrimination" lawsuit against the conservative non-profit. What the Hell was that all about? Looks like O'Donnell was just playing the "law suit lottery."

libertarian4321
09-17-2010, 09:08 AM
Most of congress is nuts and a good portion of the posters here are nuts so I think I will go with the strategy of a nutty republican senate to gridlock a nutty President and frusterate nutty Obama voters.

I don't know anything about her opponent (just as I knew nothing about O'Donnell a couple of days ago), but it's probably a safe bet that he's not a good candidate (unless he's a "libertarian" Democrat- which I doubt).

I'm not supporting her opponent, but I'm for damned sure not going to support a basket case like O'Donnell. I don't know why some here are lauding her as if she were a good candidate.

About the only thing good I have seen about O'Donnell is that she looks pretty good. Seems a waste that she's a 41-year old virgin :)

Brett85
09-17-2010, 09:32 AM
It's one of the few things about Ron Paul that gives me pause. I've often wondered if he really believes this or if it's one of the few times he's bent to political pressure to say what Republicans want to hear.

In any event, I never said Ron Paul was perfect, but he is, in general, a rational, honest, intelligent, and principled law maker. Ron Paul has never allowed that to affect the way he legislates. For example, Ron Paul has never tried supported a Federal bill pushing "intelligent design" (or whatever they're calling creationism this week).

O'Donnell, on the other hand seems neither rational nor honest nor intelligent. She may be principled, but her principles seem to be that of an extremist theocrat rather than a Constitutionalist.

Now I'm reading that she doesn't pay her campaign bills and lied about her college degree. What other skeletons does this woman have in her closet?

Although of all the crazy things O'Donnell has done, the one I find the most appalling is her "Gender Discrimination" lawsuit against the conservative non-profit. What the Hell was that all about? Looks like O'Donnell was just playing the "law suit lottery."

Yeah, O'Donnell certainly isn't a great candidate. The Republicans could've came up with a better candidate than either Castle or O'Donnell. I don't want to get into a religous debate, but there's many Ron Paul supporters who don't believe in evolution. Evolution has never been a proven fact. It's simply a theory. Ron Paul is a Christian who believes in creationism, and that's really the only view that Christians can take in my opinion. But I agree that there shouldn't be any kind of federal "intelligent design" bill. That issue should be left up to local school boards, as education should be a local issue.

Brian4Liberty
09-17-2010, 09:44 AM
I have posted 10 or so links of O'Donnell's suspect behavior
If You choose to look past them...that's your choice


Yep, every time I look at the links, there is no substance. Pretty standard religious stuff from O'Donnell, reported as if it's a big deal.

A "lust in the heart" conversation? Jimmy Carter was famous for saying the same thing...

erowe1
09-17-2010, 10:09 AM
She seems to be an extremist social conservative zealot, and those are the kinds of people who love to use the government to legislate morality.

No. Extremist social conservative zealots are not any more than anyone else the kinds of people who love to use government to legislate morality. The entire Democrat party is not populated by very many social conservatives, yet almost all it does is use government to legislate morality as they define it (such as environmental legislation and welfare programs). The neoconservatives are not generally social conservatives, but its entire essence is the use of government to legislate morality as they define it (such as deposing dictators and replacing them with democracies).

Social conservatives, by contrast are generally much more inclined toward small government and individual responsibility than the socially liberal establishments of either party are. By and large they represent some of Ron Paul's closest allies within the GOP. I don't know enough about O'Donnell to know if that applies to her or not. But her thinking that various sexual practices are sinful doesn't suggest she isn't in any way.

Granted, since the late 90's there has arisen within the religious right a movement of so-called "compassionate conservatism," exemplified by G.W. Bush and Huckabee, that has moved the old religious right more toward acceptance of the welfare state. But the older style is still around in patriot groups and the Eagle Forum, etc. And there's certainly no relationship between social conservatives and politics that shows them to be overall more inclined than social liberals to impose morality on others using government.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 10:36 AM
Because she wont tow the Darby/Scoffield biblical delusion all christian churches brainwashes their flocks with called dispensationalism/Zionism.

Translation for the uneducated= she isn't a trusted insider neocon/zionist.

erowe1
09-17-2010, 10:41 AM
Because she wont tow the Darby/Scoffield biblical delusion all christian churches brainwashes their flocks with called dispensationalism/Zionism.

Translation for the uneducated= she isn't a trusted insider neocon/zionist.

How do you know this about her?

And you don't really think Rove is a dispensationalist do you? Or for that matter, that any major neoconservatives are?

Frankly, if you asked me which person is more likely to believe in dispensationalist theology, Rove or O'Donnell, based on what I know about both, I'd have to say O'Donnell.

And dispensationalism, incidentally, does not entail zionism.

Liberty Star
09-17-2010, 11:21 AM
She appears to be essentially supportive of neocon ideology. So why is ripping on her on Hannity's show? Is this possible disinformation by Rove? Is Rove actually a frigging evil genius? Is it possible that he realizes that he and the old GOP are so despised that now he's criticizing her with the idea of planting the idea that she is a counter culture hero? So that the rank and file GOP voters will vote for her, thinking they are voting for "change" when in fact O'Donnell would play right into the Rove agenda?

I need a reality check. Thanks.

Is she really?

I thought she had called Iraq a huge blunder and wanted to bring troops home.

Xchange
09-17-2010, 02:40 PM
Wow, Salon. nice unbiased source there.

Wow Salon????so what if it's a lib site
why don't you address her cutting her mother a 3000$ check for consulting??



The truth may come out on you as well.

what that I drove 900 miles to Rally for the Republic ?

Xchange
09-17-2010, 02:44 PM
Is she really?

I thought she had called Iraq a huge blunder and wanted to bring troops home.

Strategy to bring troops home from Iraq: it’s called victory
Most importantly, Christine has a strategy for bringing our troops home from Iraq: It’s called victory. Past mistakes should not deter our need to stabilize Iraq so we can get our troops home. We can succeed in the future, but we must accompany our efforts with the honor and respect we’ve earned as a people. We cannot leave on the enemy’s terms. We must leave on our terms.


Consider military action against Iran
The three Republican candidates agreed that Iran, which Western governments fear is intent on developing nuclear weapons and which has close ties to Shiite leaders in Iraq, has benefited from the war in Iraq. Ms. O’Donnell was the only candidate, however, to assert that the U.S. should consider military action against Iran. “You can’t negotiate with the devil,” said Ms. O’Donnell, who also asserted that China has a “carefully thought out and strategic plan to take over America.”
Source: Randall Chase, Associated Press, on NewsZap.com Sep 5, 2006

Stay in Iraq until its government is stable
All three [Republican Senate primary candidates] brandish conservative credentials. They agree taxes should not be raised. They think U.S. troops should stay in Iraq until its government is stable. And all have pledged not to serve more than two six-year terms.
http://archive.ontheissues.org/International/Christine_O%60Donnell_War_+_Peace.htm

anaconda
09-17-2010, 02:44 PM
Is she really?

I thought she had called Iraq a huge blunder and wanted to bring troops home.

Somebody here said that she supported a preemptive strike on Iran.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 02:47 PM
How do you know this about her?

And you don't really think Rove is a dispensationalist do you? Or for that matter, that any major neoconservatives are?

Frankly, if you asked me which person is more likely to believe in dispensationalist theology, Rove or O'Donnell, based on what I know about both, I'd have to say O'Donnell.

And dispensationalism, incidentally, does not entail zionism.

Actually, you are partially correct and I am wrong about Odonnel. After reading a piece about her, she is definitely a neocon/zionist, my bad, continue on......yes, dispensationalism has won the day again.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 02:53 PM
And dispensationalism, incidentally, does not entail zionism.

Really, then how come Darby and Scoffield ( of Bible fame ), twisted the scriptures painfully to create support for actual Israel instead of the spiritual Israel?

Without this discernment of a mad man, there would be no support of a physical Israel by the christian church. As christians in america, we have been lied to since 1830 when Mr. Darby claimed that only he could understand the Bible and therefore he and Scoffield did conspire and burden the people's of the world with another wonderful fake version of Christanity that has been the basis of all our woes up to today.

The rabbit hole must go to the core of the earth.

p.s. christians might want to study this issue in much detail since their very salvation may ride on this deception.

erowe1
09-17-2010, 02:58 PM
Really, then how come Darby and Scoffield ( of Bible fame ), twisted the scriptures painfully to create support for actual Israel instead of the spiritual Israel?


The Israel they talked about was the literal nation of the twelve tribes of Israel descended from Jacob of the Old Testament, not the modern nation-state. In their day the modern nation-state did not exist. Nor did they write in favor of political action to bring it into existence. Nor is there any clear way in my mind to equate the modern nation-state with the ancient nation of Israel, and that's even when we're still talking about physical Israel from a dispensational perspective, and not some "spiritual Israel."

Both of them also taught that the current dispensation of the Church Age is one in which God has suspended his dealings with Israel and will not resume them until after he raptures the Church. You may have problems with this theologically, but it definitely does not entail zionism in the current political sense.

And when I look to the foremost evangelical proponents of Christian zionism, the main ones that come to mind are John Hagee and Pat Robertson, neither of whom are dispensationalists. Yes, some well-known dispensationalists (just like those nondispensationalists) are zionists, like Hal Lindsey. But zionism is not a part of dispensationalism.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 03:02 PM
The Israel they talked about was the literal nation of the twelve tribes of Israel descended from Jacob of the Old Testament, not the modern nation-state. In their day the modern nation-state did not exist. Nor did they write in favor of political action to bring it into existence. Nor is there any clear way in my mind to equate the modern nation-state with the ancient nation of Israel, and that's even when we're still talking about physical Israel, and not some "spiritual Israel."

Both of them also taught that the current dispensation of the Church Age is one in which God has suspended his dealings with Israel and will not resume them until after he raptures the Church. You may have problems with this theologically, but it definitely does not zionism in the current political sense.

And when I look to the foremost evangelical proponents of Christian zionism, the main ones that come to mind are John Hagee and Pat Robertson, neither of whom are dispensationalists. Yes, some well-known dispensationalists (just like some nondispensationalists) are zionists, like Hal Lindsey. But zionism is not a part of dispensationalism.


Wish you were right.

http://www.insider-magazine.com/ChristianMafia.htm

YouTube - Onward, Christian Zionists (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYWlB64upSc)

erowe1
09-17-2010, 03:04 PM
Wish you were right.

http://www.insider-magazine.com/ChristianMafia.htm

YouTube - Onward, Christian Zionists (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYWlB64upSc)

Nowhere does that article mention dispensationalism.

I think I've seen that video before. If it's the one I remember, those people aren't dispensationalists either.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 03:07 PM
Nowhere does that article mention dispensationalism.

I think I've seen that video before. If it's the one I remember, those people aren't dispensationalists either.

If you can't take the time to read it or watch the video shut your pie hole cause your spewing untruths.

erowe1
09-17-2010, 03:11 PM
If you can't take the time to read it or watch the video shut your pie hole cause your spewing untruths.

I didn't need to read the article. I did a search on "dispen" and before I finished the word, it already showed that there were zero occurrences.

I can't watch the video at the moment, but like I said, I think I've seen it before.

At any rate, so far everything I've said about dispensationalism is accurate. I don't see how you can think you've proven otherwise by posting links to things that are unrelated to dispensationalism.

Edit: The video I'm thinking of featured this lady: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becky_Fischer I'm pretty certain that she's not a dispensationalist (though she definitely is a zionist). But again, I'm not sure if the link you gave is the same video.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 03:31 PM
I didn't need to read the article. I did a search on "dispen" and before I finished the word, it already showed that there were zero occurrences.

I can't watch the video at the moment, but like I said, I think I've seen it before.

At any rate, so far everything I've said about dispensationalism is accurate. I don't see how you can think you've proven otherwise by posting links to things that are unrelated to dispensationalism.

Edit: The video I'm thinking of featured this lady: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becky_Fischer I'm pretty certain that she's not a dispensationalist (though she definitely is a zionist). But again, I'm not sure if the link you gave is the same video.

Darby is the father of dispensationalisum and Zionism!!

http://www.theologue.org/JNDarby-SSizer.htm

erowe1
09-17-2010, 03:38 PM
Darby is the father of dispensationalisum and Zionism!!

http://www.theologue.org/JNDarby-SSizer.htm

Every single occurence of the word "zionism" in that article is from someone else trying to pin zionism on Darby without presenting a single zionist sentence from anything Darby himself actually said. All you're doing is making a false claim and then trying to back it up by referring to someone else before you who made the same false claim.

fedup100
09-17-2010, 03:57 PM
Every single occurence of the word "zionism" in that article is from someone else trying to pin zionism on Darby without presenting a single zionist sentence from anything Darby himself actually said. All you're doing is making a false claim and then trying to back it up by referring to someone else before you who made the same false claim.

You are hopelessly lost, enjoy your journey. Trying to get rid of your false views on this subject is equal to trying to remove odor from dog shit.

Peace&Freedom
09-17-2010, 04:24 PM
The neo-cons have co-opted and mutated evangelical views toward Israel, independent of dispensationalism. If one looks at evangelical books and articles about prophecy from decades ago, there is no overlay of non-stop pro-war rhetoric or this crazy idolatrization of Israel over and above any other interest in the mideast. The neocons have politicized and secularized the theology, warping it into the current messology it is.

All that being said, I am supportive of dispensational approach to scripture, and support for Israel in the traditional sense (praying for peace of Jerusalem), not the pro-Israel be it right or wrong nation worship of today. Dispensationalism basically is just the principle that while God does not change, our complete understanding of his plan changes over time as events unfold. An example of this is in Christ's advent itself---until the ministry of Christ, the disciples thought there would be only one Advent, not two. The Church itself was a secret, so there was no way it could also be symbolically the Israel of end-time prophecy. There will be a tribulation period of judgement, but Israel will be on the receiving end of much of it, due to its maltreatment of its Arab neighbors.

The doctrine of a future rapture or blessed hope, and the tribulation and the fulfillment of as-yet unfulfilled remaining prophecies to physical Israel goes back to the Didache (an early Christian fragment from the last first/early second century, early church fathers such as Barnabus, pseudo-Ephriam and other writers---it did not start with Darby.

low preference guy
09-17-2010, 04:47 PM
Karl Rove is a big rubber.

YouTube - Tea Party Express derails GOP candidates 茶黨æ¶ç›¡å…±å’Œé»¨é¢¨å…‰ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrcIWgF5cYs)

Liberty Star
09-17-2010, 04:50 PM
Because he wants her to win due to sheer repulsion his words create?

fedup100
09-17-2010, 04:58 PM
The neo-cons have co-opted and mutated evangelical views toward Israel, independent of dispensationalism. If one looks at evangelical books and articles about prophecy from decades ago, there is no overlay of non-stop pro-war rhetoric or this crazy idolatrization of Israel over and above any other interest in the mideast. The neocons have politicized and secularized the theology, warping it into the current messology it is.

That is because Israel had not "entered in " decades ago. Since there has been a physical Israel whether God brought them in or not, NOW and ever since they entered in, 99.9% of all christian churches tell their flock they must support Israel no matter what. In fact, the book of revelation and the coming pre- trib rapture is based solely on the physical Israel and what ever may or may not happen to her. Prior to their manipulated 'entering in", the scriptures referring to Israel as the apple of Gods eye kept those wary in line.

All that being said, I am supportive of dispensational approach to scripture, and support for Israel in the traditional sense (praying for peace of Jerusalem), not the pro-Israel be it right or wrong nation worship of today.

I agree with this 100%.

Dispensationalism basically is just the principle that while God does not change, our complete understanding of his plan changes over time as events unfold. An example of this is in Christ's advent itself---until the ministry of Christ, the disciples thought there would be only one Advent, not two. The Church itself was a secret, so there was no way it could also be symbolically the Israel of end-time prophecy. There will be a tribulation period of judgement, but Israel will be on the receiving end of much of it, due to its maltreatment of its Arab neighbors.


Despite the alleged simple, plain method of interpretation claimed by the average dispensationalist, the supposedly self-evident nature of the system, and the fact that it appears at the bottom of the page of the world's most popular reference Bibles, like all other theologies dispensationalism has undergone development. Though the dispensational theologians have always understood this, the average Joe Dispensationalist today does not fully appreciate this fact. "If it was good enough for Paul, it is good enough for me!" Many Christians sincerely — and wrongly — believe that dispensationalism was held in the early church. This is at least partly related to the concerted dispensational effort to couple the fortunes of dispensationalism with those of premillennialism, which did have early origins.

http://www.reformed-theology.org/ice/newslet/dit/dit02.97.htm


The doctrine of a future rapture or blessed hope, and the tribulation and the fulfillment of as-yet unfulfilled remaining prophecies to physical Israel goes back to the Didache (an early Christian fragment from the last first/early second century, early church fathers such as Barnabus, pseudo-Ephriam and other writers---it did not start with Darby.

Hope this helps

Dianne
09-17-2010, 06:09 PM
I've watched Karl Rove "turd blossom's" (George Bush's nickname, not mine) interviews regarding O'Donnell and he is basically destroying her, in order for the demo candidate to win. This should prove to everyone that the established GOP turd blossom's such as Karl Rove, sleep with the Demo turd blossom's. Believe me, Karl Rove wishes the demo candidate to win. Karl Rove is the only one out there I've seen on national tv talking about O'Donnell's lack of credentials, credibility, intelligence, etc. as though George Bush had an ounce of any of those.

The establishment feels extremely threatened at the moment. There is no difference between the majority in the republican and democratic Congress. They all kneel to the same master, they all seek to destroy you and I for the same master; and feel sooooooooooooooooooooooo threatened we the masses have finally awakened.

What haunts me, is why demo's have not joined the tea party... I'm not talking about Sarah Palin's bs tp movement, but the real one we created back in 2007 in support of Ron Paul. They are using the same bs tactics to destroy O'Donnell as they did to destroy Paul in 2007. A bunch of lying bs pieces of dog shit on both sides of their "pretended" aisle.