@Ted Lind – Really? Really? “They did it worse!!” When Republicans screw up MSNBC, CBS, CNN, etc. all Jump on them and make sure they are publicly shamed (And they should). But save a little moral outrage for what she did rather then the fact that somebody actually disclosed it.
From Halliburton to Hastert, the right is blind to reality about their own people, like well the list of those CONVICTED from within those “respected” Republican administrations, not to mention those who should have been from "W"’s.
@dtroutma – Read my previous post and it will hang the lie about your words. I want the news to bring out the truth about Republicans and Democrats alike. All we know about Hastert so far is that he was paying blackmail – It remains to be seen about what but if it rises above adultery I’ll be right there with you shaking my finger and saying shame.
But saying “Republicans did it too” is no defense for Hillary’s malfeasance. If she is this secretive and slimy while courting the Democratic nod – Just imagine what she will be like in the White house. No Thank you!!!!
It is NOT about “they did it too”. It is about the fact that Republicans were CONVICTED of criminal activity, some later released by “conservative” judges appointed by their party.
Bill was a scumbag in his PRIVATE sexual relationships, but he didn’t do anything illegal in those acts. “Whitewater” after Starr spent millions investigating, found nothing illegal occurred. Other Clinton “scandals” have likewise not been illegal, and with such things as “Benghazi”, the right’s attacks have been unfounded, and often outright lies and defamation.
Yes, there is a difference between “they did it”, and “they didn’t do it”.
I’m not fond of HIllary’s personality or stands on some issues, and yeah, Bill’s actions were kinda’ creepy, but the constant creation of “scandal” out of Repubican cheesecloth, not whole cloth borders on , or crosses into, the absurd. (Especially by comparison to what really WAS done by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.)
#1. None of mine are in office. I have historically cited on these pages that I am neither republican or democrat. I seek out the candidate who has a positive moral record they sincerely try to uphold. It is seldom I find anyone from either party who fits this model so I have voted off party and have even written in candidates. Some may call this a wasted vote, but at least I have a clear conscience. .#2. As “I seek out the candidate who has a positive moral record they sincerely try to uphold”, I have never found a Democrat worthy of my vote. I will give the Democrats one over on the republicans for honesty. Democrats almost always legislate against the best moral choice, but they habitually campaign on a platform of moral deviancy and so they essentially remain true to self. The Republicans on the other hand often campaign on the moral high road and then flock to the sewer with their Democrat compatriots after elected..#3. I believe our elected officials should be held to a higher standard. If any of them are found to be in the legal or moral sewer they should be removed from office…,immediately, and certainly never re-elected. Unfortunately, as is evidenced from these pages, I am in a very small minority. The party line rules all here. “if our guys are corrupt, their guys are worse so its okay for our guys to get away with it”. You, WiseOrator are a shining example of this last point. If you have ever spoken against a Democrat, I certainly have never seen it. Well, at least you seem comfortable with your nose ring.
I find it interesting that you castigate me by misapplying one verse in the Bible “Judge not, that ye be not judged”, and then go and judge me for my post and judge Republicans as morally repugnant. The fact of the matter is people make judgments of right and wrong all the time by choosing their own actions, with whom they will associate and what they will allow into their lives. The verse in question refers to making rash and unjust judgments. Christ is not condemning the forming of an opinion concerning the conduct of others, in fact he later states “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment”; righteous judgment being that which conforms to the word of God. This is where I get my standards from. I am certainly not perfect at upholding all Biblical standards, but I do my best, repent when I fail, and am always seeking to improve. .The Ten Commandments you mentioned are a broad brush picture of sin that is further defined throughout the Bible. A good representation of this can be found in Galatians 5:19-21 “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God”..We must understand one thing when we talk of freedom. Freedom is not free: it comes with a price. That price is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Without that one trait coming into play a persons free choice becomes very expensive indeed..One of the common liberal mantras is “what a person does in their bedroom is their own business”. In other words fornication and adultery is okay. Tell me Mr. Orator, after people have played out their free sex choice who ends up picking up a large part of the tab for all the sexually transmitted diseases, the unwed mothers, the illegitimate children, the deadbeat dads, the broken homes (from adultery) and the abortions? Seems the judicial system and the taxpayer pay a heavy price for that free choice..Drinking is another free choice. The mantra here is “Drink Responsibly” but that statement falls flat on its face as soon as it is uttered. Alcohol begins breaking down inhibitions at the very first drink and no one knows if they are inclined to be an alcoholic prior to taking that first drink. But tell me Mr. O, After that free choice to drink is made, who pays for the police to patrol the streets to stop DUIs? Who pays for the drunken brawls, the battered wives, or the battered children? Who pays for the innocent victim killed by a drunk driver or for the grief and suffering of the victim’s family? Where was the victims free choice?.Since you brought up the Bible let’s consider these verses: 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. 12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread”..And: 1 Timothy 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. .These are just three of the many moral standards found in the Bible that most people today like to circumvent by saying “I have the freedom to choose how I live my own life. You said “so long as it does not significantly impact how someone else is allowed to live their life”. I only chose 3, but if you were to look at any moral choice made that goes against the Bible you will find a significant cost in taxes, not to mention the burden it places on our legal and medical systems. I work hard for my money. I would rather see it used to help my own family or those who truly can’t help themselves, then see it spent on irresponsible free choices.
1.They are not sinning against me and my money, they are sinning against the Lord..2.We are to forgive others (as in the people), we are not to forgive the sin. After healing the impotent man Jesus told him in John 5:14:” Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee”. Likewise with the adulterous woman in John 8:11 Jesus said: “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more”. Jesus forgave the repentant sinner, He did not forgive or encourage further sin..3.The Bible is consistent in stating that forgiveness is contingent upon repentance (i.e. a sincere regret or penitence concerning the sin). Jesus stated in Luke 17:3 “Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; AND IF HE REPENT, forgive him”. Notice that rebuking (i.e. to express sharp, stern disapproval of) is also called for with regards to the sin..4.To see how Jesus handled unrepentant sinners you should read what he had to say to the Pharisees starting at Matthew 23:13, or how he handled the money changers (et al) in the temple starting at John 2:14. Doesn’t sound too forgiving..5.The last reference I used above (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12) doesn’t sound too forgiving either. If you are able to work and choose not to, then you should not eat. Doesn’t seem like the Bible supports welfare for the lazy.
Did you read my entire post or did you just pull something you felt comfortable attacking with your own personal interpretation of the Bible?.Jesus instructed Christians in Luke 17:3 “Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; AND IF HE REPENT, forgive him”..Jesus here clearly states that we as Christians are to rebuke someone that sins (which requires making a judgment on if what someone is doing is a sin) and then only if that person repents should they be forgiven..I compare scripture with scripture, and provide scriptural quotes to support a biblical point. You then take my words, sprinkle in what seems to be your personal bias on what YOU THINK the Bible says, and attack..2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
You started by asking:“Now tell us how you interpret that deal made in the Lord’s Prayer where people ask God to judge and forgive them to the same degree that they judge and forgive others who sin against them.” To which I gave an answer directly from scripture. Not by my words (or interpretation), but those of Jesus..Then you made a snide (judgmental) remark of how “all those drinkers and fornicators and takers who are sinning against [me] and [my] money”, which completely took my words out of context. The point I made was that those sins, as defined in the Bible, cost all of us not only money, but are also a heavy burden on our judicial and medical systems. Nowhere did I ever say they were sins against me personally..Then it seems you completely ignored all but one sentence of the post you replied to and falsely accuse me of wanting to replace God. How do you come to that conclusion when the only “interpretation” I gave of what the Bible says on sin and a Christian’s response to it came from direct quotes of scripture? If a person is trusting in God to make his entire point sola scriptura how can he be considered as wanting to replace God or being prideful or self-glorifying?.Oh well, have a nice day.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member almost 9 years ago
Where are all the right wing scandals? Neither party has a lock on bad behavior. We have it at all levels of government and business.
Wraithkin almost 9 years ago
“If you like you plan, you can keep it. Period.”
Mephistopheles almost 9 years ago
@Ted Lind – Really? Really? “They did it worse!!” When Republicans screw up MSNBC, CBS, CNN, etc. all Jump on them and make sure they are publicly shamed (And they should). But save a little moral outrage for what she did rather then the fact that somebody actually disclosed it.
feverjr Premium Member almost 9 years ago
She hasn’t been elected yet and already the GOP wants her impeached.
Kentcee almost 9 years ago
I want Clinton and Elizabeth Warren. They would scare the crap out of everyone.
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
From Halliburton to Hastert, the right is blind to reality about their own people, like well the list of those CONVICTED from within those “respected” Republican administrations, not to mention those who should have been from "W"’s.
Mephistopheles almost 9 years ago
@dtroutma – Read my previous post and it will hang the lie about your words. I want the news to bring out the truth about Republicans and Democrats alike. All we know about Hastert so far is that he was paying blackmail – It remains to be seen about what but if it rises above adultery I’ll be right there with you shaking my finger and saying shame.
But saying “Republicans did it too” is no defense for Hillary’s malfeasance. If she is this secretive and slimy while courting the Democratic nod – Just imagine what she will be like in the White house. No Thank you!!!!
Pauleytee almost 9 years ago
How can there be any indictments, when Hil uses her own private server, and then deletes all the emails, genius?
Pauleytee almost 9 years ago
Oink, oink
FishDog93 almost 9 years ago
It’s hard to indict someone when they lie, and destroy evidence!
The only sheep on here that repeats lies are democrats.
Jason Allen almost 9 years ago
See, this is one of the reasons I’ve always considered the Clintons to be Republicans.
debauche almost 9 years ago
Excellent ’toon Michael!
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
It is NOT about “they did it too”. It is about the fact that Republicans were CONVICTED of criminal activity, some later released by “conservative” judges appointed by their party.
Bill was a scumbag in his PRIVATE sexual relationships, but he didn’t do anything illegal in those acts. “Whitewater” after Starr spent millions investigating, found nothing illegal occurred. Other Clinton “scandals” have likewise not been illegal, and with such things as “Benghazi”, the right’s attacks have been unfounded, and often outright lies and defamation.
Yes, there is a difference between “they did it”, and “they didn’t do it”.
I’m not fond of HIllary’s personality or stands on some issues, and yeah, Bill’s actions were kinda’ creepy, but the constant creation of “scandal” out of Repubican cheesecloth, not whole cloth borders on , or crosses into, the absurd. (Especially by comparison to what really WAS done by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.)
rnapiera almost 9 years ago
#1. None of mine are in office. I have historically cited on these pages that I am neither republican or democrat. I seek out the candidate who has a positive moral record they sincerely try to uphold. It is seldom I find anyone from either party who fits this model so I have voted off party and have even written in candidates. Some may call this a wasted vote, but at least I have a clear conscience. .#2. As “I seek out the candidate who has a positive moral record they sincerely try to uphold”, I have never found a Democrat worthy of my vote. I will give the Democrats one over on the republicans for honesty. Democrats almost always legislate against the best moral choice, but they habitually campaign on a platform of moral deviancy and so they essentially remain true to self. The Republicans on the other hand often campaign on the moral high road and then flock to the sewer with their Democrat compatriots after elected..#3. I believe our elected officials should be held to a higher standard. If any of them are found to be in the legal or moral sewer they should be removed from office…,immediately, and certainly never re-elected. Unfortunately, as is evidenced from these pages, I am in a very small minority. The party line rules all here. “if our guys are corrupt, their guys are worse so its okay for our guys to get away with it”. You, WiseOrator are a shining example of this last point. If you have ever spoken against a Democrat, I certainly have never seen it. Well, at least you seem comfortable with your nose ring.
lesmcf almost 9 years ago
Your strip is digustingly biased. Wait for some proof before you smear people.
rnapiera almost 9 years ago
I find it interesting that you castigate me by misapplying one verse in the Bible “Judge not, that ye be not judged”, and then go and judge me for my post and judge Republicans as morally repugnant. The fact of the matter is people make judgments of right and wrong all the time by choosing their own actions, with whom they will associate and what they will allow into their lives. The verse in question refers to making rash and unjust judgments. Christ is not condemning the forming of an opinion concerning the conduct of others, in fact he later states “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment”; righteous judgment being that which conforms to the word of God. This is where I get my standards from. I am certainly not perfect at upholding all Biblical standards, but I do my best, repent when I fail, and am always seeking to improve. .The Ten Commandments you mentioned are a broad brush picture of sin that is further defined throughout the Bible. A good representation of this can be found in Galatians 5:19-21 “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God”..We must understand one thing when we talk of freedom. Freedom is not free: it comes with a price. That price is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Without that one trait coming into play a persons free choice becomes very expensive indeed..One of the common liberal mantras is “what a person does in their bedroom is their own business”. In other words fornication and adultery is okay. Tell me Mr. Orator, after people have played out their free sex choice who ends up picking up a large part of the tab for all the sexually transmitted diseases, the unwed mothers, the illegitimate children, the deadbeat dads, the broken homes (from adultery) and the abortions? Seems the judicial system and the taxpayer pay a heavy price for that free choice..Drinking is another free choice. The mantra here is “Drink Responsibly” but that statement falls flat on its face as soon as it is uttered. Alcohol begins breaking down inhibitions at the very first drink and no one knows if they are inclined to be an alcoholic prior to taking that first drink. But tell me Mr. O, After that free choice to drink is made, who pays for the police to patrol the streets to stop DUIs? Who pays for the drunken brawls, the battered wives, or the battered children? Who pays for the innocent victim killed by a drunk driver or for the grief and suffering of the victim’s family? Where was the victims free choice?.Since you brought up the Bible let’s consider these verses: 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. 12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread”..And: 1 Timothy 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. .These are just three of the many moral standards found in the Bible that most people today like to circumvent by saying “I have the freedom to choose how I live my own life. You said “so long as it does not significantly impact how someone else is allowed to live their life”. I only chose 3, but if you were to look at any moral choice made that goes against the Bible you will find a significant cost in taxes, not to mention the burden it places on our legal and medical systems. I work hard for my money. I would rather see it used to help my own family or those who truly can’t help themselves, then see it spent on irresponsible free choices.
rnapiera almost 9 years ago
1.They are not sinning against me and my money, they are sinning against the Lord..2.We are to forgive others (as in the people), we are not to forgive the sin. After healing the impotent man Jesus told him in John 5:14:” Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee”. Likewise with the adulterous woman in John 8:11 Jesus said: “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more”. Jesus forgave the repentant sinner, He did not forgive or encourage further sin..3.The Bible is consistent in stating that forgiveness is contingent upon repentance (i.e. a sincere regret or penitence concerning the sin). Jesus stated in Luke 17:3 “Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; AND IF HE REPENT, forgive him”. Notice that rebuking (i.e. to express sharp, stern disapproval of) is also called for with regards to the sin..4.To see how Jesus handled unrepentant sinners you should read what he had to say to the Pharisees starting at Matthew 23:13, or how he handled the money changers (et al) in the temple starting at John 2:14. Doesn’t sound too forgiving..5.The last reference I used above (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12) doesn’t sound too forgiving either. If you are able to work and choose not to, then you should not eat. Doesn’t seem like the Bible supports welfare for the lazy.
rnapiera almost 9 years ago
Did you read my entire post or did you just pull something you felt comfortable attacking with your own personal interpretation of the Bible?.Jesus instructed Christians in Luke 17:3 “Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; AND IF HE REPENT, forgive him”..Jesus here clearly states that we as Christians are to rebuke someone that sins (which requires making a judgment on if what someone is doing is a sin) and then only if that person repents should they be forgiven..I compare scripture with scripture, and provide scriptural quotes to support a biblical point. You then take my words, sprinkle in what seems to be your personal bias on what YOU THINK the Bible says, and attack..2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
rnapiera almost 9 years ago
You started by asking:“Now tell us how you interpret that deal made in the Lord’s Prayer where people ask God to judge and forgive them to the same degree that they judge and forgive others who sin against them.” To which I gave an answer directly from scripture. Not by my words (or interpretation), but those of Jesus..Then you made a snide (judgmental) remark of how “all those drinkers and fornicators and takers who are sinning against [me] and [my] money”, which completely took my words out of context. The point I made was that those sins, as defined in the Bible, cost all of us not only money, but are also a heavy burden on our judicial and medical systems. Nowhere did I ever say they were sins against me personally..Then it seems you completely ignored all but one sentence of the post you replied to and falsely accuse me of wanting to replace God. How do you come to that conclusion when the only “interpretation” I gave of what the Bible says on sin and a Christian’s response to it came from direct quotes of scripture? If a person is trusting in God to make his entire point sola scriptura how can he be considered as wanting to replace God or being prideful or self-glorifying?.Oh well, have a nice day.