Hypocrisy and Right vs. Left Wing

[ribozyme]

Heck, He mighta had me retire so I can hang out here on CAF and challenge folks who think a bunch of country club elites are the reason he’s raking leaves or flipping burgers. They are NOT the reason, YOU are the reason. I can’t speak for ANYONE but me, but I’m telling y’alll I made it because I put my trust in Him and myself, and ignored those that said I couldn’t do it.

So how do you imagine the liberal elites? How do you image their schemes to allegedly destroy this country? Yes, liberal elites do have contempt for people in the South and Middle America, but they do genuinely possess concern for their well being although they philosophically disagree. Well, I can attest to that because I think like a liberal elite.

 

[rlg94086]

Well said!

I live in a state where people of this person’s ideology are trying to eliminate public employee retirement altogether. They’re also trying to eliminate public employees, too, but that’s a different story.

Really? California Republicans are trying to eliminate retirement for firefighters? I find that hard to believe. Can you provide a link?

 

[BamaRider]

Ribo is wantin to know-

So how do you image the liberal elites? How do you image their schemes to allegedly destroy this country? Yes, liberal elites do have contempt for people in the South and Middle America, but they do genuinely possess concern for their well being although they philosophically disagree

I don’t believe they want to destroy the country, they genuinely believe in their agenda, and that is why you gotta call them out. There’s a bunch of folks out there and they don’t pay any attention to this stuff, so you gotta helpe them see.

When a regular guys hears, “I’m gonna get ya healthcare, I’m gonna jack up the taxes on the upper miiddle class, and give it to y’all, I’m gonna make sure everybody has a job etc” He’ll think, “hey that sounds pretty good, those rich been gettin over on me too long, I need to ge me some of that health care and free college for the kids etc.” and he buys into it. And now you are pimped to the libs, because without them you can’t get healthcare, education, decent wages, childcare etc. They will come to you for more and more money to keep these floundering programs alive and soon you’re like the UK and Canada where 50% of a guys wages is garnished by the govt to keep with the ever increasing demands for the giveways. Its a endless cycle. Go look at Detroit if you wanna see what happens when a liberal entity is allowed to run amuck.

How so ya check libeal elites? Ya gotta do that at the voting booth. You have to expose them and what they want for the country at every oppurtunity, because once you do, that idedology will be rejected by the folks, because they’re agenda is to make as many people as they can dependent on govt and that in turns means votes, and they stay in power. It offers no hope and no vision.

I don’t believe for a minute they’re worried about me as much as they wanna stay in power. When you depend on the govt, you are at the mercy at whatever crumbs they throw your way. Because they are NOT gonna give ya the tools to empower the individual, they’re just gonna give ya check. Notice how election time comes and they open up the treasury with all kinds of promises of govt programs.

The lib looks at this as a zero sum game, the rich guy makes a dollar, and the working guy loses a dollar. So the govt needs to step in and make things equitable. The pie is only so big in their world.

But in MINE, the pie is infinite, we can grow it if the govt stays outta the way. George Soros slice ain’t got nothing to do with mine, but he wants me to think it does.

 

[goofyjim]

Don’t forget those of us who are disabled for whom it is a struggle to work twenty hours a week. We will never be able to enjoy the luxury life of the elites and risk having the rug pulled out from under us because of the socalled waste in government. I agree there is waste in government but that doesn’t mean every welfare program automatically falls under that category.

 

[Ender]

So how do you imagine the liberal elites? How do you image their schemes to allegedly destroy this country? Yes, liberal elites do have contempt for people in the South and Middle America, but they do genuinely possess concern for their well being although they philosophically disagree.

It is uncharitable to assume the worst about people. The “liberals want to destroy the country” argument, like the “conservatives only care about the rich” charge, are both vicious and vacuous. I have no doubt that there are people who satisfy both arguments, but for the most part I think people are doing what they genuinely believe is best. Some will disagree with this but it’s not an argument worth having because intentions don’t matter (to God, yes, to us, no).

Either a proposal is a good idea or it is not and it doesn’t become good or bad based on the integrity of the person who proposes it.

It is the argument for or against the proposal that is important, not the slander or praise about the individual who supports it. Think how our discussions would change if we focused solely on the merits of a proposal and left off attacking the proposer. I know that might not provide the visceral satisfaction one gets from a well phrased insult but it might be more productive.

Ender

 

[Amolibri]

It is uncharitable to assume the worst about people. Think how our discussions would change if we focused solely on the merits of a proposal and left off attacking the proposer. I know that might not provide the visceral satisfaction one gets from a well phrased insult but it might be more productive.

Ender

Agreed. Now, is this POSSIBLE??? We can only try.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

LCM said-

If so, that is incorrect. Those hired with the promise of that pension should not have it lifted. If they wanna change the rules for new hires, that’s different. But I’ll say this, last revenue crisis in this state they layed off a bunch of paper shufflers, and nobody missed them! Now y’all know as well as I do, you could phase out 15% of the state work force and nobody would know they ain’t there! Because every Friday 25% of them are off anyway!! ROFL

Have you ever heard of flexible work hours…like 9/8/80 or 10/40? Some people are off on Friday because they work those kinds of schedules.

There are a few things govt does well, national defense and public safety are 2 of them.

I perceive that you’re a Rush Limbaugh dittohead. You read like his two books.

Not gonna fib, my pension is lucarative, and the plan is NOT state run, but privately managed by one of the best in the country. It is 90% funded (the recent market put a hit on it till they could get stuff shulffled around) and the State can not touch it (oh how they wish they could) it is nothing like that fiasco they call Social Security that a bunch of libs sold us all those years ago.

And I am a member of the best publicly-run pension program in the country and have little worries about my pension. Here’s the thing…my pension isn’t out to make a profit for itself (which yours is…how much are you paying in administrative fees?), but for its members.

 

[SoCalRC]

This is the crux of the problem. No poster on this forum has said or inferred that “compromise” is the “one true path to salvation.” That is an absolutely ridiculous statement. Nor has anyone said that you “must” follow their lead in order to be a true Catholic…with the exception possibly of you.

It seems to me that one proclaims themselves to be the “only” source of good, on the only “real” issue, and decries everyone else as a “sideline” or “coach potato” Catholic, they are, in fact, declaring themselves morally superior.

When they go further, and indicate that the represent the sort of morals we would all do well to emulate (as Bamarider did in this very thread), miss interpretation seems harder still.

You claim that compromise in voting for someone who is not 100% on the Catholic non-negotiables is “faltering in following God.” What an incredibly sanctimonious, judgmental statement.

It depends upon your point of view. If you are an extreme Evangelical, you are saved by simply accepting Christ’s nature. If you are Catholic, you have to put Christ’s message into practice if you hope to be saved, and the Church is our interpreter.

We Catholics call to mind our sinfulness and unworthiness each and every Mass, to properly prepare ourselves for the Gift of the Mass and the Eucharist.

If I were making a judgement, I would be making a relative moral comparison between myself and others. But I have repeatedly acknowledged that I am just another sinner. So, it appears that your objection is my suggestion that conservatives are not, in fact, rightous and superior, which brings us full circle back to the previous point…

 

[goofyjim]

In case anyone forgot Matthew 25 Jesus isn’t going to ask us whether we were left wingers or right wingers in order for admittance into the kingdom. In fact when you couple Matthew 25 with the Beatitudes he has given us the blueprint so these pointless arguments of a whether a particular political viewpoint is more favored by God do nothing but further divide us which is exactly what Satan wants.

 

[rlg94086]

It seems to me that one proclaims themselves to be the “only” source of good, on the only “real” issue, and decries everyone else as a “sideline” or “coach potato” Catholic, they are, in fact, declaring themselves morally superior.

When they go further, and indicate that the represent the sort of morals we would all do well to emulate (as Bamarider did in this very thread), miss interpretation seems harder still.

It depends upon your point of view. If you are an extreme Evangelical, you are saved by simply accepting Christ’s nature. If you are Catholic, you have to put Christ’s message into practice if you hope to be saved, and the Church is our interpreter.

We Catholics call to mind our sinfulness and unworthiness each and every Mass, to properly prepare ourselves for the Gift of the Mass and the Eucharist.

If I were making a judgement, I would be making a relative moral comparison between myself and others. But I have repeatedly acknowledged that I am just another sinner. So, it appears that your objection is my suggestion that conservatives are not, in fact, rightous and superior, which brings us full circle back to the previous point…

Nice try, SoCal, but you have repeatedly condemned conservatives in your posts - that is “making a judgment” and taking a moral high ground. Yes, we are all sinners. Can you explain how Vern’s use of the term “couch potato Catholic” is morally inferior to your denegration of conservatives as not being in line with Catholic teaching? Since you have repeatedly said that **you **are speaking as a Catholic (iow…the rest of us lowly Catholic conservatives and liberals are just idealogues because we choose to identify with a political party), you are automatically setting yourself up as a moral authority.

Hypocrisy at it’s finest.

 

[SoCalRC]

But in MINE, the pie is infinite, we can grow it if the govt stays outta the way.

The problem is that we can’t all live in fantasy land. There is only one measurable reality that we know of. In that one, we have a $500B deficit, overwhelmingly structural, and have doubled our national debt in just 7 years.

Certainly, one can keep repeating economic fantasies, like cutting taxes increases revenue (the GAO says ‘no, it doesn’t’). One can even believe them with all their heart, much like a toddler and the Easter Bunny.

But, one of the other lessons that I took from my father is that we have to deal with the real cards we are dealt, not delude ourselves with wishful thinking. Right now, the reality is that we are recklessly crushing our childrens’, and their children’s, and their childrens’ childrens’ financial future and prosperity. I grew up without indoor plumbing and I’m now in the top percentile of earners, so tremendous things are possible - but no matter how much you wish it to be true, we can keep stuffing charcoal in our mouths until we gag at the very sight of it but there is still no way we are going to start miraculously pooping diamonds.

 

[rlg94086]

In case anyone forgot Matthew 25 Jesus isn’t going to ask us whether we were left wingers or right wingers in order for admittance into the kingdom. In fact when you couple Matthew 25 with the Beatitudes he has given us the blueprint so these pointless arguments of a whether a particular political viewpoint is more favored by God do nothing but further divide us which is exactly what Satan wants.

Very true googyjim. As I have said repeatedly, we all have to pray and make the best choice, in line with Church teaching. While I will vehemently disagree with other’s choices at times, I recognize that, as Catholics, we are doing our best to follow Christ.

I will still encourage, cajole, etc. Catholic Democrats to place pro-life issues above their personal views of Church teaching on social justice. I will still encourage, cajole, etc. Republicans to keep pro-life issues on the forefront and not slide toward the pro-choice side. I will still encourage, cajole, etc. fellow Catholics who wrongly, in my opinion, cast their vote third party and thereby help elect pro-choice politicians.

However, with all my encouragement and cajoling, I still respect their right to make a thoughtful, prayerful vote. I may not understand or agree with their reasoning, but I respect their decision.

 

[goofyjim]

The problem is that we can’t all live in fantasy land. There is only one measurable reality that we know of. In that one, we have a $500B deficit, overwhelmingly structural, and have doubled our national debt in just 7 years.

Certainly, one can keep repeating economic fantasies, like cutting taxes increases revenue (the GAO says ‘no, it doesn’t’). One can even believe them with all their heart, much like a toddler and the Easter Bunny.

But, one of the other lessons that I took from my father is that we have to deal with the real cards we are dealt, not delude ourselves with wishful thinking. Right now, the reality is that we are recklessly crushing our childrens’, and their children’s, and their childrens’ childrens’ financial future and prosperity. I grew up without indoor plumbing and I’m now in the top percentile of earners, so tremendous things are possible - but no matter how much you wish it to be true, we can keep stuffing charcoal in our mouths until we gag at the very sight of it but there is still no way we are going to start miraculously pooping diamonds.

Tax cuts would grow revenue through a growing economy if they were directed at keeping jobs here instead of throwing them all overseas. I agree with the notion of targeted tax cuts. If you use them to create jobs in the US you get to keep them. If you create jobs overseas then you lose them. This way the cycle stays here. Otherwise you will have people here on the unemployment line with no way to pay the benefits because the money has all gone abroad.

 

[SoCalRC]

Nice try, SoCal, but you have repeatedly condemned conservatives in your posts

Can you give an example of condeming? I’ve pointed out that there is evidence that self described conservatives think differently. Notice the word ‘different’, not better or worse. The measurable world seems to have less influence on them. In response, self described conservatives have boasted that what I said has no bearing on the proper interpretation of my motives.

Can you explain how Vern’s use of the term “couch potato Catholic” is morally inferior to your denegration of conservatives as not being in line with Catholic teaching?

One is a relative moral comparison. The other is an observation of behavior. Vern is declaring that Catholics who act out their faith differently then he are inferior Catholics. I am noting that conservatives are not supporting Catholic doctrine which the Church has pronounced to be ‘non negotiable’ in voting.

Notice that conservatives here are happy to reinforce that, ‘of course’ they want to torture detainees.

Since you have repeatedly said that **you **are speaking as a Catholic (iow…the rest of us lowly Catholic conservatives and liberals are just idealogues because we choose to identify with a political party), you are automatically setting yourself up as a moral authority.

There are two problems with this argument. First, ‘Catholic’ only carries authority with those who believe in the Apostolic nature of the Church, the Church’s origin and special recognition from Christ, and the Pope as Peter’s rightful successor. The vast majority of the ‘religious right’ aggressively reject all three of these.

Second, I have openly and directly asserted a ‘proper moral authority’ - the Mother Church and the Vicar of Christ. As a Catholic, that is the proper authority for me. Just as God is the one true source of power.

You can certainly reject this - most of the religious right in the US do. But again, as a Catholic, I think we’d be a lot better off getting our moral direction from the Pope than, say, an overweight, draft dodging, drug felon, who has a history of serial divorce.

Hypocrisy at it’s finest.

That would appear to be a judgement. When I pointed out measurable discrepencies between conservative stated views and acts, I noted only the perception of hypocrisy.

It is a distinction I suspected would ellude many here. But, as has been noted, my hypothesis is that your perceived hypocrisy is more due to way of viewing and menally processing the world.

 

[SoCalRC]

Tax cuts would grow revenue through a growing economy if they were directed at keeping jobs here instead of throwing them all overseas. I agree with the notion of targeted tax cuts. If you use them to create jobs in the US you get to keep them. If you create jobs overseas then you lose them. This way the cycle stays here. Otherwise you will have people here on the unemployment line with no way to pay the benefits because the money has all gone abroad.

I would agree, some tax credits, in particular, have historically been very successful in spurring growth. Generally, the return on investment has been very good when we, as a society, invest in creating new wealth. For example, the GI bill after WW-II helped create an exploding middle class. We saw something similiar when we used land grants to create new wealth and ownership in the century before (conservatives at the time wanted to sell off the lands to the highest bidders and use the funds to pay down national debt).

But economics is complicated and the only true test of something are the measurable results over time. We have pursued massive tax cuts and trickle-down economics with a vengence for 7 years. We’ve seen stagnant wages, anemic job growth, and exploding public debt. All against a background of exploding productivity, an incredibly weak dollar, and record corporate profits.

It all depends on your priorities. Uncle Sam currently tries to reward me for moving jobs overseas and keeping revenue abroad. We also give billions to the oil industry depsite $110+ oil. When you start going down the list it is very difficult for me to believe that the current administration is interested as much in rising the overall tide as it is in making sure that the yachts are well provided for.

 

[rlg94086]

Interesting. If we stay in the context of the recent exchanges, the natural question would be - **how do the conservative Catholics here justify voting for the GOP **since it so closely aligned with Evangelicals who do not even consider us Christian, but a pagan sect that should be erradicated?

It seems to me that, if we hold the Apostolic nature of our Church to be true, then a coallition that rejects our sacrament of marriage, the nature of the sacrament of baptism, the status of our priests, the Eucharist at the center of our Mass, and even our status of our Christianity, would normally constitute seperation from the True Body of the Faithful.

So, you are trying to tell me, that you are making no judgment here? You don’t think that conservative Catholics who vote for the GOP “constitute seperation from the True Body of the Faithful,” you are just stating a hypothesis? Riiiiiiiiight. Whatever makes you feel better, SoCal.

I’m pretty sure that anybody reading your posts has a pretty good idea of where you stand.

 

[SoCalRC]

I will still encourage, cajole, etc. Catholic Democrats to place pro-life issues above their personal views of Church teaching on social justice.

I think this highlights the difference of opinion between us. I view Catholic pro-life teaching as an absolute. Compromise merely makes us politically impotent, since there is no motivation for any political entity to actually reflect our values.

For me, it is simple:

Bagram Collection Point

Multiple blunt force injuries. Abrasion in upper right forehead. Abrasion on right lower forehead above eyebrow. Multiple contusions on right cheek and lower nose, left upper forehead, back of head. Abrasions on chest, lower costal margin. Contusions on arm, elbow, forearm, wrist, upper inner arm, groin, inner thigh, right back of knee and calf, left calf, left lower leg. Cause of death was pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries.

Manner of death: Homicide (A02-093)

Detainee was found unresponsive restrained in his cell. Death was due to blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease.Contusions and abrasions on forehead, nose, head, behind ear, neck, abdomen, buttock, elbow, thigh, knee, foot, toe, hemorrhage on rib area and leg. Detainee died of blunt force injuries to lower extremities, complicating underlying coronary artery disease. The blunt force injuries to the legs resulted in extensive muscle damage, muscle necrosis and rhabomyolysis. Electrolyte disturbances primarily hyperkalemia (elevated blood potassium level) and metabolic acidosis can occur within hours of muscle damage. Massive sodium and water shifts occur, resulting in hypovolemic shock and casodilatation and later, acute renal failure. The decedent’s underlying coronary artery disease would compromise his ability to tolerate the electrolyte and fluid abnormalities, and his underlying malnutrition and likely dehydration would further exacerbate the effects of the muscle damage.

Manner of death: Homicide (A02-95)

Whitehorse Detainment Center

Died as a result of asphyxia (lack of oxygen to the brain) due to strangulation as evidenced by the recently fractured hyoid bone in the neck and soft tissue hemorrhage extending downward to the level of the right thyroid cartilage. Autopsy reveleaved bone fracture, rib fractures, contusions in mid abdomen, back and buttocks extending to the left flank, abrasions, lateral buttocks. Contusions, back of legs and knees; abrasions on knees, left fingers and encircling to left wrist. Lacerations and superficial cuts, right 4th and 5th fingers. Also, blunt force injuries, predominatnly recent contusions (bruises) on the torso and lower extremities. Abrasions on left wrist are consistent with use of restraints. No evidence of defense injuries or natural disease. Manner of death is homicide. DOD 003329 refers to this case as “strangulation, found outside isolation unit.”

Manner of death: Homicide (A03-51)

Al Qaim

Male detainee died while in U.S. custody. The details surrounding the circumstances at the time of death are classified. Cause of death: Asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression. Manner of Death: Homicide. Significant findings of the autopsy included rib fractures and numerous bruises, some of which were patterned due to impacts with a blunt object. DOD 003329 refers to this case as “1 blunt force trauma and choking; died during interrogation.” DOD 003325 refers to this case with note “Q[uestioned] by MI [Military Intelligence], died during interrogation.”

Manner of death: Homicide (ME03-571)

Al Asad

47 year old white male detainee died while in US custody. Cause of death: Blunt Force Injuries and Asphyxia; Manner of Death: Homicide. Autopsy revealed deep bruising of the chest wall, numerous displaced rib fractures, bruising on the lungs, hemorrhage into the mesentery of the small and large intestine. Examination of the neck structures revealed hemorrhage into the strap muscles and fractures of the thyroid cartilage and hyoid bone. History of asphyxia, secondary to occlusion of the oral airway. Pleural and pulmonary adhesions. Hypertensive cardiovascular disease. According to report provided by the US army CID, the detainee was shackled to the top of a doorframe with a gag in his mouth at the time he lost consciousness and became pulseless. The severe blunt force injuries, the hanging position, and the obstruction of the oral cavity with a gag contributed to this individual’s death. DOD 00329 refers to this case as “gagged in standing restraint” DOD 003329 refers to this case as “1 blunt force trama and choking; gagged in standing restraint.” DOD 003324 refers to this case with a note indicating “Q[uestioned] by OGA [Other Governmental Agency - non-military, often refers to CIA], gagged in standing restraint.”

Manner of death: Homicide (ME04-14)

In case you are wondering, that last one does mean what it seems. Death by torture and crucifixion. This is just a tiny sample.

Read Matt 25 closely. It does not talk about us being called for judgement as individuals, but as nations. The criteria are so important they are repeated 4 times. Any way I slice it, the above seems relevant to me.

It is not about compromise, priorities, or coalition building, but a moral absolute, identified by the Mother Church, and seemingly affirmed in Holy Scripture. Murder and torture are expressly indentified as “right to life” issues by the Church. No ‘personal opinion’ nec.

It is also just not the America I believed in growing up. The one I voluteered to serve in war. For all our faults, I never thought that we would be the nation I read about from human rights groups.

However, with all my encouragement and cajoling, I still respect their right to make a thoughtful, prayerful vote.

Well said.

 

[goofyjim]

I think this highlights the difference of opinion between us. I view Catholic pro-life teaching as an absolute. Compromise merely makes us politically impotent, since there is no motivation for any political entity to actually reflect our values.

For me, it is simple:

In case you are wondering, that last one does mean what it seems. Death by torture and crucifixion. This is just a tiny sample.

Read Matt 25 closely. It does not talk about us being called for judgement as individuals, but as nations. The criteria are so important they are repeated 4 times. Any way I slice it, the above seems relevant to me.

It is not about compromise, priorities, or coalition building, but a moral absolute, identified by the Mother Church, and seemingly affirmed in Holy Scripture. Murder and torture are expressly indentified as “right to life” issues by the Church. No ‘personal opinion’ nec.

It is also just not the America I believed in growing up. The one I voluteered to serve in war. For all our faults, I never thought that we would be the nation I read about from human rights groups.

Well said.

I think Matthew 25 is judging us both individually and as nations. After all we all go before the judgement seat alone, not with our countrymen or Church members or anyone else.

 

[SoCalRC]

So, you are trying to tell me, that you are making no judgment here? You don’t think that conservative Catholics who vote for the GOP “constitute seperation from the True Body of the Faithful,” you are just stating a hypothesis? Riiiiiiiiight. Whatever makes you feel better, SoCal.

Actually, I’m stating facts. Multiple prominent figures, with regular access to the GOP leadership and the White House have written, expressly, that Catholcism is not a Christian faith (Hagee, Jones, etc.)

They note, as I have, that the US was overwhelming founded as a Protestant nation. Protestants reject the primacy of the Church and the Pope. Protestants do not recognize our Sacrament of Holy Orders and have a different understanding of the meaning of Baptism. Further, most ‘flavors’ of Protestantism accept divorce, which we do not. We consider it an assult on the family.

The original post indicated that ‘atheists’ are attacking Christianity. In that light, it seemed reasonable to ask, who does aligning oneself politically with a group that, overwhelmingly, rejects central tenants of our faith - and even our legitimacy as a branch of Christianity?

In other words, if your goal is to protected the faith why align yourself with people who reject and attack it?

The question is quite sincere. Remember, I grew up without plumbing primarily because my father would not lie about being Catholic. That does not make these people my enemy, but it does make me question the wisdom of joining them in their theocratic ambitions.

I’m pretty sure that anybody reading your posts has a pretty good idea of where you stand.

Actually, I’ve repeated pointed out that most conservatives here don’t even bother reading my posts before claiming to know exactly where I stand. In fact, they boast about not reading.

This is a form of logic and thinking that is extremely alien to me. But it is not my place to judge its merits. I have merely had the audacity to suggest that, if someone wants to believe things absolutely, on faith alone, Catholics should consider getting any rigid pre-conceptions from Rome, not Evangelicals.

To the Protestant mind, this would seem judgemental. But to a Catholic, it is an obligation. We believe that there is no salvation without the Church and, as Christians, we are obligated to help others.

 

[SoCalRC]

I think Matthew 25 is judging us both individually and as nations. After all we all go before the judgement seat alone, not with our countrymen or Church members or anyone else.

That is a great observation, one I have pondered a lot. The New Testament seems to state both.

This is one area where we differ with Protestants quite a bit. Part of the reason that we believe in salvation via the Church is that we believe that a community of faith is an essential agreement. Jesus did not appear to promise to be there for us individually, but assured us that whenever at least two of us came together, he would be there.

Again, excellent point.