Racist Newt at it again

**Sirdowski** · 01-19-2012, 11:44 AM

Newt responds to accusations of spreading racial animosity by taking advantage of South Carolina's southern roots, calling Obama, "the greatest food stamp President," Ann Curry looks like her head is going to blow off her shoulders.

The New York Times editor sets the stage for the obsequious liberal mind: "In South Carolina, where confederate flags still waves on the front lawn of the state capital, largely because of the efforts of the state GOP, it remains good primary politics to stir up racial animosity and then link it to President Obama."

"You know, modern Liberals I think frankly, are totally off the deep end."

"when conservatives care about the poor, and conservatives offer ideas to help the poor, and conservatives suggest that the poor would rather have a paycheck than a food stamp, the very liberals who have failed them, at places like The New York Times, promptly scream racism, because they have no defense for the failure of liberal institutions which have trapped poor children in bad schools, trapped them in bad neighborhoods, trapped them in crime-ridden situations. Liberal solutions have failed."

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2012/0...a-video-11912/

**StingerNLG** · 01-19-2012, 11:55 AM

It's a shame Newt has so much baggage. He is so powerful when he speaks. I would have loved to see him actually debate Obama. I'm betting he could make O actually cry on stage.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

**Sirdowski** · 01-19-2012, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

It's a shame Newt has so much baggage. He is so powerful when he speaks. I would have loved to see him actually debate Obama. I'm betting he could make O actually cry on stage.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

His baggage is disheartening, however, the race is far from over. If voters see that Mitts kept his money off shore to avoid even paying 15%, he will be toast.

**HoustonRaven** · 01-19-2012, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by Sirdowski

His baggage is disheartening, however, the race is far from over. If voters can see that Mitts kept his money off shore to avoid even paying 15%, he will be toast.

Who cares?

That's class warfare nonsense I expect from Galen.

If he isn't doing anything illegal with his money, so what it's off shore?

**NCRAVEN** · 01-19-2012, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Who cares?

That's class warfare nonsense I expect from Galen.

If he isn't doing anything illegal with his money, so what it's off shore?

**Sirdowski** · 01-19-2012, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Who cares?

That's class warfare nonsense I expect from Galen.

If he isn't doing anything illegal with his money, so what it's off shore?

I re-read what I wrote and removed "can." It did come off as if I was advocating that mindset. I still feel however that he would nonetheless be toast. My point is better now, when it would cost him the nomination, than if he gets the nomination and Obama and his campaign get their hands on him. I just see no way he could talk his way out of it to an American people that are sick of hearing about rich guys and shady things they do with their money (whether wrongly or rightly perceived).

**HoustonRaven** · 01-19-2012, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Sirdowski

I re-read what I wrote and removed "can." It did come off as if I was advocating that mindset. I still feel however that he would nonetheless be toast. My point is better now than if he gets the nomination and Obama and his campaign get their hands on him. I just see no way he could talk his way out of it to an American people that are sick of hearing about rich guys and shady things they do with their money (whether wrongly or rightly perceived).

Gotcha.

I don't agree with it. Yes, people are tired of hearing about "the rich" but I believe it's not as the media portrays it. IMO, they are sick of the class warfare / envy in general.

**Sirdowski** · 01-19-2012, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Gotcha.

I don't agree with it. Yes, people are tired of hearing about "the rich" but I believe it's not as the media portrays it. IMO, they are sick of the class warfare / envy in general.

I would hope, but just because they are sick of it doesn't mean they won't still have presuppositions about his actions.

You aren't by any chance Mormon are you.....?

**HoustonRaven** · 01-20-2012, 01:58 AM

Nope.

Healthy disdain for organized religion is my religion.

**Sirdowski** · 01-20-2012, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Nope.

Healthy disdain for organized religion is my religion.

I kid I kid.

What, if any, is your opinion on Non-denominational Christian churches?

**HoustonRaven** · 01-20-2012, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Sirdowski

I kid I kid.

What, if any, is your opinion on Non-denominational Christian churches?

My wife goes to one and I have gone along from time to time. I like it. It's more of a casual atmosphere. But at the heart of it is a believe in Christ and that's where you lose me.

I don't believe any one religion has the answer nor has the prophet that saves us all. But I do believe in a higher power and that religion was Mans attempt to explain it all.

**Sirdowski** · 01-20-2012, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

My wife goes to one and I have gone along from time to time. I like it. It's more of a casual atmosphere. But at the heart of it is a believe in Christ and that's where you lose me.

I don't believe any one religion has the answer nor has the prophet that saves us all. But I do believe in a higher power and that religion was Mans attempt to explain it all.

Many who are turned off by organized religion if nothing else, appreciate non-denominational churches for just the reason you said, the casual atmosphere. The message is generally building a "relationship" not a "religion." Being born and raised into a non-denominational church, and going through my early years in a Catholic school, I've seen both sides of Christianity

I have a great respect for and am always interested to hear the journey of conclusions, if you will, that others have taken. If I may ask, why is it that you don't believe in a correlation with religion and a higher power? It doesn't seem you have an issue with faith, after all it does take at least a scintilla to believe in a higher power.

**HoustonRaven** · 01-20-2012, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by Sirdowski

Many who are turned off by organized religion if nothing else, appreciate non-denominational churches for just the reason you said, the casual atmosphere. The message is generally building a "relationship" not a "religion." Being born and raised into a non-denominational church, and going through my early years in a Catholic school, I've seen both sides of Christianity

I have a great respect for and am always interested to hear the journey of conclusions, if you will, that others have taken. If I may ask, why is it that you don't believe in a correlation with religion and a higher power? It doesn't seem you have an issue with faith, after all it does take at least a scintilla to believe in a higher power.

A scintilla? No. An overwhelming body of evidence provided by science? Yes.

All I need to know about a higher power comes from science -- from the vast expanse of the universe (and the known end thereof) to the smallest of particles and everything in between. Religion is a finite construct, created by an inherently flawed Man trying to explain the unexplainable. A "higher being" is a infinite construct, thus impossible to comprehend fully by Man and futile to personify.

I too have great respect for those of faith nor do I begrudge them for their belief.

**NCRAVEN** · 01-20-2012, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

A scintilla? No. An overwhelming body of evidence provided by science? Yes.

All I need to know about a higher power comes from science -- from the vast expanse of the universe (and the known end thereof) to the smallest of particles and everything in between. Religion is a finite construct, created by an inherently flawed Man trying to explain the unexplainable. A "higher being" is a infinite construct, thus impossible to comprehend fully by Man and futile to personify.

I too have great respect for those of faith nor do I begrudge them for their belief.

Doesn't that also apply to science?

I mean after all, for all we claim to know and figure out about the universe and how it was created.. we really don't know 1 millionth of what could be known.

**HoustonRaven** · 01-20-2012, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

Doesn't that also apply to science?

I mean after all, for all we claim to know and figure out about the universe and how it was created.. we really don't know 1 millionth of what could be known.

Science is verifiable. Faith ain't.

And yes, what we don't know can fill a book. But that does not disprove the things that have already been proven.

**NCRAVEN** · 01-20-2012, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Science is verifiable. Faith ain't.

And yes, what we don't know can fill a book. But that does not disprove the things that have already been proven.

True. Just simply point out what they share.

**Sirdowski** · 01-20-2012, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

A scintilla? No. An overwhelming body of evidence provided by science? Yes.

All I need to know about a higher power comes from science -- from the vast expanse of the universe (and the known end thereof) to the smallest of particles and everything in between. Religion is a finite construct, created by an inherently flawed Man trying to explain the unexplainable. A "higher being" is a infinite construct, thus impossible to comprehend fully by Man and futile to personify.

I too have great respect for those of faith nor do I begrudge them for their belief.

I didn't mean faith as is "having the faith," so much as the ability to believe what is unseen. Many people will not believe in a higher power simply because they aren't willing to accept what is beyond human understanding. That's why they are willing to accept scenarios in which unknown ancestors cells fuse with other unknown cells to create new unknown organisms that evolve through an unkonwn mechanisms into eventually man; there's at least something they can wrap their brain around.

I agree the many forms of Christianity have turned into largely meaningless human tradition and man worship. That's why I am a true Christian. A follower of Christ. Not the pope, the Vatican, or whomever else tries to confine the alpha and omega to purposes conceived by men. It's not Christians MO to comprehend God, but to comprehend what has been given to us, through use of the Bible, our individual purpose. The Bible is is truly what separates Christianity from other religions. It is impenetrable. From its succinct historical accuracy to it's deep proverbial truths. No human mind could write the bible on it's own. 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed"

Some interesting information the Bible contains:

GRAVITY
Ancient Egyptians said earth floated in a river. Ancient Indians (Hindu) said earth was on the back of 4 elephants standing on the back of a giant turtle, swimming in a sea of milk, encircled by a great snake. Ancient Greeks had earth on the back of Atlas. Buddhists had earth on the back of a giant catfish.

Job 26:7 (Written 2000 BC)
"He suspends the earth over nothing."

GLOBE
People thought earth was flat until the 1400s AD.

Isaiah 40:22 (700 BC)
"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,"

CONTINENTAL DRIFT
Land masses move a few inches yearly.

Job 9:5 (2000 BC)
"He moves mountains without their knowing it"

THE WATER CYCLE
from evaporation to cloud formation to rain was not clearly understood by scientists until the 1800s AD.

Job 36:26-29 (2000 BC)
"He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind?"

Ecclesiastes 1:7 (950 BC)
"All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again."