SNAP benefits ( gentally)
- By Hans Blaster
- American Politics
- 320 Replies
It isn't sudden. social Darwinism has been part of every argument against the New Deal from the start.Suddenly, social-Darwinism is cool.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It isn't sudden. social Darwinism has been part of every argument against the New Deal from the start.Suddenly, social-Darwinism is cool.
As your source indicates, clever Donald's post is real.![]()
Obama is not getting royalties from Obamacare. That’s satire
President Donald Trump shared a claim that former President Barack Obama received millions in Obamacare-related royalties before Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency stepped in to stop it. That claim originated from satire.www.politifact.com
apparently the claims are satire.
Public opinion is largely meaningless when it comes to impeachment. Or do you think that President Trump should be impeached too? After all 52% of Americans support the idea (at least back in April - it may be higher now): https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-...americans-support-impeachment-rc-aso-memo.pdf![]()
‘Arctic Frost’ Scandal: 51% Favor Impeaching Judge Boasberg
A narrow majority of voters agree with impeachment proceedings against a federal judge involved in the Biden administration’s “Arctic Frost” investigation that secretly targeted Republicans in Congress.www.rasmussenreports.com
We will see how the country reacts as more information is forthcoming.
I do too. And when he was doing the college speaking years ago, I think he was excellent for conservatism. The perfect guy for that time.First, I still have a lot of respect for Shapiro,...
I wouldn't be surprised. There are things to dislike about him. He can be...um...what's the word...can't say "shifty", can't say "crafty"... okay - disingenuous. The Dice video below is cued. Shapiro asks for money to help "children", never telling the listeners that 100% of donations go to help Jewish kids and families exclusively. I've double-checked what Dice says, and it's true. And Shapiro may or may not be directly involved with one or both charities. It's murky....but I think he mislead me a bit, and this in two ways.
It's possible Tucker didn't want to disagree with him sharply for the reason I gave a couple of posts above. Nick is good, and perhaps Tucker didn't want to be getting shown up on his large platform? But that's just speculation.First, much of what is being said about Tucker strikes me as true, but after watching the whole interview I can see that Tucker was disagreeing with Fuentes, albeit very gently. This means that charges of "ideological laundering" pure and simple are not quite accurate.
That sort of forceful, emotional speech he makes near the beginning - I'd never heard that before. And it sounds like he's acting. In real life he's almost always smiling and happy and lighthearted even when discussing what he's been put through.Second, Fuentes is not as bad as I thought he was after I watched Shapiro's initial video. Resentment and anger seem to drive much of what he does, but he is at the same time intelligent, thoughtful, argument-based, and capable of self-reflection. For example, this is a surprising video.
Theologically. I've heard him say a few quirky things about his catholicism which I think are flat out wrong. But that's between you and him.At the same time, I think Fuentes' rhetoric is problematic, I think there is an affective problem (particularly with anger and resentment, albeit for legitimate injustices), and I think there are logical problems, including theologically,
I don't have time for the whole video. I found a little about Nick in the part where they're talking about Tucker. Is there anything else?* See for example this interview with Victor Davis Hanson.
I'm almost encouraged that you didn't denigrate the unauthorized immigrant to a lower level.Say what they want. But their opinions have no more weight than those of an illegal immigrant.
Cool, so am I. It's not that hard to accomplish. All you need is to be born in the US or have a US born parent bring you back home after birth abroad. I manged one of those on my first breath.We are American citizens.
And so has mine... no wait it hasn't. We're much more recent arrivals. Does that matter? VP Vance thinks it does.My family has been here since 1620.
Yes, but did they fight for the right side (the US side) during the Slaveholder's rebellion? (I'll give you one guess in my case.)I have people in the Revolution, the Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, VN, and the Gulf War. We have blood in this matter.
Anyone that owns property here or comes on a temporary visa pays taxes. Do their views count now?My family has 250 years of blood, sweat, and tears. We cut down the trees, plowed the land, and picked up weapons when called up. We have been paying taxes since the nation was started.
One of the values of the outsiders perpective is that they *don't* have a say. They don't have to worry about if their taxes will go up or a policy will cost their jobs. They can evaluate without being influenced by how a choice will impact them directly.Foreigners can say anything they want. But their words really do not weigh beyond a logical position. Fine. They do not have any say in where that money goes. They have no say in who our leaders are. They have no say in our laws, our constitution, or the fate of our children. I assume they have problems in their own countries that need attending to.
If you don't understand the role the US plays in global everything, I can't help you. You should have learned that already.They have a say there. Not here.
I do not ignore their opinions... I just wonder why they care what happens in my country?
Has the $100k fee been rescinded?I'm glad President Trump is finally expressing what conservatives, liberals, Republicans, and Democrats have been saying for the past 50 years.
Thank you, Mr. President. Please simplify the H-1B visa process, pursue comprehensive immigration reform, and make America great again.
Why should they? The president of the United States testified that they've been destroyed.UN watchdog unable to verify Iran's stockpile of near-weapons grade uranium in months
The confidential report also said that Iran has still not granted the International Atomic Energy Agency access to sites affected by the war.
I’m always willing to consider that.If you are wrong in some way and this is the reason you are being criticized . . .
There are the commandments besides those that were written by the finger of God, after God spoke those ones audibly. Many other things commanded, being subject to the ten, are of the shadows which involve the priesthood, the sacrifices, and the ways to be made clean, which we have Christ for in the new covenant, and the civil law, which is not up to the Christian believers. And what we can be obedient in with it being in Christ we can do.
Sorry, I'm not following
Are you saying the commandments don't change except for the ones that are the civil law? Or any other commandment that we can't keep in Christ?




I don't traffic in human metaphors for Biblically-stated truth.Death of the soul is a metaphor historically used for the same concept- for that which happens when one is separated from God. And that's the point. So are you denying that man is born dead metaphorically, while truly dead to God, and must be born again?
You make no distinction between physical death and spiritual death, seemingly treating them in the same way.A distinction without much of a difference.
Well, man does not inherit sin (Eze 18:20).How is imputing sin to anyone who isn't guilty of it any different-or better- or more just?
Do all need to be born again to have physical life?You don't quite seem to get it. All fell with Adam and so all share the same fate and consequences. All are equally dead.
All need to be born again in order to live.
Indeed. . .there is there nature, which makes them objects of God's wrath (Eph 2:3).Why, would you speculate, do all of Adam's descendants inevitably sin?
there's something more wrong with them than imputed sin.
Well, as you saw from King Charles the 'head' of the Anglican church, they are all turning and following after the entity that prophecy said would happen.It's not about "the Protestant denominations," it's about the word of God in Scripture.
The rejection of a non-Scriptural doctrine (Co-Redemptrix) puts one in agreement with the God-breathed (theopnuestos, 2 Tim 3:16) word of God written.
Ah I see. I had thought you were suggesting giving each representative equal square miles regardless of population.Well of course it would have to include people otherwise who would vote to the candidates? Hey look i didnt say my idea was perfect. It would need some tweeks somehow, but it would stop gerry mandering and make things more even. Maybe something along the lines of a gride and the grids would have to have so many people per square mile based on total population. Just brain storming. Some portions of the grid would be bigger while others would be smaller. If you have 20 representatives then you get 20 grids. And each of those grids have to have the same amount of people in them. Squares or rectangles. Like an excel spread sheet.