Palin canceled and replaced 7 times in one week

Page 3 of 3 [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Hurricane_Delta
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Aug 2008
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 179

22 Sep 2008, 11:29 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Hurricane_Delta wrote:
Also these Tories have to be reasonable, not listen to Limbaugh, and dislike Obama's politics, not the person, and cannot believe the rumors spread by various right-wing organizations. Good Luck with that.


As far as 'rumors' are concerned, the best way to check that sort of thing out is to go to the source - either www.senate.gov or www.house.gov. The bright side of the media skew is that conservatives have to double and triple-check their facts when they're discussing key issues. The economics behind the subprime crash, Fannie and Freddie, AIG, etc. for instance - whether to bail out or not to bail out, that's a huge mess that not even the best economists seem to agree on (most agree that it was necessary, as much as they hate to say it but they differ on how much will be recovered and how much of it is just a temporary loan) - that we are seeing more and more to be a bipartisan mess. As for the rest of it though - its out there and spoken quite well and without ad hominem implications.

As for any rumors that Obama is somehow a secret muslim or anything like that - there may be a few like that but the majority of people think its both a crock and completely unfair (he was raised in Indonesia for a bit, can't remember if he had a bit of Koran but that's like what, kindergarten, 1st grade, he was probably paying about as much attention to that as any of us were at that age in Sunday school - so its really irrelevant).

All the same though, I'd really encourage you to examine the facts without thinking of the people you know in Colorado Springs. Not that I'm in any way saying that you'd see things my way, only that you notice both sides are full of their own BS on different levels and a lot of what you'll accept as truth (and what most people do) tends to be less debating what's literally true but more or less debating the salience of certain things (like the war on terror for instance) and critiquing more or less how they're done, what was a worthwhile strategy and what wasn't, whether or not we need more international compromise, etc.. The people around you may be dips but they don't write reality, reality writes itself more or less and its really something external to us - there is a bottom line truth, you may be closer to it or I may, I just appreciate when we're all able to bring good points to the table and have constructive debate (I've enjoyed chatting things out with LKL, ska, and some of the other people around here because they are making me thing and when new facts come in that challenge my beliefs I welcome them - getting a bit closer to the truth at the end of a discussion or debate means more to me really than specifically being right in the debate).



Funny, you thing you can change my mind. :twisted:

After living in Colorado Springs I'll never vote Republican. I'd much rather die.



jul
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 131

23 Sep 2008, 4:10 pm

Quote:
We can research this one but I also worry about the quality of the information, since she wasn't already a big public figure it means that it'll be tough to separate what's authentic and what's just cooked up for politics.


Actually, tech, I wish it was cooked, but it isn't. It's been reported in various sources and spoken of on video by Palin herself at her church. Her church records their services and Palin was speaking on these videos. Much that was on the web has been removed by now, I'm sure. She has celebrity status but many people who support her because of down-to-earth reputation as a people-person don't read thoroughly enough to really ever find out about what beliefs she espouses, and as you said the conservative base in the Republican party will hush this because it isn't prbably the way most of them 'party' either.

But either way, as I said in another thread, even if I don't get worked up by the religion thing with her, I have plenty else to complain of. There are far more astute female leaders in politics, brainier and with a far deeper command of issues, and I feel like i should have the best mind available to represent my country,not just the most charismatic Republican they could find to bolster McCain's sagging ticket. Not to mention even Alaskan Republicans don't like the way she conducts government business and they've said in interviews that she doesn't seem to have a good grasp of how government runs, and has even been seen not even paying attention in meetings that she has called. there were a lot of witnesses -- it was a meeting. This is not digging up dirt, but finding out foibles in a personality that is being presented as one homey kind of folksy politician but is really quite different essentially.

Although,the media red carpet for Palin may be showing its raggedy edges. As of yesterday, the entire media world at large is completely enraged because Palin is going to the UN, purportedly to meet with world leaders about those issues she has no command of apparently, but the media is not being allowed to have its usual editorial presence by command of the McCain Campaign. McCain's Campaign did not want anything other than one camera by CNN. One camera is a common element if the video feed is to be pooled among different outlets, but the camera is always accompanied by editorial staff, writers from three different outlets at least etc. The Mccain Campaign wants no editorial presence and so CNN pulled its camera, and all media in general decided to stand together and refused to report any of it unless they were allowed to report all of it, as they would usually do.

I applaud their stand for freedom of the press and frankly the McCain Campaign should be roundly condemned for trying to censor the media from reporting about Palin at the United Nations. I mean, what is the McCain Cmpaign afraid of ? That Palin should be asked a question to which she has no answer? That happened recently in Ohio, when a reporter Palin questions about the wall street bailout, no answer, not even hedging.. Now, reporters are calling McCain Campaign the "no talk express" because neither candidate is answering any questions from the press that are not screened, and apparently rehearsed.

This is the answer to this thread, she can't handle the questions and has never had a grasp on the issues, even running for governor, and the real reason Sarah Palin must be protected from answering questions that are unscreened or appearing at events that may have some type of undesirable element at them, undesirable in that some reporter or citizen is asking for solid, issue-based, knowledgeable, well-grounded answers. Which Palin doesn't have. Unless she rehearses them. A week before hand.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,009
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

23 Sep 2008, 4:58 pm

Can they really sponge videos of Palin speaking in church or her pastor? It doesn't seem feasible and it's a prize where - if it happened, I'd imagine MSNBC, ABC, CNN would make that person rich, be offering them all kinds of book deals - because its the kind of news they'd be dying to get their hands on.

I've watched a bit of what they have on Youtube regarding Palin's speech at Assembly of God Church, nothing surprising, nothing over the top, or anything that plenty of other presidents or other political figures haven't already done. There was something about her pastor talking about people's salvation based on who they voted for; knowing the religious right it had more to do with what a particular priest would think of their moral clarity or more or less the specific reasons why they were voting a certain way - sounds brash to some people's ears no doubt but any Christian, even the Vatican, worries more about keeping to the church's stance rather than doing the politically correct thing. The whole idea of Alaska being an Apocalyptic refuge, no idea where he's getting that - if the end times bit is true there's no such thing as a land refuge - if your on earth at that point rather than being of those with the seal (144,000 per the bible) you'll be compelled to live through the tribulations (for those who are good but just misguided that's the trade-off for getting the undeniable proof that they needed) and I'd imagine that in other words, so much will be layed to waste all around the globe that there will be no point in just sitting the battle out (or alternately get hit by bands of thugs, pirates, no idea).

Looking at the responses to the videos though its strange, I was really expecting most of the responses to be horror and smashing Palin to bits on it because, a lot of people who are into Youtube and things like that are more big-city urban types who don't get exposed to the underlying context of this sort of thing - so to them it would sound very radical. On the other hand I was surprised to see so much of "Yeah but this pails in comparison to saying that the U.S. government created AIDS/HIV etc. etc." and I will admit, that line, the conspiracy theories, and preaching hate of whites and the U.S., class warfare - that's actually concrete; bible wavers sound almost as loony but they have a lot of checks built into the religion itself that keep them from doing anything to crazy. My point being though, the right made a fair amount of criticism about Wright but it was in proportion to everything else and a lot of policy issues (as well as Ayers, now the new issue is the CEO's of Freddie and Fannie and Obama's close campaign ties with them); the left has taken this issue about Palin much more severely than a lot on the right took Rev. Wright.

One caveat and disclaimer though; I try not to defend other people too much, if I find out I'm wrong I'm wrong, they may on a surface level represent my values but I also admit - they are not me and I realize that its a huge mistake and way too much to own when people do take their political figures (of their respective party) and take an attack on them (ie. their personal integrity and things of the like) as personal to themselves as well - that's when political debates sink into the quagmire and smart people start trying to defend flat out idiocy; I'm really trying to watch myself not to fall into that trap, I know its counterproductive because the ideas in extract mean the most - corruption is a mess and needs to be addressed - but overall I'll discount people but not ideas just because of the people.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,170

23 Sep 2008, 9:47 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
... now the new issue is the CEO's of Freddie and Fannie and Obama's close campaign ties with them)


Yes, McCain has a commercial linking Obama with a pictured black man from Fannie Mae who was allegedly his 'advisor' - which has been debunked. On the other hand, one of McCain's top advisors took $30,000 a month from Fannie for doing 'nothing'. Right, we are supposed to believe it wasn't for access to Mr. Deregulation himself, John McCain.



Quote:
Freddie Mac had previously paid an advocacy group run by Davis, called the Homeownership Alliance, $30,000 a month until the end 2005, when that group was dissolved. That relationship was the subject of a New York Times story Monday, which drew angry denunciations from the McCain campaign. McCain and his aides have vehemently objected to suggestions that Davis has ties to Freddie Mac-an especially sensitive issue given that the Republican presidential candidate has blamed "the lobbyists, politicians and bureaucrats" for the mortgage crisis that recently prompted the Bush administration to take over both Freddie Mac and its companion, Fannie Mae, and put it under federal conservatorship.


But neither the Times story -- nor the McCain campaign -- revealed that Davis's firm, the Washington, D.C. based lobbying firm Davis Manafort, continued to receive $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac until last month-long after the Homeownership Alliance had been terminated. The two sources, who requested anonymity discussing sensitive information, told Newsweek that Davis himself approached Freddie Mac in 2006 and asked for a new consulting arrangement that would allow his firm to continue to be paid. The arrangement was approved by Hollis McLoughlin, Freddie Mac's vice president for external relations, because "he [Davis] was John McCain's campaign manager and it was felt you couldn't say no," said one of the sources. [McLoughlin did not return phone calls].

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/2 ... 28770.html



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,009
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

23 Sep 2008, 10:27 pm

monty wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
... now the new issue is the CEO's of Freddie and Fannie and Obama's close campaign ties with them)


Yes, McCain has a commercial linking Obama with a pictured black man from Fannie Mae who was allegedly his 'advisor' - which has been debunked. On the other hand, one of McCain's top advisors took $30,000 a month from Fannie for doing 'nothing'. Right, we are supposed to believe it wasn't for access to Mr. Deregulation himself, John McCain.



Quote:
Freddie Mac had previously paid an advocacy group run by Davis, called the Homeownership Alliance, $30,000 a month until the end 2005, when that group was dissolved. That relationship was the subject of a New York Times story Monday, which drew angry denunciations from the McCain campaign. McCain and his aides have vehemently objected to suggestions that Davis has ties to Freddie Mac-an especially sensitive issue given that the Republican presidential candidate has blamed "the lobbyists, politicians and bureaucrats" for the mortgage crisis that recently prompted the Bush administration to take over both Freddie Mac and its companion, Fannie Mae, and put it under federal conservatorship.


But neither the Times story -- nor the McCain campaign -- revealed that Davis's firm, the Washington, D.C. based lobbying firm Davis Manafort, continued to receive $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac until last month-long after the Homeownership Alliance had been terminated. The two sources, who requested anonymity discussing sensitive information, told Newsweek that Davis himself approached Freddie Mac in 2006 and asked for a new consulting arrangement that would allow his firm to continue to be paid. The arrangement was approved by Hollis McLoughlin, Freddie Mac's vice president for external relations, because "he [Davis] was John McCain's campaign manager and it was felt you couldn't say no," said one of the sources. [McLoughlin did not return phone calls].

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/2 ... 28770.html


This whole thing gets weirder by the minute.

I'll add that to this bit that Mike Gallagher was going on about today; Paulson with $700 billion and NO oversight:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/ ... ts?page=65


If this is all symbolic of a lot of other connections that you've all been talking about, I think things are about to change - I mean get REALLY ill (especially when most of the conservative talk show hosts really believe they're supporting the right side and will really be sickened if it adds up any further, the party's about to implode quite likely).



Hurricane_Delta
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Aug 2008
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 179

23 Sep 2008, 11:17 pm

At this point, the Treasury Department is just trying to change what would have been a economic crash into an economic crash landing. :?



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,170

24 Sep 2008, 8:41 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
This whole thing gets weirder by the minute.

I'll add that to this bit that Mike Gallagher was going on about today; Paulson with $700 billion and NO oversight:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/ ... ts?page=65


If this is all symbolic of a lot of other connections that you've all been talking about, I think things are about to change - I mean get REALLY ill (especially when most of the conservative talk show hosts really believe they're supporting the right side and will really be sickened if it adds up any further, the party's about to implode quite likely).


Yes, I think that the mystery transfer of $1 trillion to Paulson to do whatever he likes with no oversight or accountability is a really bad idea.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,170

24 Sep 2008, 9:29 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
This whole thing gets weirder by the minute.

I'll add that to this bit that Mike Gallagher was going on about today; Paulson with $700 billion and NO oversight:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/ ... ts?page=65


If this is all symbolic of a lot of other connections that you've all been talking about, I think things are about to change - I mean get REALLY ill (especially when most of the conservative talk show hosts really believe they're supporting the right side and will really be sickened if it adds up any further, the party's about to implode quite likely).


Yes, I think that the mystery transfer of $1 trillion to Paulson to do whatever he likes with no oversight or accountability is a really bad idea.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,009
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

24 Sep 2008, 4:26 pm

monty wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
This whole thing gets weirder by the minute.

I'll add that to this bit that Mike Gallagher was going on about today; Paulson with $700 billion and NO oversight:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/ ... ts?page=65


If this is all symbolic of a lot of other connections that you've all been talking about, I think things are about to change - I mean get REALLY ill (especially when most of the conservative talk show hosts really believe they're supporting the right side and will really be sickened if it adds up any further, the party's about to implode quite likely).


Yes, I think that the mystery transfer of $1 trillion to Paulson to do whatever he likes with no oversight or accountability is a really bad idea.


Looks like McCain and Obama called eachother this morning and they'll both be getting to Washington to work on this.

I have a hypothesis, I think moreso if Obama wins presidency than if McCain does; it won't be an easy presidency no matter who wins it (for the candidates particularly) and I think there is a lot of partisan mythology that would be shattered in terms of a lot of boldly almost religiously held views - that is I think both parties could see major reform.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,170

24 Sep 2008, 5:09 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
I've watched a bit of what they have on Youtube regarding Palin's speech at Assembly of God Church, nothing surprising, nothing over the top, ...


Well, she wasn't foaming at the mouth, but there were plenty of code words in there. The whole refuge thing could be expanded on, although you seem to recognize there is something there - some other key words include Destiny, Umbrellaship/Shepherding, and Annointing.

Quote:
We do these things to stop the flow of people into Pentecostal churches who are destroyed personally, financially, spiritually, and mentally. We do these things because we are tired of hearing stories of children crying from the horror of demons, who are afraid to close their eyes at night from the stupidity of the Pentecostal lies and fear. We do these things because intelligent young men in their early twenties have forsaken their college careers – dropped out – and joined the “ministry” and are now “soul winners” for “God.”

...

Triggers of Alternate Personalities (Anointing)

Steve Hassan in his book, “Releasing the Bonds: Empowering People to Think for Themselves,”distinguishes between the Cult Self and the Authentic Self among those who are under Mind Control (Chapter7). In Pentecostalism, the situations are analogous to cults, but in most cases the churches are not cults, with the exception of some extremist holiness Oneness Pentecostal churches. Therefore, I will change his terms and make the distinction between the Robot Self (instead of Cult Self) and the Authentic Self (the same term Hassan uses).

Pentecostals learn code words and phrases. They are constantly hypnotized into an altered state of consciousness where they become robotic, repeating the programmed responses of their indoctrination. They have their Authentic self, the human side of them that operates rationally. The Authentic Self is the normal, humanly mode that we can speak to rationally. The Robot Self (Cult Self in Hassan’s terms) is the automatic responding personality that is usually stimulated by particular stimuli. The stimuli can be the thought of a backslider, the thought of the “anointing” coming upon them, and many other things. When we are speaking to loved ones in this Robot Mode, we must try to disengage the Robot Self, and try to engage the Authentic Self. Sometimes it is different for each person, but we must learn what triggers them into this Robot Mode, and try to avoid it. We can never reason with them while they are in Robot Mode; we can only reason with them in Authentic Mode.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:HO ... cd=5&gl=us



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,009
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

25 Sep 2008, 11:38 am

monty wrote:
Quote:
We do these things to stop the flow of people into Pentecostal churches who are destroyed personally, financially, spiritually, and mentally. We do these things because we are tired of hearing stories of children crying from the horror of demons, who are afraid to close their eyes at night from the stupidity of the Pentecostal lies and fear. We do these things because intelligent young men in their early twenties have forsaken their college careers – dropped out – and joined the “ministry” and are now “soul winners” for “God.”

...

Triggers of Alternate Personalities (Anointing)

Steve Hassan in his book, “Releasing the Bonds: Empowering People to Think for Themselves,”distinguishes between the Cult Self and the Authentic Self among those who are under Mind Control (Chapter7). In Pentecostalism, the situations are analogous to cults, but in most cases the churches are not cults, with the exception of some extremist holiness Oneness Pentecostal churches. Therefore, I will change his terms and make the distinction between the Robot Self (instead of Cult Self) and the Authentic Self (the same term Hassan uses).

Pentecostals learn code words and phrases. They are constantly hypnotized into an altered state of consciousness where they become robotic, repeating the programmed responses of their indoctrination. They have their Authentic self, the human side of them that operates rationally. The Authentic Self is the normal, humanly mode that we can speak to rationally. The Robot Self (Cult Self in Hassan’s terms) is the automatic responding personality that is usually stimulated by particular stimuli. The stimuli can be the thought of a backslider, the thought of the “anointing” coming upon them, and many other things. When we are speaking to loved ones in this Robot Mode, we must try to disengage the Robot Self, and try to engage the Authentic Self. Sometimes it is different for each person, but we must learn what triggers them into this Robot Mode, and try to avoid it. We can never reason with them while they are in Robot Mode; we can only reason with them in Authentic Mode.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:HO ... cd=5&gl=us


I'm not trying to be argumentative here but that whole thing sounds a bit removed from reality. I think its probably fair to say that we all have our own paradigms from which we see the world, a lot of times will have tendencies to grab at information that reinforces our own paradigms, but we need to be careful when it starts smelling like the 'red skies' topic. I won't go into challenging the origin and authorship because it goes without saying, on the other hand I see where this kind of thing comes from.

I think the dangers seculars face in looking at this sort of thing are related to themselves ascribing what they think they're seeing to situations where the people involved are, fundamentally, not like themselves. It might be worth an entire thread, to write about the internal paradigm of a Christian; and Pentacostal or not, it might look crazy and menacing to an outsider but as functioning people in society (at least those I've known well in my life) have more than enough internal governance - partly enforced by their own faith - not to do drastic things or really go unhinged; hastening the apocalypse is right up there toward the top of things that they should not want to do - if God is all-knowing, eternal, and set everything in emotion, they should also understand that they have no control, whether pro-active or counter-active.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,170

25 Sep 2008, 12:53 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

I'm not trying to be argumentative here but that whole thing sounds a bit removed from reality. I think its probably fair to say that we all have our own paradigms from which we see the world, a lot of times will have tendencies to grab at information that reinforces our own paradigms, but we need to be careful when it starts smelling like the 'red skies' topic. I won't go into challenging the origin and authorship because it goes without saying, on the other hand I see where this kind of thing comes from.

I think the dangers seculars face in looking at this sort of thing are related to themselves ascribing what they think they're seeing to situations where the people involved are, fundamentally, not like themselves. It might be worth an entire thread, to write about the internal paradigm of a Christian; and Pentacostal or not, it might look crazy and menacing to an outsider but as functioning people in society (at least those I've known well in my life) have more than enough internal governance - partly enforced by their own faith - not to do drastic things or really go unhinged; hastening the apocalypse is right up there toward the top of things that they should not want to do - if God is all-knowing, eternal, and set everything in emotion, they should also understand that they have no control, whether pro-active or counter-active.


Removed from reality? Yes, I agree - Pentecostals who drink the Kool-Aid are living in a strange dream land.

All Christians strange? No. No. No. I was raised Episcopal, and my wife is Lutheran. Those churches do not encourage people to induce mild epileptic fits and call it the power of the Holy Spirit. Most Christians do not roll and twitch in the aisles and they do not speak in tongues. Most Christian churches do not blame all of life's misfortunes on Satan and the practitioners of witchcraft and other non-believers. Most Christians pray to God, but they do not pretend that they hold meetings with God, where God tells them directly what to do on every decision. Most Christian churches do not spend much time trying to interpret the strange visions in the Book of Revelations and apply it to 2008. Most Christian churches do not work to establish theocracy. Most Christian churches I have attended are very much interested in discussing and promoting moral behavior, but they do not have pastors that suggest a person is doomed to hell if they criticize Bush or vote for Kerry, as Palin's pastor did.

I did get involved with Charismatic Christianity for about 2 years, and the people I knew who claimed they were born again, washed in the blood, and able to talk to God daily were just as selfish, racist, short tempered and foolish as they were before they found the magic secrets. That type of Christianity has a special arrogance and hubris that is absent from the average mainstream denomination.

I also remember a Pentecostalist coming up to my brother and I once - my brother was in a wheel chair with an untreatable medical condition (which ultimately killed him). This guy told us that my brother could be healed, get up and walk, if only he read a particular Bible passage - the only catch was, he had to have faith (if it didn't work, it was my brother's fault for not really having faith).

So yes, I have religious bias. The Pentecostalists call me "Dead in the Spirit" and non-Christian because I don't parrot their slogans and do not convulse on cue when they utter the special words. And I think they are certifiably insane blasphemers, and cannot be trusted to fairly (or safely) represent ALL the people of this country.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,009
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

25 Sep 2008, 4:47 pm

Got it; and I see where your at least coming from a little clearer. I think, for me at least, part of it is that my roommate's mom (before she passed) was a convert to a local Pentacostal church; I heard about the speaking in tongues bit, thought it just sounded psychosomatic but I figured it like this - some people like with Roman Catholicism (which I grew up in) like to dress the church up for an aura of reverence by a lot of statues and columns to get people in a certain frame of mind, some churches like to have big gospel choirs, others like to manifest it by speaking in tongues. I figured it was on the same parallel, maybe a little weird that they didn't claim it as such but that was about it.



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,411
Location: Ontario, Canada

26 Sep 2008, 6:44 pm

Who is spying on Sarah Palin? Who has a wiretap on her phone?



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,411
Location: Ontario, Canada

26 Sep 2008, 6:47 pm

monty wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:

I'm not trying to be argumentative here but that whole thing sounds a bit removed from reality. I think its probably fair to say that we all have our own paradigms from which we see the world, a lot of times will have tendencies to grab at information that reinforces our own paradigms, but we need to be careful when it starts smelling like the 'red skies' topic. I won't go into challenging the origin and authorship because it goes without saying, on the other hand I see where this kind of thing comes from.

I think the dangers seculars face in looking at this sort of thing are related to themselves ascribing what they think they're seeing to situations where the people involved are, fundamentally, not like themselves. It might be worth an entire thread, to write about the internal paradigm of a Christian; and Pentacostal or not, it might look crazy and menacing to an outsider but as functioning people in society (at least those I've known well in my life) have more than enough internal governance - partly enforced by their own faith - not to do drastic things or really go unhinged; hastening the apocalypse is right up there toward the top of things that they should not want to do - if God is all-knowing, eternal, and set everything in emotion, they should also understand that they have no control, whether pro-active or counter-active.


Removed from reality? Yes, I agree - Pentecostals who drink the Kool-Aid are living in a strange dream land.

All Christians strange? No. No. No. I was raised Episcopal, and my wife is Lutheran. Those churches do not encourage people to induce mild epileptic fits and call it the power of the Holy Spirit. Most Christians do not roll and twitch in the aisles and they do not speak in tongues. Most Christian churches do not blame all of life's misfortunes on Satan and the practitioners of witchcraft and other non-believers. Most Christians pray to God, but they do not pretend that they hold meetings with God, where God tells them directly what to do on every decision. Most Christian churches do not spend much time trying to interpret the strange visions in the Book of Revelations and apply it to 2008. Most Christian churches do not work to establish theocracy. Most Christian churches I have attended are very much interested in discussing and promoting moral behavior, but they do not have pastors that suggest a person is doomed to hell if they criticize Bush or vote for Kerry, as Palin's pastor did.

I did get involved with Charismatic Christianity for about 2 years, and the people I knew who claimed they were born again, washed in the blood, and able to talk to God daily were just as selfish, racist, short tempered and foolish as they were before they found the magic secrets. That type of Christianity has a special arrogance and hubris that is absent from the average mainstream denomination.

I also remember a Pentecostalist coming up to my brother and I once - my brother was in a wheel chair with an untreatable medical condition (which ultimately killed him). This guy told us that my brother could be healed, get up and walk, if only he read a particular Bible passage - the only catch was, he had to have faith (if it didn't work, it was my brother's fault for not really having faith).

So yes, I have religious bias. The Pentecostalists call me "Dead in the Spirit" and non-Christian because I don't parrot their slogans and do not convulse on cue when they utter the special words. And I think they are certifiably insane blasphemers, and cannot be trusted to fairly (or safely) represent ALL the people of this country.


I can symathize with your experiences. I'm Catholic btw.