The GOP, like Christianity, has flip-flopped

[2Dbunk]

I know -- "today's so-called Christians are not truly followers of Christ," true Christians would assert. "It's called hypocrisy," they'd say, when others among them adhere to racist, self-serving, warmongering misanthropy -- quite different from Christ's teaching of passivity and charity. Likewise, the party of Lincoln (as it likes to call itself) is nearly 180 degrees to that of Lincoln's philosophy and policies.

Racism is alive and well in today's GOP but was rather benign in Lincoln's camp. "Charity for all and malice toward none" was rarely, if ever, heard at Trump rallies.

Am I missing something in understanding "enlightened" present day politics? Why would a true follower of Lincoln or Christ follow the GOP agenda?

[2Dbunk]

[Replying to 2Dbunk]

No one out there can set me straight, huh? If everyone has folded, then I must be right in my assumptions about the GOP and the Irredeemable Deplorables (known also as Irredeemable Christians). ID = IC . . . (that's the engineer in me).

Neither did I vote for the LAST Republican president (the one who talked to "my Father in heaven" rather than his real father who knew the pitfalls of going into Iraq). For THAT unfortunate presidency we DID get two more months of Daylight Savings AND drug coverage with a donut. WE ALSO GOT 9/11, two humongous wars (near 8,000 dead, over 40,000 maimed Americans), and the Great Recession. What is it about prosperity that the IDs don't get. They can't remember 8 years ago when our economy was tanking.

Why so much silence?

I rest my case.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 1 by 2Dbunk]

Have Christians really flip flopped? I would say he GOP has certainly changed. This isn't all that surprising though and dates back to the civil rights movement. The reps and demos essentially flip flopped their bases as a result it changed both parties. The demos championed civil liberties the republican adopted the southern strategy.

The GOP as a result stopped being conservative in the federal sense and instead became conservative in the southern sense, promising to preserve the status quo in the south. The status quo being rife with racism.

Polorism and group think has pushed this to extremes hence Donald trump. The solution in my opinion is n to retreat from the GOP but to engage with it. There are good principles that would benefit our country both fiscally and civally. However, the more we disengage the greater extremism becomes. I don't want the GOP to be dominated by the southern strategy and idealists trying to preserve southern white power. It is incumbent upon all Americans to engage in politics 47% did not vote his election that is the real problem.

[bluethread]

[Replying to 2Dbunk]

No one out there can set me straight, huh? If everyone has folded, then I must be right in my assumptions about the GOP and the Irredeemable Deplorables (known also as Irredeemable Christians). ID = IC . . . (that's the engineer in me).

Neither did I vote for the LAST Republican president (the one who talked to "my Father in heaven" rather than his real father who knew the pitfalls of going into Iraq). For THAT unfortunate presidency we DID get two more months of Daylight Savings AND drug coverage with a donut. WE ALSO GOT 9/11, two humongous wars (near 8,000 dead, over 40,000 maimed Americans), and the Great Recession. What is it about prosperity that the IDs don't get. They can't remember 8 years ago when our economy was tanking.

Why so much silence?

I rest my case.

So, since people have better things to do over the Thanksgiving weekend than counter leftist propaganda, you presume yourself to be correct?

It is true that the party of Lincoln looks more like the party of Jefferson these days. However, the party of Jefferson looks more like the man that suspended habeas corpus(Lincoln). In fact, Roosevelt and Truman interred Japanese citizens. It is also the Democrat party that opposed the civil rights act. Johnson only joined the Republicans in supporting it, because he wanted the black vote. However, that was not enough to save him in the 1968 election. Though history revisionists like to hang Vietnam on Nixon, it was Kennedy and Johnson who are responsible for that mess. Nixon got us out of Vietnam, he also opened up diplomatic ties with China.

Regarding 9/11, Frontline, hardly a bastion of support for Republicans, points out that, without mentioning who was in charge, The Man Who Knew had already been vilified as a racist by the previous administration. I wonder who that was?

Also, the "Great Recession" was caused by the housing bubble, created by the Dodd/Frank requirement that banks provide mortgages to people who could not afford to pay them back. Remind me, what party were Dodd and Frank a part of?This was the exacerbated by the bailout of the perps with newly printed treasury notes. Admittedly, Bush and McCain supported it, but the bailout was the child of Obama, Pelosi and Reed, and it was they who nurtured it into law.

Now, I will not be so partisan as to say that Republicans have not added to the troubles we are now facing, but to lay it all at their doorstep is like saying I am solely responsible for butchery, just because I buy hamburger.

[Monta]

I know -- "today's so-called Christians are not truly followers of Christ," true Christians would assert. "It's called hypocrisy," they'd say, when others among them adhere to racist, self-serving, warmongering misanthropy -- quite different from Christ's teaching of passivity and charity. Likewise, the party of Lincoln (as it likes to call itself) is nearly 180 degrees to that of Lincoln's philosophy and policies.

Racism is alive and well in today's GOP but was rather benign in Lincoln's camp. "Charity for all and malice toward none" was rarely, if ever, heard at Trump rallies.

Am I missing something in understanding "enlightened" present day politics? Why would a true follower of Lincoln or Christ follow the GOP agenda?

I don't know what GOP stands for but Christianity is not lmited one people or one country.
For the record, Russia has build 1000 new churches in the last 15 ys. (or is it 10)
I find that amazing. If churches were emtpty that certainly would be waste of $$ which I am sure Russians would not be happy about.

[catnip]

I know -- "today's so-called Christians are not truly followers of Christ," true Christians would assert. "It's called hypocrisy," they'd say, when others among them adhere to racist, self-serving, warmongering misanthropy -- quite different from Christ's teaching of passivity and charity. Likewise, the party of Lincoln (as it likes to call itself) is nearly 180 degrees to that of Lincoln's philosophy and policies.

Racism is alive and well in today's GOP but was rather benign in Lincoln's camp. "Charity for all and malice toward none" was rarely, if ever, heard at Trump rallies.

Am I missing something in understanding "enlightened" present day politics? Why would a true follower of Lincoln or Christ follow the GOP agenda?

To be fair, I don't think Trump is a true republican.

I agree that true religion is not about fear, prejudice or domination. True religion is not about politics at all. This is worldly and the very definition of worldly. Vilifying others for their race or even political ideologies is anything but religious. Or I should say that all of these things are indicators of false religion in order to be more specific.

And no, the Republican party is nothing like it was when I was young, much less when Lincoln was elected. Personally, I had thought that open racism was finally relegated to the garbage heap. I have been horrified by the recent upsurge in open racist remarks on the Republican side. We have taken a step back into a horrible past. And we don't bury it again quickly, it will cause unrest that will consume us all. It is high time that whites accept the fact that we are rapidly becoming a minority ourselves and the day is not far off. If we don't foster an end to racism, we and our descendants will reap a bitter harvest.

[2Dbunk]

[Replying to post 4 by bluethread]

Thanks for your reply -- I'm sorry to intrude on your holiday.

It is true that the party of Lincoln looks more like the party of Jefferson these days. However, the party of Jefferson looks more like the man that suspended habeas corpus(Lincoln). In fact, Roosevelt and Truman interred Japanese citizens.

These were actions taken during wartime (Wars that were attacks on the United States I might add). It's called martial law (the railroads and some industries were also taken over by the government -- Unusual circumstances require unusual actions I think you would agree).

It is also the Democrat party that opposed the civil rights act. Johnson only joined the Republicans in supporting it, because he wanted the black vote. However, that was not enough to save him in the 1968 election.

Hogwash! Democrat Kennedy was in office during the Selma protest. His pro-integration stance is considered one of the reasons many people of Dallas rejoiced at his assassination. Johnson chose not to run in 1968 because of Vietnam -- he did not need to be "saved."

Though history revisionists like to hang Vietnam on Nixon, it was Kennedy and Johnson who are responsible for that mess. Nixon got us out of Vietnam, he also opened up diplomatic ties with China.

Partly true. But it was the Tet offensive that got us out of Vietnam -- we were kicked out if you remember! (maybe you weren't born yet?)

Regarding 9/11, Frontline, hardly a bastion of support for Republicans, points out that, without mentioning who was in charge, The Man Who Knew had already been vilified as a racist by the previous administration. I wonder who that was?

I'm sorry, you got me there. Racism is alive and well in both parties but not nearly so blatant as in the Republican party (KKK endorsements -- go figure).

Also, the "Great Recession" was caused by the housing bubble, created by the Dodd/Frank requirement that banks provide mortgages to people who could not afford to pay them back. Remind me, what party were Dodd and Frank a part of?This was the exacerbated by the bailout of the perps with newly printed treasury notes. Admittedly, Bush and McCain supported it, but the bailout was the child of Obama, Pelosi and Reed, and it was they who nurtured it into law.

Please see the following Wikipaedia article on Dodd/Frank.

The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub.L. 111–203, H.R. 4173; commonly referred to as Dodd–Frank) was signed into federal law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010.[1] Passed as a response to the Great Recession, it brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in the United States since the regulatory reform that followed the Great Depression.[2][3][4][5] It made changes in the American financial regulatory environment that affect all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation's financial services industry.

Since the Great Recession of 2008 preceded the Dodd/Frank Bill becoming law by about two years it's hard for me to visualize the Bill being the cause of recession.

Now, I will not be so partisan as to say that Republicans have not added to the troubles we are now facing, but to lay it all at their doorstep is like saying I am solely responsible for butchery, just because I buy hamburger.

Maybe not, but you certainly [strike]butcher[/strike] take immense liberty with the facts. You might want to vet some of your news sources.

[Elijah John]

I know -- "today's so-called Christians are not truly followers of Christ," true Christians would assert. "It's called hypocrisy," they'd say, when others among them adhere to racist, self-serving, warmongering misanthropy -- quite different from Christ's teaching of passivity and charity. Likewise, the party of Lincoln (as it likes to call itself) is nearly 180 degrees to that of Lincoln's philosophy and policies.

Racism is alive and well in today's GOP but was rather benign in Lincoln's camp. "Charity for all and malice toward none" was rarely, if ever, heard at Trump rallies.

Am I missing something in understanding "enlightened" present day politics? Why would a true follower of Lincoln or Christ follow the GOP agenda?

Because you are falsely accusing the GOP of being "racist". What is "racist" about the GOP agenda?

Don't you think if you throw that word around too casually, at the drop of a hat, it loses it's meaning and obscures true racism?

[2Dbunk]

[Replying to post 8 by Elijah John]

Because you are falsely accusing the GOP of being "racist". What is "racist" about the GOP agenda?

Don't you think if you throw that word around too casually, at the drop of a hat, it loses it's meaning and obscures true racism?

You are right -- the Republican Party agenda cannot endorse any kind of racism. I'll step back from calling the Republican Party racist, but their agenda draws racists who want to have a seat at their table (KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists). Conservative talk show hosts like Limbaugh tediously skirt the issue as being too much political correctness (Trump milked "political correctness" as being too commonplace in "America's fall from greatness" and he "will" rectify THAT situation).

In short, if the Republican Party is not racist, than many of those carrying water for the Party are racist. This is the party who had been dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century resisting not only integration but women's rights, stem cell research and much other social / scientific / medical progress.

[catnip]

I know -- "today's so-called Christians are not truly followers of Christ," true Christians would assert. "It's called hypocrisy," they'd say, when others among them adhere to racist, self-serving, warmongering misanthropy -- quite different from Christ's teaching of passivity and charity. Likewise, the party of Lincoln (as it likes to call itself) is nearly 180 degrees to that of Lincoln's philosophy and policies.

Racism is alive and well in today's GOP but was rather benign in Lincoln's camp. "Charity for all and malice toward none" was rarely, if ever, heard at Trump rallies.

Am I missing something in understanding "enlightened" present day politics? Why would a true follower of Lincoln or Christ follow the GOP agenda?

Because you are falsely accusing the GOP of being "racist". What is "racist" about the GOP agenda?

Don't you think if you throw that word around too casually, at the drop of a hat, it loses it's meaning and obscures true racism?

Here is evidence of the problem: Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Watch
https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/201 ... hen-bannon

He has allied himself with openly racist appointees.

Some of us actually witnessed on TV some overtly racist events during Donald Trumps campaign.