Those are some of the reasons I like you. I’ve seen the change, knowing where you’ve been.
So it’s ok that we disagree on some things.
Thanks Dave! I have changed tremendously since I’ve been coming here. Thanks for noticing. 
Trump has often used those same convulsive gestures to mimic the mannerisms of people, including himself, who are rattled and exasperated. Why couldn’t the mainstream media look this up?
Kellyanne has mentioned this numerous times so they all know but it doesn’t fit their agenda! Nuff said.
Clearly, partisan political positions hold more sway within American evangelicalism than does so-called ‘Christian ethics’ because had any of Trump’s self-disclosed words/actions been committed by said political oppositions such would have been decried mercilessly from spires and steeples alike — in a word… humbug and hypocrisy. IMO
Amen!
Clearly, partisan political positions hold more sway within American evangelicalism than does so-called ‘Christian ethics’ because had any of Trump’s self-disclosed words/actions been committed by said political oppositions such would have been decried mercilessly from spires and steeples alike — in a word… humbug and hypocrisy. IMO
I think they voted not for Trump the man but for what they hope his policies will bring. Conservative judges, economic growth, defunding of Planned Parenthood, border security etc. On the other hand Hill represented abortion rights up to the moment of delivery so i don’t see voting for Trump as hypocritical.
This was not a vote for a Pastor
Well said.
Yep I absolutely get that Steve… my point was that IF you lay aside one’s political leanings, so-called ‘evangelicals’ would have been up in arms and furiously so HAD Trump been going in to bat for the opposition, BASED wholly and solely on his own displayed BEHAVIOURS etc… THAT’S why I noted that “partisan political positions” seems to carry more weight OVER what evangelicals like to parade in terms of behavioural virtue.
THAT’S why I noted that “partisan political positions” seems to carry more weight OVER what evangelicals like to parade in terms of behavioural virtue.
Yes agreed but many evangelicals have no problem acknowledging Trump’s behavior at times is infantile. Also some positions like abortion are not just partisan politics IMO.
The Trump card was attempted before. It was with the Ross Perot campaign. And Ross did manage to get, a good chunk of votes.
Was amuses me, is that American Christians, think they have the best system. And we have Christians on this forum, from England, Australia and Canada. And they probably think, they have the best system. And it’s probably the feeling, of those in Europe also.
Much of the Trump success, will depend upon his choosing and listening to his expert advisers. Someone without political experience can still succeed, if he listens to his chosen advisory panel.
Logically, everything looks sound with Trump and his team. But my gut level feeling, is that it is - a house of cards. But it’s a house of cards, that must be played out. Perhaps for something better to eventually emerge?
Folks who are protesting, are not properly using their time and energy. A better option is for them to side with lobbyist groups. And get involved with social media.
And speaking of media. They will be after Trump and scrutinizing him - with a fine tooth comb. It’s up to him and his team, to control the media perception of events.
Enough for now. Let’s see how events play out. And let’s take Jesus’ words to heart, about “being as wise as serpents but as harmless as doves.” There is much wisdom, in being as wise as a serpent. Or if I used the Native American equivalent, it would be Coyote wisdom.
If we look at Native American Coyote Mythology, it says this:
I hung around hanging out with the Lakota, Ojibwe and Ute tribes - especially their medicine men and women. And the Coyote kept coming up in visions. So that nature is part of me. And it’s not too far removed, from the Holy Fool tradition.
Randy said:
Well, success with one group will be seen as failure by another, hence the last 8 years and the overwhelming tsunami of citizens wanting change. I think many Americans in general believe that the US has (at least written into its structure) a near perfect balance of freedom and security. One side want to move the pendulum towards more security and give us a more ‘European’ style government. The other wants to swing towards more freedom and allow the entrepreneurial spirit to flourish, devoid of the horde of crazy regulations that have been enacted in the last fifty years stifling growth and pushing jobs and investment money to other areas of the world.
You have brought up lobby groups quite a few times, but a lobbyist is merely a way for someone with money to gain the ear of a person of influence. Trump spoke to the group(s) that do not have the lobbyist. Now it remains to be seen what he will do, but a large amount of people in this country are tired of business as usual.
If you want a glimpse into what we are up against, watch the documentary film ‘Inside Job’ about the 2008 financial debacle. It should have you seething. Available on Netflix and YouTube by film maker Charles Ferguson.
Right on, Chad. Like what we seen “discussed” on this forum (although on a smaller scale). Dust off those Ayn Rand novels and put the Bible, on top of them (pretty much the essence, of the freedom and entrepreneur side). Although there is a third option - at least, for folks out of the workforce - like me (knowing the languages of Latin American, and popular languages of Europe). Live in one of those European style, government countries.
Everything is true there, Chad, except for the word ear. It should be ears. In working with AARP, they advise us to sign a letter/ petition at times, which gets emailed to the appropriate congress men and women. Or to contact certain congress men and women directly (which they so happily, supply the contact info). So the proper term is “ears”. Which are includes folks who are RINOs (i.e. Republicans in Name Only). And I forward the AARP agenda, to my social media contacts - more ears, mind you. 
Here’s a news article I received, from AARP today:
AARP Outlines Priorities to President Trump
Let me add this:
It’s business as usual, up until the point - there’s no more evidence, it’s business as usual. 
Perhaps we need a song - to emphasize the main points 
Out of curiosity, who was the last person qualified to be POTUS?
If I were to hazard a guess, it would be Rufus T Firefly. 
Out of curiosity, who was the last person qualified to be POTUS?
It has often been said that the best experience for President is to have been a governor of a state (preferably a large state). That would be George W Bush!
His experience didn’t help him with the WMD fiasco. Now Hill you could say had good experience sleeping with a President but so did dozens of other women!
Trump having no political experience can be a bad thing or then again it could be a very good thing!
Seeing what politics have devolved into, a politician was perhaps the last thing we needed.
Wasn’t Ronald Reagan once governor of California (for 2 terms, I believe)?
Wicked correct 
Did you check out ‘Inside Job?’
Oh yeah. Devastating.
Wasn’t Ronald Reagan once governor of California (for 2 terms, I believe)?
Yes & Clinton was Gov of Arkansas, but the question was about who was the last POTUS to have experience that qualified them.
Clinton certainly had the most experience with conference tables!