Christianity Today Op Ed

[Mountain Man]

That is just ignorant, as if he's not even paid attention. This is not about a phone call people dont like. It is about the president coercing a foreign nation to interfere in our election process.

It is inexcusable for him to characterize it so trivially, and for you to post such a comment as having merit.

Triggered.

[oxmixmudd]

Triggered.

living up to my expectations again I see.

[Mountain Man]

living up to my expectations again I see.

And you are living down to mine.

[oxmixmudd]

And you are living down to mine.

clever ...

[rogue06]

It's pretty pathetic when Trump, one of the most corrupt person on the planet, is the savior of "religion itself."

As the last few weeks have made abundantly clear, Trump's "corruption" doesn't hold a candle to that of the real pros like Schiff, Pelosi and Nadler.

[rogue06]

Supporting the evil empire is the new conservative.

00000000000000ab000-00aaad.jpg


00000000000000ab000-00aaad2.jpg


00000000000000ab000-00aaad3.jpg

[One Bad Pig]

I beg to differ.

Point.

And yet they do.

What did they do, travel forward in time so they could see the articles before commenting on them?

[seanD]

Supporting the evil empire is the new conservative.

Trump just passed (with the blessings of the Dems who granted him even more than he asked for) the biggest military budget on record, as well as extending the Patriot Act. So, by evil empire, I assume you're referring to the military industrial and intelligence complex.

[Starlight]

I don't understand this statement. The person who takes the President's place if the President is impeached, is the Vice Present. The CT editorial didn't need to tell us who should take his place, because nobody gets a choice in the matter.

Does Dobson mean they didn't tell us which Republicans ought to run for the Presidency in 2020 if Trump isn't there as an incumbent? Surely it's not a CT editorial board's business to endorse any specific candidate this far out? Or is Dobson implying that the Republicans literally have nobody at all who can do it, and that there are no possible worthy Republican candidates? That last seems a pretty harsh claim against the Republican party (and against Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, John Kasich, Mitt Romney etc who all seem like seriously possible options).

Or was this just part of his later pathetic insinuation that the CT editorial board are eViL SoCiAliSt DeMoCraTs?

[Starlight]

Supporting the evil empire is the new conservative.

It's an interesting question of what is the new conservatism.

The old conservatism seems dead:

• Balanced budgets / fiscal responsibility
  
• Morality in leadership
  
• Opposition to dictators / promotion of democracy
  
• No new government spending
  
• Thoughtfulness/formality in speech and action by leaders

All of that seems to have been destroyed by Trump, and surprisingly the people previously advocating for it don't seem at all worried.

What is the new conservatism?

• The idea of the Wall. Even if it isn't actually being built. Even if Mexico isn't paying for it.
  
• Triggering libs. Even if nothing is gained by it. Liberals being upset is in and of itself a good thing.
  
• Support for the Dear Leader. And a desire for his descendants and relatives to take leadership after he's gone.
  
• Active disbelief in the idea of global warming. And opposition to the very idea of doing anything whatsoever to mitigate it, no matter how easy.

[lilpixieofterror]

That is just ignorant, as if he's not even paid attention. This is not about a phone call people dont like. It is about the president coercing a foreign nation to interfere in our election process.

It is inexcusable for him to characterize it so trivially, and for you to post such a comment as having merit.

A comprehensive list of votes changed due to the big bad, Russian boogyman:

[JimL]

As the last few weeks have made abundantly clear, Trump's "corruption" doesn't hold a candle to that of the real pros like Schiff, Pelosi and Nadler.

At least you're finally admitting that you know Trump is corrupt. Baby steps!

[Leonhard]

Reagan style conservatism has been dead since the Tea Party.

[oxmixmudd]

A comprehensive list of votes changed due to the big bad, Russian boogyman:

Was talking about the attempt to get Ukraine to find dirt on Biden.

That Russia is trying to do what they can to destabilize western democracies is well know, including the US. The fact the made efforts to influence people to vote for Trump in 2016 is also well known.

The fact you think concern over those issues is funny is truly sad.

[oxmixmudd]

It's an interesting question of what is the new conservatism.

The old conservatism seems dead:

• Balanced budgets / fiscal responsibility
  
• Morality in leadership
  
• Opposition to dictators / promotion of democracy
  
• No new government spending
  
• Thoughtfulness/formality in speech and action by leaders

All of that seems to have been destroyed by Trump, and surprisingly the people previously advocating for it don't seem at all worried.

What is the new conservatism?

• The idea of the Wall. Even if it isn't actually being built. Even if Mexico isn't paying for it.
  
• Triggering libs. Even if nothing is gained by it. Liberals being upset is in and of itself a good thing.
  
• Support for the Dear Leader. And a desire for his descendants and relatives to take leadership after he's gone.
  
• Active disbelief in the idea of global warming. And opposition to the very idea of doing anything whatsoever to mitigate it, no matter how easy.

You forgot "Hold weekly rallies so you can get people pumped up like Mussolini and Hitler did!".