TomCADem
TomCADem's JournalHere is a sampling...
First, there are several Biblical quotes that directly endorse collective ownership, which are often ignored by the evangelical Christians:And all that believed were together, and had all things in common;
And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
Acts 2: 44, 45
And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,
Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.
Acts 4:32-37
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.
This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.
Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
Romans 13:1-7
Second, in direct contradiction to those who preach the prosperity gospel, i.e., that being rich reflects the Lord's favor and being poor reflects God's disfavor, the Bible contains numerous provisions expressing hostility to the rich:
"Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves."
- Matthew 21:12
"On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves,"
- Mark 11:15
"In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money.
So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.
To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!"
- John 2:14-16
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
- Mark 10:25
Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
- Luke 18:25
And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
- Matthew 19:24
Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
- Luke 18:25
And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
- Matthew 19:24
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows”
- I Timothy 6:10
WaPo Guest Columnist - "From Jesus’ socialism to capitalistic Christianity" - Great Read!
The phenomena of how Christianity became pro-capitalistism is rarely discussed. Instead, it is taken as canon by the mainstream media that Evangelical Christians and free marketeers happily co-exist under the Republican banner. However, if anyone has read the Bible, as I was required to do as a child, was is amazing is how socialistic many of its passages appear to be. I am not even talking about the passages that slam the rich such as those saying it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle then for a rich man to enter the kingdom of god.
My take is that Republican ownership of the religious right is classic case of folks making god in their image, rather than the other way around. How else can the right wing happily embrace the contradictory views of Ayn Rand, who was an outspoken atheist, while also currying favor with the religious right. I would love to see Christian reclaim the Bible from those who use it defend capitalism and the exploitation of the poor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/from-jesus-socialism-to-capitalistic-christianity/2011/08/12/gIQAziaQBJ_blog.html
But to understand just how non-capitalistic Christianity is supposed to be we turn to the first chapter after the gospels, Acts, which describes the events of the early church. Chapters 2 and 4 state that all “the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need… No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had…. There were no needy persons among them. From time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.”
Now folks, that’s outright socialism of the type described millennia later by Marx - who likely got the general idea from the gospels.
The pro-capitalist Christians who are aware of these passages wave them away even though it is the only explicit description of Christian economics in the Bible.
Two Maine news anchors quit on air, citing pressure to do biased journalism
Source: NY Daily News
Maine news anchors Tony Consiglio and Cindy Michaels' resignation didn't surprise company Vice President and General Manager Mike Palmer, who called it "unfortunate." Michaels said the pair were expected to do unbalanced political journalism.
* * *
“It’s a little complicated,” Michaels continued, “but we were expected to do somewhat unbalanced news, politically, in general.”
Neither anchor specified what political stances the management allegedly wanted them to espouse.
Unlike others at the station, the company’s vice president and general manager, Mike Palmer, was not surprised by their announcement.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2-maine-news-anchors-quit-air-article-1.1206187
The folks at Free Republic are celebrating this resignation accusing this pair of wanting to push liberal (fact based) journalism. In Ohio, several ABC affiliates that were owned by Sinclair were forced to broadcast a highly partisan attack on President Obama as a news special:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/11/sinclair_broadcast_group_ohio_anti-obama_special.php
This just goes to show that we need to hold the media accountable and that Fox News is not the only outlet that is pushing a right wing agenda. Fox News is just the most obvious about it.
The Week - "Are fringe Republicans trying to impeach President Obama?"
So much for Republicans learning from the 2012 election to be more reality based. I guess they are going to move from President Obama being a secret Muslim, to birtherism, to "Fast and Furious being a conspiracy to take away guns," to Bengazi being a covered up terrorist attack even though President Obama called it an act of terror the day after the attack. Thus, we have John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Darrell Issa once again playing to the right's lunatic fringe.
http://theweek.com/article/index/236486/are-fringe-republicans-trying-to-impeach-president-obama
On Wednesday, in his first press conference since winning re-election, President Obama showed renewed swagger, answering questions with an easy confidence that was missing in the tense weeks leading up to Election Day. But perhaps Obama shouldn't let his guard down: Some conservatives are still plotting ways to oust him from power. Nearly 22,000 people have already signed a Nov. 11 petition to the White House demanding that Obama be impeached (never mind that their grievance targets the wrong branch of government). Impeachment has become a veritable battle cry on Twitter, with angry Republicans applying the hashtag #impeach to their complaints about the Obama administration.
Now, a conservative group has started a grassroots movement to make impeachment a reality. "The Conservative Majority Fund, a conservative group known primarily for its birther conspiracy spreading, has launched a robocall campaign to gin up support for the president's impeachment," says Sam Stein at The Huffington Post. The call says Obama is "guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors," citing the widely discredited claim that Obama is not an American citizen, among other accusations.
"Conservative Majority Fund is on the fringe of the conservative fringe," says Stein, "so it's not terribly surprising that they moved this quickly to start the drumbeats for the president's impeachment." Among such groups, the possibility of impeachment comes up often when the discussion turns to Benghazi, with many claiming that the Obama administration lied to the American people to cover up a terrorist attack. Far-right websites say Obama continues to lie out of fear he'll be impeached, while even mainstream conservative columnists are peddling conspiracy theories that suggest Obama used David Petraeus' affair to force Petraeus into participating in the cover-up.
Given these popular talking points, some liberals are bracing for a full-fledged impeachment campaign. After all, the last Democratic president found himself impeached not so long ago. "Whether it's on the basis of the supposed Benghazi cover up, or something else altogether, get ready for the looming extreme right wing war cry of "Impeach Obama," says Alex Marin at PolicyMic, "as the most stubborn factions of an aging Republican Party start to grasp the inevitability of an Obama second term."
538 - "Which Polls Fared Best (and Worst) in the 2012 Presidential Race"
Interesting review of the error of pollsters in the 2012 election. Amazingly, the most well known firms, Gallup and Rassmussen decided to throw away their credibility in 2012 to support the Republican narrative.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/which-polls-fared-best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/?src=me&ref=general
Our method of evaluating pollsters has typically involved looking at all the polls that a firm conducted over the final three weeks of the campaign, rather than its very last poll alone. The reason for this is that some polling firms may engage in “herding” toward the end of the campaign, changing their methods and assumptions such that their results are more in line with those of other polling firms.
There were roughly two dozen polling firms that issued at least five surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, counting both state and national polls. (Multiple instances of a tracking poll are counted as separate surveys in my analysis, and only likely voter polls are used.)
WaPo - "Pundit accountability: The official 2012 election prediction thread"
Some of the Republican predictions are mind blowing. George Will, for example, predicts that Romney will win Minnesota.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/11/05/pundit-accountability-the-official-2012-election-prediction-thread/
Here are the electoral vote predictions from various modelers, political scientists and pundits from around the Internet. All predictions are as of Monday evening. And yes, this will be a fun thread to revisit the day after the election:
Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight: Obama 303, Romney 235. ”The model estimates that Mr. Romney would need to win the national popular vote by about one percentage point to avert a tossup, or a loss, in the Electoral College,” Silver writes.
* * *
Karl Rove: Romney 285, Obama 253. He’s got Romney winning Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, Colorado, and Florida.
HuffPo - "Yes He Did - Romney Opposed Federal Disaster Relief"
Romney's campaign surrogates have been saying that Romney would essentially do the same thing that President Obama is doing and would, of course, not abolish FEMA, but back in June, Romney was singing a different tune:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-weiler/mitt-romney-fema_b_2045760.html
King followed up to clarify that Romney's view of devolving as much as possible from the federal governments to the states and the private sector really did include disaster relief.
We cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we'll all be dead and gone before it's paid off. It makes no sense at all.
When it comes to multi-state disasters, it's simply not possible to manage relief on an ad hoc, local basis. National resources and national coordination are absolutely essential and our increasingly cash-strapped states are simply not in the position to take on such massive interventions. But Republicans have now declared war on FEMA. The Ryan budget, not surprisingly, has called for significant cuts to the agency. And, of course, the party denies that there is such a thing as human-induced climate change, including such effects as significant sea-level rise. In fact, Romney mocked the idea of climate change and the threat of rising sea levels just two months ago during his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention.
TP - "Romney Opposes Fuel Efficiency Standards Actually Moving U.S. Toward Energy Independence"
One thing to keep in mind is that Romney has pledged to get the EPA out of regulating carbon dioxide emissions.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/08/28/744811/romney-opposes-fuel-efficiency-standards-actually-moving-us-toward-energy-independence/
Last week, Mitt Romney unveiled a plan for “energy independence” by 2020, a proposal analysts called unrealistic, in part because he would roll back the same initiatives responsible for lowering U.S. foreign oil consumption.
Today, the Obama Administration is set to announce new rules that boost fuel efficiency to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, which would save 3 million barrels of oil per day, 2 billion metric tons of carbon pollution, and create 570,000 jobs by 2030.
Romney not only opposes these new rules, but he would undo existing standards requiring new cars reach an average of 35.5 MPG by 2016, the first improvement the fuel economy standards stalled for two decades. Last fall, Romney said he “would get the EPA out of its effort to manage carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles and trucks.”
The Nation - "GOP Concern for Disaster Preparedness Doesn't Extend Beyond Tampa"
Nice article by the Nation calling out Republicans for holding disaster relief hostage to achieve idealogical goals.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/169574/gop-concern-disaster-preparedness-doesnt-extend-beyond-tampa
Republicans have also continued to starve the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the money it needs to respond to natural disasters. It held FEMA hostage to the same budget battles last summer, withholding money until cuts were made elsewhere. This brought the agency literally to the brink of bankruptcy, and it was even forced to temporarily suspend relief efforts in Missouri and elsewhere last summer as the dispute raged on in Congress.
Federal agencies that monitor storms have also been targeted. The funding resolution passed by Republicans in early 2011 specifically cut funding for the National Oceanic Atmospheric Association by $454 million from the president’s request. The National Weather Service, part of NOAA, saw a $126 million reduction.
Even at the state level, the party hasn’t been kind to funding victims of natural disasters. Under Republican Governor Rick Scott’s most recent budget, “Florida may not have enough money to pay off hurricane insurance claims if a big storm hits this year.”
Romney's Campaign Efforts DESTROY The MSM Talking Point That The Country Is More Conservative
The corporate media repeatedly pushes the talking point that the Nation leans conservative. Indeed, many folks have deluded themselves into believing this talking point. Yet, Mitt Romney’s 11th hour moderate makeover in which he contradicted positions that he advocated through September of this year undermines this talking point.
With the first debate, Mitt introduced the character of moderate Mitt who was not for tax cuts to the rich, was for the auto bailout, who had no plans for anti-abortion legislation, wanted to protect Medicare and Social Security, and was open to barring insurance companies from refusing coverage based on pre-existing conditions. Suddenly, Mitt’s fortunes in the polls went from dismal to competitive. Heck, by the third debate, Mitt’s best rejoinder to President Obama’s foreign policy positions was a “me too.” Gone were the references to Russia as America’s number one threat or easy trip wires to a war with Iran.
Perhaps to the chagrin of the right wing, Mitt’s election fortunes actually improved a bit with the new moderate Mitt contradicting and disavowing the positions taken for the months by the Mitt that actually won the Republican primary. Yet, Mitt still remains on the road to an election loss mainly because few people trust him anymore given his minute by minute changes in position based on the audience of the moment.
Nonetheless, the only reason why this race is competitive is that, in addition to hundreds of millions of corporate money, Mitt has muddled right wing positions and kept silent about the specifics of the right wing policies that he has advocated such as how he pays for his $6 trillion tax cut. Thus, rather than show that the Nation has moved to the right, Mitt has only managed to make up ground against President Obama by muddling the distinctions between himself and President Obama.
If the Nation were truly conservative, Romney would have been winning going away at the end of September and, rather than muddle his positions and lie, Romney would be doubling down on the right wing rhetoric and positions he was pushing during the primaries. Instead, Romney is doing his best to avoid discussing the specifics of his platform while President Obama is the one getting more specific as to how his economic plans add up as we approach the election.
Profile Information
Member since: Fri May 8, 2009, 12:59 AMNumber of posts: 17,387
