JBGUSA wrote:The consequences of straying from the Judeo-Christian ethic, that has created most of what is great about the Anglosphere, are easy to see:
Exhibit:

Sexual and social revolution of late 60's/early 70's;




1. Spiraling divorce rates;
   
2. Rising crime;
   
3. Delinquency;
4. Demands for "gay rights";
5. AIDS;
6. Herpes;
7. Crack;
8. Heroin
   Islam
   
   
   
   
   1. Intrigue;
   2. Violene;
   3. Chaos;
   4. Dictatorship;
   5. Grinding povertyOne can quibble about the details. One cannot quibble about the big picture on either of those things.
      
      

I have to ask how you conclude that "Sexual and social revolution of late 60's/early 70's" is responsible for Islam which was founded around 620AD?  And actually, crime has been falling for the last 15 or 20 years.  And we have always had a lot of intrigue, violence, chaos around.  And dictatorships are not exactly new as they were pretty much perfected in the 20th century by Lenin, Stalin and Hitler.  And poverty, well that isn't exactly new either.  

Not that I am in favor of the "Sexual and social revolution of late 60's/early 70's" but to blame it for every malady going back to the beginning of time is a little odd.

paleocon wrote:

[/list][/list][/list]

I have to ask how you conclude that "Sexual and social revolution of late 60's/early 70's" is responsible for Islam which was founded around 620AD?  And actually, crime has been falling for the last 15 or 20 years.  And we have always had a lot of intrigue, violence, chaos around.  And dictatorships are not exactly new as they were pretty much perfected in the 20th century by Lenin, Stalin and Hitler.  And poverty, well that isn't exactly new either.  

Not that I am in favor of the "Sexual and social revolution of late 60's/early 70's" but to blame it for every malady going back to the beginning of time is a little odd.[/quote]


I think he just had a formatting/spacing problem.  I think he meant it to look like this:


A.  Sexual and social revolution of late 60's/early 70's;
      i. Spiraling divorce rates;
      ii. Rising crime;
      iii. Delinquency;
      iv.  Demands for "gay rights";
      v.  AIDS;
      vi.  Herpes;
      vii. Crack;
      viii. Heroin



B. Islam
     i. Intrigue;
     ii. Violence;
     iii. Chaos;
     iv. Dictatorship;
     v. Grinding poverty - One can quibble about the details. One cannot quibble about the big picture on either of those things.


And, as far as the consequences of Islam; I think he's just pointing out some of the things that are often inherent in modern Islamic societies (not problems that are brand new), and are less prevalent in modern societies based on a Judeo-Christian ethic.  

That's just my "benefit-of-the-doubt" interpretation.  You'll have to wait for him to respond to get the real answer.

Eyas wrote:
I think he just had a formatting/spacing problem.  

That's just my "benefit-of-the-doubt" interpretation.  You'll have to wait for him to respond to get the real answer.

Well, this just continues to make one of my long-running points.  Spell check, use full sentences, punctuation, etc. and check your posts BEFORE you hit that submit button.  It is just common sense.  Otherwise it is way too easy to end up looking like an idiot when you blame the sexual revolution for Islam....

SoldiersMum wrote:Did anyone happen to watch the Hillary/Obama lovefest CNN commonly referred to as a debate?  The only good thing I heard was a comment from Obama.  He said Hollywood and the entertainment field need to be more responsible with the violence and sex that is shown as entertainment (not exactly his words but close).  CNN then panned to Rob Reiner who was sitting there rolling his eyes and scowling.  I just thought to myself..here's a guy who tried to get the state of California to put forth more monies to further early childhood education, and all the while, he doesn't think showing children sex and violence in his films is any big deal.  They, the liberals, the socialists, the communists are morally bankrupt and have lost their hearts all the while spewing forth cradle to grave Government programs.  Ever notice it's always about "The Children" when the socialists are lecturing?  Hypocrites.

I saw a few bits & pieces of it.  What absolutely amazed me were a series of comments by these two talking about all of the problems caused by Bush.  The spoke for a good five minutes about how bad the Bush Policies are and what they would do differently.

BDS is astounding.  I don't think Hillary & Obama were pandering to voters suffering from BDS -- I think that they actually both slipped into their default BDS mode.  They were patting each other on the back about the horrors of the Bush administration.  I think that they unconsciously slipped into their most common and comfortable way of looking at the election -- i.e., as if they were running against Bush.  They might not admit it, but their entire campaigns are directed toward defeating a man who isn't running -- a candidate who doesn't exist.

George Bush is NOT running for President!  Nevertheless, this is how all Leftists/Democrats percieve this election.

Further proof that liberalism is a mental disorder.

and..so what's the difference between George W. Bush and Juan McCain?  To be honest, I can't see much.  It will be an easy transition for the dems if McCain is our nominee and the hatred for Bush will be transferred so easily.

SoldiersMom Wrote: and..so what's the difference between George W. Bush and Juan McCain? To be honest, I can't see much. It will be an easy transition for the dems if McCain is our nominee and the hatred for Bush will be transferred so easily.

Thats the sad reality that hits Me. They are both threats to Individualism and Liberty in similar ways. They both have let us down in big ways.

R John wrote:SoldiersMom Wrote: and..so what's the difference between George W. Bush and Juan McCain? To be honest, I can't see much. It will be an easy transition for the dems if McCain is our nominee and the hatred for Bush will be transferred so easily.

Thats the sad reality that hits Me. They are both threats to Individualism and Liberty in similar ways. They both have let us down in big ways.

The BIG difference between Bush and McCain is that Bush fooled us for about 4 years.  McCain didn't.  I just hope voters today realize that.

paleocon wrote:

R John wrote:SoldiersMom Wrote: and..so what's the difference between George W. Bush and Juan McCain? To be honest, I can't see much. It will be an easy transition for the dems if McCain is our nominee and the hatred for Bush will be transferred so easily.

Thats the sad reality that hits Me. They are both threats to Individualism and Liberty in similar ways. They both have let us down in big ways.

The BIG difference between Bush and McCain is that Bush fooled us for about 4 years.  McCain didn't.  I just hope voters today realize that.

It's true that Bush fooled us.  He has morphed into a globalist liberal which is who he was all along but kept it hidden.  It's who is daddy is too.  With McCain, here's the big thing that I do not get.  75% of the American people were opposed to the Amnesty Bill.  Juan is the co-author of that bill.  He is now the Republican front runner.  Where are those 75% who were so outraged by his bill?  He says he gets it...the borders need to be closed.  Yet, "Open the Borders and give us the NAU" Juan Hernandez is on his campaign staff and he continues to co-sponsor S-340, the Amnesty Bill for 1.5M - ?? M illegal agriculture workers and their families which does not address a thing about the border except the amnesty for those coming over it.  Talk about fooling..can he be fooling the 75% of the population that are opposed to amnesty?   It sure isn't likely.  So, why is he leading?  The fix in?

SoldiersMum wrote:

paleocon wrote:

R John wrote:SoldiersMom Wrote: and..so what's the difference between George W. Bush and Juan McCain? To be honest, I can't see much. It will be an easy transition for the dems if McCain is our nominee and the hatred for Bush will be transferred so easily.

Thats the sad reality that hits Me. They are both threats to Individualism and Liberty in similar ways. They both have let us down in big ways.

The BIG difference between Bush and McCain is that Bush fooled us for about 4 years.  McCain didn't.  I just hope voters today realize that.

It's true that Bush fooled us.  He has morphed into a globalist liberal which is who he was all along but kept it hidden.  It's who is daddy is too.  With McCain, here's the big thing that I do not get.  75% of the American people were opposed to the Amnesty Bill.  Juan is the co-author of that bill.  He is now the Republican front runner.  Where are those 75% who were so outraged by his bill?  He says he gets it...the borders need to be closed.  Yet, "Open the Borders and give us the NAU" Juan Hernandez is on his campaign staff and he continues to co-sponsor S-340, the Amnesty Bill for 1.5M - ?? M illegal agriculture workers and their families which does not address a thing about the border except the amnesty for those coming over it.  Talk about fooling..can he be fooling the 75% of the population that are opposed to amnesty?   It sure isn't likely.  So, why is he leading?  The fix in?

This has driven me absolutely nuts since the first day McCain was magically resurrected as a viable candidate.  It makes no logical sense.  In a sane world, this turnaround by voters who objected to Amnesty would simply not be possible.

So, I can draw no other conclusion except YES, THE FIX IS IN.  And has been in for some time.