Id go for JFK.>

The Kennedy Democrats were likeable. JFK one of the greatest Presidents ever.

The Bill Cinton Democrats were not the same as the Kennedy Democrats. They were still tolerable. Bill was a big old buffoon, but he charmed people.

And today? These Obama Democrats are different than the Clinton ones; more hateful, more restrictive of other people's Constitutional, and God given rights.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/james-da...

Remember this from last year?

<James Damore, a former Google engineer who was fired in August after posting a memo to an internal Google message board arguing that women may not be equally represented in tech because they are biologically less capable of engineering, has filed a class action lawsuit against the company in Santa Clara Superior Court in Northern California.

His claims: that Google unfairly discriminates against white men whose political views are unpopular with its executives.>

I was looking for Democrats who are still living.>

...and look where you needed to go.

It's about time! The libs have taken political correctness to a puritanical extreme and nothing highlights it like the case of James Damore.>

I have a bachelor's degree in engineering, along with my multiple degrees in physics.

In my class there was 1 black girl, 4 or 5 white girls, a few boys from non-white ethnic groups, and the rest were white males, dozens of them.

So the reason white males dominate engineering is because white males go to engineering school in large numbers, compared to other demographics.

I will leave it open to discussion as to *why* this is so. Damore gave his opinion. Other folks may have other opinions.

But any ideas about "institutional racism" or other such nonsense, when it comes to hiring engineers, is just that - nonsense.

If more than 85% of the engineering school graduates are white males, and companies are desperate for engineers to fill open jobs, then WTF_ do people think is going to happen???

Heh, heh!

<You cannot be a Christian and vote for anyone in the Democratic Party.>

As a European I am not the best qualified to discuss the topic, but there may be some problem with the statement:

If we agree that the Bible is written by humans, and that Christian theology has been developed by humans, then it must stand to reason that both are subject to interpretation. Hence there will be different doctrines of Christianity (indeed there are many) and as such it may be difficult to take a political stand that all Christian doctrines will support.

In your list of examples: Whereas the Christian stance on abortion should probably not differ much (it would be difficult to argue pro-abortion theologically), I would think that homosexuality is not so easily dismissed in the same way. Certainly there are Christians who do not see homosexuality as being against their religious views, and there are even homosexuals who define themselves as Christians. To be offended by a "Merry Christmas"-greeting, well that is simply rather lame, although I doubt that this applies to all Democrats :)

<troller>, liberal interpretations of Christianity is not Christianity.>

Look, I like you. You are straightforward, articulate, funny, honest.

But let's get one thing straight.

I MIND IF YOU EMPTY YOUR BLADDER WHILE WE ARE TALKING ON THE PHONE.

<Let me just explain why to you for a minute. Are you familiar with a man by the name of Wayne Huizenga?

-well yeah I know about him. Do mind if empty my bladder while you’re talking to me?

Excuse me?

-Do you mind if I empty my bladder while you’re talking to me?

Not at all.

-okay go ahead >

NO, DON'T GO AHEAD. HOLD IT A MINUTE.

I don't want to talk to someone on the phone while he is emptying his bladder.

I won't hang up on my brothers, if they do it, but that is the extent of my tolerance.

There is almost nothing worse than a "strong" willed woman.>

https://www.facebook.com/DailyWire/...

This is something I've been saying on the rogoff page for a long time, but this man says it better than I do. Andrew Klavan was on Tucker Carlson and you've GOT to see this.

<BP> Great, GREAT find! Thanks for posting this Klavan interview.

As always a late answer from my side, but is that not a bit too easy for your standards? My whole point was that Christianity allows different interpretations, at least the New Testament. And so how is it that a liberal interpretation is wrong?

No it doesn’t. The truth does not allow interpretation. So when people “interpret” Christianity (all of it?) what they really do is rationalize their sin, and they call it their version of Christianity.

Yes. While there are different groups in each party, fundamentally they agree on certain basic positions.

Democrats are for abortion, normalizing homosexuality, normalizing cross dressing and all kinds of other things like that. You can’t be a Christian and vote for someone who supports these views.

Not at all. I see Trump as a good man, perhaps the best man we’ve had in office in 200 years. Some people wonder if I’m serious when I say that because he speaks crudely, but I see that as a part of his honesty and forthrightness. More importantly, I see him as a man with common sense who is alone in a corrupt government, a corrupt world, bent on doing what is really right, where the enemies of goodness scandalize the truth.

We live in a world where liberalism (political correctness) has demonized the truth on all fronts, such that if a man speaks the plain truth, he is made out to be a monster. Trump is the counterpoint to this in that he speaks boldly, unafraid and unwilling to conform to the arbitrary and artificial strictures that are followed so closely by the rest of the openly corrupt politicians everywhere.