User Profile: skathesoul

Member Since: September 30, 2010


  • July 16, 2013 at 6:42pm

    And we wonder why they hate us and why they become terrorists. Some of the people on this forum are the most preachy Christians you will ever come by, and yet when it comes to matters of war and peace, the majority of you seem to prefer war and hatred. Remember that it was Christ who said:

    “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt alove thy bneighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that dcurse you, do egood to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you…” Mathew 5: 43-44.

    Christ also told us, “Blessed are the apeacemakers: for they shall be called the bchildren of God.” I would hope that those of you who profess to be Christians will not have such a strong case of cognizant dissonance when it comes to your Christian faith. You cannot believe in Christ, the author of peace, but also love war and hatred, for “No man can bserve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Matthew 6:24.

    Responses (5) +
  • May 7, 2013 at 2:40pm

    I like how the headline reads that the guest “eviscerates” the caller. The guest merely engages in name calling and ad hominem attacks, while leaving the substance of the caller’s arguments unaddressed. So in what way was the caller “eviscerated”?

    In actuality, the caller raised several good questions which I would love for the guest to address. Why ARE we allowing the left wing of the republican party (i.e. the “neocons”) march our sons and daughters off into another fool’s errand to sacrifice more blood and treasure for a land and a people which have no bearing on our country’s hard national interests? True patriots always defend American interests first, above all other interests. Those of you who support MORE intervention in the Middle East have your allegiances set on other nations and other peoples besides your own. Don’t further allow yourselves to be manipulated by the left wing of the Republican party. Shout down the McCains and the Grahams. History will prove them wrong.

    Responses (6) +
  • April 23, 2013 at 2:25pm

    We have the First Amendment for a reason–to protect religious freedom, even if the religion is unpopular. Don’t think for a second that secular liberals in this country would not love to throw Ann Coulter in jail for wearing a cross around her neck. Any thinking person who honors their own freedom of religion should be utterly appalled by Coulter’s remarks.

    Responses (2) +
  • March 28, 2012 at 9:59pm

    It’s a moderate’s world. Rand Paul put out a REAL budget plan the week before that was ignored even by so called right wing news orgs like the Blaze. What a shame.


  • July 13, 2011 at 1:24am

    ENDTHEFED2012 is mopping all of you up. You can’t fight reason. You can’t fight logic. You can’t fight the hard truth. What is the hard truth? Many of you love the idea of “small constitutionally limited government.” You love to say it and make people believe you mean it. But when it comes down to actually supporting the measures to put government back in its rightful place, you won’t do it.

    Ron Paul is only “wrong on some issues” because you’re still under the spell of FDR’s new deal, which no president has been able to successfully repudiate. I don’t blame you. We no nothing else. None of us have ever lived without the New Deal in our lifetimes. But the time has come to reject the New Deal once and for all and put the government our founding father’s gave us back in its rightful place. You cannot do that by voting for the same old big government republicans. What is truly comes down to is whether you want to “believe” in small government, or whether you want to “practice” small government. There is, in truth, no other candidate running besides Ron Paul that will give you a small government. So do you believe in small government or not? It’s time to put your money where your mouth is.

  • April 11, 2011 at 5:38pm

    Romney is a raving neoconservative that is more concerned with governing the world than he is protecting the constitution and trying to get us back to a time of peace and prosperity. Although I may share the same religious convictions as Romney, we share little else in common. Romney will lead us towards global governance faster than any other candidate out there.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 22, 2011 at 10:56pm

    bert2020, if you had any real idea what Pat Buchanan’s political beliefs are you wouldn’t jump to such a silly conclusion. Pat was not, nor has ever argued that we should emulate China’s economic model of market socialism. The only thing China is doing that America should emulate is seeking its own national interest above all other countries’ interests. This is something America used to do, which we gave up years ago. If there is one thing China does right, it is seek its own self interest. Any great country should do the same. So should the United States of America. This is what Pat is saying. If you knew anything about Pat’s political beliefs you would know that Pat lives by the mantra “America first.” China certainly lives by the mantra “China first.” This is something we can certainly live by once again.

  • January 22, 2011 at 4:46pm

    Redistributor, I don’t think you a) understand Pat’s argument, or b) know anything about Pat’s political philosophy. He is not saying that China is a preferable political model. One that, for example, we should emulate. All he is saying is that their model is working, and that there would be no reason for them to adopt another model at this point. People on this forum don’t seem to understand that China is as much a nationalist government as it is a statist government. China always seeks its self interests, even if it is at the expense of the rights of others or its own people.

    Our system, of course, actually cares about human rights and individual liberties. But China could care less about those things. China, to adopt those ideas at this juncture, would have to end its exploitation other county’s raw resources, and the exploitation of its own people, both of which are contributing markedly to China’s rise in power. Note, this is not the rise of individual power–i.e. individual freedom and happiness. China’s rise in power is purely in terms of its state power in comparison to other states in world. As far as state to state power is concerned, China is the future. Pat is right. What Pat left out is that this should give great cause for concern for those of us freedom loving Americans. My opinion is that while we should do all to protect our own personal liberties at home, we need to be more nationalistic abroad, like China is. China isn’t concerned with “the global economy,” and neither should we be. The only economy that matters should be the American economy. In this respect, we could take note of the Chinese model.

  • October 23, 2010 at 11:57pm

    I hope this lights a fire under Roberts’ butt and makes him realize that he needs to join with Thomas and Scalia as a true constitutional originalist. Only then will the enemies to the constitution be defeated.

  • October 9, 2010 at 1:35pm

    @ Joseph_Plumb_Martin,
    don’t be selectively educated. If you’re going to quote an old Brigham Young statement, be honest and and place it in the proper context of other scriptures and statements. First is the Book of Mormon scripture found in 2 Nephi 26:33, which states: “..and he (the Lord) inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come, black and white, bond and free, male and female…and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.” According to this scripture, all mankind has an absolutely equal standing before God.
    Now, the Priesthood is an entirely different matter. It had nothing to do with matters of salvation. Blacks who could not hold the Priesthood for a time were not denied membership in the church, and nor were they considered in any way intelligible for salvation through Jesus Christ. But with respect to comments made by Brigham Young, consider this statement by Bruce R. McConkie, who like Brigham Young, made ignorant remarks concerning doctrine the Lord was yet to reveal.

    “Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter any more.” This statement shows definitively that any earlier statement regarding reasons for blacks being denied the Priesthood were rendered null and void by further light and revelation given by the Lord. Some times God allows things to play out, and lets his children grope for answers. This is not evidence that there is no God, it is evidence that he wants us to exercise faith, and be patient when all of life’s mysteries are not spelled out in big bold letters.

    Responses (2) +