Let me think for a moment. Who does it sound like when one claims any criticism of a person’s position or qualifications equates to unfair and unreasonable opposition to said person? Who is best known for making personal attacks against any who oppose even the smallest portion of their doctrine?
I’m having a hard time coming up with anyone of any prominence besides Trump that doesn’t come with a (D) after their name.
Calling Sanders and "Marxist kook" is fair and reasonable? Even if you believe that, shouldn't some substance be required to convince your audience. Is that a disagreement of "even the smallest portion of their doctrine"? I'm not sure the point you are making holds water here.
 February 10, 2016 at 1:34pm
Getting this level of vitriol from Chris Matthews is the single best endorsement I can think of.
 February 10, 2016 at 1:00pm
They finally got Matthews to reveal his motivation at the end there. It’s because Cruz doesn’t like Matthew’s god Obama and, therefore, is evil and needs to be destroyed.
 February 10, 2016 at 9:37am
Course language hurts him with the over-50-crowd. It might help with the under-30-crowd. It probably does neither with those in-between.
Those under 30 have heard and used that language their entire lives. Those over 50 have used it, too, but don’t like hearing it. Those in between use it with each other, but not in the presence of those over 50.
Let me help Ms Clinton out…. Seeings your parents have broken every single one of the ten commandments repeatedly ad nauseam, perhaps the Sunday School teacher was trying to teach you lessons in morality early in life as the Bible instructs parents to do. First of all you were six and most likely remember no such thing. This does make you a pathological liar just like your disgusting parents. You and said parents are only “Christians” when it suites the agenda, which means votes. Where in the Bible does it say to visit prisoners? In the OT, I believe people were not put in prison. I believe they were using Levitical laws and a restitution to the victim. And if you were standing face to face with Christ (which we all will some day) Will you be pontificating to Him about the virtues of slaughtering the unborn (which He said He knew before we are even conceived) and how these “women’s reproductive rights” came before God’s laws of murder? These Clinton monsters are in for a HUGE surprise on the day of reconning! But you keep preachin’ it girlfriend!! Make your parents proud!! And BTW, since when does a six year old decide to pull themselves out of Sunday School? Liars all!
bondroid - Matthew 25:36
That is where you are wrong THE CLINTONS DIDN'T KILL THEIR KIDS.....no, no ......they don't practice what they preach. The 1% breed their kind for a dynasty....if you notice they are all large families. IT IS YOUR KIDS THAT THEY ARE PROMOTING TO KILL....................YOU ARE A USELESS EATER....AND THERE IS TOO MANY OF YOU ...........TAKING UP THEIR SPACE ON PLANET EARTH.........GOT THAT THEIR SPACE!!!
Just like the bastards tell you to ride mass transit and yet use limos, jets........no comfortable SUV for you .........you only deserve a cramped two by four "green home" while they have three to four MEGA mansions ..one on each continent.
Stinking useless parasites, including Chelsea.
 February 9, 2016 at 11:30am
No impact to the trial. It’s a matter of how long authorities can hold someone without an indictment.
The suspect was essentially released as though he made bail.
“You only have yourself to blame” will only be true if a Republican is nowhere in sight.
 February 9, 2016 at 8:59am
It’s implying their Jewishness is part of the problem. Intended or not, Nugent actually doubled down on this aspect making that connection seem intended. I believe he’s just sharing the graphic, I have no idea if he knows it comes from anti-Semites trying to link Judaism to gun control. I’ve never seen anything else implying Nugent is an anti-Semite, so this came as a bit of a surprise to me.
He certainly didn’t do anything to distance himself from that side of this message.
February 9, 2016 at 8:08am
That’s too bad. You wouldn’t be so much of a waste if you at least got paid for that drivel.
 February 8, 2016 at 3:57pm
Pathetic. How much you get paid to bait people? I hope it’s not much, because that was just sad.
PAID SOROS TROLLS DON'T EXIST! You're a gullible idiot for thinking otherwise.
That's too bad. You wouldn't be so much of a waste if you at least got paid for that drivel.
 February 8, 2016 at 3:53pm
To ban it takes away a choice for non-jewish parents. That may or may not be a valid position to have. Personally, unless you can point to real harm likely to occur to the child (which there’s no data for), it should remain a choice of the parents. Believe me, I don’t mind being circumcised, and I’m glad it happened at a time I can’t remember.
But for Jews, it’s a religious right. They are commanded by their religion to do it. Outlawing circumcision outlaws being Jewish.
So it’s either a bunch of know-nothing busy-bodies trying to force their will on everyone else for no reason or they are anti-Semites wanting the Jews to leave their territory. Either way, they can bugger off.
 February 8, 2016 at 3:49pm
Abortion? OK. Circumcision, though – now that’s just too far.
 February 8, 2016 at 11:55am
I think it is too early in Cam’s life and career to be so harsh. I hope he learns from this. We all know he knows how to win, but now we know that he still needs to learn how to lose.
Luckily, he’s young enough to still learn that lesson.
I believe the public needs to be harsh for Mr. Newton to learn. If no one said anything about his behavior, do you think he would change? I wouldn't bet money on that. But after the public's reaction, if he didn't change I would be very surprised. It is fine if he feels the same way but he doesn't need to make a public display.
 February 8, 2016 at 11:50am
Really, it’s the “feminists” in the image of the likes of Steinem and Albright are not for the advancement of women. They are for the advancement of progressivism and will use any means to trick women into following them. They will crush all women who stand in their way with greater vigor than they will oppose any man. The saddest thing is that Gloria “The boss gets one grope free” Steinem is still held in any regard at all by any woman.
 February 8, 2016 at 9:10am
This has been explained over and over to you, blink. You may disagree with the reasoning, but that doesn’t change the fact that you are obtuse. The only question is whether that is intentional on your part or just your natural state of being.
It has to do with point of view. All three religions claim to come from Abraham, but anyone can claim it. Doesn’t make them all the same.
Islam claims to send the same message that was taught to Christians and Jews, only Christians and Jews have each corrupted that message over the years. Only the Muslims heard it right from the lips of Mohammad.
Christians claim everything recorded in the Jewish texts (that make up the Old Testament) are true and right and Jesus Christ is the Messiah promised in those texts. Christians don’t claim the Jewish texts are corrupted. Some Jews even agree that Jesus is the prophesied Messiah.
So all three claim to worship the same God, but all three give that God different attributes and revelations. Whether He truly is the same God depends on your point of view.
“Non-messianic” Jews reject Christian theology. The God Christians describe is not the God they follow. Both Christians and Jews reject Mohammad and the god he describes.
To Muslims – he’s the same god.
To Christians – Jews have the same God, Muslims do not.
To (non-messianic) Jews – neither Christians nor Muslims have the same God.
Since you are arguing with Christians, you get the Christian PoV.
 February 5, 2016 at 2:30pm
The Unitarians threw away Biblical principles with their very founding. I think it is safe to say to legitimately be called a Christian the way it is understood today, one must believe in the divinity of Christ. Unitarians deny the trinity, the divinity of Christ, and that salvation is attainable only through Jesus Christ. They are not Christians.
 February 5, 2016 at 2:25pm
Amazing how folks these days with no knowledge of Church history and its role in developing Western Culture let alone the differences in the founding of the Unitarian Church feels like they know everything about it. Ignorance truly is bliss.
Occam’s Razor is of no value in evaluating choices between things which you know nothing about.
 February 5, 2016 at 1:27pm
Unitarian Church differs greatly from what most practicing Christians recognize as Christianity.
@Term: With many thousands of different denominations (read: versions) of 'the absolute truth', this is to be expected. A good question might be, WHY are there thousands and thousands of versions of 'the absolute truth'? If you assume a supreme being handed down this truth, it becomes perplexing why he/she/it was so inept in getting one consistent word of law out. If you assume, however, that it's all man-made nonsense, the question of why there are so many wildly different versions suddenly answers itself. Occam's razor for the win.
Many of those who claim to be Christian cannot accept what true Christianity actually looks like.
Traditions and erroneous ideas confuse them.
I'm surprised that two mentally disabled adults (gay) are raising a child with a mental disability (transgender).
I wonder which other perversions and deviant behaviors we can get recognized by a church.. serial promiscuity? gambling? lying? .. Oh wait.. I think Aleister Crowley already invented that church, just didn't think that the Unitarians were a denomination of it.
Removing the label on a jar of pickles and replacing it with one that says "peaches' does not change the pickle on the inside.
How far some churches have fallen from the Truth. The description of the Church of Laodicea in Revelation 3 is apropos for today.
Unitarian Churches are like what happens if PC completely white-washes God out of a church.
If SJWs allow a church to remain standing, that is...
 February 5, 2016 at 11:14am
You are the only expert on your own sexuality. You are free to make for yourself whatever you like in that regard.
The issue is when you try to change a standard that you are not the arbiter of to make it come into line with the things that you are the arbiter of. Be whomever you want to be. Do whatever you want to do. Please even try to convince us that we are wrong and you are right.
This is all perfectly fine, and even healthy. But please understand we also feel strongly about our own opinions and didn’t just pull them out of thin air.
So, you are welcome to your own sexuality and to do with it whatever you please, but if you attempt to then encourage us to adopt your standards over the ones we’ve held previously, be prepared for a considerable amount of disagreement.