Hillary is NOT using religion the same way Trump is.
She’s not proposing to treat American citizens, immigrants or visitors differently based on their religion. She never claimed that any of the attacks leveled against her were because she “is such a strong Christian.” She didn’t name the Bible as her favorite book despite being unable to say anything in it. She isn’t using bigotry to court votes in the Bible Belt.
And whether or not she actually believes in the tenets of her professed faith she can actually back up her claims of being a Methodist. She taught Methodist Sunday school like her mother, is a member of a Senate prayer group, and regularly attends the Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington. If she’s faking her faith at least she’s doing a more convincing job of it.
Personally, I find the idea of having a short favorite bible verse to be perverse. It encourages people to treat verses as completely independent from each other and to omit context. Without context, you can pretty much make the Bible say whatever you want it to say.
Add in the confusion caused by the early modern English or pseudo-early modern English most Bibles are translated into, a complete lack of historical context and you end up with people convinced Jesus was pro-gun and makes good people wealthy if they truly deserve it.
Sure, that’s legit. I think if the non-stop circus of Trump didn’t happen this election year, Sanders would have gotten a lot more attention from the MSM, simply because they are like kids drawn to gimmicks and flashing lights and “something different” than previous years. Sanders would have been the new unique different candidate, instead he’s drowned out by an egotistical loudmouth who appeals to angry mouth-breathers.
My humility soars above the humility of other men. It stands like a beacon to all mankind, like a star showing the way to others. Yea, it burns like magnesium with an intense and pure white flame. But I always spoil it by laughing.
I’m not sure any of us can say for sure. Corporations today also have a tendency to look at short term gains over long term problems, the immediate appeal of covering Bernie’s amazing and nearly successful challenge to Hillary would have been more important than the long term worry over what Bernie’s policies would mean for their business model. The 24-hour news cycle means they need a constant stream of hyped up stories, something Trump was just made for. Without Trump (and the subsequent disarray of the GOP) Fox News would have spent a lot of time on Bernie (“See?! We told you the Democrats were commies!”), perhaps Bernie wouldn’t have dominated the conversation like Trump has, but he still would’ve gotten more coverage.
Tronald Dump is an shit talker who lives in a money bubble – meaning he didn’t get real world feedback on his inappropriate behavior when he grew up, resulting in us having to now listen to his stupid, arrogant, shit-talking self-masturbatory evocations.
I think that idea is a good summation of the difference between how Christians and Jews treat the Torah. The idea that any part of the Torah can or should be taken at face value is a completely foreign idea in Judaism.
Indeed it is Paul - although scholars argue about it.
The issue is that Paul elsewhere commends women as preachers and leaders and declares that in Christ there is no male or female.
One reading would be 'Let the women (also) learn, (as the men do) quietly with all submissiveness.
The rest of the passage is then about uneducated women. Being saved through childbearing could be a reference to ‘bearing of the child’, referring to Mary and Jesus, and nothing to do with childbirth in general.
It’s pretty clear that he’s lost the popular vote for the primary. Unless Hillary entirely derails herself or the FBI recommends and indictment, then she’s pretty much got it in the bag now. I rather hope that kind of miracle happens and Bernie is handed the nomination by default. The other possible path I see for Bernie is very dark…superdelegates in a contested convention. It’s ironic that some in the Bernie camp are hoping it push it into a contested convention and win with superdelegates. That is the very undemocratic tactic that the Bernie camp, myself included at the time, called Hillary out on early in the primary, as it looked like the election could very easily end up that way. I honestly don’t know how I’d react if Bernie won with superdelegates. I’d rather have him over Trump, but that would be a breach of my core principles. I think I might have to throw my vote third party to favor neither in such an event. I don’t know if I could convince myself that the ends justify the means.
Out of curiosity, how do you see Bernie winning the primary?
I’d like to challenge that. Is there some evidence that media conglomerates are intentionally avoiding Sanders because he’s a threat to them? NPR and PRI barely cover Sanders and they are as far from corporate media as you can get. Independent papers like The New York Times generally ignore him as well. I don’t see much about Sanders internationally either, except in passing while talking about Hillary Clinton - though I read less of it than US media.
If your theory were correct, wouldn’t media conglomerates be avoiding Trump like the plague? After all, he wants to open up libel laws so that it is easier to sue media companies without having to prove malice. That is a far greater risk to their bottom line than anything Sanders promotes.
Actually, I think you’re right. I’ll go with Robert Reich’s take instead:
The real reason the major media can’t see what’s happening is because the national media exist inside the bubble of establishment politics, centered in Washington, and the bubble of establishment power, centered in New York.
As such, the major national media are interested mainly in personalities and in the money behind the personalities. Political reporting is dominated by stories about the quirks and foibles of the candidates, and about the people and resources behind them.
Within this frame of reference, it seems nonsensical that a 74-year-old Jew from Vermont, originally from Brooklyn, who calls himself a Democratic socialist, who’s not a Democratic insider and wasn’t even a member of the Democratic Party until recently, who has never been a fixture in the Washington or Manhattan circles of power and influence, and who has no major backers among the political or corporate or Wall Street elites of America, could possibly win the nomination.
But precisely because the major media are habituated to paying attention to personalities, they haven’t been attending to Bernie’s message – or to its resonance among Democratic and independent voters (as well as many Republicans). The major media don’t know how to report on movements.
In addition, because the major media depend on the wealthy and powerful for revenues, because their reporters and columnists rely on the establishment for news and access, because their top media personalities socialize with the rich and powerful and are themselves rich and powerful, and because their publishers and senior executives are themselves part of the establishment, the major media have come to see much of America through the eyes of the establishment.
So it’s understandable, even if unjustifiable, that the major media haven’t noticed how determined Americans are to reverse the increasing concentration of wealth and political power that have been eroding our economy and democracy. And it’s understandable, even if unjustifiable, that they continue to marginalize Bernie Sanders.
Can’t agree there; just listen to all of those smooth-voiced “underwriting” announcements. For much further distance from corporate media, how about Democracy Now? Or Pacifica more generally?
Your guy spent months and months pushing a crazy conspiracy theory that the President was born in Kenya, despite zero evidence supporting that assertion and reams of evidence supporting the assertion that he was born in Hawaii. Does that sound like a person who bases his choices on carefully considered, credible information?
