TPMDC
LA GOPer: November A Choice Between An Atheist Society And A Christian Nation
Rep. John Fleming (R-LA)
Share
Send to a friend!
Appearing before the Republican Women of Bossier with Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) cast the November elections as a choice between godlessness and Christianity. He also called bipartisanship impossible.
"We have two competing world views here and there is no way that we can reach across the aisle -- one is going to have to win," Fleming said.
We are either going to go down the socialist road and become like western Europe and create, I guess really a godless society, an atheist society. Or we're going to continue down the other pathway where we believe in freedom of speech, individual liberties and that we remain a Christian nation. So we're going to have to win that battle, we're going to have to solve that argument before we can once again reach across and work together on things.
Fleming contended that the Republicans might take 60 seats in November, and argued that the road to economic recovery is to rescind new banking regulations and make the Bush tax cuts permanent across the board. "We've got to change the way we do things," he said. "We need to restore the Bush tax cuts, or actually make them permanent. We need to cut the capital gains tax, we need to take regulations off the backs of business and allow banks to once again lend. And I got a strong feeling that our economy will snap back very quickly."
You can listen to the audio at the end of this recording, courtesy of the Shreveport Times. Fleming will likely face off against Democrat David Melville, a Methodist pastor in Louisiana's fourth congressional district in November.
Comments (105) | Join the Conversation!
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Signalman
August 25, 2010 6:24 PM
Allow banks to lend? This guy's high. Banks can lend all they want to; in fact, TARP funding was intended to be used for that very purpose. Insteead, large banks that took the funding started buying up *other,* more distressed banks and shoring up their balance sheets instead of making loans to potential homebuyers and small businesses who could have really used the help.
This guy's a moron. But not just for that one reason.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
August 25, 2010 8:07 PM in reply to Signalman
Not to mention a few bonuses here and there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
alkfuiwueiu
August 25, 2010 9:39 PM in reply to AJM
Welcome to visit
http://www.bizboysell.com
Buy these fashionable products
Buy gifts and send
We accept paypal payments
and delivery is free.
#@#%@%@#%@#@#%^#$^$#$$%^%*^&^)&*&*)&)*_(
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Commie Dearest
August 26, 2010 10:48 AM in reply to AJM
Yes, this is the choice being offered in several oppressive Muslim countries, too. It's so ironic that the right-wing nutjobs don't see the parallels in what they offer and what they purport to be terrified of.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 12:03 PM in reply to Commie Dearest
"It's so ironic that the right-wing nutjobs don't see the parallels in what they offer and what they purport to be terrified of."
It is actually stupefying that left wing nutjobs don't see the DIFFERENCES between conservatism and theocracies. Liberals see any influence of, or approval of, religious values in conservatism as a not-too-veiled attempt to establish a Christian taliban, or worse, in the U.S. GET A GRIP!! That is pure prejudice, bigotry, ignorance, and paranoia of the most hysterical sort.
While you are at it, why not proudly acknowledge that many liberals ARE atheists and that they would be happy if this country were officially irreligious, areligious, or even anti-religious (as most communist/socialist country have been).
The first amendment erected a "wall of separation of church and state" (those are the words of the SC and NOT the constitution itself). But the "wall" was intended to protect religion from domination or control by the state, and NOT to "protect" the state from the influence or input of religion(s) or religious people (whether they be Muslims, Quakers, Amish, Christians, Spiritualists, or secular humanists, and even anti-religionists)
Vitter is right. The stark differences between liberals and conservatives is now very clear. While those differences do include the divide between religion (including but not limited to Christianity----although Christianity is THE particular target of liberal HATRED) and "godless" liberalism, it also presents a clash of political and economic philosophies: proponents of individual freedom and responsibility vs. big government control over all aspects of daily life, and the substitution of nannyism in place of individual responsibility---in other words, a clash of "classical liberalism" (with conservatives now firmly rooted in the principles of classical liberalism) vs. socialism (with those who perverted the term liberal to the point that they had to change their label to "progressives" carrying the banner of godless statism/socialism).
November WILL be the time when voters get to choose whether they want to continue down the big government nanny welfare state route that most "progressives" advocate or whether to change direction and RETURN to the principles of individual freedom, individual responsibilty grounded in VOLUNTARILY acceptance and practice of POSITIVE religious values (Muslim, Christian, Wiccan, or whatever), and LIMITED government as envisioned by the constitution.
Choose your side.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frito Baggins
August 27, 2010 12:14 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
Manicheanism at its rawest. Your with us, or agin' us. Choose, MF. Well, OK then.
Oh, and. If Vitter is in a diaper with a proz, is he still right?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 12:26 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
Vitter is right, and so is Fleming.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Who said that? No, it wasn't an "extremist" rightwing "nutjob" like Vitter, Fleming, or even the reviled Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. It was that old "extremist" John Adams. (And when Adams was talking about a "religious" people, I don't think he had anything other than Christians---who made up the VAST MAJORITY of Americans at the time). I guess it is pretty clear how far liberals have strayed from the values and principles of the founders and the people of the U.S.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
August 27, 2010 12:33 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
Did John Adams say that before or after he signed the Sedition Act which made it a crime to publish "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" against the government or its officials?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 12:50 PM in reply to expat46
I would expect that as a presumed Democrat/progressive, you would be outraged at attempts to ban "false, scandalous, and malicious" writings against government officials----since that is the ESSENCE of liberal political strategy. Of course, Adams "meant well" but he was wrong. Under the first amendment, false, scandalous, and malicious writings are protected, so liberal campaigns are free to proceed as they always have.
Are you trying to point to hypocrisy of some sort on Adams' part? A moral and religious people do not lie, or make scandaloous or maliciously false statements. So there is no contradiction----actually if everyone followed Adams' observation, there would have been no need or desire for a Sedition Act. Adams rightly observed that the country only works under the constitution when people take responsibility for their own lives as responsible moral actors. When that foundation erodes or disappears, the constitution is just a piece of paper. That is why the constitution cannot just be plunked down anywhere and work-----as Adams said, it PRESUMES a county largely made up of moral and religious people (or at least moral, conceding that there are some people who are moral, but not religious)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 1:46 PM in reply to expat46
By the way, expat, do you consider Adams' observation that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other” to be the ranting of an "extremist" and do you deny the truth of that observation? If you do deny it, how well do you think a society of "godless" criminals (or "religious" criminals, for that matter) would function or how long it would last under the U.S. constitution?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 27, 2010 1:43 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
John Adams was probably the only founding father who felt that Christianity was somehow good for America. George Washington was strongly against it, Tom Jefferson was almost Shinto in his beliefs. The vast majority of the signers of the founding documents were not in any way devout Christians. This is why they made a clear separation between government and religion. Yeah, plenty of politicians have used "faith" to garner votes, but people will do anything to get power and money. Certainly Hitler promoted Christianity in Germany to get into power. That worked out well for Europe, eh? IF we turn America into a theocracy, like you seem to want, shall we burn the Jews? How about camps for homosexuals, adulterers and liberals? We will need schools to teach from the old Testament and burn history books. Blacks should be sent back to the farms and have their citizenship renounced, because we all know that our Founders kept black slaves and that is what they intended for all Americans, 40 acres and a slave, right? heck, let's go waaaay back to pre-Revolutionary times and start putting public stocks on the town square for people who don't tithe enough, or who work on the sabbath, or who have sex in other than the missionary position, like it says in the Bible!
How far down that road do you think we should go? As a liberal with gay friends and a strong urge to feed the hungry and house the homeless I suspect I would be in one of your camps because, alas, I am not a Christian, just a bleeding heart social liberal. Who else would you incarcerate for non-Christian views? Jimmy Carter? of course that Kenyan socialist Obama and his family. Then we might want to nuke San Francisco, fire and brimstone raining down on them queer-lovers. How far down the road do we go? Shall we out-Stalin Stalin? Your plan will mean that we either sign a non-aggression pact with Iran, as another theocracy, or we go to war with them. Do we, as a Christian theocracy hate the Jews, or do we forgive them for killing Yeshua?
It's all so confusing to me. I keep reading the Constitution and Bill of Rights and by golly I cannot find in the legal documents which set up this nation any reference to this being a "Christian nation". The essays of Tom Jefferson, James Madison, Ben Franklin Tom Paine...all SEEM to be saying the opposite of what you are suggesting. But then John Adams IS after all known as the "Father of our Country", right? Right??
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 2:36 PM in reply to William
"John Adams was probably the only founding father who felt that Christianity was somehow good for America."
WOW! I dare say that THAT is a pretty sweeping assertion that would not stand up to scrutiny.
"George Washington was strongly against it..." George Washington was opposed to Christianity?? Where can one find documentation of THAT?
"Tom Jefferson was almost Shinto in his beliefs." Oh, really??? And so what if he was Shinto, Muslim, atheist? The particular religious beliefs or lack thereof has little to do with the fact that a vast majority of the PEOPLE in the U.S. were and are Christians and that under the constitution, they have as much right as anyone to participate in the political life of the country.
"The vast majority of the signers of the founding documents were not in any way devout Christians."
Even if one ASSUMES you are correct, so what? See above.
"This is why they made a clear separation between government and religion."
The first amendment was designed to prevent the FEDERAL government from ESTABLISHING a state religion (as existed in many countries from which the early American fled). It was also designed to protect the FREE EXERCISE of religion (read the first amendment). It was meant to protect religion and religious freedom from interference by the FEDERAL government, not to "shield" or "insulate" the federal government from any influence of religion or religious people.
"Yeah, plenty of politicians have used "faith" to garner votes, but people will do anything to get power and money." Yes, Republicans AND Democrats have used "faith" to garner votes. Democrats routinely use churches as forums for partisan political speeches and rallies. I don't have a problem with that, except for the hypocrisy of it.
"Certainly Hitler promoted Christianity in Germany to get into power."
Hitler promoted Christianity? He may have used Christianity, as many liberals do, as a cloak for his own anti-religious and amoral and immoral statist ends. The example of Hitler, who is obviously NOT an examplar of a true Christian, illustrates the importance of having a nation of people who are TRULY religious and TRULY moral to hold irreligious and immoral leaders accountable. A Hitler could not arise or stay in power in a TRULY Christian country.
"That worked out well for Europe, eh?"
You are exactly right in your ironic rhetorical question. It did NOT work out well, but it was not because Germany was a Christian theocracy....it was instead ruled by an immoral, anti-Semitic, Aryan nationalist.
"IF we turn America into a theocracy, like you seem to want, shall we burn the Jews?"
How ridiculous can one be???!! WHO is talking about a Christian theocracy? Certainly not I or anyone I know or any Republican I know. Burning Jews????!!! It is the Christian community which is most supportive of Jews and Israel, while many liberals hate Jews almost as much as they hate Christians, and liberals have at best a luke warm support for Israel and have a soft spot for the enemies of Israel.
"How about camps for homosexuals, adulterers and liberals?"
I hope you are not speaking that way in public. You would be a prime candidate for a mental institution for extreme psychosis and paranoia. Who is talking about "camps" for homosexuals, adulterers, and liberals????? UNBELIEVABLE!! It was, however, the liberal "saint" Franklin Roosevelt who set up internment camps for Japanese Americans
"We will need schools to teach from the old Testament and burn history books. Blacks should be sent back to the farms and have their citizenship renounced, because we all know that our Founders kept black slaves and that is what they intended for all Americans, 40 acres and a slave, right? heck, let's go waaaay back to pre-Revolutionary times and start putting public stocks on the town square for people who don't tithe enough, or who work on the sabbath, or who have sex in other than the missionary position, like it says in the Bible!"
YOU are INSANE!!!!
How far down that road do you think we should go? As a liberal with gay friends and a strong urge to feed the hungry and house the homeless I suspect I would be in one of your camps because, alas, I am not a Christian, just a bleeding heart social liberal.
No, you will not be in danger of being sent to a Christian taliban camp. I would be interested in what you actually DO (if anything) as a result of your "urge" to feed the hungry or house the homeless, other than vote for liberals who will set up a government program to do that FOR you (while you get the "warm fuzzy" feeling of knowing that you have a "big heart" that is full of "compassion".
" Who else would you incarcerate for non-Christian views? Jimmy Carter? of course that Kenyan socialist Obama and his family."
Who else? No one.
"Then we might want to nuke San Francisco, fire and brimstone raining down on them queer-lovers. How far down the road do we go? Shall we out-Stalin Stalin? Your plan will mean that we either sign a non-aggression pact with Iran, as another theocracy, or we go to war with them. Do we, as a Christian theocracy hate the Jews, or do we forgive them for killing Yeshua?"
Does your ridiculous paranoia know no bounds?
"It's all so confusing to me. I keep reading the Constitution and Bill of Rights and by golly I cannot find in the legal documents which set up this nation any reference to this being a "Christian nation"."
Let me help. The U.S. never was, and is not now, a "Christian nation" in the LEGAL sense (i.e., officially under the constitution or statutes).
However, it HAS been, and still is, a "Christian nation" in the very real and practical sense that the vast majority of its citizens have been and are Christians, who have during the existence of the country exerted vast influence over the culture, politics, laws, morality, and education of the U.S. You have heard that the U.S. is an "immigrant nation", I presume. Where, in the constitution does it say that the country is an "immigrant nation"? It is an immigrant nation because the vast majority of people here are immigrants. It is in that same sense that this is a "Christian nation". If you deny that then you are more detached from reality than you already appear to be.
"The essays of Tom Jefferson, James Madison, Ben Franklin Tom Paine...all SEEM to be saying the opposite of what you are suggesting."
There may be a few passages where each of those founding fathers express their own brand of spirituality, but do they actually condemn Christianity and oppose any role of Christianity and Christians in participating in and even shaping the kind of government we have?
"But then John Adams IS after all known as the "Father of our Country", right? Right??"
Perhaps, by some, but I always thought that George Washington was the "Father of our country".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
psyclone
August 27, 2010 12:39 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
"Choose your side"
Spoken like a True American Taliban. Well said.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 12:54 PM in reply to psyclone
I know what side you are on. The liberal Taliban side.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
scooter
August 27, 2010 2:50 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
I have chosen, and I choose to not have religion a part of my government. Anything else is against the Constitution. Period.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 3:49 PM in reply to scooter
"I have chosen, and I choose to not have religion a part of my government. Anything else is against the Constitution. Period."
Are you saying that religious people may not run for office, vote, or have any input on policies that are enacted or enforced by the federal government?
Please explain whether you insist on FORCING YOUR choice on everyone else.
Also please explain your understanding of whether and how the "free exercise" portion of the first amendment relates to the federal government.
Thanks
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
August 26, 2010 11:34 AM in reply to AJM
Evidently, they used it all to finance counterfeit Nike crap blog spammers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 25, 2010 9:11 PM in reply to Signalman
high is as good an explanation as any for the crazy stuff gop and there right wing loons believe
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jjdjjd
August 26, 2010 9:47 PM in reply to Signalman
well now, if you were a bank, which would you do? as for the god issue, well i'm not sure there is a god, but i do know a democrat in the white house who thinks he's one. the bank issue is easy, they will always do what's best for themselves, and don't forget, some didn't want the money and were forced to take it just so they could buy other banks.keep it truthful, don't spin it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 25, 2010 6:26 PM
If the choice is between an open secular society and an oppressive Christian theocracy then I know which way I'm voting.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rick Jones
August 25, 2010 8:12 PM in reply to Jason
And this guy's going to be running against a Methodist minister? Obviously a Methodist minister, because he's a Democrat, will help create a Godless society, an atheist society. Jesus Christ help us all live through this effing craziness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
storm
August 26, 2010 3:14 AM in reply to Rick Jones
and wasn't the guy sitting next to vitter at the time? wtf
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 12:34 PM in reply to Rick Jones
Many "Christian" ministers are in reality "ministers" of liberalism (and in many instances, "godless" liberalism) See Rev. Barry Lynn (who regularly appears on TV to advocate AGAINST Christianity and Christians, and in favor of purely secular liberalism). Liberalism IS a sort of "religious" faith, whose "god" is big government.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
voreason
August 26, 2010 10:43 AM in reply to Jason
Really. To "go down the socialist road and become like western Europe" is sounding pretty good to me these days.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 12:09 PM in reply to Jason
"oppressive" Christian society. To liberals, the mere existence of Christianity and Christians is "oppressive" because it is a rebuke to liberals' desire for EXTREME autonomy (license to do whatever one pleases, no matter how destructive to him or herself, or his or her family, community, state, or nation). What kind of "oppression" are you talking about?!?? You guys are ridiculous!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frito Baggins
August 27, 2010 12:17 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
Your "nome" is a "misnomer".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 1:00 PM in reply to Frito Baggins
Since you, no doubt, are a deep and critical thinker, maybe YOU can explain to me what "oppression" Jason is so fearful of in a Christian society? Dismissive one-liners are easy. Substance is hard. I will eagerly await seeing some SUBSTANCE in your reply.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
August 27, 2010 12:55 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
Conservatives want the government to recognize "God" as the supreme ruler of all civil matters.
Similar to Sharia law in Islamic states conservatives want all laws in the United States to be based on the Christian bible.
For example, conservatives believe that laws should govern whether a person is required to carry a pregnancy to term and are therefor opposed to an inherent right to privacy.
You see what I did there?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 1:32 PM in reply to expat46
"Conservatives want the government to recognize "God" as the supreme ruler of all civil matters."
Who is saying THAT?!? And in what PRACTICAL way would conservatives want the government to "recognize God as the supreme ruler of all civil matters"?
"Similar to Sharia law in Islamic states conservatives want all laws in the United States to be based on the Christian bible."
That's a pretty sweeping statement!!! ALL laws to be based upon the Bible???? The bible is against murder and stealing. Must laws against murder and stealing be eliminated because they are in the bible? You DO know, I am sure, that there IS an overlap between principles in the bible and valid secular laws. Murder, stealing, rape, perjury are just a few of them. Whether ALL moral principles in the bible should or can legitimately be part of the civil law is a matter of legitimate debate. Would you eliminate laws against infanticide or "mercy" killing of infirm or elderly people who are not "productive" because they might coincide with Christian moral principles?
"For example, conservatives believe that laws should govern whether a person is required to carry a pregnancy to term and are therefor opposed to an inherent right to privacy."
Laws CANNOT MANDATE carrying a pregnancy to term. Laws CAN proscribe penalties for an abortion in the 30th week of pregnancy. Even Roe v. Wade did not provide for an UNRESTRICTED right of "privacy" (it allowed for restrictions on abortion at viability). With modern medicine, viability is being pushed back earlier all the time. How far the right of "privacy" should go is a POLITICAL matter to be decided by the people (including religious people). Liberals will line up on the side of unrestricted abortion up to and beyond birth (many Democrats support the right of mothers and doctors to finish off a baby that happens to be born alive after an intended abortion) and "religious" people will take up the "extreme" position of wanting to protect innocent life. Maybe you should thank your mother for taking up the extreme position and not aborting YOU.
"You see what I did there?"
Yes, I see that you constructed some unsupported straw men and made a ton of logical fallacies and failed to make a reasoned, nuanced, and rational argument.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
anem0ne
August 27, 2010 1:03 PM in reply to acriticalthinker
You said: "To liberals, the mere existence of Christianity and Christians is "oppressive" because it is a rebuke to liberals' desire for EXTREME autonomy (license to do whatever one pleases, no matter how destructive to him or herself, or his or her family, community, state, or nation)."
You also said: "RETURN to the principles of individual freedom, individual responsibilty grounded in VOLUNTARILY acceptance and practice of POSITIVE religious values (Muslim, Christian, Wiccan, or whatever), and LIMITED government as envisioned by the constitution."
I would think that the "liberals'" desire for autonomy arises from the principles of individual freedom, individual responsibility grounded in the voluntary acceptance and practice of positive moral values, and limited government as envisioned by the constitution.
The Christian Conservative movement, as it stands right now, seeks to abridge individual freedom by refusing equal treatment with respect to civil rights and restricting the liberty of those it doesn't consider equals, seeks to abdicate individual responsibility by placing anything and everything in the hands of their Christian God, seeks to impose and force involuntary acceptance and practice of "Christian" values, and would gladly increase the size of the government, particularly with respect to the military budget, as well as expanding and extending any sort of surveillance programs in the name of "security".
The proof is in the pudding. If, as you say, the GOP and the conservative movement truly did want to return to a nation with limited government, individual liberty and responsibility, they'd step away from every single "culture war" issue that they bring up: The Park51 Development (Ground Zero Mosque, regardless of the fact that it's not just a mosque and it's not at Ground Zero), gay marriage, abortion, prayer in schools; you'd let people practice and behave as they chose for good or for ill, and wouldn't seek to impose upon them government laws and government regulations for comparatively harmless behaviors. You'd let the defense budget get trimmed. You'd let the surveillance programs end.
This is why so many of us who aren't "Conservative" have so many grave concerns about the (often irresponsible) rhetoric spouted by the right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
davis13
August 25, 2010 6:26 PM
With us or against us... again.
Join the bloodthirsty mob or else.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jaycal
August 25, 2010 7:45 PM in reply to davis13
That's Inquisition to you mister!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Redwood Rhiadra
August 25, 2010 6:35 PM
So this guy is saying that "Western Europe" doesn't respect individual liberties or freedom of speech? I call b.s. - Western Europeans respect these more than the "Christian Nation" version of America he aspires to...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
August 26, 2010 12:27 AM in reply to Redwood Rhiadra
It's rich, ain't it?
What we need is to all have the freedom to be Christians-or-else.
He's got one thing right, though, Dems are in for a real beating in November.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bruce Webb
August 26, 2010 6:35 AM in reply to Overreach THIS!
Could use some math skills though. There are 19 Democratic seats up for election vs 18 Republican ones. In order for R's to get to 60 they need to go 37-0.
Somebody should have warned this guy off that brown acid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
vasu
August 26, 2010 8:05 AM in reply to Bruce Webb
Exactly, and I honestly think, people are getting tired of the scare tactics and all this beltway crap about dems loosing control may not actually come to pass.
People are starting to see through the fact that the GOBP has not policy to speak of other then going back to the failed policies of Bush that wrecked the economy, got us into 2 wars that were not paid for, and still insisting that the richest 2% get tax cuts. If most americans don't call BS on this then maybe they should loose their right to vote for being stupid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
August 26, 2010 1:31 PM in reply to vasu
Obviously multiple force are at play. And one is that some Dems are in open panic and no longer believe it is possible to hold the House -- that's just gone, they say. Check Politico and Morning Joe had this earlier in the week. We get hyped a bit in this echo chamber.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brianm0122
August 26, 2010 9:23 AM in reply to Bruce Webb
I think he is talking about picking up 60 seats in the house, not the senate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CajunModerate
August 25, 2010 6:38 PM
The comments are interesting, because they play well in north Louisiana, which is very socially conservative, mostly white and Protestant. Below Interstate 10 - where three-fourths of the state's population lies - it's a much more diverse and very Catholic area that tends to be more tolerant on social issues. If this guy and/or Vitter have any balls, they'll try the same thing down here.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 26, 2010 8:10 AM in reply to CajunModerate
I lived in Shreveport for a time and actually it's mostly black.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CajunModerate
August 26, 2010 10:07 AM in reply to Tonie
I lived there, too. My comments were about north La. above I-10.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dave
August 25, 2010 6:41 PM
Every time I hear a politician from Louisiana talking, it's total nonsense. I have to wonder if the people in Louisiana are, in general, so poorly educated, or lacking intelligence or plain common sense as to believe this hogswill. No, it can't be.
Of course, this is the kind of swill the Republicans need to spit into the face of the Republican Women of Bosier in order to to make them forget Vitter's perverted carryings-on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bpollen
August 25, 2010 6:42 PM
First off, let me admit that I live in Minnesota, where we have elected the only Muslim to serve in Congress, and have also elected Michelle Bachmann, so obviously we aren't sure WHAT the hell we are doing.
But one thing I do know: we are not, nor have we ever been, a "Christian" nation. A little thing called the 1st Amendment makes that abundantly clear. Those who claim otherwise live in a land somewhere between the mountains of Wishful Thinking and the far-flung shores of Revisionist History.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nowukkers
August 25, 2010 6:58 PM in reply to bpollen
With regard to your second paragraph, see also Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, as ratified unanimously by the US Senate in June 1797. It is, as far as I'm aware, still good law, and has not been repealed or revoked.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 25, 2010 11:04 PM in reply to Nowukkers
Add Article 6 of the Constitution, which explicitly lists ratified treaties (such as the Treaty of Tripoli) as part of "the supreme law of the land." Wingnuts always have fun with that combination.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
vasu
August 26, 2010 8:19 AM in reply to Gary
It's because the right only accept the parts of the constitution that fits their limited views.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
August 26, 2010 10:21 AM in reply to vasu
That applies to the Bible too. Do fundies like this bozo follow every commandment in the O.T.? Pretty hard to live like that in the modern world.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frito Baggins
August 27, 2010 12:22 PM in reply to jeffgee
Pretty much they do. Except for the stealing, killing, coveting and false god parts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nowukkers
August 26, 2010 10:16 AM in reply to Gary
Right. I'd forgotten about that one. The point is though, as another commenter on this thread noted, there's a truck load of cherry picking going on - on both sides I have to say. But the right do it with such brazenness, it stuns me. Not only that, the right has perverted the lexicon in such an odious fashion, that Lewis Carrol's Humpty Dumpty would blanch - it means what they want it to mean.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 3:37 PM in reply to bpollen
The U.S. is not a "Christian nation" as a matter of LAW (constitution, statutes). It IS a "Christian nation" as a matter of the makeup of a vast majority of its citizens and their impact and influence in and over the culture, politics, laws, etc. in the country. That is as important, if not MORE important than being a "Christian nation" by law, but not as a matter of practical everyday life. The U.S. is can rightly be described as a "Christian Nation" in the same way as the U.S. is described as an English speaking nation, even though it is not in the constitution and not everyone speaks English. No one is FORCED to speak English, but the U.S. IS a country in which the English language is predominant and its influence throughout the country cannot be denied-------EXCEPT by liberals who seem to stubbornly persist in denying the most obvious and irrefutable facts.
We do NOT want to IMPOSE Christianity on ANYONE. But Christians have a right to participate in the life of the country as much as non-religious and anti-religious persons do. That is all that 99% of conservatives are talking about. Forget all the Christian theocracy and Christian "taliban" fears. We have more to fear from the liberal "taliban" of Nancy Pelosi, Obama, et al than we do from Christian conservatives.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 4:47 PM in reply to bpollen
The U.S. is not a "Christian nation" by LAW but it IS a "Christian nation" by virtue of the predominance of Christianity and its influence in America. I have explained this at other comments on this thread, and will not do so again.
The Treaty of Tripoli does not diminish the status of the U.S. as a "Christian nation" in the sense I have explained it. There is plenty of information about the Treaty of Tripoli on the net. Wikipedia is a decent place to start for the background of the treaty (which was the problem of piracy and tribute to the Muslims in north Africa who were plundering U.S. ships and capturing U.S. sailors). The actual words of the treaty are there too. The famous article 11 the liberal anti-Christian LOVE to cite says:
"Art. 11. As the GOVERNMENT of the United States of America is not, in any sense, FOUNDED on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries"
This is merely an unremarkable and accurate statement that the GOVERNMENT --- repeat, the GOVERNMENT--- of the U.S. was not FOUNDED (i.e. not explicitly OFFICIALLY created or founded on Christianity or any Christian denomination).
Furthermore, the context of that statement was to reassure the Muslims the treaty was made with that America differed from historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them.
It does not SAY and cannot be reasonable interpreted to say that the U.S. is not a "Christian nation" (in the sense I explain that term)----the treaty was very precise: it simply states that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is not officially founded upon Christianity.
What interests me is the blatant HOSTILITY that so many liberals have toward religion in general, and Christianity, in particular. It is a very interesting psychological phenomenon. It seems to me that liberals "doth protest too much", and their irrational fear and loathing of Christianity is very revealing about the extreme individualism and desire for complete moral autonomy free of any constraints "imposed" by religion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
August 25, 2010 6:45 PM
Secular =/= Athiest.
Another epic fail from the everything-is-black-and-white crowd.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Scott in PacNW
August 25, 2010 10:03 PM in reply to Sniffit
Another epic fail from the party that hates dictionaries.
Hmm, maybe that can be my gimmick at teabagger events. I can sell old dictionaries from Goodwill for a nominal fee. Or at least hand out helpful instructions explaining what dictionaries are and how to use them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Captain Crunch
August 25, 2010 6:58 PM
Time to see if this ex-coroner has been sniffing the formaldehyde. Please pee in the cup, representative!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mepmep09
August 25, 2010 6:59 PM
Brian - you misspelled atheist in the post title (it's OK elsewhere, outside of the comments).
Normally wouldn't bother to note it - but if you want to be included in results lists of future internet searches, gotta spell the key words correctly. :-)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ironcomments
August 25, 2010 7:02 PM
American Conservatism=Christian Fascism
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxsteady
August 25, 2010 7:12 PM
This is why I'm Agnostic. They've made religion a joke!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxsteady
August 25, 2010 7:15 PM
Actually, my reasons have more to do with science. I'm much more interested in facts, (i.e) that which can be proven and I haven't seen any actual proof that god exists. I'm therefore suspicious of all religion. To those of you who are....sorry. You do have the right to believe whatever you want to.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jaycal
August 25, 2010 7:56 PM in reply to roxsteady
The line from faith to religion is the same one that leads from your heart to your wallet.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
August 25, 2010 7:32 PM
Wait, I thought the problem was that we were going to turn into a Muslim nation if we don't vote for Republicans?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jaycal
August 25, 2010 7:59 PM in reply to midnight rambler
Yep, them Muslims and Atheists, they all look alike to me... except for the burkah thingies... and the prayer mats... then there's also those yodelin' dudes at all times of the day...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jaycal
August 25, 2010 7:43 PM
"and become like western Europe and create, I guess really a godless society, an atheist society."
Lets see... the Pope is in Rome, Presbyterianism were founded in Scotland, Lutheranism was founded in Germany, Anglicanism was founded in England, Baptism was founded in Holland, and Calvinism was founded in France. Perhaps he wants to go with the wholly US-founded sects of Christianity like Seventh Day Adventists, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, or the Branch Davidians. Time to set those crosses a-burnin' folks, we've got us some heretics!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martis
August 26, 2010 10:23 AM in reply to Jaycal
jesus was amercan!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
August 25, 2010 7:55 PM
And the good people of Louisiana eat this shit up. How else could kinky serial adulterer David Vitter be 10 points ahead of his opponent?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
msirt
August 25, 2010 11:57 PM in reply to jeffgee
Maybe the people of LA who support him ain't such good people. Does that answer your question?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
August 26, 2010 5:12 AM in reply to msirt
Yes. The people of the South in general are ignorant and it takes a hell of a lot to steer them out of this kind of bullshit. The one and exact thing wrong in America now is the sheer number of ignorant fucks that we have to defeat in elections to make any god damned progress.
America is stupid and hateful and it is long since past time to call it as it is. The people who impeached Bill Clinton and brought us 8 miserable years of George Bush are on the verge of another big electoral victory. We have been way too nice to idiots. Here comes the backlash ..... again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acriticalthinker
August 27, 2010 4:13 PM in reply to hollywood
"Yes. The people of the South in general are ignorant..."
Your typical liberal arrogance, elitist superiority complex, and bigotry are showing!
"The one and exact thing wrong in America now is the sheer number of ignorant fucks that we have to defeat in elections to make any god damned progress."
Yeah, the constitution and elections are a bitch, aren't they? Wouldn't it be better if the constitution could be eliminated and we could simply appoint liberals to serve for life (like enlightened leaders in Cuba and North Korea) and make some liberal "progress", instead of all the election crap?
"America is stupid and hateful and it is long since past time to call it as it is."
And you wonder why liberals are called the "Hate America first" bunch, and why liberals so RICHLY deserve the labels of arrogant and condescending?
I am just holding up the mirror to those who have eyes to see and a brain to understand.
"The people who impeached Bill Clinton..."
Yeah, for something as insignificant as lying UNDER OATH in a court proceeding.
".. and brought us 8 miserable years of George Bush..."
when unemployment averaged around 5% and annual deficits were 1/3 to 1/2 the size of the current Democrat deficits (and Dems complained that Bush was not spending ENOUGH).
".. are on the verge of another big electoral victory."
Well, you are way ahead of a lot of other donkeys, who have put their heads up their.....and are reassuring themselves that the voters REALLY do love what the Dems have done and will reward them for pushing their socialist agenda.
"We have been way too nice to idiots. Here comes the backlash ..... again."
Yeah, the backlash is coming because progressives have been too "nice" to "idiots" (a majority of the country). Dems will learn it is not nice to try to fool them and to push their agenda AGAINST the will of a majority of what Dems view as "idiots". Members of a party that views average Americans as idiots, are the TRUE idiots.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Anthony Kennerson
August 26, 2010 10:14 AM in reply to jeffgee
Well...more like the people of Northwest/West Central LA who voted him in office...that's his district (LA-04??).
In fact, Fleming only narrowly beat back "John Breaux Democrat" (as in, typical Blue Dog conservative Dem) Paul Carmouche to even get that seat.
Unfortunately, thanks to the Katrina Diaspora effectively savaging the Black vote down here in LA, it's given wingnuts like Fleming and Diaper Dave more room to screech. Having the Dems dominated by the likes of Mary Landrieu doesn't help much, either.
Until we see either a honest populist takeover of the Dems or an independent Left alternative rise up, we're stuck with idgits like Fleming (and my own Congresswhackjob, "Lord" Charles Boustany) for some time to come.
Anthony
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
August 25, 2010 8:01 PM
Reaganomics got us INTO the economic position that we're in, and now they spend all their time doubling down on it? In Bush's two terms, regulations were more then a joke, the rich got hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in tax breaks, and the banks turned into a new Las Vegas. And what did we get for this "Ayn Rand" utopia? Trillions of dollars in debt, a fucked up economy, near double-digit unemployment, real unemployment around 16-17% and only about 1 million in job creation.
I know that I ask this question alot, but why does the right hate this country so much?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cy Guy
August 25, 2010 8:03 PM
It sounds like he's telling us that God wants us to return to Bush's economic policies. If that's what God wants, He should have thought of that before letting the economy crater in 2008. Or maybe He was just testing us with the greatest economic collapse in 80 years to get us to pray harder and repent our secular, Muslim, French, Socialist, Free-Loving ways?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
August 26, 2010 9:36 AM in reply to Cy Guy
Jesus explicitly states in the Bible the exact opposite:
Jesus orders Christians to give their money to governments, but their hearts shall belong to God. For those who consider themselves Christians anyway, voting for Republicans would be defying the words of God, would it not???
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LJG
August 25, 2010 8:19 PM
I fail to see the relationship between capitalism and Christianity. I don't even see how God fits into capitalism. Capitalism is now and always has been a completely godless system.
Ironically, the early Christians were all socialists. Maybe Louisiana Republicans should stop thumping on the Bible and try reading it - especially the second chapter of Acts and the entire gospel of Luke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joekuh
August 26, 2010 9:30 AM in reply to LJG
"Maybe Republicans should stop thumping on the Bible and try reading it"
That should be a bumper sticker.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Redwood Rhiadra
August 26, 2010 1:50 PM in reply to LJG
It's Calvinism - Calvinists believe in predestination (i.e. that whether you go to Heaven or Hell is already determined when you are born), and that one's success in life is a sign of one's eventual fate. In other words, rich people are going to Heaven and are therefore holier than the rest of us.
While few people are actual Calvinists these days, his doctrines are still deeply ingrained in the fundamentalist mindset.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barrelhse
August 25, 2010 8:33 PM
So many Christians, so few lions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frito Baggins
August 27, 2010 12:20 PM in reply to barrelhse
Sad, that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ejg3
August 25, 2010 8:45 PM
In the mindset of folks like Fleming Christians care only for individual liberty that deals with money and ignore it for the home. They all say that Jesus saved them, with the emphasis on the Me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
August 25, 2010 8:48 PM
November A Choice Between An Athiest Society And A Christian Nation
Duh. That's an easy one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GayIthacan
August 25, 2010 8:59 PM
Whoever wrote this headline might want to look up how to spell "Atheist" properly.
Because it makes you look like a really, REALLY uneducated individual.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cha
August 25, 2010 9:01 PM
Welcome to ---------------- http://www.newgoing.com
We are specialized in offering all kinds of top brand shoes, jeans, t-
shirts, bikini, swimwear, jacket, jerseys, watches, purses, handbags,
belts, wallets , sunglasses and hats etc.
Accept paypal ,All the prices list on our website include shipping
cost,insurance,tax etc..
$30 nike shoes,air jordan shoes,nike shox shoes,gucci shoes
$35 true religion jeans, ed hardy jeans,coogi jeans,affliction jeans,
Laguna Beach Jeans
$14 ed hardy T-shirts,Coogi T-shirts,Christian Audigier T-shirts,Gucci
T-shirts,Polo T-shirts.
$35 coach handbag,gucci handbag,prada handbag,chanel handbag.
fbgf
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pgbach
August 25, 2010 9:05 PM
When will real Americans understand that right wingers are not real Americans... they advocate bigotry, hatred, racism, etc. Time to grow up guys. There is not negotiating with bigots.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 25, 2010 9:22 PM
#1 I wonder if the few actual Christians left in the Demo. Party know about this that they are now "godless atheists"
#2 What real legislation has this Congressman passed for his district/Louisiana? If none and he has brought home no bacon for his constitutents(which I think is the case) then he should shut his mouth.
I wonder if, and if so, how much Congressman Fleming graces his Church with his presence..if at all.
I am sick of politicians speaking with as though they have some type of moral high ground, and they don't even go to church themselves....President Obama included.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JeffMcM
August 25, 2010 9:24 PM
NOT WESTERN EUROPE, the Worst Place on Earth!!!
I have a terrible feeling that, as bad as things have been with the 2008 crash and two wars, things are going to have to get a LOT worse before these nutcases are finally discredited.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
uggboot
August 25, 2010 9:27 PM
Hello, summer, good place for shopping, fashion, sexy, personality, maturity, from here to begin. Are you ready?
http://www.pointingtrade.com/
New era cap $10
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $16
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,*****,Armaini)$12
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
********(Coach,ed hardy,lv,d&g) $30
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
http://www.pointingtrade.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Christian Left
August 25, 2010 10:09 PM
It's funny how he uses individual liberties and Christian nation in the same sentence. My personal religious beliefs are very conservative, which is why I don't want religion and politics mixing. Most conservative Christian groups like the Christian Coalition aren't even interested in having a democracy. They are more concerned with turning this nation into a theocracy like Iran. Instead of Muslim clerics running the country, we'd have "Christian" pastors.
It's funny how people forget history. It was religious persecution in Europe that drove most of the early pioneers across the Atlantic to start this nation. Now, apparently some would like to start that same persecution here. Before Christ was crucified, He told His apostles He would leave them with a "helper,", i.e. the Holy Spirit. He never mentioned the government nor did He ever petition Caesar to spread His Gospel. He left this responsibility to the church and this can only be done in a free country where Congressmen aren't trying to legislate their version of righteousness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
buddy66
August 25, 2010 10:36 PM
The guy may be an ironist. I mean, to stand before a group of Republican women with a notorious whoremonger at his side requires a pretty sophisticated sense of humor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnnydoughey
August 25, 2010 11:13 PM
I believe our Judeo Christian nation has done pretty good so far (it only took them about 300 years to exterminate all but about 750,000 native Americans, place armies in Russia 3 times, China 3 times, attack Canada, have 7 Indian wars, support both sides of about three dozen warring nations, overthrow a democracy in Iran, torture human beings, kill innocent men, women and children around the globe, declare war on opposing religions, hang an opposing religious leader, oppose freeing slaves...)
Wow.. we've done so much already, there is little reason to change direction now...
Although our government frowns at involving itself in religion, our leaders have covertly AND overtly, made certain commies (because they are athiests). Russia (because it was athiest), arab nations (because they are not Christian), Iraq (pretty difficult to tie this not religious led nation to Muslim terrorists, but we did)... feel the brunt of our Christian filled Democracy, while making certain we support and defend our biblical ally... Isreal, no matter what it does.
We may make believe our nation is not Christian indoctrinated and led, but trillioons of dollars and a couple million patriotic cemetery crosses say different... IMHO
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Zell
August 25, 2010 11:31 PM
I'm pretty sure that hairpiece is a mortal sin.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe
August 25, 2010 11:45 PM
Ask any of my friends who fled the Soviet Union before it collapsed and wound up here in America. Every one of them will tell you that American Religious Right Christians operate the same way as the Communists did in the Soviet Union.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
August 26, 2010 12:05 AM
How exactly does a right wing Christian nation comport with freedom of speech and individual liberties?
This clown with bad 70s hair can get away with this garbage only because people in Louisiana are a bunch of ignorant morons who probably think that Paris, London, Amsterdam and Zurich are bastions of acute poverty and repression, and that the Walmart in Baton Rouge is where the US Constitution was written.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
afisher
August 26, 2010 2:16 AM
The disconnect is funny. The GOP want us all to be "christians" and believe Ayn Rand. Some in LA needs to ask for clarification!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aacme
August 26, 2010 3:41 AM
I do agree that bipartisanship is impossible, but how about a "My relioion is none of your damn business, nor your religion mine" nation like the people who wrote the Constitution envisioned.
Economically he seems to have liked the Bush administration, and apparently the results.
And I don't know if the hairpiece is a mortal sin, but it should be illegal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aacme
August 26, 2010 3:45 AM
"We have two competing world views here and there is no way that we can reach across the aisle -- one is going to have to win," Fleming said.
I wish Obama and the Democrats would get this message. Harry Reid! This is no time to appease the nutballs. It is time to stand up and lead the fight against them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
a4638809
August 26, 2010 8:16 AM
In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 26, 2010 8:33 AM
You all are focusing on god BUT David 'Diaper' Vitter and family values seem like oil and water.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
a4638809
August 26, 2010 8:40 AM in reply to Richard
My bad.
The blood of Jesus Christ can cover a multitude of sins, it seems to me. -Denis Diderot
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Capecodmercury
August 26, 2010 9:18 AM
It's the same old same old. Presume a false hood (America is a "Christian Nation") and then get the other side playing defense. The next thing this guy is going to say is that we have to go back to the way the "founders" interpreted the constitution.
Sometimes I wish that for 24 hours every politician and talk radio/tv blowhard would be forced to tell the truth for just one day. Of course, some of these people are so deluded that they might actually believe the dross that they are spouting.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 26, 2010 9:21 AM
Standing next to David Vitter, yes the guy who met with prostitutes while wearing a diaper, is definitely the Christian choice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shlalaw
August 26, 2010 9:55 AM
As a constituent in this clown's district, I want to apologize to anyone with a brain. He is a wingnut through and through, and unfortunately is indicative of a large part of his district.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
August 26, 2010 10:31 AM
I guess being a Christian in Louisiana today means pooping in a diaper and being spanked by a hooker as part of a sexual game.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TQTGA
August 26, 2010 12:51 PM
Vitter also said voters would have to make a choice, but his remark was less strident: "Voters will have to choose between Pampers and Huggies."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sav1208
August 26, 2010 9:08 PM
David Melville is challenging Fleming in November. We need to help him unseat this guy. Here is David's website:
http://www.davidmelvilleforuscongress.com/contribute.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cha
August 26, 2010 9:31 PM
Dear customers, thank you for your support of our company.
Here, there's good news to tell you: The company recently
launched a number of new fashion items! ! Fashionable
and welcome everyone to come buy. If necessary, please
input:
http://www.newgoing.com/
T-shirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $14
New era cap $10
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30
Handbags(Coach,ed hardy,lv,d&g) $35
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $35
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini)$14
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18
http://www.newgoing.com
fdvf
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ken
August 27, 2010 10:05 AM
When you have people in leadership roles like this guy creating class warfare instead of looking for ways to create a better society, you end up with the U.S. ranked down the list of nations as much less happier than many countries in Western Europe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
psyclone
August 27, 2010 12:38 PM
I love how for these boneheads, "Western Europe" is treated like the horrifying poster-child of what America should desperately try to avoid becoming up until the issue becomes the War Against Ayrabs And Islam, when Western Europe is then held up as the Bulwark of Western Civilization that we should all be willing to die for to defend.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?