If the Tea Party was truly about the things you stated above, wouldn't their politics be more inline with Bill Clinton, the last American president to run a budget surplus, instead of Michelle Bachman, a woman who believes the founding fathers fought tirelessly to end slavery and that the battles of Lexington & Concord took place in New Hampshire.

Does the Tea Party ever protest our vastly inflated Defense budget or our dependence on foreign oil that has us involved in 2 wars in the middle east? No, they think our downfall is due to those over paid, coddled teachers and the health benefits of their fellow Americans. Scott Walker plans to balance the budget by gutting funding for education. That somehow doesn't bother the Tea Party?

Christ preached that it was everyones duty to lift up those less fortunate than ourselves, that socialist prick!

---

You missed the point. Well done.

And when Christ said that, he didn't say take money from the rich and give to the poor. But of course, he's always misconstrued to form-fit one's agenda. Congratulations, you have just done the same damn thing as the Westboro Baptists do.

---

I don't have an opinion on whatever it is that Mr. Stewart / the Daily Show commented on, because quite frankly I don't care enough to do research myself. My post was merely commenting on your statement about FOX. I wasn't insinuating that you watched the other 'sindicates'. That's all.

But go ahead and keep taking my posts personal.

---

Formo-

Christ didn't say "It is easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of god"

Christ didn't throw the money changers out of the temple and damn them for worshiping gold?

I'm an atheist (lapsed Catholic if you prefer) and I know more about the teachings of Christ than you obviously.

You have shown that you are incapable of critical thought and open discussion, how sad for you. You do nothing to show how I "missed the point" (what was the point, by the way, that the Tea Party are NOT Republican shills?)

And comparing me to small minded bigots who are probably led by a self-hating homosexual is about what I'd expect from you.

And as far as taking your posts personally, I was under the impression that forums were for discussion, not pontificating.

---

Formo, I suppose you're one of those those dumbasses that thinks all the horrors of the past, the crimes committed against humanity should just stay there; and now that supposedly everyone has equal rights, we can just move forward? Just forget about our ugly history, we just need to keep teaching the righteous version of our country's history.

I have zero sympathy or tolerance for the decendents of people who inherited their wealth from ancestors who became wealthy by abusing people. And you defend them like they're your siblings or something...as you slowly eke out a living working a job you probably hate. You're one of the pawns that wealthy people use for free.

---

Completely missing the point on both counts. I'll try to avoid evangelizing to you here, but perhaps you need to do a bit more research and reflection on things first. Christ was not saying that those with wealth are inherently more sinful, as with everything else in life it's what you do with the gifts God gives you. If you use those gifts to serve yourself, you've already gotten your reward. If you use those gifts to serve Christ by serving others, you're spot on.

The problem is, most people tend to get less and less grateful the more and more they are given and the more and more accustomed they are to having more and more.

As for the second count, money changers were notorious for ripping people off, the second half of this is that business (both the money changers and other business) were being conducted in temple.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple 

^ Not exactly the best resource but as far as ease of reading goes, a good place to start. What's really fascinating about this to me is that it's mentioned in all four gospels and the only point in which it is implies Jesus used physical force.

Yes, he said/did both those things.

But he didn't do either of them as a justification for taking what the rich have.

He did them both because he was trying to illustrate the Great Commandment. That we ought not to emulate or join those who worship wealth. That we ought to remember that it isn't about how much we (or they have); that it's about how much we worship the Lord with all our heart, and all our mind, and all our soul.

Jesus wasn't worried about the rich's wealth. He was worried about their soul. He wasn't worried about the moneychanging giving bad terms. He was worried about those changing money in a place that is about worshiping Him.

Jesus wasn't anti-wealth. He wasn't even anti-moneychanging. He was worried about us worrying too much about money. He was worried about us worrying too much about worldly affairs that we forget God comes first.

Not our wealth. Not someone else's wealth.

God.

---

*saunters in to see how this thread is progressing & runs the hell out!!*

First, i want to make this clear. I DO NOT watch Fox news channel. I do watch the local Fox station (channel 6) in Milwaukee. Bit they are HARDLY "right wingers". I(t's funny how all the local news outlits show all the protestors, but show very little of those that stand with Walker. And unlike you might think, there are plenty that do stand with what he is trying to do.

I saw Bill Clinton mentioned as some great guy in this thread. You mean the extremely RICH Bill and Hillary Clinton? They have more money then i could count. WHERE did they get all that money? I know they own oil company stock.
Why are rich democrats never held to the same standard that rich republicans are? Bush gets vilified for supposedly doing dasterdly things "for the rich oil barrons". Oh....you mean like the Clintons?
My wife pays $500 a month out of her checks for our health insurance. And we still have to pay deductables. She pays almost $50 a month in union dues. Yet any time she has needed to union, not ONE of the reps at her work actually did anything to help her.
Unions push up wages, then protect the LAZY ones who SHOULD be fired, while doing squat for the hard workers. I've seen this more times then i can count. I worked at a union shop, and the guy at the machine in front of me WAS ASLEEP AT HIS MACHINE. I took a bathroom break. Was gone from my machine for 10 minutes, came back and was called into the office and yelled at. With the union rep there, i asked "Why am i being yelled at for a valid reason for not being at my machine, while the guy in front of me was ASLEEP!?!" I was told in front of my boss by the union rep "He was at his machine." So he got away with that right in front of the boss, and the boss did nothing to the guy sleeping.
THAT is what unions are today. And they inflate wages to the point where it's not possible for the companies to make their products, so the companies move to other countries.
Like it or not, THAT'S the truth.
Orgainzed crime at it's best.
People deserve FAIR wages and benefits. FAIR compensation being the main word.
But you know, i have no kids. So i guess i shouldn't give a damn if the state bankrupts and costs kids in the next several generations.
Maybe i'll join the democrats after all. After all, i'll be long dead and have no grandchildren to worry about when the bill that's owed comes due.
SPEND AWAY DEMOCRATS! I don't care anymore.

---

I don't know about politics, but I've never heard that Bill Clinton gained his wealth from oil. I have read that Bill earns millions, sometimes in double digit millions, via speeches.

---