-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Do you agree with Bill Clinton?
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Bill Clinton is the master of double speak. He thinks the consequences of 3-5 million illegal aliens coming across the southern border is that it gives Repub governors the opportunity for political “stunts” and makes liberal Dems in sanctuary cities/states look bad.
No mention of the 1200 plus documented deaths among those attempting to enter illegally. No mention of the barrage of fentanyl that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans. No mention of those caught on terrorist watch list, those convicted of serious crimes including murder sexual assault and peadophiles, no mention of the young girls and women sold into sexual slavery., no mention of the burden on the American taxpayer to provide medical care and education to the illegals.
No, I do not agree with Bill Clinton.
peace to you
No mention of the 1200 plus documented deaths among those attempting to enter illegally. No mention of the barrage of fentanyl that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans. No mention of those caught on terrorist watch list, those convicted of serious crimes including murder sexual assault and peadophiles, no mention of the young girls and women sold into sexual slavery., no mention of the burden on the American taxpayer to provide medical care and education to the illegals.
No, I do not agree with Bill Clinton.
peace to you
Bill was not a bad president. He got drug left by that shrew he is married to. Zell Miller supported him heavily and Zell was a pure southern Democrat.
He was drug back toward the center by the 94' midterms.
"...the Republican Party captured unified control of Congress for the first time since 1952. Republicans picked up eight seats in the Senate and won a net of 54 seats in the House of Representatives. Republicans also picked up a net of ten governorships and took control of many state legislative chambers...."
(what we desperately need to happen this November)
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Bill Clinton was/is a sexual predator, so even if he was not a “bad pres” he is certainly not a good person.
He didn’t get dragged anywhere by Hilary. He embraced left wing ideology, but was able to politically pivot when repubs took control in mid terms. If I remember correctly, he signed 8 of the 10 points of the “Contract with America” and took all the credit with traditional media diligently parroted and protected him.
peace to you
He was not a leftist. He was good friends with a man I used to work for. He was a social liberal (not leftist) but a fiscal conservative.
He liked his young women, but I don't judge job performance by that. If I was married to Hillary, I would "step out" too.
A President is a President;not my pastor. The biggest dirt bags have been the best Presidents and the most most Godly President in modern era was......Jimmy Carter.
Last edited:
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
He sexually assaulted and raped women.
I completely disagree with you that the biggest dirtbsgs are the best presidents. That may be the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
peace to you
Good grief. He is a rapist and a pedophile. A friend of Epstein. He should be locked up, not admired.
I don't admire him. At a personal level, I can't stand him. Being married to Hillary is enough in and of itself to make him a vile person. I am not sure about the rapist part. From what I have heard, half the men in D.C. on the Epstein list. Trump is one of the few that is not on the list. I have said all along that I judge the office of POTUS strictly on job performance.
Clinton was one of the last Democrats at the Federal level that most of my Pro-Union and Blue Collar Democrat family voted for.
By the time Obama came along only a couple of them were still Democrats and they still mostly voted Republican or Independent. The Democrats have gone absolutely insane at the national level with their nutty social views. A squirrel would have more coherent social views than Federal Democrats.
Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act and Don't Ask Don't Tell. Both were good wins for Social Conservatives.
By the time Obama came along only a couple of them were still Democrats and they still mostly voted Republican or Independent. The Democrats have gone absolutely insane at the national level with their nutty social views. A squirrel would have more coherent social views than Federal Democrats.
Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act and Don't Ask Don't Tell. Both were good wins for Social Conservatives.
didnt take long one person said:
Slave owners are not moral or religious. The Constitution shouldn't have applied to them.
and I responded:
well, since every one has done something immoral - I guess the COTUS does not apply to anyone
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Interesting quote, I'd say slaveowners can be both moral and religious. Stonewall Jackson and Lee being primary examples.
In fact, in a slave-owning culture, I'd say that Christians have a duty to purchase slaves.
In fact, in a slave-owning culture, I'd say that Christians have a duty to purchase slaves.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Christians have a command from out Lord Jesus Christ to treat others as you would like to be treated.
I doubt any Christian slave owner wanted to be treated as a slave himself.
Your comment is outrageous.
peace to you
Candy - are you trying to confuse that liberal with the facts?
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Not only that, Adams, who opposed slavery, was a prominent founding father for our country and did help write the constitution. BAM, their mind is completely blown.
I can hear them screaming “you are claiming some people didn’t own slaves when the US was founded? Disinformation! Disinformation!
peace to you
It's not outrageous. It's Biblical. Picture this:
It's 1820 and you walk by a slave auction in the piedmont of NC. There's a black family of 5 that is being broken up and sold off piece by piece. Each child and parent being auctioned off to a separate owner. You have enough spare cash and you know that you could afford to buy the entire family even though you're not a fan of slavery.
As a Christian you can:
1. Ignore this and let the family be broken up and go buy some candy or some other frivolous item
2. Purchase the family as a whole to keep them together
It'd be unChristlike to NOT purchase the family and save them.
Or scenario 2:
You walk by a slave auction of a young slave girl. The person buying the slave girl is a known rapist of his slaves. You again have plenty of money to afford a slave.
Do you:
1. Ignore the situation and allow the girl to be sold to the rapist
2. Purchase the slave girl to prevent her from a likely future of daily rape.
If I were alive back then I'd be buying slaves right and left and letting them live on my little farm where they can live out their life in safety. And if they wanted to be free then the ones that so wished would be freed.
If I was a black slave in 1820, I would love for a Christian slaveowner to purchase me.
Last edited:
Interesting -
Do you have any documented instances where this actually happened.