Eric Cantor Ousted By Tea Party

Not a joke: Liberals are actually calling this racist with a straight face…

Here’s a new one: A bad economy makes you a racist.

A bizarre study by NYU claims that as the economy heads downward, black people look “blacker” to white people.

When the economy declines, African Americans are more likely to be seen as “Blacker” and to bear stereotypical features, according to a new study by psychology researchers at New York University. Their findings, which appear in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggest that economic duress may spur racial discrimination.

Their argument is that economic stressors that suggest “scarcity” causes greater distinction between ethnicities.

The Left views everything through the prism of race, gender, and socioeconomic status. Since the election of Obama, they have been pretty fond of the race prism. Undoubtedly, this will switch to the gender prism as soon as 2016 elections really start to gear up. Anytime you don’t agree with Hillary, you are a sexist pig, deal with it.

Here is a terrific piece by Paul Krugman that...

You sadly, really do believe that.

Please compare him to Dave Brat, who has zero accomplishments.

Brat graduated from Park Center Senior High School in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota.[5]

Brat attended Hope College in Michigan and received a B.A. in Business Administration in 1986; he also graduated with a Master's degree in Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1990 and earned a Ph.D in economics from American University in 1995.[8]

Academic career[edit]
After working for Arthur Andersen and as a consultant for the World Bank, Brat joined the faculty of Randolph–Macon College in 1996,[8] where he served as chair of the department of economics, and taught courses including "Britain in the International Economy", "International Economic Development", and "Business Ethics".[9]

From 2010 to 2012 Brat headed Randolph-Macon's BB&T Moral Foundations of Capitalism program, one of sixty similar programs and chairs in the philosophy and economics departments at United States universities devoted to the study of capitalism and morality, endowed by the BB&T Corporation.[10][11][12][13]

In 2006 Brat was appointed by Virginia governor Tim Kaine to the Governor's Advisory Board of Economists, a position he continues to hold. He has also serves on the board of directors of the Richmond Metropolitan Authority, and on the advisory board of the Virginia Public Access Project.[13]

Quote:

Please compare him to Dave Brat, who has zero accomplishments.

Quote:

Brat graduated from Park Center Senior High School in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota.[5]

Brat attended Hope College in Michigan and received a B.A. in Business Administration in 1986; he also graduated with a Master's degree in Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1990 and earned a Ph.D in economics from American University in 1995.[8]

Academic career[edit]
After working for Arthur Andersen and as a consultant for the World Bank, Brat joined the faculty of Randolph–Macon College in 1996,[8] where he served as chair of the department of economics, and taught courses including "Britain in the International Economy", "International Economic Development", and "Business Ethics".[9]

From 2010 to 2012 Brat headed Randolph-Macon's BB&T Moral Foundations of Capitalism program, one of sixty similar programs and chairs in the philosophy and economics departments at United States universities devoted to the study of capitalism and morality, endowed by the BB&T Corporation.[10][11][12][13]

In 2006 Brat was appointed by Virginia governor Tim Kaine to the Governor's Advisory Board of Economists, a position he continues to hold. He has also serves on the board of directors of the Richmond Metropolitan Authority, and on the advisory board of the Virginia Public Access Project.[13]

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

David Brat — who scored one of the biggest upsets in recent political history on Tuesday by unseating House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the primary — tried to avoid answering specific policy questions in one of his first national television interviews, insisting that he “didn’t get enough sleep last night.”

Instead, Brat stuck to generalities about “fiscal issues and the Republican creed,” telling MSNBC host Chuck Todd that he believed in “free markets, equal treatment of everyone under the law, fiscal responsibility, adherence to the constitution, and a strong defense and faith in God and strong moral character.” Pressed for his position about raising the minimum wage, the economic professor demurred, saying “I don’t have a well-crafted response on that one.” He added, “all I know is if you take the long-run graph over 200 years of the wage rate, it cannot differ from your nation’s productivity.”

The conversation grew even more strained when Todd asked Brat if he supports arming the Syrian rebels. The GOP nominee immediately tried to dismiss the issue, saying, “hey Chuck, I thought we were just going to chat today about the celebratory aspects. I’d love to go through all of this, but my mind is just, I didn’t get enough sleep last night.”

When David Brat defeated House Majority leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) in the Republican primary of Virginia’s 7th Congressional District last night, House Republicans likely lost their only Jewish representative. In his place, they may have gained a radically pro-capitalist Christian theologian.

Christian Tea Party candidates are certainly not unusual, but a trail of writings show that Brat, an economics professor at Randolph-Macon college, has an especially radical theology to support his right-wing politics. Brat’s CV lists him as a graduate of Hope College, a Christian school in Michigan, and Princeton Theological Seminary, a Presbyterian Church U.S.A. seminary in New Jersey. He claims to be a “fairly orthodox Calvinist,” but several of his published writings expose a unsettling core theology that is centered around lifting up unregulated, free-market capitalism as a morally righteous system that churches should embrace—or else.

In a 2011 paper entitled “God and the Advanced Mammon — Can Theological Types Handle Usury and Capitalism?”, published in Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, Brat champions the moral superiority of the capitalistic system. “Capitalist markets and their expansion in China and India have provided more for the common good, more ‘social welfare,’ than any other policy in the past ten years,” he writes, adding “So, as a seminary student concerned with human welfare, I naturally wanted to learn about these free markets.”

Brat goes on to list a number of arguments for and against the practice of usury, but concludes the paper with a chilling warning about what will happen if churches fail to build a movement in support of free-market capitalism—namely, a Hitler-like figure could rise to power. He writes:


Capitalism is here to stay, and we need a church model that corresponds to that reality. Read Nietzsche. Nietzsche’s diagnosis of the weak modern Christian democratic man was spot on. Jesus was a great man. Jesus said he was the Son of God. Jesus made things happen. Jesus had faith. Jesus actually made people better. Then came the Christians. What happened? What went wrong? We appear to be a bit passive. Hitler came along, and he did not meet with unified resistance. I have the sinking feeling that it could all happen again, quite easily. The church should rise up higher than Nietzsche could see and prove him wrong. We should love our neighbor so much that we actually believe in right and wrong, and do something about it. If we all did the right thing and had the guts to spread the word, we would not need the government to backstop every action we take.

“I think the main point is that we need to synthesize Christianity and capitalism,” he adds a few lines later.

This isn’t the only time Brat has sung the praises of religiously-supported capitalism. The idea was also at the center of Brat’s 200-page PhD dissertation at American University, entitled “Human Capital, Religion, and Economic Growth.” The dissertation, which was also obtained by ThinkProgress, examines the role Pietistic Protestantism — as opposed to Catholicism — played in the rapid industrialization of Germany and Great Britain in the 19th century. Although he is more cautious than in his 2011 article, Brat ultimately argues that Protestantism — particularly Calvinism — deserves credit for creating scientific advancement, economic prosperity, and especially a decentralized government in German and Britain. According to Brat, Christianity — especially Calvinist Protestantism — inherently supports “the decentralization of power” that, to him, leads to economic prosperity.

Brat is not alone in using problematic theology to shore up a free-market economics. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C., sponsors a “Values and Capitalism” website where writers frequently make claims similar to Brat’s. Brat’s CV mentions a visit to AEI in 2012, where he attended a talk about conservative economics and reportedly explored “potential roles for [Randolph-Macon College] students at AEI.”

One of the problem with Pietists in public office is that they really don't want to be part of any government institutions.

I agree with this statement. The gesture gutted value in the prize.

Krugman pushes their buttons.

Shorter Krugman: ‘Kool-Aid, Anyone?’



Delusional partisan cheerleading:

Several times in recent weeks I’ve found myself in conversations with liberals who shake their heads sadly and express their disappointment with President Obama. Why? I suspect that they’re being influenced, often without realizing it, by the prevailing media narrative.
The truth is that these days much of the commentary you see on the Obama administration — and a lot of the reporting too — emphasizes the negative: the contrast between the extravagant hopes of 2008 and the prosaic realities of political trench warfare, the troubles at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the mess in Iraq, and so on. The accepted thing, it seems, is to portray Mr. Obama as floundering, his presidency as troubled if not failed.
But this is all wrong. You should judge leaders by their achievements, not their press, and in terms of policy substance Mr. Obama is having a seriously good year. In fact, there’s a very good chance that 2014 will go down in the record books as one of those years when America took a major turn in the right direction.

A major turn in the right direction? Krugman isn’t just drinking the Kool-Aid, he’s huffing the glue and smoking the meth.

Quote:

Krugman pushes their buttons.

Quote:

Shorter Krugman: ‘Kool-Aid, Anyone?’



Delusional partisan cheerleading:

Several times in recent weeks I’ve found myself in conversations with liberals who shake their heads sadly and express their disappointment with President Obama. Why? I suspect that they’re being influenced, often without realizing it, by the prevailing media narrative.
The truth is that these days much of the commentary you see on the Obama administration — and a lot of the reporting too — emphasizes the negative: the contrast between the extravagant hopes of 2008 and the prosaic realities of political trench warfare, the troubles at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the mess in Iraq, and so on. The accepted thing, it seems, is to portray Mr. Obama as floundering, his presidency as troubled if not failed.
But this is all wrong. You should judge leaders by their achievements, not their press, and in terms of policy substance Mr. Obama is having a seriously good year. In fact, there’s a very good chance that 2014 will go down in the record books as one of those years when America took a major turn in the right direction.

A major turn in the right direction? Krugman isn’t just drinking the Kool-Aid, he’s huffing the glue and smoking the meth.

http://theothermccain.com/2014/06/16/shorter-paul-krugman-kool-aid-anyone/