M.C. Swag said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

Ervin Burrell said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

wangus12 said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Talarico is awful. A complete snake. People are too easily fooled by his "aw shucks-y" howdy doody face and demeanor. He has a bright future, unfortunately.

---

That's every politician.

---

Yeah, just about. But it's worse when it's a politician who wants to take more from you, and also make the city more dangerous for your loved ones. One who says we need to take in unvetted third world bangers because the Bible is against borders and Jesus wouldn't have turned anyone away, or some such completely made up nonsense.

---

Jesus was famously in favor of refusing to help strangers

---

jesus helped strangers and the poor as a metaphor of God's love for all mankind.

Jesus lived in a time where King's ruled over all men in absolute worse conditions that is fathomable today in western society. Yet, he made zero advocacy for contempt against the Kings or revolution to overthrow their rule.

Using piety or religion in general as justification for socialistic ideals is false doctrine.

---

Someone tell that to the folks trying to put the Ten Commandments in classrooms. Or is that "different?"

---

what content of the 10 commandments do you - or anyone is civil society - take offense to exactly?

Murder
Theft
Adultery
Coveting
Honoring parents
Etc

Or it is just because it comes from the bible?

---

Half of them are about protecting God's ego. The other half are already against the law.

---

And now you know the basis for the law.

---

My guy, I hate to break it to you but the Bible is not the basis of US law or even western law. Ancient Rome, which pre dates Jesus by centuries, not only had laws for basic human liberties such as murder and theft but civil and contract law administered through trial courts. Ancient Greece and Egypt also had common criminal and civil laws that permeated how western civilization developed under codified law and order. Not some allegory of an old man showing some carvings into stone.

---

If you think Jesus presented the Ten Commandments to the world, you are not making yourself look very intelligent.

If only there were a movie about the Ten Commandments where you could quickly get up to speed on the history of said stone documents.

Whenever you guys have time to stop echoing in the political extreme echochamber, is there anything about the actual interview / monolog that is worth discussing?

M.C. Swag said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

Ervin Burrell said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

wangus12 said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Talarico is awful. A complete snake. People are too easily fooled by his "aw shucks-y" howdy doody face and demeanor. He has a bright future, unfortunately.

---

That's every politician.

---

Yeah, just about. But it's worse when it's a politician who wants to take more from you, and also make the city more dangerous for your loved ones. One who says we need to take in unvetted third world bangers because the Bible is against borders and Jesus wouldn't have turned anyone away, or some such completely made up nonsense.

---

Jesus was famously in favor of refusing to help strangers

---

jesus helped strangers and the poor as a metaphor of God's love for all mankind.

Jesus lived in a time where King's ruled over all men in absolute worse conditions that is fathomable today in western society. Yet, he made zero advocacy for contempt against the Kings or revolution to overthrow their rule.

Using piety or religion in general as justification for socialistic ideals is false doctrine.

---

Someone tell that to the folks trying to put the Ten Commandments in classrooms. Or is that "different?"

---

what content of the 10 commandments do you - or anyone is civil society - take offense to exactly?

Murder
Theft
Adultery
Coveting
Honoring parents
Etc

Or it is just because it comes from the bible?

---

Half of them are about protecting God's ego. The other half are already against the law.

---

And now you know the basis for the law.

---

My guy, I hate to break it to you but the Bible is not the basis of US law or even western law. Ancient Rome, which pre dates Jesus by centuries, not only had laws for basic human liberties such as murder and theft but civil and contract law administered through trial courts. Ancient Greece and Egypt also had common criminal and civil laws that permeated how western civilization developed under codified law and order. Not some allegory of an old man showing some carvings into stone.

---

It's just probably the most important part of the Declaration of Independence and who the founders determined we get our rights from...

Quote:

---

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights

---

I would argue that this quote below was pretty much the prevailing sentiment from most founders and people at the time...even the deists...

AgLA06 said:

---

Whenever you guys have time to stop echoing in the political extreme echochamber, is there anything about the actual interview / monolog that is worth discussing?

---

It's nice seeing a politician from Texas that speaks like a normal person and sounds reasonable.

maroon barchetta said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

Ervin Burrell said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

wangus12 said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Talarico is awful. A complete snake. People are too easily fooled by his "aw shucks-y" howdy doody face and demeanor. He has a bright future, unfortunately.

---

That's every politician.

---

Yeah, just about. But it's worse when it's a politician who wants to take more from you, and also make the city more dangerous for your loved ones. One who says we need to take in unvetted third world bangers because the Bible is against borders and Jesus wouldn't have turned anyone away, or some such completely made up nonsense.

---

Jesus was famously in favor of refusing to help strangers

---

jesus helped strangers and the poor as a metaphor of God's love for all mankind.

Jesus lived in a time where King's ruled over all men in absolute worse conditions that is fathomable today in western society. Yet, he made zero advocacy for contempt against the Kings or revolution to overthrow their rule.

Using piety or religion in general as justification for socialistic ideals is false doctrine.

---

Someone tell that to the folks trying to put the Ten Commandments in classrooms. Or is that "different?"

---

what content of the 10 commandments do you - or anyone is civil society - take offense to exactly?

Murder
Theft
Adultery
Coveting
Honoring parents
Etc

Or it is just because it comes from the bible?

---

Half of them are about protecting God's ego. The other half are already against the law.

---

And now you know the basis for the law.

---

My guy, I hate to break it to you but the Bible is not the basis of US law or even western law. Ancient Rome, which pre dates Jesus by centuries, not only had laws for basic human liberties such as murder and theft but civil and contract law administered through trial courts. Ancient Greece and Egypt also had common criminal and civil laws that permeated how western civilization developed under codified law and order. Not some allegory of an old man showing some carvings into stone.

---

If you think Jesus presented the Ten Commandments to the world, you are not making yourself look very intelligent.

If only there were a movie about the Ten Commandments where you could quickly get up to speed on the history of said stone documents.

---

Everyone knows who Moses was (the old guy I was referencing). I was ALSO saying that 'murder' as an act deemed 'criminal' by society pre dated even Jesus. Sorry that confused you! (also sorry to rob you of the dunk you think you had).

To keep this on topic, here is 47 U.S.C. 315(a) AKA the equal time rule.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/315

1. The issue at hand is the exemption of:

Quote:

---

Appearance by a legally qualified candidate on any
(1) bona fide newscast,
(2) bona fide news interview,
(3) bona fide news documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by the news documentary), or
(4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (including but not limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto),

---

Notably it does not define what a bona fide news interview is.


2. Here is a PDF of the Equal Time Rule Guidance from 2022
https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/political_programming_fact_sheet.pdf

The guidance states:

Quote:

---

"appearances by legally qualified candidates on bona fide newscasts, interview programs, certain types of news documentaries, and during on the-spot coverage of bona fide news events are exempt from Equal Opportunities."

---

Daytime and Evening/Late Night Talk shows have generally fallen into this exemption. Is a Talk Show not by definition an Interview Program? Candidates (both Dem and Republican) have appeared on talk shows without violating the Equal Time Rule for decades.

3. This is the most recent guidance release last month
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-68A1.pdf

They make the arguement that in 2006 Jay Leno received a specific exemption for a segment and that has now generally been applied to all similar segments moving forward which is no longer correct in the current FCC opinion. They also state that show whose programming is partisan in nature would not qualify for an exemption. Currently the FCC does not believe any daytime or night time talk show qualifies for an exemption.

4. A couple of issues I see

• They have stopped short of declaring all talk shows as not exempt by rule this leaves a sort of vague threat out in the open. They will decide on a case by case basis if they think you are exempt or not.
• They ignore the fact that this has been going on since the 60s.
• Trump himself benefited greatly from the exemptions leading up to his first term.
• The FCC seems to be ignoring Talk Radio which is largely conservative.

Ya of course a large portion of our constitutional ethics was informed by the faith of our founders. No one is denying that. What I'm saying is that many of the Christian laws and ethics were informed by ancient Greek and Roman governance. I was dispelling this notion that before the 10 commandments, the idea of criminalizing acts such as murder and theft were alien. That the Bible and Moses' tablets (for the kids that can't keep up) tread new ground in forming a more just and civilized society.

I know a lot of people hate the idea of the Ten Commandments in the classroom, because it's not fair to the satanists or the Islamists who want shariah, but at least there is some historical precedent there. Many of our parents experienced classroom prayer in public schools. Talarico literally thinks Jesus would be against this lol. He would rather people never be exposed to him/his teachings at all in fact lol. It's so silly and flies in the face of scripture and everything we know about Jesus and his apostles imo.

All that aside, I personally think the left only has themselves to blame for this. They waged an over-the-top culture war that involved children and young teens and now they are experiencing a little bit of a response. All of the libs and impressionable soccer moms I know freaked out and compared Governor Desantis to Hitler when he ordered books like "Gender Queer" (depicts oral sex, masturbation, and sodomy in cartoon images) removed from kids public school libraries. Also passed a law saying you could not discuss LGBTQ stuff with school children under the age of 8 (I think?) without their parents' knowledge. They called it the "Don't say gay" bill.

When you combine that with all of the in-your-face deviancy pushed by the modern left, including stuff like "family friendly drag shows" or "drag queen story hour", this seems like a pretty natural response for any red state imo. It's push back. It's a message to "take that crap back to California or Oregon, anywhere but here". If the left had't gone so crazy, this isn't even a discussion, because it's not happening. That's my honest opinion.

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

When you combine that with all of the in-your-face deviancy pushed by the modern left, including stuff like "family friendly drag shows" or "drag queen story hour"

---

you are all over the place and make sweeping generalizations about huge groups of people, but this one made me laugh.

Please tell me ONE time where you were forced into experiencing a drag show. When/where did some evil jesus-hating libtard grab you by the back of the head, force your eyes open and make you watch a drag show. Did a bunch of drag queens show up at your job or at a restaurant you were having lunch at, handcuff you to a chair, and force you to watch a drag show? Did someone kidnap your kid and take them to a drag queen story hour and hold them there against their will? Did you happen to see one on a show on tv, but someone stole your remote so you couldn't change the channel? I'm just trying to understand where this was pushed into your face.

🚨 BREAKING: CBS just called out their OWN HOST, Stephen Colbert, and Dem. Senate candidate James Talarico for LYING by claiming Trump’s FCC BLOCKED their interview from airing on TV

In a statement, CBS said Colbert “was NOT prohibited from broadcasting the interview with Rep.… pic.twitter.com/F0QwPQL0SD

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 17, 2026

AggieOO said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

When you combine that with all of the in-your-face deviancy pushed by the modern left, including stuff like "family friendly drag shows" or "drag queen story hour"

---

you are all over the place and make sweeping generalizations about huge groups of people, but this one made me laugh.

Please tell me ONE time where you were forced into experiencing a drag show. When/where did some evil jesus-hating libtard grab you by the back of the head, force your eyes open and make you watch a drag show. Did a bunch of drag queens show up at your job or at a restaurant you were having lunch at, handcuff you to a chair, and force you to watch a drag show? Did someone kidnap your kid and take them to a drag queen story hour and hold them there against their will? Did you happen to see one on a show on tv, but someone stole your remote so you couldn't change the channel? I'm just trying to understand where this was pushed into your face.

---

Hasn't been a single drag queen mentioned in the Epstein files.

AggieOO said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

When you combine that with all of the in-your-face deviancy pushed by the modern left, including stuff like "family friendly drag shows" or "drag queen story hour"

---

you are all over the place and make sweeping generalizations about huge groups of people, but this one made me laugh.

Please tell me ONE time where you were forced into experiencing a drag show. When/where did some evil jesus-hating libtard grab you by the back of the head, force your eyes open and make you watch a drag show. Did a bunch of drag queens show up at your job or at a restaurant you were having lunch at, handcuff you to a chair, and force you to watch a drag show? Did someone kidnap your kid and take them to a drag queen story hour and hold them there against their will? Did you happen to see one on a show on tv, but someone stole your remote so you couldn't change the channel? I'm just trying to understand where this was pushed into your face.

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

AggieOO said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

When you combine that with all of the in-your-face deviancy pushed by the modern left, including stuff like "family friendly drag shows" or "drag queen story hour"

---

you are all over the place and make sweeping generalizations about huge groups of people, but this one made me laugh.

Please tell me ONE time where you were forced into experiencing a drag show. When/where did some evil jesus-hating libtard grab you by the back of the head, force your eyes open and make you watch a drag show. Did a bunch of drag queens show up at your job or at a restaurant you were having lunch at, handcuff you to a chair, and force you to watch a drag show? Did someone kidnap your kid and take them to a drag queen story hour and hold them there against their will? Did you happen to see one on a show on tv, but someone stole your remote so you couldn't change the channel? I'm just trying to understand where this was pushed into your face.

---

---

ok, so you don't have an example.

This thread makes me miss the Colbert Report.

I'm not versed on the legality of the FCC's move, but I know that if they were trying to bring more attention to Talarico, the interview, and his Senate campaign, then they were successful.

Cliff.Booth said:

---

A neat little trick here from Talarico and Colbert

Federal law since 1932 has required broadcast media to give equal time to competing political candidates, but Colbert wanted to platform only Talarico and not his other opponents.

So, he interviews Talarico but releases the… https://t.co/LQ1m4IdBvp

— Theo Wold (@RealTheoWold) February 17, 2026

---

We've already discussed that talk show interviews have been exempt from the equal time provision for like 60 years.

This thread is incredible.

Talarico… literally quoting Jesus. Republicans… no, not like that.

As a Christian who actually tries to follow Christ's teachings I can't wait to vote for Talarico.

Back to the topic at hand. The YouTube video is now over 3 million views. Trump and his cronies are idiots. You let this interview play out like normal and maybe you get 100K views.

jah003 said:

---

This thread is incredible.

Talarico… literally quoting Jesus. Republicans… no, not like that.

As a Christian who actually tries to follow Christ's teachings I can't wait to vote for Talarico.

Back to the topic at hand. The YouTube video is now over 3 million views. Trump and his cronies are idiots. You let this interview play out like normal and maybe you get 100K views.

---

What's your stance on abortion?

jah003 said:

---

This thread is incredible.

Talarico… literally quoting Jesus. Republicans… no, not like that.

As a Christian who actually tries to follow Christ's teachings I can't wait to vote for Talarico.

Back to the topic at hand. The YouTube video is now over 3 million views. Trump and his cronies are idiots. You let this interview play out like normal and maybe you get 100K views.

---

Wow, this is a take.

chap said:

---

jah003 said:

---

This thread is incredible.

Talarico… literally quoting Jesus. Republicans… no, not like that.

As a Christian who actually tries to follow Christ's teachings I can't wait to vote for Talarico.

Back to the topic at hand. The YouTube video is now over 3 million views. Trump and his cronies are idiots. You let this interview play out like normal and maybe you get 100K views.

---

Wow, this is a take.

---

Thanks. I try.

schmendeler said:

---

agracer said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Talarico is awful. A complete snake. People are too easily fooled by his "aw shucks-y" howdy doody face and demeanor. He has a bright future, unfortunately.

---

lol based on what? Was he caught on a hot mic bragging about assaulting a woman? Was he found civilly liable for misappropriating charity funds? Or you just don't like his opinions so you think that makes him a snake?

---

He is constantly lying and using twisted Christian doctrine to support things like erasing our borders...and paint anyone who believes in borders and an actual legal immigration process as bigoted and "unchristian". If you start to pick up on his lies, you can see that his pious act is just an act. He's brilliant and cunning though, and has a very bright future...I genuinely think he may be the face of the democrat party within the next 10 years.

---

What are these "constant" lies?

---

right in his website. First issue is about corrupt politicians and their billionaire mega donors buying power - completely ignoring his own backing by the George Soros billionaire PAC. Maybe not a lie, but a clear misrepresentation of this specific issue.

---

This itself is a bit of a misrepresentation. PACs operate independently of candidates. He's pledged not to take any money from corporate PACs for his Senate run. And as of the latest, 98% of his campaign funds are from donations less than $100. Seems pretty in-line with his statements/stance to me.

---

How much is from "act blue" which is nothing but a democrat money laundering scheme?

---

I don't know. Your characterization of it as money laundering scheme is interesting, though. How do you feel about the GOP equivalent, WinRed?

---

Do you ever have anything but "look what your side does"?

agracer said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

agracer said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Talarico is awful. A complete snake. People are too easily fooled by his "aw shucks-y" howdy doody face and demeanor. He has a bright future, unfortunately.

---

lol based on what? Was he caught on a hot mic bragging about assaulting a woman? Was he found civilly liable for misappropriating charity funds? Or you just don't like his opinions so you think that makes him a snake?

---

He is constantly lying and using twisted Christian doctrine to support things like erasing our borders...and paint anyone who believes in borders and an actual legal immigration process as bigoted and "unchristian". If you start to pick up on his lies, you can see that his pious act is just an act. He's brilliant and cunning though, and has a very bright future...I genuinely think he may be the face of the democrat party within the next 10 years.

---

What are these "constant" lies?

---

right in his website. First issue is about corrupt politicians and their billionaire mega donors buying power - completely ignoring his own backing by the George Soros billionaire PAC. Maybe not a lie, but a clear misrepresentation of this specific issue.

---

This itself is a bit of a misrepresentation. PACs operate independently of candidates. He's pledged not to take any money from corporate PACs for his Senate run. And as of the latest, 98% of his campaign funds are from donations less than $100. Seems pretty in-line with his statements/stance to me.

---

How much is from "act blue" which is nothing but a democrat money laundering scheme?

---

I don't know. Your characterization of it as money laundering scheme is interesting, though. How do you feel about the GOP equivalent, WinRed?

---

Do you ever have anything but "look what your side does"?

---

In 2024, winred distributed $1.8 billion dollars to Republican candidates.

I'm genuinely curious why he considers actblue to be a "Democrat money laundering scheme" given there's an exact counterpart on the other side. If he were to denounce that as well, then he'd be consistent. Perhaps there's a reason why act blue is nefarious and winred isn't that he can share.

I don't think actblue is bad. I don't think winred is bad.

What do you think?

dvldog said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

A neat little trick here from Talarico and Colbert

Federal law since 1932 has required broadcast media to give equal time to competing political candidates, but Colbert wanted to platform only Talarico and not his other opponents.

So, he interviews Talarico but releases the… https://t.co/LQ1m4IdBvp

— Theo Wold (@RealTheoWold) February 17, 2026

---

We've already discussed that talk show interviews have been exempt from the equal time provision for like 60 years.

---

Except for the parent company airing Colbert, CBS, putting out a memo that they essentially aren't (or aren't willing to test it).

But you do you.

---

That's the whole point of this discussion. The current admin has changed the legal landscape.

schmendeler said:

---

dvldog said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

A neat little trick here from Talarico and Colbert

Federal law since 1932 has required broadcast media to give equal time to competing political candidates, but Colbert wanted to platform only Talarico and not his other opponents.

So, he interviews Talarico but releases the… https://t.co/LQ1m4IdBvp

— Theo Wold (@RealTheoWold) February 17, 2026

---

We've already discussed that talk show interviews have been exempt from the equal time provision for like 60 years.

---

Except for the parent company airing Colbert, CBS, putting out a memo that they essentially aren't (or aren't willing to test it).

But you do you.

---

That's the whole point of this discussion. The current admin has changed the legal landscape.

---

It sure has for the illegals!

Squadron7 said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

dvldog said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

A neat little trick here from Talarico and Colbert

Federal law since 1932 has required broadcast media to give equal time to competing political candidates, but Colbert wanted to platform only Talarico and not his other opponents.

So, he interviews Talarico but releases the… https://t.co/LQ1m4IdBvp

— Theo Wold (@RealTheoWold) February 17, 2026

---

We've already discussed that talk show interviews have been exempt from the equal time provision for like 60 years.

---

Except for the parent company airing Colbert, CBS, putting out a memo that they essentially aren't (or aren't willing to test it).

But you do you.

---

That's the whole point of this discussion. The current admin has changed the legal landscape.

---

It sure has for the illegals!

---

And legal immigrants. It's a **** show all around!

jah003 said:

---

This thread is incredible.

Talarico… literally quoting Jesus. Republicans… no, not like that.

As a Christian who actually tries to follow Christ's teachings I can't wait to vote for Talarico.

Back to the topic at hand. The YouTube video is now over 3 million views. Trump and his cronies are idiots. You let this interview play out like normal and maybe you get 100K views.

---

Talarico doesn't quote. What he does is give a summary of what he wants to be in the Bible, hopes you won't go back to it to make sure what he said was in there was actually in there (most won't) and then draws some modern conclusion to justify his social positions. Unengaged people nod along and go "Man, he's so in tune with his spirituality and draws such morals from it." and then eagerly say "I can't wait to vote for this Christian man."


Here he is *******izing the birth of Jesus to justify his position on abortion. Claiming that the angel asks Mary if she wants to participate in God's plan (aka do you want to be a virgin mother) and that Mary consents to God's plan. Except that's not what happens in the Bible.

The angel comes to Mary says that she will conceive and birth a child, that child will be God's son, that son will be named Jesus and he will be given David's throne and he will become the leader of Jacob's people for the rest of time.

Mary says how can this be, she's a Virgin.

Angel says the spirit will come over you. Says that God's word does not fail.

Mary says she is the Lord's servant.


There is no question asked. There is no consent given. She is not a collaborator. She is a servant. There is a directive from God about what will happen. There is submission by Mary to God's will.

Quote:

---

26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."
29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. 31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over Jacob's descendants forever; his kingdom will never end."
34 "How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"
35 The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[a] the Son of God. 36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month.37 For no word from God will ever fail."
38 "I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May your word to me be fulfilled." Then the angel left her.

---

I'm not even Christian and watching him wear Christianity like a skin suit to appear moral grosses me out. How do you stand it?

Texas Democrat US Senate candidate James Talarico claims the Bible is pro-choice: “The Angel comes down and asks Mary if this is something she wants to do. To me, that is an affirmation in one of our central stories.” pic.twitter.com/TgjaLtWgRB

— TheBlaze (@theblaze) February 3, 2026

Dude is literally in seminary.

Also citing the blaze as a reputable source is wild.