Wednesday, December 28, 2005

BLESSED ARE THE PEACE MAKERS * NARROW IS THE GATE


The kids are still out of school - so I'm sneaking away to post a quick item that I had written as part of an earlier blog. In memory of the tsunami victims: all these calamities, catastrophes and hurricanes show us the importance of loving and helping each other -- and helping those less fortunate. Tribal divisions and ethnic chauvinism seem so primitive. We can't survive without each other. It's also pretty clear that storing up material treasures on earth is useless. We are learning not to depend on material sustenance, but to depend on charity. Love for our fellow man -- there is nothing else worth talking about. And that is why the Gate is narrow: it's hard to love your enemies -- and I'm not just talking about terrorists; it's hard to love those people you can't stand to be in the same room with! With my relatives this weekend, I kept asking myself: "How can I be of love and service to people who are incredibly annoying?" Very few will make it through this gate of loving their enemies, not fighting, and embracing those morally bankrupt people who offend them. (I really have to forgive Bush!) But I want to start focusing on all the good we can do. (Although I have a riveting expose on this new breed of "Christian" coming out soon.) Look at this incredible universe – it would take a blind slug not to see God everywhere. This is heaven and it is here now, if we choose to see it. I was at a peacock farm with my kids, chasing peacocks all over the place -- and in the design of a peacock's feathers, you see God’s artistry. In the design of a Monarch butterfly or a baby's smile, you see heaven. Why do people debate whether or not God exists when God is simply LOVE? Who can argue with love, kindness, compassion? Asking to prove the existence of God is like asking to prove you love your kids. I actually believe that Einstein was on the cusp of proving God through science, for he said that 'goodness, truth and beauty are laws of the universe'; hence God and science are not mutually exclusive. I also love Wayne Dyer's statement that "you'll see it when you BELIEVE it" and "the antidote to depression is kindness". One act of kindness to another human being is an anti-depressant; it actually raises your serotonin levels. An observer of an act of kindness also gets a serotonin boost. If everyone in America did more love and service work, we wouldn't be thinking about ourselves so much, what we lack -- and we wouldn't be depressed. Depression is an epidemic in this country and the pharmaceutical companies love promoting our fears & obsessions. Tom Cruise said some very stupid things, some people need medication, but the way they're pushing drugs on us is criminal. Anyway, getting out of our self-centered fear by helping others works every time.

Hope everyone is having a great holiday; I have several articles in the works, a book and a new Brad Blog item which will be up soon. Rene - I love your name, sorry about the confusion. Also, my web designer is in the process of putting up new photos & DVDs for sale for charity and an 80's page of the bombshell pictures ABC put out.

My brilliant friend Chaz was there the other night and we were discussing how the world has changed and how odd it is that something we thought was a given -- these ideas I've been writing about -- make so much sense to us, but make so little sense to Bush-supporters -- and he said that if what I was saying wasn't the truth, it wouldn't upset so many people. Kind of like the film "Good Night and Good Luck" about Edward R. Murrow's battle with McCarthy. He also said that "a frog never jumps out of a pan if you turn the heat up slowly." Which is what the people in power are doing to middle-class Americans: turning the heat up and taking away our earnings, choices and freedoms in such gradual degrees that we barely notice until it's too late.

Received follow-up letters from Dennis Taylor of Phoenix, Arizona. I think this man is very intuitive -- which we are all capable of being when we open our minds.

"Dear Lydia, I have to share something that my wife said after reading your blog. Without sounding flakey…I’m convinced that my wife is correct and that this goes hand in hand with your statement regarding the next frontier being the center or the middle. We both have a strong internal sense of something impending that is difficult to explain. A feeling that many of us are going to be called to stand out for what is right and rescue the Constitution of the USA so that the country can get back to being a democracy. It seems like while America slept, we were slowly and silently robbed of democracy. The irony is the fact that so many people who call themselves Christian as well as conservative played a big role in America silently surrendering democracy to those who regard the constitution as a mere technicality to work around in order to promote their self-serving agenda’s. Respectfully, Dennis Taylor"

And though I cringe at self-promotion, the following letter is not so much about my blog as it about the truth people are hearing. The truth always upsets some people by the way. Throughout the ages, others have said these things in different ways before I did. But the following letter really touched me:

"I could not resist sending your blog page with my letter to many friends. What blows me away is how well it was received by some long time friends of mine who openly admit to be agnostic. I’ve never witnessed anything quite like that before as some of these folks have historically been some of the most open critics of religion and Christianity. I must admit that I never saw that coming. One of them even described tears coming out or their eyes while reading this and stating that your blog rekindled their hope for humanity. A hope that had been lost over the last 5 years." Best Regards and God Bless You & Your Family Dennis Taylor Phoenix, AZ

Prior post: I want to share an amazing letter I just received last night. But first: HAPPY HOLIDAYS, MERRY CHRISTMAS, HAPPY HANNUKAH, HAPPY KWANZAA, HAPPY DIWALI and GOD BLESS YOU ALL! I want to thank the hundreds of wonderful people who have sent me letters of encouragement and support. I especially want to thank Worfeus, for your wisdom and insightful commentary -- and for being a scholar of the Bible as well as every other book ever written. I am learning a lot from you. You are very truthful, and you're not afraid of ANYTHING! I'd also like to thank Rene, the lovely woman who prayed for our family and wrote such beautiful comments in this section, as well as Rebecca from Oklahoma, who left me a voice message & several supportive letters, and Jennifer the young woman from Minnesota who heard Ann Coulter speak at St. Olaf -- your letters all touched me so much. I have to mention Johnny Moo Moo, the atheist, whom I love too; he's so reasonable and balanced. I love that! I know this is unusual, but I'm adding to this post rather than create a new one because of time -- plus this one is chock full of current events. The kids are out of school and home for the holidays and driving me CRAZY with happiness! We are making gingerbread cookies and decorating every nook and cranny.

Okay, here's the letter:

Dear Lydia,

This might be a bit late in the making but I was so moved by your article regarding Ann Coulter, that I felt compelled to respond. You are to be commended for your courage in speaking the truth about Ann Coulter and hate mongers like her who somehow think that they are conservative people. A friend had sent me a link to another article on the Brad Blog and that was where I saw a link to your article. The more I read, the more I was drawn in by the content in your article. I’m sure that you already know this but I have to say it anyway. You are absolutely right in every point you made in that article and this world needs more people like you. God Bless You for Stating the Facts!!!

I have a hard time articulating just how much of a breath of fresh air your article was. As opposed to Ann Coulter’s hate mongering speeches that are designed to manipulate impressionable minds, your comments are something that Americans seriously need to be taken to heart. For the last five years, I have watched the Bush administration feverishly dismantle the very freedoms and liberties that make this nation great. At the same time, I’ve closely observed a very scary “us and them” kind of mentality that has been born and perpetuated by the Bush administration, much of the religious right wing of this nation, and vicious mouth pieces like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’ Reilly.

As a Christian with a bachelor’s degree in the Bible, I learned rather early on that I had the God given spiritual gift of discernment. That gift can sometimes be as much of a curse as a blessing as I am always able to tell when people are either lying or telling the truth. Because of the fact that I can immediately interpret one’s intentions early on, it puts me in the minority and often times in unpopular situations as I’m often referred to as being “brutally honest”. It does not win any popularity contest but then…those with honesty and integrity never feel threatened when around me either. I knew Bush was lying to America regarding just about all the things he claimed he would do during his 2000 campaign. I also knew that he was lying to America during his very first televised speech when he was trying to convince America that we needed to wage war against Iraq. But I digress….

Tactics like posting your personal contact information on Ann Coulter’s web site are nothing more then the desperate act of someone who is void of any real depth or Christian substance. It was geared towards unleashing a bunch of hate mongering minions and sycophants upon you and your family and Christ Jesus himself would find that to be completely unacceptable. And those who call themselves conservatives should be ashamed of themselves when they justify Ann Coulter’s pusillanimous activities and remarks as being satirical. True conservative people do not engage in the type of conduct or tactics that she and those like her demonstrate on a regular basis. I am convinced that if Jesus Christ almighty were to come pay us a visit incarnate today, he would have one thing to say to many of the religious right-wing and republican party as well as a result of the mess they have made. “Be gone!!! I never knew any of you!!!” (Note from LYDIA: Even Christ admonished the pharisees this way, calling them a "BROOD OF VIPERS".) It sounds harsh to put it that way, but I am not going to mince words when I see these very same people wearing Christianity as a shield to ward off criticism when their anti-Christian conduct and anti-constitutional agenda’s are exposed in the light of God’s word and Christ’s example. These very same people who did everything in their power to rake Bill Clinton over the coals for an indiscretion with a Whitehouse Intern seem to have absolutely no problem with telling lies, half truths and hiding Bush’s sins and crimes. It’s a sad but true statement when ya consider the fact that Nixon got impeached for things far less offensive then the crimes that Bush is flat out guilty of both locally and internationally.

I’m concerned about the future of this country as a result of the dangerous trend of growing lies and deception that the Bush administration and vicious mouthpieces like Ann Coulter and Bill O’ Reilly. Over the course of the last five years, people like this have effectively redefined the word “liberal” to mean a lot of things that it simply is not and never was. Liberal is actually a very positive and progressive term when examined under the light of honesty. However, in the hands of corrupt people like Bush, O’ Reilly and Coulter, it has been used to mislead the American public. Regretfully, they have used the stupidity of most Americans to believe that liberal is something bad, immoral, baby murdering and anti-Christian.

I wish that I could take credit for the following lyric excerpt from a particular song by the band Rush as it is so very true today. One would think that it might have come from a book depicting American society during the Salem Witchcraft Trials. Regretfully, it describes the “mob rules” mentality that the self-serving Ann Coulters of the USA like to incite in impressionable minds who like to be told what to think.

--“Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand. Ignorance prejudice...and fear walk hand-in-hand”.

In any case, my wife and I are 100% supportive of you and everything you said in your article. Your article was uplifting and it is nice to know that we are not alone as we observe the very same dangerous and destructive things that you were brave enough to expose. I wish that there were more people like you in this world. I regularly hear the same hateful responses from Bush & Coulter sycophants stating that they won and we lost and we should get over it. Those of us who see the truth realize that this is incorrect and the ones who lost were Americans and it has been at the price of democracy. It grieves me that my son and others who are only children right now are going to wind up paying the price for the sins of such corrupt self serving individuals. That’s just not right.

God Bless you and your family!

Respectfully,
Dennis Taylor, Phoenix Arizona

You know when you have a sixth sense about things? Well, this may sound bizarre to some of you (and quite common to others) but I actually get a knife-pang in my gut when something is wrong, even distant things outside my sphere of knowledge or interest. Right after the 2004 presidential election, I had this severe pang -- a terrifying gut instinct. I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that fraud had occurred, that electronic voting machines were rigged. A lot of people suspected this, but I KNEW there was electronic voting fraud in putting Bush in the White House. This wasn't wishful thinking, believe me I know the difference. And now it is proven to be true. Everyone who thought this -- and there were millions of us -- were instantly dismissed as crazy conspiracy-theorists. Even John Kerry was mysteriously acquiescent in accepting defeat. Why won't the mainstream media really pick this story up and bring it out to the people of America? Maybe it's too disturbing to even fathom that this could happen in our cherished democray -- and it is still tinged with that "conspiracy theory" label. But you'd think this would be front page news -- especially in light of the right-wing's rampant corruption, and the illegal spying on American citizens. And given the obvious propaganda of the Fox network, does anything seem past these people in the Bush administration or in the Republican party? You can read all about the voter-fraud scandal at BRAD BLOG

Heard someone mention to Tim Russert the other night that Bush's poll numbers were up last week (before his Oval Office address last night) simply because Bush is not talking about Katrina. This subject is off-limits because it makes his poll numbers go down. The White House will not remind anyone about Katrina, and as long as they stay off that subject, Bush can gain some ground. So they are deliberately not mentioning it! Nice Christmas present for those poor people down in New Orleans. Now that the mainstream media is focused on Barney and Mrs. Beasley or whoever the other Bush dog's name is, they don't have to shoot footage of things that depress everybody: the continuing chaos and poverty down in New Orleans. Those poor souls; God Bless them.

Narrow is the gate, not wide. Please read Craig Unger's article in the December 2005 issue of Vanity Fair -- an astounding, mind-altering article called "Apocalypse Soon! Evangelical Christians, the Rapture and the Big Business of Being Born Again" For years I had heard about this, but thought it was highly improbable. Now here is the hard evidence AMERICAN RAPTURE I believe this explains why we're in this mess in Iraq. It's the key to how this administration came to power.

For years I've been embarrassed to say out loud that I am a Christian -- because very un-Christian-acting fanatics and televangelists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have made a mockery of the most loving, peaceful force that ever came to man -- but now more than ever, I feel we must turn this lunacy around. It is frightening what these people have done to our country -- and there are so many of them, that theirs is certainly not the Way. It is too wide. And I know this is true with every cell of my being. Remember, it is how we treat "the least among us" that counts. Tim LaHaye, Jerry Falwell, Jesse Helms, Pat Robertson, Tom DeLay, Ralph Reed, George H. W. Bush and W -- this cabal which includes top executives and CEOs is just part of the C.N.P., the New Right -- and they represent the EXACT OPPOSITE of Christ's teachings! They've taken their obsession with morality and their fear of Hollywood to such an extreme, they've lost compassion for their fellow man. Many of them have become homophobic, disdainful of the poor and cruel toward any human who does not meet their rigorous standards -- while ignoring their own pride -- the character defect which annoyed Christ the most! The news footage of looting in New Orleans gave them fuel for their bigotry. Can't they see that the economic system that created such a wide chasm between the haves and the have-nots has created Les Miserables! A culture that constantly advertises salvation through Nintendo, i-Pods and Plasma TVs creates an insatiable craving for stuff. Yes looting is bad, but looting pension funds is worse. Looting votes through Gerrymandering is worse. And to think the minimum wage is still only $6.75 an hour, while Congress votes lifetime pensions for themselves up into the six figures. Reaganomics and the trickle down theory didn't work because of the greed of the corporate executives, who take such a large slice of the pie they have to eliminate the actual workers! Churches are not tithing enough to support the needy. A society must take care of the "least among us." Then we will see amazing things begin to happen. And I'm not talking about a welfare state, by the way.

A lot of you already know about the power of this group of pharisees: they are very organized and already have millions of Americans manipulated into this self-serving, rapture-obsessed, un-Christlike agenda -- and this is how they took our beautiful country, our beautiful democracy away from us. You have to read this article. And our president, calling himself a Christian -- had a perfect chance to show our enemies how Christianity works, but he chose the opposite path.

** The idea of "Christians" obsessing about the rapture and spurring on war in the Middle East (all Jews have to be in Israel) to hurry along Christ's return (and subsequently destroying all Jews in Israel) is an absolutely dangerous, sophomoric, misguided idea. Certain of these fanatics and evangelical preachers should quiet their hearts and go within -- where God is -- to find the truth. And if fundamentalists take the bible literally, FUNDAMENTALLY -- then why not take Christ's very words literally? LOVE ONE ANOTHER. The kingdom of heaven is within. Looking down on sinners is not your job. (Even though, yes, I am looking down on you, which is not very Christian of me, I know.) But I can honestly say I've cleaned house and conquered a few of my major demons. I was a complete idiot before -- selfish and greedy. And I work on those things still, every day. Character change is it's an inside job. And pride (the sins of the Pharisees) is the sin Jesus spoke about more than any other sin

There's a great website I discovered called Slacktivist:Left Behind with insightful, hilarious critique of the LaHaye-Jenkins "Left Behind" books, which I think are not only sophomoric and badly written, but false and dangerous! By the way, there was a time when I was a Republican -- but that was before I got sober. It was when I was in my ego-stage: very self-centered and full of myself. And in fear of losing what I had or not getting what I wanted. As we shed our ego, we become more compassionate toward others, more concerned about social justice and saving our earth and helping other flawed humans -- not judging them, but helping them. There's a famous cartoon I saw shortly after the election: I can't remember the exact words, but two pot-bellied rednecks are standing around drinking beer, happy with being red: "Well, my son lost his legs in Iraq, veteran benefits got cut, lost my pension plan to Enron, got laid-off down at the plant, they canceled my health insurance, Bush vetoed stem cells which would have saved my daugther's life from brain cancer -- BUT I'M SURE AS HELL GLAD THOSE TWO GAYS DOWN THE STREET CAN'T GET MARRIED!" By the way, the marriage contract is a private contract between two individuals. How does it hurt anyone to let two souls honor their monogamy by allowing them the dignity any other human has a right to? I am heartsick at the bigotry I see in America today.

276 comments:

  1. Anonymous5:43 AM

    Holy geez Lydia, it sounds like your ready to declare war on all this injustice. I agree with you for most of it and I would be very impressed if you could put a 1% dent in any of it. Nevertheless, I do support you.

    If I meet ten Christians, I consider myself extremely lucky if one turns out to be half real; my experience has shown that they use this title as a disguise for their own benefit only.

    Johnny moo moo
    aethist

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:20 AM

    Lydia -- everything you say here is the truth. I used to be a Christian, but I left the church because of what I saw there. You're right, these people are the exact pharisees Jesus talks about. But there are some really good people who love Christ also. Keep telling the truth and maybe you can bring some people back.
    James

    ReplyDelete
  3. outSTANDING article!

    I would normally want to say something poignant here, but you said it all already, and you said it right.

    All I can say to that is amen sister, amen

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous11:18 AM

    I agreed with you until you compared African-Americans with gays. There is no comparison and I am offended you went there.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, it wasn't long ago when it ws considered immoral, if not illegal, for blacks and whites to marry one another. The gay marriage thing is really no different, for all intents and purposes. The point being that it should be up to two individuals to determine if they should marry. It shouldn't be up to others to determine that for them, regardless of sex, race, religion or anything else.

    I've always found the uproar over gay marriage to be utterly silly. Whether or not gays can marry each other has no bearing whatsoever on heterosexual marriage. That's why some of these amendments that are called "The Defense of Marriage Act" are sheer nonsense.

    I sometimes will kid my wife that, once gay marriage is allowed, I'm going to divorce her and marry that handsome hunk down the street. Could anything be more ludicrous?!

    I have a number of friends who happen to be gay or lesbian. Why should I be legally entitled to marry someone because I'm a man and I'm heterosexual, but they are not allowed to do so because the person they want to marry is of the same gender? Does it somehow impact me if they CAN marry? No. I'd be happy for them.

    I once heard someone say that life is too short and too hard for most people that why should it matter WHOM we should happen to fall in love with. Just finding that person and committing to that person should be a wonderful thing.

    Yet, as we know, there are people who feel threatened by it for some unknown reason. It's sad.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Marc Olmsted2:06 PM

    A friend of mine observed that gays speak about Republican in laws in the same way Republicans in laws speak about them. In hushed tones, with a sense of shame, comments like "as long as they don't try to impose their lifestyle on us..." pepper the conversation.
    If you'd like a Christian church you'd feel comfortable in, please check out MCCLA.org. Trust me.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh my goodness - I agree. 'let the one without sin cast the first stone.' 'Jesus is to be the only judge so judge not unless you too shall be judged' oh and one of my other favorites that people don't bring up to often...You all have got to check this one out (The version of the Bible I have is "Children's Bible New Revised Standard Version")from Revelation 22: 18-19
    "18
    I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book;
    19
    if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person's share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." So with that said I wonder why people keep trying to add more to it than what is said. Interesting ay?

    Good night all. Good night sweet Lydia.

    Your friend,
    Rene

    ReplyDelete
  8. Lydia:

    The other night it disturbed me to learn the trouble Coulter has caused for you and your family and later that evening I almost went to bed without reading a bit from the bible, but my soul kept being urged to read a little scripture before going to sleep. I sat up and prayed asking God to show me what He wanted me to read. I opened up the Bible at random and it just happened to open up on Proverbs Chapters 12 & 13. Granted I'm reading from the Children's Bible, but its awesome. You should check it out when you have time. To me it was like God was saying, 'Son, I know you're concerned for Lydia and her family - and have watched her career flourish since Too Close For Comfort, but don't worry she & her family are in good hands - I'm watching over them.' It was also like He was agreeing that you're on the right track with all that you're doing too, because it's all for the good and well-being of mankind. I found it to be very moving and inspirational. Truly awesome. Well, it may seem odd to you but I just had to share that with you.

    Take care and good night again. :D

    Rene

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous10:16 AM

    Jesus Christ Lydia, take a break,up the Prozac or Paxil.Better yet read Ann Coulter's new columm.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Actually, if I were you anonymous, I would break the pills in half next time.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous3:40 PM

    Even though I do not agree with all of Lydias beliefs, her ultimate intentions are that of a decent and good human being. Sometimes war may be necessary and unavoideable, however, peace is certainly not a dirty word.

    Guilty of nothing except standing up for what she believes in,(right or wrong) I suggest it is extremely low and infantile to place attacks upon her personal character by bringing up references to her past and attempting to relate this to who she is now.

    Johnny moo moo
    80's child
    atheist
    war historian

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous12:15 PM

    Lydia, you're awesome and one of the true Christians that I wish there were more of.

    I think you really hit the nail on the head when you said you were a republican but that was when you were full of yourself. That sums them up perfectly to me.

    I just want to add that this "war on Christmas" is the biggest joke I've ever heard.

    I think Jesus would be the first to wish everyone happy holidays because he wouldn't want anyone feeling left out or like they aren't as good as Christians. HOWEVER, I say Merry Christmas and will continue to do some simply because it's what I'm celebrating, and if I have a Jewish friend or one of another faith I'll wish them a happy holiday greeting however they wish it to be.

    Its said, but there is no CHRIST in christian anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous1:19 PM

    Actually I agree with the republicans on the Gay issue....I mean isn't it obvious that homosexuality is a choice. And that these people are just attention seeking when they decide to come out because they crave negative attention? I agree that the biggest threat to my family is that Bob and Fred in NYC want to get married, and not that my 7 year old autistic son can't get the services he needs in this Christian nation. So if I have to declare Chap 13 just to pay my other bills...so be it if it'll keep those 2 from getting married.

    Sorry...i just needed to be a sarcastic smart ass for a day

    Happy Festivus!!!

    KAN12

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous6:11 PM

    Lydia I can't tell you enough how your words are changing my life. I had lost hope of ever finding a Christian who made sense -- they are all so focused on promoting their version of God it's very pushy and "holier-than-thou" with a lot of shoulds instead of love and acceptance. A lot of the mega churches seem to be into group-think and they are so in love with "being a Christian" they totally miss the point -- but I will say some churches do a lot of missionary work. So I applaud them for that. Keep telling the truth, the world needs it!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous6:51 PM

    Lydia : Being its very close to Christmas, I would like to suggest that you share some of your humorous side with us ........afterall, you are a comedian. And the "About" section does mention comedy.


    But be careful, I am a heckler.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous8:53 AM

    Rene, it really bothers me when someone drags out that old "judge not" saw. If you read the entire passage Jesus is not telling us NOT to judge, (to the contrary) he is telling us TO judge, but to do it FAIRLY.
    (the part about removing the mote from your own eye)

    As to gay marriage, Jesus said love the sinner hate the sin. And homosexuality is condemned as sin. So by advocating gay marriage you are not only condoning sin but actually promoting it above gods laws. I guess we're all so Christian now we can tell Jesus where he went wrong?

    As to the war on Christmas or Christianity, all I can say is may you all be blessed by the "Holiday Infant".

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous8:37 PM

    It seems to me that homosexuality and abortion are the two hot-button issues that "Christians" care about: the Pat Robertson-type Christians. Does it seem strange to anyone that these people organize protests about homosexuality and abortion, but don’t call for protests and marches against greed, gossip, divorce, adultery, lying or self-righteous pride? Maybe it’s just me. (From Lewis B. Bell III - bible.org)
    It’s clear in the Bible that the message of Jesus and his followers to the sinful world is one of love and forgiveness, not one of condemnation and confrontation. Jesus himself said he did not come to condemn but to save. He never told us to judge others EVER.
    But you might be saying, “Yes, the message is all about forgiveness. But these people don’t know that they need forgiveness and they won’t know unless I tell them.” You know what? The Bible says that job belongs to someone else. (Leave judgment and vengeance to God)
    It’s the Holy Spirit’s job to convince people that they are guilty and need forgiveness. That’s not our job.
    We should worry about our own sins and stop looking at everyone elses'. In fact, until you have no sin, you have no right to judge another -- and that's what Christ meant when he said, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone." No one in this earthly life is without sin. We are to love our fellow man, especially our "enemies" -- those sinners we are so focused on.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous8:48 PM

    Hey to Anonymous who said Jesus said to Judge others: WRONG!! I don't know what Bible you're reading but no where does it say you are to judge others. That's just your way of justifying intolerance. And in fact, the only people who will not be saved are the ones who are condemning others: the ones who are unkind and exclude groups they don't approve of and who judge! The ONLY people Jesus kept mentioning as being completely full of sin were the religious leaders who were in power - BECAUSE THEY JUDGED OTHERS AND WERE HYPOCRITES, AND WERE UNKIND TO THE SINNERS!! In case you are missing something: Jesus hung out with the sinners, prostitutes, thieves. They were the ones in need of help and their hearts were open. The leaders hearts were too hardened by arrogance, power and wealth.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Uh, I'm reading the Christian bible. Which one are you reading?

    "Hypocrites! You can discern the face of the sky and of the earth, but how is it you do not discern this time? Yes, and why, even of yourselves, do you not judge what is right?"
    Luke 12:56

    “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.”
    John 7:24

    Basically, the lord is saying not to judge HYPOCRITICALLY. Only Jesus can discern what is in the hearts of men, but IF done righteously we are to judge actions. We are to judge in the spirit of helping, not of being vindictive or mean.

    Do you think you will be saved when your "tolerance" allows your fellow man to continue to sin and not receive the kingdom of God?

    Yes, many of the religeous leaders at that time were hypocrites. Not because they judged others, or were "unkind" or even wealthy, but because of their SELF righteousness and arrogance, they judged HYPOCRITICALLY.

    Hence the part about removing the plank from your own eye before attempting to remove the speck from your brothers eye.

    Jesus "hung out" with sinners, protitutes and theives in an attempt to bring them to salvation.
    How will you do this when you will not see (judge) their need?
    And if you cannot see clearly (righteously) you can't help them anyway, and hanging out with them will do your spirit more harm than good.

    And if you can't swallow that, try this:
    Sin is evil, the opposite of good.
    Where in the bible does it say we are to "tolerate" evil and allow it to grow in our midst?

    Furthermore, another saw I get tired of hearing about is "intolerance". With the exception of a very few psychos who seem to be in every group, most of us are VERY tolerant.
    Tolerance, to tolerate, to put up with something we don't accept. We don't kill everyone we disagree with or even put them in prison and torture them. I'd say we're VERY tolerant. What we refuse to do is openly ACCEPT groups we disagree with, and therein lies the rub eh?

    Your idea of "tolerance" is fascist.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Uh, Eric? Exactly what translation of the Bible is the "Christian" version?

    As per the most common translation, the King James translation, we have the following.

    The most famous of Christs teachings, hands down, was the Sermon on the Mount.

    From the Sermon on the Mount, we have the following little gem;


    JUDGE not, that ye be not judged.


    Matthew 7:1

    ReplyDelete
  21. And who can forget;

    For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    Matthew 7:2

    ReplyDelete
  22. Then of course theres those pesky Beatitudes. Christians hate those pesky Beatitudes.

    Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth

    Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

    Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.


    You know, all that crap. Check out Matthew 5.
    It's a hoot.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Cause in Matthew 5, you'll find lil diddy's like this oldy, but goody,

    Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

    But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil:

    but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also


    Matthew 5:38 - 39

    Man, Christians really hate this one.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Fact is, Christ did not say one word, not one, about homosexuality, or pre-emptive war, or any of the hateful doctrines coming out of the mouths of the leaders of today's Christian Right movement.

    The Historical Jesus was a pacifist, and he believed in trying to find peaceful solutions to difficult problems.

    He condemned the zealots and resistence movement, and urged co-oporation with the Roman army occupying Israel's homeland. He felt that with patience all things would work out over time.

    Of course, that didn't work out too well for him with that whole, crucifixion thing and all, but that's not the point is it?

    The point is, if your gonna call yourself after his name, then at least get it right.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous4:16 AM

    Eric - If its your job to tell everyone in society that they are sinning, then you have a full time job. I hope you're outside Las Vegas or parts of Kentucky in front of the strip clubs with picket signs. Do you also disapprove of half-naked women on TV in lingerie ads & music videos? I hope you are boycotting Paris Hilton and Carl's Jr. And since divorce is the only sin (besides pride & tax collecting) that Jesus ever mentions -- why aren't you boycotting divorce or the IRS or Garth Brooks, Amy Grant, Pamela Anderson, Britney Spears & Jessica Simpson who are all divorcing and remarrying constantly and making a sham out of marriage -- and all the stars like Jessica Alba who pose suggestively on the covers of FHM magazine? Not to mention Playboy. Why don't you boycott those publications for promoting porn and soft-porn for our teenage daughters?

    ReplyDelete
  26. worf,

    If you're gonna quote it, quote the whole thing:

    "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye" (Matthew 7:1-5)

    Then try to understand what it means:

    Read this again carefully. Notice that it is addressed to a hypocrite!-not to those who sincerely want to discern whether a teacher or teaching is true or false to God's Word. And instead of being a prohibition against honest judgment, it is a solemn warning against hypocritical judgment. In fact, the last statement of this Scripture commands sincere judgment-"Then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." If we take a verse or a part of a verse out of its setting, we can make the Word of God appear to teach the very opposite of what it really does teach. And those who do this cannot escape the judgment of God for twisting His Word (2 Peter 3:16). Let this be a warning to us never again to take a text of Scripture out of its context.

    Many who piously quote, "Judge not," out of its context, in order to defend that which is false to God's Word, do not see their own inconsistency in thus judging those who would obey God's Word about judging that which is untrue to the Bible. It is tragic that so much that is anti-Scriptural has undeservedly found shelter behind a misuse of the Scripture just quoted. The reason the professed church of Christ is today honeycombed and paralyzed by satanic Modernism is because Christians have not obeyed the commands of God's Word to judge and put away and separate from false teachers and false teaching when they first appeared in their midst. Physical health is maintained by separation from disease germs. Spiritual health is maintained by separation from germs of false doctrine. The greatest peril of our day is not too much judging, but too little judging of spiritual falsehood.

    ReplyDelete
  27. and to anonymous,

    I suppose you think since I can't be everywhere I should be nowhere?
    Sometimes you just have to start with your own little corner of the world my friend.

    And I wasn't trying to come off as arrogant, that would be against the point I was making.
    And the point is we MUST judge evil in order to keep ourselves separate from it.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous11:41 AM

    Eric: I am no bible expert, but your point seems to make sense, however, everyone has their own version of what they believe evil is, therefore, can anyone accurately DEFINE evil?

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  29. Eric,

    I have read it. In fact, unless you are ready to start expounding on the Historical Jesus, then I would not even go there.

    I know what it means, and I paraphrased for a reason.

    Christ made it clear that judging each others actions was the mistake, which is the beam and mote reference, which I could go on and on about.

    Judgement was something to be used sparingly with regards to each other, and unrighteous judgement was condemned.

    For instance, criticizing someone who is gay, while endorsing the killing of tens of thousands, now theres a good mote and beam comparison.

    And that is what Lydia was saying in her blog, quite clearly I might add.

    As for me knowing the Bible?

    You probably still think Jesus was a carpenter. :|

    Go back and read my earlier posts in earlier blogs, and you will find out what I know about the Bible.


    I have read your post twice, and I guess you are saying that we shoud be able to "discern" evil, somthing Jesus did expound on in length.

    In fact, he gave us a foolproof method of "righteous discernment" or judgement.

    Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

    Matthew 7:20

    And the fruits of men like George Dubya Bush, are evidence enough for me of his evil.

    So see, we agree. I believe we should be able to judge good from evil, and so did Jesus.

    But if your "judgement" skills don't show you the wolf in sheeps clothing Bush and the so called Christians who support him are, then I think you better adjust that beam in your eye a little more.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Oh and BTW Eric, I don't quote anything "piously".

    I am not a Christian, nor do I call myself one.

    I attend no Church, and I have even heard from very reliable sources, that I have a bottom grill reserved at the Fish Fry.

    I'll save a spot for you :|

    ReplyDelete
  31. Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

    Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

    Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

    A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.


    Matthew 7:15 - 18

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous4:14 PM

    Worfeus: LOL big time:) I hope your not saving a spot for me on the bottom grill of this fish fry and I thought you said their were mansions, LOL? And would I ever like to know who your reliable sources are?


    Erics statement: " We are to judge in the spirit of helping, not of being vindictive or mean". This seems very reasonable to me.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  33. Yea Johnny,but I've been extra bad.

    I was shootin for medium rare, but I ended up with well done :P

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous4:56 PM

    Ah come on....enough of this Jesus crap! I came here to see some T & A!

    ReplyDelete
  35. Ahh the idiot bar must have just let out. Not you Johnny, see above.

    Johnny, keep in mind I basically agree with that statement, which I thought I said. Maybe in my waxing pompous, I blurred the intent somewhat, but I agree that Jesus expects us to discern good and evil.

    He just said don't worry about finding it in your brother, until you've removed it all from yourself.

    Funny thing about that is Jesus often said things like that, when he knew that the recipient could not possibly comply with the identified terms.

    Remember this oldie but goody?

    Once when the local leaders of the Sanhedrin brought the woman caught in the sin of Adultery, a sin that carried with it the penalty of death under the law of Moses (and in some southern Alabama districts) and asked Jesus whether or not to stone her, he knew it was a trap.

    If he said to free her, then he would be condemned, for only God could forgive sin, and also, it would show he was weak with regards to the Law of Moses.

    On the other hand, if Jesus said to condemn her, then his 'peace love dope' gospel, would be overridden by this one harsh decision, and he could be easily denounced to the masses.

    So, as he was squatting outside of the synagogue, drawing something with his finger, he suddenly rose, and said those famous words.

    let he that is without sin, cast a stone at her

    Jesus knew no one other than him, could comply with that standard, so in other words, he was saying in a very clever way, don't stone her.

    He said the same thing about Judging. He said that when you pull the beam out of your own eye, you can work on the mote in your brothers.

    Of course, the figurative here is sin, and if I since no one is without sin, he's really saying, leave your brother alone.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous7:45 PM

    This Worfeus Character is hilarious. The post that Eric responded to was exactly the same post that Worfeus used to respond to Eric's refutation. Eric kicked your butt seriously.

    Worfeus the only difference between Eric and yourself, is that you have an endless well of "blather" energy. You rehash, rehash, and rehash.

    Then when you keep blathering, you announce yourself the winner.

    I'm sorry....Eric kicked your butt with fact and scripture. He showed how you use it when it's for your absurd arguments, and showed how you denounce or change it's meaning when it's against your arguments.

    ReplyDelete
  37. StevieWonder8:25 PM

    "Christ made it clear that judging each others actions was the mistake, which is the beam and mote reference, which I could go on and on about."

    More blather....Eric answered this in-depth, something you seem to keep ignoring. Taking the scripture out of it's original contexts, switching small words, leaving out entire passages is exactly what he's talking about and exactly what you are doing here.

    "Judgement was something to be used sparingly with regards to each other, and unrighteous judgement was condemned."

    Where does it say "sparingly"? You are making a complete ass of yourself here.

    "For instance, criticizing someone who is gay, while endorsing the killing of tens of thousands, now theres a good mote and beam comparison."

    Lord, another anti-war goon. War casualties does not equal MURDER. If someone can take something out of context like the Bible though, I can sure see how you'd twist meanings of simple words that are available on Merriam Webster online 24/7. Maybe if you do a little reading you will understand the long term benefit here. Also, if you are whining and sobbing now about 2,000 American deaths, imagine what you would have said to FDR.

    "You probably still think Jesus was a carpenter. :|"

    This is just stupid, Eric posted an ENTIRE scripture in it's entire true factual context and you try and insult him (when liberals are insulting - you know you've already won).

    "So see, we agree. I believe we should be able to judge good from evil, and so did Jesus. But if your "judgement" skills don't show you the wolf in sheeps clothing Bush and the so called Christians who support him are, then I think you better adjust that beam in your eye a little more."

    This is the best! Your biblical interpretations of "evil" and "discerning" are just as biased as Howard Dean/Barbara Boxer/Nancy Pelosi's views on foreign policy. "We agree that Saddam was evil, but I'm right and you're wrong, and he wasn't a threat, but I am glad we removed him, we just should have done it in a more peaceful way".

    Here you are no different. "yes we can judge evil, but I am going to falsely characterize GWB as a murderer who blows people away and stands over them grinning while wearing a tee-shirt that says "I've got the power", and it's only okay to judge evil when it is "invented" (kind of like constitional rights to privacy for late-term abortionists) by whining liberals like myself".

    LOL. Worfeus, you are serving as a typical liberal hypocrite, accept now you are just doing it biblically instead of politically. You lie (one of the Commandments-yes those ten rules in the "beginning" of the Bible) about the context of war and compare it to killing in cold senseless blood when indeed you know there are goals in Iraq that have been met.

    Liberals will never change. I suppose I should be greatful that people like Worfeus (Lydia's pet stalker) are ensuring that the 2008 election results will certainly serve in the country's best interests.

    I'm telling you, the internet is driving liberals more and more insane.

    I really hope you are impressing Lydia (better yet I hope it's worth it),...one day, you'll have to answer to God himself. You best start preparing your summation.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anonymous9:12 PM

    Im not 100% sure, but I think that last anonymous post was Ann Coulter; I can tell by the writing style. (T&A)

    Anyways, Worfeus, your last statement was explained very well and I can safely say I agree with this reasoning. We may discern, yet "Judge not, that ye not be judged". COOL, however, cant say Ive met too many people who live by this!

    Life is one big, fat, huge, juicy catch 22 and this has always bugged me, however, theres no doubt this was extremely clever.

    And you never know, the bottom grill could break and you could be flipped up to the top?


    Johnny moo moo
    atheist..."Remember what the doormouse said"?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Well stevie wonder and the one who is brave enough to call himself anonymous, all I can say to that line of crap is prove where I took anything out of context.

    Last time I checked, Matthew 7:1 says, Judge not, lest ye be judged".

    And as for why I talk about the Bible. It's because you nazi sympathizing lunatics put your self up as the holy Christian Right, thats why dimwit.

    Don't come to me unless you got a little more ammo than that.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Oh and BTW steviewonder, anytime, and I mean anytime, you want to debate anything biblical with me, consider WORFEUS at your service.

    In fact, it will be my pleasure.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Oh and BTW genius anonymous, whoever you are, if you really think Eric kicked my butt as you put it, then I suggest you go back and "re-read" his post.

    "Many who piously quote 'Judge not,' out of its context, in order to defend that which is false to God's Word, do not see their own inconsistency in thus judging those who would obey God's Word about judging that which is untrue to the Bible"

    Nice phrase Eric.

    Too bad you didn't say it.

    See that little diddy is actually taken word for word from an article written by a fundamentalist preacher named Franklin G. Huling called Is It Right to Judge?.

    Look it up.

    It's published all over the web.:|

    See the difference between Eric and me is I let people know when I am quoting someone.

    Eric does not.

    ReplyDelete
  42. StevieWonder11:21 PM

    "And as for why I talk about the Bible. It's because you nazi sympathizing lunatics put your self up as the holy Christian Right, thats why dimwit."

    More philosophy from the biblical scholar - Worfeus!

    This is the scripture:

    "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye" (Matthew 7:1-5)

    I'm not explaining it to you - because Eric already did and you've already ignored it once, as you probably - along with every other leftist unrealistic Cindy Sheehan type - ignored every word President Bush said tonight in his address that fully acknowledged every one of your allegations. He was polite, he accepted responsibility as Commander in Chief, he regrets faulty intelligence, but holds accountable EVERYONE including every prominent Democrat who thought the same thing. Now before you flip the coin - he (as well as myself) am still eternally grateful that a tyrant like Saddam Hussein is gone. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of skeletons and bodies recovered from mass graves....those mass graves are not being filled anymore. Iraq voted in majority - INCLUDING SUNNIS - 4 days ago in an overwhelming election to establish true democracy in Iraq.

    "Don't come to me unless you got a little more ammo than that."

    &

    "Oh and BTW steviewonder, anytime, and I mean anytime, you want to debate anything biblical with me, consider WORFEUS at your service."

    For starters, don't flatter yourself. It does not require "ammo" to defeat you in any debate.

    I have debated MANY liberals on many "smear" sites to stand my ground on any issue. Regarding the Bible however, it is clear on every single thread you have copied and pasted specific words to mis-represent God's message. However, your true motivation for doing such is your apparent need to Bush bash (not to mention continued patrolling of this blog) and your antiwar babble. You don't care about "God's" word universally. You care about it to serve your goofy agenda to try and gather some new ground to debate from, and judging by your liberal leaders like Kerry and Dean with their arguments, or liberal college students that throw pies at Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, David Horowicz, etc...or stamp their feet, chant "You Suck", or play loud music to prevent Coulter from speaking, I cannot say that I blame you because I know and realize the base of your party, and their failure to produce a coherent argument that sticks, is failing in the political arena.

    But just like liberal smear of Bush during the war, during Katrina, every trick like Cindy Sheehan and Kanye West ("George Bush doesn't care about black people"), this again is another example of liberals who are still feeling the burn of their sore loss from the 2000 elections.

    Far be it for a conservative like myself to allege a "vast wing conspiracy" from the opposite side (I'll leave that for you liberals to allege to us - as you need it)but I think comparing the case against Bill Clinton (who actually led out with 17 convictions) compared to your baseless nonsense about Bush being a "murderer" is all you need to know to figure out what it is you are trying to do here.

    Using the name of God for a political agenda is shameful. No matter what your biblical knowledge is, you cannot deny the fact that God is watching. You will stand in judgement for this someday, and it's only you in your heart that knows if you are doing this for the pure good of man kind, or to create a new branch of baseless debate for the insane left to balance on. Only you truly know that.

    One thing Ann Coulter was totally right about in a discussion with Alan Colmes (a liberal) in regard to idiot college students that prevent her from speaking by shouting her down, and liberal smear sites that want to oppress speech - was her assertion that liberals like himself, Bill Maher, Joe Lieberman, Zell Miller, and Pat Cadell have all got to go off and start their own party.

    You are destroying liberals and the liberal movement with this nonsense. Anybody with a brain can read througn it. When liberals lose the next Presidential election - it will be because of the arguments put forth like these.

    ReplyDelete
  43. steviewonder11:31 PM

    And before you shoot back your nonsense about "You and the Christian right are saying this and that", let it be clear that I do not see anything on this Earth like war as grounds for Biblical discussion. In other words, I (nor has Jerry Falwell) used the word of God to explain the big picture of why we are in Iraq. Bush got through his entire speech tonight without mentioning anything to that effect. Try rebutting it doing the same thing. I dare you.

    You're setting up a straw man argument - just thought I'd burn it down before you waste your energy building it.

    ReplyDelete
  44. stevieitsawonderyoucanspell,

    That was the longest trip for a short journey. You just said a whole lotta nothin.

    What's the point you are trying to make?

    Are you saying you still think Eric had an actual argument?

    Eric did not prove anything.

    What Eric did, was cut and paste an article from the Internet, without changing a word, and put it up as his words.

    Theres a word for that stevo, and it's called plagiarizing.

    So if your argument, is that Eric, who copied an article from the Internet and put it up as his own words, if thats what you're trying to defend that, if that's what passes for beating me, then your a bigger idiot then he is.

    ReplyDelete
  45. But like I said, anytime you want to debate anything biblical, or anything else for that matter, as long as you are capable of forming some form of a coherent point this time, consider me at your disposal. :D

    ReplyDelete
  46. But look for me in ThinkProgress.org.

    I run under the same handle. My words stay under my handle for all to see, and er...judge.:|

    This place is not the Blog for your type of lowbrow mindless dribble and babble.

    Come in there, and I will be happy to give your clock another good cleaning.

    Only in there slappy, I won't be so nice.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Jerusalem -- President Bush told two high-ranking Palestinian officials that he had been told by God to invade Afghanistan and Iraq and then create a Palestinian state to bring peace to the Middle East, they recall during a documentary on Middle East peace that airs next week in Britain

    Matthew Kalman, Chronicle Foreign Service, Friday, October 7, 2005

    Since you dared and all.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Steviewonder8:11 AM

    "Jerusalem -- President Bush told two high-ranking Palestinian officials that he had been told by God to invade Afghanistan and Iraq and then create a Palestinian state to bring peace to the Middle East, they recall during a documentary on Middle East peace that airs next week in Britain"

    This was an ALLEGED statement ALLEGED by Nabil Shaath (an Arab looney with an agenda - sort of like a liberal). A statement that has been denied by the White House and ALSO DENIED by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas who was also present at the Jordan Summit that occured about two years ago (this is where Bush allegedly made the statement).

    Wow Worfeus, it might have been a little bit more convincing if you had used the name of the goon who actually ALLEGED it, rather than a liberal news reporter who couldn't wait to report it to liberal boobs who are starving for more anti Bush information.

    Eric's post was articulate and informative. He did not use the word of God to politicize anything, he posted the entirety of the verse in it's context and explained it to you.

    YOU ARE THE ONE who misrepresents the Bible to make political allegations against George W. Bush...on the basis of a phony quote no less. Again, I know why you are doing it, it's just another liberal trick, but one that doesn't have much strength.

    Bush has addressed this nation a million times (including last night) since the invasion. Using the speeches he made to us, why don't you search for a quote that he actually said for the basis of your argument here.

    Debating the Bible is easy Worfeus. You have been an excellent teacher at showing how keeping words out, or the actual context of things can serve ANY agenda. That isn't very hard to do, people have been doing it for years. Hell, Muslims thinks that Allah told them to fly planes into our buildings killing 3,000 Americans, so it is possible to use religion to prove a stupid point when you twist it's context.

    But I'd rather focus on the political end of this. The ONLY reason you are here is to promote an anti-Bush cause using a phony quote that he never made in the first place, to give credance and energy to the usual leftist empty arguments.

    Read the part again about Zell Miller, Pat Cadell, Joe Lieberman, etc...all having to go off and start their own parties. You are ensuring that they will never stand another chance to sit in the White House ever again.

    On the basis of what you have shown buddy, it looks like your entire party, let alone you individually, are the ones that need to come up with the ammo. My party is doing just fine.

    ReplyDelete
  49. steviewonder8:35 AM

    "stevieitsawonderyoucanspell"

    I think this is pretty indicative of your true "mission"

    ;-).

    ReplyDelete
  50. Wow, you actually managed to format a semi-coherent sentenece instead of one long one.

    Guess that speak-and-spell is working out for you?

    As for an argument genius I am still waiting for you to make one.

    Your endless rant and ceaseless dribble contain no argument, just another endless stream of right winged babble.

    You say, YOU ARE THE ONE who misrepresents the Bible to make political allegations against George W. Bush..

    Show me where Einstein.

    Show me one instance where I misrepresented the Bible.

    Oh and while you're at it, you may want to address the fact that you just spent 2 lengthy ranting posts testifying to us how Eric supposedly kicked my butt, only to find out that the guy you were supporting was nothing more than a lying little plagiarizer who stole an article off the Internet and posted it as his own.

    And you fell for it. LOL.

    Whether you acknowledge it or not, your 2 posts supporting Eric are in here for all to see.

    See what a chump you are that is, for trying to argue a plagiarzed post.

    I told you before numbskull, I ain't no Christian, so don't expect me to give your dumbass a pass.

    You wanna come after me then you better bring more than some cheap hack with a plagairzed article he cut and pasted off the web, and your long winded republican rants that say nothing and mean even less.

    So far Steve, you are batting zero.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Oh and BTW, if you really are dumb enough to try to argue that the Christian Right are not claiming to be Christians, and that Bush did not openly admit to being a born again, then you're even dumber than I gave you credit for.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Here's a winner though.

    Steve said

    Hell, Muslims thinks that Allah told them to fly planes into our buildings killing 3,000 Americans,

    Yea, kinda like George Bush thinks God told him to go kill Iraqi's?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Steviewonder10:53 AM

    LOL, If you got nothing out of my posts, (well you got nothing out of Eric's) then you are a nut. LOL.

    One that is so far consumed by his own rhetoric that he cannot see past Cindy Sheehan's tie-dyed shirts she wore during the antiwar rallies.

    I proved that your arguments against Bush are phony because it is NOT A FACT that Bush said those things.

    I proved that not only the White House denied such, but also other Arab leaders who attended the summit denied it as well. YOU are the one so hungry for debate against Bush that you are accepting the words of Nabil Shaath to guide your rhetoric.

    LOL, I don't need a pass from you. Stop flattering yourself. You are not one that needs to be "out-witted" by a Coulter/Einstein type. If I cared enough to write an essay on all of your nonsense I would do so. This particular quote from the Bible is all one needs to know to understand your biased poop. Eric may have copied and pasted a THOUGHT of someone else's that articulated his OWN thoughts on it. However, the SCRIPTURE in it's entirely debunks your arguments WITHOUT the commentary on it. The end of it, Eric's post provided more information on the verse and explained it in it's TRUE context, where you only used ONE LINE from the verse to support your line of rhetorical crap.

    Sadly Worfeus, I can tell you aren't a Christian. You're not telling me anything new. A christian would not use pieces of Bible verses to promote liberal rhetoric. LOL.

    But the thought is funny:

    "I'm not a christian, but I'm going to use the Bible to make points"...

    You coming back with insults each time is pretty indictive of how my "numbskull" comments have gotten to you.

    You are a liar! That's it. Just like Bill Clinton. A perfect liberal for sure. You lied about Bush, and the MAIN STRUCTURE of your argument is destroyed with one sentence of fact:

    That Bush NEVER said that, and conservatives are arguing with fact and logic, not twisted Bible verses.

    Do your party some good, and quiet down ;-).

    ReplyDelete
  54. Oh, and I can't forget this lil diddy,

    STEVEO SAID

    "Eric's post was articulate and informative. He did not use the word of God to politicize anything, he posted the entirety of the verse in it's context and explained it to you.?



    LOL, I am afraid Eric suckered you there Stevo and he played you for a fool.

    A chump.

    He cut an pasted an article from the Internet, posted it like he was saying it and you were dumb enough to bite. :O

    In fact, you ate it up, hook, line and sinker

    Yea, you're brilliant. :|

    ReplyDelete
  55. Man, your clock ain't clean enough?

    You just got busted my friend, busted supporting a plagiarized article.

    You can run from it, but you can't hide.

    Eric did not say those things. A guy named Franklin G. Huling did.

    Your friend is busted as plagiarizing, and you are busted as being stupid enough to fall for it.

    ReplyDelete
  56. steviewonder11:50 AM

    He's not my friend you boob, I don't run from the fact that he may of copied and pasted a thought of someone else's.

    (This proves you aren't reading as I stated this in my last post to you)

    What I am standing by is the ENTIRE scripture in it's FULL CONTEXT that you keep erasing.

    You are the one that cannot hook and sink anyone with your factless blather LOL. Eric really got you going and it appeared that I did as well. Haha.

    In order to clean a clock (or anything for that matter) you need good cleaning supplies. Blather is not clean - it's sort of like that air spray that has a temporary cover up scent.

    Learn to disinfect my friend.

    I gave you facts, Eric gave you facts...you are the one running.

    If you stop running, and start acknowledging truth is when and only when your party can be productive again.

    Ya know, truly live up to that "progressive" pitch you types keep giving.

    ;-).

    In fact, what i will do is give you every factual statement made by Eric and myself, and show your responses to them, to show how you have endless dance energy.

    Come on back, and give me some more material to add to it.

    ReplyDelete
  57. STEVO SAID

    "Eric may have copied and pasted a THOUGHT of someone else's that articulated his OWN thoughts on it."

    Stop dude, you're killin me..LOL.

    It's too funny to watch you backpedal trying to support plagiarisim.

    He cut and pasted an article dimwit. It was not his thoughts, they were a someone elses.

    And if like you are trying to say now, that those words represented his own, then like an honest person would do, he should have quoted the actual author's name, not affix his name to it to make it look like his work.

    He got caught in a dirty little lie.

    And you got caught believing it, and now you're caught trying to defend it. LOL.

    BLOG's have little tolerance for people who plagiarize.

    Once you get caught openly attempting to deceive everyone by posting someone elses words as your own, then you're pretty much through.

    BUSTED :D

    ReplyDelete
  58. Oh and BTW genius,

    Here is the scripture you keep referring to that Eric supposedly blew me away with.

    "Hypocrites! You can discern the face of the sky and of the earth, but how is it you do not discern this time? Yes, and why, even of yourselves, do you not judge what is right?"
    Luke 12:56


    “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.”
    John 7:24


    Eric posted two completely separate verses with no surrounding verses like you keep claiming.

    THEN I SIMPLY POSTED

    JUDGE not, that ye be not judged.

    Matthew 7:1

    For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    Matthew 7:2

    You will find I quoted word for word.

    Prove to me and everyone else just where I misquoted here Einstein.

    Just because Eric the Plagiarizer decided to post the next 3 verses, does not mean I misquoted the first 2.

    I quoted verse 1 and 2 and I quoted them accurately.

    Eric simply quoted the next 3 verses.

    How that constitutes kickin my butt, is a principle that you just can't seem to clearly articulate.

    See your argument is little more than a red herring, a non argument dimwit. You got nothin.

    Prove me wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Steviewonder1:45 PM

    "Prove me wrong."

    Eric already did! He showed the verse (s) in their full context - IN ORDER - to show what the teachings were gearing toward.

    Simplest words here: "If you are going to judge, make sure you're living by the standards you are setting forth".

    People are allowed to use other's words to articulate their own opinions. I could use one of many of Ann Coulter's one-liners to drop three of your blather posts in ten seconds or less. You're allowed to do that.

    You're doing it right now! Using the Bible to make a political NON EXISTENT point.

    What you keep ignoring is that your ENTIRE structure for this whole argument is destroyed BY pointing out the fact that GEORGE BUSH NEVER factually said those things.

    You are using an allegation from an Arab who is nutty. I know your people are prone to taking the word over Arabs as opposed to fellow Americans, but with reasonable thinking types, it does not work.

    You insinuating that I support plagiarism is the same thing as saying that George Bush is a murderer.

    I love now, you have decided yourself the "Blog Monitor" (ever hear of the expression "Get a Life"?) by asserting what is and what is not acceptable as Blog-friendly material LOL. You are so funny....is this the "meaning" of your life, or the pinnacle of your stature? Well, I guess it's a start.

    You can call Eric a plagiarist if you would like, but the fact is, he pasted an entire context of Bible verses to prove that you were either A.) Missing something or B.) Purposely withholding from us to cover up the true context. I can only hope it is A. because simple error is okay, but to purposely manipulate the word of God is not only greasy and low, but it's also blasphemous. You will answer for this one day.

    You can paint it all you want to produce your blather as compelling truth in regard to churning out ridicule to "murderous Presidents" and the "clock-cleaning" of individuals who have shot down every one of your arguments.

    I can go all day though Worf, this is fun for me. All I have to do to stir you up is mention fact. I have not avoided ONE THING you have said.

    You are clearly a liar in your respresntations of the Bible, and will stoop to such levels to produce more liberal bile :-).

    Just don't cry when Hillary loses in 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  60. LOL, too funny. But unfortunately for you the posts do not agree with your assertations.

    I made it clear early on, that I do believe Jesus did expect us to judge good from evil.

    WORFEUS SAID 29 POSTS AGO:

    "So see, we agree. I believe we should be able to judge good from evil, and so did Jesus."


    The print dosen't lie.

    And that was never my argument.

    ReplyDelete
  61. But judging good and evil, is not the same as judging each others personal sins.

    Here are the other 3 verses that supposedly kicked my butt.

    And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

    Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye


    See, it's that then that's the bitch of the bunch.

    Jesus knew that no one here is without personal transgression.

    All were sinners according to him.

    In fact, he had used this technique before, the no win scenario, where the standard overides the act itself, a common strategy utilized throughout hebrew idioms in the Torah, something I learned in 1979 when I was studying the Masoretic text at the feet of one of the finest theologians I have ever known, from one of the finest theological seminaries in the world, Catholic U, right here in DC.

    He even used the exact same technique when defying the elders who had brought the women caught in the act of adultery before him for judgement and a good stoning. He knew if he answered either way they would have him in a trap.

    Let her go, and he's trying to forgive sins, an act that was considered to be reserved for God alone (later on he admitted that he could forgive sins, but now was not the time), or if he answered to stone her, then his new peace, love dope good news gospel was just a sham.

    So, he instead gave them a standard they could never meet. He said, "let him that is without sin cast a stone at her" and watched as the rocks dropped.

    He knew that no one is without sin.

    Giving us the task of pulling the beams out of our own eyes before pulling the mote out of our brothers eyes is just a clever way of saying, don't worry about others worry about yourself.

    It's quite simple actually. You're just way out of your league.

    ReplyDelete
  62. steviewonder2:20 PM

    LOL.

    Why do you ignore? This is the same thing you are doing with Bush. You are literally MAKING UP arguments on my side to refute.

    I do not contend that you ever said that(though i'm sure you will drone on for another 5 posts about how you "called me on it" and "cleaned my clock" when indeed I never insinuated what your thoughts were to what your interpretation was in terms of what Jesus thought regarding judgement and evil.).

    WHAT I AM arguing with you about is your bold face basis of a crap argument. The entire foundation of your argument rests on the idea that GWB said "God sent me to Iraq" and that conservatives are "christian conservatives" that believe that God is the reason when indeed MOST of us are not advocating that at all.

    Your only proof - thus far - has been a copy and paste of a liberal journalist who was quoting Nabil Shaath who's ALLEGATION was debunked and denied by the White House and other Arab leaders.

    I'm also arguing with your "full context" theory of the Bible. You clearly took a PIECE of this section of the Bible without providing ALL of the context to prove something wrong.

    You, my friend, are the one who got YOUR clock cleaned, and I know you can't stand it. But I'm telling you, the sooner you admit that these assertions of yours are claims made only by a scholarly "boob" are flawed and opinionated to serve the wacky left's agenda, the sooner your mind will open up to learn more - so that you can either A.) Convert to the common sense party or B.) Start to gain the ability to at least debate them honestly with unique substantial thought.

    F for effort.

    Sorry Worfeus.

    Don't give up. I pray honestly that your heart is in the right place and that your first name is not really Mohammed.

    ReplyDelete
  63. WHAT I AM arguing with you about is your bold face basis of a crap argument. (is this a sentence? If so, what is it's meaning?)


    The entire foundation of your argument rests on the idea that GWB said "God sent me to Iraq" and that conservatives are "christian conservatives" that believe that God is the reason when indeed MOST of us are not advocating that at all.

    Actually no it does not. I never discussed Dubya until far after the argument was made.

    The argument was about whether or not Jesus said to Judge or not Judge. That's where I came in.

    Scroll up moron.

    Like I said bozo, the posts don't lie.

    ReplyDelete
  64. But if you really want to come in here and argue that George Dubya Bush does not quote from the bible, particularly from Christ,albeit paraphrased, then by all means say so.

    I would love to here you tell me how Bush did not taut his Christianity, and did not woo the Christian Right, and how John Ashcroft wasn't a half baked loon who thought he could speak in tounges, etc.

    By all means. I am all ears :D

    ReplyDelete
  65. Here, let me get you started.

    "The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries"


    President James Madison

    ReplyDelete
  66. That oughta gitcha goin :|

    ReplyDelete
  67. Or how about this?

    Can you say, Faith Based Initiatives?

    That oughta get you cranked up.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anonymous3:08 PM

    Everything must have some form of balance and I vehemently stand by this. As I have stated previously, there are no absolutes - If there were, the world would be a perfect place.

    To say: "Law is an exact science" would be incredibly unbalanced. Could law ever be an absolute?

    To say: "Never judge until you are perfect" is also incredibly unbalanced and is certainly no absolute. THERE MUST BE SOME FORM OF BALANCE IN THERE and I believe Eric pointed this out very well! I myself may judge another in the spirit of making myself a better human being which may actually benefit others as well. For instance, I will point out to my daughter that the guys sitting over there on the bench pushing needles into their arms are a bunch of lowlives. I am judging ,but, am I judging for the wrong reqasons?
    In other words, how am I to learn if I am not allowed to judge until I am perfect? Therefore, the question must be: What is the appropriate and civil way of judging?

    Although I have no absolute, I suggest that if someone is going to judge for whatever reason they feel justified, that one sits down and judges him/herself afterwards and silently points out their own imperfections. To judge silently in the spirit of improving oneself positively is also realistic. And to judge in the spirit of helping, not of being vindictive or mean is even better. However, to simply judge others vindictively, while not examining oneself, is truly evil.

    Some forms of judging may be good, while some other forms just plain suck. Hence, balance.

    Johnny moo moo
    aethist

    ReplyDelete
  69. Wow!, did I start all that?

    Worf, you'll have to excuse me. I'm a little new to "blogging". However, you are correct on one thing, I should have attributed the quote to the author. And Stevie is also correct in that I'm not quite the wordsmith you or he seem to be. I found that passage and it articulated my thoughts more accurately than I felt I could. Sorry, my bad.
    Stevie is also correct on another point though, It may not have been my words but that doesn't make them any less valid. Maybe it makes them even more valid since the person who wrote them is a biblical scholar and I am not.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Well Johnny, I never said Jesus said we should not discern good and evil.

    Go back and read what I said.

    I did post what Jesus said verbatim from the bible, and that was;

    JUDGE not, that ye be not judged.

    Matthew 7:1

    For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    Matthew 7:2


    You will find I quoted word for word.


    I never defended the morality of it, something that keeps being attributed to me, I just posted his exact words.

    All I did was paste a quote from Jesus. Matthew 7:1 and 2.

    And I quoted it accurately.

    Then I was accused of cherry picking it, although I quoted two consecutive verses.

    Then I was accused of getting my butt kicked by Eric, although Eric simply plagerized an online article, because he lacked anything of his own to say, then tried to pass it off as his own.

    Acknowledging that BTW does not excuse it.

    And it's hubris to try and defend that type of plagerisim.

    The question was about what Jesus said, and Eric, who you seem to think explained something well, just copied an article he found on the Internet, and posted it to try and sound smart.

    What everyone is giving Eric credit for saying is actually taken word for word from an article written by a fundamentalist preacher named Franklin G. Huling called Is It Right to Judge?.

    Look it up.

    It's published all over the web.

    So if that's what passes for honor, integrity or literary victory with you is this, then so be it.

    But it won't pass with me.

    ReplyDelete
  71. You know, it's difficult to debate 3 people at once.

    1 of whom plagiarizes other peoples work, and 2 others who think this type of behavior passes for ethics.

    Not to mention the fact that there really is no point being made by Steve or Eric, because I never said not to discern good and evil.

    I just gave you a quote from Jesus, and you guys went to town on it.

    Like I said, scroll up.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Anonymous3:46 PM

    Who is this Lydia person and why does she hate Ann Coulter so much?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Anonymous4:00 PM

    An outta work actress who envies Ann's intelligence.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Anonymous4:02 PM

    oh, and she tried to play coy with Ann in an attempt to outwit her and lost...lol

    ReplyDelete
  75. worf,

    geez, get over it. Out of that whole post I used 2 paragraphs of his, and I already apologized for that.

    I'd hate to see how much you whine over the big stuff....

    ReplyDelete
  76. Oh and Eric, don't think I've forgotten you buddy.

    ERIC SAID

    Worf, you'll have to excuse me. I'm a little new to "blogging".

    Yea?

    You new to honesty too there buddy? That a new concept for you is it?

    How about ethics, is that a new one for you too?

    Oh and what about plagerisim? Never heard that word before?

    Hmmmmm.....

    If what you are trying to say Eric, is that you were just born yesterday, well, then ok.

    I must praise you on learning English so fast and be on my way.

    But if not, then don't think using a 3rd graders excuse like "I'm new to blogging" is going to cut it with me.

    You showed me your colors.

    Whether others can see them is their business.

    But I see.

    What's that old saying you guys like to quote?

    Oh yea,

    Fool me once, shame on,,,,er,,you

    Fool me twice,,,,,er,,,,well,,,,

    Can't git fooled agin"


    "heh heh"

    ReplyDelete
  77. James W.4:12 PM

    Lydia Cornell is a humanitarian, a mother, a brilliant writer and comedienne - and ten times the human being Coulter is. And a TRUE CHRISTIAN!!

    In fact, she has had more effect on me with her words than any other Christian I have heard. I had given up hope of ever believing there were good Christians out there. Coulter is full of hatred. It's very sad. I've been silent too long.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Yea, I'd be nice to Lydia.

    I heard she's gonna have the spatchler at the Fish Fry.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Anonymous4:19 PM

    Have you noticed that Ann Coulter and her types attack on a personal level anyone who tries to speak up -- but Lydia, being a class act, never attacks at all? She just points out the truth.

    Guess the truth hurts.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Anonymous4:20 PM

    Worfeus: Sorry! I hate that when I leave important stuff out. You did say to discern good and evil is OK as well as raising some other good points that have excellent substance and I did not forget this. Both you and Eric have raised excellent points that fit together and I sincerely agree with both of you.


    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  81. Wow, uhhh, thanks Johnny. Not sure you're being sincere but ok, works for me.

    Interesting though, Johnny Moo Moo the atheist turned out to be the only one in here tonight with a truly Christian attitude...

    Funny how some people don't need to believe in a God to be good isn't it?

    go figure :P

    ReplyDelete
  82. Worf,

    How about enlightening me on just how you were fooled? Because the words in 2 paragraphs weren't mine they aren't valid? plagerisim? I didn't realize I was up for a pulitzer or a cash reward for that post. Since a pat on the back seems to do so much for you here ya go, I'm S-O-R-R-Y, you're R-I-G-H-T I should have quoted the author.
    Geez, I thought I only broke the rules of "Blogging", but now to find out I've corrupted my eternal soul!
    (how non-judgemental of you, and how tolerant.....)

    ReplyDelete
  83. But as for Eric The Plagiarist alas, I am not so easily swayed.

    It says a lot to me about the character (or lack thereof) of a man, who would try to sneak in someone elses work, so obviously blending it in, carefully and craftily, to try and make it look like his work.

    Then to come in here and try to push it aside with an excuse a 4 year old would use, "i'm new to blogging", like he would have ever told anyone if I had not called him to task on it, to do that is just the height of hubris.

    Unlike what the President thinks, you can't just say, yea, I lied, so? Let's move on.

    The stench of that crap reeks throughout DC, and I ain't bitin.

    Someone may choose to argue my postions in here, but every word I type unless otherwise punctuated or referenced, is directly from my keyboard.

    Thank you Mavis Beacon :|

    ReplyDelete
  84. But alright, in the spirit of Christmas and all, in the name of Johnny Moo Moo, I pronounce thee clean

    Hmmm...did that work? :\

    ReplyDelete
  85. Anonymous5:13 PM

    Worfeus: I certainly admire Eric for coming out and admitting he was wrong.

    Also, how did you know that these werent his words? Just curious? You must really get around.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  86. cause I can smell bs a mile away :P

    ReplyDelete
  87. But you're right, I tend to be a real ratbastard when it comes to all that forgiveness stuff.

    Truth is, Eric was unlucky enough to pull that move on the one dumb stiff unfortunate enough to have read the pious rantings of the good Pastor Franklin G. Huling :(

    ReplyDelete
  88. read that: He googled it.

    ReplyDelete
  89. LOL,

    Whatever buddy. I wasn't the one posting it, remember?

    If I were you though Eric, I'd quit while I was behind, or I'm gonna have to take back my Johnny Moo Moo Forgiveness Rosary Beads. :D

    ReplyDelete
  90. But hey Eric, by all means don't let me stop you.

    If you are now trying to imply that you did not "google it" yourself, then by all means speak up.

    Because if you have read Huling, or heard him preach, then I am curious to hear your viewpoint on Huling as a seperatist.

    Just curious, you know...:|

    ReplyDelete
  91. Anonymous6:09 PM

    Worfeus: Have you ever heard of Anthony B Herbert? He was a Colonel during the Vietnam war. We wrote several e-mails to each other a couple of years ago. Anyways, he wrote about the murder of innocent civilians and his refusal to take part in it; this was his downfall. He wrote his book in 1973 while the war was still going on. He also speaks of how corruption reached up into high levels of goverment. At one point he feared for his life and his family was threatened.


    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  92. No. Then again I stopped reading military books in my teens.

    Not criticizing them, I just grew tired of them, after reading Mein Kampf, lol.

    Seriously though, I saw you were a war buff. When I was young I was very much into WW2 and WW1. WW1 I mostly followed the aces, but WW2 I really got into some of the german armour, and some of the american armour as well.

    And of course as a kid, I religiously read The Haunted Tank, With Jeb Stuart, and Sgt Rock, and of course, who could forget, Han's Von Hammer, Ace of Aces :D

    ReplyDelete
  93. Hunters moon, killers moon....hunters moon killers moon...

    Remember that? LoL

    ReplyDelete
  94. And I have a digitally remastered copy of "The Blue Max" that looks fantastic in my home theatre (Projector, not Plasma).

    Only way to fly :D

    ReplyDelete
  95. ASSOCIATED PRESS 2 HOURS 33 MINUTES AGO - WASHINGTON -

    "President Bush is making selective use of an opinion poll when he tells people that Iraqis are increasingly upbeat.

    The same poll that indicated a majority of Iraqis believe their lives are going well also found a majority expressing opposition to the presence of U.S. forces, and less than half saying Iraq is better off now than before the war."

    AP 2 HOURS 33 MINUTES AGO

    ReplyDelete
  96. Anonymous7:52 PM

    Sorry Worfeus, I had to pick up my daughter at Air Cadets. I dont remember "Hunters moon killers moon" but I remember "Haunted Tank"LOL. That comic was cooler than the Fonz.

    Also, I think your a good JOE. And I value your non christian status.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  97. Hunters moon, killers moon was the little text they wove into the spinning propeller of Han's Von Hammers Fokker DR1 Tripe on two part special issue.

    How I remember that, I do not know.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I think most people will agree that Bill O’Reilly is a strong spokesperson for the Christian Right. At least he preaches regularly from his show.

    Tonight, he provided us this little tidbit of wisdom, showing us just how educated in the Bible, and the things he preaches, he really is.

    He said to his guest, Barbara Walters, that “In ALL Judeo-Christian philosophy, not the religion, the philosophy, there is a common belief in a heaven and a hell, and of free will and that you are free to choose for yourself”

    This is just another example of how the Christian Right who are public at least, like O’Reilly assert facts that they really know nothing about.

    Barbara Walters tried to counter that by saying not all Christian religions believe this. He of course countered saying not the religion (there is a religion called Judeo-Christian? That’s an O’Reilly original), but the philosophy, whatever that means, and asserted she was wrong and this was fact.

    Well Mr. O’Reilly, perhaps you should open that Bible you claim to know, and read about a little Judeo group called the Sadducee’s, who unfortunately do not meet your supposed facts.

    The Sadducee’s were a strong order because of collaboration with Rome, and prospered from around 200 BC until right after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

    The Sadducee’s were a Judeo sect that did not believe in Heaven, and they did not believe in Hell.

    So once More O’Reilly shows us just how much he really knows about nothing.

    But he did end the show with one little gem of wisdom.

    He said who know's, maybe I'm the dummy

    Amen Mr. O'Reilly, amen.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Steviewonder8:21 AM

    Worfeus, The only reason why you worry me is your post of the Associated Press and how Bush is picking and choosing the various victories and failures.

    First of all, he has explained (this is my opinion as well - seeing as this is all happening in Iraq I have to make judgment based on the rest of the results - and of course the success of the election turnout) the desire for soldiers to leave Iraq. The fact is, in that same poll I believe (it was an ABC poll - if not it was another poll - lord all these darn polls) the question of if Iraqis felt that their military was capable now of handling their own job now of dealing with terrorist attacks when they occur...the result was overwhelming that the Iraqi people now believe (as they did not 1 year ago) that their military is strong enough to handle their own problems. Throw that fact in along with Al Jazeera playing weekly various leftist reports hailing from our own country that are labeling Bush and our troops as "murderers" or "terrorists" who invade peoples' homes in "the dark of the night" - or the belief that we are "creating terrorists" (as if these nuts never existed in the first place) - I can see how many of the younger idealist crowd of Iraq would believe that U.S. presence is causing more trouble. But the fact remains, Iraq would have not achieved the above military success without the training of U.S. soldiers.

    The polls are questionable. ALL OF THEM...even the ones that talk in my favor. The only substantial facts we have are the elections, all three of them.

    January 22, 2005: 8,456,266 Iraqis showed up amidst threats of insurgents to partake in their first democrat process ever.

    October 15, 2005: 9,852,291 Iraqis
    showed up amidst overwhelming violence by fearful insurgents that want Iraq to remain oppressed.

    December 15, 2005: We are waiting for the final numbers, but we do know that over 10,000,000 showed this time; maybe over 11,000,000 (the ballots are still being counted). This time the violence was down, and Sunnis overwhelmingly participated.

    The proof of progress in my opinion was the immediate "Al Queda in Iraq" opposition. If terrorists did not think that Iraq had anything to do with terrorism, why do you think they are there? If they thought they could conduct their "business" strictly out of Afghanistan - then why are they fighting so hard in Iraq? All along that was one point that I thought nobody ever made. That in and of itself - though why it does not get reported - or why more people don't discuss it - is enough for me to certify the entire terrorist network's fear of having an Iraq that is much like the United States.

    All of this progress cost us 2,000+ lives. Though, it will save hundreds of thousands of Iraqis from being slaughtered by their own dictator who already slaughtered hundreds of thousands and forced others to live under oppression under various military regimes for the last 48 years. It will improve operations in the Middle East by having a strong ally in the Middle East to join forces in the future and battle other such regimes and networks. Many many lives will be saved. 9/11 (THOUGH IT HAD NOTHING DIRECTLY TO DO WITH IRAQ) itself was a lesson of what has happened as a result of trying to make evil people allies, it doesn't work to rub noses with them, and it does not work "giving peace a chance" with them either.

    Lastly, you seem to throw around the term "Christian right" a lot. If Bill O'Reilly was "wrong" about biblical technicalities then so be it, send him an email, and he answers all of them on his show - even the non-flattering ones. However, why does this make him a member of the "religious right" now? Who is the “religious right” by the way? If do your own Lexus-Nexus and New York Times database searches and see how many articles contain the phrase "religious right" versus "atheist left". Also, pay attention to the type of people that the articles are describing. It’s never the same cadre of folk. Sometimes it’s Jerry Falwell, sometimes it’s a farmer from Kansas who wants lower tax rates (and believes in a higher being). In any case – without their being a clear description of what the “religious right” is, it’s always used as an example to frighten Americans. These days, all it takes to become a member of the “religious right” is to vote “Republican” and acknowledge that you believe in a “higher being”. Though I do not go to church, and though I do not use religion and God’s philosophy to justify war, all it takes is to write one piece in favor of a Republican like GWB to be cast into that same crowd.

    I personally believed that "Christmas" was under attack before O'Reilly even made mention of it (and I don't even go tot Church anymore) by watching a piece on CNN (not Fox news) where they were talking about Boston Common (who receive a Christmas tree from Nova Scotia every year as a gift for Boston's help with the Halifax explosion in 1917). The ACLU and atheist minority of Boston wanted to “Christmas” struck out of it, and wanted to call it a "Holiday" tree. That's when it all started.

    Bill O'Reilly, like me, is appalled every time some corporation caves into this pressure. Art museums are allowed to hang paintings in their museums of men urinating in each other’s mouths and call it "art", but the majority is not allowed to celebrate Christmas as a community - A FEDERAL HOLIDAY - (BTW do you think an atheist will insist on working on the days off they receive for these religious-federal holidays? LOL. Come on, you have to admit...this is the one times of the year when people are actually kind to one another, people smile....it's something that comes from within...the celebration of Christmas.

    Do you think Christmas should be stripped away at the request of the ACLU and atheists just because a few of them feel like they have the right to strip the "rights" away from the majority? If not - I think Bill O'Reilly talking about it on his show is certainly not an issue that can be viewed as "dangerous" or "deceitful". Also, why do you think the left believes that O'Reilly would lie or make something up like that? JUST to demonize the left?

    Okay just be more selective when someone is branded with the "religious right" mark. When it's overstated, it becomes less believable.

    Merry Christmas!

    ReplyDelete
  100. James W.9:38 AM

    MERRY CHRISTMAS LYDIA -- You rock! Like I said before, you get my vote as the most inspirational person I've had the pleasure of reading all year! Keep writing and helping the world.
    Love,
    James

    ReplyDelete
  101. Stevo,

    You asked a lot of "talking point" questions.

    Are you sure you're not in here doing opposition intel for the O'Reilly Factor? LOL.

    Ok, I will answer your questions on everything from polling valditity to how the Grinch is trying to Steal Your Christmas :D.

    I will answer all you ask, if you merely answer just one, simple question of mine.

    What would you do, if the EU invaded the US to enact necessary regime change?

    Understand they are benevolant, only here to help, and plan on leaving as soon as we elect a new President and Congress, from among the candidates approved by our new EU liberators.

    What would you do?


    Answer this one question truthfully, and honestly, and I will answer yours.

    ReplyDelete
  102. P.S Stevo

    Understand that I am not asking you about the likelyhood of any of this happening, the logistics, or the capabilities of the EU. (if you want to get into that, read back a few blogs to read my thoughts on the new Chinese-Russo alliance)

    My only question is what would you do?

    ReplyDelete
  103. steviewonder1:01 PM

    "What would you do?"

    It's hard to answer. Honestly.

    At this moment, if anyone invaded the United States to convert us to anything, I'd fight it, any of us should.

    I cannot honestly tell you what it is like to live under oppressive military regimes though. The horrible parts of World War 2 and the Civil Wars helped to ensure that I can enjoy and never take for granted a true Democracy. A Democracy where you and I have the luxury to debate one another without you or me getting our heads sliced off. A Democracy that allows us to call our leaders horrible names (it's free speech and anyone has the right to do so).

    It's not even so much about Ann Coulter being "right". I agree with her basic conservative ideas. However, she has a right to free speech without having to endure being called Joseph Stalin.

    She gets a kick, as I do, about making liberals go crazy with speech because "we" think the left's ideas are nuts. However, the left has a right to call her "Stalin" and GWB a "murderer" if they choose to.

    If we lived in a country that limited your right to dissent from our war efforts (I.E. GWB has not chopped off your head for dissenting) I would be grateful for the right to have my democratic voice, as you have the right to yours.

    We have so much to be thankful for here in the United States. At the end of the day, if I (and guessing Coulter or Hannity as well, in fact I'd put $$$ on it) saw you or Lydia on the side of the road stranded or in need, even though I think your political views are wacky - the human being in me would kick in and feel the need to "help". The political smear nowadays is now leaving the political arena to personal attacks. But we need to remember that it is political and that more than anything - our country as a whole - must get through this hard time that is a result of decades and decades of ignoring problems with middle eastern leaders, the levees in New Orleans, Social Security, whatever.

    The partisan politics needs to be reserved for debate only - but all of us need to learn how to come together and realize that we are where we are and we need to cut it out and pray for the best.

    I know it was a long answer - a lot of that just came to me as I was writing.

    What would I do? If I was living under a dictatorship - I would be grateful. If it was our democracy and freedom at stake - I'd fight.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Anonymous2:03 PM

    If anyone deserves an especially nice thanx I would have to choose Worfeus. He has shown what appears to be true honor,loyalty, and strength of character defending Lydia and her views.

    Rene simply comes out here and says" I pray for you and your family" and she gets an extra thanx? Heck, I coulda easily said that.

    Rene sounds like that psychologist chick I dated a few months ago who thought the Titanic movie was to violent to watch. Or could not read about the "Great Boston Fire" because it was too depressing.

    My intentions are not nefarious; I just believe the award should be given to the individual who has put forth the most effort.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  105. What would I do? If I was living under a dictatorship - I would be grateful.

    Comment By Steveiewonder

    So if you didn't like are current presidential leader when this invasion took place, you would collaborate with the enemy?

    You are in here, calling yourself a patriot, and you're answer is, whether or not you would defend the United States of America if it were invaded by a foriegn power or whether you would collaborate with the enemy, is that it would depend on who was in charge that day?

    Are you sure you don't want to rephrase that answer?

    Cause I am sure that's not what you meant to say, right?

    Cause you know, they have a name for that.

    Treason.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Well ? I posted 7 minutes after you. Do you want to stand by that answer, or modify it?

    Cause this Americans answer is , I would defend my President, even if he was a stinking lousy dictator, and a tyrant, like 100 Million Americans currently believe George Bush is, myself included.

    See, he may be a tryant, but he's our tryant.

    And no one is going to tell us, America, who to put into the White House, except Americans.

    So sayeth us all.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Stevie Wonder - that was actually very eloquent and beautifully written. I do have problems with this statement you made though:

    If we lived in a country that limited your right to dissent from our war efforts (I.E. GWB has not chopped off your head for dissenting) I would be grateful for the right to have my democratic voice, as you have the right to yours.

    Figuratively, many people have had their heads chopped off for dissenting. People who wore "PEACE" t-shirts were arrested in malls. The Dixie Chicks seem to have vanished (Maybe I'm wrong, but where did they go?) Michael Moore has been marginalized and ridiculed. There's a sinister form of blacklisting going on in America right now.

    If you research it, there are thousands of "swarthy" types (Ann Coulter's term) who are still being held at Guantanamo Bay, who are completely innocent and whose lives have been ruined.

    There are also things about this war that no one is telling us; our trusted leader did not do everything in his power to avoid war -- on the contrary, he chose to ignore every spiritual leader, even the Pope, who came to him and beseeched him to stop and really think this through, or at least slow down. There was no imminent danger: we were ON TOP of Saddamm. The whole world was watching him --and there was no IMMINENT DANGER. Bush RUSHED us to war. You say he didn't create more terrorists? It's only natural: if our country was invaded, more and more people would rise up against the invaders in very violent ways. More and more people in Iraq have joined the "resistance" and are committed to hating us -- more than ever before -- across all Muslim territories. Believe me, we would do the same thing if we were invaded -- even with a despot in power. ("He may be an evil despot, but at least he's MY evil despot.") You have to remember that at the time of Sadaam's reign, there was at least a routine and normalcy to daily life that people had been accustomed to: at least they could get food & housing & electricity. Students, even women, attended universities, had parties, and celebratd birthdays in cafes without fear of suicide attacks. And Time Magazine had a report on Christians in Iraq: they were not bothered or interfered with by Saddamm -- and some even owned laundries and corner markets. I actually read that they owned their own liquor stores! And at the time we were hovering over Sadaam while the U.N. inspectors made their rounds -- no one was going to look away for one second. We had Sadaam on his best behavior, after all -- he knew the world was his stage, and at that point, just to look like a good guy -- he might have actually been malleable enough (given enough time) to be willing to work with us. I wrote a book on Stalin and he definitely had an Achilles heel: his ego. There were many ways to get to Saddam - it would have been interesting trying, in a focused way, while the world watched. Or if not him, maybe his cronies. We could have won people in the underground over to our form of democracy -- by attraction not force. Nothing is ever truly won by force (and I mean that figuratively as well -- until a person reaches his own bottom or sees the light, they resist. You never win them over until they come to the decision inside first. Yes you can chain them up, but to win their hearts they have to want to change and be attracted to the light; they have to want it for themselves.) You think what they have now in Iraq is better? Living in constant fear of walking outside, going to school, buying groceries? Religious extremists blowing up Iraqi children as they blow themselves up -- because they are so passionately against the invaders? The Mideast has always been a hotbed, why on earth did Bush have to invade Muslim Holy land -- when the extremists made it known this was their biggest beef with us? American footprints on their holy land bringing capitalism to the Muslim world. Just like we did with the Saudis.

    I will not be smeared by propagandists like Ann Coulter. I have family in the military (Marine with purple heart) and the American flag flies high outside our house. I love my sons and love all children. We are the most patriotic family I know. This is a heinous, diabolical war, brought on by an unthinking elitist who couldn't even finish his airforce training. I'd like to know why he doesn't send his own daughters to fight. Or why don't any of the other members of Congress who sold this war to the American people.

    American parents who have lost their only children in Iraq have a right to speak out against this evil war without being called unpatriotic.

    By the way, I do not hate Ann Coulter. As a Christian, I am called to hate the sin, but not the sinner. I do not hate anyone. But I will continue to speak out against her tactics. I am praying for her -- and for all of us to have softer hearts.

    Thank you for your understanding.
    Peace on Earth.
    Love,
    Lydia

    ReplyDelete
  108. WORFEUS -- I just read your above comment, and we said the same thing! Only yours was shorter and more to the point. I want to thank you publicly for your wisdom and insightful commentary -- and for being a scholar of the Bible as well as every other book ever written. I am learning a lot from you. You are very truthful -- and you're not afraid of ANYTHING!

    ReplyDelete
  109. TY Lydia, but you said it right.

    That was the best summary of the our position that I have ever, ever heard.

    It should be a Thread.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Anonymous3:26 PM

    All is well:)

    johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  111. Everyone needs to read that one.

    ReplyDelete
  112. "I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."

    James Madison

    ReplyDelete
  113. History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when our constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.

    Justice Thurgood Marshall

    ReplyDelete
  114. Johnny Moo Moo -- thank you for bringing that to my attention; I thanked Worfeus on my blog and also added a few words about you! I really appreciate all of your comments -- even the other side's because they give us a reason to use our minds. Love to all. Drewl, KAN 12, Marc, James W., Steve F., Stevie W. and everyone else is cool too!

    ReplyDelete
  115. “and the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth?

    And the answer is not very damned many.”


    Richard Cheney, August, 1992

    ReplyDelete
  116. Anonymous5:51 PM

    Lydia: Thank you for your kind comment to everyone :D Your still my favorite daughter even though I seen the "Warriors" three weeks ago." Im not your number 1 fan........ just a regular one. Dana Plato had my head spinning as a teenager.

    BTY, did you get my e-mail at info@lydiacornell.com requesting an autographed book of "Sylvia Plan"?

    Also, my offspring wants to say something to you but shes to shy as everyone on here talks so intellectual shes afraid of looking dumb :) LOL

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  117. Well, tell her that never stopped me Johnny :P

    ReplyDelete
  118. "You think what they have now in Iraq is better?

    Living in constant fear of walking outside, going to school, buying groceries?

    Religious extremists blowing up Iraqi children as they blow themselves up because they are so passionately against the invaders?

    The Mideast has always been a hotbed, why on earth did Bush have to invade Muslim Holy land when the extremists made it known this was their biggest beef with us?

    American footprints on their holy land bringing capitalism to the Muslim world.

    Just like we did with the Saudis."


    Lydia Cornell Dec 20, 2005

    ReplyDelete
  119. Anonymous7:12 PM

    Hey Lydia,
    It is only recently that I have become a fan of you; as I am of a younger generation.I really want to see your show "Too close for comfort", I love those 80's sitcoms(All in the family and Three's Company were good ones).I've read some info about you on you're site and I'm quite interested in your book "Venus Conspiracy". I agree,it's sad that girls as young as nine are so concerned with their looks;it shows how much the stars and media of now days can affect us.
    Under your favourite books section, I noticed "The diary of Anne Frank" a book I have read a few times myself,including the critical version.I own the black and white movie from 1956,it's pretty sad.She's a really good writer, her book "tales from the secret annex" includes many of her stories and an unfinished novel,maybe you've heard of it.Another author I really like is Stephen King,he's brilliant.Recently, in english class we read "Of mice and men" overall, it was a pretty good book, the end made me sad though, when George killed Lennie.Another book I suggest is "The Giver". Although it's intended for a younger audience, people of any age can read it.It's actually quite inelligent, maybe your older son has or will read it in the future.
    I'd write more, but I've got to go.
    Bye and Merry Christmas!
    Yours sincerely
    Lil Miss Moo Moo

    ReplyDelete
  120. Thank you Lil Miss Moo Moo - I'm delighted you wrote to me (you sound very intelligent, but never worry about that) and I'd love to discuss books with you in detail sometime. Tell your dad that my book THE SYLVIA PLAN will be out next year, but two other books are coming out first. I will send him an autographed copy and send you a copy of the film we did "Venus Conspiracy" as soon as we get more copies. Happy Holidays! You are so lucky to have a dad who loves you so much. Are you in high school or college?
    xoxo,
    Lydia

    ReplyDelete
  121. Anonymous7:43 PM

    Hi Lydia,thank you for responding.
    I am in highschool, as I just turned fourteen on December 13th. :)
    Bye, and have a nice night!

    P.S Happy Holidays Worfeus :P

    ReplyDelete
  122. Anonymous7:46 PM

    Sorry, I forgot to sign my name on the previous post!

    Lil miss moo moo.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Happy Festivus Lil Miss Moo Moo :P

    ReplyDelete
  124. BTW Lil Miss Moo Moo

    You're 14, and you've read the Diary Of Anne Frank several times and you even own your own copy of the 1956 Black and White movie?

    I can't explain it, but somehow that makes me feel better about things.

    Go figure. :|

    ReplyDelete
  125. Anonymous9:22 PM

    Lydia,

    I believe your quote about Ann was: "... so I suspect she belongs to the Antichrist trinity or the Taliban sect of Christianity." If that isn't hate speech what is?

    You are nothing but a liberal copy of Ann Coulter. All you do is spew hate toward right-wingers.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Hey Steve buddy, not to get off track, and I would still like a clarification of your last statement, cause I know you're no traitor, you just think you are, but I just read this in the news, and I found it pertinent to our discussion yesterday as to the Christian Right influencing our politics. (I know, I know, another AP story, sorry, it's hard to cut and paste the evening news:).

    By MARTHA RAFFAELE, Associated Press Writer
    HARRISBURG, Pa. -

    In one of the biggest courtroom clashes between faith and evolution since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district Tuesday from teaching "intelligent design" in biology class, saying the concept is creationism in disguise.

    U.S. District Judge John E. Jones delivered a stinging attack on the Dover Area School Board, saying its first-in-the-nation decision in October 2004 to insert intelligent design into the science curriculum violated the constitutional separation of church and state.

    The ruling was a major setback to the intelligent design movement, which is also waging battles in Georgia and Kansas.

    __________________________________

    This is not by a longshot the only reflection of religion into politics, but it certainly is very clear example of the Hubris of the Christian Right, who is behind this movement, (wanna argue that point?), who think it's ok to blur the lines between religion, science and government. (don't make me remind you that DOE is part of the Government).

    I mean, were talking about the freakin scopes monkey trials.

    Dosen't that scare you just a little?

    As John Stossel would say, gimme a break. :|

    ReplyDelete
  127. Steviewonder10:49 PM

    Okay,

    Sorry. I was downtown Chicago tonight with family checking out the "Christmas" displays and the tree on State Street.

    Okay Worfeus, I want to clear the confusion about the leaders.

    When Clinton was talking of going to war, I never dissented. When many democratic senators who went with the same intel Clinton used during his administration and Bush used after he was elected, I did not dissent.

    No it doesn't matter who the leader is. You asked about us being invaded, my answer is: If we were leaving in a military regime - as Iraq has for 48 years - I would be grateful..BUT since we have the luxury of living in a true democracy, I would fight it. All people in an oppressed society do not/did not have the voice that you and I have here. So it's a different situation.

    Lydia: I haven't read about the mall incidents. However - when all of the Hollywood types, including Susan Sarandon and the Dixie Chicks fell under attack for not supporting the war, it was not simply because the "right-wingers" were out to get them.

    The politics has played back and forth between parties. In May of 2000, conservative talk show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger (this is just one example of the left's marxism) was attacked by GLAAD for using an unapproved of phrase. Celebrities like Julia Dreyfus and Susan Sarandon got involved with them to make sure sponsors were ripped from her radio show and television show that came out at the time.

    I am explaining this because, at the time, Tammy Bruce (a lesbian liberal & former N.O.W. president in Los Angeles) warned in her book "The New Thought Police" that when the left (in a matter of years from that time) chose to dissent from anything that they were going to suffer a backlash. Susan Sarandon, for example should not have been surprised by this reaction from the other side when it was her time to dissent, and in fact, she and other celebrities are hypocrites for helping to set up that structure in the first place that says "we can destroy someone we disagree with".

    I have a million examples of - during the 90's - how the left has used these tactics to smother diverse opinion on any main social issues.

    That explains - sort of - why the right has now slapped back.

    Next, I understand what you are and aren't willing to put up with out of Ann Coulter. But the last time I checked, it was you who started the whole issue by writing the original piece on her.

    Please correct me if I am wrong, did Ann Coulter write or speak anything of you before this? I watch her a lot on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, I read her column every week. I don't remember her demonizing you, ever.

    Bush - along with the elected Senate - picked up where Clinton left off. The speculations were there that Saddam was developing WMD. There was "fact" that he had supported and harbored terrorists. There was "fact" that he had corrupted the United Nations and France with his Oil For Food scandal - and as a result of that - hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were gassed and stuffed into mass graves.

    Lastly, I'd like you guys to consider the fact that liberals were indeed (as Ann Coulter described in "Treason") enthusiastic about war in the Balkans based on some exaggerated numbers on human rights abuses alone. Compared to Milosevic, Saddam is a monster!

    He's gone now. He cannot kill one more person. These terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are there out of fear. Their "power" comes from fear of oppressed people who were terrified for years to speak out against government policy. I am not being a wise guy by asking this question: but, do you guys honestly recognize how LUCKY you are to dissent?

    In the political arena it is perfectly acceptable for Coulter to call you a traitor. Coulter, however is not calling for the slaughtering of liberals. Yes she will joke about it just to push your buttons, but come on...the woman weighs 90 pounds! (LOL)

    In any case, I am grateful for the discussion. I'll check back again...and I am convinced sitting down and talking with you guys could be done with dignity and without screaming or insulting.

    I am taking the realist view now. IF I did not support George Bush in the beginning (as I did) I would still get over my stuff from the past and move forward with this country because I am telling you - at this point - it's the best we can hope for.

    Goodnight.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Steviewonder10:51 PM

    "If we were leaving in a military regime"

    Replace "leaving" with "living".

    ReplyDelete
  129. steviewonder10:56 PM

    "If we lived in a country that limited your right to dissent from our war efforts (I.E. GWB has not chopped off your head for dissenting) I would be grateful for the right to have my democratic voice, as you have the right to yours."

    What I meant by this statement was:

    If Worfeus was at risk for being beheaded in our current state of government because of his choice to dissent, I would support the invasion IF the invasion of this country was to establish a free democracy to take the risk away from him being beheaded.

    In Iraq, people were killed for opposing Saddam. The US invasion and the establishment of democracy is TRYING to change that.

    ReplyDelete
  130. lydia cornell said...

    "Figuratively, many people have had their heads chopped off for dissenting. People who wore "PEACE" t-shirts were arrested in malls. The Dixie Chicks seem to have vanished (Maybe I'm wrong, but where did they go?) Michael Moore has been marginalized and ridiculed. There's a sinister form of blacklisting going on in America right now."

    That "sinister form of blacklisting" is called "Freedom of Speech" Lydia, people have the right to express themselves on public property, (unless you're a conservative, then it's called hate speech) A Mall like any other store is PRIVATE property. Remember the signs that say "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"? You don't have a right to offend others ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY. The Ditzy Twits and Michael Moore have a right to express their opinion and have done so. Liberals are not the only ones with this right. If they offend me (and others) WE have the right not to purchase their products. Likewise in capitalism, Manufacturers have a right NOT to produce their merchandise if they are either offended by them as well, or if they can't sell enough of their merchandise to make a profit. Welcome to Democracy baby.

    "If you research it, there are thousands of "swarthy" types (Ann Coulter's term) who are still being held at Guantanamo Bay, who are completely innocent and whose lives have been ruined."

    Since you have obviously done the "research" please post it. I know that plenty of innocent people happen to hang out on battlefields just because they have nothing better to do. (A friend of mine is in prison for backpacking through a bank when the safe just happened to explode) I aslo sleep much better at night knowing these people are having gourmet meals and practicing the "religeon of peace" while reading their US goverment issued korans on a sunny carribean island while I have to work my butt off for a living.

    "There are also things about this war that no one is telling us; our trusted leader did not do everything in his power to avoid war -- on the contrary, he chose to ignore every spiritual leader, even the Pope, who came to him and beseeched him to stop and really think this through, or at least slow down. There was no imminent danger: we were ON TOP of Saddamm. The whole world was watching him --and there was no IMMINENT DANGER. Bush RUSHED us to war."

    If when you say "Bush RUSHED us to war" you mean after a decade and several (what was it, 14?) UN resolutions that Saddam ignored I guess I have to agree he certainly "RUSHED" right in. (that's not even taking into account his shooting at our sons and daughters in the northern and southern no fly zones) And UN inspectors can't do a whole lot of good while Saddam's men were running around in front of them moving items of interest before the UN got there. (remember how he had the UN office in Iraq bugged?) -Yeah, we were on top of 'ol Saddam.

    "You say he didn't create more terrorists? It's only natural: if our country was invaded, more and more people would rise up against the invaders in very violent ways. More and more people in Iraq have joined the "resistance" and are committed to hating us -- more than ever before -- across all Muslim territories. Believe me, we would do the same thing if we were invaded -- even with a despot in power. ("He may be an evil despot, but at least he's MY evil despot.")"

    Would we do the same thing? How many on your side would now welcome UN authority over our country? And regardless of what you might think, on the "Evil Despot scale" Bush isn't ranking very high. What would we do if governed by a REAL tyrant? And besides I really like fighting them over there first rather than waiting for them to kill a few thousand more and fighting them here.

    "You have to remember that at the time of Sadaam's reign, there was at least a routine and normalcy to daily life that people had been accustomed to: at least they could get food & housing & electricity. Students, even women, attended universities, had parties, and celebratd birthdays in cafes without fear of suicide attacks."

    Just fear of rape and torture by Saddams evil sons. Or being fed alive into meat grinders for their entertainment.
    And that "food, housing and electricity" was only when and where availible. (offer not applicable if you happen to be a Kurd or Shite) And how about building sports stadiums with "Oil for Food" money while many of his people went without the food or medicine it was intended for? Oh, I forgot, that was America's fault for those darn sanctions....
    WHERE IS YOUR MORAL CHRISTIAN OUTRAGE AT ANY OF THIS???!!!


    "You think what they have now in Iraq is better? Living in constant fear of walking outside, going to school, buying groceries? Religious extremists blowing up Iraqi children as they blow themselves up -- because they are so passionately against the invaders? The Mideast has always been a hotbed, why on earth did Bush have to invade Muslim Holy land -- when the extremists made it known this was their biggest beef with us? American footprints on their holy land bringing capitalism to the Muslim world. Just like we did with the Saudis."

    Although you won't hear it through the mainstream media (the propaganda arm of the DNC) A lot of Iraqis DO think what they have now is better. They're going to new schools rebuilt by our men and women in uniform, many are starting their own businesses and the Iraqi stock market is begining to take off. And the religeous extremists blowing up Iraqi children aren't just "passionately against the invaders", they're against ALL Jews and Christians wherever they exist in the world.

    "I will not be smeared by propagandists like Ann Coulter. I have family in the military (Marine with purple heart) and the American flag flies high outside our house. I love my sons and love all children. We are the most patriotic family I know. This is a heinous, diabolical war, brought on by an unthinking elitist who couldn't even finish his airforce training. I'd like to know why he doesn't send his own daughters to fight. Or why don't any of the other members of Congress who sold this war to the American people."

    This "heinous, diabolical war" ended a evil regime that unmercifully gassed hundreds of thousands of it's own people, stopped it's leaders from throwing human beings into shredders alive, (as one man said, "the lucky ones went in head first") what would Jesus think about us ignoring these attrocities while we sit at home all comfy in our beds?
    AGAIN, WHERE IS YOUR MORAL CHRISTIAN OUTRAGE?
    And look how the middle east is begining to change, Syria has left Lebanon, Khadaffi gave up his nuke program, democratic concessions are being made in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. If he is an elitist, Bush was thinking more than liberals were. Please, tell me what you know about Air Force training. Bush signed form 180 releasing all of his military records from the Pentagon. (Kerry wouldn't by the way) And as far as sending his daughters to fight goes, IT'S A VOLUNTEER MILITARY, he didn't force anyone to enlist.


    "American parents who have lost their only children in Iraq have a right to speak out against this evil war without being called
    unpatriotic."

    Unless they're being disingenuous and unpatriotic. Calling terrorists "freedom fighters" while condemning your own country comes to mind.

    WWII in both the European and Pacific theaters were "heinous and diabolical". Was that America's fault too? Is not the world now a better place because of it? Anyone notice that our strongest allies now are mostly those whose butts we kicked somewhere down the line? Democracy is begining to spread in the middle east now. Becareful what side you're on. Unthinking elitist indeed. Bushes vision may just usher in an era of greater peace than ever if the liberals don't weaken our resolve before the job is done.


    "By the way, I do not hate Ann Coulter. As a Christian, I am called to hate the sin, but not the sinner. I do not hate anyone. But I will continue to speak out against her tactics. I am praying for her -- and for all of us to have softer hearts."

    Lydia please, your tactics weren't any better. You went there trying to bait her and she caught on. Conservatives aren't the dimwits you think they are. You thought you could pull a fast one on her and you got bit. (And you seem to be making a lot more hay of it than she is, I don't hear her grousing about Lydia Cornell in every column, and it's seems to have enlarged your spotlight making you a little more marketable. So relax, you're gonna make more money now than you would've before.)

    -Eric

    ReplyDelete
  131. Wow, stevo, so much false information, so little time.

    Once again you have provided me with a book where a paragraph would do. I just asked a simple question.

    But I will sift through all the rhetoric, and see if I can summarize your answer.

    Let's start with this one, since after all this has to do with my original question.

    STEVE SAID

    "I would fight it. All people in an oppressed society do not/did not have the voice that you and I have here. So it's a different situation"

    So what's a different situation?

    All I asked is what you would do.

    Ok, so you modified your statement to say you will fight even if you though our President was a dictator. Fine.

    Just remember, you don't get to decide what is freedom for another.

    The Arabs have been living under oppressive (by western standards)and cruel Muslim Governments since before the Crusades.

    And just because you think you're more enlightened than those poor arab mongrels, like the Knights Templar did, does not mean you have a right to kill or cause to be killed 30,000 or 100,000 of them, or whatever estimate helps you sleep at night, so you can force your form of government on them.

    Why is it so many right wingers never learn the concept of free will?

    You can't be forced into freedom.

    You have to want it.

    And the Iraqi people were free to either live under Saddam, or change their situation.

    Do yo really think you can force democracy on a nation?

    Don't you think they may have to choose it?

    Your way, I suggest, if their is a devil, your way of forcing a people to live by your decree, deciding for them, that your form of government is superior to theirs, and forcing them at gunpoint to accept it, I think would be his way.

    And if there is a God, it seems that the way of allowing people to make their own choices, their own decisions, for better or worse, to choose to follow a good man or an evil one, would be the way God would endorse.

    And so I ask you now, why if you would fight any outside nation, if it set foot on our shores to enact regime change, no matter how benign,no matter how benevolant, then what do you think gives you that right, but does not give it to the Iraqi people?

    ReplyDelete
  132. And as for you, Eric the Plagiarizer?

    Hubris must be your middle name junior, because I would be too ashamed to show my face in here after being caught doing something so utterly slimy, so sneaky, so patheticlly petty, as to attempt to decieve everyone with a plagiarized post, trying to sound smart, then come back in here and try and act smug telling Lydia not to worry, she'll make money?

    You really think you have the higher moral ground here do you?

    The definition of a man has apparently really changed since I was a young man.

    You don't even deserve a response really. But since you decided to write a freakin book (when will you guys learn to make one or two points or arguments, rather than write a freakin book, oh yea, it's easier to loose the meaning in all the dribble)

    ERIC THE PLAGIARIZER SAID (at least we think he said it:\)


    Would we do the same thing? How many on your side would now welcome UN authority over our country?


    To make a statement like that is not just Hubristic, it's punklike even.

    You were caught lying and now you think the fact you admitted decieving everyone buys you the right to assert that I or anyone on the left would collaborate with the enemy?

    You really have a lot of something.

    I don't know what, and don't get any of it on me, but whatever it is, you definately got a lot of it.

    ReplyDelete
  133. Ask not for whom the bell tolls Eric,
    ______________________________

    Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest
    Jurist Concerned Bush Order Tainted Work of Secret Panel


    By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Page A01
    Washington Post - 2 hours, 46 minutes ago

    A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush’s secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.

    U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, sent a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation. _________________________________

    it tolls for thee

    ReplyDelete
  134. And one more thing Eric.

    You claim we did not rush in. Fact is, everyone in the world thinks we did, except for you, and about a 50 million morons who think Iraq, a country that could not hit the broad side of a barn with a SCUD against it's neighbor Israel, could somehow have harmed us.

    You must be a real coward Eric. Cause I, and no one I know was afraid of any type of attack from Iraq.

    If you're so afraid of a tiny little country, who has no Navy and no long range bombers, and no modern military to speak of, then you must be the biggest freaking coward the world has ever seen.

    You and every other coward that thinks that invading Iraq was necessary to keep their fat, lazy selfish butts safe at night.

    You sold our our countries greatness for your fear.

    ReplyDelete
  135. War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it

    George Orwell

    ReplyDelete
  136. "If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy"

    President James Madison
    Father of the Constitution

    ReplyDelete
  137. I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force.

    I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force.

    And it’s my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq.”


    Richard Cheney, April 29, 1991

    ReplyDelete
  138. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Nice try worf,

    Talk about hubris, just dodge the facts and make up points to argue against.
    Nowhere in that post do I claim to be afraid of Saddam. Instead I pointed to the many attrocities he commited on HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of his own people and asked where the moral Christian outrage is for that on this board.

    I also notice you distorted Stevie's post to serve your own needs as well.
    I believe his point was IF we lived in a totalitarian dictatorship he would NOT fight an invasion for our liberation, but WOULD fight invaders if we lived under a true democracy like we now have. But you knew that.

    You want to accuse me of deception because I post 2 paragraphs from someone else without proper attribution? Fine, but truth is truth wether I post it under my name or not. If you have to twist words and make up arguments that don't exist you must not have much integrity yourself.

    And Democrats have always tried to sell out their own country throughout history. Copperhead democrats were preaching sedition during the civil war, you guys coddled communism in the 50's and 60's, demonized McCarthy as destroying peoples lives and then after the release of the venona papers we find he was right. No war was ever good enough to support your country was it?

    That's ok, keep on omitting the context when you quote someone. Keep twisting their words even though you know what they mean. And if all that fails just make up and attribute a position to someone and argue against that.

    You may be well read, but knowledge and wisdom are often two different things.

    You question my manhood?
    The hubris and deception is all yours little man.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Lydia,

    Geez, do you honestly believe if Christ were to come down from Heaven he would say to all the Republicans (and BTW those who DON'T think like you--of which, yes I don't always agree with you) "Be gone!"

    I know you didn't write that, but you printed it so what say you on this?

    I believe I already know your answer.

    Regards,

    Ken

    ReplyDelete
  141. steviewonder8:51 AM

    "Wow, stevo, so much false information, so little time."

    Well Worfo, if you were trying to make a case of blather on my part, I think the appropriate phrase would be "so much false information, so MUCH time" LOL.

    I don't know what you were talking about in terms of false. It's frustrating trying to have a discussion with someone who makes huge accusations like this without producing the case of guilt. I really would rather you tell me what I was wrong about, I can produce the evidence, I assumed you already knew everything that I had said.

    You said "What would you do?" I told you, that in the case of the United States I WOULD FIGHT.

    I am glad you brought that up though. What would YOU do if Arab terrorists invaded our country? Oh...wait.

    But seriously. Let's speculate, shall we? We lose the war on terror, terrorists become more powerful than ever, they invade our country, and convert us all to Islam (their kind, not "true" Islam). Wouldn't you fight?

    "The Arabs have been living under oppressive (by western standards)and cruel Muslim Governments since before the Crusades.

    And just because you think you're more enlightened than those poor arab mongrels, like the Knights Templar did, does not mean you have a right to kill or cause to be killed 30,000 or 100,000 of them, or whatever estimate helps you sleep at night, so you can force your form of government on them.

    Why is it so many right wingers never learn the concept of free will?

    You can't be forced into freedom.

    You have to want it."

    What was that group of individuals that were oppressed and gassed to death by a brutal dictator? Ummm, don't quote me, but I do believe it was the Jews, wasn't it?

    So, Worfeus, other than retaliating for WW2 and being bombed at Pearl Harbor and all (though we technically were not attacked by Hitler), why did we work to free Nazi concentration camps? Shouldn't the Jews have "wanted it" on their own without help?

    Doesn't that prove that with extreme levels of oppression, that people have very little choice to change their way of life?

    Lastly I'd like to make one comparison:

    The John Hopkins Study is false (that estimates that over 100,000 have died in the Iraq War). But we are going to use it here, just so that you have an advantage (sort of a freebie).

    In the case of the war, 100,000 Iraqis die because we are working to establish the same democracy that you and I enjoy right now! The benefits will be endless for the Iraqis and for us!

    In the case of the honorable Saddam Hussein, who corrupts the United Nations and France and gasses up to 400,000 of his own people (which surpasses the war number by 300,000) accomplishes nothing but power for himself and more oppression for Iraqis.

    My only question is: how powerful should we have let him become before we took him out?

    Also, read the numbers I provided for all three of the Iraq elections: I do believe this proves that they want it.

    I'm leaving you with a paraphrase from a fine (LOL) United States Senator.

    'I never want Saddam to see the light of say again..he needed to be removed, I just disagree with the course of action we took in removing him, we could have went in and nabbed him peacefully, as we did with Milosevic'.....Senator Barbara Boxer during the confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice.

    Let me ask you one question Worf.

    Did he need to be removed, and do you agree with liberal Barbara Boxer's statement?

    ReplyDelete
  142. Eric Said

    "Because the words in 2 paragraphs weren't mine they aren't valid?"

    And Eric Said

    "Worf, you'll have to excuse me. I'm a little new to "blogging".


    Hmmm..see the problem with a republican, is their morals are so far gone, they think plagiarizing someone elses work,and pretending it's theirs so they can sound smart in a debate, is somehow ok, as long as they don't get caught.

    And if they do do get caught?

    Then it's ohh sorry, I'm new to blogging. :|

    Like I said, you'll get no pass from me slappy.

    Your morals are as deluded as the twisted morally bankrupt tryant you claim to follow.

    And you can't come in here, pull a dirty little trick like that while pretending to debate me, and think because you apologize that I am going to waste my time and spend a month responding to your silly little book of republican talking points and meaningless rhetoric. (like saying I quoted people out of context without being able to demonstrate how)

    If I respond to anything of yours, I will do it in my own good time, and then it won't likely be much.

    And that's more than someone with your pitiful comprismised ethics deserves.

    ReplyDelete
  143. STEVE SAID

    So, Worfeus, other than retaliating for WW2 and being bombed at Pearl Harbor and all (though we technically were not attacked by Hitler), why did we work to free Nazi concentration camps? Shouldn't the Jews have "wanted it" on their own without help?

    Actually buddy, we did not work to free the Nazi concentration camps.

    That was merely a by product of the war.

    Ask my uncles. They were there. My Uncle Bill was in Bastogne on Christmas eve, 1944 when the “nuts” message was sent to the German commander of the Panzer Divisions that bore down on the little town, and my uncle Jacob was in the clean up in the Philippines smoking the Japanese out of their holes and seeing things too horrible to describe. My own dad was just Military Police, and did not see combat, but like all of us, we sign up when there is a real war. I myself enlisted during Desert Storm, but was rejected for age.

    We fought the Nazi’s because they were attacking our allies, England primarily, and because Japan, which was on the real Axis of Evil, had attacked us. That’s why we got into the war. Just like Desert Storm when the whole world could easily see that Saddam was invading Kuwait and we had to act.

    He had left the bounds of his own country, and this is the key. The difference was that he was not oppressing his own people, he was trying to invade and occupy a foreign land.

    I know you see that, you just avoid thinking about it.

    No one had to explain to the American people after Pearl Harbor why we need to defend our nation. Because another nation had attacked us in an all out declaration of war, not 19 guys flying planes into buildings.

    911 was a terrorist act. Terrorist acts have been around for a long time. No one locked the world down and started racially profiling fundamentalist Christians (which Tim Mcveigh was) after Oklahoma City.

    But your republican “knee jerk” reaction has shown the world our true yellow streak.

    Instead of going after Osama, who ordered the attacks, we instead gave him a two month head start so he could slip into the disputed region between India and Pakistan known as Kashmir, and then once he got away with most of his followers, we went of to Iraq, Dubya’s goal from the beginning.

    Iraq had no role in 911, Saddam was “in a box and he had no military capability to hurt anyone other than his own people.

    “we’re worse off now with Saddam gone. We had him in a box”

    Bob Baer Former Covert CIA Officer
    December 6th, 2005


    You know, mee dear old dar once told me this little tidbit of wisdom that I have found useful throughout life.

    ” If you need to explain to everyone why you have to go to war, then you probably don’t have to go to war”

    ReplyDelete
  144. More later Steve buddy, gotta get some work done.

    Not as much free time on mee hands as you might think :D

    ReplyDelete
  145. “and the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth?

    And the answer is not very damned many.”


    Dick Cheney, August, 1992

    ReplyDelete
  146. Woerfus,

    Hey, happy to make your acquaintance again!

    I couldn't help but notice this you wrote:

    "Hmmm..see the problem with a republican, is their morals are so far gone, they think plagiarizing someone elses work,and pretending it's theirs so they can sound smart in a debate, is somehow ok, as long as they don't get caught."

    I seem to remember a couple of Democrats having the same problem. Larry Tribe, the Democrat's top scholar and lawyer and Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware.

    Works both ways.

    Regards,

    Ken

    ReplyDelete
  147. Ken,

    Like Steve, you seem to think that I am some sort of apologists for the Democrats.

    Allow me to illuminate you.

    I am not a Democrat, nor do I make excuses for them or their misdeeds.

    You'll have to cast that line to a different pond.

    Nice try though.

    Warmest Regards

    WORFEUS

    ReplyDelete
  148. But since you brought up the Dem Repub thing like my good buddy Steve does, I will take a moment to examine the patriotism of some of the most prominent figures on both sides.


    After all the repubs are always calling the Dems cowards, traitors and "too weak to stay the course"

    Let's look at the demonstrative patriotism in actions and deeds, not words, from the lives of prominent figures on both sides.

    Let's take a look at something factual, and neutral, their military records.

    The following infomation is public record and can be found throughout the Internet.

    Let's start with the good old Patriotic Warriors the Republicans.

    Military records show of these prominent Republicans show;

    * Dick Cheney: did not serve.
    Five deferments

    * Dennis Hastert: did not serve.

    * John Ashcroft: did not serve.
    In fact, Ashcroft had 7 deferments !

    * Tom Delay: did not serve.

    * Roy Blunt: did not serve.

    * Bill Frist: did not serve.

    * Mitch McConnell: did not serve.

    * Rick Santorum: did not serve.

    * Trent Lott: did not serve.

    * Jeb Bush: did not serve.

    * Karl Rove: did not serve.

    * Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. “Bad knee.” And this is the man who attacked the patriotism of a man who sacrificed his knees and everything below them for his country, Max Cleland.

    * Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.

    * Vin Weber: did not serve.

    * Richard Perle: did not serve.

    * Douglas Feith: did not serve.

    * Eliot Abrams: did not serve.

    * Richard Shelby: did not serve.

    * Jon Kyl: did not serve.

    * Tim Hutchison: did not serve.

    * Christopher Cox: did not serve.

    * Newt Gingrich: did not serve.

    * Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.

    * George W. Bush: Sorta served.

    He failed to complete his six-year Air National Guard tour of duty; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, and disappeared from duty.

    * Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making movies.

    * Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.

    * Phil Gramm: did not serve.

    * John McCain: Served with distinction; Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.

    * Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.

    * John M. McHugh: did not serve.

    * JC Watts: did not serve.

    * Jack Kemp: did not serve. “Knee problem,” although mysteriously continued on playing Football in the NFL for 8 years.

    * Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.

    * George Pataki: did not serve.

    * Spencer Abraham: did not serve.

    * John Engler: did not serve.

    * Lindsey Graham: Served in the National Guard as a lawyer.

    * Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from an Austrian army base.

    And here are some military stats for the republican Pundits and other visible outspoken proponents of the war in Iraq.

    * Sean Hannity: did not serve.

    * Rush Limbaugh: did not serve
    Limbaugh was 4-F cause of a small cist. One could call him a little cisty.:P

    * Bill O’Reilly: did not serve.

    * Michael Savage: did not serve.

    * George Will: did not serve.

    * Chris Matthews: did not serve.

    * Paul Gigot: did not serve.

    * Bill Bennett: did not serve.

    * Pat Buchanan: did not serve.

    * John Wayne: did not serve.

    * Bill Kristol: did not serve.

    * Kenneth Starr: did not serve.

    * Antonin Scalia: did not serve.

    * Clarence Thomas: did not serve.

    * Ralph Reed: did not serve.

    * Michael Medved: did not serve.

    * Charlie Daniels: did not serve.

    * Ted Nugent: did not serve.

    ReplyDelete
  149. And in Contrast, lets take a look at the Democrats who are commonly referred to as traitors, and see if the facts add up.

    Military Records of these Prominent Democrats show


    * Jack Murtha: Distinguished 37-year career in the U.S. Marine Corps, Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts

    * Ted Kennedy : 2 years US Army

    * Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71

    * David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72

    * Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.

    * Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam in 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.

    * Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor,
    Vietnam.

    * Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.

    * John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze
    Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.

    * Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze
    Star, Korea.

    * Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star &
    Bronze Star, Vietnam.

    * Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.

    * Joe Biden: Did not serve
    Although his son is a Captian in the Deleware National Guard

    * Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve,
    1968-74.

    * Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army
    Reserve 1979-91.

    * Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star
    and seven campaign ribbons.

    * Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam,
    DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier’s Medal.

    * Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple
    Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.

    * Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne,
    Purple Heart.

    * Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in
    Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.

    * Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.

    * Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57

    * Chuck Robb: Vietnam

    * Howell Heflin: Silver Star

    * George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.

    * Bill Clinton: Got defferments.
    Entered draft but received #311.

    * Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy. Graduate of Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD.

    * Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953

    * John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal
    with 18 Clusters.

    * Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII

    ReplyDelete
  150. Interesting stuff.

    But hey, it must all be lies, right? I mean after all, we all know what big, brave patriotic warriors all you guys are, right?

    Funny, how those who preach the loudest about patriotism and duty seem to always lack both.

    Go figure :|

    ReplyDelete
  151. The following is taken from an interview with Hermann Goering in his Jail Cell, a few hours before his scheduled hanging. (which he chickened out on by biting down on a cianide capsule)

    Goering:

    "Why, of course, the people don't want war.

    Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece?

    Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany.

    That is understood.

    But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

    Gilbert:

    "There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

    Goering: "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.

    That is easy.

    All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.

    It works the same way in any country."

    Hermann Goering
    Nuremberg War Crimes Trials
    April 18th 1946

    ReplyDelete
  152. Anonymous3:07 PM

    Worfeus said: "And the Iraqi people were free to either live under Saddam, or change their situation. EXCELLENT,EXCELLENT,POINT!

    CONSIDER THIS:" The task of diplomacy is to ensure that a nation does not heroically go to its destruction but is practically preserved. Every way that leads to this end is expedient, and a failure to follow it must be called criminal neglect of duty."

    "State authority as an end in itself cannot exist, since in that case every tyranny on this earth would be sacred and unassailable. If a racial entity is being led to its doom by means of governmental power, then the rebellion of every single member of such a folk is not only a right, but a duty."

    Adolph Hitler


    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  153. steviewonder4:37 PM

    Wow Worfeus:

    Talk about plagiarism, even complete with the liberal throw- ins. Should we do a nation wide survey to see everyone who is enlisted now, of which ones are conservative and which ones are liberal?

    Something tells me though that you had a look at the following blog, OR copied and pasted it from whomever this person copied and pasted it from.

    Read it and enjoy:

    http://skaroff.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/but-arent-democrats-weak

    ReplyDelete
  154. Steve,

    Plagiarism?

    WORFEUS SAID

    The following infomation is public record and can be found throughout the Internet.


    Do me a favor Steve. If you want to debate me, then debate me.

    But don't ever accuse me of Plagiarism again if you want me to respond to you.

    I do not plagiarize. If I am posting something I got off of the Internet, then I say it is something I got off the Internet.

    I posted their military histories, and I identifed this list as being available anywhere on the Internet.

    And BTW, that is not the site I got it from.

    Not that it matters.

    Talk about Red Herrings.

    I posted facts.

    Sorry they are embarassing facts to you and your party, but they are nonetheless facts and a matter of public record.

    Deal with it.

    ReplyDelete
  155. As for current military, here is some prominent Democratic candidates who recently returned from fighting the war your fella's sent them to fight.

    Or as you would put it, just another list of cowards and traitors.

    Paul Hackett - U.S. Senate - Ohio

    Charles Brown - California 4th District - 26-year career in USAF; jet and helicopter pilot; recently retired as Lt. Colonel

    Patrick Murphy - Pennsylvania's 8th Congressional District

    Bryan Lentz - Pennslyvania's 7th Congressional District

    David Ashe - Virginia's 2nd Congressional District

    Andrew Duck - Maryland 6th Congressional District

    Eric Massa - New York’s 29th District


    If you would like to visit the website where I did take those statistics from, it's address is,

    http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html

    Read it and enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  156. steviewonder5:00 PM

    "And the Iraqi people were free to either live under Saddam, or change their situation."

    What steps could they have taken?

    Living under that kind if fear and all.

    ReplyDelete
  157. What steps?

    Gee I don't know, how about a revolution?

    You know, that thingy you guys keep comparing our invasion of Iraq with?

    ReplyDelete
  158. And if you are trying to tell us"oh they were oppressed, they could not fight back", the FACTS do not bode well with that argument.

    Fact is, almost every Iraqi household prior to our 2003 invasion, was armed to the teeth, most having numerous rifles and fully automatic AK-47s, not to mention a plethora of other munitions and ammo.

    And they all knew how to use them. In fact, they grow up with them over there.

    So if you think they could not stand up a revolution, (something Bush 1 and Clinton propagandized through the CIA for years, and even offered US support for any such efforts), then you are not as smart as I give you credit for.

    But I know you are smart and I know you just forgot about all that junk.

    Right Steve Buddy?

    ReplyDelete
  159. The following are selective quotes taken from an article by William Lolli contributing Editor for an online magazine called GunNewsDaily.com

    Oh, and I might add in case you didn't know, GunNewsDaily is not a liberal rag.

    Figured you knew that but just in case :P

    "The obvious question raised by MacFarquhar's piece is how Iraq got to be, and remains, one of the world's most repressive police states when just about everyone is packing heat.”

    The answer of course is simple:

    There is a difference between Will and Means

    If people lack the Will to exercise the Means, no power on earth can protect them from domination, tyranny, and oppression.

    A gun in your hand does not make you free. The hand must have the will and the desire to be free."

    ReplyDelete
  160. Anonymous6:16 PM

    Inspired by Hitlers own words, Albert Speer conducted his own mini one man revolution which included assassination.

    Although poorly planned, Col. Count Klaus Von Stauffenberg and his chums came very close to achieving their objective.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  161. Actually it wasn't a one man revolution.

    There were hundreds of Hitlers top Generals, including Erwin Rommel, aka the Desert Fox.

    Following a failed attempt to detonate a brief case device in Hitlers underground bunker, Rommel was given the courtesy of killing himself with his own Walther PPK.

    But at least they tried.

    ReplyDelete
  162. "Freedom is not free. You must want it bad enough to fight for it"

    William Lolli
    GND Contributing Editor
    March 22, 2003

    ReplyDelete
  163. Anonymous6:38 PM

    Worfeus: In March/April 1945 on his own initiative, Speer made a silent and moral decision to assassinate his long time friend.

    The other attempt that you are refering to, with lots of generals in it, was on July 20 1944 and Speer was not in on this one. The conspirators were basically afraid to approach him.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  164. Sorry Johnny, I read your post quickly as I am currently juggling two debaters, (or wannabee's), but I see you did separate the two.

    My apologies.

    ReplyDelete
  165. BTW, Johnny,

    What was your point exactly? I'm not being coy, I am just not sure.

    WORFEUS

    ReplyDelete
  166. Prophet6:47 PM

    Good god......164 comments.....and all but 12 of them posted by Worfeus. Dude, you're using up all the white space, and I dare say dominating the dialogue (or diatribe as the case may be). I was going to chastise you for this, but scrolling through the other comments I see that Lydia actually likes your comments (sigh)....go figure.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Prophet, it's a Blog.

    Anytime you or anyone else wants to chime in, WORFEUS is not stopping them.

    ReplyDelete
  168. Prophet6:52 PM

    Worfeus....is this you dude?

    http://worfeus.stumbleupon.com/about/

    ReplyDelete
  169. Oh and Prophet?

    Please don't let me stop you.

    Chastise away. I'm all ears.

    ReplyDelete
  170. Oh and Prophet?

    Next time I would either stand a little closer to your Abacus, or buy a calculator.

    Just quickly scrolling through I counted over 50 posts by bloggers other than WORFEUS. Not 12.

    See 50, well,,,that would be more.

    But don't be discouraged lil buddy.

    I hear they are doing wonders at night schools around the country with basic arithmetic skills for out of work adults :|

    ReplyDelete
  171. Oh, and Prophet,

    Bezuglich Ihrer Frage? Ich kennen nicht, ist es ich?

    Ich glaube nicht, warum, was denken sie?

    ReplyDelete
  172. Anonymous7:51 PM

    Worfeus: My point is in relation to your 5:12 and 6:12 pm posts and the Hitler quote I posted which one may wish to analyze.

    Johnny moo moo

    ReplyDelete
  173. steviewonder7:59 PM

    "Do me a favor Steve. If you want to debate me, then debate me.

    But don't ever accuse me of Plagiarism again if you want me to respond to you."

    I have been debating you all along. The problem is, you have been selective in what you will talk about. I have made so many factual points on this thread that you have failed to mention.

    It's easy to get your goat though, which is not my intention, though showing how easy it is for you to respond, and counting the number of posts you've made on this blog makes me wonder if you live anywhere else other than your computer screen.

    In your military assessment, you pass the idea as if you gathered the facts and wrote that entire post yourself. When indeed, someone else wrote ALL OF THAT back in November and worded it EXACTLY the same way you did. So yes TECHINCALLY you are guilty of plagiarism for wording it EXACTLY the same way.

    Sorry guy, you aren't getting a pass on this one. ;-)

    Always cute when the worm turns isn't it?

    The tact and hard work was done by someone else to compile it.

    I am not sure what your point is though. The list is not overwhelming in proving anything. The fact is now, the military is made up of volunteers - PEOPLE WHO ENLISTED. They are free to leave the military but they are staying there. Many interviews with many of the troops display pride in what they are doing there. So I would be willing to bet that MORE of them are supporting George Bush than they support Worfeus.

    It's the idea that is debateable. If you support your police department and fire department, you NOT joining them in fighting crime and fires tomorrow does not change the IDEA of having them, does it? If you don't join, does this mean that the fire department does not have your support?

    What you are ignoring, is the fact that Iraqis DO WANT the democracy. The overwhelming turnout of the polls are all the proof we need. You are ignoring that!

    I know why. But you won't admit it.

    You also ignored Barbara Boxer's comment I posted. She is grateful that Saddam is gone.

    Lastly, I'd like to give you a stress test. Sit you in a chair, hold up a picture of Saddam Hussein and hold up a picture of George Bush. LOL....Which one gets your goat Worfeus?

    By the way, speaking of those gays, you know under Saddam's regime, homosexuality was a CRIME that was punishable by death. It was also a CRIME held in the same regard as rape.

    That poor Saddam, no threat whatsoever.

    What were the evil right-wingers thinking?

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  174. steviewonder8:04 PM

    "Saddam increasingly portrayed himself as a devout Muslim, in an effort to co-opt the conservative religious segments of society. Some elements of Sharia law were re-introduced (such as the 2001 edict imposing the death penalty for homosexuality, rape and prostitution, and the ritual phrase "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great"), in Saddam's handwriting, was added to the national flag.)"

    And Worfeus, you thought that pesky religious right was oppressing homosexuals.

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  175. Steve SAID: I have made so many factual points on this thread that you have failed to mention.


    Yea, you post lots of err...facts in your posts. Lots of issues too.

    You're kind of what we call a "spread spectrum" blogger.

    Everything from someone trying to steal your Christmas to men urinating in each others mouths (what the hell was up with that anyway? :\).

    Now I know my good buddy Steve is not doing this, but I have found that some republicans who can't hang with the clear issues, try and blur their topics with lots and lots of erratta.

    But like I said, I know thats not you, I am sure you're just really, really smart.

    So I guess your just gonna have to dumb it down and try making your points a little clearer.

    My points are simple and clear. Then again, I am a simple guy.

    The war in Iraq is wrong, and the Christian Right has corrupted the teachings of Christ and blurred the division of Church and State.

    What's your point again?

    ReplyDelete
  176. STEVE SAID

    What you are ignoring, is the fact that Iraqis DO WANT the democracy. The overwhelming turnout of the polls are all the proof we need. You are ignoring that!

    I know why. But you won't admit it.


    No, I would safely wager you don't know why.

    So lets wager.

    You tell us all why you think I have ignored that.

    Then I will set you straight.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Oh and don't forget to get my goat, LOL.


    baahaaaaa :D

    ReplyDelete
  178. And BTW Steve buddy, just so you don't think I am dishonest, and would change my answer based upon yours. I will email my answer to Lydia now so I can't change it later.

    Ok buddy?

    Now go find my goat. :P

    ReplyDelete
  179. steviewonder8:55 PM

    "The war in Iraq is wrong, and the Christian Right has corrupted the teachings of Christ and blurred the division of Church and State."

    Oh no, no no no. LOL. Come on Worfeus, we went over this. Your only substantial proof of this was a phony quote that was alleged by Nabil Shaath, and you didn't even give him the credit. You gave it to a liberal journalist who reported it.

    I put that one to rest by telling you the White House denied it, AND that other Arab leaders who attended the Jordanian summit denied it as well.

    Regarding the men urinating in eachother's mouths, it was an art exhibit, in 2001 I believe in New York (I will find it) posted in a Museum. The majority wanted it taken down because they felt the exhibit was offensive but the ACLU came in and protected the rights of the artist.

    Second, the ACLU also ran to the rescue of the EXTREME minority in Boston who wanted the Christmas tree (the Nova Scotia gift I explained to you earlier) to be renamed the "Holiday" tree. This occured before Bill O'Reilly said ANYTHING about it.

    But more than anything here, why are you so threatened by Bill O'Reilly making a deal about it, regardless if his concerns were valid or not. He's just protecting Christmas. What harm do you think is going to come out of it?

    See when the left "reacts" like you seem to be to him, it makes me wonder what these signs are indicative of. Care to explain?

    In regards to these few issues, including the war, I, as well as Eric, have explained IN DETAIL our opinions and thoughts. You didn't convince us, and we didn't convince you, but don't act as if these issues like the Christmas controversy, or the "religious right's" 13 month "Rush to War" counterargument. It's all been explained and articulated to you.

    You probably didn't read all of it. I am concerned if your mind really is open to the diversity. Aren't liberals the ones who advocate "tolerance"? "Tolerance" cannot pause just when you don't agree with someone, can it? (Even if it is steviewonder, Eric, O'Reilly, or Ann Coulter).

    ReplyDelete
  180. steviewonder8:59 PM

    Well, since you made mention of it twice, I would venture to say that the comment about getting your goat, indeed "got your goat" in and of itself.

    You made mention of it twice LOL.

    The reason you have ignored the numbers of Iraqis who particpated in the greatest democracy ever is because it clearly indicates their desire.

    The same desire that you declare they needed to start their own "revolution".

    Did we force them to vote?

    Or did we cook the books when it came to counting the ballots?

    LOL...OH NO...what did I just do? More "election fraud" for the liberals to create and cry about for another four years.

    ReplyDelete
  181. steviewonder9:01 PM

    "I will email my answer to Lydia now so I can't change it later."

    LOL.

    You're kidding me.

    What is this, the game of "Life"?

    "I'm going to show you my card, let's hope he/she doens't guess it"

    ReplyDelete
  182. steviewonder9:02 PM

    By the way.....

    Why woould you admit the "real reason"

    It would mean you would have to admit your fear of a "democracy accepting" Iraq.

    Of course you aren't going to tell us the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  183. And is that your final answer? :o

    ReplyDelete
  184. steviewonder9:25 PM

    LOL....worf you are too much. Go ahead, give me your best "George Bush is a liar", we "forced the Iraqis to vote", whatever your answer is, let's hear it!

    But you must promise that it is 100% truthful (LOL yeah right).

    ReplyDelete
  185. steviewonder9:26 PM

    Patriot Act extended - passed by the Senate today!

    LOL, poor Liberals.

    ReplyDelete
  186. I offered to email it to negate the imminent "you will change your answer based on mine" accusation you undoubtably would have made.

    You know you would have.

    Here is exactly what I emailed Lydia, plus some additional comments.

    The reason I have not answered Steves statements on how many Iraqi people voted, is because "I DON'T CARE".

    We didn't go there for them to vote.

    We went for WMD.


    Just like Eric, everytime you guys get caught decieving people, you think you can just "move on" without accountability or examination.

    I blame your parents. Better values in the home would have kept Eric from plagiarizing, or trying to move on past it like it was no big deal once he did.

    Why is it that it's only the Liars who think Lying is no big deal.

    And I will add this now.

    The fact that they vote, while an occupying army pointing guns at them is literally entrenched in their cities and town, and arresting those who seem like
    "usurpers", is like a confession given at gunpoint. It serves no purpose.

    Maybe they want democracy, maybe they don't. But that vote did not prove it.

    On the other hand, it was a little convienient that the terrorists for the first time not only permitted them to vote, but the Sunni terrorist even helped protect people getting to the polls.

    Now that means that the Iraqi people know who the terrorists are, and therefore are most certainly aiding them.

    So the vote was most likely just a sham, designed by the insurgents, the Iraqi's and probably a few dozen CIA advisors to help facilitate us withdrawing soon.

    But like I said, it's moot. I will give it to you. Lets say the Iraqi people went to the polls, and the terrorists helped them, because inside every Iraqi is a republican trying to get out.

    My answer is "I Don't Care"

    ReplyDelete
  187. Also allow me to congratulate you on so craftily accusing me of overlooking your posts, while constantly overlooking mine.

    Case in point.

    You said;

    Your only substantial proof of this was a phony quote that was alleged by Nabil Shaath


    My Post at 9:56 PM yesterday clearly offered you a prime example of what I called the Christian Right influencing our politics.

    Here, let me repost it since you claim I the only evidence I offered that the Christian Right was blurring the division between church and state was the Nabil Shaath story.

    Here is what I wrote yesterday, that I am sure you just honestly overlooked. :\

    WORFEUS WROTE AT 9:56 ON WEDNESDAY

    __________________________________

    I found it pertinent to our discussion yesterday as to the Christian Right influencing our politics. (I know, I know, another AP story, sorry, it's hard to cut and paste the evening news:).

    By MARTHA RAFFAELE, Associated Press Writer
    HARRISBURG, Pa. -

    In one of the biggest courtroom clashes between faith and evolution since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district Tuesday from teaching "intelligent design" in biology class, saying the concept is creationism in disguise.

    U.S. District Judge John E. Jones delivered a stinging attack on the Dover Area School Board, saying its first-in-the-nation decision in October 2004 to insert intelligent design into the science curriculum violated the constitutional separation of church and state.

    The ruling was a major setback to the intelligent design movement, which is also waging battles in Georgia and Kansas.

    __________________________________

    This is not by a longshot the only reflection of religion into politics, but it certainly is very clear example of the Hubris of the Christian Right, who is behind this movement, (wanna argue that point?), who think it's ok to blur the lines between religion, science and government. (don't make me remind you that DOE is part of the Government).

    I mean, were talking about the freakin scopes monkey trials.

    Dosen't that scare you just a little?

    As John Stossel would say, gimme a break. :|

    ReplyDelete
  188. steviewonder9:56 PM

    Oh Geez! It's not "moot"

    I sat here, like a good boy for the last 20 minutes waiting for that!

    LOL.

    And now, you get to make assumptions on my responses? Perhaps I should start pre-emailing Lydia as well.

    "You know you would have"

    LOL. Well Worf, this has turned from a passionate back and forth to a fun chat. Which is fine.

    In any case.........

    If you scroll up you will see the advantages of Iraq democracy.

    You are wrong. We did not go to Iraq STRICTLY BECAUSE OF WMD. Condoleezza Rice reminded the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of this when Kerry, Boxer, and Biden all tried to intellectualize the same thing.

    The plan for establishing democracy and over throwing Saddam's regime was clear from the very beginning, AND was illustrated and outlined as well.

    If it weren't, Teddy Kennedy, Joe Biden, John kerry, and Barbara Boxer would have not been debating and flip flopping on the issue of "troop withdrawal".

    Look beyond little buddy.

    I have to say you've grown on me the last couple days. Kind of like an annoying little brother who I can give wedgies to and throw popcorn at. (Don't get so itsy....all in good fun of course).

    LOL.

    I have to go to bed now.

    Night!

    ReplyDelete
  189. Sorry you can't hang, I was just getting warmed up.

    That was nice how you once again overlooked the fact that you made a claim that I never showed any evidence, that I just disproved by posting the exact post made yesterday showing clear evidence of the Right Wing influencing the separation of church and state, and you didn't even offer an acknowledgement.

    I just proved you wrong, and you didn't even say thank you.

    :o

    Don't expect me to respect that in you, Steve. It's not an admirable quality.

    As for your post? Not that I should reply after you so deftly skirted over the fact that a claim you made about me was just shot right out of the sky.

    But I will respond given your semi-congenial demeanor.

    My family is from Rotterdam, so I would not be too sure if you would find me to be your "little brother". Possibly, but I doubt it.

    The smallest male in my family tree is over 6'1 1/2.

    And at almost half a century of age, I don't think I am your little brother in the sense of being younger. Unless of course you're as old as Moses. :D

    Then again, maybe as I suspect you are really Bill O'Reilly, in here doing opposition polling or something. He looks like a reasonably tall man.

    And he's got to be at least as old as Moses.

    My argument, has been, and is, that the Chrisitan Right is blurring the division between church and state.

    You try to twist my argument into something you can debate, which is what most of the right does when you can't hang with a no nothing layperson like me.

    I offered the story by Nabil Shaath as one small example of the way the Christian Right has blurred the division between church and state, and you jumped on it like a tick on an Alabama mule.

    Then you, took this one post, out of hundreds in this and other threads, and used it to repeat, over and over that I have only one peice of evidence as to Christian Right blurring the divsion between church and state.

    And that my man Steve, is how you blur the division between what I say, and what you want people to think I say.

    At least the posts don't lie.

    My words are there for all, and so far, 3 of you coming at me at once have not shown anything I have said to be incorrect, or not factual. However your side has plagiarized, got caught, tried to brush it aside, and you supported it.

    So all I can say is, do keep trying.

    WORFEUS is at your service. :|

    ReplyDelete
  190. Anonymous3:52 AM

    Dec 22 1879

    Stalin's birthday!

    ReplyDelete
  191. steviewonder6:36 AM

    "I just disproved by posting the exact post made yesterday showing clear evidence of the Right Wing influencing the separation of church and state"

    LOL. Worf....I DO NOT live on this blog bud. I answered your first "I don't care" post and went to bed. Apparently, you were typing the second post as I was answering the first.

    I did not dodge. What I have proven is that I (as many Republicans) do not have to back down...you are the ones that have to produce the evidence of Bush being a murderer, Republicans being corrupt, yada yada. We don't have to back down because common sense generally speaks in our favor. Which results in a number of things, but mainly the usual liberal label of "oh, well you know the trouble with them conservatives is they have simple answers to complex issues". LOL

    However to answer your question Worf (but I really do hate taking away that feeling of self victory on your end) I never remember discussing the separation of church and state with you. When did I bring that up? What we were discussing is the right wing's apparent "religious" rush to war. What I shot down was the argument that George Bush went to war because of religious reasons. What I am shooting down is the assertion that supporters of war are supporting it because of "religion". Now you are bringing in seperation of church and state?

    How can I be called on something or defeated on something if I never mentioned it in the first place.

    It does raise a great question for the ever-so-bright Worf. Isn't it great that Saddam was removed - seeing as he was executing homosexuals and all. He obviously thought "religion" was enough inspiration to grant justification for this.

    I know, GWB is the evil one. Poor Saddam...LOL.

    Incidentally, don't tell me you believe Saddam as he prattled on yesterday about how the United States has tortured him.

    So....okay. I think after reading here, you can see that I was not evasive with you. Still aren't.

    :-).

    And I'm 32. Somehow I feel older than you. Yoga is a terrific thing though for making one feel 21 and all. Try it. Also stops them from freaking out, as well as clearing the mind for good productive thinking.

    I am shorter than you however. 5'11. Though both brothers (younger) are 6'2, plus my sister is 5'10. I am the oldest though. Just comes natural. My poor mother though is 5'1 and weighs about 100 pounds LOL.

    "WORFEUS is at your service. :|"

    Still waitin for ya to clean my clock there Worfy.

    "Worf's Clock Cleaning Service"

    ReplyDelete
  192. steviewonder8:26 AM

    "Among the things that war entails are: killing people (sometimes innocent), destroying buildings (sometimes innocent) and spying on people (sometimes innocent). That is why war is a bad thing. But once a war starts, it is going to be finished one way or another, and I have a preference for it coming out one way rather than the other."

    "It's one or the other: Either we take the politically correct, scattershot approach and violate everyone's civil liberties, or we focus on the group threatening us and — in the worst-case scenario — run the risk of briefly violating the civil liberties of 1,000 people in a country of 300 million.

    Of course, this is assuming I'm talking to people from the world of the normal. In the Democrats' world, there are two more options. Violate no one's civil liberties and get used to a lot more 9/11s, or the modified third option, preferred by Sen. John D. Rockefeller: Let the president do all the work and take all the heat for preventing another terrorist attack while you place a letter expressing your objections in a file cabinet as a small parchment tribute to your exquisite conscience."

    A couple of great points from "hatemonger" Coulter's brilliant column this week.

    Poor Worfeus, his lunchtime break is going to require a lot of work!

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  193. Steve, don't worry, I won't waste too much more time on you.

    Because you are clearly just lying now to try to sound smart.

    All I have been debating is the war, and the Christian Right's influence on the government.

    Hell the influence of the Christian Right on politics is what this whole site is about!

    Yea, you're a genius.

    So you're either very stupid, or a liar.

    But I have been discussing two points, and two points only.

    The war is wrong.

    And the Christian Right is influencing the division of Church and State.


    And everything I post can talks to those two points.

    Like I said Nimrod, the posts don't like.

    Scroll up.

    ReplyDelete
  194. Stevie,

    How much work can it take to misquote, twist and distort?

    (by the way worf, I don't care if you ever answer anything from me. You can't. It'd just be a warped delusionary spew anyway. What a coward you are, never address an issue just bitch about sematics. -And that's the last post I'll ever address to you.)

    ReplyDelete
  195. What's that grumbling I hear? Is that Eric the Plagiarizer?

    Or or you and Steve one and the same. Odd how you always show up together.

    I don't answer you Eric, because you have already demonstrated what lengths (or depths)to try and sound intelligent.

    Think I'm wrong?

    Take a look at what Eric the Plagiarizer said not when he was plagiarizing, but after.

    He came in and said the now famous, "I'm a little new to blogging" excuse at 3:26 PM, but I never mentioned what he said just 30 minutes later, after being caught plagiarizing.

    geez, get over it. Out of that whole post I used 2 paragraphs of his, and I already apologized for that.

    Do not think I post this to illuminate merely his rapid dismissal of responsibility, but pay attention to the quantity he assigns to his trangression.


    Out of that whole post I used 2 paragraphs of his

    See, he has confessed his transgression, but he has not forsaken it.

    Even now his goal is to deceive, purporting that out of a whole post only 2, measly paragraphs were used.

    Hmmmm.....better go back and take a look at his original post, you know, the post in question where he originally plagerized the good pastor Huling.

    Scroll up, (or hit CTRL F and enter the time, 7:30 AM and hit enter) and look at his original post, entered at 7:30 AM.

    Notice anything?

    That's right chipmunks,there are only 3 Paragraphs in the entire post. :D

    2 of them are plagiarized from the good pastor Huling, and the 3rd one, is a scripture. :\

    In other words, he wrote NONE of it, except the intro.

    And he carefully crafted it in between his other posts, to make it look like his words.

    But we know all this already, right?

    Well, what he have not mentioned is that at his post made at 4:06 PM, after being busted on plagerizing publiclly, he went on to try and make it look like the rest of the post was his, probably thinking no one would go back and check.

    But he knew that there was no other paragraphs in his post other than the scripture.

    So after being caught trying to deceive, what did he do?

    He tried to deceive us again.

    Moral of the story?

    Once a liar, always a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  196. steviewonder11:55 AM

    "Steve, don't worry, I won't waste too much more time on you."

    Right, because you haven't done so already.

    "Because you are clearly just lying now to try to sound smart."

    I know I'm not lying, and one doesn't "sound" smart. They either are or they aren't. I'm not proclaiming intelligence and degrading you by pronouncing myself the "clock-cleaner" (that's your job). I'm just the "goat-getter". Which, by the way, doesn't say much for you if a "dummy" like me has gotten you to "waste" so much time on me.

    "All I have been debating is the war, and the Christian Right's influence on the government."

    What you have been debating - more than anything - is the "religious" rush to war. Which I answered to. The rest of your biblical interpretations are not really "debate" politically. They serve more biblical debate than anything. The only thing "political" I have gotten out of your "biblical" arguments is "Bush went to war because God told him to". So that's all I've answered. The seperate issue about Eric's post explaining the entire Matthew verse of judging was a separate argument. I was just stating that Eric was "right" and your definition was "wrong". (Something else that apparently "got your goat").

    "Yea, you're a genius.

    So you're either very stupid, or a liar."

    Ummm, okay so why don't you pick one so I can either A.)Thank you for the compliment B.) Accept your insult as a compliment seeing as most brilliant liberal arguments can be summarized with a small "you're stupid" or C.) Demand evidence of mis-truth (which probably exists in the same file cabinet that you are storing the "murdering" evidence against GWB - hurry send it to Capital Hill so Bush can be impeached!)

    "The war is wrong.

    And the Christian Right is influencing the division of Church and State."

    We have debated point 1. Point 2 again is a vague statement. The only point I have thoroughly debated you on was the war aspect of religion, and proved you wrong about conservatives justifying going to war by using religion as a reason. That's just false.

    Regarding you calling me a "Nimrod".

    I'll let you have that one. A present to you from me. Feel any better?

    Merry Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  197. Sure Nimrod, thanks :D

    But your said

    What you have been debating - more than anything - is the "religious" rush to war.

    Show us all where I said that cheif.

    Come on, scroll up Steve, and show us where I said that.


    Because once again you are lying.

    YOU said it 3 times, I never said it once

    The words religious" rush to war never left my keyboard.

    But hey, you say it's so, so as you say, the burden of proof is now on you.

    Show me where I said this Steve, and I'll stop calling you Nimrod. :D

    Come on, I dare you.

    ReplyDelete
  198. Well?

    Come on Steve?

    You can't even find one mention of that?

    Not one?

    :o

    Guess I'll have to take a longer lunch.

    ReplyDelete
  199. What Steve buddy? I'm back from lunch and you still have not found one instance above where I said that?

    Not one?

    :o


    Perhaps it's time to change your business cards to Nimrod Enterprises?

    Oh well, I guess you're busy writing us another novel where a paragraph would do.

    Kinda helps blur the facts, don't it?

    Ok, I'll check back later.

    ReplyDelete