Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

    Philly wrote: Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. It's not shingles that makes you a ... [more](10)

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

    syvyn11 wrote: <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/keith-olbermann-reviving-worst... [more](9)

    In

    Former Obama Support/Donor Releases Song Supporting Romney/Ryan: "We'll Take It Back Again" by Kyle Tucker

    syvyn11 wrote: @philly I don't see that happening. ESPN has turned hyper left in recent... [more](64)

    In

    Blue-Blog-a-Palooza: Ann Romney Edition!

    djthereplay wrote: By mkdawuss on August 29, 2012 6:17 PM Will John Gibson be having a "Red-B... [more](4)

    In

    No Joy in Kosville...Mighty Olby Has Struck Out

    djwolf76 wrote: "But the FOX-GOP relationship (which is far more distinguished and prevalen... [more](23)

    KO Mini Blog



    What's in the Olbermann Flood Feed?
    Subscribe to Olbermann Flood Feed:
    RSS/XML

    KO Countdown Clock


    Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5
    KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

    OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set

    OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users

    Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.

    New to Flickr? Sign up for a FREE Flickr account!


    Got some OlbyVideo? See some on YouTube? DO NOT email us. Send us a YouTube Messages instead. Include a link to the video. If we like the video you will see it displayed in our favorites list in our YouTube page.

    New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

    If they're not on Keith's payroll...

    ...they should be...

    Crooks & Liars
    Daily Kos
    Eschaton
    Huffington Post
    Media Matters for America
    MyDD
    News Corpse
    No Quarter
    Raw Story
    Talking Points Memo
    Think Progress
    TVNewser
    Keith Lovers

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

    Drinking with Keith Olbermann
    Either Relevant or True
    KeithOlbermann.org
    Keith Olbermann is Evil
    Olbermann Nation
    Olbermann.org
    Thank You, Keith Olbermann

    Don't Be Such A Douche
    Eyes on Fox
    Liberal Talk Radio
    Oliver Willis
    Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site I
    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site II
    Keith Olbermann Links
    Olberfans
    Sports Center Altar
    Nothing for Everyone

    Democratic Underground KO Forum
    Television Without Pity KO Forum
    Loony KO Forum (old)
    Loony KO Forum (new)
    Olberfans Forum (old)
    Olberfans Forum (new)
    Keith Watchers

    186k per second
    Ace of Spades HQ
    Cable Gamer
    Dean's World
    Doug Ross@Journal
    Extreme Mortman
    Fire Keith Olbermann
    Hot Air
    Inside Cable News
    Instapundit
    Jawa Report
    Johnny Dollar's Place
    Just One Minute
    Little Green Footballs
    Mark Levin
    Media Research Center
    Moonbattery.com
    Moorelies
    National Review Media Blog
    Narcissistic Views
    Newsbusters
    Pat Campbell Show
    Radio Equalizer
    Rathergate
    Riehl World View
    Sister Toldjah
    Toys in the Attic
    Webloggin
    The Dark Side of Keith Olbermann
    World According to Carl

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

    Age of Treason
    Bane Rants
    The Blue Site
    Cabal of Doom-De Oppresso Libre
    Chuckoblog
    Conservative Blog Therapy
    Conservathink
    Country Store
    Does Anyone Agree?
    The Drunkablog!
    Eclipse Ramblings
    If I were President of USA
    I'll Lay Down My Glasses
    Instrumental Rationality
    JasonPye.com
    Kevin Dayhoff
    Last Train Out Of Hell
    Leaning Straight Up
    Limestone Roof
    Mein BlogoVault
    NostraBlogAss
    Peacerose Journal
    The Politics of CP
    Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy
    Rat Chat
    Return of the Conservatives
    The Right Place
    Rhymes with Right
    seanrobins.com
    Six Meat Buffet
    Sports and Stuff
    Stout Republican
    Stuck On Stupid
    Things I H8
    TruthGuys
    Verum Serum
    WildWeasel

    Friends of OlbyWatch

    Aaron Barnhart
    Eric Deggans
    Jason Clarke
    Ron Coleman
    Victria Zdrok
    Keith Resources

    Google News: Keith Olbermann
    Feedster: Keith Olbermann
    Technorati: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Countdown
    Wikiality: Keith Olbermann
    Keith Olbermann Quotes on Jossip
    Keith Olbermann Photos
    NNDB Olbermann Page
    IMDB Olbermann Page
    Countdown Guest Listing & Transcripts
    Olbermann Watch FAQ
    List of Politics on Countdown (by party)
    Mark Levin's Keith Overbite Page
    Keith Olbermann's Diary at Daily Kos
    Olbermann Watch in the News

    Houston Chronicle
    Playboy
    The Journal News
    National Review
    San Antonio Express
    The Hollywood Reporter
    The Journal News
    Los Angeles Times
    American Journalism Review
    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    St. Petersburg Times
    Kansas City Star
    New York Post/Page Six
    Washington Post
    Associated Press
    PBS
    New York Daily News
    Online Journalism Review
    The Washingon Post
    Hartford Courant
    WTWP-AM
    The New York Observer
    The Washington Post


    Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    Great Moments in Broadcast Journalism
    Great Thanks Hall of Fame
    Keith Olbermann
    MSM KO Bandwagon
    Olbermann
    Olbermann Watch Channel on You Tube
    Olbermann Watch Debate
    Olbermann Watch Image Gallery
    Olbermann Watch Polling Service
    OlbermannWatch
    OlbyWatch Link Roundup
    TVNewser "Journalism"

    July 2013
    September 2012
    August 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


    Mailing List RSS Feed
    Google Groups
    Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List
    Email:
    Visit this group



    XML
    Add to Google
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to My AOL
    Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader
    R|Mail
    Simpify!
    Add to Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    November 1, 2007
    Another Olbermann Lie

    IDIOT

    When will we see a correction for this whopper? Maybe on the 12th of Never.


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (339) | | View blog reactions

    339 Comments

    Just to toot my own horn but I was the first to mention this on Olby watch on the Oct-31 topic thread.

    But there's no way KO will admit his "mistake"..but if O'Reilly had done something similar about Hillary he would be WPITW in KO eyes.

    Not only will he not apologize to Rudy for that ..but he'll also ignore how a Clinton supporter on conference call to Clinton's campaign staffers called for his fellow NBC colleague Tim Russert to be shot..KO is just to far up Hillary and Bill's butt to criticize them and their people in any way.

    I dunno, Keith apologized to Fox News a few weeks ago for....what was it again? Maybe he'll do it again.

    Then again, when he thinks the main point of the last Demshivik debate was a comment on Giuliani, maybe not.

    Yes, and when will Olby admit that Medved never "defended slavery" (and accept Medved's invitation to go on Medved's show to stand by his accusation)? All hail, "journalist" Keith

    It's hilarious to watch Olbermann and Huffington waxing outraged over Giuliani's supposed remarks after they had just sat through the tape of airing what he really said!

    They wanted THAT scenario sooooo badly... :D

    My prediction-- Olbermann will report the AP's correction of the story, but being the sportsman he is...will then negate the effort by making a snide remark about the very guy he had helped to falsely impugn, and he'll add a shot at either Cheney or Bush.

    Oh-blow-me-man has no brain due to the simple fact that his was sucked out during his botched partial birth abortion.

    Today's bizarro-world COUNTDOWN WORSE PERSON IN THE WORLD SEGMENT.....

    The Bronze......goes to THE ASSOCIATED PRESS who made a major blunder in their coverage of the ongoing Blackwather investigation. On Monday, THE AP covered the issuance of a press release made by Blackwater USA – announcing the corporation had formed a new “Department of Corporate Integrity” to “defend its corporate name and clear up its public image.” Part of the release had the new Public Integrity director, Kitty Laver, stating,

    “My job is to put the mercy back in mercenary.”

    The problem? The press release was a phony. A phony story put out by the anti-war group, CODE PINK. To be fair, CBS NEWS and Politico.com also reported the story and all later retracted the story.

    The Silver....New York Senator Chuck Schumer. After suggesting the current nominee for Attorney General, Judge Michael Mukasey, to The White House, even calling him, "a consensus candidate," Mr. Schumer seems to have had a change of mind. After great outcry from the blueblogs, and other liberal demogogues, over Judge Mukasey's refusal to comment on the legality of a harsh CIA interrogation technique, Mr. Schumer's prediction two weeks ago of confirmation has now flip-flopped to noncomittal, at best.

    And The Gold.....An unnamed Hillary Clinton supporter with a penchant for violence against journalists. In a conference call with supporters this past Tuesday, one caller reportedly stated moderator, and my collegue on NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS, Tim Russert, “should be shot.”

    Mark Penn and Jonathan Mantz, the campaign's senior strategist and finance director only said they were hearing a lot of the same sentiment from other supporters, but they do not plan to engage the media or the debate’s moderators.

    Let me understand this. Senior aides to Senator Clinton are told by a supporter that a journalist should be shot and they do not respond with immediate condemnation and disgust? We live in a free and open society, gentlemen, and this type of rhetoric has no place even from fanatical supporters of Hillary Clinton! I am calling for the immediate repudiation of these vile threats and hope Ms. Clinton does so quickly.

    A Clinton for President supporter ready to assasinate Tim Russert along some cynical top campaign aides....TODAY'S WORST....PERSONS...IN.....THE.....WOOOOORLD!

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/10/29/giuliani_clinton_edwards_will_change_minds_on_iraq_war_again/

    "This is the world we live in. It's not this happy, romantic-like world where we'll negotiate with this one, or we'll negotiate with that one and there will be no preconditions, and we'll invite (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad to the White House, we'll invite Osama (bin Laden) to the White House," Giuliani said.

    You are giving Olbermann way too much credit and not enough to the bull crap that actually does come out of Rudy's mouth.

    Geez Keyser, you are really on top of things. You quote a 2-day-old story, one that has been discredited, and in fact RETRACTED. You obviously didn't read the linked article which includes the VIDEO of what Giulani actually said (which makes NO mention of Osama at all). And then you proceed to post your falsehoods here, apparently in the belief that everybody else is as lazy and uninformed as you are, and won't bother getting the facts.

    Wow, if you'll go through all that, you just might be an Olbypologist.

    UH OH, Johnny Dollar is a minon of Scrub-A-Dub and the Huffer since there was no OW recap on that night. Where's Rosie when she's needed for real conspiarcies? LMAO

    Ditto Cecelia!

    I can't believe they actually can watch a clip and then make idiotic comments and lie and twist about the content. Who said terrorists? Who said Osama?

    These two numbsculls are the face of the fringe left! Weeeeee!

    Keyser Soze never existed...

    The AP retracted the mistake.
    Boston Globe never corrected it.
    Imagine the countless others that have the wrong quote up!

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hD0ebjt6beXJ8MK47NSwIL50OhXgD8SKFC1O0

    Krazy Keith Miss Huffington Post
    Two moonbats from the East and West coast
    Their sworn moonbat duty
    To smear Mister Rudy
    And to Hillary propose a toast

    This is a creepy reply from KEITH OLBERMANN to an essay written By Bryan Curtis called, "Olbermann Über Alles!" Written for Slate back in 2001. What is weird is Olbermann can't take a compliment and basically says he prefers to do sports verses "...hosting one of the endless supply of talking-head political programs..."

    His also "finished an novel" and lied about another forth coming book published by Harper-Collins.

    Here's the link if you want to read the entire essay he his responding to, (I'm just posting his response, because it's just so creepy, telling and pathetic as to the nut Olbermann really is).

    http://www.slate.com/id/101363/

    Reply From Keith Olbermann:

    While I appreciate Bryan Curtis's kind words about my writing sideline, I must protest his conclusion that my television "on-air duties have been cut back to one night a week." Nearly a year ago, my Fox employers and I executed a long-planned, completely mutual change in my schedule in which I would serve as host and Executive Producer of all of our cable network's sportscasts every Sunday night, plus continue to host the World Series and the weekly baseball game of the week on the Fox broadcast network. There's something illogical about concluding that somebody who goes from hosting one of the endless supply of talking-head political programs to hosting the telecasts of the World Series is in the "death spiral" of his television career. I might add that for three years I've also done twice-daily radio commentaries which are carried on approximately 300 stations. I also have a book of essays, If You're Scoring At Home (Or Even If You're Alone) being published by Harper-Collins next autumn, and I'm finishing up a novel about the TV news industry. And I'll be happy to breathe on a mirror if anybody needs to check.

    P.S. I did a little math, and while I confess I have trouble believing audience ratings, nor (I hope) is the quality of my work ever affected by how many people are watching, I think these stats should answer questions about death spirals: A five-game World Series last year with a 12 rating meant about 60,000,000 viewers all told. Twelve other baseball playoff games with a 5 rating mean another 60,000,000 viewers. Add that to a 3.5 rating for the pre-game baseball shows meaning about another 48,000,000 viewers all told. That's about 208 million viewers over 17 weeks, not even counting whatever the cable figures are. A year at MSNBC with an 0.4 rating would've meant 75,000,000 viewers all told. A year at ESPN with a 0.8 rating is about 150,000,000 viewers all told. What it means is, I get to work a lot less and be seen by a lot more people, which in other businesses would be considered a pretty good scam.

    --Keith Olbermann


    (2/27/2001)

    Since Michael Musto is leading the way in the "Hillary has a girlfriend" story, will Herr Goebbelsmann ask Mr. Musto about it?

    J$, any chance that Patsy bought a one way ticket this time?

    Grammie

    Anyone have any thoughts on Olbermann's reply? Or is the fact that he says he is NOT "affected" by ratings, then goes on and on talking about ratings. Perhaps his reply too obvious for all here...

    Posted by: Keyser Soze at November 1, 2007 2:45 PM

    Keyser, Back to the fan-girl sites, you're better off talking about his ties...this political thing (heck, reading thing) may be a bit too much for you.

    Soze is one of the handful of wackos that post incessantly on Olbermann.org. More than likely HE is a SHE as are most of the kooks on that site.

    The fact that he(she) never even watched the clip on his / her lover's show means that he(she) just shows what type of fans comedian Olbermahn has. They're EXACTLY like man tan man himself in that they don't care about facts as they can just as easily invent them.

    Soze is obviously living in that alternate world where Olby fans dwell.

    Olby just claimed he was a trusted television personality. LOL. Just like he claims to be a journalist. HAR!

    Keyser Soze travels the internets as an Olby apologist, adding her/his comments at KO.org and ICN also. It's a full time job.

    from one of the fangirl sites, from one of the biggest fangirls-

    "Oh I wish I was Keith Olbermann's hated gray suit
    That is what I truly want to beee-eee-eee
    'Cause if I was Keith Olbermann's hated gray suit
    Tonight Keith Olbermann would be inside of meeeee."


    Enough said . . .

    HAG-ZILLA! Read it and laugh.

    I have commented on Robert Sucking Cox and this lame hate site before.
    I nominated Bovine, a jest, to be the site's official censor.

    What did Robert Sucking Cox do?

    Allow Johnny BU$HWIPE to drive this crapper to the ground.

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    Tell the BU$HWIPES...

    Gen. Abizaid zez ...

    OH NO! Johnny BU$HWIPE just erased another thread!

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    but not before you finish your delusional rants about Bush on Mt. Rushmore.

    Take it away, Hag-zilla!

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    Take the phone and dial 9-11.

    Don't forget to mention you want to see Bush on Mt. Rushmore.

    It ought to help your diagnostic.

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    PS Exactly what state is one in when one is in a "COMMA"?

    COMMA:

    any of several nymphalid butterflies (genus Polygonia) with a silvery comma-shaped mark on the underside of the hind wings.

    Sorry neither applies to you Hag-zilla.

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    Deep thoughtful comment about Keith's Salon reply, from our favorite hardcore (Kathy Bates in Misery) fanhag Orinenglish (who now includes the "Leona" ever since Keithie said in Playboy he thinks his fans all look like Leona Helmsley...what a loser, but entertainment for us)...read on:


    "Yes, Keith’s rebuttal to that Slate article is pure geeky Keith–and pure “on the defensive” Keith, trying to point out that the death-watch on his career back in 2001 might be ever the most slightly premature. Of course, ultimately he was proven right, even if he had to eat some of his words in the process.

    The book of essays he refers to here is the one that never saw the light of day after he canceled his contract and returned his advance to the publisher–HarperCollins is a division of News Corp.–in high dudgeon over the role of Page Six in the Murdoch Evil Empire’s New York Post (oh, how we love it) in helping spread a rumor that Sandy Koufax was gay. Not because he felt it was a terrible thing to be gay, but because he was disgusted at how they tried to whip up a scandal about whether or not Koufax was gay, and then tried to blame it all on stuff in the Daily News.

    As for Keith’s “novel about the TV news industry,” there’s a vast world of difference between finishing up a novel and getting it sold to a publisher who then puts it out. I suspect he finished the novel, but could never find a buyer. So he was counting his chickens a bit before they hatched there. Maybe he should be grateful–it could be that Keith is a better novelist than Bill O’Reilly, but Billo’s bilious novel on the TV news industry is out there for everyone to laugh at/be horrified by (you could call it the TV newscaster version of American Psycho) and I am not so sure he is the better for it. All it provides anyone with is a frightening insight into the man’s sense of frustrated entitlement (does he wish HE could murder all the people who have pissed him off in his career in various horrible ways?) and a source of unintended comedy at what are intended to be his bold and daring scenes of underworld degenerates addicted to sex and drugs. (”Hey, put that pipe down and get MY pipe up!”)

    Yes, chances are Keith’s a better fiction writer than that, but still…

    I just wish we could still read the Keith-penned Contentville stories this article once linked to, which are now essentially dead links."

    By orin ("Leona") english on Thursday, November 1, 2007 10:50 pm

    Keith Olbermann plans to apologize Friday night on his MSNBC show for criticisms he leveled at Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani based on a mishearing of a Giuliani quote from a campaign speech.

    That's according to an MSNBC spokeswoman, who said Olbermann would air the correction and apologize on his Friday-night show."

    http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6497142.html?desc=topstory

    J$---get the tivo ready!

    News, didn't Media Matters, DU or KOS write it up erroneously?

    Grammie

    Bill Maher is the host of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" which airs every Friday at 11PM.


    Posted by: Why don't you think at November 2, 2007 6:37 PM


    Don't forget to be good and drugged up before you tune in. It's a *maheryloon* pre-requisite.

    "Keith Olbermann plans to apologize Friday night on his MSNBC show for criticisms he leveled at Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani based on a mishearing of a Giuliani quote from a campaign speech."

    I'm sure he'll blame it on someone else and then nobly apologize as if it's for something he did not do. That's the pattern I've seen.

    "Funny how the wingnuts care so much about a "so called" Keith Olbermann lie but can't bring themselves to talk about all of Bush's lies."

    I do care about Bush's lies but I post about that on Bush Watch sites. Check your location - you're at OlbermannWatch. So who or what could be the topic here?

    Go to Beatles sites for Beatle postings, Yankees sites for Yankee postings and Olbermann sites for Olbermann postings. Is that too difficult for you?

    Bush isn't a journalist. Keith Olbermann claims to be. Big difference. Politicans lie son in case you didn't know that. Journalists are supposed to maintain their neutrality, not that you liberal wingnuts would get that in a million years. Olbermann obviously doesn't.

    Son,

    That's it! Today you and I are going to complete your potty training once and for all. Or bust!

    Brandon: "Politicians lie son, in case you didn't know that"

    Maybe THIS really is the difference between us. There is nothing lower than an elected politician telling an outright lie, thus betraying the trust that was placed in him/her by all who voted for them.

    What I can't grasp is why anyone would excuse lying by a politician as 'normal' and accepted behavior....and then turn around and try to hold news commentators to a higher standard.

    No, I 'journalist' shouldn't lie either, but I would take a world with honest politicians over a world with honest journalists anyday.

    Do you partake in a mouthful of oxycontin while listening to Rush Limpballs ?

    Posted by: Why don't you think at November 2, 2007 7:25 PM


    I don't listen to Rush. Next?

    Thanks, philby/rudy/jennifer/clucker/Anonymous!

    'Like Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh Malkin, Coulter etc. ?'

    Posted by 'who cares?

    Always here to help the 'Single Digits' when needed.

    Now look at the top of the page.

    What does it say?

    It say's.........OLBERMANNWATCH!

    But, since you HAVE to change the subject.

    May I suggest if you have a problem with Hannity, you start HANNITYWATCH.

    Oh that's right you did.

    IT FAILED!

    Limbaughwatch?

    IT FAILED TOO!

    Malkin?

    Coulter?

    Fox News?

    Oh thats right, either FAILED or FAILING!

    Jane Fonda Network? FAILED!

    Mother Jones Network? FAILING! (Very close to FAILED!)

    Nova Radio, home to Mike Malloy?

    Let's face real facts here. With only about 13 stations. FAILED!

    Jim Hightower? FAILED!

    Bitner & Bitner? FAILED!

    Ed Schultz? Who knows? We can't find him?

    AAR? I think they have a pirate radio ship somewhere. FAILING!

    But do let me say something nice before I leave.

    That Huff, she sure is amazing!

    To find the time to work on the blog after doing that double shift at the Bendix Diner on Rt. 46.

    Where does the woman find the energy?

    ***********************************

    Don't forget to be good and drugged up before you tune in. It's a *maheryloon* pre-requisite.
    Posted by: royal king at November 2, 2007 6:59 PM

    Yes it is! But WDYT has been having a bit of a problem lately.

    Since George Bush won't give up the fight on drugs and make them free and legal.

    WDYT has been spending all his money at the local crack house and drug emporium.

    He has no money over left over for the WAY OVER DUE SHUT OFF cable bill.

    But that's okay.

    He just get's loaded and then he sits in front of his blank 1957 PHILCO 10 inch black and white model that he brought for 5 dollars at the 'FREE MUMIA' rally and flea market.

    And just pretends Bill is doing a special show just for him.

    "Bill Maher is the host of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher".

    Really? And all this time I thought it was 'Uncle Floyd'.

    How many joints do I have to smoke before I figure out Bill Maher is the host of HOB's 'Real Time with Bill Maher".

    Hey! Did you know?

    Rush Limbaugh is the host of 'The Rush Limbaugh Show'?

    Glenn Beck is the Host of 'The Glen Beck Show'?

    Jerry Doyle is host of 'The Jerry Doyle Show'?

    Bill O'Reilly is the host of 'The Factor with Bill O'Reilly?


    GEORGE BUSH! Stop the war on drugs and keep you're hands off WDYT's stash!

    NOW!

    Thanks for stopping in and embarrassing yourself again, red neck !

    Posted by: Why don't you think at November 3, 2007 12:46 PM


    Thanks, racist!

    Hmm. Bill Clinton lied too if I recall. Under oath in fact. Repeatedly. Ah, gotta love the loons, they have such very short attention spans and such small little brains.

    Despite the constant and desperate attemps of the Olbermannloons to hijack each and every discussion on this board and turn it into a referendum on the Bush administration or GOP politics in general, the purpose of this blog is to discuss the journalistic failings of one Keith Olbermann. You can no longer deny his biases, and even the most ardent of you can't justify his blatant lying in this case or his half-assed apology. So you just change the subject, as usual, and hope that no one notices. And you think we're funny? We think you're desperate, deluded, and downright hilarious-just like your little pretend boyfriend, Olby, who wouldn't touch you unless you were under the age of 21. That's your hero. The person who can't even admit when he was wrong is your God. The person who does not have it within him to give a whole-hearted apology is the person you Idolize. Why don't you wake up and see what we've been trying to tell you about Olbermann has been right all along? Or are you as graceless as Olbermann when it comes to admitting he is what he is and you're so desperate to cover it up that you'll just keep hijacking threads to the end of time or at least the life of this blog or Olbermann's career as a newscaster? Because he's not fair, he's not a journalist, and he's a proven liar. And you worship that? Yeah, you need to get a new life or at least a new obsession.

    Defending Keith Olbermann. Look, even the diehards are bailing. Another Olbermann "fan" site has closed within the past month after they got fed up with his bullshit and lying. It's a trend. No, it's inevitable. most people sooner or later get who and what Olbermann truly is. But you've projected so much on him, are so heavily invested in him, that your obsession won't allow you to see him truly so you keep on defending. But whatever. I guess when you're a 45-year old virgin it doesn't leave much else in your life does it?

    Maybe there's merit to putting a statue to Shrub up. There is the old Italian proverb, "Give him a monument so his supporters will be so busy scrubbing the pigeon shit off, they can't find another dictator." Then, too, we could always have fun pulling it down.

    If we listen to Cee, all the millions of people who go out each year to listen to Clinton are pushing an anti-American, pro-sodomite agenda. Looks to me like its the Bushites who are getting buggered. Wait, we all are. They just enjoy it.

    Llarry erroneously says, "If we listen to Cee, all the millions of people who go out each year to listen to Clinton are pushing an anti-American, pro-sodomite agenda."


    ###
    No Larry....It is very clear that the private, personal political survival of President Clinton overshadowed the running of our national security and placed The United States in a position to be attacked by totalitarian terrorist islamists in 2001. This fact of history seems to be ignored by supporters of the very same cabal who's political infrastructure failed our great country once before.

    In addition, it is clear that well over 40% of the US population already has a very strong and negative opinion of The Clintons mostly based on their sleezy and low-class behavior both while in The White House and on their departure. I find this an important factor especially as we try to move forward as a nation in a dangerous world.

    One would think the idealist leftist would be pushing for someone different and ready to advance the agenda while symbolizing a unifying force (someone like Obama).

    Yet, the established leftist ruling class is lining up behind Clinton. This says a lot about their influence on the ruling elite only and not about their popular support. The behavior of the adulterous sodomite Bill, in The Oval Office, is only a symbol of the deeper problems inherent in The Clinton "brand." You have already seen it in the fund raising scandals that are bubbling to the surface.

    Johnny,

    Here's a link to an interesting piece about one guy's efforts to get Olbermann to correct the AP Osama/Assad story.

    http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12265

    You offer no proof, Cee, none whatsoever, that Clinton endangered our nation, yet you carelessly throw it out.

    You say Clinton has a 40% negative, yet your bouy has 70% negative. What did you mean to prove, Cee?

    The problem is you have nothing. Not about anything. Never. Just your opinion that your miserable boy is leading us into the sunlight. You can't prove that. Give up on it.

    I have the events against America 1998-2001 to illustrate, easily, the lack of initiative on the part of the adulteous sodomite, Bill Clinton. Poll numbers, political spin and speaking fees do not erase the death of American civilians on American soil after a group of Al Queda terrorists hatched a plan during Clinton's administration....This was the time for action and the small victories all during the 1990's without real American responses....like The USS Cole, shows the inept policies of Clinton....Monica and impeachment and the sodomist's refusal to step aside in a distracted country was the nail in the coffin for the WTC and OBL simply new The US was not paying attention to his cause.....

    9/11 changed that and lookie....NO terrorist attacks on American soil since Bush reversed the poor course of appeasement and lack of serious policy and brough the battle to the terrorists.

    Leadership means doing the difficult thing, and poll numbers do not matter to a real leader. Clinton always lead with focus groups, but focus groups did not know about small groups of terrorists coming to America to turn planes into bombs....Perhaps Clinton should have used the intelligence available to him to poll people on a proper response to OBL, Larry?

    Bill Clinton trivialized the US presidency, did not take the grave responsibilites of national security seriously enough and his juvenille behavior in The Oval Office with the sodomy of an young girl and his adultery and lying under oath and to the public is a wonderful symbol that will always be present.....I laugh everytime a pathetic democrat shill like you defends the sodomist adulterer...especially with poll numbers. Is this all you have?

    Larry, keep trying. As I look on the NY skyline and see no towers I know Bill Clinton's heart aches at not getting OBL the multiple timea he had presented to him. I know he feels bad about Rwanda and The Sudan and all of the other little battles he ignored for political ease and to indulge his narcissistic and silly appetites....The 90's were wasted and the superficial fun was all paid on one day on 9/11/01....I am glad you enjoyed them, Larry....nearly 3,000 familes have paid the price for your pleasure and Clinton's orgasm.

    Little battles lost.....built up to 9/11....You can have your opinion and fool yourself....not learn from Bill Clinton's errors...I hope his wife, who may indeed become our next executive, learned and remembers that leadership means risk....not playing it safe for your own well-being....so far, as a Senator, she has played it safe....not cutting off funding of The Iraq War....we will see how this bad example translates over the next year.

    Poor mental midget....he doesn't like my description of Bill Clinton. Too bad, mental midget...at least I use sterile, accurate ters for behaviors....you don't like the work "sodomy?" "Adultery?" Oh well, at least I do not dehumanize the subjects of my discussion....

    Like "Chimpster."

    Let just make sure we understand the facts....OBL rose to power during Bill Clinton's administration of EIGHT YEARS. George Bush was in office for EIGHT MONTHS and turned around the trend of terrorism against Americans to have no repeats....unlike poor old sodomy Bill.

    And again, you liked Bill Clinton's behvaior in The Oval Office, mental midget? Classy? it showed power and sophistication?

    Mmmm. Oh well, at least the near 3,000 who died on 9/11 did not have to see a President Gore since dear old sodomy Bill could not bring himself to do the honorable and good leadership "thing" and resign for his disgraceful behavior...

    Lying under oath
    Lying OUTRIGHT in front of a camera to The American People
    Using the people's house, The White House as his Pleasure Dome
    Sodomy
    Adultery
    Obstruction of Justice
    Coersing others to perjure themselves

    Ah yes....great use of time from 1998 onward....

    And OBL et al created THE BIGGEST FOREIGN ATTACK ON US CIVILIANS IN HISTORY during this time....

    Keep it up mental midget, this is so much fun!

    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!

    Cee, you have some nerve calling anyone a mental midget. Beyond question the only person who contributes to this cite denser than you is Dipshit and the only person less coherent is Cecelia. With American deaths today, 2007 IS THE DEADLIEST YEAR FOR AMERICAN TROOPS IN IRAQ. Let me repeat that in faint hopes it might sink in: 2007 IS THE DEADLIEST YEAR FOR AMERICAN TROOPS IN IRAQ.

    That doesn't bother you in the least, does it?

    Remember your boy promising to get Bin Laden dead or alive? "Let's roll?" All that cheerleader crap. Well he was a cheerleader, wasn't he? Didn't have balls to play, I guess.

    That doesn't bother you in the least, does it?

    You can sure harp on one of the most popular prsidents our nation has had, who has been out of office for 7 years. Still, everything is his fault, and your boy is responsible for nothing.

    Well, Cee, YOU ARE DAMN CRACKPOT. Let me repeat that: YOU ARE A DAMN CRACKPOT. Why don't you go double bill Medicare and leave the rest of us to talk reality?

    I did reference the success of Bush in not allowing any terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11, dear mental midget.

    This is success.

    The Iraq situation is improving in every indicator, Larry....the surge is working and the Iraqis are slowly progressing to national reconcilliation....

    Without giving into Al Queda in Iraq like you and the rest of the pathetic left wanted to do back in 2004......

    Oh well, facts seem anathema to both of you.

    The farce that was the bipartisan protection fest known as The 9/11 Comission was nothing but CYA for Clinton and Bush......I have no faith in their conclusions because all of the members had personal political agendas in the scales....

    Sorry, I will continue to analyze and interpret primary sources of history to make my own conclusions, unlike the pablum eating babies, Larry and mental midget....Wah, wah...they need more milkie!

    9/11/01....The planning and staging of the endeavor was mostly while the sodomist adulterer was playing with Monica.....mere coincidence?

    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!


    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!
    SODOMY!


    I think Cee wants to be sodomized. Will someone call the RNC to help him out?

    Larry and chickenblogger....let me remind you that sodomy involves any sort of copulation that is extra-vaginal.....

    So dear BJ Clinton, the adulterous sodomite liar, is the leader of the pack and an imfamous one at that (The Oval Office!)....and a Dem!

    Congratulations!...tick, tick, tick....9/11/01!

    The Damn Crackpot with the same recycled crap over and over .... Try to understand this: The sodomy story is old news. It has been processed. The American people were disgusted, the American people forgave. Why? Because Clinton was a leader, something we hadn't had in some time and something we haven't had for the last 7 years. Like it or not Crackpot, the American people don't agree with you or your boy. You're out of the mainstream on this one. Why don't you just go get your sodomy fantasy over with and get back to double billing Medicare?

    Poor leftists like Larry and Mental Midget....so fooled in believing their radical worldview is actualy respected by normal people....just like Olbermann....

    An example....

    I just received wonderful news....In one of the "bluest" states, New Jersey, people rejected government funding of unethical human experimentation by a wide margin.

    Oh, and I thought the "mainstream" believed embryonic stem cell research was totally ethical, necessary and productive....

    Mental Midget must be in a straight-jacket and slobbering on himself right now after being part of the minority who wanted to demean human life even further than they already have.

    Sorry guys.....the bulk of the country does not respect your twisted view of life and liberty....We all want to continue our wonderful free market and free society where people can believe and worship freely without hindrance from elites who think their way is best....we all want to continue to live with the US Constitution, under God.

    So Larry....nothing recycled here....cogent news from New Jersey where government spending on unethical human experimentation was halted in it's tracks even after the leftist hypocritical governer, a democrat of course, PLEADED for its passage.....

    I am sure he will request that the state spend the money in his next budget.....if he can't get the money one way, he'll try another. So typical of the left especially when radical policy is involved.

    Oh, and wait!..Larry and Mental midget were defeated in another blue state....Oregon....Just like I mentioned above, the radical left's government spending and usurption of freedom is not mainstream....even when voters are asked to raise a tax to help 100,000 children! Aw...just like the preacher's wife on The Simpsons says, "What about the CHILDREN!"

    The poor leftists....did not get their huge government expansions in 2007.....well there is always next year!

    Crack Pot: When has the government expanded more than under your boy? Take a look. Not since the beginning of the Great Depression and the Alphabet Agencies. I always wondered why you posted so much (time and volume) when you're virtually always wrong. I get it now. If you say it long and loud enough, you think it's true. Well, Crack Pot, dumb and delusional is now way to go through life. Why do you think Cecelia is drunk so often?

    ....let me remind you that sodomy involves any sort of copulation that is extra-vaginal.....

    ---

    Everyone knows that Cee. What most of us don't understand is why you're so obsessed by it. I guess you're just a pervert you gets some sort of sordid thrill in writing "sodomy" and "vaginal".

    Larry, I would love to see your statistics regarding the federal government expansion....

    Does it include.....

    The Department of Homeland Security?

    FEMA expansions?

    No Child Left Behind?

    Federal Financial Coverage of ALL 9/11 associated illness and damage

    Are the statistics based on government spending as a percentage of GDP?....because running all of the above along with the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan would require money.....

    You are silly and wrong....and also uninformed. If you look at the rhetoric from the left's ruling class, they would expand the federal government even more than W has....we just finished a debate (and the left screwed it up royally) over such unnecessary federal expansion.....

    S-CHIP.....The democrats wanted several tens of millions more to expand this federal program.

    So Larry.....try again. Although not a successful fiscal conservative, Bush has tried top restrain the left from expanding the government...even into areas of unethical human experimentation.....Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR)

    I really like how you avoided that little gem, Larry....I live in NJ and people tell me all the time how blue we are.....

    Not this time, even after people like mental midget (why) keep predicting the american people hate The Republican Party.....

    Obviously not enough to give Democrats in NJ 500 MILLION dollars to spend on ESCR....or what I know as unethical human experimentation.

    Oh and sodomy....not my cup o Joe....I was responding to your and another poster's assumption that it only involnes anal intercoarse....it doesn't and the adulterous sodomist Bill Clinton can tell you all about and the other ways he likes to be pleasured.

    I get no pleasure out of typing sterile medical or legal terms...I am a physician and a professional....

    It does seem you are a bit insulted by me calling such activity by their true terms (and hense deviant)...that's why I do it.....

    SODOMY!

    Cee, I thought you lived in Birmingham, Al.

    I have driven through Birmingham Alabama.

    I am a New Jersey native.

    I have never said that it was so limited, Crackpot. That is some sermon that you give for which here is no congregation.

    I have driven through Birmingham Alabama.

    ---

    I assume you were the Grand Marshall of the annual Apartheid Parade?

    I assume you were the Grand Marshall of the annual Apartheid Parade?

    Posted by: Llarry at November 7, 2007 4:30 PM

    Now Llarry, not everyone shares your interests.

    ...Look, even the diehards are bailing. Another Olbermann "fan" site has closed within the past month after they got fed up with his bullshit and lying. It's a trend. No, it's inevitable. most people sooner or later get who and what Olbermann truly is. ...Posted by: You have the same obsession you always have at November 4, 2007 9:39 PM

    which Olbermann "fan" site just closed, I thought there were only two; Blogging
    Olbermann (formerly Relevent Torture) and the KO.org forum (run by some guy named Michael & his dopey wife).

    5:44 - don't forget the leonas at the DU

    I love that line about Michael's dopey wife - she's pretty important what with her power to put posters in the penalty box - there's a goal for an adult woman to aspire to

    then you have the eternal student q but that's a whole other story - if you think this site is mindless you ought to spend some time with them

    they've had to increase the number of people recapping KO at Relevent Torture - can't they stand to watch that much KO? Just ask Johnny, there's only so much of Olby you can take

    It's great to see the right wing lemmings with their panties in a bunch over Olbermann. Now you know what it's like for the rest of 77%ers who have had to listen to propaganda ministers Goebbels... I mean Mush Limpaw and Shrill O'liely. The only difference is Keith speaks for all Americans, and those other goof speak for the money-hungry, bullies. Ya gotta love it!

    Hey SanityWillReturn...is your name referring to the leftist ruling class' nominee (and Olbermann fav), HRC, possible attaining the presidency?....

    The same HRC who uses plants in her audience for questions....sounds a lot like what happened with FEMA a couple of weeks ago!

    He, he, he

    The same HRC who plans on keeping American soldiers in Iraq?....sounds a lot like what Bush has planned....What about the rhetoric from the fringe left, like Olbermann, that the war is lost and immoral?

    He, he, he

    The same HRC who flip-flops on EASY issues like drivers licenses for illegal aliens, asks not to be attacked because she is a women and then uses her adulterous sodomist husband to try to defend her against "swift-boaing?"

    He, he, he....

    My underware is very comfortable as I watch the fringe left scurry around blindly whilst their ruling class use them and their rhetoric TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO! I believe you guys really need to get back to 1968 and protest that convention!....Ideals are at stake and HRC is about to be your standard bearer!

    Does Olbermann discuss that possibility?

    STOP THE WAR....CUT THE FUNDS NOW!

    I see that our well known taunter on the ideological fringe, .... who is affectionately known as Cee, is busy taunting others whom he deems to be on the ideological fringe again.

    I see Mr. Cee also still likes to use absurd and ridiculous phrases like "leftist ruling class" within all of his fringe inspired taunts, .... which sound much like the type of language that the old Soviet Union state controlled 'News' agencies used to use to characterized THEIR ideological opponents.

    And Cee still doesn't seem to understand that taunting and laughing at political opponents is a sign of a serious character flaw....and is anything BUT Christian!

    And Cee still doesn't seem to understand that taunting and laughing at political opponents is a sign of a serious character flaw....and is anything BUT Christian!

    Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2007 11:18 AM


    I doubt Jesus minds him pushing all your buttons... :D

    Sounds like you have a real firm grasp on how a Deity thinks.
    Ha !

    Posted by: Why don't you think at November 11, 2007 1:49 PM

    Well, I know God has a sense of humor.

    Afterall, he made you. :D

    Misssss.....

    Now, in reverse....mental midget loses again....Where's THE BOSS to make him cry?.....

    The Amry Corps asked for A FRACTION of what ended up being in the bill. Once again, Congressmen and women along with their Senate coillegues are bought with pork to support a bill that is mostly unnescessary pork.....Read it mental midget....and look at what the corp asked for.....it was not even close!

    He, he, he.....

    Planted is planted AND her red faced staff has apologized for it!!! And we all get to see how mental midget thinks and rationalizes the same exact behavior he condemns....BTW dear mental midget I never have mentioned the FEMA fiasco....now I will.....Those responsible should have been fired!.....Aw lookey....they were!

    He, he, he.....

    Lastly but most importantly, the unetical human experimetation 500,000,000 dollar bust.....Mental midget sounds just like the leftist ruliling class in NJ!....They were out in force weds saying the same thing...people voted it down because it cost too much and taxes are too high!....But they forgot one thing....

    THE SAME VOTERS PASSED A 200,000,000 ENVIRONMENTAL BOND ISSUE!

    What a bunch of simpletons along with mental midget!....Look at the spread....The same margin passed one bond but defeated the other....Why? Anyone with common sense would realize that a big enough plurality was against ESCR....

    Even after Corzine spent 1 million of his own money advertising before the election to pass it....

    He, he, he....

    For those that defeated the bond, mental midget, it was because they (and I) believe embryos are nascent human life and deserving of respect. You know, German scientists held the same opinion about those The Nazis deemed nonhuman and detetermined for destruction anyway druing the 1930's and 1940's.....They justified all sorts of scientific experiments that gave the world wonderful information and advancement.

    Guess what? Your utilitarian garbage ethics along with the rest of the secular left is still just as wrong. And you did not get your money for it....How did you vote, loser?

    Try again, mental midget....you whiffed! Oh how I enjoy this!

    "Thirty years of street drugs will get you some fucking angels, my friend!" - George Carlin

    Mental midget hypocritically claims, "What Cee DOESN'T tell you is always more significant than what he does."


    ###
    Oh my...mental midget lies again....Richard Codey, who he quotes as an objective observer of the ESCR Bond loss in NJ, was actually a large supporter, a democrat, and spent almost 300,000 dollars of his own campaign money demogoging the issue prior to the vote....

    Codey and the rest of the left in NJ WANT to believe the voters voted the bond issue down because of fiscal reasons...

    Sorry, if you look at the numbers, most voted against it because they are ethically against human experimentation....They choose not to be like the Nazi Scientists and use the sad utilitarian ethical argument that since someone deemed someone nonhuman, experimenting on them is ok.

    The democrats want to pretend its about fiscal responsibility instead....

    IF that was the case, the other bond issue would have also been defeated....it was not.

    Easy, common sense analysis that mental midget wants to overlook....

    The Stem Cell bond measure lost easily while the environment bond measure passed easily.

    Again, IF it was only a matter of money.....both would have been defeated.

    Oh, and mental idget claims to have taked with HUNDREDS of people?!?!

    What a joke....Yeah, ok....the vote was 6 days ago (5 days passed when mental midget posted the claim)....that means he has been talking to more than 25-40 people a day on why they voted against the measure?....

    I don't think mentaql midget knows 10 ethical and compassionate people nevermind "hundreds."

    And these "people" tell our intrepid leftist that they wanted to send a message to the democrats in Trenton to be more fiscally responsible?

    OK....this is the same guy who thinks HRC was not aware of an obvious plant questioner...."Many young people ask about the environment....." and the same guy who thinks when the Army Corp of Engineers asks for about 30 Million dollars for a project, it is ok to spend well over 300 Million so that each and every US legislator gets some pork for his/her district....and this means Bush lost somehow?

    What about that WAR FUNDING, mental midget?.....What about S-CHIP?....What about those impeachment investigations?......Those predictions of yours sure did not pan out.

    mental midget....slinks away again.....

    What a joke....Yeah, ok....the vote was 6 days ago (5 days passed when mental midget posted the claim)....that means he has been talking to more than 25-40 people a day on why they voted against the measure?....

    Posted by: cee at November 12, 2007 1:27 PM


    How could he when he has been on this board 24/7 every day? Just look at all of his posts saying the same thing over and over.

    Mental midget just can't face the fact that a plurality of the NO vote of the NJ Bond for Stem Cell Research was based on opposition to the procedure...specifically people not liking state funding of the use of human embryos in scientific research....

    Codey was used by mental midget to try to bolster his claim....he is an active supporter of the state funding....

    The other article was baseless opinion....no poll numbers and really only a press release from the leftist Governor's office who also spent his own money trying to get people to vote for the measure.

    Mental midget can't help himself....he lies and then lies to cover the lies.....

    "Even the Church eventually admitted that the planets, including the Earth, revolve around the Sun."


    ###
    Oh dear anon...who was of the opinion of a geocentric universe other than the church prior to the discovery that it was an error?....

    Scientists.

    Dear anon, who was of the opinion that eugenics was a valid application of Darwin's theories of natural selection?.....

    Scientists.

    Dear anon, who was of the opinion that experimentation on human subjects was ethical simply based on the fact that a central authority deemed the human being destined for death?.....

    Scientists.

    Scientists have no better a track record than the scape goats your tiny little mind can come up with. Do you think human embyros are not worthy of respect despite they contain the specific and unique attributes it would have as a fetus, an infant, a child, an adolescent, an adult?

    How do you come to your conclusion?

    What is human life and when are we all obliged to respect it?

    It is a very serious discussion and as usual the left does not want to discuss it.

    It has nothing to do with the dark ages....it has to do with how we act as human beings towards eachother and how we define humanity.

    Adolf Hitler believed he embodied progress to perfection. So did Marx. So did Stalin. So did Lenin and so do you.

    I do not see progress in your worldview but a denegration of the human soul in a utilitarian ethic no different than those listed above.

    Think about it dear Anon....Who is really stuck in The "Dark Ages?"

    "science is always bad"


    ###
    This hypebole is ridiculous and a lie. The Bush Administration spent MORE money of Adult Stem Cell Research than The Clinton Administration did.....Did you know that, dear Anon.....How about diseases like Breast Cancer and Colon Cancer....more or less than 10 years ago.....

    Oh yeah, Republicans and Christians hate science.....ok....what support do you have for this wonderful observation?

    Nice dodge anonymous....You totally avoided the reality that KNOWLEDGE (either attained through observation or supernatural revelation), is limited and human beings (scientists, shamans, rabbis, cardinals, politicians, poets, philosophers, etc) have arrived at erroneous conclusions later discovered....The very same fact of a geocentric universe was widely accepted AND THE SCIENTIFIC CONVENTIONAL WISDOM for centuries and "the church" was no more responsible for that error as it was for the error of eugenics.

    This is the problem with today's secularist leftist who has such a thorn of bias towards the supernatural. He/she cannot reconcile the results of their worldview as evidenced by similar theory (Marxism, Existentialism, etc) we saw in the 20th century.....instead they only can deride the classic paradigms prior to the modern era as "dark ages."

    Well, that is a fine rhetorical tool, anonymous and it shows how ill prepared you are to defend your worldview. I am more than prepared if you want to try again.

    And your strawman argument about me personally sending men and women to their deaths in war is also easily addressed if you really are prepared. The enemy of human rights and liberty as embodied in islamic totalitarianism is a threat worthy of the use of force and the positive results in Iraq are being seen.

    Nice dodge anonymous....You totally avoided the reality that KNOWLEDGE (either attained through observation or supernatural revelation), is limited and human beings (scientists, shamans, rabbis, cardinals, politicians, poets, philosophers, etc) have arrived at erroneous conclusions later discovered....The very same fact of a geocentric universe was widely accepted AND THE SCIENTIFIC CONVENTIONAL WISDOM for centuries and "the church" was no more responsible for that error as it was for the error of eugenics.

    Posted by: cee at November 12, 2007 3:35 PM

    I'm wondering who Anonymous feels is qualified to consider and make judgments about the issues occasioned by the progress of science, if NOT philosophers, theologians, ethicists?

    Scientists?

    Ok anon....I admit to being held up in my church compound with 12 hour shifts awaiting the second coming!

    We sing cum bi ya on the hour and only eat matzos and grape juice.

    We have the entire text of the scriptures changed into numbers that when added, multiplied by 6 and then divided by the square root of 7,890,873 tells us the exact date of the apocolpse....January 19, 2012 plus or minus 6 years....

    Yeah....that's me....science, the arts, literature are totally untouchable by the flat-earther fundie!

    Oooooo!

    "I am also pleased I could help."


    ###
    Anonymous, you are about as helpful as Al Gore has been to halting global climate change.

    When and if you ever become prepared to defend your pathetic worldview, let me know.

    You can continue to watch from the sidelines for now.

    I am pleased to see you are out of denial, FIG. It is the beginning. I am also pleased I could help.

    Posted by: Anonymous at November 12, 2007 4:35 PM


    Now get to work on France, Germany, Ireland, Austria, Germany and more...

    They seem to be as anti-science as GWB...

    Reread my statement, mental midget....."as helpful as Al Gore has been to halting global climate change."

    Has Al Gore stopped the climate from changing? Do you have data saying anything he has done has stopped the climate from changing.

    When the climate continues to do what it naturally does and in 25 years we see no influence from Al Gore's "education" inititiative, will you admit you were wrong?

    Again, I did not say, "as helpful as Al Gore has been to making people spend money on silly theories and pointless tasks," or "as helpful as Al Gore has been to having a self-proclaimed mission that keeps him from running for President (thank goodness)."

    No, I stated something measurable....and so far my research has shown that the earth has warmed despite his crusade and we will all get to see another crackpot theory like eugenics fall by the wayside to the trash-heap of history.....

    Hey mental midget....what about my retort to your silliness about the NJ bond that failed.....you tried to pass a big whopper by the dear OW readers this AM!

    Cee would rather pontificate and throw those embryos in the trash ( which is exactly where discarded embryos go) rather than they help people!
    It's all symbolism to him.
    Gotta adhere to that right wing religious mind think .
    Throw embryos in trash or use them for research to hopefully find cures for deadly diseases?
    Cee is an embarrassment to the medical profession whose purpose is to do what is best for the sick.
    Instead, all this charlatan does is provoke sickness ( and nausea)
    Posted by: Why Don't You Think at November 12, 2007 7:4


    Well, it's good to know that you don't want embryos just thrown in a trashcan, WDYT...

    I don't either. That's why I'm pro-life.

    Care to tell us about all these grand discoveries coming from embryonic stem cell research as compared to adult stem cell research.

    Oh dear....mental midget has come across victims of leftist demagoguery and misinformation....

    The mislead Parkinson's patient should know that the latest advances for their disease have been arrived at with ADULT STEM CELLS.....

    Only one example...

    http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1268andwit_id=3676

    The same is true for spinal cord injuries.....Google Joni Ercikson-Tada to find out more from Christopher Reeves morally equivalent pro-lifer....She is full of joy!

    Embryonic Stem Cells have failed time and again to even come close to the success of Adult Stem Cells....oh, and if ESCR was so important, the private sector would be pursuing it like gainbusters.....guess what MM....they are not....why?....lack of success....the money is being thrust into alternatives including Adult Stem Cells.

    The Government need not advocate for the diminishment of the human family....If a mother and father wish to throw away their progeny to the trash or experimentation (ethically the same thing), they may......but I do not need to fund it through my taxes as a representation of unthical human experimentation....

    It is mental midget.....Please tell me when we should deem a human being a human being.....

    When they speak?
    When they breathe?
    When their heart beats?
    When they can contribute to the economy?

    When, mental midget?....Your answer says more about you than you know....

    No, sorry, human beings from fertility treatments are still human and deserve our respect. Parents are the first DEFENDERS of care to their children and I personally would not allow my baby to be experimented upon in some kind of utilitarian ethic.

    I tell my patients as much and say, "it is your choice," but do not thrust the poison on me.

    People respect a position of LIFE in a doctor more than a Kevorkian who may just not be so committed to the life of his/her patient when such ethics are allowed.

    I will now replace your quote with Nazi era rationalization of human experimentation on "subhumans"

    "Cee would rather pontificate and throw those Jews in the ovens ( which is exactly where Jews go) rather than they help people!
    It's all symbolism to him.
    Gotta adhere to that right wing religious mind think .
    Throw Jews in the oven or use them for research to hopefully find cures for deadly diseases?
    Cee is an embarrassment to the medical profession whose purpose is to do what is best for the sick.
    Instead, all this charlatan does is provoke sickness ( and nausea)."


    ###
    I am glad to make you sick to your stomach for what is just and right, mental midget.

    Bobo, for all your outrage the only difference between your position and GWB's position is whether federal funding be available for research using NEW embryonic stem cell lines.

    There is no prohibition on the research itself, just federal funding for one aspect of it. That is no federal funding to create new embryos solely for the purpose to use them for experimentation. Federal funding still can go for embryonic stem cell research for existing embryonic stem cells.

    Well over 90% of all new drug therapies come from private R&D. If federal funding was withheld it would barely be a blip on the radar.

    Let the market place of ideas and research handle this. It works so much better than beauracratic bean counters.

    Grammie

    You will continue to pontificate and have your head up your ass...and let religion cloud reason and science.


    Posted by: Why Don't You Think at November 12, 2007 10:50 PM


    Why do you hate God so much?

    Mental midget has no problem borrowing almost a half a billion dollars in NJ for the scientific community to spend BUT such money being spent in the private sector with free market forces that require results and choice (pharma/biotech) is something he despises. Oh the contradictions.

    Like Grammie points out, Bush and the evil right are not restricting the private use of embryos for research. Like I said in my post, if parents deem their children as subhuman and allow experimentation to ensue, that is their choice....I personally do not want to fund this ethical dimunation nor do I simply ignore it like mental midget chooses to.

    The scare tactics of the American left that implies ESCR is not occurring because huge infusions of tax money is restricted is a shame. Using the poor ethical argument that the embryos are going to be discarded anyway is just like the German scientist who did unethical human experiments on the Jews after someone else deemed them ready for the garbage heap....The end result was the same....death.

    Parents make all sorts of incorrect judgements for all sorts of practical reasons, and this latest is just another based on utilitarianism....just like later term abortion for "economic," or "societal," or "psychological," reasons. The result is the same....the devaluation of human life.

    As a physician sworn to protect life, it is required I take a more measured and intellectually stimulating approach. The demagoguery of the likes of mental midget that scares people into believing someone is ignoring their suffering is something I had hoped would not be used.

    Sorry you have to live with the 57% of us who voted down the 450,000,000 bond, mental midget....The people I talked to seemed willing to hold the government from opening up the door to unethical human experimentation while realizing there are others of different opinion....they can fund the research with their private dollars and investment....perhaps they will become wealthy!

    Put your money into it if it so important, mental midget. I prefer not to for moral reasons. And most of those who voted against the bond for Stem Cell Research while voting for the huge bond for "open spaces," shows you that there are many who think like me and Mr. Bush.....embryos are human beings and not just cells ready to be toyed with.

    "As a physician sworn to protect life, it is required I take a more measured and intellectually stimulating approach."

    You must be fucking joking, you bloodthirsty christofascist.

    No, Lucy, I am not joking.

    Most of the DO's I have met are radical rabid leftists with their unproven potions and anecdotal alternative methods....

    Sorry to show your errors again, Anon, but I am an allopath....MD....a science loving, double-blind placebo controlled study freak that looks upon current climate change "science" that lacks such research and takes it with a pound of salt.....

    Cause/effect is what I deal with everyday as well as the respect for all life and liberty. So far the "science" of human induced global climate change lacks any definitive and objective cause/effect proof and is only theory....

    Unlike much of what I deal with everyday....as a real scientist that asks for significant difference analysis and controls.

    Nice little cut-n-paste piece in which you lifted whole paragraphs unattributed from this site, WDYT:

    http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/351/17/1789

    But then, we've seen how your broad paraphrasing gets you into trouble too...

    Embryonic tem cell research can receive federal funding if the research keeps to existing lines of embryonic cells.

    There is virtually no limit (other than voting taxpayers) to state funding of research on ANY line of embryonic cells.

    There is no limits or impediments to private funding for research on ANY line of embryonic cells.

    However, both in Europe and in the U.S. private funding has not been as popular as had been predicted, so there has been much pressure put on the EU and other national coffers to cough up the money.

    Why do the robber baron capitalists, who wouldn't give an M & M to a starving child, put their money in adult stem cell research? Because benefits from these cells have far outpaced any discoveries made from ESC across the ENTIRE world.

    One of the problems is that ESCs are too mutable and may be too unstable to ever give the benefits that ASC provide NOW.

    I enjoy your usual name calling about old fuddy duddie (to put it nicely...) and the run-it-up-the-flagpole-and-salute-it speeches about how science marches on, and how we must get with the program regardless of any widely perceived ethical issues raised in the process. However, it's bunk. And though you may not take kindly to references of fallen dictators who have argued the same thing, unless their names are used in some context about the U.S. president, there are comparisons nonetheless.

    There are sensitive and profound ethical issues with this research. Because YOU view embryos as mere tissue to be flushed down a toilet or used for spare parts depending upon the situation, does not mean that the rest of the world agrees or should agree.

    Meanwhile there is a less controversial technique that has far outpaced ESC research results everywhere in the world, and this DESPITE the constant prognostications in the media about the benefits from ESCs largely based on hype.

    Now the question you should ask me, but you won't think of it, is if I would feel differently about ESC research if it were the field to show the most promise. The answer is, that I wouldn't. I would still want SOME limits on my taxdollars funding a trail between abortion clinics and research labs and for what THAT scenario will eventually yield to-- the development of embryos grown for experimentation via federal money.

    That's why I vote candidates who feel the same.

    As with all issues, inevitably there are no avenues offered for compromise with you and the people who share your temperament. Your opponents in this matter are all sorts of awful and determined to keep the handicapped in their wheelchairs, in the same way that welfare reform was the stuff of heartless monsters before being signed by someone you voted for and in the same way that your opponents drink the blood of Iraqi children until someone you vote for wisely and courageously continues to try and stabilize Iraq.

    Whatevah...

    To borrow form Cecelia, wannawipe, "Whatevah."

    I view myself as complete in using the scientific method properly (unlike the religious left environmental radicals) while allowing the creator of it all to minister to my soul and reveal His Love for me and all people and whatever else He deems He wants to reveal....

    Poor wannawipe would like to employ that litmus test all secularists have ready for use.....exclude the supernatural because it does not exist!

    Well wannawipe, like Lucy Van Pelt (SLOB), you can continue your little secularist store-front with "advice for 10 cents" or you can decide to leave your cynical manipulation behind and join Linus and Charlie Brown in their growth as human beings.....

    Eitherway I will view it as an enjoyable interaction!

    Oh Anonymous, like you think you know me (and you don't), based on what you post here... I am beginning to wonder if you even know yourself.

    Would you ever even admit to being like Linus Van Pelt or Charlie Brown?

    Because they are Luke and John in reality.....The Leviticus sort is more like Lucy and fits SLOB (just look at his sole post today) to a T....and it seems you as well.....

    Just see how wannawipe uses the Great Pumkin symbolism....he totally misses the point....do you as well?

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    "RUDY IN '08!"

    Are you trying to scare me?

    Shame, really Anon...It would be a great lesson for you in how you view God's interaction with His creation....

    But I remember....you don't want to discuss worldviews.....sorry.

    You will continue to pontificate and have your head up your ass...and let religion cloud reason and science.


    Posted by: Why Don't You Think at November 12, 2007 10:50 PM

    You must be fucking joking, you bloodthirsty [christofascist].??

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 13, 2007 8:57 AM

    I truly hope these hateful souls haven't reproduced. Can you imagine the domestic disputes their local police dept. has probably had to deal with in their homes? These are the types that kick dogs for entertainment. We know slobs weapon of choice is his handy piece of rebar. What's 'whys' weapon of choice?

    I truly hope these hateful souls haven't reproduced. Can you imagine the domestic disputes their local police dept. has probably had to deal with in their homes? These are the types that kick dogs for entertainment. We know slobs weapon of choice is his handy piece of rebar. What's 'whys' weapon of choice?

    Posted by: royal king at November 13, 2007 12:14 PM

    You say this, yet, you link to Michael Savage.

    His purse full of quarters! :)

    Grammie

    "I am pleased you find revelation in a comic strip."


    ###
    If you had any idea why it is again ironic that wannawipe (AAP) uses "The Great Pumpkin" or SLOB uses Linus Van Pelt to try to insult me is the well known fact that the creator of PEANUTS, Charles M Schulz, used the strip to teach basic truths about Christ and God. He was an evangelical Christian just like me!

    Although not as blatent as B.C., PEANUTS really has much to say about God's love.

    Ooo, BTW, Christ Himself (the gospels do document he was male), calls Jehovah "Father," so try to reconcile that one with your political correctness influenced post at 12:13PM...

    I have no idea why God has been assigned, what we call the gender, male....but HE was by His son.

    So Anonymous, would you like to discuss all this some more or are you still just putting your toe in the water?


    But I remember....you don't want to discuss worldviews.....sorry.

    Posted by: cee at November 13, 2007 12:05 PM


    Well, it's not like you're missing anything.

    A paragraph on Herr Bush and the radical, fringe, isolated, out-of-touch and, may I add-- TEENY element (added only if implying that YOU are alienated from the rest of the society, rather than the entire "GOP") that wishes its religious views codified into a system of Orwellian newspeak and mind control that makes the Taliban look like the denizens of an Amsterdam park on a sunny day....

    Then a few hits that you are a war-mongering, handicapped status quo championing, racist hater...oh, and let's not leave out.. "judgmental"... :D... and there's your rebuttal and "worldview discussion".

    Yer welcome...


    What's 'whys' weapon of choice?

    Posted by: royal king at November 13, 2007 12:14 PM

    Drag and click...

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    Women have had to deal with the ugly end of the plunger ever since.

    Posted by: Au Contraire! Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee! at November 13, 2007 1:08 PM


    You're walking, talking, upper case writing, proof of that, Patsy.

    I doubt very seriously you would refer to an older male in the same manner that you've used when addressing Grammy.

    "...or you can decide to leave your cynical manipulation behind and join Linus and Charlie Brown in their growth as human beings....."


    Phari-cee's idea of growing as a human being is to whole-heartedly and without provision support an endless war despite its shifting kaleidoscope of rationalizations, but to do so from the comfort of his giant house. He's got his medical liscense, so feels no more need to "grow" by putting his expertise to work in a front line military hospital, or even in the safety of Landstuhl. This Child of Christ is ca. 38 years of age, and would certainly be swept into service without delay if he would only offer something of himself to the horrible events his political franchise supports.

    He could save some of the lives that his fetish/president casts away everyday; he could "grow as a human being" through altruistic sacrifice of his own comfort and professional schedule, if nothing else.

    ...but instead he chooses to fight and re-fight ridiculously obtuse rhetorical battles on OW every single day, and collect his fat paycheck for pushing ambien and viagra to his well-insured fellow bourgeoisie.

    Go back, Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee and read how starting from the Genesis, Women have had to deal with the ugly end of the plunger ever since.

    Posted by: Au Contraire! Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee! at November 13, 2007 1:08 PM


    There is absolutely NO WAY this person is capable of even dressing him/herself in the morning. A horribly sick individual. I only hope someone or state/govt funded organization has him/her under a watchful eye.

    Boy oh boy....cee is really turning into one heck of a character....Between Anonymous' and Lucy's fantacies, he is one complex dude. Pile on that the vast ideology assumed by wannawipe and cee has really evolved into one sick puppy.

    I am tempted to change monikers like some due to this caricature that is before me. Although then I would be tempted to change my tune altogether. What to do?

    I'll pass. But in the mean time I can't let wannawipe's stupidity stand....Although fallen man has employed your metaphor towards women since he decided to go his own way, the ideal is so much better than you could ever imagine.....The reverse is also true...

    And I don't even have to change subjects as my example....The sodomist adulterer Bill Clinton is the perfect example of your
    scorn for how human beings treat eachother....

    oh and your question, "As to why God has been assigned the male gender, could it be because the Israelite culture was also patriarchal in nature?"

    As a Christian, I believe Jesus Christ is omnipotent, omnipresent and omnicient God on Earth so His description of "The Father" must stand on its own without my sensitivies and biases....It is too bad Anonymous has ventured off on his own theology on that one as well.

    But he has scurried away from that interesting debate as well.

    How about you, Lucy?


    "As a Christian, I believe Jesus Christ is omnipotent, omnipresent and omnicient God on Earth so His description of "The Father" must stand on its own without my sensitivies and biases....It is too bad Anonymous has ventured off on his own theology on that one as well.

    But he has scurried away from that interesting debate as well.

    How about you, Lucy?"

    Blah, blah, blah. Personally I believe the impatient socialist reformer Jesus Christ that I've read about would beat your ass with his own sandals for being the self-contented, vicariously bloodthirsty, and tautologically pious little cloud-sitter that your posts here reveal you to be.

    Correction, Lucy....You believe the impatient socialist reformer Jesus Christ that you've created to suit your own narcissistic impulses would beat my ass with his own sandals for being the self-contented, vicariously bloodthirsty, and tautologically pious little cloud-sitter that my posts here revealed me to be.

    You see, Lucy....men always have a tendency to place themselves as their god (remember our discussion on gnosticism or self-deification that is totally emodied in your secular worldview)....and based on your posts here, it is only natural that you would transform Christ into someone like yourself.

    Sorry Lucy, there is no empirical evidence that Christ would fit your description. In fact, He was quite clear who He was and why He was here....to be killed and to rise from the dead....period.

    The other "stuff" points to that end.

    I believe there was a plenary indulgence granted when it comes to Mrs. Hawkins. Nonetheless, as big a whiney, ass-kissing nincompoop as she is, many of us refrain from calling her names in deference to her advanced years and (apparent) gender.

    Posted by: Anonymous at November 13, 2007 1:48 PM

    Just as women refrain from using diminutives in your presence.

    "Sorry Lucy, there is no empirical evidence that Christ would fit your description."

    This is funny. I hate to be the one to tell you, but there is, in fact, no empirical evidence that this particular Jesus person ever lived in the first place; at least of no more an empirical nature than is the evidence that Inkidu, the hairy goat-tailed side-kick of Gilgamesh, ever lived.


    My last word on this tiresome issue is that you too, Phari-cee, create your own conceptualization of Jesus as scape-lamb - and you might be surprised to learn that its a different frame than is applied to him by scads of people everywhere who call themselves good Christians. The difference between you and many of these people is that you for some unfathomable reason entertain the hubristic certainty that your construct is the only right one.

    Your conclusion is the only one to arrive at when one views the Hebrew and Christian scriptures as anything but the revelation of Jehovah, dear Lucy.

    People can put all their own prejudices onto Christ all they want....It is futile. When one accepts and applies the totality of the Torah, the prophets and the gospels, there is no other conclusion and calling oneself a good christian does not change that idea.

    Again, you do not even feel there is a diety, Lucy so my point of view falls on a closed mind. However, when individuals like Anonymous attempt to impose a secularist ideology on the sacred, a very interesting discussion can commence, but he still seems a little shy to even try to defend his worldview.

    Your worldview, that can take or leave any "idea," including the teachings of the possibly fictional Jesus of Nazareth, is about as firm as the shifting sand and as I have shown time and again, the results have been clear over the least few centuries. Anonymous' personal construct of the secular and Christian has the same result.

    Trial and error to replace the ideal a loving God intended for His creation will continue as it has since the beginning.

    You can read all about it in The Torah, the remainder of the Hebrew scriptures as well as the Christian scriptures.

    BTW, great intellectuals who were once atheists changed their mind when they attempted the mental exercise of accepting the Hebrew and Chrisitan scriptures as fact on faith alone.....

    one being a guy I have mentioned before...

    C.S. Lewis.

    "He was quite clear who He was and why He was here....to be killed and to rise from the dead....period."


    OK, so its not my last word - I can't resist this one.

    This whole holy scape-goat mythology created around what was probably a real and influential person perfectly suits a static bourgeous like yourself, Phari-cee. Take a look at what you expect us to swallow:

    The Son of God is sent by his father from the throne-room in heaven to grow up in neolithic squallor here on Earth, for the sole purpose of "saving" humanity from the arbitrary system of bureaucratic morality that Dad himself created. This salvation is to be realized via a brutal beating and his murder by torture.

    OK, so beside the point that this infallible diety just can't seem to get things right -requiring first a destructive deluge and then a trouble-shooting intervention by junior to get his little terrarium running smoothly - what exactly is the sacrifice that is being made here? Is it the fact that Jesus had to spend 33 years infested with lice and living among people who hadn't the slightest idea of what microorganisms are capable of, or was it the crucifiction thing? I mean, experts say that the worst part of torture is the victim's awareness of the horrible potential of permanent physical damage or death as a result of the ordeal, and not necessarily the pain itself. To be honest, from Jesus' perspective the whole thing really must have been analogous to a bad summer camp experience, bracketed to either side by blissful eternities enjoyed as the adored Prince of Heaven.

    I submit that my own conception of Jesus as a mortal human agitator who pestered the powerful in full knowege of his peril is the far more evocative tale of sacrifice, altruism, and love. A human who takes a stand based on principle and empathy, and faces as a result a miserable end to the only existence that is known is really making a sacrifice, and is really worthy of deep gratitude.

    Why do patsy, why, philby, slob and mike hate God so much? Baffling.

    I expect you to accept it on faith, Lucy (and even wannawipe), as is the requirement for ANY relationship with God.

    That is why you do not "swallow" it, Lucy.....Read some C.S. Lewis and perhaps you will understand.

    That is the uniqueness of Jehovah over any man-made god through the history of man....The sacrifice of Christ to enable relationship still is based on the love relationship in faith....this is unique to Jehovah as compared to any of the man-made gods throughout human history.

    Your inability (actually your choice) not to act on faith will always be your problem, Lucy....and wannawipe's among many more. The nature of the reality cannot be changed just as much as gravity cannot be changed.

    Why do patsy, why, philby, slob and mike hate God so much? Baffling.

    Posted by: royal king at November 13, 2007 3:31 PM


    I think its because I made people like you and cee. Talk about your holier-than-thou perfectionists. I mean; give a guy a break! We all fuck up once in a while.

    Glad to oblige, Anonymous....The adulterous sodomite Bill Clinton gives so much....he has been a goldmine!....

    Treating one's wife like Christ acted towards The Church, even giving up His life for her, is a tall order, isn't it Anonymous?....

    That is why I have JOHN 13 inscribed on my wedding band.....read it and see why.....

    Your inability (actually your choice) not to act on faith will always be your problem,

    Posted by: cee at November 13, 2007 3:35 PM


    Nope, its not a problem; it's called freedom.

    "I expect you to accept it on faith, Lucy (and even wannawipe), as is the requirement for ANY relationship with God."


    Then what were you doing disputing me on the basis of "empirical evidence" a few posts above? You'd better check your faith stick, Phari-cee, I think you might be a couple quarts low.

    Oh boy, Lucy....your ignorance even of basic scripture, even that used in the recent civil rights struggle, is showing.....

    "Nope, its not a problem; it's called freedom."


    ###
    Sorry, you are wrong, Lucy.....

    "To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, 'If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.'

    "They answered him, 'We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?'

    "Jesus replied, 'I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. I know you are Abraham's descendants. Yet you are ready to kill me, because you have no room for my word. I am telling you what I have seen in the Father's presence, and you do what you have heard from your father.'

    "'Abraham is our father,' they answered.

    "'If you were Abraham's children,' said Jesus, 'then you would do the things Abraham did. As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the things your own father does.'

    "'We are not illegitimate children,' they protested. 'The only Father we have is God himself.'

    "Jesus said to them, 'If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.'

    "The Jews answered him, 'Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?'

    "'I am not possessed by a demon,' said Jesus, 'but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. I tell you the truth, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.'

    "At this the Jews exclaimed, 'Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that if anyone keeps your word, he will never taste death. Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?'

    Jesus replied, 'If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.'

    "'You are not yet fifty years old,' the Jews said to him, 'and you have seen Abraham!'

    "'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am!' At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds."

    JOHN 8:31-58


    ###
    Again, a difficult passage for the person who just wants Jesus of Nazareth as a socialist agitator....He called himself I AM....Jehovah....This is even difficult for the casual church goer like Anonymous to accept....see his posting difficulty with gender....

    Sorry Lucy...you think you are free but you are a slave according to the socialist agitator. And the blessed early leaders of the 1960's civil rights movement also believed as such....

    I'll have to go retrieve some early MLK sermons to irritate your secularist boils, Lucy and wannawipe!

    "if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed."

    "Then what were you doing disputing me on the basis of 'empirical evidence' a few posts above? You'd better check your faith stick, Phari-cee, I think you might be a couple quarts low."


    ###
    I was arguing against your faithless interpretation of scripture, Lucy. I accept the scripture based on faith that it is true....You pick and choose based on what makes "sense" to you....the easy way out.

    Well, you're right about one thing - I have no supernatural faith. That's why every single one of your self-referrential arguments is idiotic gibberish to me. Please be informed: for me to accept something from the Bible as proof that the Bible contains even a faithful record of things said on earth by Jesus, then I would need just for starters to see a viable chain of custody, and at least a couple of credible corroborating primary sources. And that doesn't even begin to adress the hocus pocus. So please, just stop embarrassing yourself.

    ....You pick and choose based on what makes "sense" to you....the easy way out.


    Posted by: cee at November 13, 2007 4:09 PM


    ...except that I was never "in". Can we surmise by your statement that you are looking for a "way out"?

    No, I am referring to those who cannot possibly believe something the scriptures say because it seems absolutely childish or ridiculous....Choosing that for the fairy tale pile while holding firm to other parts of the scriptures is the easy way out.....You do accept some of the parts of the bible, Lucy....you even quote some to me about Pharicees and praying in the closet, or taking care of the poor....but the flood, the miracles, The Shema, the resurrection?.....Lucy dismisses it.

    Ok, that's easy. But waiting on God and having faith that the words one is reading are His, that is faith, and the faith Christ was talking about.

    I am sorry you are incapable of something challenging like this Lucy. But again, atheism as a religion is deficient in so many other ways.

    Oh, and Lucy...how am I embarrassing myself?....the very words I use to refute your "freedom" claim were used by the great civil rights leader, Marin Luther King, Jr......Could it be once again that the great moral challenges of our nation were once again NOT met by secularists but by those who believed in God through faith?.....

    Again, my unmet challenge of a secular humanist abolitionist remains unmet.....

    Oh that bad old supernatural claimed by the secularist to be a fairy tale and what is holding mankind back really has had the opposite affect?

    What does the 21st century secular humanist do now?

    "At times we may feel that we do not need God ... There is so much frustration in the world because we have relied on gods rather than God..These transitory gods are not able to save us or bring happiness to the human heart.

    "Only God is able. It is faith in Him that we must rediscover. With this faith we can transform bleak and desolate valleys into sunlit paths of joy and bring new light into the dark caverns of pessimism."

    Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    "Free At Last"

    Free at last, free at last
    I thank God I'm free at last
    Free at last, free at last
    I thank God I'm free at last

    Way down yonder in the graveyard walk
    I thank God I'm free at last
    Me and my Jesus going to meet and talk
    I thank God I'm free at last

    On my knees when the light pass'd by
    I thank God I'm free at last
    Tho't my soul would rise and fly
    I thank God I'm free at last

    Some of these mornings, bright and fair
    I thank God I'm free at last
    Goin' meet King Jesus in the air
    I thank God I'm free at last


    ###
    I am not embarrassed dear Lucy to be among these berave souls who knew what freed them, truly.

    Where's the secular humanist? Hello?

    Nope, its not a problem; it's called freedom.

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 13, 2007 3:40 PM


    And you've always had that freedom in matters of faith, and it our God-given freedom to disobey God that cut us off from his presence.

    You relish your freedom and you have it. But any consequence that come from any sort of self- reliance is the responsibility of the man who exercised his freedom in the first place. Those consequences are our muck-up, not God's.

    God didn't chose mankind to fall, man did.

    And neither you or anyone else, including the man Jesus, has/had the option of risking nothingness (no afterlife) by taking on the powers-that-be who could sentence him to death.

    There is no "nothingness" after death, there is somethingness. And for you to conjecture that it would be more self-sacrificing to risk something that is not (nothingness after death), when speaking about a man who harbored not an iota of that notion and of whom scripture teaches, died in order to save humanity from the consequences of sin after death-- well, it's amusing for you, not especially shocking, and just mere nonsense.

    And nonsense is nonsense.


    Let's take this goobletygook one piece at a time...First please inform me, how exactly did this work and why?:

    "and of whom scripture teaches, died in order to save humanity from the consequences of sin after death"

    "I am not embarrassed dear Lucy to be among these berave souls who knew what freed them, truly."


    Among them? Really? Are there a lot of emancipated African Americans in your gigantic house, that you claim you reserve as the bare minimum of earthly entitlements or you and your family?

    Yes, a lot of heroism and altruism has been accomplished by people citing scripture and using biblical models.

    ...but are you also ready to claim those others that you are "among", inlcuding Adolph Hitler, Torquemada, and Nathan Bedford Forrest? - all of whom referred to the same book you do to explain and justify vile crimes against individuals and humanity? How about William Bradford, the Puritan hero, describing the masacre of hundreds of Pequot men, women and chidren?:


    "Those that scaped the fire were slaine with the sword; some hewed to peeces, others rune throw with their rapiers, so as they were quickly dispatche, and very few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fyer, and the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stincke and sente there of, but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them, thus to inclose their enemise in their hands, and gave them so speedy a victory over so proud and insulting an enemy."

    ...or Cotton Mather, who referred to this and other such events thusly:


    "I do, with all conscience of truth,...report the wonderful displays of His infinite power, wisdom, goodness, and faithfulness, wherewith His divine providence hath irradiated an Indian wilderness". (Mather's "Annals of Christ in America")

    "and of whom scripture teaches, died in order to save humanity from the consequences of sin after death"

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 13, 2007 5:34 PM

    Sir Loin, I love ya, mister, but this would take awhile.

    If you're really interested start with Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis.

    That will give you a good back foundation for what "theists" believe.

    If you really want to talk about it, argue, I will.

    Just think of me as your Shaman (Shama?)

    Yes, a lot of heroism and altruism has been accomplished by people citing scripture and using biblical models.

    ...but are you also ready to claim those others that you are "among", inlcuding Adolph Hitler, Torquemada, and Nathan Bedford Forrest? - all of whom referred to the same book you do to explain and justify vile crimes against individuals and humanity? How about William Bradford, the Puritan hero, describing the masacre of hundreds of Pequot men, women and chidren?:

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 13, 2007 5:59 PM


    It's hideous and awful and the only explanation for it is that the Indians were not thought of a fully human, as we're all pretty well aware. At least not human in the way that the settlers would have thought of other white men and women.

    I've seen people injured by fire and in car accidents, but I've never scene the aftermath of a bombing. From the descriptions that I have from good authority, I'm not so sure the aftermath isn't similar.

    I'm fairly sure that even the most pacifistic among us would admit that there were some instances in which war and bombing and the ensuing horror were necessary.

    I doubt any of these people, and the people who had experienced these things first hand, would report them with anything approaching relish-- seeing the conquering of an enemy in this graphic way, because t "relish" over such a thing is against every cultural sensibility we've learned.

    But other cultures and times have had sensibilities that were different. I'm not at all being relativistic here. We understand bravery and courage but there are other qualities that we place more importance on now, though bravery and courage are good and important things and we believe that still.

    I think there are aspects of our society that the settlers would have found shocking, things having to do with chastity and faithfulness perhaps, and honor in other things, that they would have completely undone them in the way the words above undo us.

    I think as well, there would be things about us they interrupted as a hideous lack of courage, strength and of boldness in carrying out what they thought was the best for their world.

    I'm not making excuses for them. I don't have to. I know men are evil and in need of a savior and I know men have done terrible things in the name of all philosophies and for stupid men and will again.

    Unlike the FIG's and the Sharon's of the world, I start my walk with Christ each day.

    Posted by: Anonymous at November 13, 2007 6:27 PM

    You don't know that! How can you say it!

    "The Mormon Mountain Meadows episode, dark, ugly, evil, wholly unChristian and unGodly, is a good example, not of the evils of Christianity nor even Mormonism, but the evil within people not motivated by, not restrained by faith, but exploiting faith, hiding behind faith to commit and to justify unspeakable acts."


    ...no, I'd have to say they were deeply engaged in heady, heartfelt faith. Perhaps not a sort bearing the particular hallmarks you all would like to see, but without a doubt they were embroiled in absolute certainty that they were doing their god's work, without benefit of any evidence or logical basis. That's the problem with faith - it can be profound and beautiful and beneficial to everybody around, or it can be hideous, cruel, and insane. And nobody can say or show anything to dissuade the faithful, because they are convinced that evidence and logic are antithetical to their willful affliction.

    Flucker, I was deeply moved by your profession of your deep and abiding faith and your emulation of the Pharisees to shout it out for all to marvel at.

    "Unlike the FIG's and the Sharon's of the world, I start my walk with Christ each day."

    Does Christ hold your hand or simply give you support with a light touch above your elbow?

    Does your walk together start at the same time every day or does Christ wait for you until you are ready?

    Grammie

    Stuff a sock in it, Flucker.

    Grammie

    Flucker, if you truly lived a life that starts out every day with you and Christ walking together in your journey through life you could not have made this statement and then defended it:

    "Unlike the FIG's and the Sharon's of the world, I start my walk with Christ each day."

    As I said you are the consummate Pharisee shouting out your virtue and grace from the mountaintops. But you go beyond that to preface it with a denunciation of those that you pretend to believe are not nearly as sanctified as you are.

    I believe that everything you say is agitprop, as Cecelia pegged you.

    Grammie

    Bobo, what in hell are you talking about?

    What has politics to do with Flucker being a flaming Pharisee by saying this:

    "Unlike the FIG's and the Sharon's of the world, I start my walk with Christ each day."

    Get a grip.

    Grammie

    "Unlike the FIG's and the Sharon's of the world, I start my walk with Christ each day."

    posted by philby

    This is about as hypocritical as it gets. Even beats 'mike.'

    Don't get me wrong, I am not disparaging anyone else's experience or walk. In fact, I rather envy those who can say, "Kaboom! I am a Christian!" I just can't do it that way.

    I guess it just doesn't fit nicely with your Mean As Hell agenda, does it?

    Posted by: Anonymous at November 13, 2007 8:29 PM


    Yes, Sharon and Cee have a lovely understanding of the doctrines concerning grace, justification, transmutation of righteousness, and forgiveness and therefore walk in the surety that what they could not accomplish themselves, has been accomplished for them.

    That's called faith and you don't need to envy it. It's available for you and me too.

    "This is about as hypocritical as it gets. Even beats 'Mike'".

    But it doesn't beat you!

    But it doesn't beat you!

    Posted by: Mike at November 13, 2007 9:39 PM


    Source? Proof?

    "Yes, Sharon and Cee have a lovely understanding of the doctrines concerning grace..."

    Lumping the pompous and self righteous Cee in with the gracious and respectful Sharon is truly a travesty to Sharon.

    "Source? Proof?"

    The fact that you never post "proof" of anything yourself.

    Self righteous hypocrites and "pious" republicans go hand in hand.

    Posted by: at November 13, 2007 9:57 PM

    Well, we can't all be as nonjudgmental as you...

    You are correct. I can't help seeing clearly since I got my new glasses.

    Posted by: at November 13, 2007 10:31 PM

    Evidently, they're the same eyewear they put on horses.

    Took you guys up on Lewis, and I'm not impressed. While as a child I greatly enjoyed dreaming of Narnia and all, it seems that Lewis is as silly as old Mr. Tumnus. A few quick notes:


    "...taking the race as a whole, they [people] thought that the human idea of decent behavior was obvious to every one. And I believe they were right.... I know that some people say the idea of a Law of Nature or decent behavior known to all men is unsound, because different civilizations and different ages have had quite different moralities. But this is not true. There have been differences between their moralities, but these have never amounted to anything like a total difference”

    This seems to me to argue the point I made here the other week; that morality is the predictable result of reason applied to the universal problems of human interaction, and not subject to who harkened to a supernatural revelation from a particular deity – otherwise all the specific religious dogma across “the race as a whole” would be homogenous, wouldn’t it? Or is God in the habit of provoking unnecessary conflicts?


    "Well, I think I still take that view. But what I did not see then—and a good many people do not see still—was this. I was assuming that if the human mind once accepts a thing as true it will automatically go on regarding it as true..."

    Well, that was a silly assumption for an educated man to make, but at least he seems to have arrived at a more rational position…until…


    "Now Faith, in the sense in which I am here using the word, is the art of holding on to things your reason has once accepted, in spite of your changing moods."

    Well, actually, philosophy already has this childish problem rectified: a serious thinker will “hold onto” such things until additional evidence or rational argument causes him to relinquish it.


    "...Faith is such a necessary virtue: unless you teach your moods ‘where they get off’, you can never be either a sound Christian or even a sound atheist, but just a creature dithering to and fro.... Consequently one must train the habit of Faith. The first step is to recognise the fact that your moods change."

    …but once again, screw “moods”; what about evidence and logic?

    "The next is to make sure that, if you have once accepted Christianity, then some of its main doctrines shall be deliberately held before your mind for some time every day. That is why daily prayers and religious readings and church-going are necessary parts of the Christian life. We have to be continually reminded of what we believe. Neither this belief nor any other will automatically remain alive in the mind. It must be fed.”

    Here’s the kernel – brainwashing! Should not the universal truths that Lewis started out talking about on page 5 make themselves evident in ANY kind of fact-based reading? I don’t see him advocating anything like debate or re-evaluation here, I wonder why not?


    "...if you examined a hundred people who had lost their faith in Christianity, I wonder how many of them would turn out to have been reasoned out of it by honest argument? Do not most people simply drift away?"

    How many people simply “drift away” from adherence to the theories of Evolution, of the lay of geological superposition? I’ve never heard of one. In fact, Ive never heard of anyone argued out of these positions either. Seems like reason has a few benefits that faith might want to get into.

    The fact that you never post "proof" of anything yourself.

    Posted by: Mike at November 13, 2007 9:51 PM


    Hence, the name, hypocrite mike. Mr. 'my computer won't cut and paste so I can't post any proof!" says he.

    Mr. 'my computer won't cut and paste so I can't post any proof!" says he."

    Uh...I believe we were talking about YOU, not me king hypo.

    The FACT is that YOU never back up anything you say...ever...either with reasoned, educated arguments, or with actual "proof".

    In FACT....all you do ever do is troll and snipe....but we all know that.

    "What kind of retort is that Johnny-Jeff?"

    It's the famous "I know you are but what am I?" retort known in third grade circles everywhere.

    philby, the only difference is 'mike' actually said what I quoted him saying. I never said what you quoted me saying. Dishonest? What happened to "walking with God" as you claimed to do earlier?

    "philby, the only difference is 'mike' actually said what I quoted him saying."

    And so what? .... I post on a laptop using a touch pad that is not at all cut-and-paste friendly....But that's not the point anyway: Cutting and pasting is nothing but a cop-out. I could easily go down stairs and cut-n-paste my heart away if I were that insecure.

    "What happened to "Walking" with God, as you claimed earlier?"

    I'm sure everyone has noticed how Jeff keeps changing the subject to avoid discussing how he never posts either "proof", or makes reasoned arguments backing up ANYTHING he ever says.

    It's called playing the "divert card", to use R king hypocrite's own overused words.

    Can you feel the hate pouring from 'mike?' He must be in the dog house, again. Below, 'mike,' is known as stating a fact ending with a question. I didn't 'divert' from anything. What you are doing is, interjecting in a conversation you know nothing about, as usual. Just our daly dose of hypo from you. Read it slowly.


    philby, the only difference is 'mike' actually said what I quoted him saying. I never said what you quoted me saying. Dishonest? What happened to "walking with God" as you claimed to do earlier?

    Posted by: royal king at November 14, 2007 12:30 AM

    Uh uh Jeffy, there you go again - divertin agin - the discussion was about YOU, and how YOU never, ever "prove" anything you ever say while hypocritically demanding "proof" from other posters...all of whom are FAR more educated about current events, politics, and history than you are.

    demanding "proof" from other posters...all of whom are FAR more educated about current events, politics, and history than you are.

    Posted by: Mike at November 14, 2007 1:26 AM


    Proof? That's what I thought.

    to use R king hypocrite's own overused words.

    Posted by: Mike at November 14, 2007 12:48 AM


    I only call it as I see it. Can't take the heat, get off OW. More over used words, think before you post.

    "I call it as I see it"

    Ah, but calling it "as you see it" is NOT proof King hypocrite.

    "Can't take the heat,get off OW"

    What "heat"?....All I see here is comedy.

    SLB: "This seems to me to argue the point I made here the other week; that morality is the predictable result of reason applied to the universal problems of human interaction, and not subject to who harkened to a supernatural revelation from a particular deity – otherwise all the specific religious dogma across “the race as a whole” would be homogenous, wouldn’t it? Or is God in the habit of provoking unnecessary conflicts?"


    Well, the Golden Rule is not something that can be deemed by "reason" and it would be very hard for anyone to argue it that way without basing it on a boatload of self-referential assumptions.

    Just as a sense of morality seems innate in man,
    religious dogma across the board IS fairly homogeneous. It is in the way that Lewis, in the piece you quoted, describes when he argues that different moralities can be different but not sheerly different from each other.

    "There have been differences between their moralities, but these have never amounted to anything like a total difference”.

    Religious wars and doctrinal disputes have not been over issues of whether lying, stealing, or cheating are wrong.... or even over whether a symbolic (or actual in the case of ancient religions) human sacrifice is needed to atone to the "gods".

    To say that it as been the extra thing-- the thing you called divine revelation -- (the thing outside the known morality) that screws things up is like saying that it's counterfeit money that screws up the monetary system. Yeah, fakes will do that, but fake gold doesn't diminish the reality and the value of real gold. Things of value generally are copied and are the source of disputes.

    SLB: "How many people simply “drift away” from adherence to the theories of Evolution, of the lay of geological superposition? I’ve never heard of one. In fact, Ive never heard of anyone argued out of these positions either. Seems like reason has a few benefits that faith might want to get into."

    But how many people who hold to theory of evolution or who don't hold to it, act in ways that conflict with their own sense of morality?

    The theory of evolution or quantum physics aren't ethical guidelines. They aren't transforming inner lights that make it possible for men to transcend their own natures.

    This is why Lewis stated that the exercise of faith is good for the atheist, the theist, and society alike. You take it on faith that it is better that you not steal. You can say you reasoned that it's better, because a society composed largely of thieves would be anarchy, but you have no real way of knowing this. It's not a postulate based upon some predictable pattern discovered in a labratory. In fact some people stealing some of time might be very good indeed for society, depending upon the need. There is no evidence that an allowance for such things at certain times would lead to wide scale thieving anarchy anyway. Still you know you SHOULD not steal.

    But people do steal. Even Darwinists... At the right time and in the right mood they steal and all the while knowing that they shouldn't be doing it.

    Here's where faith comes in and the exercise of it and the fostering of it against all moods, desires whims and urges felt by both atheists, theists, Darwinists, and IDers alike.

    This is a clumsy analogy but I think you're able to mold it into something you can identify with.

    "Well, the Golden Rule is not something that can be deemed by "reason"

    Bullshit. Simple positive reciprocity is the simple answer to most problems regarding people living together.


    "But how many people who hold to theory of evolution or who don't hold to it, act in ways that conflict with their own sense of morality? "

    Well, probably a lot. Happily, I was not proposing that people look to sterile scientific constructs as the wellspring of morality - moral issues can be reasoned through on their own merits. My point was simply to expound on Lewis's idea of "drift" - rational systems do not loose a lot of adherents in such a manner. The theories and constructs change over time with accumulating data, and therefore people remain interested and actually convinced

    ...but what's your point here? Do we need to start talking about the moral consistency of Ted Haggart, Jimmy Swaggart, or a whole roster of drooling Catholic priests?


    "Religious wars and doctrinal disputes have not been over issues of whether lying, stealing, or cheating are wrong.... or even over whether a symbolic (or actual in the case of ancient religions) human sacrifice is needed to atone to the "gods"."


    Well, sure, they are usually about very earthly matters of gold and land, and are justified and powered with religious rhetoric - and on this propagandistic level they are all about hubris; the need to force others to acknowledge your own wisdom and holiness. History shows again and again instances in which such ideologies have driven whole populations to abandon the "golden Rule" to which their clergy gives shallow lip service.

    This is why Lewis stated that the exercise of faith is good for the atheist, the theist, and society alike. You take it on faith that it is better that you not steal. You can say you reasoned that it's better, because a society composed largely of thieves would be anarchy, but you have no real way of knowing this. It's not a postulate based upon some predictable pattern discovered in a labratory. In fact some people stealing some of time might be very good indeed for society, depending upon the need. There is no evidence that an allowance for such things at certain times would lead to wide scale thieving anarchy anyway. Still you know you SHOULD not steal.


    That's right; I know this and I have known it deeply for the entirety of my life; which has been from the start devoid of reliious indoctrination. Its one of the reasons I despise Dick Cheney and his cabal of industrial bandits.

    "But people do steal. Even Darwinists... At the right time and in the right mood they steal and all the while knowing that they shouldn't be doing it. "

    I see; and Christians don't steal? We have already established that they snort meth and bang male prostitutes; diddle trusting little boys, and such like, I don;t think we need to waste our time finding specific instances of theft.

    "Here's where faith comes in and the exercise of it and the fostering of it against all moods, desires whims and urges felt by both atheists, theists, Darwinists, and IDers alike."


    Once again, moods like smoking meth and banging male prostitutes?

    People who profess faith tend to recieve its tenets from some authority; a gew-gawed preist or a somber talking head on the TeeVee with really great hair or the very dignified pastor who dresses like a college professor.

    They are letting authority dictate to them their understanding of the world and what is right or wrong. Now it certainly doesn't always happen, but this often can lead to the economic victimization of entire congregations, or multiple marriage of your prepubescent daughters to some old codger, or a 50-gallon drum of kool-aid in a gazeebo. Now I know you will say that "those aren't real faith", but they are. Its a dangerous thing, and you nor Lewis have demonstrated any benefits it has over simple common sense and human empathy.


    How is it dangerous to elevate "the golden rule" to status of Christian doctrine? It actually comes from Jehovah as set down to the nation of Israel and the Hebrew scriptures clearly show that man is incapable of consistently applying "the golden rule" without the law because of his flawed nature.

    Anonymous, I wonder how you can reconcile the Hebrew scriptures which clearly show the origin to all goodness in the world (Jehovah) with your last post at 8:26AM. Do you not believe, on faith, the information in The Torah?

    This is the dilemma I see arise in Christians like yourself shoe-horning secular philosophy into clear statements by Christ and God in The Bible. So there are two alternatives, continue knowing, by faith, the scriptures are true or discard them.

    To say "love your neighbor as yourself," is not directly a command from Jehovah and its origin is to discard The Torah because that was from which Christ was teaching (nevermind He is God and came up with that command in the first place).

    Well, Anonymous, to discard the context of what Jesus was teaching on.....

    Deut 6:5 (The Shema)
    Leviticus 19:18.....

    "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD."

    is to ignore the origin of "the golden rule." You said it was not "Christian," you're wrong.
    It is from Jehovah....I would not use the term, "Christian Doctrine," but "From God alone."

    This is the big dig against the atheist or secularist who firmly believes such "ethics" or "morality" is arrived through rational process. It is not...It is part of the instruction from God to His creation which is fallen. What is your opinion with regard to that fundamental "Christian doctrine?"

    This is the big dig against the atheist or secularist who firmly believes such "ethics" or "morality" is arrived through rational process. It is not...It is part of the instruction from God to His creation which is fallen. What is your opinion with regard to that fundamental "Christian doctrine?"


    Posted by: cee at November 14, 2007 9:37 AM


    So you are saying that positive reciprocity is an arbitrary edict by your deity, with no intrinsic utility or value in itself? Are we to assume that God did not arrive at this edict rationally, but that he has some other means of coming up with his commands?

    It is not arbitrary, Lucy, it is His essense....Just as Christ was described as the word in the beginning of The Gospel of John, Jehovah's nature is His law, including The Shema and Leviticus verse Christ was quoting. Anonymous and you want to place Christ's authority in stating those two basic Jewish laws somewhere else....not on Jehovah. You are wrong.

    You are humanising Jehovah, Lucy with use of terms like "arbitrary" or "arrive." His name is I AM....He is, was and always will be. He is not a white bearded elderly man sitting on a cloud throwing His commands down like lightning bolts. Faith requires you accept Jehovah as that eternal and infinite "being" and His revelation of His character to Moses in The Shema and in Leviticus passage as well as materially as Christ reflects the consistent goodness.

    This is the uniqueness of I AM (The LORD)compared to all other man-derived gods.

    Well, the Golden Rule is not something that can be deemed by "reason"

    Bullshit. Simple positive reciprocity is the simple answer to most problems regarding people living together.

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 14, 2007 8:15 AM

    Nope, that's still utterly self-referential. You're still back to saying that "good" is what's "good", even when you're defining "good" as the rule or principle that makes it easier for people to live peacefully together.

    What's more the Golden Rule is far more oriented to the individual than this. The Golden Rule dictates that it is "good" that you sacrifice your life for someone who may be physically and intellectually impaired to the point that they are a burden on society or they may have physicological illnesses that make them an actiual determent to the peace and cooperation of the society around him.

    The principle component of the Golden Rule is "doing unto others" when, for one reason or another, they do not merit it. There would have been no need to articulate any principle otherwise, because reciprocity is rarely an issue in our dealings with others if we THINK they deserve that they treatment.

    Putting aside the circular reasoning of calling "good' good...., there is nothing in the Golden Rule that can be logically reasoned as "good" as defined as what is best for society as a whole, nor if you define good as what's best for the individual.

    The innate "good" in the Golden Rule and the near universal belief that it is proper behavior, is something that didn't come from our intellect and certainly not from our instinct.

    Could there be a bigger hypocrite on this board than this warmonger ?

    Posted by: at November 14, 2007 10:21 AM


    Looked in the mirror, lately?

    This is the uniqueness of I AM (The LORD)compared to all other man-derived gods.

    Posted by: cee at November 14, 2007 10:20 AM


    What about the part where he makes that bet with Satan that Job would stay solid no matter what horrible shit he intentionally did to his family, retinue, neighbors, and property? SOunds pretty dispicably human to me.

    "Nope, that's still utterly self-referential. You're still back to saying that "good" is what's "good", even when you're defining "good" as the rule or principle that makes it easier for people to live peacefully together."


    No I'm not. I'm saying that people realize that the absense of people sticking knives in your back or stealing the products of your hard labor when you're not looking is recognized as being more beneficial and pleasurable than it's presense... and that by knowing themselves as conscious human beings capable of empathy they realize that the surest way to promote either condition is to start the ball rolling oneself.


    "Self referential " is saying that God is the greatest special God because God has said so in a book which God declares - within that same book - is full of his bona fide statements.

    So you are saying that positive reciprocity is an arbitrary edict by your deity, with no intrinsic utility or value in itself? Are we to assume that God did not arrive at this edict rationally, but that he has some other means of coming up with his commands?

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 14, 2007 10:00 AM


    "Reciprocity" isn't a good description for the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule is not about reciprocating "goodness"... you treat me nicely... you return the favor.... pay it forward...

    The Golden Rule is our understanding and our outright illogical societal expectation, that Einstein and Mozart not sit safely on the shore rather than risking all to save the drowning Down Syndrome child or the guy who mugged the old lady for her purse.

    It is not an arbitrary "edict" from God, it is his nature. Love, forgiveness, forebearance, acts of sheer power that impede the free will of men... are all ways that nature is revealed. We know those things to be "good" even as we feel shame at not doing them.

    BTW-- the emotion of shame is not logically derived reaction either.

    The code of Hammurabi is based, like all man made religions and their "rules", on pantheism and has a humanistic orientation/character (The king received the code from the god of justice?). Read The Torah, and you will see I AM (The LORD) is not ascribed human traits and furthermore, the monotheistic nature and infinite nature of God is emphsized as the first and greatest law....another BIG distinction from Hammurabi (as well as from any other man-made religion).

    The Pentateuch was distinct from the other man-derived laws, including Hammurabi, in it being the first law to recognize the dilemma of free will....Hammurabi does not make the distinction of intentional sin versus unintentional sin (or even recognize sin) hense it ignores the basic fundamental idea of free will. Hummurabi is more based on the economic worth of individuals (ie slavery) where Jehovah's law respects all persons despite their "social" designation (slaves, etc) and the law still applies.

    Hammurabi is an example of what we get when we use rational thought to arrive at laws....it is severely flawed....while The Pentateuch is perfect and starts off with the greatest commandment and then "the golden rule."

    So, wannawipe, try again.

    Pay attention and pray that at your terminal level of idiocy you may still learn something.

    Posted by: Shut up! DUMBSHIT! I mean Bovine! at November 14, 2007 10:52 AM


    Thanks, patsy! {*}

    "What about the part where he makes that bet with Satan that Job would stay solid no matter what horrible shit he intentionally did to his family, retinue, neighbors, and property? SOunds pretty dispicably human to me."


    ###
    Read Job, Lucy and see The LORD (I AM) is identified clearly..no different name or "human" character is given to Him.

    There is no bet....the exchange he has with the angel Satan is clear in it's words that the claim by the angel that man would only worship I AM because He blesses him is challeneged by Him and Job beutifully and graciously rises to the challenge....even relying on CHRIST Himself when he references Him....

    I know that my Redeemer lives,
    and that in the end he will stand upon the earth.

    And after my skin has been destroyed,
    yet in my flesh I will see God;

    JOB 19: 25-26


    ###
    This exchange in Job is core to free will and slavery to sin versus true worship in faith towards God because He is worthy.

    So Loin, nothing in The Torah or even in the words of the prophets compares to the personified Mt Olympus gods with their love life or the Babylonian pantheon or the Egyptian dieties.

    What about the part where he makes that bet with Satan that Job would stay solid no matter what horrible shit he intentionally did to his family, retinue, neighbors, and property? SOunds pretty dispicably human to me.

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 14, 2007 10:47 AM

    Well, there's a bit more to the story than that, and though Job lived up to God's billing, he had to repent in the end.

    I think this passage from C.S. Lewis in The Problem of Pain, can help.

    "We regard God as an airman regards his parachute; it's there for emergencies but he hopes he'll never have to use it. Now God who has made us, knows what we are and that our happiness lies in Him. Yet we will not seek it in Him as long as He leaves us any other resort where it can even plausibly be looked for. While what we call "our own life" remains agreeable we will not surrender it to Him. What then can God do in our interests but make "our own life" less agreeable to us, and take away the plausible sources of false happiness? It is just here, where God's providence seems at first to be most cruel, that the Divine humility, the stooping down of the highest , most deserves praise. We are perplexed to see misfortune falling upon decent, inoffensive, worthy people--on capable, hard-working mothers of families or diligent, thrifty little trades-people on those who have worked so hard, and so honestly, for their modest stock of happiness and now seem to be entering on the enjoyment of it with the fullest right.... Let me implore the reader to try to believe, if only for the moment, that God, who made these deserving people, may really be right when He thinks that their modest prosperity and the happiness of their children are not enough to make them blessed: that all this must fall from them in the end, and that if they have not learned to know Him they will be wretched. And therefore He troubles them, warning them in advance of an insufficiency that one day they will have to discover. The life to themselves and their families stands between them and the recognition of their need; He makes that life less sweet to them."

    Oh and the presence of Satan in Job places another challenge to rational secularists like Anonymous in believeing in "the devil." Once again, even Christ identifies the existence of Satan with His struggle in the desert with temptation....a real dilemma for the rationalist who fears seeming like the little child who believes in the bogeyman....

    But again, accepting the truth of Job, The Gospels, The Torah on faith because that what God requires eliminates the shame and embarrassment human fraility pushes and I am glad to discuss these "fairy tales." Just like I would be glad to discuss Genesis, the garden, the talking ass, the plagues, Passover, etc, etc, etc....

    Anonymous may find all that hard to swallow as well.

    "The principle component of the Golden Rule is "doing unto others" when, for one reason or another, they do not merit it. "


    Here is the Right-Wing mind-set at work: doing something positive in the absence of a priori "merit" makes no sense whatsoever, so an authoritarian system of magical rules is required to facilitate a civil society.

    Why can't you all realize that goodness is not a zero-sum game, and its not a cosmic mystery either. Doing positive things for and to others promotes more of the same; at its root it is a matter of recognizing that the greater good is in one's own self interest.

    wannawipe, you want to only use the dates to try to rest the argument that the golden rule existed before Moses....It did not....read the code and find that it is no different than the Egyptians or far eastern philiosophy....The Torah is unique in demanding worship to The LORD only as the first and greatest commandment (The Shema) and that the worth of all humanity is equal and not based on slavery or royalty....The code you throw around is deficient in this idea and shows its derivation....from man.

    Dates are nice, but look more closely at the code and see it lacks what The Torah has...oh and it came from the god of justice.....was he having sex with the god of love or wine?....can you tell me?

    The LORD of the universe is ONE....I AM....Hammurabi does not recognize the one true God.

    Thanks Patsy!

    Grammie

    "Self referential " is saying that God is the greatest special God because God has said so in a book which God declares - within that same book - is full of his bona fide statements.

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 14, 2007 10:55 AM

    Referencing an absolute entity who is quite outside of man's own being and reasoning and who exists outside of any societal "collective consciousness" is only self-referential in that it is the belief of that person's mind.

    It is not self-referential in the sense of saying that something is "good" because this or that which comes from it is "good".

    Phari-cee keeps referring to the Torah and Old Testament, yet I distinctly recall him - when asked if he though people should be killed for putting away some shrimp at the seafood buffet, after Leviticus - declaring that that old stuff was obsolete, having been pre-empted by the New Testament.

    How is one to know which stuff is still on the books, and which has been jettisoned? Why it it take two editions thousands of years apart for a perfect omnipotent being of Love to decide that all that stoning over hairstyles was over the top?

    Here is the Right-Wing mind-set at work: doing something positive in the absence of a priori "merit" makes no sense whatsoever, so an authoritarian system of magical rules is required to facilitate a civil society.

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 14, 2007 11:43 AM

    Well, you predicate your "authoritarian system of magical rules" for the benefit of the greater society upon the collective consciousness and I'll predicate mine on an external absolute.

    In a strictly pragmatic sense, I feel a lot safer with endowments that come from my Creator, rather than from your utilitarian something or another.

    "How is one to know which stuff is still on the books, and which has been jettisoned?"


    ###
    Why must I keep repeating myself....the law is not jettisoned it is all still applied, the sin was all paid for once and for all by the atonement of Jesus death.....

    MARK 7
    And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban' (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."

    Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.' "

    After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")


    ###
    Your human hang up on the rule of law as it's purpose is to shape human behavioror be cohersive" versus God's view of the law...it reflecting Him and that meeting it in every way being an unattainable goal because of the nature of man is the stumbling block, Lucy.

    Christ taught the law as eternal and always present but the solution either being following it both externally and internally to the letter (impossible for even Job) or giving yourself to His authority and allow His action in love as the atonement cover your flaws.

    And for you wannawipe I only have to say is that your lack of knowledge to what The Torah even says makes this conversation pointless. It is so different than Hannurabi both is origin and content.

    I have no answer to your questions because there is none and it is irrelevant because I accept on faith every occurance and utterance in the scriptures. It is required. You do not want to give that little bit of faith and that is your choice, but it is keeping you from experiencing a wonderous thing.

    I know Moses existed and spoke with Jehovah because God said it happened....this is what faith is.


    "Well, you predicate your "authoritarian system of magical rules" for the benefit of the greater society upon the collective consciousness and I'll predicate mine on an external absolute."

    Congratulations, Phari-Cecelia, you have succeded in pissing me off through your obtuse refusal to understand the English language when it is clearly written at you. Why am I wasting my time here?

    "In a strictly pragmatic sense, I feel a lot safer with endowments that come from my Creator, rather than from your utilitarian something or another."

    Of course you do. And that is not unrelated to the fact that you also feel safer that your tax dollars and political franchise are being used to kill innocents, steal the national resources, and disrupt the entire civil structure of a large country you suspect is occupied by inhuman Muslim "suiciders".

    Your defense of your Deity is more verbose than your defense of your schematically linked fetish/president, but both are faith-based and irrational.

    All I can say wannawipe is that there has been no archaeological evidence refuting anything you asked AND that to need such facts to approach the throne of God is exclusionary.....

    Read about Christ's interaction with Thomas for one of many examples of your deficiency..

    I am glad to use the inferior materialistic discoveries of the secular to alleve suffering and heal the sick....it is a noble endeavor and using double-blind placebo controlled trials is how I was trained to do it. But I do so much more than use those simple tools.

    However, eternity is a totally different and more important area and all the human discoveries up to now have no provided the solution to that dilemma.

    Your derision and cursing of the supernatural is a fine defense mechanism, wannawipe but to try to place the debate into your narrow parameters is to cede the argument. The secularist denies the supernatural (once again my point about worldview trumping all) and this leaves him/her stuck in 1st gear so to speak. Having to have proof or material evidence of something requiring faith stops the growth and I argue is the reason every single man centered/man derived ideology has ultimately failed.

    Your purely secular worldview is recent and has a small company of followers. I understand why you want it to grow....man has always idolized his own creations and wanted them imposed on others to replace the one truth. I am glad to continue to engage you respectfully and without profanity but to be honest, you offer little rebuttal in terms of facts or argument.

    large country you suspect is occupied by inhuman Muslim "suiciders".


    posted by sob

    Are you claiming 'suiciders' don't exhist in Iraq?

    "After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")"


    Exactly!! So what was up with all of those fuck-ups in the 1st edition? "Shellfish? HAH! - they were never a problem? Who the fuck sold you that line of bull?".

    Was God simply that stupid or careless, and things just had to wait for Junior to matriculate and get business running smoothly? Was Leviticus a liar? If so, why don;t the words simply burn off the pages?

    You show by your own excerpt that Jesus gets testy with the stupidity of people following the dietary restrictions like dumb brutes, and its not like he'd died yet at the time of that lecture to pay for everybody's sins; and he does not (as your decietful parenthetical footnote tries to insinuate) declare these restrictions as moot from that point on: he is clearly engaged in schooling a bunch of superstitious morons that such beliefs make no sense, and that they never have. I like the way he uses biologically based logic in doing so.

    "(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")"


    ...I have a feeling Phari-cee's Bible is full of little parentheses in the margins asserting that this passage or that says something that it clearly does not. Oh, the wonder-working power of faith!

    And the mindless anti-religious tripe gets less sophisticated.....

    Again Lucy, if you even knew what accepting things on faith meant you would understand the reason for the law as finely listed in Leviticus and Christ's not saying the law was no longer in force but that the basis of the law required the solution presented to mankind in love from The Father.

    Oh, and anon....your lack of faith does not make it any less valuable. And if you have been keeping up with the discussions I have had on this board with the secularists your would have known that I have shown time and again their Godless secular philosophy has resulted in the worst od the worst in death and decay man as ever seen.

    And once again, none of the secularists can show me examples of their atheism resulting in positive forces....even in such famous movements like abolition or civil rights.

    But again, we ignore these facts of history and fall into the ignorant cursing of the feckless deity they do not understand.

    "...and Christ's not saying the law was no longer in force but that the basis of the law required the solution presented to mankind in love from The Father."


    Okay, so you admit that your "(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")" was pulled out of your ass - but not missing a beat you pluck out a replacement.
    Read your own excerpt, dumbass:

    "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body."


    Oh but that's right; these cloud-percher's have liscense to weild their "faith" as logical "get-out-of-jail-free" cards. Remember: "Faith means never having to even read the stuff you believe your savior said". When backed into a corner, plead faith and smile.

    "And once again, none of the secularists can show me examples of their atheism resulting in positive forces....even in such famous movements like abolition or civil rights."

    Well, I've provided you with a few such examples in the past Phari-cee, but your miasmic criteria always shift to exclude them for your purposes at the moment, so I will waste no more time on your request.

    ..but lets get to your opportunistic solidarity with heroic civil rights leaders who were also religious leaders; specifically MLK, who you held up as your paragon of the moment last night.

    When someone like King cited his faith I have no problem in giving him full credence (in the faith part, that is - not necessarilly in the specific tenets). That is because his actions were monumentally consistent with his words, and his courage stands in clarion testimony of the faith he claims.

    You used his name in the same manner you use the word "faith", as a sheild, as a crutch, as a weapon. However, in previous discussions you have made it clear that you disdain everything that great man stood for. Let's get your read on the stand that made King the target of his own government, and in all likelihood brought about his murder:


    "Perhaps the more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem. So we have been repeatedly faced with the cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools. So we watch them in brutal solidarity burning the huts of a poor village, but we realize that they would never live on the same block in Detroit. I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor."

    "As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 1964; and I cannot forget that the Nobel Prize for Peace was also a commission -- a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for "the brotherhood of man." This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances, but even if it were not present I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men -- for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the one who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the "Vietcong" or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this one? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life? "


    "And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond to compassion my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula. I speak now not of the soldiers of each side, not of the junta in Saigon, but simply of the people who have been living under the curse of war for almost three continuous decades now. I think of them too because it is clear to me that there will be no meaningful solution there until some attempt is made to know them and hear their broken cries.

    They must see Americans as strange liberators. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation, and before the Communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony.

    Our government felt then that the Vietnamese people were not "ready" for independence, and we again fell victim to the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long. With that tragic decision we rejected a revolutionary government seeking self-determination, and a government that had been established not by China (for whom the Vietnamese have no great love) but by clearly indigenous forces that included some Communists. For the peasants this new government meant real land reform, one of the most important needs in their lives."


    These are only a few bits of long and powerful speech that can be read in its entirety at: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/058.html

    SLOB, I haven't noticed your contention about Cee: "You used his name in the same manner you use the word "faith", as a sheild, as a crutch, as a weapon. However, in previous discussions you have made it clear that you disdain everything that great man stood for."

    "DISDAIN EVERYTHING" (caps mine) is a broad indictment.

    Is it your contention that one must be in total agreement in every jot and dash with someone or you will accuse them of intellectual dishonesty if they hold them up as an inspiring example?

    Grammie

    More MLK:

    "There is something seductively tempting about stopping there and sending us all off on what in some circles has become a popular crusade against the war in Vietnam. I say we must enter the struggle, but I wish to go on now to say something even more disturbing. The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality we will find ourselves organizing clergy- and laymen-concerned committees for the next generation. They will be concerned about Guatemala and Peru. They will be concerned about Thailand and Cambodia. They will be concerned about Mozambique and South Africa. We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and attending rallies without end unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy. Such thoughts take us beyond Vietnam, but not beyond our calling as sons of the living God. "

    Screw that dusty old newt CS Lewis; THIS guy made that Christianity thing make a little sense!

    Is it your contention that one must be in total agreement in every jot and dash with someone or you will accuse them of intellectual dishonesty if they hold them up as an inspiring example?

    No, Peanut, that's why I said "disdain everything".

    SLOB, so to you "No, Peanut, that's why I said "disdain everything"." means what.

    The first definition for disdain is: 1. to look upon or treat with contempt; despise; scorn.

    So Cee despises and has contempt and scorn for "everything" that Dr King stood for but somehow that doesn't translate into total disagreement with his positions and beliefs?

    This old brain just can't seem to make sense of your statements taken as a whole.

    Grammie

    Let me explain myself further, Grammie:

    I see King as a man who firmly believed in the religious creed he promulgated; to the point that he actually emulated Jesus Christ; putting all his enormous efforts into issues of peace and equity and compassion, and putting himself in the path of powerful, voracious forces.

    Phari-cee repudiates all of this. Instead of taking Christ-like positions on our current war, like those I have posted above from MLK regarding Vietnam, he enthusiastically advocates its continuation, and harbors useemly idolatry in regard to its vapid commander in chief.

    It is no great leap of immagination to suggest that if King had been a doctor of medicine rather than of divinity, he would have been overseas in a hospital tent fighting his commanders for the resources to treat the wounded of the enemy along with our own. Phari-cee, however, stays in his gigantic house, and at work pushes boner-pills to old codgers as well-off or better-off than he, and probably leaves those little prayer cards in lieu of tips at restaurants. He calls that "growing as a human being", and thinks that it makes God smile at him.

    Phari-cee thinks he shares a faith with King; but King never used CHristian memes without an active social purpose - a real-world goal. When such is suggested to Phari-cee, he makes a snide joke and types "hee hee hee" on his keyboard to people he has never seen.

    Like I have instructed dear Lucy hundreds of times before, the anonimity of this and all boards limits one's ability to use personal proclamation, personal information and experience as "proof" towards any argument. I deride you as Sir Loin of Milquetoast because of your half-hearted attempt to end the immoral war you have described even quoting you repeatedly pleading with your leftist counterparts to hit the streets. You try to convice us all that you are the radical anti-war guy you would like us to believe you are but something seems to be missing.

    The fruits of my relationship with Jesus Christ are for only one to judge....and guess who that would be, Lucy? That's right, the deity you do not even believe in. In fact, any positive effect I have on my fellow (and MLK should have believed the same way), is only because of Him....worldly awards and recognition is antithetical to the true Chrisitian who works in annonimity for the glory of God only.

    It is amazing how quickly you try to make this all about me and the hypocrtie Christian you have stenciled in you mind's eye when all along you have never been able to refute the horrid and damning results of your worldview being used in the world.

    Dr King was against the Vietnam war and he was mistaken. He was duped by the same secularists that dupe organizations like Sorjourners today who shoe-horn an eternal message into a radically anti-God philosophy. Agreeing with the repressive North Vietnamese is a simple symbol of where Dr. King went wrong and I have no doubt those Christians interned by the communists because they believed in God would have something to say to the fine man. We all make mistakes.

    My example of Mr. King was his reason to fight for civil rights and they were not derived from secular humanism....That is the part of the argument you avoid like the plague, dear Lucy....Instead you call me a hypocrite and go on to the same old tired arguments instead of talking about what you know....your own atheist worldview. You think its quant and nice Dr. King believed in God and Jesus but it really does not matter because he was on the right side. Oh, but I am sure if you talked to Dr. King, he would inform you that it is because of Jesus in him that he found the power and desire to fight for civil rights.

    PLEASE give me an example of an historical movement that brought liberty and freedom to people started and based on purely secular principle. Come on now....which great emancipation was derived from secular humanism?

    There have been at least 400 years of publically expressed atheism for goodness sake! In that same amount of time, Christianity spread from Jerusalem to Rome to the east!......Why has atheism been so static in achieving freedom and liberty to the human family, Lucy?

    Sorry you don't like the debate but it is a logical AND cogent one considering you and the like attack my beliefs as fairy tale and stupidity. What about what you believe?....moral and ethical conclusions arrived at through rational process only....no supernatral influence or source......

    Well? Anyone? Try to respond to this post with proof of your own representatives, text and creed causing flowers to be thrown, people hugging and kissing, and all of man's misery addressed!

    Give me proof of the positive outcomes of secular humanism! Come on now....its easy!

    What did Darminism and Nihilism accomplish for mankind? What did the great atheist philosophers spur say 1880, 1918, 1930?.....

    Come on....what about the 1960's and 1970's....what did the secular left give to our world that says, "PEACE, LOVE, LIBERTY?"

    Making the offensive movement against my beliefs has had its chance....you failed....now please take to the DEFENSE of what you believe and the practical outcomes it has had on the world.

    "Dr King was against the Vietnam war and he was mistaken. He was duped by the same secularists that dupe organizations like Sorjourners today who shoe-horn an eternal message into a radically anti-God philosophy. Agreeing with the repressive North Vietnamese is a simple symbol of where Dr. King went wrong and I have no doubt those Christians interned by the communists because they believed in God would have something to say to the fine man."

    You're a freaking idiot, Phari-cee. Did you read the speech I posted a link to? King explains that he was not "talking to Hanoi", he was only facing the fact that his "Faith" forced him to take Jesus Christ at his word, and literally.

    "To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men -- for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the one who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them?"

    Your faith is in only your own ability to look at the New Testament and see the screenplay for the "Green Berets" (a war-advertisment that starred a draft-dodging chickenhawk).

    "There have been at least 400 years of publically expressed atheism for goodness sake! In that same amount of time, Christianity spread from Jerusalem to Rome to the east!......Why has atheism been so static in achieving freedom and liberty to the human family, Lucy?"

    Because you fucking savage Pharisee's are so closely ensconsed with fabulously wealthy and amoral arbiters of power whose stock in trade is the perpetual enslavement and virtual canibalization of their fellow man. But we'll keep trying.

    I read it Lucy and that is why I can confidently state Dr. King was in error. The pacifist position taken by King was a nice theoretical position but in reality it would allow a secular, anti-God entity, totalitarian communism, carte-blanche over the defenseless.

    You may wish all of those who believe in God say they will not defend their right to speak His name, teach their children about Him and worship but instead allow their "enemies" victory in destroying them, it means nothing to you that this happens because you do not believe in the supernatural anyway.

    Chrisitan pacifism would allow secularism like that in North Vietnam to oppress innocents wanting to be free, and that is immoral. Peace without justice, including the justice that one may worship freely and think freely, is just as vital to the human spirit as what Dr. King was fighting for in the US Constitution protected south! Nonviolence only works in a system that has the great limits placed on it like our Judeo-Christian based system does, but King's nonviolence would not have been successful against the march of the secularist's communism or the secularist's Nazi fascism.....force was necessary to defend the weak and Dr. King would have been mistaken to assume nonviolence was the right choice there.

    So sorry Lucy, try again and please try to give me an example of secularism charging and succeeding in granting freedom and justice to our world! I'll be waiting.

    "Oh, but I am sure if you talked to Dr. King, he would inform you that it is because of Jesus in him that he found the power and desire to fight for civil rights."


    Well, yeah, dipshit. ...and if you would read his speech you would know that it was because of his internalization of Jesus's message, and what he learned fighting for civil rights, that prompted him to vigorously oppose our country's transmutation into a war machine.

    You think you've got Jesus in you? How pathetic.

    "...go and sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me".

    He meant that shit; and King believed him. You're a burlesque clown.

    4:16PM....my response....

    excuses, excuses, excuses....

    I just do not understand why you leave V. Lenin all alone and unclaimed as the beacon of your worldview, Lucy?

    Why does old Vladdy not get the worship of his fellow secular humanists in his great experiment that took those (your words....) "ensconsed with fabulously wealthy and amoral arbiters of power" and handed their stuff all over to, to, to....what have you called it.....

    the commons, for the general use of everyone?......

    Now why did that not work again?

    I am sure you have even more excuses....

    4:28 PM....again all about me!....never stand up for yourself and what you believe, Lucy....again, I am waiting for the great moral movements of the secular humanists.....

    Lenin?
    Hitler?
    Stalin?
    Minh?

    Come one there has to be someone?

    So sorry Lucy, try again and please try to give me an example of secularism charging and succeeding in granting freedom and justice to our world! I'll be waiting.

    Posted by: cee at November 14, 2007 4:26 PM


    More crickets!!!

    4:34 was me, like I need to tell you....

    Ooooo, quoting those select parts of the Bible again....how about the parts about not sinning no more, sexual purity, having one spouse of the opposite gender, or even not lying, stealing or being a false witness....Did Dr. King, you, me, anyone talk and do all that stuff too, Lucy?....

    I know Dr. King faltered quite a lot...but I am glad to know we are all sinners and fall short of God's glory.

    Being a leftist, you just think mammon is the only issue, and the rest can be "tolerated." Where in the scriptures does it say that, Lucy?

    You seem to think you are a great judge, Lucy, but seem a bit slow on casting the same judgement on yourself. I know being humble is also not an attribute of the secular humanist either, but you could at least try.

    "You have learnt how it was said to our ancestors: 'You must not kill; and anyone does kill he must answer for it before the court.' But I say this to you: anyone who is angry with his brother will answer for it before the court." Mt. 5.21-22

    "You have learnt how it was said: 'Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.' But I say to you, Offer the wicked man no resistance. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; if a man takes you to law and would have your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone orders you to go one mile, go two miles with him." Mt. 5.38-41

    "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy; But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those whose persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Mt. 5.43-46

    Phari-cee responds: "I read it Lucy and that is why I can confidently state (Jesus Christ) was in error. The pacifist position taken by (Jesus) was a nice theoretical position but in reality it would allow a secular, anti-God entity, (Roman Imperium) carte-blanche over the defenseless."


    So sorry Lucy, try again and please try to give me an example of secularism charging and succeeding in granting freedom and justice to our world! I'll be waiting.

    Posted by: cee at November 14, 2007 4:26 PM

    1776. Thomas Jeferson. Declaration of Independence.

    I know you will lay claim to Jefferson's "God of Nature" again, as you always do when you haul out this straw man tactic, but you're an idiot.

    "Being a leftist, you just think mammon is the only issue, and the rest can be "tolerated." Where in the scriptures does it say that, Lucy?"

    But you see, I don;t care about the rest of it. I'm only arguing religion because you keep bringing it up, and presenting such easy targets. I very much like what the Bible attributes to Jesus in regard to treatment of the least among us, and about the futility of cyclical violence, because these positions resonate with my own. But I feel quite free to ignore anything else I feel like that lies between those covers, because I am basing none of my positions thereon.

    On the other hand, you CLAIM to base your positions on scripture, and I am happy to point out where you are completely full of shit with referrences to your own source. Deal with it.

    Posted by: Oy vey! Pastor DUMBFUCK AGAIN WITH HIS FATWAS at November 14, 2007 5:18 PM

    Name Shifter,

    I have been remiss in not expressing before my high regard for your stylized artistry and factual arsenal. To me our mutual victim Phari-cee represents the very worst America has to offer, and his kind must be afflicted wherever their comfortable asses reside. Keep up the good work.

    and I won't take much credit for my responses either.

    Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee writes much of the material himself, but I do find it amazing that he doesn't realize his own ridicule.

    Congratulations to you too.

    and I won't take much credit for my responses either.

    Hey, you're smarter than I thought, patsy/why. (*)----{-}----[+]------

    You have not disappointed me either.

    You remain as smart as always with your obstinate insistence that AAP and "Why..." are the same poster.

    Thanks, Bovine!

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge refused Friday to dismiss a defamation case against Rep. John P. Murtha and ordered the Pennsylvania Democrat to give a sworn deposition about his comments alleging “cold-blooded murder and war crimes” by unnamed soldiers in connection with Iraqi civilian deaths.

    A Marine Corps sergeant is suing the 18-term congressman for making the charge, which the soldier claims is false. Murtha, who opposes the Iraq war, made the comment during a May, 2006 Capitol Hill news conference in which he predicted that a Pentagon war crimes investigation will show Marines killed dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians in Haditha in 2005.

    Murtha’s office declined to comment on the ruling......

    Dim and dimmer (I can't decide which is which)....Time and again, the secular views widely embraced in the 19th and 20th centuries lead to the most murderous century the world has ever seen.

    Oh, but wait, wannawipe and Lucy simply dismiss this outgrowth of secular philosophy as something not of their worldview...

    They have excuses claiming capitalists and religious fanatics are at the root causes of the phenomenon of totalitarianism that can be directly traced to the purely secular ideologies as expressed by Marx and Nietzche.

    Guess what fellas, your rational conclusions resulted in mass exterminations of weaker people....much like what the secularists predicted when applying such wonderful, Godless ideas like eugenics and Social Darwinism.

    These are your children, Lucy and wannawipe...Not The Declaration of Independence or The US Constitution, or The Rights of Man....these were created by men who feared a loving and caring God who they believed created the universe.

    Once again, you try to change the argument to fit what ammunition who have....it is sad you can't think on your feet! Especially you, wannawipe....every post you have ever created reeks with about 50kcal of neuron energy...it is pitiful.

    Lucy and wannawipe, what abut evolution? My favorite subject and my major in university earning me a 3.9 and magna cum laude....My biology profs hated me but had to admit I mastered their silly theories pretty good before I went on to really helping people....

    Does wannawipe have an example of macroevolution?...Where is the proof of natural selection forming a new species incapable of breeding with its parent? Oh no, don't have an example?....Not even one of a virus or bacterium? Why not?

    Oh how about explaining to the class about spacial relation? Benign, free atoms of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, etc. combining to make amino acids....Has a scientist yet witnessed these amino acids combine and replicate their complex proteins that are required for cellular biology? Has that been shown to even be possible? You see, atoms just do not get together in the trillions of possible combinations to form complex organic molecules (amino acids) (this actually goes against the law of increasing entropy) that then can combine to make even more complex organic molecules (proteins) that then can combine to make even more complex organic molecules (DNA/RNA) that also have the ability to repair itself to continue to replicate and produce functioning organic molecules that then combine with other different organic molecules to create....

    cell membranes
    nuclear membranes
    cell organelles
    etc. etc. etc. etc.....

    Has science shown this has occurred randomly?....How could natural selection, on its own, make atoms combine in one in a trillion to the trillion combinations to form one simple protein molecule?....Do you know what the odds of that happening are?.....Even if you have trillions of years to wait for it to happen and billions of planets with ooze and gook to be the dishes?

    Oh yeah....When scientists have atoms combine to form "life," get back to me.....Not amino acids....BUT FUNTIONING AND INTERACTING PROTEINS THAT FORM COMPLEX CELLULAR COMPONENTS.....

    Not a hard thing for the rational man to do, dear wannawipe....where is it?

    Oh....and please let me know about that spacial thingy....my biologist friends have no clue about it and simply ignore the challenge a soley material universe that acts predictably with decrasing ethalpy and increasing entropy has is producing complex structures that can repair, replicate AND (wonders of wonders) ponder themselves.

    Tah.

    "Has a scientist yet witnessed these amino acids combine and replicate their complex proteins that are required for cellular biology?"


    Wow, what an argument.

    Has a preacher ever seen a man formed out of clay by a big bearded white man reaching out of a cloud? Has anyone then seen this big guy breath this clay man into life, and yank out one of his ribs (was that internal specificity made out of clay first?) and turn it into a similar version with different genetalia?

    You're an idiot; Jefferson stated explicitly that Jesus was a human with no magical qualities. Jefferson's my guy, not Stalin. Your kind caused the Holocaust. Had you been alive you would have supported Hoover's hounding of MLK like you support the war in Iraq. Go fuck yourself.

    Hey Lucy Van Pelt (Loin), wannawipe asked for an expression of BELIEF in evolution....I assume he means he BELIEVES that all we see around us and ourselves came from benign matter (simple atoms) without a diety creating it all....BELIEF!

    Well how did it all start?....Natural Selection demands adaptation in the face of DEATH (removal of the genetic material from the mix) and the dear amino acids made of atoms were not alive (no genes, no replication)....they were just floating around in some ooze and decided to make complex and highly fragile proteins that would all come together and make a cell that was "alive" ready for Darwin's great wisdom to act upon it.....Ooooo, nice defence of your creation story....

    Where's wannawipe to defend his creation story and show evidence of macroevolution?....Where is the scientist with the LIVING CELL that popped out of randomly placed atoms in space without any "drive" to combine to make the complicated structures needed for "life."

    Do you all believe in all of that stuff on faith too?

    Nice argument yourself, Lucy.....Thomas Jefferson believed in God....you do not, nor did Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Nietzche and the rest who murdered millions and millions of their fellow masses of organic molecules.....

    What did atheists give mankind that was a touchstone of progress in the protection of our liberty and dignity....all I see from secularists is THE OPPOSITE!

    They are your guys because they demanded A SECULAR worldview.....pursued A SECULAR WORLDVIEW to its logical end......and still the secularists deny the connection....how good of you!

    Jefferson was not an atheist, neither was Newton who, in the context of his deep held belief that God created what he was discovering, rejoiced and worshiped him is eloquent writing....just like MLK, George Washington, Abe Lincoln and so many more great humanitarians we have seen....

    Who are the secularist's humanitarians?....

    People like Minh, Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Castro, yep....the secularists who did not think God was real and loving and the source of our humanity and so then, our rights as individuals.

    You hate talking about YOUR beliefs, Lucy....Instead you want me to run up and kick the ball as you control the argument making childish arguments against a wonderful supernatural truth....

    Sorry, I'll continue the offensive against secularism and all of its intolerance, hatred, death and destruction.....You can continue to choose to not defend your ideology, but it only shows, once again, you have no defense!

    he, he, he....

    Well, anonymous, when two dimwits try to discuss science versus faith on their terms only, I will be happy to require my terms as well....I will bet neither wannawipe or Lucy will present cogent and correct defenses of either their worldviews' impact on the world OR rebuttals to my simple questions on their secular explaination of the origins of the universe, including life on planet earth.

    Wannwaipe opened himself up to the crtique when he asked if anyone BELIEVES in evolution.....Well.....belief requires proof according to the secularists and it is abundantly clear and inarguable that the atheist's dogma of Darwinian evolution as the sole force is forming life in the universe has more assumptions than any dogma created by man since time began....

    Including how it all started....NO PROOF

    Including new species formation....macroevolution.....NO PROOF

    Oh, but it is science.....not dogma although it deals with the origins in the secularists paradigm that there is no supernatural.

    So, Anonymous, as a Christian, you may choose not to defend what Jesus Christ taught.....the creation of the world in 6 days with Adam and Eve....etc.....but that is a choice with great implications because what secularists teach as their dogma is 180 degrees from it.

    OK, Phari-cee, ignore my relevant questions regarding play-do day in heaven....


    Just as you ignored the issue that your critiques of MLK are also critiques of your heavenly savior:


    "You have learnt how it was said to our ancestors: 'You must not kill; and anyone does kill he must answer for it before the court.' But I say this to you: anyone who is angry with his brother will answer for it before the court." Mt. 5.21-22

    "You have learnt how it was said: 'Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.' But I say to you, Offer the wicked man no resistance. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; if a man takes you to law and would have your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone orders you to go one mile, go two miles with him." Mt. 5.38-41

    "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy; But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those whose persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Mt. 5.43-46

    Phari-cee responds: "I read it Lucy and that is why I can confidently state (Jesus Christ) was in error. The pacifist position taken by (Jesus) was a nice theoretical position but in reality it would allow a secular, anti-God entity, (Roman Imperium) carte-blanche over the defenseless."

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 14, 2007 5:06 PM

    "Nice argument yourself, Lucy.....Thomas Jefferson believed in God....you do not, nor did Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Nietzche and the rest who murdered millions and millions of their fellow masses of organic molecules....."

    Well, Hitler believed in God - and Jesus ,to boot; "Gott Mitt Uns!!"

    Nathan Bedford Forrest, who crucified hundreds of black Union soldiers at Fort Pillow, TN, also founded that wonderful Christian white man's organization the KKK. He's been called "the quintessential Christian warrior" by people who sound just like you.

    I posted the other day how William Bradford, Puritan worthy of the Massachussettes Bay Colony, consecrrated the smoke from the burning bodies and blood of hundreds of Pequot men, women, and Children murdered in their homes as a "sweete" sacrifice to your boy Jehovah.


    You need to claim these as your brethren, Phari-cee, by the same logic of your redundant and petulent demands on me regarding the totalitarian monsters of the 20th century. We know you enthusiastically worship the War Criminal George W. Bush, so why so squeemish?

    "He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.

    "After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.


    ###
    A command to spread, by mouth and deed, his saving grace.

    The personal application in our daily lives of Christ's ideal of love and sacrifice extends to the defense of the weak and innocent....

    Like I said, Lucy, you would like it if those who professed faith in God did not defend their right to speak of their beliefs as Christ commanded....Liberty to preach the gospel has been under attack since the upper room and many ways have been used, both nonviolent and violent, to insure the truth is expressed to the masses....The liberty to bear witness to the goodness and love of Jehovah through His son Jesus is a fundamental freedom in The US but would not be if force of arms were not used to protect it then and now....So Lucy, even fighting for liberty and freedom of thought and religion in Iraq is perfectly consistent with Christs command to tell the nations of Him....

    Never mind the great honor of defending life against the death and destruction of the likes of Hitler, Saddam Hussein, OBL and the rest....The great defender of life and liberty, I believe The United States has been hnorable in these pursuits including Vietnam.

    Going back to spreading Christ's message (by his command).....I do not mean telling of Him under force of arms, but protecting those who believe from those fanatical secularists (like you and wannawipe), and other totalitarians (radical islamists in Iraq), who would impose their worldview by force of arms.

    So Lucy, the Christian has a fundamental challenge to know when pacifism is what God wants or when defending the defenceless is the way....It is a sobering and important decision, but I know in Iraq we are on the side of liberty as we were in Vietnam....

    Unlike the secularists who would tolerate despotism and totalitarianism because they do not believe in such values as freedom of religion.

    Again, you selectively pick the words of Christ to follow...now back to defending your pathetic worldview, secularist.

    Adolf Hitler was what you call a burlesque clown, Lucy....It is obvious even with limited scholarship, he was a gnostic....and suffered from the same delusion you suffer from in regard to self-deification. SAYING you believe in GOD but acting as if there is no eternal judgement by Him by your actions that are only based on what one thinks is practical or right for the situation is what Hitler shows in spades....

    He was a secularist....the church was only a means of control and his actions towards true believers, Jews and Christians alike, also show his secularist foundation in Nietsche.

    Your other examples are just like when you use Haggard, etc.....men who faltered and either repented or did not, mistaken in their actions just like men happen to always do when they replace God's wisdom with their own....Their belief in God, just like those who did better in their expression of His grace, was in no way the cause of their sin.

    Your leaders, however, were doing exactly what secularism deems right....NO religious influence in government, economy or social interaction, NO God based ideas or values taught to the citizenry, NO explanations of values, origins etc. based on religion.

    And look at the results....totalitarianism, and death.....On the order millions times what you sited, by the way!

    MY interpretation is selective? Yet you interpret a command to "spread the word" as licence to carpet bomb and to blow away families in their cars because of a check-list of potential-threat critera? Please explain to me then the "other cheek" and " Love your enemies" quote I posted, as opposed to your freakishly tangential, parenthetical interpretations of other passages.

    And until I hear differently I will assume you are defending Forrest, Hitler, and Bradford right along with Bush with your disgusting appologia for all sorts of aggressive invasion and ideological genocide.

    ....and also lety it be noted that Phari-cee has chosen not to distinguish his critisisms of MLK from his implied criticisms of Jesus Christ.

    According tho Phari-cee, Jesus was dangerously naive, and quite possibly a "useful idiot" to the secularists!

    And look at the results....totalitarianism, and death.....On the order millions times what you sited, by the way!

    Posted by: cee at November 15, 2007 10:51 AM


    I cited Hitler as your ideological ally, Phari-cee...at least 12 million helpless killed outright via industrial techniques; How many died in the war he started? 60 million? Please explain your math, or are you downplaying the murder wrought by your fellow Christianist?

    "Adolf Hitler was what you call a burlesque clown, Lucy..."

    Sure, I would extend that term that I coined for you to him as well.


    "It is obvious even with limited scholarship, he was a gnostic"

    "Scholarship"? Is that what you call serpentine interpretations of very direct statements until they mean something that suits your desires? Like trying to claim that Jesus' "Are you that Dull?" tirade as a declaration of a new order, as opposed to what it was; a dispellation of onerous superstitions.

    Or like sayinig that a call to evangelism is a warrant to wage destructive war?


    Or like removeing key punctuation when legal documents say something you do not like?

    You are an idiot, Phari-cee. An Evil, rancid idiot. - but a cowardly one.

    Why don't you obey your bloody demon-version of Christ and go spread his word in Iraq? Chickenhawk.

    No, Loin, MLK was naive and influenced by the secularists....

    I see my personal interaction with men and women every day as the reflection of what Christ taught in turning the other cheek and loving my enemies. However, life is precious and arbitrary or not so arbitrary destruction of life through violence (like some one attacking me or my family or someone in need of help in defending their life) is sin and according to The Bible, I am allowed to use violence to defend myself or the powerless.

    War is an extension of this idea of self defense and is what justified Vietnam....defending the free south from Godless, totalitarianism in the form of the left's pathetic worldview of communism......and in Iraq....radical "cult" islam totalitarianism....

    This is the justification that argues against the pacifism you demand of the Christian. You would enjoy seeing the Chrsitian destroyed and the word quelled as secular or other forces extinguish the truth, I gather.

    Oh and just in case you think Christ is going to turn his cheek on unholiness and what you believe is "freedom" (adultery, sodomy, false witness, greed, murder, etc....)....

    "Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, 'The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you.

    "Then he said to his disciples, The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. Men will tell you, 'There he is!' or 'Here he is!' Do not go running off after them. For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.

    "'Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.

    "'It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.

    "'It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. Remember Lot's wife!

    "'Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.'"

    "'Where, Lord?' they asked.

    "He replied, 'Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather.'


    ###
    Again, I know you like to ignore the words in scripture that insult your secular sensitivities, Lucy....but Christ still depised sin and knew it would be judged....ALL SIN....not just sins with money...Oh and by the way....he mentions Noah, again.....The Son of God....who knew all, says there was a Noah and a flood.....

    I wonder how people like Anonymous reconcile that one?

    Again Lucy....Hitler was a gnostic, not a Christian....he saw him self EVOLVING into a superman....Simple research will show you this....

    Evolving....progress....oh yes, Nietzhe's nice little application of "no god" to our world....An atheist who ended up crazy believing he was being crucified!

    Hitler was following your philsopher, Lucy, not my lord, Christ.....Please oh please stop lying about the murderous, cult -believing gnostic who hated real Christians and Jews with such a hatred as to send them to the ovens! Yep, those secularists did just fine under Nazism....just like they did under Lenin and Stalin.....Atheists like Himmler even got to apply their worldview with human experimentation on "subhumans."

    Oh yeah....there is that connection again with the secularists deeming infants, fetuses and embryos as subhuman devoid of life and so allowed to be the objects of human experimentation without their consent!......

    Oh how I love the brave new world the secularists have prepared to impose on us all!

    ...so God works through Bush, raining Fire and Sulpher and White Phosphorus on people drinking, eating, planting, etc.

    You are actually using the flood, S&G as Biblical rationalizations for waging modern, industrial warfare on civilian populations?

    I'm finally speechless. Go fuck yourself.

    Enlist, Chickenhawk.

    Oh dear, wannawipe is trying to express leftist excuses for secular ideology...oh he is trying hard, I can see his face turing red and I smell the wood burning!.....

    How about your request we all believe in evolution as an explaination of our origins, wannawipe?....Come on now....the proof of macroevolution so necessary for the variety of species we see?.....The proof of spatial relations of atoms to provide proteins that will form living cells?.....Hello?

    Oh boy....Nietzche was a secularist, deal with it wannawipe...through and through and on top of that, he had the primitive impule of gnosticism....the attainment and desire of finding "superman" through evolution, progress, reason....oh that holy grail of self-deification is such a part of human nature....even the simpleton wannawipe has bought into it!

    Keep trying, wannawipe, you may succeed in finally passing the stool you're forcing out!

    "How about your request we all believe in evolution as an explaination of our origins, wannawipe?....Come on now....the proof of macroevolution so necessary for the variety of species we see?.....The proof of spatial relations of atoms to provide proteins that will form living cells?.....Hello?"


    First give us those videotapes of God making us out of play-do.

    slob has no proof of anything, whatsoever.

    Go fuck yourself.

    Enlist, Chickenhawk.

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 15, 2007 11:41 AM


    Debating tactics of a hardcore hater. Sad, indeed.

    Again, I thought evolution was the answer....we had to start from some bacteria like cell that erupted out of the primordial ooze and then replicated itself so Darwinian Natural Selection could commense....

    I think this sounds like SCIENCE is asking us all to take something ON FAITH!

    Oh my!

    The same with speciation.....macroevolution evidence would be nice if scientists are going to claim natural selection was the only force around causing such diversity in bacterias, viruses, funghi, mammals, plants, etc.....Where oh where is ther PROOF of macroevolution?

    I think this sounds like SCIENCE is asking us all to take something ON FAITH!

    Oh my!

    So, science versus religion....what was supposed to be superior because conclusions are ONLY based on provable and observable evidence.....

    What about, gents....Proof please before you demand people BELIEVE (have faith) in Evolution.....

    Your words, wannawipe.....you want to change them now?

    Your words, wannawipe.....you want to change them now?

    Posted by: cee at November 15, 2007 12:41 PM


    He won't want to change them. He'll claim he never said it or claim what he said means something totally different than what we interpret them to say. In other words, we're all wrong and morons, too! I wonder what it's like to live in their worlds? They have ALL the answers to ALL the worlds problems, yet, they just sit at their pc's all day long making said claims w/no real action ever taken.

    "'Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left."

    Hey! another point where Phari-cee takes it upon himself to edit his holy book in places where he is made uncomfortable...

    Prior to the recent prominence of religious conservatism; Luke always read "two MEN will be in one bed...". So instead of explaining that this was Jesus pre-empting more of the Old Testament, Phari-cee and his associates just change it to suit their whims.

    I bet his Free Market Fundie Bible has Jesus on the Mount saying "Fuck off, parasites; go get your own damn fish".

    Dim and Dimmer are flickering ooooout.....especially wannawipe...oops, did I say BELIEVE in evolution?.....

    Once again, wannawipe, your evolutionary secularists were predicting the attainment of rational perfection in their lifetime.....Lenin offered it and eradicated the powerful capitalists....and whoa....what a country....

    I remember as a child packing boxes of bibles that were going to be smuggled into The USSR....oh yeah....that little book always seems to infuriate the secularists....

    Look at Lucy's reaction....he can't even imagine Christ as judge as he states He would become because of the sin that seperates man from Him. Ooooo, yes the slestive bible of the rationalist....even Anonymous isn't biting on that debate.

    Oh and what else should dear crazed Nietzche had expected out of his pathetic conclusions, wannawipe....peace and love?....yeah right....peace and love based on a secular philosophy that only could lead to what it has always lead to.....oppression and death.

    Talk to Nietzche's sis......wannawipe....just like Hitler, she was only applying what the dear secularist preached!

    But I digress......the proof of macroevolution please, wannawipe....Fossils of dead organisms assumed an age and asked by their users for us all to accept, on faith, their placement in some imagined taxonomy only agreed to with great argument and angst so that it "fits" the theory....well...again....FAITH is demanded.

    The fossil record does not prove macroevolution, wannawipe....Try again.....The large holes of "transitional organisms has been explained and excused about 4 or 5 times now....those scientists just can't seem to get their dogma straight!

    Oooooo, and how about that dilemma of the initiation of natural selection....you know amino acids, proteins, RNA, DNA, highly logical and complicated CODES that replicate, repair themselves and evolved to even ponder their own existence......over several billion years......

    Proof please.....THIS IS SCIENCE!

    Waiting patiently.....

    Awww, wannawipe can't defend evolutionary theory adequately so he is running away....too bad....

    Again, can't find that proof regarding the material evidence of macroevolution, wannawipe?

    How about explaining to the class about the process of the first cell?....The origin of life?.....

    Perhaps you will go the route of Lucy's love, Kucinich and tell us all the first lifeform came down to earth on a spaceship.....

    Werererer....UFO's!......Where's Carl Sagan when you need him, uh wannawipe?

    Flakes, weirdos and fanatics....oh how the leftists entertain!

    You should be ashamed of the casual way you edit your god's manifesto fo ryour own rhetorical convenience, Phari-cee; precisely the same way you did the Treaty of Tripoli some weeks back. Do you feel that your personal relationship with Jesus permits you to do so?

    Still on the semicolon, dash stuff, heh Lucy....Oh, and The Luke passage is yet another fine example of the selective love secularists have for the scripture....was the original greek specific to the gender, Lucy or was it like "mankind," which means people....oh and even if it was two males....what is your point?....Was this a sexual thing that the men were in bed?

    Please Lucy, what about the part of Christ's talking about Noah?....You glance over that while concentrating on people versus men?

    And again....I am awaiting your defense of your dogma regarding science deals with PROOF and as of 2007, I see no proof of macroevolution OR the origin of life as theorized by naturalists.....

    Come on now....teach the class SCIENCE...no faith....proof!

    If it is better for you to impugn my style or delivery, Anonymous so that you avoid the obvious conflict your worldview has with your worship of God that not only asks for faith in Him but His word....you know The Word as expressed in the beginning of John that was at creation....and not the creation as secularists would want you to believe, dear Anonymous.....

    The Word...oh boy....another dilemma for the Christian not quite comfortable with his "fairy tales." Now THAT's torture, Anonymous!

    Oh, sowwie little Anonymous....your lack of curiosity in the disconnect between what you described as a daily walk with Christ and your obvious difficulty with about 80% of what is contained in the scriptures in the light of 21st century secular progressive elite intellect is not my problem...

    I guess discussing such serious matters would make you an outcast at your next cocktail party?

    The contradiction that is wannawipe! SCIENCE cannot live with "the uncertainty of an incomplete theory" especially when the secular left demands The Theory of Evolution be the only explaination given for the origin of life in the universe taught in the public school system.....you idiot! You are really not very well informed....

    Science has now been cleansed of any dogma other than that of Darwinian evolution despite the fact that, AS YOU JUST ADMITTED, it is an incomplete theory....It is not taught that way in the public school system, you moron! It is taught as the only possible expaination despite the lack of macroevolution evidence and NO WAY POSSIBLE that the origin of life theories can be proven....

    So....what is the alternative?.....

    Assume the theory is right.....what is that really?.....faith.

    So, again, the secularists show their true character....they are a religion based on faith just as well when rational proof is not available....

    The priests?....all those nicely tenured "instructors" ready to make sure no one deviates from the dogma....

    Even Lucy and you are ready to fight your crusade against ignorance!

    Science?...oh yeah, we can assume things when it fits the theory. Nice worldview.

    And again....I am awaiting your defense of your dogma regarding science deals with PROOF and as of 2007, I see no proof of macroevolution OR the origin of life as theorized by naturalists.....

    Come on now....teach the class SCIENCE...no faith....proof!

    Posted by: cee at November 15, 2007 2:30 PM


    2 solid days of 'crickets' form slob, patsy and philby.

    "Don't you have a patient who needs to be neglected and misdiagnosed?"


    ###
    Everyone is just fine, Anonymous....In fact I have a very confident and well scholled 3rd year PA student with me today and she is doing a great job seeing the patients initially and learning from them and me....

    Medical education is so nice...the young learning PROPER scientific techniques along with good bedside manners.....

    Unlike the secularists here and their apologists, like you Anonymous....what a rube.

    Yes, proper science...unlike the fairy tales of the evolutionary biologists and climate change fanatics....science that has controls, repeated evidence AND consistency....

    Predicting the future or trying to present the past is a dangerous endeavor, isn't it Anonymous?

    I am in 100% compliance and ethically discharging my services as billed, dear Anonymous. I know the regulations that I live under and the ethical duties before me.

    Now you, on the other hand......

    "Still on the semicolon, dash stuff, heh Lucy....Oh, and The Luke passage is yet another fine example of the selective love secularists have for the scripture....was the original greek specific to the gender, Lucy or was it like "mankind," which means people....oh and even if it was two males....what is your point?....Was this a sexual thing that the men were in bed?"

    Oh, you're a stickler for specificity regarding the original Greek idioms etc. and whatever other variables you can pull out of thin air when it slants things your way...

    ... but when you are caught personally removing crucial piece of punctuation from a crucial document that introduces fortuitous ambiguity into a crucial sentence that, prior to your revisions, blows away your entire vacuous argument, then its no big deal.

    How many times in the past teo days have I caught you gratuitously annotating or actually editing your holy book to support your political agenda? Two ? Three?

    Do you even care that your faith is so weak that you must lie and fabricate with such abandon? Pathetic.

    Oh my, Lucy, again with the punctuation and the gender identity...If that is your rebuttal to the obvious idea that Christ is not only about communism and pacifism (which would be all the secularist could handle).....but also about....

    Judgement
    Holiness
    Personal Sacrifice
    Discipline
    Self-Denial (INCLUDING sexual and other self-indulging pleasures the dear secularist hedonists just can't live without)
    Oh yeah and the big one.....

    HE CLAIMED HE WAS GOD AND PRESENT AT THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE, KNEW NOAH, ABRAHAM AND ELIJAH AND.....now wait......

    Determined male and female becoming ONE since the time of Adam and Eve.....

    There's that 80% the secularist (and their apologists like the whimpy Anonymous) have such difficulty with......

    Mmmmm.....and your rebuttal again is.....

    Your try to show we are a secular nation based on The Treaty of Tripoli (tried and failed)....and that Jesus recognized same sex relationships (tried and failed).

    C'mon, Phari-cee;

    What about that video of Yahweh playing with anthropomorphic mud-pies? Nothing? He should be able to pop one right into your hard-drive.


    Still waiting for your decalration of ideological brotherhood with Hitler, Forrest, Torquemada, and Bradford. We know you love the Christianist Warlord Bush, what's the big deal?

    "No, Loin, MLK was naive and influenced by the secularists...."

    That's right; Phari-cee has told us today that when Jesus said "turn the other cheek", and all that stuff about the sun and rain falling on the righteous and the unrighteous, he didn't mean in any way to comment on KILLING anybody...what a laugh!...No Phari-cee explictly told us that this only referrs to every-day personal interactions:

    - when Phari-cee is cut off on the high-way, he remembers not to flip the guy off; but he merely mutters "secularist" and feels the beam of God's approving countenance.

    - but when he hears from his political leaders, whom God also obviously adores, that a dictator in a heathen land may have sent an underling to talk to a heathen terrorist, and that there is a handful of wholly unsubstantiated allegations that the dictator intends to attack us in some way, then Phari-cee quickly deduces that there must be a minority of Christians in that heathen land who are almost certainly being supressed, and therefore cannot fulfill Jesus's admonitions to Spread His Word.

    At this point, Jesus is clear that the gloves come off, and the quintessential Christian warrior Bush can do nothing but wash the heathen land with hell-fire. Whoever dies and how is of no account - its "self-defense", and all the young flesh burned by the white phosphorus is a "sweete sacrifice" in the nostrils of Jehovah!

    How could Martin Luther King be so obtuse as to miss this clear message in the following?:

    "You have learnt how it was said: 'Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.' But I say to you, Offer the wicked man no resistance. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; if a man takes you to law and would have your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone orders you to go one mile, go two miles with him." Mt. 5.38-41

    Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy; But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those whose persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Mt. 5.43-46

    Jesus said, "I have told you all this so that you may find peace in me. In the world you will have trouble, but be brave: I have conquered the world." Jn. 16.33


    As Phari-cee points out, MLK was foolish - he needn't have been killed for taking the principled, altruistic stands he took; he should have stayed in a gigantic house and hawked boner-pills to rich old white men, and "rendered unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's"...... which clearly means anything that Ceasar says is his.

    Look up the word "troll" in the dictionary. Notice Jeff's picture right next to the word.

    Posted by: at November 16, 2007 12:51 AM


    How many times have you had your ass handed to you? Shamed to 'anon?' Too damn funny! (*) [+}-----

    ."...was the original greek specific to the gender, Lucy or was it like "mankind," which means people....oh and even if it was two males....what is your point?....Was this a sexual thing that the men were in bed?"

    This is also revealing in regard to the ephemeral nature of Phari-cee's "faith". If it will help his point in any way he will resort to citing a wild-ass possibility - to which he doesn't even know the answer - that an ancient language through which his holy book was cycled featured an ambiguous idiom which would, if even true, be of use in regard to justifying his cult's political editing of the Book.

    But Moses Met Jesus!! That's a FACT!!

    Hah Hah.

    No, Phari-cee, for centuries the King James Bible said "Two MEN will be in one Bed", and those were the English words by which generations of grubby children were beaten to sleep, and for which oceans of blood was shed and burnt as a "Sweete sacrfyce" to Jehovah. Who are you manicured suburban Promise-Keepers to change it because of your sqeamishness of what you fear is pulsing within you?

    Once again, Lucy misses...The Word is inspired and revealed to the person WITH FAITH (which you lack) by God Himself. You atheists forget the supernatural EVEN WHEN YOU ARE SPEAKING WITH SOMEONE WHO KNOWS THE SUPERNATURAL EXISTS....hense my description of you as dim, Lucy....

    But you and wannawipe function only in a material world....so again, I ask....wannawipe asked for raised hand (paw was his word) of who BELIEVES in the theory of evolution and I assume he would demand this tag line implied by the argument [as the only explaination for the creation of life in the universe]......I go down to dim and dimmer's level and ELIMINATE FAITH and ask why the following contraditions exist....

    (a) Why does science demand FAITH of all of us to believe their UNPROVEN story of the initiation of the process, WITHOUT THE INFLUENCE OF THE CREATION "FORCE" of NATURAL SELECTION, in the primordial soup, where random and spatially unrelated atoms of various elements spontaneously combined to form complex and fragile amino acids and proteins that then transformed into thousands of other proteins and eventually obtained the ability to replicate and repair their "codes" so as to form working cellular components that are required for the first living cell.

    (b) And secondly, science asks for all of us to believe that macroevolution has occurred even though they have not one example of this core process that would be an example of Darwin's natural selection that resulted in new species.

    So wannawipe and Lucy.....why do you deride my faith that has withstood the attacks of empires, false prophets and atheists while ignoring the blaring holes in your religion?

    Oh yes, science...it has a special box that is raised above the masses that demands unquestioning supplication in its authority....Look at the current global climate change debate to see that dogma from the religious left!.....It seems akin to The LORD'S ark in the first tabernacle!

    he, he, he.....

    Well Lucy, there is much inside all of us, as you say, "pulsing within" all of us....It is called sinful desire and time and again, God and Christ warns us of it and provides the loving solution to it all....

    And it is within Ted Haggard, Barney Frank, me, you, George Bush, Hillary Clinton, Anonymous, Grammie, wannwipe, Saddam Hussein, V. Lenin, Nancy Pelosi, Marx, G. Washington or any theif, adulterer, liar, murderer, etc. to stop the giving-into those base desires to do wrong....it is only Him who can save us from them....Period...That is the good news and the positive message I speak of.

    You try to thrust hypocrisy onto me without even knowing the type of house I choose to live in, the type of car I drive or what I do in my chosen profession....you need it for your rhetoric and I enjoy seeing how you use it...you are imaginative, especially with the Promise Keepers jab....But it only avoids the root contradiction in your worldview that misses recognition of where all goodness comes...from Him and to base an ideology that ignores or excuses the nature of men only leads to death....Christ spoke of this and I know you have not quoted Him here either....

    Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him."

    In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again."

    "How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"

    Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

    "How can this be?" Nicodemus asked.

    "You are Israel's teacher," said Jesus, "and do you not understand these things? I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

    "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."


    ###
    See the quote, "Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed." What else does that mean, dear Lucy?...There is not translation problem for you to attack...Christ planly and in a few words describes the dilemma facing all of US (me included).

    Some take this passage and go to the false ends of gnosticism where again, man is the center of power, solution and device...This is a false teaching even of the church historically, that has also lead to death and destruction.

    Then there are the diluters of this message, like Anonymous who seems to also desire Christ as his buddy alone and not judge with verdict....Sorry, He is much more than a buddy, a philosopher or a communist pacifist...He is the living Son of God who placed Him as judge and savior for what is in within every man's heart.

    So Lucy, keep attacking....the supernatural scriptures are chock full of this consistent message from Genesis to Revelation...while you avoid tending to my challenge (once again) to defend the two deficient dogmas of your religion (see a and b above).

    I’ll confide in you, Phari-cee; I believe the supernatural exists based on personal experience; and this BELIEF brings me great joy and excitement, and incites me to no end of supposition and imaginings.

    But I am not so vain as to think for one minute that I have any aspect of it figured out, or so stupid as to buy into any classification of it dished out by any living huckster or on decaying scraps of goat-skin. Your fantasies, like mine, our right to entertain, but when one of us starts conspiring in the military conquest and senseless murder of foreign innocents based on any aspect of them, that is dangerous insanity.

    Nice retort, anonymous.

    For once I leave a discussion with Lucy at least 20% hopeful. But I am sure it will be short lived as wannawipe is sure to hurl profanities and silliness at me while ignoring the challenge I placed at his revival-like sermon in the demand we all raise our paws in faith toward eeeevolution as the sole reason gazillions of living cells have their millions of proteins that were synthesized from rudimentary atoms combining spatially to form amino acid codes that are replicated, repaired and eventually lead to these molecules being able to ponder their own existence.

    So secularists....what is it now?

    So secularists....what is it now? And Anonymous The Pirate gives a wonderful answer.....

    So secularists....what is it now?

    Posted by: cee at November 16, 2007 9:00 AM


    Well, I see no reason why it would be a bureaucratic system built by an immortal petulant who somehow has no beginning an no end, and who by immplication has giant pendulous genetalia for which there is no apparent use (we are made "in his image", are we not?), and a rectal orifice from which there is nothing to excrete, unless there are Rueben sandwiches and sushi in heaven.

    Then there is the fact that he put within us the appendix, the only modern purpose for which appears to be deadly pustuous explosions. Wisdom teeth? WTF? The coxyx? Intelligent design my ass!


    And out of some perverse mischief he gave us urges to do this or that with the equipment provided, but he issued one set of harshly sanctioned behavioral rules in these regards - issued it in a small, dusty backwater region of many languages, intense class and ethnic strife and distrust, and no fax machines or Email.

    And he gave us intelligence, curiosity, and skepticism (or was that a gift from a Promethian snake? if so, I want to hear a little more from that guy) but hides his harshly specific demands behind a fog of cryptic, poetic imagery. Ah - a puzzle! Fun!....but no; no guesswork or imagination allowed in its interpretation, or you will trip a hidden trap-door over a scalding subterranian deep-fryer.

    So only the dullest, most credulous sheep stand a chance of salvation, but only if they are lucky enough to bump into and imprint onto the right prophet at the right time. And why this whole miserable painful arbitrary test anyway? It seems that an omnipotent deity withpout a childish sadistic streak would create a world full of spherical, metalic beings with no need or machinery to consume, procreate, or deficate - only float there in sublime contentment - and with answers actually available to any pressing existential questions which might persist. - but even then the question arises: why bother? What psychological void afflicts the deity creating his need to create?

    No, it makes no sense. How did the Universe begin? Who knows? That's my version of your "God works in mysterious ways", and a far more rational response.

    And your point is, wannawipe?....This is not an example of macroevolution nor does it address the dilemma of the Darwinist with regard to how that essential complicated thing called the cell arrived on the scene!

    Proof please!

    patsy, Why do YOU hate God?

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at November 16, 2007 10:41 AM


    It seems to me that Phari-cee is dodging the very salient questions I have posed above.

    To elaborate: Does the Bible explain why and how God devised the absurd and often comical sexual mode of reproduction for his creatures? ..And then only to arbitrarily outlaw certain variations on the burlesque theme as being "sodomy"? Paradigm, please.

    I have the utmost respect for the life of all of God's creatures, not only the cute and fuzzy ones, but even the stupid and repulsive like you Bovine, Ronco and Pastor DUMBFUCK!

    Posted by: SHUT UP! DUMBSHIT! I mean Bovine! at November 16, 2007 12:59 PM


    Really? Even all the while claiming God doesn't exhist? How does that work, patsy?

    Well your near honest post almost hit the target, wannawipe....Scientific methods demand hypothesis must be tested with experimental studies that, when repeated, are independently verified.

    This little lack of science for the theory of Darwinian evolution which you asked if I believed in is a glaring problem overlooked in your post and by those who have faith in Darwinian evolutionary theory. Natrual selection being the only force explaining all of those species and fossils you proudly claim demands assumptions that destroy the application of the scientific method to these endeavors.

    Consistency would be a nice attribute to a worldview, wannawipe, and the secular humanist that demands rational, scientific methods to explain such phenomenon as life on earth means that such scutininy as I have demanded be addressed. To then say alternative explainations with the same deficiencies as Darwinian evolutionary theory are not appropriate is very inconsistant.

    You see, I know man will never be able to create a living cell from simple atoms because I know God created life. The secularist has a belief just as provable as mine but because some wish to assign "science" to a theory that you have determined.....

    "cannot test the hypothesis through experiments."

    Well then, what can one say, wannawipe?Because the scientific method demands any hypothesis be tested with repeatable experimentation my scientific mind is waiting for better proof other than what some secularist says happened in an ooze without one experiment showing it is even possible.

    And the lack of observable macroevolution makes me very skeptical that such has taken place....But if one wants such skepticism expressed they are tarred as a flat-earther instead of someone demanding the scientific method be met.

    So wannawipe, I am glad you recognize that the field of evolutionary biology at least approaches the line of good science as so many seem to want to ignore. As scientists try to show life from matter occured and never do, I would like the types of inquisitions you hold, "Do you believe in evolution," be judged as they really are....The request for opinion on DOGMA from a fanatic religious leftist.

    And Lucy, I do not see why you need any explaination for why things are including the penis and the vagina because it just is....and if Christ deems something sinful then it is. Now, if that does not fit into your ever shifting rational morality that is not God's problem, because He is perfect....it is your problem because you are not.

    That is why there is a law.....I may say driving 56 mph in a 55 mph zone is an arbitrary "sin" but that is no defense for speeding. Same with the STOP sign, same with the traffic light, same with any rule that is known. The authority says it and those under the authority are in violation if they ignore the rule.

    Go back to the first sin, in Genesis, Lucy, to see what it is all actually based on.....my persistant theme called self-deification.....

    what you called "freedom."

    "And Lucy, I do not see why you need any explaination for why things are including the penis and the vagina because it just is....and if Christ deems something sinful then it is."


    What an absolutely stupid response.

    Phari-cee's response illustrates why monotheistic systems of absolute authority were devised by complex Chiefdoms and primitive state-level societies: to justify arbitrary, heavenly-ordained monarchical rule. "Because I said so" and any request for justification = damnation/execution.

    ...hence Phari-cee's crush on George W. Bush and his insipient fascism.

    "And the lack of observable macroevolution makes me very skeptical that such has taken place...."

    What the fuck are you talking about? Its as clear as the penis jutting out of your simian forehead, Phari-cee; if you would only open your eyes...and hoist those forehead-testicles a bit ...and actually look at the data.

    All I see are millions of species of different bacteria, fungi, viruses, mammals, reptiles, birds, fish, plants, etc. Lucy....NO ONE has ever observed macroevolution when a new species evolves from another.

    Microevolution was all Darwin ever witnessed...beaks changing, claws changing, etc....If the adaptation was beneficial and gives an advantage for survival, natural selection applies its force to make that adaptation flourish....at the expense of weaker ones....what Darwin never observed and will never observe because it takes lots of time even for one species to come out of such changes, is macroevolution....its is inferred by the proposed time line expressed in the geological fossil record, BUT NEVER DIRECTLY OBSERVED.

    Alternative explainations for the observed record are given but deemed unscientific. Why are alternative explainations deemed poison when they are deficient in the same way as Darwinian evolutionary theory in not being able to observe macroevolution....it is not testable and reproducable.

    The same applies to the primordial ooze theory....it sound nice and logical but no one has been able since the 1950's to observe amino acids form complex proteins that then replicate, mutate, repair and replicate again.....It is assumed that is how it happened....

    Same criticism....the theory is not testable nor is the testing reproducable.

    I am aware of the taxonomy derived over the last several hundred years. No data supports that even one species came out of another....none....it is only the similarity in DNA and phenotypes that lead scientists to assume common ancestry. But no one has observed a common ancestor giving rise to dissimilar species just like no one has seen God.

    Oo, oo....does that hurt! It is a fact though just like you and wannawipe keep saying about Jesus, Moses, Jehovah, Job, etc. etc....They might have lived, who knows? All we have is this written stuff without, what did you demand....chain of custody, Lucy?....Well what about you demand as much of those pontificating on the ever further remote past where there were no eyewitnesses and there is only an assumed dating based on assumptions of molecular decay.

    Chain of custody for the theory of evolution seems to have broken down about 10,000 years ago!

    "No data supports that even one species came out of another....none....it is only the similarity in DNA and phenotypes that lead scientists to assume common ancestry. But no one has observed a common ancestor giving rise to dissimilar species just like no one has seen God."


    Holy crap; what a pedant! No one has seen America either, dumbass. All we have is our own eyes's impressions of shifting landscapes and tales from friends and strangers, and maps put together from diarticulated data - at first this was done through mathematics and logic; more recently via distant images providing scale and gross details - but no one has actually "seen" all of it at once.

    Still, the theory makes sense, even without tales of magical giants holding the states together and such like.

    ...and, Phari-cee, some people claim to have seen God - I 've known one or two personally - but that doesn't mean jack-shit. In America you can pick a direction, go a certain number of miles, and you will end up where the maps predict.

    When did I say God doesn't exist?

    What is your reasoning to propose that God DOES exist?


    Posted by: OK, Bovine. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt at November 16, 2007 1:55 PM


    patsy, I don't think you actually uttered the words. But, you have definitely implied that God does not exist in at least a hundred posts directed at cee. You believe in evolution, right? My beliefs are spiritual. I am not going to get into a religion pissing match w/you. All due respect.

    Animals, plants, etc. right before us are under the influence of natural selection, Lucy, and yet not one instance of this phenomenon of evolution is OBSERVED....only microevolution which then is assumed to support the idea of macroevolution. Again loin, scientific inquiry demands a theory be testable.

    There is not theory of America....It exists under my feet and can be verified with maps, plying over it with a plane or even better, observing it from outer space.

    The theory of evolution being the only reasonable explaination of life of earth is a dogma....a dogma of secularists. Just look how you and wannawipe even write about it....

    Emotionally, with the flare that would put Thomas Aquinas to shame!

    Oh and again, the theory of the primodial ooze....a reasonable explaination?...Do you know how many proteins there are in the biosphere?

    Uncountable.

    But the secularist believes each and every protein was the result of a random genetic mutation of the previous code that gave rise to yet another, and another and another.....

    Do you know the time required for even proteins that comprise unicellular organisms to arise from random mutations in the primordial soup of amino acids?.....More time than even the oldest geological estimate has made.....basically one would need more time than one would be able to write on a page for the randomhess to prvide a workable code...

    and that is for a single cell....

    let alone the evolutionary process from that unicellular organism to the complicated vertebrate.

    Oh and one other thing, what about the law of increasing entropy of the universe?.....Why is that law allowed to be suspended for trillions of years to allow higher organization to take place of amino acids, proteins, RNA, DNA?.....These molecules are highly organized and fragile....why does the law of thermodynamics not apply?.....

    You can ONLY give me an assumption, again, to that question....

    It is not testable....so again, the scientific method is abandoned for the benefit of The secularist's theory of Darwinian evolution.

    "There is not theory of America....It exists under my feet and can be verified with maps, plying over it with a plane or even better, observing it from outer space."


    Yes, it can be verified, but your standard for trans-species evolution was "seeing it". No one has ever seen the physical United States.


    ...and wait a minute..Outer Space? I think you are very close to some dangerous Biblical waters here.

    Oh boy, wannawipe, you are sounding defensive....the fairy tale will never be proven right but your theory will never be proven wrong?.....Is that the bottom line?....

    In all practicality then.....what is the truth?

    Oh yeah, the bottom line is science, when it comes to explaining the origin of life as we know it, is a simple hypothesis that cannot be tested.....

    Just as I have been saying all along.....

    So again, what does it make it in reality?.....

    Dogma that some secularist can stand up and demand an answer for to judge the character, intellect and or spohisitication of a fellow human being.

    YOU USED THE WORD BELIEVE, WANNAWIPE, NOT ME.

    And as you try to stear the debate away from your leftist religious inquisition style from yesterday, I will continue to bring us back to how fanatical secularists, like you, really think and act....

    Just as fanatical and crazy as those they hate on the opposite pole.....

    So wannawipe, keep on keeping on with the preaching....it is illustrative of how you are no different than Reverand Haggard or OBL!

    Oh and the answer to your question....I would call it another beautiful beast created by Jehovah that is now extinct....That is all I can say and is really not much less an explaination than what the paleontologist can say because there is no evidence the new dinosaur came from the primordial ooze over billions of years without a supernatural creator like the fanatic secularist left's dogma says.

    Unless you have some facts I am not aware of, wannawipe!

    wannawipe is deluded AND simple......A very pathetic combination, indeed!

    Oh, and thank you for the umpteenth example of dehumanizing rhetoric....so common to the secular left as shown by the Nazi's with terms like "rat," for my ancestors....

    Don't worry wannawipe....I have been called worse than "worm" and Jesus Christ in me forgives you!

    And in addition to dehumanizing rhetoric, wannawipe lies again.....

    It is NOT "... 400 years of publically expressed atheism..." you MORON! If you want to take the "Age of Reason" c. XVII Century as the moment when the whole world became "atheist" you are seriously fucked up, Pastor DUMBFUCK! The development and diffusion of secular ideas has taken centuries, yet, again to this day we have morons like you, and even worse:

    RAISE YOUR PAW IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!

    Posted by: Oy vey! Pastor DUMBFUCK AGAIN WITH HIS FATWAS at November 14, 2007 5:18 PM


    ###
    Wrong, Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee! I used you, and the three other (R) DUMBSHITS! that DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION, Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee and Tom Tancredo, as examples to answer your stupid Fatwa of "... There have been at least 400 years of publically expressed atheism... " Examples of sheer willful ignorance and blind acceptance of dogma in our times.


    ###
    Really wannawipe? It seems you did not even mention the gentlemen you cite in the original post.....

    Oh well....continue with your profanity, dehumanizing rhetoric, your lies AND your secularist DOGMA.

    wannawipe's prayer:

    "I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!
    I DO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!"

    Just like the lion in THE WIZARD OF OZ....

    "My personal favorite is from the Song of Solomon (yes, FIG, it is Apocryphal in some churches):"


    ###
    A wonderful book of the hebrew scriptures, Anonymous....

    I wonder if Genesis is Aprocryphal in your church?

    Given your fellow traveler said this about Genesis,

    "Go back, Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee and read how starting from the Genesis, Women have had to deal with the ugly end of the plunger ever since."

    Posted by: Au Contraire! Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee! at November 13, 2007 1:08 PM


    ###
    ....you would see Genesis as fictional for the most part, Anonymous.

    Like I said before, wannawipe...your religious dogmatic inquisition question remains....

    "RAISE YOUR PAW IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!"


    ###
    The paw is raised....

    And the response from the fanatic secularist is.....

    "STUUUUPID HICK!"
    "FLAT EARTHER IGNORAMOUS!"
    "DISGUSTING WORM"
    "RIGHT-WING RAT"
    "SCUM"
    "SINNER!"

    And the pyre is prepared!
    And the crowd cheers.........

    wannawipe exhales deeply....

    Show me one instance when I said God was affiliated with a political party, Anonymous?

    My observations have always been that certain political parties have aligned thenselves with particular worldviews....

    And if you are comfortable in a party that has a majority of its participants hateful of people who believe in God, The Bible and believe they were created by God and not an accident of nature, then that is your contradictory position as a Christian....

    I am not. The hatred and disrespect that flies from the radical left towards believers has intensified over the last 50 years and moved The Democratic Party into a position of defending itself against the charge of being disrespectful to people of faith.

    Why?

    Well, one clear example here at ow is in wannawipe's hate-filled and condescending posts regarding my beliefs and their "place" in our society and understand what you, as a Chsitian, is leaving behind when even Christ's references to Genesis and the rest of The Torah are so clear.

    How do you reconcile such contradiction, Anonymous?

    Oh and turn your own words around, Anonymous....You are implying that only certain passages and parts of Christ's message are applicable to the political realm while the rest is optional.....And to believe this is not the case makes you some kind of intolerant right-winger.

    Morality is more than feeding the poor and environmental accountability (the current tactic of The Democrat party to be "moral"). But to abandon the clear reverance the scriptures declare God has for the unborn and the clear references to what "private" behavior is right and what is wrong is to also demean God and make Him a secularist.

    You are just as reactionary in my opinion in saying God is not concerned over "this" but more concerned over "that."

    What a pompous ass and lying crock of shit you are! You have no basis whatsoever for making this statement, and you have slandered the millions of Americans who count themselves Democrats and Christians. This is, perhaps, the most shameful thing ever written on this site, and you owe millions of Americans a profound and sincere apology.

    You are nothing but a damn liar, Cee.
    Posted by: Anonymous at November 16, 2007 5:30 PM


    Oh, please... Nice histrionics, as usual.

    Boy, can you dish it out but not take it.

    I think Cee's words are hyperbolic too, but that sort of denunciation of your political opposition, both as individuals and as a party, is your bread and butter on this site.

    It generally serves as your all-purpose post for anything from mere observations to rebuttal.


    One example, Anonymous, of those in The Democratic Party showing hate towards people of faith....

    In San Francisco, an S&M street festival, The Folsom Street Fair, had an advertisement mocking the last supper portraying Christ and his disciples as half-naked homosexual sadomasochists....

    If you'd like to see it go here....

    http://www.cnsnews.com/cns/photo/2007/092507FolosomFull.jpg

    Nancy Pelosi, the congresswoman of this district, was asked about the depiction and whether she tought it could be hurtful to Christians, she basically refused to answer the question.

    People who take the scriptures seriously and teach their children the lessons and stories from them see such examples every day from the progressive community. I am not a liar for pointing out the obvious disrespect most on the left have towards faith and I will scan sites like dailykos and Huffington Post and read comments that turn my blood ice cold....The same used to be seen here but has not been so bad lately.

    The posts are hateful calling Christians "Taliban," or "Nazis."

    I am sorry if my opinion of the modern Democrat party insults your sensibilites, Anonymous, but I am not welcome in the party of the left as I "RAISE MY PAW" when asked if I do not BELIEVE in evolution.

    I am ridiculed and denounced as you see above.

    I asked you simple questions about the apparant contradiction of a Christian who believes Christ is the Son of God and savior of the world AND He clearly discusses such "fairy tales" like Moses, Jonah, God's creation and Noah and the flood while professing community with the radical secular American left who looks at those who profess faith in these references as fools and idiots.

    The same was seen in the discussion on this board regarding Embryonic Stem Cell Research....The scriptures are clear about when life begins and those that choose to ignore these passages because of other pressures choose to, but to say I am "anti-science" because I have an ethical standard that is based on sound foundations also tells me I am not welcome in the party of the left.

    Abortion is another example.

    The bible is clear on these issues and Christians must reconcile their selective references of scriptures to what their candidates support in law and policy.

    However, to imply that an entire group of people is somehow cut off from God's grace because of political orientaion which differs from the writer's seems vastly different in kind to me. It goes well beyond histrionics.

    Again, however, you made a reasonable point.

    Posted by: Anonymous at November 16, 2007 9:11 PM


    Nice try, philby. That isn't what cee said, at all. But, I am sure he will set you straight, again.

    NPR just had a story on yesterday about skyrocketing pshych issues in the military; and how military records show that these PTSD sufferers are being flushed out of the service and out of their benefits in unusually high numbers on the basis of "behavior issues".

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16330374

    This coincides with another story regarding a recent spike in suicides among recently discharged vets.

    http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22762457-5005961,00.html


    So, you patriots, this is how you treat your heroes? Its how your fetish/president treats them.

    While the anti-American, anti-religion left searches the rhetorical replacements for their previous macabre fascnination with total US Troop death numbers (which are continuing to decline)....I come across this interesting article that shows the left does not have to force unethical human experimentation on the rest of us....

    Dolly creator Prof Ian Wilmut shuns cloning

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml;jsessionid=XFT2IYJUHGB4FQFIQMFSFF4AVCBQ0IV0?xml=/earth/2007/11/16/scidolly116.xml


    ###
    Yep, nuclear transfer, (a backdoor way the anti-life left uses to get around bans on human cloning), is not necessary for experiments nor would actual embryos be needed....Adult stem cells can be made to revert back to an embryonic state.

    Wow, you see leftist secularists, we do not need to become less humane to advance science and technology to alleviate human suffering! How about that!

    What does that say about Corzine's failure to get funding for Embryonic Stem Cell Research, mental midget?

    "However, to imply that an entire group of people is somehow cut off from God's grace because of political orientaion which differs from the writer's seems vastly different in kind to me. It goes well beyond histrionics."


    ###
    A totally unsubstantiated charge. But like the poster of this lie requests, I will not address him directly expecting a response.

    This sentence is the summation of my arguments so far and in no way implies anyone or any group is "cut off" from God's grace and salvation....

    "I am sorry if my opinion of the modern Democrat party insults your sensibilites, Anonymous, but I am not welcome in the party of the left as I 'RAISE MY PAW' when asked if I do not BELIEVE in evolution."

    The hatred of Christians by the Democrats is part of their ideology. I frequently read their websites to see what their latest bit of lunacy is, and the sheer hatred I've seen expressed for Christians by the majority of posters is disgusting. Yes, there are Democrats who are Christians, but they take a beating at these websites. I've seen them plead with their fellow Libs to stop with the Christian-bashing but some are so filled with hate, and rage, that they just can't help themselves. They blame Christians for their loss in the 2000 and 2004 elections. I guess it's just easier blaming Christians for those losses than it is blaming the candidates.

    But it's a sad commentary on what the Democratic party has become.

    You are dim, wannawipe....I spell it out for you now....

    ...with total US Troop death numbers (with rates continuing to decline)


    ###
    I do think you could understand what I meant dear leftist hater....

    So what about that change in rhetoric....is it a conscious decision on the part of the left?....We all knew how much you all enjoyed posting about deaths of US service members as fodder for your debate....

    Now you enjoy talking about their struggles with PTSD, once again with crocodile tears....

    Oh but I gather as the money runs out and resources are threatened to keep our brave men and women safe and treated well once they arrive back home, the pathetic leftist ruling class will once again not stand by their empty rhetoric and pay for the war for freedom and democracy in Iraq.....

    You know trying to seperate supporting the troops and supporting their mission is such a MIRACULOUS act in itself, hey wannawipe?

    CUT THE FUNDS!.....END THE WAR NOW!

    And this is my post today, the 1,662nd day since the declaration of Mission Accomplished in Iraq.....

    I am cee, good night and good luck.

    "I'd tell you that the Democrats are talking a good game, but they're not even doing that. Everybody in Congress has to understand something: If they continue to fund this war, it's not just the President who owns it. They own it, too." Sgt. Liam Madden

    "There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administration's policies in Iraq. Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back." NYT 1/28/07

    "I think the Vietnamese are better off in Vietnam," George McGovern - NEWSWEEK

    "Lefties: Leave these pathetic drowning rats alone to stew in each other's juices. Get yourselves out in the street and fight this criminal administration in ways that really mean something, and that are noted by more than a handful of keyboard heroes!" Sir Loin of Beef

    "American liberals need to face these truths: The demand for self-government was and remains strong in Iraq despite all our mistakes and the violent efforts of al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias to disrupt it." DEMOCRAT Bob Kerrey

    "If we end up saying that because these people are committing these acts of terrorism in Iraq or Afghanistan, that we shouldn't have done the removal of Saddam or the removal of the Taliban, then we are making a fundamental mistake about our own future, about security, about the values we should be defending in the world." TONY BLAIR

    "You can't bring the troops home if you give George Bush $100 billion to wage this war. You're not supporting them. You're keeping them in harm's way." CINDY SHEEHAN

    "There is no doubt ... that Al Qaeda is operating in Iraq. There is no doubt that we've had to take very strong measures against them. And there is no doubt that the Iraqi security forces have got to be strong enough to be able to withstand not just the violence that has been between the Sunni and the Shia population and the Sunni insurgency, but also Al Qaeda itself." GORDON BROWN

    "People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there." OSAMA BIN LADEN

    "Al Qaeda really hurt us, but not as much as Rupert Murdoch has hurt us, particularly in the case of Fox News. Fox News is worse than Al Qaeda--worse for our society. It's as dangerous as the Ku Klux Klan ever was."
    KEITH OLBERMANN

    "Thinking such as your's is a cancer on our nation that needs to be cut out." MIKE posted 10/4/07 7:02PM


    You overlooked my quetioning of the secular fringe left's use of miracles, wannawipe......

    "You know trying to seperate supporting the troops and supporting their mission is such a MIRACULOUS act in itself, hey wannawipe?"

    CUT THE FUNDS!.....END THE WAR NOW!....BRING THE TROOPS HOME NOW!

    You mean "oppose the war but support the troops"?


    ###
    Practically speaking, how is that waltz into cognitive dissonance going, wannawipe?.....not supporting the troops mission but supporting the troops....

    A miracle is needed because The Commander in Chief supports both the troops and their mission....and is requesting funding for them executing their mission....

    The last time I read The US COnstitution, the elected executive was the only one capable of forming missions for the military as their commander....The legislature is requested to fund the armed forces...

    Oh what is the left going to do, wannawipe?.....

    Oh, and the public....immediate fund cuts are not popular and I am sure if the funds run out and we see the chaos that occurs in the government, the proper people will be held accountable....

    Oh, and those AWOL rates....less than 1% of the brave and honorable men and women serving....

    You'll have to try harder to demorlaize the troops because you have not yet caused the 5% AWOL rates seen in the worst of the war to protect freedom of thought and religion in South Vietnam, wannawipe....

    Keep trying.....crocodile tears from the anti-American radical left for the troops' struggles and needs has yet to make the practical impact you all promised in 11/06!

    CUT THE FUNDS!.....END THE WAR NOW!

    "The Dems offered 50 Billion to FUND a withdrawal, not a continuation of this folly."


    ###
    And as I have been saying since January, dim wannawipe, the US Constitution does not give the legislature the ability to form the mission...it is in the capable hands of the executive....

    Duh, dude....this is why you are an IDIOT, wannawipe.....

    Bush will wait for the funds for the US armed forces mission for freedom and liberty in Iraq.....and we will see what your ruling class does, wannawipe.....

    satisfy their radical base who demands the fund cuts.....END THE WAR!

    or?......

    And again, LESS THAN 1% of the total armed forces going AWOL versus 5% during the worst of the Vietnam War era....it is all how the stuff is couched, uh wannawipe?....

    Keep trying.....the surge is working and the democrats will have to be the ones to pull the trigger on premature withdraw and suffer the consequences.....

    Oh darn it all, eh wannawipe? Reality sucks, eh?

    Raise you hoove if you think reality sucks!

    Again, my response to the reality ignoring 12:30 PM post is.....

    Raise you hoove if you think reality sucks!

    The US Constitution specifically states who makes the decisions on what our brave men and women do and who funds those decisions.......

    No money.....no mission.....Cut the funding!

    So is that what your leftist ruling elites will do, wannawipe?....Or are you going to post another moronic response?

    just can't stand seeing the "F" word any more

    The hatred of Christians by the Democrats is part of their ideology. I frequently read their websites to see what their latest bit of lunacy is, and the sheer hatred I've seen expressed for Christians by the majority of posters is disgusting. Yes, there are Democrats who are Christians, but they take a beating at these websites. I've seen them plead with their fellow Libs to stop with the Christian-bashing but some are so filled with hate, and rage, that they just can't help themselves. They blame Christians for their loss in the 2000 and 2004 elections. I guess it's just easier blaming Christians for those losses than it is blaming the candidates.

    But it's a sad commentary on what the Democratic party has become.

    Posted by: Brandon at November 17, 2007 9:24 AM

    Are you such a dreamer
    To put the world to rights?
    I'll stay home forever
    Where two and two always makes a five
    ...
    All hail to the thief
    ...
    Don't question my authority or put me in the box
    'Cause I'm not
    ...
    Oh go and tell the king that the sky is falling in

    When it's not

    And, it is amusing to see the War and Pervert party pontificating Christian values.
    Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2007 10:04 PM


    Quite.
    Yet the freaky, masochistic side of myself would like to become a republican. If only for a day.

    "Apparently, the slander du jour is that Democrats are anti-Christian. I find that encouraging."

    posted by philby/rudy/jennifer/joel/anonymous/clucker

    It is what it is. Who wants to take God off money? The (d)'s. Ten Commandments out of the court houses? The (d)'s. Who is leading the war against Christmas? The (d)'s. Who is shooting down the Boy Scouts? The (d)'s. Who is the first in line to defend the enemy muslims? The (d)'s. Facts are facts.

    @ 10:18 PM: "Who is leading the war against Christmas?"

    The really amusing, but sad thing is that you actually believe such a "war" exists.

    @ 10:18: "Who wants to take God off money?"

    Yeah, Hillary, Edwards, and Obama just can't stop talking about that!

    @ 10:18: "who's the first in line to defend the enemy Muslems?"

    Does this question mean that you consider all Muslems "the enemy"?

    I guess that must mean that you also view the so called "War Against Terror" as a war between Christianity and Islam?

    Perception always becomes reality to the vulnerable.

    "Ten Commandments out of the court houses"

    When did the Ten Commandments become the law of the land?

    "Who's shooting down the boy scouts?"

    It's that 'boy hating thing' rearing up it's ugly head again.

    @ 10:18: "Fact are facts"

    But more often, fiction is "facts" with you.

    @ 10:18: "Fact are facts"

    But more often, fiction is "facts" with you.

    Posted by: Mike at November 17, 2007 11:33 PM


    Next time you're busted, you'll be whining that Johnny only outs liberal liars...

    Look, these loons get their "facts" from Olbermann, Hillary Clinton's Media Matters, and the like. You can't expect them to really deal in the truth can you? They don't like the real world so they retreated long ago into a world of propaganda and lies then whine about the "biases" of Fox News because Fox sheds light on their lies and distortions and shows the real world as it is. These were whackjobs who were positively stunned when they lost the elections in 2000 and 2004. They'll be just as stunned when '08 rolls around. That's what happens when you listen to propaganda and lies 24/7. And they have the nerve to complain about Fox (or anyone else they don't agree with)? Clean up your own yard first before coming to take a dump on this one.

    Looks like 'mike,' 'why,' 'patsy,' and 'philby' claim my facts aren't facts. Do they back their claims w/any facts? Not a single one.

    I don't see any dead fish in the barrel.
    TDF!!!!(*)[+]----

    And please provide proof of:

    "Who is the first in line to defend the enemy muslims? The (d)'s. Facts are facts."

    aclu, next?

    And please provide proof of:

    "Who is the first in line to defend the enemy muslims? The (d)'s. Facts are facts."

    aclu, next?

    Posted by: royal king at November 18, 2007 4:50 PM


    and Sean Hannity?

    Is 'and Sean Hannity' a question? Is it even a sentence? You better watch your sentence structures and grammer. Otherwise, the poster formerly known as 'mrs. philby' will be on you like flies on shit. Don't say I didn't warn ya,' trent.

    Sorry. I meant that the ACLU has defended Sean Hannity. Attacking the ACLU is pointless.

    I wasn't 'attacking' the aclu. Merely pointing out a well known fact. Stanley Cohen (scum) defends hamas and is happy to do so. That tub o' lard that was convicted and only slapped on the wrist for passing notes from the taliban to her terrorist client. Another gem from the aclu. If I had more time I would name several more. I take it you have no problem that American lawyers defend our enemy? Very telling.

    It is what it is. Who wants to take God off money? The (d)'s. Ten Commandments out of the court houses? The (d)'s. Who is leading the war against Christmas? The (d)'s. Who is shooting down the Boy Scouts? The (d)'s. Who is the first in line to defend the enemy muslims? The (d)'s. Facts are facts.

    Posted by: royal king at November 17, 2007 10:18 PM

    If there's a War on Christmas, we are botching it as badly as we have Afghanistan and Iraq.

    War on Christmas. A fact. An idiot.

    Posted by: Anonymous at November 18, 2007 7:19 PM


    So, I take it you agree with the other 4 points of my post? Or, just more of your selective responding?

    RK....Anonymous does not mind all of the public and private resources going into the litigation by his leftist fellow travelers regarding public school children utterring the words "Christ the savior is born," at the end of SILTENT NIGHT....Just google SILENT NIGHT and see how this little classic Christmas song is essentially anathema to his secularist collegues.

    Here in New Jersey, all Christmas songs that actually have the orgins of the holiday within them, you remember Anonymous?....The birth of Jesus, are usually no longer included in public activities including the schools and municipalities. Private placing of nativity scenes are usually not allowed on public properties anymore because of fear of litigation by some secularist who feels it is a violation of the seperation of church and state....again Christmas' origin is the birth of Jesus so I do not see the reasoning behind how any government entity can even be cited that they are violating the seperation clause if they include the visual or oral representations of the origins of the holiday.

    Anonymous, The Democrat, wants to ignore the dimunation of public expressions of faith by his party and try to excuse it with the commercial "holiday/season's greetings" sterilization of a wonderful commemeration of something wonderful. There is a war, but Anonymous is part of the group that wants public displays of faith marginalized for the sake of his ideology.

    For other reasons he has, he wants the radical portions of his party's agenda hidden and not discussed. Like their official party position on abortion that essentially allows infanticide or the majority of his party's delegates who feel one is anti-science if one has a moral belief that life begins at conception and human experimentation on such individuals is immoral.

    Look above to see his total lack of involvement in the discussion about the origins of life in the universe...he cowardly accuses me of somekind of hatred without a shred of evidence and pouts in the corner instead of taking a hard look at the words of his secularist party commrades like wannawipe and Lucy who essentially have an inquisition question for the evaluation of a person's intellect and heart.

    No hatred from those like me....If one wants to believe something that is false, they may and then lay in the beds for which they have made....That is also a biblical principle that dear Anonymous seems to also miss.

    Compassion for the truly repentant is always available and I rejoice in participating in such events. However, those who demand abandonment of core Christian principles to "fit-in" into some kind of secularist club can go to Christians like Anonymous and do exactly like the left has demanded of them since there was a radical secularist left....

    We can look at history and see who they were and what occurred and it is clear from that lesson that abandoning principles was not the right choice.

    Oh dear wannawipe, while your secular minions in Nazi Germany were working for their messiah, Adolf Hitler, a little girl who loved Jesus saw her father remain obedient to Christ....

    google "Ten Boom"

    Dear wannawipe, you have never addressed the inability of science to stand up for itself udner its own rules regarding its flawed explaination of the origins of life in our universe....You gave me the EXCUSES that science has in the theory that goes against the laws of thermodynamics aspect of the universe's drive to INCREASING ENTROPY....In a universe with increasing entropy, how could atoms simple combine to form incresingly more complicated, replicatable and errorless molevules as complicated as proteins?....

    And again, the lack of macroevolution evidence makes Darwin's theory impossible to apply to the expressed taxonomy....it is only accepted on assumption.

    This violates the scientific method that is applied to other explainations for the orgins of the universe and concluded as "not science." Why can one theory violate large aspects of the scientific method while others are eliminated from discussion, wannawipe....

    You have never done what you claimed at 8:34PM...all you have ever done is try to change the subject and never answer my questions regarding your dogma.....

    "Raise your paws if you don't believe in evolution!"

    What an ignorant and silly boy you are wannawipe.

    Anon at 8:49 you claimed, "Although I do find you language bothersome, you certainly pegged Cee long ago, when other of us were still trying to make allowances for him. Congratulations." Please explain and show examples of what you mean by this....

    Take exactly what you just posted at 9:05PM, wannawipe and apply it to your religious inquisition question that started this debate:

    "Raise you paws if you don't believe in evolution"

    "Mankind's limitations?" yet you demand a man's answer to something you ADMIT is limited and cannot be proven, (and this is a requirment of sicence, for a man to "BELIEVE."

    What, dear wannawipe, is the difference then, you idiot!

    I will say it again, you are the dimmest character I have ever met. Science EXPECTS a theory to be supported by more and more observable evidence as to become the excepted explaination.....and your biologist will say the theories currently espoused regarding the primordial soup and life evolving from such beinign molecules ONLY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF DARWINIAN NATURAL SELECTION is the exaplaination.....

    YOU ASKED IF I BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION ....Well then dear wannawipe, why did you ask such a question if, by your own ignorant post, mankind will be limited in providing proof of the events claimed and is not even trying to replicate it?

    You have, with one post, finally given me the simple reference that shows you have no idea what you are talking about.....Scientists are actively trying to cause amino acids to form proteins on their own and replicate themselves in all sorts of enivronments.....

    They are DESIGNING a method of creating life!.....Wow....no wonder you want to claim mankind is not pursuing such ends....The idea (and my argument) that the primordial soup theory is no more provable than the creation of the universe by Jehovah has just been vindicated by you.

    You see, the primordial soup theory must function despite the law of thermodynanmics silly little rule of increasing entropy....an influence that can be controlled by a DESIGNER...how about that little riddle I gave you wannawipe....do you wanna try to deal with that one, twit?

    Hey anon poster at 8:49....do you really think wannawipe has pegged me like you think?....Why don't you try to tangle with me and see, like wannawipe that there is nothing you can post that answers the very simple challange I have been putting out for THREE DAYS NOW!

    When I hear the Olbyloons falling down on their knees praising Allah for the brainless wonder that is Edward R. Olbermann, no, I do NOT believe in Evolution. At least not in THEIR evolution.

    Now, tell us about the "hystery" of your FUCKING CULT! and how much it has followed "principles"

    Posted by: Seriously, Pastor DUMBFUCK! at November 18, 2007 8:34 PM


    Do YOU believe in evolution, patsy? I asked you before and you dodged the question for some reason.

    While you try to deal with the religiosity of your "science," anon poster and wannawipe, with your inquisitions to judge a man's BELIEFS as correct and judge his character based on his opinion about a scientific theory no more supported than some other creation stories (again....increasing entropy in the universe....atoms combining to form amino acids, then proteins, then replication, repair, etc. etc. etc. to cellular organs and then ultimately one living cell ready to be influenced by the invisible god of NATURAL SELECTION to go on to the trillions upon trillion upon trillions of cells that comprise life on earth through the billions of years required for genetic mutation to affect the change), I will go to bed gleeful that I know no one has even touched the center of my question.

    ENTROPY HAS REPLACED SODOMY!

    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!

    Good night dim and dimmer!

    Although I do find you language bothersome, you certainly pegged Cee long ago, when other of us were still trying to make allowances for him. Congratulations.


    Posted by: 8:49 at November 18, 2007 8:41 PM


    cee, this is just our olbyloon formerly known as philby.

    I wonder if it would be possible for the Olbyloons to not use four-letter words in their increasingly unhinged replies to posts here. Oh right, they can't defend Olbermann's lies so they have to change the subject and/or just insult others with their stupidity.

    I have finally seen the defeat of the likes of wannawipe who cannot defend their secularist nimrods.....

    wannawipe, allow me to educate you. The reason the corn cell can go against the law of increasing entropy is because it is a living cell. It is a closed system with mechanisms, highly complicated might I AGAIN add, to harvest the energy of the sun to do all sorts of wonderous things like replicate cells (grow), etc.....

    JUST LIKE THE CELLS IN YOUR PATHETIC BODY THAT (ACCORDING TO YOUR PRIESTS), EVOLVED FROM THE SAME ANCESTOR OF THE CORN CELL ONLY BECAUSE OF GENETIC MUTATION (another nice theory, macroevolution, untestable by the scientific method)....BUT WHAT ABOUT THAT ORIGINAL CELL?......

    What about the state of the wonderful godless secularists' theory (dogma) of the origins of life in the universe BEFORE there was a cell that could use all those proteins to thwart the law of increasing entropy? Mmmm, wannawipe? Do you see any spontaneous life come out of the nutrient rich oose you leave in your home's gutters?.....you better check on that....aliens in wannawipe's gutters, news at 11!

    If a scientist DESIGNS an environment that allows life to spontaneously form (again those amino acids need to continue to defy the laws of thermodynamics, without a cell, to spatially arrange themselves to form very complex proteins) I will be glad to once again say....."Could this happen without some DESIGNER rigging the system against the universe's increasing entropy?"....

    Hello carbon atom, my name is hydrogen. Oxygen, phosphorus, sulfer and nitrogen are having a party over there and want to get together....you in?

    Ooooo....the scientific method ONCE AGAIN VIOLATED....the hypothesis not tested logically and without bias.....and not repeateable?.....Oooooo.....scientists once again making allowences for their poor nonscientific cousins in the secularists' religion trying to tell us all their story of creation is not DOGMA, but widely accepted scientific theory!

    Primordial ooze (make sure you have dramatic background music) the magic elixir to thwart entropy.....NEXT WEEK ON NOVA!

    RAISE YOUR PAWS IF YOU BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!

    BELIEVE
    BELIEVE
    BELIEVE
    BELIEVE?

    I'll give you ANOTHER flaw in the secularists' dogma regarding life in the universe, wannawipe.....Google "Adenosine triphosphate." Please explain to me how this little guy could come on the scene ONLY under the influence of Darwin's natural selection....Again those nasty rules that flat-earther fundy CHRISTIAN, Sir Issac Newton, formulated just keep cropping up, don't they? My college profs could not devise a dogma to expalin the spontaneous entry of this VITAL cellular component in Darwin's creation story 15 years ago...so I doubt you will be able to either.....

    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!
    ENTROPY!

    wannawipe gets his butt kicked AGAIN.....

    And it is nice to see philby and Anonymous run like little girls as well.....

    Very good Anonymous....I feel loved that you'd spend such energy creating a lovely poem just about me....

    Applying the word jihad to me is inaccurate but it just continues the lie you have created to avoid actually facing the hatred espoused by your fellows on the left towards people who have a different faith than they do....I have not one ounce of hatred in me or desire to see even the vile and profane wannawipe receive the judgement Christ discusses in the gospels you are supposedly so familiar with, Anonymous.

    Keep it coming Anonymous. Your diluted beliefs that end up no where except hatred and what wannawipe demands in his religious inquisition, "RAISE YOUR PAWS IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION," is the irony when you claim I am the jihadist.

    Oh, and wannawipe, you are confusing entropy with enthalpy....the idea of increasing randomness or the tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity,
    is what I have been talking about or increasing entropy....NOT enthalpy or the rule that states the universe in losing energy....but that is ok....I'll wait for you to catch up....Google the second law of thermodynamics along with ATP if you need to.....

    So....that primordial ooze in the face of increasing entropy and the Darwinian evolution of ATP....do you have it yet, wannawipe?

    Your dogma is in need of defending....

    Is wannwipe's dogma regarding the origins of life in the universe aligned with your's, Anonymous?

    "How does recognizing one's limitations become a victory for you?"


    ###
    In light of your religious inquisition previously, dear wannawipe....

    "RAISE YOUR PAWS IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!"


    ###
    Which is now a part of my wonderful memories here at OLBERMANNWATCH.....The dogma of the secularist (actually religious) left seems to be in need of defense...again....

    Are you going to use the scientific method or not this time, wannawipe?.....

    How about you confused Anonymous?

    RAISE YOUR HOOVE IF YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT ENTROPY MEANS!

    Do YOU believe in evolution, patsy? I asked you before and you dodged the question for some reason.

    Posted by: royal king at November 18, 2007 9:39 PM


    3rd time. Will he run scared, again?

    Yep, I was right, again. patsy ran scared. Mrs. Philby, that was a very feeble attempt at defending your cohort. The question I posed is a very legitimate one.

    "RAISE YOUR PAWS IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!"

    posted by patsy/some 75 others

    Do you consider this a legitimate question, Mrs. Philby?

    Sure, you're feeding me, wannawip, sure you are...

    I have been hungry for your defense of the dogma that demands more assumptions than any crazed relgious zealot. You haven't given me one challenging idea regarding the origins of life since this all started with your inquisition question oh so long ago....You don't even know what I mean when I talk about the second law of thermodynamics and how scientists dismiss such obvious hurdles in suggesting a theory for the origins of life....

    Let alone Darwinian explainations of basic and necessary cellular funtions like energy transer (ATP) and the lack of scientific methods in assumeing macroevolution explains the taxonomic tree.

    Secularists, who dismiss the possbility of the supernatural and place themselves seperate but unequal to such disciplines, have an obligation to not conduct themselves like those they demean with litmus test questions on whether someone believes life as we know it was only as a result of their dogmatic precepts. Like I have proven before, a religion is simply a set of beliefs common among a group of people. Period. And my dear wannawipe once again showed how stupid he is with his use of the word, "believe."

    An the even less interesting Anonymous seems content to assume such questions are only meant to be benign points of civilized discussion.

    Well the reality, just like the fringe left's sensitivity about public expressions of faith, tells a different story. Anonymous is satisfied with the delusion that hatred, academic censorship and bigotry only occurs right to left....

    Fatwa and jihad is not in my lexicon. Revelation, redemption, love and worship are and is all I have been saying since dear wannawipe issued his demand of declaration of dogma....

    "RAISE YOUR PAW IF YOU BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!"

    Anonymous hysterical take on my questions and measured defense of Christ's own teachings as some kind of puritanical deluge is more projection and insecurity on his part.

    I am ready to be told where to stand oh wise and tolerant secularists!

    ENTROPY!

    Sure, you're feeding me, wannawip, sure you are...

    I have been hungry for your defense of the dogma that demands more assumptions than any crazed relgious zealot. You haven't given me one challenging idea regarding the origins of life since this all started with your inquisition question oh so long ago....You don't even know what I mean when I talk about the second law of thermodynamics and how scientists dismiss such obvious hurdles in suggesting a theory for the origins of life....

    Let alone Darwinian explainations of basic and necessary cellular funtions like energy transer (ATP) and the lack of scientific methods in assumeing macroevolution explains the taxonomic tree.

    Secularists, who dismiss the possbility of the supernatural and place themselves seperate but unequal to such disciplines, have an obligation to not conduct themselves like those they demean with litmus test questions on whether someone believes life as we know it was only as a result of their dogmatic precepts. Like I have proven before, a religion is simply a set of beliefs common among a group of people. Period. And my dear wannawipe once again showed how stupid he is with his use of the word, "believe."

    An the even less interesting Anonymous seems content to assume such questions are only meant to be benign points of civilized discussion.

    Well the reality, just like the fringe left's sensitivity about public expressions of faith, tells a different story. Anonymous is satisfied with the delusion that hatred, academic censorship and bigotry only occurs right to left....

    Fatwa and jihad is not in my lexicon. Revelation, redemption, love and worship are and is all I have been saying since dear wannawipe issued his demand of declaration of dogma....

    "RAISE YOUR PAW IF YOU BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION!"

    Anonymous hysterical take on my questions and measured defense of Christ's own teachings as some kind of puritanical deluge is more projection and insecurity on his part.

    I am ready to be told where to stand oh wise and tolerant secularists!

    ENTROPY!

    And as I said before, Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee can't realize I'm just feeding it so it continues to spout more Funny-mental idiocies.

    Pastor DUMBFUCK! I mean Phallu-Cee must be just about ready to issue another Fatwa.

    Posted by: Don't worry. Pastor DUMBFUCK is becoming more unhinged with every post. at November 19, 2007 10:51 AM


    Is this REALLY the best you can do, kid?

    Grammie pegged you dead-on with the "one-trick-pony" bit.

    Now wait, Cecelia. You're in my face for a homosexual innuendo which was, in fact, not an innuendo (and certainly not a fact), and you immediately start talking about someone getting pegged. How is that?

    Posted by: A N O N Y M O U S at November 19, 2007 9:28 PM


    Again, I'm not interested in your mental health issues or the tricks you teach your pony...

    Vampiria,

    You ought to divorce the poor moron you married, take the cash and run off with Pastor DUMBFUCK! to his undisclosed cult location.

    Probably that's the best you can do, Vampiria.

    Posted by: WOW, Vampiria is starting the week in a blur at November 19, 2007 10:02 PM


    Well, you're a prime example of the fact that I could certainly do worse.

    Anon with spaces is like so many other elitists who think they know where I live and was raised based on my worldview....Born and raised 30 minutes outside NYC in Blue NJ....public school/liberal academia/etc/etc....The indoctrination of the lazy leftist inteligencia was quite easy to disregard since the foundation is so shaky, dear anon....

    I still live in politically putrid and corrupt blue NJ.....in a lovely community with fellow fair and kind individuals of all races, creeds, political affiliations and backgrounds....Respect for freedom of thought and religion is the lifeblood and those, like you, wannawipe and Anonymous who demand a certain puritanical dogma be agreed to under inquisition is not common.

    The corrupt and malignant Democratic Party in my state continues to make NJ the laughing stock of the country....recent indictments of local democrats show the corruption and the feckless nature of the leftist ruling elite. Soon, our government fees and tolls are going to be increased and our property tax situation remains the worst in the country. I live under leftist rule and know first hand the poor effects this has on morale and attitude...people just have given up on honest government.

    So, dear anon, no I am not your ideal right-winger (of your mind)...no KKK relationship, no Confederate Flag flying from my home....I have an American Flag out there with a nice SNOOPY flag my wife really likes celebrating autumn.....

    Once again, assumptions abound from the "rational" secular left....I enjoy the errors and the total lack of those representing the left on this board to create a cogent and winning argument against nearly everything I have posted....

    Anonymous (no spaces), Lucy (SLOB), mental midget (WDYT) and mental midget wanna be BU$HWIPE (the foolish leftist of many names) all seem to become frustrated and impotent with just a short exposure to my ideas and style....

    Too, too bad....."His truth is marching on," like the old CHRISTIAN abolitionist song goes......

    You know, BATTLE HYMN OF THE REPUBLIC....I still have not seen ONE, JUST ONE! secular humanist abolitionist example after all this time....Come on now gents...someone like Voltaire?....Nietzsche?...Marx?.....

    "... it is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother had not interbred with a nigger. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product. The obtrusiveness of the fellow is also nigger-like." Marx 1862


    ###
    The worldviews of leftist elite secularist philosophers....come now...defend these wonderful people. Will I expect as poor a defense that wannawipe gave me of Darwinian dogma regarding the orgins of life?

    Leave a new comment