A telltale habit of extremism is its refusal to look in the mirror. Take Focus on the Family: Reacting to the revelation of former Republican Rep. Mark Foley’s predatory behavior, Jim Dobson, the head of the $100-million-a-year mega-nonprofit based in Colorado Springs, sounded neither concerned nor contemplative, but instead like a conspiracy theorist. “(It was released by liberals) on the… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (57)Page 1 of 1 pagesThis could have a been an opportunity for the religious right to score credibility points - what a relief that they exposed themselves for the anti-Biblical scoundrels their doggeral ultimately belies. I wasn’t terribly surprised to NOT see their moral outrage, but still, how ridiculous to try to go on the attack with this one.
Thanks for bird-dogging the truth.
Posted by benjones on Oct 12, 2006 at 7:39 PM Religiously motivated extremist and zealots are always the first to fall....Religious maniacs are the source of many of societies problems...their pious denial complex , goes over well at first...but when you live in a glass house...it don’t take a stone to break the windows....
From my little angle on the world these christian zealots are no different than some alleged Al Queda terrorist....Sense 9/11, many have forgotten all of the abortion clinic bombings, pedophile priests and clergy....Tim McViegh....The total lack of compassion that is always evident when social issues present themselves...christian zealots get it wrong every time...without exception......
My question to them is always the same.....How can a self-professed god fearing...Jesus loving christian...be a right-wing conservatives that is four corners against anything , that the bible clearly states their Jesus was “ proactively an activist in favor of “...?
In other words...based on todays standards...if Jesus Christ were here he would be a liberal or extremely moderate to the left politically...how can right-wing christians justify their defiance of the position of their churches spiritual leader..... Jesus Christ...? .
Is this not a totally hypocritical position.....?
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 13, 2006 at 5:45 AM IN 1983, REPRESENTATIVE GERRY Studds, Democrat of Massachusetts, admitted to having sex with a 17-year-old male page. He was censured by the House of Representatives. During the vote, which he was compelled by House rules to be present for, Studds turned his back on the House to show his contempt for his colleagues’ reprimand. He was not expelled from the Democratic Caucus. In fact, he was his party’s nominee in the next election in his district--and the next five after that--winning reelection each time. He remained in the bosom of the Democratic Caucus in the House for the next 13 years.
In 2006, Republican congressman Mark Foley was found to have been engaged in lurid sexual Internet correspondence with a 16-year-old House page. There is no evidence yet of his ever laying a hand on anyone, let alone having sex with a page. When discovered, he immediately resigned. Had he not, says Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert, “I would have demanded his expulsion.” Not only is Foley gone, but half the Republican House leadership has been tarred. Hastert himself came within an inch of political extinction.
Am I missing something? There seems to be an odd difference in the disposition of the two cases. By any measure, what Studds did was worse. By any measure, his treatment was infinitely more lenient.
- Charles Krauthammer
This is not a right vs left issue, but a right vs wrong issue. If the Left wants to argue themselves into the Dark Side of the Force, so be it.
Posted by Jay Cline on Oct 13, 2006 at 10:01 AM And that rabbit/horse, is what is really hypocritical here.
Posted by Jay Cline on Oct 13, 2006 at 10:02 AM Jesus would most certainly not be a liberal - he would never advocate stealing (via taxes) to redistribute money as he sees fit. He would try to persuade those who have into giving freely to those who have not. The soul is not redeemed through force, but through choice.
And giving is not necessarily in the form of a non-stop handout - could in in training to help someone be permanently self-sufficient. Our system of government steals in order to supply the indolent. That is immoral.
“Alleged” Al Quaeda terrorist...lol....does that mean “alleged” falling of the WTC?
Posted by oleofritter on Oct 13, 2006 at 12:34 PM First as mentioned in the past , Redhorse is a gnostic...if you do not know what that means or what that is...look it up....
Secondly...Jesus never was or has been a real personality in history...totally mythical story....period...didn’t happen....ok…
Number three is the fact that to conjecture on the political musing of a mythical personality is in fact mute....
My point in doing so is to raise the question to the christians who profess belief in this “ Son of Man “…The christ of the canonical bible gospel was a extremely giving , caring , loving , forgiving , non-violent individual...the allegorical message being that faith in life and not thinks is the real purpose and mission of life.......
Niether liberal or conservative amerikans seem to grasp this concept..
Now as far as child molesters...neither party can claim that they are immune from scandal..JC...no argument there…
But JC...your post states that this is not a right vs left issue...but to quote Charles Krauthammer as your source is at least laughable, and at point , serverely duplicitous...being that this guy is one of the most faithful republican friendly columists in Washington....
If this is as you have stated , a right vs wrong issue , your words not mine...why preface that point of contention, with a commentator ( Mr. Krauthammer ); who is by far the most hawkishly partisan talking head in this city ; outside of the administration itself.....
JC...me thinks your double-speakology has tripped you up......
The fact is this happened on a republican watch , the people who said they could keep you and your children safe......so why don’t the republicans take responsiblity for what happened instead of back steppin’ , and acting like they didn’t know this was going on…
Bush ran on a platform of morality...but his third in line...Hastert...didn’t say a think about the sordid affairs of the congressman.....Foley was in control of the committee for missing and exploited children...damn...didn’t anybody check that shit out…
His behavior was known for at least 3 years , some say 10 years....but nothing was said or done...?
THAT IS VERY TELLING OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED....pragmatic cowards…
Now ms.nut , you think Al Queda is responsible because the Gov’t told you so...maybe...maybe not...but we all know for a fact that religious christian based zealots have been responsible for numerous bombings of abortion clinics...the Atlanta Olympic bombing...again Tim McViegh...etc…
So it would seem logical that if you are so freaked out about so-called Islamofacist...you would be more concerned about your home grown brethren with a penchant for bombings.......seen…
That is the hypocrisy of your little bores world view...but hey...time will tell.....whats the “good book “ say....” You will reap as you sow......”
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 13, 2006 at 2:46 PM “Our system of government steals in order to supply the indolent...”
Ms.Nut other than the salivating war mongering pestilence of the idle rich...what other indolents are you thinking of....?
And why is it immoral to give to the poor..all poor folks are not lazy...Jesus also said..."Judge not...unless yea be judged...”
This is what fascinates the Redhorse about you arrogant , ass up on your shoulders types…
I bet you think your shit don’t stink...........
Immoral....what is immoral is close to 400 years of white skin privilege…
The institutionalization and passing of laws and a culture that support this racist apartied nation
The enforcement of these laws…
Gratuitous violence against innocent civilians of foriegn nations…
Arrest and indefinite detention...without habeas corpus writ....
Enron…
Unchecked nepotism in the awarding of Gov’t contracts....
2 stolen elections....
Sending young men and women to fight and die ; so that you and your neo-con buddies can get rich....despite the fact that none of these individuals has served 1 day in a coimbat zone.....
Katrina....(.now there are some indolent people for you to look down on Ms.Nut.....)
No child left behind...the great unfunded mandate.......
Pedophile priest and politicians......
Racist bigots who conceal their motives behind religion , gov’t...or nationalism....
Pat Robertson calling for the assassination of a foriegn leader of a sovereign nation....
Fascism...the corporate control and taking over of your Gov’t....
etc.....................So as you see Ms. Nut...individuals of your , shall I say “severely limited “perspective can ill afford to referr to others as indolent...when the shoe is definitely up your ass ; or as is said in more polite circles ...."on the other foot “.................
Try a little christian logic...and pull the log out of your eye...before you attempt to comment on the twig in your neighbors eye.........
Based on your post Ms.Nut...one would assume you know little if anything about the true nature , substance or persona of the mythical christ.....or charis in the feminized pre-extant mythical form....
Finally I am completely convinced that thermite was in use at the world trade center attack...if the vision of the twin towers collapse doesn,t convince you ; watching the video of building # 7..”.being pulled “...should be enough to sway the unconvinced......
No standing structure...whether on fire or not...would or could be downed in less than 10 seconds, unless several weeks of preparations had been instituted....Watch the google video...that was an implosion...not a collapse caused by fire....Too neat , too precise....and way too fast.....
Now as obvious as building 7’s implosion is ; you can either chose to be led around like a dog on a leash...or you can think for yourself....it’s up to you ms.nut....
‘ toon..........................
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 13, 2006 at 4:39 PM Easy Redhorse ... what did Winterchestnut (or Jesus) do to you?
Please remember ITT’s admonition to be respectful in your comments.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 15, 2006 at 6:29 PM Number three is the fact that to conjecture on the political musing of a mythical personality is in fact mute.... My point in doing so is to raise the question to the christians who profess belief in this “ Son of Man “…
You admonish Winterchestnut for conjecturing and yet have done the same and even acknowledge it. Sounds like a double standard to me and is an example of hypocrisy you have accused others of.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 15, 2006 at 7:35 PM Ms.Nut is a bigoted neo-con sympathizer in the opinion of this Redhorse...( generally redhorse doesn’t care for bigoted nazi sympathizing idiots)…
Jesus never did a thing to the “easy” Redhorse...for the simple reason being ; that a myth is “ not a real thing “...just like “ the cat in the hat “ or “ bugs bunny “ are mythical stories , made into cartoons...The bible story is just that , a story...never happened....
Now Redhorse doesn’t know who you are Dave....so what’s the beef....
I have at times used a liberal satirical slander...but Ms.Nut is grown.....where’s the disrespect....especially in this post...you must have read something else I wrote......
You don’t like what I got to say....?
Free world...both ways.....correct.......?
Who are you...a priest...?
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 15, 2006 at 7:50 PM Davey...I am simply stating that hypothetical fact of mutness...satire dear Davey..satire....simply asking a question ( hypothetically )..
I did not admonish Ms.Nut for her conjecture...I admonished her xenophobic viewpoints........seen..
What......? Jesus freak....?
No disrespect intended.....................
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 15, 2006 at 8:10 PM No, I’m not a priest.
But you were right about something: You don’t know me. And how you can think you know that someone is a bigoted nazi neo-con sympathizer from a couple paragraphs is an example of the disrespect you show.
It is a free world and you are free to say whatever you like but the hosts here at ITT have specifically requested that we be respectful in our comments.
As for what you say: It’s not that I have a problem with what you say but with the way you say it. And as you have shown in your last comment you just can’t seem to stop yourself.
If you have anything thoughtful or instructive to say I would like to hear it but please leave the name calling and rudeness poorly disguised as liberal satirical slander to the hate and fear mongers.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 15, 2006 at 8:21 PM Well Davey...don’t get your panties all bunchy and stuff....Redhorse has talked to Ms.Nut in the past...that’s how I know....
What business it is of yours is beyond me , at this point in my life..I’d rather not “ suffer fools “...As far as ITT...no complaints....Care to comment on the article and stop bitchin’....
And by the way...how do YOU know the Redhorse verse is not too your liking...all you’ve read are a few lines...stick around ; I might get a laugh or two out of you......seen..
Don’t be so sensitive...................
Stop all this girlie-manish behavior.......
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 15, 2006 at 8:42 PM I don’t wear panties. You just can’t stop yourself can you?
What business it is of yours is beyond me
Are you serious? You have made it the business of everyone who is reading this article and the comments attached.As for the article : You would do well to heed the advice noted in the article ...
In Matthew 7, for instance, Jesus took pains to warn against deficiency of self-awareness, better known as hypocrisy. Cast out first the blocks that are stuck in your own eyes, he told his disciples, so that you can see clearly if you even dare to go after the bits in the eyes of others.
... As you have proven yourself to be the hypocrite you accuse others of being.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 15, 2006 at 9:03 PM Redhorse, before you come back and insult me some more with incredible humdingers like girlie-manish , I would like to share this little story with you. I hope that you are able to learn something from it.
Gift Of Insults
There once lived a great warrior. Though quite old, he still was able to defeat any challenger. His reputation extended far and wide throughout the land and many students gathered to study under him.
One day an infamous young warrior arrived at the village. He was determined to be the first man to defeat the great master. Along with his strength, he had an uncanny ability to spot and exploit any weakness in an opponent. He would wait for his opponent to make the first move, thus revealing a weakness, and then would strike with merciless force and lightning speed. No one had ever lasted with him in a match beyond the first move.
Much against the advice of his concerned students, the old master gladly accepted the young warrior’s challenge. As the two squared off for battle, the young warrior began to hurl insults at the old master. He threw dirt and spit in his face. For hours he verbally assaulted him with every curse and insult known to mankind. But the old warrior merely stood there motionless and calm. Finally, the young warrior exhausted himself. Knowing he was defeated, he left feeling shamed.
Somewhat disappointed that he did not fight the insolent youth, the students gathered around the old master and questioned him. “How could you endure such an indignity? How did you drive him away?”
“If someone comes to give you a gift and you do not receive it,” the master replied, “to whom does the gift belong?”
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 15, 2006 at 10:14 PM Just for the (historical) record, I offer a few references that at least support the assertion that there really was a living person upon whom the figure of Jesus is based. He probably wasn’t called by the Latinized name “Jesus”, but more likely “Yeshua”, considering the naming styles among Aramaic-speaking Hebrews. Writings by the historians Flavius Josephus, Cornelius Tacitus, Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, Pliny the Younger, and another writer named Thallus, seem to bear out the historicity of Jesus to a fair extent. All of these are easy to look up, if you’re interested.
To be sure, none of those sources are unequivocal, and as with any history it’s difficult to separate mythologization and other distortions from strict reporting of actual events. Much of history doesn’t even try to be objective. However, I submit that unless every reference to him is fake or is 100% derived from fakes (which is an assertion that would also need to be backed up), we’re probably on firmer historical ground to acknowledge that there are sources in addition to the New Testament that at least support the view that Jesus was a real person.
The issue of his divinity is a separate question. I hope this doesn’t come off as pedantic, just responding to posts above.
http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jrthal.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcno.htm
http://www.webjesus.co.uk/exist/historical.htm
Posted by Kuya on Oct 16, 2006 at 2:56 AM Kuya...I do disagree...The answer to the historical aspect of this question is not in the history but in the mythos...Only by a deconstruction of and understanding of the mythology of the anicent scholars, that are preextant to the period in question......
The closest possiblity would probably be the personage of Jehoshua Ben-Pandira , he was born and lived during the reign ot the King Alexander Jannaeus , apparently he was also stoned to death , for his gnostic principles..( believed too be a wizard ).but this is in no way a possible Jesus of Christ , because the dates are all wrong.....Additionally Ben-Pandira was a student of the esoteric aspect of the “mythos” and not the literal , exoteric interpretation......
Furthermore the text that is commonly referred to as the bible...is in fact a plagerized version of the cosmological knowlegde of the ancient Kemetians(egyptians)...The discovery of the Rossetta Stone by Champollion in or about the year 1798 to 1802...proves this point...This stone comprized text in ancient glyphs, heretical and greek...allowing for a translation of previously unreadable glyph text…
Excellent sources on this subject are anything written by John G. Jackson ( Man, God and Civilization / Christianity before Christ ) Albert Churchward ( Signs & Symbols of Primordial Man )...Alvin Boyd Kuhn (Who is this King of Glory ) and Gerald Massey ( Gerald Masseys Lectures / Natural Genesis / A Book of the Beginnings / Ancient Egypt the Light of the World )............
Again , the answers are not in the literal interpretation but in the mythos.........
Stellar , lunar, and solar allegorical observations using types , symbols , totemism and sign language as a base of communication..........
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 16, 2006 at 4:58 AM Davey...One would assume that you will take the advice of the old master...and quit all your whining nonsense.....
Again...care too comment on the article in question..?
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 16, 2006 at 5:29 AM Thanks, Kuya, you are correct. Whether or not one accepts the divinity of Jesus, there is much evidence that he was a real person.
Thanks, Dave, for the defense.
And as a conservative and Christian, I DO believe in charity - but freely given. Not swiped from my paycheck and spent who knows where.
And also, it was the Christian churches who swarmed upon New Orleans in the last year to gut and rebuild, clean up and send money. They’re still sending groups down there. It’s the Christian churches who take up special collections for catastrophic events - both local and global.
Christian churches send millions of dollars overseas each year to set up schools and medical clinics in areas where folks experience extreme poverty such that isn’t even found in this country.
Once in awhile, a freak criminal (claiming to be Christian) does something despicable, but you will not find true Christians in support of that person. In my entire life, I’ve never met a Christian who believed bombing abortion clinics is acceptable. It’s hideous.
Posted by oleofritter on Oct 16, 2006 at 6:46 AM I did comment on the article and provided real life context when I noted that you should heed the advice therein. Namely, removing the blocks from your eyes before daring to go after the bits in the eyes of others and avoiding wild-eyed accusation .
Like the article alludes, by your words and actions you are becoming what you profess to hate; a hypocrite. Can’t you see that?
As for the advice of the old master, I have taken his advice. I wish you could. Once again, by your own words, you have shown you cannot.
Kuya, excellent points. And it is good to see you again.
Winterchestnut, you are welcome.
As for Jesus. He is real. I know Yeshua exists. He lives in my heart.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 16, 2006 at 7:54 AM Belief doesn’t make it historically real...Ms.Nut....
And Davey...if you are listening to the old master....why are you responding to my posts.....
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 16, 2006 at 1:50 PM Kuya....Paul said it best..” I made known to you , brethren , as touching the gospel which was preached by me , that it is not after man. For neither did I receive it from man , nor was I taught it , save through revelation of the Christ revealed within....”
Massey....The Christian Theology was responsible for substituting faith instead of knowledge ; and the European mind is only just beginning to recover from the mental paralysis induced by that doctrine whch came to its natural culmination in the Dark Ages…
Massey...From beginning to end the Canonical Gospels contain the Drama of the Mysteries of the Luni-Solar God, narrated as a human history....
The Christ you seek is within...esoteric...gnostic...not canonical...exoteric..historical...completely different...completely totally different......
The origins of your faith are pagan...just like every other walking , talking human on this planet......This is what makes this christian/muslim/jewish conflict so unnecessary.......
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 16, 2006 at 2:23 PM Redhorse, I am still responding to your posts because I want to. I do think that you may have something worthwhile to share.
And, as I understand it, the old masters action or response (or lack of it) can be interpreted two ways.
The first being no response at all to the insult.
Or in other words silence .The second being not to respond to an insult with another insult.
Or in other words turning the other cheek.I choose the second interpretation. We are here at these discussions to discuss. Not sit in silence. So I have continued to respond to your comments in a respectful manner despite the insults you have hurled at me. I’m not here for cheap thrills by trash talking with people.
Anyways, you have not called anyone a bigoted nazi neo-con sympathizer or a Jesus freak or a girlie-man , on this thread at least, since yesterday.
So I think maybe you have learned some respect, so this has been worthwhile after all.
Don’t you think so?
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 16, 2006 at 4:17 PM I appreciate what Jay Cline had to submit and to say. There is a double standard when it comes to the media and how the Democratic party reacted in the Gerry Studds case. It is also imperative that we recognize the need for the pages to be protected, not from any one party but from sexual predators, regardless of persuasion. I think that interns should not be fair game either.
It is unfortunate that Gerry Studds passed away, recently...I would point out that the mainstream media did not bring up his sexual relationship with an under age page.
I will acknowledge that his behavior occured in the 80’s and one could suggest that it is in the past, a non issue. The Foley scandal brings to the forefront that the pages remain vulnerable and unprotected. As a parent, I would not trust my child in the hands of either party.
The issue of Foley’s homosexuality is a not what should be of focus. It doesn’t matter whether one is heterosexual or homosexual. What matters is if one chooses to prey on the underaged and/or engages in sexual based relationships with subordinates.
The Miami Herald sat on this story for nearly a year. Soros, since this summer. Not even the media chose to protect the pages. It isn’t a Left vs. Right issue. It is a Right vs. Wrong issue.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Oct 17, 2006 at 12:25 AM I will look at the sources you mention, Redhorse.
I tend to prefer as de-mythologized an approach to the Great Influentials of history as I can get, but of course theres a limited supply of available information that doesnt aggrandize or underestimate them. That means I generally miss out on some of the inspirations that others feel when they read of the prophets. But I find myself feeling uncomfortable with stories like virgin birth, or (in the case of Muhammad) traversing from Mecca to Jerusalem in a single night on a winged horse, or (in the case of Gautama/Buddha) being able to levitate or multiply his body, or (in the case of Marx, who has been called by some a secular, revolutionary prophet) having an almost supernatural comprehension of historical and socioeconomic relationships.
I find myself feeling a deep skepticism in response to tales like those. It’s as though a voice in my mind says, “Why try so hard to make me feel an emotional rush?” It doesnt necessarily damage the regard I have for teachings that do make sense to me (e.g. The Parable of the Good Samaritan, the concept that God doesnt see a king as being more cosmically valuable than a slave, The Four Noble Truths, the doctrine of alienation of labor, etc). But I do feel that its too easy for people to be misled by inspiration, so I fend it off a bit.
Admittedly, I may be missing out on something.
I end up wondering if its simply a human penchant, to build up the story, as it were, for dramatic effect, or to hammer home a point being made, or, as I mostly believe, to cultivate a response in the listener/reader.
Not to pre-judge the sources you offered, but just to tell you my thoughts, mind to mind.
..............................
As for the article and its topic, Studds should have been bounced out of the House so fast (and maybe into a cell) his head would spin. Who cares if hetero or homo, it’s irrelevant. Talk about an authority gradient! It’s as bad or perhaps worse than if I was to seduce one of my high school students. “Predatory” is the only way to phrase it.Had it been one of my kids on the receiving end of Studds’ or Foley’s attentions, me and the Congressmen would have to get in the Octagon. Some guys just need to get their ass beat sometimes.
.....................
Canadian Dave! How the heck are ya? High five, electron-style! Sorry for my violent remarks above, but ya know, sometimes the beast within gets woke up by bad, bad imaginings.
Posted by Kuya on Oct 17, 2006 at 3:48 AM Kuya! I am well. High five electron style right back at you. How are you? I’ve been away from here for quite some time but have seen a couple familiar faces around. I’m just here to visit for a bit and then I’ll be off on my wandering way again.
violent remarks - No worries. My pacifist nature doesn’t allow me to consider violence as a means of problem solving, as tempting as it may be sometimes, but I think you were mostly joking anyways, mostly.
Kimberly - Jay did make a good point even if it is a rather obvious one. It’s certainly no surprise that the predators and perverts come from both sides of the political spectrum. Or any spectrum for that matter.
As for the media treatment of this event I think that since the Republicans like to portray themselves as having some sort of monoploy on morality that when it comes to light that in fact they do not have a moral monopoly the natural tendency is to jump all over the story and rub their faces in it. Human nature at work.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 8:03 AM OK this is off topic but brought up by some of the more foolish comments here. . .
If you want to better understand Jesus and Christianity, check out the Amish reaction to the recent school shooting. From that, you can figure out what Christianity is all about. Frankly i think it is almost confounding to those of us who are not of that faith. (To better understand Islam - unfortunately - check out how they handle mere *insults* to their faith and founder.)
Posted by wolf on Oct 17, 2006 at 3:55 PM Hi Wolf, long time no see. How are you?
When has a topic ever stopped us from going off on tangents. I know, I know ... try to remain on topic ... but sometimes it’s hard.
Thanks for mentioning my Amish brothers. You see, and maybe I mentioned it before back in the old days, I am a Mennonite.
Mennonites are the slightly more worldly cousins of the Amish.
Back a few hundred years ago a guy named Menno Simons founded the Mennonites as an offshoot of the anabaptist movement. Eventually a schism occurred and a hundred or so years later a Mennonite named Jacob Amman founded the Amish after he decided the Mennonites were straying from the original teachings of Menno Simons. Worldliness was creeping in I guess.
Anyways, on to your point. The Amish are indeed shining examples for us all. It made me proud and humble at the same time when the Amish announced their collective forgiveness towards the shooter who murdered five of their children and injured five more. Some of the Amish even attended the funeral for the murderer and the family of one of the murdered girls invited the widow of the shooter to the girl’s funeral.
Here is a recent article that sums it up better than I could :
Amid the babble, the Amish lesson is heard.
And I am sure the Amish, being the humble folks they are, if asked about their Amish lesson would deny it is theirs and say that Jesus Christ taught it to them.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 4:35 PM The old Wolf...back from who knows where...with the same double standard bullshit.....
A born again fool started a WAR against an innocent Iraqi nation...kills 10’s of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians...murdered , men , women...babies…
Now the violence is excalating..US TROOPS ATTACKED SOMEWHERE IN COUNTRY...EVERY 15 MINUTES......
Thousands if not millions of professed believers in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior here in Amerika..cheer this murderous genocide on , in support of this administrations policies ...too stay the course....and yu...feeble wolf...crack your ass about the Amish vs Islam , and how muslims supposedly handle conflicts within their community....
Pure rhetorical , talkin’ out the side of your neck BULLSHIT..
Now Davey...instead of blushing like a school girl...you should call wolf on the duplicity of that statement....
The wolfs post was incendiary...and bigotedly unsubstantially false....
What....pacifist don’t do critical analysis......?.
One could conjecture that...unfortunately...to better understand..."christianity “...check out how priests screw around with altar boys...or how...unfortunately...to better understand christians look at the divorce rate..or how the most pious Pat Robertson handles the...” rogue paganistic “..Hugo Chavez....( with an assassination threat )...such a godly man , that Pat Robertson...............
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 17, 2006 at 5:27 PM Redhorse,
Yes, I do critical analysis.
I saw Wolf’s duplicity and as you mentioned it is a favorite tactic of his. I have called him on it before but it’s painfully obvious he has not learned his lessons. Sometimes I wonder if it’s wasted effort?
I had hoped you would know your lesson better by now too. Was blushing like a school girl really necessary? Why do you find it necessary to insult people when you speak to them? Is it so hard to simply say what you have to say and leave the name calling out? I think that the insults detract from what you have to say and your message gets lost in the hyperbole.
But I did see some previous progress and hope that you continue to learn about respect. I think that’s all you will hear from me on the subject for now. Like I said above in relation to correcting Wolf’s duplicitious remarks: wasted effort?
Anyways, I have to go now. Dinner is on the table.
But I am happy to see your return to this discussion and would enjoy seeing you teach Wolf a thing or two.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 6:11 PM To the person who posted about how Foley’s actions weren’t as bad as Gerry Studds, there are a couple of VERY important differences that are getting lost in the media frenzy:
1. The sexual relationship between Studds and the page was consensual. Not that Studds should’ve had an affair with someone who worked for him, but it *was* consensual. In the recent case, the pages clearly didn’t welcome Foley’s attention.
2. The young man who worked for Studds was actually old enough to *give* legal consent. In Foley’s case, the pages were underage.
I’m not saying Studds showed good judgment, but there were some key legal and ethical lines that he didn’t cross where Foley did. Let’s not lose track of them.
My favorite absurd moment in this whole story was watching a spokeswoman from Focus on the Family trying to say that the reason Republicans didn’t bring the story to light earlier was fear of being smeared as “gay-bashing.” Apparently, they had no fear of it when trying to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment. Or kicking the gay Arabic translators out of the military. Or cutting HIV/AIDS funding. Or preventing research on LGBT populations from getting funded. Or whipping up fear among conservative voters. (You get the drift.)
Posted by journeywork on Oct 17, 2006 at 6:18 PM I’m back. Dinner is done like dinner, the dishes too, and I have a few minutes before I do some chores. So ...
Wolf, I had hoped that you would have returned to clarify your statement by now.
What you said takes an example of good Christians responding to an insult and compares it to an example of bad Muslims responding to an insult .
Do you see?
In response to the insult you alluded to there were plenty of Muslims who stayed home and prayed for peace while a few other Muslims were inciting violence in the streets.
Just as there are Christians who are cheerleaders for warmongering there are also Christians who denounce the violence and bloodshed.
Do you hear?
There are good Christians but there are some Christians who are wolves in sheeps clothing (no pun intended but there it is). The bad examples, as Redhorse mentioned, predator priests and Pat Robertson and the so called born again president of the USA, being prime examples. Muslims have their deviants, extremists and warmongering leaders too. But most Muslims are good people. People who want to live in peace.
By the way, this has not really strayed that far from the topic . We have come back to it in a roundabout fashion.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 8:00 PM Hi Journeywork,
I do get the drift.
Some people think it’s ok to bash gays and whip up fears and prejudices unless it’s a gay Republican politician. Excellent point. More hypocrisy.Further up the page here Kimberly said
I would point out that the mainstream media did not bring up his [Studds] sexual relationship with an under age page.but you said
The young man who worked for Studds was actually old enough to *give* legal consent.Which is it? Any references anybody?
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 9:15 PM Chores all done for today
There are always more tomorrow
Gather ye rosebuds while ye mayNobody has been back here tonight except me.
Time zones. It’s a big small world after all, it seems.So I have only have this to add after reading some of the recent discussion over again.
Redhorse, you said ;
What....pacifist don’t do critical analysis......?.Good one. Seriously. I should not have let it slide and hope it won’t happen again.
My friendly, good natured and only very slightly sarcastic reply (despite saying that, for now, it was all I would say on the subject of respect) ;
What ... gnostic don’t do respect ... ?Good night and sleep tight =)
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 11:05 PM Gerry Studds had sex with a 17 year old page. I do not know what the legal age of consent is in Massachussets. It is 18 for most states.....Regardless, sex with subordinates is unethical.
I am not familiar with many sex scandals in either party but unfortunately, the ones I am familiar with are mostly from members of the Democratic party. Despite this, it should not be seen as a problem with just one party...this should be a non partisan issue.
The most tragic case I am vaguely familiar with is that of Gary Condit (?) and his intern (?) Patricia Leavy. That poor girl ended up missing and never found. Just as our leaders have aspirations, so too do the pages and interns. Especially with their young ages, they are especially vulnerable.
I don’t know who coined the phrase “moral majority” but I do see where it can become a “rubbing in the face” sort of respnse (when one falls) but that too is wrong. What is important is protecting the children and young adults. The page that contacted Congressman Kolbe about Foley’s inappropriate emails was let down by everyone who had knowledge of Foley’s emails and behaviors. It took great courage for that page to speak up and ask for help and he most certainly was let down.
Christians are sinners because that is the nature of mankind. People from all walks of life are vulnerable to weakness. That is not an excuse but a fact. True believers of all faiths will fall in various degrees. It is better to follow the examples set by the Amish in regards to humility. Even in that faith, I am sure they too have their own spiritual battles.
Republicans refer to the exposing of Mark Foley and his behaviors by the media an “October Surprise"strategy for the benefit of the Democrats in the November elections. Obviously, there were people from both parties who were not surprised as they already knew about the emails. Again, who was taking action to actually protect the pages? Does anyone who knew about the problem really care about the pages or did they sacfrifice the children for the benefit of party politics.
I think the only ones who are innocent in this whole mess are the pages and the people who had no knowledge of the problem, whether they be Democrat or Republican, Libertarian or from the Green Party. Everyone who knew of the problem and did nothing or held on to the scandal until it was advantageous for political gain behaved immorally as well.
As for the war in Iraq, I just hate it. I hate it when innocent people are killed. War is hell on earth. However, I hated it when we went into Bosnia. I hated what was happening in Kuwait in Desert Storm. I hated what happened in Viet Nam, Korea, and every other war. Now there are public service announcements asking George Bush to address the civil war in Darfur. What did we do in regards to Somalia?
Iraq is a complex issue and there is so much that I don’t understand. I do support the troops and am deeply saddened by the loss of each life as well as those that are injured and have to live the rest of their life with horrendous injuries and the psychological impact of fighting in a war. I am most distressed with the unspeakable acts of violence that are being perpetrated by the Iraqis on their own people. The news is so disturbing with each day more bodies being found that had been tortured and excecuted and them dumped in the streets. The suicide bombings that kill innocent people...What is the death toll estimate of Iraqis, 500,000? Could that be right? Even one innocent death is horrifying and a great tragedy. Yes, the coalition is responsible for a large number of deaths but the majority of deaths are being caused by insurgents and the “sectarian” violence.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Oct 18, 2006 at 2:12 AM kimberlyausten....the remains of Ms.Levy were found about a year or so ago...in Rock Creek Park...severely decomposed , bone fragments....
Condits behavior was adultery , not pedophilia....as lasciviously immoral as that behavior is...wannabe playboys are aways on the prowl...whether on Capitol Hill...or the normal office work place....
Child predators are a different breed altogether....these fools even have their own organization...NAMBLA....and web-site....
Apparently Walt Whitman was a member of this nefarious organization…
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 18, 2006 at 3:11 AM Ya know David...you seem like a deciet fellow...my hardline approach may not be your style...but it is mine.....So if you accept my brow beating style...Redhorse will not take offense to your mission of converting all on this web-site to the pacifist ideology....
I retain my right to freedom of expression...your assertions that I should “ doctor “ those comments was precieved by the Horse as an attempt to limit that perspective.....
I have no problem with the peaceful souls who wish to express their viewpoints…
“ But covert trollers are the terrorist of the internet world ; we have evidence of their weapons of mass misinformation and their stock-piles of inflammatorial rhetoric...we must stay the course...and rid the nano tech world of these fascist xenophobia inspired gega-bite trollogist....either you are with us...or against us “......sic
So you see , it’s not my fault..all seriousness aside....the Bushites are too funny not to make joke of.....be patient...Redhorse will give equal time to the liberalites and their condescending manner...but for now...Dumbbo has the stage…
Knowledge before belief , keeps superstitions away.....................gnostic
.
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 18, 2006 at 3:46 AM Redhorse,
That is so sad. I am deeply saddened for her family.
I do understand that there is a difference between pedophiles and “consensual sex at legal age”. My point is that even at 18, 19, or 20 subordinates are greatly disadvantaged when superiors come on to them. Adultery is a whole other issue and not part of my concern. Even the age difference between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky makes his actions all the more reprehensible. Bill Clinton’s legacy will be his successes in office and some questionable decisions regarding the sale of technology to N. Korea and China despite severe concerns by the DOD. Monica will always be known for giving blow jobs. Having the attention of this most powerful man took advantage of her naivte and inexperience. Btw, even if two people are the same age, isn’t it unethical for a boss to have sex with subordinates?
One thing that I am confused about is why you seem to consider Mark Foley a pedofile but not Gerry Studds. The indecent sex play from the instant messages were between a page who was 18 years of age. THis page, I believe his last name is Edmonds, is a heterosexual so he was really messing with Foley and not serious in his responses. The emails to other pages were consistent with “predatory grooming” but no sex occurred. Gerry Studds had sex with a 17 year old. Are you saying when an adult has sex with minors it is not pedophilia as long as it is consensual? Many victims of child sex abuse didn’t say no. They were aroused just as an adult would be.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Oct 18, 2006 at 5:23 AM Kimberlyausten...I understand your concerns....Monica was not that naive , no female in my family bought her” innocent little me act.”..but ol’ slick Willie..was way out of bounds....
Now as far as Mr.Studds , Redhorse is not familiar with his case....
I have never mentioned anything about the man.......
I do remember yu posting something about this guy...but the facts excape me at this moment....
I also do not believe Ms.Levys personal behavior , was directly connected too her murder...but Condins behavior was at the very least...disingenuously detached…
Yeah...I also feel that her parents handled the whole ordeal with a lot of dignity....
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 18, 2006 at 5:49 AM Redhorse,
I think you are a decent fellow too. Carry on then and express away. Peace!
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 18, 2006 at 12:01 PM David - always nice to hear from you. I rarely post here anymore - it is really a place for others to vent and i have little need of venting myself (at least electronically). Too many people “talking”, no one listening. . .
Still i wonder why you think i was in any way duplicitious? While i almost certainly will not post here again anytime soon, i will read your response and cogitate on it. Have a good day, my friend.
Posted by wolf on Oct 18, 2006 at 12:18 PM Hi Wolf,
I have been away for some time too but wandered back for a visit.
I explained the duplicity of your comment further back up the page here :
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 17, 2006 at 8:00 PM
Read and cogitate away.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 18, 2006 at 2:21 PM Ummm, the Repugnicans said they were BETTER, not the same. They PROMISED to bring the country CLEAN, HONEST, FAIR government.
So now when the truth is revealed in Foley and other scandals, their cowardly, smug response is well Democrats did it first. Yeah well SO THE HELL WHAT! You promised to be BETTER, NOT THE SAME.
Yet not only have Repugnicans proved to be NO better, they have proven to be far worse. They’ve supported this President as he ruthlessly destroyed the strengths in this country, that made us the World’s leader in so many ways. Katrina happened because of the Repug. sponsored changes at FEMA - There is NO other reason.
In promoting their claims of being the Party of Virtue, Honesty and Morality, the Repbugs condemned EVERY Democrat as a lying, tax-loving, anti-American, abortion pusher.
So now when Foley exposes the rot at the core of the Repug. camp, what is their smug response? The Democrats did it first.
OK, but you were elected because you were going to be BETTER, NOT THE SAME.
The Repugnican effort to claim the “moral high ground, and wrap themselves in the cloth of unassailable patriotic virtues” included a take no prisoners assault on the other parties beliefs, and in their efforts nothing was sacred.
Their favorite tactic “the big lie” was used ruthlessly against the Dems. and in part succeeded because so many Democrats felt they could just sit back and take power back when The Repugnicans hate-driven partisanship faded.
The bottom line is Democrats have NEVER stooped as low, nor tried to so hard to denigrate and degrade their opponents BASED STRICTLY on their LACK OF Morality and Virtues. That NATIONAL tactic was a uniquely Republican strategy
While slamming the Democrats en masse as moral sluggards who’d sell their mother’s soul for 50 cents, Repugnicans stood up and yelled from the mountaintops, WE ARE THE PARTY OF VIRTUE. We are the Party of the good. We are the honest traditional moralists of today.
So when a “Foley” happens in the Republican camp it is 10000x worse than it is in the Democratic camp. For the Republicans claimed to have unimpeachable moral fortitude, and did so while slamming the lily-livered Dems. for being amoral welfare pushers.
How any Democrat can give a point to the Repugnicans over the fact Bill Clinton got a blow job in the white house from a 21 YR OLD woman is pathetic.
<b>There is NO comparison. Bill Clinton NEVER CLAIMED to be a saint, but FOLEY DID CLAIM TO BE A PROTECTOR OF THE YOUNG.
Two wrongs NEVER make a right, yet this is the core of the defense Repugs. are using.
Only the most pathetic liberal/leftie could swallow this, and find common ground with these moronic Repugnican team players, who NEVER see anything their side does as wholeheartedly wrong.
They never do in part, because they can always find some “let’s play nice” sap on the Liberal/Progressive side to agree that yes some of our people are bad too.
Thank G-d they LOST control of the Dem. party’s response to the Repugnican lie and hate machine. For the first time in 12yrs. we are seeing Democrats fighting and looking like winners for one reason and one reason only, they are playing by Repugnican rules.
Go Rahm Go Shumar.
Posted by johnnyincentx on Oct 22, 2006 at 11:23 AM Boy Johnny,
I take it you don’t care for the Republicans. On CNN tonight, they did a piece on the Foley fallout. Not only did they bring up Gerry Studds and the fact that Nancy Pulosi voted for him 3 times to be the speaker of the House, but they also brought up Mel Reynolds who in 1994 had sex with a 16 year old campaign aide. There were charges which Reynolds pleaded guilty too and then Bill Clinton pardoned him.
Anyone that thinks any person can be without sin is sadly mistaken. All of us will be let down by our leaders from time to time, such is the nature of mankind.
One great point you make is that Mark Foley was a leader in a program that was to protect children. The hypocracy of that man...or was it a tactic so that he would shield himself with the air of harmlessness. Whatever, children needed protection from him. Granted, his emails to “children” under the age of 18 were not sexually explicit. His illicit IM’s, again, were with an 18 year old page who is actually heterosexual.
Neverless, anyone who approaches pages and interns are abusing their power just as any boss would be if he/she were to approach an employee no matter the age.
Regarding the war, everyone seems to agree that it was a good thing to take down Saddam Hussein. How could we do that with out going into Iraq? How can we leave Iraq with an unstable government? The Iraq issue is indeed complex.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Oct 22, 2006 at 11:17 PM KimberlyAustin:
The SPECIFICS of any particular Republican caught up in the raft of scandals Etc. are actually besides the point.
Let me repeat one more time .
Republicans claimed To be the BETTER, SUPERIOR, ABOVE REPROACH ALL-IN-ONE answer to the horrible Democratic run House and Senate who together with Clinton were destroying all the things ALL Americans hold sacred. They said this with a religious fervor that filled many in this country with fear and loathing.
<u>The fact that your neighbor sins does NOT forgive your sins in the eyes of the Lord. Yet this is exactly what the oh so religious Republicans are expecting America to do when it comes to their activities. Forgive us, because a Democrat did something similar.
Similar yes, but NOT the same, and that difference is magnified 1000x because of how they claimed to be the morally superior party, the party of virtue, the party that knew right from wrong, and would be fair to friend and foe alike.
They LIED completely and totally.
They Lied purposefully, and knowing full well they were lying, for them the lying just as it always was - a means to an end, gaining control of the levers of power in this nation in order to force down the 75% of Americans who are NOT Extreme Social Conservatives or Neo-CONs.
Republicans didn’t hold anything back, when they damned the Democrats as abortion pushing, tax you into the poor house, Nanny-staters who were out of touch with the rest of America, because they were living off the largesse of their corruption in DC.
Clinton held their"dream" in check , our current nightmare until 2000, when the Supreme Court’s appointment of Bush as president.
<b>You make a mistake when you assume I have a problem with Republicans I don’t have a problem with the traditional Republicans, who espoused a different philosophy than the center/left.
The Traditional Republicans played by the same rules and did NOT cheat.
They ARE guilty of “enabling” the extremists to do what they have, but it’s becoming pretty clear they’re goals and agenda have ended up just as much of a victim as the Centrist’s and Left’s. I’m sure most never believed they could be so totally suckered as they were.
Today’s Repugnican party is controlled completely by the FRight Wing ideologues, made up “neo-CON foreign policy” “free-trade that ensure FULL-EMPLOYMENT in China” and hefty doses of rigid, UN-Christian “social conservatives” whose main weapon is to literally demonize anyone who disagrees with them.
Bill Clinton used Hope and faith in the goodness of all people to find solutions to problems. Republicans trading in FEAR, HATE and RACISM, created endless problems.
The horrible damage they’ve caused to the core strengths of this nation canNOT be so easily forgiven as you’d like by merely deciding “we’re all human, and we all make mistakes.”
For the truth is the truth, they claimed to be the answer, to be morally pure, and virtuous above all others, and took it upon themselves to judge like no others who came before them.
It is due to THEIR CLAIMS OF BEING BETTER, MORAL and the ONLY VIRTUOUS choice that makes them deserving of so much more condemnation than any Democrat would earn doing the same things. Their rank hypocrisy is so vile it should never be forgiven. On their hands are the blood of almost 3000 American soldiers, and 10,000s of Iraqis.
The truth is there for anyone to see. The question isn’t why I am angry.
The question is why are so “self-described” good, honest Republicans continuing to support this? They say it’s “party loyalty.” Umm how about being a Good American and putting your country before your party?
Posted by johnnyincentx on Oct 23, 2006 at 12:03 AM KimberlyAustin:
Oh you said something else, that actually I do not agree with at all, and I imagine in 1 or 2 more years, this will be what most people accept as true.
IT WAS NOT WORTH almost 3000 American lives, It was NOT worth almost 100,000 Iraqi dead (yes that 1/2 of the high claims and PROVED by the best statistical data available) to overthrow Saddam Hussein.
Saddam was a toothless tiger, a tyrant, and cruel to his people, but the truth is President Bush’s policies have resulted in MANY TIMES MORE DEAD than anything Saddam ever did or would have done.
Saddam in power was “contained” “controlled.”
I have a question for you - considering this Administration’s penchant for “covert” ops, why didn’t they just “assassinate” Saddam? Why didn’t they just blow up his entire congress while they were in session and destroy the entire Gov’t?
It would have been far easier and quicker to get to the point we are now, but without so many dead.
The truth is Bush and Cheney are WAR MONGERS. It’s a video game to them, but instead of virtual reality they won’t settle for anything less than reality itself.
Together with Rumseld, they exhibit a blood-lust the likes of which we haven’t seen since WWII.
They revel in each time a soldier dies for then they get to act all broken up at the sacrifice of another American’s life pursuing their LOST goals.
THE SOLUTION TO IRAQ IS SIMPLE.
Do what we have to do from the SIDELINES. With the money we spend having our troops fighting there we could fun 100 guerrilla Army’s. We could outfit the give the Kurdish nation a modern army as well as anyone in Iraq who allied with us.
Then after that, they would have a reason to enforce the peace in their own country.
That cannot happen though as long as they see invaders in their homeland, raping their women, murdering their men, and destroying the lives of children.
THAT’S HOW THEY SEE IT. It’s not my opinion. If you have not read that, then it’s time you read something more than the Austin Statesmen. It like all American media has refused to print such widely known feelings in Iraq in DETAIL. However such information is easily found in such Anti-American news sources like the BBC or any other English Newspaper, or you could just go to the land full of Blood-thirsty American haters - Canada check out the CBC. You’ll be stunned at how LITTLE you are told in our papers.
So the best solution is to leave as soon as we set up the mechanisms to carry out covert efforts supporting an end to the Iraqi conflict that is in accordance with our national needs.
Posted by johnnyincentx on Oct 23, 2006 at 12:24 AM I think the majority of Republicans do vote for who they most agree with and often the least of the two “evils” presented. Anyone who blindly supports party politics with out considering the issues and where core values and ideals will best be represented is foolish. There are Republicans who have abortions, believe the tax reliefs should better benefit the poor and middle class, and disagree with the present President’s foreign policy. At a state level, it is important to carefully consider the issues and vote accordingly. Joe Lieberman is a good example of one who stood by his beliefs. He lost the backing of the DNC and the lost the Democratic primary as well. He continues to espose his position and is running as an Independent. The majority of that voters in that state will decide who is elected.
One who sins and asks forgiveness is forgiven in Christianity. Differering sects, say Catholics for instance, have different ways of attaining forgiveness. This is, of course, is when one is truly sorry for his/her sins and genuinely seeks forgiveness. I am not familiar how a Jewish person obtains forgiveness, or someone of our native american faith, or a Muslim. I am not familiar with those beliefs.
Perhaps in your eyes, it is a greater sin when it is committed by a Republican. The are no NON-SINNERS, for all come short of the glory of God. Not all Republicans are Christians. There is a greater backing by a majority of Christians because some of the issues do reflect values and beliefs they hold dearly. There are Christians who are Democrats also. I don’t think a person should vote on issues because they are Right or Left. I think a person should vote on issues that they believe are right, not wrong.
Thom Hartman has a book out called SCREWED in which he believes a war is being waged on the middle class by the Republicans in power. I believe Mr. Hartman is a Progressive. He does have a talk show on Air America. He is also concerned that America is moving toward fascism. I plan to buy his book and read it as it has real issues that need studying. One thing that he did say at his book reading was that Americans need to become more involved in their civic responsibilities. Go to meetings, whether it is once a month or a few times a year.
As far as politicians and the media demonizing individuals, it is an unfortuante fact of life and although not practiced by all, the practice knows no party lines. Prsonally, it is my opinion that there is a media bias in favor of the Democratic platform. The attack ads and mudslinging however, that we are experiencing now definately comes from both parties though not by all candidates. Wake me up, when November comes.
Humbly yours,
Kim
Posted by kimberlyausten on Oct 23, 2006 at 12:40 AM What is the Austin Statesman?
I don’t propose to have any answers regarding the Iraq situation. I know that going into Iraq was voted on by congress and the majority of both parties voted for it.
I do not have a problem with your suggestion of the assassination of Saddam Hussein rather than the bombing of innocent civilians. As I stated in earlier posts, I hate war. I hate that there are political struggles and that the innocent are killed.
I don’t have any solutions to propose for the situation in Darfur either. I think that genocide is horrible and it grieves me greatly that even today, such atrocities happen.
I watch the news and try to stay up on current events. I admit, I often watch the Daily Show and the Colbert Report as satire softens the reality of the troubled times.
I am aware that our news do not tell the complete story. I am also aware that some reporters “stage” photographs to incite greater support for their stance on a conflict. It is hard to trust what is in print or even seen. The best one can do is try to decipher the facts.
One thing I am sure of, you cannot substantiate that Bush and Cheney think this is like a video game. You can’t get into their minds and know what they are really thinking.
My dilema is knowing what the will of the Iraqi people really want. I know that they do not want war. I know that the insurgents want us to leave. I heard a news report that the government officials do not want us to leave. I also heard that there are bullet ridden bodies with signs of torture dumped in the streets of Iraq. I hear reports of sectarian violence. I heard one Democratic candidate suggest the partitioning of Iraq as a solution to the violence. That hasn’t been successful in regards to Israel and the Palestinians. What is the answer. I don’t know! I am sure you will tell me.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Oct 23, 2006 at 1:01 AM KimberlyAusten
What is the Austin Statesman?Sorry, I thought your name reflected where you live as in Austin, Texas. LOL
Y’know sometimes I forget people do actually ask questions. It’s hard to tell with so many FRight Wingers on this sight acting as covert agents. LOL
I know that going into Iraq was voted on by congress and the majority of both parties voted for it.
You know, it’s interesting how you phrased this. In doing so you actually destroy the truth in your statement. DETAILS DO MATTER. Details like:
The SUPPORT for the war was based on the “Faith” congress had that our President was being truthful and honest. He was not. After 9/11 everyone in this country including congressmen wanted to strike back. Bush used his lies to re-direct that desire to strike back at Osama to invading Iraq. They voted “for the war” AFTER an extensive months long effort to weave a web of lies to justify invading Iraq, NOT before. They were victims as much as the rest of the country.
Do you really think many congressmen (Rep. or Dem) would have voted for the war IF they knew that 95% of the info they had been given were lies and bad intelligence? The false nature of the info was KNOWN to the Bush Admin. but purposely concealed from congress.
In the end, the ONLY VOTES AGAINST GOING TO WAR came from Democrats. That does count for something, when the other side had ZERO VOTES.
I do not have a problem with your suggestion of the assassination of Saddam Hussein rather than the bombing of innocent civilians. ......
The question is again, why didn’t Bush and Cheney think of it?
I watch the news and try to stay up on current events. .......
For the best source of UNBiased news try
http://www.cbc.com
Canadian National News Service. They report the news about the USA like our News services USED to, They are not filled with anti-American bias.
I am aware that our news do not tell the complete story. I am also aware that some reporters stage photographs..........
Reporters are employees NOT managers NOT owners. They do what they are told by their bosses the editors.
To believe the Press is “liberal” is to spit in the face of reality. Our media is CONSERVATIVE OWNED AND RUN.
Clear Channel the largest radio chain in the country for example is extremely conservative.
Fox News “The Republican News Network” and CNN the Cowardly News Network all show strong conservative slants.
They almost NEVER show the liberal point of view. What they call the “liberal” view few Liberals could identify.
........you cannot substantiate that Bush and Cheney think this is like a video game. You cant get into their minds........Actually the “video game” comment was an analogy.
In regards to “knowing what they think” every human reveals what they “think” in their “actions and deeds, in the words they use” Etc.
However there are many people who are blind to it.
So blind that they cannot do what for others is easy and obvious, and so blind that they canNOT accept that SOME actually can.
cont’d
Posted by johnnyincentx on Oct 23, 2006 at 9:42 PM KimberlyAusten: (sorry for the super long post.)
My dilemma is knowing what the will of the Iraqi people really want.
learning what the Iraqis want/think is easy!!! :-) Just read ENGLISH LANGUAGE Iraqi news. Many are printed in English, and printed by Iraqis.
These are NOT Anti-American sites, HOWEVER they do NOT omit negative news about the US Military or the war. They print it all.
Most Americans NOT used to such brutal honesty will instinctively assume this means they are Anti-American terrorist sympathizers.
If you suspect them - you should ask yourself why you expect War News to be so good and clean?
Ask yourself why you think printing pictures of Iraqis killed in the dozens by American Bombs is Anti-American.
Why talking about the wholesale destruction of their nation is Anti-American.
They talk about how the people really feel in Iraq. What they do NOT do is print endless stories about “happy Iraqis” saying good things about “US Soldiers.” They do NOT because it’s not true.
We have DESTROYED their nation, and this war has cost upwards of 30,000 Iraqis their lives (that’s BUSH’s estimate. BRITISH ESTIMATES are 500,000+)
Here are some IRAQI NEWS LINKS IN ENGLISH. Enjoy ;-)
http://www.azzaman.com/english/index.asp?code=ennewsen
http://www.alsabaah.com/paper.php?source=akbar&page=37
http://www.kurdmedia.com/
Oh and the BBC - the British national network has tons of stories about the REAL STORY IN IRAQ.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2002/conflict_with_iraq/default. .stm
Here is a BRITISH Video of a BRITISH GENERAL sharing some honest thoughts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news/audio/61000/nb/61228_16x9_nb.ramI know that they do not want war. I know that the insurgents want us to leave........... What is the answer. I don’t know! I am sure you will tell me.
I have every confidence that after you read some news at the links I provided, you will come up with some good ideas on what to do next. So there is no need for me to “tell you.” ;-)
The truth is out there (like the X-files said LOL) The question is whether or not enough Americans are willing to make the effort to look up from their video games and TV shows to read a story or two about it.
Posted by johnnyincentx on Oct 23, 2006 at 9:43 PM ........unfortuante fact of life and although not practiced by all, the practice
knows no party lines. Prsonally, it is my opinion that there is a media
bias in favor of the Democratic platform. The attack ads and mudslinging
however, that we are experiencing now definately comes from both parties
though not by all candidates. Wake me up, when November comes. ................Umm, prior to this election, you’re quite wrong.
If you see Democrats as similarly culpable, then you are still treating your political affiliation as a “team loyalty” issue, and cannot see that your side is “cheating” and has been “cheating” to win for years now, or you are one of the Dems. who thinks he “gains legitimacy” by giving a point or two to the “other side” who NEVER will acknowledge your side.
You do what a lot do, and assume that IF a network reports something in a way you disagree it MUST be liberal. WRONG. The LIBERAL VIEW ALMOST NEVER gets aired. You see the Extreme Conservative, Conservative and Centrist view.
You see O’Riley and Hannity on TV almost 24hrs a week. How many minutes have you seen Pelosi in the last Year?
I find it fascinating that anyone could say with a straight face that there is a “Democratic bias” in the news, when we have a Corporate Media.
The bosses are Republicans. Reporters are “workers/employees. They do what they are told.
If someone needs to wake up, perhaps it’s the many Americans who think that the “talking heads” on TV control and decide the news. They do NOT. It does NOT matter if Dan Rather is a screaming liberal (he’s not he’s a centrist) HE DOES NOT DECIDE THE NEWS.
The OWNERS of the networks an Radio stations decide the news.. The owners like MOST OF corporate Executive America is Republican and very conservative.
Owners who hired Roger Ailes former Republican Chairman to make Fox News into the “unfair and unbalanced” mouthpiece for the Social Conservatives.
The largest radio net. in the country is Clear Channel, and EXTREMIST FRIght wing network. The second largest is equally extreme.
Please I’d like to know of ONE Major NEWS OUTLET OWNED by AN INDISPUTABLE LIBERAL?
HOWEVER in 2006 things ARE DIFFERENT. For the first time in 14yrs. The Dems. have started to play by Republican rules, and yes THIS YEAR the mud comes from all sides.
Posted by johnnyincentx on Oct 23, 2006 at 9:58 PM Pardon me for leading the conversation back off topic, now that it has recovered. You see, I am late in the game and wished to comment on some of the earlier posts. So, please do not let me guide you down a different path again.
Some mentioned whether or not if Jesus were alive in flesh today he would be a democrat (or was it liberalist). Some argued over whether or not Jesus even ever existed.
I have this to say: I am not a Christian, I use to be but chose a different spiritual path. I am however more than decently familiar with the Christian religion. I believe that Jesus did at one point walk the face of this planet. (Which by the way it is geographically impossible for Jesus to have had the pale skin he is so often depicted with) However, I do not believe that he was the son of God or the son of man any more than any of us are. I do however believe that based on what the bible speaks of, I can find no fault in the ideals and morals that this man taught. When he spoke the words, “The only way to the father is through the son” (or any other variant) I do not believe that he was telling his followers that he is God (fully God, fully man, fully holy spirit) and that the only way to get into heaven is to believe that he is the son of God and our saviour. I believe he was telling us to live how he lives, act how he acts. This man gave his entire being over to his faith in God.Now, I will also say that the bible is a compolation of altered ancient texts. Naturally, I do not believe everything that I read in the bible, especially since it is so fond of contradictiong itself. I do wish though that non-christians could critisized what his teachings have been distorted into instead of what he is actually reported to have taught.
The bible, when compiled into the bible, was done so for the benefiet of pagan converts. It was done in such a manner that made the transition easier, and more favorable. Many things in the bible are altered pagan traditonal beliefs.
Most of the U.S. (and probably other areas) holidays that are believed to be christian holidays are infact pagan holidays. Most of the iconographic paraphenelia is overflowing with pagan symbolism.
I have heard, but haven’t had the opportunity to chech this, that the first few chapters in most prominent religious texts are nearly identical to one another.
Lastly, if Jesus was alive today, he would be neither of the political parties, because he would not have involved himself in such worldly disputes. “Give onto Cesar what is Cesar’s, give onto God what is God’s”
Posted by twilightrose on Oct 25, 2006 at 6:13 AM twilightrose...Thank you for your thought-filled response....Although Redhorse does not agree with all that you have posted...I see that you have given the subject much thought and consideration....
My suggestion...is that you purchase and read literature written by Gerald Massey....I believe you will find what he has to say extremely enlightening....
Massey breaks down ad infinitum the pagan cosmological symbolisms and types...he also explains the evolutionary perspective concerning how all this information came together.....
The table of contents of “ Gerald Masseys Lectures “ is as follows....
1) The Historical ( Jewish ) Jesus and the Mythical ( Egyptian ) Christ.....
2)Paul as a Gnostic Opponent, not the Apostle of Historic Christianity....
3)The Logia of the Lord; or the Pre-Christian Sayings ascribed to Jesus the Christ.....
4)Gnostic and Historic Christianity....
5)The Hebrew and other Creations fundamentally explained....
6)The Devil of Darkness; or Evil in the Light of Evolution…
7)Luniolatry ; Ancient and Modern....
8)Man in search of his Soul , during Fifty Thousand Years, and how he found it....
9)The Seven Souls of Man, and their Culmination in the Christ....
10)The Coming Religion....
Twilightrose if any of this sounds like your cup of tea...please partake in the knowledge...but if you are not ready to READ , do not waste your money...because as stated earlier...Massey can go on ad infinitum.....
Other works by Massey on this subject are....
A Book Of The Beginnings....
The Natural Genesis....
Ancient Egypt the Light of the World....
A quote from Masseys ( Ancient Egypt ......)
“ Folk-lore in many lands is the final fragmentary form in which the ancient wisdom---the Wisdom of old Egypt---still survives as old wives’ fables, parables, riddles, allegorical sayings, and superstitious beliefs,consecrated by the ignorance which has taken the place of primitive knowledge concerning the mythical mode of representation ; and from lack of the lost key, writers on this subject have become the sheerest tale-bearers whose gossip is full of scandal against primitive and ancient man.............They have lost the memory of their meaning. It is only in the Mythos that we can ascertian their original relationship to natural fact and learn that the people who repeat the folk-tales were not always natural fools. It is only in the Egyptian Wisdom that the key is to be found.......”
Vol 1, Ch 1 ; pg.17...paragraph 2.......twilightrose , you gonna love this guy.........
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 25, 2006 at 4:56 PM RedHorse,
who is this guy, and were would find his works should they be interested? I am Pagan have been researchin Pagan History and Culture for five yeasrs or so, so if he has something different to say about my “religion” I’d like to hear it. I can’t swear I’ll listen to any of it, but I’ll give anyone a chance.
Posted by twilightrose on Oct 27, 2006 at 8:52 AM By the way, give me any Christian holiday in America, and a day or two and I can tell you specifics of it’s coralation to Paganism, assuming it is one of the many that has one.
Posted by twilightrose on Oct 27, 2006 at 8:53 AM twilightrose....Redhorse has no doubt that you can trace any and every pagan / christian holiday.....If documenting pagan origins is your bag...then Massey is a must read…
“ Gerald Massey was born in 1828 in a hut at Gamnel Wharf , on the canal near Tring Hertfordshire in England.
He believed that ancient Egyptian civilization held the answers to many of the religious and psychic problems of the world. He concentrated most of his writings in his later life towards revealing this. His beliefs and theories on Afrika as the birthplace of civilization is an idea that has enjoyed some renaissance in recent years.
He died at South Norwood on 29th October 1907 having written many outstanding works , that are still used today.”That is a qoute from the back cover of....Gerald Masseys Lectures.....you could try google or Ebay…
You could also try contacting either…
A&B;Publishers Group
1000 Atlantic Avenue
Brooklyn , New York , 11238...or....
A&B;Books Publishers
149 Lawrence Street
Brooklyn , New York, 11201 ( 718 ) 596-3389
also
Black Classic Press
c/oList
PO Box 13414
Baltimore , MD 21203
Posted by Redhorse on Oct 27, 2006 at 2:05 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Hans Johnson
- The Races to Watch
Democrats vie to capitalize on House and Senate vacancies - Loyalty First
Palin's selection doesn't augur well for Washington's warped nomination process - Jumping Ship
Citing social issues, local GOP officials are abandoning their party in droves - California Rules!
A Defeat for Right-Wing Activism On and Off the Bench - Demolition Crew Butts In Where Deft Organizers Need To Tread
- The Next Gay Moment?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
