Today's News | Christian Views
| Home | Community | WorldMagBlog | Commentary | Previous Posts | Podcasts | Contact Us | Subscribe |
On our turf
Experts say the threat of domestic terrorism is growing
FULL STORY
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration
Bitter pill: GOP senators swallow hard as judicial nominee David Hamilton is confirmed
Just friends: Obama’s Asia agenda steered clear of any tough talk on human rights abuses 
Good morning!
Today’s quote is from a 17th century French author: “The height of cleverness is being able to conceal it.”
All original content Copyright © 2009 WORLDmag.com and may not be reproduced without permission
Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
Click to Print
Include Comments
back to top63 Comments to “Whirled Views 11.19”
Kathleen Parker is out for blood today. The problem with the GOP is G-O- D. A pretty sharp attack on the True Believers.
Report comment to moderator
Moliere?
Report comment to moderator
Montaigne?
Report comment to moderator
Harris, your link doesn’t work.
Report comment to moderator
I conceal it very well.
Report comment to moderator
I like to play a mental game where I pretend I’ve suddenly been dropped into a location from a different time and place. I then have to guess where I am by looking at the topography (as in, would I know I was in Sonoma County by looking at the landscape if I didn’t actually know I was there?).
I take that “turning the prism to look at life through slightly different angle,” into my life some mornings when we wake up to the CBS news. Would I believe I’m in the United States, listening to the headlines, if I didn’t know it?
As I listened to today’s litany of social, economic and topological disasters (think SoCal fires), I’m amazed anyone is hopeful about our future. It’s the proverbial boiling frog routine. How can anyone listen to the news and imagine our society is any better than it was in the past? Why would anyone think removing people of faith and their ethics from the equation would result in anything other than disaster?
Truly sobering.
Bring on more drugs for the elementary school kids . . . fire up the Supreme Court to overturn the vote of the people . . . bail out companies failing because of their own greed . . . it goes on and on.
Report comment to moderator
Here’s the link (I’m guessing): Giving Up on God
Report comment to moderator
I did read the article, though, at townhall.com.
Meh, she’s entitled to her we-lost-so-here’s-my-take-on-whom-to-blame post, just like lots of other Republican and/or conservative columnists are doing. It’s the season for it.
Hopefully, they’ll all feel better soon. Meanwhile, the GOP, (like any party) is a coalition: social conservatives and fiscal conservatives; evangelicals and Log Cabin Republicans; neo-cons; right-leaning libertarians, etc. When things go wrong, as they surely have, some constituents blame others.
There was a time a few years ago when many local Democratic candidates were afraid to put the word “Democrat” on their lawn signs. Ditto for the “L word.” A lot can change in a few years. The GOP will eventually reconstitute itself along the same basic lines as it is now, which is sad news for both Kathleen Parker and for social-and-fiscal-conservative-but-not-Republican-per-se voters like myself.
Report comment to moderator
Kim is completely debt free except for house payment, car payment, and student loan.
Have a good rest of the year. Thank you to all who prayed for and with me in the past.
God bless you all.
Report comment to moderator
That’s wonderful news, Kim. Progress!
Report comment to moderator
Great news Kim
I have been praying for you, and others here.
I’m glad you stopped by, I was missing you.
Report comment to moderator
I wrote a bit about KP’s WP piece: She Wants Attention
Report comment to moderator
Parker’s piece today is just Part 2 of her anti-Palin rant.
However, she comes out and says what I’ve suspected for years: The Republicans don’t really want us and they don’t believe what we believe. It couldn’t be more obvious that they just want to use us during election cycles. So, when she closes with, Either the Republican Party needs a new base — or the nation may need a new party, she’s probably right.
Where would this new base come from? Are the Republicans going to give up on conservative principles and compete on the Democrats’ home turf? Though that would be stupid, there is evidence they’re considering it. Or, do they re-acquire some foundational principles of freedom and small government and try to convince Americans of their validity? Mike Pence’s new job is encouraging in that regard.
But, as to Kathleen Parker: She’s just another Beltway pundit taking a jab at Flyover Country.
Report comment to moderator
Some wise advice:
http://townhall.com/Columnists/MichaelMedved/2008/11/19/the_dangers_of_premature_obama_bashing
Report comment to moderator
There is so much to object to in that Kathleen Parker column, I could sit here commenting on it all day.
I first noticed this anti-social conservative sentiment bubbling up over at Little Green Footballs, which has become a completely secularist, anti-religious sewer. They despise anyone who questions evolutionary science, mock anyone who thinks abortion and homosexuality are wrong, and are progressively turning their back on anyone who believes in a transcendent reality. You really have to wonder why they aren’t Democrats. Apparently, fiscal conservatism and a hawkish foreign policy are the only two things that distinguish them from all other liberals.
So I’ve been thinking: if the New Republican Party is going to be the party of unprincipled, secularist pragmatism, I don’t want any part of it. There are millions who will agree with me. Basically, these anti-religious Republicans want to exchange one base for another–the religious social conservatives for right-leaning independents.
Can there be any doubt remaining that Dabney was correct in the 19th century when he said that the conservative party is just the shadow of the liberal party as it moves leftward?
Remind me why we are still Republicans, when holding our noses to vote for McCain didn’t prevent Obama from getting elected. Parker is correct in that a new party will have to emerge if social conservatives are going to be allowed the political representation they have a right to. In two or four more years, there may not be any reason to vote Republican. Personally, I may go back to not voting, or I may just vote for the Constitution Party candidates. I have no interest in being on the same side as LGF and Kathleen Parker and David Frum.
Report comment to moderator
I’ve noticed that growing theme, too, at LGF.
To be honest, I’d prefer to be registered as a Decline to State/nonpartisan voter — but when I was registered that way I found myself frustrated in not being able to vote for candidate preferences in our state’s closed primary system (which, by the way, I actually agree with — members of a party should be the only ones participating in nominating candidates from that party).
The Parker column was very condescending, although I suspect it’s just part of the circular firing squad forming right now as Republicans try to pass the blame for the party’s losses.
As for me, I’ve had enough politics to last me for, well, several months anyway. I’m taking a breather from it all, weaning myself off of the 24-hour news/talk shows. Who’s in the cabinet, who’s not; what the big plans are for the inauguration — I’m only vaguely aware of it all. For now, anyway.
Report comment to moderator
Kathleen Parker probably voted for Obama.
Report comment to moderator
“Kathleen Parker probably voted for Obama.”
Actually, she stated her intention to vote for McCain/Palin, although that doesn’t excuse her snobbish sniping.
Report comment to moderator
I agree mostly with the stated views of the Constitution Party candidate (Chuck Baldwin) in this past election. There are a few things that we don’t see eye to eye on, but on the important issues he has the positions. While many Republicans nowadays are becoming increasingly liberal, there are a few that are still very conservative. For instance, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo.
The only negative thing I found about Duncan Hunter is the fact that he supports the Patriot Act, but to do him credit, there have been instances where it has been used for good. I read something about a girl who was kidnapped and her kidnapper’s IP address was divulged by the internet provider when the FBI or police (or whoever they were) cited the Patriot Act.
Well, enough of politics for now.
Report comment to moderator
Good old whack job Maxine Waters Marxists from California now wants to not only give the big 3 an additional $25 billion (on top of the $25 Billion they haven’t even received yet from the Energy Department) she wants to bail out the parts suppliers and the minority auto dealers, as well as, the Auto Unions and anyone else, so long as they are a minority, that voted for Obama who ever bought a car.
These people are insane.
Ok I’m willing to change the llama auto bailout plan. I’m willing to buy 5 million hybrid cars made in America by non American auto makers and give then all to Maxine Waters for her personal use, if the idiots we elected allow the big 3 US auto makers go through a structured bankruptcy. They shoot horses don’t they?
I’m convinced that the CEO of GN Waggoner is even more stupid than Maxine Waters. HE was asked today how long GM could last taking the worst case scenario and how much money it would take to get GM through March 30th next year so that the government could give them enough money to get them trough the first quarter so that the government would have enough time to craft a bridge loan to nowhere for the Auto industry unions to get them through the entire downturn. Waggoner didn’t have a clue how long GM could last or how much they would need to get them through teh 1st quarter. He needs to go immediately before the end of the day.
It is obvious the Marxists are going to give the 3 long dead corpses called the US Auto manufacturers probably around a minimum of $250 Billion Dollars eventually. All involved have no shame. It is money gong down a rat hole and they all will still fail before they can sell us %45,000 electric cars (that’s what the new, in 2010, Chevy Volt costs – no one will buy them because they are too expensive). We could buy 25 million Toyota Prius’ for that and give each rich person in America 5 each since the Marxists are going to rape them again, steal their money and give it to Marxist Auto workers and their company bankrupting Union.
If one more Millionaire Marxist Senator tells me he personally is still driving is 1966 Plymouth Valiant I am gong to throw up.
It is best to just round them all up, Congressmen, Senators, Auto Execs Union officials and throw them all in jail.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks for sharing Medved’s column, Donna, I agree with him.
Llama, I’m not so sure about the big three getting their money. We got an e-mail yesterday from GM (we own a Saturn) trying to explain why I should call my congressman and beg/demand the big three get bailed out, “it’s not a gift, it’s a loan we’ll repay.”
It just made me more convinced they shouldn’t get the money. You have to have lived in a hole the last–30 years?–to not know Americans prefered foreign cars with style and better gas mileage. Or at least the Americans who didn’t need a truck or a mini-van.
In other bad news, after a weekend where I didn’t break any more machines and thus was optimistic the cloud had lifted, I just stopped off at the bank to deposit a check in their nifty new check scanner ATM.
My check was eaten. The machine is now broken.
I’d stay away from Sonoma County for awhile.
Report comment to moderator
The bad thing I see about this is the fact that American cars have gotten so much better over the past decade or so (maybe a bit longer), but everyone still thinks that domestic cars are junk and they should buy foreign cars. But now, many new cars are coming out that are much better than before, and sometimes even better than the competition. For instance, in terms of performance, the new Chevy Cobalt SS and Corvette ZR1 defeat most of the competition (in the same class), and lack only in the interior department.
However, there is also the new Ford Focus, which is one of the most affordable econo-cars that can get around 35 mpg, and the ‘09 Cadillac CTS-V, which is an admirable car, to put it plainly.
And next year the ‘09 Chevy Camaro also arrives.
Maybe if the “big three” could wait just a little while to see the sales from some of these ‘09 cars…
But I highly doubt that they’ll get enough from those sales to equal or even get anywhere near $25 billion.
Report comment to moderator
Rather than gossiping about Kathleen Parker, shouldn’t we as the Lord’s disciples spend our time praying for her?
Report comment to moderator
Having lost so soundly in the presidential election makes me a washed up politician.
Right?
So, I wonder when I will get an offer for a position in the Obama administration?
Report comment to moderator
Rio,
Um… I haven’t done any current research on the subject, but I’d just about bet that a good bit of those cars are made by foreign car manufacturers -at least a lot of the parts are.
Back when I could still stand working on cars, the Mercury Villager was nothing but a Nissan, and the little Chevy Nova was a Corolla…. etc etc.
Report comment to moderator
Hey, anyone notice that Justice Souter has given Obama til Dec 1st to respond to Philip Berg’s writ of certoriari?
World Net Daily has a rundown of all the lawsuits about Obama’s birth place/certificate:
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80928
I quote the article:
Heard anything from CBS, MSNBC, ABC, Fox, CNN?
Nothing?
Big surprise.
Report comment to moderator
Gah… writ of certiorari…
Man I wish we could edit our posts.
Report comment to moderator
Stubob (or anyone else who may know) -
I received a “fwd.” the other day with a list of little-known or interesting “facts”. I looked up some of them at Snopes.com (no, Winston Churchill was not born in a ladies room), but there were a couple I couldn’t find.
Babies have no kneecaps? The fwd. claims that babies are born without kneecaps, which appear sometime between ages 2 & 6.
But I’m pretty sure my babies had kneecaps. I think I would’ve noticed if they hadn’t.
So, are babies born with cartilage instead of bone kneecaps – is that what they’re referring to?
Report comment to moderator
PUPPY or CHICKEN?
Report comment to moderator
Either the Republican Party needs a new base — or the nation may need a new party.
The latter. And not the Constitution Party, as that only makes sense on a national level. We need a party that works at the local / state level as well. Perhaps we conservatives could work towards combining with the Libertarian Party, as its tenets go along with small government / state’s rights, and it is established already in most, if not all, states. Why build from scratch when a foundation is in place?
Report comment to moderator
Woo-hoo!
Vice President Dick Cheney and his pal Alberto Gonzales have been indicted for engaging in organized criminal activity in Texas!
Report comment to moderator
Here’s some more on the Obama Birth Certificate story.
I got this from an admittedly white supremicists web site (ugh), but I find nothing in this quote to diminish the facts. I won’t link to the site because I disagree with so much of what they stand for.
You can see the docket info here for SCOTUS Docket No. 08-570:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
Report comment to moderator
Oh, and because I know someone that is rather racist (I can’t help what a co-worker thinks) you shouldn’t think I’m racist because I found the information on a site he told me about. Normally I don’t give things he says a second thought because he’s such a whacko anyway.
But when I noticed that Justice Souter had ordered a response from President Elect Obama, then I paid attention.
Report comment to moderator
Make It Man,
You should have Googled the story and linked to a different source.
Report comment to moderator
Obama voted present today again as the stock market crashed. The shorts are killing the financials and no one gives a hoot on the left. More than 2 trillion has been lost in the market since Obama was elected. No leadership whatsoever. No announcement of his Sec of the Treasury nominee to calm the markets. No saying he wanted the Socialist Auto Unions to get a bailout from congress to calm the markets, no nothing as usual from this Marxist President elect.
There will be nothing left financially to be president of by the time he is finally inaugurated. But as a Marxist First and Foremost this is exactly what he wants. This is our new future we have been dreaming of for so long – he is it all right.
Report comment to moderator
MIM.
Obama’s lack of a real birth certificate doesn’t make any difference. If you can believe what the Messiah says you are in the wrong reality.
If Obama doesn’t have one I am sure he can quickly find 6 million eye witnesses who will swear they saw him born in Hawaii and more than 10,000 doctors that will swear they delivered him there.
Report comment to moderator
David,
I did link to a different source. See the link to World Net Daily in post #26. It’s not just the white supremecists that are talking about this.
It’s just that the MSM isn’t picking up on it much. Although Alan Keyes is making noise about it. What do you expect? Obama shafted him so that he could run unopposed…..
Report comment to moderator
Corruption King Ted Stevens has conceded the Alaska senate race so Socialist Sarah won’t be appointing herself to the US Senate!
Woo-hoo!
Report comment to moderator
Al Franken has won his absentee ballot lawsuit in Minnesota!
Woo-hoo!
Report comment to moderator
Of course, we realize that the conservative Christians and their fellow Republicans are going to do everything they can to stop Barack Obama from taking office. They refuse to accept the choice of the American people. One does wonder how far they will go to stop Obama from becoming President given that they’re encouraging their fellow conservative Christians and Republicans to buy guns and ammunition.
If they can’t stop Obama from becoming President, they’re gonna do everything they can to destroy his Presidency. They would sooner see this nation ruined than to see Barack Obama succeed. But that’s because they care more about the Republican Party staying in power than anything else. It’s a sad, sad thing to watch them become disloyal Americans and joining in league with the voices of terrorists around the world in trying to bring down our country.
Report comment to moderator
Karen O (28): So, are babies born with cartilage instead of bone kneecaps – is that what they’re referring to?
I think that’s it, more or less. Otherwise, what would the little darlings crawl on?
Anlir, your comment at 40 can’t be supported by posts on WMB. As usual, you’re attacking an Evil Christian Straw Boogeyman.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir (40): So do we Christians on this blog really match those stereotypes? The broad-brush technique is getting pretty old. We should all have the intelligence and courtesy to realize not everyone on “the other side” (no matter what side that may be) fits into some crazy-person mold.
I’m not buying guns, I have no plan to “riot.” Really. I wish the new president well, while realizing I may disagree with some of his decisions.
I am calm, I feel no bitterness or anger. My sense is that most of the Christians posting on this site feel the same. Obama won, fair and square. It’s time to move on.
Report comment to moderator
A while back, there was an amazing poster who used the screen name “James.” I wondered if he was an anti-evangelical who masqueraded as one to make conservative Christians look bad. However, many here (though by no means all) seemed to embrace and support his posts. Then as suddenly as he appeared he disappeared.
When he was going full blast, I wondered, “Are these posts how we want the world to see conservative Christianity?” I thought perhaps his posting should be shared much more widely than with the world than just this web site. I began thinking about collecting quite a few of his posts. I even started a sub-blog of my main blog where I would collect his posts as an archive. I didn’t act quickly enough. Suddenly, as quickly as he appeared, he was gone.
Even with “James” gone, there are several people who still strike me as excellent representatives of worldmagblog at its best.
I am thinking I should perhaps start a collective archive.
Who among the regular and frequent posters do you think best represents the face of conservative Christianity the wider world should see and consider?
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, your comment on #40 said this:
One does wonder how far they will go to stop Obama from becoming President given that they’re encouraging their fellow conservative Christians and Republicans to buy guns and ammunition.
I assume it was sarcasm, because I’m sure you know very well the reason many people are buying guns is because Obama, like most liberals, is anti-gun and will try to restrict gun ownership upon becoming President and not to start a riot or do anything of the sort.
I haven’t gotten any guns yet (I’m not old enough and I don’t have the money), but hopefully Obama won’t wreak too much havoc and leave the Second Amendment intact, so to speak, so I will have a chance to eventually (so I can get a couple of Sig handguns). After all, Obama has basically said that if there are judges that follow the “letter of the Constitution,” they’re not the guys for him. Imagine that. Now why would he not want justices who would follow the Constitution? I wonder…
Report comment to moderator
In #6, Michelle wrote (I am sure coming from a very different place than I, though I mean no malice or criticism directed at her):
As I listened to today’s litany of social, economic and topological disasters (think SoCal fires), I’m amazed anyone is hopeful about our future. It’s the proverbial boiling frog routine. How can anyone listen to the news and imagine our society is any better than it was in the past? Why would anyone think removing people of faith and their ethics from the equation would result in anything other than disaster?
I am not hopeful about the future. I am fairly old (almost 65, when I will retire from my current job, which has gone rather sour), and as a person without religious faith, preparing myself for the fact that my physical and mental abilities are declining, and that as with all human beings, my life will cease.
I came from a dysfunctional family. I have been fortunate in my marriage (we will celebrate 43 years this month), fortunate in my daughter (who will return to graduate school next fall), and fond of her partner and her child (who will reach five early next year). My life has turned out better than I thought it would. I am lucky to have been born in this country. I have been lucky that my health has held up as well as it has when my father died before 50, and all my siblings are troubled to some extent or other.
I am a fairly cold and dispassionate person. My wife, my daughter, her partner, and my granddaughter–those are the only people I can honestly say “I love.” I wish the rest of my family well and some friends. I don’t wish anyone in particular harm, though the world has many bad people in it, some of whom I know.
I am not quite an atheist, though very close to it. I don’t believe in “absolute values,” though I do believe in good and evil, which so many people here think an atheist can’t understand or believe in.
I consider Christianity to be a benevolent swindle. Not a swindle in the sense that one person said, “I will fool people into believing this,” but as a system of mythic beliefs that grew over time. It served as an explanation for how our world operates before science arose, and some questions about reality may never be answered by science. There are forces in evolution and psychology and sociology and culture that can account (I believe) for why we act in virtuous ways and why we act in evil ways; many thinkers developed over centuries ways to encourage virtue and discourage evil.
From my perspective, there were many flaws and weaknesses in this belief system (though much of it is admirable, but stuff such as the obsession with homosexuality is rather obnoxious, and the denial of evolutionary thoery is pretty silly). As time has gone by, the virtuous swindle is losing its effectiveness and power. The secular world has not evolved a successful replacement.
Which is a way of saying that I agree with Michelle’s post, for very different reasons. I am sad about the world my granddaughter will grow up in because I think it is a world of doom. Humans have more cunning than wisdom; we develop ways to cure the ill and alleviate our troubles, but we are better at developing ways to kill and torture and deceive than we are at doing good.
We are like a child in an attic with loaded guns. I doubt we will last the century. At best, my granddaughter will inherit a world much like the world portrayed in Mad Max; a world of scarce resources and humans who behave even more like brutes than they do now.
Report comment to moderator
There are a few people here, that I call (for lack of a better term) the “rebels.” We include atheists and agnostics and a variety of religious believers, some liberals, and some who don’t fit the narrow conservatism of many here, some homosexuals and some who don’t accept the rather extreme sexual obsessions common around here, and so on.
As a condescending person (or so I have been called frequently enough it must be true), I don’t think the rebels present themselves all that much better than the “loyalists” (as I call the posters represening the dominant world view here).
I think participation here (among both groups) displays a lot of “addictive” behavior, and quite a few people can present little or no coherent and sensible reason for their participation.
Part of my own justification (good or ill) is that I clarify my own thoughts by holding them up against people with strongly differing beliefs and seeing where they are weak and whether they need to change or strengthen. It’s a shaky justification at best.
Anyway, I think the many of the loyalists maintain their beliefs and reason for participating and common ground by opposing the rebels. I suspect (and I realize I could be wrong) that without the constant sniping of the rebels, the loyalists would turn on each other.
With very bad timing, I suggested that the loyalists begin to hold back a bit from participating. The election was too exciting for that idea to take hold.
So I am trying again. I once again request the rebels a) get a grip on their addiction by holding back on day a week and b) help with my mad scientist experiment. The election is over. The “leftist” “socialist” won and now will destroy our country when George Bush was doing such a good job of saving it.
Starting next Tuesday, I once again ask the rebels to join me in supporting “tame Tuesday,” one day a week where we skip the snipes and the “corrections” and the “battles” and see what the loyalists do without us. It’s easy to slip (I do sometimes), but give it a try.
Report comment to moderator
RN: I enjoy opposing viewpoints on this blog, especially thoughtful ones.
I don’t know that there are any deep, psychological reasons as to why most of us participate on a blog like this (though I may be wrong, wouldn’t be a first, you know!).
It’s often fun, it’s also a way, as you said, of sharpening our own views (as iron sharpens iron, as the Bible puts it).
I don’t remember a “James,” so am not sure what kinds of things he may have said. No one argues that there are not unreasonable voices out there (on both sides) — but I have to say, based on the Christians I know at church and in other circles, including most here on this blog, I have heard (for the most part) grace upon grace poured out since this election.
We know who (really) reigns, despite the human frailty, incompetence and unfaithfulness of both our republican and democrat legislators.
Are we concerned about the nation’s and world’s immediate future? Sure.
But being of a more post-mil mindset, I cannot share your pessimism of the world and the future.
Though there be deep valleys along the way. I am convinced that God is on His throne, that He is working all things together for the good of the brethren — and that many more will be added to our numbers as time moves forward. Redemption is nigh.
I am glad all of you “rebels” are here. You do serve at times to call us on our hypocrisy (yeah, it happens) and we should always take your (serious and thoughtful) criticism, well, very seriously.
Rejoice!
Report comment to moderator
RPN,
One more seat, and you guys can have it. You won’t have Bush to blame for anything, nor a Republican Congress. It’ll all be on you. Be happy now, because there’ll be a piper to pay in just a little while.
Mark my words, the Democrats won’t deliver any more than the Republicans did. They’ll fritter away their opportunity to get things accomplished by investigating all the Republicans. Or they’ll get so bogged down by the failing economy because they did all the wrong things and didn’t get us on the right track. (They’re off to a good start on that one! If they bail out the auto-makers, it’ll be one more hefty bill to pay.) And lets not even think about the Global Warming crap and how green policy will ruin our economy- more than it already is. You watch, the stock market will take another major dive before too long. I’m hearing another 2,000 points.
And if Democrats are true to form they’ll screw up the military again, and lose any advantage we had where we are….
Report comment to moderator
Bankruptcy isn’t the end of the world. It’s the means by which bad companies restructure to fix themselves. Bailouts are the means by which governments subsidize bad companies.”
–National Review editor Jonah Goldberg
As for Lumpy, his favorite socialist party will show itself to be the laughingstock of the world soon enough.
Report comment to moderator
Jay Leno:
According to CNN, Barack Obama’s popularity going into office is higher than Clinton’s, Reagan’s, or either of the President Bushes when they entered office. On Fox News, he’s somewhere between Attila the Hun and lead poisoning.
The latest rumor is that Barack Obama has offered the job of secretary of state to Hillary Clinton. That’s kind of sad considering how close Hillary came to being the first female president. Imagine after that — her next job offer? Secretary.
Hillary Clinton might make a very good secretary of state — she can cackle in seven different languages.
Actually this works out great for the Clintons. While Hillary is concentrating on foreign affairs, Bill can get back to concentrating on domestic affairs.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has called for emergency assistance for the auto industry. She said it was an absolute emergency. But since it was Nancy Pelosi, no one could tell from her facial expression that it was an emergency.
Report comment to moderator
“I think I tend to give liberals the benefit of the doubt. I happen to believe they are so besotted by their emotions that they can’t help painting themselves into indefensible corners. To blame a liberal for lying and blatant hypocrisy would be as heartless as blaming an alcoholic for drinking.
In fact, I suspect that, like alcoholics, liberals suffer from a chemical imbalance. Otherwise, how would you explain the enormous gulf between what they say and what they do? For instance, how often have we read newspaper editorials arguing for Affirmative Action in schools and in the work place? In most cases, those pieces are not being written or edited by members of a racial minority group. So, if they were sincere, shouldn’t these journalists clear out their desks and surrender their jobs to somewhat less qualified, but far more deserving, blacks and Hispanics? Or consider, if you will, how consistently liberals object to tax cuts. They prattle on incessantly about how much the wealthy benefit, ignoring the logic that if there’s a 10% reduction across the board, it figures that the person who pays more will save more. But, when liberals blather about the inequities of tax cuts, you realize they actually believe that if a millionaire saves fifty thousand on his tax bill, the guy who only earns, say, thirty grand-a-year should get the same return!!
So, while I acknowledge that liberals can be as loyal and steadfast as cocker spaniels, I have found it is nearly impossible to paper-train them.”
Burt Prelutsky
Report comment to moderator
Make It Man at #26: Heard anything from CBS, MSNBC, ABC, Fox, CNN?
Nothing?
Big surprise.
Because it’s crock. This will blow over and amount to nothing, and really, do you honestly think Obama could have gotten away this long with a fraud that would be easily unraveled with a simple check of state records?
You folks really should stop making fools of yourselves with junk like this.
Report comment to moderator
If it’s such a crock, then why did a Supreme Court Justice order Obama to respond to the writ?
Report comment to moderator
Are you saying that Justice Souter is a fool also?
Report comment to moderator
You betcha, Sarah Palin would just adore that sentence structure, also.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know, MIM. But once Obama complies, maybe then you guys will finally give it a rest.
More likely, you’ll just conclude that Souter is indeed a fool who was taken in by the obviously forged birth certificate.
Look, if this rumor had any truth to it at all, the Republicans would have blown Obama out of the water two years ago. The fact that the party itself, which stood to lose the White House, couldn’t make the case is proof enough that there’s nothing there.
I have no idea what Souter’s reasoning is (if the claim is even true, as that docket that was linked to earlier says nothing about it), but I am quite sure nothing will come of it.
Report comment to moderator
Correction: The docket does refer to the writ. But all that means is Souter wants to see the record of the lower court proceedings as part of the decision-making on whether the Supreme Court should review it.
There really is nothing there.
Report comment to moderator
Maybe Souter thinks it would be best to clear this up once and for all rather than having people forever saying that the birth certificate was probably invalid and that the powers-that-be covered it up.
Report comment to moderator
OK, I really should learn to do research before taking the word of people here on anything. Here is what is happening.
The writ of certiorari means the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case. That has NOT been issue. What has happened is:
Berg lost in the lower court.
He filed a PETITION for the writ in October. The Court’s response is due by Dec. 1. That Dec. 1 date has nothing to do with Obama producing anything.
Berg also filed a motion for an injunction against the election outcome pending a decision on the writ. The Supreme Court denied that motion.
By December 1, the Court will either issue a writ of certiorari, meaning they will hear the case, or they will deny the petition, meaning they will not.
Obama’s people at this point are not involved at all. Berg is trying to get the SCOTUS to hear his case and is awaiting their decision. That is all.
Report comment to moderator
A reference.
If you refer to the docket MIM linked to, we see that Berg filed the petition but that the response has not yet come.
Report comment to moderator
As for Souter, his only direct involvement so far has been to deny Berg’s application for an injunction. He is not singularly involved in the petition for the writ, that will be for the full court to decide.
Report comment to moderator
#47 Donna,
I appreciate your reply. Many of the exchanges here consist of stereotypes and labels (”socialist,” “leftist” “Conservative Christian Republicans,” etc.), exchanges of insults (condescending, etc.) and mock combat. I am not sure what purpose these exchanges serve. I don’t regard your messages as partaking very much of this type of communication.
I’ve said that I feel that useful communication here should serve to make each other uneasy. My point is generally misunderstood and misinterpreted. For example, it is very unlikely that messages here are going to convert atheists to Christians or Christians to atheists. It is even more unlikely that Christians here will accept gay marriage or that homosexuals here will suddenly adopt a “straight” life style.
Two examples of arguments that I advance that I feel should make make people uneasy are the participation of many (not all) Christians in genocidal behavior as document in the book Blood and Soil, and my argument that the term “sin” has little useful meaning to me.
On the other side, I am uneasy about the problem of ethics not based on absolute values and I am uneasy about the problem of abortion. This does not mean that I am a “convert” to your side of the argument any more than my genocide examples causes you or Adios or Klasko to become a radical agnostic. But I do believe you are taking the issue seriously.
I think quite a few other people here just spout rigid replies without much thought. Mileage varies.
Report comment to moderator
RN: thanks for the honest response — that you wrestle with ethics not based on “absolute values” shows you simply operate on sound logic.
As for past sins of Christians (? that is a question that remains open since we cannot really judge whether they were genuine believers or not), often in the name of the faith, I suppose we can only appeal to the biblical teaching of man’s depravity and his (our) capacity to mess up royally and commit great evil. Which, of course, leads us back to the need for God’s grace and mercy.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!