Gee that was a nice "Christian" statement to make now wasn't it?
All in the name of God right?

What a load of crap!

Gee I'm shocked!

I felt sure this thread would be populated by an entire squad of leftists saying how Eeeeevil the Republicans are and how Robertson is a Rove puppet.

I must have come early to the party.

Marc, start clicking on the posts linked to from here

It is important to assassinate any world leader that appears to be the Anti-Christ. I say 'assassinate early and often'.

I'm sure JC would be 'right behind you,' M.

Gee. I wonder what the MSM, and other pundits, would say if Howard Dean had made the same comment?

I think I can hear the deafening silence already.

Christian = terrorism

between Robertson and Dobson > this is how the world sees us.

Remember when Robertson did the prayer vigil for god to kill off two supreme court judges last summer?

Bruce -- That's hilariously silly. If the DNC advocated assassinating foreign leaders, it would be a 24/7 media frenzy of unforeseen proportions.

Yeah; Smirk's PR flunkies would make sure to try to create a circus if anyone not on the far right said anything similar.

I think it's more that anyone in public life that makes such a statement should and would get called out for being a complete ass.

I think Pat, 75, forgets he's on TV sometimes. One of these days he's going to give away his PIN or something

It would be hilarious to see him do something really awful (as if this weren't bad enough) like expose himself on TV. That would be priceless.

If you watch the remarks, it was no off-the-cuff aside. He deliberately went on television to make this announcement.

Some slight alarm bells went off in my brain thinking he might be trying to take some heat off the Bush Administration? But his comment about "not needing another $200 billion war" doesn't really vibe with that.

Plus, that would just be kind of crazy. Which brings us back to the Crazy Factor and PINs, I suppose.

May I suggest as a Robertson follow-up piece header:

Needles and PINs

guffaw!

Poor Pat says he was misinterpreted once again by the mainstream media. Um, Reverend Robertson? It is you who have misinterpreted the Word. I said it before and I'll say it again: A-U-D-I-T!

Pat Robertson is testing the microphone for the Bush Administration.

As the Secretary General of the United Nations has stated, the UN controls the airwaves.

If the UN does not demand that Mr. Robertson make a public formal apology to President Chavez of Venezuela, then the democratic world is permitted absolute free speech and open dialogue - even on the airwaves. No more libel. No more laws or restrictions to impede free speech that will debunk the liars who need the veil of censorship.

Praise God! Thank you Bush and Robertson.

Pat Robertson is testing the microphone for the Bush Administration.

By sticking his head up his ass? Is he working on some echo chamber angle or something?

If the UN does not demand that Mr. Robertson make a public formal apology to President Chavez

Mr. Robertson is a private citizen, the UN cannot just demand anything of any citizen in the world, so what enforceable power does it have here? None, sorry.

There are many of us praying feverishly though, for his early retirement.

Fallacio: Pat Robertson speaking into a microphone. Every time he wraps his lips around the microphone, the fallacies come flying out of his cake hole. Does the 700 Club have a Board of Directors? It's time to fire the twit.

What would it take for someone on the right to say "whoop! Sorry 'bout that"? Bush and company are, of course, totally incapable of saying mea culpa (and W, undoutably, can't spell it). Made-up war-reasoning, continued oil obsession in light now self-evident global warming, mass murderer Bin-Ladin still on the loose, and a degree of insensitivity that blames a dead soldier's mother for a fucked up vacation all add up to a pretty nifty tally.

Of course, Pat Robertson is not really, officially attached to the Bush administration. Not in any "according-to-Hoyle" sort of way. No, he is one of those figures who exist in the shadows, behind the curtains, doing the moral dirty work on the front lines of the screaming, lunatic fringe of the right. Just as Fox is not an "official" instrument of the right's agenda, Pat Robertson and his ilk (Fallwell, Reed, take your pick) stand on the oblique sidelines of the political process, getting to act like maniacs for their cause, doing their damage, then slipping back under their veils of "private citizen."

Meanwhile, actual private citizens like Cindy Sheehan are pilloried mercilessly as though they were some incorporated bulldozer ready to roll over unborn fetuses. The worst thing she did, of course, was to use the Christian cross in her protest. The right, as we know, has proprietary rights to the use of the symbol, therefore, it is not sacrilegious that some cowboy clown blazed over them in his massive, Saudi-oil powered SUV. Whoa to the feckless PETAphile who accidentally snags a Birkenstock on a similarly themed right wing sponsored vigil. There'd be no pitch too hot for little Moonglow.

The right's great weapon of recent years has been a kind of "shock 'n awe" kind of overreaction to anything that smacks of criticism of political status quo. If Bill Mahr questions why US Soldiers are ill-equipped in the theatre of war, then the right-wind congressman will simply label the comedian's comments as treasonous. If Chris Mathews questions the whack-job senator (who happens to be some kind of democrat, evidently) as to whether accusations made against former Presidential hopeful John Kerry's war record are true, that senator must then challenge Mr. Mathews to a duel... so he can kill him, obviously. Thus, when the grieving mother of a solider killed in Iraq decides to go to the vacation Shangri La of our poor, exhausted leader, to gain an audience, the thing for the right to do is to go ape-shit, organize, make tee-shirts, and assume Sheehan is the head of some neo-pagen, vegetarian conspiracy to make sure flags are burned at regular intervals and that Christian children are forcibly placed with lesbian parents.

My thought is that the right reacts this way not because they are particularly concerned about the specific event - Cindy Sheehan protesting the war, for example - but because they link the protest to a broader, more symbolic cultural conflict. Let's face it, they do enjoy tarring the left with a fairly broad brush. You cannot, for example, be an anti-war supporter of the NRA. You cannot be pro-choice and pro-war, etc. The narrative is too difficult for the far-right. I am sure the left does the same thing to those on the right - all right wingers are anti-choice, pro-gun, know-nothings. That, in a nutshell, is the real problem with America: an inability to accept a more complicated, more nuanced narrative.

Of course, Pat Robertson is not really interested in a complex narrative, unless, of course, it is his own. After calling for the death of Chavez, he back pedals in a way that recalls Bill Clinton's eroto-linguistic hair-splitting during the Lewinsky scandal (and aren't you feeling a little bit nostalgic for that feel-good era?). The difference is that in the case of Robertson, we have a record of what he actually said because he said it on television in his own words. To quote today's Washington Post:

>>But a video of Monday's telecast shows that Robertson's exact words were: "You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."
He continued: "We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."<<
I guess Pat is attempting to spin the word "it" as being taken "out of context". I guess I don't know too much about the way Southern Baptists use their pronouns but if it's the same way we Hollywood Pagan Liberals use it then "it," in this context, replaces the previous proper noun, and that is "the doctrine of assassination."
Ok, Pat is a total idiot but that's not what's important here. What is important is some consideration of why the right would want this particular messenger out there running wild. Simple: Chavez is sitting on an oil reserve that might mean salvation in these post-Saudi-Oil-peak era. As Saudi Arabia starts down the road of reduced output (10-15 years?) and the trickle-spout that is the Anwar oil refuge is shown to be what it is (trickle-spout), then we need another oil sponge that we can push around or at least play nicely with. That would be Venezuela. Sadly, we don't have a friendly on the ground there. Chavez is too social a democrat. He is too friendly with Castro (who, for some bizarre reason, we continue to have a hard-on for 40 years on. Pfizer and Glaxo should figure out how to bottle whatever is making this foreign policy so turgidly vertical), and he is too beloved of the poor (only in Caracas do anti-government protestors show up with manicures and leave in Jaguars). But, of course, the time is not right for a new demonization. We still have Iraq, we have Iran in our sites, and let's not forget North Korea (but do forget about Bin Ladin. He's not currently on the radar and his presence just complicates things). If Chavez's policies continue into the next several years (provided he is still in power and some locally grown thug doesn't return power to the 1% of the population who actually own land), then we might start considering how to best handle the situation in South America. Right now, Pat's comments are seeds, or trial balloons, of what narrative might be forthcoming.

"(and W, undoutably (sic), can't spell it)."

I'd be careful about condemning others for their spelling, Jackass, er ah, Jackbox.

"Simple: Chavez is sitting on an oil reserve that might mean salvation in these post-Saudi-Oil-peak era."

Our salvation is on our own property ... ever hear of ANWR?

Pat Robertson has a history as a preacher always standing on the side of the status quo. He has always been right in there with people like Jerry Falwell, furthering oppressive causes such as segregation, censorship and other inequities hidden by a veil of purity - not to mention subjecting non-believers to illegal slander, provoked hatred, and violence.

If a fundamentalist Moslem leader is a terrorist for condoning violence in the name of Allah, then so is a fundamentalist Christian leader for condoning violence in the name of God. If Pat Robertson didn't speak in God's name, then he would have been divided from God and speaking with the devil's tongue. There's no in between - as he himself would argue this point. "Either with us or against us."

As Venezuela's Vice-President Jose Vicente Rangel said, "religious fundamentalism is one of the great problems facing humanity in these times".

Evidently some people get pissed off and become troll-like when they feel unable to provide a rational argument.

Oops!

I tried to cancel my last post, which seemed kind of trollish in itself, but it got through.

Comment 20 posted by Jackbox on August 24, 2005 06:12 PM:
We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator.

200 Billion dollars to fight a war. Theres another lie out of his mouth. He ment to say 200 billion into one of his friends pocket, Because the troops are not getting it.
A strong arm Dictator. Hmmmmm I thought that President Chavez was elected by the people of his country and reelected in the recount also. I guess like a Lot of Americans these days (NOT ALL) that they have become so GOD LIKE that they now can call for the execution of an elected President. I guess that like ROME and Germany and a couple others that they feel that everyone one else is benethe them, and if they do not agree with BUSH'S policies then they can call for their execution also. Why don't we just drop the bomb on everyone that doesnt agree with Bush and then in about 100 millions years or so when all the radiation goes away maybe. Maybe man might walk the earth again and start over.

Better that 200 billion spent on promoting American power and sovereignty abroad and protecting our chief allies like Israel than spending it on wasteful domestic social programs. There is nothing more nonsensical than investing money on the underclasses and not getting a return on that investment. We receive a hefty return on our investment in ME politics. Now if we could just take out Iran and Syria, the ME would be ours to run with Israel. That's the way it should be. Our free and democratic way of life is far superior to the way of life of the Muslims. We aren't afraid of having women show their skin, either.
But of course, If you are a Jew hating anti-Israeli, you are against Mr. Bush's war to free the ME from a stupid and repressive medieval culture.

The Pat Robertson Doll complete with pins...on sale now.

Heloise

"Religious fundamentalist issues a fatwa..."

Oh wait... That wasn't from the middle east.

Punishment ? None.
Thrown out of the country ? No.
Secret pat on the back from the Bush Admin ? Priceless.

How sad when Americans aren't clamoring for the demise of a Marxist foreign dictator. Be sure to renew your Daily Worker subscriptions, comrades.

America used to be a great country.

Yeah man, thing's have really gone over to the pinkos...

Wait, no. Incorrect. The social conservative-leaning GOP runs Congress and the White House.

That's right.

And most Americans are more worried about Americans getting killed in Iraq (and the U.S.) then bothering about a Latin American President.

Eric: that's why we have a military, to go fight our wars. Why do you think we invest so many billions in national defense? To let it sit around and collect dust? Don't you think that our ALL VOLUNTEER military personnel knows implicity that they someday would be asked to possibly sacrifice their lives? Our country was built upon this very principle. Do you think in the 19th century people sat around and questioned military service when it was time to go out an kill Indians, Frenchmen, and Spaniards to expand this nation's power? You must have a very naive view of what the military and the warrior mentality is all about. But what should I expect from the modern metrosexual mentality that worries more about feelings than fighting?


Hugo Chavez is interfering with our oil supply which we so desperately need until we can get the tree huggers to lighten up on ANWR.

Why do you think we invest so many billions in national defense? To let it sit around and collect dust?

If that's your position, you should be advocating that we nuke some folks.

Hugo Chavez is interfering with our oil supply...

So should we kill him for "interfering" ?

Do you realize how extreme your positions are (he said politely)?

Wow, Mark, I just realized that you remind me of the military planners from the brilliant film, Spies Like Us.

You're thinking with your dick again.

It got me through high school.

Hilarity.

I am an extremist when it comes to people or countries that interfere with America's strategic military and economic business domestically or abroad. However, I am not the type of extremist that flies planes into skyscrapers because I've been told that 76 virgin women will be waiting for me with legs spread wide open when my soul reaches the afterlife.

>>If the UN does not demand that Mr. Robertson make a public formal apology to President Chavez of Venezuela, then the democratic world is permitted absolute free speech and open dialogue - even on the airwaves. No more libel. No more laws or restrictions to impede free speech that will debunk the liars who need the veil of censorship.<<

What the UN ought to be doing is investigating the rapid decline in basic human rights in Venezuela since the Chavez regime took over. Take a look at the Venezuela pages at Human Rights Watch.

Dave

And what action would your extremism dictate toward those who interfere with the United States' "strategic military and economic business domestically or abroad"?

We spend billions in national defense. We've invested billions in aid to Israel and Egypt. We invested in the development of Gaza and the West Bank and now we are asked to fund the pullout. The Israeli government is leveling the majority of buildings that existed in these settlements! Why? Couldn't they have reached some kind of arrangement with the Palestinians? All that labor. All those materials. Flushed down the toilet for what?

Now just because I am questioning America's financial aid of Israel does not make me anti-Semitic, so don't even play that game with me. I'm asking legitimate questions of my government about the wisdom behind the expenditures that are being made. Imagine the possibilities if we had reduced Middle East aid by 50% since 1948. Where would technology be today? Would we have finally developed energy alternatives? Would we have an efficient mass transit system? We'll never know but one thing we can be certain of is that we must learn from the mistakes we've made.

If we're concerned at all about the world we leave behind for our children and grandchildren we better take our heads out of our collective asses and start asking the questions that must be asked. Both sides of the political aisle should be clamoring for government accountability. I don't understand why it is that we can't come together on this one simple issue. We're supposed to be an intelligent people. Wake up, America.

However, I am not the type of extremist that flies planes into skyscrapers because I've been told that 76 virgin women will be waiting for me with legs spread wide open when my soul reaches the afterlife.

Come on now. Why do people insist on promoting this line of idiotic logic? They didn't plow into the WTC to meet virgins on the other side. The issues that have brought us to this point are not that simplistic and to reduce them to this drivel is an insult to all the American blood that has been shed in response to these attacks.

Silas, consider this ...

"Flushed down the toilet for what?"

I ask myself the same thing when I hear about crackheads and welfare mothers getting more tax payer money to subsidize their decrepitude.

"Now just because I am questioning America's financial aid of Israel does not make me anti-Semitic, so don't even play that game with me."

After what Jews have had to endure 70 years ago, not to mention the last 3000 years, I'd say that any carping from anyone can be rightfully construed as Jew hating. Look, in America, you say boo about blacks and Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton the whole NAACP are calling for national boycotts, and they were enslaved in America for only 250 years.

it's like this, Silas, the world owes it to the Jews to maintain an Israeli state. After all, we looked the other way during WW2 and that has to be rectified. And forget about comparisons to American Indians and African slaves. They don't rate or compare in the level of persecution or duration of struggle. A couple of hundred years vs. 3000 years? You must be joking. Yes, I'll cut to the chase. I am not an egalitarian and I don't place everything on the same moral plane. Certain cultures are superior to others. In my estimation, the Jewish race is among the superior cultures by virtue of what they have achieved in science, medicine, the arts, and business over many hundreds of years. If you have a problem with that you need to really study history very carefully and see who has influenced more human development and as a result, suffered more indignities.

Silas -- I don't think reduction in foreign aid would have really done all that much to improve American technoligcal development (or anything else).

Israel is a vital strategic ally. They're our only rock-solid friend in a troubled region.

Now, I think you could certainly make a good case for jacking R&D into alternative fuel sources now and going forward. That makes all kinds of sense to me.

But the Jews are still not superior to the Scotts. Just keep that in mind, sasenach.

Dave

Let me second Mark the Sane [comment 39] re: Jewish superiority. Pound for pound, the Hebrews have contributed more to humanity than any other tribe ever.

Most significantly to this political discussion though, I would emphasize the general MORAL superiority of Jews, and particularly the state of Israel.

The short version of this: marvel at the restraint of Israel. They have tolerated more absolutely vicious crap than any humans could ever be expected to from schmucks whom they could squash like insects with a minimum of effort.

By this point, Palestinians should all be on their goddam knees thanking the Israelis for not having wiped them out even in just the last couple of years. They'd certainly have been more than justified in absolutely leveling Jenin, for starters.

In my estimation, the Jewish race is among the superior cultures by virtue of what they have achieved in science, medicine, the arts, and business over many hundreds of years. If you have a problem with that you need to really study history very carefully and see who has influenced more human development and as a result, suffered more indignities.

Hmmm. In my estimation there is NO Jewish race. There is the Jewish Faith. That being said, I agree that Jews have achieved more than most throughout the course of history but that does not make them superior. I also agree that the world owed Israel a state of its own. Where we part company is the location of the state and I won't get into that debate here. Now, if you want to adhere to the Old Testament one could easily argue that we all are Jews thanks to Noah. So now who's superior?

Well Silas, that little parlor game about Noah is cute. However, Palestinians don't generally seem to have much trouble figuring out which ones are Jews when they're packing bomb belts.

If the state of Isreal is so superior, why does it have to go to the American tax payer every year and beg for billions of their hard earned cash. And futher more after they get the cash and whatever other good's, eg Superior arm's and technologies, they then sell on the technologies to china.

perhaps it's time for Cindy Sheehan to "take out" Pat Robertson

Jon: part of the rationale to contribute to the protection of Israel is America's (I should really say, "and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's," a latent anti-Semite and anti-Catholic if there ever was one) belated compensation for ignoring the Holocaust when it had full knowledge that it was taking place from 1938 to 1945.

As for Israel doing business with China, have you been to a WalMart lately? You should stop reading ZNet or The Nation. They will rot your brain to a small prune.

Some interesting food for thought on why Pat won't be treated as a terrorist

C Sheehan v. Pat Robertson -- I love it.

Undercard:

R Reiner v. M Malkin

Pat Robertson's been in the White House.
Not lately, I'll conceed that point to the right, but...
Pat Robertson's been in the White House. To meet with the President.

Why America? Why are you doing this to yourself?

well Mark (TSAS), you are right about isreal and the Jews, but ever so wrong about Bruce and Little Steven, so I guess you come out even

"Well Silas, that little parlor game about Noah is cute. However, Palestinians don't generally seem to have much trouble figuring out which ones are Jews when they're packing bomb belts."

Not a parlor game, Mr. Barger. Where are the fundamentalists on all sides? Judaism, Christianity and Islam have a common patriarch in Abraham. According to the Good Book, Abram only came around some 300 years after the flood. So, once again, we all are descended from the one original tribe.

I can't argue the point about Palestinian terrorism but I think it's important to note that the Palestinians have been shabbily treated by everyone including their Arab brethren. Were Palestinians and Jews able to put aside their differences for a moment and compare notes they would find that they have more in common than most people on this planet.

Unlike their Arab brethren, however, the Israelis try and try to play nice with the Palestinians. Making nice, however, has only gotten the Israelis more terrorism in response, not less.

It's not the Jews who are unwilling to try to put aside differences and work together.

re: silas post 43

"In my estimation there is NO Jewish race. There is the Jewish Faith."

only some goyische schmuck would say that.

"I think it's important to note that the Palestinians have been shabbily treated by everyone including their Arab brethren."

Perhaps if they repudiated the PA and didn't harbor terrorists in their homes, they wouldn't be hit with IDF rocketfire.

only some goyische schmuck would say that.

Sorry, my little schmeggegie. My paternal family comes from the Warsaw Ghetto. Far from goyim. My paternal grandmother was a shiksa but grandfather was not. As you know from Jewish tradition, religion follows the maternal line so I'm a goyische schmuck by accident but consider myself mispucheh. Kush meer in tokhes, sweetie.

What a bunch of racist crock! Spare us that the Jews - or anybody else - are "superior" to anybody. Judaism is a culture & a faith, not a race, derived from roots in the cultures of the fertile crescent (particularly the Sumerian) which was primarily populated by the semitic tribes - which still could not be even tenuously construed as "racial". DNA testing will not proclaim anybody a jew, an arab, or an italian.

If the jews - or historically, the israelites - have been "persecuted" in the past, it's because until the christians (also a semitic-derived cultural group) came along, the israelites were busy themselves in attacking & persecuting anybody they came across who had anything they wanted - particularly land - & they then used their religion to justify the genocide. However, most current biblical archeologists & historians - including Israeli jews - now agree that the stories in the O.T. are just that: stories. There was and is no evidence of either enslavement or exodus of the israelites in Egypt, either in Egyptian records (& they were maniacs for recording everything, especially who they conquered) or anywhere else, including Hittite or Assyrian/Babylonian records. No independent confirmation, no archeological confirmation, nada. Zip. Wars against the various kingdoms of the ancient israelis by various outsiders such as the Babylonians can not be considered "persecution", because war is war, and all parties were busy persecuting - or prosecuting - war with everybody. The only true persecution started with the rise to power of the christian movement around the 4th century, and a few centuries later by the rise of Mohammed, who considered he'd been double-crossed by a group of jews in medina & decided all jews were to blame (a trait perhaps learned from the christians?). At that point, yes indeed, jews were & have been horribly persecuted; but not prior, at least, not worse than anybody else; those that oppressed them tended to oppress everybody: they were equal-opportunity oppressors, one could say. As mentioned elsewhere, like their arab/semitic cousins, they have been happily engaged in mutual, mass, systematic intertribal slaughter since before Jericho was founded; a favorite form of semitic recreation.

As for modern Israel, they are no friends of the US or anybody else. They take our money, spy on us, steal our technology & sell it behind our backs to our enemies, in short behave just as badly if not worse than the arabs. They would sell us out to Kim Jong Il in a West Bank second if they could figure out a way to do it. The US only continues to suck up to them to guarantee a jumping-off point for war purposes in the middle east. Otherwise they are not our friends, because they themselves consider that they have no friends, a philosophy the US would perhaps be wise to emulate.

Yikes, Nancy! You're gonna get some people all mishuggah! You'll be branded an anti-Semite. You'll be vilified! Welcome to my world.

If they can't stand the facts (or can't be bothered to read the archeological records), then they should get out of the kitchen, to mix metaphors. Of course, selling the US off to Kim Il doesn't make the Israelis any different from or worse than anyone else; as far as I can determine, just about anyone in the world is willing to do that.

Oh, thenk yew. I guess there's plenty of room on your hot seat, then?

Sorry to burst your bubble, Silas, but you aren't Jewish. The bloodline must flow through the mother. Your grandmother was not Jewish, so that means your mother was not Jewish, and hence, neither are you. If you were actually Jewish, I'd call you a self-hating Jew, just like I would your pals Howard Zinn and Noam Chumpsky.

lech tiezdayen, bubbie.

Gai kakhen affen yam!

I'm not Jewish, just very worldly.

That is all.

hey nancy, I guess you're going to tell me next that the Holocaust didn't happen either, right?

Pat Robertson would hate this whole verkakte discussion.

That is all.

No, Mark, not at all. There is far too much documentation of all of it for sanity. It was, unfortunately, far too real.

nancy post 64--

Then your admonishments toward Jews, questioning their racial status, and criticizing US policy toward Israel paints you in the harshest Jew hating light, I am sorry to say. If you are anti-Israeli, then you are pro-Pally. It's a B/W issue, Nancy, there's no other way to look at it. You sound like you have a real bug up your ass when people praise Jews and Jewish accomplishments

Get out that stupid egalitarian gray area! Both sides are not equally culpable! Jews have been persecuted for 3000 years! How would you like it if YOUR people were blamed for killing the figurehead of the Christian world? How many Jews died because of THAT nonsense?

based on the what Jews have had to endure for centuries, they deserve a free pass forever.

Not at all. No one forces me to choose sides. Not being willing to slaver all over Israeli toes doesn't make me "pro-Pally"; have you ever considered the possibility that one could hold BOTH or ALL groups in contempt? And wrongs done to generations gone by doesn't give ANYONE, black, white, jew, arab, christian (no, I'm not one), muslim, or buddhist, a "free pass forever" or for any other length of time, either. We are all responsible for what WE do. "Let the dead bury the dead".

no one gets a free pass forever because of past wrongs done against them, but they do get a country - and friends fuck each other over all the time, doesn't mean they aren't friends

Friends do not 'fuck each other over all the time'. When that happens, it's called betrayal, and they are no longer friends.

"have you ever considered the possibility that one could hold BOTH or ALL groups in contempt?"

Yes, you could in theory, but it would be morally reprehensible to do so if you really understood the issue.

"We are all responsible for what WE do."

However, the Jewish race is not responsible for the horrors brought upon them for 3000 years. No other race on this planet has suffered the level of torture and persecution as Jews have had to endure, so yes, they do deserve a free pass, whether you like it or not.
They deserve their homeland and if a bunch of Muslim extremists want to destroy that the good ol' USA will be right there helping them, whether you like it or not.

Really, you sound like you've been reading too many Pat Buchanan columns. He's a classic paleo-con Jew hater.

Of course jews deserve a homeland. I never said they didn't. You're reading far more into what I wrote than I put in there.

But no, having suffered discrimination & brutality themselves does NOT give them the right to go do it to others, any more than someone having beaten you up when you were a kid entitles you to use that as an excuse to go shoot someone tomorrow. That's akin to the good jewish joke about the guy who murdered his parents & threw himself on the mercy of the courts 'cause he was an orphan.

"But no, having suffered discrimination & brutality themselves does NOT give them the right to go do it to others,"

Excuse me, Nancy, but let me apprise you of a little fact ... Israelis act in self-defense only. You attack them, they attack you. A eye for an eye. That's the way it should be. That's they way I was taught as well. I can't think of a better way to live. It always keeps things even. No one can ever gain an advantage over you.

I agree with that, totally. Never said I didn't.

Oh, Marky Mark... you need to read my posts better before you shoot off that flap trap. I said:

My paternal grandmother was a shiksa but grandfather was not. As you know from Jewish tradition, religion follows the maternal line so I'm a goyische schmuck by accident

But Israel doesn't even fight eye-for-an-eye. They're not going on vengeance runs. They use FAR more restraint than that. They have been consistently trying to respond with the least, most carefully calculated violence possible. They just want to stop the terrorist attacks. They would do almost anything short of absolutely marching off into the sea as a mass suicide- if it would stop the attacks.

Now if we want to talk about a group that has been horrifically abused (and still is) since the dawn of time, let's talk about what women have suffered & still suffer at the hands of men...!

The imbroglio can be clarified -- no one should plan to march up to a shrine without an invitation and an escort. Without regard to international role and status, the shooting might begin. The false adulation of evangelists has been exposed -- they are supposed to be helping to document a Pennsylvania shrine site, and contain [in jar or bowl] an oracle bead chronicle protected underneath the limestone monument. They are not, as example, supposed to 'sponsor' music lacking sound spectrograph identification.

OK, Marcia, you lost me at imbroglio.

Al: they fought eye for an eye when I lived there in the mid 70s. Things have now changed for the worst since Netanyahu was out. Bibi was my favorite of all time. I didn't shed a tear for Rabin. Peres and Barak were failures. Sharon is a sell-out.

I didn't shed a tear for Rabin.

Mark, this one sentence sums it up for me where you are concerned. Yitzak Rabin was a man of peace who had a clear vision of what the new Middle East should be. Netanyahu, a modern day Juan Peron, is as dangerous as Arafat once was. Because Rabin was gunned down by a fellow Jew, you shed not a tear. What would you have said had Rabin been gunned down by an Arab? Somehow, I think you would have used it to your advantage in your crusade-like quest to besmirch all that is Islam or Arabic.

Rabin was a cowardly appeaser and capitulator. YOU CAN'T MAKE PEACE WITH MUSLIM TERRORISTS! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE! The only way to defeat Muslim terrorism is to kill them all before they get the chance to kill you.

You still did not answer my question. If Rabin had been gunned down by an Arab would you have taken up the cause to punish them for his murder? So far nothing you have said on this board would indicate otherwise. You live in a sphere of hate and retribution, Mark. If all you have written is what you truly believe (and I have my doubts), I see no hope for you at all. You will die a lonely, defeated old man driven by a set of misguided beliefs that did nothing to help you understand the nature of Mankind. Mark, your God has failed you; but what's worse is that you have failed your God.

The scripture teaches that we will know them by their fruits. It is a simple task to compare people who claim to be Christian with the Christian manual and see wether they are truly Christian or not. I only say this because their are many fake, nonbelieving, deceivers out there who are no more Christian than satan himself. We will continue to hear and see people behaving as devils, speaking as devils, living as devils while at the same time professing to be Christian (crusades,inquisitions, colonialism, Christianity, etc.)

2 Corinthians 11:14. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Why am I saying this? People who turn against God and blame Christians are blaming the right people. However, the people being blamed are not Christians. Many of them do not believe the bible they supposedly teach from. The amount of money and followers do not mean a thing. Compare them, their words, their organisations, their beliefs to the scriptures that they claim to represent. Then make a decision.

1 Timothy 6
3. If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
4. He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
5. Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

If these televangelists were Christian, God would not tell us to withdraw from them. Listen to what they teach!

Hebrews 12:14. Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord

How can you follow peace while calling for assasination or praying for people to die?

A Christian would not call for assasinations nor pray for the death of people. In order for a vacancy to come in the supreme court a judge has to die. Pat Robertson prays on tv for God to open up new vancancies in the supreme court. He is essentially praying for the death of people.
Proverbs 24
17. Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth:
18. Lest the Lord see it, and it displease him, and he turn away his wrath from him.

FROM SUCH TURN AWAY! He is not a Christian. No, Christianity is not God's way. The manual commands us to be Holy and nothing else.

1 Peter: 15.But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16. Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

Peace

"If Rabin had been gunned down by an Arab would you have taken up the cause to punish them for his murder?"

Of course.

"You live in a sphere of hate and retribution, Mark."

Actually, I live in a rather nice condo in on the Upper West side with my wife.

Seriously, I an loyal first to my blood. Their enemies are my enemies. It's a shame that you don't share the same loyalty to your blood. But then, I was raised differently that you, evidently. I was taught conservative principles, you weren't.

"You will die a lonely, defeated old man"

No I won't. I have a lovely wife and three lovely and successful children to enjoy until the day I die. How about you?

"driven by a set of misguided beliefs that did nothing to help you understand the nature of Mankind."

I don't need to understand what you deem to be the "nature of Mankind." What I understand is that there is life and death and survival at all cost. There is love and hate in equal measure. There is also good and evil and we must fight to destroy evil. Right now, the evil on this earth is the Muslim jihad who have pledged to kill all Jews and Christians.

"Mark, your God has failed you;"

I don't believe in this supernatural being concept in the Judeo-Christian tradition. I am a cultural Jew only, not a practicing religious one. I am the guide of my own destiny. Are you?

Who's Nancy?

She's smart, but she scares me. She's kinda scary smart.

That is all.

From another post... on the same subject.

"Git some... Pat.

Anyone not willing to kill with their own hands, shouldn't go around asking others to do it for them.

It's called chickenshit."


I'm going to have to agree.... it's one thing to spew out B.S., it's quite another to have the stones to back it up.

Robertson ain't got the stones.

From now on I proclaim him "Lips" Robertson.

and Nancy... you're HOT!!! You ROCK!!!! and we need a picture... cuz you talk like a dude.

Hey WhiskeyRiver! I said that! That's my line!

Nancy... are you Gonzo Marx's alter ego? Or maybe Dave Nalle in drag!

THAT'S IT! OHMYGAWWD!!!! EEEEEUUUUYYYOOUUU!!!!

I hereby retract my previous retraction, and now state with certainty that, until such a time as I may retract this statement, it represents my views concerning Hugo Chavez. I believe that Hugo Chavez should be assassinated This statement in no way reflects any potential future retractions.

They have been down there in Venezula stirring up political strife for a couple of years now in secret. This is another neocon ploy to brainwash people once again in this country against "the evildoers"

Venezula has oil. And these greedy ass Republicans, are doing all they can to stir up political unrest so they can go in and invade the country and take control of it. Political unrest not only there, but here as well. Using a figurehead such as Robertson to stirup the brainwashed hillbillies is just the first step.

It's fuc$ing disgusting. This Pat Robertson is no man of God. He is the devil. The only evildoers I see around here. Are the ones touting I speak the word of God, and then make a buck on it. I aint religious ok. I do however remember a story though when my aunt used to drag me to Sunday school about the money changers in the church.

And that is exactly what this lunatic Robertson is, along with the pope.

These people have no more of a connection with God than a slug in your front yard.

Jackbox

If Bill Mahr questions why US Soldiers are ill-equipped in the theatre of war, then the right-wind congressman will simply label the comedian's comments as treasonous.


The only ones committing treason in this country are The Bush Administration. This "Govt" is so far gone it's pathetic. Look at Govt offices. The DMV, the post office, libraries. Have you seen the equipment in these places? I swear, I went to renew my license the other day. I was looking at this woman's computer. And I said, that computer is old. Like 10 years!

Why even bother making comments that military are not equipped with adequate equipment. When the DMV isn't even supplied with adequate equipment. It's The US GOVT. They're thieving, cheating, lying ass cheapos. They put absolutely no money into education, the arts, healthcare etc.

Almost every so called "civilised" country in this world their Govt pays for University, hospital, funds the arts readily. In the US however, parents practically go into debt trying to give their child a future.

You would think that a Govt would supply their own offices with adequate, UP TO DATE equipment, their military with adequate, UP TO DATE equipment, and that they would want ALL of their citizens to get a decent education to contribute productively to society.

Something's not right. Oh wait...I forgot Bush is in office, EVERYTHING IS RIGHT, but yet so wrong.

Gonzo Marx' alter ego?! You think I'm THAT smart!?!? Ohmigawd, I'm going to have to print this out & put it on the wall. I WISH I was that facile & informed! Thanks for the compliment. As for Nalle ... another compliment, as he's quite smart, altho I seldom agree with him. Oddly, this is the 2nd time I've been accused of "being" him.

Don't know what you all mean by I 'talk like a dude', tho, or why I should scare anybody, since I never threaten harm or reprisals, just generally heap oppobrium on the heads of BushCo. & all politicians.

for the Record..i have NO "alter ego's"

just this name

just me

nuff said?

Excelsior!

Not trying to steal your ID, Gonzo - just floored by the compliment.

no worries Nancy...it's all good

a sad day indeed when folks feel complimented by being compared to the likes of lil ole me...

/swoons

Excelsior!

Mark the sane and sensible: I do not and have not read ZNet or the Nation. And as for your pathetic attempt of trying to class me as a Anti-semite, how crude of you mark. Many jew's were given safe haven in my country (UK) during the second world war, a fact of which I am pround of, and I am sure many of them are to. My concern's are for what is happening now, not what happened 60 years ago. A ultra right wing goverment who have a scant disregard for human life, and as far as I am concered betrayed the very people who have help them, (America). It is a well known fact that Isreal has passed on top secret technology information to china, they have addmitted it, albeit quitely. It is you who is full of ultra right wing Zionist hate mark, not me, like many of your like minded Zionist brother's and sisters you are all tragically deluded. I only wrote the truth mark and as they say, "the truth sometimes hurts".

EUROTRASH. Let me repeat that. EUROTRASH.

After Pat Robertson's public recommendation to assassinate Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez was met with major condemnation, he sent a secret e-mail to his followers:

"At 10 am tomorrow, everybody pray that Chavez spontaneously combusts on the streets of Caracas. They'll never tie it to us!"

Afterward Robertson commented to his assistant, "Crap, I should have said '10 am Eastern Standard Time.' Ah the hell with it, let's split a pizza? I'm buying!"

"I do not and have not read ZNet or the Nation."

You may not, but you're an ultra LEFT winger and an apologist for Pally terrorists who have pledged to kill all Chrsitians and Jews. They routinely go on al-jazeera TV to declare that. Did you miss that, perhaps? These are the very same savages killing your OWN countrymen, for fuck's sake! Do you recall what happened in July? Where is your sense of national pride? You are a Brit first, not a member of any world collective.

You are either with with Israel (have some respect and spell it correctly, jon) or against her. No compromises. This is war and you have to accept that. The peaceniks won't be listened to. You are just pissing in the wind with your protests. It's war until one side is completely destroyed.

Which side of the war are you choosing to join? You can't just sit idly by, jon, you have to choose sides. This is not some academic debate in polite tones over tea and scones. This is real life.

It really admasing how a few words one way or the other makes or breaks a conversation.

So I missppeled a word :)

Going all the way back to comment 31, Mark the Sane and Sensible, I would have to disagree with the notion that our nation is founded on the principle of having an army to go around kicking asses.

When we have to kick ass, we do. (Apparently Vietnam did not have to have its ass kicked.) However, our nation was founded on the principle of not having an army at all. In fact, if you read the Constitution, you might even find that we are not supposed to have a standing army (ie, the Pentagon) except when it is called to be assembled by the Congress. If that principle hadn't been abused for so long, we wouldn't have current abuses of military power.

The absence of a standing army was not only to guarantee our personal liberties, but also to signify that our relations with other nations were not to characterized as hostile. The Constitution authorizes a Navy, to protect commerce. It does not authorize an army to protect oil supply. One is a defensive measure against piracy, the other an offensive measure of imperialism.

Interestingly enough, despite what our founding fathers intended, our nation has almost always had a decent "standing" army throughout our history. Government will do whatever they can get away with.

As far as Pat Robertson is concerned, I think he is an idiot who ought to make an outright apology for what he said.

He should give us all a thorough background of Venezuelan politics, economic policy, and the current status of trade between Venezuela and the United States, particularly concerning oil. He should explain his political/economic reasoning behind suggesting that our elite forces "take him out". Then he should publicly and directly to Chavez and the citizens of Venezuela declare that he both meant what he said, and that he was WRONG. If he can't do those things, he should crawl into a small dark hole (see Saddam Hussein) and stay there.

Everyone else should leave Bush out of this. Bush didn't say it. Both the Pentagon and the State Department FIRMLY denounced Robertson's statements. Quit acting like the White House is behind this, encouraging this, or ignoring this. Bush and the rest of the administration have enough faults to pick on without us having to pretend that he wants people assassinated.

I am curious as to why when the White House says of both Mrs. Sheehan and Mr. Robertson that while they do not agree with what they say, they defend their right to say it, the Left accuses them of throwing Mrs. Sheehan to the wolves and making Mr. Robertson their lap dog.

They treat them both equally, as private citizens with rights.

"However, our nation was founded on the principle of not having an army at all."

Bunny: it most certainly does not and you are lying.

Have you read the Preamble? Where it states "provide for the common defense"?
It's stated again in Section 8 under Congressional powers. Also in Section 8:

"To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"

What do think "To declare war" means? You're a stone cold loon, bunny, just like the rest of these libbie losers here who will say anything to impugn this country and its leaders.

I find it curious that some on the left who criticized the Iraq War on the basis that Saddam and/or Osama should have been assassinated instead look just a little bit hypocritical in criticizing Robertson now! The lefties really do have to make up their mind on where they stand...they just look like mindless partisans to me.

I'm guessing there were at least as many righties you called for assassination. I don't remember any major leaders on the left discussing this pre-war anyway.

Perhaps the Lefties aren't making the claim that they are men of God, Steve, and perhaps they aren't Reverends!

I was outraged & incredulous that just about every single congresscreature on the hill abdicated their responsibilities & simply handed over unilateral power to BushCo. to do as they pleased. Even if they agreed 100% that retaliation was called for (which I think just about everyone did/does), they should have voted instead to back his actions, not just washed their hands of their congressional duties; but that's typical congressmaggots: only take the easy stand when it yields good PR & requires no backbone.

well gee, nancy, if you feel that way about your elected leaders, why don't you run for public office yourself if you think you know better? Oh that's right, you'd rather bitch about the process on the internet, where it does ZERO good.

Eric, Pres. Clinton was real close to signing an order for assassination of Osama back in 1998, but being in the middle of the Lewinsky scandal, he felt too weakened as Pres. to make such a decision apparently. I wish you guys would look more closely at what your politicians do, you seem to have a rather idealized view of your party. (I'm not necessarily agreeing with the idea of assassination by the way).

Just like bitching about non-existent "evidence" that Bruce Springsteen is Jewish (something no one carea about anyway...) on the Internet.

Right Mark?

Osama is and has never been the leader of a sovereign state, Steve, making it a far different perspective from a legal standpoint.

Eric, if the leader is a dictator, how legitimate is his leadership anyway? (Just playing devil's advocate here). Or would you disagree with Robertson's assessment that Chavez is a dictator?

I'm talking about from a legal standpoint. If we start determining which leaders are legit or not, then by rights we have to assassinate a Musharaf in Pakistan.

Preventing broadcast is censorship.
Changing the channel is freedom of choice.

Letting the serpent talk to Eve is freedom of expression.
Letting Eve pick the fruit is freedom of choice.

Contrary to God, dictators exercise suppression and prohibition.

Letting a televangelist incite murder is freedom of expression.
Letting groups organize to boycott a ministry is freedom of choice.

a quick Thought to add to the whole Robertson discussion...i got a few Questions..maybe someone can help with

now, i know Churches are tax exempt..and i know that according to FCC statutes the airwaves belong to the American public, and are leased to broadcasters...

here's the bit...since broadcasting is a commercial venture...does the 700 Club pay taxes and broadcast fees for using the public airwaves?

if not, why not?

a TV station is NOT a "church"...by definition..do they pay proerty tax on the facility?

if not, why not?

Enquiring minds wanna Know...

thanx in advance

Excelsior!

"Just like bitching about non-existent "evidence" that Bruce Springsteen is Jewish (something no one carea about anyway...) on the Internet."

Right, you don't care to the extent that you keep responding to my posts like pathetic little moths to a flame, even after you've told me ad nauseam that you're done with the discussion.

and still Mark fo the SS adds nothign to the Discussion..and merely spews more hateful bile and insults all over the screen..

where the hell are troll and Shark when ya need them?

Excelsior!

"and still Mark fo the SS adds nothign to the Discussion..and merely spews more hateful bile and insults all over the screen.."

Just like you, gonzo. And fuck the Shark.

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.

As you read the below article keep this fact in mind. According to the tax appraiser's office for Pinellas County, Florida the 1996 dollar amount of exempt real estate held by religions in Pinellas county alone was:

$583,581,970.00!!!

That half a billion dollars plus could be added to the tax base and used to help the uninsured that the faith-healers can't heal, or to help clean up the environment, for education, etc., etc., etc. Instead it goes to promote superstition.



SHOULD THE CHURCHES BE TAXED?
by Leland W. Ruble

Should organized religion be taxed? And if not, why not? For most of the population, religion exists in a peculiar, rarefied atmosphere. It is for most people (even though they may have some doubts) the only source of hope they have for continuing their existence after the body has expired. Naturally they expect restitution in heaven, a sort of reward for countless prayers; a moral life; and obedience to God. Obviously, taxation of a faith based on a biblical God, would be a desecration of this image.

Religion therefore, has been able to develop, grow and prosper without the payment of taxes that are required from most other organizations that teach a certain philosophy or concept of existence. The majority do not think of religious mysticism as an ideology that is taxable. They feel, you cannot tax a church whose reverend is a representative of God. A person who has daily conversations and visions pertaining to a sometimes benevolent, sometimes revengeful Lord of all, the Almighty.

Presumably because religion is more concerned with the afterlife, Heaven, Hell, and a government presided over by an assembly of angels, saints, and evangelists, and considers sin as the main cause of discord on this planet, it has been exempted from taxation. It is a privilege that has granted religion an elite status that few other organizations, activities, and the productivity of human labor is immune from. The mystical exploitation of religion has created a hierarchy of sanctimonious pedagogues who prosper in an environment free of obligation to the society from which they profit immensely. There is no such thing as a non-profit religion. If there were non-profit religions, most established religions would not exist.

Why then, is religion exempt from taxation? There are those who assume that it is to prevent government influence into the activities of religion, and to prevent the same from interfering
in the affairs of government. It is also thought that taxation of religion would restrict its growth, thus constricting the freedom of worship and making it difficult for religious activity to flourish. This does not make sense. If a mystical organization cannot prosper or survive because of taxation, it must not have a message or purpose worth sustaining, nor the ability to communicate a concept that appeals to the public. If it requires exemption from taxation as the only way it can exist, then it is a religion based on a superficial concept of Biblical nonsense that eventually the public will ignore.

James Madison, the fourth President of the United States of America and a leading promoter and authority of the U.S. Constitution, had this to say in regard to the exemption of taxation for religious organizations: "Are the U.S. duly awake to the tendency of the precedents they are establishing, in the multiplied incorporations of religious congregations with the faculty of acquiring and holding property real as well as personal...? The people of the U.S. owe their independence and their Liberty to the wisdom of descrying in the minute of 3 pence on tea, the magnitude of the evil comprised in the precedent. Let them exert the same wisdom, in watching against every evil lurking under plausible disguises, and growing up from small beginnings."

Apparently not all future legislators or bureaucrats visualized the tenacity of religion to develop into huge corporations with vast properties, investments, and influence over legislation favorable to its prosperity. The present has proven Madison correct in his assumption. The scheming and manipulation of the frenzied, right wing religious fundamentalists with their army of enthusiasts, has proven that religion untaxed, is more dangerous to Liberty than taxation of the same. Why should an institution founded on fantasy and myth, the incredible and improbable, be exonerated from taxation while existing in a society that supports the infrastructure and services that make it possible for that religion to succeed? My freedom, yours, and every other individual that exists in this society, is threatened by the immense influence of organized religion in its massive appeal to legislate laws favorable to its establishment. We, unlike the religionists, do not as individuals, have the use of untaxed funds or Christianized Coalitions that exist to peddle, distribute and exercise leverage over politicians.

What is Democratic, what is justifiable in allowing the churches the extraordinary freedom to exist independently exempt from taxation??? Especially when the exempted religions pursue as their objective, the influence of legislation favorable to their continued material advancement. The survival of organized revealed religion is dependent on not only the generosity of its members, but also from a government that is sympathetic to the continued domination of mystical authority in the affairs of state and society. Witness George Bush receiving the blessing from his religious minister for the carpet bombing and resulting mass murder of Iraqi civilians during the Desert Storm exercise in ignorance.

The established religions have prospered in an environment that is maintained through the taxation of others for such simple things as street upkeep, courts of law, police and fire protection, or any of the many other services that the public pays for. It is we the people, who are assuring that religious associations can perform their functions, while they are exempted from the same obligation. They have been granted an exclusion, that is based on the erroneous concept, that religion is a non-profit enterprise. Anyone who believes religion is not profitable and exists solely as a distributor of myth and magic, has not looked recently at the vast resources and property that churches have acquired as non-profit organizations.

The religions of this nation do not contribute, in any way, to my freedom, your Liberty, or the future of civilization. Freed of taxation, indebted to the worship of an abstract biblical god, they exist exclusively as a hierarchy whose interest is the exploitation and propaganda of supernatural absurdity!

IS IT NOT TIME THAT WE THE PUBLIC DEMAND THAT THE RELIGIONS OF THIS NATION PAY FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETY??? Is it not the proper time to cease characterizing religious institutions as a privileged ideology that is more important than other philosophies and concepts?

Why should the labor of a person working eight hours a day be taxed, while a preacher who labors in mystical fantasy be excluded from the same? Why should there be a tax for the general public, but not for those engaged in the production (or fabrication) of a religious ideology? Is the enterprise of corporate religion any better or more useful to society than an individual who thinks about existence from a philosophical and rational perspective? I think not. There is no such thing as an aristocracy of thought or complete agreement on any conception. Religion in all its many forms, does not have the exclusive answers to the complexity of existence. Its reliance on mystical incomprehension, the miraculous, the impossible, is based on a fictionalized perspective, rooted in the dreams and desires of primitive man.

Taxation of religion is based on fairness and justice. It is a notification to those who represent corporate religion that they are not a special institution or a favored aristocracy that can benefit from all the liberties of a democracy, but have no obligation to support that democratic society in the form of taxation. Particularly when, as the Christian Coalition is doing, they use the millions of dollars saved from taxes to pump into the campaigns of politicians who agreed to spread their brand of bigotry and superstition.

look up at #116 and eat some more words, hate-boy...

i have shown, over my time here at BC, that i can gladly join in intellectual discourse over various topics...i can and have admitted when i was factually mistaken...and i leanr things at times, which helps expand my Understanding...

on the other hand...i can also don my asbestos longjohns and turn on the napalm as well as anyone

you set the tone...i brought the bar-b-q sauce

heretics like me don't mind some of the proverbial "heat"...but i do enjoy observing you going apoplectic

such a lovely shade of purple

Excelsior!

Contrary to God, dictators exercise suppression and prohibition.

Contrary to God, Christianity has...

...exercised suppression of alternative theologies
...prohibited the preservation of indigenous traditions
...based itself in sadomasochistic worship of cruel and unusual punishment
...supressed the concept of a personal relationship with God
...been the primary cause of discrimination and genocide for 2,000 years
...suppressed and/or rejected the study of science
...done more to promote anti-Semitism than any other religiously intolerant group

With fundamentalist Christianity who needs enemies?

"...moths to the flame..."? Mark of the SS thinks he's a flame, now? No, not that bright...more like a burnt-out match, a pathetic, angry, neocon throw-back to the 50s, whose idea of rabelasian wit & caustic comeback is to resort to obscenities & juvenile name-calling such as "commie puke". Gonzo, why are you, Shark and the others wasting your time even responding to this thing, which cannot carry on a simple civil conversation, let alone a simple civilized idea? As much as I have disagreed with others on this website, I have not felt that they deserve to be shunned; this oddity - a neocon, neo-nazi Jew of all things, with a pathological fear of and hatred for anything not agreeing with it 100% - after having read it's various spewings, I really think there is no alternative but to ignore & shun it, & blog around it. It isn't worth your time or energy, or mine, but that's your call. I have stopped responding to it.

"i have shown, over my time here at BC, that i can gladly join in intellectual discourse over various topics.."

Well bully for you! What have you gained from all this effort? Affirmation of your sick liberal views?

"and i leanr things at times, which helps expand my Understanding..."

And tell me, how can you profit from that "Understanding"?

"based itself in sadomasochistic worship of cruel and unusual punishment"

I'm sure the prosepcts of some S&M may be very interesting to you, Silas.

"...done more to promote anti-Semitism than any other religiously intolerant group"

This is another reason why you're not a real Jew, because you don't know that Islam has always been the primary haven for Jew haters.

I'm sure the prosepcts of some S&M may be very interesting to you, Silas.

Sorry, sweetie, not all fags are into S&M. And if that was your pick up line, forget it, I'm not into dudes with lots of baggage.

This is another reason why you're not a real Jew, because you don't know that Islam has always been the primary haven for Jew haters.

You say being a Jew is part of being a race. Therefore, genetically, I would be half Jew. Being a Jew has to do with faith; nonetheless, your Judaism does not make you the spokessman for the entire faith. There is no papacy in Judaism. So when you speak for my Jewish ancestors you do not speak in their name but your own. Your Pharisaic form of Judaism is tantamount to extremist Islam. You knew that already. I used to view you as an ingnorant hated-filled twerp. Now I see your posts and I smile. You do more to hasten the downfall of neoconservative philosophies than I ever could. And for that I am profoundly grateful -- keep up the good work, my love!

Mark of the SS sez...
*And tell me, how can you profit from that "Understanding"?*

well now..i do tend to consider adding to personal knowledgebase as well as greater comprehension and integration of information to be personally profitable

how about you?

Excelsior!

"well now..i do tend to consider adding to personal knowledgebase as well as greater comprehension and integration of information to be personally profitable"

But how is this possible when you read essentially the same themes discussed here in every blog dealing with politics? By the time you reach 50, there is nothing new under the sun. Everything worth knowing has already been learned. If not, you are in serious trouble because you just weren't paying attention enough.

impossible for any Man to Know all there is to know

you think my readnig is only here and about politics?

silly silly person...

this particular venue helps me understand people, not politics..and as far as that goes, once you have read Lao Tzu, Machiavelli, and Sun Tzu..you have the basics of politics for as long as we remain human beings...only the details change...

now..how do YOU profit from writing as you do, as well as spending your time here?

Excelsior!

"now..how do YOU profit from writing as you do, as well as spending your time here?"

Liberals need to be viciously attacked for their treasonous, trecherous, anti-traditional, and egalitarian ideas. I am not interested in forging common ground. I already understand what YOU PEOPLE are all about. That's why I write what I write, to express my utter contempt for YOU (inclusive) and all that YOU (inclusive) stand for.

ah..i see, so you are interested in nothing but spewing hate speech against any you feel fall into what you perceive as your sterotypical scapegoat/enemy

tell me...were you bottle or breast fed?

and is your brown shirt on a bit tight?

Excelsior!

"so you are interested in nothing but spewing hate speech"

How is it any different from any blogger here that ridicules our President, his policies, authority, authority figures, the military, or America in general?

You fight hate speech with even more hate speech until the enemy is flummoxed to the point where they break down a cry about being treated so poorly, like some have here. Just ask David Mark how he likes being called a self-hating Jew, which he is for reasons that I explained earlier.

i understand, you are one of those that beleive the Ends Justify the Means...

fair enough, i guess, but i do consider that to be ethically bankrupt as an approach to life, and being an Independant politically..it remains one of my biggest problems with neocons...

you go right ahead and enjoy your little bund hate fest, and try not to trip on the irony of exemplifying all that you proclaim to despise so much...

any Goal that is sought after via the use of lies, hate and the other tactics you espouse obviously cannot stand under it's own merits

Rand would be so pleased with your mangling of the Objectivist ethic..."where is John Galt?"...simplicity itself...he was clubbed like a baby seal and prison raped by Mark of the SS here...

do go on, "Big Brother"...thrill more with your "newspeak"...i bet you can get a smile out of Tokyo Rose

Excelsior!

mark: one question a little offtopic.

I remember you professing your atheism. Is this true? If it is I don't understand your absolutist sentiments. I mean I understand them, but I don't understand YOUR adherence specifically. It seems to me that a true atheist would be much better off if he succombed (especially in politics) to a relativistic philo. Death is rather trite and commonplace for an atheist no?

And how does that coincide with your good and evil statements you made in a few other threads?

Mind you i'm only curious because I believe in God, and am in no way associated with the left or muslim cleric apologists. (or the right for that matter)

"i understand, you are one of those that beleive the Ends Justify the Means..."

You know I've read THE PRINCE.

"any Goal that is sought after via the use of lies, hate and the other tactics you espouse obviously cannot stand under it's own merits"

have you considered the same thing of Adam Ash, David Mark, and the other bloggers that unfairly and viciously impugn our President and the war in Iraq?

i consider the same for ANYONE that attempts the ends justify the means baseline postulate

as for criticisms of the current Administration...there are plenty based on strictly factual and philosophical grounds

i am not one to suffer Fools gladly, nor do i eagerly swallow anything merely because it comes from some voice of "authority"

i tend to Question everything...such as an Administration made up entirely of folks from the oil/gas/coal/energy Industries, under whose watch gasoline prices have doubled in the last 4 years or so...

but i Questioned things about Slick Willie too...i remain an equal opportunity Jester...not being a member of either political "gang"

easy enough to see what "colors" you profess to wear, and even on the very few points where i might find some agreement with parts of your espoused Idealogy..i would and will ALWAYS fight against your methodology...cuz i really dislike fascists...

nuff said?

Excelsior!

"nor do i eagerly swallow anything merely because it comes from some voice of "authority ... i tend to Question everything..."

Children are supposed to grow up and get with the program and stop all that rebellious nonsense. This is the major flaw of the baby boom.

"such as an Administration made up entirely of folks from the oil/gas/coal/energy Industries, under whose watch gasoline prices have doubled in the last 4 years or so..."

Then work in the oil/gas/coal industries and get your hands on some of that bounty instead of being jealous or resentful of their business acumen.

After looking over the energy bill I'm firmly convinced that the influence of the energy industry people in the Bush administration is largely positive. The amount dedicated to alternative fuels and hybrid vehicles is truly signfiicant, and the tax breaks for the energy industry are designed to motivate them to build refinery capacity, which is the real bottleneck causing high prices right now. I think painting their influence as solely a negative is grossly unfair.

Dave

"I think painting their influence as solely a negative is grossly unfair."

This is what some people do, Dave, complain about capitalism when they aren't able to dip their bread in all that good gravy. They are spoiled and resentful children not getting their candy.

Mark, it's largely that they just don't think things through to their logical outcomes, and make statements and take positions based on what ideology dictates rather than what reason would suggest if they were to follow it. It's easier to operate without thinking and with all your answers canned in advance for you by Pat Robertson or FreeRepublic or Noam Chomsky or Moveon.org.

If they thought about things they wouldn't be able to stay in the comfortable cocoon of ideological brotherhood, because reason contradicts so much of what they hold dear - and this is just as true for extremists on the right as on the left.

Dave

After 141 submissions here, has anyone been enriched?
Did anyone here learn something new? Were suspicions verified?
What is the essence of Mr. Robertson's purpose? Is he here to offer special advice to humans seeking a spiritual experience, or his he here to corrupt the human experience of spiritual beings?

prediction: within week's time some prominent minister, likely tv personality, will claim that destruction of new oroleans was punishmnwnt for their sins.

pat, you are the the most hateful person, how can you call yourself a Christian.it's obvious you are working for the devil and will soon be in your own
hell as you are not getting any younger.
sherry

After 141 submissions here, has anyone been enriched?

Of course we have.

It's apparant that mark S&S was only interested in a rhetorical battle royale. Either that or it was a great and funny shtick. I believe the latter. I think he was playing trixies with hardcore liberals for his own amusement. I doubt he was any more right (or left) than anyone else here. I don't think he was an atheist and I just think he wanted to expose some hateful people. He didn't crack margaret but still he got everyone riled up. He's probably in between jobs as well, or on a long vacation. No one has that kind of time. (ok shark does) anyways political threads are now boring because Mark is not posting anymore. ...

There's no reason to deploy firearms at any shrine site unless some sort of mass conscription is attempted or desecration demanded using same. Most shrine sites are not also 'hip hop' scenarios, because only one [or more? what the tours are supposed to learn...] has a well-protected, mucousal oracle bead chronicle underneath -- a tiny archeological artifact.

"I doubt he was any more right"

Wrong, nugget. Liberalism/progressivism is a cancer on society and deserves to be thwarted. Politics are war, not a tea party.

fair enough mark. But why do you care so much? You seem to be a smart guy. Why don't you make money, read dostoyevsky, drink a good german beer and let political mudslingers have it out?

"Liberalism/progressivism is a cancer on society and deserves to be thwarted. Politics are war, not a tea party."

I guess I agree. But in the same sense, I don't view the Right and Left to be absolutes. I am brave enough to admit absolutes, yes, but politics? Aldous Huxley said that politics was the most superficial of the studies. Why not duke it out with deep-thinking philosophers/musicians/artists rather than a bunch of hokie journalists???