Not to go all political here (and I’m sure I’ll probably regret this article), but I have to say that there are some things that don’t belong in a church newsletter, let alone said from a pulpit. This church bulletin contains some examples of this particular principle:

I must tell you that Israel was the closest ally to the White Supremacists of South Africa. In fact, South Africa allowed Israel to test its nuclear weapons in the ocean off South Africa. The Israelis were given a blank check: they could test whenever they desired and did not even have to ask permission. Both worked on an ethnic bomb that kills Blacks and Arabs.

[...]

Arnold Toynbee, the world renowned historian, stated that what the Zionist Jews did to the Palestinians is worse than what the Nazis did to the Jews, because, as he stated, Jews should have learned from their tragic experience.

While I am a supporter of Israel (because of their being a democracy under siege, and a consistent political ally in an area where there are few to be had) in general, I think they have handled some of the Palestinian situation poorly in a number of cases.  I do think that a two-state solution is, at the moment (if not forever), completely unworkable, as it would basically create a terrorist state within immediate proximity of its target (as demonstrated on numerous occasions).

However, just as the pulpit isn’t a place to play politics within our own country, it is even less so an appropriate place to dabble in the politics of other countries.  (And why on earth would you attend a place like this – for 20 years, no less – in the first place, with all of the tinfoil-hattery coming from the pulpit?  Bizarre…

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 26th, 2008 at 5:26 pm and is filed under Church and Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

131 Comments(+Add)

1   Tim Reed, Owosso MI    http://churchvoices.com
March 26th, 2008 at 5:33 pm

Woah. Inappropriate is the mildest word I could come up with for that.

Even if it were reasonable criticisms of Israel (which obviously exist, and I admit even though I see Israel positively, for the reasons Chris L stated, and NOT for any sort of explicitly Biblical reasons) it doesn’t belong in the newsletter, pulpit or other official church communications.

Forget keeping religion out of politics for a second, lets try to keep politics out of religion.

2   Tim Reed, Owosso MI    http://churchvoices.com
March 26th, 2008 at 5:35 pm

Also, what’s with the advertisement for the Peeble’s Principle? That seems really strange in a church newsletter.

3   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

inappropriate but no worse than the political meddling of the hard-right Christian zionists like Hagee. actually, not as bad, since there’s no evidence of Trinity UCC setting up secretive organizations that have undue influence on politicians and their foreign policy.

also.

(And why on earth would you attend a place like this – for 20 years, no less – in the first place, with all of the tinfoil-hattery coming from the pulpit? Bizarre…

so tired of this, coming from people who haven’t taken the time to listen to full sermons from across the 30 year tenure of Rev. Wright, who haven’t taken the time to look at the FRUIT BORNE by the church in its community and elsewhere, but instead rely on three or four clips played ad infinitum on the pitiful 24-hour teevee news.

complain all you want, but be informed when you complain.

4   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 5:48 pm

okay, i change my mind after reading the full bulletin.

not inappropriate at all.

contextual, written to a church member, obviously the opinions of someone else, and both positive and negative about Israel.

some people consider it a problem that Israel has an enormous undeclared nuclear arsenal. some people might even consider that a “moral” issue. some people recognize the genocide Israel has been inflicting on the Palestinian people for years. some people recognize that an independent Palestine does not necessarily equal a “terrorist” state.

some people recognize that wholehearted support of Israel is immoral.

5   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 5:48 pm

Ah yes, politics, what a wonderful tool of divisiveness. Obama believes a social gospel as does his church, so everything that happens there is not Biblically redemptive. If we begin a journey of investigative journalism into Rev. Wright’s ministry we will have a giant reservoir of material that will redundantly reinforce what we already know.

The rotten fruit of politics.

6   Tim Reed, Owosso MI    http://churchvoices.com
March 26th, 2008 at 5:51 pm

Evan,
Do you think its appropriate that a church foots the bill for political activism using tax-free offerings?

7   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 5:55 pm

there’s a difference between endorsing candidates and partaking in social justice issues.

yes, there’s an overlap, but fighting for social justice is not “political activism” per se.

8   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 5:58 pm

and if you read the last 10 pages (or so) in the bulletin, you’ll see just how “hateful” this church really is. ministries for absolutely everything, ways to get involved and put actions to one’s beliefs…and none of it has much to do with “political activism” of any kind.

just following Jesus’s message. that’s all.

9   Tim Reed, Owosso MI    http://churchvoices.com
March 26th, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Evan,
While Chris L did make particularly broad assertions about personal reactions to that newsletter, I am not, though I would hope it would at least cause concern among the congregation.

But, making statements about Israel like that is not in any way social justice. Its far closer to paranoia than social justice. Beyond that, following Jesus’ message has very little, some would argue nothing, to do with using the force of the government to compel Biblical obedience.

I see no difference between using the gov’t to force non-Christians to pray, than in forcing non-Christians to feed the poor.

10   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

but those are not the words of the church.

it’s a letter, written by an Arab-American activist, to a church member, Oprah Winfrey.

and i don’t see anything wrong with allowing American Christians to hear a perspective that our Israel-loving media and government doesn’t want them to hear.

what i was talking about with social justice is the other 38 pages of the bulletin, and they have nothing to do with politics. they do, however, have a ministry for absolutely everything imaginable, and they have an undeniable commitment to the people of their community.

so, printing a letter in the church bulletin doesn’t seem to me like using the government to force anything.

i see that effect, actually, among right-wing churches/”ministries” like Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, etc., who lobby the government intensely to put their concerns above the concerns of the majority of the nation’s citizens.

11   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

The church should have no position on nations, and even though some of us believe the Jewish people will have a part in God’s end time this does not mean that we should support Israel politically. We should view the Jewish people the same way we view all lost people, with love and prayer.

When will we understand that all politics is counter spiritual and always corrupts church teachings? Politics views things on earth from the perspective of the earth, whereas the Spirit views things on earth from a divine perspective.

12   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 6:13 pm

tim,

it is a social justice issue. we spend billions keeping israel safe. our nation’s closeness to israel is a part of the terrorist problem we face.

when our political leaders take a pro-israel stand that endangers our country and the world then it rises to a social justice issue.

we tell iran they can’t have nuclear weapons and we are silent our the weapons israel has.

we, as a nation, are fully vested in israel and we will defend our interest at all costs. the next world war will be over oil and it will fought in the middle east (IMO)

so………..99% of what i read and hear comes from the pro-zion, israel is god’s chosen people crowd. it is refreshing to hear and read the opposite view.

now i would not have printed it a bulletin. the pulpit would be a far better place to say it :)

13   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

it is a social justice issue. we spend billions keeping israel safe. our nation’s closeness to israel is a part of the terrorist problem we face.

yeah, and it helps to create the anti-American sentiment, and thus, the terrorism employed by certain Palestinians.

we tell iran they can’t have nuclear weapons and we are silent our the weapons israel has.

and nuclear non-proliferation is a moral issue, and since Israel’s nuclear arsenal is a gazillion times larger than anything Iran could ever scrape together from the black market…

obviously the goal should be complete nuclear disarmament, but, you know, baby steps. at least people are talking about it again.

the pulpit would be a far better place to say it

haha. yeah. invite the writer of the letter to speak at a special congregational event.

call it an “interfaith” event.

14   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Politics blind everyone and invite a kaleidoscope of different perspectives based upon the ever changing eddies of nationalistic fervor and personal prejudices.

15   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 6:48 pm

rick,

true. but politics have a moral component and that is what we must speak to.

16   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 6:57 pm

Whose moral perspective? Is the Jewish orphan’s (due to a suicide bomber) moral perspective equal to the Palestinian orphan’s (due to an Israeli incursion) moral perspective? Earthly morality is all subjective and comes with an entourage of upbringing, environment, intellect, parental guidance, national influence, religious prejudice, and many other nuanced perspectives that constitute an international melee.

We as Christians should not be poisoned by the political roundtable of seeing things through subjective eyes.

17   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 7:18 pm

Is the Jewish orphan’s (due to a suicide bomber) moral perspective equal to the Palestinian orphan’s (due to an Israeli incursion) moral perspective?

yeah, and they’re the ones caught in the crossfire between their governments.

that’s why we have a moral duty to see both sides and work for social justice for ALL people.

We as Christians should not be poisoned by the political roundtable of seeing things through subjective eyes.

i wouldn’t exactly call the biblical perspective “objective.”

and to say that as Christians people shouldn’t engage in issues of social justice is to attempt to absolve oneself of responsibility for the ills of the world.

so many of the problems of the world, now and historically, stem from the idea that because i think my god says this or that, then i am absolved of responsbility for the ill i inflict on others. nations, individual religions, etc.

it’s time for human beings to get over all that garbage and realize that, until the day comes that one god or another gets fed up with this place and blows it to bits, we have a responsibility to try to make it better and counteract the Israelis who feel they can inflict whatever genocide on Palestinians because of their religion, the Muslims who feel they have a right to the land given them by their god, and can inflict whatever pain to keep it, the Christian American imperialists who believe that Israel is a special part of their own god’s plans, so it’s okay to treat an entire region of the world like filth…

the time to grow up is long past.

18   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 7:31 pm

uh rick,

i didn’t suggest using a worldly morality. every political issue has a moral component.

ie. since i am a pacifist and i am so because of a biblical conviction, war, whether started by israel or the palestinians is immoral. it is all about morality.

the u.s. is the largest arms dealer in the world. it is immoral for us to do so.

while there are certain parts of my political view that are subjective (i.e what’s in it for me) much of my view is driven by my moral views. how i view social justice drives my politics. i oppose free market capitalism (as currently practiced). this is not a subjective issue for me. my “political” view flows from my moral view.

nothing is pure. we are all whores to some degree or another.

19   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 7:33 pm

nothing is pure. we are all whores to some degree or another.

yup.

20   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
March 26th, 2008 at 8:10 pm

Chris L. ,

For the first time in over a year I can say that we (this site) are skating very close to the line of the ODM’s.

Particularly this:

(And why on earth would you attend a place like this – for 20 years, no less – in the first place, with all of the tinfoil-hattery coming from the pulpit?

I don’t feel the need to regurgitate (sp) Evans statements so let me just say I confer with him.

21   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
March 26th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

that should be concur not confer.

22   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Chris – I hope you can see that the substance of your comment is substantiated because the premise of this post revolves around politics and not Biblical issues? That is what is wrong with the post – politics. It doesn’t matter if its Pat Robertson, Hagee, Warren, or anyone else, politics is a straying from Christ.

23   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

politics is the way of this world God made, Rick.

it’s just a system.

it’s not a detractor or supporter of Christ, inherently.

it is what it is, and it’s one of the tools we must use in order to be decent citizens of the world.

24   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 8:24 pm

The whole world lies in the Wicked One.

God, circa 57 A.D.

25   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 8:27 pm

yeah, well, i believe the kingdom of God is already here, and we’re supposed to do things for Christ by doing for the “least of these,” which means participating in social justice by whatever means possible.

26   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 8:32 pm

time to quote another song…

and it’s my theme song, baby.

“Devils and Gods” (Tori Amos)

Devils and Gods now that’s an idea
But if we believe that it’s They who decide
That’s the ultimate detractor of crimes
’cause Devils and Gods
They are You and I
Devils and Gods
They are You and I
Devils and Gods
Safe and Inside

i don’t think she’s saying we “are” literally gods (anticipating that response from a million miles away), but she’s saying, like i said above, that we have got to get away from this whole idea of “My god supports my violence/hatred/inaction,” and we have to realize that our actions have consequences, and we can’t blame somebody else’s religion, we can’t sidle up to our god to excuse our apathy, we can’t cast it all aside as an earthly reflection of some kind of “spiritual warfare.”

excuses. all of it.

27   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 8:41 pm

Evan: politics is the way of this world God made, Rick.

When Jesus said that he was not ‘of this world’ (kosmos), he was using a word that referred to the value systems (including politics), in which cash, political power and strength ruled. So – politics is NOT they way God intends the world to be saved. Rather, worldly power is within the realm of Satan, as “prince of the air” – his temptation of Jesus on the apex of the Temple was not an empty promise.

Rick: That is what is wrong with the post – politics. It doesn’t matter if its Pat Robertson, Hagee, Warren, or anyone else, politics is a straying from Christ.

However, we are to be IN the world, but not OF it. This is why I disagree with you, Rick, on complete abstention from the political process. That is the way of the Essenes, not the way of Christ.

The purpose of government (not politics) is laid out in scripture – to maintain a system of justice and to protect its people. To that end, we are given a voice in the process of governing the country, and we do have a level of duty to participate.

Chris: For the first time in over a year I can say that we (this site) are skating very close to the line of the ODM’s.

Please note that I said nothing of the “true” Christianity or salvation of any of the individuals involved in this particular issue. Rather, because the wielding of governmental power is an exercise in judgment, I seriously question the judgment of someone who wants to head the government but supports, attends and justifies the level of tinfoil-hattery coming from Wright (who I have listened to, beyond sound-bites).

Can you be a Christian and believe in wacky theories? Certainly, whether it is “the US created AIDS to kill off the blacks” or “Left Behind resembles the eschatology taught by Jesus”, wearing a tinfoil hat does not cancel grace – but it should be considered when electing a leader…

28   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 8:44 pm

i believe the kingdom of God is already here, and we’re supposed to do things for Christ by doing for the “least of these,” which means participating in social justice by whatever means possible.

I, too, believe that the kingdom of God is at hand (present now), and that we are to serve “the least of these”, though not “by whatever means possible”. The greatest commandment is “love God”, and the second greatest is “love your neighbor”. If by whatever means possible violates the first commandment, then it is not of the kingdom…

29   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 8:46 pm

Wow, Chris, you just linked me to “the US created AIDS to kill off blacks”. I am wearing my tin foil sombrero!

Pre-wrath, pre-trib, that’s my story and I’m stickin to it!! I am praying you won’t be “left behind” Chris. Only tin foil hats are going!!

30   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

rick,

define politics

my views on war, economic issues, social justice do not require a political position. they do require of me a moral position.

here is what i find. conservative christians have a hard time believing that liberals believe what they do for moral reasons. as soon as we challenge the latest bushism or conservative, god is on my side, position we are accused of playing politics.

as a result………true discussion is severely limited.

31   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 8:52 pm

I seriously question the judgment of someone who wants to head the government but supports, attends and justifies the level of tinfoil-hattery coming from Wright (who I have listened to, beyond sound-bites).

actually, really, it’s obvious that you’re still in sound-bite land.

yes, the AIDS remark was a bit crazy. okay fine.

his remarks on the government giving drugs to black people could have been worded better, but he’s actually onto something there, since the US does, in fact, covertly support drug trafficking, and does, in fact, penalize blacks much more harshly for non-violent drug crimes.

his remarks on the chickens coming home to roost re: 9/11 were completely factually accurate, though many Americans don’t like to HEAR the truth.

what else, what else, what else…

oh, and again, his church is known as one of the most welcoming places in Chicago, and people who live an hour out into the suburbs still attend church there regularly because of the passion and warmth of the church he built.

but it should be considered when electing a leader…

yes, but Jeremiah Wright isn’t running for president. Barack Obama is. and the fruits of Obama’s beliefs? he walks his talk.

but seriously, please, let’s stay in our myopic shell do everything the media tells us to. the Today Show this morning opened with Hillary Clinton’s remarks about Obama’s pastor, and they stayed on it for five minutes.

relegated to a blip in the “news” section was the news from Iraq, with nary a mention of the fact that John McCain’s surge is currently falling apart.

yeah. let’s stick with what somebody’s pastor said one time that we don’t like.

as my military brother said to my mother the other day, “American servicemembers have died for your right to be as ignorant as you please.”

32   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 8:55 pm

chris,

the problem is with you using the tin-foil analogy.

wright says we brought 9-11 on ourselves. do we not bear “some” responsibility? are we guiltless? have we not , with impunity, shoved western culture down the throat of the world and basically look the world in the eye and give them the middle finger. our history is one or war and nation building. we have much to be responsible for.

it is quite funny at times watching white people debate what black people say. (I speak to myself) we have not walked in their shoes. we do not have to deal with the generational issues that are embedded in the black community. i don’t think we have a clue about the deep seated anger that courses through the black community.

so, wright is wrong on many things. but we do need to listen. and respond appropriately.

33   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 8:58 pm

we do not have to deal with the generational issues that are embedded in the black community. i don’t think we have a clue about the deep seated anger that courses through the black community.

we also don’t tend to have a clue what black churches are like.

i have the same response as i do when people say ignorant things about Muslims – “Get a Muslim friend! no, not an Arab who’s converted to Christianity, a REAL MUSLIM!”

and now:

“Get a black friend! Who goes to a black church and is not scared to give it to you straight!”

or even:

go to a black church once in a while. most of them are more welcoming to white visitors than you’d ever believe.

34   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 9:00 pm

Politics – a view of humankind through an earthly vantage point which is overtly and subliminally tethered to experience, unbringing, environment, birthplace, parents, peers, and many other nationalistic issues. It assumes sides and drives divisions and ultimately removes any eternal and/or divine perspective.

In short, it is a dirty, compromised, and fleshly business that relies wholly on money, manipulation, and the assumption that most people can be exploited for purposes of power by sheer communicative strategies. That strategy continues to prove its worth.

35   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:13 pm

oh, i agree that if you’re overly nationalistic about politics, at least in the arena of foreign affairs, then you’re playing a losing game.

but i’m not in the least bit nationalistic. i consider myself a citizen of the world, yet my involvement in politics is just another manifestation of the idea of “think globally, act locally.”

ultimately removes any eternal and/or divine perspective.

as it should be.

but i would suggest that to be completely uninvolved and uninterested in exercising your right to political involvement by virtue of it being “fleshly” is a convenient way to absolve oneself of any responsibility for the matters of this world…

but what’s funny is that a non-vote is actually a vote.

thousands have died in this illegal war this administration is waging in Iraq. those who voted in 2004 to re-elect Bush (and those who refrained from voting for whatever reason) are complicit in the continuation of this disastrous war with no end in sight. thousands are dying in the Darfur genocide we continue to ignore, and in fact abet in many ways. that’s also on Bush’s back, and by extension, the backs of those who voted for him, or refrained from participating for whatever reason.

(it goes the other way, by the way…it just happens that the worst president of all time is a Republican.)

36   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

“(it goes the other way, by the way…it just happens that the worst president of all time is a Republican.) ”

I’m declaring it a 43 way tie!

37   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

(it goes the other way, by the way…it just happens that the worst president of all time is a Republican.)

Sorry, but I’m old enough to remember the late 70’s, and Carter wasn’t a Republican…

38   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 9:26 pm

evan,

my three oldest sons took a “let’s do this before we are married” trip to alaska. they looked for a church to attend on sunday and the church they picked happened to be a black baptist church. they were the only white folks there. it was a great experience. lively. long service. lots of friendly, loving, hugging people.

i personally love black preaching. that’s what made many of the civil rights leaders so powerful. they were powerful preachers. sm lockridge is my all time favorite.

years ago we had a black foster child. she was the only black in our county. the looks. the whispers. we planned to rent a place from a local school teacher. days before we were going to move i got a call saying they weren’t going to rent to us. they lied as to the reason. i heard through the grapevine that “they weren’t going to have any niggers living in their house.” fine upstanding christians these folks were.

i have never been refused a rental because i am white.

39   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:27 pm

yeah, and Carter wasn’t quite as terrible as people misremember him.

just like Reagan wasn’t as amazing as Republicans misremember him.

(nor was he as horrible as Democrats misremember him.)

Clinton wasn’t as amazing as Democrats misremember him.

he likewise, wasn’t as horrible as Republicans misremember him.

but the moron-in-chief is here RIGHT NOW, so we don’t have to worry about misremembering.

40   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 9:33 pm

i am old enough to remember ike :) ok….. I was 3

carter……….great guy, he has done more good as a past president than he did while in the whitehouse.

personally, i think george bush will go down in history as one of the most damaging presidents our country has ever had. his unwillingness to bend or compromise has plunged this country into an economic mess. he has eroded our freedoms. and then there is the war. the _____ war. of course congress and the supreme court have been complicit with him in all of this.

it remains to be seen whether or not we recover. it may be that the best days of this republic are behind it. we need political leaders who are willing to radically change the course this country is on. i mean radically. window dressing will not do.

41   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

Evan,

We’ll go and die for you so you can spout rhetoric like that everyday if you like. So that the terrorists don’t come here. We’d rather be the shield and take the attacks there, rather than here, any day of the week. At least that’s what I signed up for, and everyone else I fight with.

No problem friend. Really.

Just be careful who you say things around, we have opinions too. We have a say too. Since we’re doing it.

Joe

42   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 9:37 pm

I’m going with Joe on this one –

As far as presidents go, I think Bush will end up being judged by history somewhere in the middle of the pack, while Carter will hang below Buchanan at the bottom of the pile…

43   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:42 pm

personally, i think george bush will go down in history as one of the most damaging presidents our country has ever had. his unwillingness to bend or compromise has plunged this country into an economic mess. he has eroded our freedoms. and then there is the war. the _____ war. of course congress and the supreme court have been complicit with him in all of this.

George thinks he’s king. it’s part of the problem with having a C-student as president…if he took civics at all, he got a C. one of the scariest things he’s done is his expansion of the power of the executive branch (and likewise the weakening of the balance of powers) with his unprecedented use of signing statements. where the man got the idea that he has the ____ right to disregard laws passed by Congress at will is beyond me. oh, and this whole “pre-emptive” war thing…isn’t that, like, anathema to all free nations? (that’s a rhetorical question. yes. pre-emptive war is anathema to all free nations.)

it may be that the best days of this republic are behind it.

maybe. what’s definite is that the days of the US being the sole superpower are long gone, and the days of the US being the strongest of the superpowers are numbered as well. the fact that we spend more militarily than anyone else in the world is not a mark of our strength, but a mark of cowardice. the EU is reaching superpower status without a common army, because it doesn’t need one.

the question is whether our next president will continue to use the old worn-out method of “stomp around and shake your big phallus” in regards to the rest of the world. if we continue on that path, our days are numbered.

44   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:43 pm

Just be careful who you say things around, we have opinions too. We have a say too. Since we’re doing it.

did you miss that we’re a military family too?

or did you just skim the post and do the old reactionary thing?

45   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 9:44 pm

joe,

so it is rhetoric if you oppose the war and the reasons for going to war but because you joined the military your views are to be accepted and respected?

this is the _______i am very tired of hearing in church after church after church.

if we never went to iraq……….are you so sure that we would be fighting the terrorists here? how can we know that?

what do we say to the hundreds of thousands of iraqi’s that have been maimed and killed. better we blow the ________ out of your country than our own? better your women and children than ours?

bring the war here and i guarantee you the debate changes immediately. perhaps we won’t be so quick to shed blood elsewhere.

i also say to you:

just be careful who you say things around, we have opinions too. We have a say too. Since we’re doing it.

46   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:47 pm

if we never went to iraq……….are you so sure that we would be fighting the terrorists here? how can we know that?

yeah, like the Shi’a and Sunnis are about to come fight their civil war in Kentucky.

47   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:49 pm

if we never went to iraq……….are you so sure that we would be fighting the terrorists here? how can we know that?

what do we say to the hundreds of thousands of iraqi’s that have been maimed and killed. better we blow the ________ out of your country than our own? better your women and children than ours?

especially since, according to the military report released last week, there were NO links between Hussein and al-Qaeda, and the reports of Hussein putting out a hit on BushDaddy are also unproven.

(but we already knew that…)

and since there were NO WMD…which we also knew before the war. our own weapons inspectors questioned the cherry-picked intelligence that Bush/Cheney/Blair used as an excuse to start a war.

48   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 9:54 pm

Anyone who thought that the Shiites, Sunnis, and Kerds would cooperate under a democratic government did not have the capacity to be in leadership. I’ll let you fill out that lineup.

49   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

we planned to rent a place from a local school teacher. days before we were going to move i got a call saying they weren’t going to rent to us. they lied as to the reason. i heard through the grapevine that “they weren’t going to have any niggers living in their house.”

that’s disgusting.

and it’s still happening…much of the predatory lending in the current “banking crisis” (created by the banks), where they would outright lie about the terms/conditions of the subprime loans they offered, was directed at blacks.

even now, whitey gets all upset when his block gets “too diverse” because he gets worried about his property values.

thankfully i live in a neighborhood that doesn’t care about things like that (and we have some of the highest property values in the county…haha…), but part of that may correlate to the fact that, whoever gets the Democratic nomination, the Democratic signs will outnumber the “Four More Years!” signs, i mean McCain signs by 3 to 1.

50   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 9:57 pm

Anyone who thought that the Shiites, Sunnis, and Kerds would cooperate under a democratic government did not have the capacity to be in leadership. I’ll let you fill out that lineup.

i need a clue, Rick. was it the same morons who said we would be “greeted as liberators”?

yep, that’s why 75% of them want the US out of their country yesterday.

51   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 10:04 pm

When you are replacing a pillar from under a four pillar edifice you must plan to hold up that corner until you can get the new pillar in place. So when you remove a dictator you must have a plan to uphold the country until you can find a viable government.

Many things must be included in your plan, sophisticated things like culture, thousands of years of religious hatred, western distrust, terrorist advances in the midst of uncertainty, and a realization that removing a dictator might just give power to other regional dictators due to the vacuum you have created.

Going in will be infinitely easier then getting out. In the line from Platoon, “It’s a beautiful war”. And just so you know I respect immensely people like Joe C..

52   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 10:08 pm

yep, and the ill-advised “surge,” which is starting to fall apart as we speak, fragile as it was, served only to mire us further into their civil war (which we created).

53   Adam    
March 26th, 2008 at 10:13 pm

We’ll go and die for you so you can spout rhetoric like that everyday if you like. So that the terrorists don’t come here. We’d rather be the shield and take the attacks there, rather than here, any day of the week. At least that’s what I signed up for, and everyone else I fight with.

No problem friend. Really.

Just be careful who you say things around, we have opinions too. We have a say too. Since we’re doing it.

active-duty right here. so active duty that this is being typed from iraqi waters. and yes, i’d be willing to die for the country and the freedoms she offers, but if at all possible, i’d prefer to remain not dead when the issue at hand is “is our leader man enough to admit a mistake or does he even care?”

and i, as well, am in good company with my brothers and sisters in arms.

54   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 10:14 pm

Wow – who thought that this thread would become the mouthpiece for the DailyKos…

55   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 10:24 pm

chris,

better than fox news :)

if kosites aren’t welcome just holler………and i’ll go away.

we are at a crucial point in this country over the war. what i hope joe c and adam realize is that my objections to the war is in hopes that they will be spared death or injury. bring them home. all home. i don’t wan to see one more soldier die over a political game that is being played in washington.

iraq is this generations vietnam. i hope we realize that before the blood flows as deep as it did then.

56   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 10:32 pm

Evan are you in the military? Brutus? There’s a difference between going there, serving in the Military, and just saying you come from military families. Perhaps your family members can explain that to you. That’s what I was going for.

And no, I don’t do the “reactionary” thing.

It seems you’ve been a bit “reactionary” to me, this whole thread. Maybe that’s just my opinion. You seem pretty heated about this topic. Allow me to get heated too then.

Brutus,

It is rhetoric to write what Evan wrote about the president, and the war, in those disrespectful and half-truth biased terms. Disagreeing with the war is a totally different thing. Rherotic is defined as: “the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.” How is what he has said not rhetoric?

Bring the war here and we’ll all cry again “WHY DIDN”T WE PREVENT THIS”? Just like we always do, and always have done. See in front of your nose and computer chair, man. The war has been here, it has hit us at home more than on 9/11, and abroad at our bases (which is HOME to some of us) more than on 9/11. The war is here, and we’re barely keeping those who want to kill you and yours out as it is. Pull us out? Are you kidding? I’m sorry that I forget you get your strategy and doctrine from television and news columns, you can’t fool me, what information are you privy to, friend? Maybe someone should start listening to the troops who are there, and here. It’s not even that we like war anymore than the next, or like that we’re gone 6-18 months at a time from our families. But I’d rather take a mortar, bomb, attack there, then in my backyard. Besides, just because there are civillian casualties, does that mean wars shouldn’t be fought? What about WW2, was that a necessary war, once it began (Or was that one “legal”, but not this one?) Do you think the United States Armed Forces prides itself on civillian desruction and death? You seem to imply that’s something we don’t care about. You have no idea.

Let me restate that, you have no idea.

Glad some of you come from military families. But rhetoric and disrespect is rhetoric and disrespect whatever way you cut it.

“if we never went to iraq……….are you so sure that we would be fighting the terrorists here? how can we know that?”

And this is a rhetorical question, for sure.

I am sure.

Like I said, I’m happy to do what I do.

V/R

Joe

57   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 10:35 pm

Adam, you’re the first other AD person I’ve seen on this site posting. Good to meet you. I go back in Janurary. When do you come home?

Joe

58   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 10:44 pm

iraq is this generations vietnam.

You cheapen the human cost of both conflicts with such stupid comparisons. Foreign policy is more complicated than most of the armchair surrender-monkeys try to make it out to be. Sorry, dude.

FYI – here’s McCain’s comments on war today:

“When I was five years old, a car pulled up in front of our house in New London, Connecticut, and a Navy officer rolled down the window, and shouted at my father that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor. My father immediately left for the submarine base where he was stationed. I rarely saw him again for four years. My grandfather, who commanded the fast carrier task force under Admiral Halsey, came home from the war exhausted from the burdens he had borne, and died the next day. In Vietnam, where I formed the closest friendships of my life, some of those friends never came home to the country they loved so well. I detest war. It might not be the worst thing to befall human beings, but it is wretched beyond all description. When nations seek to resolve their differences by force of arms, a million tragedies ensue. The lives of a nation’s finest patriots are sacrificed. Innocent people suffer and die. Commerce is disrupted; economies are damaged; strategic interests shielded by years of patient statecraft are endangered as the exigencies of war and diplomacy conflict. Not the valor with which it is fought nor the nobility of the cause it serves, can glorify war. Whatever gains are secured, it is loss the veteran remembers most keenly. Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes the merciless reality of war. However heady the appeal of a call to arms, however just the cause, we should still shed a tear for all that is lost when war claims its wages from us.”

War is an awful thing, certainly. We can armchair-quarterback Iraq until the cows come home, but declaring defeat and returning tomorrow isn’t the right way to go about “solving” the situation…

59   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 10:54 pm

McCain said it right there. Who really likes war? Is it not one of the most terrible things in existence?

But even the Angels of Heaven war. Sometimes, battles must be fought. Things have to change, and people fight. People always fight. And once a fight starts, it’s kill or be killed, it’s kill the suicide bomber before he blows himself up and kills 40 more people. It’s about finding his groups base of ops, and take it out, to stop it from happening again. It’s about destroying a terrorist network planning to fly planes in to our cities, to kill our civillians. Notice the difference between how they fight, and how we fight. DAMNIT, notice the difference. Blood spilled. People dead. No one is happy. And it’s REALLY hard to understand that unless your entire daily existence revolves around killing people and breaking their ****.

Jesus must weep that humans have made the necessity for jobs like ours. I don’t know how God can stand me.

I’m glad everyones having this discussion though. It makes me think, hey, Adam, myself, and the millions of other troops are doing our jobs right, if people are speaking freely still.

Joe

60   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 10:57 pm

what i hope joe c and adam realize is that my objections to the war is in hopes that they will be spared death or injury

oh, Adam gets it.

61   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 10:58 pm

Evan are you in the military? Brutus? There’s a difference between going there, serving in the Military, and just saying you come from military families. Perhaps your family members can explain that to you. That’s what I was going for.

dude, my brother just posted in reply to you. his name is Adam.

62   Adam    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:05 pm

brutus – right there with ya.

and joe – coming home in june, but i might be leaving for my third deployment later this year (a ground tour). i think you put it well, that civilians can never fully grasp the military standpoint unless they’ve been in those shoes. however, i am one of the growing number who thinks we should get out of the sandbox as soon as possible. ideally, we wouldn’t have a job at al, but seeing as that won’t likely happen, i’d be content if our future leadership cut this american interventionist (farm animal + 4 letter word) foreign policy out of its playbook forever. i serve next to some amazing people and know some who’ve died in the process, and i have the utmost respect for their sacrifice. however, i’m tired of americans dying in countries we have no business in. as far as the “fighting them over there” view, which i’ve heard so many times in so many forums – my issue is that it holds terrorism against america as a given, as if there’s no solution other than to kill anyone who might one day disagree with us. i firmly feel that diplomacy will always be a greater deterrent to anti-american hostility than any sort of military action. and you have to put yourself in their shoes – ever seen red dawn? i guarantee that if another army put boots on the ground in our country, destroyed our cities, killed people we knew, and showed even a hint of disrespect for our culture – that army would face such insurmountable opposition that their people back home wouldn’t see much positive in their forces staying there either. and the funny thing – we’d be called “heroes” and “freedom fighters,” just like a few hundred years ago when england lost some prime real estate to a loosely organized network of guerrilla militias and pirates…some would’ve even called them terrorists.

spilling all the tea…that’s just ridiculous.

63   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:07 pm

Unawares. I’ve been gone 6 weeks, I’m not familiar much with the new posters. My apologies. I don’t really see how Adam’s post was in disagreeing with what I was saying though…

My posts still mostly stand.

I get ‘it’. You dont want to see troops lost. That’s understandable. My wife doesn’t want to see me die. My father doesn’t. My family doesn’t. My friends don’t. My brothers in arms don’t. Who would?

But maybe you don’t get this? I said maybe. Afterall, as I have aptly demonstrated by ignorance, I don’t know you:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Thomas Jefferson

64   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:08 pm

Glad some of you come from military families. But rhetoric and disrespect is rhetoric and disrespect whatever way you cut it.

what you don’t seem to get, and maybe our president is to blame for the change in the first amendment or something, but it’s not “rhetoric” to use facts to explain why this war should never have been fought.

it’s not “rhetoric” to point out that the REAL al-Qaeda (not the franchise version in Iraq) is back at pre 9/11 levels due to the decisions made by this administration (made up of people who have NEVER worn the uniform like you or Adam).

it’s not “rhetoric” to ask that the government live up to its promise to only put our military in danger when it’s absolutely necessary, instead of considering them collateral in a grand plan to remake the Middle East.

and let me you one thing:

it’s also not being “disrespectful” to our troops to point out the carnage of this war. it doesn’t mean we’re “blaming” you. we know where the blame goes.

The war has been here, it has hit us at home more than on 9/11, and abroad at our bases (which is HOME to some of us) more than on 9/11. The war is here, and we’re barely keeping those who want to kill you and yours out as it is. Pull us out? Are you kidding?

yes, we understand. i supported going into Afghanistan, you know, the actual “going after the people who attacked us” thing? then Bush, McCain, Rumsfeld, etc., decided to use the anger over 9/11 to slip in a completely different war, an unnecessary war, an ILLEGAL war, by ALL international definitions. they decided to drop the ball and give bin Laden, inc. a beautiful gift wrapped in a bow – the elimination of the secular state in Iraq.

declaring defeat and returning tomorrow

defeat at the hands of what enemy, Chris? seriously. WHO are we fighting? the commanders on the ground state that the al-Qaeda in Iraq situation is but one tiny piece of the conflict over there. otherwise, we’re refereeing and arming both sides in a civil war.

65   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 11:09 pm

ah yes.

denigrate those you oppose (stupid right chris)

shut up unless you serve in the military. no clue no idea, right joe? all the news is wrong. all the books are wrong. only those who have been there can “really” know.

you think it is easy to stand against the war? do you think it is easy to have your loyalty and patriotism questioned?

you think it is easy to have your christianity questioned because you dare suggest the jesus taught that peace is the way and not war?

so, get off your high horse. those of us who oppose the war are not stupid. we have well thought out views and beliefs. i am sorry if they don’t line up with your views. if you don’t want opposing views or to have your assertions challenged then just say so.

if not………………show some respect for those who disagree with you.

time

66   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
March 26th, 2008 at 11:12 pm

Wow,

Great discussion.

on one hand I am just learning about the plight of Palestinian Christians that seems totally ignored and lost in the Zionist theology. In fact their plight seems worse and worse the more Zionistic theology prevails.

Yet, as far as things like war, it will be this way until all are under one Head being Christ Jesus. As Joe stated even the Angels in Heaven war against evil.

I see that in Romans, Paul teaches us to be good citizens. To strive to be a good citizen as the rulers and authorities are their to keep order. I also see that God moves nations, both Godly and ungodly to bring justice. God used the Babylonians and Assyrians against His chosen people when they forsook God and Justice… Meaning if we as a nation lose sight of loving God and one another, God will bring a nation against us and in a way I see that as happening. (big can of worms there!)

I see that we need to get out of Iraq. Not that we are not doing any good there which I do think is happening, but that nation needs to stand and not be propped up and the best way to stand is by perseverance.

Now I am not saying get out completely.

As far as Israel, I do not think God is done with them. I believe that we are still in the time of the gentiles and one day God will say that all the Gentiles that will be saved are saved and turn and pull the blindness off of Israel and they will also come in.

But, we who are ministers of God’s justice must also tell Israel when they are out of line and often I see we do not. TO be fair I see sometimes the hardships of Palestinians is exploited and that Israel has done and has tried to do things like build housing and give it to homeless Palestinian families only to have them burned down.

We need to encourage both sides to act justly toward each other as well set the standard as a nation of being just. I am not sure that is all possible, but at least we should try as we serve God and love one another.

be blessed,
iggy

67   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 11:17 pm

and i would add………….as a 50 plus year old man………i have seen my share of the consequences of war. uncles. older friends. messed up. families ruined. sat through many a counseling session with war veterans. tough stuff.

there would not be a debate(at least from me) if this was an issue of self-defense. Even though I am a pacifist i do understand, in a fallen world, the need for self-defense. what i oppose is preemptive war. what i oppose is nation building. what i oppose is wars fought on false pretenses. what i oppose is blind nationalism that can’t see that we just might be wrong.

i weep over this war. i weep every time i read of another senseless death. another father who is not coming home. another brother who is not coming come. i cry and ask “why?” i don’t want these soldiers dying in my name. i don’t want them killing in my name.

so……..i speak up. and will continue to do so until the war is ended.

68   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:18 pm

I see your point Adam.

That was a much better way to put things than most of the other posts in this thread. Thanks.

I’ll always support diplomacy over war.

There are two sides to every tale, I believe. I’d still rather fight there, than here.

I need to think more.

But a key point to make is this…

The difference between our revolutionary war and what’s going on now is simple to see. We didn’t go to England and blow up their governmental buildings. And we didn’t have boots in Afgan and Iraq until AFTER 3000 civillians were burned, crushed, and suffocated. We declared independence from England, they sent their troops here. We got blown up by some smart terrorists, so we sent our troops there, and anywhere else they might be. There’s a difference. At least I think so.

Like I said, you have good logical thoughts though, Adam. I’ll think and pray more on what you’ve said. I don’t think God wants war, and I don’t think war makes things better. It just stops other bad things from happening first.

Joe

69   Adam    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:22 pm

dude, my brother just posted in reply to you. his name is Adam.

ooh…the plot thickens. but hey, if we’re going to quote thomas jefferson, let’s quote him in his entirety:

A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. …God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. …And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. – Thomas Jefferson (November 13th, 1787)

70   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:28 pm

And we didn’t have boots in Afgan and Iraq until AFTER 3000 civillians were burned, crushed, and suffocated. We declared independence from England, they sent their troops here. We got blown up by some smart terrorists, so we sent our troops there, and anywhere else they might be. There’s a difference. At least I think so.

here’s my thing, Joe. like i said, i supported going into Afghanistan, and i still support going after the actual terrorists who attacked us.

but they’re not in Iraq. they never were in Iraq. yes, there is a group called “al Qaeda in Iraq” but it’s not the same people. it makes me angry to know that we diverted our resources from going after bin Laden, inc. by going into Iraq with ulterior motives. it makes me angry that we have been lied to repeatedly over the past five years. it makes me angry that the great majority of the troops killed in Iraq came AFTER “Mission Accomplished.” it makes me angry that, as i said before, the real al Qaeda is now as strong as it was before 9/11 – because we diverted our attention from them.

and it makes me angry that our government is still playing the American people by saying “look! there are terrorists in Iraq and we’re fighting them!” without it being made clear to the average American that those terrorists are essentially a product of our intervention, and without it being made clear that the great majority of the fighting and loss of life going on is indeed, crossfire in a civil war.

and finally, it makes me seething angry to know that 4000 troops have died in this conflict and that our lazy-assed corporate media sees fit to pay but a glance of attention to that fact before going back to what’s really important, i.e. Barack Obama’s pastor says black things!!!

71   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:29 pm

“shut up unless you serve in the military. no clue no idea, right joe? all the news is wrong. all the books are wrong. only those who have been there can “really” know.

you think it is easy to have your christianity questioned because you dare suggest the jesus taught that peace is the way and not war?

so, get off your high horse. those of us who oppose the war are not stupid. we have well thought out views and beliefs.”

I didn’t tell you to shut up, as that would be the antithesis of everything I stand for. I didn’t say every source was wrong, but only that you don’t get the same information I do, and so, as it does with mine, it warps your view. But yes, the only ones who can really know are the ones who serve. They know firsthand. You don’t have that. It doesn’t make you stupid, wrong, or mean that you should shut up. It just means that hey, you could be wrong too, and you don’t have 1st hand experience like Adam does, or myself, or my friends. Something everyone has to come to terms with about something, at some point.

I didn’t question your Christianity, at all. And I agree with you that Jesus’ way is Peace and not War. And calls Christians to live in peace with all men. But I realize what Iggy realizes, and what you seem to grasp as well. That sometimes, war must be fought.

And once again, I didn’t call you stupid, or try to imply you’re stupid. I’m not on a high horse, and I’m sorry you think I am. I can very well see that your beliefs and ideas are well thought out.

It’s funny…I was more upset about the rhetoric and inflammatory comments, rather than the fact of whether I disagreed with you or not. You didn’t catch that though. Because…you reacted. I’m sorry the convo played out this way. And I’m sorry you thought I was attacking you. I didn’t mean to.

Joe

72   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:30 pm

dude, my brother just posted in reply to you. his name is Adam.

that’s not Thomas Jefferson. that’s Weezie Jefferson.

*shakes head at the little brother*

73   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:33 pm

It’s still a great quotation. And it still applies, Adam. The last two lines is what’s called a summary of the context beforehand. I just find it interesting that our country is founded upon the principles of armed rebellion and bloodshed. It’s ironic to me.

74   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:33 pm

oops. quoted the wrong thing, because i am el retard.

75   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:38 pm

I’m tired of this kind of conversation…where everyone thinks everyone else is somehow less American because of where they stand on an issue, or even worse, not Christian.

I don’t want to see anymore people die either. I don’t want to hear about another friend dying, and then think “I have to go back there in 5 months…” anymore.

But something I think about is…okay maybe we screwed up (see, I’m willing to admit to the possibility), but now that it’s jacked up…will pulling out make it better?

“Survey says…..eeehhhhhhh”

Now it’s damage control. Unless you want another genocide like after Vietnam. That doesn’t make the news often though….

76   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:41 pm

But something I think about is…okay maybe we screwed up (see, I’m willing to admit to the possibility), but now that it’s jacked up…will pulling out make it better?

there’s a lot of scholarship, compelling scholarship, based on recent history, that suggests that pulling out completely is the only way to actually control the damage.

i would pose this question to you: since the great majority of the fighting over there is a civil war, what good are we doing by bribing the Sunni militias (who are starting to turn now that the money is drying up), indirectly arming the Shi’a, propping up the fraudulent Iraqi government? what good are we doing? how are we NOT exacerbating the conflict by merely being there?

77   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 11:41 pm

joe,

actually it was chris………..on the stupid issue. of course he thinks all liberals are demented :)

let me see if i can ratchet my rhetoric down :)

i do see the “unless you are here or have been here” point of view. i grew up poor. we lived on welfare during my teen years. my parents divorced and my mom later killed herself. so “my experience” gives me a unique perspective. so when people waz eloquently about the lazy poor on welfare i usually tell them they are full of _______.

but, i also know that “my experience” colors my thinking and that maybe it keeps me from seeing the viewpoint of others.

we are all products of our environment. we have been shaped by our experiences. good, bad, indifferent.

in recent years i have had to set through church service after church serve where george bush, nationalism, and christians are patriots is the song for the day. i have been told to keep my views to myself.

so, i can over-react. if i have done so, or you think i have, i do indeed apologize.

78   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 26th, 2008 at 11:44 pm

sorry for the bad spelling at the end. hands are wore out. sit not set. service not serve.

79   Adam    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:44 pm

I didn’t say every source was wrong, but only that you don’t get the same information I do

that is true. there are a lot of things that happen that don’t get reported for the sake of the rest of the world. for instance, remember that whole issue with the iranian small boats swarming american warships in the strait of hormuz? yea, my gun was trained on those boats the entire time. what they didn’t say in the news reports was that was the third time that had happened that week and that it really wasn’t a big deal (as in it happens all the time). however, our leadership then began a campaign of anti-iranian rhetoric. that’s just one example.

80   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:44 pm

Now it’s damage control. Unless you want another genocide like after Vietnam. That doesn’t make the news often though….

and here i would ask…was the Vietnam genocide not inevitable anyway? would it have been worth it to lose 10 or 20,000 more Americans in delaying the inevitable?

here’s my thing. we screwed up. royally. we’ve lost the good will of most of the world because of this little adventure in Iraq, which is really really sad, since after 9/11 it was higher than it had been in years.

we’ve now opened the Pandora’s box of sectarian conflict in Iraq, something that was contained under Saddam Hussein, bad man that he was. sadly, i think it’s going to have to play itself out. the question is how many more Americans have to be killed and maimed in the process.

81   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:45 pm

I guess I never looked at it that way Evan. The US Military does and has done great things over there though. Things we can’t even talk about sometimes. And that’s too bad. If we pull out now…I honestly don’t know what happens next.

Brutus, we’re ok. No worries. I’m glad we have an understanding.

82   Evan Hurst    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:52 pm

I honestly don’t know what happens next.

well, none of us knows for sure.

but it just seems to me that we keep doubling down further and things keep getting worse.

and the media really doesn’t report much of anything accurately anymore, so you have to search out your sources, but it seemed to me when they announced the “surge” that it was really just a band-aid that would wear out, as band-aids do, and that seems to be coming to fruition.

and like Brutus, i get passionate when i argue. haha. :)

83   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:53 pm

You have to consider national security. If we allow Iraq to go the way of Afganistan after the Russians pulled out…aren’t we just setting ourselves up for an even worse conflict later on? Have you considered this at length? I have…it bothers me. It’s a very damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.

On a side note…every life is precious and valuable, but from a strategic standpoint, 4000 lives is a small number compared to millions we lost in other wars. And considering we’ve thwarted and kept the enemy distracted for years, though you might disagree, and kept them from killing our people on our turf, I think many military leaders are saying “this is a small price to pay”. I’m not sure I agree, but I see their reasoning.

Do we stay the course, play the big distraction for years to come, lose 10,000…20,000 troops in the long run, and keep our homes safe and sound. Or are attacks on America inevitable anyways and we should just pull out, bunker in, and fend them off? Or should we pull out and try to reason with the extremists who want our heads? Or should we..what…? Do what?

Who’s got a plan? None of the candidates do. They just say crap, blah blah blah, let’s get em out…and no one has a strategy, a plan, something tangible that us troops can say “Hey…I can see that…” at. It’s all rhetoric. Say what the itchy ears want to hear, get elected, screw it up worse. Who’s got a real plan. Anyone? Even if we pull out. What’s the friggen plan? You know it requires a plan, right people? You don’t just say “go home, whoooo!”. Logistics, money, personnel, garrisons, training…

Who’s got the plan?

Should we….?

84   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:55 pm

I’m very upset with all the candidates, as you can see… . In all the debates, interviews, and speeches I’ve watched…I haven’t seen one real plan emerge.

85   Adam    
March 26th, 2008 at 11:58 pm

joe, what branch & mos (or rate)?
information systems tech 2nd class, usn right here

86   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 26th, 2008 at 11:59 pm

Honestly, I have to go to sleep. We all have work in a few hours I’m betting.

No one here is anti-American, that’s for sure. People wouldn’t argue so feverently unless they truly cared enough to do so. We wouldn’t get heated unless we truly valued what this country is supposed to be about. That’s American to me. Peace all.

Joe

87   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 12:00 am

I’m a SSgt in the USAF, Airborne. Like I said, it was nice meeting you Adam, you too Evan, et tu Brute, et al. lol.

Joe

88   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 12:05 am

Do we stay the course, play the big distraction for years to come, lose 10,000…20,000 troops in the long run, and keep our homes safe and sound. Or are attacks on America inevitable anyways and we should just pull out, bunker in, and fend them off? Or should we pull out and try to reason with the extremists who want our heads? Or should we..what…? Do what?

or do we RADICALLY change our tactics when it comes to dealing with Islamic radicalism/terrorism by re-learning the art of diplomacy and looking to address the root causes of the issue? i mean, look. most of the Muslim world isn’t too keen on terrorism either…but for so many of them, the choice isn’t “freedom” vs. “tyranny” as Bush likes to frame it. it’s “stability” vs. “chaos.” so they have a catch-22, themselves. most Palestinians are moderates and not into suicide bombing and whatnot, but then again, they’re being walled off from Israel, and thus from opportunity, from a free flow of food, from jobs, from stability, etc…so they’re more likely to shrug their shoulders at those who would attack Israel, because, hell, the answer to “what do they have to lose?” becomes smaller each day.

4000 lives is a small number compared to millions we lost in other wars.

granted, but let me throw a detail into that. obviously technology has changed that reduces the number of lives lost. but a big change is in the availability of medical attention….the ratios of lives lost to those injured/maimed are bigger than they ever were with this war. as in, if this were 1944 or 1967, many of those on the injured/maimed list would be dead. also, this government has a really really bad habit of ignoring veterans once their service is up, injured or not. i don’t know how much you’ve heard/read/personally dealt with what’s been going on with PTSD discharges, or as they like to call them lately, “personality disorders,” which effectively deny veterans of this war medical benefits because a “personality disorder” is considered pre-existing, while PTSD would require the US Government to admit the horrors this war has wreaked on the mental health of many veterans, and they’d also have to put their money where their mouth is with the “supporting our troops” thing.

Who’s got a real plan. Anyone? Even if we pull out. What’s the friggen plan?

you’re absolutely right…and i would suggest that we have to look first at the goals of the candidates. John McCain, his service to this country militarily notwithstanding, seems to be bankrupt in his following of the Bush plans for Iraq. Hillary Clinton seems to say one thing about bringing the troops home, but then votes for everything Bush throws at her.

you ought to do a little research on Samantha Power, the Obama senior foreign policy advisor who had to resign from his campaign for rightly calling Hillary Clinton a “monster.”

she’s a perfect example of the “radically changing course” idea in foreign policy, she’s won a Pulitzer for it, and she’ll be part of an Obama presidency, mark my words. she’s absolutely brilliant, and she represents a truly new way of thinking.

89   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 12:06 am

haha, n’nite, Joe.

(i’m not going to bed yet, because i am decidedly a vampire…)

90   Joe C    http://www.joe4gzus.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 12:10 am

All very interesting. Whoever ends up being the CiC, I have to support him/her, and follow them in to battle, whatever kind it might be. That’s just my job. Don’t have to love or like em, just respect em and do what they say. LOL.

I see a much bigger war on the horizon. Maybe it would be better to get out of Iraq now, if only to reconstitute for the next set of events.

Anyways, it’s been a nice talk, but it’s time to pay a visit to my bed. Goodnight all.

Joe

91   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 12:15 am

I haven’t seen one real plan emerge

haha…one last sidenote. part of that is, yet again, the media’s fault.

in debates, instead of substantive subjects, we have to badger Hillary about her 3 AM “experience” (whatever that means), badger Obama because his pastor knows a bad black man who says bad things, etc…

during the Republican debates, they were asking the candidates whether they believed in evolution!

i mean, my God in heaven, i cannot imagine something more irrelevant, considering the current state of world affairs, than whether or not a candidate believes in Darwin’s theory or the Genesis account.

it’s ghastly, and the American people have to demand change.

92   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 12:52 am

i know everybody’s in bed except vampires, but i just stumbled across an amazing video from Charlie Rose’s show, where he interviewed two Iraqi men on the 5th anniversary of the American occupation. this is probably the most important perspective i’ve heard yet…it’s their country, after all.

it’s fifteen minutes long, and it’s worth the time.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/26/rose-hearing-from-iraqis-about-the-invasion-of-iraq-5th-year/

93   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 3:09 am

okay, uno mas and then i’m going to bed.

this ties in b/c it’s a Samantha Power article about completely retooling our Iran policy (radically new ideas, like i said), and she starts out with an anecdote of the Iranian confrontation-that-wasn’t that Adam mentioned above…

like i said, she’s brilliant.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1704682,00.html

94   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 6:57 am

Joe C., Evan, Brutus, et. al. – It may have been right or wrong to go into Iraq, that is all subjective. Some wars are needed horizontally speaking. My point is the church should have no opinion on it, it is not our business. Can anyone see what I am saying and after reading this thread see how divisive politics can be among brothers?

The motives and actions of any secular government are not our business tro critique, we are to watch and pray and preach (and live) the gospel to every creature. That is a full plate!

95   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 7:23 am

Joe C., Evan, Brutus, et. al. – It may have been right or wrong to go into Iraq, that is all subjective. Some wars are needed horizontally speaking. My point is the church should have no opinion on it, it is not our business. Can anyone see what I am saying and after reading this thread see how divisive politics can be among brothers?

I agree, Rick, to a point – which was why I almost didn’t even post this article. My apologies for any rhetoric ratcheting of my own (and no, brutus, liberals aren’t demented, just naive when it comes to foreign policy). As for Power’s (of “Hillary’s a Monster” fame) argument, I tend to think that Michael Gerson’s analysis of such a policy is more on the spot.

Going back to the original point – as you noted, Rick – it’s not the business of the church to insert itself into the political process – whether it’s Rick Warren acting as an ambassador to Syria, Jeremiah Wright preaching against the KKKofA, or churches handing out “voters guides” which can been seen as being printed by either political party.

96   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 7:33 am

Thank you, Chris. You will be receiving your diploma in the mail. Now I will teach you some post graduate courses in anationalism. Again I say, I admire and pray for men like Joe C. who share their faith on the battlefield and I do not judge them, they are obeying their conscience.

And I am grateful for their sacrifice as well. This is something the church must learn, how to be appreciative to others with whom we have differences. I am still learning.

97   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 8:16 am

i could only make it about halfway through the Michael Gerson article before the unfounded suppositions, made-up reactions, and misrepresentation of or incapability of understanding the nuance of Obama’s positions made me hate myself for reading it without making my coffee…

Power explained on Charlie Rose six months ago, quite rightly, that negotiations and meetings should not be some “gift” the US gives a nation for doing what we want them to…to believe so overstates the waning relevance of the US in a changing geopolitical landscape.

we’re no longer the only suitor for Middle Eastern countries. they now have other options (the EU, China, Russia to an extent).

also, Kissinger’s hardly someone i would look at as a model, since he’s considered a war criminal by half the thinking world.

98   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 8:20 am

for any interested, this is a great primer on the waning American hegemony and the future of the global power balance.

it’s not short, but it’s adapted from a much longer book, and it’s worth the read.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/magazine/27world-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

99   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
March 27th, 2008 at 8:34 am

Please note that I said nothing of the “true” Christianity or salvation of any of the individuals involved in this particular issue. Rather, because the wielding of governmental power is an exercise in judgment, I seriously question the judgment of someone who wants to head the government but supports, attends and justifies the level of tinfoil-hattery coming from Wright (who I have listened to, beyond sound-bites).

Chris L.

My statement about skating close was little about judging ones salvation. It was rather more about “you deciding” what was appropiate in a church bulletin. Also your guilt by association (GBA) or Barack.

As Evan has rightly pointed out the “offending” part of the bulletin was a letter written to Oprah Winfrey. It was neither Pastor’s Wrights words nor does it say anywhere in the bulletin he endorses it.

100   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 9:18 am

My statement about skating close was little about judging ones salvation. It was rather more about “you deciding” what was appropiate in a church bulletin. Also your guilt by association (GBA) or Barack.

Is it ODM’ery to suggest that political positioning doesn’t belong in the pulpit (or the church bulletin)?

As for GBA, it’s not that I think Osama believes all of what Wright teaches – but rather that BO’s rhetoric of unity and race-blind politics is COMPLETELY at odds with someone he has referred to as his mentor/uncle/teacher/grandfather and who he has listened to on a weekly basis for the past 20 years.

Do I agree with EVERYTHING my preacher teaches week-in and week-out? Of course not. I doubt anybody does. However, if I did not hold to the same core values and driving principles as taught by my church, I would not stick around for 2 years, let alone 20. Thus, I am not looking at GBA, but rather – again – a lack of judgement (or worse, political expediency) in which actions and words do not seem to be in alignment.

As Evan has rightly pointed out the “offending” part of the bulletin was a letter written to Oprah Winfrey. It was neither Pastor’s Wrights words nor does it say anywhere in the bulletin he endorses it.

Wright did no write the ‘offending’ letter in the bulletin, but it was apparently well-thought-of enough to take up 4+ pages, without condemnation… Regardless, it was the mixing of the church position with national/global political positions that was the point of my criticism.

In the same manner, just to note, I found the ‘voter guides’ (which could have been printed by the GOP) handed out by my church in 2004 to be just as inappropriate…

101   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 9:21 am

it’s not that I think Osama believes all of what Wright teaches

haha. someone’s been having Ann Coulter dreams again.

102   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 9:23 am

BO’s rhetoric of unity and race-blind politics is COMPLETELY at odds with someone he has referred to as his mentor/uncle/teacher/grandfather and who he has listened to on a weekly basis for the past 20 years.

actually, no. by all accounts, except “accounts” taken out of context by people with an agenda.

this is all direct “talking-point” material. nothing original at all.

103   dave    http://www.mindfulmission.com
March 27th, 2008 at 9:26 am

and no, brutus, liberals aren’t demented, just naive when it comes to foreign policy

Ah… brilliant arrogance, said in such a way that one might thing Ken Silva was using your screen name.

You want to talk about naive?

How about those who thought people in Iraq would welcome the US with open arms, and that the war would end quickly?

How about those who decided to go bomb the hell out of a country, remove the government, and completely ignore the ramifications of said actions? A civil war was extremely easy to see coming before the US attacked.

How about those who believe that military might will solve all problems?

Yup… I guess only liberals are naive about foreign policy.

The arrogance and condescension is actually naivety in itself.

104   dave    http://www.mindfulmission.com
March 27th, 2008 at 9:30 am

it’s not that I think Osama believes all of what Wright teaches -

You have to be kidding me.

You should be embarrassed.

105   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 9:32 am

yeah…”ovama” would have been a typo.

that was just childish. have you ever noticed the “retorts” (from so many of that ilk) NEVER have any substance or basis in fact, but are just a regurgitation of talking points?

a great man (my brother) once said: “Just as police can match a bullet to the gun from which it was fired by looking at its markings, so can a right wing rube be paired with his pundits through talking points and catch phrases.”

isn’t that just magic?

106   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 9:35 am

Sorry – It really was a mistake!

107   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 9:36 am

And yes, I am very embarrassed…

108   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 9:38 am

ok, forgiven.

:)

109   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 9:46 am

Dave,

I’m not a big fan of the hard neo-cons or the red-libs as pertaining to foreign policy. I do see much of Obama’s posturing in the same naive vein as Chamberlain, Joe Kennedy Sr. and (more recently) Jimmy Carter.

I’ve not been a huge fan of Bush or Clinton’s use of the military, either, as I’m not sure our mission should be nation-building. In the current election, I think that foreign policy under McCain would be a lot better than Obama (definitely) and probably better than Hillary (since I don’t believe her for a second on what her Iraq policy will be, unlike Obama, who I think is dangerously naive on the subject).

110   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 9:48 am

And I believe that Adolph McCain – oops – a typo. The letters are so close! You guys entertain me, which isn’t very hard. I’m still baking Alf Landon!

111   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 9:49 am

You want to talk about naive?

How about those who thought people in Iraq would welcome the US with open arms, and that the war would end quickly?

How about those who decided to go bomb the hell out of a country, remove the government, and completely ignore the ramifications of said actions? A civil war was extremely easy to see coming before the US attacked.

How about those who believe that military might will solve all problems?

McCain.

McCain.

and.

*cough*

McCain.

112   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 9:53 am

I’m still baking Alf Landon!

I’m still a Lincoln guy, myself – even though he forced the South’s hand into starting the CW…

How about those who believe that military might will solve all problems?

McCain.

McCain: When nations seek to resolve their differences by force of arms, a million tragedies ensue. The lives of a nation’s finest patriots are sacrificed. Innocent people suffer and die. Commerce is disrupted; economies are damaged; strategic interests shielded by years of patient statecraft are endangered as the exigencies of war and diplomacy conflict. Not the valor with which it is fought nor the nobility of the cause it serves, can glorify war.

113   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 9:54 am

a great man (my brother) once said: “Just as police can match a bullet to the gun from which it was fired by looking at its markings, so can a right wing rube be paired with his pundits through talking points and catch phrases.”

That might be true, although I believe those of you that are posting from the more left side here are presenting the same talking points I hear from Air America, the Daily Kos, and the like. Anytime I hear someone complain that the mainstream media leans too far to the right, I’m a bit suspicious.

That’s a very hard thing to accept, especially when something like 90% or more of journalists and reporters in media are registered democrats. I suppose that you could be in the position where you think the dems have actually gone too far right…

114   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 9:58 am

McCain: When nations seek to resolve their differences by force of arms, a million tragedies ensue. The lives of a nation’s finest patriots are sacrificed. Innocent people suffer and die. Commerce is disrupted; economies are damaged; strategic interests shielded by years of patient statecraft are endangered as the exigencies of war and diplomacy conflict. Not the valor with which it is fought nor the nobility of the cause it serves, can glorify war.

the fact that he made a nice speech should not blind us to his actions, Chris.

all that very noble, indeed, yet he’s committed himself to continuing Bush’s foreign policy in the Middle East, continuing to double down in a conflict with no end in sight, against an enemy that escapes definition.

the very definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over again and expecting the same results.

and don’t tell me about the “surge.” it’s currently falling apart, as predicted, and really, all it was in the first place was “Bush on Crack.”

115   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 10:02 am

Did anyone hear Conan the other night? Here’s the joke he told:

“Last week Sen. Obama gave an acclaimed speech on race. Not to be outdone, though, former President Clinton gave a speech on race himself. It was entitled, “Asian chicks are where it’s at!”.

That is almost over the line for me, but it was so funny I had to share it.

116   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 10:03 am

Anytime I hear someone complain that the mainstream media leans too far to the right, I’m a bit suspicious.

it’s actually been proven by nonpartisan groups that, if anything, the media leans a wee bit to the right, but that for the most part, they try to be fair.

they still suck. the real problem with the media isn’t one of political leaning, but of corporate ownership and consolidation by those who are concerned not with upholding the call of a free press, but with the bottom line in profit.

interesting statistics: a study was done last year, again by a nonpartisan group, that looked to find out who in this country is the most informed, based on where they get their news. at the top of the list, tied, were regular viewers of The Daily Show and those who read a major newspaper daily online. in the middle were those who get most of their news from the so-called mainstream media. at the bottom were regular viewers of Fox, tied with viewers of morning news shows (Today, GMA, etc.) and those who really only watch the local news for the weather report.

oh, and i neither listen to Air America nor read the DailyKos.

the funny thing about the left is that we disagree amongst ourselves about all kinds of things…but it’s usually more nuanced.

it’s much harder to find “talking points” on the left that aren’t based strictly in fact.

117   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 10:04 am

Oh, Rick…

You’re like a riddle wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in bacon…

118   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 10:05 am

interesting statistics: a study was done last year, again by a nonpartisan group, that looked to find out who in this country is the most informed, based on where they get their news.

“non-partisan” = code word for socialist :-)

119   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
March 27th, 2008 at 10:06 am

I heard it on a clip on msnbc. By the time Conan is on I have sugar plum fairies dancing in my head.

120   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 10:07 am

“non-partisan” = code word for socialist

haha. debase the argument further, please, we on the left find it funny.

121   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 10:15 am

oh, and i neither listen to Air America nor read the DailyKos

I guess you’re probably more of a Pravda or al Jazeera sort of guy, then….j/k

122   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 10:18 am

nah, i probably read from about 50 different sources over the course of a week.

123   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 27th, 2008 at 1:24 pm

chris l,

i am being serious here……….calling your opponent naive or tin foil hat wearing is not the best way to have a constructive discussion.

at 50 plus years on this earth i seriously doubt i am naive. jaded? cynical? weary? yes. naive? not since ninth grade gym class when our gym teacher told us about sex.

i spent many years in the conservative trenches. perhaps you can’t imagine someone abandoning conservatism for liberalism. (using those terms loosely and realizing they carry little value any more)

what has mr bush done for our country? are we financially better off? are we safer? are we at peace? do we have greater freedom? with mr. bush the chickens have come home to roost. and it ain’t pretty. it will take far more than a democrat in the whitehouse to fix all the damage done by mr bush over the years.

i am a pacifist. i oppose all war. i am an environmentalist. i am not a capitalist but i am not a socialist. i am a believer in the need to address climate change. i oppose war. i support the immediate establishment of a palestinian state. i oppose the wall in israel and i oppose the wall in arizona. i support a constitutionally mandated balanced budget. i support outlawing all corporate/pac/special interest donations to politicians. i support term limits. i support the abolishment of all nuclear weapons. i support drastically reducing our military spending. i support eliminating the irs. i support free college education and a national health plan. i support making corporation prove their chemicals/goods are safe before putting them on the market. i support mandated mpg standards for all vehicles and i support penalizing people who drive big vehicles. i support taking away tax exemption from churches (or narrowing greatly what is exempt) i oppose all tax money incentives given to corporations. i oppose real estate tax. i oppose public funding of sports arenas. i oppose integration and forced busing. i oppose capital punishment and i am pro-life.

and that is just for starters. and i have read about and pondered each of these issues. so disagree if you wish but you embarrass yourself when you call me naive or allude to tin foil hats.

some of us are liberals on purpose and we even used our brain to get here.

now back to my tinfoil roll.

124   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

in my personal experience, i was a conservative before i had had a chance to think any issue through.

that’s just my personal experience, though.

125   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
March 27th, 2008 at 1:31 pm

i support free college education and a national health plan.

So, if you want to abolish the IRS and real estate taxes, how do you propose these things would be funded? Just curious…

126   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 27th, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Phil,

abolish the irs, not taxes. national sales tax? values added tax? consumption tax? tax on republicans? the income tax structure needs changed and it should be progressive.

of course there needs to be some wholesale budget cutting. drastically cut military expenditures. cut foreign aid. eliminate the IRS. eliminate the department of education and return education responsibility to the states. make NASA a privately funded business. eliminate all pork barrel spending. do not allow attachments to bills that facilitate egregious spending. in my state. one issue. one bill. i could go on and on. get rid of bush’s joke of a drug plan for seniors.

as far as real estate taxes………….i believe a man should be able to won property free and clear. as long as there are real estate taxes a man does not own his property free and clear. in my state, don’t pay your real estate taxes and in 2 years you are foreclosed upon.

that’s for starters

127   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 5:31 pm

see, Brutus is more of liberal-libertarian, and i’m somewhere in between that and something else…

i believe in progressive taxes (which we don’t have, and i don’t think a nat’l sales tax would do it, either because necessities cost the same no matter how much one makes), and i definitely believe that, coupled with a more sensible progressive foreign policy that seeks to strengthen our alliances rather than show them who’s boss, we can take care of so many of the problems in our backyard if we cut the military budget in half.

etc.

i just got home.

more on this later…

128   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 27th, 2008 at 6:05 pm

this subject made the Lou Dobbs show tonight.

129   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 6:22 pm

i’m sure whatever Lou Dobbs had to say was positively thrilling.

(he said throwing up in his mouth a little bit)

130   Brutus    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Junius_Brutus
March 27th, 2008 at 6:26 pm

i just report. you decide :)

131   Evan Hurst    
March 27th, 2008 at 6:27 pm

haha