[Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the "evolutionists" are going to save us from the Republicans
Herb Parsons
hparsons at parsonsys.com
Tue Sep 9 12:50:51 EDT 2008
I like your honest assessment on Palin, but I disagree about your
labeling of the position.
If I say I'm not going to fight in a war, but it's OK if my government
attacks another, am I anti-war, or pro-war?
Obviously, you'll not have an abortion, that would mean a male could be
neither pro or anti; however, anyone that believes the issue does not
affect me is wearing blinders.
Rik Sandberg wrote:
> Herb,
>
> Agreed. Palin claims no more religiousity (is that a word, sounds good)
> than either of the other three candidates involved. She has also shown
> that she can govern without forcing forcing those beliefs on her
> constituents.
>
> On the abortion issue: Yep, she's against them, for her. So am I, for
> me. I am pro-choice. People just can't seem to get a handle on the idea
> that pro-choice doesn't mean anti or pro abortion. It means you should
> be able to make your own choice and let others make theirs, ie, mind
> your own business.
>
> From what I've seen Palin, as governor of Alaska has been doing this too.
>
> If I had my way, the federal gov't wouldn't be involved in abortion at all.
>
> Rik
>
> Ayn Rand was a prophet - - it isn't my fault
>
>
>
> Herb Parsons wrote:
>
>> Stan,
>>
>> What evidence do you have that would lead you to believe that Palin
>> would force her religious belief on anyone? My understanding is that
>> she's all for allowing the individual states to set the standard.
>> However, that's really beside the point. As you said, anyone's pinpoint
>> of the exact time is a "religious" matter, or a matter of fath, thus
>> ANYONE setting pinpointed time would be them foisting their beliefs on
>> others.
>>
>> Surely you're not advocating allowing the parents to decide at any time
>> they choose, up to and including while the "fetus" is still in college?
>>
>> stan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Slim,
>>>
>>> As a member of your religious faith, and an ardent fan, if you really plan
>>> to skip voting (in effect voting for those whose direct religious
>>> instructions got us into such a waste of our wealth and blood) I would be
>>> truly saddened. I don't think poorly of John's and Palin's inability to
>>> live up to their own family values, relying on their gods to forgive them -
>>> I worry about their health; a topic that seems to be forbidden to address.
>>> John's cheek is not like that from his prisoner days and his vp could be our
>>> leader without notice. Then where would this country's founding desire for
>>> religious freedom end up? The first example is already on the table and
>>> Catholic Joe has it right: When life starts is a religious opinion and
>>> should not be one decided by government. You may feel life does not start
>>> until a breath is taken, the Jews count a number of months before the start,
>>> the Christens count from the moment the cells begin dividing. Personally I
>>> don't think it starts until after college. If we allow a Palin to call such
>>> shots we are on a path Jefferson and all those other smart guys insisted on
>>> avoiding. McCain told the TV interviewer that if he had his way the first
>>> judge he would get rid of is Ginsberg and than went down the list of her
>>> kind. Once this is allowed to start (we already have allowed god onto our
>>> coins), god (hypocritically speaking) help us - or we will all, eventually,
>>> become strong advocates of the second amendment.
>>>
>>> John, at least is a flip flopper so, if elected, would probably revert to
>>> many of his reasonable positions. It is Palin I am fearful will give us
>>> even worse than another 8 years. (And this from a confessed womanizer.)
>>>
>>> stan/ec
>>> .
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Steven Alm" <stevenalm at gmail.com>
>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:02 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus,the "evolutionists" are going to
>>> save us from the Republicans
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Todd,
>>>>
>>>> I'm an atheist and I think Palin's a religious kook. And you're right, I
>>>> won't vote for a religious kook. I haven't studied Darwin very much (and
>>>> I
>>>> applaud your research and quotes) but I don't think that's the only rebuke
>>>> to creationism. Since most of the species of plant and animal life on
>>>> this
>>>> earth are in fact extinct, I'd call that "unintelligent design."
>>>>
>>>> You said there are only two possibilities as to how life started. Are you
>>>> sure? How do you know this? What I know is that all religions serve in
>>>> answering three questions: Where did we come from, how do we live and
>>>> what
>>>> happens when we die? Myself, I've answered those questions to my own
>>>> satisfaction and I don't need the church to tell me anything.
>>>>
>>>> Slim
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Todd Tavares <sprocket80 at mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Slim, Wow! are you are going to vote for Obama because he is a Marxist
>>>>> or not vote for McCain just because Palin is a religious extremist? :^D
>>>>> Glad you mentioned carbon dating. Carbon has been proven by many
>>>>> scientists to be a wholly inaccurate method of dating. I am far from
>>>>> being a scientist...or a religious kook thinking the earth is only a
>>>>> couple of thousand of years old, but there is just as much scientific
>>>>> information out there to; while not proving creation is the truth, surely
>>>>> proves evolution is improbable if not impossible. You are/were an
>>>>> educator and were taught evolution from a text book, like we all were.
>>>>> Just because you read something in a text book does not make it truth.
>>>>> http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Maybe we could all stomach
>>>>> creationism if we called it a theory too. After all that is what
>>>>> evolution is...just an unproven theory. There are equally as many
>>>>> scientists out there who believe they have proven evolution is myth. It
>>>>> was not Darwin's brainstorm anyway. He thought he could further explain
>>>>> a centuries old belief; that life arose from non life and everything
>>>>> sprang from a common ancestor. Modern scientists say it was that first
>>>>> amino acid or protein chain in the pool of "primordial ooze." I like how
>>>>> one Nobel prize winner (Biology 1967?) put it:
>>>>>
>>>>> "There are only two possibilities as to how life arose; one is
>>>>> spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is a supernatural
>>>>> creative act of God, there is no third possibility. Spontaneous
>>>>> generation that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically
>>>>> disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with
>>>>> only one possible conclusion, that life arose as a creative act of God. I
>>>>> will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in
>>>>> God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically
>>>>> impossible, spontaneous generation arising to evolution."
>>>>>
>>>>> (Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at the
>>>>> University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
>>>>>
>>>>> But the most interesting fact is that even Darwin himself realized
>>>>> evolution was not workable.
>>>>>
>>>>> "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for
>>>>> adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different
>>>>> amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic
>>>>> aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems, I freely
>>>>> confess, absurd in the highest degree possible." (Charles Darwin, "The
>>>>> origin of species by means of natural selection")
>>>>>
>>>>> "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could
>>>>> not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight
>>>>> modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." (Charles Darwin,
>>>>> "The Origin of Species")
>>>>>
>>>>> "Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether
>>>>> I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." (Charles Darwin, Life and
>>>>> Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229)
>>>>>
>>>>> I could post a few hundred quotes from noted doctors and scientists to
>>>>> try to "prove" evolution wrong or creation right. I could "do my
>>>>> homework" as we say here on the list and cite actual findings, but that
>>>>> is not necessary. Because to dismiss the possibility of God or some other
>>>>> Intelligent Designer makes it easier to accept our notions that it is ok
>>>>> to be a homosexual (and not allow me a choice when the schools teach this
>>>>> gargage to my kids while denying the right to learn about the theory of
>>>>> creation along with evolution) or that it should be a crime to kill a
>>>>> tree, but ok to kill an unborn baby. Not to say everyone believing in
>>>>> evolution is an athiest (or a Democrat), but you have made me see this as
>>>>> a hinge factor in how I will vote....real issues aside.
>>>>>
>>>>> Todd T
>>>>>
>>>>> Besides, it is not very PC to say we evolved (were "selected") from apes.
>>>>> We don't want any of the apes that were not selected to be made to feel
>>>>> inferior.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Steven Alm"
>>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the Republicans are going to
>>>>> save us from the Republicans
>>>>> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:11:17 -0500
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for religious beliefs."
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I require that the candidates be sane, critical thinkers. Palin is
>>>>> obviously not. I wouldn't say that if she were a Catholic or a Lutheran
>>>>> but
>>>>> here's a woman who wants to stare down the whole scientific community and
>>>>> deny things like carbon 14 dating and declare that the heavens and earth
>>>>> are
>>>>> only a few thousand years old. You didn't just call ME an extremist, did
>>>>> you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Brad, you left out the part of Kroon saying that his parishioners should
>>>>> pray for the completion of the pipeline because at the end of the world,
>>>>> folks will flock to Alaska as their final refuge.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't believe that was you quoting all that God stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> Slim
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Steven Alm wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> "She's already demonstrated that she is fully capable of separating her
>>>>>> personal beliefs from her duties."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wouldn't it be better if she didn't have to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Herb Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for religious beliefs.
>>>>>>> She's already demonstrated that she is fully capable of separating her
>>>>>>> personal beliefs from her duties. She vetoed a bill that would have
>>>>>>> denied benefits to gay couples.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But, you extremists keep it up, I'm sure you'll find (or make up)
>>>>>>> SOMETHING on her.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Steven Alm wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She's a creationist. Her Assembly of God stuff is a deal breaker for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Religious extremism cannot be tolerated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The most important legacy the president leaves is the appointment of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> supreme court.
>>>>>>>> The next pres might appoint as many as three. If Sarabaracuda has
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> her
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> way,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> say goodbye to Roe V. Wade and hello to back-ally coat hanger
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> abortions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Slim
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Herb Parsons
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it's funny that the candidate that was considered as a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> running
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> mate for the Democratic choice a few years back, is now being
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> touted as
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "more of the same". Keep trying though, you guys may find something
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> works.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What exactly makes Palin a "religious kook", that fact that's she
>>>>>>>>> religious? I think your colors are beginning to show.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> petelargo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ben, thanks for your post. As you may have noticed, there is no
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dialogue
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> the right-wing extremists. You are wrong, end of discussion and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> your
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> idiot to boot.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When John McCain won the nomination, Bush disappears overseas. At
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RNC,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> no Bush, no Cheney (and no mention of them). They know it's a
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> failed
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> administration. Where were the solutions. Once again, they are
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> trying
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> frame the campaign as an ideology argument rather than an issues
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Today on Face the Nation, "Sis Cum Ba and WHA-LAA", McCain is now
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> candidate and stated that he will end the incredible corruption in
>>>>>>>>>> Washington and the failed policies. John McCain has re-defined a
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> whole
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> level of flip-flopping on over two dozen key issues within the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> last
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> eight
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> years including his own authored bill that he was for and now
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> against.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I couldn't give a poop about the experience argument of Palin vs
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obama.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> a waste of time. The entire Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice-Rove, etc
>>>>>>>>>> administration could be argued to be the most experienced
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> administration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> the history of the White House. A huge amount of prior "executive
>>>>>>>>>> experience". For the first time in recent politics the Republicans
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> power in the white house, judicial, house and senate. How was it
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> for
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's one thing to drive a tractor trailer up our butts, but when
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> they
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> blowing on the horn while there're doing it, it's really gone too
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> far.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A big thank you for the memories: the debt, the dead, the twisting
>>>>>>>>>> intelligence to "sell" us a war on a country that did not attack
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> us,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> good ol boy ineffectual cronyism, and finally the shredding of the
>>>>>>>>>> constitution. With Palin we now we get to have another religious
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> kook
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> satisfy the so-called conservative extremist religious right to
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'bridge'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> them into this administration and get money.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Spending 5-10 billion dollars a month on Iraq and kissing chinese
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> ass
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (borrowing the money) of the most Marxist suppressive government
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> on
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> planet at this time is a conservative value?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Finally, the biggest hypocrisy of all . That these extremists
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> actually
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> that they and the republicans are the vanguards of conservatism?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> The
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> top key pillars of conservatism are less government and government
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> intrusion
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and fiscal responsibility. The only administration that walked
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> that
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> talk
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 50 years was a Democrat that left Bush a 500 billion dollar
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> surplus.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> He
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> blew
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> threw that in one year and it was prior to 9-11. And there is no
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> greater
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> government intrusion that being told what you can or cannot do
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> with or
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> put
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> into your body. Palin wants privacy for her family decisions, but
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> she
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> to legislate publicly what you should do with yours. No thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ben Cittadino-2 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My Dear Culture Warriors;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So....are we having fun yet?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> First, I'd like to thank Richard and Slim for stepping up to join
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Assault on the Citadel".
>>>>>>>>>>> The bullets don't sting as much when the adversary's fire is
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> spread
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> among more than one target.
>>>>>>>>>>> In the words first uttered by Gen. "Vinegar Joe" Stillwell,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "illegitimi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> non carborundum".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As for Tootle, Brad, and Herb, you guys crack me up. I posted
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> about
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Obama
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> only because I saw Tootle's post that
>>>>>>>>>>> suggested anybody supporting Obama was either a marxist, or a
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> farm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> animal.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What did he expect when he said that?
>>>>>>>>>>> Herb, where was your outrage that Tootle would refer to some of
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> his
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> fellow
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Rhodies" in such derogatry terms? Supporting Obama or McCain
>>>>>>>>>>> may turn out to be right or wrong, but if we debate policy and
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> don't
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> engage in mere name-calling this "sailor's bar" could be an
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interesting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> place.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Richard's "geezer" remarks are defensible on several grounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> First,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> was provoked. Second, he was defending ME.
>>>>>>>>>>> Third, it was funny. Calling someone a "marxist" as Tootle did is
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> several
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> magnitudes worse than gentle kidding of the
>>>>>>>>>>> "old fart" kind. Surely you see the difference.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The positions I tried to lay out as reasons some people support
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> Obama
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> intended as an outline of ideology (as Slim noted),
>>>>>>>>>>> not an argument supporting any position. For example, Herb, you
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> are
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> pro-life and will probably vote for McCain/Palin in part for that
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> reason.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I am pro-choice, pro-embryonic stem cell research and so I will
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden in part for that reason. It is not hyperbole to point
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the policy differences that explain my choice. What I know for
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> sure
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> that marxism and "sheepiness" have nothing to do with it. I have
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> about all of my positions on the issues I mentioned and am
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> completely
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> prepared to explain and justify them. In Brad's oft' repeated
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> mantra
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> know I have "done my homework".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Enough for today. The games will be on soon.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ben C. , s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> go
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>> to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>>>> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>>>> Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list