Ted Haggard

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Danzig,
I really have nothing against gay people.
They deserve the same rights as everyone.
The problem that I have with all of this is that if it hypocrites are found by their own admissions, then they deserve their own consequences.
I'll pray for Haggert's wife and five kids.
I'll also include my position on this entire mess, "Judge not lest ye be judged."
Obviously, Rupert didn't read Esther 7:9, 10. The very gallows that he prepared for Mordechai were the ones that he was hanged from.
The irony, whether it was Foley's protecting children from internet porn, or Haggert's position with the 30 million evangelicals he lead in his crusade against gay marriage, or Gdubb's attempt to impose "democracy" on people that he invaded..wasted countless lives, many maimed, and an occupation that is doomed despite all claims of "victory", staying the course, "flexibility"...
on and on...
These times are crazy. Those "straw men" that became compost are only that.
Some continue to believe in them. For sure, they're entitled to that.
Just do me a favor. Spare me the gallows that I didn't construct for others to be hanged from.
DTS

i don't have anything against them either, and believe all rights should be for ALL people.

and yeah, live by the sword, die by the sword--fits here...
as for the war in iraq, i don't see the comparison--and if memory serves, congress backed up the original decision. of course a lot of people want us to forget that they voted in favor of that decision, now that things are looking bleak.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

i don't have anything against them either, and believe all rights should be for ALL people.

and yeah, live by the sword, die by the sword--fits here...
as for the war in iraq, i don't see the comparison--and if memory serves, congress backed up the original decision. of course a lot of people want us to forget that they voted in favor of that decision, now that things are looking bleak.

Danzig,
I agree with most of what you said.
I don't agree that congress made an "informed decision". They were fed deceptive information about wmd's by a CIA and other "intelligence" agencies to substantiate a decision that had already been made.
Note Powell's presentation to the uN and Bush's "State of the Union Address".
Lies bite back.
As it is written, "All things will be revealed".

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Ruppert,
I asked for an explanation.
You are very confused.
I don't think Haggard is a Muslim. Post a link if you can substantiate.
Is he a democrat? Post another link. Is it on Drudge report?
Do I create the news? Do you really think so?
Well, if you pm me and mail me a check to the address I'll provide, I'll certainly move any mountain you ask me to, cure all of your diseases, and have food fall out of the sky to feed you.
Just keep believing.
Money orders only, please. Give as big as you ask for. I'll provide the address.
NOW! Everyone raise your hands before you fall to your knees and then start digging for your wallet.
PRAISE to the Pharisees!

The guy is not a muslim. That's not what I said. I said that if he was a Muslim and a democrat, you would probably criticize the story. You would attack the messenger. But since he is Christian and probably a republican, you think it's a newsworthy story.

No, I don't think you create the news and I don't think any of us do. That was my point. I think a news story is a news story. Whereas you and Genuine Risk seem to think that any story that you don't like was created by some right-wing conspiracy.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

The guy is not a muslim. That's not what I said. I said that if he was a Muslim and a democrat, you would probably criticize the story. You would attack the messenger. But since he is Christian and probably a republican, you think it's a newsworthy story.

No, I don't think you create the news and I don't think any of us do. That was my point. I think a news story is a news story. Whereas you and Genuine Risk seem to think that any story that you don't like was created by some right-wing conspiracy.

I never claimed that he was a Christian,
He did.
You did.

Jesus said, "You will know the tree by its fruits".

Correct me if I'm wrong, did Haggart have weekly access to the White House and speak with George W Bush on a frequent basis?
That's newsworthy.

Nice try.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

I never claimed that he was a Christian,
He did.
You did.

Jesus said, "You will know the tree by its fruits".

Correct me if I'm wrong, did Haggart have weekly access to the White House and spead with George W Bush on a frequent basis?
That's newsworthy.

Nice try.

I know you didn't claim he was a Christian but you knew he was. That is why you posted the story. If he was a Muslim, you would have never posted the article.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Hey DTS, What are you going to rant about once a democrat gets back in the White House? I think a democrat will win the White House in either 2008 or 2012. Once that happens, you will have nothing to talk about. What did you complain about in the 1990s?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Danzig,
I agree with most of what you said.
I don't agree that congress made an "informed decision". They were fed deceptive information about wmd's by a CIA and other "intelligence" agencies to substantiate a decision that had already been made.
Note Powell's presentation to the uN and Bush's "State of the Union Address".
Lies bite back.
As it is written, "All things will be revealed".

and yet many still support bush, the war effort. lieberman for one was thrown to the wolves by his party for continuing to support that war--seems to me only those who are now regretful of their vote/support want to lay blame on the cia and others--that way they don't have to take any responsibility for their vote.
and it was funny to me that the same intelligence agencies that were being blamed for the lack of wmd's were suddenly being praised a few weeks back by those same critics when they came out with info that put the war and it's affects in a bad light. i guess NOW the CIA and others are correct, but were wrong before....

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

and yet many still support bush, the war effort. lieberman for one was thrown to the wolves by his party for continuing to support that war--seems to me only those who are now regretful of their vote/support want to lay blame on the cia and others--that way they don't have to take any responsibility for their vote.
and it was funny to me that the same intelligence agencies that were being blamed for the lack of wmd's were suddenly being praised a few weeks back by those same critics when they came out with info that put the war and it's affects in a bad light. i guess NOW the CIA and others are correct, but were wrong before....

Danzig,
I'll have to do a search for the NIE report. It's worth the read.
If authorization for going to war was based on false information, the blame is not on the ones that voted, but on those that provided the "information" on which it was based.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I know you didn't claim he was a Christian but you knew he was. That is why you posted the story. If he was a Muslim, you would have never posted the article.

Rupert,
You're really reaching on this one.
How in HELL do you know I would never have posted the article?
Do you speak with Miss Cleo on a frequent basis? Or do you have telepathic powers to read my mind?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

and yet many still support bush, the war effort. lieberman for one was thrown to the wolves by his party for continuing to support that war--seems to me only those who are now regretful of their vote/support want to lay blame on the cia and others--that way they don't have to take any responsibility for their vote.
and it was funny to me that the same intelligence agencies that were being blamed for the lack of wmd's were suddenly being praised a few weeks back by those same critics when they came out with info that put the war and it's affects in a bad light. i guess NOW the CIA and others are correct, but were wrong before....

I don't think anyone really cares about the stuff that DTS brings up. The only thing that people care about is the fact that the war is not going well right now and Americans are getting killed. That is pretty much the only thing that most Americans care about. I think that the only regret that people have is the fact that things are not working out the way we hoped. People are also starting to question whether this startegy of "stay the course" is working. People are starting to get pretty fed up. If this thing would have ended a year ago, I don't think most Americans would have had any regrets about this war.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Danzig,
I'll have to do a search for the NIE report. It's worth the read.
If authorization for going to war was based on false information, the blame is not on the ones that voted, but on those that provided the "information" on which it was based.

dts--i went and found one of the last playboy issues to come out, in which they interviewed arianna huffington...bear with my typing, it will no doubt have typos as i have to peck this out...

huffington:although it goes without saying that we can be legitimately outraged at the administration that took us to war--that i blame the president goes without saying--i'm equally ourtaged at the democratic leadership for allowing the president to take us to war...

playboy:...was there any reason for you to think the opposition would oppose, at least at the time?
huffington: yes, because it was a matter of going to war. and remember, we were actually in the majority in the senate in 2002, if only for a moment. you can forgive politicians for going along on umimortant issues, but to allown an adminstration to take us into an unnecessary war? nothing is more immoral.

playboy: but who in congress knew it was unnecessary? ti took years for accustaion that the administration manipulated and ignored intelligence to surface.

continued...

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Hey DTS, What are you going to rant about once a democrat gets back in the White House? I think a democrat will win the White House in either 2008 or 2012. Once that happens, you will have nothing to talk about. What did you complain about in the 1990s?

Price of Gas? An old reliable if there ever was one.

Also, Polytrack!

It's really hard to sort through the junk in the news or what seems to be passing for news these days, especially during election season. I vote based on issues instead of any straight ticket. It's actually very tough work to get a firm understanding of candidate positions.

I thnk it's real unfortunate politicians are getting brought down by what anyone reasonable would term a personal matter. But that's the way it is.

You can count on two things. First, negative campaigning stinks, but works. And the other is that Americans hate wars. I read that in the election following Pearl Harbor, FDR's party lost 45 seats in Congress. That amazed me.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Rupert,
You're really reaching on this one.
How in HELL do you know I would never have posted the article?
Do you speak with Miss Cleo on a frequent basis? Or do you have telepathic powers to read my mind?

Who does Miss Cleo like tomorrow?

I can't get through to Dionne Warwick!

... congrats on your son's accomplishments! attaboy ... way to go ... keep up the good work ...

[Danzig]

huffington: the late democratic senator from minnesota paul wellstone voted against the war in 2002. i've had off the recrod conversations with many democratic leaders who knew better and did not act on that knowledge. i believe the the democrats lacked courageous leadership, lacked a willingness to stand up for what they believed in, for what is right--even if they lost. there is a special blame and a special place in dante's inferno for them.

playboy: so why did they do it?

huffington: democrats are fools and enablers. their spineless leaders went along with the war purely for political reasons: reelectability. they assumed if they opposed the war they would be seen as weak.


---this all supports my belief that congress KNEW exactly what they cia told them at the time of their vote--that only when they felt that things were going poorly in iraq that it was time to trot out the whole 'they lied to us about wmd's' bs excuse. that way they could claim innocence, we voted for a just war, not this--but i think they knew THEN what they claim to have learned much later.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Rupert,
You're really reaching on this one.
How in HELL do you know I would never have posted the article?
Do you speak with Miss Cleo on a frequent basis? Or do you have telepathic powers to read my mind?

Because I see the stuff that you post. You post stuff that fits your agenda. I don't see you posting stuff that doesn't fit your agenda. Any article that is a negative for republicans or Christians would be something that you would be likely to post. There would be no reason for you to post an article that made a democrat or a Muslim look bad.

Would you have posted the article if it was about a Muslim Imam who was caught in a homosexual relationship? I highly doubt it.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

Price of Gas? An old reliable if there ever was one.

Also, Polytrack!

It's really hard to sort through the junk in the news or what seems to be passing for news these days, especially during election season. I vote based on issues instead of any straight ticket. It's actually very tough work to get a firm understanding of candidate positions.

I thnk it's real unfortunate politicians are getting brought down by what anyone reasonable would term a personal matter. But that's the way it is.

You can count on two things. First, negative campaigning stinks, but works. And the other is that Americans hate wars. I read that in the election following Pearl Harbor, FDR's party lost 45 seats in Congress. That amazed me.

not just americans hate it--churchill lost his first election after winning ww 2.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

Price of Gas? An old reliable if there ever was one.

Also, Polytrack!

It's really hard to sort through the junk in the news or what seems to be passing for news these days, especially during election season. I vote based on issues instead of any straight ticket. It's actually very tough work to get a firm understanding of candidate positions.

I thnk it's real unfortunate politicians are getting brought down by what anyone reasonable would term a personal matter. But that's the way it is.

You can count on two things. First, negative campaigning stinks, but works. And the other is that Americans hate wars. I read that in the election following Pearl Harbor, FDR's party lost 45 seats in Congress. That amazed me.

The price of gas has come way down. In Los Angeles, we were paying as much as $3.70 a gallon. Now the price is down to about $2.30.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

huffington: the late democratic senator from minnesota paul wellstone voted against the war in 2002. i've had off the recrod conversations with many democratic leaders who knew better and did not act on that knowledge. i believe the the democrats lacked courageous leadership, lacked a willingness to stand up for what they believed in, for what is right--even if they lost. there is a special blame and a special place in dante's inferno for them.

playboy: so why did they do it?

huffington: democrats are fools and enablers. their spineless leaders went along with the war purely for political reasons: reelectability. they assumed if they opposed the war they would be seen as weak.


---this all supports my belief that congress KNEW exactly what they cia told them at the time of their vote--that only when they felt that things were going poorly in iraq that it was time to trot out the whole 'they lied to us about wmd's' bs excuse. that way they could claim innocence, we voted for a just war, not this--but i think they knew THEN what they claim to have learned much later.

This sounds plausible to me,and after 11/7...I'm going to take a long hot shower to wash all the crap off!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

The price of gas has come way down. In Los Angeles, we were paying as much as $3.70 a gallon. Now the price is down to about $2.30.

1.92 in little rock....what a nasty place. still hovering just above $2 here.

[Downthestretch55]

Rupert,
Your words:
"I don't think anyone really cares about the stuff that DTS brings up".
Seems to me that you've spent a bit of time today discussing same.
So, are you creating a lie about me, denying what you've said, or do you have some other excuse for avoiding the truth of which I speak?
I await your response.
DTS