CLASSLESS, SOULLESS, GODLESS...AND CLUELESS

Jan --

You are obviously a very angry woman. I don't know what the solution is to ease your mind, but I think a good place to start would be a nice glass of wine.

And re-read your own post. Does what you write reflect what Christianity is supposed to be about?

Long time no see, or read. Um, yes, actually this IS what Christianity is about--protecting innocent life, celebrating God-given freedom, fighting evil...yes, I do believe that's what it's about. Am I angry? Oh sure, you bet! Look at the mess we're in. Not to worry though, I am a very happy, grateful woman, and I do enjoy a glass of wine or two each weekend. Thanks for stopping by.

Yeah, I haven't been blogging lately. But I figured I'd stop in today.

I don't think that saying someone is anti-American because they disagree with your view of this president is a good reflection of Christianity.

And it's certainly not a reflection of what I understand to be what America is about. I had to suffer through 8 years of a president I despised (Bush II) and knew many people who supported him. I thought they were wrong, and debated them. But I never accused them of being anti-American. (That's not to say that some of them didn't question my patriotism, which I deeply resent.)

No, I don't think people are anti-American for disagreeing with me, but I think they are anti-American if they trash the country every chance they get, if they think Obama's mea culpa tour of Europe was a great idea, if they think sharing our most classified intelligence with the ENEMIES of America is cool, if they think trying to dismantle the Constitution that made us the great country we are is the way to go--if they telegraph, in other words, their anti-American sentiments to all, then yes, I consider them anti-American. As with our former discussion about calling people Marxists who ARE Marxists, I don't believe the people who are anti-American think it is an insult to be called such. They admit it.

But, Jan, you have your own definition of what it means to dismantle the Constitution. I think Bush II did a great job of that by keeping criminals locked up without a trial for years and, in the meantime, subjecting them to torture that we would consider an outrage if it was done to our soldiers who are captured. If you agree with what Bush did, should I call you anti-American.

Do you call me anti-American for holding liberal views?

...if by "criminals" you mean "terrorists," the Constitution does not apply to them. I am more concerned with the government's attempts to stifle free speech, confiscate guns (both of these are currently underway), refuse to protect full term babies' lives (though they are human beings with full Constitutional protection), keeping children in schools that their parents do not want them in, etc. etc.
No I don't think you are anti-American for being a liberal. Just clueless. And if you find socialism to your liking, please feel free to join all my in-laws in Germany. Just a thought--you can stay here if you like, of course, but please refrain from trying to turn my AMERICA into Europe! I'm off to Happy Hour.

call him trailer trash, but I know some kinda classy folks who live in trailers.

Interject a thought re: Bush & Osama.
One is off white,the other darker, both are Liberals and both are addicted to spending other peoples money.
The only real difference is that one of them prevented any further attacks on this nation and the other seems to be hell bent on inviting attack

Boaz -- Trailer trash? Interesting way to refer to me.

Jan -- You are right that the Constitution does not apply to the ACCUSED terrorists that Bush held in Gitmo if we are holding them as prisoners of war, in which case we should look to the Geneva Convention.

If we do not consider them POWs because they are not fighting on behalf of a country, then they are, indeed, ACCUSED criminals, in which case we should be looking to our criminal laws to deal with them. That includes a speedy trial.

I have no connection to Europe, other than a stay there as a student, and a subsquent trip. So thanks for inviting me to leave and go to Europe, but that's not happening. You and other conservatives will just have to deal with the fact that there are people in this country who disagree with your views. Tough burden.

And you'll have to deal with the fact that so many people are disturbed by how the Republicans ran this country for so long that you have lost control of the Executive and Legislative Branches, and it now looks like the Democrats will have a filibuster-proof majority in the latter. Don't blame the voters or the Democrats. Blame the people that you voted in that abused their power and led to what I'm sure you view as a debacle. If there had been no Bush II, there would be no Obama I.

Finally, Jan, I'm not sure what your problem is with college. Too liberal? Well, I went to college during the Reagan years, and most of my friends were Reagan supporters.

I do understand your problem with TV. I also have a problem that young people seem to watch more TV than read. That's not a good development.

Boaz --

The terrorists didn't need to attack us here the last 8 years. Bush sent plenty of people over without any clear strategy for them to kill on their own ground.

I'm not sure if Boaz was calling Obama trailer trash or me trailer trash, so I'm edging off my response before. However, either way it doesn't make any sense.

...I'm inclined to give up.
Your answer to Boaz that they didn't have to attack us makes me want to say, okay, for WHATEVER reason, we have not been attacked. That seems like a good thing!
As for the terrorists, they are neither POWs nor criminals. They are enemy combatants and as such can be simply shot on sight. The Geneva Convention does not apply to them either. Read Ann Coulter's column today. They do not belong in our courts. Let the military handle them and keep the idiot lawyers out of it.
I would also like to respectfully recommend The Procrustean, a featured blog on the front of the blog page today. It is just fascinating and might give you some food for thought where religion is concerned. I know you mentioned something about fairies on a comment on one of my posts, and I understand your point, but my goodness people have often believed in fairies and other fanciful things at various times. That doesn't really relate to the profound impact of Christianity (and Judaism) on the world. Faith in God is not quite like believing in fairies, I daresay. I think the little fairies do not offer mankind much in the way of hope or guidance or salvation or eternity. I realize you don't think God does either, but you and I will just have to part company on that one!

Well the field will be cleared soon enough for this party to come to your home town soon.
No need to purchase tickets, all seats will be front row.

Read Ann Coulter? I have many, many times. She's not a good source to cite for any reason ever. That's like me telling you to read Michael Moore.

I agree with you that enemy combatants can be shot on sight until you capture them! (Unless you are in a "Saving Private Ryan" situation where you can't take them with you and can't imprison them. At that point, the Geneva Convention does permit you to execute them without trial.)

If they are not enemy combatants, you must try them as criminals.

...remember?
Actually Ann Coulter is an EXCELLENT source. She does her homework, has the best handle on satire of any writer out there today, and is not a complete lying DUMBARSE like Michael "I love Cuban tyranny" Moore. P L E A S E don't mention them in the same sentence.
The military is the proper agency to handle enemy combatants. The Geneva Convention is irrelevant, and the last thing we need is a bunch of terrorists clogging up our already overloaded courts, represented by Ramsey Clark clones trying to get them released into the general population of the U.S. to plot, seethe, hate and destroy.
Did you read the blog I recommended (respectfully)? The Procrustean. Really excellent reading, I promise.

Jan --

You really don't see how Ann Coulter has lowered the level of political discourse? I think it's sad that there are people who actually think she has anything constructive to contribute, but I guess some people think it's witty satire to call John Edwards "gay", call widows "harpies" (and suggest their deceased husbands woulod have divorced them anyway) because she doesn't agree with them, and she certainly doesn't have a handle on the facts (i.e., Canadians in Vietnam).

Michael Moore is annoying. I can't handle him all the time. But his documentaries are iluminating. At least when your mind is open.

I'm kind of busy reading other materials right now. I just finished Haldeman and Ehrlichman's memoirs, and I'm on David Frost's account of the Nixon Interviews. (I'm trying to get accounts on Watergate from all sides so I get a clear view. I previously read Theodore White's
"Breach of Faith", and have John Dean's, Jeb Magruder's, and Raymond Price's books on my shelf waiting. It's what I call the "Rashomon" approach to learning about history.) So I'll pass on your recommendation of what I assume is an extreme rightwing blog.

When you say "I'm inclined to give up" and "I gave up", I interpret that to mean that you can't handle discourse with someone who disagrees with you and who is also well-informed. It's exhausting, huh?

it isn't tiring--in fact it can be fun jousting with you, but you have to admit it's pointless. We will never see eye to eye on anything. I go on Townhall because it is conservative and I like to see that viewpoint SOMEWHERE, since the MSM is so far left it has done a sideways inversion and its head is up its....
Ann Coulter is a master of satire and very well informed. You said you are well informed, but who has decided you are? You? Michael Moore could not illuminate a dark closet with a flashlight. Lying and making stuff up--yeah, he can do that.
So when I said I give up, I just mean that we are too far apart to ever meet in the middle, and after a while it seems almost silly to discuss anything.
I'm glad you are satisfied with your reading list. The web site I recommended is simply discussing various ideas about religion over time. It isn't extreme OR right wing. But by all means, skip it if it does not appeal.
On a happy note, I welcomed my fifth grandbaby into the world last night. He is quite something. I sure wish I had a better world to offer him!

Congratulations on your grandchild! You are welcoming him/her into a great world, where everyone can speak their mind, even if others, including the majority, don't agree. I hope he/she grows up to be openminded.

Also: Please admit that you are "giving up" because you can't handle someone disagreeing with you.

I thought I made that clear! NOT giving up because you (or anyone) disagree(s) with me, giving up because it never changes ANYTHING to keep repeating the same things, on both sides, over and over. The country has never been more polarized I think, and I see no way that will change.
I have a finite amount of time and prefer to spend it, at least as far as political matters are concerned, reading conservative writers I respect and listening to intelligent people with FACTS and analyses to offer. People disagree with me all the time, including my husband and other people I love dearly! I can handle it just fine, if we are having a back-and-forth dialogue which could lead to someone, even me, rethinking an issue and drawing a different conclusion. It just doesn't happen with the left. Their bomb throwers are in charge. Their naivite and lack of knowledge about the way the world works renders them unable to THINK. They never let facts get in the way of their dogma. So there is no point. I know you are a liberal. I'm not saying you are a lefty.
Thanks for the congrats on my grandson. I'm a very happy person, because my happiness does not depend on the world, but I don't kid myself into thinking that world is not a huge cesspool in which my sweet granddarlings will have to swim and survive. I shall do my best to help them.

So in other words, it's not that you can't handle someone disagreeing with you, you just prefer to read opinions that already confirm what you already believe. Got it. Not much of a distinction, but you are typical of the rightwingers I know who just dismiss liberals as "communists", "socialists", and "libs", without really knowing the distinctions in these terms.

If you are ever up for getting into "facts", I'm up for it, too, but "facts" don't come from Ann Coulter, Monica Crowley, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity.

I got four letter words, I mean I have four better words to decribe him. Unfortunately every time I try to post them, it won't let me. S oI'll use these instead.
Marxist
Un-American
Destructive
Oppressive

Don't forget he's spending more money than any other president in history, betraying all he's said during his campaign. His lackadaisical views on national security worries me. He can talk all he wants, but there are people out there bent on our destruction, no matter what part of the political spectrum you stand on.
Good post.

Maybe you all should be trying to figure out why the Republican Party is losing the support of America.

Anyone wondering why the Republican Party has lost the support of America?

I was in fact thinking of barry with the TT comment, as for why is the RepukliKrat Party going down?
Democrat Lite doesn't sell well

Neither does Republican Bitter.

First of all, a conservative can never understand the thought process of a Marxist. Their brain is wired differently. It's like being gay, if you're straight you don't get it. I don't care if someone isgay, I just don't get it. The problem is that people are lazy. They didn't do their homework. People were saying to me "he makes more sense then McCain" and I was replying "He's a Marxist and a liar" I did my homework, they did not, but they listened to the media sing his praise ans anoint him the Messiah. The good news is I really see a ground swell to the right. hopefully this was a slap in the face to the people that voted for him. Don't get fooled again....
PS: Nice friend you have there Jan, I just love a self rightous hypocrite. Hey Ben,your Messiah Obama is anti-American, so his woshipers are either anti-American, or idiots, you choose your title.

Exaggerate much?

Oh, and you're absolutely correct about the groundswell . . . that is, if you are living in 1981.

Terrorists and criminals are not the same. If you really knew any law, you would know that.
Obama knows it but he wants to play games with words, hoping he'll be praised. Since he doesn't mind crushing baby's skulls, he has little room to complain about anything.

As for torture - in spite of Nancy Pelose, the big wheel terrorists were waterboarded in three instances. considering their own behavior, that is hardly torture.

If a man kills others knowing that he will be killed or tortured if caught, then if he is, he made the bargain. No one asked him to go out and kill but himself.

As for Ann Coulter - she has a great sense of humor, the only reason it bothers you is that she puts you democrats down so beautifully.

If Ann Coulter were funny or insightful, I'd appreciate her more, even if she expressed views contrary to mine. But she's not funny, and does not express anything that adds to political discourse.

A terrorist is a type of criminal. Either way, you can't hold someone forever without charging them, or categorizing them under applicable POW rules.

You are totally wrong about waterboarding. It was done more than three times. And let's not forget about rendition.

Nice how you throw in a reference to the most extreme form of abortion into a discussion that was not about abortion. Very Coulter-like of you. You going to mention Chappaquiddick now, too? And you all wonder why the rest of us don't take rightwingers seriously anymore.

This post is from April.

Does this mean you don't like President Obama?

As I said, this ship has sailed.
But since you asked, it means I despise,abhor,disrespect and intentionally denigrate Obama and everything he and his evil minions stand for. Thank you for visiting.

"Evil". Wow. Your bowling alley is short a few pins.