BJean

Speaking of John Dean, wasn't it amazing how he kinda did a l80, eventually!

Thanks, baby! The ole' noggin just ain't what it used to be. Yesterday I was thinking about Nixon so I probably had John Dean in my thoughts!

One of the politicians in Texas who is running for Governor, Kay Bailey Hutchison, is one low-key emotion-less woman. I don't like her politics and I do not trust her stoic, stone faced (although hard line), way of communicating.

John McCain was caught from time to time raging out of control. It was something that scared people about him if he were to become the leader of the free world. I have no doubt that it lost him a lot of votes. John Dean got all excited at a rally and screeched a cry that would have barely been appropriate at a football game. He almost got drummed out of the corps. As it was, his chance at running for president went down the tubes. He was seen as just too emotional. As far as the sexes are concerned, in the past for a female public figure raged out of control in public, she was considered mentally unstable. Men, on the other hand, were seen as strong and macho. Things have been changing, thank goodness!

Cleo's, that's one of the more straight forward explanations of what's been going on than I've heard in a while. And those same fat cats are responsible for taking their jobs (the ones who own corporations) out of the country. Why can't they understand that they've effectively cut off their nose to spite their face. That's what is so insidious about greed - the extent to which greed has become the standard in business in America -it has nearly brought this country to its' knees. Let's hope that Obama's remarks last night addressing this very topic will have some effect. Perhaps bringing it out in the open in that very public forum, will give some of these people the conscicence that they are sorely lacking.

patty: "What's 'stupid' here is that people can't see past the mother and her dilemma of having an unwanted pregancy towards the innocent baby in the womb that is alive and hoping for a chance at life. THAT"S STUPID!!! HEARTLESS and CRUEL!!!Not to mention MURDEROUS and SINFUL!!!:mad2:" So what I hear you saying is that the poor innocent baby in the womb who has some hope of a chance of a life absolutely trumps the life of a woman or girl who might die just so that baby has a hope of a chance of a life. That's the cruelest kick in the gut for women everywhere. _

I can't believe you actually used, if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. Cool. I hadn't thought of that. So it's fine with me if Sara Palin uses some high powered rifle to shoot animals from a helicopter. Because if she gets cross-ways with her government, she'll just pick up that rifle and hole up in some encampment and have her very own war. There have been plenty of examples of right wing extremists doing just that. And religious fanatics like Waco, for instance. If we all were issued guns after an extensive course on the use of firearms and the safety of having firearms in your home, then I would not be opposed to them. Right now, it sure feels like most of the folks who have lots of guns are a threat to me because their political viewpoints (right wing extremist) are the opposite of mine. So I'm not afraid of the government invading my land and taking it away. I'm afraid of people like Timothy McVeigh and kooks that love to sleep with a warm gun under their pillow.

The demographic where that they work probably results in more Democrats than Republicans registering, but there's no requirement that people they signed up had to register as Democrats. patty: "I also don't think that any agency that uses federal funds should be coaching people in ways to 'cheat' the government out of these funds, which is what they were doing." Hmmm? That's a strong statement. Can you back it up with proof?

Oh yeah, I caught that way back and forgot to point that out Cleo's. ACORN is not a government agency. They are not able to actually place voters on the rolls. The government does that. They merely set up ways to get people exposed and on a list to be registered which is, in theory, a very good thing. The larger the number of Americans who vote, the better we know how people really feel about issues and politicians. As for the video showing the ACORN employee (was she really?) talking to the supposed pimp and hooker, did she offer to make them a loan? Did they receive any money?

Some of these right wing (I guess Republican, although I'm not convinced all Republicans feel this way) are just so hard to figure. One of their major issues of contention is to make abortion illegal. I mean to say that, for some of the right wing, is the ONLY real seriously important issue on the agenda. Interestingly, they love the death penalty and support it implicitly. They also believe everyone should have the right to bear arms of any kind. Never mind that killing with guns by accident is a problem and being able to grab a gun and quickly kill in a rage is a problem and gangs carrying guns and using them on the streets is a big problem in some cities. But their major anger and intolerance seems to stem from their anger about women having the choice in the question of abortion. They talk about not wanting government interference in their right to buy guns and carry them. They don't want the government telling them have to pay taxes. They don't want the government having oversight or any control over the insurance companies who make billions on their health care policies. And they bellyache about government intrusion in their lives as being a very bad thing. They don't want to pay taxes and they don't want any government programs of the welfare type - they think everybody should be able to work, as they do. They don't want to pay for somebody elses mistakes. They don't want generations on welfare. They think it is unfair to have to give part of their salary to someone who is on the dole. But they want the government to intrude in the case of a woman's choice.They want children or women who become impregnated without their consent and against their wishes, to be forced into carrying those embryos to full term. What happens after that to those women and those babies is not their concern. Although they say they know lots of people who want to adopt them. How is that an answer? They want to make a law to force women to have babies in order to be baby mills for their friends who need babies? And to heck with the mothers and their lives. Because if that mother is unable to make a living for herself and her child because she lost her job when she became pregnant and can't get another one because she has a baby, that's just too bad. Don't ask the right wing to pay any taxes to come to her rescue. It's her problem. She shouldn't have had sex. I am sorry, it just makes absolutely no sense to me and it seems heartless and cruel and convoluted. And did I mention stupid? It seems real, real, stupid.

Thanks for the post Cleo's. Maybe Richard Nixon is guiding the party from his perch high above, eh? Seems like it's deja vous "all over again."

patty: "But, the police just wanted them caught, so they did it." The police do not set up some random instrusion into someone's office on the off chance they will catch somebody committing a crime. There would be absolutely no point. They know that they must follow the letter of the law or their case will not hold up in court. If it won't hold up in court, they have wasted their time and the taxpayers money. So they are very careful about how they make arrests. They have to have a case. These nincompoops that entered the ACORN office and had a dialogue with some female employee to manufacture a case means nothing because they weren't able to prove any wrong doing by ACORN as far as I could tell. Their reason for doing what they did was simply to give ACORN some bad press and plant the seed of doubt about ACORN's supposed illegal activities. patty: "ACORN is one of those government agencies that is deceitful and corrupt. They have been proven to abuse the system." When was that proven? When were they taken to court? There's a good chance I've just missed it because I haven't really been following the case, but if anything was definitively proven, I've yet to learn of it. A lot of people are convinced that the entire organization of ACORN is corrupt and the goof balls who were video taping the female employee are part of the reason. And some of the same people are involved in the Louisiana fiasco. What they were caught doing in Louisiana is illegal. The police are not suppose to wire tap either. But the Bush administration thought that was okay - as long as they decided it was okay. So it isn't surprising that some of the folks who admired Bush would think it is okay.

If these people were after the truth, they would not have to pose as a hooker or anything other than an investigative journalist. Because when you watch the video they released, it is edited and cut and patched and who knows what the context actually was when the ACORN employee made her statements. Nothing, certainly, that would stand up in a court of law and not necessarily because it was taped surrepticiously, but because the entire content of the discussion was not presented. You have to wonder about the motivation of such people. Really interested in uncovering the truth, or interested in inflammatory video of an odd-ball employee to paint an entire organization with? And I say odd-ball although I have no idea if she really is. I didn't hear both sides of the discussion or why she said what she did. The right wing is incensed because there have been so many people who are not supportive of the right wing cause who have been registered to vote and brought to the polling places to vote. For some reason they deem this to be unfair practices in politics. The leftists got out the vote. The right wing can't win doing that, so they use subterfuge, fear, shock and awe to win elections. And by damn, it works. Which is truthfully a sorry inditement of our politics in America.

Ok. I'm slow. But I'm old. REborn yet. Good one!

You don't have to have lived through it to read about it in the history books. If we don't learn from our past, we are doomed to repeat it. Looks like we haven't learned much, eh?

As for the mess in Louisiana, it sounds like another Dirty Tricks gambit but they were caught in the act! Like Bush said... fool me once, shame on me, fool me uh... uh you just better not fool me. (Or something like that.)

I'm sure someone will enlighten me but I have yet to see any evidence that ACORN broke any laws. I know that ACORN tried to help people get out and vote and they helped get them to polling places, etc. They worked to get people registered to vote that otherwise may not have become voters. They admitted that some of the people they hired to sign people up to become registered voters, were fudging because they were paid by the number of folks they helped to get registered. That system combined with the poor quality of some of their employees, caused the problems. So they admitted that their system needed fixing, but they did not intentionally go about trying to register voters who were ineligible or dead. In fact, the registrar's office is the entity that actually registers voters. Not ACORN. And in any cases where ACORN realized that some people might be questionable, they called it to the attention of the local registrar so that the registrar's office would be sure to check them out before placing them on the rolls. I hope someone will publish proof that ACORN is the horrible company that people have made them out to be. And if they can't, I wish to hell they'd stop accusing them publically of things that ACORN is not guilty of. As Americans we should be proud and happy that the most people who CAN vote legally, WILL vote legally. It is what democracy promises and what we believe in as a form of government.

Hummingbird I loved your post too. You were very generous and understanding that is exactly what we need in order to solve problems. I appreciate the fact that you thanked Hummingbird for her post, patty, and complimented her on it.

Oh my goodness Corliss, that was an amazing post. Absolutely amazing. You have single-handedly homed in on the heart of the debate and the soul of the solution. You have said exactly what has been in my head but because I've been so tied up in debate, I haven't been able to say it. Thank you so much. I am grateful that you've inspired e to get back on track and focus on the real problem. The polarization of the right and left - which involves disrespect and winds up causing us to not solve any of the problems that we need to be working on together. I wonder if it will ever be possible for a leader of this country to inspire us to work together instead of just fighting each other.

I don't believe that God's spirit comes and goes with our ever-changing moods and beliefs. He's either with us or he doesn't exist. I find no difference in that part of the Baptist doctrine that teaches that once saved, always saved and the remarks that you've made about being a sinner. You've said that you accept that you are a sinner but that you know God forgives you because he expects us to sin. And you have gone on to say that because of having accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior, etc... you are going to heaven. I've never read that you've put a caveat on that passport to heaven, that if you get mad at God for some personal loss or grief or depressed mental state or other reasons for perhaps temporarily not feeling his spirit within you, that he will leave you until you invite him back. The picture you paint of God is grim and depressing and it seems that you give yourself a pass if you sin - because God expects it. I don't believe that is what God, spirituality, love and grace is all about. You've pidgeon holed your particular brand of believing that is what you are comfortable with and able to have faith in. It's what you NEED right now. Later perhaps, you will be open to understanding what you are missing in the big picture.

p: "The verdict of any murder lies with the jury who decides the guilt or innocence beyond the shadow of a doubt." me: Beyond the shadow of a doubt is no longer the test in a murder trial. The test in the trial of a murderer is that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Much more leeway for error. P "The judge passes the sentence in accordance with the law. Now if it was in accordance with God's law, then it would be the death sentence." me: That's right, the judge is only supposed to be upholding the law - the law of the land not that of someone's interpretation of what God wants. We are all people, not God, and we have no right to take a man's life whether he was convicted of a crime or not. p: "I'm sure this has happpened, and it is unfortunate. But it should not stop the death penalty from being upheld. There are many murderers who outright confess that they did indeed do the murders. They definitely should be put to death. Also, those who have been proven to be guilty and those who commit multiple murders. me: Unfortunate? We kill someone who is not guilty and you say it is "unfortunate"? It is unforgivable! It is not for us to say that someone needs killing. We know when we need to separate someone from society for the good of the people. But we should not be in the business of killing human beings, no matter how much we hate them or their behavior. P: "God is the one who made the law. If he made the law, then he will not be angry with those who uphold it." I disagree. We are only human beings with all of the prejudice and bias that we've adopted during our life. God doesn't have those (or does he?) so it's within his power to make judgements. We should not have that power over other humans for if we do, we will abuse it. Neeless to say, when we put someone to death for breaking the law, it is bad for the person we kill but it is also very bad for us, as human beings.

Well said, patty!

It made my blood boil too, Cleo's. I know that he used it to make a point to teach what the church stands for regarding marriage. But I can tell you that what he said still haunts me today. I wonder whatever happened to that poor woman. That minister was a powerful force in our little town. And he preached guilt, hell, fire and brimstone. It took me about 2 years of participating in that congregation to realize what being a Southern Baptist was all about. They carried their Bibles dutifly to church twice a week and they could quote scriptures from memory, and then there was how they lived their lives on a daily basis. And those two things were not one and the same.

God knows what is in your heart. I've known plenty of people who tried to impress with good deeds but they had black hearts. Some of them were ones who professed their faith the loudest.

I am glad that what you're doing works so well for you. Once when I was a member of the Baptist church, the minister preached a regular sermon setting the congregation straight as he did every Sunday. After his sermon he said he had something very important to say to us. He said that there was a woman, a church member, who had come to him complaining that her husband was hitting her. It had happened on 2 occasions. The second time he hit her so hard and so many times, that she had to go to the emergency room. The reason she came to the pastor was because she didn't know what to do. She knew she couldn't get a divorce because she understood her vows and what the Baptist church teaches about marriage being forever, but she just couldn't put up with her husband's abuse. The pastor said to us, let us make no mistake about what this woman needed to do. She needs to absolutely abide by her husbands wishes and get right back to work, listening to her husband and not causing him, who is the absolute head of the household, any trouble. And the pastor said, that is what I counseled this good woman of our church to do. Heed her husband's words, no matter what. He told us, I thought that you all needed to hear this lesson and perhaps refresh your minds on what the Bible teaches us about the family and the roles of the husband and wife.