For THIS Democrat, at least!
"...Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace is the possibility that Israel will bomb Iran's nuclear facilities."
--Presidential Hopeful, John Edwards
NOT that Iran would acquire nuclear weapons, but that another nation might try to stop them! Sheesh! Let's all give thanks to God that this man has a near ZERO percent chance of winning the Oval Office.
20 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the real world where facts prevail. Israel bombing Iran is the greatest short-term threat to world peace.
It what real world, where FACTS prevail, should Israel NOT fear for her future and that of her people?
In what real world, where FACTS prevail, is Israel more of a threat to world peace than Iran?
OHHHhhhhh, that's right! In a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT world where FACTS are interchangeable with the deceitful ramblings of lunatics!
Suffice it to say, we disagree. And that's as testy as I intend to get.
Everytime the US and israel up their rhetoric about iran, ahmidienajhad gets a jump in the pols. That's the real world.
In the real world it's also more likely to be 6-7 years before Iran has a workable nuclear devise.
Why? Because they're all on the same page Ideologically.
As Christians, there is the hope that comes from knowing that God is still in control and His plan will unfold when His time is ready.
I've about decided that it is useless to try to debate with liberals, their eyes are so on this world and their hopes seem to be in some liberal politician that can tell "beautiful" lies.
Yeah...we know. Pols like you, BenT.
Pols like you who (according to your body of comments)look for anything and everything to condemn this president and this nation for (along with anyone who holds sacred scripture dear). Pols like you whose anger is 180 freaking degrees out of phase with reality.
Daddio-- Uhhhhh. You DO realize BenT meant 'Polls', right? For clarification, what do YOU mean by Pols?
"I've about decided that it is useless to try to debate with liberals, their eyes are so on this world and their hopes seem to be in some liberal politician that can tell "beautiful" lies."
Umm, you DO know the reason that at least we progressive Christians feel the way we do is because of our trust in God, NOT politicians?
We Christian pacifists, for instance, are willing to put our faith in God and trust in God for our defense.
Disagree with us if you wish, but don't suggest it's because WE'RE trusting wordly politicians when religious conservatives are the ones wanting to remove hindrances to corporations (another human institutions) to "save" us and a huge military to "defend" us.
Umm, you DO know the reason that at least we progressive Christians feel the way we do is because of our trust in God, NOT politicians?
We Christian pacifists, for instance, are willing to put our faith in God and trust in God for our defense.
Disagree with us if you wish, but don't suggest it's because WE'RE trusting wordly politicians when religious conservatives are the ones wanting to remove hindrances to corporations (another human institutions) to "save" us and a huge military to "defend" us.
As a former Republican, it's certainly not them either. In fact, there's not a party around about which I could even say "best represents Christ's values."
I'm just hoping to find the candidates who are least offensive to my Christian and American and human ideals. Those who'll do the least harm.
Disagree with us if you wish, but don't suggest it's because WE'RE trusting wordly politicians when religious conservatives are the ones wanting to remove hindrances to corporations (another human institutions) to "save" us and a huge military to "defend" us.
February 24, 2007 8:54 PM
I know you never intend for us to overlook you or your opinions and I personally wonder if you ever were a Republican. The party symbol for the Democrats fits you perfectly. Ever heard "stubborn as a mule"?
And it's not so much that I want you to hear my opinion as it is that I'm pointing out that you're criticizing us for one thing (depending upon politicians instead of God) and then, when I point out that I'm NOT depending upon politicians and I AM depending upon God, instead of apologizing for the mistake you wenton to try to change the subject and criticize me for something else.
Peace, sister.
That has to be about the stupidest statement I've ever heard from a "serious" politician.
"That has to be about the stupidest statement I've ever heard from a "serious" politician."
I'll repeat what I said earlier: All I've read has said that this is just a rumor, not verified that Edwards actually said this. Let's not make assumptions.
I'd think that anyone talking about "pre-emptive" bombings is a threat (maybe not the biggest threat, but a threat nonetheless), but I don't know that Edwards actually stated this.
Let's not make arguments where none exist.
But Dan err's greatly when he says,
"Let's not make arguments where none exist"
The argument DOES exist... much like evolution. Evolution has not proven itself, and neither has John Edwards.