 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
 Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 8:50 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| dim12trav wrote: | | Is it Bush who is using the Christian right or vice versa? Until Bush came along the Christian right was mostly unpolitical. Bush has painted himself as "one of them" with little credible evidence. They took the bait and ran with it hoping that it was true. |
I would argue that they take turns sodomizing each other. Sorry, there's just no other way to put it!
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | For example, when half of the Democrats in power jumped on the Iraq War bandwagon rather than carrying out their constitutional obligation to act as a check against presidential craziness, they were DEFINITELY in dereliction of their duties! |
I'm wondering P... these Democrats that voted for the war... do you believe that they intentionally derelicted their duties or that they voted their conscious? If they intentionally derilicted their duties, are you able to provide evidence, that was available THEN... not now... but that that clearly demonstrates this?
Or, if they voted their conscience... are you now going to criminalize that based on your perspective? As far as I can tell, what you are proposing is to criminalize any activity that you don't agree with. You don't think we should have gone into Iraq based on information we have NOW... not then.. but now. Then, what you are proposing is too send to jail the very people that voted, based on the information available then, for the war because you happen to feel... not know or demonstrate... was wrong.
Is this what the world of academia has spiraled into? A world where only intellectual elites get to make these choices? Where it is only they who are qualified enough, intellectually, to differentiate what is, and what is not fact. That they are the only ones able to operate at Bloom's 'Evaluation' level of cognition... that the rest of us operating a bit further down on the taxonomical scale are simply incapable of uttering these decisions?
This kind of reasoning is simply the end of a free society. Pondering did a good job of outlining what the ramifications were... and you still want to throw them all in jail simply because you disagree with their positions... never once considering what others think or believe, or really examining (WITH OBJECTIVITY) the facts behind the war or the state of reality our country has to operate in. No.... it is I hate Bush... he is a crook.... your whole political system is broke... so lets just throw them all in jail...
I simply don’t get you sometimes…
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | | dim12trav wrote: | (Revisit of the Imperial presidency thread.)
Lately the president has attempted to take over congress and write law for them and has the presumption of accusing them of taking money away from the troops when it is his vetoes which have done that task. Bush could just make one his "signing statements" claiming that the law wasn't right and he was not going to follow it. |
Dim... were you high when you wrote this?  |
This was uncalled for... I do sincerely apologize for the accusation.
I should have addressed the post… not the post-er.
The signing statements are not actionably enforceable and are therefore not usurpations, as far as I can tell, of the legislative process, therefore, Bush is not trying to take over congress and write law for them. They are disagreements between the legislative and executive branches concerning laws.
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
I'm wondering P... these Democrats that voted for the war... do you believe that they intentionally derelicted their duties or that they voted their conscious? |
I think they knew the right thing to do, but because the President had so much momentum and political capital at that point, they lacked the character and courage to actually stand up for what was right, and instead they took the easy and cowardly way out that you would expect a slimy politician to take, all the while neglecting their duties to check the power of the Executive, which is why I argue that they were in dereliction of their duties.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | I think they knew the right thing to do, but because the President had so much momentum and political capital at that point, they lacked the character and courage to actually stand up for what was right, and instead they took the easy and cowardly way out that you would expect a slimy politician to take, all the while neglecting their duties to check the power of the Executive, which is why I argue that they were in dereliction of their duties. |
So we should send them to jail then?
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
So we should send them to jail then? |
No, they should get a fair trial. But they definitely were in dereliction of their duties, and that is *really* bad.
The President and Vice President were of course also in dereliction of their duties, but that's another topic.
Did you know that Dick Cheney made $120,000,000 (give or take) from the Iraq war? I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how he was not in an EXTREME conflict of interest position, since he was simultaneously one of the architects of the war and personally had NINE FIGURES riding on it!
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 7003
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
P123...
I think your comments are right, and wrong.
You said:
| Quote: | | I think they knew the right thing to do, |
Which is right. They did know the right thing to do, and they did it. Everything else you said after that was wrong.
They knew the right thing to do, they did it, but the did not have the intestinal fortitude, nor depth of character and integrity to stand up and stay the course. What they are doing now is a result of their bending to political pressure, wilting in the face of adversity, and other less favorable symptoms of a loss of integrity.
I don't know if you saw the movie "The Guardian's" but in the begining of the movie a man a woman are drowning and are in the process of being rescued. That man, in his fear of drowning and with thoughts only for himself almost kills his wife in order to be saved first. The congress and particularly those dems who voted for the war and now are turning coat are that man.
I would bet that if that man had been asked days prior if he would be willing to sacrifice himself to save his wife he would have resolutely answered in the affirmative and only in the face of true adversity was he shown for the coward that he truly is.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Except that you're completely ignoring the entire point about separation of powers and how it is the duty of the House and Senate to check presidential craziness, and attacking Iraq was definitely a classic case presidential craziness.
The only reason there was any support for the Iraq war was Sept. 11th, which is patently absurd on its face, since Iraq had nothing to do with Sept. 11th. Saudi Arabia certainly had more to do with Sept. 11th than Iraq ever did.
But this didn't seem to bother the Democrats who voted for the war, and hence I assert they are guilty of dereliction of duty. It was their duty to check the president and instead they betrayed their duties and just jumped on the bandwagon. They were all cowards, and they showed their lack of character by doing that.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pondering
King of the Jungle
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 1506
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | Except that you're completely ignoring the entire point about separation of powers |
and you're ignoring the "balance" part...
If the Prez wants to go this way, and Congress says "no", that's a "check"
If the Prez wants to go this way, and Congress agrees, that's "balance"...that's what gives the Presidential action legitimacy 
| P1234567890 wrote: |
and how it is the duty of the House and Senate to check presidential craziness, |
true...but since they voted to give him authority...that, by definition, "un-crazy-izes" it 
| P1234567890 wrote: |
and attacking Iraq was definitely a classic case presidential craziness. |
sez you...be happy I didn't win in 2004 or we'd just be getting started 
| P1234567890 wrote: |
The only reason there was any support for the Iraq war was Sept. 11th, which is patently absurd on its face, since Iraq had nothing to do with Sept. 11th. |
revisionist history? Is your statement partly true? sure...but there is alot more to that story...not that recounting it will change your mind though.
| P1234567890 wrote: |
Saudi Arabia certainly had more to do with Sept. 11th than Iraq ever did. |
true-ish...Saudi government (i.e. the King) maybe not...Saudi regime? maybe...funding Islamist schools, etc..
| P1234567890 wrote: |
But this didn't seem to bother the Democrats who voted for the war, and hence I assert they are guilty of dereliction of duty. It was their duty to check the president and instead they betrayed their duties and just jumped on the bandwagon. They were all cowards, and they showed their lack of character by doing that. |
I really, really, really wish we'd had this board discussion back in Sept '01
_________________
Links of note:"Review for Doubting Christians"
Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs
“You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong...You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.” - Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pondering, it's the Congress' DUTY to put the President's feet to the fire EVEN when there's a SLAM DUNK argument for going to war. That's THEIR JOB.
With the Iraq War, NOBODY did this, and it CERTAINLY wasn't a slam dunk. Their evidence was shaky AT BEST.
Certainly there was at least as good an argument for invading Saudi Arabia as there was for invading Iraq. How many of the Sept. 11th hijackers were Saudis? How many were Iraqi? How much of their funding came from Saudi Arabia? How much came from Iraq?
If Congress would have been asking EVEN THE MOST BASIC AND SIMPLE questions, they would have very quickly discovered that the reasons for attacking Iraq were no better than those for attacking pretty much any other Islamic country (except of course that Iraq was NOT an Islamic Theocracy)...
That's what I'm talking about when I talk about dereliction of duty. EVERYONE in the house who voted for the war was guilty of this, but the Democrats were ESPECIALLY bad, because their default position should be to oppose ANY idea coming out of the White House, even if it kind of sounds good.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2656
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
P123 wrote | Quote: | but the Democrats were ESPECIALLY bad, because their default position should be to oppose ANY idea coming out of the White House, even if it kind of sounds good.
|
NO! That's not the function of an opposition in American politics, granted it is not to bend over and take it either, but good ideas need to be supported and bad ideas need to be shut down/stopped. Otherwise we have such political rancor that noting gets done.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dim12trav wrote: |
NO! That's not the function of an opposition in American politics, granted it is not to bend over and take it either, but good ideas need to be supported and bad ideas need to be shut down/stopped. Otherwise we have such political rancor that noting gets done. |
The point is that it's IMOSSIBLE to tell whether or not an idea is good or bad unless it's been debated thoroughly. And the case for attacking Iraq MOST CERTAINLY WAS NOT debated thoroughly, or else congress would have discovered all of the holes in the arguments.
How come nobody stood up and asked the following VERY SIMPLE question (partly plagiarized from Wikipedia):
"Nineteen men boarded the four planes, five each on American Airlines Flight 11, United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 77, four on United Airlines Flight 93. Fifteen of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt, and one from Lebanon.
ZERO of them were from Iraq. So how come we're invading Iraq when it seems pretty obvious that this was a Saudi job?"
Do you see my point? Congress COMPLETELY failed in its duties. They didn't even ask the MOST BASIC questions.
Attacking Iraq seemed like a good idea at the time because Bush had a 95% approval rating, so the spineless cowardly politicians in the House just jumped on the bandwagon rather than doing their CONSTITUTIONALLY-OBLIGED duties...
That's what I'm talking about when I yammering on about "dereliction of duty" and "treason", and I think I have a strong argument.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pondering
King of the Jungle
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 1506
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
P#s, I get your point, but to me...that amounts to crying over spilled milk...should lessons be learned in ref to future actions? Absolutely...
but there are very few "Do Overs" in life...so the way the rest of us have to deal with life is "Live, Learn" and move forward....all of this "coulda, shoulda, woulda" does NOTHING to move us forward and in fact...is moving us backward.
_________________
Links of note:"Review for Doubting Christians"
Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs
“You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong...You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.” - Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8213
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pondering wrote: | P#s, I get your point, but to me...that amounts to crying over spilled milk...should lessons be learned in ref to future actions? Absolutely...
but there are very few "Do Overs" in life...so the way the rest of us have to deal with life is "Live, Learn" and move forward....all of this "coulda, shoulda, woulda" does NOTHING to move us forward and in fact...is moving us backward. |
Do you think that the Iraq war was the FIRST time that Congress was negligent in its duties to check presidential zeal? Obviously not; it's probably happened DOZENS of times, and it's not like any Congress ever learns from previous mistakes.
Interestingly enough, what you are advocating here is EXACTLY what I want. I am EXACTLY trying to make sure that future politicians learn from the mistakes of these politicians. If they are put on trial for dereliction of duty, then future politicians will try harder to do their jobs properly.
You CAN NOT rely on the good will and social responsibility of politicians. They must be THREATENED AND FORCED to act like civilized human beings, or else they simply won't do it.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2656
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
P123.. wrote | Quote: | | You CAN NOT rely on the good will and social responsibility of politicians. They must be THREATENED AND FORCED to act like civilized human beings, or else they simply won't do it. |
Threatened? Forced? That is so unAmerican, it wont ever happen. But if we make it in their best interests to do their right duty by unelecting them if the dont do the right thing. NO implied threats, just out of office. The real issue with that scenario is that no two people would agree upon just what is correct. Leaving them to remain in office (OH that's what happens already)
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
