The Beat

"The Rebel Jesus"

posted by John Nichols on 11/23/2005 @ 12:56pm

Despite the worst efforts of Wal-Mart and its equally carnivorous competitors to hype up an earlier start, Thanksgiving Day still marks something akin to the official opening of the Holiday season. And with this beginning even the most resistant radio stations and elevator operators will now be programming a mix of Christmas music that can charitably be referred to as "lamentable."

A musical tradition that was meant to be inspiring, uplifting and perhaps even challenging degenerates each November into a mind-numbing slurry of "festive" Muzak that will, in short order, have tens of millions of Americans counting the days until December 25.

But, hark, there is redemption to be found -- though perhaps not on the radio dials of our ever most consolidated and rigidly-programmed media monopolies.

A better class of Christmas music is out there, waiting to be heard by those who seek it.

In fact, one of the finest contemporary Christmas songs is rapidly taking on "classic" status as it is recorded by discerning artists.

Canadian singers Kate and Anna McGarrigle's fine new holiday CD, The McGarrigle Christmas Hour, features a stirring rendition of the song in question: Jackson Browne's "The Rebel Jesus."

Originally recorded by Browne for the brilliant 1991 Chieftains holiday collaboration, The Bells of Dublin, "The Rebel Jesus" has taken on a life of its own. Along the way, it has become the most welcome antidote to the deadening dose of commercialism that Americans imbibe each year between Thanksgiving and Christmas.

So let us begin the season with Browne's wise words:

All the streets are filled with laughter and light

And the music of the season

And the merchants' windows are all bright

With the faces of the children

And the families hurrying to their homes

As the sky darkens and freezes

They'll be gathering around the hearths and tales

Giving thanks for all god's graces

And the birth of the rebel Jesus

|

Well they call him by the prince of peace

And they call him by the savior

And they pray to him upon the seas

And in every bold endeavor

As they fill his churches with their pride and gold

And their faith in him increases

But they've turned the nature that I worshipped in

From a temple to a robber's den

In the words of the rebel Jesus

|

We guard our world with locks and guns

And we guard our fine possessions

And once a year when christmas comes

We give to our relations

And perhaps we give a little to the poor

If the generosity should seize us

But if any one of us should interfere

In the business of why they are poor

They get the same as the rebel Jesus

|

But please forgive me if I seem

To take the tone of judgment

For I've no wish to come between

This day and your enjoyment

In this life of hardship and of earthly toil

We have need for anything that frees us

So I bid you pleasure

And I bid you cheer

From a heathen and a pagan

On the side of the rebel Jesus.

Comments (173)

  1. "From a heathen and a pagan

    On the side of the rebel Jesus."

    Umm no thanks, I'll stick to Hark the Herald Angels sing = )

    Todd

    Posted by Oksportsguy at 11/23/2005 @ 1:23pm

  2. I like Silent Night, or Come All ye Faithful....oh but I forgot...Libs and their ACLU buddies want to take Christ out of Christmas....nice...

    Posted by libz at 11/23/2005 @ 1:44pm

  3. C'mon you two (Todd, LibZ)....Jesus was a liberal! Admit it have a litte fun with the idea. You think non-Christians cannot appreciate the lessons he is purported to have taught or the principles therein? How remarkably un-Christian.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/23/2005 @ 2:01pm

  4. Man,this Jackson Browne guy is a real downer. Although I wonder how many copies of this record he sold :-)

    I much prefer O Holy Night.

    Would it be fair to say that some of those who are commercializing/merchandizing Christmas are the very same who lament and comlain about the lack of "basic human entitlements" for the poor? What are YOU buying for you and yours this year?

    Posted by usc1 at 11/23/2005 @ 2:12pm

  5. LofC,

    "You think non-Christians cannot appreciate the lessons he is purported to have taught or the principles therein?"

    Why... LofC...are you suggesting that you are a follower of Jesus?

    = )

    Todd

    Posted by Oksportsguy at 11/23/2005 @ 2:18pm

  6. I really admire Christians like LIBZ who tells Libs to go fuck themselves and those like Todd who have no problem stealing another country's oil. Hark the Herald Angels indeed..

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 2:27pm

  7. I really have to wonder how much arrogance it takes for LIBS to tell the rest of us regular Americans how to act or worship...Sounds very Stalinist to me

    Posted by libz at 11/23/2005 @ 2:31pm

  8. Which libs are telling you how to worship?

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 2:39pm

  9. American Criminal Liberties Union..... for starters

    Posted by libz at 11/23/2005 @ 2:41pm

  10. As a liberal Christian, I'd love to take Jesus out of Christmas. It doesn't take a theologian or a genius to understand he WAS NOT born on December 25th. Its quite funny to me that Christians are okay celebrating the birth of Jesus on the pagan sun god's birthday to which the Romans and Greeks used to worship. But Constantine, in his stategic genius, realized he couldn't take people's reasons to party away (after all, what do humans do best then party and worship something)...so he stuck Jesus' birthday on top of the sun god's. Quite honestly it baffles me the lengths many go to "celebrate" Jesus' birhday. I haven't found anywhere in the gospels where he is quoted as saying, "Hey, I think it would be a good idea for you to celebrate my birthday...hopefully, one day people will put out plastic displays of my birth place on their suburban lawns. If they do that, then salvation is truly theirs."

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 2:43pm

  11. If any of you morally-crazed Busheviks came across Jesus today you would treat him like garbage and you know it. Yet you castigate Muslims for thir "fascistic religion". Take a look at what the Quran says about Jesus:

    003.003 YUSUFALI: It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

    005.046 YUSUFALI: And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

    006.085 YUSUFALI: And Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous:

    043.057 YUSUFALI: When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example, behold, thy people raise a clamour thereat (in ridicule)!

    How many Bushevik-style "Christians" would do this? [tinyurl.com]

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/23/2005 @ 2:45pm

  12. Todd

    Never said I wasn't spiritual....don't consider myself an "organizational Christian" though...but Happy Turkey day nonetheless.

    LibZ

    Libs and their ACLU buddies want to take Christ out of Christmas.

    But aren't YOU the one whining about taking "Christ out of Christmas"? That would seem to infer that anyone non-Christian shouldn't have a holiday opinion? It is fact that our "traditional" Christmas celebration rituals are an amalgam of various Pagan rites, welded with a repositioned Christian birthday. see XMAS [christmas-time.com]

    Such info seems to indicate that actually, Pagans shold have "dibs" on Dec 25th!

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/23/2005 @ 2:45pm

  13. one day people will put out plastic displays of my birth place on their suburban lawns. If they do that, then salvation is truly theirs."

    Posted by BLUETEXAN 11/23/2005 @ 2:43pm

    Those plastic flag displays on their bumpers don't make them patriots, either.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/23/2005 @ 2:48pm

  14. How are they suggesting you worship?

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 2:48pm

  15. The thing about Jackson Browne's song is that he's right--Jesus was a rebel. The Sermon on the Mount still says things like "Blessed are the peacemakers." Now that's a radical (nutty liberal) idea according to many of the righties here.

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 2:54pm

  16. Can any Christian...liberal or conservative...admit that they think Jesus would be pleased with what Christmas has become? Would he smile upon the frenzied hoards of shoppers that push each other over for the last iPod or whatever kids want these days? Does he find pleasure in churches that spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to recreate his birth narrative (a church I know of in Plano...north of Dallas...that does this...live animals and all!)?

    Quite honestly, I'm scared to think of what Jesus would think and what "rewards" he might have in store for those who are responsible for what Christmas has become (of course, I don't think he would give a rip about the idea of Christmas at any point in history).

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 2:54pm

  17. Rain Man,

    The Suburban Jesus worshiped by most Americans is not the same one that gave the Sermon on the Mount. That Jesus is really worshiped in America, sadly enough.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 2:56pm

  18. "really" should be "rarely" in that last post

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 2:57pm

  19. Redbird,

    Since we are now quoting the Quran, here's some quotes from that most holly book that you convienently forgot...

    5:33-"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution (by beheading), or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;"

    8:12- "I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off."

    47:4- "Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), strike off their heads; at length; then when you have made wide Slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives": thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens."

    9:123: "Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you."

    2:191- "Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out."

    5: 45-- "We ordained therein for them: "Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear. Tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal."

    2:193- "Fight them on until there is no more tumult and religion becomes that of Allah"

    9:29- "Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day... and fight People of the Book, (Christian and Jews) who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute (Zizziya tax) by hand, being inferior."

    8:17-It is not ye who Slew them; it is God; when thou threwest a handful of dust, it was not Thy act, but God's….." (Allah is a real merciful indeed!)

    Real peaceful religion there bro...

    Right....

    Todd

    Posted by Oksportsguy at 11/23/2005 @ 2:58pm

  20. Todd,

    I don't have a Bible handy, but perhaps you should whip it out and read most of the Old Testament...you know where followers of Yahweh are slaughering heathens left and right. Might want to be careful about throwing quotes around without using context and studying translations.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 3:01pm

  21. TODD:

    Have you ever read the Old Testament of your own Bible?

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 3:02pm

  22. "The Suburban Jesus worshiped by most Americans is not the same one that gave the Sermon on the Mount"

    American Christianity is kind of a mix of Phariseeism and Nationalism, overseen by a Cosmic Santa.

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 3:09pm

  23. John Nichols

    Are Jackson Browne's royalites for the song, going to help the poor? Just wondering.

    In any event, does not sound like a real Christmas-see song. Personally I never heard of it.

    Interestingly, every time a Nation writer seems to write about something becoming big or a "classic" I find that the opposite is ususally the case. Rather they are just promoting something that the WISH would become more popular.

    BLUETEXAN

    As a Christian as well, I have no problem celebrating Christmas on the 25th. So what? It is tradition, most Christians know the history of the holiday to some extent. And you know its not important.

    Are we supposed to feel shame or embarassment? Big deal it is orginally a pagan holiday, bb bb bbbb bb bb big deal(as porky pig would say)

    Posted by CPT at 11/23/2005 @ 3:11pm

  24. RAINMAN

    In response to your last post, you need to lighten up.

    Posted by CPT at 11/23/2005 @ 3:14pm

  25. CPT,

    If you are fine celebrating pagan holidays (Christmas, Easter, Halloween, etc.), then more power to you. I just find it quite odd that Christians are so flippant with the facts on holidays, but by golly, get downright mean when it comes to other issues...you know, salvation for instance. How come when it comes to salvation, which is all over the map...with scripture to back up lots of different ideas...most Christans go ballistic over little bitter issues?

    However, the main point should be that Christians should give some close examination on how they celebrate Christmas and where their money is going, etc. vs. how Jesus would view their use of that money.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 3:19pm

  26. Why should Rain Man lighten up, he makes a very valid point? Does it hit a little too close to home?

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 3:20pm

  27. Love to stay and chat but got to run for a while, I'll check back in laters.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 11/23/2005 @ 3:21pm

  28. Thank you for posting the words. This selection is on one of my Christmas Medley CDs and I've been trying for years to understand all the words. Very moving! Poor Jesus will most likely be crucified again by the Pharisees if he really does return.

    Posted by Aly at 11/23/2005 @ 3:23pm

  29. Many thanks for the clarity on how violent the Old Testament is, down to the beloved Psalm 137 that invokes a blessing on those who dash the brains of children of Babylonians against the stones.

    And the Koran,for all of Todd's annotation here, is nothing more than explication of the worship of Allah, which is Arabic for the Lord, which I'm sure has been pointed out at least a hundred times here, but there are none so blind etc, as the scriptures put it. Yes, it has an edge, but no more so than the Old Testament of the Bible, and if I felt the need I'd quote sections as Todd does. But why should I do his Sunday School homework for him?

    I'm sick to death of arguments over religion, which, from most perspectives, concern nothing more than what happens after this life. Me, I don't give a damn, and am quite fine with ending my days whenever they end. Why should anyone get to live forever just because they tried to do right? Why should there be any rewards for being decent to one's neighbor,or for that matter, people on the other side of the world?

    In short, keep your heavens and hells. Some of us from bible thumper country have had quite enough of what all too many of you believe that stuff to be in this here lifetime. All I've seen any of you fundamentalists do is make people miserable with that crap. If that's righteousness, I'll have no part of it. And I don't care what chapters and verse you cite.

    Posted by Sweetdaddy at 11/23/2005 @ 3:36pm

  30. Thank you for posting the words. This selection is on one of my Christmas Medley CDs and I've been trying for years to understand all the words. Very moving! Poor Jesus will most likely be crucified again by the Pharisees if he really does return.

    Posted by ALY 11/23/2005 @ 3:23pm

    Look here next time. [sing365.com]

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/23/2005 @ 3:39pm

  31. I just find it amazing that Browne got Daryl Hannah back in her "hot days"!...LOL!

    Seriously, the "Jesus was a socialist" rap is pretty old, but trying to make a come-back as Dean and the Dems try to "re-take religion from the Republicans".

    problem is...one, there are some of us who are both agnostic and libertarians (small group, I admit)...but two, the number of liberals who fear and loath ANY connection to religion (primarily after 30 years of Falwell, Robertson, "Moral Majority" etc) being associated with the Republicans and conservatism.

    A debatable point can be made that Jesus was referring to INDIVIDUAL charity when he discussed the poor...and not a mandated State (or "Caesar") program of aid to the impoverished via confiscated revenue distributed at 10-25 cents on the dollar.

    Posted by Mask at 11/23/2005 @ 3:41pm

  32. I agree, Mask. Jesus wasn't a socialist. But you don't understand the individualist components of socialism, so I take any other assessment of the idea you have with a huge grain of salt.

    Posted by Sweetdaddy at 11/23/2005 @ 3:53pm

  33. A debatable point can be made that Jesus was referring to INDIVIDUAL charity when he discussed the poor...and not a mandated State (or "Caesar") program of aid to the impoverished via confiscated revenue distributed at 10-25 cents on the dollar.

    Posted by MASK 11/23/2005 @ 3:41pm

    That sounds much more like the current overpriced, economically inefficient, and healthwise-ineffective system of private healthcare.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/23/2005 @ 3:57pm

  34. Frei

    it is no surprise a guy like Bush can get elected in a country given the [lousy] public educational system of the United States!

    Sadly there is fact in this I think. I teach 1st, 2nd year college courses. MANY students coming out of public schools can barely find their own ass with two hands and a roadmap...let alone a foreign country. Can't write, math-o-phobic, scientifically retarded (look at Kansas w/ that ID thing for instance. Sadly, almost 1/2 of the US people polled believe that the Earth was created in the literal, Biblical sense even though the evidence of an old Earth from a planetary nebula is overwhelming.)

    This whole "No Child Left Behind" thing is putting bodies through schools and teaching them to pass tests. However, the level of actual "learning" seems to be decreasing over time. We are not puting out the quality of students we once did, which is why other nations are surpassing us in science and engineering every year. Sad but true.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/23/2005 @ 4:15pm

  35. REDBIRD....

    again with the socialized medicine?....SO, again, I'll say...fine, put the Federal Government in charge of all health care, and then what happens when a "pro-life" President and "pro-life" Congress take it over and decide WHAT KINDS of procedures the "Federal insurance payout" (nod to ZERO) will cover and what will be restricted.

    SWEETDADDY

    I'd like to hear how "individualism" plays a part in "socialism"....seems to be arguing that there are "hunting & fishing aspects to animal rights"???

    Posted by Mask at 11/23/2005 @ 4:40pm

  36. again with the socialized medicine?....SO, again, I'll say...fine, put the Federal Government in charge of all health care, and then what happens when a "pro-life" President and "pro-life" Congress take it over and decide WHAT KINDS of procedures the "Federal insurance payout" (nod to ZERO) will cover and what will be restricted.

    Posted by MASK 11/23/2005 @ 4:40pm | ignore this person

    I'm not aware of any private insurance companies that pay for the types of procedures that usually enter the spectrum of the Pro Choice/Pro Life debate. That usually lies with the ones having the procedures done. Am I wrong on this?

    Posted by thejman at 11/23/2005 @ 4:47pm

  37. REDBIRD....

    again with the socialized medicine?....SO, again, I'll say...fine, put the Federal Government in charge of all health care, and then what happens when a "pro-life" President and "pro-life" Congress take it over and decide WHAT KINDS of procedures the "Federal insurance payout" (nod to ZERO) will cover and what will be restricted.

    Posted by >b>MASK 11/23/2005 @ 4:40pm

    In that case they would have to fall back on the primitive, inefficient method of private funding. What makes you think that would be significantly different from the current system? If abortion was illegal under universal healthcare it would be illegal under the current system. So how is that relevant?

    If you want to argue against universal healthcare you'll have to defend the gross inefficiencies of private healthcare. You'll have a hard case to prove. Universal healthcare is much more efficient. In America the "hidden hand" refers to the nonexistent healthcare experienced by 45 million Americans. In the wealthiest country on earth and the wealthiest society in human history.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/23/2005 @ 4:55pm

  38. All (Especially the insult filled liberals)

    Have a great and enjoyable Thanksgiving! Safe traveling, God Bless! or Allah, Genish, Budda, Allah or whatever you believe.

    Honestly, this is 100% heartfelt

    Sincerely yours

    AL

    Posted by CPT at 11/23/2005 @ 5:00pm

  39. we are often told by the rght wing that we think health care, unlike other commodities and services should be "free". yes, like the police services are free, or fire service is free. none of the government services are free. we ALL pay for them, and we as a society can choose what services the governmnet will provide.we can even decide, as a society, that we want the governmnet to engage in acts of charity, here at home and elsewhere. Most if not all civilized nations, have decided for government health insurance for all. except for us, nice.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/23/2005 @ 5:09pm

  40. mask:

    "again with the socialized medicine?....SO, again, I'll say...fine, put the Federal Government in charge of all health care, and then what happens when a "pro-life" President and "pro-life" Congress take it over and decide WHAT KINDS of procedures the "Federal insurance payout" (nod to ZERO) will cover and what will be restricted."

    Pretty simple really Mask. I have lived in three countries where socialized medicine was the norm. None...I repeat...none offered coverage for abortions.

    If we ever make the right decision to adopt universdal haelth care in this country, women will still have to pay for their abortions...just like they do in all other countries.

    This answer your question?

    Posted by doumer at 11/23/2005 @ 5:33pm

  41. Dovetailing with the "public schools/self-esteem" debate:

    Can we all agree that when teachers are more concerned with what color pens are used to mark papers as opposed to making sure students get the right answers in the first place, our education system is a little backwards?

    Then again, with all the sex scandals in schools these days (teacher/student relations, orgies in school gymnasiums, etc.), at least we know kids are paying attention and studying up in at least one class.

    :-)

    Posted by usc1 at 11/23/2005 @ 5:38pm

  42. I'd like to hear how "individualism" plays a part in "socialism"....seems to be arguing that there are "hunting & fishing aspects to animal rights"???

    Posted by MASK 11/23/2005 @ 4:40pm

    depends what you mean by "socialism"

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/23/2005 @ 5:42pm

  43. Socialism's first concern is that capitalism holds individuals captive to the circulation of commodities. The clearest evidence of this is seen in what capitalist theorists thinks of as public education. The failure of much of public education under the late capitalist system is the clearest indicator of its disregard for the individual. Rather than working consistently and providing the funding to create a public education system in which adequate resource is invested to meet the learning needs of each individual, public schools work to institute a competitive model under which it becomes impossible to assess each student based upon their real learning curve and potential. Instead, capitalISM (or objectively, the belief that representative measures of wealth assume a value on their own through mystical entities like "invisible hands" etc) imposes something called "standards", which from the jump assumes that all young people learn in the same manner, i.e., sitting in classrooms all day in straight rows, learning how to read through a fetishized abstraction called "phonics" in all too many places, etc.

    Clearly some young people can learn in such a setting, some learn how to read through phonics, others will not. Now, does the education theory of capital at all seek to deepen its understanding of the individual learner? Well, yes, but only after certain hoops are jumped through, and such hoops, in the name of "cost effective" education, invariably insist upon learning styles that may be widespread or common in certain communities. Thus capital comes up with the stratifying idea of the "gifted" child, and yet again makes exclusivity the price of decent education. The irony is that many of these "gifted" young people- who are no more gifted than many a straggling young person whose own learning style has yet to be discovered, due to the factory model myopia of late capitalist education- end up believing their own press, and become stymied when their "gifts" do not apply in every situation. I've seen it happen many times.

    Bottom line is, the education of the individual is too expensive so far as capital is concerned. So capital has a problem. If you don't educate and build according to the interest of each individual, what you wind up with is exactly what we're facing now: a "postmodern" hodgepodge of public policy, which on the one hand, insists on an exacting standard of public education, but which, on the other hand, through advertising, commodified lifestyles, etc, negates the study of classic literature like the Greeks and Shakespeare and Yoruba manuscript, in fact, places interest in such matters as second to math and science. While all energies should be bent upon looking for ways to integrate mathematics and science into the arts in order to better facilitate what teachers like to call transferability of skills, and thereby acchieve in as many learners as possible not only academic strengths, but a sense of nuance and subtlety, late capital instead prefers to encourage people to believe that science and math scores are more important than literacy, or arts, etc. The outcome is a culture obsessed with technology and military prowess for its own sake, as opposed to one in which technology exists in order to give people more control over their own lives. And so on.

    Never mind the fact that capital views the health of an individual as a privilege. No individual is entitled to teeth in their head or regular health intervention under capital, these remain privileges. Forget mental health. How many times have we heard people rationalize the plight of individuals on the streets, with the line, "But many of those folks are mentally ill." Indeed they are. And since when is that a crime? It's not, but capital doesn't have any problems with individuals struggling with mental illness living on the streets, or freezing to death for that matter.

    Anyway, these are the concerns of socialism, and in particular, the socialism that will assert itself in these United States. I can go on about this all day. Don't try to tell me socialism isn't concerned about individuals. It is capitalism that will never admit how insidious its own control is over human consciousness on the individual level. Stalinism, for all its horrors, was bound to defeat, because the enemy was on the outside. Capitalism teaches the individual to assess themselves on the basis of what they own, rather than who they are, and most people go to their graves arguing about the afterlife because they have so come to detest the life they have built for themselves in this world.

    Posted by Legba at 11/23/2005 @ 6:46pm

  44. And by the way, USCI, as a teacher who has busted his ass in both inner city schools and suburban schools for close to twenty years now, I resent your inference about teachers fretting about what color ink they mark papers with. Although it could be argued that some students don't see corrections that aren't written with red ink, given that that's a universal. So you see, it's not a non issue at all, is it? Boy, it sure looks easy from the outside, doesn't it?

    Posted by Legba at 11/23/2005 @ 7:03pm

  45. I remember a saying something like: Be 'in' the world, but not 'of' it.

    Isn't that one of the battles we all share growing up--‘how to fit in'. How much more difficult it is when multimedia messages are bombarding us with commercials and propaganda 24/7. We have to continually be deconstructing messages telling us what and how to think and believe. Otherwise we fall into the automaton/zombie stage, goose stepping around like lemmings. I learned so much more when I didn't have a TV. Spent a lot of time in the library just reading, asking questions. My students rarely ask questions anymore. Too busy I suppose...

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/23/2005 @ 7:19pm

  46. Frei, are you still flogging that socialism dead horse? I listed, in a previous unanswered post, the aspects of socilism americans are very familiar with, and are determined to retain. so?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/23/2005 @ 8:08pm

  47. NEW IDEA FOR ABORTION PARTY: AID THE ENEMY November 23, 2005

    In the Iraq war so far, the U.S. military has deposed a dictator who had already used weapons of mass destruction and would have used them again. As we now know, Saddam Hussein was working with al-Qaida and was trying to acquire long-range missiles from North Korea and enriched uranium from Niger.

    Saddam is on trial. His psychopath sons are dead. We've captured or killed scores of foreign terrorists in Baghdad. Rape rooms and torture chambers are back in R. Kelly's Miami Beach mansion where they belong.

    The Iraqi people have voted in two free, democratic elections this year. In a rash and unconsidered move, they even gave women the right to vote.

    Iraqis have ratified a constitution and will vote for a National Assembly next month. The long-suffering Kurds are free and no longer require 24/7 protection by U.S. fighter jets.

    Libya's Moammar Gadhafi has voluntarily dismantled his weapons of mass destruction, Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon, and the Palestinians are holding elections.

    (Last but certainly not least, the Marsh Arabs' wetlands ecosystem in central Iraq that Saddam drained is being restored, so even the Democrats' war goals in Iraq are being met.)

    The American military has accomplished all this with just over 2,000 deaths. These deaths are especially painful because they fall on our greatest Americans. Still, look at what the military has done and compare the cost to 600,000 deaths in the Civil War, 400,000 deaths in World War II and 60,000 deaths in Vietnam (before Walter Cronkite finally threw in the towel and declared victory for North Vietnam).

    What is known as a "hawk" in today's Democratic Party looks at what our military has accomplished and -- during the war, while our troops are in harm's way -- demands that we withdraw our troops.

    In an upbeat speech now being aired repeatedly on al-Jazeera, last week Rep. John Murtha said U.S. troops "cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home." Claiming the war is "a flawed policy wrapped in illusion," Murtha said the "American public is way ahead of us."

    Fed up with being endlessly told "the American people" have turned against the war in Iraq, Republicans asked the Democrats to show what they had in their hand and vote on a resolution to withdraw the troops.

    By a vote of 403-3, the House of Representatives wasn't willing to bet that "the American people" want to pull out of Iraq. (This vote also marked the first time in recent history that the Democrats did not respond to getting their butts kicked by demanding a recount.)

    The vote is all the more shocking because of what it says about the Democrats' motives in attacking the war -- as well as alerting us to three members of Congress we really need to keep an eye on.

    It is simply a fact that Democrats like Murtha are encouraging the Iraqi insurgents when they say the war is going badly and it's time to bring the troops home. Whether or not there is any merit to the idea, calling for a troop withdrawal -- or "redeployment," as liberals pointlessly distinguish -- will delay our inevitable victory and cost more American lives.

    Anti-war protests in the U.S. during the Vietnam War were a major source of moral support to the enemy. We know that not only from plain common sense, but from the statements of former North Vietnamese military leaders who evidently didn't get the memo telling them not to say so. In an Aug. 3, 1995, interview in The Wall Street Journal, Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, called the American peace movement "essential" to the North Vietnamese victory.

    "Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American anti-war movement," he said. "Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses."

    What are we to make of the fact that -- as we now know -- the Democrats don't even want to withdraw troops from Iraq? By their own account, there is no merit to their demands. Before the vote, Democrats could at least defend themselves from sedition by pleading stupidity. Now we know they don't believe what they are saying about the war. (Thanks to that vote, the Islamo-fascists know it, too.)

    The Democrats are giving aid and comfort to the enemy for no purpose other than giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There is no plausible explanation for the Democrats' behavior other than that they long to see U.S. troops shot, humiliated, and driven from the field of battle.

    They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors.

    COPYRIGHT 2005 ANN COULTER

    Posted by libz at 11/23/2005 @ 8:11pm

  48. Frei so you don't thinkgov't should be insuring the health care of ALL americans, but you will no doubt be the first to register for your medicare when you turn that age.all members of congress, all government employees are getting what you would call gov't health care. I have yet to hear them complain or profess anecdotes about rich canadians coming here.

    we live in a society and we will decide what the gov't should be providing. you don't seem to want to acknowledge that our present system is broken.

    employer based care is broken, as companies shed their obligations.also our willy nilly system is hugely inefficient and wasteful, operating expenses for single payer care are far lower, leaving more money for care. again I ask: why are you constantly shilling for the bosses and the corporations? you are a traitor to your class.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/23/2005 @ 8:17pm

  49. Hey, there's plenty of socialism in the USA-- only it's ok for the 'needy' corporations with hidden off shore accounts, 'needing' more and more-- bailouts. OK to renege or pilfer pension funds. But individuals that either made bad choices themselves or had no choice in the matter, finding themselves in need-- too bad, their problem, personal responsibility and all, not a citizen of a great nation any longer-- because you don't got the $$$! So much for a nation founded on 'Christian' principles. Just know-- it's getting easier and easier for it to pass through that eye of the needle every day, hour, minute..., than the alternative.

    I have a feeling there's place where socialism looks pretty damn good.)

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/23/2005 @ 8:17pm

  50. Legba:

    The NyQuil is kickin' in, so I'm not sure if I'm interpreting your post correctly, but I did not intend to denigrate the efforts of teachers. My post was ridiculing those who believe teachers should use "purple" pens instead of "red" ones because red is so strongly associated with wrong answers and is, as a result, seen as more stressful. Just moronic beyond words.

    Posted by usc1 at 11/23/2005 @ 8:37pm

  51. Frei, your going to have to cite sources for that. since I am not of that civil servants class I am ignorant of their social security, psst socialism, just like the name says.

    perhaps you could also detail how gov't has control over your life, and explain that tryranny bit for me.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/23/2005 @ 9:37pm

  52. LIBZ:

    You actually posted something. I'm impressed.

    heres a question I asked ealrier that was so totally ignored:

    Referendum Number One: to upcoming December 15th, 2005 elections in iraq. No, Bushrules, this is not a trick question. Being that you are probably not Iraqi, you CAN'T vote:

    "Should all coalition forces leave Iraq immediately? Yes _____ No _____

    Do you agree that this question should be on the ballot? If so, is the essence of democracy not working as it is was meant to, by virtue of what our govt has been expounding for 2.5 years?

    Posted by doumer at 11/23/2005 @ 9:53pm

  53. sure go ahead

    Posted by libz at 11/23/2005 @ 9:56pm

  54. LIBZ:

    Second question:

    Would you support total and immediate removal of ALL coalition forces from Iraq if such a vote by iraqis was +50%?

    Posted by doumer at 11/23/2005 @ 10:19pm

  55. John,

    I hope you're getting all of the chuckles you hoped for upon penning this column.

    Posted by seattlescribe at 11/23/2005 @ 10:22pm

  56. Good gawdamighty, what a mess you folks have made of a simple concept. Namely that Jesus was a fighter against wrongs and not a defender of the ugly status quo of his times. Am I wrong about that? Or that good John Nichols just wants to tweak you? Those of you who PRAY to that person who art in heaven should THINK about what you pray to. Those of you who, like me, might think that the divinity of Jesus is a palliative myth that long ago outlived its usefulness but wish to wield those myths against conservatives are holding a damaged weapon.

    Can't we forget about Jesus? What has Jesus done for us lately? What goodness has been laid upon us for all our centuries of belief? Is there not sufficient evidence by now that belief or disbelief in these myths about righteousness and God's plans have NO effect on the course of history?

    Come on you guys! We have something far better. It's the U.S. Constitution. If all of you rebel believers and status quo believers shifted the object of your veneration to that work of real people then we might be better off. Provided, of course, that you read it first.

    Posted by oldhotel at 11/23/2005 @ 10:52pm

  57. FRANKGRITS:

    Thanks for trying to get back to the point of John's piece--nice try.

    LIBZ:

    I'm still waiting for the answer to how the ACLU is trying to get you to worship (a claim you made this afternoon).

    Posted by rain man at 11/23/2005 @ 11:18pm

  58. Posted by Legba at 11/23/2005 @ 11:21pm

  59. Oldy, jesus 2,000 years, US constitution 220 years. the latter is a flawed document to be sure, the gigantic hole in it was called slavery. also it's not really a progressive document, as it was written by landowners, not a single working man among them.

    my favorite Jesus movie is Pasolini's (a marxist) "The passion according to st matthew". it portrays Jesus as a revolutionary

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/23/2005 @ 11:29pm

  60. Freiheit: Am very happy you will be looking forward to entertaining your guests with my comments About socialism. Include the following, if you're up for it:

    1. As regards "the defeat of stalinism,as it was an external enemy". To clarify: stalinism was bound for defeat, as it was unaquainted with individual perspective. At every turn, it could only reward questions or critique with a jackboot. This provided its natural enemies with an an external and very real enemy. The state, visibly, was an enemy, whatever form it took. Stalinism of due course was bound for collapse, because it could not recognize contradiction. It could only resort to greater levels of brutality, in the name of socialism. It declared its bankruptcy openly. Socialism is democratic, or it is nothing. Now, of course, if you refer to the forms of stalinism that dominate the "moderate left", for example, the continued adherance to the "democratic" party, which adheres to business unionism and binding arbitration (both of which are authoritarian tendencies), I'm sure that I, along with your other guests, would be vastly amused by YOUR ideas about what socialism is. But that's not what I'm talking about here.

    2. Many thanks for your quotes from Thomas Sowell, who is so bloody stupid that only a postmodern intellectual would quote him. Just for the record, Mr. Sowell has no credibility in the black community, which is why he cries to white liberals. But aside from that, he should have no credibility from intellectuals- who he disparages- because socialism is a vast number of ideas, and not only that handful which he acknowledges in his rather tepid observations on the theory. Socialism is a growing theory, some of which is creative and critical enough to make the grade, and much of which is not. But whatever it is, it is not a done deal:

    1. Only a overeducated jackass would fail to recognize the shortcomings of theory which ignored the importance of past socialism's ability to integrate individual initiative into its ideas.

    2. Only a postmodern jackass would be unacquainted with the ongoing dialogue along those lines.

    3. Only a total jackass would expect socialist theorists to postulate on the idea of family, which clearly is beyond your reach. I've yet, as educator, to experience how we can make, say, the Bill of Rights, relevant to a student who wades through brains and blood and police lines, and the trauma thereof on the day of the event, to students who experience such a set of events in Washinton Heights, or the South Bronx. But I'm willing to keep trying, and if you have a magic bullet, for god's sake, look me up. I'm open to anything.

    Unfortunately, I know you don't know what you're talking about, which is why you did not address any of the issues I raised on the complete destruction of individual initiative in so many people under capitalist hegemony in my "rant", as you referred to it.

    The fact of the matter is that often, families don't know what to do when deep trauma occurs, and this is why the community needs to be prepared, and have support in place for every "individual".

    Now, go ahead and laugh it up at your Thanksgiving dinner. I don't expect anything else from you at this point, quite frankly.

    Posted by Legba at 11/23/2005 @ 11:41pm

  61. The ACLU isn't trying to tell you how you can worship. They're telling people that you can't make everyone else worship your way, unless you're willing to watch them make a spectacle of themselves in the same way you are.

    By the way, you Christians really have got to stop crying that you're being so persecuted. In point of fact, you guys are the persecuting side! Let me put it this way. Where I live, if I, as a practicing witch, decided to host a display in the middle of town celebrating the true purpose to December 25th, then the locals who live near me would try to have my head, quite literally. Who's being subjected to what, Christians? Honestly.

    Posted by Kristev at 11/23/2005 @ 11:44pm

  62. .

    KRISTEV 11/23 @ 11:44pm

    if I, as a practicing witch, decided to host a display in the middle of town celebrating the true purpose to December 25th, then the locals who live near me would try to have my head, quite literally. Who's being subjected to what, Christians? Honestly.

    .

    Relax, should you reveal yourself as a witch, no one will think of having your head . It is all too obvious, you don't have one.

    Posted by nacl at 11/24/2005 @ 12:30am

  63. LibZ

    I realize its hard to form a coherent stream of thought in that dysfunctional pile of crap that you use as a brain....however, that is no excuse to subject us to rantings that are even MORE pathetic than your own! We all know the only use for Ann Coulter scribbles is to line bird cages or scooping up dog turds on a walk. So just let it go.

    BTW CHIMI I'm blaming this on you my friend...YOU told it to go read Coulter, and now its off its meds! ....lol Happy T-day!

    NaCl : Nice of you to show that true Christian tolerance we have come to expect!

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/24/2005 @ 12:35am

  64. Chimi oops, my bad. YOU told it to go read Scarborough or Limbaugh....it found Coulter instead...

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/24/2005 @ 12:39am

  65. .

    "The Rebel Jesus"

    Stalin, once a seminarian, but thereafter with only contempt for religion, found it expedient, in the darkest days of WWII, to unlock the churches and to use faith as a morale booster.

    So too Hitler. He despised Jesus as a pacifist Jew, but when the exigencies of the war required, he had no compunction about presenting himself as a crusading knight, clad in steel, leading Christendom against the godless East.

    John Nichols too is willing to grasp a faith he disdains and nail its eponym to his purpose.

    The Christian story began with the slaughter of the innocent. It proceeded via false accusations and political intrigue to make a mockery of truth and justice. (Once by crucifying Jesus, and subsequently by crucifying the Jews.)

    Today in Iraq we have insurgents who daily slaughter the innocent, fighting democracy and denouncing as evils, freedom of speech and religious toleration.

    Nichols has the chutzpah to marshal the "The Rebel Jesus" in support of those insurgents. He has the same use and respect for that humane Rebel, and for those who revere him, as had Stalin and Hitler, and today's Left of Center fascists.

    There is no cheap and shabby device that The Nation crowd is unwilling to stoop to.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 11/24/2005 @ 01:24am

  66. Since we are on the subject of belief, did anyone here catch Penn Gilette's essay for NPR's "This I Believe." He read it on the radio and it was presented on Monday November 21st. It is about how he does not even believe in the possibility of God but how this infuses his belief in life and living. I will try and find it and post it here. It is well worth reading.

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/24/2005 @ 01:53am

  67. Here is Penn Jilette's piece. I got this off of NPR's website.

    November 21, 2005 · I believe that there is no God. I'm beyond Atheism. Atheism is not believing in God. Not believing in God is easy -- you can't prove a negative, so there's no work to do. You can't prove that there isn't an elephant inside the trunk of my car. You sure? How about now? Maybe he was just hiding before. Check again. Did I mention that my personal heartfelt definition of the word "elephant" includes mystery, order, goodness, love and a spare tire?

    So, anyone with a love for truth outside of herself has to start with no belief in God and then look for evidence of God. She needs to search for some objective evidence of a supernatural power. All the people I write e-mails to often are still stuck at this searching stage. The Atheism part is easy.

    But, this "This I Believe" thing seems to demand something more personal, some leap of faith that helps one see life's big picture, some rules to live by. So, I'm saying, "This I believe: I believe there is no God."

    Having taken that step, it informs every moment of my life. I'm not greedy. I have love, blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards, and that has to be enough. It has to be enough, but it's everything in the world and everything in the world is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more. Just the love of my family that raised me and the family I'm raising now is enough that I don't need heaven. I won the huge genetic lottery and I get joy every day.

    Believing there's no God means I can't really be forgiven except by kindness and faulty memories. That's good; it makes me want to be more thoughtful. I have to try to treat people right the first time around.

    Believing there's no God stops me from being solipsistic. I can read ideas from all different people from all different cultures. Without God, we can agree on reality, and I can keep learning where I'm wrong. We can all keep adjusting, so we can really communicate. I don't travel in circles where people say, "I have faith, I believe this in my heart and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith." That's just a long-winded religious way to say, "shut up," or another two words that the FCC likes less. But all obscenity is less insulting than, "How I was brought up and my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you can ever say or do." So, believing there is no God lets me be proven wrong and that's always fun. It means I'm learning something.

    Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just testing us, but rather something we all may be able to help others with in the future. No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future.

    Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jell-o and all the other things I can prove and that make this life the best life I will ever have.

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/24/2005 @ 01:55am

  68. NACL and BUSHRULES need to smoke a joint and chill the fuck out

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/24/2005 @ 02:54am

  69. and which "socialism" is everyone arguing about? marxism? anarchism? libertarian socialism? anarcho-communism? anarcho-syndicalism? soviet state capitalism? the socialism advocated by...marx? kropotkin? bakunin? stirner? nachaev? engels? proudhon? lenin? trotsky? mandel? the word socialism is about as clearly defined as the word democracy

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/24/2005 @ 03:38am

  70. Let'see...at the Council of Nicea in 330 AD, the emporer Constantine ordered the Christian leading men to come to an agreement on doctrinal matters dividing the church. First of which was the question of the status of Jesus. Was he a messenger from God? Or was he God? Arius, an influential Christian voice, believed it was absurd to say that Jesus was God, since he was born of human birth. On the cross, Jesus is thought to have said "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." This implies a higher power than Jesus. In the modern bible, there are similar references to a higher Father. But the views of Arius were soundly rejected, and the doctrine of the Trinity was established, werein Jesus was somehow Son of God and God at the same time. (Arius had to flee for his life, an live in exile.But he continued to speak out against the fundamental contradiction of the Trinity.) Jesus of Nazereth became the Christ, an omnipotent figure. Then the writings of the disciples were gutted and revised. And the Gospel of Thomas was cast out, because it treated women in a more equal status.(The Gospel of Thomas was discovered in Egypt in an archeological dig in 1947). Christmas was established around the time of the traditional pagan festival to celebrate the Winter Solstice. The date had nothing to do with the birth of Jesus, which most religious historians agree was in the spring. (It is a mystery, like everything about Jesus.) And now today, the Christian religion has become big business. Born again fundamentalists somehow promote war, in spite of the teachings (as we know them) of Jesus. But how can anyone take the modern bible as the word of God when it was edited by men? I cannot understand this. I guess that is the definition of faith. Merry Christmas!

    Posted by philbq at 11/24/2005 @ 06:23am

  71. I should mention my own beliefs, since this blog is about Jesus. I believe Jesus was a great teacher and philosopher, like Siddhartha Guatama, the founder of Buddism. But I think it is absurd to view Jesus as God. Personally, I am a deist, who views nature as the symbol of God. When I walk in the forest, I am in church. When I stand on the edge of the sea, I gaze into the face of God. Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Hamilton, and many other of the Framers of the Constitution were deists, and they were under attack constantly from the Christian bigshots - the Pat Robertsons of the time. The word "God" does not appear in the U.S. Constitution. That is not by chance. The Framers felt that they must resist the Christian powerbrokers who wanted to insert religion into everything. (Jerry Falwell and his ilk are still trying.) The doctrine of separation of church and state was established. And this doctrine has been under attack ever since. It's strange...I like to think of Jesus as a gentle man who preached forgiveness and tolerence, not war and power. I know I would have liked and repected Jesus, but its a different crowd today. They would have denounced Jesus as a liberal.

    Posted by philbq at 11/24/2005 @ 06:44am

  72. How very sad that the message Jesus shared with the masses continues to be overlooked as being TRUTHS, not some theory that makes good soundbites but doesn't REALLY apply to us or the world at large. I continue to be amazed at the use of Jesus as a backer of the war and the reason we will previal (Afterall isn't it the conservatives that are the TRUE & ONLY Christians). And isn't it ironic that churches across this great country are backers of this war? I would think they'd be on the side of forgiveness and turning the other cheek. Isn't that in the Bible they purport to BELIEVE so fervently in? Or is that just one of those convienient theories that doesn't REALLY apply to them? Burger King Christians is what I call them. They want it their way... If you're a TRUE Christian you would be a pacifist. Jesus was. And he went to the greatest lengths to support his beliefs. He was crucified. And yet he lives. Now THAT'S irony!!! People's fear of death overrides their belief in life after death. I for one work hard at NOT letting fear or fear-mongers rule my mind or my beliefs. When I read most posts here that espouse fear based attitudes I am struck by how simple it is for evil to win the hearts and minds of most people. Love God and love your neighbor as you would want to be loved. Anyone out there remember who said that? And what he called those two ideas? Not to mention the ten before them.

    Posted by christiandem at 11/24/2005 @ 09:35am

  73. LEGBA

    A question I always ask socialist....Say I invent something, market it, and start selling tons of it. And my business grows from "in my basement, with me and my wife and brother-in-law"...to a factory with 500 people (or even several factories)...

    at what point in YOUR preferred socio-economic system...does the State come in and take over running my business?

    Posted by Mask at 11/24/2005 @ 10:05am

  74. And in consideration of being tolerant and forgiving when one is being manipulated. It doesn't look like the US public is about to be very Christian: neither having faith in, nor turning the other cheek. 'Mis'leading does require some penance one assumes. Me thinks the Bush admin is about to find the 'real' God, not their made-up one.

    The Harris Poll. Nov. 8-13, 2005. N=1,011 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).

    "Do you think that the Bush Administration generally provides accurate information regarding current issues or do you think they generally mislead the public on current issues to achieve their own end?"

    .......................................Accurate.............Misleading.. ............Unsure

    ALL adults ...........................32 ........................64........................4

    Republicans.........................68.........................28....... .................4 Democrats............................7..........................91...... ..................2 Independents......................25..........................73........ ................2

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/24/2005 @ 10:06am

  75. hi all

    long time listener, first time caller

    christians confuse me. they can be so contradictory. the evangelical ones decry science while worshipping its destructive power, while the liberal ones always need oppressed to throw alms to, believing they are "doing their part." but i guess that can be said of just about any religion. as the times usher bleak horizons, i try to see myself detatched from the mass of humanity and giggle at a bunch of mammals screwing through life with a perpetual look of confusion, trying to mask it with assertions of meaning, afterlife, right and wrong. but don't get me wrong . . . i'm no different. it's just that i think maybe these end of year holidays should be a time when we all realize that nobody really knows what the hell is going on. ever. is it that a wise man admits he knows nothing, or something along the lines? anyway, quite a ramble for a first-time posting. happy thanksgiving, america. from a chilly young fella up on the island of cape breton, on the east coast of canada. oh, and just as a side note: don't confuse me with those canadians that are always bashing america. canadians are in a perpetual identity crises and tend to define being canadian as "not american", which is kind of funny, really. to paraphrase bill hicks, "am i american? well, my parents fucked here. i guess that makes me american"

    all the best

    Posted by tomiczek at 11/24/2005 @ 10:30am

  76. " The closest thing to Hell, is a GOOD Christian " by C. S. Lewis

    Posted by vano at 11/24/2005 @ 10:53am

  77. NACL provides a shining example and key exemplar of the failure of rightwing ideology. Remember the pattern: The more people are faced with rightwing ideas concepts and practices, the more fervently these are rejected. Bush's constantly falling approval ratings are one instance of the general pattern. In contrast with Clinton, public revulsion intensifies the more the public sees (and with more acuity and clarity) of Bush and all that his shabby junta has visited upon the world. Rightwingers only meet wide approval --- provisionally, at that --- when they are successfully able to adopt some form of disguise.

    But on to the case at hand, NACL. Even by rightwing standards, NACL is a startling intellect. In a previous thread, he equates the invasion of Iraq with WWII. Why, NACL? How is Europe "Iraq"? And the disarmed, encircled dictator Hussein "Hitler"? Bush is (teeter teeter) "Roosevelt" and Blair "Churchill"? 1944 is "2005"? Given the randomness of yoru reference points, why is Bush not "Bob Hope" or "50 Cent"? While we are at it, NACL: Why did right-leaning governments sit on their hands when the clouds of WWII were gathering (for example, during the dress rehearsal for WWII presented by the Spanish Civil War) while conservative US banks generously funded the regime of the anti-commie little Austrian with the funny mustache? It is also revealing that in stupidly fixing the equation --- "1944 = 2003" (why not "235 BC = 2003"?) --- NACL avoids the obvious comparison of the 2003 invasion of Iraq with … the first Gulf War of 1991 (in which case Iraq is "Iraq", Hussein is "Hussein", and so on). Why does the intellectual titan/historian deluxe/moral superpower NACL avoid the o-b-v-i-o-u-s comparison between the two campaigns against Iraq, one decade apert and with many of the same players? And if the second campaign in 2003 is "right" in its strategic objectives, NACL, was the first in 1991 … wrong, as it did not dismantle the government of Iraq? Please explain why you avoid the obvious comparison, NACL, and flex that extraordinary learnedness secreted from your prolixity.

    And, before what I suspect to be NACL's hypertrophic bitch titties quiver from too much effort over the keyboard, he could also uplift the discourse by: (1) showing precisely where Mr. Nichols equates "Rebel Jesus" with "Iraqi insurgent" in the editorial; (2) revealing on what occasions (with supporting notes) he has psychoanalyzed Mr. Nichols to divine his secret thoughts on religion and its uses; and (3) steeping carefully through another of his bizarre historical equations. In particular, what argument and evidence nurtures the claim that Mr. Nichols is following in the very footprints of Hitler and Stalin with the same ideological DNA? Answer quickly, NACL, as I crave the amusement that your distress at having to explain your (cough) ideas will occasion.

    If anyone is left wondering why rightwingers are regarded as laughing stocks and circus freak show material, one need look no further than NACL's pathetic lumbering stabs at erudition that amount to primitive attempts to stuff words in someone else's mouth (in this case, Mr. Nichols' mouth).

    Posted by GlennC.Lemon at 11/24/2005 @ 11:05am

  78. Real peaceful religion there bro...

    Right....

    Todd

    Posted by OKSPORTSGUY 11/23/2005 @ 2:58pm

    It's always entertaining to start reading this forum before I realize that I haven't signed in, which would activate my "ignore" list. It reminds me why I employ the "ignore" feature. Is this the post of mine that you're talking about:

    If any of you morally-crazed Busheviks came across Jesus today you would treat him like garbage and you know it. Yet you castigate Muslims for thir "fascistic religion". Take a look at what the Quran says about Jesus:

    003.003 YUSUFALI: It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

    005.046 YUSUFALI: And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

    006.085 YUSUFALI: And Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous:

    043.057 YUSUFALI: When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example, behold, thy people raise a clamour thereat (in ridicule)!

    How many Bushevik-style "Christians" would do this? [tinyurl.com]

    Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/23/2005 @ 2:45pm

    I'm asking because there's nothing in there that refers to the peacefulness or not of any religion. Why are you dodging the primary point of my post: that Bushevik-style Christians are hypocrites whose lifestyle and beliefs are utterly foreign to those of Jesus and his religion and the religion that they so frequently imply is crazed, bad, or primitive and backward, Islam, expresses admiration and love for the real Jesus and his Gospel?

    If you want to quote from holy books in regards to peacefulness why did you leave out this quote of Jesus:

    But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

    How peaceful is that?

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/24/2005 @ 11:13am

  79. Freiheit, thanks for thinking Penn Jillette's words were my own. That's a compliment! :-)

    Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/24/2005 @ 11:18am

  80. A question please. Do any posters here have a spiritual practice? Thanks

    Posted by vano at 11/24/2005 @ 11:24am

  81. the biggest ccrock of shit is that a majority of christians in this country feel that their religion is persecuted. a reptilian, corrupt demagogue like O'Reilly is fanning those flames. please give us a break, Islamists in this country are persecuted since 9/11. you christians should know what that feels like, instead of your bullshit presecution complex

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/24/2005 @ 11:49am

  82. Redbird,

    Since we are now quoting the Quran, here's some quotes from that most holly book that you convienently forgot...

    5:32 That is why We (God) decreed for the children of Israel that whosoever kills a human being, except (as punishment) for murder or for spreading corruption in the land, it shall be like killing all humanity; and whosever saves a life, saves the entire human race. Our apostles brought clear proofs to them; but even after that most of them committed excesses in the land.

    5:33-"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution (by beheading), or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;"

    5:34 But those who repent before they are subdued should know that God is forgiving and kind

    8:12- "I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off."

    47:4- "Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), strike off their heads; at length; then when you have made wide Slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives": thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens."

    9:123: "Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you."

    2:191- "Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out."

    5: 45-- "We ordained therein for them: "Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear. Tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal."

    2:193- "Fight them on until there is no more tumult and religion becomes that of Allah"

    9:29- "Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day... and fight People of the Book, (Christian and Jews) who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute (Zizziya tax) by hand, being inferior."

    8:17-It is not ye who Slew them; it is God; when thou threwest a handful of dust, it was not Thy act, but God's….." (Allah is a real merciful indeed!)

    Real peaceful religion there bro...

    Right....

    Todd

    Posted by OKSPORTSGUY 11/23/2005 @ 2:58pm

    I added back in the context (in bold) from which your quote ripped 5:33. This text and it's surrounding text prescribes punishment for murderers. That was a problem in the pagan society in which Islam arose. Someone from a powerful pagan tribe could murder with impunity someone from a weak tribe or someone who had no tribal protection. "those who wage war against Allah" refers to those who would ignore the Old Testament prohibition of murder referenced in 5:32. 5:34, however, also prescribes mercy toward those who repent.

    The manner in which you quote from the Quran is very dishonest. I have no intention of taking each and explicating it, especially not on Thanksgiving day, but they are pretty much similar in the way they were ripped from the context of the Quran. Many of them refer to individual historical events and are not a general prescription for conduct in all circumstances as you would like it to be understood, or rather, misunderstood. Your translations are also suspect when they replace "fight against" with "murder". I suspect you pulled these from a website the purpose of which is to whip up hatred of Muslims, which there are plenty of. Being an atheist, I don't have any "dog in the fight" in regards to one religion or the other. I consider them all, more or less, to have backward elements that were originally backward or are now backward because they have outlived their social utility. They also all have, more or less, enlightening and forward thinking elements.

    I do have a "dog in the fight" however when I see the extensive ongoing attempt to engender cultural, religious, and racial hatred against Muslims, or people of any other faith, in order to create an ideological substrate for conflict and violence in the world that I live in. I place your post in that category.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/24/2005 @ 12:27pm

  83. I have a religious faith. I threw 22 years of my life away as a fundamentalist Christian before I found real peace as a neopagan. I believe in the old gods. You guys say the ten commandments are 2,000 years old and still right? Wrong. Christ invalidated the ten commandments and transformed them into a single two. Those who wish, using your own bible's warnings and words, to live under those commandments are condeming yourselves again to live under Jewish law and Christ's death is rendered of no effect for you.

    No thanks. I believe in the old gods of Greece and England, because, after all, whatever it is that makes your god right also makes my gods right. Case closed.

    Posted by Kristev at 11/24/2005 @ 12:43pm

  84. I should mention my own beliefs, since this blog is about Jesus. I believe Jesus was a great teacher and philosopher, like Siddhartha Guatama, the founder of Buddism. But I think it is absurd to view Jesus as God. Personally, I am a deist, who views nature as the symbol of God. When I walk in the forest, I am in church. When I stand on the edge of the sea, I gaze into the face of God.

    Due to OKSPORTSGUY I have been reading the Quran today and was still on the subject when I came across your post and recalled this-

    YUSUFALI: To Allah belong the East and the West: Whithersoever ye turn, there is the presence of Allah. For Allah is all-Pervading, all-Knowing.

    PICKTHAL: Unto Allah belong the East and the West, and whithersoever ye turn, there is Allah's Countenance. Lo! Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing.

    SHAKIR: And Allah's is the East and the West, therefore, whither you turn, thither is Allah's purpose; surely Allah is Amplegiving, Knowing.

    Al-Quran, 2:115

    Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Hamilton, and many other of the Framers of the Constitution were deists, and they were under attack constantly from the Christian bigshots - the Pat Robertsons of the time. The word "God" does not appear in the U.S. Constitution. That is not by chance.

    Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law. - Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper (February 10, 1814)

    The Framers felt that they must resist the Christian powerbrokers who wanted to insert religion into everything. (Jerry Falwell and his ilk are still trying.) The doctrine of separation of church and state was established. And this doctrine has been under attack ever since. It's strange...I like to think of Jesus as a gentle man who preached forgiveness and tolerence, not war and power. I know I would have liked and repected Jesus, but its a different crowd today. They would have denounced Jesus as a liberal.

    Posted by PHILBQ 11/24/2005 @ 06:44am

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/24/2005 @ 1:00pm

  85. I was brought up Catholic, sort of. My parents were trained in other spiritual practices as well. My grandparents were Mexican mediums/spiritual healers. Poking around my parents library when I was a lot younger, I found many hand me down books from different organizations, some hand written, dealing with curing by laying of hands/thought, talking to the dead, mind/spiritual traveling/visiting other worlds/times, different ways of seeing/hearing,...etc. I was taught that all religions are good-- if the devil isn't doing the quoting.

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/24/2005 @ 1:06pm

  86. The Jesus I recall said "Leave everything you have and follow me," and I somehow doubt he was headed to Wal-Mart. He also said "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God;" and 'You cannot serve God and money.' I think that's pretty clear.

    Jesus associated with lepers, the poorest of the poor, foreigners, rescued a woman from being stoned to death (so you can guess his feelings about the death penalty,) and took on the Pharisees - the rich fundamentalists of his time (for which he received the death sentence.) He threw the moneychangers out of the temple. I honestly don't get the wealthy white fundamentalists of our time… not sure how they can be so comfortable in their gated communities while so many fellow humans are hungry and homeless. They must just selectively read the New Testament, pick out the judgmental stuff and leave the scary stuff that might actually force them out of their comfort zone.

    On the last day, Jesus will say to those on His right hand, "Come, enter the Kingdom. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was sick and you visited me." Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, "Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me to drink, I was sick and you did not visit me." These will ask Him, "When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?" And Jesus will answer them, "Whatever you neglected to do unto one of these least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!"

    Actually, there is no reason you have to buy into the rampant commercialism going on around you at this time of year. Just opt out. Develop your own traditions.

    My husband and I do not give presents for Christmas. We ask that those who wish to give us gifts donate instead to our favorite charities. We gather up as much cash as we can (we aren't wealthy by a long shot) and head out Christmas Eve on a quest of sorts, to find ‘the person' - often homeless - who crosses our path. Finding this person is the magic in our Christmas. It is different every year. Once we find the person who feels right, we simply wish them Merry Christmas and hand them a Christmas card with the cash enclosed. And the amazing part is that, from that moment on, we often find ourselves giggling like little kids out of the sheer exhilaration of having made a difference. We go home and have a happy Christmas. True happiness comes from within, not from any gift in any package.

    Surely Jesus would have celebrated his birthday - by giving. We can all choose to ignore the capitalist mania around us, and instead dig deeper for the true meaning of Christmas (as it pertains to Christ, anyway. Christmas is an overlay of the original Yule festival that pre-dated Christianity by hundreds of years. Just as old pagan gods and goddesses were remade as saints, Yule was simply incorporated as a Christian holiday by the early Church, and chosen as the day to celebrate the birth of Christ.)

    However, since we are talking about the ‘Rebel Jesus' here, and not the history of the holiday, it's easy enough to figure out what he would make of the commercial chaos and buying frenzies taking place all around us – especially after a year marked by such massive global suffering.

    "For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me."

    Posted by feduphoosier at 11/24/2005 @ 1:14pm

  87. PhilBQ

    Deep thoughts while stuffing the bird this AM? Good stuff though my friend.....give us all something to contemplate today!

    Tomi

    Thanks for calling! Come again....honest words go a long way. (Beware of the psychos though....honesty sometimes stes them off!)

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/24/2005 @ 1:39pm

  88. Posted by FEDUPHOOSIER 11/24/2005 @ 1:14pm

    That's great! I do that sometimes too. Hard to make it a habit though.

    It reminded of asking my father once, after I had given everything I had to a church we had visited, if he was mad, as we were pretty poor back then. He just started laughing.

    Apathy is usually what gets to me. But I found that if I focus apathy on just those things that I don't like about myself, that it serves me better. Quit smoking that way. FEDUPHOOSIER, you've motivated me to focus apathy on my commercialism. Could work, we'll see. My time and energy certainly can be better spent.

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/24/2005 @ 6:25pm

  89. Now that everyone's eaten 2-3 times. Some exercise:

    http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_246.shtml

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/24/2005 @ 7:25pm

  90. Before the crucifixion Jesus was…

    A Rebel without a Cross

    Ha Ha Ha Ha

    Sometimes I just crack myself up

    Posted by Will C. at 11/24/2005 @ 11:29pm

  91. Speaking in the abstract, I think whenever you have an organization, depending on the size; you're going to have 'some' bad apples. Worse if they achieve some semblance of power, as we can currently see in the USA. Since the Catholic Church has been around for close to 10 times longer, one can reason that it could've had 10 times more corruption historically. Thus answering for a lot of their control issues. But I'll pose that just as there are enlightened individuals not in the religious ranks, there are just as many if not more in the religious realm. And just like the great acts of individual sacrifice that occur daily from nonreligious individuals, just as many if not more occur surrounding religious communities. I think as one moves up any organization, (government/church) one (can) looses touch with the individual and has to abstract groups of people via rules, p & P's, create boundaries, use manipulator tactics to move them so, propaganda.

    However, I do not think this negates the many positive and enlightening possibilities an individual has access to and can achieve as an individual, no matter what one's group or organizational associations (even a marriage {ha}). Nor does it negate what an organization is capable of achieving if the right people are in the right positions and ‘if' the bad apples are removed. I believe if you treat an organization like an individual with phobias, illness, and cure the illness, and then the individual, the person, isn't harmed because of the association.

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/25/2005 @ 09:46am

  92. Frank

    re: Jesus' "Homies"

    there is a little talked of "Dead Sea Scroll" (at some university in the midEast that holds onto that stuff) that indicates that the resurrection was "staged" for the reasons you note above ("stick it to the man"). Was on like 60 Mins or some such a few years back that before they nailed him up his "peeps" gave him "essence of gall" which is a ref to a botanical poison of uncertain nature but is likely among a class of paralytics to ease his suffering. So when he was cut down he wasn't dead....just really F'd up and comatose, but they played like he was dead, patched him up and a few days later..."Voila" - all better and rise from the dead!

    You note that his story pretty much ends with that. No happily ever after, no "old" Jesus telling neighborhood kids "back in the day" stories.....cause he wasn't "all right". Jeez, they did gut stick him so he ultimately DID die, most likely from sepsis.

    The Bible is not a literal history of the times back then....it is a poorly translated, often intentioanally mistranslated, mixture of tall tales, legends and allegories mixed with actual history that has changed and rechanged over the course of like thousands years usually by whatever "Christian" sect was in charge at the time.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/25/2005 @ 09:54am

  93. There are also writings of what Jesus did between the ages of 12 and 33 that the church will not publish. Too bad, from what I read, interesting stuff, if any of it is true. Traveled quite a bit. Even went through India, China and Tibet, staying a bit and studying. From this thread sounds like he studied more how to overthrow a government than religion. Seems somebody in his group learned more of one than the other.

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/25/2005 @ 10:13am

  94. And hospitals should all be shut down also, because there are still sick people and pharmaceuticals make a ton of money-- that's a scam too? (One can say the same for schools.) People that don't feel guilt are termed sociopaths. The first step in resolving guilt is to admit it-- confession. Pretty simple psychology, I'd say. I really think it just comes down to bad apples and weak administrative skills for not correcting it. Power corrupts. Some people just aren't ready for it. Too bad people can't look into the souls of other people to see intent of the head/heart... We do indeed have lousy skills and progressing way too slowly. Thus, again-- guilt.

    Speaking of, back to work.

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/25/2005 @ 11:43am

  95. .

    FROMREDBIRD 11/24 @ 11:13am

    ... the religion that they so frequently imply is crazed, bad, or primitive and backward, Islam, expresses admiration and love for the real Jesus and his Gospel?

    You are either knowingly or out of ignorance repeating a lie. Islam's idea of the "real Jesus" and their admiration and love for Jesus is not for the Jesus of the Christian Gospels.

    Take a look at what the Quran says about Jesus: He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

    First of all, realize what the Koran is. Mohammed taught that the Almighty had centuries earlier delivered the Koran to the Jews and then again to the Christians. However, their leaders, dissatisfied with the subordinate roles God had assigned to their nations, had altered God's words. Their corrupted accounts gave the staring roles to the Jews and Christians: at the expense of the Arabs, whom Allah had really put at the center. The Old Testament and the Gospels were those self-serving, forged scripts. They were perversions of God's real words. Allah therefore had confided the Koran to humanity a third time. Mohammed was chosen as this final messenger. There would be no other prophets after him. Anyone who thereafter alleged a missive from God would be a fraud. Mohammed's was the last true and definitive account of what God wanted humankind to know. Thus it was forbidden to change any aspect of Mohammed's Koran, not in its language or its meaning. Not a coma could be moved, and no interpretation was allowed. The Koran must be understood literally. (It is this that has made Islam so resistant to change, and why Islam is a fundamentalist faith.)

    Thus, although many of the Old and New Testament names appear in the Koran, Mohammed's account of those biblical figures are very different. For example, Ishmael, not Isaac, is Abraham beloved son who is nearly sacrificed on Mount Moriah. Mohammed's Jesus is a prophet like Noah, not a divine figure of messianic significance.

    In short, it is not true that Muslims love the Christian Jesus. To them Jesus as Savior is a blasphemy, a distortion, a forgery. The Jesus of the Koran, whom Islam esteems, is not the Jesus of the Christian Gospels.

    There is certainly nothing wrong with Mohammed relating a message different from that of Judaism or Christianity. But he took biblical names, denounced the Old and New Testament accounts of them, and stuffed his teachings into their skins. To now credit Islam with generosity for respecting Old and New Testament holy men, is the icing on a gigantic fraud.

    The manner in which you quote from the Quran is very dishonest. . . I don't have any "dog in the fight"

    More rubbish. You pit a grudging Christianity and Judaism against a generous Islam. You ignore the central Koranic tenet: that the world contains a blessed realm of peace where devout Muslims prevails. Where they do not there must be war, till Islam is universal. This means violent struggle whenever possible, as the Koran teaches in many Surah, as the Prophet's companions reiterated in many Hadiths, and as Mohammed's own performance as a war leader affirms.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 11/25/2005 @ 1:12pm

  96. Negative press coverage of the war in Iraq in recent weeks has emphasized rising pessimism among the American public about the conflict. But a new survey found that 56 percent of the public thinks that efforts to establish a stable democracy in the country will succeed. The survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press -- which also plumbed opinions of journalists, university presidents and others in academe, diplomats, government officials, religious leaders, members of the military, scientists and international security specialists -- revealed a marked disconnect between the perceptions of the general public and many of the so-called opinion leaders.

    SO MUCH FOR YOUR LYING LIB POLS

    Posted by libz at 11/25/2005 @ 1:37pm

  97. .

    GLENNC.LEMON 11/24 @ 11:05am

    NACL provides a shining example and key exemplar of the failure of rightwing ideology.

    I suppose I should say, you exemplify the poverty of the Left. But it's not true. Ideologues of the right are as given to stupidity, mendacity and malice as those of the left. Take Horst Mahler who was a leader of German's Red Army Fraction (RAF). He switched and now is the leader of Germany's neoNazis. Mussolini began on the left. He was editor of Avanti, the newspaper of Italy's communist party. Hitler too had one foot in the socialist camp, which is why his was the National Socialist Workers Party and why he published a Socialist Manifesto for May Day, (I think in) 1921.

    In a previous thread, he (nacl) equates the invasion of Iraq with WWII. Why, NACL? How is Europe "Iraq"? And the disarmed, encircled dictator Hussein "Hitler"? Bush is (teeter teeter) "Roosevelt" and Blair "Churchill"? 1944 is "2005"?

    Show me where I said, Iraq was Europe or WWII, or that Saddam was Hitler? I doubt that I so much as mentioned Hitler. I said that Saddam and his Baath were fascists, as are today's insurgents; they too hate democracy, free speech and religious toleration. I said, the Baathists/insurgents, though 100 times less formidable than the fascists of 65 years ago, also practiced aggressive war and savage domestic terror. Saddam amputated tongues and buried hundreds of thousands of civilians. The Nazis hanged political opponents from meat hooks and worked them to death in Buchenwald. If you don't think that's accurate, or that Saddam's gang, and today's insurgents are fascists, say so!

    If you don't think, the radical Left, which includes The Nation, supported Saddam against US efforts to eject him, say so! If you don't think, the Left today demands a quick US withdrawal from Iraq, which it knows would leave the field to the insurgents, say so! And tell my why it is therefore not accurate to say, the Left today collaborators with fascists.

    I maintain that today's anti Iraq war tumult is an echo out of the 1930s and 40s. Then too the Left piously demanded peace. It called for the end of Lend Lease, the repeal of conscription and a retreat from Europe. It denounced FDR as a destroyer of the Bill of Rights, and Churchill as a warmonger. It called the Soviet Union, the only true neutral, though it was aligned with Nazi Germany and was delivering daily trainloads of iron ore and chromium to Hitler, as he was blitzing London. Read the February 1941 issue of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade newspaper, here.

    Futhermore, I asked why it was noble to invade Festung Europa, which was happily collaborating with fascist Germany, but it is ignominious to support an Iraqi regime, elected by millions, against 25,000 fascists insurgents? Why was transforming Europe and Japan worth 300,000 American lives, almost 3,000 on a single day in June '44, but the attempt to transform the Middle East is not worth 2,100?

    And note, none of the above claims Iraq is WWII or Saddam is Hitler.

    NACL avoids the obvious comparison of the 2003 invasion of Iraq with … the first Gulf War of 1991 (in which case Iraq is "Iraq", Hussein is "Hussein", and so on). Why ...? And if the second campaign in 2003 is "right" in its strategic objectives, NACL, was the first in 1991 … wrong, as it did not dismantle the government of Iraq? Please explain why you avoid the obvious comparison

    I avoided nothing. Moreover, where is the obvious comparison? Desert Storm's war aim was to liberate Kuwait. It ended short of regime change in Baghdad because Saddam promised to cede all his WMD and make himself transparent. Had that commitment been kept there would have been no invasion in March 2003.

    (NaCl) could also uplift the discourse by: (1) showing precisely where Mr. Nichols equates "Rebel Jesus" with "Iraqi insurgent" in the editorial; (2) revealing on what occasions (with supporting notes) he has psychoanalyzed Mr. Nichols to divine his secret thoughts on religion and its uses

    Nichols makes no bones about sharing The Nation's position on Iraq. He is virtuously pro-peace and, like 65 years ago, has a "get out and stay out" demand. As he sings that tune Nichols draws on Jackson Browne's, Rebel Jesus for harmony. The left radical Nichols, like the rebel Jesus, is for peace. But his peace will advantage insurgents who daily slaughter the innocent. You don't see a cheap and cynical misappropriation, eh? I'm not surprised.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 11/25/2005 @ 1:44pm

  98. Yep, people are listening.

    The Harris Poll. Nov. 8-13, 2005. N=1,011 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).

    "Do you think that the Bush Administration generally provides accurate information regarding current issues or do you think they generally mislead the public on current issues to achieve their own end?"

    .......................................Accurate.............Misleading.. ............Unsure

    ALL adults ...........................32 ........................64........................4

    Republicans.........................68.........................28....... .................4 Democrats............................7..........................91...... ..................2 Independents......................25..........................73........ ................2

    Posted by BUSHFOOLS 11/25/2005 @ 11:48am | ignore this person

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/25/2005 @ 2:48pm

  99. The new Cook Political Report poll of 1,001 adults nationwide (margin of error +/- 3.1 percent) was conducted by RT Strategies, a newly established bipartisan corporate/public affairs polling firm headed by Thom Riehle, former president of Ipsos Public Affairs and a veteran of the Peter Hart and Patrick Caddell Democratic polling firms. They find that a whopping 68% of Americans believe the political attacks on the war effort lower troop moral and make their job tougher and more dangerous.

    THIS POLL SHOULD MAKE YOU ANTI-AMERICAN ASSHOLE LIBERALS HANG YOUR HEADS IN SHAME...BUT YOU WONT STOP BECAUSE ALL YOU CARE ABOUT IS POWER...OUR TROOPS AND COUNTRY BE DAMNED

    Posted by libz at 11/25/2005 @ 3:31pm

  100. All WE care about is power? Mister LIBZ, as far as I'm concerned, whoever you are, the Republican party can nominate and elect YOU for president. The stupider and more party line assholes you all have up there, the more obvious it is to the public that this war is nothing but a reflection of your own glory grubbing shitheadedness.

    I don't care shit about the morale of the troops, they've been sent into a criminal enterprise and they should want out. That's healthy. Unlike your attitude.

    Posted by Legba at 11/25/2005 @ 4:03pm

  101. "I don't care shit about the morale of the troops"

    WELL I KNOW YOU DISGUSTING LIBS AGREE WITH THIS..IT IS OUR JOB AS REAL AMERICANS TO POINT THIS FACT OUT CONSTANTLY TO OUR COUNTRYMEN AND CRUSH YOU ANTI-AMERICAN ASSHOLES JUST LIKE WERE CRUSHING THE TERRORISTS...YOU ARE THE MOST PATHETIC EXCUSES FOR AMERICANS IN OUR 200+ YEAR HISTORY....HOPE YOUR PROUD OF YOURSELVES SCUMBAGS

    Posted by libz at 11/25/2005 @ 4:13pm

  102. Okay, LIBZ. Yawn. Crush me. After your mom lets you use the car, of course. God, you must sit in front of this thing twenty four seven. I'd spend more time addressing your rantings, but some of us have to work for a living. You do know what work is, don't you?

    Posted by Legba at 11/25/2005 @ 4:19pm

  103. Why dont one of you silly LIBS address the point....must be too intellectually tough for you

    Posted by libz at 11/25/2005 @ 4:22pm

  104. I just posted this at another blog:

    Here is the whole news release below. Obviously most people in the US worry about our troops. Too bad one can't poll the troops themselves. I'm sure most are way too busy just trying to stay alive-- period. The major point thus is whether we should even be there sacrificing our sons and daughters-- period.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/PtP_Release.pdf

    99 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 400 Alexandria, VA. 22314 Phone: (571) 721 0201 From: RT Strategies National Omnibus Poll Re: Recent Polling Results

    Nov. 21, 2005, For immediate release, contact Thomas Riehle at (571) 721-0201 These are results from survey with a representative sample of 1,000 adults nationwide, conducted November 17-20, 2005. The margin of error for this survey is + 3.1%. In the weekly RT Strategies National Omnibus Survey our firm undertook this past weekend, RT Strategies partners Lance Tarrance and Thomas Riehle test the public's response to news about reaction to the war critics and the debate that ensued. The results, in summary:

    Fewer than one-in-three adults give credit to Democratic war critics for trying to help the U.S. effort in Iraq, while half (51%) endorse the judgment that the criticisms are leveled only to gain partisan advantage. Independent voters are more likely to believe Democrats are trying to gain a partisan political advantage by almost a ten-point margin over the alternative: 45% of Independents say Democratic war critics are just seeking partisan advantage, and 36% of Independents think the criticism aims to improve the odds of a U.S. success there.

    Almost all adults go along with the argument that criticisms of the war by Democratic Senators will hurt troop morale. Intensity on this point is strong: 44% say this type of criticism hurts troop morale "a lot," and overall 70% fear criticism hurts morale. The feeling is shared by Democrats, by a two-to-one margin (55% say it hurts morale and 21% say it helps morale).

    The plurality of Americans agree (49%) with the current strategy in Iraq: withdrawing troops ONLY when the Iraqi military and government meet specific goals and objectives. Immediate withdrawal regardless of the consequences wins the support of 16%, while another 30% like the idea of a fixed timetable for withdrawal.

    These questions were part of a multi-focused survey asking questions about many issues in the news and in the national policy debate. Each week, RT Strategies interviews 1,000 adults nationwide as part of its National Omnibus Survey, with interviews conducted Thursday through Sunday and results delivered Monday. Call Thomas Riehle or Lance Tarrance at (571) 721 0201, or email either Thomas.riehle@riehle-tarrance.com or lance.tarrance@riehle-tarrance.com .

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/25/2005 @ 4:42pm

  105. LIBZ, you haven't framed an argument that challengs the intellect here yet. Now, please go rejoin your Hitler Youth contingent.

    Posted by Legba at 11/25/2005 @ 5:04pm

  106. there is a little talked of "Dead Sea Scroll" (at some university in the midEast that holds onto that stuff) that indicates that the resurrection was "staged" for the reasons you note above ("stick it to the man"). Was on like 60 Mins or some such a few years back that before they nailed him up his "peeps" gave him "essence of gall" which is a ref to a botanical poison of uncertain nature but is likely among a class of paralytics to ease his suffering. So when he was cut down he wasn't dead....just really F'd up and comatose, but they played like he was dead, patched him up and a few days later..."Voila" - all better and rise from the dead!

    You note that his story pretty much ends with that. No happily ever after, no "old" Jesus telling neighborhood kids "back in the day" stories.....cause he wasn't "all right". Jeez, they did gut stick him so he ultimately DID die, most likely from sepsis.

    The Bible is not a literal history of the times back then....it is a poorly translated, often intentioanally mistranslated, mixture of tall tales, legends and allegories mixed with actual history that has changed and rechanged over the course of like thousands years usually by whatever "Christian" sect was in charge at the time.

    Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 11/25/2005 @ 09:54am

    I read somewhere that some Muslims believe the grave of Jesus is actually located in Syria. Some Muslims travel there as a place of pilgrimage to venerate him. But others maintain that his grave is in Kashmir, that he traveled there after the crucifixion and taught for many years. There was also a program on television that made it sound likely that his grave was located exactly where the Christians say, in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/25/2005 @ 5:14pm

  107. There are so many chapters of his early life that have been deleted by the experts that I wonder if we'll ever have any clarity on his message. Did you happen to see that article on the Gospel of Thomas that appeared in Harper's this month? Rather interesting piece.

    Posted by Legba at 11/25/2005 @ 5:19pm

  108. There are also writings of what Jesus did between the ages of 12 and 33 that the church will not publish. Too bad, from what I read, interesting stuff, if any of it is true. Traveled quite a bit. Even went through India, China and Tibet, staying a bit and studying. From this thread sounds like he studied more how to overthrow a government than religion. Seems somebody in his group learned more of one than the other.

    Posted by BUSHFOOLS 11/25/2005 @ 10:13am

    And, I have also read that at the time of Jesus's crucifixion there were 4 - 6 other Jews running around claiming to be the Messiah. If true that may explain Jesus's continual references to old testament signs and prophecies of the Messiah that matched his own circumstances, to emphasize his authenticity vs. the others.

    Some are of the opinion that the Sanhedrin wanted him crucified because they feared that he could create social unrest that would result in a severe crackdown by the Romans. If this is so then unquestionably he was considered a "rebel".

    Who knows what happened to the other half-dozen "Messiahs"? Maybe they were crucified, too, but it didn't result in a new religion.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/25/2005 @ 5:25pm

  109. Almost all adults go along with the argument that criticisms of the war by Democratic Senators will hurt troop morale. Intensity on this point is strong: 44% say this type of criticism hurts troop morale "a lot," and overall 70% fear criticism hurts morale. The feeling is shared by Democrats, by a two-to-one margin (55% say it hurts morale and 21% say it helps morale).

    Posted by BUSHFOOLS 11/25/2005 @ 4:42pm

    Sure, I guess that would hurt troop morale- to find out that the whole f'n war that you and your buddies are getting killed for is a damned anti-American fraud. But, guess what- that's got to happen sooner or later when it IS a damned anti-American fraud. Therefore, sooner is better. 75 Americans have lost their lives in Iraq this month.

    How about not narrowing down the question so much that it's meaningless- how much would it improve morale among the troops to find out that they're coming home as soon as possible?

    Because Americans really do care about them and are not keeping them over there purely for the selfish political needs of an incompetent and disloyal political party, i.e., the Republicans.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/25/2005 @ 5:35pm

  110. it's just a boring song. nice idea, just bland and preachy execution, like the rest of Jackson Browne's stuff.

    Posted by muggles5 at 11/25/2005 @ 7:46pm

  111. Red

    Brush/Chainy admin lied us into war. We can't get around that. I guess a better poll would ask: Which do you believe lowers our troops morale more: A. Not being equipped, B. Calling the Brush/Chainy admin on lying us into war, C. Forced to stay beyond tour D. Seeing your buddies die, E. All of the above equally?

    PS. I finally had to hit the ignore sick kids button on LIBZ and USAPride. Ha. Fun. That was why I printed the survey originally. One of them was selectively quoting some of the numbers and not others. Then I fell into one of their idiotic rants. I swear there is no reason to read anything they say, as it's more bile manipulation and distraction

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/25/2005 @ 8:34pm

  112. Rio

    The scrolls I referred to were not part of the "regular" scrolls. These were a set apart that no one outside of these mideastern scholars had seen for like 40-50 years - and their full contents have STILL not been released. I'll dig around and see if I can find the ref....its been a while though.

    There are substantial sections of the Bible that have been rewritten, truncated, etc. In fact, there is much that was likely transcribed poorly in the middle ages (especially with royal influences on religion of the time) It was a time when politics WAS religion. Take the Apocryphal books for instance. Thrown out becuae they were originally written in Greek? Puh-lease....a goodly number of the Dead Sea Scrolls are written in Hebrew and Greek. How about the other "life and times of Jesus" books that no one has seen (outside of Vatican City perhaps) for centuries?

    see: HERE [rotten.com]

    Sure, there is some accurate, imbedded history. There is also much that is awry. (Giants, people living 800 years, a flood that overtook the ENTIRE world) that are obviously fables. Do they teach moral lessons...sure. They are "good" in that respect. Should we believe this old tome literally? No way.

    btw too: that "trinity" thing came, much..much later (as was pointed out elsewhere in the thread) I am much more in line with those equating Jesus to Buddha and Confucius. Ahead of his time, insightful, intelligent. But a deity?

    ...and for the record, I get my info from a variety of sources and take all of them with a touch of salt!

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/25/2005 @ 9:39pm

  113. Since the "FOOL" has hit the button, please pass this along to said fool.

    Get a life skippy!

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 11/25/2005 @ 9:40pm

  114. Letter to my sons:

    What if they gave a Christmas and nobody came?

    Think about it.

    Then make it happen

    Christmas?

    Just say no.

    Posted by barnesgene at 11/25/2005 @ 10:33pm

  115. Hey, Will C., did you see that joke that was going around when M. Gibson did his J.C. trip? It had an S and M flavor and went:

    Q. Why was Jesus crucified?

    A. He forgot his "Safe" word.

    Posted by Legba at 11/25/2005 @ 10:50pm

  116. P.S. I don't think it's in good taste either, but it is funny.

    Posted by Legba at 11/25/2005 @ 10:51pm

  117. LEFTOFCENTER --- I talked about the history of the bible back on 11/24 at 6:23AM...you might check it out.

    Posted by philbq at 11/25/2005 @ 11:46pm

  118. P.S. I don't think it's in good taste either, but it is funny.

    Posted by LEGBA 11/25/2005 @ 10:51pm

    Leg

    Not to worry. I ran it by the holy spirit. Dude, he was rolling.

    which makes him...

    A Holy Roller!

    Ha Ha Ha Ha

    The fun just keeps on coming.

    Posted by Will C. at 11/25/2005 @ 11:48pm

  119. REGARDING THE WAR ---Al you Bushloving cheerleaders for war don't seem to get it...it's over. The tide has turned. The public has turned against the war, and it's just a matter of how quick the troops will be removed. The Republicans and war hawk Demos see the writing on the wall. The argument is over! The train has left the station! (Do you hear me, NACL?)

    Posted by philbq at 11/25/2005 @ 11:52pm

  120. Will C.---I want some of what you are smokin'

    Posted by philbq at 11/25/2005 @ 11:54pm

  121. Posted by PHILBQ 11/25/2005 @ 11:54pm

    My friend. Take a deep breath of life.

    That's all I've been on for the last three years.

    And, I highly recommend it!

    :)

    Posted by Will C. at 11/26/2005 @ 12:01am

  122. Will C:

    What were you on before that?

    :-)

    Posted by usc1 at 11/26/2005 @ 01:20am

  123. .

    HVMILLER 11/22 @ 11:04am

    NACL, the president is fucking incompetent

    What is your criteria?

    For "fucking incompetence" consider FDR who left the Pacific fleet at anchor even as Japan's Washington embassy was burning its documents and the Japanese intercepts said, war is imminent. Or Truman, who watched China and Eastern Europe fall to totalitarianism and who declared Korea outside America's defense perimeter, whereupon the North Korea invaded the South. Or JFK who staged the Bay of Pigs, sent Castro exploding cigars and whose Berlin bungling encouraged Khrushchev to locate nuclear missiles in Cuba. Or LBJ who plunged the nation into Vietnam; or Carter who introduced America to 14% inflation, watched our diplomats taken hostage, and bungled the Tehran/helicopter rescue attempt. Or Clinton whose incompetent fucking exposed him to impeachment. (The counts were grand jury perjury and obstruction of justice.)

    i dont like our troops cruising around like sitting ducks, and no concrete plan for anything but stay the course.

    Staying the course is sound. The plan is to hold off the insurgency until Iraq's army is trained and can defend the country's elected govt on its own.

    you like to talk about world war 2, i had 6 great uncles and both grand fathers in that war.

    I mentioned the past when it bears on the present. What is your point about your relatives? I too had two grandfathers in WWII. One was killed. The other was almost captured in Belgium. He only ever talked of how miserably sea-sick he had been for ten days, until the troop ship tied up in Brooklyn. So what?

    i dont want bush to fail, hes done that quite well on his own, i would like my country to succeed, and he is certainly not contributing to anything like that. his war policy is a non policy, his economic policy is fucking lunacy. my grandfather was in japan during the occupation, this whole iraq thing is a fucking fiasco and a disgrace. if hes for free speech he sure as hell didnt need to bomb al jazeera, thats fascism

    You stagger from the pathetically incoherent to the patently irrelevant and seasons the lot with baloney.

    I don't believe you want Bush to succeed. I think that you, like most of the Left, are much more interested that the administration fails than that the country prevails. Look at the jubilation of BUSHFOOLS plastering various blogs with that Harris poll. When has partisanship so disregarded the national security interests of America?

    I'm pretty sure, this will in time turn on the Left, and with a vengeance, especially if Iraq turns out a failure. The Left will not get away with having made common cause with outright fascists in a conflict for democracy.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 11/26/2005 @ 02:24am

  124. Jesus was a big-time rebel -- against the current expression of his religion -- Judiasm!

    He saw evil being done in the Lord's name and spoke out against it. Eventually, he was killed for what he said.

    We honor His spirit when we rebel against pious sinners who pollute the world with their lies and greed.

    For those who preach Jesus, but promote the Old Testament "eye for an eye," you are blaspheming against the man who only wanted you to love your neighbor (even if he was an unbelieving Samaritan) and to help the least of us and to know that the meek will inherit the earth.

    So stop hating "libs," and stop asking for the death penalty (compare with "who among you is without sin, cast the first stone"), and stop hating in general -- or stop claiming to be any part of a true Christian heritage.

    Love your neighbor doesn't mean love only your "conservative who looks like me" neighbor.

    I never hate cons; I just despise their programs and hypocrisy -- and even so, that's only in the last several years when they've become so very hateful -- calling dissenters cowards and traitors. You may disagree strongly with what someone believes, but that's no reason for hatred, which just destroys your own soul.

    So, as the season for love and forgiving (in many religions) approaches, ditch the bile and open your hearts. No matter how much you may feel that another is wrong-headed and creating pain, extend your arms to that person, at least mentally, and experience true joy of giving forgiveness and understanding.

    Even GWB and Cheney believe in what they're doing -- even if they have additional motives as well. They think that they're improving the world even if it costs the lives and fortunes of the most unfortunate of us. They're blinded to the realities of life for the least of us. That blindness does not make them bad; it makes them ignorant.

    May we have the strength to overcome our distaste for these misguided souls and to remove them from positions of power where they can work their ignorant mischief. By increasing the schism between the ends of the political spectrum, we help them retain power.

    Those of us who can see what's happening clearly without being blinded by money or power or pure ideology (of any kind) must find common ground with all Americans and ignore the distractions of ideology.

    Believe what Jesus said and you'll know that direct help for those of the least power, the downtrodden, the desperate, the hopeless, will enoble our country and bring us to moral leadership of the world once again. Might and power are easily abused by those who become bullies despite themselves.

    The easy use of great might plunges us into a moral pit. The greatest might requires the greatest restraint. We must always set ourselves above those who would harm innocents (like 9/11 victims and the thousands of innocent Iraqi killed by us). This is the way of true strength. Cowardice is attacking the nearly defenseless with overwhelming strength and letting the children of the poor pay the price for this arrogance.

    Love is mightier than hate. Creation is greater than destruction. It's easy to hate and to destroy. It's hard to love and to create. Don't fall for the dark side; it's so easy and so powerful. Take the hard path, the path less travelled. Stand up for what's truly right. Eschew "an eye for an eye." That's the old religion before Jesus taught us to turn the other cheek.

    My friends, the message here is that the moneychangers have taken over the temple. Neither I nor the others posting here have taken the Christ out of Christmas. No, your friends the CEOs have done that better than I could have had I wished to.

    Jesus was a truly great man who preached great ideas.

    Too bad so many Christians ignore what he said.

    Posted by adr at 11/26/2005 @ 02:49am

  125. NACL --- You are pissing into the wind...give it up...the war will be ended soon. The public has turned against the war when they saw thru the lies that sold it. Maybe you think a Shiite theocracy = success, but most people do not. A civil war is building, and it's not our fight. Maybe you should sign up for the military, and put your life where your mouth is. I care about the troops...I want them home safe and soon.

    Posted by philbq at 11/26/2005 @ 09:30am

  126. NaCl

    The plan is to hold off the insurgency until Iraq's army is trained and can defend the country's elected govt on its own.

    How long? Its been what....almost 3 yrs now? How long? We take "just outta high school" kids and turn them into soldiers in like what, 8-12 weeks? Per the WH's own admission, Iraq has a single battalion of 800 that is able to roll independent of US support. The remaining tens of thousands are all of the "shoot until someone shoots back, then run home" kinda soldiers. We're babysitting and hopeful that Cheney's energy policy (installing US friendly gov'ts in as many mideast nations as we can) wil pan out. Hasn't been going so well though from where I see it.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/26/2005 @ 11:54am

  127. Is it just me or is anyone else here enjoying the delicious irony of listening to those who have "lost the faith" complaining about how other Christians celebrate Christmas?

    Posted by usc1 at 11/26/2005 @ 11:56am

  128. The moneychangers, like the Brush/Chainy admin, are still alive and doing all to well. I'm definitely not Christmas shopping this year.

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-1125shop,0,67539 79.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

    http://www.kbtv4.tv/news/default.asp?mode=shownews&id=9901

    Posted by Bushfools at 11/26/2005 @ 11:56am

  129. Dear LIBZ -

    In response to:

    WELL I KNOW YOU DISGUSTING LIBS AGREE WITH THIS..IT IS OUR JOB AS REAL AMERICANS TO POINT THIS FACT OUT CONSTANTLY TO OUR COUNTRYMEN AND CRUSH YOU ANTI-AMERICAN ASSHOLES JUST LIKE WERE CRUSHING THE TERRORISTS...YOU ARE THE MOST PATHETIC EXCUSES FOR AMERICANS IN OUR 200+ YEAR HISTORY....HOPE YOUR PROUD OF YOURSELVES SCUMBAGS

    I find it interesting to hear these arm-chair discussions about war, by those who have never seen a single bullet fly by their heads, never had a buddy die in their arms, never had to blow up a city. I give creedence to guys like Murtha, McCain and President Eisenhower - they were there.

    If you think you know more about it than these guys, I suggest you enlist. Perhaps your presence will allow some mom or dad over there to come on home for Christmas. You obviously believe the cause is just. Would you be willing to die for it? If so, I'm sure they could use you - grab a gun and get in there.

    These are for you. Two famous quotes from a Republican President/WWII War hero.

    "Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion."

    - President Dwight D. Eisenhower

    "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

    - President Dwight D. Eisenhower

    Posted by feduphoosier at 11/26/2005 @ 3:12pm

  130. I have come through the grinder of religious upbringing with its use of domination, ingrained shame, appeal to supernatural outcomes and all the rest of the content of that came out of the merging of Roman authority with an appealing simple religion of sharing what you have, tending the sick, burying the dead and maintaining a expectation of the ever present good of being connected one with another in way that was mutually uplifting and beneficial. Simple Christian principles and the way of the rebel Yesuah, were much better served in the absence of integration into the structure of the state. The simple organic nature of the original movement has, in the last sixteen hundred years, been perverted into a structure of orthodoxy and, condemnation and evil that was the original target of the rebel Yesuah. The state of that early movement has morphed into a state of Christianist superstition and evil that is in essence, THE ANTI-CHRIST. The teaching that comes to me from the old testament is that there is no place on the earth ball, in the solar system, in the galaxy, or in the universes (plural intended)where when one is standing, that that place is holy ground. In the various captivities and diasporas, the God of Israel was present as an organizational idea and as an idea of individual comfort. The rebel Yesuah, was one of many of a long line of rare individuals who had come to that realization. His earliest adherents called him raboni, rabbi, teacher. The Romans made him a God and the councils of then emerging Christian/state religion made him the God of three parts or expressions. Today we are pounded with the propaganda of the Christianist cultist that have lost all connection with the simple society of loving and caring for one another to the condition of allowing the commission of any wrong in the name of a vengeful sky God and his much worshiped fractional part, Jesus. The condition of the church, now, is that it is a flourishing fig tree that produces no fruit. Temple culture is reestablished and the building of an edifice to attract the sacrifices of the faithful is paramount. Never mind that Yesuah's strongest message was there is more holiness to be found in lepers, whores and tax collectors that in any of the pious who would lead the best bullock that money could buy to hand over to the priests for slaughter and burning on the alter of the temple. The scoffer and those who would abuse the poor by their words and actions or inactions, are less worthy of reward than the most depraved soul that they would condemn. The Rebel taught a paradox. Humans are more inclined to the orthodox or the more widely held fabrications that give comfort even it they are logically and spiritually bereft of good.

    I have shared Jackson Brown's song with many. I recommend the CD from which it comes for your holiday music, The Chieftains, "The Bells of Dublin."

    Posted by LanternBearer at 11/26/2005 @ 3:30pm

  131. Lantern Bearer's correction -

    "There is no place where one may stand that is not holy ground."

    Posted by LanternBearer at 11/26/2005 @ 3:39pm

  132. Just back from a miserable family holiday with the folks. Heard tell of a country somewhere that is apparently doing all it can to suppress the ability of a small group of good, pious people to worship as they please in what is supposed to be a democracy. Poor Mom and Dad. Good Lutherans they are and they just can't seem to do...uh...well...it's like this, we aren't allowed to...hmm. Let me think. I heard O'Reilly's rant the other day about this and he said that uh...uh...that as Christians we...uh...couldn't...or were forced to...uh.

    This was my four-day visit.

    As someone who was, in fact, born on the Sun God's birthday, let me say that I do not object to sharing my day (or a day in the same 'hood as mine) with the man who some believe is the son of God. My mother was not a virgin, I was born in a hospital on a snowy morn, and I received one small teddy bear in honor of my 4th day out of the womb, the day some claim that a fat white Northerner invades our homes annually and leaves the things we've seen advertised on sale at Wal-Mart. Somehow that trespasser is connected to God; I've tried doing a Kevin Bacon analysis of the relationship, but I've come up dry.

    I can also say as someone who has seen Jackson Browne in concert that the man and his music are barely worth noting. U2 is certainly a force for good in music and in the world, and their 1980s remake of "It's Christmas (Baby, Please Come Him)" is still about the only Christmas song I find listenable.

    As to socialism and the war and the many other topics that so many of us seem unable to set aside during any conversation, I can only say "ugh". The conversations 'round here often seem as forced and narrow as the ones I endured at my parents' home when the Scrabble board was not opened.

    Do I sound as cranky as Love Liberty? Hope not.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 11/26/2005 @ 3:41pm

  133. NACL, sorry i took you for someone who wanted to engage in discussion. addressing my comment about bush being incompetent by comparing him to past presidents is a joke, im dealing with whats going on now , im not rehashing what fdrs or jfks mistakes are, and that certainly doesnt make bush competent, only less incompetent relative to his predecessors. addressing his iraq policy by saying its sound policy, and not elaborating on it is a cop out. and you didnt mention his economic policy. you then go on to a bunch of general statements about my character and leftists in general(do i happen to be one?). using cute prose and lots of adjectives just obfuscates your cop out. call my comments incoherent, irrelevant and baloney all you want, but you still fail to address bushs policies.

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/26/2005 @ 5:04pm

  134. NACL, further, whos cutting and running? you say "The plan is to hold off the insurgency until Iraq's army is trained and can defend the country's elected govt on its own." is that defeating insurgents who are fascists? or merely delaying the day we leave until the iraqi govt can deal with them instead? you certainly dont seem to be saying the policy is putting a full, aggressive effort into ending the insurgency. and by iraqi govt defending itself, do you mean hold off the insurgency like we are , or defeat it?

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/26/2005 @ 5:17pm

  135. I don't understand something. If so many of you can't stand liberal, or even neutral, ideas, why do you come here? Because you enjoy heckling those who you pretend to be disloyal? It doesn't make any sense. What sick, twisted pleasure, does it grant to come here to a message board where you know people who don't agree with you at all gather to speak to each other. What good do you think you wrong, I mean, right-wingers do by coming here and insulting all of us, besmirching us? Likely as not, some of us may even know each other in physical life, and would not behave this way. You would-be censors, armchair intellectuals, should be ashamed of yourselves! The things you say, the way you behave, is not worthy of preschool children! We don't come here so we'll have to read your cruel attacks on us while we're trying to discuss serious issues . . . with each other. Are you trying to make us start screaming at you, in hopes you can use it against us later? Making us lose our cool and call you what you deserve, just so you can use it against us later? We don't want to read your vicious, hate-filled slanders. Speak like that on your own boards, where we will not follow you, but you are not welcome to abuse us here.

    Posted by Kristev at 11/26/2005 @ 5:26pm

  136. Speak with dignity and hold your cruel abuses, and a real debate can begin. But do check your vicious slanders and cries of 'treason,' at the door.

    Posted by Kristev at 11/26/2005 @ 5:27pm

  137. KRISTEV:

    Speaking for only myself. I come here to attempt to understand other viewpoints. Granted, not many make sense to me. But to be fair, I'm sure not many of my views make sense to you.

    I've seen so many times when the left say those of us who support the POTUS are simply in "lock step". Well, can't the same be said about those of you who disagree?

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 11/26/2005 @ 5:43pm

  138. I think it's a wonderful song. Anything that kicks against any established religion is a good thing. Religion is what binds us to our animal natures - the themes of salvation and promise of an afterlife are so alluring that we forget we're barely more than vicious animals. I really just like the presents - Jesus has been fucked for a long time.

    Posted by richbh at 11/26/2005 @ 6:41pm

  139. RICHBH:

    Not cool man.

    God forbid, you should try to cross the street and a bus clips you, throwing you face down into the curb.

    At this time - you should refrain from calling his name. Instead, just lay their and bleed to death - alone...

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 11/26/2005 @ 8:12pm

  140. Richbh -

    ow much research have you done into Chjristianity? What books can you cite? You must be well informed to have such a strong opinion.

    If your starting presumption is that we already know everything that there is to know in the universe then I can see how you think you are right., but If you do some honest research about Jesus you would be surprised. I don't expect that from you though because you already appear to know everything. I was Not a Christian for most of my life, but God is real and Jesus is his son who died for our sins. I pray for people like you.

    Posted by jzimm at 11/26/2005 @ 10:21pm

  141. Will C:

    What were you on before that?

    :-)

    Posted by USC1 11/26/2005 @ 01:20am

    Dry gound

    It just road a little different.

    Posted by Will C. at 11/26/2005 @ 10:23pm

  142. I pray for people like you.

    Posted by JZIMM 11/26/2005 @ 10:21pm

    Please don't

    I've seen hell

    Posted by Will C. at 11/26/2005 @ 10:25pm

  143. Just watched one of the American Idol runners-up speaking on Fox News. He began a sentence with the words [maybe not the exact words--seeking a transcript for such a thing seems not worth the time]: "And then the Lord spoke to me..." Only in America can someone who hears the voices of an imagined creature be celebrated as special, and not the kind of "special" that usually gets one placed in a padded cell.

    This country needs no more prayers nor does it need anyone else channeling God's words or doing his work. We are but maggots and worms on this planet. Whatever exists beyond this sphere is well-beyond the ability of our feeble minds to imagine and our limited language to describe. Believe or not believe--it just doesn't matter. Those who choose to believe are no closer to the truth than anyone else. If you believe that choosing to believe gets you special gifts while living and gains bonus points for your soul, then you are engaging in a bit of ignorant pride the likes of which my beliefs say will get you a divine spanking. Please keep your dementia to yourself and we will let you walk the streets without too much laughter directed at you.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 11/26/2005 @ 11:39pm

  144. TJB

    Scarier still is that there are reports that Dubya has made similar claims re: the reason for war. If we are fighting becuase of the voices in his head...well, let's just say that it is probably NOT a good thing!

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/27/2005 @ 12:40am

  145. i wonder if JIZZM thinks bush is chosen by god or something along those lines, and if he would admit it. i know mullah mohammed omar of the taliban suffered some kind of closed head injury and hears voices, of course his followers think its divine voices. i wonder if these voices told him to blow up the giant buddhas in bimayan

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/27/2005 @ 01:15am

  146. I think that the level of religious involvement in this country is not good. Compared to most European countries, this country is like Iran. The extreme fanatical twice-born Christian Taliban seek to impose their beliefs into public schools, government, and everywhere else. The current regime in Washington, D.C. is run by these religious fanatics. Somehow they support and argue for war, in spite of the words of Jesus. Every modern President asks that God bless the United States exclusively and its imperial wars. Many churches , preaching their "greed-is-good" prosperity gospel, have become huge tax-exempt corporations. In my city, Olympia,WA, the Catholic Church and the Salvation Army are the churches commited to helping the poor and homeless. The twice-born palaces are packed with Republicans celebrating their holy prosperity. They do not open their ornate doors to the poor and homeless. Mary and Joseph would not have found shelter there. Anyone looking like Jesus would surely be sent away. (Hippie bum!) In europe, they are older and wiser. Religion is for the church, not the government. That is where it should stay.

    Posted by philbq at 11/27/2005 @ 05:41am

  147. Suggest a much better alternative from pinko woody guthrie: VERSION #1

    Jesus Christ was a man that traveled through this land; A carpenter, true and brave; Said to the rich, "Give your goods to the poor", So they laid Jesus Christ in His grave. Jesus was a man, a carpenter by hand; Carpenter true and brave; And a dirty little coward called Judas Iscariot Laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    The people of the land took Jesus by the hand, They followed Him far and wide; "I come not to bring you peace, but a sword", So they killed Jesus Christ on the sly.

    He went to the sick, he went to the poor; And he went to the hungry and the lame; Said that the poor would one day win this world, And so they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    They nailed Him there to die on a cross in the sky, In the lightning, the thunder and the rain. Judas Iscariot committed suicide When they laid poor Jesus Christ in his grave.

    One day Jesus stopped at a rich man's door. "What must I do to be saved?" "You must take all your goods and give it to the poor", And so they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    They nailed Him there to die on a cross in the sky, In the lightning, the thunder and the rain. Judas Iscariot committed suicide When they laid poor Jesus Christ in his grave.

    When the love of the poor shall one day turn to hate, When the patience of the workers gives away; "Would be better for you rich if you never had been born", So they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    This song was written in New York City, Of rich man, preachers, and slaves; Yes, if Jesus was to preach like He preached in Galillee [sic], They would lay Jesus Christ in His grave.

    VERSION #2

    Jesus Christ was a man who traveled through the land, A hard working man and brave. He said to the rich "Give your goods to the poor." But they laid Jesus Christ in His grave. Jesus was a man, a carpenter by hand, His followers true and brave, One dirty little coward called Judas Iscariot Has laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    He went to the preacher, He went to the sheriff, He told them all the same, "Sell all of your jewelry and give it to the poor," But they laid Jesus Christ in his grave.

    When Jesus come to town, all the working folks around Believed what He did say, The bankers and the preachers they nailed Him on a cross. Then they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    The poor workin' people, they followed Him around, They sung and they shouted gay, The cops and the soldiers, they nailed Him in the air, And they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

    Well, the people held their breath when they heard about His death, And everybody wondered why, It was the landlord and the soldiers that he hired, To nail Jesus Christ in the sky.

    This song was written in New York City, Of rich man, preacher and slave, But if Jesus was to preach like He preached in Galilee, They would lay Jesus Christ in His grave.

    Posted by Bob T at 11/27/2005 @ 07:24am

  148. Jesus was a rebel and a great man who preached help, understanding and love. 400 years later, the power-hungry usurped his message and his words. They distorted them, edited them, censored them. They created Christianity not for love, but for power.

    If GWB were a true follower of Jesus, he would long ago have given his wealth to the poor. He would not help the rich amass more riches through dishonest taxing tricks. He would not send the children of the poor to an unnecessary war where they lose their lives, their limbs and their minds.

    Every step, every action of GWB appears to contradict what Jesus would have done, would have said, would have thought. We have a name for him that has come through the nastiest of religious zealots: the Anti-Christ.

    So, no matter what your religion, I ask that this season you pray for the soul of GWB. May he find truth and find it quickly.

    If he does not, work your butts off to get a Congress in 2006 that will escort GWB & Co. out of Washington, DC on a rail. Then, we can start rebuilding our decimated country. It will take a long time, probably the rest of my life, before we are once again strong in morals before the world, strong in economics, strong in our armed forces, strong in our science and technology as once we were so long ago. My heart yearns for an honest administration that will uplift all Americans, not just the rich and powerful.

    I'm afraid that there are few Democrats who are qualified for this job and fewer Republicans. How about a new party, the Honesty party?

    Posted by adr at 11/27/2005 @ 11:55am

  149. Well, one thing's for certain. Those of us who are serious about building a progressive coalition had better figure out a way to address the issues that both major parties want to kick aside, or we'll continue to have what we have now: two major parties that don't want to address complex social and public health questions that don't concern the professional and speculator cliques. The active voting public will continue to fall away, and the only real "special interest groups" whose politics dominate public discourse will continue to drive this country into a consumption- minded rut. How did Mark Twain phrase it? "a culture of empty, seldome satiated pursuits and the sleep that does not refresh". Here t'is.

    Posted by Legba at 11/27/2005 @ 1:30pm

  150. Feduphoosier,

    Your post to LIBZ is the best one I have read on this blog yet. Well done.

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/27/2005 @ 2:20pm

  151. LIBZ, for you to think that the liberals in this country hate our troops, hate our freedoms, hate our privileges and our rights is really a shame. If you truly feel this way it sounds like the war you are fighting (or thinking of fighting) is against many of your fellow Americans and not just terrorists.

    When you walk down the street do you peer out of the corner of your eye at passersby because you think they might just be plotting to bring down your world? I hope not. If so, you might as well go to Iraq and fight because over there our troops have to do exactly that.

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/27/2005 @ 2:23pm

  152. It is a pity you cannot enjoy what this country is really about. Freedom is uncomfortable, isn't it?

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/27/2005 @ 2:24pm

  153. HHEMWN:

    Read your last 3 posts.

    You are a nutcase.

    Lay of the glue = you...

    Posted by USAPRIDE at 11/27/2005 @ 5:09pm

  154. HVM

    As Dubya claims divine inspiriation at times, I wouldn't doubt his minions believe it so. So no church / state muddling here huh?

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/27/2005 @ 6:20pm

  155. It is sad that Bush uses his religious base to further his political and financial gains but I do think that many of the people he duped are waking up.Not his political buddies but the public is becoming aware of Bush's shortcomings.Katrina was devastating but it was KATRINA that woke so many people up.Once awake they started looking at a lot of other despicable actions Bush has taken.We need our checks and balances back--dictatorship isn't working.If allowed to go unchecked for 3 more years we might find ourselves being invaded by some do gooder democratic country coming to save us from an oppressive monarchy! They would over throw Bush and install an interim government until we could hold fair elections. Wouldn't that be nice?!!!

    Posted by BusyHands at 11/27/2005 @ 8:01pm

  156. .

    HVMILLER 11/26 @ 5:17pm

    You complain that -

    addressing my comment about bush being incompetent by comparing him to past presidents is a joke

    It is sad how obtuse you are. My point was that even the most illustrious administrations had cracks and potholes. The path through war is never smooth. Thus the WWII expression: SNAFU (situation normal, all fucked up).

    You are in no position to sneer at the brains or competence of anyone. Bush is inarticulate and can be boorish, but only twits think that that makes him dumb, or incompetent.

    Iraq was a showdown. A tyrant had played footsies with the US for 12 years. He was out to show the world's other police states that America could be disregarded. Whatever she said about human rights, WMD, nuclear proliferation, she would not carry through. The UN, France, the Left would tie her up in knots. She could not make her words stick. Bush had to disprove that. He had to wring Saddam's neck. That was done swiftly and decisively.

    Thereupon the possibility arose of showing the Arabs an attractive alternative to the repressive police states they are used to. The chances of raising up such a model in Iraq was not a slam dunk. At best it had a 50/50 chance. But to have not given it a try would have been unforgivable. That was what I said in April 2003, and not just I. And the outcome remains undecided.

    I didn't however, anticipate w partisan feelings that prefer the triumph of fascists over the administration's success. The left is willing to suffer a national security setback for the satisfaction of a Bush failure. That is extraordinary and unforgiveable. That will haunt then Democrats and may well in time delegitimize the party. People like Biden, Hillary and Lieberman understand the danger, which is why they yet support the war.

    As to Bush's economic policy, I'm not crazy about the enormous deficits. But Clinton showed that a few prudent measures and a good economy can quickly turn huge deficits into enormous surpluses. Moreover, Bush did prevent the country from sliding into the steep post-bubble recession everyone had predicted, and despite the extra weight of 9/11. The upshot is, the economy is doing okay. That is not "cute prose" but the stock market's hard nosed message.

    you certainly dont seem to be saying the policy is putting a full, aggressive effort into ending the insurgency. and by iraqi govt defending itself, do you mean hold off the insurgency like we are , or defeat it?

    You think 150,000 + men is not "a full, aggressive effort"?

    We are doing what is possible in the current climate. It was different in 1920 when 100,000 tribesmen revolted and the British bombed and machine gunned Iraqi villages from the air, and used mustard gas (it was not illegal back then). That summer they killed 10,000 insurgents and themselves lost 2,000 troops; but that put a lid on the rebellion. They then installed a Hashemite monarchy which ruled until 1958.

    The point is, the Iraqis do bend when exposed to harsh punishment. (And when not encouraged to believe that if they just persist they will win.) Which was one reason Saddam ruled with such cruelty and was careful to show no weakness. So too the Assads in Syria. There they have "Hama rules," after the rebellious town that was artilleried to rubble at the cost of 20,000 Islamists and their sympathizers.

    It is not politically possible for US forces to play that rough. But an Iraqi army is another matter. (A permanent US force in the region would prevent that army from getting any coup ideas, a tendency in Iraq.)

    Patiently building up a tough and disciplined local force, loyal to the govt, is a reasonable plan. Until then our forces have to hold on. If such an army cannot be raised, we will have failed in this the second part of the Iraqi venture. But the first, ejecting Saddam, showing that we mean what we say, is solidly under our belt.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 11/27/2005 @ 9:14pm

  157. NACL: Your arguments for launching the invasion and continueing the occupation are falling on deaf ears: they are saggy and tired. Nobody buys your reasons anymore. Have you looked at the polls? But I guess facts and reality don't matter if you are a fanatic. Actually, this blog is about Jesus anyway. You're off subject.

    Posted by philbq at 11/27/2005 @ 9:36pm

  158. .

    LANTERNBEARER 11/26 @ 3:30pm

    The Rebel taught a paradox. Humans are more inclined to the orthodox or the more widely held fabrications that give comfort even it they are logically and spiritually bereft of good.

    You are a posturer gushing ridiculous pieties. Think of it, you tout the "Prince of peace" on behalf of a dictator who tore out the tongues of his critics, and on behalf of terrorists who slaughter the innocent. You are the brain transplant patient rejected by the brain.

    Posted by nacl at 11/27/2005 @ 9:51pm

  159. .

    BUSHFOOLS 11/26 @ 11:56am

    The moneychangers, like the Brush/Chainy admin, are still alive and doing all to well.

    You demonstrate that the most ancient bigotry is still alive.

    You explain why radical of the left and right have found their moral center on the side of an Arab police state, a mass murdering tyrant, a fascist insurgency.

    Saddam was the toughest of Israel's enemies and led the most capable Muslim army. He encouraged Palestinian suicide bombers with $30,000 bonuses, and had vowed to turn Israel "into a sheet of flame." At the first opportunity, in 1981, he rained Scuds on Israeli cities, as a reminder to his supporters of who he was. That was why that despot was dear to you. And that was why you went crazy at his ejection.

    Posted by nacl at 11/27/2005 @ 9:58pm

  160. BUSHFOOLS 11/26 @ 11:56am

    The moneychangers, like the Brush/Chainy admin, are still alive and doing all to well.

    You demonstrate that the most ancient bigotry is still alive.

    Posted by NACL 11/27/2005 @ 9:58pm

    Please tell me, NACL, that "the most ancient bigotry" is the one against stupid and hateful people. Are you incapable of suppressing your flailing barbs of anger even during one of our blessed holiday weekends?

    Love and Kissies, Saltman! I recommend a puppy. It'll be sure to warm your frozen cockles.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 11/27/2005 @ 10:17pm

  161. "the economy is doing okay" according to an above post.Who besides the ultra rich is doing okay? Did the Gov. raise the min.wage?Has the problem of health,education,environment or social issues been resolved? Just who is benefitting from this "okay" economy?Seniors are still struggling to hang on to the homes they've worked all their lives for,children are still running around with cavaties and no medical care,working families are bringing home 2 paychecks(if they're lucky)that barely cover the mortgage or rent and still you say the economy is "okay".Maybe so for those with incomes above $100,000 but for the rest of us it's NOT OKAY.

    Posted by BusyHands at 11/27/2005 @ 10:55pm

  162. Busy & all BTW

    Sure, the min wage hasn't gone up in a decade. Ask a conservative and they'll pine that such a fool's errand will destroy civilization as we know it. But you know what? In that same decade, the average pay for a Congressman has gone up nearly $30,000 /yr.

    Who's fooling who?

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/28/2005 @ 01:32am

  163. BUSHFOOLS 11/26 @ 11:56am The moneychangers, like the Brush/Chainy admin, are still alive and doing all to well. You demonstrate that the most ancient bigotry is still alive. You explain why radical of the left and right have found their moral center on the side of an Arab police state, a mass murdering tyrant, a fascist insurgency. Saddam was the toughest of Israel's enemies and led the most capable Muslim army. He encouraged Palestinian suicide bombers with $30,000 bonuses, and had vowed to turn Israel "into a sheet of flame." At the first opportunity, in 1981, he rained Scuds on Israeli cities, as a reminder to his supporters of who he was. That was why that despot was dear to you. And that was why you went crazy at his ejection. Posted by NACL 11/27/2005 @ 9:58pm | ignore this person

    NACL,

    There you go again – Semite baiting. This whole sacrifice of American blood and treasure is all about that which is best for Israel in your myopic view of events. You have the gall to try and intimidate those who criticize this wrongful invasion of a country that was a non-threat to the US by accusing the dissenters of engaging in that "most ancient bigotry" and saying their moral compass is aligned with "a fascist insurgency."

    Sorry, fella, but that old dog ain't gonna hunt any more. I can't speak for others, but I find it intolerable reading your Israel-first, pro-Bush propaganda when American soldiers are being shot dead and maimed for what they are told is a hazy defined mission having something to do with keeping America safe from terrorists. It is bad enough that their own commander-in-chief can't objectively define their mission, but I wonder what they would think if they were told their lives are really put in danger for the sake of Israel.

    I'm sure the MAJORITY of the American public that now opposes this war will be delighted to learn that their morality is aligned with a "fascist insurgency." I'm sure that other patriotic Americans on the right like Pat Buchanan, Bill Buckley, Congressman Murtha, and many others who oppose this war on the grounds that American interests should be served by our policies before the interests of any other country will be delighted to learn that their morality is aligned with a "fascist insurgency."

    I respect your loyalty to Israel, but the dissent to the war in Iraq by Americans speaks more to American values of truth in advocacy that we expect from our leaders than the derisive and insolent motives you ascribe.

    Posted by seattlescribe at 11/28/2005 @ 03:14am

  164. NACL

    You are in no position to sneer at the brains or competence of anyone. Bush is inarticulate and can be boorish, but only twits think that that makes him dumb, or incompetent.

    yeah, hes got a genius level iq, im sure.my assessment of his competence isnt based on his ability to articulate, but appointments of people like brown, and poor post invasion planning.

    Moreover, Bush did prevent the country from sliding into the steep post-bubble recession everyone had predicted, and despite the extra weight of 9/11. The upshot is, the economy is doing okay. That is not "cute prose" but the stock market's hard nosed message.

    how? tax cuts? the Fed had nothing to do with the economies performance? or...increased deficit spending? a HUGE factor is chinas economy keeping down inflationary pressure.but i would posit presidents have alot less control over the performance of the economy than most would say. who knows how its going to look if a housing bubble bursts, there is a hell of alot more money in that than in wall street.those bubbles are due to wall streets optimism, by the way, and cutting taxes while increasing spending is reckless

    You think 150,000 + men is not "a full, aggressive effort"?

    no, i dont. they just increased it for the election, not to stop insurgents. the goal is catch the insurgents, right? im rather surprised they arent adding more troops.

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/28/2005 @ 04:04am

  165. NACL, as for the morale of the islamicist insurgents, they were delighted that saddam was toppled by "infidels", as it showed he was not favored by god. the practical aspects of al qaedas functioning if bin laden were to be caught are debatable, but the morale of al qaeda would most certainly drop, as they would infer him, and possibly their cause, was not favored by god any longer.

    Posted by hvmiller at 11/28/2005 @ 04:10am

  166. Pardon my belated response to NACL, as real life has intervened.

    However, I am now on the scene to drive the public works truck around this virtual place and clean up the mess left behind by rightwing vandalism of the gorgeous countenance of Truth, to hose down streets onto which rightwing memes have been vomited, to indict and prosecute the perps.

    I present the response to NACL in 3 parts, conceptually divided, since many people are anathema to any single post that looks long.

    Cleaning Up the 'Hood : Part I of III : NACL's Opening Smokescreen

    NACL opens with some discussion of Mussolini's early politics. As with his meditations on Stalin in the seminary, these passages betray a fascination and self- appointed "expertise" in the early activities of tyrants; an odd hobby, n'est-ce pas? Nonetheless, for the purposes of this discussion, these verbal flares are distractions. Although they depart from the usual rightwing pre-occupations --- such as the semen-drenched blue dress or Vincent Foster's assassination at the hands of Clintonian "death squads" --- they remain distractions from matters at hand as NACL assays to put the discussion on terms on which he believes he can gain some traction.

    On to specifics:

    NACL writes: _Show me where I said, Iraq was Europe or WWII, or that Saddam was Hitler?_

    An earlier he post of invokes Normandy 1944; the implication is crystal clear in drawing a continuity between US intervention in fighting Euro-fascism of yore and the invasion of Iraq. However, NACL's posture on the matter becomes even more curious when he confirms that this is indeed what he has in mind: "I maintain that today's anti Iraq war tumult is an echo out of the 1930s and 40s". To at once float the WWII analogy and then attempt to annul the logic of it, is a bid to have "it both ways"; bid denied. Furthermore, NACL is silent on what I have indicated about the run-up to WWII; in particular, conservative pols in the UK and US business were pleased with the nationalist cause in Spain that would enable anti-communist discipline of the workforce and protection of their investments, and they were happy to do business with the Nazis who were still lionized in many quarters of US opinion (McCormick family's Chicago Tribune). These developments nourished Nazism far more directly than the pacificistic utterances of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade to which NACL points.

    Posted by GlennC.Lemon at 11/28/2005 @ 09:08am

  167. Cleaning Up the 'Hood : Part II of III : NACL on Iraq

    NACL writes: _Furthermore, I asked why it was noble to invade Festung Europa, which was happily collaborating with fascist Germany, but it is ignominious to support an Iraqi regime, elected by millions, against 25,000 fascists insurgents?_

    Where to start with this one?

    US policy with regard to Iraq has been a mess for decades, much to the hideous detriment of the long-suffering people who live there and aspire to a decent life. I invite NACL and others who are interested to read the US government's narrative on the matter, in their own words, that is available in declassified documents available in the archive maintained online by George Washington University. See memos on Donald Rumsfeld's preparations to visit Saddam, efforts to continue funnelling material to Saddam during the course of grotesque human rights abuses and war crimes with regard to Iran, among other stomach-turning matters.

    Prior to 1990, Iraq was a wealthy, relatively secular nation with strong infrastructure (education, medicine). If the Iraqis had been endowed with the opportunity to rebuild their country after the 1991 Gulf War --- rather than being subjected to what US military college professor called "sanctions of mass destruction" in Foreign Affairs, May/June 1999 --- they may have been able to do what Argentines did after the "Dirty War" and Falklands War debacle; or the Spaniards and Portuguese were able to accomplish with regard to liberal democracy after the Franco and Salazar dictatorships, respectively; or South Africans after apartheid, the Nicaraguans after Somoza, among other examples. In each case, in the face of a viscous regime, the people did it for themselves --- sometimes with a boost from outside, but never with a heavy-handed occupying force sucking the resource base out of the country. The US-UK enforced sanctions were instrumental in keeping Saddam's boot on the throat of the people after 1991 --- and in creating a hothouse for deprivation-driven hopelessness and fanaticism on a scale unfathomable in the Weimer Republic, the fruits of which we are now seeing in fully hideous bloom. Had a disarmed Iraq been enabled to rebuild and solve its own problems in the 1990s, it was potentially prosperous, secular, and modernized enough to become a stable republic like its secular-Muslim/NATO ally neighbour Turkey. Oh yes: In Turkey, by the way, the EU wields considerable influence (down to abolition of the death penalty) not by the force of arms and bloodshed, but via the prospect of EU membership. Care to dwell on the contrast, NACL?

    To make an ellipse to the present, here is what the lost opportunity to enable Iraqis to solve their own problems and dump Saddam on their own terms has occasioned. I did not have to fish around for this one; it showed up on the front page of the Sunday paper (UK Observer, 27 November) and has since been picked up by the AP wire service on Yahoo. The story concerns Ayad Allawi's characterization of Iraq right now, 32 months after being "liberated". Remember Allawi, NACL? He was the US-appointed Prime Minister until April, former anti-Baathist and Saddam prison victim, and was totemistically waved about during Bush's election campaign. He says, the Iraqi State apparatus is presently "doing the same as Saddam's time and worse...These are the precise reasons that we fought Saddam Hussein and now we are seeing the same things" such as secret police, secret bunkers, disappearances, the whole grisly array of abuses with its stomach-turning accoutrements. After further elaboration, Allawi remarks that "he had so little faith in the rule of law and order that he had instructed his own bodyguards to fire on any police car that attempted to approach his headquarters without prior notice". That is the "democracy" that has been installed from outside in Iraq.

    NACL writes: _Why was transforming Europe and Japan worth 300,000 American lives, almost 3,000 on a single day in June '44, but the attempt to transform the Middle East is not worth 2,100?_

    Two points:

    1. Got a sickly feeling reading this one. WWII was a necessary war, but framing it as having a "price" that can be quantified in "lives spent" says something unseemly and craven about the author, NACL.

    2. Aside from (1), what is at the core of this "attempt to transform the Middle East"? Into what is it to be transformed, is the key matter? A republic? Or a Halliburton field office? A client State/torture chamber (see Allawi's assessment, above) with formal elections, provided the results do not contravene the sponsor and install conservative Islamicists or left-oriented Socialists? Bush and Co. had the opportunity to engage in their ruinous vanity war unimpeded by the UN, by US commentary or public opinion --- and they have failed to realize the ostensible objectives they have set (even as they flip-flop on those objectives). Bush is doing for the US and Middle East what he formerly did for Spectra 7 and Arbusto, his spectacular flops as a "businessman", and it will take decades to clean up the resultant mess. He should never have left the barstool, Rummy should never have behind his bedpan at the old age home, Condi should have stuck with paper pushing at Stanford, etc.

    NACL writes: _I avoided nothing. Moreover, where is the obvious comparison? Desert Storm's war aim was to liberate Kuwait_.

    This is sheer party line-style cant. The "Desert Strom" objective went far beyond Kuwait. Hence, sorties were carried out all over Iraq to disable the country's power grid and infrastructure. Sanctions insured that the damage endured until the present. This is not a new story, but was reported in grisly detail in the months following the Gulf War: See Tyler (NY Times, 3 June 1991, p.1) and Gellman (WashPost, 23 June 1991, p.1).

    NACL writes: _It ended short of regime change in Baghdad because Saddam. promised to cede all his WMD and make himself transparent. Had that commitment been kept there would have been no invasion in March 2003._

    Laughable. The commitment was kept, and with strenuous effort and hiccups, Iraq was disarmed. See the many commentaries by UNSCOM inspector Scott Ritter across many years on the matter as well as the UN's nuclear watchdog headed by Mohamed el Baradei. Whether Iraq was disarmed --- to reiterate, it was disarmed --- was immaterial to the cover story antecedent to the 2003 invasion. Moreover, the US never made any bones about its desire to torment Iraq's citizens, hence the berserk statements of US officials going back to the Clinton admin. (including Clinton himself: Sanctions will go on "until the end of time", he ranted).

    Posted by GlennC.Lemon at 11/28/2005 @ 09:11am

  168. Cleaning Up the 'Hood : Part III of III : NACL, Almost Semiotician

    NACL writes: _The left radical Nichols, like the rebel Jesus, is for peace. But his peace will advantage insurgents who daily slaughter the innocent. You don't see a cheap and cynical misappropriation, eh? I'm not surprised._

    This is vintage NACL, where knowledge precedes knowing, where "JohnNichols=TheNation=RadicalLeft" in uncomplicated equation, and where "they" say whatever NACL wants to caricature "them" into saying. Assuming these easy equivalences is NACL's warrant to find the seamless continuity between Mr. Nichols' editorials and … Stalin in the seminary, the Abe Lincoln Brigade, and whatever other nearly random reference point NACL desires to lob into the stew. No doubt, Mr. Nichols represents the left end of the spectrum of opinion, which accounts for his employment at TheNation (and why someone who turns his or her battleship around, like barstool bombardier Chris Hitchens, alights from the same publication). The totalizing assumptions of NACL cannot be bothered with what Mr. Nichols actually said since, by NACL's definition, it must necessarily be encrusted with whatever WWII-era reference he deigns to invest it with. Facts and Truth and Logic are unnecessary garnishings.

    OK! I have done my part for today to clean up the 'hood, to dickslap and frighten away the would-be thugs on the corner with muscular argument, and to delicately plant the flowers of Truth on the boulevard. Undoubtedly, there will be more rightwing creeps --- with their subliterate graffiti and random efforts to victimize upstanding people --- to police and to discipline, but for today the town square is a little safer and saner.

    Posted by GlennC.Lemon at 11/28/2005 @ 09:14am

  169. Busyhands, it's almost a moot point for many of the folks who post here. Even if some of them were at one time destitute- I mean dirt poor, nothing but the britches on your butt- and I imagine a handful of folks who post here once were, maybe- they've forgotten what poverty is. How it reduces choices, how it often means a mouthful of dental abscesses and other chronic disorders that go untreated, how sometimes mental illness can blot away what presence of mind one has left. A lot of these folks want to talk about that conservative fiction, a "culture of poverty" that keeps the poor impoverished. And to a certain extent, they're right, but not for the reasons they claim. But as several people here have pointed out, those folks who don't know about the bad end of today's economy don't have to know. But keep talking.

    Posted by Legba at 11/28/2005 @ 09:19am

  170. Well, my problem with the song is that rebel has strong connotations of someone using violence to change the gov't and, as is well-illustrated in "The Politics of Jesus" by John Yoder and restated by Paul in Romans 12-13, Jesus decisively rejected the Zealot path of becoming a rebel.

    I think the general point of Jesus being far more counter-cultural than most culturally-captivated USEvangelicals still holds true.

    I went to a conference that discussed Ron Sider's book, "The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience" last Spring and wrote up my notes from the main speakers, including Randall Balmer [sodsbrood.com].

    I recommend them. dlw

    Posted by dlw at 11/28/2005 @ 11:22am

  171. USAPRIDE,

    You missed my point. I was saying to LIBZ that it really is a shame that you think liberals are on par with terrorists. Think about it; if you really believe your fellow Americans are trying to destroy everything you know and love because they hold viewpoints that you don't, that is quite unfortunate. After all, freedom is not always comfortable because people who hold opinions often repugnant to your own are allowed to demonstrate for what they believe in and sometimes even get elected.

    So, if you are going to walk down the street thinking that the enemy is all around you then you might as well go and fight over in Iraq because then you will find the enemy really is all around you.

    Hardly the opinion of someone who sniffs glue. . . .

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/28/2005 @ 11:43am

  172. Though perhaps you feel as frightened of your fellow Americans as LIBZ does? I hope not.

    Posted by hhemwm at 11/28/2005 @ 11:45am

  173. .

    GLENNC.LEMON / HVMILLER / SEATTLESCRIBE

    I see that this forum has moved on. I'll write my ripostes under Nichol's new blog entry.

    .

    Posted by nacl at 11/28/2005 @ 2:22pm

John Nichols John Nichols

Breaking news and analysis on political, social, economic and cultural activism that mainstream media commonly ignore.

Archives

  1. February 2010

  2. January 2010

  3. December 2009

  4. November 2009

  5. October 2009

  6. September 2009

blog roll

Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

Facing Bipartisan Criticism, RNC's Steele Asks If Race Is Factor | "Why? Is it because Michael Steele is the chairman, or is it because a black man is chairman?” he wonders. Maybe he could compare notes with Obama.
John Nichols

» Editor's Cut

New Web Column at The Washington Post | Every Tuesday, I'll be featuring progressive thinking about politics and challenging the Right in my new web column for The Washington Post. Read my first one here.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
31 Comments

» The Notion

When Snow Melts: Vancouver’s Olympic Crackdown | Anger is growing in Vancouver in advance of the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. Like Olympic clockwork, here comes the media crackdown.
Dave Zirin
44 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

The Mind-Boggling Stupidity of Michael Rubin | How an AEI apparatchik's love affair for Ahmed Chalabi blinds him to Chalabi's pro-Iran treachery.
Robert Dreyfuss
27 Comments

» Act Now!

Demand Question Time | Join the call for the President and Congress to implement regular Question Time sessions.
Peter Rothberg
56 Comments

» And Another Thing

How to Counterbalance Focus on the Family on Superbowl Sunday | Give to help low income girls and women.
Katha Pollitt
54 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | James O'Keefe and Alter-reviews.
Eric Alterman