Odd Things You're Proud Of...and 2008 pres discussion...

I had a dream last night where I was awarded $100,000 check from the U.S. Government. The letter included with it said it was an apology from the gov't for failing me to run a fair and clean election in 2000. It went on to say the reason I, like a few others, am getting this was because I voted against George W. Bush three times. in his route to make it in the presidential office.

Anyway, the point is that dream reminded me how I've done something very few people have, voting against President Bush three times. I'm actually pretty proud about that achievement the more I think about it. When all is said and done George W. Bush should go down as one of the Bottom 5 Presidents of our time (If you're republican, I don't hate you - trust me). I knew back in 1999 when I was reading about Bush and what kind of person/leader he was that he wasn't someone I would vote for. I thought John McCain was the perfect fit for President back then so I did something I thought I'd never do, I registered myself as a Republican voter so I could vote for John McCain over Bush because I was reading that Bush had the backing of many of his father's buddies in the system (I'd rate George HW Bush as probably the most average president in our history). Bush did run off his family name and the money he was able to get because of it. Meanwhile John McCain was just going out there making sense, constructing actual coherent sentences, and looking exactly like the type of leader we needed after Clinton (who I would rate in the top half of our history).

I'm not a Republican and not a Democrat. I'm an independent who probably used to lean more left in my college years and right now feel like some of my right wing ideas have put me back in the middle again. When Bush got the nod in the primary, I focused my attention to the Democratic party and worried about Gore chances to win office. It was a grand mistake to not use Clinton to get votes. If anything Clinton could have poked fun at himself and talked about how good of a family man Gore was. I don't think Clinton would have eliminated any votes that were already in Gore's pockets. Big Mistake.

Somehow after looking like a bumbling fool in the 2000 debates, Bush won the presidency. I was kind of shocked to be honest. Voters ended up voting for a guy they could feel comfortable around in a bar over a guy with an actual IQ of over 90.

Well, four years go by and no one is really singing any praises of Bush at this point. Here comes another election and here comes the Democratic party bringing out the most boring intellectual they could find once again. Bush again just gets clobbered in all three debates....once again looking like a guy you could sit by at the bar because you feel so ridiculously superior to him. And then election night came and I sat and watched as the results came in. I couldn't pick my jaw up off the floor no matter how hard I tried. I was in shock for about two weeks. Seriously. I actually would talk to myself because I was so bothered this nation wanted four more years ot this man's absolute garbage.

Anyway, to make a long story....umm long, I have voted against George W. Bush three times in his successful attempts to become our president. It's unfortunate there weren't more of you. This will be one of those things I'll always be proud of and maybe someday I can at least get a free dinner out of it.

I think it'd be great if Bush had to go to every house of a fallen soldier and tell their family he feels sorry, but the way to stop terrorism is to declare war on Iraq, break it down, and the re-build it. I wish this president could go to every person in need of better health care and tell them how much money he has asked us to spend on Iraq than in our own backyard. Do I blame everything on Bush? Absolutely not. Democrats and Republicans alike made coward decisions at the time to remain popular and didn't think about what they were doing.

To those of you who voted for Bush once, twice, or three times this is in no way an attack on you. We all have our opinions and I respect yours. While I may always think like this about your decisions to vote for Bush, I'll remain respectful of them.

Also, I'm not a favorite of one party or the other. I find myself once again going into this election having really, no clue who to vote for. The Republicans are going to try and win another election using 9/11 by rolling out Gulianni and his so called "experience" on fighting terrorism. There's some great stuff out there on Gulianni about how horrible of a candidate this guy is. I love the fact he has a son and daughter that won't even talk to him or trust him, but he's looking for more than half of Americans to trust him. Then there's McCain and it looks like his ship has sailed now. He's eight years older that before and it shows when you go back to his primary days in 1999. I still like him, but for some reason his campaign team continues to bail. That can't be a good thing necessarily. As for the Democrats I like the ideals of Barack Obama, but to me, he almost sounds to green for the position. Sure all politicians lie and say things they know will never happen when they get into office, but Obama sounds like he actually believes his bullshit which is kind of scary...in a good way I guess. I just feel like he'll be in for a rude awakening if he became president. I question if he's ready to be a national leader. I would have liked him to wait this out longer. Then there's Hillary. And my Kylene and I have different opinions of her. Kylene can feel more than free to post to defend why she doesn't like Hillary. But honestly, when I've been around her or family members (hers and mine) the only thought I can really feel out of any of them is that Hillary just comes off bitchy, acts too tough, and "I just don't like her." I will say with Kylene I think she has some major issues with her Health Care plan and I'd like to learn more about that. But I think it would be a mistake to rule out Hillary this early. I have no opinion of her really one way or the other at this point. I have no front runner for my vote right now which is pretty rare for me.

- On a sidenote, why is it whenever a woman shows a little toughness or control they get labled as bitchy? I think that's crap. Thoughts?

alright so this post in the end was supposed to be about something weird I am proud of and turned into political talk and a look at '08.

Thoughts on this long ass pointless post?

I think it's sad that you phrase it "I voted against Bush" instead of "I voted for" whoever. Makes it sound like there's nothing out there except for evil and lesser evil. No one knows who they like anymore, they just know who they hate. Who's fault is that?

I agree with a lot of what you said. While I can go along with you on voting against Bush three times and saying he's one of the worst presidents ever and Clinton is one of the best (who knew we could agree on so much?), I'm not someone who would ever wear a "I Love America but Hate Bush" t-shirt. I actually voted for Ralph Nader for the love of God...I wouldn't say I voted anti-Bush in 2000 as much as 2004.

John McCain did appear to make sense and seemed like a reasonable person and a man I think every American should have respect for after what he has gone through. I don't doubt he's as big of a patriot as you will find. HOWEVER, I think he was too good to be true.

To be honest, I cannot believe what has taken place under George W.
Bush in this country. And I wouldn't want to even start to get into that because I'll go on forever. His administration is one of the most un-American things I've ever witnessed. They don't want democracy judging from some of the things they've done and said. It absolutely boggles my mind how on Earth this man (and I use that term lightly) could have been elected and then re-elected. And I know there are Republicans who would agree with me wholeheartedly which is comforting. I don't consider myself a liberal as much as a moderate, I wouldn't be against ever voting for a GOP candidate but the Democrat will get my support most of the time...so I always listen to both sides.

I'm not 100% decided on any candidate right now but I do think I'm leaning towards Obama. He doesn't have the experience. So what? I think that's what we need. Get a fresh new leader in there. He'll have to learn his way through but he's also still positive enough right now to actually make people hopeful for a change and make Americans believe he actually does care. When was the last time anyone actually thought Bush gave a crap what anyone besides him, his dad, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld thought? Obama just seems like the kind of guy right now who yes, might be a little naive, but is more than willing for the challenges that would lie ahead against him.

Since this is a sports board, I'll say it like this: Obama's like that pitcher that was just called up from Triple A who was highly touted and drafted high, he has all the tools, he has a great fastball, a 12-to-6 curveball, can change speeds and good location. He lacks in experience, though. Could he be a bust? Sure, that's a possibility. The percentages weigh in his favor, though as a positive change and a new look....George W. Bush is like an old has-been who thinks he still has it (see Curt Schilling, most of the San Francisco Giants or Kenny Rogers maybe), he's not willing to listen to any coaches, says whatever the hell he wants, feels like he can do whatever he wants, won't adjust because he still believes he can throw 95 but only can get it up to 90 on a good day. He's lost his location, he hates his catcher, he even despises the fans. He is in it for himself and probably willing to cheat by, I don't know, having a foreign substance on his hat or thumb. He believes he's above the umpires. He won't speak to the bullpen and rarely has anything to say to the press that's good. He comes in the clubhouse with a "I deserve a red carpet" attitude and is an absolute cancer to his team, even though he has the opportunity to make adjustments and work on the location and changeup to help the team, but he prefers it's his way or no way. Everything is black and white. No gray. And I got carried away but you get my point. Politics is another big interest for me.

And yes, women get an unfair knock for being called "bitchy" when they show any sort of leadership or control. But it isn't one-sided. Men get called "whimps" when they show any sort of emotion...it would be looked at as a negative thing for any male candidate to cry or show emotion or reveal some sort of weakness even if that weakness was something they couldn't help like FDR's legs...why do you think the media didn't want to show that he was in a wheel chair? He would have looked "weak".

Politics is hardly fair. It's hardball (and yes, I love Chris Matthews). And it would eat me alive if I ever wanted to run for something but that's the way it's always been. Someone's always gonna look for the personal dirt and always going to stereotype to try and bring that person down.

The negative feel of politics I know turns some people off. There's always gonna be that side. But if you turn a blind eye to it, you're as responsible as anyone else when a guy you can't stand gets elected, re-elected, whatever. That's another issue. Too few people vote. Educate yourself and decide what's most important to you then go vote. Does that sound like an MTV commercial? Sure, but it's true.

Unfortunately, a lot of presidential campaigns have come down to the lesser of two evils. It's really too bad. The current system is frightening.

My problem with John McCain is the same as it always was, in that he continually tries to play both sides of the fence. He toes conservative line until he gets into office, and then flips on some things. I think the issue with him in the 2000 election was that all he talked about was campaign finance reform. No matter what people asked him, he could somehow link it to campaign finance reform. The fact that he couldn't seem to talk about anything else was a little unsettling to some people, and rightfully so.

See, I thought Bill Clinton was a piss-poor president, who was full of charisma and could talk a good game, but didn't do much else. I would never vote for his wife either. I love the idea of a female president. Just not her. She seems to do a lot of throwing stones to hide her hands; I get the feeling of constant misdirection when she's talking, and I don't trust her. She backpedals a lot, and can very conveniently forget some things, like the fact that she was all for the war before it wasn't popular, and now likes to say that she was against it all along. Or the fact that she swore on her mother's grave not a year ago that she had no intention of running for president, that she was planning to serve out her term because she promised her constituents, blah blah blah, and look at her now. It's almost as though telling the truth actually causes her physical pain. No thank you.

Then there's also a little something that I like to call the Blowjob Issue. I know this is going to make me sound like some kind of nutty chick (so what else is new?), but I wouldn't vote for Hilary because she clearly doesn't tend to her own husband's needs. If the guy she's promised herself to for life doesn't stand a chance, I have serious doubts as to what she'd be willing to do for me, person she's never met before.

Also, I'm not a fan of socialized medicine.

I don't think it's the toughness or control that gets her labeled as bitchy. I think it's her bitchiness that gets her labeled as bitchy. But I understand what you're saying. I just disagree with it. It's like my mother always used to say, you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. A woman who is tough and in control, but has a honey-like aspect will never be seen as a bitch. She will be seen as a tough, savvy woman. There is a difference. Hilary Clinton has no honey. She's all sharp edges and backbiting.

I mean, think it's pretty safe to say that I come off as fairly tough. I have my opinions, I am unapologetic about it even when they aren't popular, and I'm not afraid to go to the mat. Have any of you ever thought of me as a bitch? No, at least, not that's been said to my face. The opinion that is generally presented where I can see or hear it is that I am a tough, savvy woman.

whodeygal wrote:

I wouldn't vote for Hilary because she clearly doesn't tend to her own husband's needs. .

There have been arguments and rumors that Hillary and Bill had an "arrangement" and that he could do whatever he wanted in that area of their lives. I personally don't know if I believe that and I'm definitely NOT endorsing it. It's not like there haven't been guys (or girls) that cheat on their spouses even if they're still getting it at home. However, the fact her husband had another girl give him "it" in a particular way (we have 14 year olds reading these posts :)) shouldn't exclude her from becoming president. It just means one time her husband was unfaithful and that gave Republicans even more reason to call themselves the "God Party" (a whole other subject that is absolute insanity and frankily doesn't deserve a response because it's so offensive to any sort of intelligence or any idea of what is right and wrong that it actually makes me cringe).

I wonder how a guy would look if his wife was found to be cheating on him if he was president? He'd be looked at as someone who could be taken advantage of and his wife would be labeled less than complimentary names. But if the president cheats, then Hillary can't tend to her husband's needs? Hmmm...don't get me wrong, I love Bill Clinton, I'm on neither side but I don't really understand that thinking.

Also, just because Bush is a poor public speaker doesn't make him a moron. I'm not a fan of the correlation between the two. He doesn't do well in public, thus he has an IQ of 60. It seems like sound logic, but it isn't. Emily Dickinson was a total shut-in. She didn't do well in public at all. But it is impossible to say that she was an idiot. Edgar Allen Poe has an amazing body of work, a testament to his high intelligence. But he spent a large portion of his life shut away doing opium. Public presence does not equal high IQ. Unfortunately, because we live in a society where appearances are everything, we have made this connection, though it is a foolish assumption.

Look, I voted for the man. I'm pretty unapologetic about that too. He said and did some things that weren't popular, but he felt they were right, so he made the choices. Has his administration been the bestest? No. But I don't think it's been nearly as bad as some people might think. Yes, his approval ratings are low, but that actually doesn't mean a damn thing. The idea that someone's legacy is tied to whether or not people like them or what they do is bunk.

Let's be real here: the Bush administration has had to deal with some situations that few others have had to. Very few men in history have had to respond to such horrible situations. It's really easy to say that had Al Gore or John Kerry (I totally forgot his name for a minute there; says a lot about him!) been elected, things would have been different. But we don't really know that, do we? It's easy to say that had we been reading to a group of school children in Florida on the morning of September 11, 2001, that our reaction to being told of what had happened would be different. But we don't know that.

Remember: Lincoln was hated by quite a few people following his signing o the Emancipation Proclamation. But here, 150 years after the fact, he is seen as one of the greatest men who ever led this country.

I can't vote until 08 But every election is between a douche and a turd (see south park).

I dislike Bush. He has only worsened the situation our country is, and I would agree he is one of the worst in history. This war we are in is a bunch of crap and was all a vendetta for his father. (I can't comment on Clinton because I was more interested in Ninja Turtles then politics)

Quote :

I wonder how a guy would look if his wife was found to be cheating on him if he was president? He'd be looked at as someone who could be taken advantage of.

That's how you would see it. I, on the other hand, would see it the exact same way as I saw it when he cheated.

I don't know about you, but I am married. I just celebrated my 7th anniversary. And if there's anything that I've learned, it's that it takes two people to mess up a marriage. Unfaithfulness is a choice, but it's a choice generally born out of deficiency in some area of the marriage. Sometimes it's from a partner's unwillingness to tend to the needs of the other. But sometimes it's from someone's willingness to turn a blind eye to what needs to be seen.

I didn't say that the need that wasn't tended to was a physical one in nature. That was your interpretation of my statement. But I meant it more that there's clearly an issue of some sort between the two of them, and she turned a blind eye to it, for many, many years. This isn't the first time he's done that to her, and his lack of discretion is appalling. But equally appalling is her willingness to overlook it for the sake of having what she wanted, which was a political career that she knew she would be unlikely to have in this day and age without a husband by her side.

I'll refrain from getting in any sort of marriage debate (I've always been poor or clueless at arguing with women on that or any other related subject :)). I just wasn't sure what you meant by Hillary not satisfying her husband's needs for your reason for not wanting to vote for her. But I see where you're coming from now. However, you did indicate it was a physical need from Hillary since you started the whole thing off with what you called the "blowjob" issue.

And no, I'm not married. But I have had a "live with" experience that makes me completely agreeable that it takes two people to destroy or make a marriage yet I wasn't saying that a marriage is definitely over if there's infidelity....oh well, live and learn.

But this does bring about an interesting point: I know other women who can't stand Hillary. I've actually heard another woman say "I just don't think a woman should be in charge of the country." So Hillary definitely won't be able to just expect the female vote.

Let me say whodey I never went into any election with the thinking I was voting against Bush. I voted for McCain - who I do believe would have handled the past 8 years 100 times better. I also voted for Gore. And I aslo voted for Kerry. I felt all three were better than Bush. I never went into an elcetion voting against Bush, but my point was I've had three opportunites to vote for Bush and all three times I didn't. All I was saying was I'm glad I can look back and say I never did vote for him. Therefore I voted "against" him. Hell as Bush said it in his own words, "You're either with us, or against us."

As for the correlation between public speaking and being smart, I agree with that whodey. I also believe Bush to still not be a very intelligent man who has had intelligent people around him his entire life. I'd love to give George Bush 30 days with no help from anyone and see what he could write in words. I'm sure I would be unimpressed once again.

It's also unfortunate that the extreme christian groups vote blindly for Republicans based on getting Rose vs Wade overturned. The Republican party has been playing these people for years. Twenty plus years of votes have really got them nowhere on it. But a lot of these people don't follow their own creed of WWJD?

CPH also hit it on the nose for me with George Bush as acted more Unamerican than any other adminstration...maybe ever?

I reread the original post.

Quote :

Anyway, the point is that dream reminded me how I've done something very few people have, voting against President Bush three times. I'm actually pretty proud about that achievement the more I think about it.

Gag me!

Seems a bit conceited of you to believe you had this guy so pegged for what he was and what he would do in 1999. A full page dedicated to your superior judging of character followed by the line, "To those of you who voted for Bush once, twice, or three times this is in no way an attack on you." ... Yes, I'm not saying you're dumb. I'm just saying that I'm much, much smarter than you.

What if you had missed the signs you saw and judged him favorably years ago? If you had voted for him... would you feel ashamed now? I view that part of the point of this story is to show that your hands are clean. So if you voted for Bush, would you feel compelled to come out and apologize rather than gloat?

I do know people who voted for Bush in 2000 and regret it now. It takes some guts to admit where you were wrong so they deserve credit, too. If you voted for Bush and you're proud of it, good for you. That's why America is great. But even Annakin Skywalker before he turned into Darth Vader said "if you're not with me, you're against me"...is that what we want? A president who's more machine than man? You tell me. I've had too much sun today.

Oh wow

EVERYTHING can be expressed in Star Wars terms... not just NFL teams!

Ha. I guess I'm just saying I'm happy looking back that I never voted for Bush. And no meathorse, there's no way i could have envisioned it would have gone this bad.

Who wants to talk religion next?

If you do take a step back, Bush has acted very unamerican like with the whole with me, against me and fear politics they've used. To his, or I should say Karl Rove's credit, I have to applaud because it got him re-elected.

Yeah, because Democrats never pull the with us/against us mess or use any kind of fear tactics to get votes. Riiiiiight.

Give me a break. You can gag me when you get done with meathorse over there.

Frankly, there are very few people in politics who have acted in an "American" fashion lately. It's like I've been saying for years: Anti-Americanism is the new American Way.

Quote :

You can gag me when you get done with meathorse over there.

Quote :

Who wants to talk religion next?

I have a t-shirt featuring a cartoon Jesus nailed to a cross. He's grinning, winking and giving a thumbs up. It says "Jesus did it for the chicks."

I do not wear it outside.

whodey, I never mentioned once this was a Republican line of thought. This has been a Bush line of thought and a successful one by Karl Rove. I'm not here to say Dems are better than Repubs by any means. Hell, I have no clue who to vote for or put the most trust in these days. You nailed your description of John McCain these days. I think he got desperate and unfortunately checked in any credibility he had. Hopefully you arent so upset about this that you won't be able to have any good discussions come election time. I'd like to know who you're leaning towards right now and why. This election seems so up for grabs.

The "What Would Jesus Do" shirts, bumper stickers, etc. are I guess nice to think about but extremely non-realistic. You get the feeling from some people that wear those shirts that they actually believe they're the second-closest thing to Jesus, which is funny cos do you really think Jesus would wear a shirt that said "What Would I Do?". I mean, if you have no food and you were Jesus, you'd just snap your fingers and have food. I don't know any humans who can actually do that. So I think the WWJD is a marketing thing and the people who came up with it are laughing all the way to the bank because they realized there were people out there who'd buy into it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not putting that idea down, in some instances maybe it helps...however, some use it to make others feel guilty and show how "great" they are to other people. That is the exact opposite thing they should be doing.

What does this have to do with politics? According to the last two elections, ALOT. Bush has managed to make some people believe in order to be a Christian you have to vote Republican and some managed to actually buy into it. However, we have seen a downturn in the percentages of evangelical Christians who vote Republican blindly so that's good. OK fine, Republicans are more associated with pro-life...which party is more concerned with helping the poor? That would be the Democrats. Which party has the president that has killed more people by the "electric chair"? Republicans. Which party is notorious for caring more about their own rich people getting the best tax cuts? Republicans. Which party gets behind a pointless war? Republicans. So what's more talked about in the Bible: gay marriage, abortion or helping the poor? It is a landslide. It isn't even close. It's helping the poor. And the Bush administration skipped over that part. In fact, I'm not sure what part they have followed so much.

George W. Bush is the decider and the deceiver. You get the feeling he actually believes God is American. And this is why people get pissed off at some church people. It's actually it's own form of terrorism. They get people to buy into the idea that to be a great person or Christian you need to be anti-gay marriage and pro-life. f**k everything else. It doesn't matter if you help your neighbor or not. And if anyone happens to be gay or has an abortion, you need to make them feel as awful as you can about it. That's what the Bush administration is about.

:) There.

Quote :

whodey, I never mentioned once this was a Republican line of thought.

I know you didn't, but you did say that it was a purely Bush line of thinking, and it's not. I have seen groups on both sides with this particular attitude. That was my point. Others have been more subtle about it, but it's there.

Quote :

I mean, if you have no food and you were Jesus, you'd just snap your fingers and have food.

That's not really how Jesus worked. Yes, there was the miracle of the fish and the loaves, but that was different. That was a blessing of abundance from God. Generally, that's not how God works. He created the rules, and he works within them. As one of the primary rules of Physics states that matter cannot be created or destroyed, snapping one's fingers to feed oneself is a bit simplistic. Sorry, that statement just bothered me a bit. Moving on...

Quote :

...which party is more concerned with helping the poor? That would be the Democrats.

Okay, stop right there. From what I have seen the Democrats aren't about helping the poor; they're about easing their guilt at not being poor. I have seen many groups, whether they lean toward Democratic or Republican ideologies, who are very much into helping the poor. That's a very unfair and untrue statement.

Having been one of those poor of which you speak, I have encountered all kinds of groups and their philosophies. Some were "Democratic" and some were "Republican." From my standpoint, I found the more Dem groups to be almost condescending in their approaches. Aw, pitiful creature, it's not your fault you're poor. Do you really think that kind of thinking helps those who do not have? Only if the goal is to keep them in the system with downtrodden beliefs that they'll never get out from under.

Honestly, I don't really care that the Bush Administration wasn't all about the poor. It's not really up to the government to help the poor anyway. If we really want to bring the Bible into this discussion, we are charged with taking care of one another. Not waiting for welfare or affirmative action or some job program. We are charged with taking care of each other. That means that if you know money and your brother doesn't, you need to sit down with your brother and teach him how to get to know money. If that kid down the street is trying to make a better way for himself, you do what you can to help him. Not by giving him money, but by giving him knowledge.

That is my general issue with the Democratic party, their idea that the government is supposed to take care of us with state welfare and socialized medicine. I'm not an idiot; I prefer to stand and fall by my own merits.

And why does everyone get all wrapped up in the whole "Tax Cuts for the rich" thing? The rich benefit from most of the tax cuts because they pay most of the taxes. It's the truth. I make a pretty decent living. I own my own home, and I consider myself to be part of the middle class. Lower end, but middle class just the same. I work hard, and I'm upwardly mobile. Do you know how much is taken out of my bi-weekly pay for federal income tax? Anyone?

Nothing.

Because my income falls below a certain amount for the number of dependents that I have, I don't pay any federal income tax. So tell me, what exactly is the government supposed to be giving me back in terms of tax cuts? How can you cut my tax if I don't pay any?

I just get very stymied by that complaint is all.

Quote :

Hopefully you arent so upset about this that you won't be able to have any good discussions come election time.

Of course not; I'm always up for a fun political discussion. Just be warned that I do have a somewhat unorthodox way of looking at the world an at politics, and my opinions my piss you off. If you're okay with that, I have no problem talking. :)

These types of discussions usually bore me to tears when the twisting and conflicting lines of logic don't drive me away first. But whodey's got her shit together. What's your full name? I'm writing you in.

Quote :

As one of the primary rules of Physics states that matter cannot be created or destroyed, snapping one's fingers to feed oneself is a bit simplistic.

Much like a singularity or Chuck Norris, Jesus H. Christ is not bound by your silly physical laws.

Quote :

Much like a singularity or Chuck Norris, Jesus H. Christ is not bound by your silly physical laws.

Actually, they're His laws. I'm one of those weirdos who believes that you can't use science to disprove God because it's part of God's work; it would be much like using your posts or your NFL picks to disprove your existence. How would it look if the Lord didn't abide by the rule system he created? It would be total chaos, my friend, total chaos.

(As opposed to now, where it's just semi-chaos.)

whodeygal wrote:

As one of the primary rules of Physics states that matter cannot be created or destroyed, snapping one's fingers to feed oneself is a bit simplistic. .

When Mary and the disciples go to see Jesus' dead body in the tomb after he's crucified and then don't find it...you can't really explain that with any sort of modern day science. Simplistic or not, that's what happened.

I know you didn't like what I said but I hope you got the point. My point was that it's impossible for anyone else to be like Jesus and expect to be able to do what he did in every aspect of their lives. And that any inkling of thinking you are is ignorant.

There's plenty of examples of miracles in The Bible that have nothing to do with any sort of "order". But yeah, I know there are laws that were created and science is part of it. And do we want to get into the miracles Jesus performed??? It was actually a significant part of how he worked. BTW, blessings aren't handed out on a "deserving" basis. This is another common misconception. I just wanted to add that part.

There are people who can't help the situation they find themselves in. I don't really look at it as condescending as much as sympathetic. While sympathy doesn't go a long way, it would be pretty hard to believe someone was trying to be condescending in a situation like that. Maybe that was your interpretation. I would agree it's up to each and everyone to have the responsibility to get up on their own when they can. We shouldn't allow the government to control our lives. Hurricane Katrina-like instances is where it does need to come into play though. Way to go "Brownie"...

Finally, George W. Bush brought faith into the campaigns in a way that I'm not sure had been done before (even more than Reagan). He did it with getting more votes in mind. Not because he's so humble and faithful and wanted to lead people to God. He wanted to lead people to him...by any means. Even if that meant selling to conservative Christians that the Kingdom of God would be escorted in by the United States Army. He has ACTUALLY gone on record as saying that "God told him to invade Iraq". This came from him. I know we're fighting a dangerous group of extremists but I believe our current president isn't a stranger to be an extremist in his own right. What a dangerous man and administration. Thank God he'll be gone soon. God bless America...aim, shoot, fire.

I'd also like to echo that I can keep going with this as long as you're OK with the possibility of getting pissed off at me. :)