Readers’ Responses to Our Question (76)

*with a cartoony blink-blink in Lorenzo's direction.*

Umm. Seriously. What?

This is why, in America, we don't have 'religious tests' for office, cause Bush, as an 'ex-sinner,' let's not forget, c claimed 'God' told him, 'Eh, Bin Laden's cornered in Tora Bora, but, let's blow the crap out of Iraq, a situation the international community had contained, but after which we aren't prepared to clean up after.'

Yes, he said he talked to 'God.'

And people 'believed in him.'

Bon appetit.

Of course, American political speech is all about hyperbole, exaggeration, accusation and counter-accusation, and the telling of tales. We obfuscate and ‘spin.’ It’s messy and people argue passionately for what they believe. The question foreshadows the reality that most citizens accept without question that “politicians lie” – it’s universally accepted in the way that gravity is universally accepted.

Yet almost all ethical traditions teach that individuals should tell the truth, avoid lying and safeguard the words they use in the world. These traditions teach that words have meaning and impact people’s lives in real and tangible ways and therefore must be truthful, gentle and directed at worthy ends. Speaking honestly is a first principle of ethical conduct and an indispensable part of our individual path to be free from suffering. We are encouraged to prevent deception from growing from our words to the greatest extent possible. We are admonished not to speak to create division or discord, but to unite and create concord. A person should abandon harsh language for tones that are soothing, technique that is polite and respectful, and words that go to the heart and speak to our shared experience of this world. And we would speak only facts, preferably known from direct experience, and directed at the goal of creating understanding, unity and knowledge of the truth.

Truth-telling is even a commonplace of the American political tradition, all the way back to George Washington confessing to the cherry tree incident. If it’s a good enough lesson to teach our children – why not our public officials? American politics would be so much more meaningful if it paid more attention to this painfully obvious point.

I think the instinct for the truth needs to be understood through the prism of the interconnectedness of all beings. As spiritual beings, we move toward unity with other spiritual beings. Being limited by the bodies and minds we inhabit however, we struggle to understand and to be understood. Our speech is one of the most significant ways we go beyond these physical limitations to make clear our needs, desires, wants, and intentions – to understand our selves and build connection with others. Honesty is vitally important because we use language to portray the world in a particular manner, and that in turn supports our arguments to justify policy choices. To be honest about such things builds trust. If we desire understanding and compassion, we must speak with understanding and compassion. To lie is to demean the hope of every soul. It shatters trust.

I wonder at times, how much our willingness to lie and tell tales grows from our right to free speech. Too often this is taken as license to say anything in any way toward any purpose one can imagine. We’ll say any damn fool thing (as my grandfather used to say) if it suits our purpose. I’m all for free speech as much as the next person (hence this entry), but can we really be said to be free when we debase ourselves, and allow our public officials to debase themselves, through a cavalier treatment of the truth? At the end of the day, I don’t want to be led by someone who demeans themselves by sacrificing their honesty and in turn, their trustworthiness.

Someone asked me, a Christian black ex-sinner, why aren’t you voting for Barak Obama? I simply told them that I didn’t believe in the man. They said, are you voting Republican then? I told them, I just might if Hillary Clinton doesn’t somehow get on board with him. Wow, they said! I told them, it came down to two things for me. The first one: Barak Obama reminds me too much of the Barak in Judges chapter 4, a man who history gave the credit for winning a battle but a man who didn’t get the credit by God. By this I mean that Barak never wanted to run in the first place for the President of the United States of America, he heard about Hillary Clinton beginning to ponder on entering the race and he was convinced by those around him to enter into the race. A man that does not have God as his central guide should not be given a place of power. Every man, because that who they were, relied on God, the Word of God to guide this country. I believe the Bible is clear: in the absence of a qualified man a qualified woman immediately must take the reigns; don’t elect an unqualified man into power because it is just trouble.
The second thing that I said was, having a President who fears God is the most important thing to me in times like these. In this country we pride ourselves on religious tolerance, Christians accept non-Christians because they wrote it in the Constitution of the United States; however, they wrote in the Constitution because they knew that it took the power of God to accept others in their country. Let us take a lesson ahead of the election from 1st Samuel 8, the children of Israel set the path to their destruction by voting a man into power that possessed great stature. They didn’t know he would be all about the power and bring them to a point of almost destruction. This man, Saul, was later found not to even respect the Word of God or the prophet of God. Although this very prophet had guided him spiritually through many problems in his elected life, a man that all people knew was anointed by God, Samuel the prophet, this man shrugged his noise up at him and did the opposite of what he said. Matthew 10: 40-41 in the New International Version of the Bible states it best:
He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me. Anyone who receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet's reward, and anyone who receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man will receive a righteous man's reward.
What’s the flip side of this? In all that we know in this country about the plight (trouble) of children of Israel, how can we inter-mix other religious ideas into our government now? Who will give Barak Obama the Word of God now, now that he has publicly shamed his own pastor? Will even our legendary Bill Graham be able to talk to him about the Word? Remember, if you are not getting the Word of God you are getting the word of human and the word of … That’s my answer to you and to you that read these words. She’s been down and she’s been up but she has never forgotten God even when she sinned. We all fall short but we never talk about the Lord’s person when they are doing the Lord’s work.
Proverbs 1:1-7
The proverbs of Solomon son of David, king of Israel: 2 for attaining wisdom and discipline; for understanding words of insight; 3 for acquiring a disciplined and prudent life, doing what is right and just and fair; 4 for giving prudence to the simple, knowledge and discretion to the young- 5 let the wise listen and add to their learning, and let the discerning get guidance- 6 for understanding proverbs and parables, the sayings and riddles of the wise. 7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

An update (or how we are spending or how we have spent USA taxpayers’ money to eliminate global terror and aggression)

A Partial and Rather Recent Body Count

1) Assassination of Benazir Bhutto

2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens, 1000’s injured

3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, 4056 US troops and 83,521 – 91,094 Iraqi civilians iraqbodycount.org/

4) Kenya- In Nairobi, about 212 and an estimated 4000 injured; in Dar es Salaam, the attack at least 11 and wounded 85.

5) Bali-in 2002- 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.

6) Bali in 2005- Twenty and 129 people were injured by three bombers who also died.

7) Spain in 2004- 191 and wounding 2,050.

8) UK bombings in 2005- 52 commuters and the four radical Islamic suicide bombers, injured 700.

Other elements of our War on Terror and Aggression:

1. Saddam, his sons and major henchmen have been deleted. Saddam's bravado about WMD was one of his major mistakes.

2. Iran is being been contained. (besides containing the Sunni-Shiite civil war in Baghdad, that is the main reason we are in Iraq. And yes, essential oil continues to flow from the region.)

3. Libya has become almost civil. Apparently this new reality from an Islamic country has upset OBL and his “crazies” as they recently threatened Libya. OBL sure is a disgrace to the world especially the Moslem world!!! Or is he??

4. North Korea is still uncivil but is contained. With the opening up of rail traffic between North and South Korea after 50 years and with the assistance of the US Navy in retrieving NK ships and personnel, a fresh sense of civility is afoot. One of the most eminent US cultural institutions, the New York Philharmonic Orchestra, has performed a landmark concert in North Korea.

The concert included music by Western composers and a Korean folk song, and was broadcast live on local television.

Unfortunately, North Korea’s apparent move toward peace did not last long as they fired test missiles last recently and threatened South Korea with military action.

5. Northern Ireland is finally at peace.

6. The Jews and Palestinians are being separated by walls. Hopefully the walls will follow the 1948 UN accords and the Annapolis Peace Conference is at least somewhat successful.

7. Bin Laden has been cornered under a rock in Western Pakistan since 9/11.

8. Fanatical Islam has basically been contained to the Middle East but a wall between India and Pakistan would be a plus for world peace. Ditto for a wall between Afghahistan and Pakistan.

9.Timothy McVeigh was executed. Terry Nichols will follow soon.

10. Eric Rudolph is spending three life terms in prison with no parole.

11. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Kaczynski, the "nuns" from Rwanda, and the KKK were all dealt with and either eliminated themselves or are being punished.

12. Islamic Sudan, Darfur and Somalia are still terror hot spots.

13. The terrorizing and torture of Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo and Kuwait were ended by the proper application of the military forces of the USA and her freedom-loving friends.

14. And of course the bloody terror and aggression of the Japanese, Nazis and Communists was with great difficulty eliminated by the good guys.

A MUST READ BOOK FOR WAR SUPPORTERS

The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict
Joseph E. Stiglitz, Linda J.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3419840.ece

Athena,

Whatever rights we may have given up since 9/11, they are not evident at the airport.

I think that Stephen Colbert put it best with the word "truthiness". Something doesn't have to be the truth, it just has to give the appearance of being truthful. For example:

- John McCain is a "maverick" who speaks his own mind (except when he's backpedaling and flip-flopping)

- Hillary Clinton is a "working class hero" (who grew up in suburban Chicago and owns two mansions)

- Barack Obama is a Muslim (because he has a funny name and spent some of his childhood in a predominantly Moslem country); or a Black Radical (because his pastor said some things that scared white people); or is an elitist (even though he was raised by a single mother who worked her way through college).

Democrats are for "big government" and Republicans are for "small government" (even though the size of the Federal workforce shrank under Clinton, but exploded under Bush).

Truthiness.

Oh, and GaryD - if you don't think that you've given up any rights since 9/11, try getting on an airplane.

Sally and Jon,
Could we give the candidates some breathing room?
Breathing and the Holy Spirit, speaking of which
could you kindly consider interviewing Franco
Zeffirelli, the director, who is about 86 years
of age, and I believe, a highly articulate
ethicist of Christianity.

He may be able to impart a gem or two to many
of us.

Victoria I judged nothing and no one in fact in your specific case I stated that given the fact that I had no information I could make no judgment at all.

I gave you an example of a nonexistent right - the right to not be offended - and then explained why that right does not exist and in fact cannot exist in a country that values freedom of speech especially political speech.

The Republicans from 1995 to 2001 did not create more intrusive government while in the House and senate, they in fact prevented such. The coalition that brought that about unfortunately died in 2001 when one Senator from up east switched sides and gave the Senate to the Democrats.

Can we not say that it is only right and fitting for the country to be led by a candidate who best represents its values? And therefore either of the current Presidential candidates will do?

Mo-

"in a democratic society,right and wrong is not distinguished ,you can be all you can be ,you can open a fidelity shop as well as a fonication shop ,a spiritual place of worship shop as well as a spiritual liquer store and a gambling shop ,it doesnot matter,since the lord died for your sin!."

Look Mo, I understand having your own faith tradition, but you're not allowed to have your own facts.

Right and wrong are not distiguished? Well, sir, how do you explain the right to trial by jury, where a jury of your peers must look at the evidence and decide if you were right or wrong? How do you explain that we have county, state and federal courts? How do you explain judicial review?

And by the way, there are plenty of Americans who do not believe that the "lord" died for our sins. I'm one.

Mo, Mo, Mo,

You must revisit atonement theology and its flaws.

To wit:

(from Professor JD Crossan's book, "Who is Jesus" co-authored with Richard Watts)

"Moreover, an atonement theology that says God sacrifices his own son in place of humans who needed to be punished for their sins might make some Christians love Jesus, but it is an obscene picture of God. It is almost heavenly child abuse, and may infect our imagination at more earthly levels as well. I do not want to express my faith through a theology that pictures God demanding blood sacrifices in order to be reconciled to us."

"Traditionally, Christians have said, 'See how Christ's passion was foretold by the prophets." Actually, it was the other way around. The Hebrew prophets did not predict the events of Jesus' last week; rather, many of those Christian stories were created to fit the ancient prophecies in order to show that Jesus, despite his execution, was still and always held in the hands of God."

"In terms of divine consistency, I do not think that anyone, anywhere, at any time, including Jesus, brings dead people back to life."

Added reality and truth:

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

The muck and stench of Catholicism you ask?

Pedophiliac priests, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

democracey died for your sin!

the right of the people by the people and for the people.

but the problem is in the people by the people and for the people,people are humankind who they apt to sin,mistakes,shortcomes,dizzyness,lustness,greedness,agressivness and oppressivness and unconsistness all the way to the governement.

the mass ideology and the mass conscious of any human society is the boss incarnated in the person of the president .

in a democratic society,right and wrong is not distinguished ,you can be all you can be ,you can open a fidelity shop as well as a fonication shop ,a spiritual place of worship shop as well as a spiritual liquer store and a gambling shop ,it doesnot matter,since the lord died for your sin!.

in a judochristiandemocratic society ,
the president need to please every body and ameen every body ,hypocrisey is part and parcel of the system.

A meaningful relationship, in part, is founded in trust. Honesty and integrity are the foundation for trust. A country has a relationship with itself and other countries. If a country can't be trusted then how can it make significant positive contributions to the world and lead by example?
A president, as our country's leader, needs to trusted, not only by the citizens but other countrys' leaders and citizens.

Soya,

There is significant debate about the Pentecost as discribed by Luke in Acts 2 being historical. Many NT exegetes put Pentecost on the myth pile classifying Pentecost as legend kept alive by some well meaning early priests See the review of Borg-Wright debate at layman.org/layman/news/news-around-church/jesus-scholars.htm

Ken frets that Clinton says she would 'obliterate' Iran if they used nuclear weapons against Israel, as opposed to Eisenhower's refusal to okay their use against China.

I have news for you, Ken. No President since Truman has repudiated the policy of 'Mutually Assured Destruction' devised to counter the threat of nuclear war. Kennedy reaffirmed it during the 'Cuban Missile Crisis'. Reagan flatly refused to back away from it even when the then failing USSR wanted to.

Even Ike, despite opposition to the Korean war and to all wars for that matter, never directly repudiated MAD.

Hillary was just reminding the Iranians that she also endorses MAD, so they shouldn't waste time, money and effort developing nuclear weapons to use against Israel.

Wishing all my Christian brothers and sisters in the US and elsewhere in the world a Happy Pentecost day, the day the Catholic Church celebrates the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the disciples of Jesus!

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

QUOTING VICTORIA:
it must get lonely, and boring too- way up there above it all for you

How is this not a judgment itself?

In a free society, social animals like human must rely on trust and honesty. They are evolutionary properties that lead to a better functioning society.

Political darwinism should not be much different than social darwinism. However, we, the voters, the militia of democracy, are the selective force in the political arena, and lying and political expediency have served politics all too well, and by extension, us.

I believe this is because of a divergence in shared values, a desire for the swinging pendulum, which merely counts time, instead of the tacking of a sailing boat, which has a direction.

This question reveals the level of cynicism that has contaminated our political process.

Senators Clinton and Obama have been involved in an extended campaign where every statement that they utter is analyzed to see where they have been inconsistent. If any of us were put under such a microscope and had our views continually reviewed for contradictions, our honesty and trustworthiness would be jeopardized.

We need to differentiate between consistency and honesty. None of us are totally consistent. To expect that kind of absolute rigidity of discourse is silly and demeaning.

This question reveals the level of cynicism that has contaminated our political process.

Senators Clinton and Obama have been involved in an extended campaign where every statement that they utter is analyzed to see where they have been inconsistent. If any of us were put under such a microscope and had our views continually reviewed for contradictions, our honesty and trustworthiness would be jeopardized.

We need to differentiate between consistency and honesty. None of us are totally consistent. To expect that kind of absolute rigidity of discourse is silly and demeaning.

LEFTIST - anyone that does not adhere to the right-wing neo-conservative ideology of Bush/Cheney, et al.

Just so folks understand what the term implies when the right-wing headbangers here define virtually everyone with a lick of common sense and beyond-Bush intelligence as being as 'leftist'.

WELL GARYD- that is one "right" you don't have-
to judge-

i was trying to figure out how one 'creates a non-existent right'

but you stepped right in and did it for us-

your non-existent right to attempt to judge- it seems- every single person who doesnt think exactly like you-

it must get lonely, and boring too- way up there above it all for you-

An update (or how we are spending are or how we have spent USA taxpayers’ money to eliminate global terror and aggression)

A Partial and Rather Recent Body Count in the War:

1) Benazir Bhutto

2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens, 1000’s injured

3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, 4056 US troops and 83,521 – 91,094 Iraqi civilians iraqbodycount.org

Other elements of our War on Terror:

1. Saddam, his sons and major henchmen have been deleted. Saddam's bravado about WMD was one of his major mistakes.

2. Iran is being been contained. (beside containing the Sunni-Shiite civil war in Baghdad, that is the main reason we are in Iraq. And yes, essential oil continues to flow from the region.)

3. Libya has become almost civil. Apparently this new reality from an Islamic country has upset OBL and his “crazies” as they recently threatened Libya. OBL sure is a disgrace to the world especially the Moslem world!!! Or is he??

4. North Korea is still uncivil but is contained. With the opening up of rail traffic between North and South Korea after 50 years and with the assistance of the US Navy in retrieving NK ships and personnel, a fresh sense of civility is afoot. One of the most eminent US cultural institutions, the New York Philharmonic Orchestra, has performed a landmark concert in North Korea.

The concert included music by Western composers and a Korean folk song, and was broadcast live on local television.

Unfortunately, North Korea’s apparent move toward peace did not last long as they fired test missiles recently and threatened South Korea with military action recently.

5. Northern Ireland is finally at peace.

6. The Jews and Palestinians are being separated by walls. Hopefully the walls will follow the 1948 UN accords and the Annapolis Peace Conference is at least somewhat successful.

7. Bin Laden has been cornered under a rock in Western Pakistan since 9/11.

8. Fanatical Islam has basically been contained to the Middle East but a wall between India and Pakistan would be a plus for world peace. Ditto for a wall between Afghahistan and Pakistan.

9.Timothy McVeigh was executed. Terry Nichols will follow soon.

10. Eric Rudolph is spending three life terms in prison with no parole.

11. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Kaczynski, the "nuns" from Rwanda, and the KKK were all dealt with and either eliminated themselves or are being punished.

12. Islamic Sudan, Darfur and Somalia are still terror hot spots.

13. Although a bit dated, the terror and torture of Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo and Kuwait were ended by the proper application of the military forces of the USA and her freedom-loving friends.

14. And of course the bloody terror brought about the Japanese, Nazis and Communists was with great difficulty eliminated by the good guys.

GaryD writes: "It is You TJ who have accepted the comfortable lie as opposed to the hard truth. You refuse to see what the man has listed on his own web site for what it is instead of what you wish it to be. But you go ahead and keep that wool over your eyes its what socialists expect from the common man."

The funniest, and saddest, thing about this is that you obviously think that the president of the US is the king of the US and is able to legislate and enforce by decree.

Oh wait. The war criminal that you probably voted for, twice, has expanded the powers of the executive branch so much, with the help of a complicit congress which you also probably voted for, that your ideas about Obama's kingship are probably right.

I'll ask a second time: Please remove your head from the cavity that it is lodged in.

We Can't Handle the Truth

We get the president we deserve, and we DON"T WANT our politicians to tell us the truth.

We want them to tell us
*we'll be greeted as liberators and be back in 3 months
*we can reduce our taxes AND keep our bridges from falling down
* we can spen $5billion a week on war and still have lots of money left over to solve our problems at home.
etc etc

Susan Jacoby is right: we need to Grow Up and accept truth ourselves, and not expect a Candidate to bring us Salvation.

RICH FROM MN. wrote:
"Sadly, our political system has regressed to a point where candidates who tell the truth suffer for it. They're forced to fudge or offer obscure answers to avoid alienating certain segments of voters. God help the candidate who openly states we have too many guns or evangelicals."

We have too many Evangelicals? You're kidding, right? Would you ever say 'We have too many Muslims'? 'We have too many Jews'?

So, what would you do, Rich, if we have too many Evangelicals? Kill some of us?

Do people's rights get occasionally trampled on of course that's life in the modern world and it happens every where not just in the Good old USA.

Of course I'd have to see the circumstances of how you rights were abused to judge whether your rights were being abused or you were trying to create a nonexistant right to make a point.

For instance you do not have the right in this country to never be offended that would require an a priori interference in free speech. You have the right to say and/or believe any cockamamie thing you want however you should expect that some people may make objection to what you say or believe and that is there right so long as they don't try to punch you out.

im going to venture a guess garyd- that you have never had to test your rights-

i have- and my rights were so egregiously abused, that even in the concrete evidence of that abuse- people said incredulously- THAT couldn't happen in america!"

and it happened because i wouldn't back down, and i wouldn't lie to protect the 'status quo'.

and more than once.

maybe ill tell you the story- maybe i wont-

it depends how bellicose you are in your response.
if you are brave enough to respond, that is.

tell us a story of how you bravely stood up and told the truth and your rights were protected garyd.

Oh get real what rights have you lost? They weren't taking away your right to sue they were limiting people's right to sue over essentially nothing or for harm they did themselves through there own negligence or stupidity. My wife spent 20 years working for sears service center. You wouldn't believe the idiot things people wanted and the dumb things they threatened to sue over.

Lawsuit abuse is real and the court system almost always sides with the little guy even when he's wrong.

I would notice if I had lost any rights that mattered a whit. Your angst does not mean there is any malice afore thought on the part of anyone on the political right.

"Pagan you need desperately to read something besides left wing blogs and the NYT. I haven't lost one single right that I can find."

Well, as you so often point out, you're a white male straight Christian who wouldn't notice.

" And If you have a legitimate beef tort reform wasn't going to hurt you."

Ah, yeah, Trust The Company. Even if you don't have the right to sue anymore. It's for our comfort, convenience, and protection: If you're a loyal citizen, you have nothing to fear or complain about: thus if you complain you're disloyal, ...and have no 'legitimate' beef.... according to whom?

You?

Or am I just 'elitist?'

We need a President who thinks there are 57 states in the USA?

I mean that is really bringing "change" to America.

One of those new states: the State of Confusion.

As I said before- talk is cheap, skin color is veneer. BO shows us every day -he is still a rookie.

Who has really "lost his bearings"..

It is You TJ who have accepted the comfortable lie as opposed to the hard truth. You refuse to see what the man has listed on his own web site for what it is instead of what you wish it to be. But you go ahead and keep that wool over your eyes its what socialists expect from the common man.

Pagan you need desperately to read something besides left wing blogs and the NYT. I haven't lost one single right that I can find. And If you have a legitimate beef tort reform wasn't going to hurt you.

How important is honesty and trustworthiness in a president?

Not important at all. What exactly are we expecting a president to say that we cannot learn about life from opening a newspaper every day? Just go ahead and open a quality paper such as the Washington Post. The news tells us we are rapidly moving to a multipolar world and soon China, India, the U.S., the European Union, etc. will be on par. This means if not a Darwinian struggle to the point of outright war at the very least we can expect increased competition with nations, more traffic hurtling down the roads as people jockey for position.

The plain fact on opening any quality newspaper is a world of primarily business, economics, politics and biology. For all talk of religion people actually believe in a seen world and we are moving more and more every day to accepting a Darwinian view of existence. Of course--and speaking about strictly the U.S.--we can expect people to keep trying to console societies losers with religion, but that becomes a most disgusting mockery when precisely the party which speaks most about religion is the most relentlessly Darwinian in its business methods.

As for the Democratic party, how exactly does it expect to come to grips with a Darwinian world? Socialistic practices? I see! Not only are we expected to arrest the Darwinian process with socialistic practices, we are expected to do so as the world becomes more relentlessly multipolar.

What a sad century we are about to live in. We are about to have thrust in our faces as never before the sad fact of so many people in society being perpetually at the bottom. This fact is about to be thrust in our faces because we can no longer cover up the Darwinian process with religion nor can we manage in a strictly economic/political/scientific sense the fact that some people win and others lose.

But I do expect science to try to solve the problem with an advanced eugenics system, in an attempt to have the winners of society not be born by accident but by design. Furthermore we can expect more drugs for the mentally ill, more television, and probably more calls to euthanize the elderly, homeless, etc. So much suffering...It seems it will only be overcome by a society which finally takes its evolution in its own hands and manages to bring exceptional human beings with regularity directly from the womb. So far all is brutal accident! So many suffering losers being left behind by winners in nice automobiles! How much longer can we ignore that these facts speak directly from the newspapers?!

There is nothing politicians can say to us that we do not already know. The question is one of minimizing suffering. How do we do so? What honesty and trustworthiness approaches the problem? I see no difference between McCain, Obama and Clinton on the fundamental fact of any newspaper right in a citizen's face. Tomorrow there will still be the homeless. Tomorrow there will still be high fuel and food prices. Tomorrow there will still be the anguish of the mentally ill. Tomorrow the cars will still whizz by and we will still feel the desperate pressure to be in a fast moving automobile otherwise we might be a dead animal by the side of the road.

I am afraid the athiests seem to be winning the battle for our view of existence. The problem is that not even they can take pleasure in the battle anymore. Read the newspaper...I thought I would never say this, but the newspaper never lies.

I can't get through the day without telling one or two whoppers myself, so I really don't expect politicians to be any different.

We all lie, and those who claim they don't are the biggest liars of all.

It isn't the lie itself that's important: It's what you choose to lie about that reveals your character. You might lie, say, about sex because obviously the details would be embarrassing; or you can lie about the reasons for going to war and get thousands of people needlessly killed.

by Concerned The Christian Now Liberated :

Obama's millstones:

major #1, The "Reverend" Jeremiah Wright.

major #2, His failure to immediately condemn Wright's recent speech.

major #3, His disrespect for unborn children.

major #4, Not recognizing the flaws and errors of contemporary religions."

I add the following:

major #5 him thinking that the American people would ever elect an afrocentric as President. and being an afrocentric that he would dedicate the resources of the United States to Africa where his real allegiance lies...

Honor and Integrity should be the base for all Statesmen. But then we do not have statesmen any longer...we have politicians. Those who play the game of power and favors. Obama's story is one of honesty and discovery...his mother was an amazing woman who taught her son to respect differences and ideas. He says that though his mother was not "religious" she was the most spiritual person he has ever known.

He was raised without religion, but with love. That gives him a grounding of inclusion and not bigotry. He made a promise that he will tell us the truth...but can we take it? Can honesty beat out bigotry? Can calmness beat out shrill negativety?

I am 60 years old..a feminist and a white woman...and in all the fight through the years to create equality for all I dreamed of a female president...but not this one. Not one that just played another race card...a race card that states hard working "White" Americans vote for her. I do not believe that all her followers are racists, but how come there is no out cry by them about this?

One way to tell who follows Hillary...go to :
www.hillaryis44.com
take a bath after.

terra

Honor and Integrity should be the base for all Statesmen. But then we do not have statesmen any longer...we have politicians. Those who play the game of power and favors. Obama's story is one of honesty and discovery...his mother was an amazing woman who taught her son to respect differences and ideas. He says that though his mother was not "religious" she was the most spiritual person he has ever known.

He was raised without religion, but with love. That gives him a grounding of inclusion and not bigotry. He made a promise that he will tell us the truth...but can we take it? Can honesty beat out bigotry? Can calmness beat out shrill negativety?

I am 60 years old..a feminist and a white woman...and in all the fight through the years to create equality for all I dreamed of a female president...but not this one. Not one that just played another race card...a race card that states hard working "White" Americans vote for her. I do not believe that all her followers are racists, but how come there is no out cry by them about this?

One way to tell who follows Hillary...go to :
www.hillaryis44.com
take a bath after.

terra

Sadly, our political system has regressed to a point where candidates who tell the truth suffer for it. They're forced to fudge or offer obscure answers to avoid alienating certain segments of voters. God help the candidate who openly states we have too many guns or evangelicals.

Once a candidate becomes president, there is no excuse for lying. Even worse, creating the truth and demanding that people accept it. The Bush administration tried to make it un-American to question "their contrived truths". From Russert to Mathews, no one did. Now look at the mess we're in.

GaryD, it doesn't surprise me that you prefer a comfortable lie to a hard truth. It defines who you are.

" Garyd :

"TJ a vote for Barack Obama is a vote for big intrusive government. His own website says as much of you bother to read it and add it up."

Bush has increased the size of government more than any President in history, and has basically tanked the economy: government has only gotten 'smaller' for the *real* elites, the corporations and the very rich, to whom he's transferred public wealth while in fact *screwing up* the economy for the 'little people.'

Maybe business is booming for Bush's pals on Wall Street, but for the rest of us, the economy *is* shrinking. In terms of real wages and what things cost, and our own opportunities as citizens, it's *shrunk.*

And government doesn't get any more intrusive than when it steps in to block one's civil rights and marginalize one for her religious beliefs, ...while taking away one's rights to have grievances redressed (Remember 'tort reform?' That means that we have less right to call corporations to account if they decide to poison us for their profit margins.)

Intrusive? Gods. It's *never* felt so *intrusive* as we've seen in recent years.

Polititions have to lie for one very good reason, the american people cannot handle the truth. There are just far too many americans that cannot stand the thought of their preconceived notions about the way things are being challenged by the truth. The events of 911 are the perfect example. The laws of physics, and all the credible science makes it absolutely clear that the "official" story about what happened that day is a blatant lie, yet most americans won't even look at the evidence. They put their metaphorical fingers in their ears and sing la la la la la so they don't have the hear the truth. The entire war on terror was manufactured by the lie of 911, but there are people that will post on this very board and call me a wacko insted of doing some real research to find the truth. Americans want to sit in their little cacoons of ignorance and enjoy their bliss, and find comfort in the lies, so they can continue their fantasy that america is still the good guy, insted of facing the brutal truth that we start wars of aggression, torture prisnors, take away the rights of our citizens, absolve the police of murder and abuse of power, have a government that spies on it's citizens, and have criminals in the white house, that the criminals in the congress won't do anything about. Polititions lie because the people can't handle the truth. If they could they would already know it.

Let's face it. The Republicans have demonstrated that when they have power, they are just as corrupt and create just as much big intrusive gov't as the Dems do.

One party creates massive debt, the other increases taxes. One wants to legislate us to heaven, the other wants a nanny state. They are two sides of the same coin, and neither one is going to put this country back on track. Unless we're willing to address the deficit, become fiscally responsible, and get some real long-term fixes in place for SS, medicare, and the tax code, this country is toast. I don't see any politician who is willing to admit those problems and take them seriously, let alone fix them.

Of the three potential choices, I'll probably vote for Obama, just for the possibility that he might bring a slightly different approach than what we've had for the past 20 years.

On the other hand, the Dems will certainly pick up more seats in Congress, so it may be better to vote McCain. Political gridlock may be the best way to minimize the damage that too much (D) will inflict - just as too much (R) has done recently.

TJ a vote for Barack Obama is a vote for big intrusive government. His own website says as much of you bother to read it and add it up.

If I am against big intrusive government why on earth would I vote for Obama or Hillary for that matter?

Might I suggest you shave that wool from over your eyes before you cast that vote?

A vote for Obama is a vote for big intrusive government.

If I am against big intrusive government why would I vote for some one whose web site clearly indicates that he plans on providing us all the government we can handle and more besides.

Obama's knew politics is little more than the same old socialism.

GaryD,

The one thing, perhaps the only thing, we have in common is apprehension about big, intrusive government.

For this reason, I'll not be voting Libertarian this time, as I always do, and will instead vote for Obama.

In the interests of our country, I urge you to remove your head from the orifice that it is firmly planted in and do the same.

Over a year ago I used to post here on a daily basis. The trolls and some of the people that post got very old very fast. I decided to check in today out of boredom. Hmm S__Charles above has told so many others story. Right now I post on HuffPost because of the election. We have our share of trolls there of course but it seems more interesting than this religion stuff. By the way I am a non-believer (in religion) that is and that part of this election is driving me crazy. I never liked Hillary even during the Clinton years. I listened to her in the beginning as I would love to see a woman in the WH. Almost immediately I went for Obama. I had heard his speech at the 2004 convention and decided at that moment in my mind that he would most certainly be our first black (half/black) president. I by no means thought it would happen this fast. I stood up for Clinton during those years even through the impeachment (that shows you how stupid I was) and now that I look back it is hard to believe that when he looked us all in the eye and said I didn't have sex with that woman how hard it was for me to buy it. But buy it I did. Talk about dishonesty. And now to add insult to injury Bill/Hill are lying through their teeth everyday and asking us to believe them again. How sad. I can't. There maybe no such thing as an honest politican but hey I have to go with the one that seems to be the most honest!!! He hasn't been around Washington long enough to be as dishonest as the Clintons. They play the game. He may end up having to play some of the games but I truly believe that he will try his hardest to keep his promises to us as much as possible. That's all I need from him. He is a brilliant man he will be a great president and a welcome change from the Bush/Clinton dynasty.

GaryD

So, if what you say it true, then how come under the Republicans, we have more debt, more borrowing, a vast expansion of the government, and more and more rules and regulations? You see`only what you want to see, and tune all the rest.

Obviously I disagree with your assessment of GWB.

I will take almost any Republican over almost any Democrat simply because of policy considerations.

I know beyond any doubt that if I vote Democrat I am voting for higher taxes, more government, and a smaller economy. The lesson of the Laffer Curve is that increasing taxes beyond certain percentages means beyond any doubt a smaller economy and more government generally means more rules and regulations which compound the problem created by increased taxes.

We demand that they be dishonest and unworthy of trust. Why would they be any other way?

Please remember this: As bad as democrats may be, they're always to be preferred over republicans. Looking at the record of America's worst president in modern times (that would be George W. Bush) we can only expect that McCain would continue with these policies in his own doddering way - the man is far too old, and far too easily swayed by the right wing of the GOP to be trusted in the Oval Office.

His lack of real conviction (despite his highly touted identity as a political 'maverick'), compromised character, and changeability on any and all issues has become obvious - a function of both age and ambition.

He has since backed off altogether on his previous position on immigration reform when it didn't suit the far right. What needs to happen in Washington is the total marginalization of idealogical right wing influences on national and international policies - we've had it for 8 years and it's caused countless thousands of deaths & nearly bankrupted the country - ordinary folks are really feeling the pain about now.... all the while making a political pariah of the USA throughout the world.

Nobody knows what America will do next, but internationally speaking, everyone is convinced it will be in the best interests of those select few that run our government - we've seen quite clearly where that leads. None of this will change with McCain, and we can take that to the bank. If you like the war in Iraq and the economy in a shambles, you'll love where McCain is going to take us.

democrat,mechavili and jesus.

political christianity is never separated from democratism nor mechavilism,simply because christianity is a church bound box faith, never was a way of life although the creed say,jesus is the way the truth and life ,but in actual life there is the secular law that govern the clergy ,the laity and the mass public and the state in general.

so again there is serious separation between the church of christ and actual life ,a serious separation between the teaching of jesus and the teaching of democrate and mechavili,right and wrong never nor will they ever mix,.

a double face society is not always a failure but always a destruction ,this is one of the fundementals of this life that never favior no body nor discriminate against no body(equal employment opportunity).

in a( jeudochristianicdemoraticmechavilic)society people take and pray to the god that it please them but as soon as it contradict their lust or style or way of life,soon they drop and throw their god in the nearst toilet?

god a la chart is another delusion.in order to belive in god you need to practice god.

Could it be it has nothing to do with any actual perception of morals, but rather the corporate media's insistence upon finding any slightest wedge of divisiveness or mistrust they can find and blowing that up to be the entire story?

GaryD Said:

"Are honesty and integrity important qualities in a politician? Of course, anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves."

So, do you think that is why George Bush has turned out to be such a lousy President?

The biggest problem I had with Bill Clinton was that it seemed to me only logical that if his own wife couldn't trust him neither could anyone else.

If you can't trust a politician then the promises he or she makes aren't worth anything.

Are honesty and integrity important qualities in a politician? Of course, anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.

Honesty and trustworthiness go hand-in-hand.Our President can't succeed with the electorate, Congress or world leaders without these characteristics. The most important evidence of these traits, to me, is consistency so with the exception of a few stumbles I have to give Obama more points. Clinton has multiple faces, accents, tones of voice and demeanors depending on her audience. Her message has changed from one of "experience" to one of "toughness" to "good'ol girl" and I don't know who she really is. Obama portrays the foibles of us all but he has been consistent with his message of change and his consistently calm demeanor gives me the confidence that he is capable of uniting us all and leading us through crises "from day one."

I would attribute part of the cynicism of politicians to a contradictory set of expectations:

1) STAND FOR SOMETHING. This expectation works as long as you accept as long as you accept the reality that there are going to be instances when the person you elect is going to vote differently than you'd like them to.

2) REPRESENT ME. This expectation works as long as you accept that reality that politicians are going to be telling you want you to hear and voting the way you them to--at least part of the time.

You can't have it both ways: i.e. expect politicians to be authentic AND vote in consistently vote in ways you agree with.

It comes down to an important question. Do we elect people to vote with us and make us feel good, or do we elect people to go in the legislature or Congress, etc and get things done even if we don't always agree with it?

I would attribute part of the cynicism of politicians to a contradictory set of expectations:

1. Stand for something, and be authentic.

2. Represent Me

Those who stand for something and are authentic are going to represent some constituencies , but not others and those they don't are going to be angry that they aren't being represented.

Likewise, if you attempt to represent everyone as Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton have done, you don't come across as very authentic.

With such varied constituencies, the expectations that a politician stand for something and represent "me" is a zero sum game: i.e. one comes at the expense of the other.

Although it was a bit of a journey to get there, it was this very issue that made me change candidates.
I am a 60 yr. old, white woman and like many others I was a Hillary supporter. I did not know much about Sen. Obama. Although he came across to me as a very decent man, I thought he was simply too inexperienced, too young. (the arrogance of the elderly I guess)
But as the Democrat primary carried on after Feb.5th, I became increasingly aware that my 'level of comfort' was being pushed.
Although a life long Democrat, passionate about taking back our Country from Bush and the GOP, I found myself turned off, although I forced myself to carry on.
I was nearing the maximum donation level to Sen. Clinton but as I went to make the last donation to her campaign, I just could not do it. Acting on what I considered to be an unexplained impulse, I gave the money to Sen. Obama.
After that I really started to pay attention to what was happening to me, on a 'gut' level and why I was feeling uncomfortable.
I realized it was not the little things, the odd misstep or exaggeration it was a much bigger issue that I was feeling although not able to define it for awhile.
It came down to the big picture, what they were showing me versus what they were saying or doing in a given event like a debate or on a specific matter.
To me honesty and respect are inseparable, you cannot have one without the other.
What a candidate asks us to believe about themselves and what they are saying or doing, is an indication of how much respect they have for ordinary citizens who vote them into office.
I watched as Sen. Clinton moved from one incarnation of herself to another, to suit what ever she thought might appeal to a particular voter,no matter how conflicted with reality it was. It got more outrageous by the day.
By contrast Sen. Obama, even under attack, remained calm and dignified appearing strongly grounded in who he was as a person. Whether you agreed with him or not on issues, he was always real.
I watched and cringed as she employed her 'kitchen sink' tactics, including those that played to the racial divide, against Sen. Obama.
I watched as she attacked a fellow Democrat saying things I would be reluctant to say or raise with a Republican Candidate.
I came away not only repelled by Sen. Clinton but appalled by her display of dishonesty on so many levels. It was not just because her message and conduct made a blatant appeal to the worst in us that created an irreversible change in me.
It was because the message behind it said she believed we were ignorant, unprincipled and lacking in sound moral judgment,capable of being taken in by a few sound bites.
On the other hand, Sen. Obama appealed to the best in us and expressed a belief in us to make principled judgments. Here was this young man, I thought was too inexperienced, showing enough respect to talk to us like adults and trusting us to act as the intelligent people we are.
He has won not only my support and respect but absolute confidence in his ability to be a President we can be proud of; one who will do his very best on our behalf.

Although there is signicant doubt that Jesus' actually said,

"If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea", Mark 9:42,

wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/198_Millstone_for_Temptation,

it is, however, a great passage for judging leadership qualities.

Clinton's millstones:

major # 1, Her dishonest, lying, cheating husband whom she should have dumped years ago. Having him in the Whitehouse again would percolate the stench of adultery and womanizing on a 24/7 basis for four more years.

major #2, Her disrespect for unborn children.

major #3, Not recognizing the flaws and errors of contemporary religions.

minor #1, "forgetting" the details of her trip to Bosnia.

Obama's millstones:

major #1, The "Reverend" Jeremiah Wright.

major #2, His failure to immediately condemn Wright's recent speech.

major #3, His disrespect for unborn children.

major #4, Not recognizing the flaws and errors of contemporary religions.

Attempts were made by Air Force brass to have Eisenhower agree on a plan to use nuclear weapons against China if China blockaded Taiwan. Eisenhower, a former army general, said no. Wise man!

Hillary Clinton was asked what she would do if Iran used nuclear weapons against Israel. Hillary stated that she would obliterate Iran - with nuclear weapons.

How can anyone trust a potential president who responds so casually to something so very serious. We're talking about millions and millions of dead civilians. This woman is dangerous.

Truth is if we can't trust them, we can't trust them to look out for us and lets face it, they have not looked out for us.
obama is afrocentric and being afrocentric is like being a member of the klan except that this klan consists of blacks.
Hillary wants to give American's jobs but she said outsourcing is a reality, get used to it.
McCann as a Republican wants to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform knowing it will change the face of America forever.

these are your choices, Good Luck choosing...