[Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the "evolutionists" are going to save us from the Republicans
Herb Parsons
hparsons at parsonsys.com
Wed Sep 10 14:17:02 EDT 2008
I'd say that'd be a bit extreme. Akin to telling a woman asking for an
abortion that she'd need to be sterilized first, after having her eggs
harvested.
However, I wouldn't be a bit opposed to sterilization of men that refuse
to pay child support.
elle wrote:
> Forced semen storage and then mass castration could end the abortion debate once and for all.
>
> elle
>
> We can't change the angle of the wind....but we can adjust our sails.
>
> 1992 Rhodes 22 Recyc '06 "WaterMusic" (Lady in Red)
>
>
> --- On Wed, 9/10/08, Ben Cittadino <bcittadino at dcs-law.com> wrote:
>
>
>> From: Ben Cittadino <bcittadino at dcs-law.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the "evolutionists" are going to save us from the Republicans
>> To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
>> Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 12:05 PM
>> Herb,
>>
>> You raise an interesting legal point. Did you know that
>> the right to use
>> deadly force to defend one's property is different in
>> the different states?
>> In fact it changes in direct proportion to one's
>> movement from northeast to
>> southwest. In most northeastern states a person has a duty
>> to retreat and
>> not use deadly force to defend one's property, but as
>> one moves southwest a
>> person has more legal right to stand their ground and even
>> use deadly force
>> to defend their property. It's actually a fascinating
>> study of the whole
>> macho "code of the west" thing.
>>
>> I just can't do the abortion debate. Nobody ever
>> changes anybody's mind on
>> it. I think it just comes down to a society balancing very
>> impotant
>> competing interests. So far our society has decided that a
>> woman's privacy
>> right trumps the government's interest in protecting
>> the life (or potential
>> for life) of the not yet born up to the point of about
>> 2/3rds of the way
>> through the pregnancy. It's a judgment call. It seems
>> reasonable enough to
>> me.
>>
>> Ben, s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ
>>
>>
>>
>> Psssst, Brad, don't tell anyone on here that already
>> knows differently,
>> but in spite of my personal religious beliefs, I believe
>> that the issue
>> should be left up to the states.
>>
>> Further, I think that local cities should be allowed to
>> further
>> restrict, within the confines of their state's charter
>> and constitution,
>> the matter. I believe that to be how we should operate on a
>> lot of
>> different issues.
>>
>> Did you know that in some states it's illegal to own a
>> handgun, but in
>> the GST (Great State of Texas), you not only can legally
>> own one, you
>> can shoot, and kill, someone who's stupid enough to try
>> to take what is
>> your property when you've got one of them handy.
>>
>> Brad Haslett wrote:
>>
>>> Herb,
>>>
>>> The nut cuttin' of the conversation is how much
>>>
>> should the federal
>>
>>> government be involved in personal decisions of
>>>
>> morality. I say, not
>>
>>> much. That should be left up to the states and the
>>>
>> locals. I grew up
>>
>>> in a dry township. Other people with other ideas
>>>
>> about that moved six
>>
>>> miles away. Everything is a trade-off. Roe v Wade was
>>>
>> an unnecessary
>>
>>> invasion of states rights. What certain groups
>>>
>> can't get legislated,
>>
>>> they try and get decided from the bench. The issue
>>>
>> that started this
>>
>>> thread was Gov. Palin's religious convictions.
>>>
>> The first bill she
>>
>>> vetoed was one that would strip health care benefits
>>>
>> from the gay
>>
>>> partners of Alaskan state employees. Her reasoning
>>>
>> and statements at
>>
>>> the time of the veto was that is was unconstitutional.
>>>
>> What greater
>>
>>> litmus test is there? The far lefts poster child yard
>>>
>> sign is molding
>>
>>> and wilting in the sunshine. We'll have this
>>>
>> argument another day
>>
>>> under another banner and with a different cheerleader.
>>>
>> This one
>>
>>> turned out to be an empty suit on too many other
>>>
>> issues.
>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Herb Parsons
>>>
>> <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> There is nothing wrong with society determining
>>>>
>> the "moral boundries"
>>
>>>> they wish to maintain. There is also nothing wrong
>>>>
>> with those moral
>>
>>>> boundries being subject to change as said society
>>>>
>> changes. In spite of
>>
>>>> my religious beliefs, I do not now want a
>>>>
>> theocracy, no have I ever.
>>
>>>> However, the notion that 5 men can forever dictate
>>>>
>> to a nation of
>>
>>>> millions what their moral boundry should be is
>>>>
>> tyranny. I do not want
>>
>>>> the feds pushing any agenda one way or the other,
>>>>
>> and that includes the
>>
>>>> federal judicial branch. I want the citizenry to
>>>>
>> make that choice.
>>
>>>> I know, I know, it kinda blows your "Herb
>>>>
>> wants his religion for
>>
>>>> everyone" nonsense, huh Michael?
>>>>
>>>> BTW, all of the above reflects my personal
>>>>
>> opinion. None of it intended
>>
>>>> to be perceived by an reader or observer as any
>>>>
>> type of fact, implied or
>>
>>>> otherwise. They are worth at least as much as the
>>>>
>> durability of the
>>
>>>> media in which they are made, and their only
>>>>
>> asserted value is that. All
>>
>>>> readers and/or observers are free, and even
>>>>
>> welcome, to ascribe to said
>>
>>>> beliefs, or simply write them off as so much
>>>>
>> bullshit.
>>
>>>> Oh, and Michael, you flatter yourself. I
>>>>
>> didn't just recently "realize"
>>
>>>> all of that. I DID make the absurd assumption that
>>>>
>> you recognized
>>
>>>> opinion when you saw it. Silly me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Todd,
>>>>>
>>>>> I certainly never wanted to remove God from my
>>>>>
>> life. I, like Ben C.,
>>
>>>>> have
>>>>> no problem with the coexistence of God and
>>>>>
>> science. I cannot understand
>>
>>>>> why
>>>>> every group in this country (religious or
>>>>>
>> non-religious) feels that the
>>
>>>>> separation of church and state means that we
>>>>>
>> need to remove all traces
>>
>>>>> of
>>>>> religion and culture from public places.
>>>>>
>> Since we can't offend anyone
>>
>>>>> by
>>>>> celebrating our religious rituals, we must
>>>>>
>> remove all religion from
>>
>>>>> schools,
>>>>> government and the public. I think that if we
>>>>>
>> remove all holidays,
>>
>>>>> ethnic
>>>>> traditions, religious symbols, etc. the world
>>>>>
>> will be a pretty ugly
>>
>>>>> place.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do, however, feel that religious beliefs
>>>>>
>> are very personal and no one
>>
>>>>> has
>>>>> the right to impose them on others. I think
>>>>>
>> that this is what was meant
>>
>>>>> by
>>>>> the separation of church and state, to
>>>>>
>> eliminate religious persecution.
>>
>>>>> How
>>>>> is one to deal with the concept put forth by
>>>>>
>> some faiths that place the
>>
>>>>> responsibility for misdeeds by one on all of
>>>>>
>> society? What is the basis
>>
>>>>> for
>>>>> the following statement from Todd: "Each
>>>>>
>> draws his line of good
>>
>>>>> conscience
>>>>> to justify acts past, present, or future in
>>>>>
>> his or her own life (or
>>
>>>>> afterlife) - not to protect the legal
>>>>>
>> reproductive rights of every
>>
>>>>> random
>>>>> Jane Doe." What, exactly, does it mean?
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
>>>>> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Todd Tavares"
>>>>>
>> <sprocket80 at mail.com>Sent: Tuesday, September 09,
>>
>>>>> 2008
>>>>> 4:43 PM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael, It is just another example of
>>>>>>
>> taking God OR religion out of
>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> equation to ease our conscience. Excluding
>>>>>>
>> cases of rape, incest, etc.,
>>
>>>>>> the parents of the developing fetus;
>>>>>>
>> whether you consider it alive or
>>
>>>>>> not, had a choice and responsibility they
>>>>>>
>> chose not to exercise. Is
>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> knowledge and ability to perform surgical
>>>>>>
>> abortion the only thing that
>>
>>>>>> separates us from our animal urges and the
>>>>>>
>> apes we evolved from?
>>
>>>>>> Religious, Christian, Atheist, or Pagan;
>>>>>>
>> view videos and pictures of a
>>
>>>>>> "partial birth abortion"-- which
>>>>>>
>> the legal rights of the mother to
>>
>>>>>> choose, Clinton initially fought to try to
>>>>>>
>> preserve and even a
>>
>>>>>> civilized
>>>>>> atheist would exclaim OH MY F'ing GOD
>>>>>>
>> and start thinking
>>
>>>>>> differently...even if they'd never
>>>>>>
>> admit it openly and risk
>>
>>>>>> contradicting
>>>>>> their publicly espoused views. Each
>>>>>>
>> draws his line of good conscience
>>
>>>>>> to justify acts past, present, or future
>>>>>>
>> in his or her own life (or
>>
>>>>>> afterlife) - not to protect the legal
>>>>>>
>> reproductive rights of every
>>
>>>>>> random
>>>>>> Jane Doe. Let's look in the mirror
>>>>>>
>> and stop lying to ourselves and
>>
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> other here. (not a fact....just a thought)
>>>>>>
>> Todd T
>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "Michael D. Weisner"
>>>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise
>>>>>>
>> Jesus, the "evolutionists" are
>>
>>>>>> going to save us from the Republicans
>>>>>> Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:54:12 -0400
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Herb,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You state as fact:
>>>>>> "... the individual's religious
>>>>>>
>> belifs (sic) involve yet another
>>
>>>>>> individual."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You conclude:
>>>>>> "You are advocating that a woman be
>>>>>>
>> allowed to kill another living
>>
>>>>>> human
>>>>>> based on HER religious beliefs, not those
>>>>>>
>> of that living human."
>>
>>>>>> The "fact" is actually your
>>>>>>
>> opinion according to your religious
>>
>>>>>> beliefs that
>>>>>> this is another human being. You then
>>>>>>
>> employ your religious beliefs
>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> close the argument in restating the
>>>>>>
>> premise "... of that living
>>
>>>>>> human."
>>>>>> There is no logic to the argument. It is
>>>>>>
>> so only because you say it
>>
>>>>>> is so,
>>>>>> and that is according to your religious
>>>>>>
>> beliefs. This is circular, at
>>
>>>>>> best.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know that you can do better ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
>>>>>> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Herb Parsons" Sent:
>>>>>>
>> Tuesday, September 09,
>>
>>>>>> 2008 3:06 PM
>>>>>> > Resent away Michael, but what did I
>>>>>>
>> "present as fact"?
>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > And, beliefs aside, my reasoning is
>>>>>>
>> not "circular". I believe very
>>
>>>>>> much
>>>>>> > in an individual's right to
>>>>>>
>> decide for themselves what they will
>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> > will not do. However, when that
>>>>>>
>> decision directly affects another,
>>
>>>>>> > especially the life of another, than
>>>>>>
>> it is not the one individual's
>>
>>>>>> > choice to make.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>>>>>> >> Herb,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> It always amazes me that you
>>>>>>
>> have no problem putting your beliefs
>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >> opinions in the form of fact in
>>>>>>
>> your arguments. The interesting
>>
>>>>>> thing is
>>>>>> >> that the more I agree with the
>>>>>>
>> basic principles of these
>>
>>>>>> discussions, the
>>>>>> >> more I resent your reasoning.
>>>>>>
>> While we may reach the same
>>
>>>>>> conclusion, the
>>>>>> >> paths are significantly diverse.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> My opinions and beliefs aside, I
>>>>>>
>> think that in order to state "I
>>
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> >> agree, except in this case, the
>>>>>>
>> individual's religious belifs
>>
>>>>>> (sic) involve
>>>>>> >> yet another individual,"
>>>>>>
>> one must employ circular reasoning, thus
>>
>>>>>> defeating
>>>>>> >> the value of the statement.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Mike
>>>>>> >> s/v Shanghai'd Summer
>>>>>>
>> ('81)
>>
>>>>>> >> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> From: "Herb Parsons"
>>>>>>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 09,
>>
>>>>>> >> 2008 1:58 PM
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> I would agree, except in
>>>>>>
>> this case, the individual's religious
>>
>>>>>> belifs
>>>>>> >>> involve yet another
>>>>>>
>> individual. You are advocating that a woman
>>
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> >>> allowed to kill another
>>>>>>
>> living human based on HER religious
>>
>>>>>> beliefs, not
>>>>>> >>> those of that living human.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Rik Sandberg wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>> Herb,
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Well, here you go my
>>>>>>
>> friend. War is a terrible analogy.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> IF we are going to have
>>>>>>
>> freedom OF religion, which would also
>>
>>>>>> include
>>>>>> >>>> freedom FROM religion
>>>>>>
>> and the abortion issue is mostly decided
>>
>>>>>> on a
>>>>>> >>>> religious (or
>>>>>>
>> non-religious, choice again) basis, it is not our
>>
>>>>>> place to
>>>>>> >>>> expect anyone else to
>>>>>>
>> assume our religious beliefs.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Which leads us right
>>>>>>
>> back to; the gov't should have no voice in
>>
>>>>>> this at
>>>>>> >>>> all.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Rik
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Ayn Rand was a prophet -
>>>>>>
>> - it isn't my fault
>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Herb Parsons wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> I like your honest
>>>>>>
>> assessment on Palin, but I disagree about
>>
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> >>>>> labeling of the
>>>>>>
>> position.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> If I say I'm not
>>>>>>
>> going to fight in a war, but it's OK if my
>>
>>>>>> government
>>>>>> >>>>> attacks another, am
>>>>>>
>> I anti-war, or pro-war?
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Obviously,
>>>>>>
>> you'll not have an abortion, that would mean a male
>>
>>>>>> could be
>>>>>> >>>>> neither pro or anti;
>>>>>>
>> however, anyone that believes the issue
>>
>>>>>> does not
>>>>>> >>>>> affect me is wearing
>>>>>>
>> blinders.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Rik Sandberg wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Herb,
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Agreed. Palin
>>>>>>
>> claims no more religiousity (is that a word,
>>
>>>>>> sounds good)
>>>>>> >>>>>> than either of
>>>>>>
>> the other three candidates involved. She has
>>
>>>>>> also shown
>>>>>> >>>>>> that she can
>>>>>>
>> govern without forcing forcing those beliefs on
>>
>>>>>> her
>>>>>> >>>>>> constituents.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> On the abortion
>>>>>>
>> issue: Yep, she's against them, for her. So am
>>
>>>>>> I, for
>>>>>> >>>>>> me. I am
>>>>>>
>> pro-choice. People just can't seem to get a handle on
>>
>>>>>> the idea
>>>>>> >>>>>> that pro-choice
>>>>>>
>> doesn't mean anti or pro abortion. It means
>>
>>>>>> you should
>>>>>> >>>>>> be able to make
>>>>>>
>> your own choice and let others make theirs,
>>
>>>>>> ie, mind
>>>>>> >>>>>> your own
>>>>>>
>> business.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> From what
>>>>>>
>> I've seen Palin, as governor of Alaska has been
>>
>>>>>> doing this
>>>>>> >>>>>> too.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> If I had my way,
>>>>>>
>> the federal gov't wouldn't be involved in
>>
>>>>>> abortion at
>>>>>> >>>>>> all.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Rik
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Ayn Rand was a
>>>>>>
>> prophet - - it isn't my fault
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Herb Parsons
>>>>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stan,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> What
>>>>>>
>> evidence do you have that would lead you to believe that
>>
>>>>>> Palin
>>>>>> >>>>>>> would force
>>>>>>
>> her religious belief on anyone? My understanding
>>
>>>>>> is that
>>>>>> >>>>>>> she's
>>>>>>
>> all for allowing the individual states to set the
>>
>>>>>> standard.
>>>>>> >>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>
>> that's really beside the point. As you said,
>>
>>>>>> anyone's
>>>>>> >>>>>>> pinpoint
>>>>>> >>>>>>> of the exact
>>>>>>
>> time is a "religious" matter, or a matter of
>>
>>>>>> fath, thus
>>>>>> >>>>>>> ANYONE
>>>>>>
>> setting pinpointed time would be them foisting their
>>
>>>>>> beliefs on
>>>>>> >>>>>>> others.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> Surely
>>>>>>
>> you're not advocating allowing the parents to decide
>>
>>>>>> at any
>>>>>> >>>>>>> time
>>>>>> >>>>>>> they choose,
>>>>>>
>> up to and including while the "fetus" is still
>>
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> >>>>>>> college?
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> stan wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Slim,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As a
>>>>>>
>> member of your religious faith, and an ardent fan, if
>>
>>>>>> you really
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> plan
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> to skip
>>>>>>
>> voting (in effect voting for those whose direct
>>
>>>>>> religious
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> instructions got us into such a waste of our wealth and
>>
>>>>>> blood) I
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> truly
>>>>>>
>> saddened. I don't think poorly of John's and
>> Palin's
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> inability to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> live up
>>>>>>
>> to their own family values, relying on their gods to
>>
>>>>>> forgive
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> them -
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I worry
>>>>>>
>> about their health; a topic that seems to be
>>
>>>>>> forbidden to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> address.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> John's cheek is not like that from his prisoner days and
>> his
>>
>>>>>> vp could
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> be our
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> leader
>>>>>>
>> without notice. Then where would this country's
>>
>>>>>> founding
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> desire
>>>>>>
>> for
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> religious freedom end up? The first example is already on
>>
>>>>>> the table
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>
>> Joe has it right: When life starts is a religious
>>
>>>>>> opinion
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>
>> not be one decided by government. You may feel life
>>
>>>>>> does not
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> start
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> until a
>>>>>>
>> breath is taken, the Jews count a number of months
>>
>>>>>> before the
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> start,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>> Christens count from the moment the cells begin
>>
>>>>>> dividing.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Personally I
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> don't think it starts until after college. If we allow a
>>
>>>>>> Palin to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> call
>>>>>>
>> such
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> shots we
>>>>>>
>> are on a path Jefferson and all those other smart
>>
>>>>>> guys
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> insisted
>>>>>>
>> on
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> avoiding. McCain told the TV interviewer that if he had his
>>
>>>>>> way the
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> first
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> judge he
>>>>>>
>> would get rid of is Ginsberg and than went down the
>>
>>>>>> list of
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> her
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> kind.
>>>>>>
>> Once this is allowed to start (we already have allowed
>>
>>>>>> god
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> onto our
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> coins),
>>>>>>
>> god (hypocritically speaking) help us - or we will
>>
>>>>>> all,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> eventually,
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> become
>>>>>>
>> strong advocates of the second amendment.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John, at
>>>>>>
>> least is a flip flopper so, if elected, would
>>
>>>>>> probably
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> revert
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> many of
>>>>>>
>> his reasonable positions. It is Palin I am fearful
>>
>>>>>> will give
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> us
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>
>> worse than another 8 years. (And this from a confessed
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> womanizer.)
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> stan/ec
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> .
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>
>> Original Message ----- From: "Steven Alm"
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To:
>>>>>>
>> "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent:
>>>>>>
>> Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:02 AM
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject:
>>>>>>
>> Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus,the
>>
>>>>>> "evolutionists" are
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> save us
>>>>>>
>> from the Republicans
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Todd,
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> I'm an atheist and I think Palin's a religious kook.
>> And
>>
>>>>>> you're
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> right, I
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> won't vote for a religious kook. I haven't studied
>> Darwin
>>
>>>>>> very much
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (and
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> applaud your research and quotes) but I don't think
>> that's
>>
>>>>>> the only
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> rebuke
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>> creationism. Since most of the species of plant and
>>
>>>>>> animal life
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> earth are in fact extinct, I'd call that
>> "unintelligent
>>
>>>>>> design."
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You
>>>>>>
>> said there are only two possibilities as to how life
>>
>>>>>> started.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Are
>>>>>>
>> you
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> sure? How do you know this? What I know is that all
>>
>>>>>> religions
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> serve in
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> answering three questions: Where did we come from, how do
>>
>>>>>> we live
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> happens when we die? Myself, I've answered those
>> questions
>>
>>>>>> to my
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> satisfaction and I don't need the church to tell me
>>
>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Slim
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On
>>>>>>
>> Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Todd Tavares
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Slim, Wow! are you are going to vote for Obama because he
>>
>>>>>> is a
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Marxist
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> or not vote for McCain just because Palin is a religious
>>
>>>>>> extremist?
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> :^D
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Glad you mentioned carbon dating. Carbon has been proven
>>
>>>>>> by many
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> scientists to be a wholly inaccurate method of dating. I
>>
>>>>>> am far
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> from
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> being a scientist...or a religious kook thinking the earth
>>
>>>>>> is only
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> couple of thousand of years old, but there is just as much
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> scientific
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> information out there to; while not proving creation is
>>
>>>>>> the truth,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> surely
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> proves evolution is improbable if not impossible. You
>>
>>>>>> are/were an
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> educator and were taught evolution from a text book, like
>>
>>>>>> we all
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> were.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Just because you read something in a text book does not
>>
>>>>>> make it
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> truth.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Maybe we could
>>
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> stomach
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> creationism if we called it a theory too. After all that
>>
>>>>>> is what
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> evolution is...just an unproven theory. There are equally
>>
>>>>>> as many
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> scientists out there who believe they have proven
>>
>>>>>> evolution is
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> myth. It
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> was not Darwin's brainstorm anyway. He thought he could
>>
>>>>>> further
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> explain
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> a centuries old belief; that life arose from non life and
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> everything
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> sprang from a common ancestor. Modern scientists say it
>>
>>>>>> was that
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> first
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> amino acid or protein chain in the pool of "primordial
>>
>>>>>> ooze." I
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> like how
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> one Nobel prize winner (Biology 1967?) put it:
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "There are only two possibilities as to how life arose;
>>
>>>>>> one is
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is
>>
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> supernatural
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> creative act of God, there is no third possibility.
>>
>>>>>> Spontaneous
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> generation that life arose from non-living matter was
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> scientifically
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That
>>
>>>>>> leaves us
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> with
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> only one possible conclusion, that life arose as a
>>
>>>>>> creative act of
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> God. I
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> will not accept that philosophically because I do not want
>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> believe in
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> scientifically
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> impossible, spontaneous generation arising to
>> evolution."
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> (Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of
>>
>>>>>> Biology at
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> But the most interesting fact is that even Darwin himself
>>
>>>>>> realized
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> evolution was not workable.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable
>>
>>>>>> contrivances for
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting
>>
>>>>>> different
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and
>>
>>>>>> chromatic
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems,
>>
>>>>>> I freely
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> confess, absurd in the highest degree possible."
>> (Charles
>>
>>>>>> Darwin,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "The
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> origin of species by means of natural selection")
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ
>>
>>>>>> existed which
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> could
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive,
>>
>>>>>> slight
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
>>
>>>>>> (Charles
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Darwin,
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "The Origin of Species")
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have
>> asked
>>
>>>>>> myself
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> whether
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." (Charles
>>
>>>>>> Darwin, Life
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229)
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> I could post a few hundred quotes from noted doctors and
>>
>>>>>> scientists
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> try to "prove" evolution wrong or creation right.
>> I could
>>
>>>>>> "do my
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> homework" as we say here on the list and cite actual
>>
>>>>>> findings, but
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> that
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> is not necessary. Because to dismiss the possibility of
>>
>>>>>> God or some
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> other
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Intelligent Designer makes it easier to accept our notions
>>
>>>>>> that it
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> is ok
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to be a homosexual (and not allow me a choice when the
>>
>>>>>> schools
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> teach this
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> gargage to my kids while denying the right to learn about
>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> theory of
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> creation along with evolution) or that it should be a
>>
>>>>>> crime to kill
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> tree, but ok to kill an unborn baby. Not to say everyone
>>
>>>>>> believing
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> in
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> evolution is an athiest (or a Democrat), but you have made
>>
>>>>>> me see
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> this as
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> a hinge factor in how I will vote....real issues aside.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Todd T
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Besides, it is not very PC to say we evolved (were
>>
>>>>>> "selected") from
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> apes.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> We don't want any of the apes that were not selected to
>> be
>>
>>>>>> made to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> feel
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> inferior.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> From: "Steven Alm"
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the Republicans
>>
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> going to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> save us from the Republicans
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:11:17 -0500
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus
>> test for
>>
>>>>>> religious
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> beliefs."
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Yes, I require that the candidates be sane, critical
>>
>>>>>> thinkers.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Palin is
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> obviously not. I wouldn't say that if she were a
>> Catholic
>>
>>>>>> or a
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Lutheran
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> but
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> here's a woman who wants to stare down the whole
>>
>>>>>> scientific
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> community and
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> deny things like carbon 14 dating and declare that the
>>
>>>>>> heavens and
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> earth
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> are
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> only a few thousand years old. You didn't just call ME
>> an
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> extremist, did
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> you?
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Brad, you left out the part of Kroon saying that his
>>
>>>>>> parishioners
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> should
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> pray for the completion of the pipeline because at the end
>>
>>>>>> of the
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> world,
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> folks will flock to Alaska as their final refuge.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> I can't believe that was you quoting all that God stuff.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Slim
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Steven Alm wrote:
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "She's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> already demonstrated that she is fully capable of
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> separating her
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> beliefs from her duties."
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> be better if she didn't have to?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> 2008 at 6:18 AM, Herb Parsons wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ahh, so the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for
>>
>>>>>> religious
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> She's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> already demonstrated that she is fully capable of
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> her
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> beliefs from her duties. She vetoed a bill that
>>
>>>>>> would
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> denied
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> benefits to gay couples.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> extremists keep it up, I'm sure you'll find (or
>>
>>>>>> make up)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SOMETHING
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> on her.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Steven Alm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> She's a creationist. Her Assembly of God stuff is a
>>
>>>>>> deal breaker
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> Religious extremism cannot be tolerated.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> most important legacy the president leaves is the
>>
>> appointment of
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supreme
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> court.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> next pres might appoint as many as three. If
>>
>>>>>> Sarabaracuda
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> her
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> goodbye to Roe V. Wade and hello to back-ally coat
>>
>>>>>> hanger
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abortions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> Sep 7, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Herb Parsons
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> think it's funny that the candidate that was
>>
>>>>>> considered as a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> running
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> mate for the Democratic choice a few years back, is
>>
>>>>>> now being
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> touted as
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "more of the same". Keep trying though, you guys
>> may
>>
>>>>>> find
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> something
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> works.
>>
>> What exactly makes Palin a "religious kook", that
>> fact
>>
>>>>>> that's
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> she
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> religious? I think your colors are beginning to show.
>>
>> petelargo wrote:
>>
>> Ben, thanks for your post. As you may have noticed,
>>
>>>>>> there is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> no
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dialogue
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> with
>>
>> the right-wing extremists. You are wrong, end of
>>
>>>>>> discussion
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> your
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> idiot to boot.
>>
>> When John McCain won the nomination, Bush disappears
>>
>>>>>> overseas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> At
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> RNC,
>>
>> no Bush, no Cheney (and no mention of them). They
>>
>>>>>> know it's a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> failed
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> administration. Where were the solutions. Once again,
>>
>>>>>> they are
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> trying
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> frame the campaign as an ideology argument rather
>>
>>>>>> than an
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> issues
>>
>> discussion.
>>
>> Today on Face the Nation, "Sis Cum Ba and
>> WHA-LAA",
>>
>>>>>> McCain is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> now
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> change
>>
>> candidate and stated that he will end the incredible
>>
>> corruption in
>>
>> Washington and the failed policies. John McCain has
>>
>>>>>> re-defined
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> whole
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> level of flip-flopping on over two dozen key issues
>>
>>>>>> within the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> last
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eight
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> years including his own authored bill that he was for
>>
>>>>>> and now
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> against.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> I couldn't give a poop about the experience argument
>>
>>>>>> of Palin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> vs
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> It's
>>
>> a waste of time. The entire
>>
>>>>>> Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice-Rove,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> etc
>>
>> administration could be argued to be the most
>>
>>>>>> experienced
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> administration
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> the history of the White House. A huge amount of
>>
>>>>>> prior
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "executive
>>
>> experience". For the first time in recent politics
>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Republicans
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> power in the white house, judicial, house and senate.
>>
>>>>>> How was
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> it
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> for
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> It's one thing to drive a tractor trailer up our
>>
>>>>>> butts, but
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> when
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> they
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> start
>>
>> blowing on the horn while there're doing it, it's
>>
>>>>>> really gone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> too
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> far.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> A big thank you for the memories: the debt, the dead,
>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> twisting
>>
>> intelligence to "sell" us a war on a country that
>> did
>>
>>>>>> not
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> attack
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> us,
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> good ol boy ineffectual cronyism, and finally the
>>
>>>>>> shredding of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>> constitution. With Palin we now we get to have
>>
>>>>>> another
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> religious
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> kook
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> satisfy the so-called conservative extremist
>>
>>>>>> religious right
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>> 'bridge'
>>
>> them into this administration and get money.
>>
>> Spending 5-10 billion dollars a month on Iraq and
>>
>>>>>> kissing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> chinese
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> ass
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> (borrowing the money) of the most Marxist suppressive
>>
>> government
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> on
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> planet at this time is a conservative value?
>>
>> Finally, the biggest hypocrisy of all . That these
>>
>>>>>> extremists
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> actually
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> think
>>
>> that they and the republicans are the vanguards of
>>
>> conservatism?
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> The
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> top key pillars of conservatism are less government
>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> government
>>
>> intrusion
>>
>> and fiscal responsibility. The only administration
>>
>>>>>> that walked
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> that
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> 50 years was a Democrat that left Bush a 500 billion
>>
>>>>>> dollar
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> surplus.
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> blew
>>
>> threw that in one year and it was prior to 9-11. And
>>
>>>>>> there is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> no
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> greater
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> government intrusion that being told what you can or
>>
>>>>>> cannot do
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> with or
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> into your body. Palin wants privacy for her family
>>
>>>>>> decisions,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> but
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> she
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> wants
>>
>> to legislate publicly what you should do with yours.
>>
>>>>>> No
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> thanks.
>>
>> Ben Cittadino-2 wrote:
>>
>> My Dear Culture Warriors;
>>
>> So....are we having fun yet?
>>
>> First, I'd like to thank Richard and Slim for
>>
>>>>>> stepping up to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> join
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "Assault on the Citadel".
>>
>> The bullets don't sting as much when the adversary's
>>
>>>>>> fire is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> spread
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> among more than one target.
>>
>> In the words first uttered by Gen. "Vinegar Joe"
>>
>>>>>> Stillwell,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> "illegitimi
>>
>> non carborundum".
>>
>> As for Tootle, Brad, and Herb, you guys crack me up.
>>
>>>>>> I posted
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> about
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Obama
>>
>> only because I saw Tootle's post that
>>
>> suggested anybody supporting Obama was either a
>>
>>>>>> marxist, or a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> farm
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> animal.
>>
>> What did he expect when he said that?
>>
>> Herb, where was your outrage that Tootle would refer
>>
>>>>>> to some
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> of
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> his
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> fellow
>>
>> "Rhodies" in such derogatry terms? Supporting
>> Obama
>>
>>>>>> or McCain
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> may turn out to be right or wrong, but if we debate
>>
>>>>>> policy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> don't
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> engage in mere name-calling this "sailor's
>> bar"
>>
>>>>>> could be an
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interesting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> place.
>>
>> Richard's "geezer" remarks are defensible on
>> several
>>
>>>>>> grounds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> First,
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> was provoked. Second, he was defending ME.
>>
>> Third, it was funny. Calling someone a "marxist"
>> as
>>
>>>>>> Tootle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> did is
>>
>> several
>>
>> magnitudes worse than gentle kidding of the
>>
>> "old fart" kind. Surely you see the difference.
>>
>> The positions I tried to lay out as reasons some
>>
>>>>>> people
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> support
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Obama
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> were
>>
>> intended as an outline of ideology (as Slim noted),
>>
>> not an argument supporting any position. For
>>
>>>>>> example, Herb,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> you
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> are
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> pro-life and will probably vote for McCain/Palin in
>>
>>>>>> part for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> that
>>
>> reason.
>>
>> I am pro-choice, pro-embryonic stem cell research
>>
>>>>>> and so I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> will
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> Obama/Biden in part for that reason. It is not
>>
>>>>>> hyperbole to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> point
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> the policy differences that explain my choice. What
>>
>>>>>> I know
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> for
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> sure
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> that marxism and "sheepiness" have nothing to do
>>
>>>>>> with it. I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> have
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> about all of my positions on the issues I mentioned
>>
>>>>>> and am
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> completely
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> prepared to explain and justify them. In Brad's oft'
>>
>>>>>> repeated
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> mantra
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> know I have "done my homework".
>>
>> Enough for today. The games will be on soon.
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Ben C. , s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>
>>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> go
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>
>>>>>> mailing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> list go
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>
>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>
>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>
>>>>>> mailing list go
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> --
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>
>>>>>> mailing list go
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>
>>>>>> list go
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>
>>>>>> list go
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> To
>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>
>>>>>> list go to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> To
>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>
>>>>>> list go to
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>> To
>>>>>>
>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>
>>>>>> list go to
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe
>>>>>>
>> or for help with using the mailing list
>>
>>>>>> go to
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or
>>>>>>
>> for help with using the mailing list
>>
>>>>>> go to
>>>>>> >>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for
>>>>>>
>> help with using the mailing list
>>
>>>>>> >> go to
>>>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> > To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help
>>>>>>
>> with using the mailing list
>>
>>>>>> > go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with
>>>>>>
>> using the mailing list go
>>
>>>>>> to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>>>>> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>>>>> Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with
>>>>>>
>> using the mailing list go to
>>
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with
>>>>>
>> using the mailing list go to
>>
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using
>>>>
>> the mailing list go to
>>
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>
>> mailing list go to
>>
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>> list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Praise-Jesus%2C-the-%22evolutionists%22-are-going-to-save-us-from-the-Republicans-tp19382633p19414836.html
>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>> list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list