Robertson suggests God smote Sharon
 

(I wasnt sure if this was the right forum for this, since I dont hang out here much)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/05/rob...ron/index.html


Ok, now this just pisses the hell out of me.....its people like this that keep me from believing organized religion is a good thing. I believe in god, thats no secret but this man just continues to say crap like this, and he honestly believes it!!!

I think pat robertson tries to offend as many people as possible. I'm a devote christian and every time he talks he offends me. One of these days he will have a stroke or a heart attack and then we can all say "God is punishing him for being a jackass and somehow thinking he spoke for God"....

People like roberston scare me.....he emboides everything I find wrong with the world of religion today....I know Im not supposed to judge but good grief he needs a chill pill IMO

I agree with both of you. This is the sort of thing that really turns off non-Christians (and other Christians, obviously) and gives Christianity a bad name. The thing that is really scary is how many people follow him and believe what he has to say.

Robertson is pretty much a nutter
what get's me is that he says
"that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine retribution
for the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza"
I would belive god smote him because
he is a mass murdering war criminal.
On trial
List of crimes
But not for attempting peace in the region
Robertson is far beyond waiting for revelations to unfold....
He is actively pushing events to force end time prophecy.

*Sigh*

Who will we have when Robertson finally goes off the air?

The anti-christ......and he will have 43 more followers :lol:
seriously....there are hundreds just like him
waiting in the wings.
His son is rising in the ranks too
/scary

Oh.

Is he still around?

And does any idiotic thing that spews forth from his mouth still make news?

Thank you, Labelle. :)

"And does any idiotic thing that spews forth from his mouth still make news?"

Of course it will. Because it's perfect ammunition for the liberal media to demonize the republican party and christianity. I don't identify with those thoughts any more than the rest of you, but I read that article much differently then the rest of you.

It try's to equate an extreme religious view (albeit harmless), as having significant influence in the republican party. An influence that amount to "a political agenda for the entire world." I've seen Robertson many times, and he has more to say, much of which I have agreed with, than the quotes in this article, In fact, I can't say I've ever heard him say anything this far out any time i've watched him.

This crazy ass quotes are "nothing new to the Christian communty." Seriously, what are you people scared of. Do you really believe the implications of these quotes are as far reaching as the article would suggest. Let me put it another way, do you really believe the influence of these quotes are as far reaching in the christian community (or as devastating), as say a speach by a Muslim radical in that community - which the left spends time justifying - or at the very least doesn't "frighten" you.

You wonder why this makes the news, left by itself I bet this thread would go to 5 pages with the liberals on this board expressing their "moral disgust" at the quote, christianity, and conservatives. That should sort of answer your question.

He gets airtime and press coverage. He spews partisan bile and hatred then props it up by calling it God's word. And he's very possibly mentally ill.

Matthew330: I'm struggling to see what your point is. Do you agree with him? Are you saying nobody listens to what he has to say? Are you saying there ought to be no 'moral disgust' at what he says?

Say what you will about Sharon, Robertson's sense of occasion and timing sure do suck.

Matthew330: Perhaps you missed watching, but certainly must have heard of his call to assassinate Chavez? Or perhaps his condemnation of a PA town, who should no longer look for God in times of need.

He does this while raping other countries of their mineral and oil assets. Now, *there's* a righteous man. :rolleyes:

Um. What?

Until you, no one has mentioned republicans in this thread. Or the left or the right. Or liberals.

Are you saying the liberals created this story to make republicans look bad? Or are you saying that its liberals fault that Robertson says dumb shit like this?

I believe he's saying that the story is written to make it appear as though Robertson's words have more weight then they really do in order to discredit Republicans/Christians/the right in general.

Now, that is only my impression from his post, since I didn't read the article as nothing Pat Robertson says has any relevence in my Republican, Christian life.

Robertson is a total nutcase. What's sad is he has a nice amount of followers, and other televangelists don't seem to refute him but rather embrace him. I think some of thise is because of fear that the last person who spoke against him (Jim Baker) ended up destroyed.

I had the displeasure of meeting the man once. My aunt worked for his animation department in the late 80's and early 90's, and when I was stationed in Norfolk I met up with her and she gave me a tour of the CBN facility in VA. Beach. That's how I met the old Pat.

He's very charismatic and his eyes and smile are almost hypnotic..... not warm or comforting but cold and seeing right through you, almost like looking for your weakness. And that was just my impression seeing him in passing, I can't imagine what the effect would be being around him on a regular basis.

I truly believe at one time he did mean well and probably had a great message to send, but the power and greed took over. I have a feeling there's a few skeletons in that man's closet and the hypocrasy in his life has made him totally crazy.

If this had been any other preacher saying this about Sharon, or Chavez or NO or all the other idiocies he has said, that preacher would be without a following or considered a freak with a cult following like Koresh. Unfortunately, he built up a following that as he grew bitter and evil grew bitter and evil with him.

Perhaps, someday before "God calls him home" (to quote another televangelist) old Pat will repent and try to make amends to society and those he has hurt.

For a follower of Jesus' teachings, the man doesn't turn the other cheek but rather finds his enemies' weaknesses and goes hellfire after them, kicking them when they are down. Some day hopefully his followers will wake up and see he teaches the opposite of what Jesus stood and stands for.

I don't think it is fair to associate Christians and Republicans. One does not imply the other in any way. I'm sure most people on this board will call me liberal and i'm a devout Christian.

The only relevence he has to the GOP is that the leaders of the party use him to get elected and to promote their agendas.

Perhaps his insanity is related to the inner turmoil of trying to pass Jesus' teachings and being in politics. It has definately taken away from the true focus he states he has and that is on Jesus' teachings.

There are far more positive and better things to focus on in the Bible than the Book of Revelations.... Pat. Such as the Book of Matthew Chapter 7 and the story of the 2 houses and of false teachers.

seriously...robertson, falwell and the like scare me more than any islamofascist terrorists...ever..ever..have.

There are a few that aren't politically driven (or try to keep politics out of their sermons) like Swaggert, Angely (right here in Akron), the Hour of Power guy, and Billy Graham.

Falwell pretty much really started it in the 70's with "the Moral Majority" and his boycotts of whatever HE (Falwell) deemed wrong. I remember this being the main reason my 2 favorite shows in the 70's (SOAP and WKRP) were cancelled. But, today Falwell isn't that much of a factor anymore, the battle with Flynt really did destroy Falwell.

Robertson just took it a notch higher and once he had eliminated his major competitor, who was more politically silent and taught acceptance of others and actually had a bigger audience, Jim Baker (IMHO a very good televangelist, in what he taught), Robertson was able to truly make waves and not have anyone stop him. And I truly believe Robertson's mission is to make Revelations a reality in his lifetime.

Yes, Robertson is a very scary individual in what he says and what he teaches. The scariest part is that the GOP sells out to the man for his votes. You have a President now that actually uses him as an advisor.

Politics makes strange bedfellows, who would have ever believed in the 70's that Rev. Moon and Robertson would not only support the same president but that president would use both as advisors? Or that both would be very powerful "news sources" to their followers?

If Baker hadn't fucked up and had he continues to keep swaying people away from Robertson, things may be totally different today in the realm of politics and religion.

I would just like to say....I did not post this to start blasting parties, most of you know I dont hang out much in the politics thread and those of you who post here all the time scare the hell out of me (hehehe in a good way though)

My reason for the post was to, as a christian, talk about my disgust for the ideals that come out of this man and the gaul that he has to be God's PR man.

Isnt it possible to just take what he has said and not apply it to party lines?

oh wait...thats a dumb question isnt it :lol:

matthew330 said
well Im sorry matthew, Im not a liberal, Im a republican and Im here to express my moral disgust over Pat Robertson....NOT any particular party

What are we scared of? The fact that this idiot *is* a mouth piece and is listened to by many, many people who take him seriously... including yourself it seems.

It is important to expose this charlatan for what he is... a ripe wind bag who *does not* represent the sentiments of the average Christian. Robertson has a big audience and the world is listening.

When the conservative media pundits and conservative politicians denounce him, I will be happy.

Yep. I think Pat has done more to repel people from Christianity than he has to bring them closer.

Whats the past tense of smote? has smitten? smoted? So robertson suggests God has smitten sharon? or robertson suggests God smitted sharon? maybe roberson suggests God has smoten sharon. this is very confusing.

that was a good one!

I was just thinking, did Pat think that God smote the Muslims with the tsunami? or the earthquake in Pakistan? or the workers at WTC on 9/11?

Maybe God smote JFK for having too many affairs...

Pat on 9/11: "What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve."


Keep in mind, this is the same man who in 1988 claimed that Bush Sr. was part of a cabal of witches determined to control the world. He then backed Bush Jr. in y2k.

smitten is the term used when one person has a sort of crush on another term - -so maybe god does have a crush on Sharon... :) Aren't Israeli's the chosen people, it'd seem appropriate that god did have a crush on one of them... :)

(goes back to work and waits for the fires of hell to come get her)

I think the term is Smited :)

It seems more to me that Matthew is saying that people will use this as a means to smear all Christians as Pat Roberston style Christians, and he seems to be annoyed with this.

I would count Instapundit as a media pundit:
PAT ROBERTSON OFFERS US ANOTHER REMINDER of why he was one of the original models for the term "idiotarian:"

Also, I've found The Corner to generally be a conservative group of pundits:
WHEN WILL PAT ROBERTSON FINALLY JUST SHUT HIS STUPID MOUTH?

Obviously these two posters don't hold near as much weight as say, a politician, but they tend to be on radio and t.v. news shows occasionally, so they have an audience.

I would agree with that statement. And if not "repel" people...certainly give them cause to take a step back and go...whoa.

I have seen Pat Robertson called a "nutter", a "nutcase", a "jackass", an "idiot", a "wind bag", and compared to islamofascist terrorists. And that's just in this thread. Ok...so, I'm inclined to agree. However...the man is also very charismatic. He has an agenda, and he has followers that he tends to manipulate, exploit and control. So also has every "cult" leader that has lead their flocks over the edge of the cliff. Jim Jones, David Koresch, Charles Manson, Marshall Applewhite, and even to some degree, L. Ron Hubbard and Fred Phelps. So, I think perhaps we shouldn't be so casual as to dismiss him as just another "nutcase". For a nutcase he may be...but I happen to believe that he's also a very dangerous nutcase.

I get what he is on about and think, as usual, he is overreacting and missing the point that the only one smearing Christians in this case is Pat Robertson.

I agree with you, then, I just feel that his over reaction is a means to distancing himself from Robertson's statements.

But I'm with most people in the camp that Robertson should have tape firmly placed over his mouth and not take him out of the quiet time until he is old enough to make intelligent political commentary.

i dont think anyone in their right mind would confuse the raving of this tedious fundamentalist protestant tele-evangelist fuckwit with all of christianity.
you would have to have an understanding of christianity that is a crude and one-dimensional as, say, the american right's "understanding" of islam to reach such a ridiculous conclusion.
or you would have to actually believe the claim that floats from the right from time to time that it and it alone represents christianity by representing its extreme protestant reactionary fringe.
this in the face of all evidence and reason but it sometimes appears that contemporary conservative politics is not encumbered with a terribly tight relation to evidence and reason (they believe that hayek was describing something that acutally existed for example)

on the other hand, the extreme protestant right was and remains a significant element in the far right coalition fashioned by the republicans across the 1990s (all of which is a kind of colossal unintended consequence of the clinton/morris "triangulation" strategy)....so it seems to me that this kind of statement being associated with that coalition is not unreasonable...in fact, you would think that folk from the right woudl try to own up to iteven as it is embarrassing rather than whining about some fantasy left media conspiracy. robertson is your boy, conservatives---you use him and his influence when it is convenient and then try to distance yourselves when he says something embarrassing.

if this kind of statement is in fact an embarrassment and if it runs counter to the reality of the conservative coalition out there, then what one would expect to see is a distancing from the religious right on the part of the republican party.
have you seen any evidence of this?
i havent.

so it follows that embarrassment generated by people like pat robertson is a function of the way the right has constructed its social power.
so there seems to be no basis for distancing.
which explains bizare reactions like those posted earlier by matthew330---no other choice for the far right on this matter.

The reason the Republicans won't distance themselves from Robertson is because he gets them votes. If they distance themselves, they risk losing votes. The same as how Democrats don't distance themselves from their nutcases (the dems nominate their nuts to head the DNC).

And it's humourous that you would say it's ridiculous to associate Robertson's views with all of Christianity, but have no problem associating those views with all Rebublicans/conservatives. It seems you must see conservatives everywhere, flying in black helicopters, shadowing people down dark alleys, sending thought-stealing rays at peoples' heads, etc. Not everything is some grand, conservative scheme for world-domination, nor are liberals somehow exempt from doing wrong.

And more on point, I used to think that Robertson had at least some redeeming values, but stuff like this makes it really hard to logically keep to that belief.

perhaps you shoudl reread the post--i didn't say what you react to--i simply pointed out that the robertson squad is part of the right coalition.
this is not the same as associating him with all conservatives.
in fact, i would assume that many conservative are embarrassed by robertson (see above, your post included)--but this changes nothing about the fact that the right--which is now an extreme right coalition--courted the fundamentalist protestant fringe and relies on that fringe to get out votes---as you say.

you cant have it both ways--either robertson is of this grouping or he is not--you yourself concede that he is----so far as i am concerned, then, conservative attempts to distance themselves are laughable---the right has made its own bed and so should lie in it, whether individual conservatives like it or not. look at it as an exrcize in assuming responsibility. the right likes to talk about responsibility when it applies to other people. you rarely see them exercizing it themselves.

But it is perfectly OK in some circles for people to characterize all Muslims based on the ravings or actions of bin Laden or the Ayatollah.

Yeah, but those circles are pretty much confined to Robertson and his devotees.

really? I bed to differ and submit the bias crimes that anre and were committed against Muslims here in America aren't Robertson watchers or devotees. They are normal people who follow the impressions they get from the media.

Robertson is a bad man. I catagorize him similarly to those preachers who said Katrina hit LA because of hedonism. They would mislead the flock of God because of their own petty ignorances and bigotries. Even more sham on anyone who would allow themselves to agree with Robertson. He is wrong, and he is a bad Christian.

This isn't the old testment, Pat. And you're an idiot.

I've said this in the other Robertson threads, but most people don't know that Robertson was a former Presidential candidate and that he did pretty well before self-destructing. He also has regular meetings with President Bush. If he's an extremist, than so are the Republicans.

Now that's just the kind of hyperbole we don't need.

Yes he ran for office and yes he's an extremist... but to then turn and paint *all* Republicans with the same brush serves no purpose other than to make you look bad and by the same sort of extension all others who would criticize the Republicans.

One could also look at it this way....

If you want to destroy religion's power in the political arena what better spokesperson to have?

Eventually, he keeps talking and the Right distances themselves realizing he costs them more votes than he gives them..... and religion would no longer truly have a voice in American politics for a long time.

But that wouldn't make sense to anyone but me and my conspiracy mind would it?

We have a difference of opinion there. I don't believe anybody who has committed hate crime against Muslims are "normal". I think they are likely to be along the same intellectual ilk as Robertson.

Having come from a rural southern area where the population was openly encouraging of the local mosque and its members, I have to think it takes a special kind of ignorant person to attack Muslims based on bin Laden's activities.

I'm pretty sure smote is the past tense of smite. Back to your discussion...

and?

:) j/k

The thing that bugs me most about robertson is that most sane people see him as a nutjob, but millions and millions hear him, AND believe him and what he says and not only that, but HE believes what he says. That scares me

Say what?
He's an extremist and he has been embraced by a large segment of the Republican party and by the Republican President of the United States. So it seems to me that the Republicans are painting themselves with that same brush. I'm not doing anything but pointing it out.

Not only does he believe it he sells it as legitimate news.

Maybe Smitted on his bad self? :)

He's a dangerous man. He spews ancient poison and those of weaker minds and spirit are his target. Those with greater ambition use him for whatever acclaim. TV+Ancient Poison=Perpetual Chaos.

This wouldn't be news if Republicans didn't get their marching orders from wackjobs like Robertson and Limbaugh. Here he is telling us Ariel Sharon (of all people) has fallen out of favor with god because of his peace agreements with Palestine. It will be a good day when Robertson falls ill, not a terrible thing at all.

Sharon is kind of interesting in that he was elected as an extremist, but became more moderate as time went on. Robertson is trying to make sure sure the next leader of Israel is a purebred ideologue without these tendancies toward peace.

It's sad that Robertson's able to represent himself as Christian.

I agree. His insane ramblings may seem humorous. But this guy is deadly dangerous.

Consider if we had a young Osama Bin Laden living in this country preaching to millions of Muslims about the same things he was preaching before 9/11.
He had not yet directly planned or caused any acts of terrorism, but was fanning the flames of fundamentalism much the way Robertson is now.
How harmless and kooky would he seem to everyone here?

I do see a difference between Osama and Robertson. But it is a matter of power.

Osama WANTS power. He doesn't have it, so he creates violence to fill that void as a way of spreading his word and influence.
Robertson has PLENTY of it. He has had private meetings with several Presidents, has multimillion dollar deals with foreign heads of state, started enough organizations that have net assets of well over 100 million dollars and is part of a culture that is the undisputed cultural ruler of the world.
Robertson doesn't need to create violence. He is much closer to his version of victory than Osama.

Switch their positions Osama is a highly influential cleric in a theocratic national government of the United States of Arabia. He can support his nations war to oust the dictator of the Nation of Texas (what some of the more liberal Arabians are calling an oil war ;)), but Osama doesn't have to actually lead any terrorists himself.

Cleric Robertson and Falwell, on the other hand, lead a small band of fundamentalist christians in the hills of Colombia. The culture of the US of Arabian permeates the world, Arabs control Israel, and have bases in many North American nation states.

One day, 12 Christians from Topeka fly planes into Mecca and Medina. Later the 700 Club takes responsibility.

I can DEFINETLEY see these men switching positions like this in a different world. One where Robertson doesn't have such access, prestige, freedom to push his poison.


This guy has MILLIONS of followers and financial backers. He started or helped start American Center for Law and Justice, Christian Broadcasting Network, the Christian Coalition, the Flying Hospital, International Family Entertainment, Operation Blessing International Relief and Development Corporation, and Regent University, and The 700 Club. The 700 club, by the way is shown twice a day on Disney owned ABC Family. The channel is contractually required to.

This 'christian' invested millions in a Liberian gold mine, and did his damn-ness to help the brutal dictator of that country from an ouster.

He's called for the wholesale assassination of the State Department Hugo Chavez , Strongly 'prayed' that something would happen to each SC Justice that was on the more leftward side, Revels in Sharon's ailment.
Anyone who follows him is either deluded or insane. But it only takes one sick individual that takes his prayers, wishes, ideas to heart, to cause a disaster. He is feeding some dangerous flames.

The trail of tears, slavery in america, the Holocaust, say Hi Pat!

This isn't the comedy goldmine of 'Pastor Gas'. This fucker is just evil.

Ironman posted this in the General Forum, so I promptly stole it. I find it odd that the White House would strike out on the Sharon comment, but merely gave a shrug to the call to assassinate Chavez. Must be the difference between friend and foe.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4589270.stm

then whats the past participle?

Wow - didn't realize that you were serious. Sorry 'bout that. Turns out your jest was partially correct... From the dictionary:
So, smitten is perfectly correct. Personally, I find smiter to be the most entertaining word there - it just sounds silly. That said, the alternate meaning of smitten:
explains why you see smote more often than smitten - less chance for confusion (not that the two are easily confused). I think people just instinctively shy away from using smitten in the smiting way.
Now that we've cleared that up, we can go back to disussing Pat Robertson.

I find this so ironically hilarious and extremely satisfying.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...980422,00.html

Robertson tries to save Jesusland after Sharon gibe

Pat Robertson, the American televangelist, today appeared to withdraw a diatribe against Ariel Sharon in an attempt to salvage his $50 million plan for a biblical theme park in Galilee.

Ministers in Jerusalem were furious after the millionaire preacher suggested that the Israeli Prime Minister suffered a stroke in divine retribution for carving up the Holy Land in withdrawing from Gaza.



The future of the project, nicknamed Jesusland and criticised by some for commercialism in an area of undeveloped rolling hills, is now hanging in the balance.

Mr Robertson released a statement saying that he was merely pointing out the Old Testament perspective on the division of Israel.

Avi Hartuv, a spokesman for Israel’s tourism minister, said: "We can’t accept this kind of statement. We will not do business with him."

Mr Robertson is leading a consortium of evangelicals who have pledged to raise $50 million (£28 million) to build the Christian Heritage Centre in northern Galilee.

The religious group was to put up the funding, while Israel would lease the land at no cost. The attraction was expected to draw one million pilgrims annually and bring in $1.5 million (£850 million).

The theme park was to be built in 35 acres around key Christian sites such as the Mount of the Beatitudes where Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, and Capernaum which was described as the town of Jesus in the Bible.

There were plans for food outlets at Tabgha on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, the scene of the feeding of the 5,000.

However, the potentially lucrative agreement has been thrown into doubt following comments made by Mr Robertson on his 700 Club programme a day after Mr Sharon suffered a severe stroke.

"God considers this land to be his," Robertson said. "You read the Bible and he says ’This is my land,’ and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, ’No, this is mine."’

Mr Hartuv left the door open to continuing the project but only with evangelists who disown Mr Robertson’s statements.

"The contract is still open - just not with Mr Robertson. If there are other Christian leaders, they are most welcome to sign a contract to bring Christian tourists to the State of Israel.

"We want to see who in the group supports his (Robertson’s) statements. Those who support the statements cannot do business with us. Those that publicly support Ariel Sharon’s recovery are welcome to do business with us. We have to check this very, very carefully."

"The attraction was expected to draw one million pilgrims annually and bring in $1.5 million (£850 million)."

Well, it is known that a man cannot serve God and Mammon, for he will love one master and loathe the other.

This might be a clue to who's calling the shots for Pat.

I think that's a typo,
1 million pilgrims bringing in only abuot $1.50 each...

i think that's supposed to be 1.5 Billion dollars, esp since it's 850 pounds.

"Jesusland" to attract Christian tourists? I can't tell you how wrong that sounds to me.

it's the vacation destination of right wing zealots everywhere..

bc everyone wants to vacation in a conflicted area in the middle east..

Well new news on this

Now they are hitting Robertson where he hurts.

How long before Robertson call's for an invasion of Israel or the assination of its leaders? He did the same to Venezuela, why not Israel?

jesusland?
i like to think of this park as being designed so that, if seen from above, the rides and links between them trace a picture of jesus's head (you know, the white boy with long hair and a beard like mine)...that way i can think of the funhouse as a journey into the inner jesusear and the rollercoaster as a voyage through the jesus-sinuses and a tilt-a-whirl as being a jesus-eye and the hall of mirrors as a jesus retina-----the waterslide as a jesus-salivary gland.

it'd be great.

it'd become a kind of pilgramage site for the halluciongenic set---and what could be better than being midway through a trip, stopping for a second atop the center hill on the sinus-coaster and looking toward the enormous food court that, following the mapping of jesus's head onto the layout of the park, would have to be jesus's brain?

nothing.
nothing could be better than that.
i would go in a minute.



i was imagining the music that would be played there for a moment and now need to go do something else because....well.....try it yourself and you'll understand.....

instead of, "It's a small world after all", you could go on a ride with little children singing, "Jesus loves me yes he does"
seriously, though...could you imagine the big bulls eye that would be on this place to extremists...

roachboy, I think that is the funniest thing I have ever seen on TFP.

How about "Onward Christian Soldiers" on a water ride through the colon?

Yes, and apparently, at least half of the country still takes his word as the gospel.

That's scary.

Wow, well you punish the guy and he does a 180. So much for his religeous belief.
I am sure that there are other articles, but this was the first I found on it, and I got to leave for work. But either way, it just shows how a little smacking around works. But just because someone says I am sorry, that does not remove the initial reaction. So I hope they forgive him, and leave the punishment in. I guesss the forgiveness would be for his immortal soul! :lol:

Got to love Robertson even his appology he goes and blames everyone else but himself.

Boohooo Pat you say something beyond contempt and the press picks it up, but you expected instead that they showed how much "love" you had for the man.

Boohooo Pat you say something very vile and foul, but then blame the Prophet Joel, because you would never believe that, but you felt this urge to say vile things and use Joel as an excuse instead of send heartfelt warmth and good wishes out.

Gee, Pat who put the words in your mouth? Who made you say those vile things Pat? Aren't you a grown man and supposedly this great wise sage, who is supposed to pass on Jesus' teachings of love, peace and salvation....... not spew hatred, self righteousness and pretend to know what God's motives are?

Fuckin hypocritical, spoiled little man, who is run by power and greed. You're a perfectly great example for what Christ taught against people being.

I assume that's the same liberal media that kept Bush's spying program a secret from the public?

The New York Times knew about the domestic spying program in 2004. Why didn't they tell anyone for a year then? If they were truly liberal, they would have reported it.

I have never seen any reports on the news of how the thousands of "troops" we have trained in Iraq are all in militias, fighting for their own tribes and not for their country.

A story of how the Sunnis are calling for another election in Iraq appeared on the FIFTH page of my newspaper. Don't you think a CIVIL WAR in Iraq would be big ammo for the "liberal media"?

All the media does now is "he said, she said" reporting. They'll say on CNN that the president says there are 60,000 troops. They never say something like "we checked and saw that they were in the militia."

What about the secret Energy Task Force agreements? That stayed on long. I saw one story on it!


I see absolutely no liberal media. I see people like Rush Limbaugh saying that the media is liberal, and then spreading his own lies. The media is not liberal, but it tends to be against those in power. That is the nature of the business!

I see no reference to the Republican party in the article. It says the President supports Sharon! How can you possibly think this story is demonizing the Republican party!