Useful reading for RSA Republicans

"Conservatives' core duty on WMD"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p09s01-coop.html

lal_truckee wrote:
Dave Stallard wrote:
"Conservatives' core duty on WMD"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p09s01-coop.html

Well, you just can't trust those Christians - nothing is sacred to them.
They'll question anything, and always demand hard evidence, eschewing
mere faith in the goodlyness of their leaders. What's up with that?

The Christian Science Monitor has always been something of an anomaly -
while it's run by a church that has some pretty wacky doctrines, it's
always been a pretty solid source of news. The management is secular,
and there's a pretty big firewall between their editors and the church
leaders. (If only there was that much separation between the editors
and corporate bean counters at NBC, News Corp., Viacom, AOLTimeWarner,
et. al. - they seem to devote a large amount of energy brownosing
Michael Powell at the FCC to get him to allow unlimited media mergers,
but I digress...)

Anyway, The Monitor always seemed to play it straight down the middle,
even if their (ob)skiing coverage is somewhat weak. A decade or so ago
they had a daily radio program called Monitor Radio that was equally
high quality and which they stopped producing due to a budget crunch.

Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute makes some pretty good points in the
piece, but I'll leave it to fellow conservatives (fellow to him, not me)
to comment.


For further reading, I'd suggest this little editorial from The Army
Times:

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f...59-1989240.php

--
//-Walt
//
// "...the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
// That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
// attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
// exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
// - Herman Goering

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 14:37:55 -0400, Dave Stallard
wrote:

"Conservatives' core duty on WMD"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p09s01-coop.html


In the spirit of the times, I have to ask, WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING
SADDAM??? HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN 9/11??!!?!? WHY DO YOU SUPPORT THE
TERRORISTS????? DON'T YOU LOVE FREEDOM?????

Just curious,
bw
(oh, and what about the children, won't somebody think of the
children?

Walt wrote:

The Christian Science Monitor has always been something of an anomaly -

Yep. I actually had a subscription, once upon a time ...

ObSki: Their ski coverage was lousy way back then; same as now.

lal_truckee wrote in news:behnul$5asal$1@ID-
90251.news.dfncis.de:

Dave Stallard wrote:
"Conservatives' core duty on WMD"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p09s01-coop.html

Well, you just can't trust those Christians - nothing is sacred to them.
They'll question anything, and always demand hard evidence, eschewing
mere faith in the goodlyness of their leaders. What's up with that?



Don't confuse Christians with Christian Scientists. Two completely
different animals.

"Chuck" wrote in message
...
lal_truckee wrote in news:behnul$5asal$1@ID-
90251.news.dfncis.de:

Dave Stallard wrote:
"Conservatives' core duty on WMD"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p09s01-coop.html

Well, you just can't trust those Christians - nothing is sacred to
them.
They'll question anything, and always demand hard evidence,
eschewing
mere faith in the goodlyness of their leaders. What's up with that?



Don't confuse Christians with Christian Scientists. Two completely
different animals.

You mean like a dog and a dingo? Or crocodile and alligator?

Isn't the main difference that the xtian scientists started making up
their **** even after there were proven, more reasonable, explanations
for things. The xtians just stuck with the old stuff *after* learning
that they had been wrong.
Not to say that some of the guiding principals aren't valid, just the
hocus pocus that they used to convince the masses in a less
sophisticated time.

cone of fireretardant lowered

"pigo" wrote in
news

"Chuck" wrote in message
...
lal_truckee wrote in news:behnul$5asal$1@ID-
90251.news.dfncis.de:

Dave Stallard wrote:
"Conservatives' core duty on WMD"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p09s01-coop.html

Well, you just can't trust those Christians - nothing is sacred to
them.
They'll question anything, and always demand hard evidence,
eschewing
mere faith in the goodlyness of their leaders. What's up with that?



Don't confuse Christians with Christian Scientists. Two completely
different animals.

You mean like a dog and a dingo? Or crocodile and alligator?

Isn't the main difference that the xtian scientists started making up
their **** even after there were proven, more reasonable, explanations
for things. The xtians just stuck with the old stuff *after* learning
that they had been wrong.
Not to say that some of the guiding principals aren't valid, just the
hocus pocus that they used to convince the masses in a less
sophisticated time.

cone of fireretardant lowered

Christians follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. In particular that He
said He is the only way to heaven (John 14:6)

Christian Scientists folllow the teachings of Mary Baker Eddie, and L.
Ron Hubbard (Dianetics). They're the ones that believe you can heal
yourself through mediation and stuff. Christians OTOH would pray first
and then go to a doctor.

"Chuck" wrote in message
...

Christians follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. In particular that He
said He is the only way to heaven (John 14:6)

Christian Scientists folllow the teachings of Mary Baker Eddie, and L.
Ron Hubbard (Dianetics). They're the ones that believe you can heal
yourself through mediation and stuff. Christians OTOH would pray first
and then go to a doctor.

How is that different from what I said? Both are made up bull****.

In news:Chuck typed:

Nope. Not a snowboarder. I was under the incorrect notion that L. Ron
Hubbard and his "Church of Scientology" was the new name for Christian
Scientism. As Pigo has already stated, both are made up.

L. Ron Hibbard's Scientology is based on a crappy sci-fi novel and
designed to get as much money from the "believers" as possible and has
nothing to do with a deity or religion.
--
Mike
__________________________________________________ ______
"Colorado Ski Country, USA" Come often, Ski hard,
Spend *lots* of money, Then leave as quickly as you can.

Mike Speegle wrote:
In news:Chuck typed:

Nope. Not a snowboarder. I was under the incorrect notion that L. Ron
Hubbard and his "Church of Scientology" was the new name for Christian
Scientism. As Pigo has already stated, both are made up.

L. Ron Hibbard's Scientology is based on a crappy sci-fi novel and
designed to get as much money from the "believers" as possible and has
nothing to do with a deity or religion.

Yep. A big world of difference between Christian Scientists and
Scientology. Scientologists aren't Christians for one. And neither has
much to do with science.


--
//-Walt
//
// "...the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
// That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
// attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
// exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
// - Herman Goering