Rev. Erudite Redneck, B.S., B.S., M.A., M.Div.

The following three paragraphs in the story quoted and linked:

"The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.

He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that "we had all known weapons facilities secured," has proven itself to be untrue.

"It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump," he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them."

No more saying "there were NO WMD's in Iraq!"
 

Oh yeah? "There were no WMDs in Iraq." Hoot.

Bro. DooDad and lots of others will wear themselves out with this story, but the fact remains: Chemical weapons were not why this country went to war in Iraq.
 

Okay Reverend, give us the "reason" we went to war, oh, pious one!

And by saying "there were no wmd in Iraq", you show your blatant, and wreckless dishonesty.

But we all recognize your blatant, wrecless dishonesty, anyway....so....there's nothing new there.
 

daddio, if you think for one blessed second Bush could point to this story and claim vindication for his illegal invasion and chose not to for whatever reason (is he part of the vast LW conspiracy?!), you're only fooling yourself.
 

It is ONE reason among MANY reasons that we went into Iraq.

And it was a GOOD reason.
 

No. Don't forget reality.

Everyone knows that Saddam has been a bad boy since back in the day when Reagan and Daddy Bush were supporting him. This was no secret. But we weren't going to war against Saddam because he was misbehaving. We weren't going to war because he has broken a few UN rules (hell, we do it all the time!)

Team Bush sold Congress on invading a sovreign nation based upon the fear of a "mushroom cloud" over New York City. "We know exactly where the WMDs are, over there and down to the left a bit," they told us. And, while the majority of the nation didn't really trust Team Bush, they did win Congress over (despite an unprecedented millions of people around the world telling Bush this was a wrong).

No. Don't misstate the facts, Daddio. We invaded a sovreign nation and have been responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians solely because we were sold a mushroom cloud that didn't exist.

You know, at church last night, we were studying the beatitudes, where Jesus says, "Don't worry about tomorrow," and someone pointed out that probably the greatest difference between those on the right and those on the left is not greed, not hatred, not warmongering.

No, the difference is most likely that most fragile of human emotions: fear. The right tend to live in fear ("But...what IF they get a bomb. What IF they want to use it?! They may want to use it on us!!") The leaders on the Right (moreso than the people who vote them in), peddle fear like a child molester peddles candy because it gets them the power they need and because they probably live in fear themselves. The only way they feel comfortable is with a missile and bullet security blanket.

Trust in God (or humanity, for those without a belief in God out there)?! But...but..that's too scary!

yeah, it is scary. But what's the choice? To invade nations preemptively because they MIGHT have a weapon and they MIGHT choose to use it on us?

You'd think having the world's most obscenely large military would comfort the fearful ones, but that's just it: We can't really be safe enough. More bombs. More bullets. Give up human rights. Give up civil liberties. Just give me safety!

Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat (or drink), or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing?... Can any of you by worrying add a single moment to your life-span?

Sorry, I had a sermon wash over me.
 

No, Dan. The main difference between the right and the left is one sees the importance in responsible behaviour, while the other glorifies and promotes irresponsible behaviour.

It is not fear that causes me to support our war on islamofascist terrorism--it is purely responsibility.

George W. Bush is not Reagan or "Daddy Bush. It is dishonest to use the argument you have.

George Bush has changed ou way of dealing with global-thugs. I admire him for that.

But, though I have been accused of being a Bush apologist, it is one of the few things I admire about him.
 

Bro. Doodad, re: "Okay Reverend, ... oh, pious one!"

I don't use these very often around here, but you deserve this:

You are one sorry son of a bitch.

(I think Jesus preferred "brood of vipers," but the sentiment is the same, for the same reason.)

You're bleeped until I decide to let you in again. BUG OFF.
 

Oh, come on, ER! Daddio and I are banjo buddies. Mando Men. Let him in to play, too!

Daddio, don't get me started on responsible behavior! I agree that it is a classic conservative trait, the notion of personal responsibility. Which is one reason why I maintain that I'm more conservative than most who claim the title.

Personal responsibility?

Invading a sovreign nation unprovoked is irresponsible.

Hiring convicted and unrepentant felons for national cabinet posts (Abrams and Poindexter) is irresponsible.

Pushing "free" trade agreements upon weaker nations to profit large corporations is irresponsible.

Weakening Clean Air and Water inititiatives is irresponsible. (And then giving them titles such as "Clear Skies," is just evil!)

Pushing a fossil fuel economy when fossil fuels are non-sustainable is irresponsible.

Letting the oil and gas industries write your energy policy is irresponsible.

Shall I continue? I'm all for personal responsibility, so you may be correct that it is a difference between the Left and the Right, but you've pegged the wrong team as the personal responsibility advocates.

And I noticed that you did not debunk what I said about fearmongering. Just said "it ain't so." And then claimed "responsibility."

You think we have a responsibility to invade sovreign nations? Feel free to try and explain that one sometime (come on, ER, cut him some slack).
 

Lame, Dan--just lame.

I wouldn't have the space to provide all the irresponsible positions of the left.

Some of your accusations are just plainly dishonest.

Others are fair.

But to say that the right is less responsible than the left is pure horse-hockey!
 

What's the difference in "DooDad" and "Reverend", Reverend?

Oh, I see--you have a liscense to be spiteful. After all, you are a liberal and liberals get quite a bit more rope, don't they?

I don't care if you "bleep" me. It showa your absolute inability to be fair. It shows your hypocrisy.

I'll continue to dog you as long as you continue to dog me, pal.

Get used to it. because I don't believe it is in you to really be "civil" in any way whatsoever.

Dishonesty and hypocrisy is your goal and you hit it squarely each time you stroke your keyboard.
 

Only 'cause you asked, Dan!

"Doodad" is a lil payback for you being a jerk about 98 percent of the time. I've asked you repeatedly to stop calling me "reverend," yet you persist. So, get used to it Bro. Doodad.

Dude. Just quit acting like you're 5 years old! I really do not censor ideas here! Ask around. But you're just a low-grade, garden-variety jerk. Stop. It.
 

Dog you? I haven't been to your site in WEEKS. Liar.
 

Bro. D.Dad said I "attacked" his mother. Only if he means by calling him a son of a bitch above. Otherwise, I have no idea what he's talking about.

Oh, and a Mouse got bleeped for attacking me personally behind cover of mouseness and for no reason, as far as I can tell.
 

There are those who swallow a camel and swear it was a nat, and others who gag on the nat and swear it was a camel.
Hezikiah 33:2
 

ER, I agree D.Dad has been snide and rude to you (and me, too).

But I think your arguments were more effective before you started returning his name calling with more name calling. Especially for casual observers who aren't aware of the history between you two.

It's not about you, or D.Dad, it's supposed to be about ideas.

Hey, I don't blame you for it- I've done the same thing. He does deserve it.

But remember the golden rule....
 

"Bro. DooDad" does not rise to the level of "name-calling" in a setting where one is called D.Daddio and the other is called Erudite Redneck in the first place.

Now, son of a bitch, that's a name. First time I've ever called him that, or anything else, as far as I recall. (He keeps saying I called him "demonic." I don't remember tha. I might very well have ascribed something he wrote to the devil.)

I called him a son of a bitch deliberately. It felt good. Hey, one time after all I've put up with from him? Golden rule? If I were being such a total jerk, all the time, I would want somebody to call me on it, and if they had to call me an SOB to rattle my cage some, well, then so be it.
 

Thanks for your magnanimous patience, ER.

"But to say that the right is less responsible than the left is pure horse-hockey!"

I'll freely own up to the fact that the Dems in office are often no better in the responsibility dept than the Reeps. However, feel free to talk about ideals that those passing themselves off as conservatives that are about responsibilty. Feel free to show me where those you disagree with are being irresponsible. Anytime.

I may even agree with you. But I doubt it, somehow.

But on THIS particular post, personal responsibility wasn't the topic and since this is neither my nor your arena, perhaps we'd best save it for elsewhere.

I'd say it DOES fit in the responsiblity category insofar as I'd suggest it is irresponsible to point to this as the "smoking gun" evidence to support Bush's claim of WMD when Bush's own people aren't making that claim and are saying that such a claim is mistaken.

These "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war." said the official Administration spokesperson.

These are not the weapons you are looking for. These are not the WMD's for which we went to war. So say Bush's people.

Would it be irresponsible to create support for something so questionable as a possible war crime when Bush isn't? Isn't it irresponsible for Santorum to do so?
 

Oh, and while I did call him a "liar, I meant it as in "he lied" when he said I'd ben "doggin" him. Unless he runs ELashley's blog and one or two others. Which he does not.
 

Hezikiah! Hoot!
 

ER, It was the "Doodad" thing that prompted me to write.

Seriously, your strength is your friendly, philosophical tone. Let D.Dad beat his head against the screen and call names and become unhinged. It's how he always loses.

Yeah, you've been way more patient and civil than D.Dad. But that's what we've come to expect from you. It's how you win.

If you become like the terrorists, the terrorists have won.
 

Sigh.

My blood pressure's back down now. And I made decent progress on work today, tho it ain't done, despite having to be home this afternoon for a repairman.

Yer right, of course. Although I don't think there are any winners where D.Daddio's anger and judgmentalism are involved.

I stand corrected, nonetheless. :-)
 

Pots.

Kettles.

This used to be a fun place to visit, and discuss Ideas with respectful people who may or may not agree with your point of view, but were nonetheless receptive to your opinion.

Now it is simply a place to watch Conservatives and Christians get beat up for the crime of showing up.

ER, have you noticed that I have stopped reading your Blog, for the most part?

How long has it been since you have had a comment from Mark?

Xena?

Daffy?

Timothy?

These people had all labeled you a Jerk long before D.Daddio ever showed up.

The deeper you become entangled in that So-Called Church that you have decided to Worship (because it validates your Liberalism) the more hateful, confrontational, insulting, and blasphemous your Blog becomes.

Everything you write is motivated by hatred against one group or another.

D.Daddio still has not lost patience with you and turned you over to a reprobate mind. You should be thanking him for still being concerned enough for the condition of your Mortal Soul to keep challenging you.

I still pray for you, but I'm afraid that my prayers when it comes to you are useless.

We all ultimately have Free Will, and you are absolutely free to pursue the wrong path, if that is your choice. Unless you choose to see the flaw in the Theology that you have embraced, even God Himself will not turn you from it.

I wish you well, but I am removing you from my Blogrole, and I am not planning to return here.

I love you as a brother, and I pray that you turn away from the path of Heresy and promotion of self destructive behavior in the name of Jesus before it is too late.
 

Tug, then you are nuts, and I likewise release you.

Historically, when a Christian says to someone, "I love you like a brother," it means blood is fixing to be shed.

D.Daddio has done nothing but confirm the decisions I've been making to separate myself from the fundamentlism of my upbringing.

When D.Daddio around, "(I am) afflicted in every way but not crushed, troubled but not despairing, persecuted but not forsaken; cast down but not destroyed, always carrying the death of Christ in (my body)."

That's from II Peter 4:8-10 -- and yes, I dare quote that piece of Scripture in this particular circumstance. I have never, EVER been talked to by a fellow Christian the way D.Daddio has talked to me. Not ever.

Your own influence, Tug, has been nil. No harm, no foul.

As for the rest of the fundie ilk you named, they all seem more comfortable in groups of others like themselves, so I don't blame them for staying away. It gets pretty hot in here when people get to thinking, and cussing and discussing.

Unblogroll me. Not much loss either way. We stopped communicating a long time ago.

Peace.
 

Oh, and there is only One to "blame" for my "entanglement" in the "so-called church" aim fixing to join:

Jesus, the Christ.

No quote marks. No crap.
 

Schism.

It seems to be going around.
 

Jesus Christ was a man that traveled through this land;
A carpenter, true and brave;
Said to the rich, "Give your goods to the poor",
So they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

The poor workin' people, they followed Him around,
They sung and they shouted gay,
The cops and the soldiers, they nailed Him in the air,
And they laid Jesus Christ in His grave.

Woody Guthrie

You're in good company, ER.

It is interesting that, for all their piety about being loving when they leave that many who self-identify themselves as conservative Christians really just want to be around people who'll tickle their ears.
 

"(or humanity, for those without a belief in God out there)?!"

thanks for the hat tip, dan, for that is exactly where i put my faith.

and i'm a cynic!

KEvron, "there were no wmd in iraq."
 

"....while the other glorifies and promotes irresponsible behaviour."<

but we love you anyway!

KEvron
 

Thanks, Dan.

Yo, Kev. 'Sup?
 

I have been condemned for hangin' around with you, Kev, and for not unquestiongly supporting the Establishmentarian Blog Church of the Corporate-Capitalist God.

Makes me feel all Jesusy somehow.
 

"D.Daddio still has not lost patience with you and turned you over to a reprobate mind."

go back and read dildio's second comment (the first wass essentially just a cut and paste) again, you disingenuous hypocrite. he was combative and insulting from the start, yet you give him a free pass. go figure. maybe from now on, i'll just lift dildio's comments from this blog and paraphrase them onto yours. i'm sure you won't object to their tone....

KEvron
 

"Makes me feel all Jesusy somehow."

always happy to taint your reputation among the wingnuts, brother!

KEvron
 

Tugboatcaptain said, "How long has it been since you have had a comment from Mark?

"Xena?

"Daffy?

"Timothy?"

Tug, I gotta say that I didn't even notice your absence, nor Xena's nor Daffy's. I did notice, and appreciate, not having to read the overzealous, ignorant comments posted by Timothy and Mark.

When, and I pray soon, this D.Dad Dude decides its time to vacate, this blog will become so much better.

I enjoyed your prose, and while it's a little over the top in the other direction to our host here, it provided a fantastic balance to ER's rhetoric. Kinda like when Nick pops his head in. Don't rightly recall anything of significance from Xena or Daffy, and that might be saying a lot in a nutshell.

But Mark, Timothy and this D.Dude: It's all good, in my eyes. Good riddance.
 

tugboatcapn said...
"Everything you write is motivated by hatred against one group or another."

this from the same guy who said on his own blog:

"I mean, maybe the North Koreans want to use their Long Range ICBM for humanitarian purposes...

Like taking out San Francisco, California."(emphasis mine)

lol! if that ain't love, then what is?! and for your fellow americans, no less! lol!

KEvron
 

Tugster is long gone, I'm afraid. And it makes me sad. He and I never had a serious cross word, as far as I'm concerned.
 

Makes note to self to add you to my blogroll...
 

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."

So, they don't count? I am surprised, ER. I didn't think you were that naive.

Listen: A WMD is a WMD, no matter when it was manufactured. You can't spin this. WMD were found in Iraq. You can't pretend they weren't, and you can't say they don't count. Explode an old one or a new one and you are just as dead.

Face it. The lie that there are no WMD in Iraq is proven to be a lie. And you Liberals are too stubborn and arrogant to admit it. You were wrong. Say it.

You

were

wrong
 

we

are

right.

hey! that does feel good!

KEvron
 

I am proud to have ER on my blogroll!
 

Shrub.

Was.

Wrong.


Hmmm. That *does* feel good.

No spin necessary.

And, thanks, eyedoc.
 

Mark, if that isn't among the most ludicrous back-justifications for this war I've ever heard.

I'll give you a better one: Saddam killed his own people! Twenty years ago! Ten years ago! Ohmygod, we must act NOW!

And while we're at it, Iran may STILL be holding hostages from the Carter administration!

And Egypt still might have some them Jews that Moses exodized! And the Sumerians might still be inventing weapons of mass delineation! And don't get me started on the Chinese and GUNPOWDER!!!!!

*shaking head*

There's dumb and there's dumber. You've wandered all the way to dumberer...
 

He's an In-duh-vidual?