<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> it mocks dubya for the way he uses jesus.<p><hr></blockquote><p>I'm not sure I've ever heard Bush comment on Jesus specifically. I have heard Bush say OUTRAGEOUSLY OFFENSIVE things like "May God continue to bless the United States of America."<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

You know, I was going to respond in kind, but it's pointless. A person whose mode of argumentation is to repeat talking points ad nauseam, and when that fails then to attack people's courage (my balls are fine; thanks for inquiring), and then ultimately to subside into grossness doesn't deserve a response.<br><br>

I love how liberals in this forum, when confronting those who support the President, accuse them of the ol' "talking points" charge, in that special MCCARTHYISM sort of way: <br><br><blockquote>"republicans can stick to the talking points that are short and sweet."<br><br>yep, talking points, get the c...tion."<br><br>"That's fine and it's a good ide...uous."<br><br>"this vietnam stuff is a nice di...sing."<br><br>"nice calling us women. you got ...ican."</blockquote><br><br>TALKING POINTS, TALKING POINTS!! RRRUUUUUUNNNNNNN<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

Yoyo, so if you have McCarthy's balls in a jar and they are fine, would you consider offering them up for stem cell research? See, our President banned federal funding for creating new embryonic stem cell lines and your balls might be just the ticket.<br><br>But I think you are right, this thread is dead and does not deserve a response. Instead of a highly dubious segue I will start a new thread about how anti-science our current President is.<br><br><br><br><br><br>luciferase is a four nineteener

everything from whitehouse.gov:<br><br><a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&q=bush+"jesus"+site:whitehouse.gov&btnG=Search">a few Jesus references mixed in</a><br><br><a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&q=bush+lord+site:whitehouse.gov&btnG=Search">559 for bush and Lord</a><br><br><a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&q=bush+god+site:whitehouse.gov&btnG=Search">1,740 references for bush and God</a><br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>And it still moves me to think that there was a powerful message being delivered by nature, to the point where I remember turning back to the people of Romania and said, "God is smiling on Bucharest." And I meant that.<p><hr></blockquote><p>almost as if God talks with him given his sincerity.<br><br>or this<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> We pray for wisdom to know and do what is right. And we pray for God's peace in the affairs of men.<p><hr></blockquote><p>he turned around less than 2 months later and invaded iraq. <br><br><br>--<br>one of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Plato

I like this first Google hit from the your "Lord" expose link . . . <br><br><blockquote>For Immediate Release February 19, 2003. President Bush Meets with NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson.</blockquote><br><br>So Bush is a religious man, so what? Why does this whip liberals in to hysterics? <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

i saw that, but i figured that out of over 500 Lord references, the vast majority are religious and that's what i was using to help illustrate to you that dubya is religious b/c you seemed to imply that dubya doesn't comment on jesus and a deeply religious man would clearly comment on jesus from time to time. <br><br>this doesn't whip me into hysterics . . . i expect it from the guy. i do find it a bit disingenuous that you make statements to the contrary to try and make a point.<br><br><br>--<br>one of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Plato

[color:red] bush lord site:whitehouse.gov -"lord robertson" -"drug lord" -"Lord Shaftesbury" </font color=red><br><br>513 hits. Hey, that's kind of cool. I knew a google would do that but a use I never thought of.<br><br><br><br>luciferase is a four nineteener

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>b/c you seemed to imply that dubya doesn't comment on jesus and a deeply religious man would clearly comment on jesus from time to time.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Wrong Sean. I never implied that at all. On the other hand, you seem to pass yourself off as a "Bush uses Jesus" scholar when you said in an earlier post:<br><br><blockquote>it mocks dubya for the way he uses jesus.</blockquote><br><br>My reply to that was:<br><br><blockquote>I'm not sure I've ever heard Bush comment on Jesus specifically. I have heard Bush say OUTRAGEOUSLY OFFENSIVE things like "May God continue to bless the United States of America."</blockquote><br><br>Which is a far cry from your accusation that I'm implying dubya doesn't comment on Jesus. I just don't remember hearing Bush comment on Jesus specifically, (have you?) I never said he doesn't. <br><br>That said, why don't you enlighten us all in the ways Bush uses Jesus, since you know all about it.<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

2003 Newsweek While Rove and Hill leaders work the domestic side, Bush is dwelling on faith-based foreign policy of the most explosive kind: a potential war in the name of civil freedom—including religious freedom—in the ancient heart of Arab Islam. The article also touches on stem cell , abortion etc..Holy Bush considering this was in 2003 I would say he is following his Gospel according to plan. Perhaps Newsweek's next headline will be.."God tells Bush he is a Republican" <br><br>