[Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma

[joekc at roadrunner.com]

I have supported J. Ford for personal reasons. But as has been pointed out. Other than that I'm 
not sure what you're talking about. But since you seem to have all of my posts saved and 
categorized -- or one of your friends does -- no doubt you'll bring one up if I'm mistaken!

I am not reading Dr. No's posts for the simple reason that what little I did read contained, as I
noted, obvious and numerous fallacies. There is not much of a challenge there and little interest.

He does get my panties in a wad, I'll admit. But not because of his arguments, or even his insults.
I still can't get over how a local church could so blatantly act like a political machine. That they 
can continue to do so while most people, intelligent though most may be, fail to notice what 
strikes me as being so dang obvious.

Just to make my point, I'll ask you straight up, Gary. Are you really going to tell me that you don't
know who No Weatherman is, and with what church he is affiliated? We may have our differences
but, previous name-calling aside, I certainly consider you to be intelligent. But my guess is, you'll say "No" and "No." And that just makes my point. I am stunned that they could pull the wool over 
even your eyes, a crafty, no-nonsense man of the people. Just thinking about it, let alone being 
reminded of it on a daily basis, drives me fricken nuts.

And since I'm not reading Dr. No's posts and you consider him to be so challenging, could you just
repeat for me what you take to be his best point, and the best argument for that point. Just one.
If it is not an easily identifiable fallacy, I'll be shocked. But prove me wrong! Just one example.

--
Joe Campbell

---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote: 
> What is not so much offensive as hilarious is someone who chooses to hop up 
> onto their moral high horse concerning one anonymous contributor while 
> having ignored or lauded so many others. Where was your massive concern when 
> we were regularly receiving missives from B. Herodotus, P.Place, T. 
> Scimitar, J. Flores, and last but far from the least (prolific) J.Ford? I 
> seem to recall several instances of your leaping to the defense of at least 
> one of these miscreants. Clearly the problem that you are having with Mr. 
> Weatherman is that he has the unmitigated gall to bring up topics along with 
> citations that you find uncomfortable and difficult to reconcile. So, rather 
> then respond to the matter at hand, you attempt to divert the discussion 
> with phony outrage at the commentators anonymity and/or his potential 
> affiliations. I guess if you can't answer the questions, attack and vilify 
> the questioner. I personally prefer to evaluate the argument, taking into 
> consideration the lack of a name or a face as just one more piece of 
> information. So far, the mysterious nature of the anti-weather dude has no 
> bearing on BHO's unsavory affiliations and his and his supporters inability 
> to account for them.
> 
> g
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>
> To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 12:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma
> 
> 
> > I'm not reading this but I just wanted to point out that if Doug Wilson 
> > thought that this was
> > inappropriate, then the posts would stop in a heartbeat. Otherwise, I'm 
> > not sure what to say
> > about No Wetherman's bad joke on the Courtney blog. {Just because you 
> > don't use your name, Dr.
> > No, it does not mean that many of us do not know who you are.}
> >
> > So, I ask you Area Man and Roger Falen, Harkins and Crabtree: do you not 
> > find it offensive that
> > someone might post such comments without revealing his name? If it turns 
> > out that this person
> > was affiliated with a church, one that might be a political group instead 
> > of a religious one, would
> > that offend you? Do you think that such groups should reap the benefits 
> > sanctioned by the first
> > amendment? Warning: If you say that this is OK, then you are sanctioning a 
> > similar approach by
> > a pro-Obama spokesman, perhaps on a national level. What do you think in 
> > this light?
> >
> > --
> > Joe Campbell
> >
> > ---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> At the risk of offending those of you who have already taken offense
> >> by my cowardly, anonymous, and purely factual presence in this
> >> one-sided conversation, please allow me to ask a terribly awkward
> >> question that I hope will cut to the heart of this issue about when
> >> life begins.
> >>
> >> We all know that Barrack Hussein Obama is the illegitimate son (one of
> >> many) of a Kenyan father who knocked up a teenager from Kansas.
> >>
> >> Let's say that Roe v. Wade was in place back then and that Obama's
> >> mother attempted to terminate her pregnancy, via a saline abortion,
> >> but things went sadly awry — the baby, or as some on this list prefer
> >> to call it, the "potential human being," refused to die.
> >>
> >> What moral obligations, if any, do you believe should be on the
> >> attending physicians:
> >>
> >> 1. Kill the baby.
> >> 2. Abandon the baby (which is number 1 by another name).
> >> 3. Save the baby.
> >> 4. Other.
> >>
> >> As I said, this is a terribly awkward question but it helps put flesh
> >> and bones on this sensitive subject and it's not beyond the realm of
> >> possibility because it happens more often than Americans want to know:
> >>
> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anieuWFWe8s&feature=related
> >>
> >> Barrack Hussein Obama said that this question was above his pay grade,
> >> but we all know he was just avoiding the uncomfortable truth. That
> >> "potential human" in the womb is a precious human life and Obama
> >> should get on his knees every night and thank his maker that his
> >> mother couldn't resort to Roe v. Wade to kill him.
> >>
> >> Part of the daily fudge.
> >>
> >> =======================================================
> >>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>                http://www.fsr.net
> >>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> =======================================================
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               http://www.fsr.net
> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > ======================================================= 
> 
>