One other thing, just so that everyone knows: Yesterday GWB signed into law, (subject to Supreme Court interpretation), that non-U.S. citizens do not have the right to Habeus Corpus when faced with arrest inside by the United States. How is it that the land of the free is looking more and more like the land where foundation-stones of jurisprudence are being thrown out. I suppose since it only applies to non-citizens it is of little consequence, but then I am reminded of this poem that came out of Nazi Germany: “First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.” Pastor Martin Niem ller Neo-conservativism in the United States is attempting to deconstruct the building blocks upon which the country was built. I am sorry that as a Canadian I will no longer be able to safely visit your fair country. As you are probably aware a dual-citizen Canadian-Syrian (Mayer Arar) was detained and sent to Syria when his return trip to Canada stopped in New York, where he was tortured. Extraordinary Rendition is a vile abuse of fundamental human rights. I never thought I would see it come to this. Finally after almost a year the Canadian government was able to secure his release. The United States has lost its moral compass under GWB. What was once a shining example for the world has become a shameful shadow of its former self. Without the strength of the moral convictions that were once the bedrock of the United States, the world is rightly suspicious and fearful. What a sad day it is.

Errata: The name of the Canadian sent to Syria for torture is Mahar Arar (not Mayer Arar.)

In the midst of the partisan wrangling (on all sides) and the cynicism and disillusionment with the political process, your appearance on last Sunday’s 60 Minutes program gave me some hope for America. Someone who puts conscience above partisanship….. I can remember when this wasn’t a rarity! Hang in there: the mean-spirited attacks will soon move on to the next target of opportunity, but your courage will be remembered as one of the few high points of 2006.

The Judas comment does not equate the President with our Lord and Savior. Instead it speaks of the damage Mr. Kuo’s book and interviews are doing to the hope of those who have prayed so hard and worked so long to achieve a Supreme Court that will reverse Roe vs. Wade, to a Congress that recognizes there are people who wish to slaughter large numbers of Americans, to citizens that don’t want their children raised by Hillary’s village or live in a country coerced to acquiesce to the same “politically correct” views enforced on most of our college campuses. Kuo took an honest critique by his former parishioner and flatters himself by only seeing the political side, it frees him to be dismissive of the true result of his book and his interviews: those who despise God and this country most will reap the benefit.

Dennis, while you are correct in assessing the damage caused, I’d like to point out that the real damage came from the fact that Republicans were able to use Evangelicals for political purposes. If we (as Christians) had not formed these pacts with Republicans (or with Dems as the case may be), there would be no damage to The Church. The same goals that you mention could have been reached if we had instead used our influence within either existing or new political action committees that do not use Christ as a front.

Dennis Castle, Rather than reproducing those very familiar talking points, try reading David Kuo’s book or at least his blog entries that are readily available here.Jesus never taught his followers to engage in political seduction or corruption. In fact, it was a politically corrupt Religious Elite who helped deny Jesus through public execution. This alone is a lesson for us all, for prayer and meditation.

Mr. Kuo: By your logic, if God is not 100-percent happy with what is going on with His followers here on earth, then He should simply abandon them for …. let’s say, two years, just to teach them a lesson. No. I don’t think so, Mr. Kuo. Especially not if the end result of that ‘abandonment’ is to hand this country over to people who openly advocate a desire to rip any mention of God out of the fabric of public life.One can only hope you would rethink your childish quest to teach us all a lesson. To willingly give up our ‘right to vote’ that was purchased by the blood of so many (Christians included) would be the ultimate snub, don’t you think? DS

David, thanks for your kind comment. I’ve been given your idea and your blog some thought away from the computer, and I think I’ve been more strident than is necessary. For that I sincerely apologize. I think, in the end, my reaction could be summarized in this way: 1) I don’t think a fast from politics is necessary for the vast majority of Christians on both sides of the political aisle. Most do not idolize politics or politicians; at most, we need to be reminded that we ought to be civil and that we are called to love even our enemies. 2) I don’t think a fast from politics is effective in advancing the agendas of politically active Christians. One could argue persuasively that Democratic elites in Washington take advantage of the black voters who help put them in office or that Republican elites look at gun owners as backward hicks. Nevertheless, neither the NAACP nor the NRA do their causes any good by silencing themselves: they may need to make it clear that their votes shouldn’t be taken for granted, and they should perhaps be more effective in supporting candidates they like during primary season, but silence? That would do them no political good. 3) I do not think a fast from politics is good for the country. It does seem to me that there are people who are serious about national defense and people who are not; a great many Christian conservatives are in the “serious” group, and to weaken that group’s political power now — when margins are so slim in the Senate and in the House, when North Korea is defiantly testing nuclear weapons, when Iran continues to work to build its own nukes, and when the United States needs to reassert its will to confront its enemies by not retreating from Iraq — is astoundingly irresponsible. 4) If you’re right about too many Christians going overboard with their concern for the political sphere, tasteless comparisons to Judas and the Axis of Evil are to be expected. (For what it’s worth, I think those comparisons are proving themselves to be the exception and not the rule.) But you’re not going to persuade as many people as you could to support your cause by demonstrating thin skin about such comments while simultaneously attributing negative responses to an orchestrated effort on the part of the Bush Administration and implying that those who disagree with you are idolators. The initial reaction I had to those comments is probably going to be shared by others. 5) Finally, if you want to demonstrate that you’re not interested in depressing the vote of Christian conservatives, you should be bi-partisan. There are Christian liberals who are equally passionate about their causes, who believe that Christ is on their side in issues like social services, redefining marriage, and national defense. In that list of liberal Christians, I would add Jim Wallis, who (unless I misremember) believes that the Bible requires high taxes. And let me remind you that the only Reverend who sought the nomination for President in 2004 did not have an “R” by his name. It may be Christian conservatives have more political clout than their liberal counterparts; but if you want to prove your neutrality, you should call for a cease-fire on both sides rather than give one an opportunity to take advantage of the other’s fasting. Obviously, I’m not going to support your call for a fast from politics. I do hope that you and I both grow in spiritual maturity — I know I need to — and I hope we both grasp the difference between asking “Is Jesus on our side?” and “Am I on His side?” The former implies that Jesus is a figurehead to be attached to a cause rather than the Lord that must rule over our lives. Truly, too many on my side politically act as if they know the answer to that first question, but you should resist the temptation to counter with, “No, I know Jesus really is on my side.” It may be that you feel it necessary to fast personally from politics, and that may even be God’s will for you, but you should be very careful in presuming that that is His will for all of us — or in criticizing those who disagree or are even skeptical.

Mr. Sommers, If you had read Mr. Kuo’s blog carefully, you would understand that he is not telling Christians not to vote. I quote him: “I’m not talking about a permanent retreat from politics. I’m not suggesting that current politicians leave office. I’m not suggesting that we stop voting. I’m just suggesting that voting is all that we do.” What he is suggesting is that Christians spend the time and energy that so many of them currently devote to debating, arguing and haranguing about politics and commit it to prayer, bible study and doing more of what Jesus spent a LARGE chunk of his time talking about — helping others.He is NOT asking Christians to stay away from the polls–but to do more of what Christ spoke about (which was rarely politics.)

As a brief aside, and to concur with Dave Sommers, my pastor is fond of reminding us that the Sermon on the Mount’s metaphors of salt and light make clear how we should work with the world: we should not be absorbed by the world, and we should not retreat from the world: we should be in the world yet distinctive from it so that we might transform it for the better. It may be that some of the salt in Christians who are politically active conservatives have lost some of their saltiness. But — to mix metaphors — it’s still not the case that they should hide their light under a basket.

There are many ways to look at what the results will be of what Mr. Kuo has done. But in the end the most important thing is that the truth be told. I think Mr. Kuo tells the truth. What impact this truth will have on voters in Nov I do not know. I do think, perhaps, in the future leaders will think more about whether they are really doing the things they say they are. They might consider longer the chance that someone like Mr. Kuo will tell the truth and thus reveal their hypocrisy. And so, perhaps they won’t engage in hypocritical acts in the first place. Perhaps Christians will be smarter in the future and inquire more into what the people they put into office are really doing what they claim to be doing. Mr. Kuo thank you for telling the truth. God bless you.

If Christianity calls us to pick one of two political parties in any country in which Christians live, refuse to acknowledge any flaws in the actions of that partry, to regard those with whom they disagree as enemies, and to distort the views of those with whom we disagree, then Dennis Castle’s views make sense. Any experts out there? Did Jesus say anything one way or another about hating our enemies?

Tom, it is possible for a Christian to support a political party while recognizing its flaws and imperfections, while not letting the perfect become the enemy of the good. It is also possible for a Christian to believe that people who hold positions different from them may be political enemies — insofar as their goals differ from ours, or their policies harm our goals. We are still called to love our enemies, but not to pretend that we don’t have any. What would you have Christians do? Abandon a political party the moment it’s less than perfect? Support our political goals so weakly that we accomplish nothing? It’s possible you genuinely believe so, but it’s naive to think that it’s going to happen and insulting to those who have actually given their faith and their politics a great deal of thought.

Bubba, I could take issue with a lot that you say in your points 3-5, but I agree with your points 1 & 2. I wrote yesterday that a 24-second pause to reflect on how a comment or proposal is considerate and in line with one’s ethical and moral considerations is more realistic and maybe more useful than a 24-month fast. Also, hats off to you for dialing down the stridency.

Whoa, didn’t realize you’d responded to me, Bubba. No, I don’t think a political party should be abandoned the moment it’s less than perfect. As I’ve written here and elsewhere, I don’t think a fast is realistic (or necessarily productive, if it doesn’t lead to the reflection I think Kuo is calling for). One can disagree with Kuo’s recommendation for a fast without dismissing everything he says. And the main point of his book, as I see it, is that the faith-based initiatives office was never run as anything more than a means of appearing to take faith seriously in order to get votes. If, with eyes open, you believe that, say, the situation in North Korea requires you to vote for the same party as before, that is a perfectly reasonable resonse. But fixating on one recommendation in the book with which you disagree, and refusing to consider the main, factual narrative of the book, strikes me as missing the point a bit.

This is a short summary of how I and many others see politics from a Christian perspective. The only way to change your own political party is from the inside. If you feel called to be a Democrat, by all means, get involved! My brother told me about his friend who’s a Catholic, pro-life, yellow-dog Dem who’s running a campaign in Minnesota for a like-minded politician. Great, I say, I hope for more Christian influence in both parties. I’m working for the Republicans in Ohio. If I sit out, less Christian, less conservative, less principled folks will run the party. There is plenty of recent evidence for this. (cough, cough, Taft, cough) If you don’t want to get involved directly in any campaigns, letter-writing can be a HUGE way to influence politicians. You can call and email politicians as well. How many people do that? I’ve done it 5 or 6 times, but I’m ashamed I haven’t done it more. We changed Voinovich’s mind on the state marriage amendment by bombarding his phone bank. (He denies it, but that’s his problem — he supported it and the amendment passed.) If a group “sits out” in a public way, they will eventually be discounted. I know it’s hard for folks to understand this if they haven’t worked inside campaigns. But constituencies do matter. Say “You don’t have my vote anymore” and you will be replaced with someone else’s vote. Plain and simple. I promise I’ll fast from politics after the election. Please discuss and flame away.

Been a long time. I saw you on TV. I don’t get it. Sorry, this is going to be a bit stream of consciousness, but I’m short on time. 2.154 billion to Faith-Based organizations in 2005. 2 billion in 2004. 1.170 billion in 2003. Programs that that assist prisoners, provide housing for the elderly, assist abandoned infants, provide housing for persons with AIDS, etc. Money that was not going to Faith Based Organizations before. The opportunity to have Faith Based Organizations more involved in communities through the use of federal dollars. But you’re not happy with parts of it. Based on your experience during a small fraction of the lifespan of Faith-Based Initiatives office you condemn the entire program. Why? Because in the world of politics where the program is administered, you allege that some of it got political. Based on something you actually proposed. Shocking. I believe that you told Leslie Stahl you would have been happy with the progress of the program had it been any president but Bush. Rather than choosing to look at the program objectively and laud accomplishments you choose to view it subjectively and condemn those same accomplishments. Your solution? Let’s throw the baby out with the bath water. Let’s “fast” from politics so that the gains in these programs can be reversed. Doesn’t make sense. I’m sorry, but from my perspective, the only thing that makes sense is that you appear to be trying to make a quick buck by jumping on the Bush-Bashing Bandwagon. You have to know that there’s a rabid pack out there looking for any little thing no matter how trite. Well, I guess you’ve given them what they’re looking for. Hope you make a buck or two. Take care.

Dino, it’s possible that David’s book is being used by Bush bashers without that being his intent for the book. Tom: And the main point of his book, as I see it, is that the faith-based initiatives office was never run as anything more than a means of appearing to take faith seriously in order to get votes. Let’s suppose that that’s true: is it better for a cause to have those in power to accomplish part of your goals in a cynical attempt to get your vote, or to have people who sincerely opposed to your goals? I can imagine being disillusioned by the former, but taking actions that result in the latter strikes me as counterproductive.

Tom is correct in his implication that Christ did not call us to hate our enemies, thanks Tom for pointing that out. Does this mean I must refrain from stating that the opposition political party to the Republicans desires to continue making abortion (even to the 9th month of pregnancy, even to maintaining that parents need not be informed – the case here in Oregon) the law of the land? Does it mean that I cannot state that they wish to see the activity of the terrorists as being a legal matter instead of a matter of war? Or does it mean that I can state it all I want as long as I state it in a way that cannot be heard (that is, by remaining by myself instead of using the democratic means at hand by associating with a political party that has achieved a status necessary to promote my views)? I understand that David Kuo feels hurt that he invested time and energy into the public policy arena and has a list of grievances that he feels prevented him from getting the job done that he should have.Now he’s getting his payback. He’s using very religious language and recruiting all kinds of friends who would love nothing better than to see Christians and their hopes rolled back to Carter-era levels. It’s a very natural reaction. But please don’t pretend that it’s any less political than anything else. Mr. Kuo wants to rally his constituents (in this case Christians) for/against a particular cause in order to influence a course of action. Yes, God healed his tumor and has blessed his life and has helped him become a very good person with nice friends. That doesn’t make him above the sin of Pride and the desire to take vengeance against those whom he feels wounded him or took advantage or whatever. Have a moments transparency, vulnerability and discernment and you ll see what I m saying is true.

Dave Sommers, It is polite to first listen to someone’s ideas before trying to critique them.If you had read David Kuo’s blog entries, read his book, or even listened to the numerous interviews now readily available, you’d know that David Kuo never–not once–asks people not to vote. And we can do without your mean-spirited, baseless accusations.

Wow. After looking over the rest of this thread, I can see that the mean-spirited, smear-campaign continues to rail against David Kuo.That Jesus is missing in this Inquisition is quite telling.

Tenoch, comparisons to the Inquistion are themselves hardly less than mean-spirited.

I truly believe that David Kuo has presented us with his honest beliefs and his genuine reaction to life- altering events. The former colleagues of post-Damascus Paul/Saul weren’t too happy with his transformation, either. If you think David in error, that’s okay. But don’t presume to judge him. Someone else has that job, and considering the price He paid, I think we should let Him have it.

Bubba, Anything is possible. But, I think David would have to live in a total vacuum to say that. If that wasn’t the intent why late October for a release date? Why not November 15? Easy, because after the election cycle neither the media nor far left would care about this book. No press, no sales, no cash. Release now, however, and go on Chris Mathews, etc. and you’re doing a great job selling to the bashers. From what I remember of David, he is not unintelligent. He worked in communications for a while. He worked in politics for a while. Everybody working in those fields knows that when you say something can be more important than just saying it. Sorry, I don’t buy it.

Bubba, you talk a lot about David watching out for impartiality but then you turn it right around and champion your political side. In your first point you say, Most do not idolize politics or politicians First, I think you re wrong but I d put it in a different way. Most people idolize the surrounding situation and the ideology they most identify with. Your second point: they may need to make it clear that their votes shouldn’t be taken for granted. This is not realistic right now. Have you read Tempting Faith ? Have you seen the PBS documentaries about earmarks in politics? This is simply na ve, bubba. And then finally you say: It does seem to me that there are people who are serious about national defense and people who are not. I will not be condescending to you or anyone but this quote War On Terror has had a big effect on you. To suggest that our national defense will put you and others in more jeopardy with a Democratic Congress is over the top. And Christian s fasting from politics in 24 months will not put the country in this jeopardy either. YOU too need be very careful in criticizing those who disagree or are even skeptical. Let s just be honest here, OK? We both know that you and others, Dem and Rep. alike, are worried about losing votes if this fast happens. Isn t that what this is really about? You want to be in your big camp and others want to bolster theirs. It s not about stepping away from the nastiness and partisanship, is it? Secretly, we all love a knock down, drag em out political campaign don t we?

Dennis Castle: Does it mean that I cannot state that they wish to see the activity of the terrorists as being a legal matter instead of a matter of war? You are perfectly free to state that. The First Amendment protects (non-libelous) lies, and statements made in ignorance. John Kerry in 2004: “I will hunt down and kill the terrorists, wherever they are.” distantocean.blogspot.com/2004/10/killer-kerry.html As I’ve written repetedly, it is perfectly within your rights, and can make perfect sense, to vote Republican in spite of the assertions in Kuo’s book. It is revealing, though, that instead of any kind of reflection on what Kuo has written, you fixate on your hatred and distorted views of Democrats.I think it makes perfect sense for someone who is strongly pro-life to vote Republican. I think it is advisable to cast that vote with open eyes.

Sorry, hope that ends the italics reign of error on my post above…

I caught your interview on Fresh Air–definitely got a ‘driveway moment’ out of it! Thank you for your refreshing take on the religious hypocrisy in the current administration. As I wrote on my blog re. your post, you were absolutely right when you told Terry Gross that God has no politics, only love for the poor. Keep up the good work!

Dino, I believe David’s position is that the book was published at this time against his wishes. I’m not saying I find these positions to be absolutely credible, which is why I think that, if David’s going to call for a fast from politics, he should do so for Christians on both sides of the aisle. Frank, I thought you were no longer interested in responding to me. Guess not. I’m not all that interested in replying, so I’ll be brief. Bubba, you talk a lot about David watching out for impartiality but then you turn it right around and champion your political side. That’s exactly right, Frank, but I’m not urging Christians on either side to fast from politics, and I’m not suggesting that I’m non-partisan. IF David Kuo wants to appear as truly non-partisan while he calls for a fast from politics, he should not focus exclusively on Christian conservatives. You write: I will not be condescending to you or anyone but this quote War On Terror has had a big effect on you. To suggest that our national defense will put you and others in more jeopardy with a Democratic Congress is over the top. “Quote”. Huh. We’re fighting a war that some people don’t think actually exists. I think Sowell’s right that some people are simply not serious about national defense. But it’s absolutely correct that — as they exist now, as a party of radical appeasers that is driving out their last hawks and is more committed to defeating Bush than al Queda — the Democratic Party will be dangerous to national security if they have control of Congress. From Vietnam to the Iranian hostage crisis, to our retreat from Somalia and our limp response to terrorism in the 1990′s, we have given our enemies the very strong impression that we’re ultimately unwilling to do what it takes to defeat them. If a Dem-controlled Congress defunded our presence in Iraq and forced our withdrawal — which seems very damned likely — we will have invited attacks that make 9/11 look like a warm-up. This isn’t about loving a “knock down, drag em out political campaign,” it’s about recognizing the importance of what’s at stake.

Conservative evangelicals are not going to fast from politics because their lives revolve around it. David, I think you’re going to be on your own.

a party of radical appeasers that is driving out their last hawks and is more committed to defeating Bush than al Queda — the Democratic Party will be dangerous to national security if they have control of Congress. This is just plain cuckoo bananas.

Bubba, where do I start? I thought you were committed to being less “strident.” Anyway, you begin with saying, “IF David Kuo wants to appear as truly non-partisan while he calls for a fast from politics, he should not focus exclusively on Christian conservatives.” My response is not only will I not be condescending, but also I won’t get in a tit for tat argument with you. David Kuo isn’t focusing on Christian conservatives anymore than he is any other CHRISTIAN. But we all clearly see how you might feel like he is, bubba. The fact of the matter is that the world is not burning up because of a particular brand of politics. If anything partisanship is harming OUR country. If anything it’s making us look less united. This is the situation we’re in my friend. The approach that you advocate isn t winning. Nobody is saying to stop looking for terrorists and not protect the borders. What s at stake is not winning a war, bubba. It s staying vigilant against extremism while setting a better example at home.

Dave, I heard you this morning on National Public Radio as I drove to work. Thank you for taking a stand to defend God’s exceeding love for all people, especially the marginalized who can’t defend themselves. I believe we like to call this God’s “Preferential Option for the Poor.” I am 24 years old and tired of being pressured to tow the party line and to vote Republican in order to be a conscientious Christian. Thank you for reminding us of the need to come back to the words and actions of Christ – and to seek to express that in tangible ways.

“is more committed to defeating Bush than al Queda” Bubba, you’re quite the comedian. Who was it who said of bin Laden,”And, again, I don’t know where he is. I — I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him”?

That was Bush in 2002, dovid, but context matters. “Well, as I say, we haven’t heard much from him. And I wouldn’t necessarily say he’s at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don’t know where he is. I — I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.”But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became — we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we — excuse me for a minute — and if we find a training camp, we’ll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That’s one of the things — part of the new phase that’s becoming apparent to the American people is that we’re working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.”And we’ve got more work to do. See, that’s the thing the American people have got to understand, that we’ve only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don’t know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it’s going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I’m not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.” The context of that comment exonerates Bush — that is, for people who care about context. Are you one of them, or are you one of those sad souls who’ll isolate a single clause from a treatise just to score a cheap rhetorical point?

Frank, by the way, I believe I am being less strident: I’m just not going to compromise my principles and beliefs in order to play nice. And to be honest, I’m not sure I comprehend what it is you’re trying to say — and not for the first time.

How can I make anymore clear?

But, wait a second here. I’ve scanned this blog for the last few days just like you. Who comprehends your views?

Bubba, I feel sorry for you. You are a victim of your own worldview. And not only that, but we’re all watching history crumble this worldview. That’s why I kind of feel bad because I can see you sitting down sometime and there it will be for you to watch in plain sight. So, I don t blame you for not understanding. It s evident to me that there s something much deeper behind your denial.

Bubba, I see you’re back on the attack with more right-flaming.Don’t think I haven’t forgotten your failure to produce factual evidence of the White House and Fox “News” playing fair with David Kuo.If you’re unwilling to provide even the most elementary support for your wild accusations, then I’m uncertain of your intentions on this blog. The time is coming soon when you will have to decide whether you are willing to participate in dialogue or if you’re just a Trolling interent agitator.

Tenoch, I’ll reiterate that the burden of proof does not lie with me: if David Kuo asserts (as he did) that the Bush Administration controls a cable news network, the burden is on him to prove that assertion, not on me to prove him wrong. “Bush doesn’t control Fox News” is not a “wild accusation.” Frank, there’s nothing complex about my inability to comprehend you: you’re not that clear of a writer. Your writing is vague, riddled with cliches, and it’s often the case that your cliches don’t make a great deal of sense. In trying so very, very hard to sound profound, you make your writing opaque.

Bubba, I may seem vague because I don’t feel it’s necessary to entertain the long discussions I can see you are poised to go into. Nothing you say inspires me, at all. So you’re absolutely correct, bubba, I have not been trying my best when we’ve communicated. And the same goes for others that are in your “camp” here or elsewhere. Besides this is a blog not a writer s convention. I’m riddled with cliches? At least I’m original and so are the majority of people who contribute here. I admire others who hang in there and try to dialogue with you but I’ve discovered that’s an endless battle. You’ve spent nearly a week on this blog and you’re getting shot down. But I see David Kuo acknowledged you yesterday so that’s got to make you feel good I guess. I suppose I should be insulted by your response to me but I m just not. I think it s strange that you spend all day here trying to grab some kind of upper hand. When do you have time to organize and talk to your own political people? It s getting pretty late don t you think? You better get out there and get on that!

Remember that bit yesterday where I said I wasn’t going anywhere but you’re free to ignore me? I meant that. If my so writing leaves you so thoroughly uninspired, go back to ignoring it. Deal with the fact that I’ll come and go as I damn well please, and quit trying to urge me to leave. It’s quite pathetic.

It’s hard to ignore inciting and prickly remarks, Bubba. You’re proving more of my case about you with each and every post.

Ms. Beth Blinn: Mr. Kuo, in his book, says: “I’m just suggesting that voting is all that we do.” He can speak for himself. In fact, if he is feeling guilty about not doing enough volunteering or charity work, perhaps he can join the millions of Christians LIKE MYSELF who are out there each week, giving of themselves and of their finances, to help those less fortunate. In fact, my local church is an absolute beehive of activity — all week every week — with normal everyday people gladly helping those less fortunate. How presumptive of a man (Mr. Kuo), who holds himself out to be this more-in-touch-than- other Christians, to accuse everyone of not donating enough time and/or resources. And then as a punishment, we are supposed to give up for two years the right to vote, a right which was bought by the blood of soldiers, Christian and non, for the past 230 years. Perhaps it is the crowd with which Mr. Kuo hangs out, because from my perspective, the Christian community at large is doing lots and lots of good in the USA and in this difficult world.(Perhaps Mr. Kuo is suffering from ‘projection’ — that malady whereby a person accuses everyone else of committing the very thing to which they themselves committ — just to asuage their own guilt) Sorry to be so harsh, but that’s the way I see it. Dave Sommers

I’m sure you think so, Frank, but since I do believe what I’ve been writing is of value — prickly or not, though I doubt you always judge harshly comments that are controversial — I will continue commenting here as long as it suits me. I would appreciate it if you stopped trying to get me to leave.

You’re free to do as you wish. Nobody has to tell you that. I’m not the moderator, remember. Follow your heart and try not to be so angry. Jesus was controversial too and in a tactful manner.

“The context of that comment exonerates Bush — that is, for people who care about context.” Actually, if “context” is more of the boilerplate that Bush’s writers dish up for him, no, it means nothing. It only has meaning for those who drink deeply of the Kool-Aid he pours his followers.

if he was accusing me of being (literally) Judas, that would then make President Bush Jesus. (He’s not.) BLASPHEMER!

JESUS AIN’T MISSIN’ in ANY INQUSI-SHOWN hear: yA’ll don’t KNOW M.E. NOW, SOOOO DON’T BBBB TELLIN’ OTHERS WHAT I SAY,DU,BE,AM, OR OTHERWISE, 444 I AM HERE 222 SPEAK & BBB 4444 MY-SELF NOW, in 2006, THUS DUAY OCT.21st!!!!!!!

Dear David, I just saw you on Bill Maher. Bravo!!!!!! Seriously, if more Americans would stand up, such as you have, maybe we could turn this country around. Unfortunately, it looks bleak. Everywhere, I look there are more people following in the footsteps of some other individuals whose basic desires are greed. And some of these other individuals profess out of their mouth that they are Christians. This is severely causing damage. So profound and drastically fast. People are literally running from God. I am one of the many americans ignored by the Bush administration. Since they say that the economy is at an all time high and unemployment is down. Or, maybe I just live in the wrong state. I m not sure of the answer. All I know is I have been unemployed for 8 months and as of this coming week will have no benefits, because the government has control over my unemployment. I am either over qualified or not enough qualifications. So, even though I willing to flip burgers at McDonalds, they won t hire me. My point being, Bush has lied to people and there are sheep out there still following him. There are still other sheep out there following other corrupted leader wantabe s just as bad, but with a different label. It s time to gather the flock together and take them into another direction where there truly is grass for grazing and plenty of fresh water. A gazillion Kudos to you and all who support you. Most Humbly, Jeannine