Clinton Speaks about Bush-

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Oh, and Scaeagles- the Salvation Army, while a great organization, has a bit of a rep in the anti- gay dept. Most of them do. We had a 'church' up here for decades that was pro- Aryan; think they would just give to anyone?

Does the salvation army ask people to prove sexual orientation before giving them food? I really doubt it, but I have no evidence to support my claim.

Of course there are whacko individual churches everywhere. This does not mean they would receive federal funds to support their charitable work.

Supreme arrogance is being absolutely certain that your way is the only way.

I always liked the quote by Lady Thatcher - "Consensus is the absence of leadership." However, to suggest that Bush believes his way is the only way is not always true. Ted Kennedy (or rather his staffers) wrote the education bill. So much has been made of "flip flopping". He didn't want a Bureau of Homeland Security, then he changed his mind. There are other numerous examples. Was it flip flopping or seeing that his way wasn't best?

On tax cuts, no - he believed his way was best. He stood by it. Pushed for them in an uncompromising fashion. Does someone run for President because they believe they have ideas that will work for the country? Of course. This means you get in and push your agenda. Of course it is arrogance. Show me a politician who isn't arrogant. You must have an ego to run for office and tell people that you are the best to lead them.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

How does Halliburton get a contract for repairing a disaster before it even happens? And if they have an exclusive 'Contractor for the USA' contract, that's news to the rest of us.

You don't have to prove your faith to me, but you don't get to act like your on a mission from God, either. Bush thinks he is the Annointed One, and has ever since 9/11. I merely observe that oftentimes, people of a quieter faith show by deed, not by verbosity.

Supreme arrogance is being absolutely certain that your way is the only way.

Oh, and Scaeagles- the Salvation Army, while a great organization, has a bit of a rep in the anti- gay dept. Most of them do. We had a 'church' up here for decades that was pro- Aryan; think they would just give to anyone?

Halliburton gets contract to repair damage from Hurricane Katrina

(HalliburtonWatch.org) 02 Sep 2005 The US Navy asked Halliburton to repair naval facilities damaged by Hurricane Katrina, the Houston Chronicle reported today. The work was assigned to Halliburton's KBR subsidiary under the Navy's $500 million CONCAP contract awarded to KBR in 2001 and renewed in 2004. The repairs will take place in Louisiana and Mississippi. In March, the former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is tasked with responding to hurricane disasters, became a lobbyist for KBR.

Even comes from a super leftist site Link

But I would think it is clear that 2004 was before 2005, when the hurricane hit and Haliburton got the contract. Or maybe you are not clear about how few companies do the work that Haliburton can and does?

Mocking me doesn't change anything-nor does it make you right.

So, someone who stands by their faith and says their faith is right, and others wrong, is supremely arrogant? So, they lose respect because they believe something that strongly- what? Would they be acceptable to you if they suffered doubt, questioned themselves and constantly had to adjust what they believed because they might be wrong?

Yeah- got it.

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Even comes from a super leftist site Link

But I would think it is clear that 2004 was before 2005, when the hurricane hit and Haliburton got the contract. Or maybe you are not clear about how few companies do the work that Haliburton can and does?

Mocking me doesn't change anything-nor does it make you right.

So, someone who stands by their faith and says their faith is right, and others wrong, is supremely arrogant? So, they lose respect because they believe something that strongly- what? Would they be acceptable to you if they suffered doubt, questioned themselves and constantly had to adjust what they believed because they might be wrong?

Yeah- got it.

First off- show me where I was mocking you. Don't accuse me of doing something I wasn't doing- I asked a largely rhetorical question as to how the hell Halliburton got a permanent no-bid contract, and you answered it. From the Bush Administration. Years ago, which dosen't make me feel any better about it.

As to the faith thing- I have the utmost respect for Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa and individuals like them. They didn't run around talking about how Christian they were- they were and are, in their actions and in their daily lives. Anyone can talk about being something, but I am far more impressed by those that actually live it.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

As to the faith thing- I have the utmost respect for Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa and individuals like them. They didn't run around talking about how Christian they were- they were and are, in their actions and in their daily lives. Anyone can talk about being something, but I am far more impressed by those that actually live it.

Does Bush really go around talking about how Christian he is? I just have never seen him do this(and I watch the 700 club )

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

First off- show me where I was mocking you. Don't accuse me of doing something I wasn't doing- I asked a largely rhetorical question as to how the hell Halliburton got a permanent no-bid contract, and you answered it. From the Bush Administration. Years ago, which dosen't make me feel any better about it.

As to the faith thing- I have the utmost respect for Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa and individuals like them. They didn't run around talking about how Christian they were- they were and are, in their actions and in their daily lives. Anyone can talk about being something, but I am far more impressed by those that actually live it.

I am not accusing you of something you did not do- though perhaps the mocking and sarcastic tone to -

How does Halliburton get a contract for repairing a disaster before it even happens? And if they have an exclusive 'Contractor for the USA' contract, that's news to the rest of us.

was unintentional-


Nor did it sound rhetorical- so I answered it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

So, someone who stands by their faith and says their faith is right, and others wrong, is supremely arrogant? So, they lose respect because they believe something that strongly- what? Would they be acceptable to you if they suffered doubt, questioned themselves and constantly had to adjust what they believed because they might be wrong?

I loose respect when they attempt to force that faith on others.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I loose respect when they attempt to force that faith on others.

Is being confident in your faith the same as forcing it on others? I find that being confident in your faith and sharing it is no different than, say, a product testimonial or talking about a life changing event to someone else.

Ex-smokers can be this way. Often times they are so proud of themselves, so happy about the change they've made, that they want to tell everyone and can become antismoking zealots.

[Name]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Honestly-sometimes I think some people believe that people have to prove their faith to them- if that is not supreme arrogance I don't know what is.

I don't require anyone to prove their faith to me, in fact I don't require anyone to disclose their religious preference to me either.

That being said, its the people that do disclose their religious preference without being asked about it, that generally give religious people a bad name.

I am a big fan of the don't ask, don't tell policy, in almost everything in life, especially when the answer really has no bearing on anything.


To say that religious preference means anything, is arrogance, IMNSHO.

[wendybeth]

Okay, Scaeagles, so we screen the church entities that wish to participate. For what? To see if they are breaking any laws regarding equal rights, discrimination, etc? Few churches could pass that test. The Salvation Army has a policy in place barring employment of gay persons. (Or they did). Would their refusal to hire gays negate any government contracts? What about the actual ministering- would it be only to a particular churches' congregation, or like-minded people, or to the general public? (There goes a few more churches I can think of). Would they proselytize while they were doing it? Would they even be allowed to? Too many questions, and then don't even get me going on the type of governmental agency that would be created to oversee this whole mess.

And in the end, would there be enough to address the need out there? I doubt it.

[scaeagles]

So, then, WB, what you are saying then is that it is more important to make sure that those passing out food don't allow certain religious beliefs to influence their hiring practices and don't dare mention the name of Jesus or Allah or whomever.

I thought the important thing was making sure they got fed and had their needs met.

While we're at it, we better make sure no Christians take in foster children. Foster parents take state money to care for them and they might dare bring them to church.

The whole idea is to limit government regulation so that the help gets to where it is needed in a more efficient fashion. Current government regulation makes overhead ridiculous and the process as inefficient as possible. I do not believe that government can do it better than relifgious organizations.

Would there be fraud and misuse? I have no doubt. I would dare say that there may be just a bit of that going on in the current way of the government handling things.