Delta123 asked: 'My own continuing study has led me to conclude that Joseph Smith was who he said he was. If he, and the religion that resulted, were such clear and blatant frauds, then how has the religion not only survived, but thrived?'

IMO, he was marketing a religion that allowed men to have multiple wives...no, glorified them having multiple wives (talking about the pre-1890 version) & that was obviously attractive to certain men (and I guess, certain women).

MereMortal had this quote: '"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."'

That he/she had attributed to Joesph Goebbels. I believe that it was Hermann Goering who actually said the above quote.

Hey Wes, I checked out the Salon Personals for 1st time & you're right, there are some hot babes out there. It wouldn't let me look at the photos without signing up, though.

How about UK whopping UL last Sat. night, any comments on that?

By the way, thank you for getting your star ;-)

It's a shame that Bob Ford shot Mr. James. I'd have much rather seen him go to the gallows.

That's sad, Wes. I think Kragthorpe is a good coach & UL will be fine. I went to UK - Kent St. game week before & all the fans were already frothing at the mouth about the UL game. I think Commonwealth was a tough place to play that night.

Hope you have fun on your golf junket.

Paul Dirks mentioned this in a post: 'Of course the founding documents of Christianity are inconsistent on the subject which is why gay-bashers tend to focus on Leviticus which of course has a whole litany of other passages which are dutifully ignored while those of us of a less hostile bent tend to focus on the Gospels and the focus on our own sins rather than those of others that is the core message therein'

While I agree that there certainly are a whole lot of passages in the New Testament our right-wing nutwads try not to acknowledge/live-up-to, there are several long passages in Paul's letter to the Romans that quite explicitly come down on homosexuality.

So, I guess I'm saying Leviticus isn't the only book they selectively quote from.

I think Rove & Co. knew the memos shown in Mr. Rather's piece were re-created/fake, because they had the original ones on file & thus could compare & contrast the minor formatting differences.

Yes sir, Fraud Guy, WWPD is lived up to a whole lot more than WWJD. I think modern protestant Christianity could more accurately be described as 'Paulism'.

I, for one, think our Democratic politicians don't use enough Jesus quotes out of the New Testament when responding to various hard hearted actions by the other side.

If you go back & read some of FDR's & Truman's speeches/remarks, they weren't at all embarrassed to place their priniciples/legislative desires on the side of Christ & point out how the opposition was going against the presumed desires of the Prince of Peace.

The thing to remember when confronting these pseudo-Christians is that you don't have to necessarily believe what's in the Bible, THEY have to (or at least pretend they do).

Uh, I think Jim Mc was trying to say that we are on the way to bankrupting ourselves with our crazy Mideast adventures, much like the Soviets did trying to 'keep up with the Jones' (according to the acolytes of Saint Ronnie).

At least, that was how I read his post.

Bill Timberman commented: 'Are we really gonna blame Al Gore's loss on Clinton's penis? C'mon p_l_c, that's kinda below the belt. Surely Gore's posing as a cigar-store Indian, and Tipper's decency, and Sactimonious Joe as a running mate had something to do with it.'

I think p_l_c has a point. When the whole Lewinsky saga unfolded it was after the 1996 election. I remember there were many people I spoke to then (mostly older people in their 60s & 70s) who were extremely pissed off at Pres. Clinton.

From what they were telling me, they probably wouldn't have voted for him back in 1996 (but they had voted for him in 1996).

That segment of people was never able to vote against Pres. Clinton to show their displeasure. I think alot of those people did what they considered to be the next best thing & voted against VP Gore in 2000.

Probably not the most logical thing to do, but when has our electorate been logical?

Cpl Groenhagen, who certainly covered himself in honor, during his Marine tour (got all the way to Corporal, must have been really squared away), is now doing yeoman's work engaging the real enemy (commies posting on Salon) as a Grenadier-Bullshitter 2nd Class in the 101st Fighting Keyboarders (motto: Grinning & Spinning cause we're not Winning).

I'd have liked to have seen you do Marine Basic back in mid 50s like Mr. Rather did. I don't think you'd have lasted past the D.I.s first kick to your tiny balls (IMO).

I'm not suggesting that was the only reason for VP Gore's loss back in 2000 (maybe p_l_c is, but I'm not).

My take on Mr. Gore's shortcomings are amply documented in my letter archives. However, in such a close election, that segment of people I described in my previous post, was certainly a segment that VP Gore would have had vote for him if the Lewinsky mess had never occurred (IMO).

Thank you for responding. I enjoy reading your posts.