Further evidence of Goodling crimes – her affiliation with Karl Rove, an affiliation leading to perjury – her direct role in voter suppression, a major felony – her work with Tim Griffith, directing voter suppression.

Caging list documentation is in public hands.

Sent to Leahy.

Evidence shows that:
she committed perjury before Congress.
is guilty of subversion of Government.
is guilty of violations of Voter Rights Act.

Goodling is now scheduled to appear mid June before Senate Judiciary.

you are such a bitch to people who know more than you. it is really annoy. could you f*ckin’ shut up already? if david isn’t denying it was him, then who are you to speak for him? you know better than anyone that people change names to look like other people. having a child is so easy that there are six and a half billion people on the planet. the fact that you spit out a couple brats is irrelevant. dogs and rats do it all the time and look how stupid they are. it’s knowledge that is harder to acquire and rare. no wonder you are so bitterly jealous of people who have done things you aren’t smart enough to do. stupid cow. go read a book. but we won’t hold our breaths. we’ve come to expect you to act like a stupid idiot. i dare youu to prove me wrong.

i can’t brag about a bible quiz score, as i don’t care enough about a book of tales and parables to take such a quiz,
but i can sure brag about my 2 children, and so i have!

thanks for endulging me that, TP and all!

lots to do… bye!
…

and on thursday i’m off to california to see my first born, my son,
receive his doctoral degree in chemistry on saturday…
whew! … i did a couple things right at least!

enjoy your debates… i’m learning so much!
…

oops! … guess that predeeding post proves that someone didn’t bother to read far enough…
see below:

165. [...]There will be a judgement day and if you are not prepared for that, then what will it profit you if you have won every argument and lost your own soul?
Comment by David — May 10, 2007 @ 7:09 pm

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/09/benedictine-nuns-may-protest-bush/#comment-3797414

oops! looks like unbelievable owes both david and David an apology…
don’t anyone hold your breath!
…

Firstly, thankyou for proving my point for me. As I already pointed out, the method for improving humanity is through reasoned argument, education, and to some extent a guiding philosophy of “The Better Person.”

It is a vision which constantly changes with each person’s life experiences, and as new ideas of what constitutes a better person come to the fore, but the concept that we each individually strive to be that better person should be enough to improve humanity.

In short my plan is, when it comes down to it, to try and lead by example. I am not the better person, but I try to be, which is something I get the faint feeling, is beyond your understanding.

As to philosopher kings:

Yes and no. On the one hand I believe we should encourage a love of the truth, and if a person is to lead a love of the truth would be a positive indicator. Someone who is capable of thinking, is fine by me.

However, what I really encourage is to not follow leaders and rather think for yourself. Reason is not based on following the reasoning of others, but rather making your own mind up based on the facts and arguments life presents you.

In other words I encourage a philosopher populace, not a philosopher king.

Of course, as you oppose thought and as I would never accuse of being a hypocrit in that regard, I am sure you will find yet another way to dodge what I am saying and read into my words what you want them to mean.

You might as well just type “blah, blah, blah”, because that’s just as valid as your silly strawmen, off-the-mark insults, and total lack of substance (facts, argument, information). The bottom line is that you’ve been thrashed in this discussion, proven to be a liar (see below), and now, aren’t even worthy of a point-by-point debunking because your comments are just third grade hysterics.

Best to just pick yourself up off the floor upon which you are pitching your temper tantrum, and go home. The sooner you let go the sooner you’ll get over it…

But, feel free to say hello from time to time. I enjoy the laugh…

There will be a judgement day and if you are not prepared for that, then what will it profit you if you have won every argument and lost your own soul?
Comment by David — May 10, 2007 @ 7:09 pm

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/09/benedictine-nuns-may-protest-bush/

Guess that proves me right and you, a liar…

Later. I’m going to go try and find someone who is actually a thinker (as Ernest Hemingway said “All thinking men are Atheists”), and not an insulter to debate.

Yes, you’ll probably say I’m building a strawman out of those concepts. But how do you improve humanity? What is “humanity”? You seem to have already decided you know best. And what is the “common good”? Do you intend, like your good friend Socrates, to impose Philosopher Kings on us?

This is why I say unbelievable was the bizarro Monica Goodling. It seems to me that the Christian Right and the Progressive Left want to play a game of alternating purges. It will be like the purges of Marius and Sulla during the Roman Republic. Or England in the times of Bloody Mary and Elizabeth. What fun!

I mean the people who were eliminated based on the best, flawed, incomplete and misleading data of the day. Just because it wasn’t based on innate prejudice didn’t make it right.

Also, improving humanity as in: A greater will towards the common good, improving the lot of humans everywhere and reducing the harm caused by humans on the enviroment without turning on our own species.

Improving humanity as a concept, as opposed to the purely physical improving humans as a species.

Of course, you will now procede to ignore this clarification and try to build another straw man out of it.

What exactly do you mean by “improve humanity”? Are you sure you don’t include that bad idea of eugenics? And what’s with that qualifier “mostly”? Do you mean that some “less desirable” people were eliminated rationally?

I’m sure you are aware of the Yale experiments of Stanley Milgram. So much for reason, so much for science as a way to improve humanity. How easy to lead the worshipper of Reason to commit atrocities! And then there’s Joseph Heller’s Catch-22: an example of Kurt Godel’s premise of incompleteness.

I love the Socrates of Aristophanes. And Leo Strauss loved the Socrates of The Republic –a work I always considered a bit silly. And I loved the Socrates of I.F. Stone. I’m not sure that Socrates shouldn’t be called a sophist himself. He’s certainly no lover of Democracy.

Tens of millions died before the 20th century, and their killers weren’t sorry, they did it again, and again and again.

You try to twist my words into meaning something they do not and you fail, because you are lying. You are liar, I did not say killing millions would be good with a more rational excuse, I said reason got us thinking that killing people for being different as being wrong.

You want to pretend that thought is the enemy how very 1984 of you. While I disagree with the religious I support their right to their religion, I support the fact that Goodling should be fired for taking something that is irrelevent to the functioning of a lawyer as a disqualifying factor.

I do not support the idea that we mustn’t speak out against religion. I do not support keeping quiet in the face of anything I think of as being wrong, because I do not support cowardice masquerading as good manners.

A religious person wants to try and convert me, I am all for it. I like arguing, particularly if the other person does not try logical fallacies as a rout towards winning the argument. You have appealed to authority lots, where is your argument? I’ve read the same books as you and they are opinion, not fact. The only opinion I trust to that extent is the opinion of Socrates.

You have built straw men to try and knock me down, I am not made of straw. Where have I stated that genocide is excusable? The aim is to improve humanity, and we judge humanity on how we treat our weakest, so where do I say lets engage in genocide?

You are a coward and a sophist, and frankly I don’t have time for either.

Dear me, Bruce Gorton, I’ll have to call my Unitarian mother and tell her that her son has gone over to the Dark Side in the minds of Progessive posters. It’ll go hard with the Marxists that haunt my mother’s side of the family. And my father’s father was British Labour through and through.

I do think you have to wake up to the fact that this is a Post-Christian/Post-Enlightenment world. It’s a PoMo World, dear friend. And Reason didn’t survive into the 21st Century. I can recommend Johh Ralston Saul’s Voltaires’ Bast*rds. Saul annoys me at times with his glibness, but he has more than enough food for thought.

Sure, people can be mistaken in their reasoning, however in terms of human suffering the 20th century is actually a damn site better then the ages before it, where the holocaust against the Jews wouldn’t have even been mentioned as a bad thing.

Reason, for all of its flaws, has given us a view of human beings as being humans, while religion has repeatedly been used to reinforce the divine right of the abuser, to control the abused. Sure, eugenics were a bad idea, but the basis behind those who were deemed “Less desirable” was mostly based on prejudice, not reason.

I’m not impressed. You think the tens of millions murdered in the 20th Century are better off because their murders said “sorry” a few decades after the killings? How strange! And you’d be happier if the “less desirable” were eliminated on a more rational basis, is that it? I don’t think that would sit well with anyone I know, theist or atheist.

I enjoy HL Mencken, but there’s more than a little truth about him in that play Inherit the Wind. The character of EK Hornbeck, that is. Me, I’m completely in sympathy with Henry Drummond, the character based on Clarence Darrow. I have both Communists and preachers on my family tree. And the family Bible in my home was not the KJV, but the Plays & Prefaces of GB Shaw.

where crimes of “morality” and “blasphemy” were considered far worse in nature than mere “secular crimes.” The former “crimes” carried unspeakble consequences.

Call me what you want – I DON’T CARE – I want a public execution of this diseased, pathetic misanthrope.

And you don’t think a “public execution” is an unspeakable consequence?

I’m sorry, but I’m as Christian as Spinoza and Einstein. But that just verifies my impression that you’re a bigoted SOB. And just as much of a proselytizing goon as any Southern Baptist or Mormon.

I can’t shake your faith in reason, eh? Not after Pavlov? or Evolutionary Psychology poked holes the size of toilet seats into Reason’s laurel crested head? I’m shocked. Try reading John Ralston Saul’s Voltaire’s Bastards. I find JRS annoying at times, but he’s the postmodern future and you’re the 18th Century past.

Things you forgot to mention were: Worldwide communications, space travel, medicine, an end to child labour, the rise of the unionist movement, the rise of the civil rights movement and the fall of colonialism.

That’s a laugh. You don’t recognize the Christian leaders involved in the Civil Rights movement? I’ll tell that when next I see Martin Luther King. Colonialism? I don’t recall America using missionaryism as an excuse to conquer the Philippines or Cuba –or even its invasion of Vietnam and Iraq. No, it was the all-knowing REASON of national security. And who invented hospitals? Not reason. It was the Church. And who were the first socialists? Protestants: the True Levellers. And what does space travel have to do with reason or faith –except some delusional desire to finance the next generation ICBMs.

Sure, people can be mistaken in their reasoning, however in terms of human suffering the 20th century is actually a damn site better then the ages before it, where the holocaust against the Jews wouldn’t have even been mentioned as a bad thing.

Are you joking? So the dozens of millions murdered in the 20th Century are a good thing because someone said sorry a decade or two after they did it? I’m sure that is comforting to the soulless dead. And why did it happen in the Age of Reason and not in the Middle Ages? Even witches were protected by the Church until the 13th Century. It was the twin Gods of Reason & Science that allowed mass extermination. And don’t forget Hitler’s holocaust began with the elimination of the mentally and physically handicapped –something that was happening in America through forced sterilization by the State.

Both you and unbelievable belong to some outdated and cruel faction that believes in the Triumph of the Reason’s Will. Tosh! You’re living in a post-Christian, post-Enlightenment world. Get over yourselves. Don’t meddle in the beliefs of others. Finding meaning is all that counts now. And doing no harm to others. If you can’t defend those you don’t agree with, I say you really don’t get what Jefferson and Thoreau were all about. And if you think the automobile isn’t the slow poison killing the planet, well, you must live in Detroit.

I am going to call the ABA to inquire as to why she hasn’t had her law license revoked. I hope other people do the same. Monica Goodling is a traitor in the sense that was described by Cicero.

I feel disgust at her plea – the 5th Ammendment – before even testifying before congress. Her statement of a “hostile environment” is the maneuver of a caught criminal who needs to play victim to save her skin.

She is a traitor. She is a liar and she is a coward.

Her part in turning the DOJ into the politically based legal hit squad for the GOP takes us one step closer to the totalitarian domination of a government over its people.

Infusing her specific brand of Christianity as a government yard stick – towards employment and acceptable behavior – takes us back one step closer to the dark methods of penalization of the religious state – where crimes of “morality” and “blasphemy” were considered far worse in nature than mere “secular crimes.” The former “crimes” carried unspeakble consequences.

Call me what you want – I DON’T CARE – I want a public execution of this diseased, pathetic misanthrope.

They have the right to their religion, and that right should be vigerously defended for in defending it my right to not believe is defended, and besides I am perfectly capable of being wrong.

That said, I do not agree with their faith, and defending their faith should never simply mean keeping quiet when you think it is a load of lies. We shy away from religious arguments because of some stupid idea that freedom of religion equals freedom from having that religion criticised. It does not.

Freedom of religion means that you are free to believe whatever you want. You want to take it on faith that the earth is flat, that is your prerogative, but if you are wrong expect to be called on it. If your faith, because I do not believe you are an atheist, cannot stand against real scrutiny then it has no validity.

You are no atheist. I have read your words, you are religions version of a sympathy troll – you fake your unbelief in the hopes of strengthening a position which is untenable – that thought is the enemy, logic is the problem, and that all can be solved via an application of faith.

You are no atheist, nor in truth a mystic or a pantheist. You are as Christian as your rhetoric confirms you to be.

Sure, people can be mistaken in their reasoning, however in terms of human suffering the 20th century is actually a damn site better then the ages before it, where the holocaust against the Jews wouldn’t have even been mentioned as a bad thing.

Reason, for all of its flaws, has given us a view of human beings as being humans, while religion has repeatedly been used to reinforce the divine right of the abuser, to control the abused. Sure, eugenics were a bad idea, but the basis behind those who were deemed “Less desirable” was mostly based on prejudice, not reason.

Prejudice is a weakness within a person’s reason, in that it acts as a double blind spot, this is not the result of pure reason, which dictates one judges based on the facts, but rather on belief, which is an element of faith.

The automobile, for all that you might consider it to be evil, has given people access to food, services and work which simply wouldn’t have been available otherwise.

Things you forgot to mention were: Worldwide communications, space travel, medicine, an end to child labour, the rise of the unionist movement, the rise of the civil rights movement and the fall of colonialism.

Reason, was what led to the end of many of the ideas which you lambast as being evil products of it, as reasoned debate led to the understanding that those ideas were wrong.

Your argument has failed to convince to me.

Dear Bruce, are you reading what I write? I do not have a God. Not one that appears to me or doesn’t appear to me. So stop speaking for atheists as if you belonged to some club with an agreed upon platform. And did you read Job? If you did you would know that chapter 38 is where God answers Job.

BTW, who said you were damned to Hell? Who said there was a Hell? You do know that the Afterlife is not a Jewish concept. Even the Roman Underworld is hardly like the Hell that has grown up in the minds of writers such as Dante. Since you will die and become loam, that’s all you need fear. What happens after death is a mystery and nearly everything you’ve heard about it is invented and beyond the text of the Bible.

As for prohibiting faith, I don’t think there’s a War on Christmas or any such nonsense as that. But I do think there’s a war against faith. Look at the laws against Islam popping up in all the Western countries. Even Monica Goodling was crusading against certain kinds of Christians. If you cannot defend the rights of those being persecuted by Pat Robertson, then I cannot find anything useful in your god Reason. And you and unbelievable didn’t simply express your viewpoint. No, you attacked all believers and ridiculed them and slandered them and smeared them with falsehoods. And rather than apologize for your extremism and correctly identify whom you were critiquing we were treated to something like “There is No God but Reason and Unbelievable is her Messanger.” What nonsense!