Prayer

[Racerbvd]

Prayer


In a small midwestern conservative town, there wasn't a place to get a drink for miles around, so a local entrepreneur saw an opportunity: He started to build a tavern.
Liking a "dry" town, the local church started a campaign to block the bar from opening with petitions and prayers. The businessman was polite when congregants came to protest, but work continued on the tavern.
But the night before the grand opening, a lightning strike hit the bar and it burned to the ground.
The church folks were rather smug in their piousness after that -- until the bar owner sued the church on the grounds that the church was ultimately responsible for the destruction of his building, either through direct or indirect actions or means.
The church vehemently denied all responsibility or any connection to the building's demise in its reply to the court.
At the first hearing, the judge held up the paperwork and took in the lawyers and both sides of the lawsuit.
"I don't know how I'm going to decide this," the judge said, "but as it appears from the paperwork, we have a bar owner that believes in the power of prayer, and an entire church congregation that doesn't."

[Hugh R]

Let me be the first to mention the name of GWB in this context.

The Dems bash Bush for mistakes in the war (which I believe there are, BTW). Nevertheless, by bashing mistakes made, that says to me that they (the Dems) expect no mistakes from the President (this one, or apparently any future President). Ergo, they must expect the President to be omnipotent, meaning all seeing, or God-like.

[kang]

Originally Posted by Hugh R

Let me be the first to mention the name of GWB in this context.

The Dems bash Bush for mistakes in the war (which I believe there are, BTW). Nevertheless, by bashing mistakes made, that says to me that they (the Dems) expect no mistakes from the President (this one, or apparently any future President). Ergo, they must expect the President to be omnipotent, meaning all seeing, or God-like.

You have drawn a false conclusion. They don't expect GWP to be omnitpotent, just to admit to the mistakes he has made. He has not done that.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

There's also a big difference between "mistakes" and "blatant lies and fabrications".

Unfortunately the declassification of documents necessary to conclusively prove that the intelligence data leading up to the war was deliberately fabricated in order to get the desired outcome (war vote in Congress) probably won't occur in our lifetimes. Probably not even the next. I'd say maybe on the order or 75-100 years.

But oh yes - I most definitely believe it was deliberate based on common sense.

[Nathans_Dad]

Oh boy, the "blatant lies and fabrications" bit again...gee, I wonder if we should go down THAT road again...the one that asks them to prove a lie or fabrication...nah, that horse is dead and rotting by now...

[Hugh R]

Kang, please re-read my post. I said ANY president. Don't get me wrong, I think he blew it. The trouble is that whether Hillary or Pelosi or harry reid like to admit, it or not, they saw the same information as Bush and voted for the war. THEY won't take ownership for their "mistakes" either. I don't think anyone of them has actually said that the Executive Branch hid information that came out later did they? Sure new refined better info came out later, but if you've ever investigated anything (I investigate accidents on occassion) and things always come out later, including lies. What "lies" were uncovered, as opposed to new information has been uncovered by the Dems. And if there is, why isn't an impeachment in progress, as opposed to blowing ho,t baseless, air.

[Jeff Higgins]

Great joke, Byron. Just thought I'd throw that in...