I think she was 4 inches shorter after she was fitted with prothesis, but thanks for your concerned sympathy for abandoned wife Carol McCain.

*****

Boxlock tries to equate liberalism with sexual license. How then does one explain Neil Bush contracting herpes from a Chinese whore and then passing it on to his then-wife?

Liberalism, I suppose . . .

Nathan enjoys being a marine — but he only does it part time —- so he really isn’t having the same experience as active duty Marines have — yet he wants us to believe that he is a hero warrior …. (regular and hlp also) …. sorry nat too many have sacrificed so much more than you to be called hero —– I suspect the government through the gi bill and other benefits, is paying for at least 75% of your education (taxpayers paid for ALL of McCains college education)—- thats for a part timer, yet he opposes any increase in aid for soldiers / veterans attending school … He’s got his …..

“…McCain…should perhaps consider highly some folks who have good stage presence; not highly controversial; perhaps female; such as Kay Bailey Hutchison, or Christie Todd Whitman; or even Sandra Day O’Connor(hey, I didnt come up with that — a friend of mine did!)”

O’Conner is as old (or older) than McSame. Constitutionally, the Vice-Presidential can’t come from the same states as the standard-bearer. That’s why (The Big) Dick Cheney reestablished residency in Wyoming in 2000 to run with Shrub.

Further, the primary reason O’Conner retired from the SCOTUS was to tend to her husband who was debilitated by Alzheimer’s Disease. The prospect of doing the same with doddering old McBush probably wouldn’t be appealing.

Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal might be a choice — a person of color, young. But that would negate attacks on Obama’s youth.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist might be on a short list. Important, big, southern state, and all that. But Charlie “hasn’t found a nice young lady to marry and settle down with. (wink wink).” Not sure how that would sit with the Dobson and Perkins crowd. (Although, it’d be interesting to see Second Lady Lynn Cheney replaced by a strapping young pool boy.)

Whitman still has a bad taste in her mouth about the way her service at EPA was subverted by BushCo. She’d be asked a lot of uncomfortable questions about that and just might answer them. Hutchison is a ditz; a bunch of campaign gaffes waiting to happen.

I doubt if any sitting Senator will be selected by either party.

Grassley is almost as old as McBush. Hagel’s stance on the Iraq War won’t play, what with McCain’s commitment to another hundred years of war.

I doubt if Schwarzkopf or Petreus have the political chops to get the nod. Gates is an interesting consideration but he, too, is too closely associated with Shrub’s little Iraqi adventure.

“I just hope that whoever the choices are, they would be capable of stepping into the Big Chair at any time, should the tragedy happen, and the Top Man could not continue!”

Most years, the Vice-Presidential nominee is a two-day story and an afterthought for most voters. The next President has to stress that the next Vice-President will not be (The Big) Dick Cheney’s 3rd term, either. Or Dan Quayle’s 2nd.

You finally seem to be handling Nathan the way I thought a person in your position should be handling him, rather than by typing in caps the equivalent of STOP IT(!!!!). By demonstrating that the history of Christianity and Christian creed(s) is far more complicated than simply taking the Bible literally (particularly considering that what is called the Bible is a series of documents translated by hand for centuries by people who made mistakes and sometimes felt compelled to make “corrections”, and that the books in the Bible were selected in a very political meeting arranged by Constantine). The kind of Biblical literalism that Nathan subscribes to is historically quite new, and the “you are not a Christian” argument by the doctrines that Nathan assumes is the worst sort of question begging.

I found it interesting that you resisted the urge to respond to the attempts by both Anti and Nathan to provoke you in their references to previous posting behavior (which were totally irrelvant to the subject at hand).

I particularly liked this response from you:

“Nathan is clearly delusional, by believing that one only posts a link to what one believes…”

I wouldn’t have made the “delusional” comment, but the point still stands.

Have you looked in the mirror lately?

I didn’t say I was watching live, it is recorded live and shown later, and maybe if more of the scene were shown I maybe I could have scanned the crowd later for the wild eyed hysterical misfit. But since they show little except for the board and the individual speaker that will probably not be available.

What with Ted Kennedy suffering the brain tumor; and the other Senator from the Dakota’s not in the greatest of health, Obama should possibly avoid looking at Senators as running mates.

He haas a fairly wide choice among some Governors – perhaps members of the House – Maybe somebody from business, industry, or even higher education. How about the woman from Missouri who went to bat for stem cell research? What about Wesley Clark? So many think Obama is a light-weight on military — Clark would possibly give some balance.

What about the Governor of Arizona?? Might put some heat on McCain’s home state!

However, Bill Richarson would be a very broad-based choice — International diplomacy; Border state expertise; hispanic vote magnet —

Many choices — but also still time for some very careful considerations.

I over-heard the other day a couple of lawyerly types discussing this; and one said perhaps Obama should consider Caroline Kennedy; while the other suggested the son of former President, Jimmy Carter —

My lady friend asked about the possibility of somebody like Robert Redford — who is an active Democrat activist, and according to some early reports, had considered a run for the Presidency in 2007.

Many choices — Any of them could be a significant presence on this year’s political stage.

As for McCain, he should perhaps consider highly some folks who have good stage presence; not highly controversial; perhaps female; such as Kay Bailey Hutchison, or Christie Todd Whitman; or even Sandra Day O’Connor(hey, I didnt come up with that — a friend of mine did!)

McCain might also think about somebody like Chuck Grassley, or Chuck Hagel(Nebraska) — Or perhaps somebody the caliber of Norman Schwarzkopf — I heard a radio talk show caller suggest even David Petreus — One sports show caller the other day mentioned Curt Shilling, Boston Red Sox pitcher, and Republican Party activist. Another possibility mentioned recently was the current Sec’y. of Defense, Gates(ties to Kansas, but more favorable than Brownback)

I would not envy anybody the position of advising either candidate on a VP choice, as topsy turvy as this race will be —

I just hope that whoever the choices are, they would be capable of stepping into the Big Chair at any time, should the tragedy happen, and the Top Man could not continue!

Those aren’t my words, my Lord Jesus Christ told me as much.

A$ WHOL

Aren’t you going to answer the 2 easy questions in my 6:21 pm post?

http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/06/open-thread-69/#comment-365994

In the first three centuries, the church found itself in a hostile environment. On the one hand, it grappled with the challenge of relating the language of the gospel, developed in a Hebraic and Jewish-Christian context, to a Graeco-Roman world. On the other hand, it was threatened not only by persecution, but also by ideas that were in conflict with the biblical witness.

In A.D. 312, Constantine won control of the Roman Empire in the battle of Milvian Bridge.

Attributing his victory to the intervention of Jesus Christ, he elevated Christianity to favored status in the empire. “One God, one Lord, one faith, one church, one empire, one emperor” became his motto.

The new emperor soon discovered that “one faith and one church” were fractured by theological disputes, especially conflicting understandings of the nature of Christ, long a point of controversy. Arius, a priest of the church in Alexandria, asserted that the divine Christ, the Word through whom all things have their existence, was created by God before the beginning of time. Therefore, the divinity of Christ was similar to the divinity of God, but not of the same essence. Arius was opposed by the bishop, Alexander, together with his associate and successor, Athanasius. They affirmed that the divinity of Christ, the Son, is of the same substance as the divinity of God, the Father. To hold otherwise, they said, was to open the possibility of polytheism, and to imply that knowledge of God in Christ was not final knowledge of God.

To counter a widening rift within the church, Constantine convened a council in Nicaea in A.D. 325. A creed reflecting the position of Alexander and Athanasius was written and signed by a majority of the bishops. Nevertheless, the two parties continued to battle each other. In A.D. 381, a second council met in Constantinople. It adopted a revised and expanded form of the A.D. 325 creed, now known as the Nicene Creed.

The Nicene Creed is the most ecumenical of creeds. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) joins with Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and most Protestant churches in affirming it. Nevertheless, in contrast to Eastern Orthodox churches, the western churches state that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father, but from the Father and the Son (Latin, filioque). To the eastern churches, saying that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son threatens the distinctiveness of the person of the Holy Spirit; to the western churches, the filioque guards the unity of the triune God. This issue remains unresolved in the ecumenical dialogue.
————————————————–

Quoted from The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Part I, Book of Confessions; Geneva Press, Louisville, KY. Copyright ©1996 by the Office of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior permission of the publisher, except as noted.

http://www.creeds.net/ancient/Nicene_Intro.htm

Nicene Creed

————————————————–

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

http://www.ccel.org/creeds/nicene.creed.html

Blessings ALL!!

So mote it be!!

Lots of good reading in those posts, folks!!

Enjoy!!

For someone who claims to be a Christian, Chas sure doesn’t believe anything that Christians do.

Christian? Not at all.

Minister? Probably, but the most vulgar and prone to throw temper tanrums I have ever dealt with.

Thanks. I love being a Marine. I love doing the things Marines do.

I will be a Marine until I retire.

Unfortunately, there are those few people here who no matter what I do it will never be good enough for them.

You posted a link to this website:

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html

This is what that website also concluded:

The gospels were not written by eyewitnesses.
The names attached to the gospels are second century guesses.
The nativity accounts are 100% fiction.
The one account of his childhood is more likely a fictional creation by Luke based on Old Testament passages.
There are major problems with all the major events in his life: the Baptism by John, the temptation in the wilderness and even whether there were actually twelve apostles.
None of the miracle accounts seems credible. The nature miracles and the epiphanies are obviously false, while many of the healings are unimpressive and could be explained by non-miraculous means.
Jesus’s teachings were not that much different from the teachings of other major religious traditions and were well within the tradition of various contemporaneous Jewish itinerant preachers.
His personality was probably not that attractive: the evidence points to the fact that he was, like most Jewish preachers of his time, a xenophobic, rather fanatical, Jew.
He never claimed to be God.
Many events surrounding the “passion week” are of dubious historicity.
The account of Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin is obviously fiction as it contradicts everything we know about the procedures of the council.
The trial before Pilate is largely fictional as well.
The accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion read like fiction.
The accounts of the burial and resurrection could not be true as they stand for they contradict one another openly.

You are no Christian Chas.

Anti,

I know what the common meaning for “ESAD” is.

However, I wouldn’t want to go through antoher Chas episode where he said “STFU” meant: Stand The Floor Up.
—-
Yes, I know…I am still in shock that a grown man claiming to be a preacher would come up with that definition to slime out of a comment…pathetic… but it still makes me chuckle…LOL ROFL ect.! A side note- Thank you for your service to this country! It seems lately (read forever) the Left thinks that doesn’t matter much.

I am going to assume that you don’t believe in the virgin birth since everything you are posting is going against it.

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html

If not then why did you post it?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/virgin_b.htm