Calif Bill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Jan 5, 10:33 am, HK wrote:
JG2U wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:01:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
If you read all the way to the bottom of the item, you'll see that
your link actually validates my point about some Christians who
describe themselvs as "evangelical" (including the Methodist preacher
quoted)
having difficulty with Romney's Mormon faith.
From your link:
Evangelicals are hugely influential in the Iowa caucuses, making up by
some estimates some 40 percent of Republican caucus-goers. Many of
them, however, have profound reservations about Mr. Romney's Mormon
faith.
Mr. Hurd, the pastor of West Hill United Methodist Church here who
identified himself as an evangelical, said he wrestled with that issue
himself but decided in the end it should not matter in his decision.
"Although they have a theology vastly different from mine, Mormons
generally are good citizens," he said.
Mr. Hurd also offered some insight into where his fellow Alliance
board members are leaning. He said they are mainly divided between Mr.
Romney and Mr. Huckabee, with the latter probably holding the edge.
"A lot of them are troubled by his Mormon religion," he said. "That's
probably the difference."
*******
So there's a statement, by an Iowa pastor describing himself as
"evangelical", confirming that many Christians of his acquaintance are
"troubled by (Romney's) Mormon religion."
Not quite... there are no quotes around evangelical in the article. So
it didn't come out of his mouth, but probably went something like
this:
"Do you evangelize as part of your faith?"
"Yes."
"So would you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?"
"I suppose."
My whole point continues to be that it is the *media* who seems to
find the labels "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (which *you*
improperly used) important, not Christians themselves.
And also that there are Christians who do not have a problem with the
Mormon faith. Sure some do, but there are groups who are opposed to
Romney for other reasons as well. So? Weird people everywhere.
twisted logic deleted
Huckabee is a perfect match for the GOP base.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
No he is not... you just want him in because your candidates are so
weak...


Are you on consciousness-altering drugs?

In the recently concluded Iowa caucuses, the Democratic candidates brought
more than twice as many voters out on a cold night than the Republicans. I
don't recall the exact count, but I believe the Dems had about 240,000
Iowans show up for caucus, while the Repugs had only about 115,000. And it
was much more difficult and took much more time to vote in the Democratic
caucuses.

If the Democratic candidates were so weak, they wouldn't be outpolling the
Republicans by such a substantial number.

The only *decent* candidate on the GOP side is John McCain. Your hero,
Huckabee the Evangelical, is a foreign policy numnutz. We've already had
seven years of that with Bush. It isn't going to happen again.


Most of that is how the Dem's set up their caucuses.




What? Twice as many dems as repugs showed up because they were
motivated, not because they had to. Are you drinking from Zell Miller's
cup again?

"HK" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Jan 5, 10:33 am, HK wrote:
JG2U wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:01:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
If you read all the way to the bottom of the item, you'll see that
your link actually validates my point about some Christians who
describe themselvs as "evangelical" (including the Methodist
preacher
quoted)
having difficulty with Romney's Mormon faith.
From your link:
Evangelicals are hugely influential in the Iowa caucuses, making up
by
some estimates some 40 percent of Republican caucus-goers. Many of
them, however, have profound reservations about Mr. Romney's Mormon
faith.
Mr. Hurd, the pastor of West Hill United Methodist Church here who
identified himself as an evangelical, said he wrestled with that
issue
himself but decided in the end it should not matter in his decision.
"Although they have a theology vastly different from mine, Mormons
generally are good citizens," he said.
Mr. Hurd also offered some insight into where his fellow Alliance
board members are leaning. He said they are mainly divided between
Mr.
Romney and Mr. Huckabee, with the latter probably holding the edge.
"A lot of them are troubled by his Mormon religion," he said.
"That's
probably the difference."
*******
So there's a statement, by an Iowa pastor describing himself as
"evangelical", confirming that many Christians of his acquaintance
are
"troubled by (Romney's) Mormon religion."
Not quite... there are no quotes around evangelical in the article.
So
it didn't come out of his mouth, but probably went something like
this:
"Do you evangelize as part of your faith?"
"Yes."
"So would you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?"
"I suppose."
My whole point continues to be that it is the *media* who seems to
find the labels "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (which *you*
improperly used) important, not Christians themselves.
And also that there are Christians who do not have a problem with the
Mormon faith. Sure some do, but there are groups who are opposed to
Romney for other reasons as well. So? Weird people everywhere.
twisted logic deleted
Huckabee is a perfect match for the GOP base.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
No he is not... you just want him in because your candidates are so
weak...


Are you on consciousness-altering drugs?

In the recently concluded Iowa caucuses, the Democratic candidates
brought more than twice as many voters out on a cold night than the
Republicans. I don't recall the exact count, but I believe the Dems had
about 240,000 Iowans show up for caucus, while the Repugs had only about
115,000. And it was much more difficult and took much more time to vote
in the Democratic caucuses.

If the Democratic candidates were so weak, they wouldn't be outpolling
the Republicans by such a substantial number.

The only *decent* candidate on the GOP side is John McCain. Your hero,
Huckabee the Evangelical, is a foreign policy numnutz. We've already had
seven years of that with Bush. It isn't going to happen again.


Most of that is how the Dem's set up their caucuses.


What? Twice as many dems as repugs showed up because they were motivated,
not because they had to. Are you drinking from Zell Miller's cup again?

You drunk or all the lead from yesterdays shooting got to you? They run
their caucuses different.

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:47:19 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Jan 5, 10:33 am, HK wrote:
JG2U wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:01:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
If you read all the way to the bottom of the item, you'll see that
your link actually validates my point about some Christians who
describe themselvs as "evangelical" (including the Methodist
preacher
quoted)
having difficulty with Romney's Mormon faith.
From your link:
Evangelicals are hugely influential in the Iowa caucuses, making up
by
some estimates some 40 percent of Republican caucus-goers. Many of
them, however, have profound reservations about Mr. Romney's Mormon
faith.
Mr. Hurd, the pastor of West Hill United Methodist Church here who
identified himself as an evangelical, said he wrestled with that
issue
himself but decided in the end it should not matter in his decision.
"Although they have a theology vastly different from mine, Mormons
generally are good citizens," he said.
Mr. Hurd also offered some insight into where his fellow Alliance
board members are leaning. He said they are mainly divided between
Mr.
Romney and Mr. Huckabee, with the latter probably holding the edge.
"A lot of them are troubled by his Mormon religion," he said.
"That's
probably the difference."
*******
So there's a statement, by an Iowa pastor describing himself as
"evangelical", confirming that many Christians of his acquaintance
are
"troubled by (Romney's) Mormon religion."
Not quite... there are no quotes around evangelical in the article.
So
it didn't come out of his mouth, but probably went something like
this:
"Do you evangelize as part of your faith?"
"Yes."
"So would you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?"
"I suppose."
My whole point continues to be that it is the *media* who seems to
find the labels "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (which *you*
improperly used) important, not Christians themselves.
And also that there are Christians who do not have a problem with the
Mormon faith. Sure some do, but there are groups who are opposed to
Romney for other reasons as well. So? Weird people everywhere.
twisted logic deleted
Huckabee is a perfect match for the GOP base.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
No he is not... you just want him in because your candidates are so
weak...


Are you on consciousness-altering drugs?

In the recently concluded Iowa caucuses, the Democratic candidates
brought more than twice as many voters out on a cold night than the
Republicans. I don't recall the exact count, but I believe the Dems had
about 240,000 Iowans show up for caucus, while the Repugs had only about
115,000. And it was much more difficult and took much more time to vote
in the Democratic caucuses.

If the Democratic candidates were so weak, they wouldn't be outpolling
the Republicans by such a substantial number.

The only *decent* candidate on the GOP side is John McCain. Your hero,
Huckabee the Evangelical, is a foreign policy numnutz. We've already had
seven years of that with Bush. It isn't going to happen again.


Most of that is how the Dem's set up their caucuses.


What? Twice as many dems as repugs showed up because they were motivated,
not because they had to. Are you drinking from Zell Miller's cup again?

You drunk or all the lead from yesterdays shooting got to you? They run
their caucuses different.

A bunch of young folks showed up from other states hoping to get laid.l
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:16:54 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:56:24 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:47:19 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Jan 5, 10:33 am, HK wrote:
JG2U wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:01:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
If you read all the way to the bottom of the item, you'll see that
your link actually validates my point about some Christians who
describe themselvs as "evangelical" (including the Methodist
preacher
quoted)
having difficulty with Romney's Mormon faith.
From your link:
Evangelicals are hugely influential in the Iowa caucuses, making up
by
some estimates some 40 percent of Republican caucus-goers. Many of
them, however, have profound reservations about Mr. Romney's Mormon
faith.
Mr. Hurd, the pastor of West Hill United Methodist Church here who
identified himself as an evangelical, said he wrestled with that
issue
himself but decided in the end it should not matter in his decision.
"Although they have a theology vastly different from mine, Mormons
generally are good citizens," he said.
Mr. Hurd also offered some insight into where his fellow Alliance
board members are leaning. He said they are mainly divided between
Mr.
Romney and Mr. Huckabee, with the latter probably holding the edge.
"A lot of them are troubled by his Mormon religion," he said.
"That's
probably the difference."
*******
So there's a statement, by an Iowa pastor describing himself as
"evangelical", confirming that many Christians of his acquaintance
are
"troubled by (Romney's) Mormon religion."
Not quite... there are no quotes around evangelical in the article.
So
it didn't come out of his mouth, but probably went something like
this:
"Do you evangelize as part of your faith?"
"Yes."
"So would you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?"
"I suppose."
My whole point continues to be that it is the *media* who seems to
find the labels "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (which *you*
improperly used) important, not Christians themselves.
And also that there are Christians who do not have a problem with the
Mormon faith. Sure some do, but there are groups who are opposed to
Romney for other reasons as well. So? Weird people everywhere.
twisted logic deleted
Huckabee is a perfect match for the GOP base.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
No he is not... you just want him in because your candidates are so
weak...


Are you on consciousness-altering drugs?

In the recently concluded Iowa caucuses, the Democratic candidates
brought more than twice as many voters out on a cold night than the
Republicans. I don't recall the exact count, but I believe the Dems had
about 240,000 Iowans show up for caucus, while the Repugs had only about
115,000. And it was much more difficult and took much more time to vote
in the Democratic caucuses.

If the Democratic candidates were so weak, they wouldn't be outpolling
the Republicans by such a substantial number.

The only *decent* candidate on the GOP side is John McCain. Your hero,
Huckabee the Evangelical, is a foreign policy numnutz. We've already had
seven years of that with Bush. It isn't going to happen again.


Most of that is how the Dem's set up their caucuses.


What? Twice as many dems as repugs showed up because they were motivated,
not because they had to. Are you drinking from Zell Miller's cup again?

You drunk or all the lead from yesterdays shooting got to you? They run
their caucuses different.

A bunch of young folks showed up from other states hoping to get laid.l


So, you are saying that Young Republicans are Asexual?

They don't have to hop on a bus and go to Iowa in hopes of getting laid.
They do quite well at home.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:43:06 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:16:54 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:56:24 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:47:19 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Jan 5, 10:33 am, HK wrote:
JG2U wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:01:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
If you read all the way to the bottom of the item, you'll see that
your link actually validates my point about some Christians who
describe themselvs as "evangelical" (including the Methodist
preacher
quoted)
having difficulty with Romney's Mormon faith.
From your link:
Evangelicals are hugely influential in the Iowa caucuses, making up
by
some estimates some 40 percent of Republican caucus-goers. Many of
them, however, have profound reservations about Mr. Romney's Mormon
faith.
Mr. Hurd, the pastor of West Hill United Methodist Church here who
identified himself as an evangelical, said he wrestled with that
issue
himself but decided in the end it should not matter in his decision.
"Although they have a theology vastly different from mine, Mormons
generally are good citizens," he said.
Mr. Hurd also offered some insight into where his fellow Alliance
board members are leaning. He said they are mainly divided between
Mr.
Romney and Mr. Huckabee, with the latter probably holding the edge.
"A lot of them are troubled by his Mormon religion," he said.
"That's
probably the difference."
*******
So there's a statement, by an Iowa pastor describing himself as
"evangelical", confirming that many Christians of his acquaintance
are
"troubled by (Romney's) Mormon religion."
Not quite... there are no quotes around evangelical in the article.
So
it didn't come out of his mouth, but probably went something like
this:
"Do you evangelize as part of your faith?"
"Yes."
"So would you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?"
"I suppose."
My whole point continues to be that it is the *media* who seems to
find the labels "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (which *you*
improperly used) important, not Christians themselves.
And also that there are Christians who do not have a problem with the
Mormon faith. Sure some do, but there are groups who are opposed to
Romney for other reasons as well. So? Weird people everywhere.
twisted logic deleted
Huckabee is a perfect match for the GOP base.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
No he is not... you just want him in because your candidates are so
weak...

Are you on consciousness-altering drugs?

In the recently concluded Iowa caucuses, the Democratic candidates
brought more than twice as many voters out on a cold night than the
Republicans. I don't recall the exact count, but I believe the Dems had
about 240,000 Iowans show up for caucus, while the Repugs had only about
115,000. And it was much more difficult and took much more time to vote
in the Democratic caucuses.

If the Democratic candidates were so weak, they wouldn't be outpolling
the Republicans by such a substantial number.

The only *decent* candidate on the GOP side is John McCain. Your hero,
Huckabee the Evangelical, is a foreign policy numnutz. We've already had
seven years of that with Bush. It isn't going to happen again.

Most of that is how the Dem's set up their caucuses.

What? Twice as many dems as repugs showed up because they were motivated,
not because they had to. Are you drinking from Zell Miller's cup again?
You drunk or all the lead from yesterdays shooting got to you? They run
their caucuses different.

A bunch of young folks showed up from other states hoping to get laid.l

So, you are saying that Young Republicans are Asexual?
They don't have to hop on a bus and go to Iowa in hopes of getting laid.
They do quite well at home.

So, you are saying they are "stick in the muds" with no drive or
curiosity about the outside world?




Young Republicans in search of sex "do quite well at home."

:}


Vice is nice, but incest is best?


Well, for Republicans, I suppose it beats hanging out at the men's room.

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:47:48 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:43:06 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:16:54 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:56:24 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:47:19 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


snipped

You drunk or all the lead from yesterdays shooting got to you? They run
their caucuses different.

A bunch of young folks showed up from other states hoping to get laid.l


So, you are saying that Young Republicans are Asexual?

They don't have to hop on a bus and go to Iowa in hopes of getting laid.
They do quite well at home.

So, you are saying they are "stick in the muds" with no drive or
curiosity about the outside world?


Outside world? Iowa?

I've been across Iowa north-south and east-west, by car and by motorcycle.
I can honestly say, the best way is by fast jet.

Where do you live that you'd call Iowa the 'outside world'?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

HK wrote:



Young Republicans in search of sex "do quite well at home."

:}


Vice is nice, but incest is best?

Why do all of your sexual references focus in on bestiality, incest and
young girls.




Well, for Republicans, I suppose it beats hanging out at the men's room.

HK wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:43:06 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:16:54 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:56:24 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:47:19 -0800, "Calif Bill"

wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Jan 5, 10:33 am, HK wrote:
JG2U wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:01:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
If you read all the way to the bottom of the item, you'll
see that
your link actually validates my point about some Christians
who
describe themselvs as "evangelical" (including the
Methodist preacher
quoted)
having difficulty with Romney's Mormon faith.
From your link:
Evangelicals are hugely influential in the Iowa caucuses,
making up by
some estimates some 40 percent of Republican caucus-goers.
Many of
them, however, have profound reservations about Mr.
Romney's Mormon
faith.
Mr. Hurd, the pastor of West Hill United Methodist Church
here who
identified himself as an evangelical, said he wrestled with
that issue
himself but decided in the end it should not matter in his
decision.
"Although they have a theology vastly different from mine,
Mormons
generally are good citizens," he said.
Mr. Hurd also offered some insight into where his fellow
Alliance
board members are leaning. He said they are mainly divided
between Mr.
Romney and Mr. Huckabee, with the latter probably holding
the edge.
"A lot of them are troubled by his Mormon religion," he
said. "That's
probably the difference."
*******
So there's a statement, by an Iowa pastor describing
himself as
"evangelical", confirming that many Christians of his
acquaintance are
"troubled by (Romney's) Mormon religion."
Not quite... there are no quotes around evangelical in the
article. So
it didn't come out of his mouth, but probably went something
like
this:
"Do you evangelize as part of your faith?"
"Yes."
"So would you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?"
"I suppose."
My whole point continues to be that it is the *media* who
seems to
find the labels "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (which *you*
improperly used) important, not Christians themselves.
And also that there are Christians who do not have a problem
with the
Mormon faith. Sure some do, but there are groups who are
opposed to
Romney for other reasons as well. So? Weird people
everywhere.
twisted logic deleted
Huckabee is a perfect match for the GOP base.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -
No he is not... you just want him in because your candidates
are so
weak...

Are you on consciousness-altering drugs?

In the recently concluded Iowa caucuses, the Democratic
candidates brought more than twice as many voters out on a cold
night than the Republicans. I don't recall the exact count, but
I believe the Dems had about 240,000 Iowans show up for caucus,
while the Repugs had only about 115,000. And it was much more
difficult and took much more time to vote in the Democratic
caucuses.

If the Democratic candidates were so weak, they wouldn't be
outpolling the Republicans by such a substantial number.

The only *decent* candidate on the GOP side is John McCain.
Your hero, Huckabee the Evangelical, is a foreign policy
numnutz. We've already had seven years of that with Bush. It
isn't going to happen again.

Most of that is how the Dem's set up their caucuses.

What? Twice as many dems as repugs showed up because they were
motivated, not because they had to. Are you drinking from Zell
Miller's cup again?
You drunk or all the lead from yesterdays shooting got to you?
They run their caucuses different.
A bunch of young folks showed up from other states hoping to get
laid.l

So, you are saying that Young Republicans are Asexual?
They don't have to hop on a bus and go to Iowa in hopes of getting laid.
They do quite well at home.

So, you are saying they are "stick in the muds" with no drive or
curiosity about the outside world?




Young Republicans in search of sex "do quite well at home."

:}


Vice is nice, but incest is best?


Well, for Republicans, I suppose it beats hanging out at the men's room.

Did they make you take the medical sterilization as a condition of parole?

BAR wrote:

Did they make you take the medical sterilization as a condition of parole?


And you're so clever you quit high school to join the Marines, eh?



--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:56:15 -0500, HK wrote:



Young Republicans in search of sex "do quite well at home."

:}


Vice is nice, but incest is best?


Well, for Republicans, I suppose it beats hanging out at the men's room.

Very cool, Harry.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."