And it’s all James Carville’s fault! Just kidding. Carville would make anyone curse, though.
So Bob Novak is suspended from CNN. In some circles, this is an honor. But that’s just me. Let me set the scene: During a “debate” on “Inside Politics” about Florida politics, blah, blah, blah, Carville said something about “right wingers” and backbones, and Novak cursed. Got it? Here’s the exchange:
“Let me just finish, James, please,” Novak continued. “I know you hate to hear me, but you have to.”
Carville, addressing the camera, said: “He’s got to show these right wingers that he’s got a backbone, you know. It’s why the Wall Street Journal editorial page is watching you. Show ‘em that you’re tough.”
“Well, I think that’s bull — and I hate that,” Novak replied. “Just let it go.” (Source)
I see. The profanity of profanity. Well, it would take a lot more than Carville’s smart mouth to make me to “lose my religion” on TV, but a man’s got to do what he’s got to do. Perhaps there’s more to the story, but that’s all I got. The Captain’s blogging it. Malkin’s picked up the meme. And Wizbang, too.
More sources: CNN Suspends Novak After He Walks Off Set, CNN Suspends Robert Novak ….
Here’s what’s REALLY strange: MSM and liberal bloggers have nothing worthwhile to say about Air America allegedly stealing money from poor black kids in New York, but they’re all over a story about a man saying the word “bullsh**” on cable news? Look at this madness.
Priorities, straight.
Update (8/5): I hope this means LBC will be featured on Connected Coast to Coast today. The world needs to read my probing and insightful commentary on cable news and curse words. (Watch the videotape)
Love means never having to say you’re sorry. Michelle calls on others to apologize, too.
I like search engines. They’re so…smart.
{ 8 trackbacks }
{ 92 comments }
I loved this video! I’m so entertained by profanity. Especially profanity coming from the mouth of the treasonous Bob Novak.
As a liberal blogger, I’m upset about the Air America scandal and, honestly, I would have written about it, but, in general, I’ve been in a funk lately and have really failed to update my site.
I’ve criticized the network for a while now. The only show that remotely interests me is Randi Rhodes.
Thanks for reminding me. Maybe I’ll add my liberal two cents at my site. I do have something to say about it. I suppose I’m just a bit lazy.
It would have been much better if he said the same and them slapped the shine on Carville’s bald head and that smile of his face when he said it.
I think it was refreshing to hear a “conservative” FINALLY speak what they feel. I just love it when politicos are real!
#1 “Treasonous?” Someone doesn’t know his definitions.
Ok, Raymond, I’ll take it back.
How’s “traitorous” sound?
#5. You may want to look up that definition too there sparky.
After years of watching Carville literally spit in the face of his opponents, it’s about time that somebody got one on him. I agree that Novak should keep walking, but only because he’s too good for those hacks at CNN.
I want all of the conservatives to leave CNN. And state the reason why. Eason Jordan. Won’t come back until he’s gone.
Oh. wait am minute. They all just did leave.
All I have to say about Novak is that he’s a prime A, number 1, pompus jack***. He and Sam Donaldson are neck and neck. I’ve had “run ins” with both in D.C.
Nice name calling….
If you remember, CNN could not find a reason to criticize Eason Jordan, let alone suspend him. What Jordan did was far worse that what Novak did.
Let’s face it - CNN has had the long knives out for Novak since Rovemania began.
Thanks for reminding me! Eason Jordan implied that American soldiers were targeting and assassinating journalists, and CNN didn’t can him until the blog swarm got too big. Yet they promptly suspend Novak for losing his temper???
Bunch of idiots, the whole lot of them. Novak is better off.
OK, the cop was cute but he doesn’t make up for posting that picture of Carville.
maxnnr
Looks like the Ragin’ Cajun got his wish. Now when CNN unsuspends Novak, he can tell them to take the job and shove it. That’ll leave them totally w/o a conservative and the left-wing bias will be complete.
Mike M. what law did Novak break? Wishing something to be so doesn’t make it so.
Gotta love how the lefties deflect from the real issue to partisan attacks. Wait!!! Looky there, it’s Rove!! Bum rush the show!
Mike M.;
One day, while listening to Randi Rhodes, I heard her describing a ‘crack whore’ (in her words) whose baby had been killed because he was black, poor, and the son of a ‘crack whore’.I felt sick to my stomach, and called the hospital that had taken care of the child. They then faxed me all the notes that were in the public provenance. I spoke to the NICU unit who loved that little baby, and nursed him through six months of agony.The nurse I spoke to had fallen in love with this child. His name was Sun Hudson. He was born with thantaphoric dysplasia, with massively undeveloped lungs, and a rib cage that did not develop, coupled with dwarfism. Normally, these children are allowed to die at birth, as they cannot breathe, must be respirated, and in severe cases as Sun’s, the prognosis is cruel. Unfortunately for Baby Sun, a doctor placed him on a respirator immediately following birth. When the extent of his birth defects became apparent, the doctors went to his mother to have the respirator withdrawn.Sadly, she believed that she had been impregnated by the sun, and felt that her son had a cosmic or special purpose in life, and refused to have the respirator and other intervention withdrawn. The hospital, feeling that the mother may not have truly understood the implications for her baby of trying to keep him alive, provided her with a lawyer to advocate on her behalf. The legal wranglings persisted for six months, paid for by the hospital. During that time, poor baby Sun had to be anesthetized every morning to withstand the agony of having his lungs thrust against his miniscule ribcage. He was being kept alive by a host of machines, and round the clock intensive care, with no hope of progress. As time went on, his body developed,in a deformed fashion, but his lungs and ribcage remained tiny. He was undergoing a slow suffocation and the tissues of his body were being starved of oxygen.Finally,at six months, after a number of conferences with ethicists and doctors, it was unanimously decided that the torture had to stop, as Baby Sun was being suffocated to death. Randi spat out that President Bush had put forth a bill to allow hospitals to just kill the patients they did not want….in paticular, the poor children of ‘crack whores’ as she mentioned over and over. And here was a case of a child that had been kept alive at a cost of hundreds of thousands, if not a million dollars. In reality, after researching the bill, speaking with the hospital, Bush’s bill actually mandated that if a patient was to be withdrawn from life support, and the family was not in accord, there was to be a waiting period in which the hospital contacted every other institute it could to see if they would accept the patient. Prior to Bush’s legislation, the hospital simply had the option to make the decision on its own, without further conferencing. In Sun’s case, the hospital contacted forty neo-natal units around the United States to see if they would take this child. All forty said that they would never put a child through the type of fruitless pain and agony that were being inflicted on him. Finally, he was allowed to die, which happened very quickly, as he was unable to breathe on his own. His mother had not been to see him for the last month of his life, though she was there at his death. What was so amazing to me, was the ugliness of Randi Rhodes, her disregard for the facts, and her overwhelming hatred of Bush that clouded any type of journalistic integrity. Her version was published in our newspaper here, and I felt we had made one more giant step into the pit of hell and hatred. By the way, everyone I spoke with about the case, said that Sun’s mother was a loving mother, and never demeaned her in the way that Randi did. So often, liberals seem to believe that the ends justify the means. I reject that with every fiber of my being.I think this was the day that Air America truly began to turn my stomach with its distortions.
Since when did CNN adopt tougher moral standards than any cable television station?
Ludicrous.
Stupidity at it’s finest.
For Jan Brauner:
Thanks for comments on Baby Sun. I hope yor don’t violate the HIPAA police - they may come to take you away.
Randi Rhodes is less than human - she doesn’t deserve the time to listen. But I occasionally listen to Air America to refresh myself at how low some people can sink just to Bush-bash.
As a medical doctor, I am quite familiar with the Texas Futile Care law. There are many checks and balances, and they were all used in this case.
This baby had an incurable condition, and the humane and reasonable thing to do would be to let nature take its course. The mother was not reasonable.
There is no doubt much civilized discussion about Baby Sun. Your comments are reasonable. Those of Randi Rhodes are not.
Ah, but Frank, you’re talking about a left that thinks murderers (an INHUMANE ACT against an innocent person (99.9% of the time)) deserve humane treatment. Uhm…They are inhumane and don’t care about their victims. They gave/give up their rights upon acting with violence. Therefore, hence and forsooth, they don’t deserve humane treatment.
This goes for the terrorists in Gitmo as well, although my belief is most of them are not US Citizens, so the Constitution doesn’t apply to them.
Dan
Macmind said “Bob should have “Clocked†Carvell”
In some circles “clocked” is defined as a “physical” confrontation.
Perhaps CNN can bring in Jerry Springer to conduct these “highbrow” conversations in the future.
As a so called “professional” journalist and analyst, Novak should have taken the remark with a grain of salt, paid no attention, and not given Carville the TIME of day!
Ok, how about a compromise? Novak should not have walked off and used foul language, but rather he should have waited for that useless idiot Carville to come out to the parking lot and THEN slapped him silly.
I imagine that Carville is a coward, just like most loudmouthed braying jackasses, and would have started crying for his mommy at that point.
The above two paragraphs are based upon the author being a short-tempered curmudgeon with no tolerance whatever for fat-mouthed screamers like Carville, and the recommendation therein should be disavowed by the management of this board.
Whoa!!! Did we change horse’s in mid-stream on this thread? Since it appears so, allow me to get my feet wet!
Dan said; “This goes for the terrorists in Gitmo as well, although my belief is most of them are not US Citizens, so the Constitution doesn’t apply to them.”
Regaurdless of your the crime, everyone deserves to be treated humanely.
In my state if II intentionally or recklessly killed an animal I could be subject to;
A person who violates subsection (2)(a) to (e) is guilty of a felony punishable by 1 or both of the following:
(a) Imprisonment for not more than 4 years.
(b) A fine of not less than $5,000.00 or more than $50,000.00
(And yes, the terroist’s can be compared to animals)
Even animals have rights, (although they’re not protected by the constitution either)so lets place our measures and standards above those who have no regard for humanity.
Regardless of your the crime, everyone deserves to be treated humanely.
So some sub-human who decides to murder your mother deserves humane treatment? Bah. They’re not human to commit an inhuman act, therefore they don’t deserve humane treatment.
Animals are as the bible states. Under the sway of humanity. So you’re going to tell me when I eat a steak I murder a cow…..Do you murder your veggies when you inhumanely rip them out of the ground to consume them?
You, sirrah, have some rethinking to do. I do not want the animals in society (and this means the murderers, rapists, pedophiles) to have even the REMOTEST chance of ever having the opprotunity to do their evil again. They are inhuman, and deserving of the same treatment they gave their victims. And should be put down as soon as possible. As soon as this starts to happen, the sooner society will become the humane place you seem to desire. Otherwise you and your ilk continue to propogate the problem.
Frank;
Thanks. I, too, listen to Air America, six hours a week, so that I can try to understand their issues, and then research them. Randi Rhodes is so full of vituperance, that it stuns me…along with Janeane Garofolo, and others. Journalists, talk show hosts, and others, would do well to respect their readers and listeners. Success would be predicated on producing an empirically based presentation,coupled with humor and charisma, followed by the unthinkable……. allowing the the reader to absorb, analyze, and draw conclusions, based on reality, not ideology. But, methinks theythinks we’s all too stupid! By the way, I moved, so the Hippa police don’t know where I am…..
Dan:
“So some sub-human who decides to murder your mother deserves humane treatment?”
That is the same logic that allowed black slaves to to be catagorized in the Constitution as 3/5 of a person.
The bible also says:
“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”
-Matt 7:1
“Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven”
-Luke 6:37
Either you believe the word or you don’t…can’t just follow some of it.
Broken law or not, no one but thier Creator can void thier humanity.
I’m tired of these grown a** men acting like children. Grow up, already.
Jan sweetie. I love ya, but can you break down your content in one post a bit?
Thanks!
M. Woodward, what was the context of the “judge not” admonition in both passages? Rarely does quoting a few lines of Scripture out of context suffice.
While you’re preparing to comment about that, see these posts:
http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/05/14/bronward-christian-soldiers/
http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/08/28/worldview/
LaShawn:
I understand that the passages do not imply being passive. But, the problem is when someone says that another person is “sub-human” and not deserving of humane treatment. That is what my post was about, no matter how horrific the crime, it not for humans to judge the “humanity” of another human and condemn them as sub-human, period.
Of course you must defend yourself against any agressor and you don’t just lay down and “take it”.
But, someone who kills, no matter how horrific circumstances, is still charged with murder and has a trial as a murderer. You cannot decide that the person is inhuman therefore not subject to humane treatment, is they are guilty than they must pay the price for that, but they are still human and not “..cattle, and creeping thing, or beast of the earth.”
I believe in life imprisionment, but not the death penality because it is not my place to judge someone life worthless…I did not create it, I cannot take it away.
M. Woodwards comments demonstrate why criminals do not fear retribution from the left and why they keep on preying on good people. Not trying to start a fight on the subject, but the use of the initial “M” instead of the full name also tells me quite a bit about where this type of thinking is coming from and why the US is just not ready for a woman to sit in the White House.
On a larger scale, this is the reason China is building its military. They do not fear the US left. They are banking on a Hillary/Democrat win in the Presidency in 2008 and will attack Taiwan soon thereafter. Probably in the late spring.
Expect the US to become involved in a major world conflict if the liberals ever get power back.
Then what you want to do is challenge him for denying a man’s humanity. It has nothing to do with not judging the crimes of fellow humans because we are also sinners. Because we are fully human, we are accountable, and that’s exactly why we must be judged.
I’m not trying to pick on you, but I’m so tired of seeing those passages quoted to prove that no one should judge anyone. Instinctively, you know that’s false, so it can’t be what God intends, and we know he doesn’t lie.
Exactly…is that not how it came across?
No. Committing a man to the electric chair is not judging his life as “worthless.” It’s a penalty for his crimes.
La Shawn:
I believe Bob Novak has got a swollen head from all the publicity about “Plemegate”. He is in the limelight, and yesterday’s act got him more of it.
Up to now, many Leftists knew who Bob Novak was. Now everyone knows. No doubt Novak will write a column about it.
Novak certainly know what to expect from Carville.
I bleieve it is an act to boost Novak’s ego.
“Not trying to start a fight on the subject, but the use of the initial “M†instead of the full name also tells me quite a bit about where this type of thinking is coming from and why the US is just not ready for a woman to sit in the White House.”
I really try to ignore you but what the heck are you talking about??? What does an initial have to do with this discussion??
I’ve already figured out you are sexist so I’ll just ignore the other commentary.
Now, I disagree with that…
Murder, death penality, abortion, any killing not in self defense, are all wrong to me because it is man (man meaning mankind) exerting dominion over other men, Man was given dominion over “the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth”. Not other men…
But, that is a philosophical difference and we can agree to disagree on it…we do agree though, that “judge not…” does not mean “be a punk”.
This is why Christians go to the BIBLE about such things. Your philosophical ideas about man’s punishment don’t trump what God has to say. “Murder” and “killing” are not the same thing. But whatever. Time is fleeting, and I’ve got to earn the palace…
Raymond:
First of all, why don’t you post your last name??
Secondly I am a man and a manly one at that. What does me not believing that YOU, a man should be able to decide what classifies a person as human and for what reason a human needs to have thier life taken from them make me less of a man?
Thirdly, what makes a criminal commit a crime is not lack of fear of consequences but, that they are a criminal. Has the high instances of executions in Texas stopped people from committing murders in Texas? No. They still committ murder and either think that they will get away with it, don’t care that they may get the death penality, or maybe just aren’t thinking about that while they are killing the person.
#43. A “sexist.” Such a politically charged “anitahillish” label. Ad hominem and no substance.
Are you being typical and playing right into and supporting my perceptions?
Come on now. Elevate my sister. Contrary to what you may believe, I am not the only man who feels this way. In fact, many many women feel the same way and it is not based on emotion and old, traditional values. It is based on may things whcih could be discussed IF you and other feeling like you do could stow your emotions long enough for a rational discussion.
Just as the world has not “caught up” to the acceptance of homosexuality and other cultural scourges, the world also has not caught up in given blanket acceptance to the idea of women in leadership positions.
In fact, I submit, that as with African-Americans, many of the gains of women have been gained artificially and through forced legislation as opposed to merit.
I respectfully ask LaShawn to see where this topic goes before summarily dismissing it and deleting it.
Raymond, I have no problem with seeing “where this topic goes,” but you have a tendency to cross the line between civility and inflammatory rhetoric that tends to lower the level of discourse. It doesn’t matter if you don’t agree with my assessment. All that matters is that I perceive it. I think you ought to start your own blog so you can say whatever you want however you want without censorship. - Admin
There is a very thin line between what makes a criminal versus a law abiding sentence. That line is called getting caught.
The severity of crimnal behavior does however assign enhanced classification on the offending human up to and including reclassification as “dangerous animal” fit for execution.
LaShawn:
I am going to stop all of this because all of this is off-topic for the Carvell thing, but I am always wanting to learn, if there is scripture that states that the death penalty (for a crime) enforced by man is sanctioned by God, than so be it…I have just not come across one and I readily admit I am not a bible scholar, but I am seeking the knowledge.
I apologize for taking this off-topic.
Lashawn, I have been trying to get something started over the photo in the WAPO today. The photo is caption June 2003 (before the plame story).
Note the Rove lapel button.
Photo shopped?
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/08/04/PH2005080401684.jpg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/04/AR2005080401606.html
Raymond:
In order to ‘elevate’ to your level, I’d have to sink pretty low so no thanks.
In response to your comments, I would submit that I actually agree that certain cultures definitely are not conducive to having women as leaders however your comments about women in general are rude and disrepectful. There are posts where you have called women ‘broads’ and seeing how our hostess is a woman that is rude.
Also our hostess has built up her blog readership through hard work and insightful (and provocative) posting. Her being a woman is secondary. She did it on her own merits. For you to insinuate otherwise is insulting.
M Woodward, you’re absolutely right about Man was given dominion over “the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
But, you left out Gen 26:11, Exo 19:12, Exo 21:12, Exo 21:15, Exo 21:16, Exo 21:17, Exo 21:29, Exo 22:19, Exo 31:14, Lev 20:2, Lev 20:10, Lev 20:11, Lev 20:13, Lev 20:27, Lev 24:16, Num 1:51, Num 15:30 & 35, etc, etc, so forth and so on for 89 verses in all with the keywords “put to death”.
To summarize, God’s OT instructions for capital punishment include: rebellion, cursing/striking your parents, owning a ‘pit bull’ (modern day adaptation) that kills someone, commiting a sex crime, killing a fellow man, bestiality, breaking the Sabbath, impregnating heathens, witchcraft, adultery, incest, homosexuality, blasphemy, trespassing the Tabernacle, presumptuousness, among others acts of evil.
Now to state that we no longer live under the law would be logical, and more so, we are not a theocratic republic, but a religion neutral republic, therefore some of the laws that apply to Jews can’t apply to us. Furthermore, it is also valid to point out that Jesus personally voided some of the penalties, such as adultry and breaking the sabbath.
However, as the NT makes very clear, the government is empowered by God to inflict capital punishment on behalf of society’s peace, quiet & security:
Rom 13:4 For he (Government) is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
I hardly think the sword in this context means spanking someone with it. To assert the contrary would be to ignore God who knows human nature more than man could ever hope to match. We ignore God’s roadmap at our peril (Pro 14:12 & 16:25).
For one man to execute another as punishment would be wrong, for the government to extract blood as punishment is just & righteous.
M. Woodward-
Romans 13:1-5
“Everyone must submit to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God. So then, the one who resists the authoirty is opposing God’s command, and those who oppose it will bring judgement on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do good and you will have its approval. For government is God’s servant to you the good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it DOES NOT CARRY THE SWORD FOR NO REASON. (Emphasis added) Therefore, you must submit, not only because of wrath, but also because of your conscience.”
M. Woodward-
Hope you don’t feel dogpiled. Andy and I reached the same conclusion at the same time.
Hey, I agree with you 100% this time Tiff!
On the Novak incident, I personally don’t think any conservative should ever be on any show with Carville. He’s a shrill, rude, attacker and will not let you speak if he gets the itch. There is no civility, no decorum and no respect.
Hey Hey, HO HO, James Carville has got to GO !
Sorry. My mind was working faster than my fingers. I forgot to include: “For government is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong.”
When I was in college, I got bombarded by enough mush to believe that the death penalty was wrong, until I took a Bible study class that covered the entirety of Romans, not just the Romans Road to salvation. Ever since, I have been squared away properly. God is just, and he gives government this ultimate punishment as justice.
Raymond, I already discredited your sexist view on a recent post of La Shawn’s, as have others. It is one thing to say that most women are not suited for leadership, it is another thing to state that flat out and imply that ‘God’ backs your views.
I even gave you plenty of Biblical examples of women with more you know what than some men, as well as some modern day examples.
The point is if and whenever a woman is elevated to a leadership in government, you are ORDERED, as a Christian, to respect the position and authority she holds.
The safe thing for you to do is moderate your view and stick to the substance of an issue and leave one’s sex out of the equation. Otherwise, you come across as a raving misogynic (like the islamofascists that we both hate) wingnut and we know we have plenty of those on ‘our side’ as it is now.
Believe me brother, I’m not a violent man, but if you were to refer to my mother, sister, wife and daughter as a broad or what have you to my face, I’d clock you on principle, any underlying truth notwithstanding.
Or put a landmine underneath his car as the “alternate straigtening out his mind strategy”.
Ok. That wasn’t as funny as I thought it’d be.
Chris R, spot on, brother!
Carville is a professional agitator, whose own use of profanity puts Novak’s slip to shame.
I wish Ted Turner would apply the same standard to all his networks. Apparently, the material can get real rough and ready over at TNT (where it’s artistic expression), yet a conservative commentator can’t slip without getting suspended.
Besides, with all that $$$ over there at CNN, are we to believe that they don’t use the 7 second delay like everyone else, or that they don’t have a “dump” button like other news organizations???
Novak would be better off getting out of CNN, and plying his trade elsewhere.
Andy, we’ve been very like minded lately.
Thank you for reminding Raymond of the great works done by women throughout the Bible, and reminding all of our duty towards the government, no matter how bad it can be. Our pastor had both as his focal point a scant few weeks ago while discoursing through Dueteronomy and Leviticus.
We are duty bound to follow the law.
Andy, Chris: Thank you for you references, I will definitely have to do more research into this…I don’t feel piled on at all, I have no problem learning something when someone else’s knowledge exceeds my own.
I also want to do research more about government in the bible, because surely I am not to think that when I visit China, that government is God’s servant…
Just this morning on the morning news, I think it was ABC or something, during a “man on the street” interview about inflating gas prices in Cali, a citizen interviewee used the word sh*t on camera with no edit, upset about high gas prices ofcourse. Then they reported on the story of Novak being banned right afterwards, funny!
Women in the Bible? Again, hasn’t LaShawn warned us about the use of selected scripture passages without looking at the entire context?
Somehow I just don’t see how the exploits of women like Esther and Golda Meir who presided over pretty much useless strips of desert compares to running a world, continent sized, nuclear superpower of 250 million people and I also resent your emotional outburst which charges that I have ever insulted LaShawn. I have not “Mrs. Boxer.”
Mr. Woodward, I have never ever lost respect for the truth in the service of anything. It is not my nature, it is not my character, And I would hope that we can have this conversation and discuss what happened before and what went on before and what I said, without impugning my credibility or my integrity.”
You may disagree with my charges and you may be inclined to bow to your emotions and call me sexist or mysogynistic but you would not only be wrong, you would cowardly be avoiding legitimate dialogue and discourse to try and understand my rationality on the issue.
As for comparing my views on the role of women to the muslim view, you still come across as conveniently short sighted. Contrary to the news headlines you read, muslims are not the only entity in the world who adhere to a separation of roles based on gender.
You see the problem with your “thinking” is that you have subconsciously succumbed to the feminist propaganda which says that the traditional role of a female in American society is somehow dishonorable if it is limited to home domestic leadership.
Your vitriol directed at me is because you have bought in to the talking points. You, like African-Americans do to others who have “left the plantation” attack me simply because I do not agree with you. While you may find my stance repulsive, it is nonetheless my stance as well as the stance of others and I would hope that you could present a better argument to support your side than Esther and Golda.
Dan, I’ve rethought my position.
If it were my mother that was murdered by a pernicious, evil, heinous, fiendish, wicked no good low life…
I would petition for the reinstatement of the electric chair, reverse the laws for public lynchings,no…no.., even better; amend the constitution to allow torture and various other forms of punishment.
Yeah, we could resort to “throw back” laws like those of the middle ages, the times of the Tudors, when the Catholic Church employed torture. The stocks, pillory, ducking stool, the rank or hot pinchers to the eyes, choose your poison!
No, better still, public executions! A good ole’ fashioned beheading by guillotine or the chopping block in view of a gathered crowd so that all may see the murderous villians freshly severed pate.
I hope you are patronizingly satisfied!
Lashawn, thank you for the comments and I have zero problem with you censoring me in that I admit the posession of an acid tongue. I apologize for that.
I do not take issue with any of your actions. I respect that. Whereas I take general shots on general topics, I do see where others are quick to deliver very sharp ad hominems specifically in my direction. Even when I am not talking to them and they have a tendency not to be regulated, but again, much respect and even when I do start my own blog, yours will remain my favorite!
Nice name calling….
If you have met Novak or Donaldson, there is only one conclusion and I stated it.
I don’t care if you like the conclusion or not.
When Dan Rather walked off the set for a news cast, his behavior was blasted. What makes Novak special?
OH, he’s a conservative.
Never mind.
#66 “Believe me brother, I’m not a violent man, but if you were to refer to my mother, sister, wife and daughter as a broad or what have you to my face, I’d clock you on principle, any underlying truth notwithstanding.”
How’s this for elevated discourse? LOL!!!!
You know what’s in my mind DS?
Nope.
Nothing makes Novak special.
Or Carville
Or Eason Jordan
Nice ESP though. You got the wrong channel on though.
Why not just apologize for using “broad” and promise you won’t again instead of LOL.
There was another derogatory reference to women you made (I can’t remember it) but you could apologize for that one too…..
Nice ESP though
My reply was in general, not towards you in particular. I don’t see what’s so big about it.
The man got mad. He’s known to have a temper.
The man cursed on air and then walked off the show while still in progress.
His employer, suspended him. So what?
Raymond: Huh?? I said nothing of your character, I think you have me mixed up with “Tiffany In Mpls”.
Darkstar, you said it all in post #67.
Novak’s a conservative.
Birds of a feather do what?
67 and 73,
Gettin’ the facts wrong. Michelle Malkin and La Shawn and every other blog that I’ve seen writing about it take Novak to task for cussing.
So. Let me change it to…
… Nice getting wrong…
M. Woodward. If so then I stand corrected.
Raymond, your rants are getting tiresome, even if we are on the same side. It may not be obvious to you, but I believe it’s as plain as the noses on their faces to everyone reading this that when it comes to ad homimens you rawk.
To wit, you have not disproved one single thing that I’ve stated.
With regards to your #64, you’ve misdirected most of your sentences to M. Woodward, but two. Even with those two sentences, you’ve degenerated to yet another ad homimen when he called you on it. The rest of your screed should have remained aimed at me.
1) “Women in the Bible? …” Do you even understand your Bible, aside from cracking it open, once in a great while to quote something out of context? Aside from just knowing the names, do you even know what exactly it is that Rahab, Deborah, Jael Heber’s wife (Jdg 5:24), Esther or even Dorcas did or who they were? It would mean something to us all if you could refute the significance of their being mentioned in the Bible. But you can’t, can you?
To butress my comment about those placed in leadership above You, I would like to add the following verses:
1Pe 2:11 Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;
1Pe 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
1Pe 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
1Pe 2:14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
1Pe 2:15 For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
1Pe 2:16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
2) “Golda Meir who presided over pretty much useless strips of desert compares to running a world, continent sized, nuclear superpower of 250 million people …”
It just goes to show your reverence, actually the lack thereof, for a strip of land designated by God as his Holy Land in fulfillment of his promises to Abraham on down to us. The place where our Lord will return to judge and rule the world. I’d also caution you about cursing Israel as those who do will in turn be cursed by God, while those who bless her will be blessed, man-made nuclear might notwithstanding.
3) “… you would cowardly be avoiding legitimate dialogue and discourse to try and understand my rationality on the issue. …”
And you’re the paragon of legitmate dialogue? Sometimes I find myself agreeing with Baklava’s suspicion that you’re actually a liberal plant with the goal of making outrageous righty statements in order to sabotage the honest discourse. If you want honesty in a debate of views, stick to and address the substance of the points.
4) “As for comparing my views on the role of women to the muslim view, you still come across as conveniently short sighted. Contrary to the news headlines you read, muslims are not the only entity in the world who adhere to a separation of roles based on gender.”
Dare I say that half of the world’s 1st & 2nd world nations have at one time or another been ruled by a woman? Even Pakistan. Even so, adherence to a separation of gender-based roles does not dispute the notion that SOME women are capable of ruling just as good or as bad as men. Or are you saying that England would have been better off with a Girly-Man rather than cede “God-given” power to Maggie Thatcher? Before you dispute this, I refer you back to Deborah and your notion of God-given authority.
5) “… you have subconsciously succumbed to the feminist propaganda …”
Far from it, instead you’ve succumbed to a knee-jerk reaction to feminists. Not to mention your total & complete ignorance of my clearly stated position on the subject. My wife is proud of her second career as a home-maker. Nevertheless, I’d still clock you if you refer to her as a broad.
6) “… I would hope that you could present a better argument to support your side than Esther and Golda. …”
You haven’t even discredited my examples, other than to dismiss them as insignificant broads. Until you can substantiate your points on my female role models, you may as well keep talking to the hand.
Ref #62. M. Woodward, fortunately, God has answers on that issue as well.
In a nutshell, WOE! Not only to civilian rulers, but prophets & teachers that do evil to their charges, and those who empower the aforementioned, will have to give an accounting of that evil, as well as the abuse of their authority.
I’ll try to keep it short this time, but by all means look them up for context:
[OT]
Lev 4:22 When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty;
Ecc 10:4 If the spirit of the ruler rise up against thee, leave not thy place; for yielding pacifieth great offenses.
Isa 3:13 The LORD standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people.
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isa 5:21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
Isa 10:1 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed;
Isa 29:15 Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the LORD, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us?
Isa 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
Jer 23:1 Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.
Eze 13:3 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!
Mic 2:1 Woe to them that devise iniquity, and work evil upon their beds! when the morning is light, they practice it, because it is in the power of their hand.
[NT]
Mat 18:7 Woe unto the world because of offenses! for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh!
Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
Luk 6:26 Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.
Luk 11:46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
Luk 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
2Pe 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
2Pe 2:10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
1Pe 3:12 For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
2Jo 1:11 For he that biddeth him Godspeed is partaker of his evil deeds
Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
BTW, with regards to comparing criminals to animals, the notion is repeated often thruout the Bible:
2Pe 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
2Pe 2:13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
2Pe 2:14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: a heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: [Sounds like some of our big issues of the day -- 'beguiling': moral relativity, 'covetous': redistribution & cursing children: sex offenders that curse and scar our precious children for life]
2Pe 2:15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
2Pe 2:16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbade the madness of the prophet.
PREACH ANDY PREACH!!!!!!
There is no need for me to disprove non-sequitur fallacies.
From “Novak Curses” to “Bible Verses”.
Whats next?
Is religion truly “The Opiate of the masses?”
Thus sayeth Raymond: “if you disagree with me, non-sequiturs all”.
Andy, I do appreciate that you at least tried to present a viable argument. Maybe if you had done that first instead of acting like a scolded school child I would have been more receptive to having dialogue with you.
In a show of good faith, I will address your rebuttals as long as you know that I think they are red herrings and wholly irrelevant to my feelings on the issue. You are not likely to change those feeling with any argument you present, but let’s have some fun.
I submit to you that the Bible is historical in nature in addition to being Holy Scripture, therefore using past performance has to be a relevant indicator of future performance and I see no evidence there that any of these characters did anything extraordinary. Execptional and anomalytic, but not exceptional.
As far as you claiming superiority of “understanding”, be careful their sparky. Somehow Proverb 3:5 has some relevance here.
I also ask that you revise your own understanding of what respecting the power of those appointed over you actually means. It does not mean that I as a man should capitulate leadership responsibility in every capacity to a woman, not does it mean that a “lesser” role a woman plays is somehow inferior to the ones Gloria Steinem and Gloria Allred define.
And since you are so enamored with Scripture to support your fallacious rebuttal why don’t you give these two Scriptures a try.
1 Corinthians 14:33-35 and Rev. 22:18-19
In other words, be VERY CAREFUL using the Word of God in vain. For your own personal useless purposes. I also caution you to not try and transmit His meaning through your filter of corporeal fallibility.
Maybe if you had done that first instead of acting like a scolded school child I would have been more receptive to having dialogue with you.
One can only control oneself’s actions. One of the largest life lesson’s is learning how to do the right thing no matter what the person you are talking to or working with does. It is always within your control to dialog civilly, not name call, walk away….
I’m not saying I’m perfect at all. I’m simply sharing what I think is helpful for the moment…
“I also ask that you revise your own understanding of what respecting the power of those appointed over you actually means.”
Judge Roy Moore learned what that means… just commenting…
First off, exegetically speaking, there is no ‘leadership’ scripture in the bible that precludes women from a high position of leadership authority. We could make that argument from a pastoral position, but not from a secular leadership position.
Andy provided salient and relevent examples of women whom God ordained to lead, and he missed a couple. In addition to biblical examples, there are secular examples as well.
The scripture in Corinthians is directly related to one specific aspect of Church policy and to infer from that one scripture, that refers to one circumstance, and use that as a generalizatio conferred on secular society is poor hermeneutics.
The point is this, are there out there who would be more qualified than men out there? Yes. If that woman ran against a man, who was less qualified than her, should she receive the vote? I argue yes.
We agree Dell…
Dell. Not attacking the merits of your argument, but lets see if we are in the same ball park as to the definition of “church.” It seems to me and correct me if I am wrong, but your definition appears to be church as in building as in institution on 39th and Elm.
The “church” in Corinthains based on what I have been taught means The Body of Believers in Christ Our Lord. Not the church in the physical sense. This debate always comes up when the issue of tithing is the subject.
Andy: Thank you for giving me a few more references, I have a good bit of reading to do over the next few days and weeks.
Raymond: I don’t think you are being malicious, just a little misguided on women. A woman’s role is to submit not be lesser. From my understanding that is within a marriage not in society as a whole. Even that submission in a marriage is only supposed to be to the husband that walks in the spirit. In submitting, it does not mean that the woman has no voice, a man should seek his wife’s counsel to help make decsions, but after giving counsel, the wife should submit to the husband’s decsion and support it whether it follows her counsel or not. That’s just my understanding, I may be wrong.
No, Raymond, there is a duality to the church, it serves as both organism and organization, that is why Paul provide structure and guidelines for the organizational structure. The organistic structure is the transcend ‘church’ composed of all the believers, the bride of Christ.
My point is that you can not extend a scripture relayed to women and their role in the church ‘organization’ and extend it outside of the church ‘organization’ without a correlating scripture that shows it applies not just to church functioning, but also the secular world.
For one, I think of the numerous female deacons listed in the New Testament, not just the Old Testament.
But simple pragmatics says that just like in the WNBA, and women there being able to beat some men, there are going to be better women leaders than men.
For example, would you rather have a conservative female that values your core ideals in the white house, or a liberal male who rejects everything you believe about the way this country should be run?
I married a strong woman, and I’m better for having done so. When I say she’s strong, I don’t mean bossy or loud, but rather that she’s firmly grounded in moral and philosophical principles and is willing to stand up for them. Her advice and counsel has been wonderful over the years, and I’ve learned to rely upon her judgement.
Besides, she gives me a nice allowance each week.
Hearty belly laugh…
Redbeard…right…
Some women think “Strength” equals being hard…but in reality it is simply a matter of knowing what you believe and holding that line against the insanity of cultural depravity…
My wife catches so much grief for A) Staying home with the kids, B) Having so many kids, C) Homeschooling the kids…
But you know what, she is the strongest woman I know, stronger by far than all those corporate types I have seen…
Gettin’ the facts wrong. Michelle Malkin and La Shawn and every other blog that I’ve seen writing about it take Novak to task for cussing.
I never said they didn’t take him to task for cursing. However, some people on this comment section are riled up about him being suspended and apparently backing Novak because Carville is obnoxious.
Context.
Raymond, I’m inclined to say deal with mine first, then I’ll deal with yours.
However, I feel you’ll just slink off, so try not to let these truths hit you on the way out.
1) Proverbs 3:5. Might I add, Phi 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.? Again, I challenge you to be like the Bereans and test what I’ve stated against the scriptures. Until you do so, one can only assume you’re whistling dixie without a leg to stand on…
2) Rev. 22:18-19 I asked you to test or disprove my statements. If you can’t do that, then I’d think the verses apply to you.
To complete the context, I’d also add Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
I hardly think calling women ‘broads’ as being within his commandments, let alone respectful and with purity.
1Ti 5:1 Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;
1Ti 5:2 The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.
1Ti 5:3 Honor widows that are widows indeed.
1Ti 5:19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
If the shoe fits, wear it! I think you owe every woman an apology!
Likewise premptively willing to write off a sub-continent for the sake of killing the islamofascists that make up 1, 10 or even 75% of the population is at best silly and bombastic. I freely admit to being hyperbolic at times, but I think any rational person can see that it would be in proportion to the idiocy that I’m responding to. If I’m wrong anyone is free to correct or question me.
Tit 2:1 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:
Tit 2:2 That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.
Tit 2:3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behavior as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
3)1 Corinthians 14:33-35 deals with how the church should act when in fellowship. I suppose you meant to include 1 Tim 2:9-14 as well.
As with most rules, there are exceptions, to which I deliberately referred you to Dorcas, Timothy’s mother, and other OT/NT women occassionally described as ‘chief women’, ‘honorable women’ and the ‘help those women which labored with me in the gospel’. Again, I suspected that you opened your mouth without even understanding the significance of these women. [Kindly insert your foot in your mouth]
This has no bearings on social or legal constructs.
I’ll also submit myself to 1Cor 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
I’ll be waiting for another judge.
Furthermore, to complete the context, I’ll submit myself to:
1Cor 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
1Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1Cor 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
2Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
I’ll be waiting to be declared ignorant by a jury of my brethren AND sisters.
Finally for your edification and to save La Shawn’s bandwidth, I present you with the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia’s section on women:
http://www.amerikahaus.com/Women%20according%20to%20the%20Bible.txt
I highly suggest you download it and read it before you EVER open your mouth, or opine, again about women, let alone disparage them!!!
Carville is just obnoxious?
How about rude and uncivil?
How about unable to control himself? (Remember the Swift Boat Vet treatment Carville gave)
Darkstar,
I thought you were directing your commentary to me and not “some people”. You referenced my quote in post #67 and asked what makes Novak so special.
I gave my answer. Novak isn’t special. Neither myself or any of the people blogging about it excuses Novak’s behavior. In fact Novak was wrong to cuss (as the bloggers I’ve noted mentioned).
My commentary was directed at your ability (er actually non-ability to read my mind, after you first name called and I commented on that).
You didn’t know what I thought. You were incorrect. You can admit it now? You should this time…
Dell, I agree with you 100% here.
DarkStar, I’ve never particularly liked Novak, and I certainly didn’t like the way he acted on CNN. He should have shown more class. But on the Lifetime Classlessness Scale, that insufferable cretin Carville scores in the 99th percentile. I’d say 100%, but I believe I once heard the man say 3 words together that were not offensive, so……
How about rude and uncivil?
That’s covered by obnoxious.
I thought you were directing your commentary to me and not “some peopleâ€.
I referenced and responded in one paragraph. Made other comments in another paragraph. I try to reply in one post rather than spread out all over the place unless it’s easier to break up responses/comments that way.
You didn’t know what I thought. You were incorrect.
The comment in question wasn’t directed towards you, so no attempt was made to read your mind. Since it wasn’t directed towards you, no reason to apologize so I won’t. End of that discussion.
But on the Lifetime Classlessness Scale, that insufferable cretin Carville scores in the 99th percentile.
If I had not had a “personal” experience with Novak, I could understand that one. Since I have had a “run in” with Novak, I’d say Novak takes the cake.
Oh, same for Oprah as well.
Raymond;
You are right. I go on entirely too long. Gotta stop that….Thanks for breaking it to me gently,
On the death penalty. I’ve always been pro-life across the board, but I always noticed that in Saudi Arabia, where murderers wee executed immediately in the public square, I felt a heck of a lot safer, even in the worst areas. Hmmm!
Recently, I read a riveting study Called ‘Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? The Relevance of Life-Life Tradeoffs’, by Cass Sunstein,Adrian Vermeule and Karl Llewellyn. Their academic credentials were beyond impressive. Their work was reviewed by professors from MIT, Harvard, University of Michigan, and more.Their premise is phenomenally intriguing, has a great deal of merit, and should make everyone with a mind at least examine his/her position. It’s available by googling the title. Have fun!
Ok, ok, now can we go back to the part about slapping Carville silly? LOL
I saw you today on CSPAN (the young conservative gathering). I was so impressed with your radiance and wisdom, I just had to visit your site for the first time. Thanks for being YOU! We need more you’s!
Wayne Reeves
Comments on this entry are closed.