The Goat Pen

Professor Tiger wrote:

innocentbystander wrote:For the record, Mitt was NEVER Pro-Choice.

Really?



He sounds about as passionately pro-choice as you can possibly get. He was even trying to out-pro-choice Ted Kennedy, for crying out loud. But I guess other than that, he was "NEVER prochoice." LMAO.

Don't ever play poker.

Wait a minute; you said Romney was "never pro-choice." I just posted a video of Romney being passionately pro-choice. Based on that video, in what sense can your claim that Romney was "never pro-choice" be true?

I don't know if I believe prof is Orthodox even though he says that he is now Orthodox. In fact, we have proof of him attending a Protestant seminary. How can we trust him to now really be Orthodox if he has a history of Protestantism??

The Dow closes above 13,000 for the first time since May of 08. Can't wait to hear the spin in here.

sardis wrote:I don't know if I believe prof is Orthodox even though he says that he is now Orthodox. In fact, we have proof of him attending a Protestant seminary. How can we trust him to now really be Orthodox if he has a history of Protestantism??

1. I have always been Orthodox, even when I was growing up a Protestant Church, while attending two Protestant seminaries, while ordained as a Protestant minister, and engaged in the Protestant ministry. And all that time I wasn't just Orthodox; I was something called "seriously Orthodox."

2. Yes, I wrote a lot of papers, published articles in "The Journal of Evangelical Theology," taught a lot of Bible studies, and preached a lot of sermons where I steadfastly denounced Orthodoxy as a idolatrous cult of Mary worshipers. And yes, those sermons and papers are widely available and can be seen/read by anyone. But I didn't mean a word of it. I was "playing poker" by telling bold-faced lies to my professors and my parishioners. In fact, despite all the overwhelming evidence that I was once a Protestant, I was NEVER Protestant.

3. Furthermore, I should be congratulated for my skill at deceiving Protestants that I was one of them, but all the while I was quietly reciting the Hail Mary and praying to the saints. This skill at deceit is the best proof that you should believe me now when I say that I am now Orthodox.

4. If you don't believe #3, then try this on for size: I DID believe all the anti-Orthodox things I said back then, but I changed. Yeah, that's the ticket. But my radical change in religious beliefs had nothing to do with the fact that, by becoming Orthodox, I had a better shot at a much bigger church and higher salary. That was just a coincidence.

5. I am the obvious and inevitable choice to become the next Bishop of Chicago. Everybody already just knows this. It is a forgone conclusion. Others may want the same job, and they appear to be fighting me tooth and nail for it. But the truth is, they all know in their hearts that I am predestined to be the next bishop. By vigorously running against me, they are actually just jockeying for the best position to become my assistant when I become bishop.

6. Back when I was masquerading as a Protestant, I was a staunch opponent of liturgical prayer, use of tradition to interpret Scripture, infant baptism, salvation which includes works, and icons. Now that I have come out of the closet and proclaimed my lifelong Orthodoxy, I now believe that my former opposition to liturgical prayer, use of tradition to interpret Scripture, infant baptism, salvation which includes works, and icons were completely true at Dallas Theological Seminary, but only at Dallas Theological Seminary. It was a Dallas belief that was right for the city of Dallas at that time.

But now I totally support liturgical prayer, use of tradition to interpret Scripture, infant baptism, salvation which includes works, and icons at the national level. These beliefs are completely different when you embrace them in Washington DC than in DFW. They're two completely different situations. Everybody knows that. People in Dallas don't have a problem with that either because they understand theological federalism.

Jesus is a fictional story.

Romney has Arizona. He's ahead in Michigan by over 20,000 votes.

It's over.

Agreed. Obama in a landslide. You heard it here first. After IB of course.

Funny how Mitt was the conservative four years ago vs. the moderate McCain.

So now you can't be a true conservative unless you want to return the country to the social order pre-LBJ (if not pre-FDR). If the read meat of the GOP was still pro-business/fiscal restraint, this race would have already been decided months ago.

Michigan Results:

Romney: 41%
The Three Non-Romney Conservatives: 57%

Michigan Delegates Won:

Romney: 15
Santorum: 15

Professor Tiger wrote:Michigan Results:

Romney: 41%
The Three Non-Romney Conservatives: 57%

Michigan Delegates Won:

Romney: 15
Santorum: 15

How many of those were Michael Moore and his cohorts wanting Romney to lose? But I know, "The end justifies the means"...

bluetick wrote:Funny how Mitt was the conservative four years ago vs. the moderate McCain.

So now you can't be a true conservative unless you want to return the country to the social order pre-LBJ (if not pre-FDR). If the read meat of the GOP was still pro-business/fiscal restraint, this race would have already been decided months ago.

tick, they just hatin' on the Mormon...

All I can say is, Wow....just wow. Makes me sick to my stomach what we've become.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cro ... eir-cause/

Professor Tiger wrote:Michigan Results:

Romney: 41%
The Three Non-Romney Conservatives: 57%

Michigan Delegates Won:

Romney: 15
Santorum: 15

Still waiting patiently for you to swallow your pride on the SS-I debate. But you continue to prove that your pride is more important than anything.

By the by, isn't she perfect?

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-02-29.html

My First Wife wrote:Most recently, Santorum assailed Obama for saying everyone should go to college by responding: "What a snob!"

No! No! No!

Santorum's response merely reinforces the insane liberal worldview that going to college is the preserve of our betters, a hoity-toity proof of social class, a desirable consumer product like a Louis Vuitton bag.

This isn't the '20s, when only the upper classes went to college. These days, every idiot who can scratch an "X" on his checkbook assumes hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to make himself less employable by taking college courses in -- for example -- "Lady Gaga and the Sociology of Fame" (University of South Carolina, Columbia), "GaGa for Gaga: Sex, Gender and Identity" (University of Virginia), "Arguing With Judge Judy: Popular 'Logic' on TV Judge Shows" (University of California, Berkeley), "The Phallus" (Occidental College), "Zombies" (University of Baltimore), "Comics" (Oregon State University), "Harry Potter: Finding Your Patronus" (Oregon State University), and "Underwater Basket Weaving" (University of California at San Diego).

My fellow Americans, Meghan McCain has a bachelor's degree.

From Columbia, I believe...

My First Wife wrote:It's not snobbery that compels liberals to promote college for all; it's a scam to manufacture more Democratic voters, much like their immigration policies.

Is a Valley Girl who takes courses in Self-Esteem at Cal State Fresno (an actual course at an actual college) a finer class of person than a skilled plumber with approximately 1,000 times the earning capacity and social worth of the airhead?

No. But she is more likely to vote Democratic.

Encouraging everyone to go to college creates an all-new class of people entirely dependent on the government, which is to say: reliable Democratic voters.

First, the taxpayer subsidizes the wasted human space teaching these moronic courses (at prices far outpacing inflation), and then the taxpayer pays the incomes of the graduates who are resigned to filling ever-growing no-show, self-paced and self-evaluated government jobs.

Who else would employ a graduate with a degree in Women's Studies, Early Childhood Education, Physical Education , Sociology or Queer Studies but the government?

Certainly not Wall Street, which is why these people were occupying.

My First Wife wrote:Santorum can't be the one arguing for our side.

He's a nice guy, just doesn't understand conservatism fully.

Why do so many conservative pundits mock college education when almost all of them attended college (some very good schools in fact) and would never try to convince their own kids that college is a waste of time?

Sheriff Joe plans to reveal the details of his crack investigation which will blow the roof of everything!!

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/media-finall ... igibility/

Is IB really over 70 or is he just a moron?

Jungle Rat wrote:Is IB really over 70 or is he just a moron?

He can be both

Still waiting patiently for you to swallow your pride on the SS-I debate.

Um, what's the SS-I debate?

And I'm still waiting for you to explain your comment "Romney was NEVER pro-choice" after the footage I posted showing Romney trying to be more pro-choice than Kennedy. Good luck with that one.