God Damn Pat Robertson (?)

So, how could I come to actually endoursing such an extreme statement.  I'll tell you how.  Mike Meloy was concerned about Mitt Romney’s wife suffering the strain of all this combativeness, which she had contributed to, and wondered how her husband could be so heartless to expose her to all this needless tension with her illnesses.  But it’s when Mike uttered the words “God damn Pat Robertson’ where my ears really perked up.  It seems that Pat Robertson has made a fresh statement (among so many apparently weird statements these days) and in this one he said that a Christian shouldn’t, should not, adopt battered or abused children “because these children are just too weird and messed up to be redeemable”.  Obviously this flies in the face of Jesus saying to “Not prevent the children from coming to me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven”.  Good point.  It hits a little too close to home to that “worst Christmas sermon of all time” where Rev. Bill Halliday proclaimed that ‘Jesus was qualified to be the Messiah because he had a happy upbringing with good parents devoid of childhood traumas” or some such thing- - and those remarks of Bill have offended me to this day.  President Kennedy said in his inogural address that "If a society cannot minister to the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich".  Well, these children are emotional impoverished.  And Jesus said "Blessed are the poor for theirs is the kingdom of heaven".  Jesus also said "He would prevent one of these little ones from coming to me, it would be better for a millstone to be thrown around his neck and drowned in the sea."  Jesus also spoke against tampering with the Faith of these "little ones".  So I don't care if your name is Lucifer or Neil Savedra, if you interfere or hinder or discourage the faith development of a "little one" you merit the damnation of God.  It also says that "He who labels someone as no good or a fool, shall be a candidate for Hell".  For either Pat or Reverand Holliday to say that someone should be rejected for salvation because they are either "damaged goods" or "not good enough" is one of the most damnable statements a person can utter in the kingdom of God.  First of all we aren't talking about Sin.  As I have told you many times under Calvinism- - both Prayer and Sin are wiped off the books.  They have become completely irrelivent and non sensical to even bring up or discuss.  Since God is completely in control of your life and every aspect of it from cradle to grave, the idea of somehow "departing from it" is nonesensical.  Neil Savedra says you should not be cowed by the fact that God knows what you're going to order for desert when you go out to Denny's today.  Well Ok, I won't be cowed, but the thing is I's such a creature of impulse- - I don't even know MYSELF what I'm going to order for desert.  But we learn other things from scripture.  We learn that "It is not God's will that any should perish".  And we are also told that Hell (more properly "Tarterus' it looks like) was made for "The Devil and his Angels" and not for Man.  You'd be hard pressed to come up with a single scripture that states that any particular Man was predesstined for Hell.  And yet God has predestined our lives so completely that he knows when each and every hair will fall out of our balding heads.  You may then ask, "Well hasn't somebody somewhere figured this out".  The question is they did.  In the five hundreds there were two doctrines in the Catholic church coming into prominence.  One concerned reincarnation, which may have been the result of increased commerce with the East.  The other was this doctrine of Universal Salvation, which Justinian ordered an end to.  And that was that.  Children are creatures of impulse.  In my hyperbola rule- - "the sinless life" has an optimal just over one percent "impulse factor" where you are entitled to do just over one percent of your lives strictly on impulse without thinking.  Now Federation Theology calls on an individual to be perfect, but here we expect more than merely being "without sin" as Christians define that word.  It means playing a perfect hand at bridge making no stratigic mistakes, and ditto with chess.  It means pitching a perfect baseball game, which has only been accomplished about twenty times in the major leagues.  But sin is a reality built into this Universe.  Stu the other day almost alluded to a "sin graviton" which transversed even the Karmic world.  The sin factor would seem to be one's own karmic weight.  The mere fact you exist at all seems to open up the logical possability of sin.  And yet the Sin factor or Karmic gravity pervaids the Universe and can be said to be "Universe-al".  Power or some might say "Size" or one's own "Gravitas" would appear to make little difference because in Galelleo's world- - - free falling objects fall together- - in a common gravity (or gravity-less field)  Two items in the same orbit can co-exist along the orbital path on the same mathematical justification- - laid out by galileo.  This is a lesson Mittens Romney needs to learn.  Rich people are not insilated from Sin merely by being born rich, as apologists like Judy imply.  You can't have the rich being jealous of the rest of us the same way the greedy king in Nathan's parable to David- - was jealous of his neighbor's pet sheep and had it slaughtered and served that night at his table.  I fail to find a primary axiom of the Faith of people like Walter Martin who they say as an a priori or "necessary" first fact, is the realization that "Every man is destined to burning forever in Hell in erernal damnation".  So what would be the destinctions between the Whites and the Blacks, to use a convienient color reference?  We know it can't be Sin.  So what is it?  According to Thom Hartman - - certain Calvinists believe the deciding factor is wealth and the "blessing of God".  Those born with "The blessing" go to eternal Paradise and those born without '"The blessing" go off to eternal damnation.  I'm just laying it all out here.  You people decide for yourselves.

I have a few petty, sniping news items for you.  Joe Byden on Wednesday while speaking to a primarily Black audience spoke of the whole “shackling of Wall Street” thing and “removing the shackles to this economy” and then Byden said that ‘All of you people are in chains and need to be unshackled from Romney’s economic plan”.  Too many people are hypersensitive to Joe Byden’s use of words.  Mitt Romney was talking about how the President is running a campaign of negativity and hate, and suggested that he take all of his mal-content and go back to Chicago where he came from.  The people of Chicago didn’t take too kindly to that.  Then Anne Romney got into the act by saying that Romney’s finances were being held in a blind trust for the past ten years and she would like to see what’s in there herself.  And she reiterated her remark about how “You people don’t deserve to know what’s in Romney’s taxes”.  And then we have the remark of Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, the one who defiantly pointed her finger at the President a few months ago as if dressing him down.  She took this “stand” that she was going to invoke a nullification doctrine and that the President’s moves on immigration weren’t legal but should more properly be done by “elected officials” as though this President were not elected.  Her remarks reminded many people of George Wallace’s stance of standing in the school house door to prevent Blacks from going in and saying “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever!”   Then we have Mittens himself coming forward himself to say that in no year did he pay less than thirteen percent income taxes, and there was no year in which he paid Zero taxes.  The Obama administration today offered Romney a deal of sorts saying “We’ll settle for five years of your income tax statements, and we won’t bring this issue up again”.  If it were Romney I’d take that deal, but I’m not Romney.

Wednesday night James was playing Pink Floyd and I heard the 2^nd half of “Breath” and “The Great Gig in the Sky” and a dash of “Money”.  Seid had come out to the den of iniquity which is the smoking patio and stated that the Mormon group was meeting down stairs and we were all three invited to join.  That would be me and Steve and James.  This is when he gave us fresh, chilled peaches, that were not quite ripe but they still tasted good.  I remember thinking about how "Maybe God hasn't slammed the door of Mormonism on me entirely" and kept thinking, "I'll get some Sign - one way or the other, and know for sure."  This was about eight and then I typed and saw the rest of “The Mittle” where Brick was complaining about his mother forgetting and leaving him at work.  Oddly when I returned at 8:30 “Money” was still playing out of James’ CD.  Then he skipped to “Dark Side of the Moon” title song.  One thing I don’t remember hearing at the end were the spoken lines, “There is no dark side of the moon really,  actually, it’s all dark”.  Then I went down to check on how Seid and the Mormons were doing and was surprised to see “that it was all dark”.  The doors were closed and the room was dark.  There was no crescent moon in the morning when I was out early and looked.  I went to the store and bought a pack of John Black grape, and a thing of creamer.

There are picks of songs with the same title but are different songs.  This list has some overlaps with the one I sent my brother.  With "Desperado" it's Alice Cooper over the Eagles ** with "Moonlight Drive" it's the Doors over the Rolling Stones**with Julia Dream (Pink Floyd) over Julia (Beatles) Pink Floyd gets the nod ** with "Sunday Bloody Sunday" it's the Plastic Ono Band over U2,  with "Words" it's the Monkees over the Bee Gees, with "Fools in Love" by Joe Jackson or "Fools Rush In" by Ricky Nelson - - Joe Jackson gets the nod.  With "Friends" it's Led Zeppelin over the Beach Boys, with "I Need You" it's the Who over the Beatles, with "Words of Love" it's the Beatles over the Mamas & Papas - with "Who Are You?" it's Black Sabbath over the Who, with "Memories" it's Dean Martin over Elvis Presley.  With "Ride On" it's AC DC over the Rolling Stones, and with "You Shook Me (all night long)" it's Led Zeppelin over AC DC.