"Why don't they have Bibles? Can we get them Bibles? Would they like Bibles?" The most reported inquiry by George Bush about the fate of the US Air crew of the American surveillance plane downed over China. Newsweek, April 23, 2001, Atlantic edition
When I read of the above quote in the papers during the Chinese stand off, I was happy to find the missing link in understanding George Bush.
The incident occurred five months before 911. An American spy plane collided with a Chinese fighter plane, forcing the American plane to land on an island off of China. The crew had infuriated the Chinese by remaining locked in the plane until they had destroyed sensitive material and equipment. When they emerged, they were taken prisoner and were held for 22 days while America negotiated for their release.
As State Department officials worked on the situation, President Bush made the above comment, which was considered the most reported statement of the event.
Considering the fact that the situation was quite tense and there were so many possibilities of an escalating crisis. Hearing that the president is worried about them having access to the Bible and exercise equipment was simply astonishing.
However, this event was a quite useful in learning about Bush and his psychological make up. President Bush had already admitted to having had severe alcohol problem during his younger years and that he stopped drinking when he was confronted by his wife and mother. The Chinese incident showed me that like many other recovering alcoholics Bush is using physical exercise and hyper religiosity to keep himself sober.
Why Exercise? Research on prolonged exposure to drugs and alcohol indicates that the brain of an alcoholic is often permanently harmed by the chemicals and loses its ability to maintain necessary levels of endorphins. Endorphins are the famous natural opiates that the body produces to deal with physical and emotional pain. Not having enough natural opiates makes the person vulnerable to physical and emotional pain, which can potentially push the person towards a relapse. Recovering alcoholics have a lot of difficulty in dealing with physical and emotional pain unless they find a way to produce endorphins in a natural manner. Psychologists routinely encourage patients to turn to vigorous exercise.
President Bush is perhaps the fittest president in history; however, he is not a "Health Nut." He is just obsessed with exercise. If he was seriously devoted to his health he would not have abused alcohol, or indulge in activities like overexposing himself to the sun and eating what is reported to be his favorite snack, pretzels (at least, that's what he choked on while watching television).
Why the Bible: A recovering alcoholic has to deal with the cognitive aspects of alcoholism as well. The cravings for alcohol are quite strong and potentially overpowering. Some successful recovering alcoholics deal with the cravings by replacing their obsession of drinking with hyper religiosity.
Both supporters and detractors agree that the President is a religious man, unwavering in his beliefs. He refers to his work as a 'crusade.' He abhors the idea of abortion, homosexuality and, of course, gay marriage. He openly admits that he makes his decisions based on biblical teachings.
Learning disability: There have been many reports that the president suffers from Dyslexia (severe difficulty with reading and writing). Most people suffering from Dyslexia eventually learn how to read and write, however in some cases, reading remains a chore and they get little pleasure from it. President Bush seems to belong to this group. He does not like to read books or newspapers and relies heavily on others to do it for him. For example, Bush said he believed that the CIA memo that warned of an imminent Al-Qaeda attack on 9/11 was 'read to him.'
The president has very poor penmanship. His handwriting is not bad like a doctor; rather, it is primitive hand writing like that of a child. A thank you card he sent to Dick Clark had only one sentence ... but it took both sides of a 4x6 card to write it. Bush has been questioned on this issue numerous times, and he continues on denying it. However, his response to one of these questions is most revealing:
"The woman who knew that I had dyslexia - I never interviewed her." - Orange, Calif., Sept. 15, 2000
President Bush's language deficit does not seem to be limited to Dyslexia. He often mixes two words to come up with a meaningless term, such as "misunderestimate." Entire books have been written about his malaprops (the misuse of words). He also has problems with verbal memory and syntax. The latest one of these errors was:
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many O-B-G-Y-N's aren't able to practice their...their love with women all across this country." - Poplar Bluff, Missouri, Sep 7, 2004
George W. Bush has never been a good student and, in fact, he takes pride in being a self-described 'C' student. When he took his pilots' exam to enter the National Guard, he scored at the 25th percentile. That is the lowest passing grade for a pilot.
Prior to taking office, the President did not show any desire to know about other countries. He had never traveled abroad. After taking office, the White House press corps complained that, unlike other Presidents, this one traveled into a country on government business and straight back out with no time to explore or learn about the country. When he traveled to Africa, he did three countries a day. He has never had a thirst for knowledge, once referring to Bob Woodward as a "fancy-pants intellectual."
A person's vocabulary and syntax have a high correlation with his general IQ. The problem of poor vocabulary is quite evident in Bush's communications. He demonstrates this difficulty vividly when explaining his point on important matters. In the absence of the right word, he often uses strong facial expressions to make his point. Considering Bush's poor vocabulary and syntax, one can postulate that his general IQ is probably at the lower end of the average range.
Throughout his life, President Bush has learned different methods to compensate for his language deficits and average IQ. He accomplishes this task by becoming charming and personable.
Other indicators of shortcomings evident throughout Bush's life. (1) Poor reading skills and lack of desire for general knowledge has made him almost intellectually illiterate. He required heavy tutoring in history, geography and international affairs before his run for office. Condoleezza Rice and Dick Cheney worked with him for a year to prepare him for the job. And since then these deficiencies have caused him to become dependent on his advisers for decision making. In the relationship between Vice President Cheney and President Bush, the more mature Cheney has become the dominant figure. Consequently, he has difficulty making decisions without Chaney (remember the seven minutes in the classroom while America was under attack?)
My name is Dr Abbas Sadeghian. I Am a Clinical Neuropsychologist. I work mostly with people who have suffered from stroke or other neurological conditions. My minor in college was History. I am an Assistant Professor of Psychology in Northeastern Ohio University College of Medicine.
Well I thinked I summed it up best with the nickname "Dubya Gump". He is a delusional optimist with concrete thinking. The primary difference between Dubya and Forrest is Forrest's actions had good outcomes and Dubya's don't.
by
BenMarbleMD (19 articles, 0 quicklinks, 185 diaries, 285 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 7:51:30 AM
As a registered nurse-
with borderline OC tendancies-
and a deep spirituality,
but not institutionally religious,
I thought when George gave up the bottle he substituted that addiction for an addiction to empire building; power, control, domination.
When the USA bombed Baghdad all I could think of were the innocent ones caught in the crossfire and how my government refers to them as COLLATERAL DAMAGE.
I prayed in repentance for my government's actions.
President Bush admitted he didn't pray for his enemies before bombing them.
JC taught that to follow him one MUST forgive, pray and do good towards ones enemies.
So, I spent that first night of bombing in mournful repentance for my nation and hoped that the words from the 11th century mystic, Hildegard of Bingen were really true;
"God responds speedily whenever the blood of innocence is being shed. Of this the angel choirs are singing and re-echoing their praise. And yet at the loss of innocence clouds are weeping."
Over the following weeks, I continued to repent for all the violence and the words of Dorothy Day came and remained with me:
"Peace, peace, peace. God's peace be upon you. But living today in a time of war, crying out peace, peace, peace, where there is no peace. Fearing age and death, pain and darkness, destitution and loneliness, people need to get back to the simplicity of Brother Lawrence." [Dorothy Day]
The following is excerpted from
"Keep Hope Alive"
Chapter 10: THAT DAY
Brother Lawrence was a monk in the 17th Century who lived in a monastery and was consigned to the kitchen. He spent his life baking bread and chopping onions, scrubbing pots and floors. He ran all the errands, did all the shopping and always brought back the finest of wine. He loved his brothers deeply but they merely tolerated his many eccentricities or he was totally ignored...Truly, I tell to you, if ever a saint was born to bring hope to the addicted and those afflicted with obsessive compulsive tendencies: he is the one. For Brother L learned that by continually re-remembering the Lord, no matter what the activity, or where one might be, the Lord was ever present and a holy habit was born, just re-remembering that.[page 90]
Candidate Bush claimed his favorite Philosopher was Jesus, but President Bush ignores the central message of JC which is:
WAKE UP! The Divine is already within you and all beings. Love God and all your neighbors and seek to live in peace with everyone.
Imagine a world where ever Christian did that!
I am an optimist but also a realist;
nothing happens without effort and perseverence,
but "all things are possible for those who love God and are called to his purpose"-[Romans 8:28]
And what is God's purpose?
"He has already told you o'man:
Be JUST, be Merciful and walk humbly with your Lord."-Micah 6:8
Imagine what a world it will be, when every Christian does that!
I am perservering for a Greater Awakening and what gives me hope that it is possible is the increasing interest from people of all faith paths and agnostics and atheists who all agree:
END THE WAR!
On January 27, 2007 We the People for Peace and Justice will March on Washington DC and rise up in Congress on
January 29, 2007
You're going to think me unkind and uncharitable for criticizing your religious views, but when you introduce them into a mixed forum containing both believers like yourself and nonbelievers who do not engage in faith-based thinking, you subject those ideas to the same scrutiny and rigor as any other statement. This religious stuff doesn't stand up to that kind of critical evaluation, and it really has no place appearing outside of collections of believers, or, if it does, it's advocate has no right to expect a pass just for identifying himself as religious.
If it gives you comfort, go for it, and share it with all of your like-minded friends. But for a lot of us, instead of comfort, religion gives us cognitive dissonance. There is nothing in this material that isn't common to scores of other traditions and philosophies, some antedating Christ by centuries, or else is patently wrong and contradicted by reality, such as the contention that God spares the innocent.
So, at the risk of casting myself as the heavy for criticizing upbeat thoughts (everybody loves religion, right?), here goes:
"I thought when George gave up the bottle he substituted that addiction for an addiction to empire building; power, control, domination."
No. It was religion. It has been noted before what a sedative or soporific religion is, and it is why, in the case of alcoholism or other dependency problem, one can substitute one for the other. This is part of the author's thesis.
"I prayed in repentance for my government's actions. "
How'd that work out? I'm still waiting for results from all of those millions of drivers with "God Bless America" on their cars that pray for America every day. How's that effort playing out? You must please try to understand that faith-based thinking is antithetical to evidence-based thinking. Think about that. When you advocate magical thinking that flies in the face of experience and reality, it deserves comment.
"God responds speedily whenever the blood of innocence is being shed."
This is just more magical or faith-based thinking. Read your Bible. Nobody sheds innocent blood indiscriminately along with that of the guilty quite like Yahweh. This kind of pardoning, revisionism, and rationalization keeps Yahweh's record spotless.
" God's peace be upon you." [Dorothy Day]
Peace be upon you, too. But it has very little to do with religion. Religious people are not very convincing that they love peace any more than the rest of us. They are just as contentious and belligerent as the rest of us, often much more so as in the case of Bush. War, on the other hand, is chiefly caused by religious differences, frequently by the Judeo-Christian followers of Yahweh. Why is it God's peace? Why not Odin's peace or Athena's peace? Being Christian doesn't make one more likely to be peaceful or more facilitative of peace than non-Christians, and it is offensive to imply otherwise, especially when the precisely the opposite appears to be the case. I'm certain that the flag waving Bush supporters of 2002-2004 contained a higher fraction of church going Christians than the marginalized war protesters and dissenters. Why do you so casually steal the word "peace" for your God? They seem to be unrelated or inversely related.
I am an optimist but also a realist
Not if you expect divine intervention. Realists don't engage in faith-based thinking, or if they do, they are not being realists at that time. Saying that it is so does not make it so. I wish that you would recognize how far from a realist you actually are, especially in the eyes of someone who has not subjugated himself to your religious dogma.
"all things are possible for those who love God and are called to his purpose"-[Romans 8:28]"
I'm sorry, but this is just false advertising. I'm sure that you believe it, but, once again, experience belies belief. If there is going to be peace pushed onto the world by pacifists, it will not be by the church. Nor will Christians even make up the majority.
The emperor is naked. There, I said it.
by
Yaybob (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 3:40:32 PM
YOU WROTE:
...when you introduce them into a mixed forum containing both believers like yourself and nonbelievers who do not engage in faith-based thinking, you subject those ideas to the same scrutiny and rigor as any other statement.
I SAY: EXCELLENT! I love a dialogue.
YOU SAY:
This religious stuff doesn't stand up to that kind of critical evaluation, and it really has no place appearing outside of collections of believers, or, if it does, it's advocate has no right to expect a pass just for identifying himself as religious.
I SAY:
I offer my spirituality, I am NOT religious, there is a huge difference.
As with most anti-religous people, you knee jerk and attack without understanding when ever you are confronted with the Mystery of God, love and compassion.
I am offering something when I write, and like grace, it is free-accept or reject, you have free will.
But don't expect me to not write because you don't like it, after all, who made you the pope?
I am exercising my free speech and you are free to not read me and free to disagree, but I will express what is in my heart, for it may help even one.
he was right, tho. all that god talk is rather disgusting to the ear, considering who is in the white house, and his reliance on the same fella to justify his sick inhuman actions.
by
Nezua (42 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 93 comments)
on Saturday, January 13, 2007 at 3:20:03 AM
I think that it is you who has missed the point. I haven't asked you to stop posting or even to stop preaching. And yes, quoting the Bible as a source of factual knowledge is preaching. I'm just saying that in an intellectual forum, vacuous religious declarations aren't entitled to the same protection and deference that they would get at say an invocation or benediction. Here, you cannot expect that your supernatural claims will be overlooked and get a free pass as they do elsewhere.
Whether it is your intention to do so or not, you are repeatedly redirecting our attention to the Bible, and you are implicitly recommending Christianity and Christ as a source of answers. I think that that is an invalid source of information and that using it as one is a tactical error.
You say repeatedly that you offer spirituality, not religion. But I also know the difference, and I'm seeing plenty of religion being served up. Just saying that God is love is not spirituality.
As soon as you hit dogma, there's religion. When you quote Micah and Romans, you offer them as reliable sources, and the Bible just isn't a factual source for any of us who have not taken what you call a leap of faith, and what I call suspension of belief when I'm feeling generous, or a suspension of reason when I'm not. To whom but a believer is that an appropriate source to cite? I noticed that you didn't quote the Bhagavad-Gita or the Qur'an or any secular sources such as Gandhi or Einstein.
No, you're selling the Christian bible dressed up as spirituality right in the midst of a dicussion of its part in facilitating the pathological effect of religion in the hands of a typical zealot and alcoholic like Bush. You sane Christians don't have one tenth of the power and influence of the crazy ones. You cannot expect us to define Christianity by the behavior of the relatively irrelevant minority.
You probably see yourself as spreading cheer and hope and good feeling. But I see you as distracting the conversation away from the psychology of George Bush and the problem of his misuse of religion, and doing so by actually citing his bible as a source of knowledge, and I am saying so.
You ask us twice to,
"Imagine a world where ever[y] Christian did that!"
The world you imagine doesn't even include me. I imagine a world more like John Lennon's, one with no religion. It includes you. Even if you cannot see it yourself, it's obvious that you see the world as a Christian one with some of us just not yet being on board with Jesus and Yahweh.
You assert that,
"all things are possible for those who love God and are called to his purpose"-[Romans 8:28]
I've personally tested that back when I was a believer. It's just not true, which everywhere else but religion is called fiction, error or fraud. More true is, 'all things are believable for those who have the ability to believe without (or despite) evidence'. Once again, that's the problem in the White House, not the solution. Thus, in my opinion, you are barking up the wrong tree, and I have said so, not that you must be silent. Just teach with facts, not preach with a bible filled with homilies that are useless in a political crisis. I'm afraid that too many Christians cannot make that distinction.
"And what is God's purpose?"
How is this not preaching? What if I asked you what Thor's purpose is? Am I not asserting the very real existence of the Norse god of thunder? And how is that different than citing Yahweh or Jesus? Or how is that different from what Bush does?
No, nobody tried to stop you from expressing your opinion. It is just that if your opinion is that we should heed the Bible, mine would be that that would be a blunder. That book is filled with ambiguity, errors and false claims. Your cited source has been rejected as a source f knowledge. That is not censorship.
You are striking out at a straw man and completely ignoring the purpose of my post, and that is, to put you on alert that although you may be accustomed to magical thinking being treated with deference elsewhere, here it is of no help and should be identified as such every time that it is wheeled out.
No, you seem to be telling me that it is *I* who is inappropriate for challenging you. And you do so with the straw man argument that I can't tell you what to say.
"As with most anti-religious people, you knee jerk and attack without understanding when ever you are confronted with the Mystery of God, love and compassion."
Like most religious people, you fall back on this old chestnut whenever you are called to justify for your claims for your religion. It's the conversational equivalent of kicking below the belt. I didn't come to you attacking your religion. You came to an open political discussion and began preaching the word of Yahweh. As I said, this isn't church and you're not in the pulpit now, so your religious pronouncements are subject to criical evaluation here.
Taught by example to play the victim, whenever the secular contingent of society try to stem the encroachment of your dogma into our public courtrooms, school curricula and political discussions, you claim that you are being persecuted and/or that God is being censored. Your turf is in your own mind, your home, and your church. Keep it there. Your religion should be private or between interested parties. It does not belong in my government, and it has no value in my world.
What I have been confronted with here is not the, "[m]ystery of God, love and compassion", as you call it, but the mystery of magical thinking and superstition. Where is this love and compassion that you Christians keep attributing to yourselves, and what makes you think that you know any more about them than I?
You Christians, as I said above, not only don't have more of them, as a group, you seem to have less. Note that nobody else but Christians think that Christianity is any more related to love and compassion than George Bush is. I know, I know, Bush is not a real or true Christian. That's the other chestnut. He's a lot more real to me than Jesus.
Your religion wasn't under attack until you presented it as a method to obtain spiritual enlightenment in this post. The evidence is to the contrary, and I must conclude that your religion is wrong.
What was under attack were your specific assertions, wherever they came from. In my opinion, they're wrong too. All things are *not* possible for those who love God and are called to his purpose. They fail repeatedly.
"I am offering something when I write, and like grace, it is free-accept or reject, you have free will."
Agreed. Feel free to express any opinion. I'm just letting you know that if it is based on scripture, it will probably be rejected as religious dogma, and that wastes your time and the readers, unless your purpose is proselytizing rather than arguing rationally and with supported fact. You need to justify opinions found in the Bible with nonbiblical sources that are acceptable to your audience. Your religion doesn't belong here because it has no currency with nonbelievers.
So keep up the good work, but leave your Bible at home, unless you don't mind seeing it get rejected out of hand. And when that happens, can the persecuted religious martyr act.
Despite the incessant whining of the religious superstars like Robertson, Falwell and Dodson about their religion being persecuted, nobody in America except a handful is coming after religion or trying to diminish its presence in church or before the evening meal. Au contraire, it's religion, through people like them and even you, that is trying to expand and encroach into into the public, secular world.
by
Yaybob (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Saturday, January 13, 2007 at 6:44:40 AM
The term Christianity was not coined until three decades after Christ walked the earth. Until the day of Paul, followers of Christ were called members of The Way; the way being what he taught! Christ was never a Christian, but he was a social justice, radical revolutionary Palestinian devout Jewish road warrior who rose up/intifada and challenged the corrupt Temple and disturbed the status quo of the Roman occupying forces by teaching that God was on the side of the poor and the outcast.
Here is the good news i have been spreading:
Excepted from KEEP HOPE ALIVE
Chapter 16: All I've Got
"All I've got is a red guitar, Three chords and The Truth.
All I've got is my bleedin' heart, and a voice cryin' out
of the wilderness to you
I see there is a way out of here,
a way to get some relief
Listen to me, all you little one's, come in here:
Listen to me;
I AM very small, I AM so very very small,
So small as to indwell the heart of every atom,
and I AM beyond your comprehension...
Listen to me;
I hear Wisdom calling from the highest point of the city;
*'Wisdom has built her house and She calls to all; "Come, eat my food and drink my wine and you will live abundant life and walk in the ways of understanding." [*Proverbs 9: 4-6]
Wisdom calls; "I have built it; will you come? Do you have eyes to see and ears to hear?
Holy Wisdom, the Feminine Divinity: Hokema,
Who was with The Word from the very beginning,
She is One with Him and He with Her;
Pure Being; One God;
One Creator; One Lover of All the Human Family...
Brother, I see you lookin' at me like you think I've skated off the edge and maybe I have,
what's it to you?
but let me tell a little story to illuminate you
if you haven't heard
the one about the Rabbi Hillel,
who lived 100 years before The Christ walked the earth
let me tell you,
that wise Rabbi knew that the Hebrew understanding of Hokema; Holy Wisdom
was the same as the Greek understanding of The Logos: The Word.
It was Paul and John who first understood
The Word was good and
The Word was The Logos
The Word is The Christ
It was John on Rubber Soul who intuitively knew:
"The Word is just The Way and The Word is Love"
Little children, listen to me and use your imagination,
can't you see that before Christ walked the earth a man,
He was already a She: Hokema, Holy Wisdom; the Feminine Divinity
and isn't that good news?
The God Head is One Pure Being;
as much male as female
as much mommy as daddy.
And we are all children of Her Universe;
And **He is the oldest personality because He is the origin of everything;
and everything is born of Him.
He is the supreme controller of the universe,
the maintainer and instructor of humanity.
He is smaller than the smallest.[**Bhagavad-Gita]
He indwells the heart of every atom and
She is beyond the Universe.
Wisdom is calling,
She is rattling your windows and shaking your walls
With some more good news of the
three witnesses,
and three always beats one
and not just that,
I've got a fourth.
Get out your Good Book sisters and brothers and chew on this;
Matthew 12:31-32, Mark 3:28-29, and Luke 12:10
are simpatico with heretical Thomas saying 44:
'Jesus said: "Whoever blasphemes against the father will be forgiven, whoever blasphemes against the son will be forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven either on earth or in heaven."
Listen to me, God is within every sister, brother and all Creation,
wake up to your own divinity and
Get a clue Christian:
His ways are not your ways and Her thoughts are not your thoughts
Dominion never meant to rape and plunder,
but to nurture, care and love
And if you have not love, you have nothing at all
And on that final day we all will stand naked before The Creator
And we have been warned that there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth
by those who were so sure they were in, because they are the ones left out.
WAKE UP Christian,
Hear the wind begin to howl."
e
by
Eileen Fleming (139 articles, 48 quicklinks, 264 diaries, 581 comments)
on Sunday, January 14, 2007 at 8:29:55 AM
My apologies for wasting your time. As long as one's heart's in the right place and one's message is optimistic, it will be helpful. I was wrong to suggest otherwise.
by
Yaybob (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Sunday, January 14, 2007 at 5:15:01 PM
I never wrote PEACE will come through Christians or any church.
I wrote:
I am perservering for a Greater Awakening and what gives me hope that it is possible is the increasing interest from people of all faith paths and agnostics and atheists who all agree:
END THE WAR!
On January 27, 2007 We the People for Peace and Justice will March on Washington DC and rise up in Congress on
January 29, 2007
Your write about Bush with some authority and you make good points. However, your language skills appear deficient. Some of your phrases beginning with a capital and ending with a period are not sentences. You spell words wrong. This lack of care in what you published on line on this subject only marginalizes what you have to say.
by
William Betz (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 9:25:29 AM
On your website you have New York Metropolitan area, but I'm pretty sure that metropolitan shouldn't be capitalized. You also capitalize Boroughs of New York, and I'm not sure about that either.
Of course, that must reflect on your ability as a lawyer, right? NO, it doesn't.
The man is a neuropsychologist and probably (and correctly) didn't feel it was necessarily ethical to make a TA or student edit his work for OpEdNews. He is probably used to professional editors taking care of the occasional typo or grammatical mistake, just as a highly paid lawyer might be used to using a paralegal or legal secretary to check theirs.
CharlieL
Portland, OR
by
Charlie L (2 articles, 2 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 638 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 10:24:13 AM
I am sorry about the gramatical errors in this article.I should have had my secretary clean it up .
English is not my native language,and although I have lived in the U.S.for thirty one years I still make errors.
Sorry
by
Abbas Sadeghian, Ph.D. (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 10:42:44 AM
"Considerate?" Excuse me, but I thought it was incumbent upon writers to be considerate of the audiences for whom they write, and not the other way around. "Grammar gestapo?" You belie your ignorance of our language and your contempt for education.
I weary of this PC nonsense. Our children are illiterate, which is even worse.
by
Moss David Posner, M.D. (7 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 49 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 12:56:53 PM
I thought the whole piece was a hack job. There are a couple unattributed assertions that we are just supposed to take on faith, and some details that are plain wrong. You write that Bush "abhors" homosexuality, when it's more likely that his anti-gay agenda is fueled by pure political expediency. Also, Bush accompanied his father to China in the 70s, so he had been overseas before 2000. While these points do nothing to dissuade me from my belief that Bush is the worst President in the last 100 years, they also do little for the credibility of the writer. Betzlaw is correct - the writer has marginalized himself, but with sloppy rhetoric as well as loose grammar.
by
Heraldblog (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 25 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 3:58:59 PM
I had noticed the identical thing, and it puzzled me as well. The other possibility is that English is not the writer's first language; and while that does not disqualify him from writing, still it makes it incumbent upon him to have his work reviewed carefully. In all fairness, it also reflects on OPED NEWS that the editor did not see fit to intervene.
He makes several good points, in particular about the dysletic associations; however, I think any good observer could find sufficient to criticize without the medical degrees.
Moss David Posner, M.D.
by
Moss David Posner, M.D. (7 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 49 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 12:51:32 PM
is a volunteer site with volunteer editors. It doesn't have a ten million a year budget, like the nation, for example. But, since I know Abbas, and know that English is his second language, I did edit this article. Still, I only made major corrections, attempting to respect his writing as much as possible. That said, I do tend to leave a little more leeway with people who are writing in English as a second language.
by
Rob Kall (746 articles, 3832 quicklinks, 320 diaries, 1607 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 3:56:27 PM
You have quite a problem with sentence structure yourself. You express yourself poorly. Dr. Sadeghian, on the other hand, has made a cohesive and lucid argument.
You'd be wise to consider Sadeghian's content rather than form. You, in your haste, are lacking in both form and content.
Ciao!
by
bramdean (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 1:58:18 PM
Lighten up on the good doctor's English. Language has one goal and that is to communicate. The good doctor did a good job of doing just that though I may disagree with much of his underlying anti-christian bias. Not very many people would hold George W. as what is a committed Christian. If you want an American President try who was a committed Christian, try Abraham Lincoln or even Jimmy Carter.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 943 comments)
on Friday, January 12, 2007 at 7:21:48 PM
