March 19, 2009 1:07 PM
Ernie weighs in
From Ernie from Naperville (visit #1,366,239 to MommyLife) - referring to my reporting on the fact that Eric Holder is releasing Guantanamo prisoners:So you're saying that we have to imprison these people for the rest of their lives without a trial? If it's so obvious that they're all guilty and a threat to world peace, why weren't they ever charged or tried?Ernie has a half dozen comments I haven't printed because they are all this chaotically emotional. All would have required too much energy to untangle.
You talk big talk about Animal Farm/Through the Looking Glass/drinking the Kool-Aid/etc., but are oblivious to your own turning of a blind-eye toward the Bush Administration. Talk about a cult of personality! You claim to be Pro-Life, but sanction unjust war and torture. You claim to be Pro-Law and order, but sanction Guantanemo's [sic] end-run around the legal process. Talk, talk, talk.
Take for instance the fact that my carrying a news report leads Ernie to assume (wrongly) that I think they should be detained forever. Arguing with someone who opens with that kind of false accusation makes it not worth it.
Ernie, my prayer for you is that a few of the released prisoners buy the house next door to you. Y'all will have a lot to talk over!
But hey, you've been reading my blog for some time now - that makes me very happy! Try to keep an open mind. I'm inclined to believe that people who go through life never changed by their experience and unfolding reality are deeply disturbed.
Flash: Ernie just left another unique perspective on terrorist camps in the US:
I wonder how this compares with the number of "Christian" terrorist training camps in the U.S.? The KKK has been terrorizing, bombing and killing Americans for over a century and terrorists with links to "Christian" extremist groups blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Yet, I haven't heard of a single member being sent to Guantanemo.[sic].. Barbara, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but you've suggested that racism no longer exists in America except when a black man encourages whites to "cling to what is right." However, systematically treating a group of people differently solely based on their religion is racism as defined by the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Would you really support the detention of Christians in the same way that you support the detention of Muslims at Guantenemo [sic]?I'm saddened, knowing that you won't post views that differ from your own. However, I hope you're at least reading and thinking.More chaos and confusion. You've been reading MommyLife for 47 minutes, Ernie, just searching for stuff to argue about.
Funny, Ernie, you say you hope I'm reading and thinking when it's so clear you're not.
Posted in Obama Nation | Permalink
Comments
Wow. Incredible. Ernie, would you please enlighten me and tell me exactly where in the Catechism it says the definition of racism? Perhaps I've missed that. Entirely possible.
Ernie, your logic is lost somewhere in your emotionalism. I am from Buffalo where Timothy McVeigh lived near. (please read this carefully. I said near not in.) Timothy McVeigh was Catholic in name only. Christians do not advocate violence unless we are threatened. Anybody who does otherwise goes against the Christian beliefs. Catholic or non-Catholic.
Ernie, I think you are talk talk talk without think think think. I think you're just looking for someone to hate.
Posted by: Sue from Buffalo | March 19, 2009 1:44 PM
Thank you, Barbara for blogging and posting a perspective that a lot of us have and which can't be found in the mainstream media. I'm so tired of the love affair with Obama and the "rights" of Muslim terrorists, liberal leftists and a multitude of others who are ruining our country and telling us that being Christian (and often times white) is as bad as (or the same as) being a criminal. Anyway, I appreciate the views and the information that you provide on your blog. Ernie reminds me of a lot of the commenters on "news" sites when there are a lot of comments opposing the left's view, they all start attacking . . . what's up with that ?
Again, I thank you, Barbara and I applaud what you do here (as well as at home). You are an inspiration and a light in the darkness !
Posted by: dee | March 19, 2009 2:33 PM
Barbara, people like Ernie (and there are apparently a lot of them) seek to intimidate others whose religious, social and political free speech does not conform with their ideology so that you are silenced. That is the goal and little more. They are not people who love individual freedom and responsibility but who seek to sow strife, conflict and crisis in an effort to mislead many into believing that government is the answer to our problems. Personally, I would be happiest with NO government, though I concede there are legitimate functions that are tolerable. Just leave me alone is my mantra. As Reagan said, government is not the solution, it is the problem. This has never been more apparent that in the short time that Obama has been in the White House. His every act has promoted growing government and now it is all beginning to unravel. He won't enjoy the 2 or 3 term "honeymoon" that FDR had because there are too many lovers of liberty out here now that will shine the light of truth on the lies being generated from Washington on a constant level now. I don't trust that many Republicans either by the way. I think that Bush kept this country safe but beyond that he really wasn't able to get anything positive done (like veto 99% of every spending bill sent to him which he just signed like it was nothing). Keep doing what your are doing. Have courage as I think that you are about to be, if not already, targeted by the socialist smear machines. Watch your back. These folks can't be trusted.
Posted by: Mack | March 19, 2009 4:16 PM
If you don't agree with Ernie, you still don't have to be rude. You sound like those angry Democrats who have no manners, attacking someone personally rather than addressing their opinions. Republicans have always been above the fray. If one goes in the mud to fight, they get dirty, too.
[Note from Barbara:
Actually, Annie-who's-never-before-left-a-comment-here-but-but-suddenly-has-something-critical-to-say, there is nothing at all rude about what I wrote. I don't call myself a Republican and I wouldn't say that Republicans have always been above the fray, either. I am a conservative, and the way our cultural conversation works these days is that if a conservative stands up for him/herself she is shut down as being rude/strident/divisive, etc. Frankly, Annie, I call things the way I see them and opinions like yours matter very little to me - there is too much at stake these days for the future generations for us to be threatened by people who think we're not nice enough.]
Posted by: Annie | March 19, 2009 7:13 PM
Sue, the section of the Catechism you asked about is 1935, which states, "The equality of men rests essentially on their dignity as persons and the rights that flow from it: Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God's design."
Posted by: ernie | March 24, 2009 6:55 AM
