Wednesday, October 20, 2010

At the "Conservative Candidates Forum": How Do You Call Yourself a Christian?

At the Boone Tea Party's "Conservative Candidates Forum" last night (no commie Dems were invited), the most perceptive question of the night was asked by Dr. Charles Ford, a Boone otolaryngologist (ear, nose & throat doc), who said to no one in particular (though Dan Soucek and Jonathan Jordan were sitting directly in front of him) that as a Christian he was disturbed by some of the campaign mailers he had received (mailed out to benefit primarily the campaigns of Dan Soucek and Jonathan Jordan for State Senate and State House). And how did treating fellow Christians (by which we assume he meant ... gasp! ... Democrats) in such a scummy way square with the devout Christian self-image that all the candidates at the front of the room professed?

Only Congresswoman Virginia Foxx found her voice to answer. It's unfortunate, she said, but such negative attacks work, and because they work, they'll go on, although she never used negative attacks herself, no never.

Meanwhile, both Soucek and Jordan were evidently holding large pats of butter in their mouths that simply would not melt.


Mike D. said...

"the most perceptive question of the night was asked by Dr. Charles Ford, a Boone otolaryngologist" - J.W.

Do you mean the guy who claimed to be neither a Republican or a Democrat?

Do you mean the guy who changed clothes at the end of the event so that anyone who passed him outside would see his Billy Kennedy shirt?

Do you mean your plant at the event?

Did I not see you outside, after the event, almost stuck in a ditch in a minivan, getting called over by that same doctor to discuss his brake lights?

Of course you thought his was the most perceptive question! He was your guy on the inside, J.W.!

J.W. Williamson said...

That's quite the little conspiracy you spun out for yourself, Mike D., but, sorry, you're wrong on almost every count (except my getting into a ditch). The man in the Billy Kennedy T-shirt was there from the beginning and never said a word. He did NOT change his shirt afterward (or perhaps all day). The man who asked the question is Dr. Charles Ford, who is in very good standing among the Tea Party. He would be most surprised to hear himself described as my "guy on the inside." I believe, amazingly, that he was thinking for himself.

Mike D. said...


I've always wished that you would contribute to the comment threads on your site.

It makes me happy to see it happen. :)

My mistake. I thought it was the same gentleman. They looked rather similar, but then, it was dark outside.

By the way, you made a nice recovery once you realized you were in the ditch.

Anonymous said...

Do you mean the guy who changed clothes at the end of the event so that anyone who passed him outside would see his Billy Kennedy shirt* Mike

What you saw Mike was the Arch-Angel Micheal changing wings and flying away to warn Virgina Foxx that the Devil was in the meeting..

Anonymous said...

My favorite part of the meeting was where Dr. Ford said he didn't think the hate mail out there was very Christian, that those in the room standing on so-called Christian ground were saying one thing and doing another. Since neither Sucek nor Jordan knew WTF to say, they let Virginia handle it. She said Republicans were using it because it worked. I found that interesting and refreshing: we're Christians when it's convenient; otherwise, we just do whatever it takes.

Anonymous said...

JW, what do you and your allies mean by "hate mail"?

Anything that scores some points against YOUR side, YOUR candidates?

It seems to me that your allies, JW, your candidates have and still are very good at that tactic, too. But anyone who uses that strategy against your buddies, it is "hate mail" Huh?

And does Dr. Ford believe that Christians should always back away from the opposition, always be on the defensive? The truth is the truth.

amjp said...

You just don't get it, last Anonymous, which is not surprising. Dr. Ford's comment, which I commend, has nothing to do with backing away from "the opposition," but to the behavior of those he was confronting. I surmise he was referring to all the violations of the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount that are consistently being displayed, such as not bearing false witness, not making false vows, loving thy neighbor, reconciling differences, etc. All those folks who claim they are Christians, yet display characteristics which are antithetical to the teachings I mentioned, are representing themselves falsely.

Anonymous said...

amjp: No, you are the one who doesn't get it.

Those of your social and political persuasion violate these principles as much and even more so as your opposition does.

It is when your opposition's points hit home and are effective is when those like you begin hypocritically squealing 'unchristian', 'bearing false witness', violations of the Ten Commandments', etc.

You still want a grossly unfair and unlevel playing field when it comes to resolving current issues.

amjp said...

Last anonymous: You've got it completely wrong, at least as far as I'm concerned. My comments have nothing to do with current issues, but with behavior - - on all sides, and regardless of the political persuasion of those exhibiting it. I'm just sick and tired of those sanctimonious and hypocritical persons who present themselves as moral and virtuous, yet whose actions and words are anything but.

Anonymous said...

Yes, amjp, that's exactly my point.

You don't care one iota about the real issues and their effects on people.

You just want an unfair advantage in every situation and you want your opposition to lay down and give up and let those like you have everything your way. You and your allies are the ones who want to dictate other people's behavior.

Well, those like you have had your way for too long now, and you are very much afraid that the status quo will change. That's why you are screaming at every tiny chance you get, whether real or imagined.