Jesse Ventura vs. Joe Scarborough

Joe 'intellectual prostitution for a paycheck' Scarborough with the Mika yes girl.

gravel kucinich paul nader
mckinney ventura too
perot charts
RATM

It appears to me that Scarborough is the dummy in this argument not Ventura. Jesse may not always come across as slick as Morning Joe, but at least he's not in delusion on the subject of torture or an enabler of the people who think that somehow it was justified just because of 9/11.

"Jesse Ventura's contention that the United States only seems to water-boards Muslims has drawn some heat on the cable talk circuit."

If anyone, including Mark Silva, read the Silva article above, they'd note the 2nd paragraph, in which Ventura admits that HE (a non-Muslim) was water-boarded in his navy training. In other words, Ventura's own words and history contradict his charge that only Muslims are water-boarded.

As to the larger point raised, I'm sure the U.S. would water-board Amish terrorists, if terrorists were Amish. Or water-board those darn Presbyterian Terrorists in order to prevent future Presbyterian terrorist attacks.

We know Swamp members are desperate to publicize anyone who'll advance their (leftist) agenda. But Jesse Ventura? Can't you guys find a more credible source?

I was never really a fan of Jesse Ventura...until now!

Issues aside, Joe's inflammatory language bothers me. He vehemently attacks anyone who doesn't share his opinion. He's smug, sarcastic and insulting. It's school yard name-calling and has no place in a real debate.

MSNBC should cancel Morning Joe in favor of someone who can offer real Republican viewpoints.

Don't forget that Scarborough was a part of the Contract ON America Congress. They really had no point (other than being a homophobic, anti-choice, rich boy club) they just talked faster and louder.

Mark. I see that your video labels Elisabeth Hasselbeck a "right wing idiot."

Whatever happened to civil discourse? Is that the sort of journalism the Tribune endorses? Is that the type of "non-partisan" source you get your story ideas from?

Brucy, the boy that falcifies his documents: Do you really need to come back out of your closet? You have an Independent politician saying that he has been waterboarded and that it is certainly torture....so much so that he would prosecute the pugs if allowed, and you do not find that viewpoint compelling or worth publishing? You confirm what the vast majority of the country thinks about pugs.

Bruce,

Ventura said he was waterboarded as part of his SERE training when he was sent to Vietnam. He also asked why WE are only waterboarding Muslims.

I'm going to take the word of a veteran who has been subjected to torture over the word of a talking head who thinks he knows everything and says he KNOWS the answer to whether waterboarding is effective despite the fact that professional FBI interrogators say it hinders gathering accurate information any day of the week.

One last thing: This is not a left/right issue. And the mainstream media needs to stop trying to shoehorn the debate as a left/right issue. There is no debate. Torture is wrong and America does not torture.

I am glad to see that the Republicans have finally seen the light and accept torture for the beautiful thing it is. All those years they criticized it, now they finally understand that they were on the wrong side of history, and that we torturers were actually right, nobly acting in the common good. I am proud to stand along side good Republicans everywhere who embrace the virtue of torture. Together we can ensure that torture blossoms and becomes the world wide norm it should be.

Bruce,
It's interesting that the Left always has an "agenda".
Is torture the Right's "agenda"?
I am an ex-airman and a career firefigher (so I must have some type of true American bona fides).
When I was growing up I knew two things for sure (and I was proud of them).
1) The US doesn't torture
2) The US will never begin a war, rather the US will only enter into a war if attacked.
Both of those are no longer true thanks to Republicans.

"Joe Scarborough, the former Republican congressman from Florida who hosts hours of political talk on MSNBC each morning, says the former independent governor of Minnesota and big-time wrestler is fighting out of his weight class in the torture debate."

Ventura, as a former Governor, member of the military special-ops, and somebody who has been waterboarded is "out of his weight class" on this debate? And Joe Scarborough isn't? Scarborough, a former member of the House and current talk show host, is that much more qualified than Ventura to tell him this?

And then, to make this completely like the Onion, Joe adds: "It seriously should be a crime, to be that dumb on TV.''

For once I agree with you Joe, for once.

Hey Bruce, should the US have waterboarded Timothy McVeigh, the Christian Terrorist, after he was arrested to make sure no further bombing were planned? How about Erich Robert Rudolph, should he be waterboarded? Should the people who attended their churches be waterboarded to make sure they aren't about to bomb anyplace?

* * * * *
Posted by: Nick | May 19, 2009 2:00 PM
.
McVeigh was a “Christian terrorist”? What a slanderous piece of B.S. McVeigh was a nominal Catholic who admittedly ceased practicing his own religion. He described himself as an agnostic, and said, “Science is my religion.” Furthermore, wanton property destruction, mass killing of innocent civilians and obsessing over hate and violence aren’t Christian teachings.
.
So, I suppose YOU could call him a Christian terrorist. One can call anyone anything. It’s a free country after all. With equal logic, I could describe you as rational and wise. Then again, I would have a hard time convincing any rational being in the universe that I was right. Calling you ignorant would only serve as a serious insult to ignorant people.

Joe S. has way too high an opinion of himself.

Here's what happens when you get dropped on your head one too many times

http://www.drudge.com/news/121172/ventura-we-only-seem-waterboard-muslims

Joe Scarborough & Mika Brzezinski are spoiled rotten elitists who get off on torture and try to propagandize your brain in New World Order thinking. They support the ideas of CFR founder Rockafeller and Mika's trouble making father Zbigniew Brzezinski, they have Zbigniew "Zbigot" on the show constantly spouting his hate mongering with Richard Haas President of CFR. CFR Council on Foreign Relations is a cult started by Skull and Bones with an agenda to subvert the US Constitution. They have turned America into Nazi America, replete with torture, wars of agression, removal of habeas rights and concentration camps like Gitmoschwitz and Abu NaziGrahib.
The media or Goebells propaganda stations like FOX "FIX" news and Mika and Joe should be tried with those who did the torture for spreading the lies and propaganda that led our country and soldiers to desecrate what soldiers died to give us, Life Liberty and the ... Try them and fry them, as always, frying pans free @ www.iviewit.tv

John W, but you have no problem with people babbling on about Muslim Terrorists, do you? Oh, that's right. Christians are all peaceful, loving innocents, and Muslims are all murderous, hatefilled, monsters. Right.

Want to tell me that Rudolph was any less a Christian Terrorist that Bin Ladin is a Muslim terrorist?

* * * * *
Posted by: Nick | May 20, 2009 9:01 AM
.
Nick,
.
Dragging Rudolph (Eric, I assume, and not the reindeer) and Osama Bin Laden into the discussion is a B.S. red herring. I was talking about your nonsensical efforts at saddling Christendom with McVeigh. Apparently, since you could not substantiate this claim in the face of the evidence that McVeigh was not a Christian, you have to change the subject entirely to the issue of Muslim terrorism. You lose.
.
As for the question of whether Muslims are peaceful or terrorists, or whether their religion promotes terrorism, I suggest you read the book “Why I Am Not a Muslim” by Ibn Warraq (a former Muslim). I refuse your invitation to get into the subject.
.
As far as Eric Rudolph is concerned, I will concede that he was (and is) a terrorist, the same as Osama Bin Laden. I do, however, deny that he is a Christian. Rudolph was a nut-job that got involved in the white supremacist “Christian Identity” movement. Groups like this do not adhere to anything close to orthodox Christianity. They use Christianity merely as a pretext to justify their hatefulness. They even re-wrote the Bible for their own use, adding references to the sin of “mongrelism.” They claim that all non-white people are going to Hell. Christendom disavows and condemns such ideas. “He who hates his brother abides in Death” is one of the unmistakable and often repeated messages in the New Testament. Furthermore, you have a tough time pinning the “Christian” label on someone who claims to “prefer Nietzsche to the Bible.” (See http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-07-05-rudolph-cover-partone_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA .) Do I have to explain to you that Nietzsche was about as anti-Christian as philosophers come? So, while it is true that he is a terrorist, it is not true that he is just as much a “Christian Terrorist … [as] Bin Ladin is a Muslim terrorist[]” Bin Laden’s Muslim credentials are intact. Rudolph’s Christian credentials are non-existent.

As I suspected John W, you are a religious bigot. You twisted logic is just laughable. Those who kill for Islam represent all of Islam, but those who kill for Christianity don't really count as Christians. Never mind that the far majority of the worlds Muslims find Bin Ladin's acts as anthetical to their religious beliefs as you find Rudolph's. None of that matters. Nope all that matters is your bigotted, close minded belief, Islam Bad, Christianity Good. I understand why you refuse my invitation, it's because you know how bigotted, uniformed and hate filled you would prove yourself to be if your told us what you really thought about Islam. Now go crawl back under whatever slimy rock you live under and leave the discussion to people who aren't blinded by hate, ok?

http://www.mpac.org/article.php?id=157

http://www.islamfortoday.com/murad04.htm

http://www.strategicnetwork.org/index.php?loc=kb&view=v&id=8018&fto=674&

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=101271&d=17&m=9&y=2007

I could provide you many more simiilar links, but they really would be wasted on somone of your limited nature.

* * * * *
Posted by: Nick | May 20, 2009 4:47 PM
.
“Those who kill for Islam represent all of Islam, but those who kill for Christianity don't really count as Christians.”
.
I never said such a thing. That you could possibly extract that idea from anything I wrote is a reflection on your limited communication skills. In fact, I explicitly declined to join in your side-show discussion of the subject of Muslims and terrorism.
.
What I said is that Rudolph is not a Christian, that he doesn’t really claim to be one; and that he is a terrorist to the same extent as Osama Bin Laden. However, there is a difference between Rudolph and Bin Laden regarding their religious standing. No one claims that Osama Bin Laden isn’t a Muslim. The articles you cite do not deny that he is a Muslim. At best, they imply that he is not a good Muslim for the way he interprets the Koran and Hadiths to promote terrorism. The fact that I made the observation that Rudolph is not a Christian, or that Osama Bin Laden is a Muslim, is not the same as saying Muslim terrorists speak for all Islam; nor was it intended to convey that idea. It was merely to refute your earlier claim that Rudolph is just as much a “Christian Terrorist … [as] Bin Ladin is a Muslim terrorist[].”
.
BTW - If anyone here is a religious bigot, it is you and not me. You are the one who constantly wants to paint the “Christian” label onto domestic terrorists where it just doesn’t belong. You are the one who dragged Islam into the picture; not me. I was happy just to contend simply that McVeigh was not a Christian. I would have been very happy to leave it at that.

http://www.armyofgod.com/EricRudolphHomepage.html

http://www.armyofgod.com/EricRudolphStatement.html

He says he is a Christian. He denies that he is an Identity Christian as you claim in order to protect your bigotted view of the world. You may deny that he is a Christian, but that is not reality. That is not fact. He is as much a Christian Terrorist as Bin Ladin is a Muslim terrorist.

By the way, John W. Bigot, Tim McVeigh was enough of a Christian to take last rights before his execution.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/06/11/mcveigh.03/index.html

Now, John, I know you are of pretty limited intellect, but try and read the post we are responding to. It directly addresses the topic of religion and terrorism. That's why we are discussing it. Islam was in the picture from the beginning. Think real hard, and maybe you'll understand. If you can't, go find a first grader, they'll have enough reading comprehension skills to be able to explain it to you.

Oh, and John, I myself am a Christian. However, as opposed to you, I do not live in the delusion that Christianity hasn't been used to justify violence and extremism. My eyes are wider open than that. I do not blame other Muslims for the actions of Bin Ladin any more than I do other Christians for the actions of Rudolph. That's the point.

Nick,
.
I can see now that you are a very confused person. Simply calling oneself a Christian doesn’t make it so. Had you ever read your Bible beyond the passages approved in some Daily Missal (of which I have serious doubts), you would have seen where it said that labeling oneself a Christian doesn’t do it. In particular, in Matthew 7, verses 21-23 (using the Douay-Rheims English version, just for you), Jesus was reported as saying:
.
“Not every one that saith to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name?’ And then will I profess unto them, ‘I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.’”
.
And why is this so? It is so because a Christian is not a Christian because he or she mentally assents to a particular set of religious ideals. What makes a person a Christian is the fact that he or she is spiritually called to Christ and spiritually rooted in him. (See John 6:44 [“No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him . . .”] and John 15: 5-6 [“I am the vine; you the branches: he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing. If any one abide not in me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up, and cast him into the fire, and he burneth.”].) As such, a Christian is a person whose spiritually driven behavior reflects “spiritual fruit.” (See Matthew 7: 16-20; Galatians 5: 17-25.) I suppose I don’t have to tell you that mass murder is one of the spiritual fruits of the Christian walk. To the Contrary, murder is one of “the works of the flesh …” for which “they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5: 20-21; and see 1 John 3: 15 [“Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer. And you know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in himself.”].)
.
Rudolph is not only a multiple murderer, he is an unrepentant one. He does not confess that his unlawful taking of human life is either sinful or wrong according to any normative standards. He justifies all the killing on the ground that he was executing social justice to rectify the lapses (i.e. abortion and homosexuality) caused by “Liberals.” This is not the spirit of God. Christians are supposed to allow God to take his own revenge, to be obedient to civil government, and not to try to repay or overcome evil with evil. (See Matthew 5: 38-45; Romans 12: 17-21; Id. 14: 1-7.) Also, as stated in 1 John 2: 11 “But he that hateth his brother, is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth; because the darkness hath blinded his eyes.” Rudolph has rejected all calls for repentance, and even mockingly declared that he prefers reading Nietzsche to the Bible. If you can look at Rudolph, compare his behavior to the teachings of scriptures, and gloss over all of it to affirm that Rudolph is a Christian, then you have no idea what Christianity is (although you claim to be one).
.
I might add that the last rites Tim McVeigh took did not retroactively make him a Christian during his terrorist days, much less save his soul, for many of the same reasons. Do you genuinely believe that say, for instance, a Mafia Boss is saved by last rights although he has willfully lived his life in defiance of all laws, not the least of which are God’s? Where is the repentance? Where is the calling? It is overly naïve of you to believe that a church administered rite is going to save anyone. No church has ever saved anyone.
.
Oh, and BTW - I don’t give a fig about the post to which you were responding. I was responding to your post. That is fair game on this board. Therefore, the fact that I challenged one of your basic statements, rather than include some statement about Islam, doesn’t justify or provide any basis for your parochial condescension. In any event, you have no place to speak about another’s ignorance. Physician, heal thyself!
.
Furthermore, I do not live under the delusion “that Christianity hasn't been used to justify violence and extremism.” Religion has historically been one of the favorite pretexts by which many a tyrant has sought to justify evil. If you take the Roman Catholic Church for instance (please!), you will see that it violently persecuted many thousands of people for no other reason than their disagreement with the Church’s own apostate teachings. That doesn’t mean, however, that the evil done by the Roman Catholic Church is legitimately attributed to Christianity. It merely means that an organization pretending to speak for God, and pretending to function as his church, committed mass evil against God and his church. That evil is certainly not prescribed by God or those to whom he entrusted the dissemination of his spiritual teachings. As I have already shown from citations to scripture, that behavior does not partake of the spiritual heritage of Christ. Since it is blasphemy to suggest that God speaks out of both sides of his mouth, we cannot ascribe to him the sanction of both loving and peaceful behavior along with evil persecution.
.
And finally (since you didn’t get it on any other occasion) I have never blamed any other Muslims for the behavior of Osama Bin Laden, any of his lieutenants or subordinates, or any other terrorists. You, and only you, keep bringing up the comparison between Christians and Muslims when it comes to terrorism. For all the reasons I have given, however, I still dispute your claim that Rudolph or McVeigh ever were Christians. That’s my point.

John w, I see, to be a Christian, one must be declared a Christian by you, right? And you also get to declare who is a Muslim. Do you determine who is really a Hindu too? How about the Buddhists, do you have that contract as well? I'm sorry that I didn't recognize that you KNOW, as fact, what is in the deepest hearts of other people, and that you can speak with authority on what calling they feel. I'm privledged to be talking to some one who has been granted such great powers.

To be more serious John W Bigot, your whole long winded self rightous post simply proves my original statement of your position:

“Those who kill for Islam represent all of Islam, but those who kill for Christianity don't really count as Christians.”

You believe that no Christian could be a terrorist by definition, no matter what the person's actual religious beliefs are. In fact you take it even farther. You have decreed that certain acts mean that an individual was not only not a Christian at the time of the act, but that they were NEVER a Christian. However, you do not view Islam the same way. People who claim the Muslim faith, no matter what they do, are acting as muslims, no matter how far from Islamic morality the action is, no matter that Muslim scholars reject their beliefs as heresy, in your view (presumably after you have determined exactly what is in the hearts of people you have never met) they are muslims, and can then be called muslim terrorists. "Bin Laden’s Muslim credentials are intact". Your words, your pronouncement. The difference between the way you view those who call themselves muslims who are terrorists and those who call themselves christian who are terrorists defines your bigotry. I know you want to pretend like you aren't making that comparisson, but you are.

By the way, John, in the theology of the Roman Catholic Church, McVeigh's last rites are retroactive, if he was truly repentant. (The "apostate" Catholic Church, interesting to see that your religious bigotry includes other Christian beliefs too, or have you used your great powers to declared Catholics not to be Christians?) God can forgive all sins. I have no idea if McVeigh felt true repentance as his death neared. I hope he did. I certainly am not arrogant enough to presume I know what he felt at that moment.

It'd obvious that you are too intellectually and emotionally stunted to understand your own arguments, let alone those of people who aren't crippled by ignorance and hate like you are, so I'm sure this will all fly over your head. Pray hard John, maybe Christ will open your heart and free you from your hate so that you can see that we are all his children, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, whatever.

Maybe if Muslims weren't the main perpetrators of terrorism, they wouldn't be waterboarded, Jesse.
If I had a dime for every time i've heard some Muslim say "This person doesn't represent Islam", I'd be rich!