Nobel Peace Box
By Frank Hagan | Related entries in News, ObamaA brief introduction: I’m a libertarian Republican, fiscal conservative and born-again Christian with moderate social views. That means I’m sure to irritate everyone at some point, but never mind; I’m pleased to be invited to be part of the Donklephant team. Now, on to the first post …
Along with the head scratching regarding President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize came quite a few humorous quips. Including from the President himself:
After I received the news, Malia walked in and said, “Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo’s birthday!” And then Sasha added, “Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up.” So it’s good to have kids to keep things in perspective.
The President reflected the general feeling that the Nobel Peace Prize award was, at best, premature. He chose to turn the attention to the country itself, and the hopes and dreams of all people. Good on you, Mr. President.
But look closely at the text of the speech. The President recognizes another fact, that the Nobel Committee awarded this prize on the eve of the decision to expand the war in Afghanistan:
And even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today. I am the commander in chief of a country that’s responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies.
Ego is one of the core character traits of any world leader, and some have noted that our President is in possession of one himself, to put it mildly.
His frustration with a single media outlet that does not genuflect at the altar of his personality, Fox News Network, leads to a public spat, crossing a line not even the ego-mania of President Nixon would breach: shooting downhill. Fox News can only benefit from the attention, and gain even more viewers as they realize only one media outlet is catching the attention of the administration.
His speeches are peppered with self references, and his “World Apology Tour” found him apologizing on our behalf. Yet, I don’t recall that he ever apologized for saying the Cambridge Police Department “acted stupidly”, even though his subsequent actions showed he knew he blew it. Ego gets in the way of many things with our leaders. And the Nobel Committee knows that.
Can a man who accepts the Nobel Peace Prize live with the diminished reputation as the only winner to immediately escalate a war, sending tens of thousands of troops into harm’s way?
The Nobel Committee sent the Peace Prize in a box large enough to house our President. Mr. Obama’s immediate response indicates that perhaps he won’t climb into the box. Let’s hope not.
Cross posted to FrankHagan.com
This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 13th, 2009 and is filed under News, Obama. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 13th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
[...] Cross posted to Donlephant [...]
October 13th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
I could care less if faux gets more viewers, if that’s even possible. Someone needs to call them out for what they are: 100% pure propaganda.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
I don’t have an issue with the perspective, but the passive aggressiveness of this post leaves me a bit troubled. You start with stating that somehow warn us that you upset everyone, as if you have a better opinion then others because of a unique opinion, then you fire one across the bow yourself.
“Can a man who accepts the Nobel Peace Prize live with the diminished reputation…”
what exactly is being diminished? his reputation, or the prize’s?
As someone who comes from a multi-generational military family, I do not see the victimization of the military the same way as others. In fact, I do not see them victimized at all.
On another and more important note, the press seems to think that the prize will redefine the President. I think the President is going to prove that it is the prize that is redefined in the end.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Justin Gardner, Mr. Meta. Mr. Meta said: DONKLEPHANT: Nobel Peace Box http://ow.ly/15UNtr [...]
October 14th, 2009 at 5:33 am
What is this continued ego discussion? The fact is, to be the president of the US, you NEED to have a strong ego. The system is setup to reward those who do and punish those who do not. Ghandi would never win an election in the states. In fact, look around at the pedigree of our leaders. It’s a low percentage of those who do not have an inflated ego.
Of course I see self references in Obamas speeches, as with any other president (I’m the Decider!), I can also hear positive references and praise given to those around him. I see words of trust to those he places in power and delegation of authority to those whose responsibilities are critical to the topic in question. The successful recovery of the captain from the Somalia pirates comes to mind. He never took any credit, although he had direct involvement in the decision-making. Rather he took a very low profile, yet when he appeared in public, he distributed credit to those involved.
This “ego” discussion is similar to “pals around with Ayers” and “prays with Rev Wright”. If you cannot attack a man directly, do it subversively in ways that are indefensible. Question his character, his ethics, his moral creed….but not his actions.
Your original statement “I’m a libertarian Republican, fiscal conservative and born-again Christian with moderate social views. That means I’m sure to irritate everyone at some point” contains several self references and assumes your opinion has the power to irritate others. Wow, like every other blogger in this world, that’s one fine ego you’re sportin’.
October 14th, 2009 at 7:12 am
Peace is not beneficial for all people. http://inspirationwriting.blogspot.com/2009/10/do-all-people-seek-peace.html
October 14th, 2009 at 8:45 am
A couple things folks…
I think the line about Obama’s ego is meant to call out the fact that folks have said he’s all ego. And there are examples of times where he has overreached this early. The Fox News and Cambridge police situations are good examples where he got involved when he shouldn’t have.
Also, what Frank is saying here is that he doesn’t want Obama to abandon Afghanistan because he’s being influenced by peace prizes. And I tend to agree, although I’m not sure that Frank and I would see eye to eye on the best methods to achieve that.
So, if all you got out of this post is that Frank is pointing out that Obama has an ego and you’re taking umbrage because of it, well, please read it again.
October 14th, 2009 at 9:27 am
The best, still, comes from Ryan Sager:
October 14th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Justin, if everyone responding has the takeaway that this is yet another iteration of the Obama’s Ego meme, then common sense dictates that it’s a failure on the part of the author, not the readers. As to this particular criticism, as has already been gently pointed out here, not only is it specious to act as if this President is somehow different in this regard (what, both Roosevelts, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Clinton and W. just to name a few DIDN’T constantly display their egos?) but it’s also a pointlessly ad hominem attack. I expect this blog to provide more substantive content than that. Frank should strive to be annoying by challenging assumptions and raising inconvenient questions, not by trotting out the same tired memes I can get from Fox and Friends.
Obama’s Ego is yet another attempt to reduce, a convenient way for his opposition to invalidate his every move as self-serving. I think Donklephant can do better than that…
October 14th, 2009 at 10:20 am
I stated ego is a “core trait” of world leaders, our current President included. I could have listed every President and given ample examples of ego-influenced, but politically harmful behavior. But since this is about our current situation and not President Taft, I talked about Mr. Obama.
The Nobel Committee does things for a reason, and the Peace Prize is sometimes given to encourage certain behavior, such as the encouragement for Arafat to continue his peace initiatives.
The reason behind the Prize may be that they are trying to “encourage” our President to see things their way. Regardless of party affiliation, I suspect we all want our President to make the best choice based on the best information, and not influences from a committee in Norway.
The “box” is very real; can President Obama escalate the war in light of it (assuming he decides that the best course)? His speech indicates he knows about the “box”, and that leads me to believe he won’t be trapped by it.
October 14th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Frank-
You may think you weren’t being snarky, but you said
Ego is one of the core character traits of any world leader, and some have noted that our President is in possession of one himself, to put it mildly.
“to put it mildly” puts this over the top and shows you were not trying to present the balanced view you are now trying to say you presented.
On another note, I find it amazing that a self proclaimed born-again Christian should spot the speck in Obama’s eye when they believe the God of the Universe takes a personal interest in them Additionally, their last representatives, W and Palin, both thought God had chosen them for their job, hard to imagine anyone having an ego that big or that dangerous.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:05 am
I understood the ego comment. The part I had a problem with is this one.
What Fox does goes far beyond what the snark from Mr. Hagan claims. Anyone not a fervid follower of theirs knows this.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:50 am
While we’re naming Presidents who had a big ego, let’s not leave out Teddy Roosevelt, Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson!!
But gee whiz, people, they’re all long dead and Obama is President now. To say he’s got a big ego may or may not be much of a criticism but the immediate response of denouncing the writer for being “snarky” or launching an “ad hominem” attack is a bit overwrought.
Obama will be President for at least another three years and three months. Folks should get used to his being criticized — yes, on Donklephant, too.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
John-
Certainly everyone deserves criticism but as kk might point out. When the discussion starts dripping of snarkiness, and that is my view, doubtful that many won’t have turned out the messenger. I thought maybe Doomed wrote it.
Here are places that I thought were snarky
reflected the general feeling that the Nobel Peace Prize award was, at best, premature.
So pray tell What was it at it’s worst?
Ego … to put it mildly.
The Fox News spat BS (with the gem) crossing a line not even the ego-mania of President Nixon would breach: shooting downhill.
…his “World Apology Tour” found him apologizing on our behalf.
The most even handed assessment I read on the Peace Prize came from here http://oratoricalanimal.typepad.com/
*The committee used the word “daring” and focused on the future. Obviously, this is not the usual Nobel Prize. They gave this award for some of the same reasons they give the Peace Prize to human rights activists: It is meant to increase Obama’s leverage. He can carry that (symbolically, I hope) into the room with the president of Iran or Russia or the prime minister of Israel or Kent Conrad, for that matter, and drop that sucker onto the table. It’s not everything. But every little bit helps.
I think that was perceptive, it covers the it was too early and the why aspect done with a lot more value than I got from the above article.
The last two paragraphs of Frank’s article had some food for thought. Unfortunately, by the time I got there I had no interest in pursuing them with him.
October 14th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Anyone care to take a little trip off The Deep End with me? Yes? Good! Here we go…
I’ve been mulling this whole NPP thing over for almost a week now, and I like some of the theories popping around here. Besides the “Free Pen Theory” and the “Calling Card Theory” referred to by the Word, there’s something else that’s crossed my mind…
[as we drift to the edge...]
There’s some interesting history and peculiarities behind Alf Nobel and all his prizes–according to the Wikipedia stuff, at least. To summarize…
* There’s a tightly-run calendar on all this. Nominees are accepted in the early part of the year, awards are announced in early October, you pick up your prize in December.
* Posthumous awards are never given. The award-winner must be alive when their name is announced in October. Yes, there have been one or two rare instances when somebody was announced in October, and then they died before the December ceremony.
* Self-nominations are immediately disqualified.
* If you are reading this, you probably can’t just fire off an email or letter and nominate somebody for the NPP. Only certain people get to do that.
* You can’t be considered if you haven’t been nominated.
* The selection committees for each award cannot nominate people, or consider those who have not been nominated. This, for me, is the most likely reason that Andrew Sullivan’s wish didn’t come true this year. Same goes for Elaine Lafferty.
* Lots of rumors are spread about who was nominated. The official lists are sealed for 50 years. So, if this is still bugging you in 2059, and you still happen to be here (and there’s still a “here” for you to “be” in)… well, have at it.
[Nearing the edge, the sound of falling water getting louder and louder...]
There is one really glaring omission on the list of NPP laureates. I have to admit, when I read about Gandhi’s 1947 statement on war (and subsequent backpedaling?), it made me think of President Obama stepping up activity in Afghanistan. Had Obama escalated the Afghan campaign earlier–say, in late September–would he have been dropped from the short list of NPP candidates?
The bottom line is, Gandhi was shot before the Nobel folks could award the NPP to him. The committee decided to leave the space blank for that year, not awarding the NPP to any one person or organization, as a kind of “silent homage” to Gandhi.
I don’t think they want to do that again.
[Here I go... over the edge!]
We have, now, the very first Black president in the White House. Certain segments of the American population have serious reservations about this. A lot of these same folks have been stocking up on guns and ammo… so much so that firearms dealers have empty shelves.
I can’t help but wonder, then, if the Nobel committee didn’t feel the pressure of time and history. I can’t help but wonder if they didn’t award the NPP to President Obama this year because, well… he’s still walking around above ground.
Please wait until the ride comes to a complete stop before pushing up on the lap bar and unfastening your safety harness. Please exit the ride to your… left.
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
October 14th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
While Agnostck is on the theory end of things. The blog I mentioned earlier also presented this one which I think also has some validity
It’s now called the “NoBush” Peace Prize. In all seriousness, even liberals seem to have underestimated the disdain that much of the world held for George W. Bush. Actually, it was not even disdain–it was despair. The United States is still irreplaceable in world affairs and when it, in effect, becomes a rogue nation, then it’s an enormous problem for the world. Obama’s determination to restore the United States to the political and moral center of the family of nations earned him this prize.
October 14th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Frank you parrot well – you covered all the talking points. There are news organizations, and then there are propaganda organizations cloaked as news – do you claim FOX is impartial?
There will be an escalation in the conflict not because fighting insurgents in Afghanistan is a good or a bad idea, but because $80 billion a month in military spending can’t just be turned off. The greedy and socio-pathic splattered throughout the DOD won’t allow it. That ship sailed years ago, the problem in Iraq and the “Stans” is now a hydra with a will of it’s own – it will take years to fix if that’s even possible. Kennedy and Johnson both relied on military advisors regarding Vietnam and look where that got us.
I find the Republican party and those on the right truly ridiclous, as if their opinions even matter anymore. They spent the last 30 plus years lighting fires in virtually every facet of our society (political, social, economic, international) and then claim righteous indignation when the fire department shows up to put out their handiwork. There are no solutions coming from that side of the aisle, there never were.
October 14th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Once he actually gets the prize, we’ll have to have a photo along the lines of this.
Hell, f**k the box! The more I read this, the more I like the idea of using it in negotiations. Take that medal, mount it on one of these, and wear it out when he goes to see Ahmadinejad or Kim.
“Know what this says, b!tch? It says ‘I talk, and you listen!’ “ :p
October 14th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Frank, if ego is a core trait of our world leaders as you state, then it’s hardly worthy of remark, is it? Obama’s Ego is a currently pervasive meme on the Right, however, so hanging your thesis on it is suspect to say the least, and casts your lot with the most questionable conservative media figures. If it’s broader feedback you seek, the entry also lacked focus and was marked by excessive editorializing; one man’s Apology Tour is another man’s Fence-Mending Tour after all. Snarky or not, some of the assertions were on the juvenile side.
I find the idea that Obama would do anything that ran counter to his concept of U.S. interests, simply to please or placate the Nobel committee, to be laughable. I mean, seriously.
October 14th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Agnostick,
Frightening theory, not unbelievable.
October 14th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Folks,
As I mentioned even before he commented and affirmed it, Frank’s main intention with this post was to hope that Obama does not allow the Nobel Peace Prize to influence his decisions about Afghanistan. And, like it or not, that is a HEAVY thing to have happen to you. If you don’t think it could have at least some effect, you’re kidding yourself.
Also, whoever tries to compare egos in this discussion is missing the point…big time. Frank said that it’s a core trait of EVERY world leader and so his comment covers EVERYBODY. Basically, if you’re bemoaning the fact that he didn’t bring up other folks in his discussion, please read the post closer next time.
Last, but certainly not least, Frank ran http://www.politetalk.com/ before he decided to fold up shop. So, given that he has spent a considerable amount of time dedicated to having reasonable discussions, afford him the courtesy of not piling on.
October 14th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Everyone was surprised by the Nobel Peace Prize award – even the president.
October 14th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Mike-
That may be true but Obama’s response was more mature and thoughtful than any criticism I have heard.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Frank:
If you think Obama’s an egomaniac check out Berlusconi.
Actual quote”I am inferior to no-one in history.”
Actual scandal 1: Currently sleeping with a girl a quarter his age. That was not a typo. She’s 17. He’s 72. He does not understand why everyone else thinks this is sleazy.
Actual scandal 2: Slept with a truly gorgeous woman, was surprised when she turned out to be a hooker. Still certain she was not paid for this particular liaison, because beautiful hookers just can’t resist fat septuagenarians. Subsequently tried to make her a candidate for European Parliament, but was stymied when his wife objected.
And I haven’t even started on the numerous corruption trials, and his ability to dodge said allegations by granting himself immunity until the Statute of Limitations runs out.
————–
As for the Nobel I sincerely doubt it will affect Obama’s behavior much. As Frank pointed out all politicians are inherently arrogant. They think what they think is the best course for everyone. So he’ll figure that (eventually) the world will come along to his view even if he sends 40,000 more troops.
It will be very helpful to him in the Middle East conflict. Apparently he’s hopping mad at Netanyahu, and bringing Bibi to heel will be slightly easier now that he’s got a Peace Prize. Not much easier, but hey.
The Palestinian side is actually more troublesome for him right now. It’s divided, and apparently the Fatah-aligned Palestinian Authority urged the Israelis to bomb the crap out of Hamas-run Gaza even if it would “result in thousands of civilian casualties.”
He’s gonna need every bit of stature he can get to get those three groups around a negotiating table, speaking in good faith. The Nobel can’t hurt.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Terry – “diminished reputation” meant to convey that his … “reputation” … would be … “diminished.” I thought the phrase made it clear.
MikeA – I am possession of an ego, and it serves me well. It is also a potential weakness. I recognize that, and hope the President does as well. Darn! Maybe I should have made that point in the original!
the Word – re-read the sentence … “to put it mildly” refers back to the phrase “some have noted” that Obama has an ego. I know I hid the phrase in the beginning of the sentence. Next time I’ll try to over-type the letters on each other to put them closer. For the record, I also believe the President is in possession of a large ego like, as I said, every world leader is; as others have noted, it is almost a prerequisite. I also believe surgeons, attorneys and CEOs have large egos, and for the same reasons. It is important to note it as a potential weakness, which could have been part of the original point …
One other point, while I’m always ready to discuss the theological implications of “thou shalt not judge” off-line or in a more appropriate forum, I always find it amusing that a *judgement* is made that I’m a person who judges and therefore … what, a “judger”? Suffice it to say that noting a personality trait hardly qualifies as the “judgement” Christians are prohibited from doing. If you disagree with me, you are going to hell (oh, darn, I just “judged” … scratch that last sentence … that’s a judgement only God can make. Get it?)
Stimulating conversations … thank you all! I hope you catch the friendly ribbing nature above. No offense intended. I will be traveling all day tomorrow, but will be able to log back on either tomorrow night or Friday morning. I’m not ignoring anyone who has a comment in the interim.
October 15th, 2009 at 5:59 am
Frank,
Yes, we all have an ego and in some instances serves us well. The point that I was obliquely trying to make was:
Large ego does not equal arrogance
Large ego can sometimes equal leadership
Ego is a part of the whole and, unless an entirely dominant trait, cannot by itself define the individual.
October 15th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Franks said: “to put it mildly” refers back to the phrase “some have noted” that Obama has an ego. I know I hid the phrase in the beginning of the sentence. Next time I’ll try to over-type the letters on each other to put them closer.
That’s just a sentence construction issue. Next time you’d write, *Ego is one of the core character traits of any world leader, and some have noted, to put it mildly, that our President is in possession of one himself.* You’d want to place it immediately following the portion of the sentence it modifies. I’m prone to dropping parenthetical thoughts into my writing, so I’d probably have written something like, *Ego is one of the core character traits of any world leader, and some have noted (to put it mildly!) that our President is in possession of one himself.* I think those constructions are still awkward — I’d probably characterize those noting the ego as detractors — but at least they’re grammatically correct.
Also, the preferred spelling is still judgment I believe. Considering the teevee ads for Saw VI spell it judgement, this must be one of those areas where our language’s remaining quirks are being ironed out to conform to common, erroneous usage. Hardly a high crime.
No one need read the post more closely, Justin. Why continue to ignore the fact that the premise of the entry, which emerges suddenly and unexpectedly halfway through, echoes a popular Right Wing meme? From there it’s a string of seemingly random thoughts (Fox news feud, says I and Me a lot in speeches, Apology Tour hoho, Nobel+AfPak=?, The Box!) strung together, like Larry King without the ellipses. It might have made more sense to begin the piece with the ego line and proceeded from there, with a bit more meat on the bones of course.
Opinion pieces aren’t typically this blog’s specialty. I expect they’ll get better?
October 15th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
I like the notion that NPP as a Euro-blessing gives our comander in chief more clout in foreign relations. The Swedish basically said, it’s not just the 53% (or so) of Americans who are solidly behind this guy; it’s a whole lot of us Euro-types, too. (Like we didn’t know.) But the NPP is special. Won’t it be a little harder for Kim Jong, or Ackmadeno@#joiyaad, or China to get snarky with him? I think quite a bit.
And on queue, the right insists we throw away American leverage and prestige (along with the Olympics and anything that the “enemy” touches) because it’s not all about them. I seriously do not think the people representing the bulk of the political right have our country’s best interest in mind. I don’t. When their leaders try to act sensibly, they eat ‘em: (Lindsay Graham). It’s shocking. I can’t help but think that the GOP is going through the political equivalent of a white head. An infection has been laying under the surface for years and now with a little pressure from within, it’s pimpling up. (And, BTW, like teenagers, they refuse admit a mistake, blame others for everything, know it all, don’t do their homework, bully, and throw tantrums when they don’t get their way.) It’s ugly to look at now (the pimple, I mean); but it will be so much better for them and for us when it finally pops. I guess we have to take mom’s advise and not rush it, but damn i just want to squeeze it so bad…. I know, I know…
When it happens, just stand back cuz it’s a whopper.
October 15th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Mike…
Just read that last one to my wife, I thought it was so good! You have perfectly described what is passing for “American Conservatism” 2009.
So yeah, I read that to my wife.
“You know why you like that? You like that because it’s one big, pimply metaphor.. and you love metaphors!”
“I know,” I replied. “Plus, it fits like a GLOVE!”
“It fits like a what?”
[damnit...]
October 16th, 2009 at 7:34 am
Hi Frank and seriously welcome to Donklephant from a dedicated reader. I think one of the issues is that people like me flocked to Donklephant in the past year… or two?… who are intelligent, looking for honest insight, and terribly tired and hyper-sensitive to the grandstanding currently displayed in 99% of political discussions in this country.
There is an old saying in marketing – talk about my grass, not your grass seed. It’s a shame you tried starting on a light note to put yourself in perspective, and it completely skewed my view of your post! The rather sad part is, drawing so many lines you were thinking you were showing me how complex your thinking is. The truth is that I read that realized that the only people that are proud of pissing people off are typically grumpy old men who talk in complete BS while trying to convince everyone around them they have some special insight or secret data others do not.
I’m sure if Justin put you here that is not the case for you, and I hope that is true. But know I for one am hyper sensitive towards that group of people. They have infected the news. Fox is of course the biggest employer of grumpy old men but most TV/Cable programs seems to have their Jack Cafferty, Keith Olbermann, Lou Dobbs… wow, I just realized how long of a list I could create here.
That list of people have completely destroyed the credibility of ALL broadcast journalists for me; everything on the tube is suspect now. That is why I turned to places like here. And truly Donklephant has been a breath of fresh air. A place people can talk about their views and reconcile their differences.
So please, just talk about my grass. If your seed contains a little religion, a little conservatism, that’s perfectly fine. If it works, I’d go for it.
October 16th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Agnostic – I love a good metaphor. They can really shine a light on things. Technically, “Fits like a glove” is a simile; but I enjoy a good simile, too, like a kid with a new toy! Cheers.
October 16th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Thanks, everyone, for the advice. I do appreciate it.
Political discussions are difficult because of polarization in political debate today. I understand that many of you think I’m a Glen Beck-style rabble rouser because I identified myself as a conservative, a Republican and a Christian. That’s understandable; you have only a short article to judge me on, and with the recent and often unfair criticisms of the President, my mild criticisms seem like more of the same.
About the “intro”: Donkelphant likes new posters to write a short intro and pre-pend it to their first post. Many of you have commented that I should have made that intro more consistent with the tenor of the post, and that’s a fair criticism. I think the intro signaled that you may have reason to be offended. That wasn’t the intent of the intro, of course, but I did want to warn you that my views do not always fit into the conservative-Republican-Christian category. Thankfully, I don’t have to have an introduction on every post.
I will probably make other grammatical errors, and perhaps a spelling error or two (”judgement” is incorrect, as people have pointed out).
A couple of you have mentioned that Donklephant is not a place for “opinion”, a comment that truly surprises me. I think Donklephant has a lot of opinion, and most of it is from a center-left perspective. So I’m not sure how to incorporate that idea to help in the future.
October 16th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Frank-
I think you missed the point on theology. I’m more than willing to talk to you about it anywhere you’d like.
As to your entry on the scene, suffice it to say that people will give you several chances here before they write you off completely. Some really worked at it to get there and then like Limbaugh with his racial comments arrived wondering how they got there.
Welcome