-
It's that time of year again - our ISP is asking for money. If you have some spare change, please click the Donate link... Thanks!
- About Us
- Search
- Need Help?
- Donate
- Login/Register
Latest Entries
Actions Menu
Blog Roll
- 4F Facebook Page
- Turn Up The Night with Kenny Pick
- Stephanie Miller Show
- The Tim Corrimal Show
- The Rachel Maddow Show
- Angry Americans with Paul Rieckhoff
- Thom Hartmann Program
- Turnips! Fans of Turn Up the Night Facebook Page
- Snopes.com
- Factcheck.org
- Official White House Page, if you must.
- The Brad Blog / Green News Report
- The Poorly Written Political Blog (Joe Santorsa)
Libya, NATO, Congress, and the President
Author: BobR
Date: 03/23/2011 11:11:17
Once again, President Obama has taken an action which is approved by the majority of Americans, but condemned by those on the right and by some on the left. His measured actions in Libya have Republicans questioning his lack of hawkishness, and Progressives angry about yet another war front.
The biggest question is whether he got Congress involved enough:
According to the President, however, he did consult with them. In fact, the Senate passed a resolution calling for a "no-fly zone", which ended up in the UN resolution:
As required by the War Powers Resolution, Obama sent an official notification to Congress. Of course, the House ison vacation recessed for "constituent outreach" this week, so that doesn't help. That hasn't stopped Kucinich from talking about impeachment. For what, I ask? What high crime or misdemeanor? While some people question the Constitutionality of the 1973 War Powers Resolution, until some court says otherwise, it is law and - from a technically legal point of view - therefore within the Constitution.
So the politics of this are all over the map. There are Democrats like Anthony Weiner (D-NY) who remind people what happened in Rwanda when we did nothing. On the other side are Democrats like the aforementioned Kucinich who are trying to block funding from being used for this. Republicans, on the other hand, would normally support this sort of thing, but are torn between supporting the action and trying to find a way to not support Obama. They seem to have settled on the talking point that it is "too little, too late", or for allowing another country to take leadership on this. On both sides, there is the question of the monetary costs involved.
The challenge to Obama as this plays out is to define our mission there, and keep our involvement short and not let "scope creep" turn this from disabling Ghadaffi's ability to attack his own people to a mission to unseat him completely. Remember criticisms of the first Gulf war, when people said Papa Bush didn't "finish the job"? That criticism will occur here as well, because once again - that is not the job. That is not in the UN resolution which NATO is enforcing.
The other question is: what will arise from the smoke? Who are the rebels, and will they be able to coalesce into a working government, should Ghadaffi step down? Libya tends to be a tribal country; there is no single unifying leader to step into a power vacuum.
The end result of this will be the final measurement to whether or not the mission was ill-advised and could be a boost or an achilles heel for the Obama presidency. I hope this turns out well, and the post-mortem analysis shows that it was the right thing to do. Not just for Obama, and not just for our country, but for Libya as well.
The biggest question is whether he got Congress involved enough:
Kucinich also questioned why Democratic leaders didn’t object when President Barack Obama told them of his plan for American participation in enforcing the Libyan no-fly zone during a White House Situation Room meeting on Friday, sources told POLITICO.
And liberals fumed that Congress hadn’t been formally consulted before the attack and expressed concern that it would lead to a third U.S. war in the Muslim world.
According to the President, however, he did consult with them. In fact, the Senate passed a resolution calling for a "no-fly zone", which ended up in the UN resolution:
Exhibit A for the White House: A Senate resolution that passed March 1, which denounced Khaddafy's atrocities. The White House says the U.N. resolution authorizing force in Libya incorporates it.
The resolution was incorporated unanimously and calls for a "no-fly zone."
As required by the War Powers Resolution, Obama sent an official notification to Congress. Of course, the House is
So the politics of this are all over the map. There are Democrats like Anthony Weiner (D-NY) who remind people what happened in Rwanda when we did nothing. On the other side are Democrats like the aforementioned Kucinich who are trying to block funding from being used for this. Republicans, on the other hand, would normally support this sort of thing, but are torn between supporting the action and trying to find a way to not support Obama. They seem to have settled on the talking point that it is "too little, too late", or for allowing another country to take leadership on this. On both sides, there is the question of the monetary costs involved.
The challenge to Obama as this plays out is to define our mission there, and keep our involvement short and not let "scope creep" turn this from disabling Ghadaffi's ability to attack his own people to a mission to unseat him completely. Remember criticisms of the first Gulf war, when people said Papa Bush didn't "finish the job"? That criticism will occur here as well, because once again - that is not the job. That is not in the UN resolution which NATO is enforcing.
The other question is: what will arise from the smoke? Who are the rebels, and will they be able to coalesce into a working government, should Ghadaffi step down? Libya tends to be a tribal country; there is no single unifying leader to step into a power vacuum.
The end result of this will be the final measurement to whether or not the mission was ill-advised and could be a boost or an achilles heel for the Obama presidency. I hope this turns out well, and the post-mortem analysis shows that it was the right thing to do. Not just for Obama, and not just for our country, but for Libya as well.
Comments:
Order comments Newest to Oldest Refresh Comments
Comment by 
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 12:37:07
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 12:37:07
Morning 
I think the turn of phrase that Obama maybe thinking for these past few years - "you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't"
I think the turn of phrase that Obama maybe thinking for these past few years - "you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't"
Comment by 
Raine on 03/23/2011 12:37:19
Good Morning!
It's kinda burning my chafe that people are saying that congress was not consulted.
Please note the date of this article:
And there is this: A TIMELINE
March 18: 12:30 p.m. ET: Obama meets in the Situation Room with a bipartisan group of Congressional leaders on Libya for one hour. Some leaders attended the meeting in person and a larger group participates by phone.
Raine on 03/23/2011 12:37:19
Good Morning! It's kinda burning my chafe that people are saying that congress was not consulted.
Please note the date of this article:
Posted at 02:15 PM ET, 03/18/2011
Obama consults with congressional leaders on Libya
President Obama held a closed-door consultation with congressional leaders on the crisis in Libya on Friday afternoon, hours after a cease-fire was declared and one day after the United Nations Security Council authorized a no-fly zone and “all necessary measures†to protect civilians in the country.
The meeting convened 12:30 p.m. in the Situation Room and ended shortly before 2 p.m. A Senate leadership aide said that the meeting brought together leaders from both parties and both chambers.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attended in person; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is currently leading a bipartisan congressional delegation to Italy, were among those attending by phone.
And there is this: A TIMELINE
March 18: 12:30 p.m. ET: Obama meets in the Situation Room with a bipartisan group of Congressional leaders on Libya for one hour. Some leaders attended the meeting in person and a larger group participates by phone.
Comment by 
TriSec on 03/23/2011 12:48:48
TriSec on 03/23/2011 12:48:48
Greetings, programs!
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 12:53:46
Raine on 03/23/2011 12:53:46
I was reading Ezra Klien's wonkbook this morning, and he said something VERY compelling
Not to steal Bill Maher’s schtick, but new rule: if you’re not willing to consider tax increases, you’re not serious about deficits. Full stop. Just as rigid pacifists aren’t credible on national defense and dogmatic Christian Scientists are rarely consulted on health-care policy, a politician who has made an ideological vow to refuse to even consider tax increases is not interested in reducing deficits -- and that’s true no matter how often they say the word “deficits.â€
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 12:59:08
Raine on 03/23/2011 12:59:08
Elizabeth Taylor has passed away. 
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 13:12:12
Raine on 03/23/2011 13:12:12
Go Glenn GO!
Mr. Beck declined an interview request about his future plans, but through a spokesman, he provided a statement. “Roger Ailes has built the most important voice in America today — Fox News — and it is an honor to do my show there every night,†he stated. “I have no intention whatsoever of doing the show I am doing now on Fox anywhere else.â€
Mr. Beck has been contemplating a cable channel of his own for more than a year, according to the people who have spoken with him about it, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Mr. Beck may not be able to actively pursue such an arrangement until his Fox contract is up.
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 13:19:58
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 13:19:58
oh no, Sassy back!
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 13:24:42
SAAAssy!
Raine on 03/23/2011 13:24:42
Quote by wickedpam:
oh no, Sassy back!
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 13:38:08
and still as harsh as before. Is it odd that I want new sassy commecials?
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 13:38:08
Quote by Raine:SAAAssy!Quote by wickedpam:
oh no, Sassy back!
and still as harsh as before. Is it odd that I want new sassy commecials?
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 13:46:20
That dog is the worst representative for shelter adoptions -- ever.
Raine on 03/23/2011 13:46:20
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by Raine:SAAAssy!Quote by wickedpam:
oh no, Sassy back!
and still as harsh as before. Is it odd that I want new sassy commecials?
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 13:49:29
Raine on 03/23/2011 13:49:29
Wow, Yesterday was William Shatner's 80th birthday!
Comment by 
BobR on 03/23/2011 13:56:04
Thanks for this - I may edit the blog and add it in.
BobR on 03/23/2011 13:56:04
Quote by Raine:
It's kinda burning my chafe that people are saying that congress was not consulted.
Please note the date of this article:Posted at 02:15 PM ET, 03/18/2011
Obama consults with congressional leaders on Libya
President Obama held a closed-door consultation with congressional leaders on the crisis in Libya on Friday afternoon, hours after a cease-fire was declared and one day after the United Nations Security Council authorized a no-fly zone and “all necessary measures†to protect civilians in the country.
The meeting convened 12:30 p.m. in the Situation Room and ended shortly before 2 p.m. A Senate leadership aide said that the meeting brought together leaders from both parties and both chambers.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attended in person; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is currently leading a bipartisan congressional delegation to Italy, were among those attending by phone.
And there is this: A TIMELINE
March 18: 12:30 p.m. ET: Obama meets in the Situation Room with a bipartisan group of Congressional leaders on Libya for one hour. Some leaders attended the meeting in person and a larger group participates by phone.
Thanks for this - I may edit the blog and add it in.
Comment by BobR on 03/23/2011 13:57:00
BobR on 03/23/2011 13:57:00
Quote by Raine:
Elizabeth Taylor has passed away.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 13:59:34
Your welcome.
It seems to me that Boner's biggest gripe was this: emphasis mine.
Raine on 03/23/2011 13:59:34
Quote by BobR:Quote by Raine:
It's kinda burning my chafe that people are saying that congress was not consulted.
Please note the date of this article:Posted at 02:15 PM ET, 03/18/2011
Obama consults with congressional leaders on Libya
President Obama held a closed-door consultation with congressional leaders on the crisis in Libya on Friday afternoon, hours after a cease-fire was declared and one day after the United Nations Security Council authorized a no-fly zone and “all necessary measures†to protect civilians in the country.
The meeting convened 12:30 p.m. in the Situation Room and ended shortly before 2 p.m. A Senate leadership aide said that the meeting brought together leaders from both parties and both chambers.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attended in person; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is currently leading a bipartisan congressional delegation to Italy, were among those attending by phone.
And there is this: A TIMELINE
March 18: 12:30 p.m. ET: Obama meets in the Situation Room with a bipartisan group of Congressional leaders on Libya for one hour. Some leaders attended the meeting in person and a larger group participates by phone.
Thanks for this - I may edit the blog and add it in.
It seems to me that Boner's biggest gripe was this:
The President is the commander-in-chief, but the Administration has a responsibility to define for the American people, the Congress, and our troops what the mission in Libya is, better explain what America's role is in achieving that mission, and make clear how it will be accomplished. Before any further military commitments are made, the Administration must do a better job of briefing members of Congress and communicating to the American people about our mission in Libya and how it will be achieved.
Comment by TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:04:49
TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:04:49
OK, I'm annoyed.
Listening to the news, and they're on about the radioctive iodine in the water supply around Tokyo. They've made up a measurement called a "beckerel" or something that sounds like that.
I don't know much about radiation exposure, but I do know what 'rads' and 'millirems' are. We've also heard about 'sieverts' during the crisis.
Are the intentionally trying to confuse everything, or does nobody know what the fuck is going on and they're pulling this out of their arses?
Listening to the news, and they're on about the radioctive iodine in the water supply around Tokyo. They've made up a measurement called a "beckerel" or something that sounds like that.
I don't know much about radiation exposure, but I do know what 'rads' and 'millirems' are. We've also heard about 'sieverts' during the crisis.
Are the intentionally trying to confuse everything, or does nobody know what the fuck is going on and they're pulling this out of their arses?
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:20:12
That is a measurement. It wasn't made up.
Becquerel
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:20:12
Quote by TriSec:
OK, I'm annoyed.
Listening to the news, and they're on about the radioctive iodine in the water supply around Tokyo. They've made up a measurement called a "beckerel" or something that sounds like that.
I don't know much about radiation exposure, but I do know what 'rads' and 'millirems' are. We've also heard about 'sieverts' during the crisis.
Are the intentionally trying to confuse everything, or does nobody know what the fuck is going on and they're pulling this out of their arses?
Becquerel
Comment by 
Scoopster on 03/23/2011 14:22:11
Scoopster on 03/23/2011 14:22:11
Morning all! 
Becquerels, haven't heard that one yet til now.
BTW, this link should help clear things up.
Quote by TriSec:
OK, I'm annoyed.
Listening to the news, and they're on about the radioactive iodine in the water supply around Tokyo. They've made up a measurement called a "beckerel" or something that sounds like that.
I don't know much about radiation exposure, but I do know what 'rads' and 'millirems' are. We've also heard about 'sieverts' during the crisis.
Are the intentionally trying to confuse everything, or does nobody know what the fuck is going on and they're pulling this out of their arses?
Becquerels, haven't heard that one yet til now.
BTW, this link should help clear things up.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:31:27
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:31:27
I don;t know what news you are listening too, Tri, but I suspect it not meant to confuse, I just think many of us never learned beyond High School what the ramifications are of the table of elements.
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 14:36:46
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 14:36:46
I swear these people just have a very low opinion of women
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:39:44
This guy is disgusting.
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:39:44
Quote by wickedpam:
I swear these people just have a very low opinion of women
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:41:05
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:41:05
Translation:
It's a WOMAN's FAULT we get pregnant. It's out fault for everything. He should be given a vasectimy -- FORCEFULLY.
It's a WOMAN's FAULT we get pregnant. It's out fault for everything. He should be given a vasectimy -- FORCEFULLY.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:41:35
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:41:35
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:44:45
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:44:45
He wants to have sex education in school so girls know how to use condoms, and yet he says guys hate them.
How about we teach ALL kids about sex, and thhe ramifications of teenage pregnancy? How about we teach them how to not get pregnant with the understanding that teens are going to have sex????
Because they are, that is what teens do. Lawd this Victorian society is going to be the end of me.
How about we teach ALL kids about sex, and thhe ramifications of teenage pregnancy? How about we teach them how to not get pregnant with the understanding that teens are going to have sex????
Because they are, that is what teens do. Lawd this Victorian society is going to be the end of me.
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 14:49:53
he was an idiot - in his world nothing out of the ordindary ever happens and there are no extenuating circumstances
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 14:49:53
Quote by Raine:
He wants to have sex education in school so girls know how to use condoms, and yet he says guys hate them.
How about we teach ALL kids about sex, and thhe ramifications of teenage pregnancy? How about we teach them how to not get pregnant with the understanding that teens are going to have sex????
Because they are, that is what teens do. Lawd this Victorian society is going to be the end of me.
he was an idiot - in his world nothing out of the ordindary ever happens and there are no extenuating circumstances
Comment by TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:50:18
TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:50:18
Actually, it was NPR this morning. And I always catch the 1300 GMT broadcast of BBC World News.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:50:23
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:50:23
Oh, man, that condom caller REALLY rubbed me the wrong way. (no pun intended, this time)
Comment by TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:51:27
Aha, different names for the same thing.
TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:51:27
Quote by Scoopster:
Morning all!
Becquerels, haven't heard that one yet til now.
BTW, this link should help clear things up.
Aha, different names for the same thing.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 14:52:43
Except for all te girls who go and get knocked up... 
It's because in his view they are too stupid to know better to not have sex because boys hate condoms. 
Am I getting that right?
Raine on 03/23/2011 14:52:43
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by Raine:
He wants to have sex education in school so girls know how to use condoms, and yet he says guys hate them.
How about we teach ALL kids about sex, and thhe ramifications of teenage pregnancy? How about we teach them how to not get pregnant with the understanding that teens are going to have sex????
Because they are, that is what teens do. Lawd this Victorian society is going to be the end of me.
he was an idiot - in his world nothing out of the ordindary ever happens and there are no extenuating circumstances
It's because in his view they are too stupid to know better to not have sex because boys hate condoms. Am I getting that right?
Comment by TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:54:27
TriSec on 03/23/2011 14:54:27
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:08:44
yep- that sums up what I heard him say
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:08:44
Quote by Raine:Except for all te girls who go and get knocked up...Quote by wickedpam:Quote by Raine:
He wants to have sex education in school so girls know how to use condoms, and yet he says guys hate them.
How about we teach ALL kids about sex, and thhe ramifications of teenage pregnancy? How about we teach them how to not get pregnant with the understanding that teens are going to have sex????
Because they are, that is what teens do. Lawd this Victorian society is going to be the end of me.
he was an idiot - in his world nothing out of the ordindary ever happens and there are no extenuating circumstances
Am I getting that right?
yep- that sums up what I heard him say
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 15:11:41
How did you get that conclusion?
Am I misunderstanding something here?
Raine on 03/23/2011 15:11:41
Quote by TriSec:Quote by Scoopster:
Morning all!
Becquerels, haven't heard that one yet til now.
BTW, this link should help clear things up.
Aha, different names for the same thing.
Am I misunderstanding something here?
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:15:43
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:15:43
Quote by TriSec:
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
Comment by BobR on 03/23/2011 15:16:41
BobR on 03/23/2011 15:16:41
To clear things up:
A "Becquerel" is a unit of radiation activity. It is non-material-based (the "curie" was tied to radium-226)
A "Sievert" is a measurement of a dose of radiation absorbed by an organism.
rems are similar to Sieverts, but using a different measuring basis.
A "Becquerel" is a unit of radiation activity. It is non-material-based (the "curie" was tied to radium-226)
A "Sievert" is a measurement of a dose of radiation absorbed by an organism.
rems are similar to Sieverts, but using a different measuring basis.
Comment by BobR on 03/23/2011 15:29:03
I think the male-dominated society pre-dates Christianity. It's interesting because at one time, females were revered because they "created life". I don't know when or how that changed, but remember that the Jews (of which Jesus was one) could have multiple wives at one time.
BobR on 03/23/2011 15:29:03
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by TriSec:
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
I think the male-dominated society pre-dates Christianity. It's interesting because at one time, females were revered because they "created life". I don't know when or how that changed, but remember that the Jews (of which Jesus was one) could have multiple wives at one time.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 15:33:35
You know, Mary Magdelene had her own Gospel, right?
I have long been of the opinion that the Bible has been manipulated to be more male oriented -- removing the contributions of women in the history -- for a long time.
Someone rewrote the book, for politics, power -- not sure which.
Raine on 03/23/2011 15:33:35
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by TriSec:
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
I have long been of the opinion that the Bible has been manipulated to be more male oriented -- removing the contributions of women in the history -- for a long time.
Someone rewrote the book, for politics, power -- not sure which.
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:35:56
ok they didn't have sister-wives in any of my childhood Bible stories
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:35:56
Quote by BobR:Quote by wickedpam:Quote by TriSec:
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
I think the male-dominated society pre-dates Christianity. It's interesting because at one time, females were revered because they "created life". I don't know when or how that changed, but remember that the Jews (of which Jesus was one) could have multiple wives at one time.
ok they didn't have sister-wives in any of my childhood Bible stories
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 15:36:48
Raine on 03/23/2011 15:36:48
Judas had a gospel as well.... Funny how the uncomfortable parts have been whited out. I guess somewhere along the line some Christians heeded with the responsibility to transcribe the bible needed a fall guy.
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 15:38:30
Those women were called concubines. 
Raine on 03/23/2011 15:38:30
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by BobR:Quote by wickedpam:Quote by TriSec:
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
I think the male-dominated society pre-dates Christianity. It's interesting because at one time, females were revered because they "created life". I don't know when or how that changed, but remember that the Jews (of which Jesus was one) could have multiple wives at one time.
ok they didn't have sister-wives in any of my childhood Bible stories
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:39:19
Yes, Constintine and then King James.
I think that would be in interesting read. MM from what I understand a fairly wealthy woman who was widowed and ran her own business
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:39:19
Quote by Raine:You know, Mary Magdelene had her own Gospel, right?Quote by wickedpam:Quote by TriSec:
It all goes back to religion, and the dominant role men are given in all organized religion over the congregation and women.
If you recall, 'twas reproductive issues that drove Mrs. TriSec and I out of the Catholic church. A move I've never regretted nor looked back on, either.
Sorry to get a little religious, hope i don't offend anyone
this is something I've never understood about Catholism - The way I was taught, by going to a variety of churchs and my born-again Aunt, was that Jesus' most devoted of apostles were the women, esp Mary Magdelene. To the point of being the people that stayed with him and tended to him when he was removed from the cross and being there when he died and if I remember right, they were the first people he appeared to after death.
Yet because the "church" was built by Peter (or was it Paul I can't remember) they shoved women to the back ground or put them up on pedastals to "protect"
I have long been of the opinion that the Bible has been manipulated to be more male oriented -- removing the contributions of women in the history -- for a long time.
Someone rewrote the book, for politics, power -- not sure which.
Yes, Constintine and then King James.
I think that would be in interesting read. MM from what I understand a fairly wealthy woman who was widowed and ran her own business
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:41:24
Heck, there are hugh chunks of time left out of the Bible - Jesus was a kid then suddenly a man in very short time. I think I heard that the years from 18-30 are missing.
And read Lamb if you want a funny verions of what happened :)
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:41:24
Quote by Raine:
Judas had a gospel as well.... Funny how the uncomfortable parts have been whited out. I guess somewhere along the line some Christians heeded with the responsibility to transcribe the bible needed a fall guy.
Heck, there are hugh chunks of time left out of the Bible - Jesus was a kid then suddenly a man in very short time. I think I heard that the years from 18-30 are missing.
And read Lamb if you want a funny verions of what happened :)
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 15:46:45
Yes, those years are missing.
I'm gonna say something blasphemous.
I think Jesus was prolly getting jiggy with it for those 22 years. I mean seriously -- he was human. If he was such a prophet, and I happen to believe he did exist and was a real person, he had to obtain some kind of experience.
I really think the idea of Christianity has been altered to fit the world view of the time.
Raine on 03/23/2011 15:46:45
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by Raine:
Judas had a gospel as well.... Funny how the uncomfortable parts have been whited out. I guess somewhere along the line some Christians heeded with the responsibility to transcribe the bible needed a fall guy.
Heck, there are hugh chunks of time left out of the Bible - Jesus was a kid then suddenly a man in very short time. I think I heard that the years from 18-30 are missing.
And read Lamb if you want a funny verions of what happened :)
I'm gonna say something blasphemous.
I think Jesus was prolly getting jiggy with it for those 22 years. I mean seriously -- he was human. If he was such a prophet, and I happen to believe he did exist and was a real person, he had to obtain some kind of experience.
I really think the idea of Christianity has been altered to fit the world view of the time.
Comment by Scoopster on 03/23/2011 15:49:54
Scoopster on 03/23/2011 15:49:54
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:59:26
I don't know that its that blasphemous a notion anymore really, heck most of the world read the DaVinci Code
Always thought there was something more but without being a Theological scholar I have a limited view
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 15:59:26
Quote by Raine:Yes, those years are missing.Quote by wickedpam:Quote by Raine:
Judas had a gospel as well.... Funny how the uncomfortable parts have been whited out. I guess somewhere along the line some Christians heeded with the responsibility to transcribe the bible needed a fall guy.
Heck, there are hugh chunks of time left out of the Bible - Jesus was a kid then suddenly a man in very short time. I think I heard that the years from 18-30 are missing.
And read Lamb if you want a funny verions of what happened :)
I'm gonna say something blasphemous.
I think Jesus was prolly getting jiggy with it for those 22 years. I mean seriously -- he was human. If he was such a prophet, and I happen to believe he did exist and was a real person, he had to obtain some kind of experience.
I really think the idea of Christianity has been altered to fit the world view of the time.
I don't know that its that blasphemous a notion anymore really, heck most of the world read the DaVinci Code
Always thought there was something more but without being a Theological scholar I have a limited view
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 16:11:41
Raine on 03/23/2011 16:11:41
Comment by 
livingonli on 03/23/2011 16:52:13
livingonli on 03/23/2011 16:52:13
A belated good day to everyone..
Comment by wickedpam on 03/23/2011 16:58:13
wickedpam on 03/23/2011 16:58:13
hey Liv
Comment by Raine on 03/23/2011 17:02:28
Raine on 03/23/2011 17:02:28
Testing a new emoticon:
Comment by livingonli on 03/23/2011 17:03:24
livingonli on 03/23/2011 17:03:24
I guess I just get depressed with this rain and crappy weather. We're supposed to get snow tonight here in New York and it was in the 70's just a few days ago.
Comment by BobR on 03/23/2011 17:07:41
just like with Obama's life!
BobR on 03/23/2011 17:07:41
Quote by wickedpam:Quote by Raine:
Judas had a gospel as well.... Funny how the uncomfortable parts have been whited out. I guess somewhere along the line some Christians heeded with the responsibility to transcribe the bible needed a fall guy.
Heck, there are hugh chunks of time left out of the Bible - Jesus was a kid then suddenly a man in very short time. I think I heard that the years from 18-30 are missing.
And read Lamb if you want a funny verions of what happened :)
just like with Obama's life!