Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Chris Dodd in 2008? (God help us)

From the Political Wire

Dodd Gears Up for White House Bid

Sen. Christopher Dodd (DC) said today he has "decided to do all the things that are necessary to prepare to seek the presidency in 2008," the Hartford Courant reports. He "will hire staff, raise money and travel around the country in the next few months as he tries to enlist support."


Another gun grabbing New England liberal. The only thing good I can say about Chris Dodd is that he's not his dad Thomas Dodd who wrote the draconian 1968 gun law.

20 comments:

patrick flynn said...

Mr. D is an embarrassment to Catholics everywhere. What is it with Catholic politicians? The Kennedys, the Kerrys, the Gulianis, the Schwarzeneggers, the Granholms, the Coumos, the Daschles, the Pelosis - why do they feel the need to betray their own church and its 2000 year-old moral truths?

It doesn't make any sense and it's simply outrageous.

Anonymous said...

Moral truths!!!

Hogwash!

All those Catholic people you listed have very high morals.

There is nothing moral about homophobia and putting women and doctors in jail.

It's well proven that what limits abortion is birth control and education. We had several hundred years of very high deaths and high abortion rates. Abortion rates went down under Bill Clinton's administration!!!!!

Education works!!!

The world needs love, compasion and medicine. Please stop the trend to put more of citizens in jail.

Calling those who want to make criminals out of women and their doctors is NOT PRO LIFE.

But then you are the ones who think who believe this war is about freedom, so I guess I now understand why you just don't get it.

Kevins said...

Here, here, anonymous. I coudn't agree with you more. I don't understand what being Catholic has to do with being a politican.

patrick flynn said...

"I don't understand what being Catholic has to do with being a politican."

It's no wonder with Ted Kennedy as your example.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how you think it is your right to comment on anyone's faith.

Anonymous said...

I know Jesus is very clear and to the point on judging others.

You don't cherry pick what you hold up as values of faith do you?

Kevins said...

I don’t understand what bringing up Sen. Ted Kennedy has to do with the discussion. If that’s your debating style you don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell against mike rogers. By your reasoning, the people who said a Catholic could never be president and said John Kennedy could not be president because he took his directives from the Vacation were apparently right.

patrick flynn said...

Look, I'll spell it out for you. Chris Dodd affirmed to believe and practice the moral teachings of the Catholic Church when he was initiated into the Knights of Columbus.

He betrayed that with his political behavior.

You're simply wrong on the Jesus/judging thing. Nobody condemned Dodd to Hell. I simply stated he is an embarrassment because he is.

I think that some of you may be just so used to public servants who have lost their moral compass. We've forgotten that we're supposed to set the bar high for those in leadership.

patrick flynn said...

The people who spear-headed the movement to assert that Kennedy and Al Smith could not be president were for the most part, the Ku Klux Klan. You might find yourself in some very strange company, Kevin.

Even if the KKK had maintained their power, they would not have hindered the Kerry campaign.

BTW, Jack Kennedy did not take his directives from the Vatican. They came right from Papa Joe.

And if Teddy took even the basics of his faith and instilled them in his heart, Mary Joe Kopechne might have still been alive.

Kevins said...

I did a little research of Sen. Dodd, and I see why the smear has begun.

You may have spelled it out for me, Mr. Flynn, but you left a lot of letters out.
The teachings of the Catholic Church are, or should be, separate from his “political behavior.” There’s a thing in this country called separation of church and state, maybe you have heard of it? It’s so sad that the political debate is this country has reached such a low that just because you don’t agree with someone else’s policies they are morally bankrupt. But after the eight-year right-wing attack witnessed on the Clintons that continues today what can we expect. I’m not sure what moral teachings the Knights of Columbus represent. According to their web site, they are a fraternal benefit society formed to render financial aid to members. A great organization, but I’m not sure how sponsoring bingo and free-throw contests translated to moral teachings that can be betrayed.

You do not have to be a Catholic to have morals, you do not have to be a Christian to have morals and you can even be an atheist and have morals.

It was not just the KKK who said John Kennedy and Al Smith could not be president, and I’m sure you know that. I don’t know how I would find myself in strange company because I don’t support the Klan and I think they are a despicable hate group, and I don’t think a man’s or woman’s religion has anything to do with them holding elected office. A Catholic, Baptist or an atheist is just as capable as anyone else. I agree with you when you say if the KKK were in power they would have hindered Kerry’s campaign because they vote republican. I never said Jack Kennedy took directives from the Vatican, but your ridiculous suggestion that he took directives from his father is just that. I’m sure he may have taken some advice from his father, what son doesn’t? Its too bad george bush did not take some advice from his father then maybe we wouldn’t be in this useless war in Iraq.

The crack about Ted Kennedy and Mary Joe Kopechne is just a cheap shot that does nothing for the discussion, but I have a cheaper one for you that touched more than just one person. If all the many Catholic priests took “even the basics of their faith and instilled them in their heart” maybe the hundreds of young boys would not have been raped, and if the church had stopped protecting the rapists and continued to transfer them to prey on new victims then maybe the innocence and lives of many boys would have been saved.

patrick flynn said...

"There’s a thing in this country called separation of church and state."

Please give me your definition of this and show me where it is documented.

"You do not have to be a Catholic to have morals, you do not have to be a Christian to have morals and you can even be an atheist and have morals."

Of course Kevin. One of the most tender, loving and generous people I have ever met is a non-believer. The point of the entire discourse is that those who profess should practice. Isn't that simple enough?

"If all the many Catholic priests took “even the basics of their faith and instilled them in their heart” maybe..."

No argument here. It actually supports what I'm saying. It's best not to profess at all than to profess and betray. It is incumbent upon all Christians to hold each other accountable lest all Christendom suffer.

Oh and for the record, Mary Joe Kopechne's death touched more than one person.

Anonymous said...

What about Laura Bush? She was totally responsible for a person's death in a car accident. Of course you don't hear anyone holding this against her. It was her fault, but clearly a terrible mistake and an accident. Patrick, you don't wear your faith very well.

Kevins said...

My definition of separation of church and state is you worship in church, and my source is the First Amendment when it says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Additional documentation is a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802 that said “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other
of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”

If you agree that you don’t have to be Catholic, a Christian to or you can be an atheist to have morals, and then what was you original post even about? I get you disagree with Sen. Dodd, but what does that have to do with religion? Answer: nothing. His stand on the issues are and should be separate from his religious views, and you can still be a good, practicing Catholic and Christian and disagree with you.

Granted, the death of Mary Joe Kopechne touched the lives of more than one person, but it happened to one person. Again, it was added by you to be a cheap shot, and did not belong in the discussion, and it comes nowhere near the number of deaths caused by the acts of priests.

patrick flynn said...

Oh, Kevin. Your misinterpretation of the First Amendment and Jefferson's letter has so run its course as a false argument.

Kevins said...

Oh Mr. Flynn. Misinterpreted? Are you serious? It could not be clearer. Why don’t you enlighten me on how I misinterpreted it and how it’s a false argument?

patrick flynn said...

Kevin, I know from reading your comments on this blog that you are not stupid. I actually worked with you I think twice at the church several years back when we started the school. You seemed to be intelligent and professional.

I could be wrong, but I'm concluding that you really like conflict and being contrary. If I'm right, that would be the difference between you and me. I really hate conflict. But, I hate indifference and weakness more. That's why I get more upset with some conservative Repubs who wander in their conservatism than liberal Dems who for the most part are pretty consistent with their liberalism.

Here's my analogy concerning Mr. Dodd. Let's say that I joined PETA. I go to the meeting and sign the oath or pledge or whatever. I am actually professing my unity of thought and practice with the group.

Now, a week later, a few other PETA members are strolling down the lane and peer into the window of the local Outback. They are shocked to see me gleefully engaging my Queensland rib-eye (16 oz. cut, rare as a beating heart).

They would consider me an embarrassment among them and rightly so. This would be based on my hypocrisy. And, who could deny it?

Now I could say to them, hey look, when I'm at a PETA meeting, I'm a friend of the fuzzies. But when I'm at Outback, well dude, I'm a bloody carnivore!

They would still consider me a phony.

Any liberal or conservative would understand this.

I said that Dodd is an embarrassment among Catholics. I say this based on his hypocrisy. I did not say that he should be shot, arrested, or burned at the stake. Did I?

If Dodd were a panthiestic, new age warlock, so be it! Just profess who you are and behave and act that way. No problem!

I think you are displaying your contempt and outrage at religion by twisting my presentation.

You know what, Kevin? I really am serious when I say that I hope you can someday get to the point where you stop seeing an enemy in every pew. You'll certainly be a lot happier.

Anonymous said...

To Kevins -

You definitely have a few wires loose in your brain. Unfortunately, this defect is in the "logic" circuit, which is why you are unable to sort through facts and make good decisions.

Hopefully you understand that your lack of ability to think clearly will prevent you from ever being a good reporter. Perhaps you should persue another career. I hear that some local sanitation companies are hiring. With the type of stuff you write you are already well qualified to work in the garbage industry.

Kevins said...

No, Mr. Flynn, I do not like conflict. However, I like reasoned, well-thought out debate, and that is what I am doing. I feel very strongly about my beliefs, and they did not come overnight. I have lived in lots of places, including a foreign country; I have talked to a lot of different people from every walk of life and political belief and I have read a lot to come to the views I have.

The PETA analogy dies not even come close to defining this situation. All you need to be a Christian is a belief in God, and I don’t know where it’s written that you have to be a conservative to a Christian or a Catholic. The church has no business telling anyone what political beliefs they should have. Again, that’s why we have the First Amendment, and men like Thomas Jefferson advocated for the wall of separation between church and state.
It’s funny that you have the nerve to say I see “enemy in every pew” when the fact is your problem with Sen. Dodd is simply because he’s a Democrat.

Kevins said...

Anonymous, you are truly sorry. Yea, I guess you would hate me because I’m kicking your sorry ass on every issue, and you hate that. As for logic, you have displayed none, and you have not proven one of your issues and views, and my logic has kicked your butt again and again. Yea, I see why we get the name calling from you because you have no facts, logic or truth. Just name calling, and that’s the best you can do. Hey, when you get some facts and logic to back up your positions, come and see me.

Shallow Throat said...

Boy, this blog makes me proud to be a progressive.

There's no beating history.