America Meet Sharron Angle

Angle says her campaign vs. Reid is a "calling" from God

Angle says her campaign vs. Reid is a "calling" from God.

Story at:
Angle says campaign to defeat Reid God's 'calling' - Yahoo! News

Sharron Angle is a whole new level of crazy. She's so crazy I don't think it's far for any of us to presume what's going on in her head. She puts the Z in crazy. Her eyes are really windows into a bat cave. She puts the A crazy. She's what Gnarles Barkley was singing about. She puts the EEEE in crazEEE.

Crazy? What's your proof? Is is because she thinks her service to the people of Nevada is a calling? Don't we all have a calling of some kind? If, like you say, she's nuts, I'll take nutty over evil every day.

My proof is that you like her.

I'll take nutty over evil every day.

Yes, but will you take nutty over chocolaty?

My proof is that you like her.

pretty unbecoming statement from a moderator.

Sarah, I am getting good at letting go many things you say. But I'm only human.

You said "Global warming has been proved a hoax".

This statement is 100% false unless you replace proved with-

called...

Geo, I'm not a scientist so I had to decide for myself which group of scientists, "expert's, " are telling the truth and which group are not. A dilemma. As in many subjects, there are two sides and it seems there's a darn agenda behind every thing these days, small or large. We differ in our thinking and I don't believe there's more we can do for the Earth other than respecting it, keeping it clean and conserve where we can. I do not believe driving down hills in neutral will accomplish anything, as Obama suggested.

There is proof that scientists falsified reports about global warming.

Mr. Williams, your reply was not proof of Angle's 'craziness'.

I think it's narcissistic for anyone to think they have a calling.

.
I can see where she could believe she had a "calling" to serve and believes God will help her get through the rigors of a campaign but if she thinks God is taking her side to win that's a different story - that's where I think it would be crazy.

If one candidate feels they have a calling and the other one didn't, does that make one evil and one not? :roll:

What if opposing candidates both felt they were "called"? ..... The problem comes into play if either, or both, think God is on their side. That's when it gets crazy!


.

I think it's narcissistic for anyone to think they have a calling.

Do you think your doctor who believes he had a calling to practice medicine is a narcissist? Or your neighbor who had a calling to be a policeman, or a builder, researcher, inventor etc.?

Yes, but will you take nutty over chocolaty? That's a good one. LOL

I think it's narcissistic for anyone to think they have a calling.

Do you think your doctor who believes he had a calling to practice medicine is a narcissist? Or your neighbor who had a calling to be a policeman, or a builder, researcher, inventor etc.?

Yes, but will you take nutty over chocolaty? That's a good one. LOL

I think there is a big difference between being a narcissist which is some diagnostic category and exhibiting a behavior which is narcissistic. I'm not a psychologist, so obviously all this is just my opinion, and even for a professional, it's a qualified opinion.

As far as having a calling in life, it is not an idea that resonates with me in any way. Again, just my opinion. I don't see it, I don't get it, I don't think like that in any way shape or form ever. As far as the doctor, policeman, and builder etc. with callings are concerned, I think they are fooling themselves, but whatever motivates them and gets them through the day is their business. My opinion is that they found professions for which they were well adapted, not that destiny had anything to do with it. Getting back to Sharron Angle, and lets throw in Sarah Palin while we are at it, I think they might be full blown off-the-chart Narcissists.

.
I can see where she could believe she had a "calling" to serve and believes God will help her get through the rigors of a campaign but if she thinks God is taking her side to win that's a different story - that's where I think it would be crazy.

If one candidate feels they have a calling and the other one didn't, does that make one evil and one not? :roll:

What if opposing candidates both felt they were "called"? ..... The problem comes into play if either, or both, think God is on their side. That's when it gets crazy!


.

There's a good book , Seven Miracles That Saved America. It's an easy read simply written. I do believe some of the great Americans in this book were
'called" by God. Read and decide for yourself. Whether you are a believer or not it's a fascinating book. Here's a description from Amazon:

When the odds were stacked against us, and there have been many times when the great experiment we call America could have and should have failed, did God intervene to save us?

That question, posed by authors Chris and Ted Stewart, is the foundation for this remarkable book. And the examples they cite provide compelling evidence that the hand of Providence has indeed preserved the United States of America on multiple occasions. Skillfully weaving story vignettes with historical explanations, they examine seven instances that illustrate God's protecting care:

-The unlikely discovery of America by Christopher Columbus

-How (and why) desperate English colonists were able to survive the starving time at Jamestown

-The Battle of New York during the Revolutionary War

-The miraculous creation of the United States Constitution

-Abraham Lincoln's desperate prayer that turned the tide of the Civil War at Gettysburg

-How a series of extraordinary events changed the Battle of Midway during World War II

-The preservation of Ronald Reagan's life from an assassin's bullet, allowing him the time he needed to help extend freedom around the world

Never, at any of these critical junctures, was a positive outcome certain or even likely. Yet America prevailed. Why?

"No man is perfect," write the authors. "And neither is any nation. Yet, despite our weakness, we are still, as Abraham Lincoln said, the best nation ever given to man. Despite our faults, this nation is still the last, best hope of earth." In short, God still cares what happens here. This reassuring message is a bright light in a world that longs for such hope.

There's a good book , Seven Miracles That Saved America. It's an easy read simply written. I do believe some of the great Americans in this book were 'called" by God.

.
And I would tend to believe that they may have believed they were also. But that doesn't mean they truly were - only that they thought so.


.

Charles Manson believed he was "called" to do what he did. Son of Sam was "called" (by a dog) to do what he did. Hitler probably felt he had a "calling". I would prefer my politicians to keep their religious beliefs in their hearts and run the country with honor, integrity, and good common sense.

LakeViewToo, The people you mentioned, Manson, Son of Sam and Hitler were surely called. Not by God but Old Beelzebub, the Devil.

LakeViewToo, The people you mentioned, Manson, Son of Sam and Hitler were surely called. Not by God but Old Beelzebub, the Devil.

And we're sure Sharon Angle isn't listening to the wrong number?

Climate Change Deniers

Geo, I'm not a scientist so I had to decide for myself which group of scientists, "expert's, " are telling the truth and which group are not.

The percentage of scientists who deny that climate change is largely anthropocentric is roughly equivalent to the percentage of scientists who deny evolution.

If you're not a scientist, but feel you have to decide whether you personally think climate change is largely due to humans, why not use the "whose ox is being gored" criterion?

That is, if someone is "playing fast & loose with the truth" how would it benefit them?

Clearly, there are a lot of big corporations & big businesses who don't want to accept that their businesses are contributing to climate change, because laws might be passed to make them spend $ to mitigate such contributions.

99.9% of scientists should not care one way or the other whether humans are contributing to climate change. If they study the area, they will be looking for "the truth," since scientists make their reputations by true findings & lose their reputations via false findings.

If you say that 99% of scientists are wrong about this, either you know something they don't or you think they have some ulterior motive for falsifying their findings--a political agenda, money, power,...I can't imagine what their motivation would be for conspiring to lead us all astray on this.

It seems more likely to me that big oil, big autos, big capitalism, just doesn't like the science because Their Ox is Being Gored. Business is unfortunately more focused on near-term profits than on the long-term health of our planet.

The scientists are not engaged in an evil conspiracy--but the corporatists may be.

Son of Sam has found religion in prison, and now gets lots of attention from Christian leaders. I wonder if anyone thinks he's been called by god. Yeah that's it. God wants to see him out on parole.

Son of Sam has found religion in prison, and now gets lots of attention from Christian leaders. I wonder if anyone thinks he's been called by god. Yeah that's it. God wants to see him out on parole.

I hear these strange beeping noises, and a general feeling that someone is "calling" me...but, most of the time, it's just my telephone.:blink:

The percentage of scientists who deny that climate change is largely anthropocentric is roughly equivalent to the percentage of scientists who deny evolution.

If you're not a scientist, but feel you have to decide whether you personally think climate change is largely due to humans, why not use the "whose ox is being gored" criterion?

That is, if someone is "playing fast & loose with the truth" how would it benefit them?

Clearly, there are a lot of big corporations & big businesses who don't want to accept that their businesses are contributing to climate change, because laws might be passed to make them spend $ to mitigate such contributions.

99.9% of scientists should not care one way or the other whether humans are contributing to climate change. If they study the area, they will be looking for "the truth," since scientists make their reputations by true findings & lose their reputations via false findings.

If you say that 99% of scientists are wrong about this, either you know something they don't or you think they have some ulterior motive for falsifying their findings--a political agenda, money, power,...I can't imagine what their motivation would be for conspiring to lead us all astray on this.

It seems more likely to me that big oil, big autos, big capitalism, just doesn't like the science because Their Ox is Being Gored. Business is unfortunately more focused on near-term profits than on the long-term health of our planet.

The scientists are not engaged in an evil conspiracy.

Scientists tend to police each other with a heavy dose of skepticism when it comes to just about anything. The bad ones are like bogus bills, they will be tracked down eventually, every time.

I hear these strange beeping noises, and a general feeling that someone is "calling" me...but, most of the time, it's just my telephone.:blink:

I would think in this day and age you would get a texting.

I would think in this day and age you would get a texting.

Does God have thumbs?

Does God have thumbs?

No, but Beezelbub (sp?) does (i think).

.
The Interfaith Alliance, through its president, Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, issued a statement/warning regarding Angle?s political career being driven by religious impulse:

"Sharron Angle's recent comments on her race against Sen. Harry Reid being 'a calling,' and that she considers herself a 'faith-based politician' should be deeply troubling to anyone who cherishes religious freedom. If elected to represent the people of Nevada in the United States Senate, Ms. Angle will do so as a representative of the people of her state, not of her church. My guess is that God will be just fine without playing a role in either candidate's campaign.?

"Candidates for public office are free to talk about how their faith informs their thinking, but should not imply that policy position will be based on scripture rather than the Constitution. It has been my experience that when candidates intentionally insert faith into politics, the purpose is rarely to protect religion; rather it is done to enhance a political position."

Sharron Angle's Calling, Criticized - Politics - The Atlantic


.

And then God spake unto W, saying...

God told George W. Bush to run for president
Bush says God chose him to lead his nation | World news | The Observer

God told George W. Bush to invade Iraq and Afganistan
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa