Mr. Bush must be a pig, since he is full of pork. Since he too office, he has not vetoed a single tax cut or spending bill, causing the deficit to swell to immense proportions. What is his response? To privatize social security. The idea itself isn't bad, except for one minor problem. WHERE THE HELL DO YOU GET THE MONEY TO PAY FOR PRESENT BENEFICIARIES??? There are deficits as far as the eye can see, a tax system which is becoming more and more regressive, and a congress full of "fiscal conservatives" that refuses to trim the budget. The result? A trainwreck. Eventually payment will come due, and you know who pays? We do. The deficit has always been the "next generations" problem. You know why? Since politicians need to appeal to their constituents, and their constituents are those people over 18. So the youth of America is screwed. An amendment to the constitution that would allow the killing of everyone under the age of 2 would probably pass, since every politician's constituency are old folks. And you know who Bush loves to pander to? Old, white, rich folks. Those people who have made a living screwing everyone else over, polluting the air, the water, and committing fraud. And you know what the amazing thing is? The people who he screws over actually vote for him! Since they are all so poor and uneducated that they don't know what is going on! They think that the commander in chief doesn't need to know when to change course. There was another commander who thought that he could keep charging ahead, full steam, and damn what the others thought. His name was Edward John Smith, and his ship ran into an iceberg on April 14, 1912, and sunk, killing 1595. At the current rate (we have lost 1155 soldiers in Iraq so far), Bush's stupidity will eclipse that of Mr. Smith sometime next year. One can only hope that a similar fate awaits Mr. Bush. A long ride down to the bottom of the ocean aboard a sinking ship of state.

Eeek. Politics. How scary. I totally won't get into this kind of arguement.

Well, as a Christian, I have to throw my hat into the ring... That Globe article really has almost nothing to do with politics. Sure, Bush is a Christian. That's one of the (few) things that I like about him.

And Christians have a huge divorce rate.

The Journalist is being incredibly unfair to Christians, though, as he is obviously just bashing them and their supposed right-wing associations.

I think that the fact of such a huge divorce rate in Christian families is evidence that Christians are still human, and we still have work and improvement to do. The important thing (and one that Bush fails to do very often) is that we Christians shouldn't discriminate against other people who have problems (viewed as sin) that aren't as prominent from *within* the church.

For example... look at how many alcoholics or divorced people are in the church. If you aren't all that familiar with Christianity, there are a lot. But what about HOMOSEXUALS (waits for cry and faint across the room)?!?! Christianity views this as something just as bad as anything else (and yes, Christianity does reject homosexuality).

However, here's the important part: How many of the alcoholics are being harassed or condemned? Very few, if any. But the homosexuals.....
Sad thing about today's church.

Ok, nice tangent. Understand what I'm ranting about? ;-)

Zeke, the writer of the piece was not a journalist. He was a professor. William V. D'Antonio is professor emeritus at University of Connecticut and a visiting research professor at Catholic University in Washington, D.C. Journalists would have been too wishy-washy.

OK. Then he's just a short-sighted, intolerant pig.

Ever notice how the most tolerant people in the world are intolerant towards Christians? Just food for thought...