An interesting, and staggeringly ironic, question coming from someone who opposed the Iraq war.

BUSH LIED KURDS SURVIVED!!!

…

no wait.

Indeed true :). But most of us have been through that and survived.

Kirsten said: “For the record, I like being called lovely. What’s wrong with lovely?”

Ms. Powers, there is no doubt that you are lovely. We need only to see you speak to realize this. Saying that you, MKH, Michelle, Laura Ingraham, that lady who worked for Nixon (Crowley?), most of the FOX ladies, etc., are lovely once in a while is great! You all are. Harping on it is something different entirely. It makes you no more than a pretty body. It disregards your greater beauty, which is your mind. I must say I disagree with a lot of what you say, but I don’t believe you are just another pretty face.

Repeating how pretty any of you are is an insult to your insight. All of you are much more than how you look. Mentioning how beautiful any of you are once in a while is fine, but the repetition belittles you all, and I remain against it. We’ve seen how beautiful all of you are. We want to know more about how smart you are (all of the, uh, lovely, ladies I’ve mentioned have passed the test :))

I’m sad that you read my comment though. He’s never going to hit on you now :(

Calling someone ‘lovely’ is best left for one on one conversations.

For the record, I like being called lovely. What’s wrong with lovely?

Kirsten on January 31, 2007 at 9:27 PM

The lovely KP in the (virtual) flesh!

Allahpundit on January 31, 2007 at 9:28 PM

There goes the neighborhood.

Given Haggard’s scandal, I don’t blame her for putting it in the movie, but I’m perplexed why she thought that clip was worthy of inclusion before the scandal. Jokes aside, what’s so unusual about married people having sex frequently?

Laura on January 31, 2007 at 1:10 PM

Well, you see people on the left aren’t married, since they are all gay, so are all their friends. Therefore, they don’t think married people have sex, because after all they don’t know anyone married….

Can’t knock Pelosi too much
Allah are you nuts! THis SIHT is a leftist attempt to divert attention away from the lunatic Muslim fringe and toward the lunatic Christian fringe.
Only difference is, the lunatic Muslim fringe is plotting to kill us
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on January 31, 2007 at 2:10 PM

This is it in a nutshell.
Why is everyone allowing a hard-core, agenda-driven Leftie define Christianity? This little film was more successful than I had thought it would be, which is really depressing. Everybody is either hastily distancing themselves from what Pelosi identifies as “evangelicals” or vainly trying to defend Christianity boxed in by ridiculous terms of debate – when what she shows is NOT Christianity or evangelicalism. Christian bookstores, wrestling matches, theme parks – whatever! are simply marketing crap, and have no purpose in Christianity.
That’s the bald truth. We have the religious equivalent of harmless, but eccentric cousin Ralph puttering around in some little hobby that keeps him busy, tolerated by his relatives because they all know he means well and he doesn’t want to hurt anyone, and Pelosi’s got him set up as a horrid, power-hungry radical a la Taliban.
The bottom line, if you had to survive three hours locked in a cell with, say, Oral Roberts with an axe in his hand or someone similarly placed of the Taliban also armed with an axe, you know which one you would choose. Roberts might annoy you or bore you or pester you, but he’d never ever dream of harming you.
Remember the technique of the hard Left – slice the salami -identify a narrow target, demonize them, ridicule them until they have no more general support, then crush them. Move on to next slice.

Sometimes I even refer to myself as Catholic, just not Roman Catholic. I think you know what I mean.

The reformers used to say that.

I just say I’m more of a Reformed confessionalist, or that I hold to the Westminster Standards.

An interesting, and staggeringly ironic, question coming from someone who opposed the Iraq war.

Before I read AP’s excerpt, I clicked on the ‘lovely’ KP’s thread, read the whole thing and then said to myself “duh, KP you were/are against the war…silly”. Came back here to find AP’s quote from her, with same irony…

Even the brighter leftie minds are confused on the dangers of our time. See today’s Birmingham story…what, oh what will it take?

I applaud you sir!! One so rarely sees such blunt honesty! Bravo!!!!

honora on January 31, 2007 at 1:52 PM

Great honora!

In other words, liberalism as J. Gresham Machen defined it.

PRCalDude on January 31, 2007 at 4:54 PM

Well, yeah. Actually, and unfortunately.

That’s why a lot of us old-world Evangelicals don’t refer to ourselves as Evangelical anymore. What I often tell people is that I am either confessional, or orthodox confessional. Sometimes I even refer to myself as Catholic, just not Roman Catholic. I think you know what I mean.

Evangelical in North America:

In North America, “Evangelical” does not have a unique meaning that is acceptable to all. Various groups and individuals define it as a specific conservative Christian system of beliefs, or a type of religious experience, or a commitment to proselytize the unsaved, or as a style of religious service, or as having a personal “walk with God,” or as a group of denominations, or as a personal acceptance of a “biblical worldview,” or as some combination of the above.

In other words, liberalism as J. Gresham Machen defined it.

If this is the definition of evangelical…Well, let’s just say it doesn’t mean what it used to mean.

nailinmyeye on January 31, 2007 at 12:58 PM

Me too.

Here’s what Evangelical really means via:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/evan_defn.htm

Evangelical in Europe:

“Evangelical” was derived from the Greek word “euangellismos” which means: gospel or good news.

During the Reformation, Martin Luther referred to his movement as the evangelische kirche (evangelical church). Later, “Evangelical” became a near-synonym for “Protestant” in Europe. It retains this meaning in Germany today.

Evangelical in North America:

In North America, “Evangelical” does not have a unique meaning that is acceptable to all. Various groups and individuals define it as a specific conservative Christian system of beliefs, or a type of religious experience, or a commitment to proselytize the unsaved, or as a style of religious service, or as having a personal “walk with God,” or as a group of denominations, or as a personal acceptance of a “biblical worldview,” or as some combination of the above.

Given these definitions, it might explain some of our uniquely American confusions about Christianity and religion in general.

‘I never saw a burning bush so neither did you’.

Limerick on January 31, 2007 at 1:55 PM

I like that one, Limerick. Thanks for sharing.

Just ask the woman for a date! The worst she can say is no.

Kevin M on January 31, 2007 at 2:26 PM

No, the worst she can say is, “Ha. Haha. Hahahahaha.”

But returning to the topic du jour: Watching that video of Ted Haggard … How could they not know?

I don’t know, but I can see them.

Well… I see the number of comments and trackbacks continuing to rise on that thread, but I still can’t see them. It’s very frustrating. I never got to see if anyone bothered to respond to my last comment over there.

Who, for the record, is also quite lovely. Along with smart as hell, and in possession of major gumballs.

Exactly, Pablo. Smart as hell. Though I disagree with some of what KP says (though less and less lately), she’s smart as hell too. I’m all for saying ‘the ever smart as hell KP’. I’m against diminishing her as a lovely object.

AP, it bothers me enough to complain, not to stop reading. I enjoy the vent, all of Bryan’s posts, all of Ian’s snark videos, and about 95% of your posts as well. Even when I disagree with you, I enjoy the read, such as when you suggested that those Border patrol agents were the bad guys. I’m not even against you objectifying women once in a while, since they do it to us as well. It’s the repetition that is so bothered. I don’t want to go into detail in case she reads our comments, but you should know that she gets it. Strike now. The worst outcome is that you will be in the same boat you are in right now.

I’ll stop complaining about this if my account is in jeopardy, but I won’t if it’s not. This isn’t a ‘fun only, not to be taken seriously’ site for us conservative/libertarians, unlike AoS. Not to to denigrate AoS of course. It’s one of my favorite sites.

The difference is, you guys bring powerful information to America, and the rest of the world as well. I spent a few hours defending Michelle/Bryan at Sadly, no yesterday (unrequested of course), because I believe you guys, and I believe IN you guys. You are, or soon will be, the best example of conservative/libertarian thinking on the web. Belittling this shining example of brilliant conservative thought simply because you have a thing for a girl is despicable. It’s too reminiscent of Clinton, but in a strip club style venue.

The Monster on January 31, 2007 at 3:06 PM

There is a proverb that sorta’ distills this idea. It goes somethin’ like:
“God gives every bird its food, He just doesn’t throw it the nest, ya’ know.”

Heavy rains swelled a river, causing a huge flood. A deputy in an SUV drove up to the front porch of a house, and told the resident that he was there to rescue him. “I trust that The LORD will save me!”, the man said.

Later, the deputy returned in a boat. He brought it alongside a second-story window, where he spoke to the man again, but he still insisted that God would save him.

Yet later, the man was on top of his roof, hanging onto the chimney, when a rescue helicopter approached, dropping a rope ladder for him. For the final time, he refused. Shortly afterwards, the flood waters swept the man away to his death.

Just before he went under the water, he prayed: “Lord, I have always had faith in You. Why have You forsaken me?” And God answered him: “I sent an SUV, a boat, and a helicopter. What more do you want?”

And if you tell me to shut up again, you’re gone. Got it, sport?

Allahpundit on January 31, 2007 at 2:50 PM

I think we are seeing the aftermath of the 500 comment Pelosi thread. Posts/threads like that one stir-up a LOT of hostility (on all sides of the issue). Everyone that can, should take a Valium, and go take a nap. No doubt there will be hard feelings for months now. Some of the exchanges that took place on that thread reminded me of an Iraq war protest hosted by liberal moonbats. It’s not exactly something that I think we (the participants at HotAir) should be proud of. Just sayin’. Or are my observations regarding this matter incorrect?