Links
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(295)
-
▼
Mar 2010
(65)
- Self-Respect vs. Self-Esteem
- A Lunch Worth Having
- The Cartel
- Wilson on the Lust for Relevancy
- Passion Isn't Enough
- Just Read
- Holy Week
- No Mere Lip Service
- Final Four Time!
- An Inconvenient Wife
- On to the Elite Eight
- 10 Steps to Biblical Resistance
- Worth Reading a Second Time
- When Greed and Resentment Run the Law
- False Religion Leads to False Dichotomies
- The Reason for Evil
- Our Holy God
- They Speak, Will Anyone Listen?
- Evil Explained
- Politics is No Savior
- Not Fit to be Masters
- The Law of Unintended Consequences
- A Curious Scale of Values
- Round Two Complete
- The Day America Died
- Round One Complete
- When Killing Was Murder
- Victorianism by Another Name
- The Field is Set
- It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year
- Speaking More Truth to Power
- True Social Justice
- Not Long Now...
- Foreign Aid: A False Panacea
- Just Enough Truth
- Christianity Leads to Conservatism
- It's Dancin' Time!
- Recognizing Orwellian Doublespeak
- "Movie Title"
- The Gospel as Story
- Is Happiness a Reaction or a Choice?
- Waking Prince Rilian
- Happy Birthday, Chuck
- Government and Corporations Make Strange Bedfellows
- Welfare
- Healthy Patriotism vs. Sinful Exceptionalism
- Morality
- It's Coming!
- Dalrymple on Parenting
- This is Merely the Introduction
- Reading Well
- Global Warming Smackdown
- Today's Piltdown Man
- Expanding Abortion via Health Care
- Andrew Peterson
- Life: One Frame at a Time
- If...
- Keep the Gospel Central
- The Thin Line Between Humor and Cruelty
- The Black Genocide
- Intolerant Tolerance
- Republicans are Monsters!
- Ghost Church
- Mmm, Casserole!
- A Blessing and a Curse
-
▼
Mar 2010
(65)
Labels
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
This piece by Jim Wallis is so utterly disingenuous and intellectually dishonest, I both grimace and grin while reading it. It's difficult to take him seriously when he has no idea what he's talking about or is too dishonest to acknowledge the possibility that people might disagree with him for logical and moral reasons. Or am I wrong, is Wallis both charitable and correct?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment