Is Bush a Sith Lord?

NewsMax.com ^ | May 25, 2005 | Paul Craig Roberts

[processing please hold]

The Dark Side is the right side.

Agreed. once again...Long live the Sith.

[Schwaeky]

Without evil, there can't be good, so evil has to be good in some way...

[processing please hold]

Without evil, there can't be good, so evil has to be good in some way...

Are you saying the Devil has good qualities?

[NeoCaveman]

Is Paul Craig Roberts a Sith Head?

[LYSandra]

What is a Sith?????

[LYSandra]

What is a Sith?????

[Redcloak]

This would explain why Bush used a Force-push to knock Kerry off the stage and into the audience during the 2nd debate.

[Pelayo]

biblically, you are supposed to. check out Deuteronomy 20: 16-18.

And when God commands the indiscriminate killing of Arabs you can quote that. But as it stands Deuteronomy does not overturn Matthew 5:38-44?

At least not for a Christian.

[processing please hold]

This would explain why Bush used a Force-push to knock Kerry off the stage and into the audience during the 2nd debate.

(((snicker)))

[Pelayo]

Agreed. once again...Long live the Sith.

Out of curiosity, would you in fact support a benevolent dictator if he were a moralist, and a conservatively principled humanitarian, like Bush?
I'm asking this candidly.

[processing please hold]

a benevolent dictator if he were a moralist, and a conservatively principled humanitarian, like Bush?

Worded that way yes.

I see the UN as the corrupt Jedi. Who always want to seek diplomacy when they should fight.

I see Bush as Sith, ready to take on those who would try and destroy him.

[processing please hold]

As an after thought: The Jedi can be described precisely like the Sith. Both want to CONTROL the universe and they had a war to see which would win. Why the Sith are considered bad, when the Jedi are considered good...depends on your perception. They both seek the same goal. The Sith are truthful about it. The Jedi use smoke and mirrors.

[sayfer bullets]

This guy needs to go home and play with his dolls.

[Kuksool]

Delusion the theories of this writer. Misreads the movie with great error. Plays too much with Star Wars figures.

[Paul_Denton]

I saw the film. No the "Bush is a Sith" is way overblown. As others of said, it is just a movie.

[Pelayo]

ME:Out of curiosity, would you in fact support a benevolent dictator if he were a moralist, and a conservatively principled humanitarian, like Bush?

YOU:Worded that way yes.

Yeah well it wasn't worded that way. If you are not willing to answer the question I asked, I'll have to assume your are not really sure. Perhaps the nature of our system of government doesn't truly concern you? We know it really doesn't concern the pseudo-liberals.

[Fledermaus]

Is any comparison to "Star Wars" lame or what?

[Melas]

Tell that to Jon Alvarez, who actually spearheaded a boycott of this film based on what you have just read.

With all due respect, Jon Alvarez, a freeper himself, has boycotted virtually everything from the movie, music, television, and print industries. And the stunning success of ROTS is about par for the course for Alvy boycotts. The guy is Quixote reincarnated.

[new cruelty]

Please read a few verses before 16 and notice what is said regarding women, children, cattle, etc.

[new cruelty]

Let me break this down a bit. Suppose a child of 8 or 9 was strapped with a suicide belt. That child is about to walk into the middle of 30 to 40 children playing in a park...would you shoot that child before they made it to the innocent children?

No. Breaking this down a bit, supposing I had time to act before the child with the bomb had a chance to reach the other children, I would move the 30 or 40 children out of harm's way.

If I had did not have time to act before the child with the bomb made it to the other children, killing the child with the bomb would not diffuse that bomb and all the children would be dead anyway.

Earlier you suggested that if you thought that a child would grow up to do what it was taught to do, reared to do, you would kill that child.

If my enemy's child has done nothing to me, even though I thought that child was capable of harming me, I would not kill that child. The scenario you now suggest is another matter.

I do not mean to split hairs with you. I do understand the horrible scenario you put before me is entirely possible, as are 1,000s of other scenarios (which is why I answered the way I did to this particular scenario). I imagine you can rephrase your scenario in such a way that I had little choice but to kill my enemy's child. I've heard accounts from men that were in combat and faced very similar situations. They did what needed to be done, but they did it with extreme hesitation and only after they were certain such an act was necessary.