Posted on 05/03/2003 9:47:29 AM PDT by MatthewViti
During the eight years of Clinton's presidency, I was repeatedly asked, "Chuck, do you think Bill Clinton is the antichrist?" (Of course, I answered no.) Therefore, it is more than interesting to me that since G.W. Bush became president no one has asked if I thought he was the antichrist. Not one single person! Instead, many people attribute to Bush god-like qualities, which actually makes him a better candidate than Clinton was.
You see, one of the chief characteristics of the coming antichrist is that he appears "as an angel of light." Therefore, an obvious reprobate such as Bill Clinton is immediately disqualified. The antichrist, by very definition, is a master deceiver. He must be someone who appears as good and benevolent. The bite is in his tail not in his tongue. In reality, Bush's angelic persona makes him much more dangerous than bad boy Billy.
For example, while Clinton was in the process of appointing numerous homosexual activists to his administration, copious letters from Christian leaders such as Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, and D. James Kennedy flooded America's Christian community. Appeals for protest and resistance were heard from pulpits throughout the country. A massive media campaign began against Clinton.
Today, however, President Bush is in the process of copying Clinton's numerous appointments of open homosexuals to high positions of government, but there are no letters, no warnings from pulpits, and no media campaigns opposing it. Just the opposite. Bush is being defended, lauded, and glorified for everything he does, no matter how unconstitutional or unscriptural it might be.
When Clinton only talked of legalizing embryonic stem cell research, he was castigated and condemned. Bush actually made the procedure legal, and yet, he was praised and honored. Clinton was denigrated when he tried to convince Israel to give up land for peace. Now, Bush is in the process of actually trying to create an independent Palestinian state for Israel's enemies (with Jerusalem as its capital, no less), yet continues to receive glowing adulation. If Clinton even suggested that America's immigration laws might need to be liberalized, he was denounced in the harshest terms; but Bush can actually grant limited amnesty to thousands of illegal aliens, and there is not the faintest whisper of protest.
Do you recall how Clinton was criticized for the "low lifes" he invited to the White House? Well, Bush recently invited wild man rocker, Ozzie Osbourne, to the White House. Have you heard any notable Christian leader take Bush to task for that?
You remember Ozzie Osbourne, don't you? He is the former front man for the heavy metal band, Black Sabbath. He is famous for stage antics such as biting the heads off birds and bats. His abuse of drugs and alcohol are also well known. Furthermore, Ozzie Osbourne desecrated The Alamo by pissing all over it. In spite of this, George W. Bush is said to be one of Osbourne's biggest fans. As such, Osbourne was recently invited to the White House for dinner. Have you heard any criticism of Bush for this?
Obviously, I do not believe President Bush is the antichrist any more than I believed Bill Clinton was. However, I do believe that Bush possesses more deceptive qualities than Clinton did and, therefore, is more dangerous. I also now understand more clearly how even "the elect" can be deceived. Bush' s acceptance by the overwhelming majority of Christian people proves the country is ready for the antichrist, whoever he is.
Are Bill and Hillary Clinton politicians?
I thought they were morticians.
Well, you certainly tend to get in a dither over things you don't have the facts on.
There is no picture of President Bush with Sami Al Arian at the WH because he did not meet him personally on that day, nor was there a repeat of that invitation. The picture you are thinking of was taken when President Bush was Governor Bush and he was campaigning to become president. The son was in fact escorted from a meeting at the WH six days after the father's visit, so clearly the lists were updated pronto.
As to the status, Al Arian just fired his lawyers and wants to represent himself.
It is not worship, it is well earned respect.
And if people persist in spreading false stories you can bet they will be corrected. That does not fall in the category of following blindly.
Besides...
You didn't warn me about donning tinfoil before reading this crap!
You can dish it out yourself but you can't take it. Here's your reply to Calpernia:
What a wonderful communist you would make! Reminds me of China and the old Soviet Union where they labeled people who did not agree with their Great Leaders as insane, and would lock them up.
I fail to see anything in her post that would "remind" you of that. She is merely expressing her opinion and not only did you say she'd make a great communist but implied she'd also make a great locker-up of persons who disagreed with Bush.
Now, here's your latest passive-aggressive attempt at your own namecalling, this time to me:
critter....hmmmm. Now who else likes to use that term for those they deem less than human? What could that possibly imply?
What could *you* possibly be implying, DB, eh?
You must think a whole lot of yourself, to bypass the operative words "namby-pamby" and "marshmallow" to focus on "critter" and then, like a silent fart, release the Hitler bugaboo in a way I'm sure you thought was subtle.
I've heard the indentical crap forever from liberals and the peacenik rabble and it just doesn't work on me anymore. You don't even get a "nice try", not for the lame comeback, and not for the hyperbole.
You're not fooling me with the tsk-tsking and the handwringing about the lack of civility. I remember you positively mourning all night long for Former Lurker after he finally crossed the line and got banned, and placing the blame on other posters not "tolerating his opinions".
So let's see if I have it straight so far. Calpernia should be running a gulag, I'm a Hitler wannabe because I called you a marshmallow critter, and you...you're just "distressed" at the overall mean tone of this site. That about it?
Sniveling amoeba...boo hoo.
(Should I have flagged the Mod, or would you like to do the honors a second time?)
This whole thing is totally preposterous and even the SUGGESTION that the most Godly President we have had in a century or more, is the antiChrist is worthy of the derision any thinking Christian would give it. Just asking the question is patently absurd to anyone who has read the Scripture and has any understanding of what God's word says.
I have serious doubts that either you, or the author fits in either category.......that is, thinking...... or Christian.
Now before you reply erroneously again, try to read the words I actually said here, OK??
I notice that lots of pro-Clinton comments are springing up, trying to plant the seeds of suggestion that he wasn't such a bad pres afterall.
2004- It's just ONE year away.
The 2004 Presidential Election
building up steam..Here Comes Hillary!
I think Baldwin has a head wound that he needs to recover from. Oh boy.
The Hillary-Propaganda Machine is obviously planting pro-Clinton, anti-Bush remarks for the sake of those new-readers who come to this site.
Dare they allow Americans to read what FreeRepublic has to offer without the input of that famous Clinton-Spin!
The Battle Begins!
Election Year - 2004
Are WE ready?
Notice the insult disguised as a plea to refrain from insults. It thinks no one notices. ;P
And if people persist in spreading false stories you can bet they will be corrected. That does not fall in the category of following blindly.
That reminds me, do I have to do all the work around here? Look what I found in our own archives. This was posted the day after poor Ozzy's fried brain mistook the nature of the invitation he'd received:
PMSNBC just reported that the White House has *denied* this invite. Bummer!
A live report while it was happening is as good as anything else, I suppose. But there's also this from MTV News...and if anyone should know, it's MTV, since they produce Ozzy's hit show:
Ozzy Will Visit White House [even they got the title wrong]
If the Commander in Chief breaks bread with Ozzy Osbourne next month, relax; George W. Bush is not a closet metalhead, nor is it a sign of the coming apocalypse.
The unlikely meeting would happen at the annual White House Correspondents Association dinner, where the godfather of heavy metal and his wife, Sharon, will be the guests of TV news anchor Greta Van Susteren and Fox News Channel, according to a network spokesperson. Guests are invited by members of the association to sit at their respective tables, and the Osbournes accepted FNC's offer earlier this week.
Now in its 88th year, the White House Correspondents Association dinner is a goodwill gesture between the White House and the journalists who cover it. President George W. Bush is scheduled to attend this year's event, which will take place May 4 at the Washington Hilton in the nation's capital.
Baldwin knew it wasn't true when he wrote it. OR he could have. Or he should have. Take your pick. Regardless of what you choose, the article contains the same wrong information a year later.
Just in case......
This is PRO-Clinton Rat swill.
Whining that we criticized Xlinton for the same things we're giving Bush a pass for.......with the endgame being that xlinton wasn't such a bad guy after all.
Good call!
Right......but understanding that requires knowledge of Scripture, which neither the author nor the poster possess.
Regardless of where you stand politically, this article is absurd........besides, Planned Parenthood just named George W. Bush, "Public Enemy #1." That should take him out of the running all by itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.