Posted on 11/28/2007 3:59:54 PM PST by CounterCounterCulture
No, Huckabee would have been better off with a chichlet smile. His teeth are all crooked, his gums are receded and his teeth are yellow.
Yeah, McCain looked bad. He’s had a lot of surgery on his face, so his face looks fairly wrinkle free, but the neck is very crepey. Huckabee looks kind of the same way. His neck looks a lot older than his face. He probably had to have some surgery after losing all that weight.
Thompson just looks old and has discolored teeth. But the only that didn’t have noticeably bad teeth was Duncan Hunter. He could use some tooth bleaching though.
More like a bubba Clinton in my opinion.
You wrote, “Mitt seems to stumble on whether he has belief in the Bible. There was a lot of stuttering, delay and faltering there. Very interesting. What happened!?”
This is what I think (emphasis: THINK) happened:
The Mormons believe that the Bible is true and accurate ...um...let’s see...I’m trying to remember how they phrase it... I think they say “...the Bible is accurate in so far as it is accurately translated...”
According to Mormon belief (I think-—and if I’m wrong, I’d be happy to be corrected by someone more knowledgeable of Mormon theology), the Bible has become corrupted over the centuries and is no longer entirely accurate. That’s why a new revelation of Jesus Christ was necessary (The Book of Mormon).
Whereas Rudy and Huck accepted the question as merely being “Are you a literalist Bible-thumper” type question, to Mitt ... well.... it possibly sent alarm bells ringing in his mind. Possibly, he was unsure whether or not to take this as a question targeted specifically at his Mormon theology.
He must remain faithful to Mormon theology,
... but.....
it would not go down well in the debate to out-and-out say the Bible is (somewhat?) corrupted and inaccurate.
Anyway, I THINK that this is why he was stuttering.
Regards,
Molly K.
“Huckabee time and again made them applaud, laugh, and say, “He looks presidential.” Huckabee is definitely connecting with viewers.”
He definitely is connecting. He is Reagan-esque in his stage presence. He hits a home run, rhetorically speaking, every time he opens his mouth.
Romney looked like a deer caught in the headlights half the time. This was his least impressive performance. He came across very poorly in his exchange with McCain over torture. He got dinged by Giuliani on the “sancuary mansion” issue, and he didn’t really have a good comeback for that. Etc.
Giuliani is looking more liberal every time. Forget it. He had the best video though. At least it was funny.
Could Fred Thompson have any less charisma? It’s very annoying that he clears his throat every 3 seconds when he’s speaking. It gives away his anxiety, and he doesn’t come across well. I agree with him on the issues, but I don’t think he can win a general election against Hildebeast. Sorry.
This was McCain’s best performance so far. He looked Presidential. But he comes across as too serious, too pessimistic, and is lacking in the kind of hope and optimism that Americans like to see in their Presidential candidates.
Tancredo, Hunter, and Paul can pretty much pack it up and go home. Why are they even still around?
What might be instructive is to see if there are any reputable "Morman blogs" out there, and what they say on this topic today, as I am sure many of the ears of LDS faithful perked up upon that question and Mitt's reply).
I never imagined being undecided this close to the FL primary.
Exactly.
This sentence is grammatically incorrect. Prepositions are words and, standing alone, do not make, or not make, sense. Perhaps you meant to say that my use of prepositions did not make sense. If this is the case, which usage of a preposition are you having a hard time with?
The sentence on your home page is grammatically incorrect.
I really would like to know what you meant by:
Prokopton : One who has become aware that he is ignorant and of his need to pursue virtue is making progress
Prokopton : One who has become aware that he is ignorant and of his need to pursue virtue is making progress
In the philosophy of Stoicism, a Prokopton is one who is "making progress:(prokope), especially in being a Stoic.
In order to make progress as a Stoic one has to understand that they need to learn i.e. that they are, to one extent or another, ignorant. In Stoicism, especially the kind promoted by Epictetus, the goal or end (telos) is virtue, that should be pursued for it's own sake and not for the sake of any other thing. Therefore, to be a person "making progress" (Prokopton) one must also seek virtue.
Prokopton, then, is a person who seeks the truth understanding his own ignorance and seeks virtue as the highest goal.
If I had to give a condensed version of Stoicism it would be that happiness (eudaimonia) can be attained by living a life of reason. A life of reason for a Stoic means living virtuously and living according to nature. Living according to nature can be described as pursuing a course responding to ones own needs as well as performing ones duties as a social human being while always accepting ones own fate and putting no importance in things outside of one's own control.
Epictetuts is prominent as a Stoic Philosopher largely because many of his writings still exist. However, his philosophy takes much from earlier Stoic philosophers going back to Zeno (of the famous Zeno's paradox) 400 years before Epictetus.
All of that being said, I am not an expert on Stoicism or Philosophy. I like the way Stoicism dovetails with Christianity and believe much of it's tenets are wise. Prokopton, though, is just a screen name.
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.