Rotating Header Image



RedSquareSmallDark.gif Isaiah Chapter 6, Verses 1 – 8 does NOT say,
“He (John Kerry) could have avoided going (to Vietnam), too, but he said ‘Send me’…”

RedSquareSmallDark.gif What Isaiah Chapter 6, Verses 1 – 8 DOES say is this:

The Prophetic Books: Isaiah Chapter 6

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 1 – In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple.

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 2 – Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft.

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 3 – “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts!” they cried one to the other. “All the earth is filled with his glory!”
(Read Footnotes -1- and -2-)

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 4 – At the sound of that cry, the frame of the door shook and the house was filled with smoke.
(Read Footnote -3-)

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 5 – Then I said, “Woe is me, I am doomed! For I am a man of unclean lips, living among a people of unclean lips; yet my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!”
(Read Footnote -4-)

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 6 – Then one of the seraphim flew to me, holding an ember which he had taken with tongs from the altar.

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 7 – He touched my mouth with it. “See,” he said, “now that this has touched your lips, your wickedness is removed, your sin purged.”
(Read Footnote -5-)

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 8 – Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?” “Here I am,” I said; “send me!”

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 9 – And he replied: Go and say to this people: Listen carefully, but you shall not understand! Look intently, but you shall know nothing!
(Read Footnote -6-)

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 10 – You are to make the heart of this people sluggish, to dull their ears and close their eyes; Else their eyes will see, their ears hear, their heart understand, and they will turn and be healed.

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 11 – “How long, O Lord?” I asked. And he replied: Until the cities are desolate, without inhabitants, Houses, without a man, and the earth is a desolate waste.

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 12 – Until the LORD removes men far away, and the land is abandoned more and more.
(Read Footnote -7-)

RedSquareSmallDark.gif – 13 – If there be still a tenth part in it, then this in turn shall be laid waste; As with a terebinth or an oak whose trunk remains when its leaves have fallen. (Holy offspring is the trunk.)


-1- [1-3] Temple: the holy place, just in front of the holy of holies. Seraphim: literally “the burning ones,” are celestial beings who surround the throne of God. Each has six wings. Reverence for the divine majesty causes them to veil their faces with two wings; modesty, to veil their extremities in similar fashion; alacrity in God’s service, to extend two wings in preparation for flight. Holy, holy, holy: God’s perfect interior holiness whose exterior manifestation is his glory. These words are found in the Roman liturgy just before the Canon of the Mass.

-2- [1] In the year King Uzziah died: 742 B.C.

-3- [4] Smoke: reminiscent of the clouds which surrounded God at Mount Sinai; cf ? Exodus 19:16-19; ? Deut 4:11, ? 12.

-4- [5] Doomed: it was popularly believed that to see God would lead to one’s death; cf — Genesis 32:31; — Exodus 33:20; — Judges 13:22.

-5- [7] Touched your lips: Isaiah is thus symbolically purified to be worthy of his vocation as God’s prophet. In the Roman liturgy, the celebrant at Mass makes reference to this incident just before he reads the gospel.

-6- [9-10] The truth that the nation will remain impenitent is vividly foretold, as if its obstinacy would be caused, instead of merely occasioned, by the prophet’s warning. Cf — Matthew 13:13-15; — Mark 4:12; — Luke 8:10.

-7- [12] Several limited deportations in the time of Isaiah would later culminate in the Babylonian exile.

(End, Footnotes)

BD21423_.gif SO FAR: the Democrats have managed to completely annoy a lot of people watching/not watching/ being forced to watch or who have at least overheard (which describes my situation, since I’ve now seen the vignettes and “live” coverage in reply at the midnight hour Tuesday A.M. through this morning), but, the most irritating aspects, so far, to me are:

BD21423_.gif THIS: For people who despise President Bush’s “faith” and the fact that Bush is a Christian, as are many among Republicans (I think it’s just Christianity that they despise), the Democrats are sure making a lot of use of Christian symbols and even outright Holy Scripture (per Clinton’s in the above, but he’s rewritten Holy Scripture and reapplied his rewrites for political purposes before and still people fall for it, something I’ll never understand).

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: An interesting photo from CBS, in which someone appeals to John Kerry for “salvation” (which does not speak well about John Kerry if you know much of anything about Holy Scripture, nor about the woman with the sign, making the appeal) (even if you know nothing about Holy Scripture and could care less, the imagery indicates that the woman with the sign has some knowledge of it, thus the adaptation of it, meaning, she has an awareness of what she opines, meaning, it’s blasphemous, if not reverent to an Anti-Christ imagery of John Kerry, or, otherwise, reinforcing of Kerry as the Anti-Christ, but, least of all, it’s an ugly image — I am guessing that for Democrats, it IS “religious” after all, despite their protestations, and, therefore, there is imagery/signage such as this):


Photograph from Associated Press

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: Then I hear the Reverend Jesse Jackson saying on FOX (replay, “On the Record, Live with Greta Van Susteren“) — (he defines “the country” as being “us Democrats”) — “we need healing” (and therefore “we” need to “vote for Kerry” to receive our “healing”).

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: Then I hear one of the female reporters with Greta Van Susteren advising that “the second most important speaker after Clinton tonight was Reverend (something)…” More of that faux religiousity, lauding the religious as long as it’s not religion — which they despise — lauding the uplift as long as it’s within the realm of the political, elevating the political to the religious, in fact.

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: Are a lot of us getting a ~wee bit~ tired of female reporters and various commentators “in the news” getting a ~tad~ too sweaty for visual comfort whenever Bill Clinton speaks? Based upon Greta Van Susteren’s two female visitors — one of which was Susan Estrich, who was noticably affected in her pro-Clinton moment — there was enough heat there to last a while, as to Bill Clinton. Then the fireworks started when Hillary was mentioned. I was waiting for horses outside to start whinnying (“Yes, YES, he VAS my BOYfriend!”), but…

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: Then I heard that tonight we get to hear Ron Reagan, an avowed and proud “atheist,” preach about funding (increased funding) for stem cell research — which may or may not be a good thing but that’s not the point here nor is it undoubtedly going to be the actual point that Reagan will be making — and I’m sure there will be some condescending “instructions” to “America” from Ron Reagan about the ills of “faith” and such, given his track record about the theme. I’ll retract these statemtents tomorrow if that, in fact, doesn’t take place, but I doubt that I’ll need to. Just saying.

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: About revisions, I read that Ann Coulter’s convention coverage column was deemed to be too “hot” for USA Today to publish, and why they deemed it so (you can read the “hot” column along with USA Today’s obtuse reasons in “Human Events“). With Michael Moore lined up to provide “convention coverage” for USA Today during the Republican National Convention in New York later this Summer, who can argue with obfuscation such as that?

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: Summarizing here, Clinton says, “our way works better!”

And that way…is…?

The Democrats “can’t bring up” social issues (that means that they can’t/won’t “bring it up” but they will work to deliver “it” if they’re in office, but can’t be held accountable if they do because — hey — they never brought it up!), per their convention manager, Bill Richardson, and have to “be positive” or else be edited. I think he confuses “be positive” with “be creative,” as in, “try other things” or rather, “do what works.” Adapt. Rewrite reality. Quote sources out of context, rewrite quotes if necessary, just smile.

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: As if all that wasn’t non-religious enough, Governor Jeanne Sheehan (Democrat, New Hampshire) this morning tells FOX News that Kerry’s Vietnam veteran supporters, and “the country,” has been asked (to be) “marching into battle again (with Kerry, as a vote for Kerry)” — like the good Christian soldiers they are not supposed to be (it’s a play on the religious hymn, “Onward Christian Soldiers,” with lyrics: “Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war, with the cross of Jesus, going on before…” only to Democrats, the lyrics are ommitted because they contain the words “Jesus” and “Christian soldiers” and “cross”, but they do like the tag line of “marching into battle”). Oh, and “unity.”

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: “marching into battle” from the Christian hymn; “send me” twisted out of Isaiah Chapter 6; “unity” as Democrats as Party that equals America which is in need of healing as per the Reverend; and, all this from a three-podium (“trinity”) arrangement, which I read on littlegreenfootballs or maybe Wizbangblog (sorry, can’t now locate the thread but it was one of those two, a week or two ago), is comprised of a white podium in center that only John Kerry is to use. Perhaps to bring salvation — while relying on atheists to reprimand the principles of others about certain medical procedures — as that Catholic he swears he is, as does his wife, who have decided to not speak about specifics because it wouldn’t be uplifting, would produce issues that they’d prefer to shove out of the way. Hokay, then.

BD21423_.gif AND THIS: For more interesting convention coverage, read ALTHOUSE (“A little convention simulblogging…”).

9 C O M M E N T S

  1. -S- says:

    So, here ya’ go: User I.P.A., writing as from GreyAdvertising, traced to “” and signed here as “Kevin” writes: –HERE’S REPRINT OF IT’S NIFTY EMPLOYEE OF THE WEEK WORK —

    [BEGIN QUOTE, from “Kevin” and/or his alternative author ID, “Anonymous”]

    God, Suzy, you worry me. That was quite the logorrheic diatribe. Are you sure you’re feeling well? Umm.. I’m not quite sure, did you see the Clinton speech or not? You seem to have seen quite a bit of the post speech coverage, but what about the event itself? Even Fox News Channel website describes it as a “memorable speech.” describes it as “Clinton in old form.”

    BTW the only scripture he cited was “Be not afraid.” “Send me” was his characterization of John Kerry’s attitude when responding to crises. You seem to be a little muddled. Maybe you just need a time out. How’s that Karpal Tunnel treatment coming along? After all that feverish typing your wrists must be the size of grapefruits.

    Ta for now dearie,

    Kevin —

    Posted by Anonymous to at 7/27/2004 08:39:14 AM


    ============END OF IT’S WORK=================

    (1.) Yes, I listened to “whole speech” but I didn’t watch it (I thought the point of a “speech” was what was said, not how cute Bill Clinton was;

    (2.) “Karpal Tunnel” is a strange accusation, new one for me; additionally, I don’t have Carpal Tunnel Syndrome nor the strange other you suggest called “Karpal Tunnel”; I also don’t antagonize strangers on the internet as you do about physical ailments or disabilities used as pejoratives against them.

    (3.) my wrists don’t resemble grapefruit but I think to “Kevin,” anything female would be sorta icky from his obvious orientation toward the sarcastic here.

    Another MAC author, too busybusybusy to respect the words of someone else…

    “Clinton in old form” sounds about right, however, so I do agree with the GOP. I didn’t include that in my “diatribe” out of consideration for employees at Grey, writing on their employer’s time; glad that you found that on your own, however.

    Also, interesting that you admit that Clinton’s “send me” WAS, in fact, a scriptural reference, however rewritten.

    Last thing: is “dearie” a good or bad thing? I mean, in the context that you use it, it seems a tad sarcastic, so, was just asking.

    Kevin: you certainly are not, sincerely, “worried” about me, but, then again, YOU’re the one writing caustic emotions in a total stranger’s blog, feigning ‘anonymity’ at that. Clearly, you’re projecting your “worry” — pretty sick, Kevin.

  2. -S- says:

    Kevin, you’re going all Teresa Heinz-Kerry here:

    You wrote:
    –>>”…BTW the only scripture he cited was “Be not afraid.” “Send me” was his characterization of John Kerry’s attitude…”
    So, you write (^^) “the only scripture he cited was” in regards to Clinton. So, you write that Clinton quoted scripture. So, that’s what you wrote, right there.

    Now you write (second insincerity, a little longer this time [wasn’t your original complaint about me that the comments I’d written were too lengthy, only you used another word, still right there for your memory ‘case you forgot what it was]) that you didn’t write that.

    About your “work” requirements, whatever, it matters to me that anyone, anywhere would use someone else’s utilities (and trust) to go all nasty on a total stranger’s website as you have, and worse yet, you don’t seem to have an ethical awareness about it in that context. If your employer doesn’t mind (Grey Advertising), I mind on their behalf. It’s not about autocratic environments, it’s about individual self responsibility and obviously, you have some compromises there.

    But, where, how, whatever as to your employment, isn’t my concern. What IS my concern is that you call me “sweaty” and earlier, “sweetie,” when, what is that? If someone’s sweet — I’ll leave the “sweatie” alone — it means that there’s affection there. Obviously, you have no affection for me, you don’t even know me, so, is that just a lie? It’s certainly insincere, ’cause, come on, now, Kevin, anyone can tell that you don’t have affection for me, what with your imaginings about my “wrists” the size of “grapefruits.”

    It makes me sad to read about Americans, in Americna industries, who are quite so squeaky as to consider the good faith and confidence of their employer as “autocratic,” or thereabouts, it really does. Personal responsibility is important, you should go learn about it.

  3. -S- says:

    Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:

    Grey Advertising
    777 Third Avenue
    New York, NY 10017
    212.546.2000 fax: 123 123 1234

    Record expires on 10-Jun-2010.
    Record created on 09-Jun-1994.
    Database last updated on

    27-Jul-2004 12:14:18 EDT.
    Domain servers in listed order:
    ========================= is []
    Grey Advertising
    GREYNET22 New York, NY

    –>with hop from there to:
    Los Angeles

  4. -S- says:

    “Holy Scripture” is a significant difference and titling, in comparison with “Scripture.”

    It’s the same difference as Judaists referring to “G-D”, as to significance of titling and reverential use of both.

    Why you’d want to make fun of my use of “Holy Scripture” is beyond me.

    About grapefruit, no, the fruit does not have a gender but the trees do, as do their seeds.

    I’m really not interested in counting my keyboard keys, and based upon the fact that I’m not suffering excruciating pain at the moment, all my fingers appear in place and to be working just fine.

    But, are these issues REALLY what you intended to discuss here? I still don’t quite have a specific idea as to what it was that brought you to this point of my commenting page, but there’s got to be SOMEthing about the theme of my comments, these, that set you about writing all that you have. I bet it’s related to the “religious” theme, to take a guess.

  5. -S- says:

    No, not at all “trying to intimidate” you.

    Just sharing the information. If that “intimidates” you, I can’t imagine why. You’ve pretty well embarrassed yourself, however, so that might be intimidating to other people, at least concerning.

    Why does my Christianity bother you? I get the impression from you that you aren’t at all familiar with Christianity or even eager to be, so can’t imagine why you assume you can make value judgements about what constitutes “Christian” behavior and what does not. Meaning, you aren’t in a position to make such an evaluation, based upon who you’ve indicated here that you are.

    I think you’re using that pejorative as a means to, rather, “intimidate” me, here, my site, you an aimless Internet user, writing all this hate, for whatever reasons aren’t actually important, but what is important is that you’ve done so.

    But, I do conclude after your latter comments that it is, in fact, “Christianity” that is bothering you. About my site, I hate to have to request a ban from Blogger on your I.P.A., but at least GreyAdvertising has an opportunity to look into your client and/or employee use if your comments continue here.

  6. -S- says:

    I also never wrote here or anywhere that “(YOU) said that Clinton reworked scripture.”

    So, I have no comment about that objection of yours.

    If you’re confused about what’s been written here and what has not, just reread the sequence. You wrote, I wrote, you wrote, I wrote and that might help clear things up for you.

    Again, however, it doesn’t seem worthwhile to try to discuss “Holy Scripture” here with you to any degree — I am no scholar, I can only share what I know about it — since you don’t appear to be sincere in your request about that, so much as you attempt to use that topic here as an abusive issue. Good luck.

  7. -S- says:

    I assure you that you entirely missed anything and everything that was ever available to you in that “raised Catholic” past of yours, unfortunately. That is, based upon how truly embittered your comments are here to and about me (I remember you wrote earlier that I was “a horrible woman” — I also noticed that you didn’t write, “person” but went so far as to write “woman” which means that there are other issues negatively affecting you than simply what some aimless stranger writes about Sandy Berger and/or anyone else, for that matter — you can visit here and on company time at that and dare to write abusive comments about me, who you don’t know, and even if you did, your behavior would be equally abusive in content written here), anyway, based upon your history here, and here only, you are a personality who is quite craven, who has missed completely any positive or rejuvenating effect that any “Catholic” exposure might have otherwise had on your life.

    About those “pink…animals…” I can’t even stoop down to respond to that foolish comment of yours.

    You have not “challenged” anything here but have succeeded in not challenging yourself, based upon your presentation here, and you certainly haven’t challenged me. I wrote to Grey Advertising, and I do hope that they’ll help you to stop visiting here, one way or another.

    You’ve been asked twice to stop commenting here. Why are you still here?

    Again, good luck. Sorry you’ve not seen the Light, hope and pray that you will and do, as I do for everyone. Now, please stop using my site to share your brooding.

    Or, was there some specific aspect to Christianity, particularly as to Isaiah 6, that you find of interest? I never mentioned “Sandy Berger” in this comment and I actually didn’t mention Teresa Heinz-Kerry in these comments, either, now that I think about it. Elsewhere, but not in this thread.

    If you can’t move along, at least go back to work, “Kevin.” Over seven additional comments by you have been deleted by this site, there’s no need for you to continue your temper tantrum on this site and I hope on any others.

  8. -S- says:

    I musta’ missed that part where anyone asked you if I was “pretty,” by the way. I don’t think I’d be interested in meeting your standard of “nice,” either. So long, “Kevin.”

  9. patrick says:

    A big point is being missed. Clinton – incapable of telling the truth in all matters – simply is dissembling on this point about ‘send me’ to Vietnam. John Kerry never said it nor wanted to go to Vietnam.

    In fact, Jo