2004 Presidential Election

[FLZapped]

So, you've bought in totally to this propaganda of half truths spewed forth from the mouths of people who weren't there and snippets of testimony and lines from books taken out of context. What is a young man to do? He goes off to war with no real goal or objective yet he kills and is shot at just like those who fought with an objective. He's the one who was cheated, not those who went before him and fought the good fights for legitimate causes.

Geez, we've lost about a thousand in Iraq SINCE Bush declared victory/success in a flight suit on an aircraft carrier. In a day and age of precision strike weaponry, in a war where our oppenents have no air force and no real ground equipment to speak of, believe it or not, some of us are surprised that we are still losing lives in a war that we were told we won a long time ago. This "shut up and salute attitude" is the most anti-American sentiment I've witnessed in my young life. Where's Piece-it-Pete with his quotes? There's one about "patriotism" that I think, unfortunately, fits about half the country.

Speaking about propaganda and twisting the truth. Bush declared major battle operations over. Not victory. Get your facts straight.

And get over this shut-up and salute BS, that is one of the biggest lies ever perpetuated. A shallow argument when one has no answers.

Can you deny what Kerry is doing on the cover of his book? Can you?
Read the book and read his testimonial transcripts, they are all available.

And in case you didn't know. Kerry also applied for a deferment. It was denied because he wanted to go study overseas(France). The governement wasn't issuing deferments for that purpose. So Kerry weasled his way into OTS. Then he weasled his way onto a swift boat where he knew he cold lead, instead of take orders. Four months later he was on his way home because of an obscure rule that allowed him to after his 3rd combat injury. You can't tell me that he wasn't looking for any way out and found it. Did yo know that one of his Purple Hearts was denied? He was only sucessful in getting it when his upper command structure changed. Did you know that in his own diary that he admitted to causing his own injury for one of the purple hearts he applied for?

Then with all this great experience he had, including tha infamous Christmas in Cambodia event etched in his memory, he can clearly tell congress of all these autrocities he saw. More BS. The guy is a communist sympathizing socialist who will do and say anything to promote himself.

Can you explain his bizarre voting record between the two gulf wars? Can you? Can you explain how he will build better aliances, when he called the current one the "bribed and coerced"? Can you?

Can you deny his congressional voting record? It goes completely counter to his campaign rehtoric.

-Bruce

[dean_martin]

Speaking about propaganda and twisting the truth. Bush declared major battle operations over. Not victory. Get your facts straight.

And get over this shut-up and salute BS, that is one of the biggest lies ever perpetuated. A shallow argument when one has no answers.

Can you deny what Kerry is doing on the cover of his book? Can you?
Read the book and read his testimonial transcripts, they are all available.

And in case you didn't know. Kerry also applied for a deferment. It was denied because he wanted to go study overseas(France). The governement wasn't issuing deferments for that purpose. So Kerry weasled his way into OTS. Then he weasled his way onto a swift boat where he knew he cold lead, instead of take orders. Four months later he was on his way home because of an obscure rule that allowed him to after his 3rd combat injury. You can't tell me that he wasn't looking for any way out and found it. Did yo know that one of his Purple Hearts was denied? He was only sucessful in getting it when his upper command structure changed. Did you know that in his own diary that he admitted to causing his own injury for one of the purple hearts he applied for?

Then with all this great experience he had, including tha infamous Christmas in Cambodia event etched in his memory, he can clearly tell congress of all these autrocities he saw. More BS. The guy is a communist sympathizing socialist who will do and say anything to promote himself.

Can you explain his bizarre voting record between the two gulf wars? Can you? Can you explain how he will build better aliances, when he called the current one the "bribed and coerced"? Can you?

Can you deny his congressional voting record? It goes completely counter to his campaign rehtoric.

-Bruce

First, I wouldn't call what Kerry did weasling. My father applied for OCS with the Navy just before he got his draft order from the Army where he surely would have been a frontline junior officer in Vietnam. The Navy wanted him so they got him. (No strings pulled - my dad was the first in his family to go to college. His father was a logger. He continued to use oxen into the early '60s. He didn't know anyone of any influence.) Second, although I have no military experience, it has always been my impression that it's crazy to go in as an enlisted man if you have a college degree and can go in as an officer.

If he got his Purple Heart then it may have been initially denied, but it wasn't denied. You don't answer the question WHY. Of course that's a time-tested tactic.

NO, you get over this we can't question our commander-in-chief BS, while there's still a First Amendment. Read it sometime. No answers? To what question? I'm the one asking the questions. What the hell are we doing in Iraq? I mean right now.

Who has John Kerry's personal diary available for viewing? I couldn't pick out which one was Kerry on the cover of that book. I have no desire to relive the Vietnam era. Believe me, you're candidate doesn't want to either. I hope you noticed that I didn't go after Bush for his "service". My impression was that Kerry, in his testimony to Congress, was careful to point out that most of the autrocities he laid out were based on testimonials from other soldiers.

Anyhow, that was a messy time. Kerry playing up his own heroics (you let others do that for you, like he did in Iowa during the primaries), the controversial swift boat ads, etc. are turn-offs for me. I don't even put much stock into bashing Bush's military record. What these people did during the Vietnam era just demonstrates how different people deal with complicated, life or death issues at a particular time. To call these decisions right or wrong is unfair unless you can back it up with an official, contemporaneous finding of guilt. They don't send one to hell and the other to heaven. AND, I don't believe what we've heard so far disqualifies one for President. Some may. Because I'm not defending Kerry's military record, doesn't mean I'm conceding that his service was dishonorable. There's certainly no basis for such a charge. It seems to me that some (and I can't get a grasp on who they are) are pissed about what Kerry did AFTER he returned from Vietnam. To make their case stronger, they've subsequently tried to tarnish his service record. For me, so long as the military was satisfied with his service, I have no problems. I've yet to hear of an official contemporaneous report that criticized Kerry's service. The rest of the mess has more to do with how one feels and is therefore highly subjective.

I can't explain Kerry's vote on the first Gulf War. I think I know that on the second war he was voting to give the President authority to use force with the assumption that the President would follow the UN process to its conclusion, would go in as a last resort and would plan carefully.

After the damage Bush has done, I'm not sure how Kerry is going to build better alliances, but I do know that he's polling much better in traditional European allied countries.

Finally, how do you defend or even taut a 20 year Senate record? If there's something to vote on that you have no interest in you don't have to be there. If there's something to vote on that you are interested in, but you know there are enough votes going your way, you don't have to show up. The people of Massachusetts trusted him. They kept sending him back. He didn't just crawl out from under a rock. Where have all these highly personal attacks been for the last 20 years? What is it about his 20 year record, other than the votes on the 2 Gulf Wars, you don't like?

Hell, man, vote for Bush already! I'll vote for Kerry! The only test is whether we still consider each other Americans afterwards (as opposed to a "communist sympathizing socialist" - what is that anyhow? A socialist who really aspires to be a communist? A left-leaning socialist? Who does a socialist sympathize with these days?)

[FLZapped]

My final point on this whole mess:

Perhaps the most instructive question that can be asked regarding the
upcoming presidential election is this: Given the chance, would Saddam
Hussein, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, Osama bin Laden, Kim Jong-Il, Mohammad
Khatami, Moammar al-Ghadafi and Hu Jingtao vote for
A) George Bush, or
B) John Kerry?

How would Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroeder and Kofi Annan
vote?

-Bruce

[JSE]

My final point on this whole mess:

Perhaps the most instructive question that can be asked regarding the
upcoming presidential election is this: Given the chance, would Saddam
Hussein, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, Osama bin Laden, Kim Jong-Il, Mohammad
Khatami, Moammar al-Ghadafi and Hu Jingtao vote for
A) George Bush, or
B) John Kerry?

How would Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroeder and Kofi Annan
vote?

-Bruce

And the award for best spelling goes to Zapped. Dang man, it would have taken me half an hour just to make sure I spelled all those names correctly. Of course I am just assuming you got them right.

JSE

[FLZapped]

And the award for best spelling goes to Zapped. Dang man, it would have taken me half an hour just to make sure I spelled all those names correctly. Of course I am just assuming you got them right.

JSE

Shhhhhhh.....Don't tell anyone, but I copied them from "The Federalist".....

-Bruce

BTW - Although I have made my final point, I had previous points on this topic:

A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
A fair criticism of John Kerry
Kerry's Foreign Endorsements?
John Kerry and Troop Support

[nobody]

A bit off topic, but as this is an election thread, I thought the following study of just how informed of Bush's positions his supporters are, and how aware of established facts they are would be inetresting to some of you...

The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters

[piece-it pete]

A bit off topic, but as this is an election thread, I thought the following study of just how informed of Bush's positions his supporters are, and how aware of established facts they are would be inetresting to some of you...

The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters

nobody,

Thanks for the link. I'll read it this weekend.

One thing was obvious at a glance - Kerry supporters sure are a lot righter - even though they're left.

OK, so that's not that funny, sue me.

I'm killing myself.

Have a great weekend!

Pete

[FLZapped]

A bit off topic, but as this is an election thread, I thought the following study of just how informed of Bush's positions his supporters are, and how aware of established facts they are would be inetresting to some of you...

The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters

This is a flawed report.

1) They did not provide the questions used in any of the polls as an appendix item, therefore it is impossible to tell what the questions were and what biases they contained. It also make it impossible to repeat the work.

2) They base many of their conclusions against the Charles Duelfer report, which came out on September 30 yet two of the three polls they used were taken weeks before it came out. The final, less than two weeks afterward.

3) They claim that Kerry supporters are more inline with his view, while ignoring the fact he has been on both sides of almost every issue during this campaign. Not even Imus, who strongly supports him can tell where he stands.

4) They use nebulous wording such as "substantial support" - which will mean different things to different people.

This statement alone shows how biased this report is:

"Bush appears to assume that his support is fragile. He refuses to admit to making any mistakes."

In a time of war, the president is not at liberty to say many things. He sure isn't going to say anything to indicate there may be a weakness the enemy may exploit. How are they to know how the president views his support? This is a complete guess on their part.

I also find it amazing that they ignore the fact that an AL Qaeda base was found during the war that we were able to gain intelligence from. I find it amazing that you have a major Al Qaeda figure(whose name escapes me) in Iraq more than once over the years not an indication of an alliance of some type. Now Al-Zarkawi has now admitted is allegance to Al Qaeda.

I can't say that I believe this "paper" is worth the electrons it's written on.

-Bruce

[Feanor]

...
Conclusion

The failures by George W. Bush, the viable alternative of John Kerry, the massive number of newly registered voters, the amount of attention being given by the American people on this election and the mass media trying to spin this race as being close are all clear signs of a Kerry landslide. On the November 2, 2004 the people will speak loud and clear.

The world, not to mention Americans, needs that result.

I'm Canadian but I don't pretend to be unbiased. As never before perhaps, Americans are deceived and self-deceived in this election race.

The pathetic, ridiculous debate about whether Kerry flip-flopped on this or that issue, much less whether he was such a war hero as has been made out, is diversion. Yet I suppose many American see these non-issues as somehow important. Americans, see the big picture!

Focus on the fundamental issue: do you want an America dedicated to the protection of narrow, short-term personal and corporate self-interest, (viz. greed), or to personal freedom and opportunity, and a better world.

One of the more appalling aspects in this race is the polarization a long religious lines: "conservative Christian", (Catholic and Protestant), versus everything and everyone else. Again, I'm not unbiased: "Christian Right" is an oxymoron. Conservative Christianity in the US is Pharisaic, that is, like the self-centred, self-righteousness of the Biblical Pharisees whom Christ condemned. Were I not a religious sceptic, I'd greatly fear that they have not accepted Christ's true message and hence will go straight to hell. Won't they be surprised, though!

On the Iraq issue, to be completely pragmatic, Bush made America and the World much less safe, rather more so. by the invasion. It's not just whether the money and lives would have been better spent on fighting Bin Laden.

[piece-it pete]

I certainly respect you and your fellow Canadians, proven good friends of ours.

But.



Opinion! So:

The world, not to mention Americans, needs that result.

The world needs leadership. Were are they going to get it? France?

I'm Canadian but I don't pretend to be unbiased. As never before perhaps, Americans are deceived and self-deceived in this election race.

The pathetic, ridiculous debate about whether Kerry flip-flopped on this or that issue, much less whether he was such a war hero as has been made out, is diversion. Yet I suppose many American see these non-issues as somehow important. Americans, see the big picture!

I appreciate your candor. Many now pass themselves off as independents.

We heard about character being a non-issue before, and became the laughingstock of the world there for a while.

Don't judge him by his RECORD, judge him by what he's saying now?

Fight for a guy that called you a baby-killer, let alone respect him?

Focus on the fundamental issue: do you want an America dedicated to the protection of narrow, short-term personal and corporate self-interest, (viz. greed), or to personal freedom and opportunity, and a better world..

Then by all means vote in the super-rich, THEY'LL protect you from the merely wealthy!

And Bush freed the Iraqis from the Butcher. No hollow talk, that.

One of the more appalling aspects in this race is the polarization a long religious lines: "conservative Christian", (Catholic and Protestant), versus everything and everyone else. Again, I'm not unbiased: "Christian Right" is an oxymoron. Conservative Christianity in the US is Pharisaic, that is, like the self-centred, self-righteousness of the Biblical Pharisees whom Christ condemned. Were I not a religious sceptic, I'd greatly fear that they have not accepted Christ's true message and hence will go straight to hell. Won't they be surprised, though!.

Christians didn't just desert the Dems, they were thrown out. Search "christian" at www.democraticunderground.org to see what I mean.

Jesus will vote for abortion on demand? Gay "marriages"? And our God does not shy away from terror nor condemn the soldier for doing his job.

If you are not a Christian, how can you decide, with authority, who is?

If I called you a hypocritical bigot, wouldn't you be offended?

On the Iraq issue, to be completely pragmatic, Bush made America and the World much less safe, rather more so. by the invasion. It's not just whether the money and lives would have been better spent on fighting Bin Laden.

Big picture, or Bin Laden? Old Binnie has been holed up for years now, while we take out the Al Qida still operating, and tie up their resources in Iraq. It's been VERY successful - we haven't been hit again.

Pete

[Feanor]

Indeed it does, piece-it. US-bashing happens in Canada, but deep down most Canadians have a profound respect for Americans and America. Canadians and people of many other nations would be glad if the US were providing that needed leadership.

But there's a difference between leading and throwing your weight around. The US has forfeited the moral high ground. Arabs have believed this for years on account of US' unqualified support for Israel vs. Palestinians. The rest of the world is coming around to the same opinion, (Tony Blair excepted, of course).

Though I'm a religious skeptic, I had a religious upbringing and understand Christian theology quite well for a layman. I am therefore as qualified as a pious person to hold an opinion regarding Christian ethics. Call me a hypocrite if you like, I'm not chagrined. Personally I think reasonable interpretation of the Bible does not supports Gay marriage nor abortion. But how great am I if I ban these things but leave people sick and starving in the streets: to me that's hypocracy.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Though I'm a religious skeptic, I had a religious upbringing and understand Christian theology quite well for a layman. I am therefore as qualified as a pious person to hold an opinion regarding Christian ethics. Call me a hypocrite if you like, I'm not chagrined. Personally I think reasonable interpretation of the Bible does not supports Gay marriage nor abortion. But how great am I if I ban these things but leave people sick and starving in the streets: to me that's hypocracy.

Feanor, with all due respect to a fellow christian brother, the bible mentions nothing about same sex marriage, nor abortion. The bible is VERY clear about what God doesn't like, but same sex marriage was not an issue in biblical times, this is a recent issue.

I believe that God gives us choices. We have a choice to serve him, or not. Each choice has repercussions(good or bad). What we as man think is wrong, may not be wrong in Gods eyesight. Remember, as high as the heavens are from the earth, are his thought from ours. Men look on the outside, God searches the heart. We must be careful in our reasonable interpretation not to color/filter Gods word with our own prejudices.

[Feanor]

Feanor, with all due respect to a fellow christian brother, the bible mentions nothing about same sex marriage, nor abortion. The bible is VERY clear about what God doesn't like, but same sex marriage was not an issue in biblical times, this is a recent issue.

I believe that God gives us choices. We have a choice to serve him, or not. Each choice has repercussions(good or bad). What we as man think is wrong, may not be wrong in Gods eyesight. Remember, as high as the heavens are from the earth, are his thought from ours. Men look on the outside, God searches the heart. We must be careful in our reasonable interpretation not to color/filter Gods word with our own prejudices.

Amen to all of it.

[jeskibuff]

None of your stuff is backed up.

Sorry, but I write from the wealth of knowledge I have acquired. I just don't cut-and-paste from someone else's thoughts and think that because I provide a link, it's irrefutable!
If I had more time, I'd provide links to back up my assertions, but I don't, so I won't.

I spoke with a veteran on Friday who flew helicopters in Vietnam...When he received the Distinguished Flying Cross, he took no fire. But, he had to fly through a fog bank at low altitude and at a slow speed to reach a tank that had hit a mine.He was exposed to danger and was a sitting duck for enemy fire but took none.

Well, that was a heroic act. Kerry demanding that he receive a medal for a superficial self-inflicted scratch that required a band-aid was an arrogant manuever, consistent with the opportunist behavior that he exhibits today.

You know your point-by-point analysis of the factcheck.org article is, with all due respect, stupid.

I wouldn't say that. I would say that your support of a man with such little character that Kerry possesses is utterly stupid. Your inability to refute my points with something other than "you're stupid" just exhibits more of your stupidity.

The one that jumps out is your dismissing Rassman's account because he was holding his breath at the bottom of the river. Why do you think he was doing that?

Well, DUH...a boat was just blown up by a mine. They thought they were being ambushed. He fell into the water. There was gunfire. Boats were gunning their engines (Kerry high-tailed it out of there, the coward) I'd probably duck under the water, too. From the perspective of being in the water (ever take a swim in a lake?) you cannot adequately assess what's going on around you. But the fact that none of the boats was hit by gunfire indicates that either the enemy had EXTREMELY poor aim, the Swift Boats had their shields up or THERE WAS NO ENEMY GUNFIRE! Based on the testimony of the many Swiftees that had a better perspective, I'll believe them! Based on Kerry getting caught in many lies, I'll believe the Swiftees over lying Kerry ANY DAY!

Look, I was born in 1968.

That's a surprise. By your weak arguments, I would guess that you were born yesterday!

These attacks against the decisions young men made during that era (including those against Clinton, Bush and Kerry) will not sway my opinions.

Face the truth. Kerry could kill someone in public and you'd still vote for him. There's SO MUCH damning evidence against Kerry that you'd be a total fool to still vote for him. But you will, won't you?

I'm not defending Kerry with unsupported summaries of "what really happened."

That's good for Kerry. He can't seem to support his own summaries of what happened (again, refer to Christmas in Cambodia)

I do know that the swift boat ads came from heavy Bush supporters out of Texas and I do have experience with Karl Rove's tactics in my state. These ads have his signature.

Yet, you'll eat up all the Michael Mooron/Dan Rather/Al Franken /George Soros/Moveon/Kitty Kelley propaganda without batting an eyelash, won't you?

I'll cut you some slack if you're military (a "true soldier" to use your words) and I'll stop responding to your unsupported accusations. In other words, I'll even let you have the last say. But, until you step up, I'll keep calling you out.

Oh, what a drama queen you are. You've got a lame candidate that you blindly support. You're really quite pitiful.

His actual actions in Vietnam are not really provable. He did get the medals.

But if he signed that form 180 and released his records, we'd see who's doing the lying - the Swiftees or Kerry. Based on Kerry's track record, it's not really necessary. Kerry's nothing less than pathological.

...
Conclusion

The failures by George W. Bush, the viable alternative of John Kerry, the massive number of newly registered voters, the amount of attention being given by the American people on this election and the mass media trying to spin this race as being close are all clear signs of a Kerry landslide. On the November 2, 2004 the people will speak loud and clear.

The world, not to mention Americans, needs that result.

From http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3395977/

October 11, 2004 | 6:20 PM ET

THE ELECTION MAY TURN ON THE ELECTIONS
In America, most pundits are still talking about Friday's debate between John Kerry and George W. Bush. But the real events of the weekend are elsewhere. In fact, they may be the elections that determine the election.

In Australia, pro-American and pro-Iraq war Prime Minister John Howard won a fourth term, and gained legislative seats, in an election that Australia's anti-war left did its best to turn into a referendum on the invasion of Iraq. And it looks as if they succeeded in that, to their detriment. As Australian journalist-blogger Tim Blair notes, candidates who tried to blame the terror-war for terrorism (in this case, the Bali bombing that killed so many Australians) didn't do especially well.

Howard's resounding victory hasn't gotten a lot of attention from the American press -- though you can bet that if he had lost we'd be hearing that it was a colossal defeat for Bush, evidence that standing alongside the United States is toxic worldwide, yada yada, yada. But since good news for Bush is unwelcome, at least until November 3rd, the reverse isn't being emphasized.

Here's hoping that tomorrow's election will produce similar results!

[FLZapped]

Feanor, with all due respect to a fellow christian brother, the bible mentions nothing about same sex marriage, nor abortion. The bible is VERY clear about what God doesn't like, but same sex marriage was not an issue in biblical times, this is a recent issue.

Just because there isn't an explicit mention doesn't mean it isn't covered.

Was same sex marriage ever ordained by God? No. However, marriage between a man and woman was.

I believe that God gives us choices. We have a choice to serve him, or not. Each choice has repercussions(good or bad).

You start off by saying God gives us choices and then talk about choices man makes.

The former is incorrect the latter correct.

We have a choice and the free will to accept it, ot reject it.

-Bruce

[piece-it pete]

F,

When I said:

If I called you a hypocritical bigot, wouldn't you be offended?

I was refering to this:

Conservative Christianity in the US is Pharisaic, that is, like the self-centred, self-righteousness of the Biblical Pharisees whom Christ condemned.

where you compared me, an American conservative Christian, to a hypocrite, condemned by Christ.



From this:

Though I'm a religious skeptic, I had a religious upbringing and understand Christian theology quite well for a layman. I am therefore as qualified as a pious person to hold an opinion regarding Christian ethics.

I got the impression that, although you grew up in a Christian atmosphere, you are not a born again Christian. Do I have this right?


Anyway, thanks for: "deep down most Canadians have a profound respect for Americans and America.", I will say that my experiences with Canadians have been very good, I would be flattered if I was mistaken for a Canadian. May our historic border remain at peace though the ages!

Now we have a Society of Mutual Admiration.

...there's a difference between leading and throwing your weight around. The US has forfeited the moral high ground. Arabs have believed this for years on account of US' unqualified support for Israel vs. Palestinians. The rest of the world is coming around to the same opinion, (Tony Blair excepted, of course).

No matter what, there will be those who say we're throwing our weight around. Sometimes they'll be right.

But we're NOT effecting them, outside of keeping the economic system that contributes mightily to their prosperity running smoothy - with our boys' blood.

We are the most friendly empire to ever walk the planet. Enlightened self interest - what a concept!

I'm not on board with those who blow up buses of innocents. Isreal is our staunch ally.

Blair, Blair, Blair. What should a conservative think? I used to call him "little clinton"!

But thinking Americans will not forget, at least for a month or two, , our mother countries' help.

Personally I think reasonable interpretation of the Bible does not supports Gay marriage nor abortion. But how great am I if I ban these things but leave people sick and starving in the streets: to me that's hypocracy.

Thanks, I can't see how one can believe Jesus would support abortion. When He forgave Mary Magdelene he did NOT ok the sin.

But as far as people sick and starving, then we by extention of that logic can or should do nothing. I will agree that everything man does is at least tinged with hypocracy.

Anyway, shortly all this will be moot. Kerry or Bush, to many world wide will disappoint. Bush will of course continue his policies, and Kerry will follow the same basic foreign policy plan regardless of his words.

Pete

[Feanor]

F,
...
Anyway, shortly all this will be moot. Kerry or Bush, to many world wide will disappoint. Bush will of course continue his policies, and Kerry will follow the same basic foreign policy plan regardless of his words.

Pete

As of this moment I guess most polls are closed, absentee and military ballots are in too. So we'll wait, (and wait, and maybe wait), to find out the winner.

Yes, it's true, Kerry cannot and will not walk away from Iraq. The US has put itself in Iraq's debt and the tab will be paid.

I'm sorry, I can't retract, qualify, or mitigate my statement that conservative Chrisitianity is Pharasaic. The Biblical Pharasees themselves did actually obey the law of Moses more precisely than most Jews of their time and felt themselves fully justified thereby. But Jesus condemned them ... Many, even most, Conservative Christians are genuinely moral people in terms of their personal obedience to the commandments, but, as for the Pharasees, it is not enough.