Thursday, March 27, 2008

BLOG SEQUENCE REARRANGED ~ Open Message to Mudrake

Dear Readers: you may have noticed that my next two posts are not my newest ones. When the Toledo-area blogger Mudrake posted my address and Jeanette's address and phone number 90 times in a two day period (76 times in one day) on the next two blog topics, the easiest way to get rid of them was to copy my blog and comments over into new posts --minus his spammed addresses. I also added the scrambled word feature, to discourage spammers. I learned that Mudrake was right to say Blogger doesn't let us block individuals from our sites except through moderation of comments or forming a team of desired bloggers and shutting out comments from others. But I would rather delete the occasional address posted, and let other unfriendly posts remain--to let the others see whatever true colors people want to display --so they'll realize that the obsession and hateful attitude in the blog battle is not mine--that I don't want the battle. As Rob said, the mud splashes back on the mud thrower.

TO continue to spam with that scrambled word feature I added, Mud-rake would have to be even more insanely obsessed and time-wasting than I already consider him to be. I think this obsession is beneath him. I think he's a victim of a mental disorder of some sort --the one he accuses me of --obsessive compulsive disorder. How else could it be explained? Evil? Nah! He has a better nature toward most people but his obsessive tendencies get the better of him when dealing with people of faith who don't agree with his liberal views.

Praying for you, Mudly. It's OK to own our sins --that is, you own yours; I own mine. Confession is good for the soul. I believe in miracles --that someday you and I, in friendship, may, hopefully, laugh at the ridiculousness of this blog battle.

Jesus expects it of His disciples --reconciliation and forgiveness. So I stand willing anytime, any place. But you pretty much indicated that while you admire Jesus and His love teachings, and attend a Catholic church, the miracles and resurrection were myths --that He is not divine --and thus, you feel no obligation to be loving and forgiving --though you chide us anytime you think we are falling short in that area.

So what DO you believe about Jesus? Should we love and forgive or not? He actually said if we don't, that He will not forgive us --and if we DON'T confess that He is Lord before others, that He will not acknowledge us before the throne of God on Judgment Day.

You and I at our age COULD keel over any time --no man knows his appointed time to enter eternity. Jesus gave us promise and His own resurrected life so that we didn't have to face eternal mortality --or eternal damnation--but could be resurrected to eternal life better than this one --if we would only believe in Him as God's Resurrected Son. I find those New Testament writings convincing --historical. I believe the Church would have died out --or been only about love, etc. --but instead the New Testament disciples endured great persecution and death to get the Word out that Jesus was seen by them alive after His death. It truly is "The Greatest Story every Told." And those early disciples believed it. They were witnesses to His miracles and his Resurrection. I believe them. It makes all the difference in whether or not I am compelled to love you --as HE loves you --or not.

God gives me such peace about you and your harrassment of me (and Jeanette.) His peace is real --and the love He gives us is real --even if we give in to anger at times. Shame on us.

I believe that God is/has a Master Computer of some sort which is "The Lamb's Book of Life" referred to in the Bible. Our names and DNA codes and other identifiers are recorded there so we can be resurrected as He was and known as we are known --that is recognizeable as "us" in Heaven. I believe that He has in this "Book" a "file" of our every word, thought, and deed recorded (as the Bible says) --from which He says He will expunge the sins --THANK GOD! --when we access the blood of Christ over those sins, admitting that we do indeed need our records expunged!

Cleanse my file, Lord! Hide me in the Cleft of the Rock! from your knowledge of sins past. And keep my feet from stumbling into human ways of anger, revenge, hatred.

He answers that prayer.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible


Yankee Doodle said...

Thank you for the reminder.

Yankee Doodle said...

Have you heard the news of one man raised from dead after his doctor prayed for a miracle?

Barb said...

don't think so. Do you have it on your blog somewhere?

Yankee Doodle said...


Barb said...

Everybody should go over to Yank's and read about the doctor who prayed and raised the dead with a combo of medical science and prayer.

Just follow the link on the right side of my home page: Yankee Commentary.

steve said...

I think you should just sever all ties with MR and microdot and the french blog. You've done your best to put them on the straight and narrow, but it's obvious that they are just not buying what you are selling. I don't think it does you, or them any good, or frankly your testimony any good. It's now a matter of pride for you and not in the best interest of "the Lord". You've done your best to "heap the coals", but I think at this point, to carry on any longer would put a "stumbling block" in their path. Call me crazy, but that's just my take.

Barb said...

To the extent that it becomes a matter of pride to THEM to not believe because I believe --yes, you have a point.

But I'm not aware of pride being what motivates me --except that i don't like being lied about so egregiously.

and I also would like to push them to the point where they realize that their hatred and intolerance are unfair and beneath their own self-professed ideals of tolerance --irrational --and thus it has a diabolical source. Where does such hatred come from, but the devil himself? Should they be able to return to their comfortable sinful state without facing the fact of their own intolerance and hypocrisy? Is it really good for them to leave them alone so they can continue in their self-deceit??? to their own eternal loss?

They have put so many lies out there to intimidate me (and personal info in Mudrake's case) that I wanted to be sure and set the record straight on both blogs before I quit. But the truth from me seems to generate more lies from them--so I just may have to resign myself to their hell-bound state.

steve said...

Well if that's the Chick tract version of what I said.. OK...

Barb said...


Barb said...

It will be a relief and a release to let them go --for now! But whenever he comes over here, I feel invited back there! Isn't that what he's fishing for? More attention for his comments on believers?

On the one hand, he seems to be just wanting me to delete or moderate him so he can point out that I am the censorer, not he. (How can he believe that!?? The same way he says I have OCD for posting 3 comments in a row --or providing half the comments on my own blog topics --and yet he does the very same thing!!!) and yesterday he commented on the fact that I just had a handful of posters yesterday ---and he had one fewer than I did!
What's wrong with him?

He closes his blog, opens it, closes it, moderates it, stops moderating, deletes, deletes, shuts down all comments, deletes everybody's comments, then re-opens, closes again--GSSSSSH --and he posts my name and address, posts articles and refers to me in them --OFTEN!

What does he really want, if not attention??

steve said...

Well I think that he wants to express his views with out distractions, and I think that he wants to keep the conversations focused on the issues at hand. I think that he takes his blog very seriously and all this -I guess-, "preaching" going on is a major distraction. Plus I think he feels the way I do about gays and abortion, that they are just wedge issues the GOP uses to cheaply garner votes and divide people. The roof is on fire in this country, but people are focused on a bunch of pointless crap that shouldn't be in the political arena in the first place. But I can't speak for him obviously. You guys are like oil and water, you just need to let it go.

Barb said...

You give him far too much credit --unless you mean by distractions, "difference of opinions" --as encountered in a society with free speech.

He said he wanted people of my "ilk" to be flushed down the toilet

He lamented that so many of us vote

He wants to be free to malign people and mischaracterize them without challenge --that's what he did in Nov. 06 when he wrote about me for a Blade letter I had published. He didn't just criticize my letter --he went into this tirade about my years as a school board member and what my agenda was and how i didn't care about the education of the children really --just my right wing or religious agenda. 'Til then, I did not know his blog existed.

So from the get go, I had to rebut him.

He is not nice, and it is disgusting how anyone sticks up for the kind of posting he does --and the spam tactics.

My comments on the faith healing failure were right on topic and didn't disagree with him --except to say that not all Bible believers shun medical help --that they are in the minority. And he deleted. What was the distraction?? just my name --not my post.

Don't defend him. He's not right. He blasts people for doing what HE does, censoring, annoying one liner comments on right wing blogs, or spam --and he posts personal data as a threat.

He wants to say whatever he wishes about me and fellow believers, without challenge. And the former, is libelous because he lies about me.

He needs to be prosecuted, not defended.

steve said...

Well he doesn't like fundamentalist Christians, that's pretty plain. I don't think anything you say is going to change that fact. I guess you could say that he has the same opinion of you that you have of homosexuals. He just can't stomach fire and brimstone evangelicals.

You might say that a blog is like a person's castle. Imagine if you were sitting at home in your castle and some Jehovah’s Witness people came calling. Well naturally you would be friendly the first visit, maybe accept their pamphlets, maybe have a heated discussion on biblical topics, but ultimately you would send the Jehovah’s Witness folks packing. Would you not? Now lets say they just didn't take your polite “no thank you” for an answer and came back day after day after day. They would peek in your windows and follow you to the supermarket. Slamming their "Watchtower" on their well manicured palms and insisting you were going to HELL if you didn't buy a shiny new copy of the Watchtower. Well you might just call a cop!!

I’m not defending.. no sir eee, I’m just pointing out some observations..

Barb said...

I don't see how the abortion and gay issues keep us from focusing on any other problems. There are plenty of people talking about and addressing Iraq, gas prices, global warming, global economy problems, African problems, natural disasters, the global terrorism threat, the falling dollar and so on. And we all want remedies.

The GOP just happens to consist of a lot of people who ALSO care about religious freedom and the social issues in the U.S. and the kind of nation we are going to have for the next generation if the present cultural decline continues.

There is a correlation between birth rate and Social Security support and tax revenues in general. The nation is less moral than ever with couples not bothering to marry at all. Divorce does climb higher --and I think numbers of confused kids thinking they might be gay are probably climbing higher, too, with society's acceptance and push of perversion.

To the Church people, a nation's view of marriage and life are basic to that nation's blessings from God. He didn't like it when the Caananites and other "ites" you mentioned sacrificed children to Molech. He didn't like it when people had any kind of sex outside of hetero marriage --according to His design plan --the male/female image of God.

As the Family goes, so goes the nation. The more deteriorated our families, the more deteriorated our nation. Children need a mom and dad happily married for their optimum development --not all kids have this and some will do all right anyway, BUT it's a fact that fathers interested in their kids are important to those kids --that sexuality is learned from 2 functional parents -- that TV is teaching our kids differently than the good parents are teaching them --undermining their good influence. It's a fact that divorce brings more poverty to everyone involved --and enriches only the lawyers.

so the more our families are struggling, the more our economy struggles and the more people look to gov't to meet their needs.

There is definitely a correlation between family values and economic prosperity of the nation as a whole. Traditional marriage is best for us emotionally, physically and economically.

Barb said...

But he does it, Steve. He goes elsewhere just to pick. Ask Roland, ask Kooz, ask RightWingToledo, ask Yankeedoodle --and all those other right wing blogs he accuses of censoring him with moderation.

Barb said...

Roland isn't even right wing. He ran into mudrake at Toledo Talk, I think --and found him so nasty that he came to my blog to tell me so. And Roland is a liberal democrat --and no evangelical, but Jewish, himself.

And I dont' feel about homosexuals the way mudrake feels about evangelicals at all. He hates evangelicals. I don't hate homosexuals in the slightest. I think they are wrong to seek marriage rights and to violate God's standards. But I'm not trying to punish them with jail or deny them their privacy rights behind closed doors or even deny them their free speech rights. I just don't want to see us celebrating any sexual activity outside God's intended hetero marriage. There is a big difference between tolerance and advocacy and celebration. We need to help kids be normal --not encourage them to think they have a choice to choose same or opposite sex for marriage.

Notice how nasty he got with Fonso --when he couldn't persuade him to his views. He censored him, also.

steve said...

I'm not sure, but I think you just pulled one of Yankee Doodles 8 steps.

Families are in decline because of the economic pressure that hyper neo-capitalism and globalization are placing on them. You now have to have a 2 parent income just to afford gas so that the main breadwinner can make it to their job thanks to that Secret Dick Cheney energy summit and the ego stroking oedipal Bush war.

their have been homosexuals in society since the gladiator days.. I saw it on Ben Hur. And yet humanity soldiers on.

steve said...

Well I don't know what I can say about MR. I should just mind my own business. i enjoy posting on both your guys blogs and I like the both of you equally. I guess I'm overly tolerant. I don't care what you say on my blog. I don't take it that seriously. You could talk about bananna splits and vanilla sundays and I'd probably enjoy that just as much.

Barb said...

A blog is a speech forum --as well as a living room.

He wants people to tolerate him on the right wing blogs. He needs to give the same tolerance he seeks.

When it's a living room, it's a tolerant social friendly place --despite the differences within the room.

Yes a blog is "owned" by its creator TO A POINT. The internet is a public place, UNLIKE a living room in that regard. We can make it private and close it to friends --but if you are going to publish
about other people, you had better expect those people to defend themselves where the attacks are made on an OPEN blog.

I think we have the right to delete to keep out obscene language, irrelevant comments off topic, pictures, inappropriate info., personal and private info --we have the right to screen out differing opinions on a topic, but why would we do that on a forum??

And what kind of blogger makes remarks against persons and religions, etc. --and deletes any dissenting opinions about those things? Not a good free speech advocate. Not a fair-minded, open- minded person.

Barb said...

You would be less fond of Mudrake if he treated you as he treats me. Believe me.

I do generally take him with better humor than one would expect -- but it is troubling when a fair minded person like yourself can't get into my shoes and see it from here because the guy treats YOU Ok. I'm grateful that you, at least, haven't climbed on his bandwagon. ( I think I saw that your wife could do that if she had the time and motivation to blog.)

You think families are in decline because of the economy? For sure, economy may stress relationships --but I'm talking about people's morality--their view of what is right and what is wrong --and how the results of THAT affect economy.

Casual sex on dates is reportedly being taken for granted, living together without getting married is also, having babies without parents getting married is epidemic --look at the birth stats in the paper --only mothers are named because fathers haven't married or provided their names for the birth certificates. Divorces climb and so do the numbers of people swinging bisexually--and the diseases that come with homosex and bisex are staggering in medical costs. So we talk about universal health insurance --but not about stopping the behavior that is causing terrible diseases to kill our kids who have lost the value of chastity and fidelity, having one hetero marriage partner for life.

steve said...

I try to avoid posting on his topics about religion or fundementalists because I'm a spiritual person and I believe in God. I know his oppinions and microdots about those things. I just comment on the things important to me like the war and the economy and the decline of our freedoms and constitution, and 9 times out of 10 I'm in agreement with what they are saying. I think I've attracted his ire before, I've agreed with you about the whole ACLU gays in the boyscouts issue. For that MR tagged me with a "lightweight" moniker, but it didn't bother me. I don't take those things personally because ultimately I express my oppinion at the ballot box. Isn't that what we all do? If you want to debate with me on an issue, I'll debate with you for days on end and not get mad. But if you close the arguement by getting nasty ect.. then I know I'm not going to change your mind and I just drop it. That's how I feel about MR and religion. I'm not going to influence his oppinion in the least.. so why even try. Same thing with you and the gays, I know I'm not going to change your mind. But you like to debate about it, so I give you a debate.. that's not the case with MR.. the case is closed.

There are other right wingers on his blog that he tolerates, and in fact looks forward to hearing from. I think the difference is that you make it personal, you call into question his morality and beliefs or lack of beliefs in a personal way. That probably grates on him like fingernails on a chalk board. I can handle it cause I get the same thing from my parents on a daily basis.

Barb said...

It only got personal, because HE makes it personal. I would stay on topic --but then he deletes me even if I do. The problem is his posts are so often personally about ME, "the o so righteous Christian woman." And so I have questioned his fairness, his objectivity, and the hypocrisy of complaining about censorship when he censors and has done so from the beginning -- complaining about my 3 posts in a row and saying I have OCD, when HE does the same thing-- crowing that I have so few commentors yesterday--when he had fewer still.

Although it was very amusing once when he complimented me on a post --because I posted as anonymous --and he credited me for being on topic, etc. It wasn't all that short either. I never told him it was really me.

I tell you, it's not what i say --it's who I am, because he barely tolerates my presence even if I agree with him --if he knows it's me. That's what makes me wonder if he holds this grudge because of knowing of me personally from school board days.

And what excuse is there for the 90 posts of our addresses, the post of my house photo, publishing the link to the sacriligious cross photo at the French blog, putting my name in headlines with address following, as he makes up stories about me being racist and bigoted?

Why wouldn't I get personal in return and challenge him on this egregious bad blog behavior which has been PERSONAL in nature???

Barb said...

I appreciate that you can stand vigorous discussion and not get steamed.

That's the way blogging should be. Not that I'm not steamed! but I don't mind argument --it's a battle of the brains -- Unfortunately, both microdot and Mudrake can dish it out but can't take anything substantive in return.