A faith based missile defense system...
February 22, 2001 8:19 AM   Subscribe

A faith based missile defense system... now that's what we really need. Of course, considering the current state of the necessary technologies, that's what we already have. [From Greg Restall]
posted by silusGROK (7 comments total)
Isn't there some old saying about the way to overtake an enemy country is to send in plenty of bombs and bibles? Whatever isn't destroyed by one thing will be destroyed by the other.
posted by mathowie at 8:35 AM on February 22, 2001

I told you this would happen and you did not believe me.

The president has gone fully WACKO! This is what happen when you elect a president who shows clear signs of brain damage. You drink enough booze, snort enough cocaine and this is what happens.
posted by y6y6y6 at 8:47 AM on February 22, 2001

What else do you expect from a faith-based presidency?
posted by harmful at 8:51 AM on February 22, 2001

Um... I hope that y6^3 understands that the Slate article was satire.

Aside from that, I am a man of faith... so I have no problems with faith-based initiatives... nor, for that matter, careful gov't involvement in said initiatives.

I just think that Bush is an idiot, and the Slate article was a hoot.


Some day we'll have a president that can really pull it off well (I'm taking donations... ).
posted by silusGROK at 9:06 AM on February 22, 2001

Why not deploy a faith based missile defense system. It has about the same probability of working as the other missile defense shield. For the uninformed, that would be zero, zipsky, zilch.
posted by quirked at 9:42 AM on February 22, 2001

How about a faith-based judicial system?
posted by MarkAnd at 11:45 AM on February 22, 2001

The article was clearly a satire. My marriage (number 1) was faith based. My divorce was state based.
posted by Postroad at 4:13 PM on February 22, 2001

« Older Bryan Singer + Battlestar Galactica = relaunch.   |   August 17, 1995. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments