That's funny, a refusal to comment is an end to a discussion as far as I know.
Posted By: lall on 2009-05-01
In Reply to: Why should I comment on France - or avoid doing so? - TechSupport
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Doesn't your refusing to comment on my question then end the discussion?
It seems there is no topic upon which to stay.
This is a funny comment because
I tried to avoid watching the political rallies as much as possible and still thought Obama's daughters and wife were highly visible. How silly to say Sarah Palin isn't concerned about her children's education!
Why are you so sensitive about such unimportant topics anyway?
This could explain the refusal of some to acknowledge global warming.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-endtimes22jun22,0,7902314.story?page=3&coll=la-home-headlines
'End Times' Religious Groups Want Apocalypse Soon
'End times' religious groups want apocalypse sooner than later, and they're relying on high tech -- and red heifers -- to hasten its arrival.
By Louis Sahagun, Times Staff Writer
June 22, 2006
For thousands of years, prophets have predicted the end of the world. Today, various religious groups, using the latest technology, are trying to hasten it.
Their endgame is to speed the promised arrival of a messiah.
For some Christians this means laying the groundwork for Armageddon.
With that goal in mind, mega-church pastors recently met in Inglewood to polish strategies for using global communications and aircraft to transport missionaries to fulfill the Great Commission: to make every person on Earth aware of Jesus' message. Doing so, they believe, will bring about the end, perhaps within two decades.
In Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has a far different vision. As mayor of Tehran in 2004, he spent millions on improvements to make the city more welcoming for the return of a Muslim messiah known as the Mahdi, according to a recent report by the American Foreign Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank.
To the majority of Shiites, the Mahdi was the last of the prophet Muhammad's true heirs, his 12 righteous descendants chosen by God to lead the faithful.
Ahmadinejad hopes to welcome the Mahdi to Tehran within two years.
Conversely, some Jewish groups in Jerusalem hope to clear the path for their own messiah by rebuilding a temple on a site now occupied by one of Islam's holiest shrines.
Artisans have re-created priestly robes of white linen, gem-studded breastplates, silver trumpets and solid-gold menorahs to be used in the Holy Temple 覧 along with two 6ｽｽ-ton marble cornerstones for the building's foundation.
Then there is Clyde Lott, a Mississippi revivalist preacher and cattle rancher. He is trying to raise a unique herd of red heifers to satisfy an obscure injunction in the Book of Numbers: the sacrifice of a blemish-free red heifer for purification rituals needed to pave the way for the messiah.
So far, only one of his cows has been verified by rabbis as worthy, meaning they failed to turn up even three white or black hairs on the animal's body.
Linking these efforts is a belief that modern technologies and global communications have made it possible to induce completion of God's plan within this generation.
Though there are myriad interpretations of how it will play out, the basic Christian apocalyptic countdown 覧 as described by the Book of Revelation in the New Testament 覧 is as follows:
Jews return to Israel after 2,000 years, the Holy Temple is rebuilt, billions of people perish during seven years of natural disasters and plagues, the antichrist arises and rules the world, the battle of Armageddon erupts in the vicinity of Israel, Jesus returns to defeat Satan's armies and preside over Judgment Day.
Generations of Christians have hoped for the Second Coming of Jesus, said UCLA historian Eugen Weber, author of the 1999 book Apocalypses: Prophecies, Cults and Millennial Beliefs Through the Ages.
And it's always been an ultimately bloody hope, a slaughterhouse hope, he added with a sigh. What we have now in this global age is a vaster and bloodier-than-ever Wagnerian version. But, then, we are a very imaginative race.
Apocalyptic movements are nothing new; even Christopher Columbus hoped to assist in the Great Commission by evangelizing New World inhabitants.
Some religious scholars saw apocalyptic fever rise as the year 2000 approached, and they expected it to subside after the millennium arrived without a hitch.
It didn't. According to various polls, an estimated 40% of Americans believe that a sequence of events presaging the end times is already underway. Among the believers are pastors of some of the largest evangelical churches in America, who converged at Faith Central Bible Church in Inglewood in February to finalize plans to start 5 million new churches worldwide in 10 years.
Jesus Christ commissioned his disciples to go to the ends of the Earth and tell everyone how they could achieve eternal life, said James Davis, president of the Global Pastors Network's Billion Souls Initiative, one of an estimated 2,000 initiatives worldwide designed to boost the Christian population.
As we advance around the world, Davis said, we'll be shortening the time needed to fulfill that Great Commission. Then, the Bible says, the end will come.
An opposing vision, invoked by Ahmadinejad in an address before the United Nations last year, suggests that the Imam Mahdi, a 9th century figure, will soon emerge from a well to conquer the world and convert everyone to Islam.
O mighty Lord, he said, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace.
At the appropriate time, according to Shiite tradition, the Mahdi will reappear and, along with Jesus, lead Muslims in a struggle to rid the world of corruption and establish justice.
For Christians, the future of Israel is the key to any end-times scenario, and various groups are reaching out to Jews 覧 or proselytizing among them 覧 to advance the Second Coming.
A growing number of fundamentalist Christians in mostly Southern states are adopting Jewish religious practices to align themselves with prophecies saying that Gentiles will stand as one with Jews when the end is near.
Evangelist John C. Hagee of the 19,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio has helped 12,000 Russian Jews move to Israel, and donated several million dollars to Israeli hospitals and orphanages.
We are the generation that will probably see the rapture of the church, Hagee said, referring to a moment in advance of Jesus' return when the world's true believers will be airlifted into heaven.
In Christian theology, the first thing that happens when Christ returns to Earth is the judgment of nations, said Hagee, who wears a Jewish prayer shawl when he ministers. It will have one criterion: How did you treat the Jewish people? Anyone who understands that will want to be on the right side of that question. Those who are anti-Semitic will go to eternal damnation.
On July 18, Hagee plans to lead a contingent of high-profile evangelists to Washington to make their concerns about Israel's security known to congressional leaders. More than 1,200 evangelists are expected for the gathering.
Twenty-five years ago, I called a meeting of evangelists to discuss such an effort, and the conversation didn't last an hour, he said. This time, I called and they all came and stayed. And when the meeting was over, they all agreed to speak up for Israel.
Underlining the sense of urgency is a belief that the end-times clock started ticking May 15, 1948, when the United Nations formally recognized Israel.
I'll never forget that night, Hagee said. I was 8 years old at the time and in the kitchen with my father listening to the news about Israel's rebirth on the radio. He said, 'Son, this is the most important day in the 20th century.'
Hagee's message is carried on 160 television stations and 50 radio stations and can be seen in Africa, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and most Third World nations.
By contrast, Bill McCartney, a former University of Colorado football coach and co-founder of the evangelical Promise Keepers movement for men, which became huge in the 1990s, has had a devil of a time getting his own apocalyptic campaign off the ground.
It's called The Road to Jerusalem, and its mission is to convert Jews to Christianity 覧 while there is still time.
Our whole purpose is to hasten the end times, he said. The Bible says Jews will be brought to jealousy when they see Christians and Jewish believers together as one 覧 they'll want to be a part of that. That's going to signal Jesus' return.
Jews and others who don't accept Jesus, he added matter-of-factly, are toast.
McCartney, who only a decade ago sermonized to stadium-size crowds of Promise Keepers, said finding people to back his sputtering cause has been like plowing cement.
Given end-times scenarios saying that non-believers will die before Jesus returns 覧 and that the antichrist will rule from Jerusalem's rebuilt Holy Temple 覧 Jews have mixed feelings about the outpouring of support Israel has been getting from evangelical organizations.
I truly believe John Hagee is at once a daring, beautiful person 覧 and quite dangerous, said Orthodox Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, vice president of the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership in New York.
I sincerely recognize him as a hero for bringing planeloads of people to Israel at a time when people there were getting blown up by the busloads, Hirschfield said. But he also believes that the only path to the father is through Jesus. That leaves me out.
Meanwhile, in what has become a spectacular annual routine, Jews 覧 hoping to rebuild the Holy Temple destroyed by the Romans in AD 70 覧 attempt to haul the 6 1/2 -ton cornerstones by truck up to the Temple Mount, the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock shrine. Each year, they are turned back by police.
Among those turned away is Gershon Solomon, spokesman for Jerusalem's Temple Institute. When the temple is built, he said, Islam is over.
I'm grateful for all the wonderful Christian angels wanting to help us, Solomon added, acknowledging the political support from Christians who are now Israel's best lobbyists in the United States.
However, when asked to comment on the fate of non-Christians upon the Second Coming of Jesus, he said, That's a very embarrassing question. What can I tell you? That's a very terrible Christian idea.
What kind of religion is it that expects another religion will be destroyed?
But are all of these efforts to hasten the end of the world a bit like, well, playing God?
Some Christians, such as Roman Catholics and some Protestant denominations, believe in the Second Coming but don't try to advance it. It's important to be ready for the Second Coming, they say, though its timetable cannot be manipulated.
Hirschfield said he prays every day for the coming of the Jewish messiah, but he too believes that God can't be hurried.
For me, he said, the messiah is like the mechanical bunny at a racetrack: It always stays a little ahead of the runners but keeps the pace toward a redeemed world.
Trouble is, there are many people who want to bring a messiah who looks just like them. For me, that kind of messianism is spiritual narcissism.
But some Christian leaders say they aren't playing God; they're just carrying out his will.
Ted Haggard, president of the National Assn. of Evangelicals, says the commitment to fulfilling the Great Commission has naturally intensified along with the technological advances God provided to carry out his plans.
Over in Mississippi, Lott believes that he is doing God's work, and that is why he wants to raise a few head of red heifers for Jewish high priests. Citing Scripture, Lott and others say a pure red heifer must be sacrificed and burned and its ashes used in purification rituals to allow Jews to rebuild the temple.
But Lott's plans have been sidetracked.
Facing a maze of red tape and testing involved in shipping animals overseas 覧 and rumors of threats from Arabs and Jews alike who say the cows would only bring more trouble to the Middle East 覧 he has given up on plans to fly planeloads of cows to Israel. For now.
In the meantime, some local ranchers have expressed an interest in raising their own red heifers for Israel, and fears of hoof-and-mouth disease and blue tongue forced Lott to relocate his only verified red heifer 覧 a female born in 1993 覧 to Nebraska.
Cloning is out of the question, he said, because the technique is not approved by the rabbinical council of Israel. Artificial insemination has so far failed to produce another heifer certified by rabbis.
Something deep in my heart says God wants me to be a blessing to Israel, Lott said in a telephone interview. But it's complicated. We're just not ready to send any red heifers over there.
If not now, when?
If there's a sovereign God with his hand in the affairs of men, it'll happen, and it'll be a pivotal event, he said. That time is soon. Very soon.
Your continued refusal to answer the question is very telling.
Why would I ask a Jewish person if he or she were allowed to go to heaven according to someone's Christian beliefs? Wouldn't that be silly? And you're right. It has nothing to do with whether Jews go to heaven. But it has everything to do with whether you go to heaven or not, right? Is your undying, unquestioning loyalty to Israel because you love Jews who will never be good enough to go to heaven according to your religion, or is because of the real estate the Jews inhabit in Israel?
You yourself wrote: Then there is no Biblical alternative to supporting Israel and the Jewish people.
One more time: DO JEWS GO TO HEAVEN?
If you again refuse to answer that, then my next question is where in the Bible does it say that said hypocrisy and disingenuousness are next to Godliness?
You also wrote: If you are truly, then, a nonbeliever, it explains much of what I am seeing here.
And: Are you all nonbelievers here?
How can you square that with your claim that you haven't judged anyone?
Trailblazing refusal of public funds, record-breaking fundraising
That guy sure knows how to raise mountains of money. Small donors, big votes. Innovative and successful. Now that's what I'm talkin' about. T-minus 18 and counting.
Comment on Bush comment
I heard Bush this morning saying that no one predicted or knew that the New Orleans levees would give way. Well, that is not true. This was widely predicted by engineers and meteologists. The engineers predicted it for years if/when a major hurricaine hit, as well as engineers and meteorologists predicting this 1-2 days before Katrina. I even told my boyfriend last Sunday night that they were predicting some levees would break, that New Orleans would be in water the same depth as Lake Pontchartrain and that thousands could die. Gee, guess I should be a White House advisor.
My other gripe is that this federal response seems a bit slow. Like maybe Monday afternoon things should have been put into motion instead of......Thursday? But then, I'm sure not an expert.
too ignorant a comment to comment on...nm
nm
If that is all you got out of this discussion, please, do bow out.
As I see from your other posts you just tend to step in and make random irrational comments, I'm sorry I even replied to your post.
What exactly is illogical, and where was the discussion?
There certainly *is* a feral element on the right that will attack anyone viciously if it serves their purposes - nothing is sacred to them - and they don't respect "logic" any more than they respect the mothers of deceased soliders. I've spent years talking to these people. It took me a long time to reluctantly come to the conclusion that you can't reason with them because they don't respect reason. You can't find common ground because they don't want to share any ground - they want it all. You can't speak to them in a sincere way because they will take that as a sign of weakness and attack you all the harder. You can't deal with them fairly and expect to be treated fairly in return - they will lie at the drop of a hat. Their intention is not to be tolerant of others but to crush any dissent and run smear campaigns against those who are not "like" them. Now that's just my experience with this specific element on the right. It's just my opinion but it's far from illogical to draw conclusions from many years of personal experience. If you are a progressive, may you have better luck than I in trying to find a human face amongst that particular element I'm referring to. If you are a Republican and you actually want to discuss something, it seems like there are plenty of people here including me who would be willing to discuss an issue without getting personal. But no matter who you are, don't expect me or anyone else who's had my experience with the ugly among the right to parse their words or try to be falsely sweet and forgiving toward a specific group of people who are just flat downright dangerous and despicable, and don't deserve to be kid-gloved.
I really enjoyed the discussion, as well.
It was nice to have a peaceful discussion with differing viewpoints. Peace to you, too.
Could you please take your discussion to your own board
PLEASE.
This is the liberal board, or at least that what it says. I don't understand why you guys have taken it over.
This discussion is about where Bush was and was not.
Ignored the most devastating natural disaster in recent US history.
new topic for discussion
McCain's cross in the dirt story he tells now -- history of:
how similar the McCain story is to that offered by Soviet dissident Alexander Solzhenitsen and then later popularized by Christian leaders Chuck Colson and Billy Graham. Sullivan also points out other suspicious changes:
The story changed from the guard using a sandal to the guard using a stick.
At Saddleback, McCain talked about a single guard being the protagonist. The same guard loosened his ropes and then later sketchd the cross in the dirt. In McCain's 1999 book, these were two different guards at two different prison camps.
McCain's first writings about his time in captivity didn't mention the story at all, so he's asked his readers for evidence of McCain offering that story prior to his 1999 book (when he was gearing up for a presidential run).
Several contributors to the comment thread on my first post have pointed to this rather stunning New York Times piece from 2000 in which McCain tells the story but about someone else!
Many years ago a scared American prisoner of war in Vietnam was tied in torture ropes by his tormentors and left alone in an empty room to suffer through the night. Later in the evening a guard he had never spoken to entered the room and silently loosened the ropes to relieve his suffering. Just before morning, that same guard came back and re-tightened the ropes before his less humanitarian comrades returned. He never said a word to the grateful prisoner, but some months later, on a Christmas morning, as the prisoner stood alone in the prison courtyard, the same good Samaritan walked up to him and stood next to him for a few moments. Then with his sandal, the guard drew a cross in the dirt. Both prisoner and guard both stood wordlessly there for a minute or two, venerating the cross, until the guard rubbed it out and walked away.
I think they had a family discussion ...
and they decided as a family to go forward. And this would not be an issue had there are those judgmental among us who decided to make it one. In this day and time for the Dems here, of ALL People, to act all holier-than-thou and act like being pregnant not married still carries some kind of stigma just stinks to high heaven. These same people who have told us to go back to our churches and not push our morality on them. The hypocrisy is staggering. The very people they called judgmental are the ones surrounding this family to support them, not ostracizing them like they had announced their daughter was a pedophile or a serial killer.
I would put the judgment here much MORE in question than Sarah Palin's, and I think a lot of people out there in America whose lives this very thing has touched will do the same.
And I would say that regardless of what party affiliation she has too. If that was a Democrat running for VP and people wre bashing her in this way I would be yelling foul just as loud.
It just amazes me the depths some will sink to for political purposes. INcluding fileting a 17-year-old. Just because her mother made the announcement did not mean poeple were obligated to attack..that was a choice and it taking that choice says a lot about character...or the screaming lack thereof.
we are having a mature discussion
about politics and religion, please do not start posting useless dribble. Thank you.
a "mature" discussion about
seeing black men run through the house, black arms coming out from under the bed, and several people talking to Jesus in the flesh? Okay then. I will bow out.
Don't read too much into this discussion. It just happens...sm
to be the news of the day. I do find it amusing though that her clothes came from the stores that they did. NM has $3000 handbags, etc, very HIGH prices and she probably only got a few outfits for the RNC's $150,000. I am sure that she didn't choose to get her wardrobe from these stores. She was probably staying in a hotel and the repub bigwigs called the department stores and told them what to bring over and what size, charge it to us. They were molding her to what they wanted her to be in order to get votes. It backfired. I actually feel sorry for her now. I hope she gets to keep her new clothes. She will probably be glad to get back to Alaska and out of the lower 48.
No, actually I'm not begging for discussion..
I am simply pointing out diversity. I've seen numerous posts on here from christians, and I really don't feel a need to debate their religion every time I see it. In fact, I respect other's opinions and beliefs, especially when they are willing to express them.....something you should try.
haven't been following this discussion at all BUT
isn't that calling the kettle black? I only clicked on this message cause it was the latest posted one... and after reading it i go... um excuse me... did you EVER given the current administration a break? for ANYTHING? And i dont want to hear they did this and this and this and this. that's fine, people were against them from the beginning too. This happens on BOTH sides, why doesn't everyone agree that there are hypocrites on each side!!! that is hypocritical in itself when you ALWAYS point fingers at the other side! Differing opinions is one thing, but to say that the RIGHT cant give this government a break? Well that's because they OPPOSE what it is they stand for! just like the left opposes what the right stands for!!!!
You call that discussion?
By definition, a discussion is give and take. An informed opinion on a complex issue takes more than a snarky one-liner on a subject line. It's really easy to define an opinion with which you disagree as "endless babble."
Besides, message boards are lousy places to have a true discussion about anything.
Here's a topic for discussion
Leaving criminal penalties out of the equation: Is it immoral to break the law?
What if you consider the law immoral (such as, for example, segregation)? What if you consider integration immoral? How much does individual conscience have to do with this? Easy to say someone else's conscience is in error, but they are saying the same about yours.
Some people try to short their taxes because the money goes to fund a war they do not believe in (there's usually one going on) or to fund abortions, or medical research they abhor, and now to bail out failed businesses and individual mortgages. I think everyone could find something that's funded by our tax money objectionable. How much are we morally required to render unto Caesar?
It's illegal to overstay a parking meter. Is it also immoral if you did it intentionally, simply because you've violated a law? How about sliding through a red light at 3 a.m. on a deserted country road when you could not possibly injure anyone?
If it's legal to raise rent past a tenant's ability to pay, is it also moral? What if this makes them homeless?
I thought the discussion was
for employees to have their health benefits taxed as income.
As noted in a discussion below about this...(sm)
I don't care what his views are or what he is. What I do care about his what he teaches kids. Sending them to his conservative website for homework in my opinion is way out of line.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the language used by the poster above, which is what I was talking about before you tried to change the subject, as usual.
Why is this discussion over - Ive been away for awhile and,
So why is this topic now closed?
So much for logical discussion between right and left.
/
I see. I saw in a discussion about Bruce on Netscape.nm
z
Bashing and discussion are two different things. sm
Evidently the moderator agrees, as she hasn't paid a visit to the boards.
Question regarding the abortion discussion below??
This question is mainly for anti abortion advocates. What would you do in a situation where you were found to be pregnant, but it was found to be an ectopic pregnancy? Would you terminate the pregnancy, or carry it to conclusion, whatever that conclusion may be? Thanks for any replies.
Discussion from Gab Board re Pres.
"First... I don't claim him. I think he's a tyrant to put it nicely and I think he is a warmonging hillbilly (and that's sad for the hillbillies because they are decent folk he gives a bad name). I told everyone not to vote for him last time... I tried to warn them. I didn't want him and he hasn't done anything to help me our my friends and family in the slightest, except make us look ridiculous on the international stage (which I can say because I live in Europe at the moment and I know how foolish they think us right now). Second, good for you. Maybe you should vote for McCain so that the pain (errr I mean pleasure) never ends. I bet the people that he's been against and not fought for (i.e., Katrina victims, Iowa flood victims, homosexuals, people with diseases that stem cell reasearch could help, innocent people in far off lands that lost family members and friends who were innocent victims) I bet they all share your same sentiments.. right? You can have him.. I bet right about now he's half price on the discount rack anyways! Third... you should be grateful she put "creatrue." Its probably how Bush spells and says it, so its a true representation. Fourth... I think the last time I checked it was a free country with free speech and allowed for people to have their own opinions. I have better names to call him than childish ones... but I won't use them since your so easily offended... are you his personal emotional filter? I doubt he cares what the American people call him... he's certainly proven he doesn't care what they think or how they feel... so why should we care about him? Thanks back atcha. I can have whatever opinion I want of the president and I can tell you, I am more the majority than you are."
Moving over here per Mod request.......
Of course you can have your opinion about President Bush. I was just saying that the names are uncalled for. Are you staying in Europe forever or are you planning on coming back to the U.S.? Just curious.
President Bush isn't perfect and there have been many mistakes, I do agree. I did vote for him and agree with the vast majority of his conservative views. I do plan on voting for John McCain in November. But, if Obama is our next president, as much as I disagree with his views, I wouldn't call him names; but that's just me I guess.
I do not envy anyone who is willing to take on the gigantic role of running the country. I would not want the job in a million years. I have respect for ANYONE, republican or democrat, who is ready and willing to take on this great responsibility.
I still would like to know what a creatrue is and President Bush is NOT retarded.
This discussion kind of reminds me of the ...sm
election of 1960, Nixon/Kennedy. Everyone was saying Nixon is a God. He has the most experience. No way John Kennedy is qualified to be president. Then came the first debate, and the rest is history. No teleprompter needed for either JFK or Obama. Their vision for America was/is enough to light the world.
yeah, so what, you aren't following the whole discussion
nm
Not trying to start a religious discussion here, but
being on its knees is exactly what this country needs. 
So there has to be a discussion of posts for it to be relevant?
what a stupid, anonymous comment
You really don't want to start this discussion, Sparky
x
i thought i'd find some intelligent discussion
here, but what a nasty post. or maybe you are hopelessly superficial. so sorry.
another life-altering issue for discussion
brought to you by the True Believers. distract, distract. blame the clintons.
More on Obama eligibility status from discussion
This argument validates the lawsuit, so it would seem to not be so frivolous. Can't argue about the facts.
************************************
It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for the following reason:
Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between " December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986? . Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal. US Law very clearly stipulates: ".If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which mea ns though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawai'i being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama's birth, but *after* age 16 It doesn't matter *after*. In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18 in Hawai'i. His mother would have needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama's birth for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have him as the only U.S. Citizen parent.
Obama instead should have been naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the office.
*** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President *** Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, all the other info does not matter because his mother is the one who needed to have been a U.S. citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those years being after age 16. Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had, rather than living in Indonesia. Now you can see why Obama's aides stopped his speech about how we technically have more than 50 states, because it would have led to this discovery. This is very clear cut and a blaring violation of U.S. election law. I think the Gov. of California would be very interested in knowing this if Obama were elected President without being a natural-born U.S. citizen, and it would set precedence.
Not THE solution, but perhaps one of many? sorry I put an idea out there for discussion, didn't
and sorry if my post ended up with yours, that happens, and I am not here to insult anyone. I do believe in my stance and my idea, have many reasons for it, thought that for once an issue on here could be discussed without personal attacks, if you read my first posts, there is no content other than the proposed idea; I was insulted and attacked for no reason, had the AUDACITY to defend myself and what I am trying to do with my life, my OWN life, and as usual it has turned ugly and it is almost impossible to figure out the original thread....oh well, back to work.
Good discussion on PBS' Lehrer News Hour
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/political_wrap/july-dec05/bop_9-2.html
Very good discussion of the political ramifications of the current governmental failure in this emergency - includes New York Times columnist David Brooks, a Republican with some rather surprisingly accurate statements.
You must skip all the "rabid" democrat discussion, and obviously don't count...sm
However, rather unfair to use the term "rabid" for any of us, don't you think?
I'd love to hear from the gal that was keeping score yesterday, to see who really rants and rails the most.
Seems to me the dems on this board far out rant the reps, and yet I don't see you calling the dems rabid.
rabid
One entry found.
Main Entry:
raｷbid Listen to the pronunciation of rabid
Pronunciation:
ˈra-bəd also ˈrā-
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Latin rabidus mad, from rabere
Date:
1594
1 a: extremely violent : furious b: going to extreme lengths in expressing or pursuing a feeling, interest, or opinion
2: affected with rabies
That is true....so everyone want to move the discussion to Faith board? nm
x
This is for a serious discussion... Do you think Obama will help the black community to "change&#
I am watching a story on Nightly News maybe that's what this is... It is about what he will do for the "black community" I guess they call it. They then pointed out the murder rate between in that community, that African-Americans make up 13% of the population but 40% of the incarcerated, etc. etc.
My discussion would be this, do you think it will be a main focus for him to guide or change those young men and women into better things and do you also think that him simply becoming president gives the ones on a bad road reason to make more of their life?
already heard this - wasn't funny then, not funny now!
x
I think BB has a point here in that the main point on the board is political discussion, and let'
face it, there is SO MUCH going on right now, changes, problems, disasters, and so much debate on what should/could be done, but so many tims the political discussion disintegrates in a finger-pointing, name-calling exercise, spouting religion all over the place. Yeah, our spiritual beliefs are dearly held and we would all strive to be the best we can be, and do whatever we can whatever the ideology is, but sometimes I wonder, since we have a board EXPRESSLY for Faith isuues, where relgious debates/discussions/forums, etc are welcome, why does THIS board have to be turned into RELIGION BOARD PART II, especially if one ideology wants to dominate or ridicule/condemn those who come on here for lively inteligent discussion, debate of issues in Congress and in our lives, and just want their beliefs held separately? CNN is not EWTN or any other Christian network, and there are constant informative, bright, lively, balanced discussions from all over the political spectrum on the credentialed news stations, as well as C-Span, but they are not constantly hiding behind a cross, rosary, bible, star of David, or whatever....can we not strive to do the same and put religious debate on the Faith board?? Just a thought to ponder, MHO, it might work beter, who knows?
Comment
Why did you choose the Hilter comparison?
Here is what I saw in Hitler:
1. Megalomania - yes, possibly in Bush.
2. Skillful use of the propaganda of hate to unite a nation and incite a lust for war. Blaming of select ethnic group for Germany's woes -- yes, I see some similarity there, but Bush seems more like "oops, sorry I accidentlly killed you" to the Iraquis (Islam nations) rather than "I will place you in concentration camps until you are all exterminated."
3. Hitler was mentally ill but still capable of great, inspirational speeches and inspiring confidence in the masses -- Bush is kind of dopey and I'm not sure who he inspires, really, if much of anyone.
4. Hitler seemed to have an agenda to exterminate -- as mentioned, I don't see that in Bush.
Well, I had fun with this. WWII is an area that I know quite a bit about.
Comment
Did gt actually say there were NO socialist Jews? I took her to mean that Jews in general should not be categorized as socialists. There are probably socialist Irish, socialist Catholics, socialist African-Americans....but that doesn't mean you label the entire ethnic group as such. Common sense would dictate this. Just as I keep saying, you cannot label all liberals or all democrats as having the same ideals and belief systems. You seem to keep trying to put square pegs in round holes here....or, as also has been mentioned...thinking only in black and white when the world and all its people are shades of gray. It makes me very sad to see this and I end up feeling hopeless about the future of our country and of the world.
As far as Chomsky, I haven't read tons of his writing but what I did read a few years ago I very much liked. Could it be a case of you taking some things he wrote out of context? Or perhaps some things he wrote were more fiery or radical than you were comfortable with? Perhaps you didn't survey his writings as a whole and only picked out a few you didn't like. When you make an accusation as you did, please provide examples to back up your comments.
Your comment...
I think I do your understand your point....basically you are saying his comment was taken out of context? It did seem that what I read of this quote was more that he was careless in his comments - they touched a nerve, as I said. It seemed he was looking at a cultural problem from a tongue-in-cheek statistical line of reasoning, and perhaps spoke before thinking. At least, I HOPE that's all it was. I have not read this all that carefully, I must admit. I also admit I know NOTHING about him personally or his past.
Thanks for your intelligent commentary.
Comment
Obviously your beliefs bring you solace and comfort and that is a benefit that religion offers, in my opinion, and that is very good if it helps you.
However, perhaps you should not generalize. I was a hospice worker as well as watching my mother die from cancer. She was a life-long agnostic and I don't believe it ever even crossed her mind to call out to Jesus or Zeus or any other deity. She made the most graceful exit from this world I have ever seen and was at peace with that process.
I do agree though that in times of extreme stress many folks may want to enlist the aid of a higher power, but please don't assume that we all turn to Jesus.
Just a comment
Does this apply to anyone who helps a specific region? That would certainly limit a lot of programs that target specific groups of the poor. So when President Johnson launched his War on Poverty targeting Appalachia he should have been required to live there? I am just so happy to see interest and help provided for the most downtrodden sectors of our society (as well as worldwide) that I can see no good reason to require that the folks contributing have to change their place of residence.
Had to comment
The story about your prescriptions rings so true! My insurance company sends me these little papers after every x-ray, lab test, etc. that outlines what I paid, what they paid, and whether or not the price was reduced. I had blood tests that I was initially told cost $1,150. (I almost passed out!) After a few months of arguing with the insurance company and the lab, I get one of these little papers that says my $1,150 bill was knocked down to $150 - without my insurance paying anything. The lab went ahead and reduced the price since my insurance was obviously not going to pay for it. I've had this done with hospital bills, too. I just love looking at those numbers. Someone is making a HUGE profit somewhere for them to be able to cut the price down that much. Kinda like when I worked in retail and I got to see the difference between what the store paid to the manufacturer and what the price tag said. Sometimes I'd almost rather not know...
Just another comment
I've been watching all stations of the news. I'm not voting for Obama. I don't trust him. I also don't trust McCain and not voting for him. I'm sure I will write in someone's name. With that said I have seen no "love fest" with Obama (watch CNN, MSNBC, and FOX). I'm not seeing this "love fest", however it was so obvious with Clinton. It was so obvious and so nauseating that I always had a bucket nearby to retch in.
As for McCain..who is saying that he is supposed to "hide" the fact that he was tortured. I've never heard that on any station. However, McCain keeps playing it over and over and over. This is not the Vietnam war and I don't care what anyone says...just because he was tortured doesn't make him qualified to be President. What makes some qualified is having your "faculties" together. Know what country you are talking about and know what's going on with the countries. DH and I were looking at each other funny when he's talking about Iran and says the Israeli people and vice versa. He doesn't know where the Taliban are, and for sure he has no idea or plans to get this country back on its feet. He is a war mongerer and that's all he's planning for. If its not one country he'll start up a war somewhere else. It's what he thrives on.
As for September 11th - the truth will come out one day and people will be shocked and in denial.
|
