In the spirit of the holiday season, I decree this to be a get-away-day open thread. And may all of you soon to hit the road to grandma's house, or elsewhere, have a very Merry Christmas.
Posted by Eric Earling at December 20, 2007 11:16 PM | Email ThisPlease accept with no obligation, implied or explicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2008, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor that it is the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishees.
To the Republicans:
Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
(Not original material, but, oh, so appropriate.)
Posted by: Kent on December 21, 2007 06:52 AMRon Paul has raised over $18.5 million this quarter alone. Huckabee has only raised about $4.5 million. No results are out for McCain et al, but I would not be surprised if Ron Paul was leading the fundraising race. He raised $6 million on 12/16/07 alone, breaking the record for any candidate's one day fundraising in US political history. His is a groundswell of support.
Only Huckabee and Ron Paul have rising poll numbers. Ron Paul is at about 8% in national polls and rising. Overall, I think his campaign is clearly ahead of McCain, Huckabee and Thompson. I think he is in third place, and closing.
Ron Paul has a workable plan to eliminate the IRS and replace it with NOTHING. It involves getting foreigners off the dole funded by US taxpayers, and cutting spending back to what it was only a decade ago.
Ron Paul believes in the Constitution, US sovereignty and free trade. He is a Christian, but believes in the separation of church and state. He is a ten-time elected Congressman from Texas.
He is the only Republican who stands a chance of winning in November because his position on the Iraq war is popular. If the R's nominate a hawk in 2008, they will lose just as surely as they lost in 2006.
Ron Paul's supporters are independents, and the formerly discouraged. He is brining new blood and vitality to the Republican Party. His position is centrist, and fundamentally American.
He is pro-life.
Yay, Ron Paul! Please donate today and join the revolution!
Happy Holidays, Happy Chanika, and Merry Christmas!
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 21, 2007 07:15 AMWise men still seek Him.
Merry Christmas to all.
Posted by: Independent Voter on December 21, 2007 08:11 AMHuckabee's broke, but he outpolls Paul 6:1....
How cometh?
Posted by: Rey Smith on December 21, 2007 08:34 AMHee hee! My brother and I used to sing that version on the days up to Christmas break. Drove my mom nuts.
Have a wondrous Christmas all!
Eric, thank you so much for posting that link to best drive times for the day before Thanksgiving. It really helped my travel! Haven't had an opportunity to say that yet.
Posted by: Jessica on December 21, 2007 08:53 AMAs a result, there is a related misinterpretation of the meaning of the 2006 elections, and of the American people's opinion regarding the war in Iraq.
The Republican Party will nominate a candidate with a victory strategy in 2008, and that candidate will win.
On the other hand, the Democrats will nominate either Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John Edwards in 2008. In other words, they will nominate a candidate who opposes a victory strategy in Iraq, and who opposes a victory strategy in the broader war against Islamic fascist terrorism.
Such a candidate will either misread the American people and run an openly "antiwar" campaign, or try to appeal to the majority of voters by pretending to be "tougher on terrorism" than the Republican candidate (as John Kerry pretended in 2004).
If the Democrats nominate an avowed "dove" in 2008, they will lose just as surely as they lost in 2004. And if the Democrats nominate an anti-victory candidate pretending to be a "hawk," they will have even less success than Kerry did in fooling the American people.
During the 2006 election campaign, it was often pointed out that Democratic Party candidates would, if elected, seek to cut off funding for our troops, and try to enforce a timeline for retreat from Iraq.
Often, the response from many Democrats, many liberals, and many antiwar activists was something along these lines: "No, not at all! We're not against the troops! We won't cut off funds or force a precipitate withdrawal! That charge is a false accusation - just Republican hyperbole!"
Such denials became more and more common during the campaign, especially as November approached.
Despite their sincere lack of interest in a victory strategy, the Democrats knew that they could not win the elections if the voters thought that in power, they would cut off the funds and enforce a timeline for retreat.
That, by the way, says volumes about where the American people actually stand with regard to the war against terrorism, support of our troops, and the desire for success and victory in Iraq.
Almost immediately after the November elections, the Democratic Party leaders started claiming a mandate for withdrawal timelines, defunding, "ending" the war, etc. Although this was not really the position of the American people, it was the sincere goal of the Democrats.
Turn to 2007. In the early stages of the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination, the leading (and even the non-leading) candidates tried to trump each other's antiwar credentials.
Recently, especially since encouraging progress in the military situation and the backfiring of the ultraleft Moveon.org attack on General Petraeus, and reflected (for example) in the most recent Democratic candidates debate, the Democrats (especially Clinton, Obama, and Edwards) have started to verbally distance themselves from timelines and funding cutoffs.
In fact, just as Kerry in 2004 at the Boston Demcoratic convention sought to portray himself as a military hero who would do a better job of fighting and killing the terrorists, we can expect the 2008 Democratic nominee to similarly claim they would not retreat, not surrender, not cut off funds, etc.
The Democrats have already begun to slightly distance themselves, and as November 2008 approaches, they will continue to incrementally distance themselves from the far left. The better to get elected, you see.
Some Democrats, some liberals, and some antiwar activists falsely claim that the 2006 elections represent a "mandate" to "end" the war. However, if it were really true that the American people agreed with retreat from Iraq, there would be no brake stopping the Democratic candidates from pursuing their misguided, but sincere, "exit strategy." (Besides, even retreat from Iraq would not "end" the Islamic fascist war against us.)
As in 2004, they will fail, I believe. But in order to make sure that their disingenuous effort fails, Republicans and convservatives and others who support victory must hold the Democrats' feet to the fire. We must constantly point out that the Democrats' sincere desire and sincere goal is to force retreat from Iraq, and to go back on the defensive with regard to the threat of Islamic terrorism.
Posted by: Steve Beren on December 21, 2007 09:51 AMwashingtonsharedparenting.com
Posted by: joe on December 21, 2007 09:52 AMOn the 12th day of the Eurocentrically-imposed midwinter festival, my potential acquaintance gave to me,
TWELVE males reclaiming their inner warrior through ritual drumming.
ELEVEN pipers piping (plus the 18 member pit orchestra made up of members in good standing of the Musicians Equity Union as called for in their union contract even though they will not be asked to play a note...)
TEN melanin-deprived, testosterone-poisoned scions of the patriarchal ruling class system leaping,
NINE persons engaged in rhythmic self-expression,
EIGHT economically-disadvantaged female persons stealing milk products from enslaved Bovine Americans,
SEVEN endangered swans swimming on federally-protected wetlands,
SIX enslaved fowl-Americans producing stolen, nonhuman animal products,
FIVE golden symbols of culturally-sanctioned enforced domestic incarceration, (NOTE: after a member of the Animal Liberation Front threatened to throw red paint at my computer, the calling birds, French hens and partridge have been reintroduced to their native habitat. To avoid further animal American enslavement, the remaining gift package has been revised.)
FOUR hours of recorded whale songs,
THREE deconstructionist poets,
TWO Sierra Club calendars printed on recycled, processed tree carcasses,
and a Spotted Owl activist chained to an old-growth pear tree.
Is the direct link to what Joe refers to above.
Why should a fit parent be removed from regular, and significant contact with their children?
So the bureaucracy can bumble on. Merry Christmas to my buds at DCS anyway, and may santa visit the Temple of Doom anyway, and fill your socks with coal.
Over half of what you collect would be collected anyway, without your intervention.
The Geez
Posted by: The Geezer on December 21, 2007 10:11 AMHere is also hoping for a safe Christmas for our men and women serving in harm's way. May they be safe! We appreciate all your effort.
Posted by: tc on December 21, 2007 10:15 AM'Twas the night before Christmas and Santa's a wreck...
How to live in a world that's politically correct?
His workers no longer would answer to "Elves",
"Vertically Challenged" they were calling themselves.
And labour conditions at the North Pole
Were alleged by the union to stifle the soul.
Four reindeer had vanished, without much propriety,
Released to the wilds by the Humane Society.
And equal employment had made it quite clear
That Santa had better not use just reindeer.
So Dancer and Donner, Comet and Cupid,
Were replaced with 4 pigs, and you know that looked stupid!
The runners had been removed from his sleigh;
The ruts were termed dangerous by the C.A.A.
And people had started to call for the cops
When they heard sled noises on their rooftops.
Second-hand smoke from his pipe had his workers quite frightened.
His fur trimmed red suit was called "Unenlightened."
And to show you the strangeness of life's ebbs and flows:
Rudolf was suing over unauthorized use of his nose.
So, half of the reindeer were gone; and his wife,
Who suddenly said she'd enough of this life,
Joined a self-help group, packed, and left in a whiz,
Demanding from now on her title was Ms.
And as for the gifts, why, he'd never a notion
That making a choice could cause so much commotion.
Nothing of leather, nothing of fur,
Which meant nothing for him. And nothing for her.
Nothing that might be construed to pollute.
Nothing to aim. Nothing to shoot.
Nothing that clamoured or made lots of noise.
Nothing for just girls. Or just for the boys.
Nothing that claimed to be gender specific.
Nothing that's warlike or non-pacific.
No candy or sweets...they were bad for the tooth.
Nothing that seemed to embellish a truth.
And fairy tales, while not yet forbidden,
Were like Ken and Barbie, better off hidden.
For they raised the hackles of those psychological
Who claimed the only good gift was one ecological.
Dolls were said to be sexist, and should be passé;
And Nintendo would rot your entire brain away.
So Santa just stood there, dishevelled, perplexed;
He just could not figure out what to do next.
He tried to be merry, tried to be gay,
But you've got to be careful with that word today.
His sack was quite empty, limp to the ground;
Nothing fully acceptable was to be found.
Something special was needed, a gift that he might
Give to all without angering the left or the right.
A gift that would satisfy, with no indecision,
Each group of people, every religion;
Every ethnicity, every hue,
Everyone, everywhere...even YOU.
So here is that gift, it's price beyond worth...
"May you and your loved ones enjoy peace on earth."
RD, Do you expect politicians at a crowded event to screen every supporter who comes up and requests an autograph and picture?
Posted by: Michelle on December 21, 2007 10:56 AMTo the Jesus imposter above. Oh, that you were a tenth as wonderful as the original. We could elect you and there truly would be peace on earth.
Even and especially to you, Jesus imposter, MERRY CHRISTMAS, may the meaning of what that means infuse your soul
Posted by: WVH on December 21, 2007 11:23 AMMERRY CHRISTMAS to you in the spirit of the season.
In answer to Michelle, why is it the racists feel so welcome at the Ron Paul table and no where else? Maybe other candidates don't have to screen the racists out because they don't feel welcome. It's a thought. In any event MERRY CHRISTMAS to all the Nazis, KKK, and Aryan Nations types. The message of Christianity has actually converted a few of them and taken them from a life of hate.
Posted by: WVH on December 21, 2007 11:35 AMHey! When I pipe, you don't need no stinkin' other "musicians!"
Merry Christmas and Chappy Chanakuah!
The Piper
Posted by: Piper Scott on December 21, 2007 11:46 AMMerry Christmas to the many commenters on the site. Seems like old friends now, doesn't it? Many thanks for Bruce Guthrie for pouring out his emotions about two weeks ago. It was very touching that Bruce felt comfortable enough to put his inner self on the internet. I am jealous since I can't do it yet.
Posted by: swatter on December 21, 2007 12:30 PMSo true. I've heard a few of those have happened on the Ron Paul campaign.
Surely you remember the outrage over Jesus dining with prostitutes and tax collectors? I'm not comparing Ron Paul to Jesus, but he's smart not to exclude anyone from supporting him.
Jesus dined with publicans and sinners and welcomed all. His message was a religious and theological one. Paul is a pol. His message is get me and my ideas to the White House. The message of his associates is that any non-Caucasian and non-Protestant is inferior. Some of the Nazis site do call for the extermination of people of color and Jews. If this was Jesus' message, darn if in reading my Bible, I missed it. You are free to support, contribute and vote for any Nazis, Aryan Nation type, KKK or other bigot magnet you choose to. But, inferring that Paul associating with them is like Jesus, well...
Since I know that you read your Bible, you are familiar with the story of the woman at the well who had had several relationships and was now living with a man to whom she wasn't married. Jesus said:
1. Your sins are foregiven
2. Go and sin no more.
Paul is missing part two of the equation. He is unable to condemn the ideology and actions of his associates. I hope republicans are clear that they neither endorse nor support the bigotry of the Nazis, KKK, and Aryan Nation types. I have asked you specifically a couple of times do you know of any republican presidential candidate other than Strom Thurmond, David Duke, George Wallace and Ron Paul to actively accept such support? What is your answer?
Now, to even mention Paul's actions in comparison with those of Jesus - well I am speechless.
MERRY CHRISTMAS.
Posted by: WVH on December 21, 2007 01:23 PMYes, the mainstream media is downplaying Iraq as an issue because the good news coming from Iraq contradicts their bias regarding the war against terrorism.
So - Iraq (and the broader war against terrorism) is now an issue to be avoided by the mainstream media and even many liberal politicians. However, that only shows how out of touch the liberal elites and the "drive-by" media are with regard to the importance of victory to the American people.
In that sense, Iraq is not "out of the country's consciousness now," if by "country" we mean the American people. The successes in Iraq are oout of the liberal elite's and liberal media's consciousness now. They are in denial about the recent good news, just as they are in denial about the overall threat posed by terrorism.
That's why the liberals (and others) are so, so wrong about the real meaning of the 2006 election. And why they (and others) are so, so wrong about the road to electoral victory in 2008.
The above being said, let me add my Christmas wishes to everyone who reads and/or posts on SoundPolitics:
I particularly feel inspired by, and drawn to, Isaiah 9:6 at this time of year. To all SP posters and readers - May God bless you and your loved ones in this joyous season, and throughout the year ahead. Warmest Merry Christmas greetings, and all my best wishes for a Happy New Year in 2008.
Posted by: Steve Beren on December 21, 2007 01:26 PMSafe travels. Happy New Year too.
Posted by: Jeff B. on December 21, 2007 01:26 PMThen, to make things worse, the Julian calendar was "improved" by the Gregorian calendar imposed upon the world by the Euro/American hegemon. And who comissioned that "improvement"? None other than Pope Gregory, head of a world wide enterprise bent on domination and patriarchy. I'm not saying he was a pedophile, but....
So, I wish you all a happy new year at some time in the next 356 days, whenever your ancestors celebrated it, whether it be in spring, summer, autumn or winter. And for those non-Earthling Americans among us, I apologize for my yearocentric orientation, and wish you a happy trip around the Sun, however long it may take.
Dang, now I have excluded non-Solar system Americans. I will enter rehab forthwith.
I don't perceive the Republicans as having been silent on Iraq. That's based on my monitoring most of the major GOP candidates' websites very frequently and actually watching every minute of every GOP debate so far.
Huckabee's "numbers" went up, but that was before his Foreign Affairs article, with all its weaknesses, came to light. If I am right about the continued importance (even centrality) of Iraq and the broader war on terrorism, his numbers may go down.
Likewise, McCain's "numbers" supposedly are going up. McCain is certainly not one of my favorites (for many reasons, but especially his very weak position on illegal immigration). Nevertheless, perhaps his numbers are going up because recent successes in Iraq confirm the validity of his strong Iraq stance.
And I am not so sure of Giuliani's "fall." Right now, there is speculation about the reasons for his "fall," but in another 30 or 45 days, it may turn out that there was no fall at all.
I haven't endorsed anyone yet, but I do believe that the candidate who presents the best and most plausible victory strategy in the war against terrorism will win the nomination and defeat the Democrats next fall.
The Democrats will nominate a "dove," though a perhaps a "dove" pretending to be a "hawk." This should virtually assure that a true pro-victory GOP candidate, a true "hawk," will be victorious next fall. We shall see.
Posted by: Steve Beren on December 21, 2007 02:29 PMRemember...Christmas...Pie hole shut...maybe help your buddy get his kid out of prison.
oh...and happy new year.
Posted by: k2 on December 21, 2007 02:56 PMOH OH OH OH
Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year!!!
Posted by: me on December 21, 2007 03:23 PMAn Investor's Business Daily editorial names the president "The Comeback Kid" and says: "The political tide may be turning as well. 'Republicans (including the president) have made real progress in swaying opinion to their side, while 10 months of Democratic efforts* have failed to persuade citizens that the war continues to be a disaster,' says Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin political scientist who analyzes public opinion."
*and I would also add Ron Paul efforts.
Don't forget to leave milk and cookies for that fake fat man that manages to come down your chimney alive ,without tracking in any stains, with a sack of toys.
Don't forget to start your kids off right with the biggest lie they will ever be told in their life,make sure to build them up with the lie so we can tear them down with the truth later.
It sets them up for the American way of life and gets them used to hearing more lies,and living more lies..
Then tell Them their dad is really the milkman.
LoL
Happy lie everyone.
Even though you Bah Humbug the season and from previous posts seem to think religion and Christians in particular are poison. MERRY CHRISTMAS to you and in the words of that great Patty Labelle song, I hope Santa brings you a "New Attitude" for Christmas. I know you'll never sound as good as Patty, but the song begins with "I've got a new attitude...."
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Posted by: WVH on December 21, 2007 04:35 PMThere used to be a comic in the Stranger in years back called "Bitchy Bitch". The main character reflects the mind set and emotional health of your common every day Democrat. Pity them.
Posted by: Attila on December 21, 2007 05:16 PMIs it any wonder we live in a world where at any moment there is a war going on somewhere?
Can't everyone for once put down their axes and arrows to simply "get along" for one friggin thread??
Posted by: pbj on December 21, 2007 05:29 PMHow convenient that Christmas is so near to Yule. We get to celebrate both!
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on December 21, 2007 05:34 PM1. Glad you are in to Patty Labelle. She is own of life's treats both vocally and as a person.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. (Exodus 20:7)
All I have to do in this earthy life is wish you a MERRY CHRISTMAS and Blessings. God will deal with you in His own way and His own time.
3. Public Puppy, you can only rain on another's parade if they let you. This is a beautiful season, too bad you are incapable of enjoying. Cheers to you anyway.
Posted by: WVH on December 21, 2007 06:16 PMYou didn't get me riled up. I have the best protection possible, called a hedge of protection from the Great I AM.
May you be visited by the Spirit if not this coming year, thereafter, may you have the peace that passes all understanding.
Oh, by the way, don't eat too much and pass
gas. :-)
PBJ, I think you're wrong. In fact, I think I may counter your statement point-by-point to show that this thread didn't evolve into a debate...
MERRY CHRISTMAS! :)
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 21, 2007 07:03 PMThen we find out that Santa is a lie. Like PublicBulldog, this was a valuable lesson for me. I no longer could trust my parents to be right, or even to be telling the truth. This made it easier for me to decide I was an atheist while I was in college.
I will never lie to my kids in this way. They may come to religion on their own, but I want to be a trustworthy father.
To me, Christmas will always be about sharing the fruits of our wealth and hard work with those we love. It will always be a celebration of free enterprise and capitalism, and the warmth of family. It has nothing to do with Santa or any of the imagined gods.
But I wish you a happy one, whatever you take it to be! :)
This thread is supposed to be about anything. Well, it is! Thanks for the opportunity, Eric! :)
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 21, 2007 07:45 PMhttp://www.faqs.org/faqs/drugs/hemp-marijuana/
We have destroyed our environment for a buck.
We were lied to.
Stop living the lie.
Posted by: Publicbulldog on December 21, 2007 08:01 PMDid anyone at all ponder what's wrong with that sentence?
Sorry, Geoffy, you just aren't that important, so no riling tonight... or ever.
... Back to the offending sentence: Lying "sets them up for the American way of life"?
Only in the mind of a flaming liberal to whom it comes naturally, who knows no other way and who easily convinces themselves that lies produce results.
How sad.
How very definitive of who they are though.
Merry Christmas... even to you Geoffy.
And by the way... As an adult with adult children, I STILL believe in Santa, I believe in the innocence, the goodness, the hope and the magic he represents. I still leave him cookies and he never fails to leave a note of thanks. And I think he happily takes a small second to the birth celebration of Christ. They are not mutually exclusive, especially in light of the Christian origins of the legend. To read or listen to it told wonderfully, order The Autobiography of Santa Claus by Jeff Guinn, available in book and audio at KCLS. Listen to it with your kids, you will not be sorry, and you will all be anxious to listen to How Mrs. Claus saved Christmas and The Great Santa search as told to Jeff Guinn by Santa Claus himself. Jeff Guinn combines solid historical FACTS with a magical legend. Wonderful all.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 21, 2007 08:26 PMI prayed to god.
God did not answer my prayers.
So I began to ask God:
Am I asking for too much to just get what others have.
Am I not worthy to get what others have.
Do you not love me God.?
Are you real God.?
I don't believe you exist God.
You either Allah the me too god.
This is a logical thought process that has gone on since...before maple syrup was invented.
Many people think these thoughts for their own reasons.
They belive in something else.
I believe only my Grandparents or my parents care about what happens to me.
I believe in the family bloodline.
http://www.houseofnames.com/xq/asp.fc/qx/worthington-family-crest.htm
I believe in what I can see and touch.
I am good to people because I know that their family loves them,I can not hurt them because I know their family would be hurt.
My hurting them would be felt for generations.
I am good to the planet and the people on it.
I do not have to pray on Sunday for being an A$$hole monday thru Saturday.
If I pi$$ somebody off for telling them how I feel I hope they can get happy in the same pants I pi$$ed them off in.
GO back and watch that episode with the white gorilla. Pay attention to how you get cured. Some hot babe half dressed performs a half naked ritual on you. I'd say that is a great reason to get bit by a white gorilla.
Posted by: pbj on December 21, 2007 08:54 PMLOL,
I could never watch the ephisode long enough.
LOL
Until I was older..
http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/multimedia/2007/11/gallery_star_trek_monsters?slide=8
Posted by: Publicbulldog on December 21, 2007 08:59 PMYou claim to only believe in what "can see and touch".
I guess that pretty much eliminates love, hope, optimism, trust, goodness...
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 22, 2007 12:15 AMWhat are you all afraid of ? A drive by shooting? A nasty phone message? Offending your neighbor? Offending your wife?
Tell me. What are you all afraid of?
Posted by: Bart Cannon on December 22, 2007 06:39 AMEarly on we figured how to sell lies.
We used sophisms to sell lies to the people and make money selling those lies.
Now we seem to have perfected the art of selling lies to make money.
It is my mission to expose as many lies as I can so my bloodline will be buying real things,and not be living a lie so somebody can make money.
@66 I believed in the white gorilla popping out of nowhere when I was 7 or 8.
the point being I believed in lies like Talking scarecrows, flying monkeys, etc.
My Dad sold lies,My uncle sold lies,my country sold lies.
Nothing has changed for centuries.
We ruin our environment,and deposit PCB dioxins inside our people because Dupont was able to convice the people that Industrial cannabis would make you want to listen to music faster and faster,and faster.
Dupont has a patent on the bleaching process that makes white paper.Cannabis paper lasts longer,is safer for us and would be a better product,BUT WE CANT USE IT BECAUSE WE BOUGHT A LIE.
Industrial Cannabis would have competed with petroleum products to make "ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE" Gas,Oil,and paint products,BUT WE BOUGHT A LIE.
Cannabis has been used for medicine for centuries
but can not be patented..so we kill our liver and kidneys.. because..WE BOUGHT A LIE.
We are killing our kids to protect the carbon spewing fossil feul supply while we could be converting to clean burning industrial cannabis feul.
We are killing our forest so we can make Dupont a fortune using a poison chemical process that is killing us,when we could be using industrial cannabis.
We are not using the most useful plant on the earth because we bought a lie sold by the owner of a patent process.
We still live that lie to this day....
The D's want us to give up our cars,move into high rises,and pay a carbon tax..they are selling us a lie.Lovie and Thurston(the rich for those of you that can't solve the bottlecap puzzle)can afford to buy all the lies,poor people can't.
remember that when Nickels and Sims escort you to your mandated high rise condo downtown.
Brother can you spare a carbon tax..
Brother can you stop buying so many damn lies.
We would be just fine if we stopped falling for lies.My work is never done.Somewhere someplace sombody is selling a lie.Somewhere someplace somebody is willing to buy a lie.
Some people , if you don't tell them they won't Know.
Posted by: Publicbulldog on December 22, 2007 07:29 AMImagine that.
RE Bart... you must be incredibly stupid, sadly naive or lying about your name.
ANYONE with an ounce of sense protects their identity on the net in ALL situations.
Have you ever read HA and the thinly veiled threats there? Hells bells, the few times I visit and post there I block all cookies and go through an internet proxy... that's how demented I believe those hate-filled folks to be.
Do you honestly think in this miserable day and age brought to us by a degraded and dying culture it's safe to have you address easily found because your dumb enough to post your vital info? Are you willing to risk your children or your wife for identity honesty boasting rights?
Haven't you yet realized that anything you post (so you damned well better be polite and not easily misconstrued) can be used against you by colleges and employers?
You do understand, don't you that once it's on the net, it's there forever? THAT'S exactly the reason kids are being warned about posting their pics on sites like MySpace and FaceBook. If you post it, it WILL...not might, not possibly, it WILL come back to bite you someday.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 22, 2007 11:19 AMImagine that.
RE Bart... you must be incredibly stupid, sadly naive or lying about your name.
ANYONE with an ounce of sense protects their identity on the net in ALL situations.
Have you ever read HA and the thinly veiled threats there? Hells bells, the few times I visit and post there I block all cookies and go through an internet proxy... that's how demented I believe those hate-filled folks to be.
Do you honestly think in this miserable day and age brought to us by a degraded and dying culture it's safe to have you address easily found because your dumb enough to post your vital info? Are you willing to risk your children or your wife for identity honesty boasting rights?
Haven't you yet realized that anything you post (so you damned well better be polite and not easily misconstrued) can be used against you by colleges and employers?
You do understand, don't you that once it's on the net, it's there forever? THAT'S exactly the reason kids are being warned about posting their pics on sites like MySpace and FaceBook. If you post it, it WILL...not might, not possibly, it WILL come back to bite you someday.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 22, 2007 11:19 AMSilky Pony starring in The Fetus Whisperer... "I Channeled Baby And It's Not Mine"
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 22, 2007 11:46 AMHow disappointing. I thought YOU were one of the few who was actually using his own name.
Yes. I fully understand that everything ever posted on the net will be around forever. I've seen some of my lousy Sound Politics posts by searching my name in google.
If all one is providing is an honest opinion and not a threat or a promise to commit a crime, then I still say "so what".
Posted by: Bart Cannon on December 22, 2007 11:49 AMDarn you caught me. Of course Bart Cannon is only a pen name. I named myself after a brilliant man with a cool name who I knew way back in college.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on December 22, 2007 11:55 AMGet the hand warmers ready for another year of gathering intitiative signatures.
You have run your party into the far right wall.
Take a bow on the thread for losing all checks and balances here in our state.You have no arms,no legs and no brain.
All you have is a watch salesman and a congregation of moral theme idiots waiting to sell another fear that nobody in Washington State will buy.
Your time is done.
Do the right thing and get out ..so a real platform with a real chance to provide a checks and balances can manifest itself.
You religious right dorks have done enough damage here in Washington State.
Go tap feet in a restroom stall or have father Nelson slip some kid into a full Nelson with some holy penetration.
We have real work to do if we are ever going to get any checks and balances here.
People in this State do not buy your fears.
To the LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS--
Bah Humbug in '08 to y'all and your Marxist Agenda!
I agree....and while I'm at it, I'll strike another name off the "sane" list....
Posted by: Saltherring on December 22, 2007 02:59 PM
The Jerome Corsi in WND (World-Net-Daily) below shows once again how the Supercorridors System of the coming North American Union are being planned and built -- AND CISCOR IS A PART OF IT. All denials to the contrary notwithstanding, these Supercorridors are intended to be the links uniting CANADA, THE U.S., AND MEXICO INTO ONE UNION! -- And, make no mistake about it: The Laws of this Union will supersede the Laws of our Nation, States, Counties, and Localities -- and the Tribunals and Courts of the North American Union will overule the decsions of our Local Courts, our State Courts, our U.S. District Courts, and our U.S. Supreme Court! In short, the North American Union will destroy U.S. Sovereignty and incorporate our nation as only a part of the NAU. WAKE UP! DROWSY AMERICANS! VOTE FOR A DEMOCRATIC OR TOP-TIER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, (MCCAIN, GIULIANI, ROMNEY, HUCKABEE) AND YOU WILL PULL THE PLUG AND SEND OUR NATION DOWN THE DRAIN! -- If you really care about what happens to our Nation, please read the article below. I am doing my best to warn, -- Duane V. Maxey, Surprise, Arizona, December 22, 2007.
* * * * * * *
NORTH-OF-BORDER LINK FINISHES NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY GRID
Atlantic-Pacific route would allow cross-continental goods deliveries
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 18, 2007
10:07 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
Canada has announced a plan to extend the NAFTA Superhighway network north in a way that would finish a continental grid designed to accommodate an anticipated tsunami of containers from China and the Far East.
The C-anadian I-ntelligent S-uper Cor-ridor, or CISCOR, is a national transportation route designed to reach from the West Coast ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert to Montreal and Halifax.
As WND has documented, recent articles published in The Nation and Newsweek magazines have attempted to characterize the NAFTA Superhighway as a "conspiracy theory." [It's more than a THEORY, its a CONSPIRACY FACT!]
Yet, the CISCOR case study provides strong evidence that the continent's ports, highways and rail lines are being reconfigured into an inter-modal system emphasizing technological logistics and "inland smart ports" designed to meet the demands of world trade, largely driven by the relocation of North American manufacturing to China.
Inter-modal is a transportation economics reference to containers that can be transported on several different modes of transportation, including container ships, trucks and trains, without having to be unloaded or repacked.
According to the CISCOR website, the Saskatchewan-based CISCOR Inland Port Network of the cities of Regina, Saskatoon and Moose Jaw is designed to serve "as the central logistics and coordination hub, creating a Canadian east-west land bridge connecting three major North American north-south corridors: North America's SuperCorridor, or NASCO, the Canada-America-Mexico Corridor, or CANAMEX, and the River of Trade Corridor Coalition."
A multi-color North American continental map on the CISCOR website leaves no doubt the Canadian super corridor is designed to interface with the NAFTA Superhighway, extending down into Mexico.
The CISCOR map strongly models the continental map displayed by NASCO on the trade group's website in 2005.
The CISCOR website confirms an earlier WND report documenting the Canadian national transportation plan to open Prince Rupert and Vancouver as deep-water ports capable of handling the new class of 12,500 container-capacity post-Panamax ships now being built for China.
The CISCOR strategy falls under the umbrella of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative as defined by Transport Canada, the Canadian counterpart to the U.S. Department of Transportation.
WND previously documented how the Canadian National and Canadian Pacific railroads are included in Canada's Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative, positioned to operate as NAFTA railroads.
Under the CISCOR plan, the Saskatchewan cities are defined as an "inland smart port," as are Kansas City, San Antonio and Denver in the U.S.
The CISCOR website cites the University of Texas Center for Transportation research to define an inland port as follows: "An Inland Port is a physical site located away from traditional land, air and coastal borders with the vision to facilitate and process international trade through strategic investment in multi-modal transportation assets and by promoting value-added services as goods move through the supply chain."
The plan to make the Saskatchewan cities an inland port centers on utilizing the West Coast deep-water ports in British Columbia as the input point for millions of containers from China and the Far East.
American companies have taken advantage of cheap labor in China that in some cases functions at slave or near-slave levels. Communist Chinese prison camps also continue to make goods for the U.S. market, despite human rights pressure.
Reconfiguring the transportation infrastructure of North America into NAFTA Superhighways or Super Corridors drastically reduces the cost of transporting the containers from China.
A quick look at the continental map shows the physical location of the Saskatchewan cities qualifies them to be an "inland port" because the area can function as a switching center, with easy access either to CANAMEX or to what NASCO refers to as the NASCO Corridor, the complex of Interstate Highways 35, 29 and 94.
Containers can be unloaded by crane in Saskatchewan and placed in giant warehouses. There they await pick-up by truck or train to be transported to the next regional warehouse for delivery to the final destination in North America.
An inland port is considered to be a "smart port" when technology - such as Radio Frequency Identification, or RFID systems - are utilized to facilitate customs clearance, security, warehouse distribution, multi-modal trans-load operations, empty container management and advanced container logistics tracking.
As WND reported, the Chinese ports management firm, Hutchison Ports Holdings, is working with Lockheed Martin in a joint venture with NASCO to place RFID sensors along I-35 to track inter-modal containers from China that enter North America through the Mexican ports of Lazaro Cardenas and Manzanillo.
An 87-page business analysis archived on the CISCOR website lays out the case for developing Saskatchewan as an Inland SmartPort in the following points that begin the report's Executive Summary:
A majority of the new containerships entering the world fleet in the next five years will be post-Panamax vessels ready to transport cargo from China, Southeast Asia and India to North American ports already strained with capacity.
The Panama Canal is approaching operational capacity and the U.S. transportation network is struggling to meet the predicted 15 percent annual rise in Asian container traffic.
In response to the rapid growth in North American trade, the shift in the global freight supply chain and the increased congestion at U.S. ports and along the inter-modal system, shippers are now routing a growing share of cargo via Canadian ports.
The CISCOR business report Executive Summary concludes, "Canada can serve as the North American gateway at the intersection of three powerful and shifting trade networks - the north-south North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the European-NAFTA, and the highly-utilized trans-Pacific route."
"The desired result is a fully-integrated, seamless cargo transport corridor moving cargo from the ports to rail and highways and to an inland port logistics center that serves all North American markets," the CISCOR Executive Summary concludes.
To open the connection to the European Union, CISCOR envisions extending the Canadian Intermodal Network to the east coast port of Halifax.
* * * * * * *
But of course, CISCOR will link with NOT JUST 1 NAFTA SUPERCORRIDOR, BUT 4 NAFTA SUPERCORRIDORS SHOWN AT THE TOP OF THIS EMAIL.
* * * * * * *
END OF THIS EMAIL
Want to race through your inbox even faster? Try the full version of Windows Live Hotmail. (It's free, too.)
© 2007 Microsoft Privacy Legal Help Central Account Feedback
As I attempt to re-read the ramblings and rantings of your previous postings, I have come to realize you are near to the edge and really do need to get some help.
Posted by: Saltherring on December 23, 2007 05:48 AMThere are many libertarians and secular progressives here who give cogent and rational arguments on poitics and social issues. I may not agree with their arguments, but at least they are cogent and rational. I know that Bruce, not Bruce G has been posting here for a while and he is an atheist. He at least presents his arguments in a cogent matter.
If you read your postings above, what does the gorilla metaphor or description have to do with the spirit of the season other than you are making the argument that everything in your background, culture, and belief sytem that you were taught is a lie. So, what is your version of the truth? You seem incapable of presenting a cogent version of what you believe to be truth other than people of faith are phoney, lie, and have destroyed society with their values. My counter to that is it the secular values you want to promote that have destroyed society. Just say Paris Hilton, a 16 year old knocked-up Jamie Lynn Spears, Sharpton/Jackson, Viacom and its programing options, most media and our worship of sports and their morality challenged stars, they are your secular offerings.
I once accused you of holding the whiskey bottle too close to your lips while you typed. You indicated you had a illness. You need to go back to the doctor and have them check your medication and medication level. Something is terribly wrong.
My two cents.
MVH,You have degraded your posts into name calling because not everyone wants to subsidize defending Israel.
Saltherring lives in Chimacum enough said.
Other than to scare people and call them names ,all of you have no idea's.
Katomar,MVH,saltherring,Ragnar,Attilla,etc.
What solutions do you offer..Nada.
You are a bunch of losers with no base and no backing.
None of your fear based mantra's will save the economic formula that poor people can thrive in.
MVH says she doesn't care about economics..Ragnar could care less b ecause people don't deserve it because they are all images of the devil..
Their mantra's vary from the people are not worthy, to you are a paultard that does not want to keep throwing money to Israel.
All of you don't mind paying 10 or heck even 15 bucks for a cornish game hen for some archaic moral theme,or a special interest crusade of some sort.You are no different than the D's only they just want union payouts and services which will get them more union payouts.
The people of Washington State have spoken over and over again.
They would rather support union payouts and services over some intolerance driven moral theme(usually a lie),or some out of country crusade to save someone else's hoily land
As far as being cogent,if I was not cogent than you would have nothing to respond to.
Obviously my points are cogent if Ragnar can rant 10,000 words on how we don't deserve anything unless we say our prayers and take our vitamins just right.
You all buy and sell lies.
Washington State isnt buying them.
Go back to Safeway and collect signatures.
I implore you to get some help. Seriously.
Posted by: Saltherring on December 23, 2007 12:58 PMWhat exactly is your version of the truth?
1. You said:
"I am out to get checks and balances period."
Define a check and balance in your world
2. You said:
"What solutions do you offer..Nada"
Since you listed several posters, each would have to give you their solutions. I believe there are some common issues, although there are differences. Some posters believe in a very limited role for government and believe totally in market or private solutions. I believe that there are some issues because of the complexities and need for massive resources will require some government intervention. Having said that, the pork and earmark problem is out of hand. There should be sunseting of programs, strict audits and follow-up of the audits. For example, there should probably be a criminal investigation at the Port. I do not believe that the Constitution mandates a wall between religion and state.
3. It is interesting that you chose not to address the points I made about what the secular culture has brought. Also, you keep saying the voters have rejected conservative ideas. Do you have poll results and how do you explain Tim Burgess' election in Seattle? At most, I think all you can prove all over the country is people tend to favor the status quo.
No, Puppy, there is something medically wrong with you aside from a misanthrope and sour dispostion. You really need help. I suppose if the bloggers here provide a measure of therapy for you, then guess what, that is what Christmas is about- helping the afflicted and those in need. MERRY CHRISTMAS.
Are you talking about Israel or the United States?
Here is what one of our forefathers intended.
http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html
then rest of them came up with this.
http://www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/separation_cs_primer.asp
I thought I was not cogent...
I am proud to disagree with religious freaks that have taken our country on crusades that have weakened our country.
WVH can not stand the thought of a rich country like Israel paying for their own defense.
She wants the poor people of our country to do it so the rich Israelites don't have to.
She hates Ron Paul because he wants to cut Israel off at the pockets,and force them to spend some of their billions in banks all over the world..
ENOUGH.
Israel should pay for its own defense,I have bridges falling apart,and other vital infrastructure falling apart.
They are trying to move us all into high rises,so we don't have to build infrastructure. for pete's sake.
The poor people can't afford to live in these sparkling new urban villages.
The social cut gets higher and higher.
Poor people are getting farther and farther behind the eight ball,and all the religious kook's on this thread can think about is strengthing religion's role in a government that was intended to be free of it.
Christians can bite me ,for trying to circumvent the constitution and insert a christian moral regime every chance they get.
We ran from the church to form this Country.
Which religion do you think it was we ran from...
There is nowhere left to run.
I will fight you religious dorks to my last breath to keep you out of our government.
Washington State is not a christian stronghold.
Thank whom ever's God.
How do you like me now church people.
2. Now, the question of Israel and the Palestinians is more complicated than we will resolve here. Arafat had several chances to better the lives of his people and blew it. He left a bitter legacy. Some actions by Israel have seemed at times a bit strong. There is enough blame to go around. Still, in my opinion, a lot of Paul's analysis of Israel is grounded in anti-Semitism. Have you studied the school curriculum in the Palestinian schools and the Jihad character that is modeled after Micky Mouse? Until something is done about the state sponsored hatred of the madrasas, we are looking at a centuries long conflict. Hatred is a toxic poision whether spread in the Middle East, Northern Ireland, Sudan, or in you, Puppy. Hatred never kills the intended target, it kills you instead. No, I do not hate Paul, I think he is misguided and like Pied Pipper is leading many down the wrong path.
3. From my observation of this thread, the bitter people who feel that their life is based upon lies and who seem to think that their culture and history are founded upon lies seem to be atheists. Why is that?
Seems you need Christmas more than anyone on this thread. Christmas is a feeling and spirit of well being no matter the circumstances. The Apostle Paul said I have learned to be content no matter my circumstances. I guess that is something you atheists will never have. What a pity.
Posted by: WVH on December 23, 2007 02:38 PMHere is the choice you are offering voters.
1.Join a religious moral theme regime and feel morallly cleansed for spending 10 bucks for a cornish game hen. Or
2.Get a service handed to you for free because you can afford to pay the social cut thanks to your cost of living raise,so a 10 dollar cornish game hen wont bother me..
For the last 15 years the Washington State voters have chose 2.
It doesnt take someone to come out from behind a burning bush for me to realize we have the wrong damn platform.
A.You have no right to bitch about the D's
B.The religious right platform is a failure.
C.We will never have any checks and balances from a religious right ploitical platform here.
D.How many more R's candidates and losing elections will it take to figure out religious platforms don't work here.
E. The only people comming out from behind burning bushes here in Washington State are U.S.Forest service workers.
WVH, I don't know and I don't care. That is my answer. Do not claim that I have not answered that question. I have. I don't have the time (nor the desire) to go through every possible donor to every possible presidential candidate (not even the ones I don't like) the way those who are hell bent against Ron Paul do.
I am not comparing Ron Paul's association to those of Jesus as much as I'm comparing your reaction to that of the Pharisees'.
Posted by: Michelle on December 23, 2007 06:51 PMI suppose the talking points memo for the Paul team is to call people Pharisees. Bruce G said this at the Gang of Four Thread:
"Jesus decried the Pharisees, who prayed in public in the attempt to demonstrate their piety, and in that way gain popularity and power among the people. Instead, Jesus tells us to pray in the back rooms of our houses. Jesus tells us not to use our religion to further our political ambitions."
1. You finally did answer my question, you don't know if any other republican presidential candidate except Strom Thurmond, David Duke, George Wallace and Ron Paul who has garnered so much support from Nazis, Aryan Nations, and the KKK, nor do you care. Is that the same answer the rest of the team members would give. Seems that most other republican candidates not don't want the support, but do care. I guess your view of the republican party is different from that of Lincoln. With republicans like you, Black people would still be slaves. But, slavery is something you probably wouldn't care about either.
2. Now to say that my disgust for racists and those who support them is the same as a Pharisees, well Bruce G. didn't annonate the memo enough. Now, this is what the definition of a Pharisee is:
"At the time Jesus Christ walked the earth, the Pharisees were the "conservative party" within Judaism. They held very strictly to the Torah and the Talmud and were very outwardly moral. They were the leaders of the majority of the Jews, mostly the "common people." They were revered by their followers for their religious zeal and dedication, and they were held up as models worthy of imitation...."
http://www.outsidethecamp.org/pharisee.htm
Now this is from your site which explains your Paul connection:
"Yesterday, I received a column by Chuck Baldwin via e-mail from a local pro-life leader, entitled Pro-Life Candidates Should Put Up or Shut Up. I found myself agreeing with the first several paragraphs that correctly pointed out that pro-lifers have been tricked into believing that ending abortion depends on having the right Supreme Court Justices on the bench, and that other than that, members of Congress and the President really have no control.
Baldwin rightly criticizes the presidential candidates, specifically: Romney, McCain, Thompson, and even Huckabee for perpetuating this myth, and then points out that it is within the power of Congress and the President to use the "life raft" that is available to them to save pre-born babies from being executed. That "life raft" is the Constitution. Baldwin points out that for six years (2000-2006), with a Republican controlled Congress and with a Republican President, these leaders have failed us. He goes on to say that the ONLY presidential candidate to use this "life raft" is Congressman Ron Paul.
Ron Paul, as Baldwin asserts, is the ONLY presidential candidate to sponsor and support the "Sanctity of Human Life Act."
Ron Paul seems to be the only presidential candidate who understands that under Article. III. Section. 2., the Constitution gives to the Congress of the United States the power to hold rogue courts in check and to overturn outlandish rulings such as Roe v. Wade.
Accordingly, Ron Paul has introduced and reintroduced the Sanctity of Life Act (including in the current Congress). If passed, this Bill would recognize the personhood of all unborn babies by declaring that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception." The Bill also recognizes the authority of each State to protect the lives of unborn children. In addition, this Bill would remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the Court, thereby nullifying the Roe v. Wade decision. The Bill would also deny funding for abortion providers. In plain language, the Bill would overturn Roe v. Wade and end abortion-on-demand.
I must first point out that two glaring points that Baldwin failed to make were 1) the promotion of a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution, which would be very difficult to achieve, would more permanently protect the right to life and make it permanently the law of the land, and 2) the two presidential candidates who have been in Congress and have proven their support of this Human Life Amendment, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter. They weren't even mentioned...."
You are so focused on abortion politics to the exclusion of everything else that you would tear your party apart, this country and demolish everything in your path. Oh, you helping the republican party to win elections? That Pharisee thing works both ways, girlfriend. Maybe Bruce G should have given you the term "zealot" to use instead of Pharisee. Don't you think it fits better?
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Posted by: WVH on December 23, 2007 07:34 PMHe has a right to do this, since this forum is private property, but I doubt this kind of behavior will represent good PR for him.
The first amendment applies to government, not to private forums, but allowing all civil and relevant discourse makes forum leaders look good. Deleting civil and relevant posts or shutting down a discussion in progress does not tend to make people think you are acting fairly, even if you do have the legitimate power to do so.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 12:04 AM"sic semper tyrannis."
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 12:11 AMMerry Christmas to all
Posted by: Saltherring on December 24, 2007 06:38 AM
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. (Exodus 20:7)
All I have to do in this earthy life is wish you a MERRY CHRISTMAS and Blessings. God will deal with you in His own way and His own time.
Posted by: WVH on December 24, 2007 10:16 AMI did not call Jim Miller a tyrant, I was referring to Lincoln. "Sic semper tyrannis" is what John Wilkes Boothe claims to have said after killing Lincoln. It may be translated as "thus always to tyrants" or "death to tyrants." It was also uttered by Brutus when he killed Caesar, and for exactly the same reason. Both had betrayed the Republic and sent us down the road to tyranny.
Lincoln killed 600,000 people in order to preserve his own legacy. It was not about slavery. That was marketing spin. He did not want to go down in history as the President who let the south go, for whatever reason. Lincoln violated the principles of our American Revolution. All other nations eliminated slavery without civil war. We could have done the same, and we would have less legacy of racism today if we had. Lincoln jailed newspaper editors who disagreed with him. He was a tyrant, and I say again: "sic semper tyrannis."
Don't believe all the history you were taught in the government monopoly socialist schools. But I do not consider you a disgrace to the human race just because you have been indoctrinated. It is not your fault.
I did not invoke the first amendment against Jim, because I am not a liberal, and I know that the first amendment only protects us from government, not in private forums. What I said was that Jim's actions do not make him look good to others. This is true.
If you don't like my favorite presidential candidate, you are free to ignore my posts. But that is not your real problem. Your real concern is that my views, some of which you disagree with, are getting a hearing. I'm afraid you will have to live with it, my friend.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 11:20 AMAnd so shall He with you, me and all my friend. I don't perceive 'imposter jesus' as taking God's name in vain.
I know that God will deal with me. It is called the Judgement. So, Imposter Jesus and I will both be judged.
Oh here is some theology on taking God's name in vain:
"MISREPRESENTING GOD
Not "swearing" or "cursing" is about as far as most people's understanding of the third commandment reaches. But there are more subtle ways to abuse the name of our Lord GOD, equally dangerous, which the christian is perhaps more likely to commit.
For instance, Ezekiel 13:1-16 reveals that God will judge those who misrepresent him, and who claim to be speaking for Him (i.e. "in His name") when they are not speaking His Word:
13:1 The word of the LORD came to me: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, prophesy and say to those who prophesy out of their own minds: `Hear the word of the LORD!' 3 Thus says the Lord GOD, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! 4 Your prophets have been like foxes among ruins, O Israel. 5 You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the LORD. 6 They have spoken falsehood and divined a lie; they say, `Says the LORD,' when the LORD has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfil their word. 7 Have you not seen a delusive vision, and uttered a lying divination [e.g. Jeremiah 7:4], whenever you have said, `Says the LORD,' although I have not spoken?"
8 Therefore thus says the Lord God: "Because you have uttered delusions and seen lies, therefore behold, I am against you, says the Lord GOD. 9 My hand will be against the prophets who see delusive visions and who give lying divinations; they shall not be in the council of my people, nor be enrolled in the register of the house of Israel, nor shall they enter the land of Israel; and you shall know that I am the Lord GOD. 10 Because, yea, because they have misled my people, saying, `Peace [With the result that people complain against God, saying "Why didn't you tell us?"],' when there is no peace; and because, when the people build a wall, these prophets daub it with whitewash; 11 say to those who daub it with whitewash that it shall fall! There will be a deluge of rain, great hailstones will fall, and a stormy wind break out; 12 and when the wall falls, will it not be said to you, `Where is the daubing with which you daubed it?' 13 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: I will make a stormy wind break out in my wrath; and there shall be a deluge of rain in my anger, and great hailstones in wrath to destroy it. 14 And I will break down the wall that you have daubed with whitewash, and bring it down to the ground, so that its foundation will be laid bare; when it falls, you shall perish in the midst of it; and you shall know that I am the LORD. 15 Thus will I spend my wrath upon the wall, and upon those who have daubed it with whitewash; and I will say to you, The wall is no more, nor those who daubed it, 16 the prophets of Israel who prophesied concerning Jerusalem and saw visions of peace for her, when there was no peace, says the Lord GOD." (Revised Standard Version)
Similar messages are at Jeremiah 14:14-16 and Jeremiah 29:21-23...."
http://www.amen.org.uk/studies/rhj/3rdcomm.htm
MERRY CHRISTMAS to you.
Posted by: WVH on December 24, 2007 12:22 PMNeither are you in a position to make judgement of me, are you? I suppose that you, me, and phoney Jesus will just have to let Jesus decide at the final Judgement. I'll take my chances with the real Jesus, what about you and phoney Jesus?
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Posted by: WVH on December 24, 2007 01:32 PMGuess what, both lay and professional theologians disgree. We disagree. I am entitled to my opinion that phoney Jesus is in error. Now, how you can guage how deeply I think about theology is in fact a judgement on your part. Who your God is, I don't know. You didn't say whether your particular faith is Christianity. If not, that adds a whole other layer to this discussion, doesn't it? Are you Christian? I am speaking from a Christian perspective. Is that you perspective, what denomination?
Posted by: WVH on December 24, 2007 01:51 PMForgot to add I am a terrible speller without spell check. Now, is your faith Christianity or some other faith? If your faith is not Christianity, what is it?
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Posted by: WVH on December 24, 2007 02:05 PM1. You did not answer my question as to what your religion is.
2. Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." -- John 14:6 (NKJV)
Now, what is your religion?
Posted by: WVH on December 24, 2007 02:13 PM1. Is the correct answer to the religion question that you are an atheist? I have no problem disclosing that I am Roman Catholic.
2. Now, this is what Scripture actually says about Jesus. How fitting we are having this discussion at Christmas. From Phillipians:
"9 Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
So, yes Jesus would ask you to identify yourself as one of His sheep.
Are you, the wolf in wolf's clothing, the atheist, Bruce G?
No, my friend he w/not ask for ID. You're so misinformed.
Posted by: Simon on December 24, 2007 02:47 PMI am correct that you are an atheist, right?
You said:
So, yes Jesus would ask you to identify yourself as one of His sheep."
"No, my friend he w/not ask for ID. You're so misinformed."
"My sheep know my voice, and I know them, and they follow me" (John 10:27
Now, cite Christian Scripture for your opinion. Otherwise my atheist brother it is you who are misinformed. Your cites from the Bible are?
I am not in the least concerned by your views and opinions being posted. On the contrary, we now know that you advocate the cold-blooded murder of a sitting President because he did not share your twisted historical perspective. You are indeed a cold-hearted and dispicable individual. But I have met few avowed athiests who were anything other. And post your political advertisments to your heart's desire, as I seriously believe no one else reads them either.
Posted by: Saltherring on December 24, 2007 04:22 PMMany in the south today consider John Wilkes Boothe just that kind of patriot. On this issue, I am on their side, even as I oppose slavery.
(We had a policy of decapitating the Iraqi regime by killing Saddam Husein. And Iraq posed no threat to us! We handed him over to the locals when we caught him, knowing they would kill him for us. Killing Hitler in cold blood in 1939 would have been a good thing. In the American revolution, King George lost his legitimacy when he became a tyrant. Or do you think the American founders committed treason, and should have been hung?)
I argue that Lincoln betrayed the revolution and was a tyrant. Once violating the principles of the founders, he lost his legitimacy as President. Boothe considered him the illegitimate head of an invading government, and not a sitting US President. Lincoln caused the unecessary deaths of over 600,000 people.
Sic semper tyrannis.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 06:14 PMMany in the south today consider John Wilkes Boothe just that kind of patriot. On this issue, I am on their side, even as I oppose slavery.
(We had a policy of decapitating the Iraqi regime by killing Saddam Husein. And Iraq posed no threat to us! We handed him over to the locals when we caught him, knowing they would kill him for us. Killing Hitler in cold blood in 1939 would have been a good thing. In the American revolution, King George lost his legitimacy when he became a tyrant. Or do you think the American founders committed treason, and should have been hung?)
I argue that Lincoln betrayed the revolution and was a tyrant. Once violating the principles of the founders, he lost his legitimacy as President. Boothe considered him the illegitimate head of an invading government, and not a sitting US President. Lincoln caused the unecessary deaths of over 600,000 people.
Sic semper tyrannis.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 06:18 PMI think the main states' rights that were violated by the civil war were the right to seceed from the union. In any free association, one must always be allowed to part company. It is like one party wanting a divorce, and the other party preventing the divorce through a use of physical force! Kinda tyrannical...
I suspect that southern state courts were left in power after the civil war because the feds only really cared about maintaining federal authority, not about reducing racism or making sure the blacks in the south were not discriminated against as they learned to use their new found freedom.
The government school social studies teachers lead us to think the civil war was fought over the issue of slavery, but it was really about federal control. Slavery was just marketing spin that Lincoln used to rally the troops and gain public support for his invasion of the south.
I suspect that slavery was on the way out anyway. Most other coutries abolished it peacefully, and now have far less residual racism than we have. I think there would be less racism today if Lincoln had left the south alone. I think that public sentiment was turning against slavery and that the southern abolishionists would have won the day soon anyway. The result would have been less lingering resentment, less ghetoization, less flight to the northern cities, and over half a million fewer dead under Lincoln's presidency.
FDR was a moderately racist fellow himself, and probably cared little about the lingering racism and Jim Crow laws of the south. He was a Democrat, and the south was still solidly Democratic in the '30's. He could count on their votes, and therefore didn't feel the need to mess around with southern states' rights. I suspect that is why he left the southern courts on their own.
FDR was also a tyrant, and one I like even less than Lincoln. Few Presidents violated the Constitution more completely than FDR. Where were the John Wilkes Boothes when we needed them?
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 08:45 PMI think the main states' rights that were violated by the civil war were the right to seceed from the union. In any free association, one must always be allowed to part company. It is like one party wanting a divorce, and the other party preventing the divorce through a use of physical force! Kinda tyrannical...
I suspect that southern state courts were left in power after the civil war because the feds only really cared about maintaining federal authority, not about reducing racism or making sure the blacks in the south were not discriminated against as they learned to use their new found freedom.
The government school social studies teachers lead us to think the civil war was fought over the issue of slavery, but it was really about federal control. Slavery was just marketing spin that Lincoln used to rally the troops and gain public support for his invasion of the south. Slavery was the WMD or the Gulf of Tonkin or the Missile Gap of the era: an invented excuse to go to war.
I suspect that slavery was on the way out anyway. Most other coutries abolished it peacefully, and now have far less residual racism than we have. I think there would be less racism today if Lincoln had left the south alone. I think that public sentiment was turning against slavery and that the southern abolishionists would have won the day soon anyway. The result would have been less lingering resentment, less ghetoization, less flight to the northern cities, and over half a million fewer dead under Lincoln's presidency.
FDR was a moderately racist fellow himself, and probably cared little about the lingering racism and Jim Crow laws of the south. He was a Democrat, and the south was still solidly Democratic in the '30's. He could count on their votes, and therefore didn't feel the need to mess around with southern states' rights. I suspect that is why he left the southern courts on their own.
FDR was also a tyrant, and one I like even less than Lincoln. Few Presidents violated the Constitution more completely than FDR. Where were the John Wilkes Boothes when we needed them?
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 08:49 PMI think the main states' rights that were violated by the civil war were the right to seceed from the union. In any free association, one must always be allowed to part company. It is like one party wanting a divorce, and the other party preventing the divorce through a use of physical force! Kinda tyrannical...
I suspect that southern state courts were left in power after the civil war because the feds only really cared about maintaining federal authority, not about reducing racism or making sure the blacks in the south were not discriminated against as they learned to use their new found freedom.
The government school social studies teachers lead us to think the civil war was fought over the issue of slavery, but it was really about federal control. Slavery was just marketing spin that Lincoln used to rally the troops and gain public support for his invasion of the south. Slavery was the WMD or the Gulf of Tonkin or the Missile Gap of the era: an invented excuse to go to war.
I suspect that slavery was on the way out anyway. Most other coutries abolished it peacefully, and now have far less residual racism than we have. I think there would be less racism today if Lincoln had left the south alone. I think that public sentiment was turning against slavery and that the southern abolishionists would have won the day soon anyway. The result would have been less lingering resentment, less ghetoization, less flight to the northern cities, and over half a million fewer dead under Lincoln's presidency.
FDR was a moderately racist fellow himself, and probably cared little about the lingering racism and Jim Crow laws of the south. He was a Democrat, and the south was still solidly Democratic in the '30's. He could count on their votes, and therefore didn't feel the need to mess around with southern states' rights. I suspect that is why he left the southern courts on their own.
FDR was also a tyrant, and one I like even less than Lincoln. Few Presidents violated the Constitution more completely than FDR. Where were the John Wilkes Boothes when we needed them?
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 24, 2007 08:49 PMTITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I--CRIMES
PART II--CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART III--PRISONS AND PRISONERS
PART IV--CORRECTION OF YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS
PART V--IMMUNITY OF WITNESSES
Just curious, are the atheists planning where they might be next Christmas? :-)
Carry on dudes.
§ 3231. District courts
The district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of all offenses against the laws of the United States.
Nothing in this title shall be held to take away or impair the jurisdiction of the courts of the several States under the laws thereof.
The US DISTRICT COURTS in upper case mean FEDERAL COURTS.
U.S. district court in lower case means state district court.
As you can see by 3231 which is in lower case,original criminal jurisdiction.
Despite the civil war,or despite the interstate commerce rulings,they never got around to changing 3231 in title 18.
One reason for that is because if they re write title 18 it would strip the states of police power,and the Federal Courts would have to spend astronomical amounts of resouirces to police matters previously controlled and regulated by the states.
Another reason is they would have to change the constituion.
To make a long story short the Federal Courts are only given original jurisdiction of criminal cases in Federal Parks,,the District of Columbia,Puerto Rico or an insular possession of the United States,places the State's have ceded to the feds,and the feds have accepted ceding from the states.
Despite all of
