Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

Full story: Newsday

Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family.

Comments (Page 1,970)

Showing posts 39,381 - 39,400 of65,184
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Ken YaYa

Pompano Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43149
Nov 10, 2012
 
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
The most amazing part of this election to me, was the fact that Team Romney actually believed their hubris. I honestly thought they were just trying to spin it.
That's because like all Obama worshippers, you're a dumbazz! LOL

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43150
Nov 10, 2012
 
MUQ wrote:
Lecture 6 The Practical Aspects of His Life and its Practicality Part-39
Prophet and Fasting:
He enjoined the Muslims to fast. The Muslims are required to fast during the month of Ramadan, thirty days a year. But, there never was a month or a week when the holy Prophet was not fasting. Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with her) says that when he began fasting, it seemed he would never stop. He forbade the Muslims to fast for longer than a day, but himself he would fast for two or sometimes three days at a stretch without taking any food at all. His worthy companions wanted to follow suit but he would not allow them saying,‘Who amongst you is like me? My Lord provides sustenance for me.”
He fasted continuously during the months of Sha’ban and Ramadan every year. In addition to that he would fast on the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth day of every month. He would fast for ten days in the month of Muharram and six days in the month of Shawwal. Every week, Monday and Thursday were fixed for fasting. That was the practical example of his fasting.
Prophet and Charity:
He ordered the Muslims to pay Zakat and spend on the needy. But he was the first to set an example. You have already heard his first wife Khadija ’s evidence who had said “O Messenger of Allah! You help people who are unable to pay their debts. You help the poor and spend money on people in distress.” He did not ask his followers to give up everything they owned.
Nor did he shut the doors of the Kingdom of Heaven for the wealthy. He simply asked them to spend a portion of their wealth for charitable purposes for the sake of Allah:“…and spend out of what We have provided them.”(Chap 2: Vrs 3)
The holy Prophet’s own example was that he spent on others everything he owned. There was no shortage of money because spoils of war were coming into Madinah from everywhere, but that money was meant for others. The Prophet (Peace be upon him) would spend a bare minimum on himself and his family. For them it remained the same old life of austerity.
His Household living:
After the victory at Khyber (in 7 AH), it became usual for him to fix a yearly allowance for his wives, but it never lasted a whole year because they too, would share most of it with the poor and
the needy. Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) says that the holy Prophet was the most generous of men and his generosity knew no bounds, particularly in the holy month of Ramadan, He never refused anyone who came to him asking for help.
He did not like eating anything by himself, no matter how little he had; he would share it with others. It was his instruction to everyone “If any Muslim dies leaving an unsettled debt, let me know so that I should pay on his behalf And if he leaves anything behind, his relatives will inherit that”
Once a rustic asked him roughly,“O Muhammad!(These provisions) do not belong to you, or to your father. Load them on to my camel” The holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) did not mind his rudeness and ordered that he be given a camel-load of barley and dates.
He used to say “l am but a distributor and a custodian. The real sustainer is Allah.” Abu Dhar (May Allah be pleased with him) says, one night, while he was having a walk with the holy Prophet, he said “Abu Dhar! If this mountain of Uhad turned into gold for me, I would not like that three nights should pass and I still had a Dinar left with me, except that I should keep some to
pay a debt.”
(Contd.)
Rarely do I meet a stupid person as you. I say my thoughts in 100-2-- words. You claim 10,000 words why? No one reads this crap, shi--t. What are you trying to prove here???? That shi==t stinks? YOU ACCOMPLISHED YOUR GOAL CRAPPER.....
Frijoles

Hamden, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43151
Nov 11, 2012
 
Ken YaYa wrote:
<quoted text> That's because like all Obama worshippers, you're a dumbazz! LOL
Your side lost in the most spectacular of ways. As predicted.

Try to be graceful about it.
Frijoles

Hamden, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43152
Nov 11, 2012
 
SeasideSoon wrote:
<quoted text>Anyway, I've got a new Rosetta language to start on and Topix is very distracting, so I'm going to take a break for a few weeks.
Salaams, and Happy Veterans' Day to you'all!!
Just think of all the time you would save if you cut out cable news.

And the benefits to clear thinking to boot!
Voluntarist

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43153
Nov 11, 2012
 
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
The "job creators" (GOP code for "my rich friends") were not "killed" during the Clinton years.
In fact, most of us did pretty well.
Most small companies will not be affected my Obama's proposal.
Simply a return to the Clinton-era rates for those at the top.
You know, the good days, before that other president I'm not allowed to mention!
:))
The one nobody in Tampa mentioned; same as in 2008.
Job creators aren't always rich, most small businesses (the backbone of the country) are struggling between the federal and state governments.
If they want to increase tax revenue why don't they lower taxes?
Frijoles

Hamden, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43154
Nov 11, 2012
 
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Job creators aren't always rich, most small businesses (the backbone of the country) are struggling between the federal and state governments.
If they want to increase tax revenue why don't they lower taxes?
Because they tried that in the 80s under Reagan and it was a failure. Nice idea but the data does not pan out.

http://www.econdataus.com/taxcuts.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics#Anal...
Frijoles

Hamden, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43155
Nov 11, 2012
 
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Job creators aren't always rich, most small businesses (the backbone of the country) are struggling between the federal and state governments.
If they want to increase tax revenue why don't they lower taxes?
An interesting article last year in Business Week that questions whether small business are in fact the "backbone of the country". It makes a point that if you want more jobs, don't look to small businesses - instead look to corporations.

Rethinking the Boosterism About Small Business

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/rethinki...
Frijoles

Hamden, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43156
Nov 11, 2012
 
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012...

Which Polls Fared Best (and Worst) in the 2012 Presidential Race
By NATE SILVER
-----

The best: Investors Business Daily

The worst: Rasmussen and Gallup
former res

Broomall, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43157
Nov 11, 2012
 
SeasideSoon wrote:
<quoted text>Are you telling me that Obama's drone strikes are free? Are you telling me that making an acceptance speech is a move to the center?? More action, less talk. WTH is Grove Norquist???
Actually the housing debacle caused by Barney Frank is close to being #1 cause of the deficit - all those bailouts. And then there's Solyndra and other failed tax-funded green energy companies. And now I heard that GM is going to get a pass on the rest of the money owed to the taxpayers.
I hope you noticed that I've been sensitive to your feelings and haven't mentioned Jimmy Carter.(maybe once - I'm not sure):)
Anyway, I've got a new Rosetta language to start on and Topix is very distracting, so I'm going to take a break for a few weeks.
Salaams, and Happy Veterans' Day to you'all!!
You really don't know who Grover Norquist is? Google him. Most of the GOP has taken his pledge. No balanced approach possible with the budget with this in place.

You don't recall Bush touting the "Ownership Society" where everyone should own a house?

Your supposed causes of the debt are very funny and based on emotion rathere than fact.

You may mention the Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter anytime you wish. Our military never fired a shot during his tenure.

Your neocon freinds would not appreciate that.

Enjoy your Rosetta stone program. It gets high marks.

A few annoying facts will follow re the Bush tax cuts.

Shalom
former res

Broomall, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43158
Nov 11, 2012
 
Back in 2001, CRS said, the Congressional Budget Office projected gradually rising federal budget surpluses for the next decade. The tax cuts helped alter the outlook "dramatically," and the budget in 2002 recorded a deficit for the first time since 1997.

"The Bush tax cuts, with a $1 trillion 10-year price tag, contributed to this shift from budget surpluses to deficits," CRS said. Other contributors included the 2001 recession, the increase in defense spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Medicare prescription drug benefit.

But the tax cuts "generated the largest 10-year increases in budget deficits," CRS said.

Estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation put the total cost for the tax cuts (including the Working Families Tax Relief Act of 2004) at more than the amount allocated to the Defense Department for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"This means that even with the spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the federal budget would have been in surplus in 2007 if the tax cuts had not been enacted, or if their costs had been offset," said a 2008 analysis from the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The CBO last year projected a decrease in deficits if the tax cuts expired, and said extending all of them permanently would cost $3.3 trillion over 10 years and increase deficits.

PolitiFact has previously examined assertions that tax cuts increase revenues by stimulating economic growth. We found that the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation and the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers say that tax cuts lead to revenues that are lower than they otherwise would have been – even if they spur some economic growth.

"There's no clear relationship between taxes and economic growth," said Bob Williams of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. "Too many factors complicate the picture to draw clear conclusions about the taxes-growth relationship."

Our colleagues at FactCheck.org came to a similar conclusion.

Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office reported in March, "Relative to the size of the economy, federal revenues are currently at their lowest level in 60 years."

"There is no real dispute among economists that broad-based federal income tax cuts reduce revenue (except when tax rates are much higher than they are now)," said Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "Revenue is lower than it would be without the Bush tax cuts -- liberal and conservative economists are in accord on this question."

Debate will go on about the effectiveness of tax cuts in stimulating growth. We won't enter it. But analysis backs up Kucinich in saying that the Bush cuts "helped to create a substantial part of the deficit."

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/201...
former res

Broomall, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43159
Nov 11, 2012
 
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Job creators aren't always rich, most small businesses (the backbone of the country) are struggling between the federal and state governments.
If they want to increase tax revenue why don't they lower taxes?
I know - that's my point.

You know this and I know this. Most small business would not be affected by a return to the Clinton tax rates at the highest bracket.

It's the GOP who is attempting to shift the tax burden back to the middle class.

Lowering taxes will increase the deficti. See my previous posting from Politifact.

Trickle down is a myth.
Voluntarist

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43160
Nov 11, 2012
 
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
An interesting article last year in Business Week that questions whether small business are in fact the "backbone of the country". It makes a point that if you want more jobs, don't look to small businesses - instead look to corporations.
Rethinking the Boosterism About Small Business
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/rethinki...
Much of that article is about growth, the word "backbone " signifies strength, stability.

Small firms:
• Represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.
• Employ half of all private sector employees.
• Pay 44 percent of total U.S. private payroll.
• Generated 65 percent of net new jobs over the past 17 years.
• Create more than half of the nonfarm private GDP.
• Hire 43 percent of high tech workers ( scientists, engineers,
computer programmers, and others).
• Are 52 percent home-based and 2 percent franchises.
• Made up 97.5 percent of all identified exporters and
produced 31 percent of export value in FY 2008.
• Produce 13 times more patents per employee than large
patenting firms.
Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Census Bureau and Intl. Trade
Admin.; Advocacy-funded research by Kathryn Kobe, 2007
( www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs299.pdf ) and CHI Research, 2003
( www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs225.pdf );U.S. Dept. of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Voluntarist

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43161
Nov 11, 2012
 
Small firms accounted for 65 percent (or 9.8 million) of the
15 million net new jobs created between 1993 and 2009.
Much of the job growth is from fast-growing high-impact firms,
which represents about 5-6 percent of all firms and are on
average 25 years old.
Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Business
Employment Dynamics; Advocacy-funded research by Zoltan Acs,
William Parsons and Spencer Tracy, 2008 ( www.sba.gov/advo/
research/rs328.pdf )
Voluntarist

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43162
Nov 11, 2012
 
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
I know - that's my point.
You know this and I know this. Most small business would not be affected by a return to the Clinton tax rates at the highest bracket.
It's the GOP who is attempting to shift the tax burden back to the middle class.
Lowering taxes will increase the deficti. See my previous posting from Politifact.
Trickle down is a myth.
Lowering tax rates is not about trickling down theory, its about increasing government revenue.
I suppose they should get rid of tax free week for shopping, it doesn't increase revenue for businesses.
Voluntarist

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43163
Nov 11, 2012
 
former res wrote:
Back in 2001, CRS said, the Congressional Budget Office projected gradually rising federal budget surpluses for the next decade. The tax cuts helped alter the outlook "dramatically," and the budget in 2002 recorded a deficit for the first time since 1997.
"The Bush tax cuts, with a $1 trillion 10-year price tag, contributed to this shift from budget surpluses to deficits," CRS said. Other contributors included the 2001 recession, the increase in defense spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Medicare prescription drug benefit.
But the tax cuts "generated the largest 10-year increases in budget deficits," CRS said.
Estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation put the total cost for the tax cuts (including the Working Families Tax Relief Act of 2004) at more than the amount allocated to the Defense Department for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"This means that even with the spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the federal budget would have been in surplus in 2007 if the tax cuts had not been enacted, or if their costs had been offset," said a 2008 analysis from the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The CBO last year projected a decrease in deficits if the tax cuts expired, and said extending all of them permanently would cost $3.3 trillion over 10 years and increase deficits.
PolitiFact has previously examined assertions that tax cuts increase revenues by stimulating economic growth. We found that the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation and the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers say that tax cuts lead to revenues that are lower than they otherwise would have been – even if they spur some economic growth.
"There's no clear relationship between taxes and economic growth," said Bob Williams of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. "Too many factors complicate the picture to draw clear conclusions about the taxes-growth relationship."
Our colleagues at FactCheck.org came to a similar conclusion.
Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office reported in March, "Relative to the size of the economy, federal revenues are currently at their lowest level in 60 years."
"There is no real dispute among economists that broad-based federal income tax cuts reduce revenue (except when tax rates are much higher than they are now)," said Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "Revenue is lower than it would be without the Bush tax cuts -- liberal and conservative economists are in accord on this question."
Debate will go on about the effectiveness of tax cuts in stimulating growth. We won't enter it. But analysis backs up Kucinich in saying that the Bush cuts "helped to create a substantial part of the deficit."
http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/201...
True or false , the social security trust fund was tapped to balance the budget?
Frijoles

Hamden, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43164
Nov 11, 2012
 
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Much of that article is about growth, the word "backbone " signifies strength, stability.
.
Kind of the same thing in my mind.

But lets amuse ourselves with your statement and accept the assumption. I would have to agree with Formers former post - I posted the basically the same thing.

Lets protect the middle class and raise taxes on those who can actually afford it.

If the rich could afford to throw their money into ill conceived and ill implemented Super-Pacs, then they can afford to pay a little more in taxes and help us little guys.
former res

Broomall, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43165
Nov 11, 2012
 
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Lowering tax rates is not about trickling down theory, its about increasing government revenue...
Kindly expalin this.

I've posted information today pointing to the Bush tax cuts being the single biggest cause of our current deficit.

What information do you have to back-up your claim?

Simply repeating it does not advance your statement.

Non-Fox viewers (like me) tend to appreciated facts over platitudes.
former res

Broomall, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43166
Nov 11, 2012
 
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
The most amazing part of this election to me, was the fact that Team Romney actually believed their hubris. I honestly thought they were just trying to spin it.
This Slate piece made the same point I was making.

The professional bean counters failed miserably.

I guess it's like Karl Rove. You believe what you want to.
For example, that climate change is a hoax.
Or that up is down. Scary.

__________

Why Romney Never Saw It Coming

He was the numbers guy. But in the end his numbers were all wrong.

By John Dickerson|Posted Friday, Nov. 9, 2012, at 9:15 PM ET


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politi...
former res

Broomall, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43167
Nov 11, 2012
 
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
True or false , the social security trust fund was tapped to balance the budget?
Social Security is the least of our problems.

Are you trying to say W left us in better fiscal shape than Clinton did?

Are you side-stepping the point of the article? Yes, you are.
Frijoles

Bristol, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43168
Nov 11, 2012
 
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
This Slate piece made the same point I was making.
The professional bean counters failed miserably.
I guess it's like Karl Rove. You believe what you want to.
For example, that climate change is a hoax.
Or that up is down. Scary.
__________
Why Romney Never Saw It Coming
He was the numbers guy. But in the end his numbers were all wrong.
By John Dickerson|Posted Friday, Nov. 9, 2012, at 9:15 PM ET
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politi...
Well, Romney always said (or implied) that he was going to run the country like a business, and it appears that he made good on that claim.

I think he would of done a better job if he ran his campaign(business) like an excercise in applied science, as the Democrats did, or as Nate Silver observed.

David Axelrod this morning on Cable (forget which program - it was on in the gym) basically :
"We went into election day with a knowledge of a small but comfortable lead thanks to our bright "kids" who had extensively analyzed the data beforehand. By 8:15 pm it was evident that the initial returns were strongly calibrated to our models, and that after that it was just going to be a matter of time until we reached the finish line...."

(tried to find this on link but couldnt yet)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 39,381 - 39,400 of65,184
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

42 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min No Surprize 1,034,631
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 4 min Rogue Scholar 05 167,685
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 10 min Los Angeles 43,024
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 19 min what 47,075
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 33 min Hbu Hd 1,163
IL Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Illinois ... (Oct '10) 1 hr jimtownhounddogsniffing 6,538
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr ScarletandOlive 96,151
•••
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••