glenn beck for president !

[grokagain]

likeitis wrote:

<quoted text>
naw, its just that if water is 500 degrees or 1000 degrees, it's gonna burn ya either way. i say throw all the bums out. i am tired of all this rhetoric from the right and left wing extremes, while they take our country to bankruptcy

you know 'throwing the bums out' would do no good. we've handed over the government to the corporations when we believed the politicians who told us that the government was the enemy. if there's ever an organization or effort to have public influence, corporations call their media watchdogs and get all the people against it.

the corruption and 'kleptocracy' of it is ingrained at this point. put all the people you want in there, they will turn. if they actually did not turn, a little smear campaign and they'd be turned out.

it all belongs to the 1%'ers now. live it, love it.

[Thinking out loud]

what i don't understand is all the right wing, conservative, republicans who rally behind the "christian" title, i'm a left wing, liberal, democrat and i label myself a christian, i don't attend church like i should but i read and study the bible, it's the most fascinating piece of literature i've ever read and i can't get enough of it, i'm well read so i'm wondering if i'm cofused or just plain stupid in what I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TELLS ME

i thought the 10 commandments was GOD's law given to Moses to give to the Hebrew people, one of them says do not KILL, how can christians support the death penalty and yet want the 10 commandments posted everywhere, i'm not going into how much more an execution costs than a life sentence nor will i go into the worst thing possible in a free country like the USA, an innocent person being executed but i'm against the death penalty, GOD's punishment will far outweight anything we can do and execution just lets the person of the hook easy, let them suffer in jail till they die but pray for them to find the lord and ask FORGIVENESS, it's the easy or am i wrong

several places in the bible jesus tells people it's easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to get into heaven, if i were rich, a serious christian and read my bible i'd be worried about my salvation, i'd be worried alot, i believe jesus opines about not loving the things of the earth as they are only temporary, but dropping everything to seek him, i know jesus say's love your enemies like you'd love yourself and turn the other cheek, has any christian politicians ever read that or did i read it wrong? didn't stephen give thanks for being stoned to death because he was glad GOD saw fit for him to suffer a horrible death like Jesus, am i the only person that understands the meaning of these words or am i wrong again?

i could go and and on, anyone else feel the same as me, i don't see the republican/jesus/christian connection except the republicans trying to ally with christianity

i'd rather be on GOD's side then have GOD on my side, does anyone understand that

Glenn Beck is a recovering alcoholic and public entertainer, i could care less for him but i do pray for him and all others i don't like

[likeitis]

Thinking out loud wrote:

what i don't understand is all the right wing, conservative, republicans who rally behind the "christian" title, i'm a left wing, liberal, democrat and i label myself a christian, i don't attend church like i should but i read and study the bible, it's the most fascinating piece of literature i've ever read and i can't get enough of it, i'm well read so i'm wondering if i'm cofused or just plain stupid in what I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TELLS ME
i thought the 10 commandments was GOD's law given to Moses to give to the Hebrew people, one of them says do not KILL, how can christians support the death penalty and yet want the 10 commandments posted everywhere, i'm not going into how much more an execution costs than a life sentence nor will i go into the worst thing possible in a free country like the USA, an innocent person being executed but i'm against the death penalty, GOD's punishment will far outweight anything we can do and execution just lets the person of the hook easy, let them suffer in jail till they die but pray for them to find the lord and ask FORGIVENESS, it's the easy or am i wrong
several places in the bible jesus tells people it's easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to get into heaven, if i were rich, a serious christian and read my bible i'd be worried about my salvation, i'd be worried alot, i believe jesus opines about not loving the things of the earth as they are only temporary, but dropping everything to seek him, i know jesus say's love your enemies like you'd love yourself and turn the other cheek, has any christian politicians ever read that or did i read it wrong? didn't stephen give thanks for being stoned to death because he was glad GOD saw fit for him to suffer a horrible death like Jesus, am i the only person that understands the meaning of these words or am i wrong again?
i could go and and on, anyone else feel the same as me, i don't see the republican/jesus/christian connection except the republicans trying to ally with christianity
i'd rather be on GOD's side then have GOD on my side, does anyone understand that
Glenn Beck is a recovering alcoholic and public entertainer, i could care less for him but i do pray for him and all others i don't like

excellent post, and i wish to make a few comments. first of all, about "thou shalt not kill". the right wing thinks this applies to "innocent" pre-born babies, but does not think it applies to "guilty" criminals. i believe the left wing thinks it does not apply to pre-borns, but applies to everyone who has already been born. while i can see both sides of the argument (yeah i know i have left out many particulars of each argument), i cannot see the rationale of "someone who is innocent might be put to death, using the death penalty". here is why:

if you are against the death penalty to begin with, even for criminals, then the fact that someone who is innocent might be put to death would seem redundant, since it would be just as wrong to kill the child rapist as it is the innocent person. but lets suppose that your only argument against the death penalty was the possibility of executing an innocent person. i would say that that is the price that society must pay in order to have the death penalty deterrent. death is in all aspects of life. innocent people are killed in wars, in cars, in planes, in construction, in hospitals, in hunting accidents, etc. the list goes on and on. since the beginning of time, innocent people have had to die in order for our society to be what it is. that is my opinion, altho i am not a republican...

[likeitis]

Thinking out loud wrote:

what i don't understand is all the right wing, conservative, republicans who rally behind the "christian" title, i'm a left wing, liberal, democrat and i label myself a christian, i don't attend church like i should but i read and study the bible, it's the most fascinating piece of literature i've ever read and i can't get enough of it, i'm well read so i'm wondering if i'm cofused or just plain stupid in what I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TELLS ME
i thought the 10 commandments was GOD's law given to Moses to give to the Hebrew people, one of them says do not KILL, how can christians support the death penalty and yet want the 10 commandments posted everywhere, i'm not going into how much more an execution costs than a life sentence nor will i go into the worst thing possible in a free country like the USA, an innocent person being executed but i'm against the death penalty, GOD's punishment will far outweight anything we can do and execution just lets the person of the hook easy, let them suffer in jail till they die but pray for them to find the lord and ask FORGIVENESS, it's the easy or am i wrong
several places in the bible jesus tells people it's easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to get into heaven, if i were rich, a serious christian and read my bible i'd be worried about my salvation, i'd be worried alot, i believe jesus opines about not loving the things of the earth as they are only temporary, but dropping everything to seek him, i know jesus say's love your enemies like you'd love yourself and turn the other cheek, has any christian politicians ever read that or did i read it wrong? didn't stephen give thanks for being stoned to death because he was glad GOD saw fit for him to suffer a horrible death like Jesus, am i the only person that understands the meaning of these words or am i wrong again?
i could go and and on, anyone else feel the same as me, i don't see the republican/jesus/christian connection except the republicans trying to ally with christianity
i'd rather be on GOD's side then have GOD on my side, does anyone understand that
Glenn Beck is a recovering alcoholic and public entertainer, i could care less for him but i do pray for him and all others i don't like

as for republicans trying to "ally with God", i agree with you - this is terribly wrong, especially given their track record. on the other hand, it seems that democrats try to distance themselves from the teachings of God, even going so far as to try to remove all references to him from everyday life and from society. this is equally wrong...

[Thinking out loud]

likeitis wrote:

<quoted text>
excellent post, and i wish to make a few comments. first of all, about "thou shalt not kill". the right wing thinks this applies to "innocent" pre-born babies, but does not think it applies to "guilty" criminals. i believe the left wing thinks it does not apply to pre-borns, but applies to everyone who has already been born. while i can see both sides of the argument (yeah i know i have left out many particulars of each argument), i cannot see the rationale of "someone who is innocent might be put to death, using the death penalty". here is why:
if you are against the death penalty to begin with, even for criminals, then the fact that someone who is innocent might be put to death would seem redundant, since it would be just as wrong to kill the child rapist as it is the innocent person. but lets suppose that your only argument against the death penalty was the possibility of executing an innocent person. i would say that that is the price that society must pay in order to have the death penalty deterrent. death is in all aspects of life. innocent people are killed in wars, in cars, in planes, in construction, in hospitals, in hunting accidents, etc. the list goes on and on. since the beginning of time, innocent people have had to die in order for our society to be what it is. that is my opinion, altho i am not a republican...

I think it's horrible that I or anyone could be arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced and executed who is innocent, thats one reason, the other and most important is GOD said do not kill and my Lord and Saviour Jesus preaches off love, forgiveness and sacrifice, he did have a choice on the alter but chose to die for all of his, him the only innocent one ever, and lastly it costs a shitpot of money to execute a person

and on the pro death penalty side i say if i'm still against except when someone confesses and i say hang them on the square on saturday morning and let EVERYONE SEE what happens when you take a life

[likeitis]

Thinking out loud wrote:

<quoted text>
I think it's horrible that I or anyone could be arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced and executed who is innocent, thats one reason, the other and most important is GOD said do not kill and my Lord and Saviour Jesus preaches off love, forgiveness and sacrifice, he did have a choice on the alter but chose to die for all of his, him the only innocent one ever, and lastly it costs a shitpot of money to execute a person
and on the pro death penalty side i say if i'm still against except when someone confesses and i say hang them on the square on saturday morning and let EVERYONE SEE what happens when you take a life

your opinion seems sensible enough. what about abortion? is that killing as well? and what are your views on that?

[just an observer]

likeitis wrote:

<quoted text>
are you "yellow dog" posting under another alias? apparently you dont read the content of a post before mouthing off. if you will take the time to read my post, you will see that i said obama is a continuation of bush. i did not say that obama started the wars or the bank bailouts. i did not say he was introducing legislation designed to speed up job outflow. i said he was continuing bush's policies. these policies contained all the aforementioned things and more. the only thing of any significance that obama has done differently than bush, is to propose a government take-over of healthcare. i am sure bush would have done that himself if he had been given another term. they both tried/are trying to bankrupt this country! as for me being against "government interference" where jobs are concerned, it is a bit late for that, my friend. it was "government interference" a few years ago that brought us NAFTA. so yeah, lets let them give us health care too...and down the drain we go.

If I misunderstood your post, I offer my appology. Your statement spoke of "his" wars, bank bailouts "continuing" to allow our jobs to be lost and the proclamation about Islam - all in the same sentence so, hence my interpretation.
I too am disappointed with Obama's performance. His desire for "bipartisanship" only allows the remaining mindsets that got us in this position to further their damaging agendas.
I do though take issue with your (and others') representation that offering an OPTION for a health insurance plan that is administered by the government is a take over. It is simply an option; another choice for Americans to consider when choosing a health plan. Private insurance plans will still be available for those that desire them. Isn't Medicare a government administered healthcare plan already? If it is so bad, why do millions of Americans subscribe to it and nearly Every healthcare provider apply for inclusion? Does Medicare ration care or have the "death panels" that the radicals claim result from a government administered plan?
If you don't wish to participate in the "Public Option" (if there ever is one) then don't. Please don't try to deny me the right to make the same choice.
As for NAFTA - yes it was a mortal wound to our economy. But do remember; do an online search for the NAFTA timeline. You'll see that it was initiated by the "Conservative" Republicans, starting with Reagan announcing his intentions to Congress for a free trade agreement in 1985 and sealed by Bush Sr. The NAFTA agreement was formally signed in San Antonio by the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and our President at the time...George H.W. Bush on Dec. 17, 1992. Revisiting NAFTA was promised by Obama - let's all hope he keeps that promise and doesn't cave in the name of bipartisanship.
BTW - no, I'm not Yellow Dog.

[Murphy]

Who the heck is Glenn Beck?

[just an observer]

JOHN3 3 wrote:

<quoted text>
Why are we not enjoying a flourishing economy? By lending money to people who couldn't afford to by homes.
Instead of bailing-out big business and banks,our government should have given each tax-payer 50 -$100,000. and we could have helped the banks out by paying off our mortgages and car loans etc.

Not sure if your post is sincere or sarcasm but, you're on the right track. Reagan's "trickle down economics" is hogwash. Fluid trickles down, cash trickles up. When business realizes increased profits; it's the business and it's shareholders benefit. Workers don't see increased benefits and wages. When the working class gets more expendable income however, not only does their standard of living increase but, more goods and services are bought and consumed thus enrichening business' profits as well. Trickle up benefits the most, trickle down benefits the few.
As for party affiliation - I agree with you. Wish there was a "Do the Right Thing" party. Greed and self serving agendas have crippled the integrity of both parties.

[just an observer]

Murphy wrote:

Who the heck is Glenn Beck?

You're better off not knowing.

[just an observer]

Revisiting NAFTA was promised by Obama - let's all hope he keeps that promise and doesn't cave in the name of bipartisanship. Bipartisanship or special interest that is.

[likeitis]

just an observer wrote:

<quoted text>
If I misunderstood your post, I offer my appology. Your statement spoke of "his" wars, bank bailouts "continuing" to allow our jobs to be lost and the proclamation about Islam - all in the same sentence so, hence my interpretation.
I too am disappointed with Obama's performance. His desire for "bipartisanship" only allows the remaining mindsets that got us in this position to further their damaging agendas.
I do though take issue with your (and others') representation that offering an OPTION for a health insurance plan that is administered by the government is a take over. It is simply an option; another choice for Americans to consider when choosing a health plan. Private insurance plans will still be available for those that desire them. Isn't Medicare a government administered healthcare plan already? If it is so bad, why do millions of Americans subscribe to it and nearly Every healthcare provider apply for inclusion? Does Medicare ration care or have the "death panels" that the radicals claim result from a government administered plan?
If you don't wish to participate in the "Public Option" (if there ever is one) then don't. Please don't try to deny me the right to make the same choice.
As for NAFTA - yes it was a mortal wound to our economy. But do remember; do an online search for the NAFTA timeline. You'll see that it was initiated by the "Conservative" Republicans, starting with Reagan announcing his intentions to Congress for a free trade agreement in 1985 and sealed by Bush Sr. The NAFTA agreement was formally signed in San Antonio by the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and our President at the time...George H.W. Bush on Dec. 17, 1992. Revisiting NAFTA was promised by Obama - let's all hope he keeps that promise and doesn't cave in the name of bipartisanship.
BTW - no, I'm not Yellow Dog.

perhaps my post was not clear enough, but no apology needed.

as for NAFTA, being a republican thing, i don't disagree that they were more behind it than the democrats were, HOWEVER, after bush signed the agreement, it was then ratified by a democrat congress and then signed into law by President Clinton. in fact, he made a big deal of the signing by having a ceremony on the white house lawn. i hope you were unaware of this, as opposed to giving your chosen political party a pass on it. what we need are for people such as yourself, to hold their own political party accountable, just as you hold the opposing party accountable.

as for healthcare reform, there are 2000 pages of it and the democratic congress refuses to allow the american people to read it. that alone tells me to be leary of it. perhaps you are correct in that it will be a good thing. i am simply going on my basic feelings.

as for "death panels", im all for them, if they allow for older people to be able to have counselling and to make an informed choice about whether they wish to be kept alive when the quality of life is not worth living. i know i dont wish to be kept alive artificially, and it is not right for my neighbors children to have to pay for it either.

[likeitis]

just an observer wrote:

Revisiting NAFTA was promised by Obama - let's all hope he keeps that promise and doesn't cave in the name of bipartisanship. Bipartisanship or special interest that is.

i fear that you dont understand the meaning of the term "bipartianship" when it comes to nafta. in this instance it means that neither the republicans, who are controlled by big business, nor the democrats, who are controlled by big business, want nafta to be overturned. and finally, it means that obama, who is controlled by big business doesnt want it overturned either.

[grokagain]

all this long conversation and it has nothing to do with me or my post. do you really expect me to read it? i don't care what either one of you think. it's almost certain you're both retarded... so i only am concerned with my post, and posts that respond to my post. now i would appreciate it if you, and all topix posters... at least in the russell springs threads, would take my needs into consideration. thank you.