Author Topic: Re: Obama (Read 18892 times)

TheJaylor · « **Reply #25 on:** January 06, 2011, 06:19:59 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 06, 2011, 05:56:45 PM

Quote from: KoalaKingoFA on January 06, 2011, 05:54:44 PM
He should be 0/0 instead of 1/1.
Oholibamah is a woman. She was Esau's wife...

My point exactly.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #26 on:** January 06, 2011, 08:20:39 PM »

Quote from: Red on January 06, 2011, 04:18:36 PM

Caring for the poor and homeless(Wellfare which is a socialist policy) That job is for the Church not the goverment. Also if you wish to debate via pms I would be happy to change to that.

The private Charity sector can't. They don't have enough money, man power, or will. Look at which countries have the largest percentage of poverties and where the most citizens only have access to subpar living conditions, food, water, etc: they're all relatively poor (whether you look at it by GDP or GDP per capita) countries wherein the government is unable to provide welfare. Why hasn't the private sector stepped up and saved them? It can't.

You may attribute some, or most, of it to a geographical difference. Keep in mind, however, that the United States is one of the least charitable developed nations per capita.

Red · « **Reply #27 on:** January 06, 2011, 08:32:06 PM »

Another reason people poor and on welfare is also because they don't work(Before you bring up the ecomy it was that way before the ecomey took a dive) Welfare at it's best is the Goverment wasting money on lazy people. They can find work even if it's only five bucks a day which is MUCH better than sitting around not doing anything. So if more people tried working even for small amounts of money the church could suport more poor seeing as some of them would have SOME money that the Goverment didn't give them. Also if you look at the Roman REPUBLIC(Read not empire) it failed AFTER they started providing Welfare.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #28 on:** January 06, 2011, 08:42:51 PM »

Quote from: Red on January 06, 2011, 08:32:06 PM

Another reason people poor and on welfare is also because they don't work

Many people can't work. I'm not referring to free rides, as they're an unfortunate and unavoidable product of the system.

Quote from: Red on January 06, 2011, 08:32:06 PM

(Before you bring up the ecomy it was that way before the ecomey took a dive)

L

Quote from: Red on January 06, 2011, 08:32:06 PM

Welfare at it's best is the Goverment wasting money on lazy people. They can find work even if it's only five bucks a day which is MUCH better than sitting around not doing anything. So if more people tried working even for small amounts of money the church could suport more poor seeing as some of them would have SOME money that the Goverment didn't give them.

I'm not asking anyone not to work. But it is unfair to expect someone unable to work to work. Also, it is naive at best to assume working odd jobs could sustain them.

Quote from: Red on January 06, 2011, 08:32:06 PM

Also if you look at the Roman REPUBLIC(Read not empire) it failed AFTER they started providing Welfare.

No. The Roman REPUBLIC became the EMPIRE after leaders such as MARIUS AND SALA exerted general power and was it fully transformed by CEASAR, but met minor problems (ie: Brutus, whom should be considered a hero...). The empire was then truly accepted under AUGUSTUS.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #29 on:** January 06, 2011, 08:46:46 PM »

Ooooh this is frightfully delicious! Too bad I wasn't here earlier or I would have declared the thread now about Doctor Who, and a Doctor Who thread (or a train thread, LOVE those!) would be nice.

I'm not going to join this argument as it's already gotten emotional and therefore can no longer be productive. Now it's just fun to watch B)

SomeKittens · « **Reply #30 on:** January 06, 2011, 08:56:13 PM »

Also, I wouldn't work for $5 a day. That's an insult.

A living wage comes to $10 or so an hour (depends on exactly where you live). Minimum wage is $7.25, federally.

So if I work a normal, eight hour day, I'm going to be $22 short of what it'll take to stay alive. Why even work under these conditions?

Nice high horse there Pol.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #31 on:** January 06, 2011, 08:59:06 PM »

I'll come down when the parade is finished.

TheJaylor · « **Reply #32 on:** January 06, 2011, 09:39:05 PM »

I don't like polotics.

JSB23 · « **Reply #33 on:** January 06, 2011, 09:40:45 PM »

I just wish Stephen or Doug was here to post about how badmouthing the president gives aid and comfort to the enemy

The Schaef · « **Reply #34 on:** January 06, 2011, 09:43:49 PM »

First of all, I never said that, you seem to have a penchant for taking whatever you think is the lolfauxnews meme of the day and inserting it into my mouth.

Second of all, if there's something in this thread referring to military operations, I must have missed it.

JSB23 · « **Reply #35 on:** January 06, 2011, 10:14:26 PM »

Really,
I was sure you would have remembered Doug's article about the KGB agent

The Schaef · « **Reply #36 on:** January 06, 2011, 10:33:29 PM »

In point of fact I do not, but I'm not sure what Doug supposedly wrote that's supposedly related to "badmouthing the president" has anything to do with claiming I would say (and thus, suggesting I have previously said) something as vague and nonsensical as that.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #37 on:** January 06, 2011, 11:07:01 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on January 06, 2011, 10:33:29 PM

In point of fact I do not, but I'm not sure what Doug supposedly wrote that's supposedly related to "badmouthing the president" has anything to do with claiming I would say (and thus, suggesting I have previously said) something as vague and nonsensical as that.

Just to refresh your memory... Here is the first paragraph from the Wall Street Journal editorial by a former KGB agent that Doug posted approvingly back in August of 2007.

Quote from: Ion Pacepa

Sowing the seeds of anti-Americanism by discrediting the American president was one of the main tasks of the Soviet-bloc intelligence community during the years I worked at its top levels. This same strategy is at work today, but it is regarded as bad manners to point out the Soviet parallels. For communists, only the leader counted, no matter the country, friend or foe. At home, they deified their own ruler–as to a certain extent still holds true in Russia. Abroad, they asserted that a fish starts smelling from the head, and they did everything in their power to make the head of the Free World stink.

When I noted that the basic claim that dissent is unpatriotic is essentially unamerican, you disagreed vehemently and argued strongly for the point of view that Pacepa espoused. We then got sidetracked when you decided to make the ludicrous claim that conservatives had never called honest dissent against President Bush and his policies treasonous.

I guess my question to all the folks on these boards--such as yourself--who slammed me for slamming Doug's original post approving of this tripe believe that those who are now criticizing President Obama are "sowing the seeds of anti-Americanism?" Or is it only anti-American to disagree with presidents who happen to be Republicans?

The Wall Street Journal no longer has the original editorial archived, but it was way popular and mentioned prominently in right-leaning blogs back in its day. I've found it on several, and if anyone wants to dive into the muck I've left enough clues that you can find the original op-ed in its entirety.

stefferweffer · « **Reply #38 on:** January 06, 2011, 11:34:41 PM »

I just hope that we all, myself included, defend our Lord's name and our faith with the same level of fervor that we do our political beliefs.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #39 on:** January 06, 2011, 11:49:09 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on January 06, 2011, 11:07:01 PM

I guess my question to all the folks on these boards--such as yourself--who slammed me for slamming Doug's original post approving of this tripe believe that those who are now criticizing President Obama are "sowing the seeds of anti-Americanism?" Or is it only anti-American to disagree with presidents who happen to be Republicans?

Rush Limbaugh said that his purpose was "to make the Obama presidency fail". That is anti-American, and borders on treason. Making an accurate comment on a politician's actions is another matter entirely. "I don't like how Bush handled the post 9/11 era".

It's an issue on both sides of the isle. Some say Obama wasn't born in the US, and others say Sarah Palin isn't Trig's mother, but grandmother.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #40 on:** January 07, 2011, 12:20:07 AM »

How is Rush Limbaugh stating that he hopes the UnAmerican and treasonous? (note: I don't agree with his statement)

It is unChristian to not work for $5 dollars a day - Paul often chastises those who don't work and commands that Christians not only work but work joyfully.

Random lightningrod of the day: Heaven seems kinda like socialism.

The Schaef · « **Reply #41 on:** January 07, 2011, 12:58:27 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on January 06, 2011, 11:07:01 PM

When I noted that the basic claim that dissent is unpatriotic is essentially unamerican, you disagreed vehemently and argued strongly for the point of view that Pacepa espoused.

Since you have a pretty long history of either misunderstanding or misconstruing some of the things I say, can you link me to my exact words so we can examine the truth of the matter and not only the lens through which you recall it?

Quote

We then got sidetracked when you decided to make the ludicrous claim that conservatives had never called honest dissent against President Bush and his policies treasonous.

I think we're again confusing the general with the specific. I'm pretty careful about avoiding absolutes, which causes me to question the large number of absolutes you ascribe to me here: that zero conservatives criticized any honest dissent zero times.

Quote

Or is it only anti-American to disagree with presidents who happen to be Republicans?

I did not spend long months defending criticism of John Kerry's war record to be accused now of assigning "Americanism" on the basis of party affiliation. Especially when I have had none for nearly a decade and am reasonably certain I've mentioned that at least one time prior.

Quote from: Alex

Random lightningrod of the day: Heaven seems kinda like socialism.

Depends on how you define it. As an economic theory, it's a non-starter, since there's no economy in Heaven. As a political theory, it's commonly (in America) associated with nationalization of industry as a means of establishing an egalitarian state. Since the criticism of socialism on earth is based on people depriving other people of liberties by force of law in order to redistribute to people without their own means, that also doesn't apply in Heaven, because unlike on earth among humans, God IS a supreme authority to whom all of our liberties and all of our resources actually belong. So He quite literally can do whatever He wants with us with impunity.

On the other hand, if it's a co-operative commune like the apostles lived in the first century, that's just people helping people, and there's no shame at all in saying Heaven is like that.

Red · « **Reply #42 on:** January 07, 2011, 08:06:50 AM »

Disagreement is not Anti-American, Obama is just a man after all and you can disagree with me but your saying it's anti-American to disagree with the president who after all is a man, not a supreme unhuman overlord.

stefferweffer · « **Reply #43 on:** January 07, 2011, 08:40:56 AM »

Just for the record, Jesus sure didn't pull many punches when He spoke about the political and religious leaders of His day. He once called Herod "that fox", and Matthew 23 is just one example of the multiple times He chastised the scribes and Pharisees. Now we know from 1 Peter that He did not "revile" His enemies even when He was "reviled" by them, but no one can deny that Jesus had many very public and very negative things to say about those individuals. John the baptist was beheaded because of his public outcry against Herod's adulterous marriage. Was John wrong to do this?

We are told as Christians to have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather to "expose them". We are also told to pray for those in authority and to obey them, even the stupid laws, up to the point that they do not violate God's laws (at which point "we must obey God rather than men"). But to say that we cannot vehemently point out the sins of our leaders sure seems to violate the example of our Lord Jesus Christ, and so many other bible "heroes" from both testaments.

megamanlan · « **Reply #44 on:** January 07, 2011, 02:29:25 PM »

[\Quote from: Red on January 06, 2011, 03:11:12 PM
[\Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on January 06, 2011, 02:08:05 PM

Also, SOCIALISM FTW! Jesus wasn't a capitalist. Your family is socialist. [\quote]
How is the Goverment taking the Church's job good?(Only quoting what I'm referring to)
[/quote]
You do not know what a socialist is!
Plz, also read Deuteronomy, that is aboslute Capitalism, Communists and Socialists hate God, Jesus and the Church. Read their writings!

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #45 on:** January 07, 2011, 02:46:11 PM »

Dude, you have no idea what you are talking about. One coudl argue heaven is Communism because sin is removed from the equation and thus Communism can succeed (exception being clearly that Christ is the Lord, rather than all being equal).

Communism does not by necessity hate God. You only think that way because the communist states (which weren't communist btw) that have existed have hated God.

Absolute Capitalism would be a terrible system. Do you not realize that Capitalism is a product of the broken human state? It is the most successful economic system because it assumes that everyone will work based upon the sin that is inside them.

COUNTER_SNIPER · « **Reply #46 on:** January 07, 2011, 02:51:20 PM »

My turn. I personally am not happy with either the Republicans or the Democrats or even the entire American political system the way it has become. However, the American political system reminds me of the United Nations in the fact that we ARE the United States, which, like individual nations, have differing opinions on just about every issue. Combine that with the fact that each state is then represented by multiple individuals, who also have their own opinions, yet often times are controlled more by their own agenda (themselves) rather than what they honestly think is best for our country... That basically leads to all these arguments and debates which rarely seem productive because one minute there are enough yeses and the next minute their screaming bloody murder for the repealing of something that was voted on 8 months prior because a few more people are now in positions of majority. It's all entertaining really, but that's just how I see it: A zoo full of primates fighting over who has control of the most feces-covered banana peels. <-- that is my personal opinion of politics.

My professional view, however, is based on my current occupation: A member of the United States Military. I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United states from enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC. No one in this country is excusable from their actions, not even the President. Yes, he is my ultimate earthly boss and I will respect him for that. However, should he (Any President) be deemed an enemy of the United States, no threat of "Treason" would ever change my mind. While President Obama may not be doing the best job that I think he could be doing, there is no visible reason to think he is bringing direct harm to the United States.

As far as wanting his presidency to fail, I don't see that as treasonous because although he doesn't appear to be directly harming the nation, he is definitely skewing the world's opinion of our nation and he is racking up an increasingly large debt on items that aren't, shall we say, immediately pressing. So, if he fails to complete his objectives, it could be a good thing.

Now as far as the United States' "poor," they are richer than a good majority of the world, so I don't think we have anything to fear there.

-C_S

megamanlan · « **Reply #47 on:** January 07, 2011, 03:03:41 PM »

Actually, God gave that system to the Isrealites as one of the laws they had to obey, It's in Deutronomy, Socialism was made by curruptted man to attempt to take God out of the picture.
In Heaven, there is nothing of the sort because there is no Economic system, everything anyone there would want is there. No one is taking from someone to give to someone else. Socialism is theft, It states that we should take what those that worked for their money, and give it to the poor, by force. That is wrong, and it makes no one want to work so the government will have to force us to. I insist that u read the Communist Manifesto and Karl Marx's writings, and u will learn what they truly want.

And Obama is a Socialist because what the Socialists said was the way to bring America to it's knees, was Buy up major companies so that the gov owns them, Implement Hate Crimes, Healthcare and Allow Gays into their Millitary. In essence, They control UR Health, they choose who lives and who dies, and then destabilization of our Millitary because of Sodomy, Thats what God Calls them.
I hope God will open UR eyes to the truth.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #48 on:** January 07, 2011, 03:07:27 PM »

Quote

there is no visible reason to think he is bringing direct harm to the United States.

lol wut

megamanlan · « **Reply #49 on:** January 07, 2011, 03:12:49 PM »

Quote from: COUNTER_SNIPER on January 07, 2011, 02:51:20 PM

My turn. I personally am not happy with either the Republicans or the Democrats or even the entire American political system the way it has become. However, the American political system reminds me of the United Nations in the fact that we ARE the United States, which, like individual nations, have differing opinions on just about every issue. Combine that with the fact that each state is then represented by multiple individuals, who also have their own opinions, yet often times are controlled more by their own agenda (themselves) rather than what they honestly think is best for our country... That basically leads to all these arguments and debates which rarely seem productive because one minute there are enough yeses and the next minute their screaming bloody murder for the repealing of something that was voted on 8 months prior because a few more people are now in positions of majority. It's all entertaining really, but that's just how I see it: A zoo full of primates fighting over who has control of the most feces-covered banana peels. <-- that is my personal opinion of politics.

I quite argree w/ u on this, except that Healthcare was not wanted by an overwhelming Majority. But yes, they are supposed to be their to represent the STATES, not themselves. I'd hope that we could find people in office that could care more about their true reason of being there instead of the lobbyists, their back pocket and their agenda.

News:

Author Topic: Re: Obama (Read 18892 times)

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

The Schaef

The Schaef

The Schaef