The purpose of the "Giles Free Speech Zone" is to identify problems of concern to the people of Giles County, to discuss them in a gentlemanly and civil manner, while referring to the facts and giving evidence to back up whatever claims are made, making logical arguments that avoid any use of fallacy, and, hopefully, to come together in agreement, and find a positive solution to the problem at hand. Help make a difference! Email "mcpeters@usit.net" to suggest topics or make private comments.
posted by J. Kendrick McPeters | 7:37 PM
96 Comments:
How did America get in this mess? Besides Obama, who could be worse for this country than McCain?
Totally hilarious! Allen Barrett
have to admit- pretty funny. One thing for sure, even Barrett can't be any worse than Georgie W. The country needs to hire Jesse Jackson to take care of Bush in the manner that he proposed taking care of Obama.
To have to admit..
What about bill clinton and Ron Brown? Interesting. The popular laugh, though far too frightening to be a joke, is that obama would be dead within his first two years as President should he select hillary clinton to be his VP.
Oh, and by the way, we CANNOT afford to forget obama and McCain. I'm not toally happy with McCain, but we have no real choice. Obama is certainly not who we need.
It is funny to me how you guys have so much to say about Obama!And you have even realize yet that he will the next President Of The United States Of America! It is out of "your" control. The Bible that the last will be first and the first will be last! Also the number 8 biblically means new beginning!!!!!!! So Get Ready!!We as Africian Americans are so Excited!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GO Obama!!!!!!!!!!!! You guys are so up tight and frantic! It will be alright!!!!!! Calm down!!!!!! Once Obama is President Of The USA
He is Not going to do anything crazy like force people into slavery. Come on now only someone that doesn't have a heart would do that!!!! Take a deep breath and exhale slowly.
I know so many dont like Obama and think he is Satan incarnate. But considering that McCain if (emphasis on if) would be practically dead by the time he left office. Obama is a breath of fresh air and is promising so many great things. Obviously they promise more than they might be able to do but people we need someone with a different idea about things. Someone to bring us together as one nation. I am all for Obama and we should all take time to read more about him instead of denouncing him bc of some bullshit propaganda someone is spitting out.
Obama is nothing more than a lying two bit politician like most all the rest. Read his books, read his record, read his proposals and what you find is a socialist seeking to redistribute wealth that has been worked for to people who refuse to work or better themselves. He is all promise and no delivery based on his congressional record. In Illinois the only thing he delivered on was pushing to allow babies that survived attempted abortions to be killed anyway.
Most votes he didn't even bother to show up for.
If you want a black president at least get someone who has some qualifications, is actually black, an American first, is not a socialist, doesn't hang with terrorist and has a wife that loves this country.
annonymous 10:01.....
Well, we as English Americans are not excited one little bit. Does it not bother you that the democrats throw blacks an entitlement bone every now and again for their vote? Does it not bother you how they pander to blacks? I would be extremely insulted and angry. Allen Keyes is the African American you need to listen to. He is trying to educate his people as to how the democrat party is using them.
You may be excited that a "black" man is running for the presidency, and that's all well and good. But don't vote for a socialist just because he is black. The things he represents are far bigger than his skin color. Think.
Yea a black president.. thats all we need.. This country is going to hell in a hand basket.. Get your guns ready is all i have to say..
Anonymous, July 10, 2008 3:42:00 PM, said:
One thing for sure, even Barrett can't be any worse than Georgie W.
Would that be humanly possible? Dubya has been a disaster of truly biblical proportions. Watch this:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/bush_tours_america_to_survey
The country needs to hire Jesse Jackson to take care of Bush in the manner that he proposed taking care of Obama.
If you're gonna dream, why not dream big? I think we as a nation should launch a "Manhattan Project" style "cost is no object" program to develop a working time machine. Then, we'll send Jesse back 100 years, so he can do the "clip job" on Prescott Bush. Voila, no more Bush Dynasty... and if the time machine only works one way, so much the better!
Anonymous, July 10, 2008 10:01:00 PM, said:
It is funny to me how you guys have so much to say about Obama!
Equally funny, to me anyway, is the way Obama supporters have so LITTLE to say about the plans and programs of President (Almost) Elect Obama. Can you folks name even ONE thing Obama has promised to do that (a) is actually doable, and (b) will make the world a better place?
And you have even realize yet that he will the next President Of The United States Of America!
I hope he will be! I hate practically everything Obama stands for, but he does have at least one saving grace: he's not John McCain. And that means he might NOT launch our nukes and start World War III the first time he loses his temper.
It is out of "your" control.
Is this supposed to be a newsflash or something? Presidential races have been as fixed and fake as professional wrestling, for as long as I can recall. The corporate fat cats who pull the strings on "both" of our beloved political parties, always annoint a candidate from each party. Then We, the People, get to make our meaningless "choice" between the "lesser of two evils," and one corporate shill is picked over the other. The fatcats really don't care which of their "annointed" we happen to pick, just so long as we don't go off the reservation, and pick a non-shill candidate like Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, or Dennis Kucinich. (Not to worry, though, because the corporate owned media whores -- like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly -- will prevent this from accidentally happening by either ignoring or ridiculing the "non-shill" candidates. America will slumber on, while the corporate masters continue to sell out our birthrights.)
The Bible that the last will be first and the first will be last! Also the number 8 biblically means new beginning!!!!!!!
It also says, in real big print, that coveting and stealing are especially bad things. Not that this has stopped any so-called "Democrat" since the days of Grover Cleveland!
So Get Ready!!
Indeed you should get ready! Ready to go, from the back of the bus, to kicked off the bus and into the street! Ready to go from being treated like second class citizens, to being treated like third class citizens.
The Mestizos are flooding across the border, and they're taking away most of the jobs that traditionally served as the first step up the economic ladder for young blacks. In California, Mestizos are using gang violence to run blacks out of their traditional neighborhoods. And before long, Mestizos will OUTVOTE blacks... and, when that happens, blacks will be as totally ignored by the Democrats, as traditional conservatives are by the Republicans. The attitude, in both cases is, "they've got no-one else to vote for, so to hell with them!"
And how does Obama fit in to this inevitable marginalization of blacks? That's simple. His party wants a herd of docile voters who can be bribed into supporting the Dems, while his corporate masters want to increase the supply of cheap labor. So.. open the floodgates, and let them all in! Yeee-haw!!!
Obama made his intentions perfectly clear the other day, when he said that Americans should start learning to speak Spanish. It would be, you know, unfair to expect the Mexican invaders to learn OUR language, and assimilate to OUR culture... so we must learn to fit into theirs.
We as Africian Americans are so Excited!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why all the excitement? He's as much white as he is black, and yet doesn't do anything for a honkie like me. Hmm.
Really, Obama supporters, you should look up the meaning of the term "Judas Goat," and ask yourself if you can honestly support someone who seems to have every intention of making you and your children's lives worse off, rather than better.
CAN WE VOTE OURSELVES BACK TO THE PLANTATION?
YES WE CAN!!! YES WE CAN!!! YES WE CAN!!!
Voting for or against someone because of their skin color is exactly what Dr. King was against, spoke and fought against. Not the color of the skin but the content of the character.
This is a quote from Teddy Roosevelt from 1907 and should still be the measure used today. "We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
It's way past time Americans started looking out for all Americans instead of the rest of the world. We have tried to buy the worlds love and it just didn't work out. It's time to stop exporting our oil, technology and dollars and
focus on our own needs.
Senator Obama has not had one piece of legislation originate from him. He has not done one thing other than talk about what he's going to do. He refuses to release his birth certificate to public view. He has a long history of being involved with a blatant racist and William Ayers and his wife who are thieves and terrorist.
Read his books and his website and what you see is a man determined to be important at any and all cost even the destruction of this nation
he obviously has little or no respect for. In fact about the only things he seems to have going for him other than the dynamics of a good speech maker, even that becomes a minus when he gets off the prepared topic, is a charismatic personality and the fact that Jessie Jackson wants to castrate him. Allen Barrett
anom 3:42 here - Believe me when I say that my comment was not a derogatory statement about Obama -only used as a reference to what Jackson said - ANYBODY but another Republican! Go Obama!
anonymous..
So minor little things like abortion (murdering the unborn), gay marriage, higher taxes, and bigger government don't concern you all that much? If they don't, then perhaps you should vote for the democrat. Brilliant!
For the honkie(Quote). Say what ever you like but Obama is the MAN!!!!!! He can't do no more wrong to this country than all the "white" Presidents. So, if he doesn't have this policy or doesn't have a clean slate or so what is he tells lie after lie or so what if he didn't vote the way you think he should have voted on certain issues. SO What!!!!!!!!!!This what ALL the white Presidents have been doing forever. So, now let the BLACK MAN tells us a few lies. Its okay for the white man to do all that he has done. Because remember it has been them that has ran the country. So, it is only fair for the Blacks to have their chance. Remember gas is $4.00/gallon . And the world trade centers were blew up and "your" President never did a thing about that instead he put us into a war that shouldn't have been.Why? Don't know.Me either. Just face it and deal with it!!!!!OBAMA BABY!!!!!!! And as far as being kicked off the bus It will probably not be "us" being kicked off. Because like you said we have already been on the back of the bus so maybe "yall" want be able to ride. Now thats JUSTICE!!!!!!!!!!!
This country is already in hell with out a basket and all because of the hand that it has been in. We need another white president? WOW! Did you take your meds today!
And blacks claim it is the white man who is prejudiced! What a laugh that is. We have to bend over backwatds for them and they still treat us like dirt. No, it is they who are largely prejudiced. I can see the roots of it are in slavery, but we had NOTHING to do with it. I think it is people like the one who posted above who need to "get over it" and act like a responsible adult.
The above post PROVES without a doubt that this election is about race and is not concerned with issues of higher taxes, murdering the unborn, homosexual rights, and etc. Shameful.
Anyone who votes for that IDIOT OBAMA, does not have one ounce of christian faith in them.
Now that is not nice, and its very closed minded, similar to everything that Wab and his cronies stand for.
Anonymous, July 12, 2008 3:18:00 AM, said:
For the honkie(Quote). Say what ever you like but Obama is the MAN!!!!!!
Wow. His skin is slightly darker than mine. And THIS qualifies him to be President??? I'm so very, very impressed!
He can't do no more wrong to this country than all the "white" Presidents.
Not so. He could easily bring this country to an utter collapse:
http://tinyurl.com/5o6xvg
Actually, I'm rooting for a full blown Obama-tastrophy, because, until this country hits absolute rock bottom, the average uninformed voter probably won't see any reason to change anything.
So, if he doesn't have this policy or doesn't have a clean slate or so what is he tells lie after lie or so what if he didn't vote the way you think he should have voted on certain issues. SO What!!!!!!!!!!
In other words, all that matters is that Obama has slightly darker skin than McCain? How is voting based on skin color not completely racist?
This what ALL the white Presidents have been doing forever.
Most Presidents, since Calvin Coolidge, have been complete scumbags. So how does that justify voting in another scumbag like Obama? Why can't we vote for a non-scumbag, and have some "change we can believe in?"
Personally, I'd almost be willing to sell my soul to the Devil, if it would get Walter Williams and Larry Elder elected as Prez/VP. And they're not only MUCH darker than Obama, they were both born in the United States, and therefore are legally qualified to be President.
Would you vote for the Williams/Elder ticket? I'm just curious to see if some factor other than skin color matters to you.
So, now let the BLACK MAN tells us a few lies. Its okay for the white man to do all that he has done. Because remember it has been them that has ran the country.
Well, there's your problem right there. Thinking that ANY politician can "run the country." This isn't the Soviet Union; here, "the country" is supposed to be "run" by the accumulated mass of free decisions made by free individuals. (A process known as free market capitalism, FYI.)
In my opinion, neither Obama or McCain is qualified to work as a night shift manager at a McDonalds franchise. McCain "earned" his fortune by dumping his first wife, and marrying into a beer money family. And I'm pretty sure Obama has never held a real job in the private sector, in his whole life.
You'd have to be crazy to want to give essentially dictatorial power -- "run the country," remember? -- to either one of these nitwits.
So, it is only fair for the Blacks to have their chance.
Well, don't get your hopes up too high. Obama has already sold you down the river, but you're so mesmerized by the slightly brownish color of his skin, that you haven't yet noticed. Too bad.
There are only two things that leaders of the Democrat party care about: money and votes. When most blacks have lost their jobs to the Mexican invaders, they won't have enough money to interest the party leaders. And when the Mexicans are able to OUTVOTE blacks, that will be the end of the Democrat party's concern for blacks. Wait and see if I'm not right!
Remember gas is $4.00/gallon . And the world trade centers were blew up and "your" President never did a thing about that instead he put us into a war that shouldn't have been.
I can't disagree with any of that, other than one thing-- how DARE you call George W. Bush my president? I detest the whole Bush clan, and wouldn't vote for any of them for any job, including dog catcher. Ever since the day that a close friend of the Bush family attempted to kill Ronald Reagan -- a little bit suspicious, don't you think? -- the Bush's have been in control and driven the country into ruination.
Why? Don't know.Me either. Just face it and deal with it!
Actually, I do know. Bush launched that war (which was planned LONG before 9-11) for several reasons, all bad: (1) for the thrill, and high approval ratings, which go along with being a "wartime commander in chief" (2) to drum up business for Halliburton and his other war-profiteer cronies, (3) to run up the price of oil, and steal the Iraqi oil fields, if possible, (4) to advance the interests of the State of Israel, and (5) to settle an old grudge involving Saddam Huesein. (It's also possible, though we have only circumstantial evidence to suggest it, that Bush and Cheney are Satan worshippers who revel in the deaths on both sides, which they regard as "blood offerings" to their true Lord and Master, Lucifer.)
!!!!OBAMA BABY!!!!!!!
Can you give even ONE reason for supporting Obama that doesn't involve skin color? Can you name even ONE program or policy suggestion of Obama's that will be of benefit to the nation as a whole? If you can't, then quite frankly, I think you should just sit out the November election. And that goes for everyone else planning to cast a vote purely on the basis of race... JUST STAY HOME, and let the "grown ups" take care of the election. Thank you!
And as far as being kicked off the bus It will probably not be "us" being kicked off.
You're deluded. The Mexicans are displacing blacks in neighborhoods all across the Southwest, and the racial tensions between blacks and Mexicans are getting pretty ugly. Filling up America with Mexicans -- which Obama fully supports, BTW -- will do nothing good for blacks.
Because like you said we have already been on the back of the bus
I doubt that very much. White males like myself have been riding the back of the bus -- thanks to racist "affirmative action" laws -- for over forty years now. And what have blacks done with four decades of legal coddling? Not enough to justify all the evil that's been done to whites like myself who were born a hundred years after the last American slave was freed.
If you are forty years old or younger, you've spent your entire life being babied and pampered by laws that treat you like a permanent and helpless victim. And yet you claim to be a rider of "the back of the buss?" Ha. Now that's a good one!
so maybe "yall" want be able to ride. Now thats JUSTICE!!!!!!!!
I've never done a damned thing to any black person. I treat everyone as an individual, and give them the benefit of a doubt, no matter what the color of their skin.
Yet you believe that "justice" will only be met, after I'm punished further for the sins other whites (long dead) did to their slaves (who are also long dead.)
This is not only appallingly RACIST, it makes no logical sense whatsoever. I'm begining to suspect that you're not really a black person, but instead a Ku-Kluxer pretending to be black in order to make blacks look stupid and racist.
If you wish to disprove the above theory, you only have to give up the cloak of anonymity, and start posting under your "real name." Think it over, okay?
Look at it this way - If Obummer get elected we can call this nation what it has & will become - an Obama nation.
new pledge - stuff one finger in mouth & other in exhast hole - when drums roll, everybody switch - it's called a platform of "change"
I just received an email saying Obama wasn't qualified to be president,as Obama is not legally a U. S. natural-born citizen according to law on the books at the time of his birth which falls between "December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986.
Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen. If the child was not born to two U. S. citizen parents, {which of course is what exempts John McCain, though he was born in Panama Canal}.
If one parent was born in the U. S. at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.
Obama's mother was 18 at his birth so that leaves her not a US citizen for 5 years after age 16.
Could this be true?
Understand this does not mean I am for or against Obama, just want to know it it's true.
Looks like that was just another stupid email.
Check
http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert
Anonymous, July 14, 2008 1:56:00 PM, said:
Looks like that was just another stupid email.
Maybe. Maybe not. I found it curious that Obama's "proof" was presented in such a way, as to be almost unreadable. So, I right clicked the "birth certificate" and saved it to "My Pictures." Then I launched "Microsoft Paint" and opened the file I'd just saved.
And guess what? The "certificate" offered by Obama as "proof" is NOT his original birth certificate. In fact, it was printed at least fifteen years after he was born!
How do I know this? Because there is a notation (bottom left) that shows it was printed on a laser printer... and the first (monster sized and very expensive) laser printer was sold by IBM in 1976!
Anyone who knows how bribable state record-keeping workers are, has to view this "certificate" with a great deal of skepticism. Why would Obama attempt to hoodwink the public with this "certificate" if he really has an authentic document in his possession? My guess is that the rumors are true, and Obama actually WAS born in Kenya, and thus is not legally qualified to be President.
Wonder why McCain doesn't make something of this situation? Maybe, because people in glass houses know better than to throw bricks! The following article was published in "The New York Times" three days ago:
July 11, 2008
A Hint of New Life to a McCain Birth Issue
By ADAM LIPTAK
In the most detailed examination yet of Senator John McCain’s eligibility to be president, a law professor at the University of Arizona has concluded that neither Mr. McCain’s birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone nor the fact that his parents were American citizens is enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the president must be a “natural-born citizen.”
The analysis, by Prof. Gabriel J. Chin, focused on a 1937 law that has been largely overlooked in the debate over Mr. McCain’s eligibility to be president. The law conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, and it made John McCain a citizen just before his first birthday. But the law came too late, Professor Chin argued, to make Mr. McCain a natural-born citizen.
“It’s preposterous that a technicality like this can make a difference in an advanced democracy,” Professor Chin said. “But this is the constitutional text that we have.”
Several legal experts said that Professor Chin’s analysis was careful and plausible. But they added that nothing was very likely to follow from it.
“No court will get close to it, and everyone else is on board, so there’s a constitutional consensus, the merits of arguments such as this one aside,” said Peter J. Spiro, an authority on the law of citizenship at Temple University.
Mr. McCain has dismissed any suggestion that he does not meet the citizenship test.
In April, the Senate approved a nonbinding resolution declaring that Mr. McCain is eligible to be president. Its sponsors said the nation’s founders would have never intended to deny the presidency to the offspring of military personnel stationed out of the country.
A lawsuit challenging Mr. McCain’s qualifications is pending in the Federal District Court in Concord, N.H.
There are, Professor Chin argued in his analysis, only two ways to become a natural-born citizen. One, specified in the Constitution, is to be born in the United States. The other way is to be covered by a law enacted by Congress at the time of one’s birth.
Professor Chin wrote that simply being born in the Canal Zone did not satisfy the 14th Amendment, which says that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”
A series of early-20th-century decisions known as the Insular Cases, he wrote, ruled that unincorporated territories acquired by the United States were not part of the nation for constitutional purposes. The Insular Cases did not directly address the Canal Zone. But the zone was generally considered an unincorporated territory before it was returned to Panama in 1999, and some people born in the Canal Zone when it was under American jurisdiction have been deported from the United States or convicted of being here illegally.
The second way Mr. McCain could have, and ultimately did, become a citizen was by statute, Professor Chin wrote. In Rogers v. Bellei in 1971, the Supreme Court said Congress had broad authority to decide whether and when children born to American citizens abroad are citizens.
At the time of Mr. McCain’s birth, the relevant law granted citizenship to any child born to an American parent “out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States.” Professor Chin said the term “limits and jurisdiction” left a crucial gap. The Canal Zone was beyond the limits of the United States but not beyond its jurisdiction, and thus the law did not apply to Mr. McCain.
In 1937, Congress addressed the problem, enacting a law that granted citizenship to people born in the Canal Zone after 1904. That made Mr. McCain a citizen, but not one who was naturally born, Professor Chin said, because the citizenship was conferred after his birth.
In his paper and in an interview, Professor Chin, a registered Democrat, said he had no political motive in raising the question.
In March, Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard and an adviser to Senator Barack Obama, prepared a memorandum on these questions with Theodore B. Olson, a former solicitor general in the Bush administration. The memorandum concluded that Mr. McCain is a natural-born citizen based on the place of his birth, the citizenship of his parents and their service to the country.
In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Olson, whose firm represents Mr. McCain in the New Hampshire lawsuit, said Congress could not have intended to leave the gap described by Professor Chin. The 1937 law, Mr. Olson said, was not a fix but a way to clarify what Congress had meant all along.
Professor Tribe agreed. Reading the “limits and jurisdiction” clause as Professor Chin does, Professor Tribe said, “is to attribute a crazy design to Congress” that “would create an irrational gap.”
Brian Rogers, a McCain spokesman, said the campaign concurred and was confident Mr. McCain is eligible to serve.
In the motion to dismiss the New Hampshire suit, Mr. McCain’s lawyers said an individual citizen like the plaintiff, a Nashua man named Fred Hollander, lacks proof of direct injury and cannot sue.
Daniel P. Tokaji, an election law expert at Ohio State University, agreed. “It is awfully unlikely that a federal court would say that an individual voter has standing,” he said. “It is questionable whether anyone would have standing to raise that claim. You’d have to think a federal court would look for every possible way to avoid deciding the issue.”
As I've said before... a plague on both their houses!!!
to anonymous July 11 7:25 - you said,"So minor little things like abortion (murdering the unborn), gay marriage, higher taxes, and bigger government don't concern you all that much? If they don't, then perhaps you should vote for the democrat. Brilliant!"
Well, as to higher taxes and bigger government- that's a coin flip- Bush has proved that the Republicans are just as good at it as Democrats. As to your, holier than thou, attitude on abortion and gay marriage, well I don't figure that's any of your business - if you are not involved in it.
-----------------------------------
to anonymous July 12, 2008 7:49 - and you said,"Anyone who votes for that IDIOT OBAMA, does not have one ounce of christian faith in them."
My, my. You both sound like REAL FINE upstanding self professed Christians to me.
Actually sounds like hogwash from two ignorant idiots! I say two idiots, because surely there can't be one person that is that stupid.
Saturday, July 12, 2008 7:49:00 AM
Obama is a half white socialist with out a clue what all his freebie handouts will cost it'll make what we've paid for 911 , katrina an the war look like peanuts.
A Taxpayer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Col, Sanders.
to anonymous 9:46
I mentioned minor little things like abortion (murdering of the unborn) and gay marriage in particular, becaue both are an abomination to God. It makes you liberals so angry when people like me mention it because you KNOW both are wrong! So you try to salve your conscience by calling people like me Bible thumpers, right wing fanatics, holier than thou, etc. There was a time when Christian minded people were not ridiculed for their beliefs. The Book has not changed, and AGAIN, people like me have not moved from those positions. Have you?
You say that it's none of my business whether or not you vote for candidates who are pro murder and pro gay marriage. You are absolutely right about that. However, my Bible (and yours as well) teaches in at least a couple of places that we are NOT to be part of things like that. I forget the actual passages, but they are there and can't be denied. The irony of it all is that I attend church with people who vote democrat. I've never understood that. I have discussed the matter of abortion with a couple of my liberal friends at church, and they respond by saying the same thing you did. That is, they claim innocence because they are not the ones actually killing the children. Outrageous. Then they into the voting booth and vote for pro-death politicians. Yes, it may be none of my business, but there are a lot of people who are going to have to give an account for these things. You know all this though, don't you?
One last comment. This is NOT the same democrat party that your parents and grandparents aligned themselves with. Think.
1128 sure thing they'll get plucked first, then quarted & fried!
Kendrick
I have aways had alot of respect for you bc you stand up for what you believe in and Im glad that you started this blog. I dont always agree with some of things you write about and thats ok........everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Nonetheless, the respect is there for you. I like someone who stands up for their convictions. I've never commented but you said something that I took very personal. So, with all do respect........this comment was not nice, "In my opinion, neither Obama or McCain is qualified to work as a night shift manager at a McDonalds franchise." I happen to be an assistant mgr at McDonald's and there are a few things I want people to know. We arent just slinging burgers. I have had to attend three different training classes (so far) to be able to be an assistant mgr that have lasted 1-2 wks. There is alot of training that goes into being Mgt. And, I would like to clear up this fact too........McDonald's is NOT a minimum wage job.......not even for the teenagers who work there. As assistant mgr., I make $40,000 a yr with allowances for expenses for myself going back and forth to work which brings my total income up to about $50,000 a yr. with health, dental and vision benefits. This may not seem like alot of money to some people but since I have been employed there, I have been able to buy myself a new home, put braces on my teeth (that my parents couldnt afford), and I've furnished my new home with nice things. I will soon be attending the McDonald's university so I can go further up the ladder and I can become mgr. of a store or even own my own McDonald's. Please understand, Kendrick, I dont think either candidate is qualified to poop in their own toilet with out making a mess. I just didnt care for the reference to McDonald's. I hope you didnt mean the McDonald's part of the comment as I took it and if you didnt, I'm sorry for bringing it up. But I do hope this clears things up as far as McDonald's is concerned. It is a great place to work!!!!!!!!!!!
To Anon8:07 ---You stated:
"So you try to salve your conscience by calling people like me Bible thumpers, right wing fanatics, holier than thou, etc. There was a time when Christian minded people were not ridiculed for their beliefs. The Book has not changed, and AGAIN, people like me have not moved from those positions. Have you?"
Well the "Book" may not have changed (but of course it most certainly has changed over the last couple of thousand years), but people of your ilk have certainly changed the interpretation to suit what they personally believe and DEMAND that everybody believe as they believe! I find that attitude to be THE MOST dangerous problem facing America - You have half wit TV preachers conning weak and/or poor viewers to SEND IN THE CASH , so you'll GO TO HEAVEN! I'm trying to figure out who would want to go to a place filled with con artists and people that have no tolerance for other ideas, always quick to tell everyone how they are correct and how every other idea is wrong. People much like yourself. If there is a heaven and it is full of only people like you, then I think I'll pass, thank you.
anonymous..
So, does your Bible not mention anything about hands that shed innocent blood and how man laying with man is an abomination? Does your Bible not mention that God knew them even before they were known (speaking of the unborn)?
Yes, there are televangelists who talk people out of their money. We all know that, but it doesn't change the fact that murdering innocent children and homosexual marriage are two things clearly condemned in the Bible. Man has changed, but the warnings haven't. So, if it's not "salving the conscience" by promoting such things, then it must be ignorance or contempt for God's word. In general, which would you say it is?
Let me, as a Bible thumper and right wing fanatic, share one last thought with you. Let's assume that this truly is a Christian nation. Were that true, Senator McCain would win the presidency in a landslide if he picked a running mate like Huckabee. Would you agree with that? Think.
note - I don't think we need to worry about those who use the cloth to fleece people - there's a special place for them & it ain't pleasant. The good one's aren't hard to find & God is always there if you look or listen or see or feel
To July 16, 2008 7:00:00 AM: Just curious - Do you think that the interpretation of the bible has changed over the past hundreds of years to suit the cause dejour, whether it be good or bad, or has the perception / definition of good and bad changed?
Good and bad have become opinions - a similar process to WWI Germany through 1945. We call it relativism, arguably whatever feels good is moulded by the power structure for themselves. Look around - lot's of oil but none for the descendents of those who truly gave their lives to preserve those vast reserves that were supposed to be for us. We have the same Constitution, but it now means whatever some judges says it means, not what is written!
All we hear is BS - supply & demand but not a step to the reality of the subject .. price & manipulation. SUPPLY- Conserve and change your lifestyle back to the 1800's, but WE have more than enough for ourselves! 300 million people & 30 million of them illegal aliens using your resources and driving the price of subsistence double & triple & to the moon. SUPPLY - can't drill because you might inconvenience a polar bear or is it drill, drill, and drill some more so the oil magnets can continue to drive the price up by speculation, and sell what we have to someone else.
But, that's modern education - all a matter of someone's opinion - & the someone is a globalist who hates & cares squat about the US!
Not one jot or title, my enlightened friend (dejour).Impressive. People are the ones who changed, not the Bible.
Just curious....Do you think Bible principles concerning homosexuality and the murder of innocent children are subject to individual interpretation? If those things aren't condemned, then what does the Bible teach about them, according to YOUR interpretation?
Would someone please respond to the question about McCain picking Huckabee (or someone like him) as a running mate? Please. I want to know why he wouldn't win in a landslide if this truly was a Christian nation.
McCain couldn't win a real election even if he ran with or against Huckleberry Finn. He is a liberal looser who has not lifted a finger to acknowledge Christianity or sovergnty of this nation! Unfortunately, the other choice will get your throat slit if your wife doesn't wear a burka!
This country is being "oil-nuked" by the Arabs & globalists right now. By year end, there will be no money left in this country, no property to own, just debt with no way to pay it and no way to produce a bullet, let alone defend ourselves.
Your standard of living has just been moved back a hundred years. The Mexicans were invited in to show us how to live & adjust to our new way of life, working for the internationalists. Imagine, not enough natural resources to sustain our sovergn land, in a country overrun by 30 million or more (10%) illegals, plus selling the Alaskan oil to other nations for huge profit, in a speculative frenzy, & whining about not enough energy supply, food supply, ad infinitum!!!!!
These rats should be in jail!
You didn't really address my question. Were this a Christian nation, wouldn't a candidate with Christian values and beliefs win an election? In addition, I would like to know if you think Bible teaching on homosexuality and the slaughter of the innocent unborn are issues subject to one's own interpretation?
to July 17, 2008 5:26:00 PM -sorry for the slow response,but I don't get on this blog much. As to your question about "Bible teachings on homosexuality and the slaughter of the innocent unborn are issues" - are we talking old or new testament? Personally, I'm not opposed to either.
Anonymous, July 15, 2008 2:09:00 PM, said:
I have aways had alot of respect for you bc you stand up for what you believe in and Im glad that you started this blog.
Thank you for your kind words. They are most appreciated!
I dont always agree with some of things you write about and thats ok........everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Indeed... that's what they call "The American Way," right?
Nonetheless, the respect is there for you. I like someone who stands up for their convictions. I've never commented but you said something that I took very personal. So, with all do respect........this comment was not nice, "In my opinion, neither Obama or McCain is qualified to work as a night shift manager at a McDonalds franchise."
I'm sorry you took offense... in truth, I meant no disrespect toward either McDonalds, or the people who work there. I merely was trying to mention a job which everyone was familiar with, which involved "working with other people" and which was considered fairly low on the "ladder."
I meant my comment to reflect my low opinion of McCain -- a man prone to screaming at people till he turns red faced when he doesn't get his way -- and Obama, an "empty suit" who coasted to the top via affirmative action, but who has no skill other than making vacuous "feel good" speeches. I suppose either of these two windbags could be trained to bus tables, or mop the floor at McDonalds. But I truly don't think they have "the right stuff" to hold any position of responsibility... such as, say, night shift manager.
Rather than taking offense, you should've recognized a backhanded complement: it is my sincere belief that the average McDonald's manager is far more ethical, responsible, and trustworthy than any of the folks who wind up as "serious" candidates for President of the United States. And you know what? McDonald's managers HAVE to be ethical, trustworthy, and responsible... because if they aren't, they'll quickly be fired from the job. McDonald's managers, in short, are accountable. Presidents, on the other hand, are not. True, if they make a mess of their first term, they may offend enough voters that they aren't re-elected... but that's not much comfort if, say, you're a soldier killed in an unnecessary foreign war!
NcDonald's managers achieve their position by demonstrating competence. Politicians -- including Presidents -- get their position, merely by lying to, and fooling, the majority of those who vote. Is it any wonder that I'd prefer to be "led" by a fast food manager, than a professional politician? Hardly!
I happen to be an assistant mgr at McDonald's and there are a few things I want people to know. We arent just slinging burgers. I have had to attend three different training classes (so far) to be able to be an assistant mgr that have lasted 1-2 wks. There is alot of training that goes into being Mgt. And, I would like to clear up this fact too........McDonald's is NOT a minimum wage job.......not even for the teenagers who work there. As assistant mgr., I make $40,000 a yr with allowances for expenses for myself going back and forth to work which brings my total income up to about $50,000 a yr. with health, dental and vision benefits. This may not seem like alot of money to some people but since I have been employed there, I have been able to buy myself a new home, put braces on my teeth (that my parents couldnt afford), and I've furnished my new home with nice things. I will soon be attending the McDonald's university so I can go further up the ladder and I can become mgr. of a store or even own my own McDonald's.
Wow. I appreciate you taking the time to write this, as it quite nicely dovetails with my long held belief in the free market. It is really somewhat inspiring to see how far a person can go, in what so many liberals scorn as a lowly "McJob," simply by working hard and following the rules. So, I thank you once again for explaining how things work, and I wish you the very best of luck in climbing up the ladder to the top.
Please understand, Kendrick, I dont think either candidate is qualified to poop in their own toilet with out making a mess.
Hah! I agree. Unfortunately, the way the political system is rigged, there's not much chance of a decent candidate being nominated, let alone elected.
I've said on this blog many times, that elections are just "popularity contests" and that we need to "abolish democracy" if we ever expect to be truly free. I'd always hoped, whenever I made such a "radical" comment, that someone would demand to know what I'd do, if we actually got rid of elections.
Well, I really do have an answer to that question, but most people will consider it impractical and extreme. So let me illustrate its workability, by flipping it around. Try to imagine that we used "the modern political process" to fill up our jury boxes....
Imagine living in a world where the most vain and self important people were encouraged to "nominate" themselves to run for election as a juror. Imagine a world where only the rich, or those who could siphon "campaign contributions" from wealthy friends, were able to mount "credible" campaigns for juror. Imagine the airwaves and newspapers being overflowed with political ads where jury candidate A trashes jury candidate B, and vice versa. Imagine a world where jury candidates hired pollsters and spin-handlers in order to tell the public exactly what they want to hear, and then, after the election, completely forgot about these "campaign promises."
I think we can all agree that a world with a politicized jury system, would be one where "justice" was an exceedingly rare commodity... much like "representation" for the "common man" is so exceedingly rare in today's world!
But, whoever said that "politics" was required, in order to have "representative government?" Not the ancient Greeks! They used the same "random sortition" system that we use to select jurors, to pick their representatives. And that's exactly what I propose -- cancel the elections, and give us a Congress of "ordinary voters" chosen by random lot. What could be more "representative" than that? And could randomly chosen voters POSSIBLY do any worse than the swindlers and con men who currently purport to "represent" us? I think not!
What about picking a President without resorting to politics? Well, I've been saying, for the last several months, that we should cancel the fall election, and put the names of every fast food manager in the US into a big drum, and then draw out two names -- one for President, and one for VP. As long as they meet the constitutional requirements for age and citizenship, they'd get a four year shot at the job, and be out -- to live again as "normal people," without Secret Service protection, a big pension, or any other perks.
Can anyone doubt that a President and Veep chosen this way will, almost certainly, be better than anyone who claws their way to the top of the "political process?" In the world of private businesses, the cream rises to the top. But in the world of government -- even DEMOCRATIC government, it is the scum that rises to the top.
Every four years, I look at the presidential candidates offered by the alleged "two-party system," and say to myself, "Wow! We've finally struck bottom... there's no way that anyone worse than these two bozos will ever be nominated! And yet... four years later, I am always proven wrong, when the DemoPublicans choose two sock puppets even worse than those offered in the previous election.
I just didnt care for the reference to McDonald's.
I'm sorry about that. Maybe next time, I'll throw in a Simpsons reference, and say "Krusty Burgers" instead of "McDonalds."
I hope you didnt mean the McDonald's part of the comment as I took it and if you didnt, I'm sorry for bringing it up. But I do hope this clears things up as far as McDonald's is concerned. It is a great place to work!!!!!!!!!!!
I too hope things are cleared up, and I agree with your assessment of McDonalds. Again, thanks for giving me -- and this blog's readers -- a bit of an education... and good luck climbing the ladder of success. Do take care!
Anonymous, July 15, 2008 2:09:00 PM:
I meant to add my apologies on how long the above took me to post. I wrote about 90% of it two nights ago, and stopped working because I was too sleepy to finish. Then last night, I finished it, but -- again being too far past my bedtime -- accidentally deleted it when I was trying to post it.
So, I started again tonight with the 90% version (which I had, luckily, saved), finished it, and got it posted. I hope it explains my position to your satisfaction... and that you'll forgive me for how long it took to get on the blog!
Kendrick - excellent analysis - got to agree on the name in the hat/ I say noting could be worse than the two rejects now running - wish they were running the other way. However, I'm sure it will get worse next time ... if we're allowed to vote next time
The new Testament.
8:45, "Rather than taking offense, you should've recognized a backhanded complement..."
come on its obvious you didnt mean that comment about mcdonalds as a compliment. instead of making up an explanation to cover up your insult you should have just admitted the insult and apologized. probably the only reason you even responded to it was to give yourself a reason to spout another of your long tirades against the government.
Anonymous, July 17, 2008 9:36:00 PM, said:
Kendrick - excellent analysis - got to agree on the name in the hat/
Yes... wouldn't it be great to never, EVER hear another political ad, ever again? And if our "representatives" knew that "random chance," and not "a mandate of the People" had placed them in power, they'd likely be a tad humbler... which would be a very good thing!
I say noting could be worse than the two rejects now running - wish they were running the other way.
Or, at least, running in the general direction of the edge of a cliff!
However, I'm sure it will get worse next time ...
I'm expecting two ex-cons to get the DemoPublican annointment in 2012. (I can't think of many other ways to continue the unending downward trend!)
if we're allowed to vote next time
Aye, there's the rub! Our Masters may decide that it's time to end the Charade of Democracy, and simply cancel the next election. Doing this would, at least, be a refreshing whiff on honesty, on an otherwise putrid political system!
Anonymous, July 18, 2008 5:39:00 PM, said:
come on its obvious you didnt mean that comment about mcdonalds as a compliment.
You don't understand the difference between an "intentional compliment" and a "backhanded compliment," do you? My purpose in comparing "McBama" to a hypothetical McDonalds night manager was to make clear that I believed the latter was far superior -- in terms of ethics and competence -- to the former.
Obviously my intention wasn't to praise McDonalds managers... but I wasn't trying to put them down, either. Here are the exact words I used : In my opinion, neither Obama or McCain is qualified to work as a night shift manager at a McDonalds franchise. I then went on to point out that McCain ditched his first wife, to marry into a rich family, and that what little Obama had accomplished was via affirmative action.
I chose the words "night shift manger" at a McDonalds very carefully, to paint a very specific picture. A McDonalds manager is someone who (more likely than not) started out doing something very basic, such as cooking burgers. At some point, they demonstrated "people skills" or a "good work ethic" or something similar, and were promoted to assistant manager. In this position, they would have to deal effectively, not just with inanimate food, but with people. And, if it turned out they couldn't "cut the mustard," they'd quickly be fired (or perhaps demoted to their old job). In any event, it is clear that managing a McDonalds is a position of responsibility. The quality of the manager has a direct impact on the bottom line. A manager who (like John McCain) attempts to get his way by screaming and cursing at people, would cause employee morale to plument. And a manager (like Obama) who had no skills, but had been promoted to manager in order to meet a "diversity" quota, likewise would have a hard time motivating the troops.
I never intended to suggest anything negative about McDonalds managers. I simply needed an instantly recognizable example of a job that required managing other people, that was closer to the bottom of the ladder than the top. You see, the President's job -- if you follow the Constitution, anyway -- is to supervise the work of other people. By making the point that any random "night shift manager at a McDonalds franchise" is more qualified to be President, than either of the "presumptive nominees" of the Demopublican Party, I was condemning "McBama" about as harshly as I could. I could've said that neither McCain or Obama was qualified to work as a greeter at a Walmart store. But that would be obviously untrue, as "Walmart door greeter" is about the only private sector job I can think of that they might actually be able to handle. To take it to the other extreme, I also could have said that Steve Jobs -- probably the top corporate CEO in the US -- was more qualified than either McCain or Obama. But that would've been a ridiculous comparison, too, since nobody really expects the President to be as brilliant or successful as Steve Jobs.
Saying that "McBama" couldn't cut the mustard as a fast food manager was, IMO, just right. It's plausible, given what we know about the two candidates. And, saying that literally hundreds of thousands of fast food managers would be better suited to the Presidency, causes one to realize how dismal the "choice" this fall truly is. In a somewhat better world, a few years' worth of managing a burger joint ought NOT cause you to outrank the officially annointed candidates of our beloved "two party" system. In a somewhat better world, "we the people" would take offense if we saw either party nominate someone who had never run a successful Fortune 500 business. Alas, we are so far from that somewhat better world, that either McCain or Obama will be named President this fall, like it or lump it.
instead of making up an explanation to cover up your insult
You just called me a liar, and I do not appreciate that. If I say something, you can take it to the bank, cash the check, and spend the money. That's because I don't lie, ever.
Why do I refuse to lie? Because I am very aware of my own mortality, and have a strong desire to wind up in The Good Place -- reunited with my beloved parents, and many dear friends -- after I die. As I am considered "morbidly obese," -- doctor lingo for "so fat I could drop dead any minute" -- I don't take my next heartbeat for granted. Every morning when I wake up, I thank God for two things: giving me another 24 hours use of my overtaxed heart, and for another 24 hours of vision, despite the glaucoma that's strangling my optic nerves. I thank God for these two miracles every morning without fail... and then I ask Him to give me another day's worth of heartbeats and vision. (And so far, He hasn't let me down.)
About four months ago, I ran out of blood pressure medicine, and woke up one morning with a dark red splotch blocking most of the sight in my right eye. It turned out not to be all that serious -- a small blood vessel in my eye had burst from my high blood pressure -- and, after a few months, the last of the splotch faded away. But what if that overtaxed blood vessel had been located a few inches further back... in my brain?
Well, in that case, I'd have had a stroke, and I might not be here anymore to run this blog. The point is, when I say that I'm aware of my own mortality, you'd better believe I'm serious about it. And since I seriously would prefer to go to Heaven when I keel over dead -- which I could do at literally any minute -- I do NOT tell lies. Not to win a political debate. Not for any other reason.
you should have just admitted the insult and apologized.
No insult was intended, so there was no reason for me to offer any apology.
probably the only reason you even responded to it was to give yourself a reason to spout another of your long tirades against the government.
Since when do I need a "reason" to do that? I run this blog, ya know... so if I want to post a "long tirade" against the government, or anything else, I can simply start a new topic thread anytime I like. (Incidentally, that would get me more readership, to boot, than posting my thoughts as a comment.) No, the real reason -- and the only reason -- I responded, was to make clear to the anonymous McDonalds manager, that I meant no insult with what I said. And you can believe that, or not, if you like... but remember... I DON'T TELL LIES.
The words, "brain dead" keeps swirrling around in my mind. I think "O'buma" and who would vote for him & the only flash is "brain dead". Then, I look at the other candidate who some think will save us & think of the savior and the saved & the same flash blots everything else out, "brain dead".
How did this happen? Look at all the foultry of our education system - & the fact that our two bit leader is undoubtedly less efficient at screwing things up as the average headmasters of confusion! Could it be that what little our current masters of deception had was burned up with LSD & glue fumes?
to: July 18, 2008 5:26:00 PM - New Testament eh?. Question - is it ok to believe in the writings of the Old Testament or is that the same as being a non believer? just wondering.
anonymous..
I realize that you are just trying to be humorous and impress your friends, but I don't think it's working.
The Old Law (Testament) was put aside as the standard to live by when Christ died on the cross. The New Testament is the law under which we live today. That DOES NOT mean that anything found in the Old Testament is wrong or false. This is what I believe, and you are free to believe whatever you want about the scriptures.
Your attempt to trip me up was silly.
The Old Testament contained the Law among many other things of great importance, at no time do we see Jesus saying that the Law of the Old Testament was put away, rather it's the penalty of the Law that Christ set aside through His Grace.
While "we" have set aside many parts of the "rules" and ignore many parts of the Commandments that does not remove our guilt for breaking that law, there is always a penalty for not following God's directions.
Our Salvation is no longer dependent on the law but on the Grace of God through His Son Jesus the Christ. Allen Barrett
to July 20, 2008 8:33:00 AM -make no mistake - I just asking questions. I had no forethought of "tripping you up" or to be "humorous" or "impress my friends". Actually my friends know that when I ask a question, I'm asking for a reason and looking for an answer -nothing more, nothing less. (what certainly would amaze them is that I'm on an ultra right wing blog asking them). If you rather I didn't ask any more, I certainly won't.
to: J. KENDRICK MCPETERS!!........
FIRST OF ALL NONE OF WHAT I WROTE WAS MEANT TOWARDS JUST U!! AND BY YOU SAYIN YOU AINT NEVA DID NUTTIN TO ANY BLACK PEOPLE..HAHAHA..(I WAS TAUGHT THAT A GUILTY DOG ALWAYS BARKS)AND NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY OBAMA IS GOIN TO BE THA NEXT PRESIDENT SO YOU MAY AS WELL GET OVA IT CUZ THERE IS ABSOULTELY NUTTIN U CAN DO ABOUT IT AND THATS WATS SO FUNNY ABOUT IT!!AND YALL SAYIN WE "BLACKS" ARE ONLY VOTIN FOR OBAMA CUZ HE'S BLACK AND THATS EXACTLY RIGHT!!!! AINT THAT WHY YALL VOTIN FOR DAT OLD WRINKLED MAN DO YALL EVEN KNO HIS FIRST NAME?? I MEAN COME ON YALL NEED TO GET A LIFE!! YALL ONLY SAYIN THIS CUZ YALL ON THA COMPUTER CUZ I PROMISE YALL WONT SAY HE'S A DEVIL AND ALL THIS STUFF TO A "BLACK PERSONS" FACE!! OBAMA IS THA NEXT PRESIDENT!!
BECUZ BEFORE NOVEMBER MCCAIN WILL NEED A WALKER AND A BED PAN YA DIGG!!!
OBAMA=PRESIDENT 09-17
MCCAIN=ADMITTED TO NURSING HOME 09-??
GO OBAMA GO!!!!!!
wab..
You are correct in the sense that our salvation comes by God's grace and that's not in the old covenant with man. No, grace and salvation are found in the new covenant. That doesn't give man license to violate and break other laws.
Some scriptures that come to mind, and I paraphrase are: He taketh away the old that He may establish the new. We are saved by grace and not by works (works of the Old Law). There are many more passages that show the old covenant was done away with, but I don't have them in mind at the moment. But we are no longer debtors to the old covenant. It was nailed to the cross.
I believe the last sentence of your above post supports what I am trying to say.
12:31 pm; You are a bigger racist than any white person I have ever met; It's you and people like you that keep the educated black people who are highly qualified for a particular position from knowing if they got it on their own merit or through affirmative action. I sure don't know why you think blacks are any more entitled to special perks than anyone one else. I don't believe there has been a single president elected in this great country's history that was elected because of his skin color. Your ignorance is showing through...by all means you should vote for Obama if you feel he is the most qualified; but please don't embarrass the rest of our black community by posting such ignorant drivel again. I personally don't feel that Obama is our best choice, but unlike you, I don't focuse on the distant past history of which nobody alive today had any control. I would rather set my sights on the future, and when I achieve my goals and ambitions, I want to know I did it, not because of my skin color, but because of my hard work, dedication, and self-pride! I don't want a hand-out, I care enough about myself to make it on my own.
You are an embarrassment to your race! (an obviously ignorant as well)
Kendrick
I am July 15th-2:09-I appreciate you commenting back to me.I also appreciate your explanation of what your words meant and I am the first to admit I didnt understand a backhanded compliment. As some of the bloggers expected you to give me an apology (which I think was nice on their part and I appreciate them too), I, did not comment expecting one and I didnt ask for one. Maybe I was misunderstood myself for that I'm sorry. I guess I've become kinda touchy on the subject of my job bc sometimes when I tell people where I work, they give me a look like, "Well, you dont want much for yourself, do you"? I felt the need to make people understand how McDonald's works, the benefits of working there and I wanted to defend my decision. Like I said before, it is a great place to work. I suppose I'm one of the lucky ones who doesnt mind getting up every day and going to work. Not everyone can say they love going to work. I truly do. I'm not only lucky.......I'm blessed. With that being said, I now understand your comments and how you meant them. Thank you for taking the time to answer me and giving me a platform to defend my employer. It felt good to get that off my chest. Maybe bc of your blog, people will have a better understanding of how things work at McDonald's. Keep doing what you're doing.......and I hope things go better for you with yor health.
I came from barack obama with a banjo on my knee, Dung so high I lost my breath, obama set me free.
Oh oh Johnnie got your cane I see
Keep on a trucking, cauz you aint fer tennessee!
This is to the comment made by 12:31 pm.
Now lets get serious about this. You stated where in the history of America has a President been elected because of his skin color. Mr./Mrs. educated how could this be when all of the candidates have been white. And I do truly understand that you want to make your acomplishments due to your talents and not your color. However, your color is why you have to push so hard. What do you mean by the distant past baby it is happening now what are you talking about? I know you are not that naive!!!! And for you to down play affirmative action now who is ignorant? Honey face it at the end of day it is all about COLOR~~~~~~~!!!!!!!!
Obama isn't about color, it's about a wolf in skunks clothing - you can smell him a commin'>
As far as physical appearance & outward eloquent delivery (color included) he his far superior to McCain who is not only physically down the ladder, but no where close to Obama in delivering the message & convincing the lemmings where the promised land is.
IT'S THE MESSAGE! Neither understands the basics of economics - supply & demand - no drilling Obama & both for open borders & access to our energy supplie when we don't have enough for ourselves! Both are globalists who are eager to strip the Constitution altogether! IT"S A BLACK AND WHITE VISION OF BAD - WITH OBAMA THE WINNER OF LOSERS
I'd just like to address the 11:29 post.
Were I a black person, I would be totally embarrassed by the above comment. And people like that have the nerve to call us racists! I have seen this type of racism for many years, and it's very sad that some people just can't let it go and treat all men as God's children. But no, we can't do that, can we?
As far as affirmative action goes, that would also be an embarrassment to me, were I black. I have seen it in action, and it's pretty sickening when an employer is forced to hire someone who is not nearly as qualified as another because of skin color. I would be ashamed to accept the job. But wait! Don't respond and call me the racist for pointing this out. It's happening right now and THAT is what's all about skin color! I have been a victim of it, so I have some knowledge of the concept. What a shame.
I so admire the black people who are part of the solution and not of the problem. They get my ultimate respect. These people would NEVER allow themselves to be condescended to via affirmative action or entitlement programs. NO, they believe in the work ethic and would be too proud to be bound by the chains of dependency and hand-outs. And, believe this or not, they are ashamed of the ones who think life owes them something! Don't believe it? Ask prominent politicians like Allen Keyes and stop listening to those like Jessie (never had a real job) Jackson and Al Sharpton. Those two are part of the problem.
I am the 9:01 post; I think somebody thought I was the 12:31 post; Please don't confuse us again! That person's views are an embarrassment to the black race. You are right, racism is alive and well. Picture this, two identically qualified candidates for the same job, one black, one white....who gets it???? The black candidate of course, but why? Maybe he interviewed better, maybe personalities just clicked better, but maybe the possibility of an expensive lawsuit likely led by the Jesse Jackson types, screaming racism....The black cadidate will forever be denied the knowledge of whether or not he earned the job....Yes, racism is alive and well and it's name is "affirmative action". And by the way, I am NOT an "African American, I AM an American! No other adjectives needed or wanted. We think blacks are downtroddened??? Last time I looked there is not a "United Caucasian College Fund" or "Historically Caucasian Universities"or a "Miss White America" beauty pagent,or a "White History Month": I personally want to make it on my own merit, not skin color and while my ancestors may have endured horrific treatment, I never have and unless there is some remarkable anti-aging products on the market today, nobody I am aware of caused any of that bad treatment. Quit playing the race card every time you don't get your way, it trivializes an important issue. As for no blacks having run for president before,,,,Jesse Jackson did, (you know the man with the illigitement child out of an affair) and there are plenty of respected blacks in the senate and congress as well as respected elected blacks all over the country, so if nobody got as close as Obama, the blame (or intelligence because who in their right mind would want the job???) rests squarely on the black individuals who chose not to run. Truthfully, I would love to see a ticket with Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice,,,,it's not gonna happen and I can't blame a white person for that. Get the chip off your shoulder, grow up, quit expecting the white man to be able to rewrite history, he can't and shouldn't.
signed "Plain AMERICAN"
I'm afraid I just don't get all this Obama the black president stuff. First of all he is only part black just as former president Warren G. Harding was part black. So based on his color he would neither be the first black president or even the first presidential candidate of a major party, it was already done by Republicans.
The problem with Sen. Obama isn't his color it's his ideas. A dyed in the wool socialist that has openly advocated the total redistribution of wealth from those who work and earn to those who sit back and wait for more government handouts.
We presently have $4.00 a gallon gas as a result of the dim witted democrats who were elected on the promise they would fix the situation and make sure we would no longer have two dollar a gallon gas
that's certainly one problem they kept. Senator Obama has been a major contributor to those policies that have caused this problem.
In Zimbabwe a few years ago a great redistribution of wealth took place. All the land was taken from the white farm owners and given to the black farm workers. In less than five years Zimbabwe went from being a major exporter of food to almost total dependence on imports for food. We saw basically the same situation in the old U.S.S.R. when more people became takers than producers. People basically have a greater pride in themselves when they earn their living instead of taking it from the labors of others.
The point is whether black, white, yellow or somewhere in-between it takes more than skin color to build a nation that is strong and healthy. Without the expertise, incentive, character and proper work ethic no nation or individual can succeed and those things are not related to the color of a persons skin. Allen Barrett
Anonymous, July 22, 2008 8:43:00 AM, said:
As for no blacks having run for president before,,,,Jesse Jackson did,
And, much more recently (in 2000), Ezola Foster ran as VP nominee of the Reform Party. Alas, she likely wouldn't qualify as "authentically black," since she was prone to saying stuff like this:
"God brought African slaves to America so that their descendants would know freedom."
"Our people were better off under the bondage of slavery than the Marxist 'Great Society' of Johnson."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezola_B._Foster
Truthfully, I would love to see a ticket with Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice
Hmmm. Colin Powell I'd agree with. He tried really hard to talk Bush Junior out of starting his swell little war in Iraq (countless innocent lives lost + over $1.6 Trillion in total cost + $4/gallon gas!) but, alas, was ignored. Meanwhile, Condi -- a "neocon" warmonger from Day One -- has done nothing to discourage Bush's bloodthirst. For that reason she certainly does NOT deserve to be "one heartbeat away" from the Presidency.
In her place, I suggest Walter Williams or Larry Elder. A Powell/Williams or Powell/Elder ticket would be an all black ticket offering us change we could REALLY believe in. (Especially if Powell focussed on foreign policy, and Williams or Elder on domestic.)
Powell/Williams or Powell/Elders couldn't possibly govern any worse than what we've endured the last twenty years, and -- as a special added bonus -- their election might actually shut up certain crybabies who are still whining about what happened to their distant forefathers, a hundred and fifty years ago. (But I kinda doubt it.)
To Just Plain BLACK:
YOU ARE JUST A PLAIN FOOL talking shit
Roll over America, the globalists have arrived in full view for all to see. The ObamaNation is here!
We're going to save the world with what you have (had). The natural resources your fathers died to save for you and future Americans has been transferred to hands better qualified to take care of it. We have changed the spelling of "hardship & poverty" to a single new universal word "conserve", as in con-serve. It sounds better than walking because you not able to drive to work. Snuggled up in a big wooly blanket is con-servation and better than a warm cozy home.
Let's hear it for the Obama-Nation!
In fairness, Mc(son of)Cain deserves a note - The price is OK, we simply need to drill like hell, so Mr Goodfingers can sell more of our stuff to our enemies. Con-serve will still be the word of the day.
Choice? Take out a loan to buy big wooly blankets before the price goes up - or freeze your rear end off this winter!
(Move to Mexico?)
Consider this.
The price of gas will start falling immediately as soon as we start drilling. And that's without regard to the fact that we can't drill ourselves out of this mess. The only problem is that we have to get the obstructionist democrats out of the way before any progress can be made. They say it would take too long to realize any relief from drilling. Ridiculopus. As George Will stated, "Then let's get started now". That alone is sufficient reason NOT to vote for a democrat, regardless of how your parents or grandparents voted!
Just with Bush issuing the executive order to drill has already dropped the cost of crude $20 a barrel, Of course it hasn't got to the pump as fast as it went up but it's an improvement. Now if the dimwit democrats can be convinced to not add the ten cents a gallon tax they propose we might survive the Pelosi/Reid agenda of arrogant stupidity.
We do need to drill, but the real emergency can only be met with rationing and stopping all exports of oil & gas from this country until we are self sufficient.
The billions upon billions leaving our citizens to the oil cartels, monopolists, and speculators has probably destroyed this nation already. It's past time to nationalize the oil and gas resources and production until we can break up the monopolies, foreign influence, and speculation. Roll the prices back and ration what is left until we can become 100% self sufficient with capacity to meet annual storms & bull crap excuses to raise prices!
Yes we need to send pelousy, kennedy, & the democratic mafia in the same bus as the republicans who made all this possible - up past the artic circle to count and feed polar bears and see if they can find two snow flakes that are alike!
Are you telling me the US sends oil out to other countries?
I thought we had to buy most of what we need.
The US should stop sending food to other countries, then maybe they would stop charging so much for gas.
Alaskan oil is supposedly exported to the far east. BS tells us that it really doesn't matter, because we can sell it for the same price we pay to the Arabs. Ever play Monopoly? You own the electric works & have no cash - the global monopolists own the rest. Do you think you can make it past go & collect $200?
Millions of gallons of oil are imported from Mexico and Central America each month, it's processed in our outdated refineries and then shipped to Europe at a huge discount which our government supplements.
this was all exposed on the national news less than a month ago. Allen Barrett
The new era school has a purpose - disinformation at the grass roots. If you can dumb down the population you can take control of it.
The public meeting for budgets was a good example. We do have some good commissionsers & their frank answers hit the bullseye - they tried but couldn't get any information from the budgets! Like the rest of us - it's intended to convey disinformation - nothing of substance.
On the school side - the pitiful wall of silence shows more than ignore-ance, it's called contempt for the public. For key people to sit there & stonewall questions with silence is beyond incredible.
Don't hate them, just want to change their jobs to something they can handle - basket weaving, maybe just go fishihg... now is too late!
To Friday, July 25, 2008 7:45:00 PM - you talk about, "dimwit democrats " & "we might survive the Pelosi/Reid agenda of arrogant stupidity". Did you read the paper or watch or listen to any news during the last 7 years??? After 7 years with the sorriest sob that ever sat in the White House, you'd think you might want to give someone else a chance since we already know what the 'publicans are all about!
So if one group is more an idiot than another they should be given a free pass? How stupid, why not get rid of both instead of trying to use one to justify the other.
If you listen to the news or read the liberal papers you'd think we are in the greatest recession since the great depression and lost the war in Iraq years ago when the truth is we're not even in a real recession and great progress is beingmade in Iraq....
Can't disagree with the Bush barb - can't think of any president worse than Bush. Of course that says nothing of the two who are running for president - both are determined to imediately outrank Bush & make Bush, Clinton, & Carter look good.
You would have to search a lifetime to find something worse than McCain! Unfortunately, the dumbocrats came up with the only candidate in the universe that is preferable to Obama the Great! Of course, the repugnalikens haven't picked a running mate - neither have the dumbocrats.
To Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:43:00 PM - got anybody in mind? I'll listen.
I belong to the GOP, and am proud of it. However, I am much more a conservative than I am a Republican.
I do not support pro abortion and gay marriage candidates. I refuse to vote for those who promise to raise my taxes and give my money out to people who have been taught all their lives to rely on government as a way of life. I would never vote for a presidential candidate (obomma) who says NO to almost everything surrounding the energy crisis. I believe in personal responsibility and making my own way, given the opportunity. And, in reality, we all have opportunities.
So why on earth would I be a democrat? Why would anyone?
The thing that is so amazing is how blacks typically vote for democrats. They vote for the party that was against slavery and forget that it was the party of Abraham Lincoln who set them free.
The democrat claims to love the poor and the black while treating them as if they are stupid and unable to manage their own lives. THAT is the greatest scam of them all. And people fall for it without ever questioning why or asking who really asks them to take responsibility for their lives and become independent of the entitlement umbilical cord. I will go further and say that the democrat party is the greatest slaveowner in history. That needs to be changed!
TO: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 7:51:00 AM - I'm much more a Liberal than a Democrat. I do support pro choice and whats the big problem with gay marriage? I think they have the same right to be just as miserable as the rest of us! By the way it's Obama - NOT Obomma.
Gay marriage is unnatural not to mention an abmonition to God. The purpose of marriage was to procreate not to have benefit coverage and that is what gay marriage is about. They can not naturaly have each others child, some of the "couples" can not even give birth(men). I have chidren and I do not want them growing up thinking they can marry someone of the same sex and it be okay, and I am tired of people telling and showing them it is. In most states sodimy is against the law, so it's not only a sin but it is illegal.
"What's the big problem with gay marriage?" It's to be expected that one willing to identify self as a liberal would have trouble understanding the difference between right and wrong. Why would anyone willing to support the mass killing of innocent children see anything wrong with any other perverted activity?
If the matter was simply for two perverts to get together and do whatever they want to do there would be no problem for anyone else to deal with. The purpose isn't to be able to do as you want but to legitimize that behavior and make it accepted by those who see it as a perversion. Everyday more propaganda is disseminated through the media trying to make it acceptable and indeed it has worked with more and more people embracing the idea. Next the focus will be on
sexual relations with children then will come the other species.
We are turning into a moral cesspool and there seems to be little concern for applying the brakes. Those who remain silent are as guilty as those who embrace the perversions.
What's the problem with pro-choice as you say? Ask yourself one question. Do you think the unborn child should have a choice? Can you find a single scripture in the Bible that would even remotely sanction the murder of an innocent child? NO!
You can salve your consciene all you want and pretend it awya, but the fact remains that it IS the shedding of innocent blood for which those who engage in it or support candidates who promote it will one day have to give an account. That includes people who go to church and profess belief in God. Think.
Mr. Barrett,
Would you agree with the above post?
Do any of you* have any real thoughts of your own? Do you* ever have any original ideas or free thinking thoughts? It seems that everytime you* get challenged by any idea that is contradictory to your own, you* run screaming to the Bible and explain your ignorance , or lack of free thinking ability, away with YOUR INTERPRETATION on the scriptures. Sad, sad.
*you - (meaning the vast majority of bloggers on this site covering every subject from politics to abortion rights to sports stadiums)
I fully agree with both 11:54 and 4:08.
I do have a problem with 8:52 and the utter ignorance they show with what the Bible is and means to many people. Everyone including the poster of those comments has their thinking shaped by someone or something. No one has ever developed a life philosophy totally independent of all other influences. For many, including myself, the foundation on which they stand is God as revealed in His word the Bible.
Free thinking is just another catch phrase for non responsible living.
Usually people grow out of that with their first job but some of course hang around waiting for others to take care of them. It's like all the hippies that went out looking to find themselves and ended up being a clone of every other bum looking to find themselves. Allen Barrett
To WAB 9:33pm - You believe one thing - I believe another. I was just stating a very obvious (to me and others) fact about the bloggers here - If someone doesn't agree with your beliefs, just bring up the Bible to straighten them out. I do have a honest question: Even among good, honest and faithful Christians, there are differences in beliefs and interpretations of the Bible. I have good friends that go to various Churches and some believe that if you are not a member of a particular denomination you cannot be saved / go to heaven. What's your feeling about that? Does every faithful servant of every Christian denomination get to Heaven or just those who belong to the "right church"? I honestly would like to hear your opinion. Thanks
YEP! - We have a lot of free thinkers, especially in the school admin & beholding category
IT'S FREE - spend teacher money money on drones - first come first serve - self service for the servers
IT'S FREE - pass the sales tax & freely spend!
It's a damned free for all that leaves the taxpayers holding the bag. Time for NO!
To Anonymous of the 1 Aug 11:47 post.
You offer some serious observations and questions so I’ll try to answer as best I can. There are very few people who believe exactly the same on every question or issue and it seems sometimes there are issues on which no two people can agree. The problem isn’t so much in disagreeing but in how we express those disagreements and even that is subject to disagreement. The more support a person has for their side of the issue usually the more confident that person feels and expresses themselves. Where there is little confidence and support usually defensiveness and lack of reason are substituted. For many Christians, the Bible, because of its importance to us, is where we get most of our confidence to deal with most matters. So when a matter comes up it isn’t unusual for a Christian to turn to the Bible for answers, clarification and support much like a person would turn to the dictionary to find the meaning of an unfamiliar word. Often this is not to “straighten” anyone out but to simply help explain our reasoning and position.
In response to your second question I too have friends who are part of other denominations. Some think I will never get into heaven because I’m a Baptist. Even some Baptists think that. The Bible makes it very clear there is one requirement to be saved and thus enter heaven. That requirement is to be covered by the blood of Christ through our belief/faith in Him. The foundation for the Christian is Jesus the Christ in whom we trust through faith.
Denominations are merely groups with whom we choose to express our faith in worship of Christ so that those who choose to express their faith in one way may be referred to as Methodists, or Baptists, or Catholics, etc. Being a part of one congregation or another doesn’t make you any more or less saved. Again it’s our trust in Christ that saves us. A faithful servant regardless of church membership or denomination will get into heaven based on the word and work of Christ.
Very often the question arises about those of other religions, is the Buddhist, Hindu, Moslem, etc saved? I think they are not based on what the Bible requires for salvation. I hope you do not interpret that to mean I consider them less important than those who proclaim Christianity for I do not. The Bible teaches that God made man and holds him in such great value that He allowed His own Son to be a sacrifice so all mankind through Him could be saved. Many will choose that gift as their greatest possession but many others will by their choice have no part of it.
I hope this has this has been a benefit to you and I sincerely appreciate you asking. Allen Barrett
To WAB - Thanks for the indepth answer. you said "Being a part of one congregation or another doesn’t make you any more or less saved." Not trying to start anything or get smart , just another question: Aren't there, in fact, some mainstream Christian Churches that preach that if you are not a member of their church, you will not go to Heaven? I know a few people that switched churches- for one reason or another, and from that day on were ignored / shunned by their own family members and the church. And I'm talking about good people, both in the church and in the families. Thanks
To Anonymous of the 2 Aug 10:07 post:
You are very correct when you state, "some mainstream Christian Churches preach that if you are not a member of their church, you will not go to Heaven?" It's sad that such beliefs exist but the simple fact is that anyone can be wrong and those who hold those beliefs are simply wrong, primarily due to wrong teaching from those who should know better.
Another issue you raised,treatment of some by other church members also is a sad fact of life. Some "church members", which is not necessarily the same as being a Christian, can be very mean spirited with those who do not deserve such a response. I believe that one reason many churches are now in decline is because of the Pharisee's attitude of some church members. As long as a church family is made up of human beings there will be less than perfect behavior.
It's a great thing to remember that it is God who forgives and makes our way to Him, not other humans or human institutions. Thanks for your question and the opportunity to respond. Allen Barrett
I just wonder why there isn't widespread preaching of the word against abortion and gay marriage. Both are clearly condmned in the Bible, and it troubles me that Christian people think they will be excused from voting for candidates who sponsor these things.
408 I join your concern - too many preachers who need to be doing something else. There is great need to speak out & condemn those acts.
We need a Harry Truman. Instead we have an obomanation or a Bush clone - either way civilization as we knew it is probably extinct. The nation is imploding.
If you call yourself a democrat I'll bet you're not watching convention without holding your head and just staring at your shoes. What an incredible embarrassment. It's bad enough so called Christians are supporting the murder of innocent babies but some of the stuff they are saying is beyond belief. Did you hear the Nun on there, if so are you still considering yourself to be a democrat?
Point was what we need. No rational person could support what is running the dem party today. Any good dems? Yes & that includes some office holders. The side that runs things are best described as an obomanation. Nothing could be worse! The seller outer of the USA - McCain is a close third, almost as bad as The Bush debacle.
Post a Comment
<< Home