Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: #Iowa pastor proves he's a royal cunt
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Dänk 42Ø
Oct 16, 2012, 1:06:22 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>
> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because he
> voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to castigate
> a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
http://www.ucc.org/justice/jpanet.html
United Church of Christ, Justice and Peace Action Network
[Note: The UCC is Chairman Obama's own denomination, and also that of the
oh-so-fucking-righteous reverend Jeremiah Farrakha...err..Wright. Though
it is tax-exempt itself, the UCC is especially vocal when demanding how
other people's tax money should be spent.]
"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
Independence Day!"
"Stop More House Cuts to SNAP, Medicaid and Child Tax Credit: Congress
has been proposing more cuts to programs vital to hungry and poor people.
The latest is a vote that the House of Representatives will take soon on
additional cuts to SNAP and Child Tax Credits."
"Say No to Discrimination in Women's Health Care: Tell Congress to stop
playing politics with women's health! Equal access to contraception will
protect women's lives."
> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>
> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because he
> voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to castigate
> a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
http://www.ucc.org/justice/jpanet.html
United Church of Christ, Justice and Peace Action Network
[Note: The UCC is Chairman Obama's own denomination, and also that of the
oh-so-fucking-righteous reverend Jeremiah Farrakha...err..Wright. Though
it is tax-exempt itself, the UCC is especially vocal when demanding how
other people's tax money should be spent.]
"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
Independence Day!"
"Stop More House Cuts to SNAP, Medicaid and Child Tax Credit: Congress
has been proposing more cuts to programs vital to hungry and poor people.
The latest is a vote that the House of Representatives will take soon on
additional cuts to SNAP and Child Tax Credits."
"Say No to Discrimination in Women's Health Care: Tell Congress to stop
playing politics with women's health! Equal access to contraception will
protect women's lives."
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 1:09:44 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>
>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>
> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>
>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>
> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
Dänk 42Ø
Oct 16, 2012, 1:52:34 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>
>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>
>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>
>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>
> No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
Agreed. But then why does Chairman Obama's own activist church continue
to remain tax-exempt? As the link I provided shows, the UCC calls on
Congress to do this or that, which is a POLITICAL, and thus TAXABLE
activity.
Remember that separation of church and state is an absolute concept, and
does not depend on the ideology of the religion sticking its righteous or
lefteous nose in secular politics.
http://www.ucc.org/justice/jpanet.html
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>
>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>
>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>
>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>
> No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
to remain tax-exempt? As the link I provided shows, the UCC calls on
Congress to do this or that, which is a POLITICAL, and thus TAXABLE
activity.
Remember that separation of church and state is an absolute concept, and
does not depend on the ideology of the religion sticking its righteous or
lefteous nose in secular politics.
http://www.ucc.org/justice/jpanet.html
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Steve
Oct 16, 2012, 8:27:30 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ř wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>
>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>
>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>
>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>
>No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>>
Zepp has no problems with Mediamatters abusing their tax exempt
status... but then he's always been two faced... and triple
chinned.
wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ř wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>
>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50 EDT
>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>
>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>
>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>
>No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>>
status... but then he's always been two faced... and triple
chinned.
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 9:41:52 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:52:34 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>>
>>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
>>>> EDT
>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>>
>>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>>
>>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>>
>> No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>
> Agreed. But then why does Chairman Obama's own activist church continue
> to remain tax-exempt? As the link I provided shows, the UCC calls on
> Congress to do this or that, which is a POLITICAL, and thus TAXABLE
> activity.
Preaching the the choir, bubbles. I think churches should be stripped of
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>>
>>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
>>>> EDT
>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>>
>>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>>
>>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>>
>> No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>
> Agreed. But then why does Chairman Obama's own activist church continue
> to remain tax-exempt? As the link I provided shows, the UCC calls on
> Congress to do this or that, which is a POLITICAL, and thus TAXABLE
> activity.
tax exemption.
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 9:54:26 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:27:30 -0400, Steve wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>>
>>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
>>>> EDT
>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>>
>>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>>
>>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>>
>>No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>>>
>>>
> Zepp has no problems with Mediamatters abusing their tax exempt
> status... but then he's always been two faced... and triple chinned.
Media Matters is tax exempt as an advocacy group. Are you accusing them
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>>
>>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
>>>> EDT
>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>>
>>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>>
>>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>>
>>No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>>>
>>>
> Zepp has no problems with Mediamatters abusing their tax exempt
> status... but then he's always been two faced... and triple chinned.
of pretending to be a church?
Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
emoneyjoe
Oct 16, 2012, 11:44:20 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>
>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>Independence Day!"
How is that possible, more regulations?
Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>>"Stop More House Cuts to SNAP, Medicaid and Child Tax Credit: Congress
>>has been proposing more cuts to programs vital to hungry and poor people.
>>The latest is a vote that the House of Representatives will take soon on
>>additional cuts to SNAP and Child Tax Credits."
But figure out how to pay them without borrowing.
>>"Say No to Discrimination in Women's Health Care: Tell Congress to stop
>>playing politics with women's health! Equal access to contraception will
>>protect women's lives."
>
>Well said.
Sounds not only idiotic to me, but maybe
discriminatory against men, does government
give equal contraception to men.
What is with all the free government give
aways, is this a reverse way to communism,
asking for it before it is imposed?
The single most important objective should
be, stop borrowing.
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>
>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>Independence Day!"
Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>>"Stop More House Cuts to SNAP, Medicaid and Child Tax Credit: Congress
>>has been proposing more cuts to programs vital to hungry and poor people.
>>The latest is a vote that the House of Representatives will take soon on
>>additional cuts to SNAP and Child Tax Credits."
>>"Say No to Discrimination in Women's Health Care: Tell Congress to stop
>>playing politics with women's health! Equal access to contraception will
>>protect women's lives."
>
Sounds not only idiotic to me, but maybe
discriminatory against men, does government
give equal contraception to men.
What is with all the free government give
aways, is this a reverse way to communism,
asking for it before it is imposed?
The single most important objective should
be, stop borrowing.
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 10:54:29 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>
>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>Independence Day!"
>
> How is that possible, more regulations?
>
> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>
>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>Independence Day!"
>
> How is that possible, more regulations?
>
> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
needed to get the results they want.
Steve
Oct 16, 2012, 11:12:00 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:54:26 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
political advocacy, you pathetic moron.
>Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
Depends on how you define "play a role," Porks.
wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:27:30 -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:27:30 -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ř wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>>>
>>>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ?slap? woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>>>
>>>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
>>>>> EDT
>>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>>>
>>>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>>>
>>>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>>>
>>>No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>>>>
>>>>
>> Zepp has no problems with Mediamatters abusing their tax exempt
>> status... but then he's always been two faced... and triple chinned.
>
>Media Matters is tax exempt as an advocacy group. Are you accusing them
>of pretending to be a church?
Mediamatters like all tax exempt groups is banned from practicing
>>>>> EDT
>>>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
>>>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>>>>>
>>>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
>>>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
>>>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>>>>
>>>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>>>
>>>No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>>>>
>>>>
>> Zepp has no problems with Mediamatters abusing their tax exempt
>> status... but then he's always been two faced... and triple chinned.
>
>Media Matters is tax exempt as an advocacy group. Are you accusing them
>of pretending to be a church?
political advocacy, you pathetic moron.
>Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 11:40:08 AM10/16/12
to
wing lies in the media, and they seem to stick pretty close to that.
>
>>Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
>
> Depends on how you define "play a role," Porks.
And the dancing begins...
>>Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
>
> Depends on how you define "play a role," Porks.
Steve
Oct 16, 2012, 12:23:36 PM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:40:08 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
So here's Porky Jamiesson trying to dodge the fact that Mediamatters
advocates for the re-election of Leftists...
>>>Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
>>
>> Depends on how you define "play a role," Porks.
>
>And the dancing begins...
<LOL> So you're not even interested in what kind of roles I would
deem acceptable or otherwise? ...or perhaps defining your use of the
words in your question?
Ah well, I always said that discussing things with you was a total
waste of time.
advocates for the re-election of Leftists...
>>>Should churches play a role in government, Steve?
>>
>> Depends on how you define "play a role," Porks.
>
>And the dancing begins...
deem acceptable or otherwise? ...or perhaps defining your use of the
words in your question?
Ah well, I always said that discussing things with you was a total
waste of time.
Dänk 42Ø
Oct 16, 2012, 12:57:42 PM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:54:29 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>Independence Day!"
>>
>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>
>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>
> Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
> needed to get the results they want.
Isn't that how Chairman Obama won? Oh, wait, elections are only bought
by corporations when your side loses. When your side wins, it is the
will of the people.
The text quoted above is from the website of the United Church of Christ,
a TAX-EXEMPT religious organization which also happens to be the same
denomination Chairman Obama, and his former (?) preacher Jeremiah Wright,
belong to.
The issue here is not corporate money in politics, but whether a CHURCH
should be allowed to engage in politics and retain its tax-exempt
status. Zepp started this thread by criticizing a right-wing Christian
preacher who dared to express an opinion on homosexuality If his church
can lose its tax-exempt status for speaking out on an issue that is as
much religious as it is political, the UCC should lose its tax exemption
for lobbying on purely political issues.
http://www.ucc.org/justice/social-security/
"In 2005, the UCC's General Synod approved a resolution that "reject[ed]
any attempts to privatize Social Security or to add private accounts to
the current Social Security program..."
[Note: Imagine the fuss if the Baptist or Mormon church adopted a formal
resolution advocating FOR the privatization of Social Security. Church
and state! Quack quack quack quack quack!]
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>Independence Day!"
>>
>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>
>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>
> Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
> needed to get the results they want.
by corporations when your side loses. When your side wins, it is the
will of the people.
The text quoted above is from the website of the United Church of Christ,
a TAX-EXEMPT religious organization which also happens to be the same
denomination Chairman Obama, and his former (?) preacher Jeremiah Wright,
belong to.
The issue here is not corporate money in politics, but whether a CHURCH
should be allowed to engage in politics and retain its tax-exempt
status. Zepp started this thread by criticizing a right-wing Christian
preacher who dared to express an opinion on homosexuality If his church
can lose its tax-exempt status for speaking out on an issue that is as
much religious as it is political, the UCC should lose its tax exemption
for lobbying on purely political issues.
http://www.ucc.org/justice/social-security/
"In 2005, the UCC's General Synod approved a resolution that "reject[ed]
any attempts to privatize Social Security or to add private accounts to
the current Social Security program..."
[Note: Imagine the fuss if the Baptist or Mormon church adopted a formal
resolution advocating FOR the privatization of Social Security. Church
and state! Quack quack quack quack quack!]
Matt
Oct 16, 2012, 1:21:15 PM10/16/12
to
3196 Dead <de...@gone.com> wrote in news:k5jv4o$kps$6...@dont-email.me:
Why are you wasting your time?
Ask him about the American Legislative Exchange Council and watch the
real dancing begin.
Matt
Ask him about the American Legislative Exchange Council and watch the
real dancing begin.
Matt
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 1:38:13 PM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:57:42 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:54:29 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>>Independence Day!"
>>>
>>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>>
>>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>>
>> Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
>> needed to get the results they want.
>
> Isn't that how Chairman Obama won? Oh, wait, elections are only bought
> by corporations when your side loses. When your side wins, it is the
> will of the people.
Corporations are YOUR side. What you accepted as your owners in lieu of
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:54:29 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>>Independence Day!"
>>>
>>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>>
>>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>>
>> Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
>> needed to get the results they want.
>
> Isn't that how Chairman Obama won? Oh, wait, elections are only bought
> by corporations when your side loses. When your side wins, it is the
> will of the people.
having your own country.
Dänk 42Ø
Oct 16, 2012, 3:25:00 PM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:38:13 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:57:42 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:54:29 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>>>Independence Day!"
>>>>
>>>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>>>
>>>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>>>
>>> Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
>>> needed to get the results they want.
>>
>> Isn't that how Chairman Obama won? Oh, wait, elections are only bought
>> by corporations when your side loses. When your side wins, it is the
>> will of the people.
>
> Corporations are YOUR side. What you accepted as your owners in lieu of
> having your own country.
As an anarchist, I don't like any entity controlling my life, whether it
be government or corporations. However, please explain how you reconcile
your pathological hatred of corporations with your use of the products
they produce, such as the microprocessor and telecom service you use to
post your rants to this newsgroup.
Do you use Intel or AMD chips, or do you grow your own organic 64-bit
quad-core processors in your "tomato" garden? If you do use these
corporate products, please tell me what you think is a "fair" price for
something that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to design, and
manufactured with machines that cost billions? What should the engineers
who spent a decade or more studying electronics and materials technology
get paid? Are they entitled to earn more than an unskilled high school
dropout, or should everyone receive the same "fair" wage? And given how
much money is at stake, don't corporations have a right to some voice in
politics when it comes to laws that affect them? Who are you to say that
Intel or Apple or IBM or whoever have "too much" money, that they are
less deserving of it than you, that they somehow "stole" it and should be
forced to share it with you, and not only that, they have no right to
express their objection to it?
Capitalism does have some flaws, but it is the only system that has been
shown to work, and has been used since the dawn of time. Your preferred
system, socialism, failed miserably, and with few exceptions, the Soviets
never invented anything and simply copied and stole technology from the
capitalist West. And yet you want us to give this system a second
chance, based on a vague promise that it will try not to kill as many
people this time.
10-289
Russian iPhone:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2180/1806260658_507ac6843d.jpg
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"In his lifetime, the name 'Nat Taggart' was not famous, but notorious;
it was repeated, not in homage, but in resentful curiosity; and if anyone
admired him, it was as one admires a successful bandit. Yet no penny of
his wealth had been obtained by force or fraud; he was guilty of nothing,
except that he earned his own fortune and never forgot that it was his."
-- Atlas Shrugged
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:57:42 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:54:29 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>>>Independence Day!"
>>>>
>>>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>>>
>>>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>>>
>>> Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
>>> needed to get the results they want.
>>
>> Isn't that how Chairman Obama won? Oh, wait, elections are only bought
>> by corporations when your side loses. When your side wins, it is the
>> will of the people.
>
> Corporations are YOUR side. What you accepted as your owners in lieu of
> having your own country.
be government or corporations. However, please explain how you reconcile
your pathological hatred of corporations with your use of the products
they produce, such as the microprocessor and telecom service you use to
post your rants to this newsgroup.
Do you use Intel or AMD chips, or do you grow your own organic 64-bit
quad-core processors in your "tomato" garden? If you do use these
corporate products, please tell me what you think is a "fair" price for
something that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to design, and
manufactured with machines that cost billions? What should the engineers
who spent a decade or more studying electronics and materials technology
get paid? Are they entitled to earn more than an unskilled high school
dropout, or should everyone receive the same "fair" wage? And given how
much money is at stake, don't corporations have a right to some voice in
politics when it comes to laws that affect them? Who are you to say that
Intel or Apple or IBM or whoever have "too much" money, that they are
less deserving of it than you, that they somehow "stole" it and should be
forced to share it with you, and not only that, they have no right to
express their objection to it?
Capitalism does have some flaws, but it is the only system that has been
shown to work, and has been used since the dawn of time. Your preferred
system, socialism, failed miserably, and with few exceptions, the Soviets
never invented anything and simply copied and stole technology from the
capitalist West. And yet you want us to give this system a second
chance, based on a vague promise that it will try not to kill as many
people this time.
10-289
Russian iPhone:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2180/1806260658_507ac6843d.jpg
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"In his lifetime, the name 'Nat Taggart' was not famous, but notorious;
it was repeated, not in homage, but in resentful curiosity; and if anyone
admired him, it was as one admires a successful bandit. Yet no penny of
his wealth had been obtained by force or fraud; he was guilty of nothing,
except that he earned his own fortune and never forgot that it was his."
-- Atlas Shrugged
emoneyjoe
Oct 16, 2012, 5:09:38 PM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:54:29 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
case workers and medical professionals,
I put up with them to be non-confrontive
(most of the time).
And that is exactly the point, everything
government does means more masters,
and costs more money, and becomes much
more inefficient, the "masters" produce
nothing but suck up a lot of resources.
I don't fit in with any party or group,
I believe in action, while the rest of you
don't even know what to do, and just
drag your feet, communists calling
themselves "progressive" is a joke.
A president with any brains would
order an instant stop to new federal
borrowing, just continuing to service
the debt and hold it to the present
level.
And keep the FRB out of the
business of adding to more federal
debt, with the present size of the
economy and the computer system,
all new money can be electronic.
And debt is not needed to create
money any more, that was a banker's
dream come true.
wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>Independence Day!"
>>
>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>
>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>
>Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
>needed to get the results they want.
I have no masters other than the
>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:44:20 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:38:01 -0700, Fair Play <us...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø <da...@kgb.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Restore the Voice of the People: Check the power of big money in
>>>>campaigns - Call on Congress to pass fair election legislation this
>>>>Independence Day!"
>>
>> How is that possible, more regulations?
>>
>> Isn't one vote per (live) person (citizen) enough?
>
>Yes, but your masters seem to think a few extra billion dollars are
>needed to get the results they want.
case workers and medical professionals,
I put up with them to be non-confrontive
(most of the time).
And that is exactly the point, everything
government does means more masters,
and costs more money, and becomes much
more inefficient, the "masters" produce
nothing but suck up a lot of resources.
I don't fit in with any party or group,
I believe in action, while the rest of you
don't even know what to do, and just
drag your feet, communists calling
themselves "progressive" is a joke.
A president with any brains would
order an instant stop to new federal
borrowing, just continuing to service
the debt and hold it to the present
level.
And keep the FRB out of the
business of adding to more federal
debt, with the present size of the
economy and the computer system,
all new money can be electronic.
And debt is not needed to create
money any more, that was a banker's
dream come true.
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 5:15:56 PM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 16:09:38 -0500, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
That's where you anarchists/libertarians miss the whole problem.
Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem. It just creates
a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are anxious to
fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have your
best interests at heart.
With the existing government, you can at least make it responsive to
your needs, assuming you quit trying to weaken it so it can't.
Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem. It just creates
a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are anxious to
fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have your
best interests at heart.
With the existing government, you can at least make it responsive to
your needs, assuming you quit trying to weaken it so it can't.
Steve
Oct 16, 2012, 5:31:06 PM10/16/12
to
your best interests at heart, Porks, cause you're not going to find
it.. Only a fool expects anybody other than your friends and
family to give a shit about you, and you have no friends or family.
>With the existing government, you can at least make it responsive to
>your needs, assuming you quit trying to weaken it so it can't.
needs, Zepp. I prefer that the government ignore parasites like you.
emoneyjoe
Oct 16, 2012, 8:27:26 PM10/16/12
to
anarchist, I am not satisfied with the
present organization of government,
I want to see more stable, secure and
efficient programs.
I don't know what libertarians claim
to support, but I know I ain't one.
>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
the word doesn't mean that central controls
every movement of my hands.
>It just creates
>a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are anxious to
>fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have your
>best interests at heart.
very confused.
>With the existing government, you can at least make it responsive to
>your needs, assuming you quit trying to weaken it so it can't.
to my needs than I want it to be, I just heard
I will get a $17 a month raise December 1st,
in my January check.
What I really want is to be able to do
whatever I want, earn money without
government taking two dollars for every
dollar I earn.
I don't believe in any sudden ending
or cutting of programs, but there needs
to be long term planning to balance the
spending with the revenue, even if it
requires creating emoney.
And the borrowing must stop, else
that cliff you can't see is closer than
you think.
3196 Dead
Oct 16, 2012, 8:52:27 PM10/16/12
to
>
>
>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>
> Who wants to get rid of government,
> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my hands.
>
So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan, an end to the
>
>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>
> Who wants to get rid of government,
> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my hands.
>
Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy, a cut of half a trillion to military,
and an end to all laws banning abortion, same-sex marriage, and
elimination of domestic surveillance programs outside of warrant searches?
>
>>It just creates a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are
>>anxious to fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have
>>your best interests at heart.
>
> Your propaganda writer obviously is
> very confused.
That isn't propaganda. That's history.
>>It just creates a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are
>>anxious to fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have
>>your best interests at heart.
>
> Your propaganda writer obviously is
> very confused.
emoneyjoe
Oct 17, 2012, 12:57:39 AM10/17/12
to
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:52:27 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
No, 84, with turtle recall, and a clear mind.
>>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>>
>> Who wants to get rid of government,
>> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my hands.
>>
>So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan,
Why would that be important to you,
are your friends being hunted by drones?
The president has already ordered
a time limit that may leave a lot of people
vulnerable.
>an end to the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy,
Fine with me.
>a cut of half a trillion to military,
Silly, that would not leave enough
to feed and fuel the service members,
let alone pay them.
>and an end to all laws banning abortion,
That is a medical question, I would
mentally oppose allowing doctors doing
anything that puts the woman in danger,
but I would not vote or do anything to
affect what congress does.
>same-sex marriage,
That is as silly as adults playing with dolls.
>and
>elimination of domestic surveillance programs outside of warrant searches?
Personally, I don't care what the police do,
especially if I don't know what or when they
are doing it.
Anything that prevents violent crimes
should be allowed, and criminals need
to be brought to justice.
As long as homes are not entered
illegally, what can be the problem.
>>>It just creates a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are
>>>anxious to fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have
>>>your best interests at heart.
>>
>> Your propaganda writer obviously is
>> very confused.
>
>That isn't propaganda. That's history.
That is your opinion of history, made
into propaganda.
There is nothing about churches or
aristocracy that affects you, people of
means do not take anything from you,
they have a right to do with their money
as they please as long as they don't
break any laws.
Obviously you are not happy with
current law, which seems odd, even
criminals don't argue with the laws.
>>>With the existing government, you can at least make it responsive to
>>>your needs, assuming you quit trying to weaken it so it can't.
>>
>> The government is even more responsive
>> to my needs than I want it to be, I just heard I will get a $17 a month
>> raise December 1st,
>> in my January check.
>>
>>
>> What I really want is to be able to do
>> whatever I want, earn money without government taking two dollars for
>> every dollar I earn.
>>
>> I don't believe in any sudden ending
>> or cutting of programs, but there needs to be long term planning to
>> balance the spending with the revenue, even if it requires creating
>> emoney.
>>
>> And the borrowing must stop, else
>> that cliff you can't see is closer than you think.
All of your above is just more effort to
divert attention from the 23 million that
are not earning enough money to live on.
>>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>>
>> Who wants to get rid of government,
>> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my hands.
>>
>So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan,
are your friends being hunted by drones?
The president has already ordered
a time limit that may leave a lot of people
vulnerable.
>an end to the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy,
>a cut of half a trillion to military,
to feed and fuel the service members,
let alone pay them.
>and an end to all laws banning abortion,
mentally oppose allowing doctors doing
anything that puts the woman in danger,
but I would not vote or do anything to
affect what congress does.
>same-sex marriage,
That is as silly as adults playing with dolls.
>and
>elimination of domestic surveillance programs outside of warrant searches?
especially if I don't know what or when they
are doing it.
Anything that prevents violent crimes
should be allowed, and criminals need
to be brought to justice.
As long as homes are not entered
illegally, what can be the problem.
>>>It just creates a power vacuum, one that existing power structures are
>>>anxious to fill: big business, churches, aristocracy. None of them have
>>>your best interests at heart.
>>
>> Your propaganda writer obviously is
>> very confused.
>
>That isn't propaganda. That's history.
into propaganda.
There is nothing about churches or
aristocracy that affects you, people of
means do not take anything from you,
they have a right to do with their money
as they please as long as they don't
break any laws.
Obviously you are not happy with
current law, which seems odd, even
criminals don't argue with the laws.
>>>With the existing government, you can at least make it responsive to
>>>your needs, assuming you quit trying to weaken it so it can't.
>>
>> The government is even more responsive
>> to my needs than I want it to be, I just heard I will get a $17 a month
>> raise December 1st,
>> in my January check.
>>
>>
>> What I really want is to be able to do
>> whatever I want, earn money without government taking two dollars for
>> every dollar I earn.
>>
>> I don't believe in any sudden ending
>> or cutting of programs, but there needs to be long term planning to
>> balance the spending with the revenue, even if it requires creating
>> emoney.
>>
>> And the borrowing must stop, else
>> that cliff you can't see is closer than you think.
divert attention from the 23 million that
are not earning enough money to live on.
skye...@yahoo.com
Oct 17, 2012, 5:16:12 AM10/17/12
to
On Oct 16, 6:41 am, 3196 Dead <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:52:34 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
> >> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>
> >>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
> >>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
> >>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
> >>>> EDT
> >>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
> >>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>
> >>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
> >>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
> >>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>
> >>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>
> >> No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>
> > Agreed. But then why does Chairman Obama's own activist church continue
> > to remain tax-exempt? As the link I provided shows, the UCC calls on
> > Congress to do this or that, which is a POLITICAL, and thus TAXABLE
> > activity.
>
> Preaching the the choir, bubbles. I think churches should be stripped of
> tax exemption.
What 3196 Dead said.
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:52:34 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:09:44 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
> >> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:06:22 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
>
> >>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:18:42 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
> >>>> Iowa pastor threatens to ‘slap’ woman for objecting to anti-LGBT
> >>>> political activism By David Edwards Monday, October 15, 2012 13:50
> >>>> EDT
> >>>> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/15/iowa-pastor-threatens-to-slap-
> >>>> woman-for-objecting-to-anti-lgbt-political-activism/
>
> >>>> An Iowa pastor who has called for an Iowa judge to be removed because
> >>>> he voted to legalize same sex marriage recently used a sermon to
> >>>> castigate a woman for objecting to political activism at his church.
>
> >>> Political activism by a church? Oh, the horror!
>
> >> No horror. But no tax exemption, either.
>
> > Agreed. But then why does Chairman Obama's own activist church continue
> > to remain tax-exempt? As the link I provided shows, the UCC calls on
> > Congress to do this or that, which is a POLITICAL, and thus TAXABLE
> > activity.
>
> Preaching the the choir, bubbles. I think churches should be stripped of
> tax exemption.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
3196 Dead
Oct 17, 2012, 11:42:21 AM10/17/12
to
never heard the phrase "power vacuum" before?
>
>
>>>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>>>
>>> Who wants to get rid of government,
>>> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my
>>> hands.
>>>
>>So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan,
>
> Why would that be important to you,
> are your friends being hunted by drones?
It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
>
>>>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>>>
>>> Who wants to get rid of government,
>>> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my
>>> hands.
>>>
>>So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan,
>
> Why would that be important to you,
> are your friends being hunted by drones?
actually militants of any sort.
If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out entire
villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
> The president has already ordered
> a time limit that may leave a lot of people vulnerable.
>
somehow. If a forest fire is approaching, do you pile up dead brush
around your home to protect it from the heat?
>>an end to the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy,
>
> Fine with me.
superpower in their stead, then OK.
>
>>a cut of half a trillion to military,
>
> Silly, that would not leave enough
> to feed and fuel the service members,
> let alone pay them.
>
Nonsense. You could even give them pay raises. Start by firing XE and
>>a cut of half a trillion to military,
>
> Silly, that would not leave enough
> to feed and fuel the service members,
> let alone pay them.
>
all the other scummy mercenary outfits that service the military and fail
to protect US embassies.
>
>>and an end to all laws banning abortion,
>
> That is a medical question, I would
> mentally oppose allowing doctors doing anything that puts the woman in
> danger,
And you would, indeed, be mental to do so. Like forcing a woman to term
>>and an end to all laws banning abortion,
>
> That is a medical question, I would
> mentally oppose allowing doctors doing anything that puts the woman in
> danger,
whether she's ready for it or not.
Dänk 42Ø
Oct 17, 2012, 12:01:31 PM10/17/12
to
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:42:21 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 23:57:39 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>> Why would that be important to you,
>> are your friends being hunted by drones?
>
> It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
> actually militants of any sort.
>
> If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out entire
> villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
Are you comparing Chairman Obama to Hitler? But he doesn't care what you
think, since he knows he can count on the bleating support of leftards
like you no matter how many innocent civilians he orders killed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alfred-w-mccoy/extraordinary-rendition-
torture_b_1775438.html
"President Obama has closed the CIA's 'black sites,' its secret prisons
where American agents once dirtied their hands with waterboarding and
wall slamming. But via rendition -- the sending of terrorist suspects to
the prisons of countries that torture -- and related policies, his
administration has outsourced human rights abuse to Afghanistan, Somalia,
and elsewhere. In this way, he has avoided the political stigma of
torture, while tacitly tolerating such abuses and harvesting whatever
intelligence can be gained from them."
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"When they had once got it by heart the Obamatards developed a great
liking for this maxim, and often as they sat on their fat asses smoking
crack and watching Rachel Maddow they would all start bleating 'Obaama
good, Buush baad! Obaama good, Buush baad!' and keep it up for hours on
end, never growing tired of it."
-- Animal Farm (rectified edition)
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 23:57:39 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>> Why would that be important to you,
>> are your friends being hunted by drones?
>
> It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
> actually militants of any sort.
>
> If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out entire
> villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
think, since he knows he can count on the bleating support of leftards
like you no matter how many innocent civilians he orders killed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alfred-w-mccoy/extraordinary-rendition-
torture_b_1775438.html
"President Obama has closed the CIA's 'black sites,' its secret prisons
where American agents once dirtied their hands with waterboarding and
wall slamming. But via rendition -- the sending of terrorist suspects to
the prisons of countries that torture -- and related policies, his
administration has outsourced human rights abuse to Afghanistan, Somalia,
and elsewhere. In this way, he has avoided the political stigma of
torture, while tacitly tolerating such abuses and harvesting whatever
intelligence can be gained from them."
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
liking for this maxim, and often as they sat on their fat asses smoking
crack and watching Rachel Maddow they would all start bleating 'Obaama
good, Buush baad! Obaama good, Buush baad!' and keep it up for hours on
end, never growing tired of it."
-- Animal Farm (rectified edition)
3196 Dead
Oct 17, 2012, 12:22:29 PM10/17/12
to
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:01:31 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:42:21 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 23:57:39 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>> Why would that be important to you,
>>> are your friends being hunted by drones?
>>
>> It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
>> actually militants of any sort.
>>
>> If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out
>> entire villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
>
> Are you comparing Chairman Obama to Hitler? But he doesn't care what
> you think, since he knows he can count on the bleating support of
> leftards like you no matter how many innocent civilians he orders
> killed.
I am. You keep trying to pretend that I approve of drone strikes because
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:42:21 +0000, 3196 Dead quacked:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 23:57:39 -0500, emoneyjoe wrote:
>>> Why would that be important to you,
>>> are your friends being hunted by drones?
>>
>> It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
>> actually militants of any sort.
>>
>> If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out
>> entire villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
>
> Are you comparing Chairman Obama to Hitler? But he doesn't care what
> you think, since he knows he can count on the bleating support of
> leftards like you no matter how many innocent civilians he orders
> killed.
Obama is doing it, and it just shows what an empty liar you are.
Now you can take your other favorite troll tack, and pretend that I'm a
big fan of the Taliban.
emoneyjoe
Oct 17, 2012, 5:19:54 PM10/17/12
to
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:42:21 +0000 (UTC), 3196 Dead <de...@gone.com>
There isn't going to be anything like a
power vacuum, the splinter groups are not
enough of a factor to cause any really major
disruption as long as government is reasonable.
>>>>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>>>>
>>>> Who wants to get rid of government,
>>>> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my
>>>> hands.
>>>>
>>>So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan,
>>
>> Why would that be important to you,
>> are your friends being hunted by drones?
>
>It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
>actually militants of any sort.
And you fault Obama, but not the murderous
Son Of a Bitches being hunted because of the
things they did?
>If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out entire
>villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
No, and don't assume that many of the
Germans would have either.
There is a factor I call the little lieutenant
syndrome, a trivial order carried out to the
very extreme.
>> The president has already ordered
>> a time limit that may leave a lot of people vulnerable.
>>
>And you think just leaving them there would make them less vulnerable,
>somehow. If a forest fire is approaching, do you pile up dead brush
>around your home to protect it from the heat?
The more training the locals have and
the more confidence they have that they
can stay safe and secure from the terrorists.
Your analogy is bad because there are
federal laws against clearing brush from
around homes.
>>>an end to the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy,
>>
>> Fine with me.
>
>As long as you're willing to pay for the cost of running a first-world
>superpower in their stead, then OK.
I am not wealthy.
>>>a cut of half a trillion to military,
>>
>> Silly, that would not leave enough
>> to feed and fuel the service members,
>> let alone pay them.
>>
>Nonsense. You could even give them pay raises. Start by firing XE and
>all the other scummy mercenary outfits that service the military and fail
>to protect US embassies.
You obviously can't do math, the
military and NASA are already being
starved for cash, with many projects
cut to the bone.
>>>and an end to all laws banning abortion,
>>
>> That is a medical question, I would
>> mentally oppose allowing doctors doing anything that puts the woman in
>> danger,
>
>And you would, indeed, be mental to do so. Like forcing a woman to term
>whether she's ready for it or not.
Like you care about women. The reason
that late term action is unwarranted is because
it puts the health and life of the woman at risk.
Unless the planners accept the fact that
there is a lack of new products to buy, and
that the buying age groups are smaller than
previous by millions of people, things will
continue to languish or decline.
Maybe a change in leadership and more
confidence by the public will help, but the
long term is going to require major changes,
the borrowing just can't continue at the
current rate.
power vacuum, the splinter groups are not
enough of a factor to cause any really major
disruption as long as government is reasonable.
>>>>>Getting rid of government doesn't solve the problem.
>>>>
>>>> Who wants to get rid of government,
>>>> the word doesn't mean that central controls every movement of my
>>>> hands.
>>>>
>>>So would you oppose a fast withdrawal from Afghanistan,
>>
>> Why would that be important to you,
>> are your friends being hunted by drones?
>
>It looks like maybe one in twenty people killed by those drones were
>actually militants of any sort.
Son Of a Bitches being hunted because of the
things they did?
>If you were in Germany in the 1940s, would you approve wiping out entire
>villages because saboteurs took out a convoy nearby?
Germans would have either.
There is a factor I call the little lieutenant
syndrome, a trivial order carried out to the
very extreme.
>> The president has already ordered
>> a time limit that may leave a lot of people vulnerable.
>>
>And you think just leaving them there would make them less vulnerable,
>somehow. If a forest fire is approaching, do you pile up dead brush
>around your home to protect it from the heat?
the more confidence they have that they
can stay safe and secure from the terrorists.
Your analogy is bad because there are
federal laws against clearing brush from
around homes.
>>>an end to the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy,
>>
>> Fine with me.
>
>As long as you're willing to pay for the cost of running a first-world
>superpower in their stead, then OK.
>>>a cut of half a trillion to military,
>>
>> Silly, that would not leave enough
>> to feed and fuel the service members,
>> let alone pay them.
>>
>Nonsense. You could even give them pay raises. Start by firing XE and
>all the other scummy mercenary outfits that service the military and fail
>to protect US embassies.
military and NASA are already being
starved for cash, with many projects
cut to the bone.
>>>and an end to all laws banning abortion,
>>
>> That is a medical question, I would
>> mentally oppose allowing doctors doing anything that puts the woman in
>> danger,
>
>And you would, indeed, be mental to do so. Like forcing a woman to term
>whether she's ready for it or not.
that late term action is unwarranted is because
it puts the health and life of the woman at risk.
there is a lack of new products to buy, and
that the buying age groups are smaller than
previous by millions of people, things will
continue to languish or decline.
Maybe a change in leadership and more
confidence by the public will help, but the
long term is going to require major changes,
the borrowing just can't continue at the
current rate.
3196 Dead
Oct 17, 2012, 5:48:45 PM10/17/12
to
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:19:54 -0500, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
Does it matter if government is "reasonable" if one of your "splinter
groups" such as the corporatocracy decide otherwise?
groups" such as the corporatocracy decide otherwise?
emoneyjoe
Oct 17, 2012, 9:37:12 PM10/17/12
to
to any groups, the only two clubs I ever
joined was an aquarium association and
a science fiction society.
One splinter group is not capable of
anything, and most splinter groups that
are not left wing are pro-US government,
your imagination is playing tricks on you.
Odd that liberals like some laws and
completely ignore others.
0 new messages