The leadership in that video are from a cult like denomination of christanity called Peny Cost which fall under that group of people that take the bible out of contex.
The Pentecostal church is not a cult. They teach the same thing found in most evangelical, fundamentalist sects of christianity
Setting religion aside,the fact of the matter is that Sarah Palin is a person who is not qualified to be 2nd in line to be president, any sort of shortcomings Obama had experience wise is balanced by taking Biden as his VP pick . Picking Palin as VP does not balance anything,it is a shameless cynical pick meant to pander to evangelicals and women voters.
The Couric interview and the VP debate made this quite clear and the polls reflect that. Anyone who thinks this woman could step into the presidencey and do a good job is dangerously mistaken. Imagine Palin going toe to toe with a Vladimir Putin in a crisis,its scary. If she cant handle a Couric how will she perform on the world stage.
If your the type of idiot who voted for Bush because you could see yourself having a beer with him and plan on voting for this women because she is a hockey mom /maverick,please,for the good of your country stay home on election day. Im tired of having a leader who embarasses us in front of the world.
Bible Boy has a right to his opinion, and the choice to share it.
I think, in today's world, there are many issues that need dealt with. Many individual tasks that need immediate attention. More important issues than homosexuality. So I think, to vote for someone simply for their faith is ignorant. In this circumstance, it's more a question of denomination, as all candidates are Christian.
And also, I don't think Mc Cain nor Palin are like that. Do you think they are?
You have just talked down on Pentecostalism, as it not being a valid representation of the church. Yet, Palin attends a non-denominational Pentacostal church. Of course, since being selected as VP candidate, the McCain campaign has been downplaying her beliefs heavily. McCain is a Southern Baptist. The "Southern" portion of that title is due to its primary location in the US, and its roots in supporting Slavery.
Obama and Biden are both Catholic.
Nothing personal. Please feel free to support your beliefs. Just don't be late to cast your vote for President on Nov. 5th.
Utimatly, Arabic or Jew, (as far as Faith goes) i'd only vote for a Canidate that held the same Christian Values I hold. As a Christian i believe that to be very important in a Presidential Candidate.
you should do some research.
all three of these religions (Judaism , Christianity & Islam) are basically the same in the core and roots back to the one religion. it is a matter of different time and different areas that it changed and updated like different versions of the same thing.
statements like your sounds scary to me because extremism is not good no matter what religion it is.
once again i ask you to do more research, knowledge is power and you seem to lack a lot of it.
If McCain and Palin are as extreme as the Baptists and Pentacostles in Florida there's no way they should be in office. Basically all Muslims are considered agents of Satan, actually anything bad is caused by Satan. Late to work? "The devil really held me back this morning" <=I quote that because it's an actual quote from a coworker and the other coworkers shook their heads knowingly, I think that's the point when I realized I had to get the hell out of there.
not that I would vote republican, but one has to put numbers into context
also would be interesting to know how inflation put a role for those figures.
obviously "trends" were on in certain times and "war costs money".
defence spendings were used as a weapon to drive the soviets faster into bankruptcy, so one could argue it was a non-violent way to end the cold war (risky and costly).
just saying one can use diagrams/charts for a lot of stuff
however I would also think that democrats would put the money for better use, just a feeling always hard to judge on "what if".
I agree with Crazybutcher. Although the chart is pretty insane.
I remember reading that Clinton pilladged social security to pay down the deficit/budget...anyone know if that's true?
B
This post makes you come off far worse than those 'Christians' that push their faith on everyone.
Did you read my post? Did you read his post? Think about it... I never mentioned his beliefs at all. I mentioned the fact that he does not even know the difference between Arab and Muslim, and is yet making decisions and statements about these things. I said to educate himself, I don't care what a persons beliefs are, so long as that person has actually taken the time to educate themselves on the world around them.
If you are interested, You should read the bible for your self. Do some research and come to you own theological interpretations and conclutions. Don't neccicarily take what a preacher or pastor or tv channel or internet news articles good or bad, (or me) as what is right or wrong. I would suggest you come to what ever truth you find for your self and make your own decisions.
This is great advice, however I'm a baptized and confirmed catholic, went to Christian schools all my life, and have read and studied the bible. Basically, I've already come to my own conclusions based on research. My problem with your post, and I was too harsh on you, I apologize for that, is that you seem to have set yourself into very specific conclusions and thought patterns without actually doing that research. The fact that you don't understand the difference between and Arab and a Muslim shows a lot of ignorance of the world, and of other religions and cultures. I have a very serious problem with this when you make political statements and decisions based on this. Not because of you specifically, but because it's such a common problem, so when I see it I get very frustrated.
Huge spending is part of the Republican strategy for smaller government, as ass-backwards as it sounds. It's called "starving the beast," where you run up a godawful deficit which then makes slashing spending to "non-essential" government programs like social security, public education, emergency management, etc. easier to justify. And of course we can see how much good this kind of philosophy has done for our economy!
i didn't know that they couldn't bring notes... seems very odd because it was obvious to everyone that saw the debates that she had notes... why else would she shuffle the papers in front of her?
Sorry to keep beating the dead horse, but Ephesian's whole thing brings back a disturbing trend I've gotten pretty annoyed with recently.
What's with calling the neo-con right the ethically Christian side? If Jesus came back in time for the election, do people honestly think he would vote against the left?
Against the party that's at least more for supporting the poor and downtrodden? For prisoners rights? More for diplomatic resolutions, education, and feeding the homeless? Do people REALLY think that he'd vote against that just to keep people from marrying their own sex and having abortions?
I mean, not that the left is perfect, but if you one-to-ten'd Mr. Jesus's priorities, gay marriage and abortions are sure as hell not in the top 5, if on the list at all.
lol Now now, didn't anyone see the newst epi of Family Guy? Jesus would just get drunk with power and ruin everything and lose sight of his closest friends. He's best sticking to the record store.
From this alone i rate Clinton as the best president for the economy. Yes i know they don't control it but its a nice way of looking at what happened and when, for us visual people.
From this alone i rate Clinton as the best president for the economy. Yes i know they don't control it but its a nice way of looking at what happened and when, for us visual people.
well this one was.. ambiguous. what is the numbers on the left representing?
clinton being the best president, is that sarcasm, because i clearly see the numbers going way way up during clintons administration.
You also have to ask yourself what kind of conditions where created to allow for the explosion up. The higher and faster it raises the harder and faster it falls. The key would be sustained steady growth
Just because wall street was making money hand over fist doesn't mean that growth can be sustained or the business practices are sound. I'm not saying Clinton was the devil and is the true mastermind behind all of this, but lets stop and think, graphs going up, doesn't aways mean good things are going on.
Mostly that graph was for curiosity's sake. Still amazes me just how much it went up during his time. Thats more than any other time in history. As for what the numbers mean on the side, i'm not sure. I did a search for the the data and found that graph less the red/blue bars for presidents.
VIG, i agree when things grow that much in that little of time you really to have to wonder what dirty deals caused it. Nothing grows that exponentially with out huge change. None the less still a pretty outstanding jump for 8 years.
Just because wall street was making money hand over fist doesn't mean that growth can be sustained or the business practices are sound. I'm not saying Clinton was the devil and is the true mastermind behind all of this, but lets stop and think, graphs going up, doesn't aways mean good things are going on.
Yes the economy was booming, it wasn't all Clinton's doing, but the key note is that it was handled in a responsible Keynesian way... we paid off our debts and saved the money. Clinton spent way less than Bush and the spending/government increases were relatively small. He saved money, like the government should, during great economic times. So that when we face hard economic times, the government has money to spend to stimulate the economy (exactly what you are describing, make the mountains slightly lower to make the valleys higher). And we saw how that money was used...
Don't forget about the 'recession' republicans were whining about when Bush took office that they blamed on Clinton (and was due to policy and natural ebb and flow of the market)... then look at THIS disaster and say that Clinton didn't do a good job tempering the boom.
I think the numbers on the left must be something bad in that graph, because as inflation increases the the value of the market goes down even if the point level is the same-- ie 1 point = 1 USD, so if a company has their stock trading at 100, and the dollar loses half it's value, than that companies' stock is worth half as much.
So, when they say the stock market is "below 10,000", it really means that things are much worse than they were the last time the stock market was at 10,000 (inflation marches on)
The only saving grace is that these companies' actual worth and productivity is not really tied to their stock price-- it is the stock price that is (kind of) tied to the worth of the company (but is really more tied to hype and speculation).
I think whatever that graph is measuring it is probably pretty accurate. I have seen other graphs, like the DOW measured in ounces of gold or barrels of oil, that are just scary.
Yes the economy was booming, it wasn't all Clinton's doing, but the key note is that it was handled in a responsible Keynesian way...
One of the core ideas of Keynes was that you could spend yourself out of a recession. I used to be all for free market economics (which is basically the opposite of the government collusion with business that we have now), but I think Keynes was right; that with the correct circumstances you can spend yourself out of a recession. The circumstances are not right for it now though.
I suspect that Clinton just gave fewer hand-outs to his buddies, not to mention huge increases in productivity (caused by the PC) that had nothing to do with him, and that is why the economy did so well back then.
Replies
SNL nailed it.
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/vp-debate-open-palin-biden/727421/
The Pentecostal church is not a cult. They teach the same thing found in most evangelical, fundamentalist sects of christianity
The Couric interview and the VP debate made this quite clear and the polls reflect that. Anyone who thinks this woman could step into the presidencey and do a good job is dangerously mistaken. Imagine Palin going toe to toe with a Vladimir Putin in a crisis,its scary. If she cant handle a Couric how will she perform on the world stage.
If your the type of idiot who voted for Bush because you could see yourself having a beer with him and plan on voting for this women because she is a hockey mom /maverick,please,for the good of your country stay home on election day. Im tired of having a leader who embarasses us in front of the world.
I think, in today's world, there are many issues that need dealt with. Many individual tasks that need immediate attention. More important issues than homosexuality. So I think, to vote for someone simply for their faith is ignorant. In this circumstance, it's more a question of denomination, as all candidates are Christian.
You have just talked down on Pentecostalism, as it not being a valid representation of the church. Yet, Palin attends a non-denominational Pentacostal church. Of course, since being selected as VP candidate, the McCain campaign has been downplaying her beliefs heavily. McCain is a Southern Baptist. The "Southern" portion of that title is due to its primary location in the US, and its roots in supporting Slavery.
Obama and Biden are both Catholic.
Nothing personal. Please feel free to support your beliefs. Just don't be late to cast your vote for President on Nov. 5th.
you should do some research.
all three of these religions (Judaism , Christianity & Islam) are basically the same in the core and roots back to the one religion. it is a matter of different time and different areas that it changed and updated like different versions of the same thing.
statements like your sounds scary to me because extremism is not good no matter what religion it is.
once again i ask you to do more research, knowledge is power and you seem to lack a lot of it.
do some research and you will be surprised.
also would be interesting to know how inflation put a role for those figures.
obviously "trends" were on in certain times and "war costs money".
defence spendings were used as a weapon to drive the soviets faster into bankruptcy, so one could argue it was a non-violent way to end the cold war (risky and costly).
just saying one can use diagrams/charts for a lot of stuff
however I would also think that democrats would put the money for better use, just a feeling always hard to judge on "what if".
I remember reading that Clinton pilladged social security to pay down the deficit/budget...anyone know if that's true?
B
Did you read my post? Did you read his post? Think about it... I never mentioned his beliefs at all. I mentioned the fact that he does not even know the difference between Arab and Muslim, and is yet making decisions and statements about these things. I said to educate himself, I don't care what a persons beliefs are, so long as that person has actually taken the time to educate themselves on the world around them.
This is great advice, however I'm a baptized and confirmed catholic, went to Christian schools all my life, and have read and studied the bible. Basically, I've already come to my own conclusions based on research. My problem with your post, and I was too harsh on you, I apologize for that, is that you seem to have set yourself into very specific conclusions and thought patterns without actually doing that research. The fact that you don't understand the difference between and Arab and a Muslim shows a lot of ignorance of the world, and of other religions and cultures. I have a very serious problem with this when you make political statements and decisions based on this. Not because of you specifically, but because it's such a common problem, so when I see it I get very frustrated.
On a side, note. I think the dems got this fucker in the bag:
http://www.pollster.com/
Nothing's over till it's over. And no matter what happens, I guarantee that if it's a close call, whoever loses is going to fight the vote.
Edited out the drunkenness
awesome vid
heh
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/27057346#27057346
why not ask McCain about Charles Keating too
btw,
http://gizmodo.com/5060256/yep-were-screwed-national-debt-clock-runs-out-of-numbers
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
edit:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/10/mccain_obama_deal_puts_limits.html
i didn't know that they couldn't bring notes... seems very odd because it was obvious to everyone that saw the debates that she had notes... why else would she shuffle the papers in front of her?
huh? what was that? 50 billion pounds? oh shi-
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2008/10/john_mccain_mem.html
What's with calling the neo-con right the ethically Christian side? If Jesus came back in time for the election, do people honestly think he would vote against the left?
Against the party that's at least more for supporting the poor and downtrodden? For prisoners rights? More for diplomatic resolutions, education, and feeding the homeless? Do people REALLY think that he'd vote against that just to keep people from marrying their own sex and having abortions?
I mean, not that the left is perfect, but if you one-to-ten'd Mr. Jesus's priorities, gay marriage and abortions are sure as hell not in the top 5, if on the list at all.
From this alone i rate Clinton as the best president for the economy. Yes i know they don't control it but its a nice way of looking at what happened and when, for us visual people.
well this one was.. ambiguous. what is the numbers on the left representing?
clinton being the best president, is that sarcasm, because i clearly see the numbers going way way up during clintons administration.
Just because wall street was making money hand over fist doesn't mean that growth can be sustained or the business practices are sound. I'm not saying Clinton was the devil and is the true mastermind behind all of this, but lets stop and think, graphs going up, doesn't aways mean good things are going on.
VIG, i agree when things grow that much in that little of time you really to have to wonder what dirty deals caused it. Nothing grows that exponentially with out huge change. None the less still a pretty outstanding jump for 8 years.
Yes the economy was booming, it wasn't all Clinton's doing, but the key note is that it was handled in a responsible Keynesian way... we paid off our debts and saved the money. Clinton spent way less than Bush and the spending/government increases were relatively small. He saved money, like the government should, during great economic times. So that when we face hard economic times, the government has money to spend to stimulate the economy (exactly what you are describing, make the mountains slightly lower to make the valleys higher). And we saw how that money was used...
Don't forget about the 'recession' republicans were whining about when Bush took office that they blamed on Clinton (and was due to policy and natural ebb and flow of the market)... then look at THIS disaster and say that Clinton didn't do a good job tempering the boom.
So, when they say the stock market is "below 10,000", it really means that things are much worse than they were the last time the stock market was at 10,000 (inflation marches on)
The only saving grace is that these companies' actual worth and productivity is not really tied to their stock price-- it is the stock price that is (kind of) tied to the worth of the company (but is really more tied to hype and speculation).
I think whatever that graph is measuring it is probably pretty accurate. I have seen other graphs, like the DOW measured in ounces of gold or barrels of oil, that are just scary.
[edit]
One of the core ideas of Keynes was that you could spend yourself out of a recession. I used to be all for free market economics (which is basically the opposite of the government collusion with business that we have now), but I think Keynes was right; that with the correct circumstances you can spend yourself out of a recession. The circumstances are not right for it now though.
I suspect that Clinton just gave fewer hand-outs to his buddies, not to mention huge increases in productivity (caused by the PC) that had nothing to do with him, and that is why the economy did so well back then.