One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: no propaganda please
Page: <<prev 1 ... 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 ... 1863 next>>
Oct 16, 2014 15:37:31   #
cant beleve wrote:
Your right Charles and we can't even monitor these h**e spewing Imams let alone stop them. Come on f*gs,fair is fair!


Whether the demands for all the sermons and notes and communications are because of the new law that allows those of the opposite sex to use the restrooms and showers because they claim that on that particular day they feel like they are a member of the sex indicated on the sign, or whether the new law bans religion and politics to be incorporated within the churches preaching, the ordinance is interfering with religion. If those "churches" that preach black liberation theology, gay liberation theology, proscess theology, promote LaRaza in their churches, or just the black baptist churches that always incorporate religion and politics, particularly at e******n time are not included in the demand for all church sermon documentation then it is just an anti Christian move on the part of the L***Q activists, and quite the normal activity for those groups. As usual it is an attempt to intimidate those who will not go along with the very powerfully funded 3%. Yes, I know that TRDnest claims 20 % of Americans are homosexual but hasn't yet been able to say what orifice he pulled that figure out of.
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 15:16:03   #
Ranger7374 wrote:
Good morning all, May the Grace and Peace of Jesus Christ be with you all. Let us pray,
"In the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit....Amen"

Lord Jesus may your blessings and forgiveness come upon us as we pray the Ancient Prayers of Solomon son of David, King of Israel and your servant.

God’s Kindness to Rebellious Israel
A Contemplation of Asaph.


Give ear, O my people, to my law;
Incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
I will open my mouth in a parable;
I will utter dark sayings of old,
Which we have heard and known,
And our fathers have told us.
We will not hide them from their children,
Telling to the generation to come the praises of the Lord,
And His strength and His wonderful works that He has done.
For He established a testimony in Jacob,
And appointed a law in Israel,
Which He commanded our fathers,
That they should make them known to their children;
That the generation to come might know them,
The children who would be born,
That they may arise and declare them to their children,
That they may set their hope in God,
And not forget the works of God,
But keep His commandments;
And may not be like their fathers,
A stubborn and rebellious generation,
A generation that did not set its heart aright,
And whose spirit was not faithful to God.
The children of Ephraim, being armed and carrying bows,
Turned back in the day of battle.
They did not keep the covenant of God;
They refused to walk in His law,
And forgot His works
And His wonders that He had shown them.
Marvelous things He did in the sight of their fathers,
In the land of Egypt, in the field of Zoan.
He divided the sea and caused them to pass through;
And He made the waters stand up like a heap.
In the daytime also He led them with the cloud,
And all the night with a light of fire.
He split the rocks in the wilderness,
And gave them drink in abundance like the depths.
He also brought streams out of the rock,
And caused waters to run down like rivers.
But they sinned even more against Him
By rebelling against the Most High in the wilderness.
And they tested God in their heart
By asking for the food of their fancy.
Yes, they spoke against God:
They said, “Can God prepare a table in the wilderness?
Behold, He struck the rock,
So that the waters gushed out,
And the streams overflowed.
Can He give bread also?
Can He provide meat for His people?”
Therefore the Lord heard this and was furious;
So a fire was kindled against Jacob,
And anger also came up against Israel,
Because they did not believe in God,
And did not trust in His salvation.
Yet He had commanded the clouds above,
And opened the doors of heaven,
Had rained down manna on them to eat,
And given them of the bread of heaven.
Men ate angels’ food;
He sent them food to the full.
He caused an east wind to blow in the heavens;
And by His power He brought in the south wind.
He also rained meat on them like the dust,
Feathered fowl like the sand of the seas;
And He let them fall in the midst of their camp,
All around their dwellings.
So they ate and were well filled,
For He gave them their own desire.
They were not deprived of their craving;
But while their food was still in their mouths,
The wrath of God came against them,
And slew the stoutest of them,
And struck down the choice men of Israel.
In spite of this they still sinned,
And did not believe in His wondrous works.
Therefore their days He consumed in futility,
And their years in fear.
When He slew them, then they sought Him;
And they returned and sought earnestly for God.
Then they remembered that God was their rock,
And the Most High God their Redeemer.
Nevertheless they flattered Him with their mouth,
And they lied to Him with their tongue;
For their heart was not steadfast with Him,
Nor were they faithful in His covenant.
But He, being full of compassion, forgave their iniquity,
And did not destroy them.
Yes, many a time He turned His anger away,
And did not stir up all His wrath;
For He remembered that they were but flesh,
A breath that passes away and does not come again.
How often they provoked Him in the wilderness,
And grieved Him in the desert!
Yes, again and again they tempted God,
And limited the Holy One of Israel.
They did not remember His power:
The day when He redeemed them from the enemy,
When He worked His signs in Egypt,
And His wonders in the field of Zoan;
Turned their rivers into blood,
And their streams, that they could not drink.
He sent swarms of flies among them, which devoured them,
And frogs, which destroyed them.
He also gave their crops to the caterpillar,
And their labor to the locust.
He destroyed their vines with hail,
And their sycamore trees with frost.
He also gave up their cattle to the hail,
And their flocks to fiery lightning.
He cast on them the fierceness of His anger,
Wrath, indignation, and trouble,
By sending angels of destruction among them.
He made a path for His anger;
He did not spare their soul from death,
But gave their life over to the plague,
And destroyed all the firstborn in Egypt,
The first of their strength in the tents of Ham.
But He made His own people go forth like sheep,
And guided them in the wilderness like a flock;
And He led them on safely, so that they did not fear;
But the sea overwhelmed their enemies.
And He brought them to His holy border,
This mountain which His right hand had acquired.
He also drove out the nations before them,
Allotted them an inheritance by survey,
And made the tribes of Israel dwell in their tents.
Yet they tested and provoked the Most High God,
And did not keep His testimonies,
But turned back and acted unfaithfully like their fathers;
They were turned aside like a deceitful bow.
For they provoked Him to anger with their high places,
And moved Him to jealousy with their carved images.
When God heard this, He was furious,
And greatly abhorred Israel,
So that He forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh,
The tent He had placed among men,
And delivered His strength into captivity,
And His glory into the enemy’s hand.
He also gave His people over to the sword,
And was furious with His inheritance.
The fire consumed their young men,
And their maidens were not given in marriage.
Their priests fell by the sword,
And their widows made no lamentation.
Then the Lord awoke as from sleep,
Like a mighty man who shouts because of wine.
And He beat back His enemies;
He put them to a perpetual reproach.
Moreover He rejected the tent of Joseph,
And did not choose the tribe of Ephraim,
But chose the tribe of Judah,
Mount Zion which He loved.
And He built His sanctuary like the heights,
Like the earth which He has established forever.
He also chose David His servant,
And took him from the sheepfolds;
From following the ewes that had young He brought him,
To shepherd Jacob His people,
And Israel His inheritance.
So he shepherded them according to the integrity of his heart,
And guided them by the sk**lfulness of his hands.
Psalm 78:1-72

And the Psalm says it all! So in his words, we ask this in the name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Amen.

In the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit....Amen"
Good morning all, May the Grace and Peace of Jesus... (show quote)


As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. AMEN
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 14:48:42   #
BearK wrote:
(Oh goody)

Puppies


healthy

(rule break the friends we stayed with had a litter of 9 Airedale puppies two days ago, 4 females, 5 males, and they are doing well. The Airedale in the painting is the sister to the mother of the puppies)
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 14:44:08   #
cant beleve wrote:
It has taken me awhile to
(A) get back on opp and
(B) find this 3rd edition of the prayer team site.
I was getting a locked message on page 111 on the prayer team website on the second edition. And now I find we have this many new pages on the third edition? Congratulations on praying so much team members. I need to thank all of you for your prayers offered on behalf of me and John. The stay this time was much shorter,and the diagnosis was a severe kidney infection that is a result of all the pills that John has to take because of his health. Your prayers were felt by both of us. The IV's were much more easily administered as was the time in the hospital shortened.
Your prayers were felt by us both. Thank you again,we feel so honored to have friends that intercede on our behalf.
God Bless each and everyone of you is our prayers. Cant beleve, (Curtis) and John.
P.S. thanks to all who sent us P.M's also.
It has taken me awhile to br (A) get back on opp ... (show quote)



We were wondering where you were particularly on prayer team. Is John's kidney infection clearing up? Every hospital trip is so worrisome and the stress doesn't help either of you. Glad you are back, and as I see on other posts full of yourself again, which is wonderful. Our love and prayers to you both.

Mike and MaryBeth (NPP and SWMBO)
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 11:16:03   #
cant beleve wrote:
Your right Charles and we can't even monitor these h**e spewing Imams let alone stop them. Come on f*gs,fair is fair!


All is fair in love and war, haven't you heard that one? Same sex marriage is the "love" part The "war" part is the all out assault on Christians and any other group that believes in right and wrong. It is not about "h**e" on the right, but the intense h**e from the left.
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 11:08:03   #
Tasine wrote:
Disintegration of the family. Absence of fathers. No decent role models. Lack of attention while growing up. Gangs. Drugs. Lack of integration into decent society. H**e filled rap music, tv shows, and movies. Lack of a guiding hand at home. I'm sure there are more factors, but these are the ones that JUMP OUT to most conservatives.



Right on the money

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 11:05:05   #
bahmer wrote:
Amen, or theory versus fact.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 11:02:03   #
BearK wrote:
twins


litter
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 10:34:41   #
Old_Gringo wrote:
If it is untrue then perhaps he should inform both CNN and FOX.


I have seen the same type of article from four different sources so far. Google it and I am sure you will find more. I even asked friends in Houston and they said it was in their newspaper already. It doesn't really surprise me with the way things are going Most people in Houston are more worried about Ebola. One of the friends to whom I spoke has cancelled his bypass surgery and is looking for another place to have it done, and hoping that his records can be t***sferred quickly, since it will be his third bypass and it NEEDS to be done, but not with the risk of Ebola as a secondary complication.
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 10:16:12   #
This is from National Review online

Hope these two articles are helpful

After President Obama tapped Princeton University professor Alan Krueger to chair the Council of Economic Advisors, Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein wrote that Krueger “is arguably the leading labor economist in the country” and “known for bringing a near-superhuman rigor” to the subject.

One wonders how any economist would earn a “near-superhuman” superlative for their research. One can particularly wonder in the case of Professor Krueger, who is known for his 1990s academic research that attempted to prove that employee wages were not subject to the laws of supply and demand.

In 1993, Krueger and David Card published a study that examined employment statistics of fast-food restaurants in New Jersey and Pennsylvania following the Garden State’s minimum wage hike. The authors reported that employment at fast-food chains in New Jersey increased by 13 percent compared to restaurants across the Delaware River in Pennsylvania. Clinton administration Labor secretary Robert Reich, Senator Kerry, Senator Kennedy, and other luminaries of the Left pointed to the study’s findings to call for raising the minimum wage.

But analysis by independent researchers revealed the Krueger-Card report, which was based on a phone survey in which fast food restaurant managers and assistant managers were asked about their staff size, to be deeply flawed. The Employment Policy Institute analyzed the phone survey results against actual payroll data from the restaurants and concluded that “the data set used in the New Jersey study bears no relation to numbers drawn from payroll records of the restaurants the New Jersey study claims to cover.”

According to the Krueger-Card data set, a Burger King in New Jersey went from zero to 29 full-time workers after the minimum wage hike between February and November of 1992, while a Wendy’s in Pennsylvania reduced its workforce from 30 to zero full-time workers during the same nine-month period. Truly radical — indeed, implausible — shifts in a business’s employment strategy. When compared to actual employment records, the EPI analysis found that in one third of the restaurants surveyed, Krueger-Card even got the direction of employment change (whether staff was cut of added) wrong.

A subsequent analysis published by the National Bureau of Economic Research based on payroll records of fast-food restaurants during the same period revealed that Garden State workers experienced a 4.6 percent decrease in employment after the minimum wage hike compared to the Pennsylvania control group. In other words, they confirmed the commonsense economic principle that when something costs more, people can afford less of it. Or in the case of a minimum-wage hike, when workers cost more to employ, businesses can afford to hire fewer workers.

If we weren’t suffering 9 percent unemployment, it would be easy to enjoy the irony of the leader of the “party of science” choosing a man to lead the White House’s “pivot” to jobs who, based on this faulty study, could be called a “supply and demand” denier.
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 10:06:22   #
lindajoy wrote:
Maybe this will help you, although the date changes what?? Given the topic we know its the hot button of late and wouldn't be all that old~~As if the date has relevance I mean...The article is dated, the date of the actual study is not defined as far as I can see here, anyway~~
http://townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/2014/10/16/if-minimum-wage-is-so-great-why-cite-bogus-study-n1905730/page/full




This is from Forbes regarding the study


Alan Krueger's Mistake on the Minimum Wage


The Card and Krueger paper on how the minimum wage rise did not reduce employment in fast food restaurants is justly famous. It’s such a counter-intuitive result that, well, lots of people have been crowing about it for years and lots of others have been insisting that there’s something wrong with it.

The full academic to and fro is ably described by Susan Adams here. I, and I admit to a bias here, would say that the paper has been shown to be at least not proven even if saying it has been shown to be wrong is too strong.

However, I now want to go on and make a much stronger claim: Card and Krueger were looking for their evidence in the wrong place. A mistake which I would and do argue means that wh**ever they found where they were looking the result just isn’t either interesting or important. Brave words from someone like me about the academic research done by someone who has just been appointed Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers but bear with me a moment.

It isn’t actually correct to regard the fast food chains (which is what Card and Krueger studied) as the fast food industry. There are two very different groups that make up that industry as a whole.

Firstly there are the chains, yes. The Burger Kings, Arby’s and the like which were studied. Then there’s the other part, the independents. The delis, Mom and Pop stores, meatball and subs places, these make up the second part of the fast food industry.

Now, something that might not be obvious from the outside but is very much so from those who have worked in the industry (yes, that would be me) is that the independent sector is much more labour intensive than the chain sector. The chains are better equipped, differently supplied (things as seemingly trivial as buns for hamburgers arriving pre-cut instead of having to be sliced open in store) and labour as a portion of turnover is much lower (and capital correspondingly higher) than in that independent sector.

So, if the price of labour rises, we would traditionally say that the amount of labour used in the entire sector, independents and chains, would decline. However, we would expect the use of labour to decline more in the independent, the more labour intensive, sector than in the chain, the capital intensive sector. In fact, we can construct entirely believable models which show employment rising, falling or staying stable in the chain sector while labour employed in fast food as a whole declines from the rise in the cost of labour.

For example, the rise might be sufficiently severe that a goodly portion of the independent sector simply goes out of business. This could increase the trade of the chain sector sufficiently that labour demand there rises despite (or even because of) the rise in labour costs.

Please note, I’m not saying that is what happened: only that it is possible and entirely consistent with simple basic economic understanding. By studying only one part of the sector we don’t in fact find out anything useful at all about the entire sector’s response to a change in the minimum wage. By looking only at the response of the capital intensive part we are ignoring the response of the labour intensive part. It really is possible that a minimum wage rise will increase the demand for labour in the capital intensive, chain, sector while reducing it by more in the labour intensive, independent, sector.

Which leads to an interesting conclusion: it doesn’t actually matter whether the chain restaurant employment rose or fell as a result of the minimum wage rise. Doesn’t matter whether Card and Krueger were right or wrong in their original findings. As they weren’t looking in the right place, employment across the entire fast food sector, they couldn’t find the answer we wanted. Does a rise in the minimum wage reduce the number employed in minimum wage jobs?

That is what we want to know but unfortunately the original study structure makes it impossible to derive an answer to that question from the study.
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 09:24:09   #
BearK wrote:
sisters


siblings
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 09:04:01   #
JMHO wrote:
Once upon a time, the liberal position was to reject the old discriminatory branding of people by the color of their skins rather than by the content of their characters.

Not now. Political and career advantage is found in trumpeting -- or occasionally making up -- genealogies.

Take the inexact category of Latino or Hispanic -- an often constructed identity that increasingly no one quite knows how to define. Almost anyone can be a Latino or Hispanic, from a fourth-generation American with one-quarter Mexican ancestry, to a first-generation Cuban, to a youth who recently arrived illegally from Central America, to someone whose great-grandparents emigrated from the Portuguese Azores.

What ties them together? Not necessarily appearance, their names, knowledge of Spanish or proximity of their ancestral homelands.

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez is Latina -- her parents were Mexican-American. But her now-desperate Democratic challenger for the governorship, Gary King, claims that Martinez "does not have a Latino heart." Apparently for King, a self-appointed genealogist, if you do not share his liberal agenda, then you are, de facto, not Latino.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made a similar statement in 2010, when he defined ancestry by political ideology: "I don't know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK?"

Last year, former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a liberal who is of mixed Mexican and Spanish ancestry, claimed that Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a conservative who is half-Cuban, should not "be defined as a Hispanic" because Cruz opposes comprehensive immigration reform.

But imagine if Richardson were conservative, had taken his mother's name and went by Bill Marquez, and if Cruz were liberal, also took his mother's name and went by Ted Wilson. Who would be the more authentic Hispanic/Latino?

The New York Times made up an absurd category for George Zimmerman, classifying him as a "white Hispanic" when it wished to gin up the Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin controversy along racial fault lines. But had Zimmerman taken his mother's last name, Mesa, or Latinized his first name to become Jorge Zimmerman, then the New York Times might have had more trouble pulling off its racial gymnastics.

After all, Zimmerman is as Hispanic as Barack Obama is African-American. But the Times would not dare dub the president, who had a white mother and African father, a "white African-American." In short, not only are racial bumper stickers sometimes cynical, but they are also hopelessly inexact.

In an ever more racially diverse society where intermarriage is routine and assimilation often rapid, we have no discernible rules for what determines one's race.

Is ethnic heritage certified by native language fluency? If so, former San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, the new secretary of Housing and Urban Development and a rising star in the Democratic Party, wouldn't qualify because he cannot speak fluent Spanish.

We still live under antiquated, 50-year-old ideas that grant some ethnic groups privileges over others. Because these racial rubrics can be advantageous for things like college admissions and employment, and because the idea of racial purity is becoming ever more problematic, fantasy becomes inevitable.

That is why the charlatan Ward Churchill, a noted activist, tried -- and succeeded in -- fabricating a Native American identity to land a job at the University of Colorado. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren invented a Native American pedigree and so became Harvard Law School's first recognized Native American professor. When other elites hyphenate their last names and accentuate first names, they remind us that without such IDs, one might not otherwise learn -- or care about -- their particular racial pedigree.

But even if some can prove ethnically pure heritages, who gets an edge in racially mixed-up America and who does not -- and why?

Will the tens of thousands of Central American children who recently crossed illegally into America soon be eligible for affirmative action? If so, on what grounds? That America welcomed, fed, clothed and schooled those who were all but driven out from their oppressive Central American governments?

Will these newcomers soon be eligible for special consideration in a way that Syrian refugees who are scheduled to arrive legally to the United States will not?

In t***h, the criterion for affirmative action is not superficial appearance. (Syrians are perhaps as much non-white in appearance as Central Americans.) It is not past discrimination. (Central American dictators have been as unkind as Syrian dictators.) Nor is it present prejudice. (Both groups are new to the United States and not past victims of American discrimination.)

Why continue with d******e racial self-identification?

Too many of our ethnic aristocrats and politicians benefit from a fossilized system of a past century that is now largely irrelevant in 21st-century America.

Victor Davis Hanson
Once upon a time, the liberal position was to reje... (show quote)



Great article. You always seem to find the most thought provoking articles to start conversations. Hopefully this one will not devolve into name calling as so many do.
Go to
Oct 16, 2014 08:57:18   #
Btfkr wrote:
Have you ever studied "two spirit" or berdaches? I may or may not comment further on this whole subject matter at some point in time. I do believe you are mixing apples and oranges. What cultural items you mention in societies past really have nothing to do with sexual attraction. In all the consternation of attempting to categorize everyone the way the most common interpretations of the Bible wants, and all the tangents that are taken, the obvious is disregarded. I personally am 100% convinced that I was born gay. The vast majority of gay people I have ever met think the same way. I spent the first 40 years of my life denying what and who I was. Would it not just be easier to accept the t***h from the people who really know?
Have you ever studied "two spirit" or be... (show quote)



I am amazed at how well you and I and Paul and I have been able to have civil conversations on a subject that neither of us will ever change our beliefs in large part. I know that both you and Paul are L***Q activists, paid or not doesn't matter, but we have been able to work around that for the most part. When I first started working with boys who had been molested, I was not concerned about 2% of the population was doing as long as they left the kids alone. It quickly became apparent that the demands from the L***Q groups about changes in law concerning "gay marriage" affirmative action for homosexuals, all the way to having both sexes use the same bathrooms and showers were not in the best interest of the population and the country, so I began to do more research on the movement. Our discussions have been most helpful, although some of what you state as fact is in disagreement with many people with whom I have spoken who have had personal experiences directly the opposite to yours, as well as research material from else where in the world that contradicts your statements. The situation will never be settled, but the conversations are valid, and I thank you for that.
Yes I would like to learn more about the berdaches belief of some American Indian tribes. I am sure it would be interesting. Thank you for offering to explain it to us.
Go to
Oct 15, 2014 21:00:24   #
BearK wrote:
crazy


bi-polar
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 ... 1863 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.