Workers at Shell plant told they would not get paid unless they attended Trump's speech: Report – Raw Story http://va.topbuzz.com/s/fkmhkU
Workers at Shell plant told they would not get paid unless they attended Trump's speech: Report – Raw Story http://va.topbuzz.com/s/fkmhkU
Fat hurts wrote:
agip wrote:
1) PLEASE stop listing 3+ links in your posts. It's stupid, useless and inconsiderate.
2) Hey Flagpole, the Mooch thinks Trump will drop out in March 2020 after realizing he can't win.
His poll numbers are quite bad at this stage. Do you think he might drop out, like Lyndon Johnson in 1968?
Yes. He’s gonna drop out of the race because it’s gonna become very clear. Okay, it’ll be March of 2020. He’ll likely drop out by March of 2020. It’s gonna become very clear that it’s impossible for him to win. And is this the kind of guy that’s gonna want to be that humiliated and lose as a sitting president? He’s got the self-worth in terms of his self-esteem of a small pigeon. It’s a very small pigeon. Okay. And so you think this guy’s gonna look at those poll numbers and say—he’s not gonna be able to handle that humiliation. And by the way, he is smart enough to know that that entire Congress hates his guts.
I wouldn't listen to the Mooch.
Tiny will never drop out, even if he loses.
If he drops out in March 2020, he will be indicted ten months later (assuming a Democrat wins the WH.)
His best chance to avoid a federal prison is to run out the clock while staying in office.
Just Another LRC Idiot wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
I wouldn't listen to the Mooch.
Tiny will never drop out, even if he loses.
If he drops out in March 2020, he will be indicted ten months later (assuming a Democrat wins the WH.)
His best chance to avoid a federal prison is to run out the clock while staying in office.
We have been hearing how he will be indicted blah blah blah for almost 3 years now. Stop with it. He is going nowhere. You sound like an idiot when you keep saying this stuff. He is here to stay.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
A sense of humor is everything. The left has none.
Right. Must be why comedians are almost exclusively right-leaning.
The Burgh wrote:
Workers at Shell plant told they would not get paid unless they attended Trump's speech: Report – Raw Story
http://va.topbuzz.com/s/fkmhkU
Pennsylvania union leaders reveal Shell employees who skipped Trump rally lost hundreds in income
http://va.topbuzz.com/s/TyhZrUFake Audiences wrote:
The Burgh wrote:
Workers at Shell plant told they would not get paid unless they attended Trump's speech: Report – Raw Story
http://va.topbuzz.com/s/fkmhkUPennsylvania union leaders reveal Shell employees who skipped Trump rally lost hundreds in income
http://va.topbuzz.com/s/TyhZrU
I work with a lot of guys who used to live under communist rule in Czechoslovakia. This reminds me of their stories of being forced to attend political rallies and other party functions. They had precinct captains who took attendance. If you were absent without a medical excuse you were in big trouble. You could lose your job or get kicked out of school.
Remember when conservatives were against big and overbearing government.
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-administration-supreme-court-transgender-workers-233331144.html
Proofer wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
INCORRECT!
Prove it.
Well, I don't know how I could prove it to anyone's liking here on the internet, but I have a profound interest in The Bible. I am the son of a now-retired United Methodist minister, so I heard every sermon given twice each Sunday in my impressionable years, continued to be involved in the church into my 30s after I had children and co-taught Sunday school with my wife for a number of years. When I was in college, I took almost enough classes to major in Religion and for a while greatly considered taking my journalism degree to look to be the Religion writer at a newspaper somewhere. I changed course early on in journalism and became a sports reporter instead and then on to other types of journalism before I headed off in an entirely new direction altogether. Oddly enough, unbeknownst to each other, my father and mother have taken their already liberal Christian attitudes a step further and have left the United Methodist Church (they went to a different one than I did) and now attend a much more liberal church that has ideals similar to my own.
I'm sure that won't do it for you, but I have no need to try to convince you, so you won't see me trying to beyond the above.
Call them as I see them wrote:
f.r.g wrote:
Flagpole has that Trump-level of knowledge about Christianity.
Given how much he dislikes Trump, it's kind of funny that Flagpole shares A LOT of traits with Trump.
I share no traits with that man.
1) I've been married to one woman for 30 years and have no other children from any other women other than my wife.
2) I was a present and good father to my children all through their growing up.
3) I did not inherit 400+ million dollars.
4) I actually started a business on my own that has made money.
5) I've never played a round of golf in my life, though I DO go to the driving range once in a while and can hit them 300+ yards.
6) I lead a grace-filled life. He does not.
7) He couldn't write himself out of a wet paper bag. I can.
8) He's no musician. I play two instruments and sing and have been in several gigging bands,
9) He's never run a marathon. I've run 7 plus two ultras.
10) I've never committed adultery.
11) I've never obstructed justice.
12) I've not run a criminal enterprise.
13) I understand how wind and solar power work.
14) It is true that neither of us are Christians, but he SAYS he is one. He's a liar.
15) I drink alcohol (infrequent, but I do) and he reportedly does not.
16) He was not a college athlete. I was.
17) He's racist. I am not.
I could go on and on. I don't even like KFC like he apparently does.
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) I say Jeffrey Dahmer was evil, and he might have disagreed. He might have believed I was evil because we disagreed. He was wrong. Those who are not for equal rights for all people are profoundly immoral and therefore evil. The fact that they use a book written by mortal men about an imaginary omnipotent man in the sky just makes them even more so.
2) In your paragraph about literal scripture, what you are describing there is ultimately that those who believe in the literal will cave when it suits their interest and accept the literal also when it does...so hypocrites.
3) The view of the wife of that pastor was becoming the prevailing view in the church. Insane, and I had to break ties at that point. If it wasn't her, it would have been something else in the near future as I was close to leaving not only the church but the religion.
4) For a long time as a church-goer and a self-described Christian, I was more than ok with deciding that Jesus was a great teacher and, even though no one ever called him "Jesus", there was a lot in The Bible to help one lead a good and grace-filled life. I had enough of people telling me that you had to believe Jesus was the Son of God, had to believe in all the "magic" performed by him and others, and that the Bible was to be taken literally, so I had to renounce my Christianity.
1) You are comparing ordinary Christians to Jeffrey Dahmer. Let's get back to reality, shall we?
A hundred years ago, you would have trouble finding a single person in American who would say that gays should have the right to marry. So you are saying that every person in American was evil?
2) No, you missed the point entirely. I'm saying that many people who say they believe in a literal interpretation of scripture all will concede that "literal" doesn't mean every single passage. But they use literal interpretation as their first principle of hermeneutics. When the literal interpretation doesn't make sense, you turn to something else. It's a perfectly valid academic approach.
However, many Christians know so little about hermeneutics that they will say they take the Bible literally without understanding the implications at all.
3) It's always sad when that happens, but sometimes groups morph into something you can no longer support. Your faith is your own. I'm afraid you let that influence your relationship with God, which is even sadder.
4) Everyone called him "Jesus". That was his name. Perhaps you meant to write something else?
Being a Christian means following Jesus' teachings, including the ultimate claim that he is the son of God. But you never got all the way there. You were never willing to surrender yourself fully to Him. That leap of faith can be scary, but it is the key to a life filled with the peace that passeth all understanding.
1) We're not talking about a hundred years ago. We're talking about today. I don't want to go back a hundred years ago and accept anything from then...not their science, not their labor laws, not their treatment of women and minorities, nothing.
2) I am fine with an academic approach, but those who do what you say are not in it for academics. They do it (other than academicians) to have it be their way no matter way...hypocrites.
3) I could perhaps be satisfied at a UCC church somewhere, AND you are correct that religion and how it is perceived is deeply personal. Christians in the last 20 years in this country have gone bonkers, and I can not and will not associate with it anymore.
4) No one ever uttered the sound "Jesus" to the one we know as Jesus. LOTS of historical texts on this, and it is more likely to be Yeshua than most other possibilities, but NO ONE called him "Jesus". That came out of the Greek
"Iesous", and then the Latin "Iesus" from where we get "Jesus". So no, I did not mean to write something else.
5) Your last paragraph is another in a long list of things I disagree with with Christians. You said my faith was my own, but apparently only if it is defined as you define it. God is viewed differently by people with a range from a man in the sky who looks like Charleston Heston to an idea that is as broad. There are many Christian and Hebrew traditions now and historically that do not state a requirement is that you believe Jesus to be the son of God. The "son of God" does not appear in the Hebrew Bible.
agip wrote:
Hey Flagpole, the Mooch thinks Trump will drop out in March 2020 after realizing he can't win.
His poll numbers are quite bad at this stage. Do you think he might drop out, like Lyndon Johnson in 1968?
Yes. He’s gonna drop out of the race because it’s gonna become very clear. Okay, it’ll be March of 2020. He’ll likely drop out by March of 2020. It’s gonna become very clear that it’s impossible for him to win. And is this the kind of guy that’s gonna want to be that humiliated and lose as a sitting president? He’s got the self-worth in terms of his self-esteem of a small pigeon. It’s a very small pigeon. Okay. And so you think this guy’s gonna look at those poll numbers and say—he’s not gonna be able to handle that humiliation. And by the way, he is smart enough to know that that entire Congress hates his guts.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/anthony-scaramucci-interview-trump
Interesting that Mooch thinks this. I agree with Fat Hurts that I don't see him dropping out. There are too many reasons for him not to.
1) He will go to prison sooner if he loses.
2) Polls were not favorable to him in 2016 and yet he won.
3) I think his ego won't allow him to drop out.
4) I think, as Fat Hurts does, that it is more likely he will lose the 2020 election and then challenge the result to the end of the earth to the point that we may have the courts decide and he might have to be physically removed. Now, if that happened it would surprise me, but him dropping out would surprise me more.
so sayeth wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
1) You are comparing ordinary Christians to Jeffrey Dahmer. Let's get back to reality, shall we?
A hundred years ago, you would have trouble finding a single person in American who would say that gays should have the right to marry. So you are saying that every person in American was evil?
2) No, you missed the point entirely. I'm saying that many people who say they believe in a literal interpretation of scripture all will concede that "literal" doesn't mean every single passage. But they use literal interpretation as their first principle of hermeneutics. When the literal interpretation doesn't make sense, you turn to something else. It's a perfectly valid academic approach.
However, many Christians know so little about hermeneutics that they will say they take the Bible literally without understanding the implications at all.
3) It's always sad when that happens, but sometimes groups morph into something you can no longer support. Your faith is your own. I'm afraid you let that influence your relationship with God, which is even sadder.
4) Everyone called him "Jesus". That was his name. Perhaps you meant to write something else?
Being a Christian means following Jesus' teachings, including the ultimate claim that he is the son of God. But you never got all the way there. You were never willing to surrender yourself fully to Him. That leap of faith can be scary, but it is the key to a life filled with the peace that passeth all understanding.
Correct.
Flagpole - this discussion is way over your pay grade. You look foolish.
INCORRECT!
By the way, the new owner of the business in Thailand contacted me to ask if I was interested in consulting for them as I was with the previous owner. He even offered an increase in my normal rate because the new company is bigger.
I said no.
Flagpole wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
1) You are comparing ordinary Christians to Jeffrey Dahmer. Let's get back to reality, shall we?
A hundred years ago, you would have trouble finding a single person in American who would say that gays should have the right to marry. So you are saying that every person in American was evil?
2) No, you missed the point entirely. I'm saying that many people who say they believe in a literal interpretation of scripture all will concede that "literal" doesn't mean every single passage. But they use literal interpretation as their first principle of hermeneutics. When the literal interpretation doesn't make sense, you turn to something else. It's a perfectly valid academic approach.
However, many Christians know so little about hermeneutics that they will say they take the Bible literally without understanding the implications at all.
3) It's always sad when that happens, but sometimes groups morph into something you can no longer support. Your faith is your own. I'm afraid you let that influence your relationship with God, which is even sadder.
4) Everyone called him "Jesus". That was his name. Perhaps you meant to write something else?
Being a Christian means following Jesus' teachings, including the ultimate claim that he is the son of God. But you never got all the way there. You were never willing to surrender yourself fully to Him. That leap of faith can be scary, but it is the key to a life filled with the peace that passeth all understanding.
1) We're not talking about a hundred years ago. We're talking about today. I don't want to go back a hundred years ago and accept anything from then...not their science, not their labor laws, not their treatment of women and minorities, nothing.
2) I am fine with an academic approach, but those who do what you say are not in it for academics. They do it (other than academicians) to have it be their way no matter way...hypocrites.
3) I could perhaps be satisfied at a UCC church somewhere, AND you are correct that religion and how it is perceived is deeply personal. Christians in the last 20 years in this country have gone bonkers, and I can not and will not associate with it anymore.
4) No one ever uttered the sound "Jesus" to the one we know as Jesus. LOTS of historical texts on this, and it is more likely to be Yeshua than most other possibilities, but NO ONE called him "Jesus". That came out of the Greek
"Iesous", and then the Latin "Iesus" from where we get "Jesus". So no, I did not mean to write something else.
5) Your last paragraph is another in a long list of things I disagree with with Christians. You said my faith was my own, but apparently only if it is defined as you define it. God is viewed differently by people with a range from a man in the sky who looks like Charleston Heston to an idea that is as broad. There are many Christian and Hebrew traditions now and historically that do not state a requirement is that you believe Jesus to be the son of God. The "son of God" does not appear in the Hebrew Bible.
1) You say that anyone who does not accept gay marriage is evil. Therefore, 100 years ago everyone was evil.
Or maybe you are making the nonsensical argument that the measure of an evil person changes over time?
2) Christians genuinely want to understand scripture for themselves. And they do argue about the meaning of certain passages. You have not demonstrated anything that is hypocritical about it.
3) Every church is different. You could easily find a church where you would be comfortable. I encourage you to do that.
4) You are arguing about the pronunciation of the word "Jesus"? I don't see how that is relevant.
5) Your faith is your own no matter what you believe. All I can do is provide a witness of my own faith, which is what I have done. It is completely your choice as to whether or not you accept Jesus as the son of God. It is your choice as to whether or not you accept my witness to you.
I'll say this again because I know it to be true both from the New Testament and from my own personal experience:
Being a Christian means following Jesus' teachings, including the ultimate claim that he is the son of God. That leap of faith can be scary, but it is the key to a life filled with the peace that passeth all understanding.
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) We're not talking about a hundred years ago. We're talking about today. I don't want to go back a hundred years ago and accept anything from then...not their science, not their labor laws, not their treatment of women and minorities, nothing.
2) I am fine with an academic approach, but those who do what you say are not in it for academics. They do it (other than academicians) to have it be their way no matter way...hypocrites.
3) I could perhaps be satisfied at a UCC church somewhere, AND you are correct that religion and how it is perceived is deeply personal. Christians in the last 20 years in this country have gone bonkers, and I can not and will not associate with it anymore.
4) No one ever uttered the sound "Jesus" to the one we know as Jesus. LOTS of historical texts on this, and it is more likely to be Yeshua than most other possibilities, but NO ONE called him "Jesus". That came out of the Greek
"Iesous", and then the Latin "Iesus" from where we get "Jesus". So no, I did not mean to write something else.
5) Your last paragraph is another in a long list of things I disagree with with Christians. You said my faith was my own, but apparently only if it is defined as you define it. God is viewed differently by people with a range from a man in the sky who looks like Charleston Heston to an idea that is as broad. There are many Christian and Hebrew traditions now and historically that do not state a requirement is that you believe Jesus to be the son of God. The "son of God" does not appear in the Hebrew Bible.
1) You say that anyone who does not accept gay marriage is evil. Therefore, 100 years ago everyone was evil.
Or maybe you are making the nonsensical argument that the measure of an evil person changes over time?
2) Christians genuinely want to understand scripture for themselves. And they do argue about the meaning of certain passages. You have not demonstrated anything that is hypocritical about it.
3) Every church is different. You could easily find a church where you would be comfortable. I encourage you to do that.
4) You are arguing about the pronunciation of the word "Jesus"? I don't see how that is relevant.
5) Your faith is your own no matter what you believe. All I can do is provide a witness of my own faith, which is what I have done. It is completely your choice as to whether or not you accept Jesus as the son of God. It is your choice as to whether or not you accept my witness to you.
I'll say this again because I know it to be true both from the New Testament and from my own personal experience:
Being a Christian means following Jesus' teachings, including the ultimate claim that he is the son of God. That leap of faith can be scary, but it is the key to a life filled with the peace that passeth all understanding.
Get a room!
Flagpole wrote:
By the way, the new owner of the business in Thailand contacted me to ask if I was interested in consulting for them as I was with the previous owner. He even offered an increase in my normal rate because the new company is bigger.
I said no.
WTF is the matter with you?!? That subject had (mercifully) died. Then you bring it back to make the thread all about you again?
WTF is wrong with you?
Trump's Derp Crowds ? wrote:
agip wrote:
[Trump's] poll numbers are quite bad at this stage. Do you think he might drop out, like Lyndon Johnson in 1968?
Yes. He’s gonna drop out of the race because it’s gonna become very clear. Okay, it’ll be March of 2020. He’ll likely drop out by March of 2020. It’s gonna become very clear that it’s impossible for him to win.
Here are a couple of pics of Trump's latest rally "crowd."
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ECDhmMfW4AAdKDt?format=jpg&name=mediumhttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/ECDhm27XUAAjKpQ?format=jpg&name=medium
NH Fire Marshal: Trump DID smash Elton John's arena attendance record.
• Crowd of Over 11,500.
• 8,000 people stood outside the arena in an overflow crowd area, watching the rally on jumbo TV screens.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7365155/Fire-marshal-says-Donald-Trump-DID-smash-Elton-Johns-attendance-record-New-Hampshire-arena.htmlCreepy Uncle Joe pulled a whopping 30 supporters in NH during Trump rally- bahahahaha!!
http://coupons.eagletribune.com/Trump wins again!
KAG2020
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) We're not talking about a hundred years ago. We're talking about today. I don't want to go back a hundred years ago and accept anything from then...not their science, not their labor laws, not their treatment of women and minorities, nothing.
2) I am fine with an academic approach, but those who do what you say are not in it for academics. They do it (other than academicians) to have it be their way no matter way...hypocrites.
3) I could perhaps be satisfied at a UCC church somewhere, AND you are correct that religion and how it is perceived is deeply personal. Christians in the last 20 years in this country have gone bonkers, and I can not and will not associate with it anymore.
4) No one ever uttered the sound "Jesus" to the one we know as Jesus. LOTS of historical texts on this, and it is more likely to be Yeshua than most other possibilities, but NO ONE called him "Jesus". That came out of the Greek
"Iesous", and then the Latin "Iesus" from where we get "Jesus". So no, I did not mean to write something else.
5) Your last paragraph is another in a long list of things I disagree with with Christians. You said my faith was my own, but apparently only if it is defined as you define it. God is viewed differently by people with a range from a man in the sky who looks like Charleston Heston to an idea that is as broad. There are many Christian and Hebrew traditions now and historically that do not state a requirement is that you believe Jesus to be the son of God. The "son of God" does not appear in the Hebrew Bible.
1) You say that anyone who does not accept gay marriage is evil. Therefore, 100 years ago everyone was evil.
Or maybe you are making the nonsensical argument that the measure of an evil person changes over time?
2) Christians genuinely want to understand scripture for themselves. And they do argue about the meaning of certain passages. You have not demonstrated anything that is hypocritical about it.
3) Every church is different. You could easily find a church where you would be comfortable. I encourage you to do that.
4) You are arguing about the pronunciation of the word "Jesus"? I don't see how that is relevant.
5) Your faith is your own no matter what you believe. All I can do is provide a witness of my own faith, which is what I have done. It is completely your choice as to whether or not you accept Jesus as the son of God. It is your choice as to whether or not you accept my witness to you.
I'll say this again because I know it to be true both from the New Testament and from my own personal experience:
Being a Christian means following Jesus' teachings, including the ultimate claim that he is the son of God. That leap of faith can be scary, but it is the key to a life filled with the peace that passeth all understanding.
1) When going back a century, yes, I am giving people the benefit of the doubt as social norms have changed. Shows how open minded I am.
2) Hypocrites will (and do) take passages literally when it suits them and don't when it doesn't. As there are many who say they take the Bible literally and yet they don't kill someone they know who worked on Sunday, they are hypocrites or ignorant or both.
3) Until the very bad stigma that Christians have created in this country changes, I do no anticipate going back to church.
4) I am not arguing about the pronunciation of Jesus. I made a comment that was correct that no one ever called him Jesus, and you incorrectly challenged that. There is no argument here. I am just correct.
5) Again, I disagree with your definition of what it means to be a Christian. Your view IS the majority view of Christians today, less so historically, but it IS one of the reasons I have had to leave the church and no longer consider myself a Christian, because I will not align myself with fantasy and fallacy.
I am fine with deciding to just disagree here.
WTF is the matter with U? wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
By the way, the new owner of the business in Thailand contacted me to ask if I was interested in consulting for them as I was with the previous owner. He even offered an increase in my normal rate because the new company is bigger.
I said no.
WTF is the matter with you?!? That subject had (mercifully) died. Then you bring it back to make the thread all about you again?
WTF is wrong with you?
There were several who were adamant that I had been "fired".
Well, nope. I was not. People are pretty quick to make judgments when they should not. You continued it by making your comment. Good going.