Sounds like a petty, cruel god's rules
Posted By: Just a thought on 2006-08-31
In Reply to: Simply put, those who have salvation are bound for heaven. - Those who do not are doomed. It doesn't (sm)
Actually this sounds like a human's idea of what a god would want. So obsessed with rules and regulations......
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I'm not cruel to anyone
Believing what God says doesn't make me cruel. ;-)
Some liberal dem women are = most cruel to their own sex ....sm
than any people I've ever known in my life.
Not all liberal women, mind you, just some.
In general kids can be very cruel.
How many fat kids in school were popular? Not many, eh? This type of behavior stems from home. How many of us talk bad about other people in front of our children? I'm not just talking about homosexual bashing either. How many of us gossip about what so and so wore, etc.? How many of us bash others when we don't think our kids are paying attention?
How many times do Christians post on here and are bashed horribly for their beliefs and called names? How many Christians post on here bashing homosexuals and calling them sick freaks? This type of behavior comes in all shapes and sizes and comes from all sides....black vs white, gay vs straight, believer vs nonbeliever.
You cannot take on particular subject like homosexuality and us it soley to teach tolerance of people different than you. There are many other things that children are picked on for than just that one subject.
Oh look at 4 eyes over there or how about that dork with the braces, etc. Look at the kid not wearing designer clothes. Look at the freak with the emo makeup on.
See what I mean.....tolerance is such a broad thing to teach children that you can't just use homosexuality to teach tolerance and I think it is unfair to people who do not agree with homosexuality that their kids are being taught ACCEPTANCE and not just tolerance on that issue anyway.
Like I said before....I keep my God out of school.....keep your homosexuality out as well.
So you're okay with cruel and inhumane...(sm)
treatment so long as it's done for revenge. Since you call yourself a christian, you might want to check out what the Bible has to say about that one.
I emailed the moderator and why are you being so cruel? unbelievable
Ever think you might hurt a person's feelings? Or you simply do not care?
how cruel you are to this woman. Suppose you were pregnant
with a baby doomed to die soon after delivery, how would you THEN decide?
It is always easy to judge from afar, but it turns differently when it hits home!
Petty, petty, petty....
slow news day today ladies?
How petty can you get?
I think we can chalk this up to hope for the best, expect the worst and be prepared for either. While we are on the subject, it seems McC is not too sure if he should be inside of outside of his own victory celebration....the lawn may be the best place from which to launch a quick getaway. Who knows? McC has been throwing up everything he can think of against the wall and so far, nothing sticks. This cocky mantra is only the latest and perhaps one of the lamest yet. Obama himself has warned repeatedly in the past few days about the dangers of complacency. Just because we are excited at the idea that he has a clear shot at winning does not in any way mean that the job is done or that his supporters have stopped their most diligent efforts to cover all the bases, dot all their Is and cross all their Ts. McC has also said "when I am president" and O has said "if elected." For pete's sake, grow up already.
No, I'm just going with petty.
Obama isn't the one griping about Blair house, I am. First off, he needed to move early so his kids could go ahead and start school. He wasn't trying to move into the white house. He was making a decision based on the needs of his kids. Yeah, that was just terrible of him.
Secondly, Blair house is what, 70,000 sq feet, comprised of townhouses, with 110 rooms and 35 bathrooms.
Third, the only guest there is the former prime minister of Australia, John Howard, who incidentally was kicked out of office for aligning with Bush.
Let me guess, there just wasn't enough room?
This is simply Bush being a butt head. Very childish, if you ask me, for someone who is supposed to be president.
Petty...huh?
And continually talking about Sarah Palin's daughter getting pregnant isn't petty? That has nothing to do with Palin's ability to run her state. Yet people continually bring that up and consider it a reason for Palin to fail politically.
The whole point of this is the fact that Obama is spending more money wastefully during this crisis. I'm sure he didn't foot the bill for that party. If our country had money, fine.....but everyone has to cut back during this time and that includes politicians. If they want to spend their own money....more power to them, but a majority of them are using taxpayer money. Just like Pelosi using military planes. Everyone is cutting back and they went after bank CEOs and auto CEOs and gave them crap for having private jets and here you have Pelosi using military planes costing taxpayers money. Another example of do as I say and not as I do, huh?
Petty tit for tat...(sm)
As much as I do dislike the last admin, this isn't about getting revenge. It's about standing up for what our nation is supposed to stand for.
If you want to go with just everyone who "knew" about it, then that would definitely wipe out a ton of people in the senate (probably both sides). However, who gave the orders to carry out torture? Who tried to rewrite the laws regarding torture? I would simply go after the directly guilty...and that does not include, btw, military personell who were following orders.
If you want to fry a dem on something, then go for Clinton for rendition, but that guilty by association thing that you guys seem to love to use isn't going to float.
petty and pathetic.
x
Your jealous and petty
is my . . that's the law of the land, quite your botchin'. Change it or live with it. Good greasy gravy, grow up.
and even more pettiness....where's Tom Petty when
this whole board is petty
just doing my part to contribute.
How is it being petty and ridiculous because
There are so many of us out here struggling to make ends meet, put food on the table for our families and they are going out on a date at our expense? I did not vote for O, I am neither a republican or a democrat, but I have encouraged every one I know to support him and give him a chance. However, it seems that the more that I now try to encourage myself to support him, the more stupid things that he does. Let's forget about the date and talk about the trip to Los Angeles to raise money for Harry Reid. He took Air Force One, which by itself costs an unbelievable amount of money to just get ready to fly, hundreds of thousands of dollars, then you add in what it costs to get in the air. I completely understand that this is something that has been done by both parties in the past but when you stand before the cameras and ask every last person in America to sacrifice and then you go out and do things that are costing these same people even more money, I believe that it is completely appropriate to be angry as heck. Then I saw on CNN where the question was posed "is the $400,000 salary of the President of the United States adequate, should it be more." Well let's see, he travels at our expense, he has a roof over his head with no expenses whatsoever, food is on the table at no expense to him, he has a beautiful place to escape to for long weekends, again at no expense to him, so do I think that $400,000 is appropriate? You are dang right I think that it is appropriate.
This is an administration who preached about transparency during the election and, in my opinion, so far, they have been far from transparent. Even though I did not vote for him I truly hoped (and still hope) that he would make things better for all of us and so far I personally do not see that happening.
Petty? Why not to a movie, but
Double-standards, Obama's way.
Great try at a comeback. You are just as petty as
nm
I doubt they have time for that petty stuff. NM
I like what I see in the mirror. Petty squabbles do not rile me,
I have not been trying to rile anyone all day. I have posted infrequent, well researched, rationale, logical discussions and comparisons of issues, plans, policies, platforms and positions, trying to egg pubs into some sort of similar response. So far, in response, they run from issues and reply with dodges, slams, bashes and digs.
I do not back down from these either, because some of the inflammatory ignorant poop they post seeks to undermine my candidate in destructive ways. I will be answering every single time in the same spirit that is used in the posts I am replying to. I have no sympathy for what pubs have "suffered" from SS today because dems are forced to deal with our own sally in the form of Sam 12 hours a day 5 days a week and have been doing so for months and months now. It's like Obama. He has been relentlessly raked through the coals for the past 18 months and has not complained one single time. SP and McCain have had this same treatment now for around 5 days and they are wimping out, whining like a couple of 5 year olds and declaring war on the so-called "liberal" press....not a terribly intelligent thing to do in the middle of a campaign.
Your double standard claim means less than nothing to me, but I do agree with you that my time and energy is better spent compliling fact to fight fiction and promoting my candidate to the best of my ability, in a thoughtful, intelligent and credible manner. See ya back at the board, Get Smart. Would look forward to engaging you in a real political debate on issues, etc, should you feel so inclined.
But why is this stuff seemingly petty to Americans?
nm
Petty bickering about stuff from 16 years ago
Pardon the pun here, but we have bigger fish to fry....much bigger fish. Rahm has all the qualities that a chief of staff needs and if you don't like his personality, oh well. What is obvious here is that you are making judgments WAY too prematurely. One person does not a trend make. The undertones of your post are juvenile and you sound like a smart alek. If you rarely read or post on this board, then why don't you just drive on by and keep on going? We could probably get along just fine without your input.
That's a pretty petty thing to be bugging you.
xx
Ann is a biterr and jealous petty little witch.
x
like the left doesn't know anything about petty snipes
if the woman can't count, she can't count. so what
Petty or not, going on a date with taxpayer money
nm
Yeah, but they all count, no matter how petty the reason....
and that goes for both sides...sigh.
That kind of attitude makes you sound jealous and petty..
I'm sorry if you are offended by my opinion that I don't want to pay more in taxes. You wouldn't either if the tables were turned.
You are right. I will obey the rules from now on. sm
Have a nice holiday.
Sure you don't break the rules
Sure you don't. Your fingerprints are all over the conservative board, but that's neither here or there but I could really care less.
Some of Pelosi's new rules sm
This is from an article before the elections. This sure would be a good start in the right direction.
The act is a tough document, authored by Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco-area congresswomen who has been the Democratic House leader since 2002. She will likely be the House Speaker if the Democrats win next Tuesday.
Here are some of the new rules Pelosi wants:
No House member may accept any gift of any value from lobbyists, or any firm or association that hires lobbyists.
No free travel, which means an end to the corporate jet line every Friday at Reagan National Airport.
No free tickets to Redskins games; or no meals of any value, even at a McDonalds; no front-row seats at entertainment venues. No, no and no.
Temptations resisted
To reduce temptations to cheat, Pelosi's bill attacks the usefulness of members to richly endowed lobbyists.
House members will no longer be able to slip in special-interest projects on unrelated legislation. Such measures will no longer be allowed on a bill once negotiations between the Senate and House are complete.
Further, all bills will be made available to the public a full 24 hours before a final vote; presumably this gives watchdog groups a chance to flag any skullduggery.
Under the Pelosi rules, lobbyists will no longer be able to use the House gym (you'd be surprised how much gets negotiated in a sauna). Lobbyists will no longer be allowed onto the House floor or to use the cloakrooms just off the floor, preventing last-minute arm-twisting.
What's more, no member or staffer will be able to negotiate for employment in the public sector without disclosing such contacts to the House Ethics Committee, and within three days of such contact being made.
Finally, all of this will be audited and investigated by a new Office of Public Integrity, and that office reports, directly and only, to the U.S. Attorneys Office.
At this point, you'd be entitled to ask, heard this before, what makes you think it will be accepted by Congress?
Can it work?
No doubt there will be attempts to water down some of these new regulations. In fact, many of these proposals have been in other bills that have been defeated in the recent past.
But several key congressional experts tell CBC News that Pelosi means business and might just be able to push this through. They put it this way.
Pelosi and the congressional Democratic leadership are not likely to get much credit simply for gaining control of the House.
Conventional wisdom already sees such a victory, should it happen, first and foremost as a repudiation of the Bush administration and the Republicans.
This Honest Leadership and Open Government Act is a way of hitting the bricks running. Plus, it could be enormously popular with voters of all persuasions.
They point out Pelosi herself has little national profile and wants quickly to paint some bold strokes. She promises the act will be the first legislation tackled if she leads a new Congress.
Also, Pelosi can and will extract promises of support from those getting leadership positions and plush committee chairmanships and the like.
These new rules will apply in the House as soon as they are passed by simple majority.
The Senate has different rules, but for Republicans and Democrats there, the pressure to comply with the Pelosi standards will be huge.
rules, forum
dd
Where does one find the rules? There have been...
many posts that were quite lengthy. Is there a limit on length or just cut and paste?
I understand that is against the rules, but
the only way I can see that actually making a difference is if somebody went in completely undecided, but had prayed for God to show them a sign. 
I sure hope everybody has a clear picture in their mind of who they want to vote for and why before they drive to their polling place and punch that card.
they have not changed the rules yet
Hedge funds are still doing sneak attacks on companies, driving them into the dirt.
Citigroup got hit today, down 23%. It is worth 6 bucks and one year ago was 40. They need to change the rules on these hedge funds. They can pick on any company and kill it in a day.
Okay. Thanks. I understand now. Different rules for different boards.
nm
Majority rules not the minority
as long as someone is given the option not to participate then no one is getting hurt. If they are the only one in the class that does not want to say it then that's life. We can't cower majority traditions and beliefs to make every individual feel included. We'd truly have chaos then, because every one's feelings are different.
Just playing by liberal rules
It doesn't matter if something is supposed to be funny or not. In the liberal world every statement is taken literally. According to GT even thinking something stereotypical or racial should be grounds for dismissal from your job or worse yet a trip to the gallows, but in the next breath she posts a blatantly stereotypical article about our nations regions.
Oh did I take what GT said out of context? Did other people take what GT said out of context? Gee, gosh, sorry...but cccording to the LIBERAL rules nothing is ever taken out of context. If you utter the words like *black* or *abortion* in the same sentence. Then you're a racist...case closed.
Don't blame us for enforcing your rules. We didn't make them, but you have to play by them too, or we'll call you out...
Have a nice night....
Actually I agree about the rules. But don't use the first when you really don't respect it.
x
And the monitor obviously has one-sided rules.
All you have done since you showed up here a few days ago is attack me personally. You don't even know me, and it wouldn't matter what I posted, you have already made your mind up that you hate me, and all you want to do is call names and insult.
It started when I posted a response to Democrat's post above. Since then, you've done nothing but attack me.
At least Carla was asking intelligent questions and trying to have a meaningful and informative dialogue on the CON board. Yet, she was reprimanded by the moderator.
All YOU have done is insult and be just generally nasty and rude. In none of your posts have you made an effort to have an intelligent dialogue. All you're about is attacking. Yet, YOUR actions go unreprimanded.
Says a lot about fairness on this board.
And now, knowing how much the truth is appreciated here, I suppose I will be banned, while you will be free to continue on with your rudeness and hateful attacks.
Will you leave? Sure. *RME* As soon as pigs fly or as soon as AG stops *accidentally* posting on this board. Choose one.
To Monitor: A CON says your rules are *stupid*
and refuses to quit coming here (along with a troll named Nina). They both do nothing but insult and cause trouble and make this board an unpleasant place to visit.
Nobody is bothering them on the Conservative Board (as of 11:15 a.m. MT, anyway, though they might quick post some insults to themselves after they read this and then whine about it).
Please ask them to leave.
Posted By: huh? on 2006-03-10,
In Reply to: Oh, she revealed it on the Conservative Board - ??
The stupid rules have made these boards a place where only crickets chirp. Its sad that people are so childish and cannot discuss things like mature adults. This is why these boards will remain a snoozeville, because some people are not capable of mature conversation and get insulted by anyone who does not believe exactly like they do, but if you like it dead here...by all means enjoy the silence.
I already posted the one that said your rules are stupid
in my post to you above. Another example is the post below.
Never mind. Maybe the poster is *right.* I have a feeling if a liberal poster was trolling the conservative board and said your rules were *stupid* you would be telling them to stay on their own board.
There are other sites where the rules are enforced equally, even for liberals.
See ya.
He can't make rules by himself....obviously the rest of the...
legislature must have agreed with him. Again I ask you...if it happened in YOUR family, would you not use every means at your disposal to help your family member get the help they needed?
Seems he likes to make up the rules as he goes along (sm)
You know, like a child playing a board game changes the rules all the way through to make sure he or she will win? If he was going to improve his aquaintances he should have done that a loooong time ago. Not right now before the election, looks kinda....fishy.
Does Palin once again think the rules don't apply to her?
thought this article was interesting.
Does Palin once again think the rules don't apply to her?
Posted on 02 January 2009
By Dan Fagan
How is it possible that the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law is working as an apprentice on the North Slope?
The Governor, in trying to dispel rumors the father of her grandchild is a high school drop out, released this statement this week, “Levi is continuing his online high school work in addition to working as an electrical apprentice on the North Slope."
But federal regulations require any members of apprentice programs, union or otherwise, first obtain a high school diploma, something the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law, Levi Johnston does not have. Some apprentice programs even require the completion of high school level Algebra or the post secondary equivalent.
So how is it that the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law is working in an apprentice program? Is this another case of the Governor believing the law doesn’t apply to her?
Bo Underwood, who heads up ASRC’s electrical apprentice program, confirmed Johnston is indeed enrolled as an apprentice. Underwood claimed not to know whether a high school diploma is needed to be an ASRC apprentice and said he would check on it. But federal regulations clearly state a high school diploma is needed before entering an apprentice program. How is it the man who runs the program does not know that?
Underwood also claimed not to know whether there is a waiting list for the ASRC apprentice program he runs. Imagine that.
Rebecca Logan, executive director of Associated Builders and Contractors, an organization that also has an electrical workers apprentice program, says waiting lists almost always accompany apprenticeship programs. Her organization’s apprentice program has a waiting list of at least 100 people.
Bo Underwood promised to get back with me on how the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law got into the apprentice program.
The Alaska Standard has a call into the Governor’s office as well. We’ll let you know when we hear back from them on this issue.
Does Palin once again think the rules don't apply to her?
thought this article was interesting.
Does Palin once again think the rules don't apply to her?
Posted on 02 January 2009
By Dan Fagan
How is it possible that the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law is working as an apprentice on the North Slope?
The Governor, in trying to dispel rumors the father of her grandchild is a high school drop out, released this statement this week, “Levi is continuing his online high school work in addition to working as an electrical apprentice on the North Slope."
But federal regulations require any members of apprentice programs, union or otherwise, first obtain a high school diploma, something the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law, Levi Johnston does not have. Some apprentice programs even require the completion of high school level Algebra or the post secondary equivalent.
So how is it that the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law is working in an apprentice program? Is this another case of the Governor believing the law doesn’t apply to her?
Bo Underwood, who heads up ASRC’s electrical apprentice program, confirmed Johnston is indeed enrolled as an apprentice. Underwood claimed not to know whether a high school diploma is needed to be an ASRC apprentice and said he would check on it. But federal regulations clearly state a high school diploma is needed before entering an apprentice program. How is it the man who runs the program does not know that?
Underwood also claimed not to know whether there is a waiting list for the ASRC apprentice program he runs. Imagine that.
Rebecca Logan, executive director of Associated Builders and Contractors, an organization that also has an electrical workers apprentice program, says waiting lists almost always accompany apprenticeship programs. Her organization’s apprentice program has a waiting list of at least 100 people.
Bo Underwood promised to get back with me on how the Governor’s soon to be son-in-law got into the apprentice program.
The Alaska Standard has a call into the Governor’s office as well. We’ll let you know when we hear back from them on this issue.
Pardon me. Are you saying the rules are not enforced equally? sm
I asked for an example, i.e., a specific post. Which post is it specifically. I do not have time to read every post on this board. Also, you said insults. I asked for examples of that. Again, you did not provide any. I am not quite sure how I am to do something about anything when you are not cooperating. I have, in the past, posted equally on both boards regarding sticking to the boards you belong on. However, I can't assume that simply because someone disagrees with your point of view, that they are of a certain political persuasian. That would be, indeed, labeling and unfair on my part. I will post another reminder about which board to stay on, but I don't appreciate your insinuation that there is favoritism here. As the board owner has said before, if this board is not to your liking, you certainly have options.
We haven't changed the rules at all. To what are you referring?
/
I follow the Old Testament and those rules aren't too
NM
Bush weakens EPA/ESA rules to pave way for
that would be mountain-top mining of the kind that has blown mountain tops off in the Appalchains. Ever seen a picture of this? Is this the kind of drill, baby drill you want?
Prop 8 --- majority rules problem...(sm)
Okay, I've seen several posts on here about how Prop 8 should be upheld because *the majority rules.* Almost every civil rights movement that was successful including the right for women to vote, the right for inter-racial marriage, etc would have never made it if we had gone by the idea that the majority rules. In fact, isn't that the point of civil rights? -- to protect minorities? Also, the constitution says *we the people,* not we the christians. ARRRRGGGGHHH!
|
