Obama Investigates China for being too Green?

Obama Investigates China for being too Green?
October 17, 2010 by Briggs Armstrong

The NY Times reports that China has rebuked the Obama Administration for its "inquiry" into China's policy of subsidizing "green" industries.

"I have been thinking: what do the Americans want?" said Mr. Zhang, the vice chairman of the government's National Development and Reform Commission. "Do they want fair trade? Or an earnest dialogue? Or transparent information? I don't think they want any of this. I think more likely, the Americans just want votes."

Mr. Zhang is exactly right. This whole crusade against China subsidizing green industries was started by the United Steelworkers Union (which gave millions to purchase President Obama in the 2008 presidential campaign).

Here are a few more gems (as reported in the NYT piece) from Zhang, who also happens to be the head of China's National Energy Administration:

On Sunday, Mr. Zhang called the Steelworkers' complaint unfounded, saying that American subsidies to clean-energy industries proposed by the Obama Administration total $60 billion, and the American government has slapped domestic-content provisions ­ so-called "Buy American" clauses ­ on certain clean-energy products.

"What America is blaming us for is exactly what they do themselves. Chinese subsidies to new energy companies are much smaller than those of the U.S. government. If the U.S. government can subsidize companies, then why can't we?"

Should American officials pursue the Steelworkers' complaint, he added, "the only ones who will be humiliated are themselves."

Government subsidies are always a bad thing. They distort markets and transfer wealth from a large, often ignored portion of the population, to a smaller, more politically connected portion. This effect is universal, regardless of which government is doing the subsidizing or which industry is receiving the subsidy. What makes this story so interesting, even outright humorous, is the unabashed manner in which Mr. Obama and his fellow democrats sell their green souls for union votes.

you may find this article on religion of interest

you may find this article on religion interesting

Linkedin Groups	October 17, 2010
Atlas Shrugged
Most Active Discussions (3) "Atheists, agnostics most knowledgeable about religion" 38 comments » Started by Don West Mark, I would NEVER want to discourage someone who's asking a real, honest question, through insults or anything else. Perhaps I've done... More » By Rodney Schroeter Have you read either of these two books on Ayn Rand? 5 comments » Started by Sherry Karr I found the accounting of Rand's relationship with the classical liberals/early libertarians and her active political involvement very... More » By Marsha Enright WSJ.com - Opinion: Capitalism Saved the Miners 4 comments » Started by Bruce Majors I couldn't agree more. It needs to be said over and over again. Look at why it has to be stated again and again!!! Without all of you ... More » By Dr. Mark Lehr   Don't want to receive email notifications? Adjust your message settings. Stop inappropriate content the moment it is posted. Send me an email for each new discussion » LinkedIn values your privacy. At no time has LinkedIn made your email address available to any other LinkedIn user without your permission. © 2010, LinkedIn Corporation.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: 3 Reasons Why You Can’t Trust a Christian or a Jew

Actually, the point  the author made has been MISSED.

One can do a 'search' for words and phrases found within the Bible and posit them as one has seen regularly by those presenting their FEAR agenda (ie. the substitute for the Commie under every bed that was 'successful' until 1991).
Within its CONTEXT it often has DIFFERENT meanings -- as do similar exercises.

FURTHERMORE, one should be skeptical (as the author notes) of these actions.

Regard$,
--MJ

... the mainstream is so polluted with lies, once you are wet it's so hard to get dry, we are all taught, how to justify, history, as it passes by ... --Ani Difranco




At 11:58 AM 10/17/2010, you wrote:

Hey Michael,
 
What  Alan Steveo, (or is this really Lew Rockwell??)  doesn't understand, is what Jesus is actually doing here in Luke 14.  Jesus  is warning those who want to be his disciples, telling them that the life of a disciple will be difficult. They will be put in situations where their own flesh and blood will oppose their faith or tempt them to disobey Jesus. As Jesus says elsewhere, "Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For from now on in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law" (Luke 12:51-53). Indeed, it will get even worse, as the end draws near: "And brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death" (Mark 13:12).

Once Again, the premise of the article is flawed. 




On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 8:12 AM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

3 Reasons Why You Can't Trust a Christian or a Jew

by Allan Stevo

"Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple."

Where's this quote come from? A jihadist manual on terror? One of the Surahs of the Koran? Maybe Mao's little red book? Was it spoken by the terrorist prophet himself, Mohammed? No, it comes from the Gospel of Luke.

It was read to millions of Christians a few Sundays ago in churches around the world. I wonder how many people in the pews heard it and thought "Wow, that really wouldn't sound too good as a sound-bite in the media of the Muslim world" (or in atheist media, or even secular media for that matter). In the same way that lines from the Quran are taken out of context, lines from the Bible can also be taken out of context.

Do Christians hate life?

Christians that I know personally do not behave as if they hate life. As an industrialized country with such a high level of church attendance, the U.S. is a statistical anomaly. Many Americans identify themselves as Christian, 78% according to this Gallup poll. We are by multiple measures a Christian country.

This Christian country of ours has a very high illegal murder rate, especially when compared to other industrialized countries. Preventing those murders is an issue of much contention. This Christian country of ours also has a very high rate of "legal" extraterritorial murder in undeclared war zones all over the world. Those murders are not so difficult to avoid. For example, if an American soldier is not outside of the U.S., that American soldier will not be able to shoot or be shot by anyone outside of the U.S. In reality, despite my loved ones showing no outward signs of hating life, the argument can be made that Christian Americans do hate life based on the behavior of the society in which we live. We Americans tacitly agree to extraterritorial "legal" murders.

Murder is the ending of life. Surely a case can be made for Christians, at least American Christians, not realizing the gravity of life. I'm unable to argue that life is "hated" as opposed to "disliked" or even worse, simply not appreciated. Or maybe it's just the value of other people's lives that is the problem. I suspect an American does tend to recognize the importance of his or her own life.

I know quite a few people who call themselves Christians and quite a few who aren't Christians and I don't see a clear hatred of life among the one group more than the other. At its surface, those people I know don't seem to have very effectively followed Jesus' command to "hate…life itself."

It's a strongly worded statement written in the Bible that doesn't look good as a sound-bite taken out of context, away from the centuries of schools of Biblical scholarship that exists and that many of us now read the Bible through. Perhaps it's intellectually lazy of a person to try to do the same thing with the Quran and to speak like some kind of Quranic scholar because he knows a few ideas from the Quran that he read in USA Today. I supposed in general we all know better than to trust self-proclaimed authorities. However, the fact that a single person watches the network news or buys a major newspaper indicates that there are many people who are comfortable with putting faith in those self-proclaimed authorities.

On Sept 19, again Christians heard another confusing verse. It can quite effectively be taken out of context when one imagines the corporatist American government, like a greedy octopus, slithering around the world taking things by force. "And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes." ~ Luke 16:9

Christians agree that Jesus actually said that.

This upcoming Sunday, the many Christian churches that use the Revised Common Lectionary will hear a reading from the book of Genesis where the patriarch Jacob wrestles with God. During this reading, God changes the unfortunately named Jacob's name to "Israel." Jacob, one of the patriarchs to which Judaism and Christianity trace their faith, literally means "he who grasps the heal." Figuratively, this name has an even worse meaning: "He who deceives." Israel, his new and improved name, means: "he struggles with God."

To me, there can be a beauty in a faith that lets you struggle with God. At the same time, it's easy to take this out of context. To struggle with God is to be opposed to God, to challenge the Almighty and His ways. This presents a rather unflattering talking point about Israel. The word Israel, the name of the most problematic state in the Middle East, was chosen by leaders of that country as a way to present itself to the world – "struggle with God." For the billions of people out there who believe in a God that's about the worst name you can come up with for a country.

Let me just restate all that in a nine-second talking point about Judeo-Christian culture:

Jacob means "he who deceives"; Israel means "struggles with God"; Jesus commands his followers to be dishonest and to hate life. Are these the professed values of a good people? What more does one need to know distrust Christians and Jews?

Do these facts make me not want to go to church? No, they just make me realize how important it is to never trust the media about anything. Nine-second sound-bites are alluring and deceptive. Just like my religious proclivities seem very strange to others when taken out of context, the religious, political, athletic, emotional, and physical proclivities of nearly any person seem strange when taken out of context. For shock value, the hate mongers of American society love taking religion out of context, as long as Christianity's not that religion.

Filter the Media

On all topics there is an agenda. Base your understanding of situations on your relationship with people. Use the media to try to challenge yourself and to seek out differing perspectives. Never let your own experience be overshadowed by the words you read from some unknown journalist. I've sat down with enough respected journalists to realize that they are not as critically questioning and decent as their readers seem to believe.

Slovak-Hungarian Hatred?

In Slovakia Hungarians are said to be hated. There's a long history in which Hungarians (Magyars) controlled the land known today as Slovakia. That history spanned a good thousand years and had some very ugly moments, akin to a soft genocide, that sought to snuff out the existence of Slovaks.

It is said that Slovaks hate Hungarians. I can attest that some do.

However, when I am invited to visit a Slovak family that has Hungarian neighbors, I recognize that relations between Slovak and Hungarian neighbors tend to be quite hospitable. Just as hospitable as with any other neighbor.

The media and the whispers of popular culture, especially around election time, are quick to tell ugly stories about how bad those ethnic relations are. This no doubt actually influences some relationships. However, experience in the intimate relationships of a handful of diverse people tells me that the media is likely incorrect in this matter. I choose only to speak from my own experience on this topic, which also has its shortcomings, but is far more honest than pretending myself an expert just because I've read lots of work from some far-off journalists.

When it comes to neighbors, my Slovak acquaintances tend to be quite welcoming to the Hungarian minority that still live in Slovakia. Forced language is a sign of oppression. The Hungarian authorities used to force Hungarian language on Slovaks and understandably that period in history still impassions many Slovaks today. Freely spoken language, on the other hand, is a way to build a bridge into a friendship. I often hear Slovaks throw around a few Hungarian phrases with their Hungarian neighbors. Such relationships are in the best interest of neighbors.

Good relations are not in the best interest of those who 1. want to sell papers, 2. are filled with hate, and/or 3. have no other issues on which to win an election.

The nationalist parties of Slovakia and Hungary don't like these amicable relationships among Slovaks and Hungarians. They like to poke at the very real wounds of the past. The more they can get people to foremost remember those wounds, the more they can get their audience to forget that these are living breathing people they are asking them to hate and to mistreat, the more votes, the more media time, the more influence, the more money there is for those nationalist parties. They have a formula and they wield it effectively.

A political consultant by the name of Mike Rothfeld, linked to here, gives a great speech on political participation that I saw at the Leadership Institute in Arlington, VA. In his speech, Rothfeld makes a request of his audience: Whenever you listen to a speech, whenever you read a newspaper, whenever you are watching TV, or even just talking face-to-face and see someone trying to get you to believe something, you've got to ask yourself 'How does it benefit this person if I believe what he's saying?' Cui bono? In whose interest? Is the old concept that he restates. We all know that people don't often exert great effort just for the heck of it. Receiving communication through the media, from some person you don't know intimately, let alone have never met face to face, makes the answering of that question considerably harder.

The Effective Stereotype of the Muslim

Are all Muslims secretly terrorist time-bombs waiting to go off? I don't know, I can't answer that one for you, but I can tell you that it's a pretty effective line – repeated ad infinitum in the media. In that little idea of the Muslim terrorist time-bomb, you are told 1. You cannot trust a Muslim, 2. It's worthless to get close to a Muslim, 3. the closer you are to a Muslim, the more in danger you are, 4. Muslims are unreliable and may try to kill you at any time, 5. Be on your guard around Muslims, 6. Muslims live to kill, and especially to kill you, and of course 7. A Muslim sleeper cell may become active and detonate itself and those around them at any time and without notice.

If you buy into this, you involve yourself in some self-fulfilling prophecies. You can't really believe numbers one through seven above without eliminating the possibility of a friendship with a Muslim. Muslim terrorists do kill Americans. It's true. But from the perspective of a non-American Muslim in the year 2010 things must look very different than from that of an American Christian. As far as I can tell Muslims are a very forgiving people. After all, there are many Muslims who have, for some reason, not risen up against the United States, despite the very aggressive action taken by out American government seemingly randomly against Muslim civilians.

Muslims seem so forgiving that I am somehow still able to travel the world and find a man or woman who does not think America is running a Jihad on Islam. American behavior – 1.4 million Iraqi Muslim civilian casualties over the last seven years according to Just Foreign Policy – is enough to leave me thinking that our Christian nation does not value Muslim lives. Once again, that is in Iraq alone, and in the last seven years alone. Expanding the focus would make America's treatment of Muslims appear much worse.

Political rhetoric might be expected to tell a different story. It might be the way that Americans offer a soothing smile to the Muslim world on television as the soldiers ransack the countryside roughing people up. Under Bush, even the political rhetoric made America look like a nation that does not value Muslim lives. George Bush in this video addressing the media unscripted on Sept 16, 2001 referred to the pending war as a "crusade." Here he is addressing U.S. troops in February 2002 from a script again using the same language. Those who learned something in World History know that "crusade" is literally a battle fought under the cross of Jesus, and effectively took place in the past to take land and treasures from the Holy Land where Muslims, Jews, and even Christians lived. Many Christian, Jews, and especially Muslims were killed by European invaders. Despite the treatment, despite the language, I'm able to find decent and welcoming Muslims. Reality doesn't match the rhetoric of the media.

Make Your Own Choices

Do you genuinely hate your Pakistani neighbor that you've gotten to know well? Fine. I'm not going to try to talk you out of building a nice tall wall between your family and his. At least you're being more intellectually honest than a person who ignores reality.

One example of a person who ignores reality might be the proverbial bleeding heart liberal who seems to infinitely ignore the bomb being built next door. He doesn't seem to be in touch with the fact that people do actually do real bad things. Another example might be the Huntington-preaching/thumping/wielding conservative who has never spoken with/met/known a Muslim. She may have a hard time acknowledging that human beings are capable of behaving like individuals. Neither of such persons seem to take the time to know or understand his or her neighbor. Both are blinded by significant intellectual biases that the media seeks to convey.

Overwhelmingly, the mainstream media can't be trusted to report anything to us with authority. Which is a good realization, because in all honesty few sources should be trusted as authorities. A thinking person should analyze multiple sources on every issue, trying to derive multiple perspectives before coming to any conclusions. Grandma can be trusted as an authority on baking delicious pies and breads, but not on immigration laws. Dad can be a trusted authority on fixing the furnace and on whatever it is he does best, but not on campaign finance reform. You know that the people closest to you have certain talents in some areas and have little more than unstudied opinions in other areas. At least that much due diligence ought to be done before you decide to trust an unknown out there in the media.

In the year 2010, using exclusively mainstream media sources to find those multiple perspectives is likely to leave you with a big bowl of thoughtless – but generally appetizing and surprisingly pleasant to swallow – mush in front of you.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/stevo7.1.1.html

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

 

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: President Obama it is time you stoped this practice and returned America to its place of honor as the shining city on the hill !

WHAT -- specifically -- is "American" or "Anti-American".

Regard$,
--MJ

If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the
government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit
those guarantees.
-- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993 From a letter to the
editor, The Washington Times National Weekly Edition, June 5-11, 2000, page 39.

At 04:34 AM 10/17/2010, you wrote:
>President Obama it is time you stoped this practice and returned
>America to its place of honor as the shining city on the hill ! you
>must purge the bush loyalists from our millitary and end this anti
>American agenda started by bush in Afganistan and Pakistan .
>http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/10/15-5
>
>--
>Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
>* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Republicans Don’t Trust Americans

There is no RIGHT to vote.
There is a CIVIL privilege to vote.

Amendment XV prevents using RACE or COLOR or PREVIOUS SERVITUDE as
criterion for disqualifying the civil privilege of voting.
Amendment XIX prevents using SEX as criterion for disqualifying the
civil privilege of voting.
Amendment XXVI prevents using AGE (18 and over) as criterion for
disqualifying the civil privilege of voting.

Regard$,
--MJ

A right is the sanction of independent action. A right is that which
can be exercised without anyone's permission. If you exist only
because society permits you to exist, you have no right to your own
life. A permission can be revoked at any time. If, before undertaking
some action, you must obtain the permission of society - you are not
free, whether such permission is granted to you or not. Only a slave
acts on permission. A permission is not a right. -- Alyssa Rosenbaum

At 04:30 AM 10/17/2010, you wrote:
>every citizen has the right to vote which is why we the dred scott
>laws to ensure that states do not block citizens from voting because
>of race , religion or area they live in
>
>On Oct 16, 5:59 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > voting is a state right. The rights of the feds are specifically
> pointed out
> > in the constitution.... please show me where this one is.
> >
> > No politician has to register with the Federal government to run
> for office.
> > All that run for Federal office must register in his own STATE. Those that
> > run for President are only eligible to run in those states they register
> > in... (50). It is and was a STATE function.
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM, mike [ proud to be a liberal ] 532 ! <
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > littlemike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > you think federal election laws are unconstitutional ?
> >
> > > On Oct 16, 4:09 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > We have Federal Election Laws (which are unconstitutional) so that
> > > > the Republicans and Democrats can retain their positions.
> >
> > > > Block "Citizens" from voting?
> >
> > > > Regard$,
> > > > --MJ
> >
> > > > "Freedom for supporters of the government only, for members of one
> > > > party only no matter how big its membership may be is no freedom at
> > > > all. Freedom is always freedom for the man who thinks differently."
> > > > --Rosa Luxemburg
> >
> > > > At 03:58 PM 10/16/2010, you wrote:
> >
> > > > >we have federal election laws so that the states can not block
> > > > >citizens from voting
> >
> > > > >On Oct 16, 3:26 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I had NO idea that there exists (or ever did) a federal election.
> > > They
> > > > > > are entirely the purview of the individual states. If and
> when there
> > > > > > is a federal election then the feds have a right to make or enforce
> > > > > > election law.
> >
> > > > > > On Oct 16, 10:47 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > You have several things working against you.
> > > > > > > Not only does Amendment I apply (Congress shall make no law ...
> > > > > free speech),
> > > > > > > there is no Power provided the Congress within the Constitution
> > > > > to 'regulate' or
> > > > > > > 'restrict' or otherwise 'campaigns'.
> > > > > > > Money is most certainly speech -- whether it consists of
> > > > > 'hiring' someone to
> > > > > > > best spread your message OR the measure for the success of a
> > > business or
> > > > > > > enterprise.
> > > > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > > > --MJYou should see what the law professors on the H-LAW mailing
> > > > > list are saying about yesterday's Supreme Court First Amendment
> > > > > decision. Allowing people to purchase political ads and make
> > > > > political films without government regulation is, it seems, the end
> > > > > of the world. -- Kevin Gutzman on Citizens United v. Federal
> > > > > Election CommissionAt 12:41 PM 10/16/2010, you wrote:This is a
> > > > > close call.... mike.....Freedom of Speech is Freedom of
> > > > > > > Speech..... but, like I said elsewhere... political donations...
> > > > > > > money... is not speech (in my opinion). I would think
> that, as long
> > > as
> > > > > > > the "person" doing the speech is an "individual" then
> the money end
> > > > > > > (advertising access costs) associated with his/her
> political speech
> > > > > > > need not be disclosed... but when the "individual" becomes a
> > > > > > > "political advocacy group" of any sort, then where the
> money comes
> > > > > > > from should be disclosed...But, of course, there's a Criminally
> > > > > > > Crooked Supreme Court Majority to contend
> > > > >
> with.....currently.http://van-ezproxy.vancouver.wsu.edu/pag/index.html
> > > > > > > U.S. Chamber of Commercehttp://www.uschamber.org
> > > > > > > E-Mail: mbrs...@uschamber.org
> > > > > > > 1615 H St. NW
> > > > > > > Washington, DC 20062-2000
> > > > > > > Phone: 202-659-6000, 800-638-6582
> > > > > > > Fax: 202-463-3190 "We protect and represent you so your business
> > > can
> > > > > > > grow and prosper in a free market economy."
> > > > > > > (http://www.uschamber.org)
> > > > > > > Then there's Karl
> > > > > Rove...
> > >http://prairieweather.typepad.com/big_blue_stem/2010/10/suing-one-of-...
> > > > > > > On Oct 16, 10:41 am, "mike [ proud to be a liberal ] 532 !"
> > > > > > > <littlemike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > the court has opened the door for other governments
> to chose our
> > > > > > > > leaders .
> >
> > > > > > > > On Oct 16, 10:37 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > That s what Republican campaign fund-raising groups are doing
> > > by
> > > > > > > > > concealing their donors from the public.
> > > > > > > > > ROTFLMAO!
> > > > > > > > > Individuals, of course, have a right to privacy.
> > > > > > > > > BOTH Republicans AND Democrats fo not trust Americans, but
> > > > > > > > > it is with their lives (of course they are Peddling Pull to
> > > maintain
> > > > > > > > > their Power).
> > > > > > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > > > > > --MJYou should see what the law professors on the H-LAW
> > > > > mailing list are saying about yesterday's Supreme Court First
> > > > > Amendment decision. Allowing people to purchase political ads and
> > > > > make political films without government regulation is, it seems,
> > > > > the end of the world. -- Kevin Gutzman on Citizens United v.
> > > > > Federal Election Commission- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > > > For options & help seehttp://
> > > groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> > > > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > > >--
> > > > >Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > >For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> >
> > > > >* Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > >* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > >* Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> >
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
> >
> > --
> > Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>--
>Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
>* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Hey! I'm trying to fish here!

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM....... deerburgers.

On Oct 17, 7:39 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Hey! I'm Trying to Fish Here!
>
> *
>
> *Okay, I give up -- we can play, I can fish anytime...
>
> --
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 106KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 88KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 77KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 78KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 125KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 110KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 103KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 97KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 77KViewDownload
>
>  image_jpeg_part
> 110KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fwd: therapist in chief explains our inability to think clearly

-------- Original Message --------

Subject:	therapist in chief explains our inability to think clearly
Date:	Sun, 17 Oct 2010 11:44:29 -0400 (EDT)
From:	claguerra245@aol.com
To:	Rhomp2002@earthlink.net

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Therapist-in-Chief explains our "inability to think clearly" [!]

In Barack Obama's struggle to explain his fall from grace, condescension and self-delusion dominate:

President Barack Obama said Americans' "fear and frustration" is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.

"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared," Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. "And the country's scared."

Obama told the several dozen donors that he was offering them his "view from the Oval Office." He faulted the economic downturn for Americans' inability to "think clearly" and said the burden is on Democrats "to break through the fear and the frustration people are feeling." 

"You can respond in a couple of ways to a trauma like this," Obama said, referring to the economy. "One is to pull back, retrench and respond to your fears by pushing away challenges, looking backwards. Another is to say we can meet these challenges and we are going to move forward. And that's what this election is about." [emphasis added]

He's working overtime not to get this: The trauma is Obama! And the massive rejection of his pernicious agenda is proof that plenty of responsible Americans are thinking clearly and acting rationally, at last.

Obama was speaking at a suburban Boston fundraiser for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which raised an estimated $900,000. His remarks were somber and at times emotional as he tried to make sense of the political climate that changed so quickly since he was swept into office with overwhelming nationwide support. 

He can't handle the truth. All he can do is philosophize about the childlike  electorate's weak-mindedness.

Hey, what a coincidence -- John Kerry is saying the exact same thing as Obama:

"This is a tough year," he said at the fundraiser at the home of Ralph de la Torre, the CEO of Caritas Cristi, a Massachusetts-based health care system. "Facts, science, truth seem to be significantly absent from what we call our political dialogue. It's hardly a dialogue. It's a shouting match, sloganeering."

So ultra-liberal politicians are now the font of "facts, science, and truth"? Like the fact that the stimulus worked, and government created (or saved!) zillions of jobs? Or the fact that Obamacare won't raise our healthcare costs?

Two weeks to go and this is what they've got? Oy.

Shock: Department of Justice come out against legalizing Pot

Shock: Department of Justice come out against legalizing Pot Scotty Starnes | October 17, 2010 at 10:57 AM | Tags: Attorney General Eric Holder, California, DEA, Drug Enforcement Administration, Eric Holder, Federal law, legalize pot, marijuana, pot, Prop 19 | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-36S

Finally, the Obama Department of Justice is against something illegal. No, not illegal immigration. The Eric Holder-led DOJ is coming out against California trying to legalize pot.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Attorney General Eric Holder said the Obama administration "strongly opposes" a California ballot measure to legalize marijuana, warning that federal drug-enforcement efforts would be "greatly complicated" if the measure passes.

Will the Obama administration sue California as it did Arizona? Remember, we can't have a patchwork of laws.

Recent polls indicate voters narrowly favor passing the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act, also known as Proposition 19, in next month's election. If passed, the measure would only affect state law, leaving intact the federal law that classifies marijuana as a controlled substance alongside cocaine and other drugs.

Mr. Holder said in a letter Wednesday to nine former Drug Enforcement Administration chiefs that the administration would continue to enforce federal law if California legalizes marijuana. The DEA chiefs had urged him to speak out on the matter.

The ballot measure would block state police officers from seizing marijuana that complies with state law. That would be a "significant impediment" for federal agents, Mr. Holder wrote, because the federal government typically works with local law enforcement when carrying out marijuana and other drug busts.

Already, California has decriminalized possession of smaller quantities of marijuana deemed to be for personal use. The measure would go further than existing law in California and other states that allow use of the drug for medicinal purposes.

The Obama administration has largely hewed to the marijuana-enforcement policy of previous administrations. Mr. Holder has said the government won't target medicinal-marijuana operations that comply with state law, but will continue to pursue prosecutions of traffickers.

Continue reading>>>

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Reach out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Who do the Buccanevers play today ???

Every now and then I like to watch them....when I need a good laugh.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Obama to Let Insurers Raise Fees for Sick Children

Obtuse obfuscation does not become you.

On Oct 17, 8:26 am, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How is that going to reach thousands of people, when they cant see
> you?
>
> On Oct 17, 10:21 am, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Example has always been the best teacher.... they have been taught.
>
> > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > ""They depend on the government to do what
> > > > taxpayers pay them to do,  regulate environmental toxins.""
>
> > > > And hows that working out for you?? How long before "people" learn ?
>
> > > How can they learn unless someone teaches them?
>
> > > > ""Tis is not a time for employees to be choosy. ""
>
> > > > It is the BEST time to be proactive... it can have a much greater impact
> > > > when things are "bad".
>
> > > Things are "bad"
>
> > > where do you live?
>
> > > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > "We" The people that live in the U.S
>
> > > > > "Why can't I drink the water in a stream"? I wouldnt allow a child to
> > > > > play in the stream, no less drink the water.
>
> > > > > People in this country are happily holding onto any job they cant get
> > > > > at the moment. Tis is not a time for employees to be choosy. Work to
> > > > > pay the bills and feed the family, isn't that a number one priority?
>
> > > > > Since we already have the EPA, CDC, FDA, NIH and have learned they are
> > > > > only fronts for corporations. I will have to say, you are right,
> > > > > people need to take responsibility for their own health. But, not
> > > > > everyone is as wise as you, They depend on the government to do what
> > > > > taxpayers pay them to do,  regulate environmental toxins.
>
> > > > > On Oct 16, 4:08 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Who is "we" white man ?? (to quote Tonto) I drink the water that runs
> > > by
> > > > > my
> > > > > > house.... why can't you??
>
> > > > > > Simple, Individuals continue to work just to "make a buck" instead of
> > > > > > choosing their position based on all aspects of the job and its
> > > impact.
> > > > > It
> > > > > > boils down to PERSONAL responsibility short of that there is no
> > > "cure".
>
> > > > > > Oh, quit buying and eating that shit and it won't effect you. You
> > > CHOOSE
> > > > > the
> > > > > > food you put in your mouth. Yes there are alternatives to everything.
>
> > > > > > The last thing this world needs is more legislation and government
> > > > > > interference.
>
> > > > > > The one thing we do need is people taking responsibility for
> > > themselves
> > > > > and
> > > > > > their choices.
>
> > > > > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think you just responded with that to get me to post in further
> > > > > > > detail. I would hate to believe you are that dumb that you would
> > > > > > > think  parents would knowingly poison their own child.
>
> > > > > > > We live in a chemical cesspool, from the air we breathe to the
> > > water
> > > > > > > we drink or bathe in. Your skin is the largest organ, so when you
> > > > > > > bathe, its absorbing all those chemicals in the water. You might
> > > have
> > > > > > > filtration for your drinking water, but what about for your bath?
> > >  Of
> > > > > > > course we are told that if we dont vaccinate our children, they
> > > cant
> > > > > > > go to school. The food we eat is soaked with pesticides. The
> > > chicken
> > > > > > > we eat is full of chemicals, antibiotics and hormones. The milk we
> > > > > > > drink is full of hormones. Hormones everywhere ..
>
> > > > > > > You have a little pituitary glad that controls hormones, when this
> > > is
> > > > > > > out of whack, you land up with obesity. Last I heard obesity is
> > > > > > > epidemic in our country. How that happen? Some blame X-Box. I say
> > > if
> > > > > > > that's true, why aren't all disabled children who aren't mobile,
> > > > > > > obese?
>
> > > > > > > Obesity causes diseases.
>
> > > > > > > The air we breathe is polluted with all types of toxins, is this
> > > the
> > > > > > > parents fault, too? Or should they place the baby in a bubble?
>
> > > > > > > On Oct 16, 3:18 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > I would suggest that they not live (or allow their children) in
> > > or
> > > > > > > > ingest things that make their children ill. This is straight
> > > forward
> > > > > > > > abuse and the direct fault of the parent.
>
> > > > > > > > MY kids are MY responsibility.... YOURS are YOUR responsibility.
> > > > > > > > Please explain just why it should be any different... and be
> > > > > specific.
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 16, 12:57 pm, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > When you can test a baby and find over two hundred chemicals in
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > one baby, the majority of those chemicals being neurotoxins or
> > > > > > > > > carcinogens, YES, EVERY taxpayer that votes in lawmakers that
> > > allow
> > > > > > > > > this to happen,  to innocent children should at least pay for
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > childs medical bills.
>
> > > > > > > > > If you dont like it, Than I would suggest you start electing
> > > people
> > > > > > > > > that will fight environmental poisoning in American children.
>
> > > > > > > > > As of right now, According to the CDC and American
> > > Pediatrics...One
> > > > > > > > > out of six children in the U.S has some form of developmental
> > > > > > > > > disorder, this does NOT include epidemics of children with
> > > Asthma,
> > > > > > > > > cancer, diabetes, kidney diseases etc, etc...
>
> > > > > > > > > And for the "scientist" on the forum that make the claim "The
> > > dose
> > > > > > > > > makes the poison" That might be true if you only had one
> > > poison,
> > > > > add
> > > > > > > > > in 200 and see what that does to a babies health!
>
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 16, 2:40 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > My house burned down.  Will you sell me insurance NOW that
> > > will
> > > > > > > > > > provide for its rebuild?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Any idea WHY health care is expensive?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yeah, let's not 'punish' the families who have these
> > > children,
> > > > > > > INSTEAD,
> > > > > > > > > > let's force everyone else to provide for them.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > > > > > > --MJ
>
> > > > > > > > > > ...wonders how long it will be before Republicans are
> > > campaigning
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > defenders of Obamacare, just as they campaign now as
> > > defenders of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > Department of Education and other programs they once pledged
> > > to
> > > > > > > > > > abolish. -- Dan McCarthy
>
> > > > > > > > > > At 02:22 PM 10/16/2010, you wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > >They dont want to insure sick kids and will only use this as
> > > a
> > > > > loop-
> > > > > > > > > > >hole charging more than the family can afford. Leaving the
> > > sick
> > > > > > > child
> > > > > > > > > > >uninsured. Which will result in the family being fined?
>
> > > > > > > > > > >More and more families with sick kids are thrown into the
> > > > > poverty
> > > > > > > > > > >level, Because its VERY expensive having a chronically sick
> > > > > child.
> > > > > > > > > > >There are many out of pocket cost that even with the best
> > > > > insurance
> > > > > > > > > > >doesnt cover. Very sad that we cant take care of the needs
> > > of
> > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > >children in this country without punishing the family
> > > > > financially.-
> > > > > > > Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > > > For options & help seehttp://
> > > groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: 3 Reasons Why You Can’t Trust a Christian or a Jew

Hey Michael,

 

What  Alan Steveo, (or is this really Lew Rockwell??)  doesn't understand, is what Jesus is actually doing here in Luke 14.  Jesus  is warning those who want to be his disciples, telling them that the life of a disciple will be difficult. They will be put in situations where their own flesh and blood will oppose their faith or tempt them to disobey Jesus. As Jesus says elsewhere, "Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For from now on in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law" (Luke 12:51-53). Indeed, it will get even worse, as the end draws near: "And brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death" (Mark 13:12).

Once Again, the premise of the article is flawed. 

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 8:12 AM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

3 Reasons Why You Can't Trust a Christian or a Jew
by Allan Stevo

"Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple."

Where's this quote come from? A jihadist manual on terror? One of the Surahs of the Koran? Maybe Mao's little red book? Was it spoken by the terrorist prophet himself, Mohammed? No, it comes from the Gospel of Luke.

It was read to millions of Christians a few Sundays ago in churches around the world. I wonder how many people in the pews heard it and thought "Wow, that really wouldn't sound too good as a sound-bite in the media of the Muslim world" (or in atheist media, or even secular media for that matter). In the same way that lines from the Quran are taken out of context, lines from the Bible can also be taken out of context.


Do Christians hate life?

Christians that I know personally do not behave as if they hate life. As an industrialized country with such a high level of church attendance, the U.S. is a statistical anomaly. Many Americans identify themselves as Christian, 78% according to this Gallup poll. We are by multiple measures a Christian country.

This Christian country of ours has a very high illegal murder rate, especially when compared to other industrialized countries. Preventing those murders is an issue of much contention. This Christian country of ours also has a very high rate of "legal" extraterritorial murder in undeclared war zones all over the world. Those murders are not so difficult to avoid. For example, if an American soldier is not outside of the U.S., that American soldier will not be able to shoot or be shot by anyone outside of the U.S. In reality, despite my loved ones showing no outward signs of hating life, the argument can be made that Christian Americans do hate life based on the behavior of the society in which we live. We Americans tacitly agree to extraterritorial "legal" murders.

Murder is the ending of life. Surely a case can be made for Christians, at least American Christians, not realizing the gravity of life. I'm unable to argue that life is "hated" as opposed to "disliked" or even worse, simply not appreciated. Or maybe it's just the value of other people's lives that is the problem. I suspect an American does tend to recognize the importance of his or her own life.

I know quite a few people who call themselves Christians and quite a few who aren't Christians and I don't see a clear hatred of life among the one group more than the other. At its surface, those people I know don't seem to have very effectively followed Jesus' command to "hate…life itself."

It's a strongly worded statement written in the Bible that doesn't look good as a sound-bite taken out of context, away from the centuries of schools of Biblical scholarship that exists and that many of us now read the Bible through. Perhaps it's intellectually lazy of a person to try to do the same thing with the Quran and to speak like some kind of Quranic scholar because he knows a few ideas from the Quran that he read in USA Today. I supposed in general we all know better than to trust self-proclaimed authorities. However, the fact that a single person watches the network news or buys a major newspaper indicates that there are many people who are comfortable with putting faith in those self-proclaimed authorities.

On Sept 19, again Christians heard another confusing verse. It can quite effectively be taken out of context when one imagines the corporatist American government, like a greedy octopus, slithering around the world taking things by force. "And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes." ~ Luke 16:9

Christians agree that Jesus actually said that.

This upcoming Sunday, the many Christian churches that use the Revised Common Lectionary will hear a reading from the book of Genesis where the patriarch Jacob wrestles with God. During this reading, God changes the unfortunately named Jacob's name to "Israel." Jacob, one of the patriarchs to which Judaism and Christianity trace their faith, literally means "he who grasps the heal." Figuratively, this name has an even worse meaning: "He who deceives." Israel, his new and improved name, means: "he struggles with God."

To me, there can be a beauty in a faith that lets you struggle with God. At the same time, it's easy to take this out of context. To struggle with God is to be opposed to God, to challenge the Almighty and His ways. This presents a rather unflattering talking point about Israel. The word Israel, the name of the most problematic state in the Middle East, was chosen by leaders of that country as a way to present itself to the world – "struggle with God." For the billions of people out there who believe in a God that's about the worst name you can come up with for a country.

Let me just restate all that in a nine-second talking point about Judeo-Christian culture:

Jacob means "he who deceives"; Israel means "struggles with God"; Jesus commands his followers to be dishonest and to hate life. Are these the professed values of a good people? What more does one need to know distrust Christians and Jews?

Do these facts make me not want to go to church? No, they just make me realize how important it is to never trust the media about anything. Nine-second sound-bites are alluring and deceptive. Just like my religious proclivities seem very strange to others when taken out of context, the religious, political, athletic, emotional, and physical proclivities of nearly any person seem strange when taken out of context. For shock value, the hate mongers of American society love taking religion out of context, as long as Christianity's not that religion.


Filter the Media

On all topics there is an agenda. Base your understanding of situations on your relationship with people. Use the media to try to challenge yourself and to seek out differing perspectives. Never let your own experience be overshadowed by the words you read from some unknown journalist. I've sat down with enough respected journalists to realize that they are not as critically questioning and decent as their readers seem to believe.


Slovak-Hungarian Hatred?

In Slovakia Hungarians are said to be hated. There's a long history in which Hungarians (Magyars) controlled the land known today as Slovakia. That history spanned a good thousand years and had some very ugly moments, akin to a soft genocide, that sought to snuff out the existence of Slovaks.

It is said that Slovaks hate Hungarians. I can attest that some do.

However, when I am invited to visit a Slovak family that has Hungarian neighbors, I recognize that relations between Slovak and Hungarian neighbors tend to be quite hospitable. Just as hospitable as with any other neighbor.

The media and the whispers of popular culture, especially around election time, are quick to tell ugly stories about how bad those ethnic relations are. This no doubt actually influences some relationships. However, experience in the intimate relationships of a handful of diverse people tells me that the media is likely incorrect in this matter. I choose only to speak from my own experience on this topic, which also has its shortcomings, but is far more honest than pretending myself an expert just because I've read lots of work from some far-off journalists.

When it comes to neighbors, my Slovak acquaintances tend to be quite welcoming to the Hungarian minority that still live in Slovakia. Forced language is a sign of oppression. The Hungarian authorities used to force Hungarian language on Slovaks and understandably that period in history still impassions many Slovaks today. Freely spoken language, on the other hand, is a way to build a bridge into a friendship. I often hear Slovaks throw around a few Hungarian phrases with their Hungarian neighbors. Such relationships are in the best interest of neighbors.

Good relations are not in the best interest of those who 1. want to sell papers, 2. are filled with hate, and/or 3. have no other issues on which to win an election.

The nationalist parties of Slovakia and Hungary don't like these amicable relationships among Slovaks and Hungarians. They like to poke at the very real wounds of the past. The more they can get people to foremost remember those wounds, the more they can get their audience to forget that these are living breathing people they are asking them to hate and to mistreat, the more votes, the more media time, the more influence, the more money there is for those nationalist parties. They have a formula and they wield it effectively.

A political consultant by the name of Mike Rothfeld, linked to here, gives a great speech on political participation that I saw at the Leadership Institute in Arlington, VA. In his speech, Rothfeld makes a request of his audience: Whenever you listen to a speech, whenever you read a newspaper, whenever you are watching TV, or even just talking face-to-face and see someone trying to get you to believe something, you've got to ask yourself 'How does it benefit this person if I believe what he's saying?' Cui bono? In whose interest? Is the old concept that he restates. We all know that people don't often exert great effort just for the heck of it. Receiving communication through the media, from some person you don't know intimately, let alone have never met face to face, makes the answering of that question considerably harder.


The Effective Stereotype of the Muslim

Are all Muslims secretly terrorist time-bombs waiting to go off? I don't know, I can't answer that one for you, but I can tell you that it's a pretty effective line – repeated ad infinitum in the media. In that little idea of the Muslim terrorist time-bomb, you are told 1. You cannot trust a Muslim, 2. It's worthless to get close to a Muslim, 3. the closer you are to a Muslim, the more in danger you are, 4. Muslims are unreliable and may try to kill you at any time, 5. Be on your guard around Muslims, 6. Muslims live to kill, and especially to kill you, and of course 7. A Muslim sleeper cell may become active and detonate itself and those around them at any time and without notice.

If you buy into this, you involve yourself in some self-fulfilling prophecies. You can't really believe numbers one through seven above without eliminating the possibility of a friendship with a Muslim. Muslim terrorists do kill Americans. It's true. But from the perspective of a non-American Muslim in the year 2010 things must look very different than from that of an American Christian. As far as I can tell Muslims are a very forgiving people. After all, there are many Muslims who have, for some reason, not risen up against the United States, despite the very aggressive action taken by out American government seemingly randomly against Muslim civilians.

Muslims seem so forgiving that I am somehow still able to travel the world and find a man or woman who does not think America is running a Jihad on Islam. American behavior – 1.4 million Iraqi Muslim civilian casualties over the last seven years according to Just Foreign Policy – is enough to leave me thinking that our Christian nation does not value Muslim lives. Once again, that is in Iraq alone, and in the last seven years alone. Expanding the focus would make America's treatment of Muslims appear much worse.

Political rhetoric might be expected to tell a different story. It might be the way that Americans offer a soothing smile to the Muslim world on television as the soldiers ransack the countryside roughing people up. Under Bush, even the political rhetoric made America look like a nation that does not value Muslim lives. George Bush in this video addressing the media unscripted on Sept 16, 2001 referred to the pending war as a "crusade." Here he is addressing U.S. troops in February 2002 from a script again using the same language. Those who learned something in World History know that "crusade" is literally a battle fought under the cross of Jesus, and effectively took place in the past to take land and treasures from the Holy Land where Muslims, Jews, and even Christians lived. Many Christian, Jews, and especially Muslims were killed by European invaders. Despite the treatment, despite the language, I'm able to find decent and welcoming Muslims. Reality doesn't match the rhetoric of the media.


Make Your Own Choices

Do you genuinely hate your Pakistani neighbor that you've gotten to know well? Fine. I'm not going to try to talk you out of building a nice tall wall between your family and his. At least you're being more intellectually honest than a person who ignores reality.

One example of a person who ignores reality might be the proverbial bleeding heart liberal who seems to infinitely ignore the bomb being built next door. He doesn't seem to be in touch with the fact that people do actually do real bad things. Another example might be the Huntington-preaching/thumping/wielding conservative who has never spoken with/met/known a Muslim. She may have a hard time acknowledging that human beings are capable of behaving like individuals. Neither of such persons seem to take the time to know or understand his or her neighbor. Both are blinded by significant intellectual biases that the media seeks to convey.

Overwhelmingly, the mainstream media can't be trusted to report anything to us with authority. Which is a good realization, because in all honesty few sources should be trusted as authorities. A thinking person should analyze multiple sources on every issue, trying to derive multiple perspectives before coming to any conclusions. Grandma can be trusted as an authority on baking delicious pies and breads, but not on immigration laws. Dad can be a trusted authority on fixing the furnace and on whatever it is he does best, but not on campaign finance reform. You know that the people closest to you have certain talents in some areas and have little more than unstudied opinions in other areas. At least that much due diligence ought to be done before you decide to trust an unknown out there in the media.

In the year 2010, using exclusively mainstream media sources to find those multiple perspectives is likely to leave you with a big bowl of thoughtless – but generally appetizing and surprisingly pleasant to swallow – mush in front of you.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/stevo7.1.1.html

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: A Friday Night Perspective On Islam

Hello Merc!

 

Long time....No Talk To!  I hope that you are doing well, and it is good to see you back over on this part of the street!

 

Mark, I could not have said it any better than what you did!

 

Christianity is a loving, forgiving religion, period.  Christ, and the New Covenants makes it quite clear that we are all sinners.  None of us are perfect.  Christ accepts all, there are no prerequisites, other than accepting the Holy Trinity, (which is a hard concept to understand). 

 

Both Christianity and Islam have a common tenet that requires members of each faith to attempt to convert non-believers. By example, all of the Gospels within the New Covenenants define and describe a Christian's duty, to: "Fish For Men"; e.g.; to spread the word of Jesus Christ as the one and only Saviour; ergo: the Holy Trinity; the Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost.  See Matthew 4:17-22. 

 

Christianity has no penalty for Christians who do not convert non-believers, and there is no penalty for non-believers in this life. 
 
In Islam, non-believers are not tolerated. The distinction between Christianity and Islam, specifically with regard to conversion of non-believers, is that Islam has tenets which require all Muslims to convert all non-believers, by any and all means necessary.  First by persuasion, second by humiliation, and third by taxation.  If these methods fail, then their is no tolerance for the non-believer, and they are infidels. 
 
"Jihad al Asghar" – the struggle to defeat infidels, non-believers and opponents who threaten the faith. 
 
By example:
 
"Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah[] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued".

 

 "O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd) you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter".[]

 

 "If you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all, and Allâh is Able to do all things. "

 

"O Prophet (Muhammad)! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them, their abode is Hell, - and worst indeed is that destination."

 

 

Further, I am unaware of these scriptures that you quote Merc.   Where for arent thou?

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Obama to Let Insurers Raise Fees for Sick Children

How is that going to reach thousands of people, when they cant see
you?

On Oct 17, 10:21 am, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Example has always been the best teacher.... they have been taught.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ""They depend on the government to do what
> > > taxpayers pay them to do,  regulate environmental toxins.""
>
> > > And hows that working out for you?? How long before "people" learn ?
>
> > How can they learn unless someone teaches them?
>
> > > ""Tis is not a time for employees to be choosy. ""
>
> > > It is the BEST time to be proactive... it can have a much greater impact
> > > when things are "bad".
>
> > Things are "bad"
>
> > where do you live?
>
> > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > "We" The people that live in the U.S
>
> > > > "Why can't I drink the water in a stream"? I wouldnt allow a child to
> > > > play in the stream, no less drink the water.
>
> > > > People in this country are happily holding onto any job they cant get
> > > > at the moment. Tis is not a time for employees to be choosy. Work to
> > > > pay the bills and feed the family, isn't that a number one priority?
>
> > > > Since we already have the EPA, CDC, FDA, NIH and have learned they are
> > > > only fronts for corporations. I will have to say, you are right,
> > > > people need to take responsibility for their own health. But, not
> > > > everyone is as wise as you, They depend on the government to do what
> > > > taxpayers pay them to do,  regulate environmental toxins.
>
> > > > On Oct 16, 4:08 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Who is "we" white man ?? (to quote Tonto) I drink the water that runs
> > by
> > > > my
> > > > > house.... why can't you??
>
> > > > > Simple, Individuals continue to work just to "make a buck" instead of
> > > > > choosing their position based on all aspects of the job and its
> > impact.
> > > > It
> > > > > boils down to PERSONAL responsibility short of that there is no
> > "cure".
>
> > > > > Oh, quit buying and eating that shit and it won't effect you. You
> > CHOOSE
> > > > the
> > > > > food you put in your mouth. Yes there are alternatives to everything.
>
> > > > > The last thing this world needs is more legislation and government
> > > > > interference.
>
> > > > > The one thing we do need is people taking responsibility for
> > themselves
> > > > and
> > > > > their choices.
>
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I think you just responded with that to get me to post in further
> > > > > > detail. I would hate to believe you are that dumb that you would
> > > > > > think  parents would knowingly poison their own child.
>
> > > > > > We live in a chemical cesspool, from the air we breathe to the
> > water
> > > > > > we drink or bathe in. Your skin is the largest organ, so when you
> > > > > > bathe, its absorbing all those chemicals in the water. You might
> > have
> > > > > > filtration for your drinking water, but what about for your bath?
> >  Of
> > > > > > course we are told that if we dont vaccinate our children, they
> > cant
> > > > > > go to school. The food we eat is soaked with pesticides. The
> > chicken
> > > > > > we eat is full of chemicals, antibiotics and hormones. The milk we
> > > > > > drink is full of hormones. Hormones everywhere ..
>
> > > > > > You have a little pituitary glad that controls hormones, when this
> > is
> > > > > > out of whack, you land up with obesity. Last I heard obesity is
> > > > > > epidemic in our country. How that happen? Some blame X-Box. I say
> > if
> > > > > > that's true, why aren't all disabled children who aren't mobile,
> > > > > > obese?
>
> > > > > > Obesity causes diseases.
>
> > > > > > The air we breathe is polluted with all types of toxins, is this
> > the
> > > > > > parents fault, too? Or should they place the baby in a bubble?
>
> > > > > > On Oct 16, 3:18 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > I would suggest that they not live (or allow their children) in
> > or
> > > > > > > ingest things that make their children ill. This is straight
> > forward
> > > > > > > abuse and the direct fault of the parent.
>
> > > > > > > MY kids are MY responsibility.... YOURS are YOUR responsibility.
> > > > > > > Please explain just why it should be any different... and be
> > > > specific.
>
> > > > > > > On Oct 16, 12:57 pm, Merc <kevysmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > When you can test a baby and find over two hundred chemicals in
> > > > that
> > > > > > > > one baby, the majority of those chemicals being neurotoxins or
> > > > > > > > carcinogens, YES, EVERY taxpayer that votes in lawmakers that
> > allow
> > > > > > > > this to happen,  to innocent children should at least pay for
> > the
> > > > > > > > childs medical bills.
>
> > > > > > > > If you dont like it, Than I would suggest you start electing
> > people
> > > > > > > > that will fight environmental poisoning in American children.
>
> > > > > > > > As of right now, According to the CDC and American
> > Pediatrics...One
> > > > > > > > out of six children in the U.S has some form of developmental
> > > > > > > > disorder, this does NOT include epidemics of children with
> > Asthma,
> > > > > > > > cancer, diabetes, kidney diseases etc, etc...
>
> > > > > > > > And for the "scientist" on the forum that make the claim "The
> > dose
> > > > > > > > makes the poison" That might be true if you only had one
> > poison,
> > > > add
> > > > > > > > in 200 and see what that does to a babies health!
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 16, 2:40 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > My house burned down.  Will you sell me insurance NOW that
> > will
> > > > > > > > > provide for its rebuild?
>
> > > > > > > > > Any idea WHY health care is expensive?
>
> > > > > > > > > Yeah, let's not 'punish' the families who have these
> > children,
> > > > > > INSTEAD,
> > > > > > > > > let's force everyone else to provide for them.
>
> > > > > > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > > > > > --MJ
>
> > > > > > > > > ...wonders how long it will be before Republicans are
> > campaigning
> > > > as
> > > > > > > > > defenders of Obamacare, just as they campaign now as
> > defenders of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Department of Education and other programs they once pledged
> > to
> > > > > > > > > abolish. -- Dan McCarthy
>
> > > > > > > > > At 02:22 PM 10/16/2010, you wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > >They dont want to insure sick kids and will only use this as
> > a
> > > > loop-
> > > > > > > > > >hole charging more than the family can afford. Leaving the
> > sick
> > > > > > child
> > > > > > > > > >uninsured. Which will result in the family being fined?
>
> > > > > > > > > >More and more families with sick kids are thrown into the
> > > > poverty
> > > > > > > > > >level, Because its VERY expensive having a chronically sick
> > > > child.
> > > > > > > > > >There are many out of pocket cost that even with the best
> > > > insurance
> > > > > > > > > >doesnt cover. Very sad that we cant take care of the needs
> > of
> > > > all
> > > > > > > > > >children in this country without punishing the family
> > > > financially.-
> > > > > > Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > > For options & help seehttp://
> > groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > --
> > > Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> --
> Mark M. Kahle H.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.