i've always liked bee, what you guys talkin about?
Re:
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 6:43 am
by CUDA
Bet51987 wrote:"Our leaders, our national leaders, are sending soldiers to Iraq on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." --Sarah Pailn
do you even understand what is being said in that quote?
let me reword it for you so you can understand easier.
Father God we pray that there is a plan and that that plan is your plan. we pray that Our leaders, our national leaders, are sending soldiers to Iraq on a task that is from you and not from our wants.
any one that truly believe in God and calls themselves a Christian would pray "THY WILL BE DONE" that is EXACTLY what Palin did in that prayer. stop the hating Bee
Re:
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:02 am
by Insurrectionist
Bet51987 wrote:"Our leaders, our national leaders, are sending soldiers to Iraq on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." --Sarah Pailn
Why did you leave the part of the quote out?
She was talking about her son going to Iraq nd that they should pray "that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God, that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God's plan."
I for one think the tea party could do better not to have any of the old politicians and start a new with reg folks. NO INCUMBENTS should be left standing for they are against the People. It we voted them all out maybe then they would get the picture.
Re:
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:32 pm
by Tunnelcat
woodchip wrote:So did either of you actually see if anything was written on Palins hand? If so what was it? For all you know one of her kids wrote on it, "Good luck Mom". Of course if you don't have kids you wouldn't understand things like that.
Did you look at the picture in my link? It clearly showed what she had written on her palm. I even wrote it in my post for those who are looking through man organ-colored glasses! Watch her peek at her hand during the interview:
Let me get this straight. Dems use or almost use nuclear bombs but Repubs would never use them? ROFL! I'll bet that Bush, or maybe warmongering Cheney were sorely tempted during the Iraq War or when Iran started making nuclear moves! We'll see if the Obama has enough bawls to do it to Iran! I doubt it. I'm betting the Israelis will do it first out of self preservation. Obama doesn't seem have enough backbone anyway.
In the case of Truman, it was either invade Japan and sustain large troop looses on our side or use the bomb and shorten the war. You notice that he never used it during the Korean War. I'd bet that a Republican President would have done the same exact thing to avoid the inevitable heavy looses of our own boys after the long weary war. By the way, WE DIDN'T START THE WAR in the first place, unlike Bush the Crusading Saint, dig, dig!
You'll notice that Kennedy DIDN'T use the bomb when he clearly could have. He was smart or cagey enough to know that it should ONLY be used in foreign high stakes poker AS A BLUFF, but we'll never know if Khrushchev would have called Kennedy's bluff either, will we? To really use the bomb back then would have resulted in WWIII and Armageddon. Thank GOD the Russians blinked first.
As for women being more or less smart than men, take these things into account. Women have more interconnectivity between the 2 halves of their brains and are MORE likely to use emotion rather than logic to solve problems. Men may be more dominant with their logical left brains, but still fall victim to the influences of testosterone, a hormone that promotes violence. So which is worse, a cat fight or a cage fight?
Insurrectionist wrote:She was talking about her son going to Iraq nd that they should pray "that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God, that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God's plan."
She's STILL saying the SAME THING, "that there is a plan, that plan is GOD's Plan"! She's essentially saying that WE are in the right and GOD is on OUR side! Little Bushie even said it!
And although we didn’t start Vietnam or Korea…it was Democrats that dragged us into both.
And really…don’t we fight all our wars in the name of god.
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:04 pm
by Sergeant Thorne
Tunnelcat wrote:As for women being more or less smart than men...
I'm going to accept this demonstration as an isolated occurrence. I never said anything about intelligence.
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:06 pm
by Behemoth
right, because there is no contest
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:14 pm
by Tunnelcat
Maybe WE are smarter. The problem is with that interconnected brain we have. It muddles up our logical thinking with all those damned EMOTIONS. You guys are no better with all that testosterone raging away at YOUR logical brain either!
Re:
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:34 pm
by CUDA
tunnelcat wrote:She's STILL saying the SAME THING, "that there is a plan, that plan is GOD's Plan"! She's essentially saying that WE are in the right and GOD is on OUR side!
apparently English isn't your first language. that is NOT what she said.
Re:
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:24 pm
by Bet51987
.
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 12:48 pm
by SilverFJ
Every plan is God's plan, no matter how much we think we have anything to do with our futures.
It was God's plan that the World Trade Center fell.
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:34 pm
by flip
No not every plan is God's plan. He did not circumvent the free will of those who did bring down the World Trade Centers, but he in no way perpetrated it.
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:58 pm
by Nightshade
More like \"God\" doesn't exist and we make BS up about \"his will.\"
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:45 pm
by Kilarin
SilverFJ wrote:Every plan is God's plan
Yes and no.
Yes, in the sense that every plan is God's plan because He planned to give us free will. So it was according to His will to give us the power to step outside of His will.
BUT, no, in the sense that God did not WANT these things to happen. They happened because of choices that went against what God instructed.
In other words, when a mother tells her kids that she is going to quit pestering them to get their homework done because she wants them to learn to be responsible: It was, in a sense, in her will if the homework doesn't get done, because she willed to give the kids a choice. But it was NOT what she wanted to happen. She wanted the kids to make the right choice and do their homework.
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:55 pm
by Spidey
Yea, that reminds me of the story of the garden. God places his children in a garden, and tells them not to touch a particular tree. Well any parent knows that as soon as you tell a child not to touch something, it becomes taboo, and that child must touch it. And God knew this would happen…because he is all knowing…
Re:
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:03 pm
by Will Robinson
Spidey wrote:Yea, that reminds me of the story of the garden. God places his children in a garden, and tells them not to touch a particular tree. Well any parent knows that as soon as you tell a child not to touch something, it becomes taboo, and that child must touch it. And God knew this would happen…because he is all knowing…
Reading that I envision mankind as the ants and God as the little boy with a magnifying glass...he looks at us for a while...he burns us a little....he looks again...then his mom calls him to dinner and he leaves us alone....when he returns tomorrow morning who knows what he will do!
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:47 pm
by Duper
...
Re:
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:45 pm
by AlphaDoG
Will Robinson wrote:
Spidey wrote:Yea, that reminds me of the story of the garden. God places his children in a garden, and tells them not to touch a particular tree. Well any parent knows that as soon as you tell a child not to touch something, it becomes taboo, and that child must touch it. And God knew this would happen…because he is all knowing…
Reading that I envision mankind as the ants and God as the little boy with a magnifying glass...he looks at us for a while...he burns us a little....he looks again...then his mom calls him to dinner and he leaves us alone....when he returns tomorrow morning who knows what he will do!
I suspect he's either, gonna pee, or poop on us. Then again, he might lift us up, look at us, then spit.
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:47 pm
by AlphaDoG
Sorry that was totally off topic.
Did you know? The Taxed Enough ALREADY Party has Sarah?
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 3:15 pm
by SilverFJ
The whole God's will thing needs to be a split topic, I'd love to participate in it.
On topic, however:
Debra Medina vs Rick Perry in Texas (for governor). One of them, Medina, is a Tea Party advocate who agrees with smaller government and the purification/disbanding of the Fed. On the other hand, Rick Perry is an institutionalist who is for the expanded government and the current administration. Where did Palin's endorsement go? Who did she help with their campaign? Rick Perry. I'm starting to believe that the Tea Party movement is simply being infultrated by the GOP in an attempt to strengthen it. My views of Palin are starting to slip. The TPN doesn't need any rock stars in it's movement, because it's gunna be the same old thing.
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 4:47 pm
by Insurrectionist
Good thing she didn't back Debra Medina, the 911 Truther. Boy would that had been a mess.
tunnelcat wrote:She's STILL saying the SAME THING, "that there is a plan, that plan is GOD's Plan"! She's essentially saying that WE are in the right and GOD is on OUR side!
apparently English isn't your first language. that is NOT what she said.
Well, the plan IS ours, the U.S. plan to destroy the terrorism threat I assume, right? And then she says it's GOD's plan at the end of the same sentence. Sounds like she's saying that God's behind OUR plan to me, IN ENGLISH!
Don't just take my female view on Palin. Here's a MALE college student's take on her that's not very flattering:
tunnelcat wrote:She's STILL saying the SAME THING, "that there is a plan, that plan is GOD's Plan"! She's essentially saying that WE are in the right and GOD is on OUR side!
apparently English isn't your first language. that is NOT what she said.
Well, the plan IS ours, the U.S. plan to destroy the terrorism threat I assume, right? And then she says it's GOD's plan at the end of the same sentence. Sounds like she's saying that God's behind OUR plan to me, IN ENGLISH!
Don't just take my female view on Palin. Here's a MALE college student's take on her that's not very flattering:
good Lord at least do SOME research on the backround of her comments before you spout off about it.
here is her complete statment, instead of the hacked version Bettina posted
"My oldest, my son Track, is a soldier in the United States Army now. ... Pray for our military. He's going to be deployed in September to Iraq. Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
and here is Bettina favorite truth-o-meter website's comments on her statment
The questioner was ABC News' Charles Gibson. Gibson asked her, "You said recently in your old church, 'Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.' Are we fighting a Holy War?"
Palin: "That's a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words, when he said, first he suggested, never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words, but what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was, let us not pray that God is on our side, in a war, or any other time. But let us pray that we are on God's side. That's what that comment was all about, Charlie."
Gibson then followed up: "But you went on and said, 'There is a plan, and it is God's plan.'"
Here's the rest of their exchange:
Palin: "I believe that there is a plan for this world, and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country, to be able to live and be protected within inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie. And I believe those are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That in my worldview is the grand plan."
Gibson: "Then, are you sending your son on a task from God?"
Palin: "I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision. What he decided to do, in serving for the right reasons in serving something greater than self, and not choosing a real easy path, where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer."
We decided to compare Palin's words and Lincoln's words side-by-side to see if Palin's words were a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's.
Palin made the original comments in June 2007 to the Wasilla Assembly of God. Her visit there had been videotaped and posted to the church's Web site. The video has since been removed, but copies are available on the Internet.
In the video, Palin is speaking informally to a group of students, talking about her family and discussing current events. She offers quotes from the Bible at times, and also makes enthusiastic, casual comments, at one point joking that the students are "a cool-looking bunch of Christians."
"My oldest, my son Track, is a soldier in the United States Army now. ... Pray for our military. He's going to be deployed in September to Iraq. Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
We think it's important to note that Palin is asking the audience to "pray for" military men and women, and that national leaders are sending troops out "on a task that is from God." She even repeats "that's what we have to make sure that we're praying for." Gibson doesn't mention the words "pray for" when he questions her. Praying for something implies that you don't yet have it or that it there is some uncertainty, so it seems logical that Palin is expressing a hope that something is true, not a certainty.
Meanwhile, we tracked down Abraham Lincoln's words on God's will. The original source appears to be a book titled Six Months in the White House with Abraham Lincoln , written by Francis B. Carpenter and published in 1867, not long after Lincoln's death.
The following is from Page 282 of Carpenter's account:
"No nobler reply ever fell from the lips of a ruler, than that uttered by President Lincoln in response to the clergyman who ventured to say, in his presence, that he hoped 'the Lord was on our side.'
"'I am not at all concerned about that,' replied Mr. Lincoln, 'for I know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side.'"
In fairness, Lincoln's words do seem to express a greater degree of anxiety about being on God's side than Palin's. Lincoln is also rebuking a clergyman's inflated sense of moral piety, while Palin appears to be expressing solidarity with fellow believers. But Gibson's truncation of her comments — omitting the crucial words "pray for" — change the meaning of her comments from a wish to a certainty. Palin's and Lincoln's words are similar in that they both express a hope that a plan meets with God's favor. Granted, some people find any mention of God's will and warfare to be disturbing. But we find similarities between the two sets of comments. We find Palin's statement Mostly True.
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:00 am
by Duper
...ouch...
Re:
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 2:07 pm
by CUDA
Bet51987 wrote:
FYI I don't hate Sarah Palin.
Bee
Yes you do, fess up its OK to admit it
the english language is a wonderful thing when you know what the words mean
hate /heɪt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [heyt] Show IPA verb, hat⋅ed, hat⋅ing, noun
–verb (used with object) 1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.
2. to be unwilling; dislike: I hate to do it.
–verb (used without object) 3. to feel intense dislike, or extreme aversion or hostility.
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:19 pm
by Kilarin
Cuda wrote:Yes you do, fess up its OK to admit it
It IS possible to disagree with someone without hating them.
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:40 pm
by Sergeant Thorne
Bettina wrote:FYI I don't hate Sarah Palin.
Bee
I believe that.
Re:
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:08 pm
by CUDA
Kilarin wrote:
Cuda wrote:Yes you do, fess up its OK to admit it
It IS possible to disagree with someone without hating them.
yes it is, but Bee doesn't just disagree with Palin, she goes out of her way to slander her.
Re:
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:58 pm
by Bet51987
.
Re:
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:18 am
by Will Robinson
Bet51987 wrote:...
It seems that Sarah Palin falls into this category when she accused Obama of palling around with terrorists, creating death panels, (both of which were untrue) and other statements she's made to slander Obama....
You mean besides his long term relationship in personal and professional life with a terrorist who bombed a police station?
As for the 'Death Panels', Obama's proposed health care plan calls for the creation of a panel of government appointed bureaucrats who would make life and death decisions regarding who gets to have treatment and who doesn't based on cost not the same kind of criteria a doctor would use to recommend treatment!
One of Obama's health policy advisors has written about rationing medical services to exclude patients “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens". So I guess once you aren't a tax revenue producing citizen you go to the back of the hospital bus...
If you had cancer and your doctor was paid by your insurance company to recommend you go into hospice instead of chemotherapy I think you would be a little more than agitated wouldn't you? Well that is exactly the kind of reality Obama's plan calls for so maybe the term 'Death Panel' is a bit hyperbolic but it sure as hell isn't without foundation.
But yea, sure, besides the truth in her statements you can call them lies if it suits you.
Maybe we need to start quoting you in our sigs, you know, "just to keep things fair".
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:53 pm
by CUDA
cmon Will, your not playing fair, your not supposed to present facts in an emotional debate. it just confuses some people
Re:
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:02 pm
by SilverFJ
Bet51987 wrote:
CUDA wrote:
Kilarin wrote:
Cuda wrote:Yes you do, fess up its OK to admit it
It IS possible to disagree with someone without hating them.
yes it is, but Bee doesn't just disagree with Palin, she goes out of her way to slander her.
Slander (for spoken words), and libel (for written or otherwise published words) is the communication of an untrue statement about someone which is intended to damage their reputation.
It seems that Sarah Palin falls into this category when she accused Obama of palling around with terrorists, creating death panels, (both of which were untrue) and other statements she's made to slander Obama. You didn't seem to have a problem with that. But, when I say that Sarah Palin is not competent to be president, and that comments she makes during her tea partys makes her look like a religious lunatic, you bring out the hate word.
I'm not without hate mind you. I hate child molesters, and I hate Islam and the Taliban in it's entirety but Sarah Palin is a universe away from my hate radar. I believe she will eventually have a place in life but it will be in entertainment... not politics.
And, like Woodchip uses his avatar to express his umm...dislike for Obama, I intend to use a Palin quote as my signature from time to time....to keep things fair.
Bettina
How's the weather in soundbyte land where nobody looks into anything?
Re:
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:03 pm
by Bet51987
.
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:26 pm
by Spidey
Edit: Retracted!
It’s only but so long before that prism you peer through, leaves you totally blind.
I wasn't going to say a thing...until I read your response to Krom's post on .com.
Re:
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:12 pm
by Bet51987
.
Re:
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:36 pm
by Will Robinson
Bet51987 wrote:..
Oh, I see. I call out a public figure and you attack a forum member. So republican are you.
Bee...
It's considered an attack if I disagree with you and point out where you are wrong?!?
Face it (or not) you are more wrong on the two allegations you made than Palin was in pointing them out in the first place!
And your best effort to refute my two points was to completely ignore one and for the other one you go all four year old on me and say 'well they did it too' as if that somehow corrects your error?!?.
Ok then....
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:41 pm
by Spidey
Roid’s post?
You’re right…I never have anything constructive to say, so I retract my comment and wish you a long and hateful life.
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 6:32 pm
by Sergeant Thorne
Bettina wrote:We already went through this Will. She's lying and you bought it all.
I happen to know that the death panel thing is right straight up the liberal alley, even just as a concept, so I don't need to be told whether or not that's an accurate statement. There are people in his administration that are just nuts enough, in their own intellectual way, to involve themselves in weighing human life for the "greater good".
Re:
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:01 pm
by Bet51987
.
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:10 pm
by woodchip
So Obama hires someone who idolizes Mao and some here think that is not a problem? Yet fixating on Palin comments taken out of context is OK?
I wonder Bee, since you use the phrase \"So Republican of you\" in the derogatory, do you know that the president who freed the slaves was a republican? What the hey though, I guess it was just \"So republican of him\" to do so.
