Hoping America gets worse

[Dr. Shane]

If Bush's economic policies and that of his predecessors were good, we wouldn't be in this pickle now!!!

That ignores the major role the Federal Reserve and Congress play. Bush wasn't President long enough to have caused the crisis we are in now. That is not to say he didn't contribute to it but he was only a small piece to the puzzle.

[Woody]

Okay guys ... you don't give up do you.

Here is what I am saying.

The novelty of a black or a woman is enough to put someone over the top. Many voters are ... not wait ... MOST voters are not informed. Sorry but this is true. They will vote for someone on the most flimsy of reasons. OR ... they just vote party line. Since most registered voters are Demos ... the Republicans have to have something strong to pull them away.

This time the Demos had the pulling power with a black man at the top of the ticket. I believe that Hillary would have had the same advantage because of her gender.

So ... was the ONLY reason that Obama won was that he was black? No. There were many reason why he won. But he would not have won in my opinon if he was not black.

You said " the President got there only based on the colour of his skin" I find this totally ridiculous. People voted for him for a number of reasons. But some did vote just because he is black.

-I said ?IF Obama was not black ... he would not have been elected"

I stand behind what I said. But this was not the main reason that many voted for him. Many voted for him just because of party line no matter what his color of skin might be. However .. those who did vote for him because of the color of his skin ... tipped the scales and caused him to win.

Hope that is clear as mud.

[Dr. Shane]

the president is who was chosen by the people of America (although I'm afraid I can't resist adding 'or, in 2000, the Supreme Court'.

No, the President is chosen by the states. The name of the nation is The United States of America. There are 51 elections held on election day. Each state and the District of Columbia holds an election. Those election decide who the state or district is going to vote for. The President is later elected by the states in the electoral college.

The Supreme Court has never elected a President. In the year 2000 they simply stopped the recount of the recount of the recount. The national media later finished the recount of the recount of the recount and discovered that had the Supreme Court not stopped the recount of the recount of the recount Bush would have still been declared the winner in Florida.

Al Gore Jr. lost. He was the third candidate in history to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college. If the US didn't have the electoral college it would mean the major population centers would choose the President and the rural areas would have virtually no influence on the election.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

The novelty of a black or a woman is enough to put someone over the top.

Part of the reason I voted for Obama was because he was black. I thought it would do a lot of good for race relations for a black man to be elected President. That isn't the only reason I voted for Obama. A bigger reason was that Obama has better character than McCain. McCain claims to be a conservative but is much too close to Hollywood for me to trust him. I also like Obama's plans for universal health care. I think some of his ideas are extreme but it will be good to lay them out before the country and have a national debate. If they are as bad a Republicans claim, it will give Republicans exactly the kind of issues they need to be elected back into power.

[Woody]

Thank you Shane for clarifying that for Bravus.

Good point ... if the supreme court had not stopped the recount of the recount of the recount of the recount ... they would still be recounting the recount of the recount of the recount. ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

[Dr. Shane]

Take out all those periods. It messes up the screen something terrible.

[Liz]

Who blew up the board?????

[Woody]

Must have been a Democrat.

[Neil D]

Uncle Redwood.....

[phkrause]

pk

[Liz]

My nephew always says "guilty dog barks first".

[scripturewisdom]

i'm not sure if you listened to the actual speech R.L. made, but what R.L. was saying is not that he hoped Obama would fail as a human being, nor did he even hint to saying he hoped our country would fail. in fact, what he was saying is the direct opposite. he was saying that he hoped that the effort to change our country to socialism would fail because obama and the majority of congress are fast-forwarding our country into socialism, government control, the end of free-trade capitalism and bankruptcy. obama is highly unqualified to run the USA. he knows very little about the economy or how to fix it. if we look back at the bush administration, we see that the financial crisis began after the election of a democratic/liberal "spending" congress. that was the last 2yrs. of the bush administration. not that bush had no faults, but let's look at the facts. if the democrats have their way, if, for all intents and purposes, president polosi, has her way, our country would quickly fall into a "socialist, moral decay".

in the first week of obama's office he snuck in, under the radar, a change in the moneys allocated to the "worldwide planned parenthood" corporation to fund abortions to anyone worldwide asking for it, even a minor child, without their parents knowledge.

now planned parenthood is seeking over a billion dollars in bailouts. that is just one sneaky thing done the first week in office.

but i regress, the topic of R.L. desiring the ruin of our country is left-wing propaganda spun by the liberal media to divert attention from the truly dangerous things going on in this present administration.

here is a quote from Ellen White:

"The poor are everywhere. The banks have ruined the country. They invested the people's deposits in various speculations, exceeded their funds, and as the result some have failed, and others have closed, so that the people are poor and helpless. Thousands are destitute of money; they are thrown out of work, and distress is everywhere. The country is in financial ruin." -E.G.WHITE-Letter 30a, 1894 pp. 2, 3.

When our country becomes insecure physically and financially, we become vulnerable and a target of the people in the world that want to bring us to ruin and take control over us.

if obama and the liberal democrats succeed, we become a socialist country and that will be the most brutally depressing day in our history. we will have become what so many americans died for, trying to prevent. our freedoms will be lost, and the prophecies will unfold.

Simple Summary: If obama succeeds, we, as a free country will fail. that's what rush limbaugh was saying.

[Woody]

Quote:

here is a quote from Ellen White:

"The poor are everywhere. The banks have ruined the country. They invested the people's deposits in various speculations, exceeded their funds, and as the result some have failed, and others have closed, so that the people are poor and helpless. Thousands are destitute of money; they are thrown out of work, and distress is everywhere. The country is in financial ruin." -E.G.WHITE-Letter 30a, 1894 pp. 2, 3.

This quote is about the history of what happened in Australia while Ellen White was there. Not sure what your point is. They obviously recovered.

[scripturewisdom]

prophetic wisdom is always relative.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Can not the Moderator fix the format of this page?

That aside,

Quote:

Quote:Bravus

And 'nothing to offer but his skin' is in the eye of the beholder: some people actually *do* value education and knowledge.

Lasted ah looked, Congrisse seemt tah ha’ bin both ejicated an’ knoliged. Umm, sorta, mebbe, like thata fella Dodd, yes?

“Coincidentally, the Royal Bank of Scotland gave nearly a quarter of a million dollars to Senator Dodd, who is leading the bailout negotiations in the Senate.

Chris Dodd:

Top 5 Contributors, 2003-2008

Citigroup Inc - $314,694

SAC Capital Partners - $282,000

United Technologies - $263,400

Royal Bank of Scotland - $229,950

American International Group - $224,678 (otherwise known as AIG)” [ed.jasd]

Whas wid dat? :-o

Gimme ol’fash horscents an’ carakter, ensted.

Anyway, here’s hoping that all our education and knowledge will not be wasted planting potatoes and goober peas – for hunger, shortly. After all,

a service economy can only take a people so far – and no farther – it’s all downhill from there...

So, wha’happened to our industrial sector!? Where’d it go? (the American South lost the Civil War –mainly, because the North outproduced them on every front, ‘ceptin’ mebbe, cotton, tobacco, and cornpone shuck and jive... :-)

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Bravus

...but for better or worse President Obama was elected, with quite a large majority.

“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.

A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.

From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.” --Alexander Tyler, 1787 (commenting on the fall of the Athenian Republic)

[ed.jasd]

Alexander Tyler also laid out an 8-step sequence from Bondage to Bondage that proves interesting, following:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage

[Gerr]

Wow!!! That looks so true!!! And it looks like we are in the

last stages.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

if we look back at the bush administration, we see that the financial crisis began after the election of a democratic/liberal "spending" congress. that was the last 2yrs. of the bush administration.

I don't think Republicans can pin this on Democrats any easier than Democrats can pin it on Republicans. The Federal Reserve drove down interest rates which played a large role in artificially inflating the housing sector. That was going on long before Bush even ran for office and the Republicans were in control of Congress. When Bush wanted to increase oversight on Fanny Mae and Freddie Mack the Republicans were in charge in Congress and they (along with the Democrats) didn't allow Bush to do anything.

[Kingroyal]

Our SS Lesson today spoke about interpretation of Scripture and prophetic writings and the value of interpreting them in context. The above discussion demonstrates why it is so important to gather all the factual context before jumping to conclusions.

Some of the discussions above have correctly put their comments in context. Socialism is no friend of freedom or democracy and this is the point Rush is making. I too hope socialism fails because it takes personal responsibility away from the individual and makes a dependent class of citizens expecting everything to be provided by the state with little or no personal and individual responsibility.

Spread the wealth or redistribution of income from those who are productive to those who are not is wrong and the Bible has many statements that indicate a person should be personally responsible to provide for themselves. e.g. See Proverbs 10:4-5, 13:4, 14:23, 21:25, 24:33-34.

Yes, the poor and truly needy we will always have in our midst and we are to be responsible by helping them but we should not make them into a dependent class. Unfortunately the majority in this category today are "freeloaders" with a mind-set that they are not responsible but society-at-large is.

[carolaa]

The problem is that most of the poor in our country are hard working, productive people. Something's wrong with this picture.

[Dr. Shane]

The issue is "how do we help?"

1. Making people dependent on other people is ultimately not helping them. Remember: Give a man a fish - feed him for a day. Teach him to fish - feed him for life.

2. I live in the poorest county in the US. We have a lot of people that can accurately be described as "freeloaders". They will sit on unemployment and collect it as long as they can. I grew up on the welfare dime and my mother did not fit that description at all. She worked low paying jobs and was willing to do whatever she had to. So there are two types of people collecting public assistance. One type are what I call the "ambitious poor" and the other I call the "freeloading poor." I am not sure which is the majority and which is the majority but am convinced that whichever is the minority - they are not a small minority.

[Woody]

Freeloaders ?

What about AIG ?

WE bail them out with 170 Billion Dollars.

What do they do with it?

They give 165 Billion Dollars of it to their employers as BONUS money for doing such a good job of running it into the ground and then crying to tax payers.

Not sure what they did with the over Five Bill.

But as far as I am concerned these 'freeloaders' should be fired if we are going to bail them out.

But who am I to question Obama's plan.

[Dr. Shane]

I think there is a big difference between those on welfare and financial CEOs. If the CEOs don't get their bonuses (which are part of their salaries) they will leave the company and go to work for someone else. I speak from experience. I worked for a company that cut bonuses and within two months I was working for a different company.

[Neil D]

I think there is a big difference between those on welfare and financial CEOs. If the CEOs don't get their bonuses (which are part of their salaries) they will leave the company and go to work for someone else. I speak from experience. I worked for a company that cut bonuses and within two months I was working for a different company.

So, what I hear you saying is that it is expected to obtain bonus in your job. It is part of the compensation of wages and how much you get depends upon ....your percieved value? What?

Your job and the people who work in that job classification expect bonuses.That is wrong....What's wrong with your wage? Can you not live off that alone like what the rest of us do? Why do you get a bonus? What expectations are said of this type of arrangment?

Why is it, as I study various jobs, that those who do the work, get a wage or a salary and those who are upper management get bonuses for the work that those who actually do the work. That appears to me as wrong.

[Dr. Shane]

Waitresses are paid less because their tips are considered to be part of their salary. In much the same way, many managers are paid less because their bonuses are considered part of their salary. These firms that are now being threatened by the government are considering increasing the wages of these managers to make up for the loss of bonuses.

Bottom line is that these managers depend on these bonuses to pay their bills. If we are going to take away their bonuses we may as well foreclose on their homes at the same time.