Posted on 04/03/2015 7:43:04 PM PDT by StoneWallJack
Yet another retarded communist jew from San Francisco.
That damn earthquake sure is taking it’s time in coming.
In the mean time this creature is busy meeting with another retard that thinks he’s Prince of America, Jeb Bush.
They should take his name off all those children’s hospitals.
I wonder if Benioff would be willing to write a $50,000 check to a Salesforce Christian who feels uncomfortable working in San Francisco.
I had already given up on most professional sports, and now NASCAR is dead to me, too.
There will be a time that every person must accept the mark, or they will not be able to conduct business.
I once read an article that attempted to debunk ‘the mark’ as an actual physical mark, but more of a spiritual mark.
Right now if one even dares to say you are a Christian business owner, you are surely damned by the secular world.
Consider the God calls for our ‘first fruits’ to be given to Him. Small business owners can still do this, but employees really can’t as government taxes are taken first.
Using Mark Benioff’s logic would be difficult for most people because it’s so nonsensical, but here goes!
Mark Benioff and Salesforce.com do business in Arab States where women have no rights whatsoever.
Mark Benioff supports the stoning and beheading of women in Saudi Arabia because his company does business there.
The veil is off. Fascism has officially emerged in the U.S.
It is time to let the agents of Satan, such as Benioff, to remove themselves and their money from Christian states and values. Let the agents of Satan sell to their own kind. Let the chips fall where they may!
Perhaps we will have a few States that practice Christian values. The people will flock to places where their God given rights are respected. A benefit will be safety, security, fewer health risks, longer life spans, and fewer mental health issues. Perhaps there also will be new business opportunities as the misguided CEOs achieve the chaos they so desire, with its attendant self-destruction.
I really think that Benioff’s “third party of CEO’s” comment has been the most under-reported scary crazy statement of the week. Could you imagine what would have happened if the Chik-Fil-A CEO had uttered such nonsense?
“You will care. You will conform. You will like it. Resistance is futile.”
The media gets ALL it’s money from these guys.
The national politicians get nearly ALL their money from these guys.
ALL politicians’ news coverage is by the media that gets ALL their money from these guys.
What they say goes in a democracy. And we have very little republicanism left in our country.
Purely for anyone’s reading pleasure a debate on democracy, oligarchy, and monarchy from about 520 B.C.:
“[3.80] ... Otanes recommended that the management of public affairs should be entrusted to the whole nation. [democracy] “To me,” he said, “it seems advisable, that we should no longer have a single man to rule over us - the rule of one is neither good nor pleasant. Ye cannot have forgotten to what lengths Cambyses went in his haughty tyranny, and the haughtiness of the Magi ye have yourselves experienced. How indeed is it possible that monarchy should be a well-adjusted thing, when it allows a man to do as he likes without being answerable? Such licence is enough to stir strange and unwonted thoughts in the heart of the worthiest of men. Give a person this power, and straightway his manifold good things puff him up with pride, while envy is so natural to human kind that it cannot but arise in him. But pride and envy together include all wickedness - both of them leading on to deeds of savage violence.
True it is that kings, possessing as they do all that heart can desire, ought to be void of envy; but the contrary is seen in their conduct towards the citizens. They are jealous of the most virtuous among their subjects, and wish their death; while they take delight in the meanest and basest, being ever ready to listen to the tales of slanderers. A king, besides, is beyond all other men inconsistent with himself. Pay him court in moderation, and he is angry because you do not show him more profound respect - show him profound respect, and he is offended again, because (as he says) you fawn on him. But the worst of all is, that he sets aside the laws of the land, puts men to death without trial, and subjects women to violence.
The rule of the many, on the other hand, has, in the first place, the fairest of names, to wit, isonomy; and further it is free from all those outrages which a king is wont to commit. There, places are given by lot, the magistrate is answerable for what he does, and measures rest with the commonalty. I vote, therefore, that we do away with monarchy, and raise the people to power. For the people are all in all.”
[3.81] Such were the sentiments of Otanes. Megabyzus spoke next, and advised the setting up of an oligarchy [aristocracy]:- “In all that Otanes has said to persuade you to put down monarchy,” he observed, “I fully concur; but his recommendation that we should call the people to power seems to me not the best advice. For there is nothing so void of understanding, nothing so full of wantonness, as the unwieldy rabble. It were folly not to be borne, for men, while seeking to escape the wantonness of a tyrant, to give themselves up to the wantonness of a rude unbridled mob. The tyrant, in all his doings, at least knows what is he about, but a mob is altogether devoid of knowledge; for how should there be any knowledge in a rabble, untaught, and with no natural sense of what is right and fit? It rushes wildly into state affairs with all the fury of a stream swollen in the winter, and confuses everything. Let the enemies of the Persians be ruled by democracies; but let us choose out from the citizens a certain number of the worthiest, and put the government into their hands. For thus both we ourselves shall be among the governors, and power being entrusted to the best men, it is likely that the best counsels will prevail in the state.”
[3.82] This was the advice which Megabyzus gave, and after him Darius came forward, and spoke as follows:- “All that Megabyzus said against democracy was well said, I think; but about oligarchy he did not speak advisedly; for take these three forms of government - democracy, oligarchy, and monarchy - and let them each be at their best, I maintain that monarchy far surpasses the other two. What government can possibly be better than that of the very best man in the whole state?
The counsels of such a man are like himself, and so he governs the mass of the people to their heart’s content; while at the same time his measures against evil-doers are kept more secret than in other states.
Contrariwise, in oligarchies, where men vie with each other in the service of the commonwealth, fierce enmities are apt to arise between man and man, each wishing to be leader, and to carry his own measures; whence violent quarrels come, which lead to open strife, often ending in bloodshed. Then monarchy is sure to follow; and this too shows how far that rule surpasses all others.
Again, in a democracy, it is impossible but that there will be malpractices: these malpractices, however, do not lead to enmities, but to close friendships, which are formed among those engaged in them, who must hold well together to carry on their villainies. And so things go on until a man stands forth as champion of the commonalty, and puts down the evil-doers. Straightway the author of so great a service is admired by all, and from being admired soon comes to be appointed king; so that here too it is plain that monarchy is the best government.
Lastly, to sum up all in a word, whence, I ask, was it that we got the freedom which we enjoy? - did democracy give it us, or oligarchy, or a monarch? As a single man recovered our freedom for us, my sentence is that we keep to the rule of one. Even apart from this, we ought not to change the laws of our forefathers when they work fairly; for to do so is not well.””
[Herodotus]
Nice, but we did not select the Oligarchs. They selected themselves. Nothing good can come from that. And so our forefathers gave us a representative republic, for as long as we could keep it.
People who get a taste of freedom are sometimes extremely violent when it is proposed to take it away from them, a principle our own progressives appear to have forgotten.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.