I'm a day late but your Variety spoof had me chuckling out loud. The best I can do in return is rip off a few of the classics from the New York Post.
 |
 |
 |
Posted on 07/04/2012 1:16:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Never said you were.
But I do note that your actions in this thread do parallel theirs.
Now, if you are lying about never being there and you get caught out there....
Well, don’t shriek about it if that is the case.
Jim’s email addy is on FR’s front page.
Season 7, Disc 2. Got it. Made me happy you did the legwork. She and I remember the episode well, indeed. 8>)
I seriously doubt that Quix was someone who would vote for Romney. And beside the political basis - I would say that on religious grounds, too - since Romney is a member of a CULT GROUP and I’m pretty sure that Quix would not vote for a CULT MEMBER as President of the United States of America.
And likewise for me ... I see a lot of good political reasons for not voting for him, the big ones being abortion and Obamacare (as I think was already mentioned here). But, there is also the reason — that — I would NOT vote for a CULT MEMBER as President of the United States of America.
It’s bad enough having such an anti-Christian as Obama in office (and that’s refraining from talking about the political items). And he sure is one - so antagonistic to Christianity, while pretending, at the same time, to be one!
He basically doesn’t know anything about Christianity (or rather absolutely hates it) - according to the way he talks about dedicated and faithful Christians.
Likewise, if we got a CULT GROUP MEMBER in office as President, he’s liable to try to RAM THROUGH MULTIPLE MARRIAGES for men - on top of all his other bad policies - and allow his CULT GROUP to have multiple wives - to get back at the United States for forcing them to abandon their multiple wives doctrine!
NO ... you don’t want a CULT GROUP MEMEBER as Prresident of the United States (and like I said - besides his bad political stance).
Dj,O .. thanks so much for your supportive thoughts and comments. It was very stunning and revolting to me personally to see those brazen comments Star Traveler posted to me last night, free of any self-censoring, common courtesy, basic civility or discretion, and he’s still pronouncing the same mantras and scripts he/she is so SURE he/she KNOWS with absolute certainty.
That’s why my very, very sincere request today is that the management consider removing those religious debate threads in the interests of good will and the good of the whole community. They obviously serve as a divisive and destructive influence, and have become an actual source of much unnecessary interpersonal forum turmoil, as amply shown.
And I’ve and I’m sure many others have seen the carryover negativity elsewhere outside those threads with personal grudges, anger, personal attacks, hard feelings, etc. We have enough to discuss and worry about, don’t we?
I have enough years on this earth, crisis-scarred faith, dozens of life experiences and knowledge of God’s Holy Word to know that the Almighty has made it clear that all knowledge in all things was never ours to know, it is His domain exclusively, no matter what imperfect humans believe and may spout that they know with utter certainty..
StarTraveler .. this is what your last post sounds like:
“I do not support the war, but of course I support the troops.”
Disingenuous, feckless, parroting a well-memorized script, obedient puppetry, empty of genuine substance or feeling.
You’ve been well programmed.
I’ll not be requesting any judgements or memorizations on such matters from you, but God bless you and God bless us all.
Yikes! Forgot Jim really is handicapped. Just nevermind then.
You won’t find my name over there ... :-)
But, it might be interesting to go over there and talk to some of those people to find out what’s going on in their minds. However, I usually have only enough time for Free Republic - and even that has been extremely limited recently. I’ve only started posting here again, more consistently in the last days-weeks ... and that’s it.
I’ve been busy with a Geert Wilders page over on Facebook and fighting against Muslims and Islam and Sharia Law over there ... :-)
I might mention that I did frequent the Religious Forum quite a bit and also had a “caucus” over there for one of the religious topics. As I said earlier - I really did appreciate the way they set up the Guidelines over there and kept things on track for arguing about doctrines and teachings and institutions and organizations - but not attacking the people directly who were talking about that. I think that’s the way to go.
The spew wasn't Scripture but man-inspired.
And you're absolutely correct that it sounded scripted. That's why the direct Word of God was never used, it doesn't support the vitriol. Sad.
I'm a day late but your Variety spoof had me chuckling out loud. The best I can do in return is rip off a few of the classics from the New York Post.
|
|
|
What you do find are cowardly people there who hide who they are behind childish and infantile handles.
And they absolutely obsess about FReepers.
It is interesting in the pathology of the thing.
I encounter this kind of MISUNDERSTANDING quite frequently on another topic that I deal with.
I handle a forum for Geert Wilders and we argue against POLITICAL ISLAM and that totalitarian, oppressive, evil, wicked, backward, retarded, violent and and extremely murderous IDEOLOGY of Islam and Sharia Law. It’s probably the most EVIL and ABSOLUTELY WICKED IDEOLOGY that exists on the face of this earth.
BUT ... what a lot of people “hear” when that is said - is that “You hate Muslims!”
Well, that’s not true. In fact, Geert Wilders states very emphatically and constantly that he has nothing against Muslims, does not hate them, and actually believes that the MAJORITY of Muslims are peaceful and law-abiding.
However, the IDEOLOGY itself and its teachings as comes from these ISLAMISTS and JIHADISTS are absolutely wicked, evil, retarded, backward, woman-hating, Jew-hating, oppressive of all rights - and belongs nowhere in the world of today!
BUT STILL ... people say if you’re against an IDEOLOGY (whatever the teachings and doctrines are) that you are a HATER of people and thus you are committing a “hate crime” of sorts - you must hate Muslims.
WELL ... the exact same thing applies to other religions and not just Islam. You don’t have to hate Muslims and make them your enemy - if you are against the IDEOLOGY that the Islamists and Jihadists perpetrate. Not at all.
And likewise, here - one doesn’t have to be against you or others - personally - to be EXTREMELY CRITICAL of an IDEOLOGY and a set of teachings and doctrines ... you see.
Anyway - what I’m pointing out is THAT is precisely the “modus operandi” of the Liberals and Multi-culturalists ... when they try to shut up people on criticizing Islam and Sharia Law. They make it out to be “hating people” - and that’s not true!
Can you point out to us when the last time a sitting President lost a primary?
And, if Romney is as bad as Obama, things WILL be worse. Why? Because the party in the White House is blamed when things go bad. That means Republicans will be losing seats under Romney in Congress and at the state level. If Obama is a disaster, Republicans will continue to gain seats in both Congress and at the state level.
My strategy is to support the most conservative candidate who has a chance of winning in every race always
How did that strategy play out with the Bushes? Did the country move to the left under both? The lesser of two evils strategy simply continues to move the nation to the left. Liberal ("moderate") Republicans advance liberalism, not conservatism.
The way to deal with RINOs is to replace them with conservatives whenever you can.
You never have the guts to hold Republicans feet to the fire. You'll vote for anyone the Republicans put up.
The list is about knowing how many of us there really are as opposed to how many it looks like there are. And people who know me via FR know they can trust me when I say, "Hey, there are 180 of us or damned close." If some folks don't believe me, that's their problem. But I know how heartening it is to be able to tell FRiends, "Hey, there's not just a handful of us, there's 15 dozen of us at least." It's good for morale, especially becaue it's true.
I'll take you off the list when I read you say you're planning to hold your nose and vote for Coke in order to get rid of Pepsi, or the equivalent.
Yours was one of the first names on the list, and it doesn't even have a question mark behind it, so reading your post just now gave me a bit of a fright.
But: So, I have been un-thrilled with Republican party Presidential candidates for most of my voting life but I've gone along with the flow...until now, posted by you a little more than a week ago, and this ...
I also will be voting for many Republicans this November. But a few of us on this forum, including the owner/operator, find more than enough faults with the apparent Republican nominee and are constrained to vote for someone other than this (pre-selected) nominee.
... which you wrote not even two weeks ago.
The list remains at 180.
I'd love to know what the plaque outside your church says. What brand of Christianity are you espousing?
Well, thanks, I guess. It’s good for MY morale to learn there are more than five or ten of us. But could you write my name in some sort of code? In case your list gets lost or captured.
if one wanted to continue a religious discussion (and it looked like it was turning into a discussion by then) - the place to do it is in the religious forum.
~~~~
Really? Then why did you feel you could inject such things on Quix’s opus thread posted by the site owner? Not much contradiction or hypocrisy at all ... /S
WOW. You must be shaking in your boots. /s/
I see they are up to 475 now, last month 418. Just think at this rate in ten years they’ll have 1/10 as many members as FR does today.
In reviewing your posts earlier today, I saw that you’ve said you refuse to vote for Romney, so added your name. Quix I vetted way back when I started it, and in reading back-posts (skimming them, actually, as one is wont to do with Quix’s novelas! ;^), while I found lots of posts where it’s clear he doesn’t like Romney, I found zilch to confirm or really even to imply that he would refuse to vote for him. So Quix was never on the list, though I’d love to put him on it because Q is the ONLY letter in the alphabet on this alphabetized list that isn’t represented!
Might I suggest that since you use the '?' notation for those who may still be questionable, one might also use an '!' for those who are definitively adamant - In which case, my handle on your list should look something like this:
!!!roamer_1!!! (!!!!!!!)
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.