And quite appropriate, methinks.
Posted on 11/20/2010 7:12:25 AM PST by marktwain
I do not like to wait for people to write checks either. Similarly, I do not like to wait for people to use credit cards. I like cash, but it seems that a large number of people in society have been indoctrinated into not carrying cash.
It didn’t offend me, but perhaps it was the “Christ on a Stick” comment that upset Rita?
“Might I suggest a google search of “God complex” which might convince you of the accepted terminology in the society in which you live.”....
If so, then to use a standard diagnostic term in a context which is not religious just might not be “blasphemy”.
May I suggest that “accepted terminology” that mocks the reality of the sacred has quite well diminished the society in which you live, and that “standard diagnostic term(s)” have done very little to advance the state of society which now gives you cause to strap on your pistol.
>>I really enjoyed this read. What an inept know-nothing. She ought to run for office.<<
If Zero had heard about this gal, she would have a senior position in his administration before the day was out.
May I suggest that you view waiting from a different angle.
Use the time to examine the clothing styles of the people around you and perhaps make changes to your own.
Take note of the architecture if you are considering making changes to your own surroundings.
Or you could just be thankful that when the sun came up this morning you were on top of the grass and not below it. A rapid glance up and a silent ‘thank you’ will be heard by the One responsible for that.
Writing a check doesn’t take any longer than swiping your card, entering your PIN, waiting for the remote bank to approve it, etc., etc. If it takes any longer, it’s because of the merchant’s process for check acceptance. If you don’t like the wait blame them, not the customer. (And no, I’m not one who writes checks at the grocery store)
I have a problem with this, for the simple reason that it is not the best way to teach. Teach? Yes, absolutely.
For decades now there has been a loss in public knowledge about guns, gun laws, the 2nd Amendment, and importantly, gun culture.
This means that when you assert your rights, you are not in a sea of hostility, but a sea of ignorance. And while hostility is one thing, it’s very important to *assume* that they are just ignorant, because in the vast majority of cases, this will be the situation.
1) There’s a good chance that whoever it is has never even fired a gun, much less owned one.
2) Their entire family is likely totally unfamiliar with guns, except for the bizarre, distorted image they seen in the movies and on TV.
3) A large number of people translate this ignorance into fear. Not knowing, they assume the worst.
Of course, none of this excuses abusive behavior based on the *color of authority*.
I am torn by this. But deep down, I believe that the right to personal property should trump an individual's right to carry a weapon, when that person who wants to carry is on that property owner's property.
Mark
I missed the “Christ on a stick”, but having found it, it seems tad lame. No pun intended, but there is, now that I think of it, a “Christ on a crutch” saying I heard somewhere, once.
Please, go read the definitions and try to understand what the term describes. The term is used to describe those with delusions of grandeur, particularly those who think they are the latest visitation to Earth by God.
Psychosis exists, I am sorry to have to tell you. So long as patients consider themselves to be God, you must expect those who have to describe them to use well known nouns and adjectives to describe said patients.
Additionally, if the person doing the describing does not intend blasphemy, them minus “criminal intent” has a crime occurred?
Also, I am beginning to detect a rigidity in your parameters for discussion of anything even tangentially related to the word “God” which some may well find reminiscent of “DO not insult the Koran”.
I really enjoyed the post. Very entertaining but I don’t think I would waste all that time and emotional energy on a bottom of the rung employee who makes about $10 an hour and has absolutely no authority at the bank.
When ones runs a business, it is ALWAYS bewst to have WRITTEN records of your financial transactions.
As a life-long bookkeeper, I can tell you that trying to find record of payment for something when all you have is a transaction number & a crazy-to-decipher abbreviation, it can be a nightmare. One of my clients used his debit card alot. I spend an inordinate amount of time trying to ID some of his purchases. IF & WHEN the 1099 crap starts—I truly don’t know how I can keep track of every gas station & Home Depot he goes into.
I won’t bank on-line, nor will I work for anyone who does, particularly deposits.
I cannot tell you how many times in the past 45 years that I had to prove something was paid to a vendor by showing a COPY of the FRONT & BACK sides of the check in question.
One event was triggered around an embezzlement. Our payment to the vendor of over $3000 wasn’t shown in their records-—but our check had been deposited.
I am very uncomfortable not getting my cancelled checks back, only a copy of the front of the check. That does not give me the clear picture of the endorsement.
Banks will provide such back of the check endorsement-—at $50 per hour, only within 90 days. Sometimes an embezzlement takes a long time to discover. Getting those check copies after 90 days could be a nightmare, also.
That is just not fair.
What is the rest of the story? Did a customer put a stop to a bank robbery? Can she prove this story of hers?
Did she make this up too?
That's my approach to any "No Guns Here" sign. Later on, when I told someone I had carried at that place (non Federal) she got all upset. I asked her to explain her concept of "Concealed".
Liberals don’t like push back from Conservatives..
Even the Bible says that there are "gods many and lords many". There is only one Almighty God, but even using his title ("God" is a title, not a name. In English we say "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" for His name. Other languages transliterate it differently.) to describe someone with an overblown view of themselves hardly seems blasphemous.
I agree. I hate that, and I hate that they did it without getting the customers' permission first. At least the check images come in the statement now. When they started it, you could only get the images by doing something proactively -- downloading each and every check image online, or requesting them from the bank. Who's going to assume those new costs? Plus, now your fate is in someone else's hands. What if their servers crash and lose the images and you need it later? What if it's the bank you're having a dispute with? How sure are you that they'll be honest in the use of their equipment and data to protect you from THEMSELVES? We've all seen how police car videos always seem to malfunction in exactly the cases where the civilian is alleging police misconduct. The means to protect you should be in YOUR hands and no others.
Yes, I like how each time one of her statements is challenged, her response basically amounts to “Yes, I was full of crap with that statement, but it doesn’t matter because what I REALLY meant was ‘Blah, blah, blah’”, and expect everyone to be OK with that. She’s probably full of crap this time too.
yup...
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.