Free Republic

I didn’t mean to imply that we should start shooting today, just that if there is a real concern and desire to change (or reestablish) then people should be willing to sacrifice a little more than just a couple of free hours on a Saturday. Not that Tea Parties aren’t a good start - I think they are. I’ve attended a few and I’ll be going today. But they should be just that - a start. Politicians and elected officials should pay attention to what the citizens are saying. But if they don’t then there should be a next step and people who are willing to take it.

It’s our country and we should ask for it back, demand it back and, if NECESSARY take it back. Assembly/rally, civil protest, civil disobedience...

I’m a quiet, peaceful man, by nature. I think most of the people I’ve met at the tea parties are. But I’m finally mad. That’s all.

Thanks for starting this post. Thanks for letting me vent.

I Agree. Today's tea party is the last one I'll be going to for the reasons you stated. I'm not going to continue to attend tea parties just for the sake of attending tea parties. I am not a leader of men but I am willing to follow a leader into battle - whatever that battle entails. I am willing to sacrifice for the sake of my country and countrymen and women but screaming and yelling for a couple of hours and then going home isn't going to get much accomplished.

Anyone who thinks patriots in this country don't do anything radical beyond the point of assembling and peacefully protesting against government tyranny ought to remember what Thomas Jefferson said in defense of violent farmer outbursts, "A little revolution every now and then is a GOOD thing." Emphasis mine.

The problem with this poll is it's almost rigged to get the answer the union and probably the paper want. Is 60% of the people split and say either that 3% is good enough or too high and 40% vote for "too low" they will report that "in our poll, most people answered that they think the 3% pay raise offered isn't high enough".

If you want to know which way an organization leans or what answer they are actually trying to manipulate a poll to give, check the questions - the number and the wording. In this case, whenever there are three questions and none of the choices is "none of the above" (and sometimes even when one is), you can bet that two of the questions are meant to split one side of the issue and make it appear that the 'right' side (usually the 'left' side) predominates.

A company parking lot is private property. Noone has any more 'right' to be there than they do your front lawn.

While I agree that we have to be very careful in our hearts when we fast and when we pray, Jesus was very specific when he said that the hypocrites had their reward in full. Because they were putting on a show for men, not God - THAT's why they had their rewards in full. He didn't say that the ONLY way to be rewarded for our efforts was to do them in private, He was telling us to do them in private in order to ensure our intentions were absolutely pure. He also said to pray in private and we must if we are to grow close to in our relationship with the Father. But I'm fairly sure no Christian would say that public prayer is forbidden by Jesus. As an example of non-private fasting, the disciples and early church prayed and fasted together in Acts 13:2 and 14:23.

I do not mean to disagree with your admonition - the same admonition that Jesus gave the disciples (you're in good company!) - that Cyborg check and guard her heart and be absolutely sure of her intentions in posting concerning her fast, just that if she is being called by the spirit to a 7 day fast and is truly excited about coming in close proximity to God and spending dedicated time with Him, then I wouldn't want to be the one to discourage or dissuade her from that call. In fact, since her post was to ask for prayer for her during her time of preparation and fasting, I find it wholly appropriate.

Cvengr, your gentle warning was considerate and should be taken to heart.

Cyborg, God be with you, find joy in the experience and I will be praying for you.

The Foolish One

Come!

I have prayed for you and I will try to remember to continue in prayer over the next 7 days.

I don't have the strength or will power to fast for 7 consecutive days (or even 3) but I am 6 Wednesdays into a 40 Wednesday fast. I intend to take every 7th Wednesday off and spend the entire day in prayer, meditation and scripture reading. Please pray for me during your fast, as well.

Keep the faith and have fun.

What's wrong with this poll? Can anyone see it?

This is how the liberal media can ask seemingly unbiased questions and still get the answer they want.

No, I believe he refered to Sen. Barak Obama as Osama Obama. But it's still pretty funny.

I think Target screwed themselves - and unnecessarily. They could have continued their 'no solicitation' policy and allowed the Salvation Army bell ringers to stay as a matter of tradition and calling it a 'non decision' since they had been allowing them all along. Now they will lose business by banning them and they will lose business and create additional problems for themselves if they decide to let them return. Certainly, they won't be able to fall back on the 'tradition' excuse if they reverse their decision and allow the kettles the next time someone else asks to stand in front of Target and solicit donations or sell things for charity.

They made a conscious decision and by doing so they force their customer base to make a conscious decision, as well. Somebody should be fired.

Another excellent posting today - both the APOD and article!!!

That's pretty funny. Actually, I think he said something like "By the way - what happened to your eyebrows?"

Thank you. First post. I'll try to do better next time.

Just in case anyone might have been thinking that Charles Gibson actually seemed unbiased Friday evening (or needed confirmation on whether he really leans left or not), this ran in the St. Louis Post Dispatch Sunday and can be found in their online edition STLToday. Sounds like he is rooting for one side to win to me. (Or at least pining for a candidate who can win.)

That's beautiful!

Sounds reasonable based upon our experiences. I doubt that the ANG would be ahead of regulars in implementing new programs although it could have been mandated to start at the same time.

It'll be interesting to see where all of this leads.

Nope. Couldn't make up a name like that with a straight face. Had to take my randomly selected IBM punchcard to the base clinic and give samples twice.

Just as a datapoint, I can attest that a drug testing program was in place in the USAF as early as 1974. It was called Operation Goldenflow. Since it was fully implemented and routine by the time I enlisted, I assume it was probably around in some form in 1972. At least, I wouldn't bet against it.

Thank you.

Thanks for both!