Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 To all the Members who wrote me privately, Since there is a no religious posting rule to the group, I want to especially thank all the people who wrote to me privately to make sure that I got the word and explained to me about satanic plots, world governments, rapture, etc. and also the concern for my soul. It seems if I will just read both of those towering theological and intellectual sources Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh I will surely understand everything. I have to confess that I didn't do so the first 1,567 times someone has sent me this type of information but I plan to now. After all who wouldn't want to be enlightened? Maybe I will report back with my findings. regards, Frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Frank, to best of my knowledge, there is nothing theological about Rush Limberger, and very little that is theological about Jerry Foulweather. However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the fat twerp. JMO Elliot , Frank <califpacific> wrote: > To all the Members who wrote me privately, > > Since there is a no religious posting rule to the group, I want to especially thank all the people who wrote to me privately to make sure that I got the word and explained to me about satanic plots, world governments, rapture, etc. and also the concern for my soul. > > It seems if I will just read both of those towering theological and intellectual sources Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh I will surely understand everything. I have to confess that I didn't do so the first 1,567 times someone has sent me this type of information but I plan to now. After all who wouldn't want to be enlightened? Maybe I will report back with my findings. > > regards, > > Frank > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 I bought some glasses and a glass pitcher that came from Mexico. They are a common theme; clear glass with a blue rim. They are nice looking and I like them but... I've read that some glasses are dangerous because of the way they are fired and the lead they contain can leach out into the water you drink from them. Does anybody know anything about this? Thank you very much for listening to my question! Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Dave, There is a small kit available at the hardware store to test glass china and pottery for lead content, I have one myself. NG - " Dave R Hermanson " <tumblweed4 Saturday, June 26, 2004 11:03 PM Re: Private Messages > I bought some glasses and a glass pitcher that came from Mexico. > They are a common theme; clear glass with a blue rim. They are > nice looking and I like them but... I've read that some glasses are > dangerous because of the way they are fired and the lead they > contain can leach out into the water you drink from them. > > Does anybody know anything about this? > > Thank you very much for listening to my question! > > Dave > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 I agree. My point although I may not have made it clear, was that people keep sending me those two references when it comes to religion, moral questions and understanding politics. I really wasn't trying to say that Limbaugh was a theologian. The message also wasn't about the film Fahrenheit 9/11 but about the gratuitous sending me of messages to enlighten me to the secrets expounded by these two towering pillars of BS and nonthink. How would they like it if I kept sending them my own personal ideas about religion or politics to their email boxes all of the time? Especialy if they were considered a little off the wall. As for your preferences based on ( pictures?) So you choose the smirking chimp over the fat twerp. Big deal. See anyone can descend to name calling and small minded character assination. Also I didn't realize that it was a beauty contest. I thought rather naively that it should be based on truth or not. That is the one thing that seems to get conveniently lost along the way. " Truth " in our society is becoming just another word for what brand of lie is being pushed by what rich politically powerfull group who wants to do a snow job on us. Did Bush lie about all those things, yes or no. Or all of the other things that are coming out about this group that we have in Washington. If what I have been reading is true it goes way beyond partisan politics, but to the core of us a society. If these things are true then we should kick the whole bunch out and put them in jail. If you personally want to accept and condone those kinds of things just because the person involved is of the same political party says volumes and we may be in even deeper trouble than I thought.. It is not some personality comparison betweeen a moviemaker and a president. I can't accept lieing, stealing, cheating or subverting justice whether in a moviemaker, president or the local grocer, cop, or city official. It is solely.... are these people doing illegal things and if so what? If they are then the crimes are even more outrageous by using the office of the president to do them. I will say this about the movie, most of the major media, political suppression, etc. If someone lies it is almost always because the truth cannot stand the light of day whether it is a child, adult or a major political figure. If someone is telling the truth and it is acceptable to most, they do not need to manipulate the facts, media, channels of communication, etc. But if they are doing those things then it is a very good indication that someone is trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Frank breathedeepnow <aug20 wrote: Frank, to best of my knowledge, there is nothing theological about Rush Limberger, and very little that is theological about Jerry Foulweather. However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the fat twerp. JMO Elliot , Frank <califpacific> wrote: > To all the Members who wrote me privately, > > Since there is a no religious posting rule to the group, I want to especially thank all the people who wrote to me privately to make sure that I got the word and explained to me about satanic plots, world governments, rapture, etc. and also the concern for my soul. > > It seems if I will just read both of those towering theological and intellectual sources Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh I will surely understand everything. I have to confess that I didn't do so the first 1,567 times someone has sent me this type of information but I plan to now. After all who wouldn't want to be enlightened? Maybe I will report back with my findings. > > regards, > > Frank > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 If I agree with anything it is this: Quote: As for your preferences based on ( pictures?) So you choose the smirking chimp over the fat twerp. Big deal. See anyone can descend to name calling and small minded character assination. Really, what is with the name calling?...Fat twerp…gee I can guess what you were like in elementary school. You know, people will listen and take you more seriously if you stick to the cause and not revert to the same tactics my 5 year old does. When I first read the “fat twerp” remark that someone had made…well…it just really doesn’t do anything for your cause…just makes you look like you have no real standing….get a cause and dig a little deeper than “fat twerp” if you want to be taken seriously. Stacy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Elliot needs to explain why his right-wing friends are so anxious to deprive people of their right to see this movie. You bet he's got the goods on Junior. That's why your friends are so scared of the movie. JP - " breathedeepnow " <aug20 Saturday, June 26, 2004 7:52 PM Re: Private Messages > Frank, to best of my knowledge, there is nothing theological about > Rush Limberger, and very little that is theological about Jerry > Foulweather. > > However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, > smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. > If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the > fat twerp. JMO > > Elliot > > , Frank > <califpacific> wrote: > > To all the Members who wrote me privately, > > > > Since there is a no religious posting rule to the group, I want to > especially thank all the people who wrote to me privately to make > sure that I got the word and explained to me about satanic plots, > world governments, rapture, etc. and also the concern for my soul. > > > > It seems if I will just read both of those towering theological and > intellectual sources Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh I will surely > understand everything. I have to confess that I didn't do so the > first 1,567 times someone has sent me this type of information but I > plan to now. After all who wouldn't want to be enlightened? Maybe I > will report back with my findings. > > > > regards, > > > > Frank > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Dear Frank, Regarding your response concerning Farenheit 9/11, you couldn't have said it better. We must never feel it would be disloyal to seek the truth, no matter where it takes you. Our loyalty should be first and formost to seeking the truth. Truth is the road out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Dear JP, With regard to " right wing friends, " I am independent. I do not vote " democratic " or " republican, " but rather for the person or people I believe will best do whatever it is I'd like to see accomplished. With regard to " depriving people of their right to see this movie, " I know nothing about that, but I don't expect anyone ought to be deprived of their right to view it. I will add this, with regard to the character purported to have made the movie: Abraham Lincoln said, " After the age of 40, every man is responsible for what his face looks like. " That being the case, if the character who made " Fahrenheit 911 " is over 40, he is in sad shape. If he is not, he'd better start working on his life and his face, because he looks like no one I would trust or hire. With regard to calling The President " Junior, " may I suggest that even if one does not respect the person occupying the office, then at least the office of The President deserves a great deal more respect than that? JP, may I also suggest you tone down your posts---make them less assuming and less accusative about a member or members of this board? In fact, you have no idea who I am or what I represent. Thank you and best wishes, Elliot , " John Polifronio " <counterpnt@e...> wrote: > Elliot needs to explain why his right-wing friends are so anxious to deprive > people of their right to see this movie. You bet he's got the goods on > Junior. That's why your friends are so scared of the movie. > JP > > - > " breathedeepnow " <aug20@m...> > > Saturday, June 26, 2004 7:52 PM > Re: Private Messages > > > > Frank, to best of my knowledge, there is nothing theological about > > Rush Limberger, and very little that is theological about Jerry > > Foulweather. > > > > However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, > > smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. > > If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the > > fat twerp. JMO > > > > Elliot > > > > , Frank > > <califpacific> wrote: > > > To all the Members who wrote me privately, > > > > > > Since there is a no religious posting rule to the group, I want to > > especially thank all the people who wrote to me privately to make > > sure that I got the word and explained to me about satanic plots, > > world governments, rapture, etc. and also the concern for my soul. > > > > > > It seems if I will just read both of those towering theological and > > intellectual sources Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh I will surely > > understand everything. I have to confess that I didn't do so the > > first 1,567 times someone has sent me this type of information but I > > plan to now. After all who wouldn't want to be enlightened? Maybe I > > will report back with my findings. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Frank > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 I have already stated that I have no need to explain anything. I just wish to add, (and then I will be permanently off this thread, as I will have nothing more to add), that the reason I wrote this: " However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the fat twerp. " is because it happens to be true. Every time I have seen the character who is apparently responsible for " Fahrenheit 911, " he has looked like a simpering, sloppy clown. His face, his bearing and his attitude betray him. Anyone who wants to put their faith in what he has to say---it's fine with me. But personally, I have little respect for, and no confidence in, characters who choose to appear and to behave like perennial adolescents. Auf weiderzein and off this thread, Elliot , " John Polifronio " <counterpnt@e...> wrote: > Elliot needs to explain why his right-wing friends are so anxious to deprive > people of their right to see this movie. You bet he's got the goods on > Junior. That's why your friends are so scared of the movie. > JP > > - > " breathedeepnow " <aug20@m...> > > Saturday, June 26, 2004 7:52 PM > Re: Private Messages > > > > Frank, to best of my knowledge, there is nothing theological about > > Rush Limberger, and very little that is theological about Jerry > > Foulweather. > > > > However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, > > smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. > > If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the > > fat twerp. JMO > > > > Elliot > > > > , Frank > > <califpacific> wrote: > > > To all the Members who wrote me privately, > > > > > > Since there is a no religious posting rule to the group, I want to > > especially thank all the people who wrote to me privately to make > > sure that I got the word and explained to me about satanic plots, > > world governments, rapture, etc. and also the concern for my soul. > > > > > > It seems if I will just read both of those towering theological and > > intellectual sources Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh I will surely > > understand everything. I have to confess that I didn't do so the > > first 1,567 times someone has sent me this type of information but I > > plan to now. After all who wouldn't want to be enlightened? Maybe I > > will report back with my findings. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Frank > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Regarding Elliot's comment about Michael Moore, I would like to point out that I believe he is reflecting a cultural divide between the West Coast of the US and other regions. Certain regions of the US have more fixed rules for membership in the community. For example, loyalty to the president and agreement with close friends may be more important than a search for justice or " the truth. " It is a cultural value which places membership in a group such as a family group or a political group above other factors. This is the same cultural value projected by Bush who is from the South. They are lovely people but God have mercy on you if you accidentally insult one of their friends. It's all over, and no second chances. (I have a personal theory that this cultural value has its roots in the Germanic culture that immigrated to the US over the past 100 years) (You're either with us or against us.) The West Coast has a very different orientation and is less inclined to take it as an affront if someone steps outside of the group or even challenges it. Anyhow, let's remember that we are a culturally diverse country and try to understand each other. It can be a fascinating cross cultural experience! So many limit their education by refusing to read or listen to " the other side. " We need to be free of the good opinion of others and seek the truth, seek to learn, seek to understand. I was unimpressed by Michael Moore's earlier films, but this one is a masterpiece. It could literally change the history of this country. For no other reason, it should be seen. I have already stated that I have no need to explain anything. I just wish to add, (and then I will be permanently off this thread, as I will have nothing more to add), that the reason I wrote this: " However, with regard to Fahrenheit 911, I don't think the fat, smirking twerp who's behind that movie has anything on George Bush. If a picture is worth 1000 words, I will take George Bush over the fat twerp. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 , " breathedeepnow " <aug20@m...> wrote: > > With regard to calling The President " Junior, " may I suggest that > even if one does not respect the person occupying the office, then at > least the office of The President deserves a great deal more respect > than that? No I don't think that respect is or should be automatic. Respect is what people give in response to other people acting respectable. In fact I like a certain amount of healthy disrespect. It helps to keep the BS down to a more acceptable level. Speaking of respect for presidents, here is what Moore had to say on the TV clip about Bush and Clinton. " Clinton was the best republican president that we have ever had " . Bush he calls the, " Thief-In-Chief " . I don't see anything wrong in people voicing disrespect for politicians. Do you expect me to believe that our politicians are sqeaky clean, altruistic, and are doing it for the love of country and the " betterment of mankind " and we should hold them up to respect. Pleeeease....! Frank > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 I will not respect anyone who does not respect me no matter his/her title. Many politicians have for far to long disrespected any who do not fit ito their social class, such as the lower middle class society. If they did respect us we would not be taxed heavier than those making thousands more than us. We are not respected because we are made to remain in the social class we are currently in by the laws that are passed without oir rights being considered. Additionally, anytime our right to choose is taken from us, so is a freedom, that is not respectful. And EVERYTIME a politician runs for office and makes a lot of promises and then does not follow through with them, that politician has lied and therefore immediatley looses my respect. What a person looks like or how the media chooses to portray a person, does not make that person, but their personal actions do make them. I do not judge people by looks but by character. That same character is what garners respect! califpacific <califpacific wrote: , " breathedeepnow " <aug20@m...> wrote: > > With regard to calling The President " Junior, " may I suggest that > even if one does not respect the person occupying the office, then at > least the office of The President deserves a great deal more respect > than that? No I don't think that respect is or should be automatic. Respect is what people give in response to other people acting respectable. In fact I like a certain amount of healthy disrespect. It helps to keep the BS down to a more acceptable level. Speaking of respect for presidents, here is what Moore had to say on the TV clip about Bush and Clinton. " Clinton was the best republican president that we have ever had " . Bush he calls the, " Thief-In-Chief " . I don't see anything wrong in people voicing disrespect for politicians. Do you expect me to believe that our politicians are sqeaky clean, altruistic, and are doing it for the love of country and the " betterment of mankind " and we should hold them up to respect. Pleeeease....! Frank > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2004 Report Share Posted June 29, 2004 I am talking about the Office, not the person. There is a difference. , Michelle Custer <tw34dd> wrote: > I will not respect anyone who does not respect me no matter his/her title. Many politicians have for far to long disrespected any who do not fit ito their social class, such as the lower middle class society. If they did respect us we would not be taxed heavier than those making thousands more than us. We are not respected because we are made to remain in the social class we are currently in by the laws that are passed without oir rights being considered. Additionally, anytime our right to choose is taken from us, so is a freedom, that is not respectful. And EVERYTIME a politician runs for office and makes a lot of promises and then does not follow through with them, that politician has lied and therefore immediatley looses my respect. > What a person looks like or how the media chooses to portray a person, does not make that person, but their personal actions do make them. I do not judge people by looks but by character. That same character is what garners respect! > > califpacific <califpacific> wrote: > , " breathedeepnow " > <aug20@m...> wrote: > > > > > With regard to calling The President " Junior, " may I suggest that > > even if one does not respect the person occupying the office, then > at > > least the office of The President deserves a great deal more > respect > > than that? > > > No I don't think that respect is or should be automatic. Respect is > what people give in response to other people acting respectable. > > In fact I like a certain amount of healthy disrespect. It helps to > keep the BS down to a more acceptable level. > > Speaking of respect for presidents, here is what Moore had to say on > the TV clip about Bush and Clinton. > > " Clinton was the best republican president that we have ever had " . > > Bush he calls the, " Thief-In-Chief " . > > I don't see anything wrong in people voicing disrespect for > politicians. Do you expect me to believe that our politicians are > sqeaky clean, altruistic, and are doing it for the love of country > and the " betterment of mankind " and we should hold them up to respect. Pleeeease....! > > Frank > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2004 Report Share Posted June 29, 2004 HOw can you respect the office if the person who is running it is not respectable? For the time that person is in the office are they not one and the same? breathedeepnow <aug20 wrote:I am talking about the Office, not the person. There is a difference. , Michelle Custer <tw34dd> wrote: > I will not respect anyone who does not respect me no matter his/her title. Many politicians have for far to long disrespected any who do not fit ito their social class, such as the lower middle class society. If they did respect us we would not be taxed heavier than those making thousands more than us. We are not respected because we are made to remain in the social class we are currently in by the laws that are passed without oir rights being considered. Additionally, anytime our right to choose is taken from us, so is a freedom, that is not respectful. And EVERYTIME a politician runs for office and makes a lot of promises and then does not follow through with them, that politician has lied and therefore immediatley looses my respect. > What a person looks like or how the media chooses to portray a person, does not make that person, but their personal actions do make them. I do not judge people by looks but by character. That same character is what garners respect! > > califpacific <califpacific> wrote: > , " breathedeepnow " > <aug20@m...> wrote: > > > > > With regard to calling The President " Junior, " may I suggest that > > even if one does not respect the person occupying the office, then > at > > least the office of The President deserves a great deal more > respect > > than that? > > > No I don't think that respect is or should be automatic. Respect is > what people give in response to other people acting respectable. > > In fact I like a certain amount of healthy disrespect. It helps to > keep the BS down to a more acceptable level. > > Speaking of respect for presidents, here is what Moore had to say on > the TV clip about Bush and Clinton. > > " Clinton was the best republican president that we have ever had " . > > Bush he calls the, " Thief-In-Chief " . > > I don't see anything wrong in people voicing disrespect for > politicians. Do you expect me to believe that our politicians are > sqeaky clean, altruistic, and are doing it for the love of country > and the " betterment of mankind " and we should hold them up to respect. Pleeeease....! > > Frank > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.