@shinyblurry

There's a question that causes debate among many believers, and that is the age old question... Are Jesus and God the same? Well, it does say that "for God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son", so naturally you would think the answer is a simple no.

But as nearly ever other aspect of Christianity goes, it's not that simple. For some reason Christians think Jesus is God, God is Jesus, and so on. Yet, they cannot back up this belief with anything from the Bible. There are so many things one can use to show that Jesus was not God, but none to the contrary.

Of course one of the first things you come across would be the concept of an infinite God in a finite body. I understand the argument of God being non-physical, and thus size would not be an issue. But what about other human limitations shown by Jesus. Primarily dying. Why would God become a person, just to die, therefore destroying any beliefs that this guy was God? Well, at least it should have destroyed beliefs. The only reasonable thing would be to survive death and live forever on earth to prove that you are God. Hell, if there was a 2000 year old man who could document it and that had public records of... I'd believe in God.

The main thing is that Jesus never called himself God, never insinuated he was God. He mostly referred to himself as Son of Man. Now people often cite various biblical verses with sayings like "I and the father are one" and that you can't get to the father without Jesus. But regardless of how much those who would like to believe it as being Jesus saying he is God close their eyes and wish. It will never be an admittance of being God.

Many of gurus, and well, anyone who has found the zone have become one with something. Be it a monk trying to be one with the universe, or Wayne Gretzky being one with his hockey stick. It's a common saying of something being so familiar to you that it's nearly a part of you. Jesus was only saying that he knows God so well, that God has become a part of him. Now for some on topic humor. What did the Guru say to the pizza man? Make me one with everything.

Now how do people think that because Jesus said that the only way to get to the father is through him, that he said he was God? Who knows? All he was saying was that he was the guide to God, follow him and you will see God. It's like that Heavens Gate guy said that he was the way to get to the Hale Bop comet, he wasn't saying that he was the Hale Bop comet.

They were criminally reckless. Her disqualifying lack of knowledge was so extreme, there's no way she could have faked it until after the convention. Unless these other guys were clueless themselves about basic civics/history/world events, which is even sadder, but not hard to believe. They are political hacks, after all.

If you were interviewing a highly experienced engineer, you wouldn't ask him or her something basic like Newton's 3 Laws. But you would talk shop with such a person about issues that depend upon knowledge of the fundamentals. It wouldn't take 5 minutes to uncover an unsophisticated cad. So, I don't believe the book or the movie. They knew they were in trouble the first conversation they had with Palin.

On Edwards, it's not up to me to prove a negative. I don't know one way or the other. The McCain aid certainly can't prove his assertion, which is my point. I never was in the Edwards camp, but the fact that he was a lying philanderer counts for nothing. Wouldn't be the first time we had a president with those two flaws.>> ^shuac:

>> ^longde:
They should have pressed him alot more on why he knowingly put up an unqualified person as a candidate for the VP. He wasn't contrite enough, IMO.
Also, how does he know Edwards was unqualified?

While I agree that he wasn't contrite enough, you can't say he knowingly put up an unqualified candidate. They just did a crappy vetting job of her. And even if they had the time to fully vet her, I think she could've faked her way through it, she being a good politician.
The vetting process probably assumes a great deal about what a candidate knows because when you ascend to becoming somebody's veep pick, it's a safe bet that you know a few things about the world. In other words, they don't ever bother vetting a sophomore high school student because, why would they ever need to unless sophomore high school students is all we had? Yet that is the level of world knowledge Palin seems to have had...so the vetting questions do not start that far back, understand? My point here is that they didn't realize the full extent of her ignorance and instability until well after the convention. I read the book and saw the movie.
But my question for you about Edwards is this: do you believe he was qualified? You think a person with such crucially flawed judgement and character would be okie-dokie as president, is that right? Better than Palin? Probably, but that's not the only hurdle a potential president has to jump, is it?
So tell us why Edwards wasn't unqualified given his public record.

>> ^longde:

They should have pressed him alot more on why he knowingly put up an unqualified person as a candidate for the VP. He wasn't contrite enough, IMO.
Also, how does he know Edwards was unqualified?


While I agree that he wasn't contrite enough, you can't say he knowingly put up an unqualified candidate. They just did a crappy vetting job of her. And even if they had the time to fully vet her, I think she could've faked her way through it, she being a good politician.

The vetting process probably assumes a great deal about what a candidate knows because when you ascend to becoming somebody's veep pick, it's a safe bet that you know a few things about the world. In other words, they don't ever bother vetting a sophomore high school student because, why would they ever need to unless sophomore high school students is all we had? Yet that is the level of world knowledge Palin seems to have had...so the vetting questions do not start that far back, understand? My point here is that they didn't realize the full extent of her ignorance and instability until well after the convention. I read the book and saw the movie.

But my question for you about Edwards is this: do you believe he was qualified? You think a person with such crucially flawed judgement and character would be okie-dokie as president, is that right? Better than Palin? Probably, but that's not the only hurdle a potential president has to jump, is it?

So tell us why Edwards wasn't unqualified given his public record.

Oh, and the cops lied about the murderer's police record:

Zimmerman, who is white, has not been charged in the death of Martin, who was black. Police in Sanford, where the shooting occurred, told Martin’s family that Zimmerman had a “squeaky-clean” record and that’s why they had not arrested him, according to Tracy Martin, the teen’s father.

Crump said public records show that Zimmerman was arrested in Orange County in 2005 on charges of resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer.

“They just lied to the family,” Crump said. “They just couldn’t see why [Zimmerman] would do anything wrong or be violent. But not only do you know the guy killed this kid, because he admitted to it, you knew that he has a propensity for violence because of his past record.”

What must a white man do to get arrested in this town???

>> ^Boise_Lib:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^MrFisk:
At least he's not killing minorities.

And guess what? Proves cameras are making officers more accountable (I did not say "responsible.") As opposed to the other views that the cameras are only for police protection...

Of course you must mean their own cameras (the ones which they control).
The public's cameras--not so much.


Both. A public records request would allow this filmer, even without a camera, to release the dash view--which would prove the episode. (Of course, that is Florida law, but then again, it is also many other states too...)

You can hide anything from the public--unless they ask for it. Now, are most people to lazy to care and therefore would this guy have went out of his way to prove the cop was at the wrong? Of course not... That's why we have a country that is falling apart...or at least one reason.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Steve Jobs doesn't publicise ANY of his private life - I'm not surprised that there is no public record of philanthropy. @kymbos I read that piece this morning as well. Seemed like a bit of a partisan hatchet job to me.

Far too long....

>> ^quantumushroom:
QM:I'm happy to see that you accept the label 'right wing nutjob', that saves us time.
If it makes you happy to believe that, go right ahead. And there is no time being saved here at the sift.


Make me happy? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
It saved me time to waste on other stupidness.


I wonder where you get your 90% figure (or your implication that 100% of teachers unions are democrat)...if true, why don't right wingers believe in education and journalism? No one is stopping them from being teachers or journalists.
"MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms."


So, in your small sampling, it's 87%. I somehow think the sampling may have been intentionally skewed, but OK. Note I didn't disagree with your stat, just questioned it's origin, if it was Faux, I would discount it offhand.


You're part right about McCain, I did respect him for the most part (but didn't always agree with him) until he sold his soul and lost his mind in/after 2000 when the 'straight talk express' took a 90 deg right turn into a sewage filled ditch of lies, direction changes, blatant pandering, and BS. It makes me shudder to think what might have been if he had been president during his 'right wing wind sock' days, turning whichever way the right wing wind blew that day.
Yeah, because things are going SO great with the clueless community organizer at the helm. Did you see the Dow drop 500 points today? No confidence in the Obamateur, from Americans or the world.


You seem to assume that because I think McCain is worthless now that Obama must be my preferance, and that I support his policies and actions and think he's leading us strongly. That is an incorrect, and all to often made assumption. Why must you continue to make an ass out of umption, do what you like to yourself.


You have no idea when or how I was raised, so you should refrain from commenting on that subject. Let's just say your statement is wrong, as I'm sure are most of your assumptions about me.
Well, you're not overtly libertarian or conservative. So what's LEFT?


I'm what used to be republican. I'm a social liberal, and fiscal conservative. There is no sane party I can call home today.


The idea that the left is 'running roughshod' over the right is more complete insanity, the left is incapable of being cohesive enough to do much of anything intentionally. The right is cohesive, but their ideas are insane and proven repeatedly to be wrong for the most part. I do give them credit for knowing how to get their agenda furthered, I just disagree with their agenda as enacted.

Obama is on track to spend more than bush, but he has not yet. The reasons for the respective spending sprees and amount of each is another discussion in itself.
Sorry, this is untrue. Obama so far has spent 3 trillion in 3 years, whereas Bush spent close to 5 trillion in eight years, much of it opposed by the Right.


This is why people call you nuts...you are insisting that 3 trillion is more than 5 trillion, and that spending sprees and tax (revenue) cuts under total republican control were against republican (the right's) wishes.


All taxpayers tired of being 'over' taxed are not right wing nutjobs, or even right wingers. That's an utter falicy and insulting BS. It's seemingly easy for you to point at the failings of one underfunded, over administrated program (public schools) and make the leap to the theory that all governmental programs are failures, but that is a gross simplification of a multifaceted problem.
Goverment schools are "underfunded"? On what planet? BTW, there is no direct correlation between school performance and how much money is spent per student. I believe DC spends the most per student and you can see how well that turned out.


Underfunded because of insane administration costs, better? More money doesn't automatically make better schools, but it helps, but not if it's all spent on non-school related administration expenses.


Even so, that theory doesn't hold water. The 'free market' for higher education shows that many, if not all completely 'private' schools provide sub par education (if any at all) while many schools using 'public' funds are among the highest ranked in the nation.
And yet how many liberal politicians send THEIR kids to private schools, even as they need teacher union votes? Competition weeds out crappy private schools while failing government schools keep churning out dummies. Government schooling is a racket, as well as unconstitutional at the federal level.


I'm not sure your arguement here...I'm not a liberal politician, or a true supporter of them, so how does what they do relate to me? I've been to good and bad private and public schools, the ones with money always had a leg up. I really believe if you have children, you should be taxed the cost of a decent education and allowed to spend it at the school you prefer (excluding religious school, that's another issue). Since this doesn't happen, I prefer decent public education be purchased with my tax dollar rather than prison cells and barbed wire. I do see it as an either or situation.


I'm sure you did call the feds attempt at stoping the failed CEO's from looting the failing companies we had just bailed out "obamatrons trying to loot corporations in the name of "social justice" ", so why isn't it 'the far right trying to loot the pensions and paychecks of the teachers' in the name of social justice? What's good for the goose...right? A legal contract is a legal contract, right?
I was never a fan of any bailout. Bush was barely conservative as it was. The left was too busy hating Bush to notice him rubber-stamping most of their spending requests. Stupid Hillary is on record claiming she'd like to seize all of the oil companies' profits. To the best of my knowledge, some states are making some teachers pay a tiny fraction more for their own health insurance and/or pension. Hardly the a$$rape by unnamed "far right" specters you're insinuating.


I'll never understand the arguement that, when confronted with their own abhorrent behavior people answer with 'look, that other guy I always call an a$$hole is doing bad stuff too'.
As I understand it, many states are cutting back on pension payments, or not paying them at all. At the same time they are regulating teachers, denying them union status, and forcing renegotiation of in place pay and work hours/load contracts. Not total a$$ rape, but close, and certainly not fair or acceptable treatment.

I'm not sure if you are ignoring my last statement there or if that's some kind of 1/2 assed, racist response. Either way, TOTAL FAIL.
Knowing me, I probably just didn't give a sh1t. Nothing personal. Youse guys have such thin skins when it comes to these faux-racial matters. What part of 'Kenyanesque Hawaiian' is racist? Odumbo's fadda was Kenyan and he (the son) was purportedly born in Hawaii. Where's the racism? Only in your mind.

I said:Letting right wing nutjobs re-write contracts and negate our obligations was one of our biggest mistakes.

You replied: Fail. The Kenyanesque Hawaiian never met a spending cut he liked. He's overclocked this economy because he wants to cripple it. Here comes the broom to sweep the moonbats out of the belfry.

The ridiculous infactuation with his ancestory (race) is where the racism is. Kenyanesque only applies if he acts Kenyan, and he does not. It is intended to be racially insulting, you know it, we know it. Either give it up or own it.
It's sad that you just don't give a sh!t about your people being so unstable that you can't trust any agreement made with them. That's my issue, not so much their political party, but their actions and trustworthyness. I'm hardpressed to find a politician of either party I wouldn't call fectless and feculant. I call out the right more often because they went bat sh!t crazy and deserted me, leaving me partyless.

QM:I'm happy to see that you accept the label 'right wing nutjob', that saves us time.

If it makes you happy to believe that, go right ahead. And there is no time being saved here at the sift.

I wonder where you get your 90% figure (or your implication that 100% of teachers unions are democrat)...if true, why don't right wingers believe in education and journalism? No one is stopping them from being teachers or journalists.

"MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms."

FOX news appears to 'tilt' right. You may have heard of them.

As for conservative educators, they're out there but are a minority on kollij kampii.

You're part right about McCain, I did respect him for the most part (but didn't always agree with him) until he sold his soul and lost his mind in/after 2000 when the 'straight talk express' took a 90 deg right turn into a sewage filled ditch of lies, direction changes, blatant pandering, and BS. It makes me shudder to think what might have been if he had been president during his 'right wing wind sock' days, turning whichever way the right wing wind blew that day.

Yeah, because things are going SO great with the clueless community organizer at the helm. Did you see the Dow drop 500 points today? No confidence in the Obamateur, from Americans or the world.

You have no idea when or how I was raised, so you should refrain from commenting on that subject. Let's just say your statement is wrong, as I'm sure are most of your assumptions about me.

Well, you're not overtly libertarian or conservative. So what's LEFT?

The idea that the left is 'running roughshod' over the right is more complete insanity, the left is incapable of being cohesive enough to do much of anything intentionally. The right is cohesive, but their ideas are insane and proven repeatedly to be wrong for the most part. I do give them credit for knowing how to get their agenda furthered, I just disagree with their agenda as enacted.



Obama is on track to spend more than bush, but he has not yet. The reasons for the respective spending sprees and amount of each is another discussion in itself.

Sorry, this is untrue. Obama so far has spent 3 trillion in 3 years, whereas Bush spent close to 5 trillion in eight years, much of it opposed by the Right.

All taxpayers tired of being 'over' taxed are not right wing nutjobs, or even right wingers. That's an utter falicy and insulting BS. It's seemingly easy for you to point at the failings of one underfunded, over administrated program (public schools) and make the leap to the theory that all governmental programs are failures, but that is a gross simplification of a multifaceted problem.

Goverment schools are "underfunded"? On what planet? BTW, there is no direct correlation between school performance and how much money is spent per student. I believe DC spends the most per student and you can see how well that turned out.

Even so, that theory doesn't hold water. The 'free market' for higher education shows that many, if not all completely 'private' schools provide sub par education (if any at all) while many schools using 'public' funds are among the highest ranked in the nation.

And yet how many liberal politicians send THEIR kids to private schools, even as they need teacher union votes? Competition weeds out crappy private schools while failing government schools keep churning out dummies. Government schooling is a racket, as well as unconstitutional at the federal level.

I'm sure you did call the feds attempt at stoping the failed CEO's from looting the failing companies we had just bailed out "obamatrons trying to loot corporations in the name of "social justice" ", so why isn't it 'the far right trying to loot the pensions and paychecks of the teachers' in the name of social justice? What's good for the goose...right? A legal contract is a legal contract, right?

I was never a fan of any bailout. Bush was barely conservative as it was. The left was too busy hating Bush to notice him rubber-stamping most of their spending requests. Stupid Hillary is on record claiming she'd like to seize all of the oil companies' profits. To the best of my knowledge, some states are making some teachers pay a tiny fraction more for their own health insurance and/or pension. Hardly the a$$rape by unnamed "far right" specters you're insinuating.

I'm not sure if you are ignoring my last statement there or if that's some kind of 1/2 assed, racist response. Either way, TOTAL FAIL.

Knowing me, I probably just didn't give a sh1t. Nothing personal. Youse guys have such thin skins when it comes to these faux-racial matters. What part of 'Kenyanesque Hawaiian' is racist? Odumbo's fadda was Kenyan and he (the son) was purportedly born in Hawaii. Where's the racism? Only in your mind.

I'm not wondering. This is how the video was obtained, most likely:

"News stations fill out a request under the Freedom Of Information Act.

Anyone can request most police video, as it is a matter of public record. If the department refuses the request, you can request it from the District Attorney through a Motion of Discovery."


>> ^Peckinpaw:

What we are really wondering is who the person was who had access to the camera in the pig's car that uploaded the video to youtube, .

"BEHIND CLOSED DOORS!"

Yea, it's not like statements are ever taken out of context to successfully demonize anyone in the media these days.

Maybe I'm alone on this, but as long as the details of proposed legislation/regulations are publicly available then I'm really not concerned with every minute conversation associated with it being public record. Conspiracy theories aside, I'd rather they have an honest conversation than a public one as long as any implementation of their conversation is available for scrutiny.

QM still shilling for the Republicans I see!

BankruptingAmerica.org:
Executive Director: Gretchen Hamel
- Former Press Secretary for House Republican Conference and Republican John Carter of Texas
Owned by NJI Media Group

NJI Media Group:
Director of Online Strategies & Development: Bryant Avondoglio
- Former intern of House of Representatives Republican Conference, and Republican Congressman Scott Garrett of New Jersey

This information is fairly new and not very easy to dig up. Not many names attached to these websites and 10 min in google yielded these results.

I just wanted to do some legwork for the uninformed, and explain where this information is coming from, using public records. It is extremely easy to create websites that can then seem bi-partisan, but are actually being funded by parties behind the scenes.

>> ^Mashiki:

What are you talking about? The parent companies of NBC, CBS and ABC all do the same thing. The only difference is they're happily lying to your face about it.


Bzzt. Completely wrong. First, this is all a matter of public record, both on the part of Fox, and the parent companies of the other three major networks.

Second, there's a big difference on the partisan split (and total amount) of money being spent. According to CNN, we're looking at numbers like this:

News Corp (owner of Fox): $1,074,700 to Republicans, $105,500 to Democrats
(91% to Republicans)

GE (owner of NBC/MSNBC): $410,100 to Republicans, $688,900 to Democrats
(37% to Republicans)

Viacom (owner of CBS/Comedy Central): $64,000 to Republicans, $108,700 to Democrats
(37% to Republicans)

Disney (owner of ABC): $95,000 to Republicans, $110,500 to Democrats
(46% to Republicans)

Time Warner (owner of CNN): $41,500 to Republicans, $70,500 to Democrats
(37% to Republicans)

But wait, you're saying, doesn't this go to show there's a liberal bias in all other forms of media? No, not really. It's pretty normal for companies to tilt their spending to the party in power, especially when they hold the White House, and large majorities in both chambers of Congress.

You can identify partisan organizations by the way they always lean toward one party, regardless of their level of control over congress, or merely by the naked one-sided nature of the tilt (like 91%!). In the case of News Corp, you have both.

Oh, and a final point about the quantity of contributions. I'd note that while GE's total donation amount is comparable to News Corp's, GE isn't just a media organization, it's also a major manufacturer, and a defense contractor. If you compare them to just the pure media companies, you see that News Corp donated nearly ten times as much just to the Republican party as the next largest media company's total spending on campaign contributions.

And you wonder why cops serving search warrants get wasted by a person in a home with a scatter gun; because of shit like this.

Any more information on this? Is there a copy of the search warrant, I assume that is a matter of public record.

Lastly let me say it; fucking pigs.

@Nordlich
You generalize to an extreme point of your own view. People elect officials who make the laws. Those officals can make whatever laws they want for years after they are elected without any input from the people... Sometimes we vote directly to constitutional amendments; however, this is rare and only a lot of money can get the amendment to the ballot anyways. Secondly, you not respecting is fine so long as you deal with the consequences should a dispute arise. Society has been around before you, and it will be around after only because it follows laws as a whole.
Oh--and if you truly do not respect authority, then you do not respect the 1st amendment. And since you do not respect authority, you must love the cop because he did not respect those in authority over him--those who wrote his laws! Is Mr. No Respect Copperson your hero?

@Crosswords
You do realize he did not "get away with something so blatant as that," right? A ten day suspension (In law enforcement) is not getting off scot-free as you imply. It may seem like a slap on the hand, but even that is a weak assessment. Every termination in Civil Service takes three things, time, progressive discipline and documentation, or sans that, a lawsuits will follow and the wrongfully terminated cop, even at fault, will sue and win and the taxpayer will be left with the liability. A teacher with tenure is just as equally protected as law enforcement and most other jobs do not have cameras to catch people in the first place so that point is mute. What you should have said is that only a cop deals with people every day and because of that environment, would attempt something so blatant and dumb.

Out of the millions of cumulative hours law enforcement work --actually billions probably--constantly around criminals, I would say that the percentage of incidents is darn good... Yes, there are some mental cops, childish cops, arrogant cops... And yes, I am glad they have cameras and that the cameras are subject to public record. I just wish people would stop foaming at the mouth and scapegoating the good cops because of the bad cops. The average citizen is far worse than the average law enforcement official in my personal experience.

Lastly, I love how this guy is suing the taxpayers... The department seems to have laws against what the officer did and since they offically disciplined him, looks like Suer Mc Suerson won't get a dime from them... Still, they will probably settle out of court because that is cheaper for corporations and departments... I would not disagree with suing the cop himself... but, that's another debate.

don't forget the IDF is the most moral army in the world!



The IDF have done a lot of things, but I don't think they deliberately executed this baby (or purposefully fired a missile at a single person).

If you believe that an Israeli soldier shot a baby, on purpose, and that that would be seen as acceptable or normal in the Israeli army, you are delusional. Could it happen? Sure.. but I think it's much more likely that, if a child died, it died in an explosion or other attack not targetted at a 6 month old.

This program makes no attempt at balance or describing what happened in any even vaguely objective way. Some public record on how the attack went down and what came before it would help a lot.

And I think it's fairly clear the girl is scripted, and the scenes are staged. You think there's just clean clothes left there lying on top of the rubble? I think it's fairly clear someone went and arranged them before this shot. I realize this is editorial, but they should have some basic journalistic standards that prevent them from doing this kind of smearing propaganda piece.

All in all, this kind of programming doesn't help anything I don't think - it perpetuates the dangerous myth (on both sides) that the other side is inhuman, and it's that myth that is the biggest barrier to any kind of understanding or long term peace.

The reality is that both sides are humans. The Israelis are desperate for their own security, and will displace and kill people in their attempts to attain it. (But they won't deliberately execute babies! Or drink their blood!) The Palestinians, driven by fear and by a belief that their enemies are inhuman, will fight however they can and support a government that will never bring them the peace and life they need. (But they would, given the right agreement, live in peace!)