96 in a 35, nearly triple the speed limit in a rural/residential area!?!…that’s 100% dangerous reckless driving. He intentionally drove in an outrageously unsafe manner with wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property….under color of authority to boot! That should make this a felony with a 5 year sentence.

Any citizen caught would go directly to jail with the car impounded for a week minimum (after getting beaten up and tased), and sentenced to 5-90 days, $1000 fine, two or more points on their license, cancelled insurance, and loss of employment if they drive for their job.

He gets a ticket he won’t even pay, no thought of impound, and two days of extra vacation (“without pay” means they use sick time, vacation time, overtime, or Flex Time…they still get paid in full, they’re just not on the clock for 2 days.)
His passenger in uniform didn’t even get a reprimand for doing it with him. He should also see prison.

It’s time for citizens to citizens arrest these criminals, deadly force is authorized if they resist.

Similar to his answer to the question..”do you think this (Putin invading Ukraine) is evil.”

Trump “I think in 100 years people are going to look back and they’re going to say “how did we stand back and nato stand back” which in many ways I’ve called a paper tiger don’t forget I rebuilt nato because when I became president the first thing I noticed when I went there to the first meeting was that most of the countries were not paying or were paying far less than they were supposed to. There were only 8 out of 28 countries that were paid in full the United States was not only one of them, we were making up the deficits in order to protect Europe. We were paying POSSIBLY 80% of nato to protect them and then they take advantage of us yet on trade because on trade they’re every bit as bad as Gina. They treated us very badly on trade. We changed a lot of that around but they were very tough on trade I asked, Angela Merkel how many chevrolets are you selling this month in Munich or Berlin, and she looked at me and said “well probably none” I said you’re exactly right, none and yet we had the Mercedes Benz and the Volkswagens and all of them. We had all of the German companies, and the same thing with farmers, our farmers sell virtually nothing to Europe, you take a look at what we sell and yet we take their product.
They treated us very badly in trade and we defended them and we really if you look at the real numbers I bet you it’s close to 80% and I said “you have to pay and if you don’t pay we’re not going to defend you, and it’s one way or the other I knew Putin very well…almost as well as I know you, Sean, and I will tell you, we talked about it. We talked about it a lot. He did want Ukraine but I said “you’re not going into Ukraine”. He would never ever have gone into Ukraine and President Xi of Gina would never have even thought about going into Taiwan ..not doing windmills because they’re killing eagles. They’re killing the bald eagles and other eagles and other birds and we have these windmills all over the place and the environmentalists pretend they love them, but they’re really hurting our country they’re driving down values, they’re just absolutely killing us it’s one of the most expensive forms of energy…the turbines are all made in Gina or Germany, so they get the advantage of that….it’s…uh…just ridiculous but the real problem…”

Again, the question was “Do you think this (referring to the Russian invasion) is evil?”
This is the second interview where Hannity asked him that very question and he completely ignored it to ramble nonsensically.

Just as rambling, disjointed, fact free, casting blame, flattering himself, and completely ignoring the question because he cannot say anything rational, certainly nothing remotely against Putin or the pee tape goes public….or something worse.

@bobknight33…this is you guy? This is want you want? Mr stream of consciousness word salad spewing Trump? My 97 year old grandmother could still think and talk circles around him with her teeth out … and she’s been dead for 8 years.

Dumb shit snowflakes have been whining for the last 2 years, ignoring orders to make minor changes for both public health and to be able to reopen quickly, but like spoiled two year olds on time out, you guys kept defying orders, making the pandemic and the shutdowns exponentially worse, and restarting the “time out” clock.
You also complained non stop about shutting down the economy, hurting small businesses and commerce, but when a tiny (100+-) group of mostly white, swastika/confederate flag waiving truckers decide to shut down international commerce, costing hundreds of millions of dollars weekly (more than all rioting damage done in 2020, because they are targeting businesses and commerce) just to throw a tantrum, not achieve a thing, you are not just accepting of it, you support it.
Clearly your complaints about shutting down and hurting the economy to fight Covid and save hundreds of thousands of lives were not genuine since you are happy to do the same and worse to save the feelings of 100 truckers.…fuck your feelings, remember?…...big surprise, bob is a hypocrite willing to say anything to support his position today, including the exact opposite of his position yesterday.

All Trudeau needs to do is confiscate the trucks at gunpoint. Any trucker joining loses his truck. If it’s not their truck, they’ll have a huge bill from the owner.
Also, maybe remove their licenses for 2 years (or until restitution is paid in full). (Edit: nice, seems they actually thought of all that and have made it the law, and added up to a year in prison for those blocking commerce.)

Dumb shit, the restrictions
1)were also USA restrictions, like everyone else, Canadian truckers can’t cross the border without vaccinations. How does Trudeau stop that?…serious question I know you will ignore.
2) were being lifted in short order once the current variant slows its roll or border crossers get vaccinated
3) you really think a few hundred truckers (and a few hundred more rabble rousing morons with them) should have veto power over an entire federal government, and a federal government in another country, don’t you? But only when they look like you and waive confederate and nazi flags.
No, that’s not right? It has nothing to do with race? Why didn’t you support Trump defunding the police and/or removing immunity then?

So incredibly short sighted, myopic, hypocritical, self centered, likely racist, and just plain dumb Bob. You never disappoint.

Lemme guess, you support My Crackhead’s plan to illegally fly a helicopter over the protest and dump thousands of his pillows with bible verses covering them on Canada in a massive foreign littering/proselytizing scheme against a country that’s already banned him from entry. Right?

Really? Explain why. It's in there, as clear and codified religious law.

I'll give you a synopsis:

God established the law because of sin:

Galatians 3:19

Why then was the Law given? It was added because of transgressions, until the arrival of the seed to whom the promise referred. It was administered through angels by a mediator

The seed it is talking about is Jesus Christ, referred to by this prophecy in Genesis of the coming of the Messiah:

Genesis 3

14The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life; 15And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.

Sin came into the world through the transgression of Adam. Because of sin man was separated from God because God is holy and cannot dwell with sin. Because of sin God gave us the law as Paul referred to. Jesus, the new Adam, satisfied all of the moral requirements of the law by living a perfect life. He reestablished the relationship between God and man:

Romans 5

17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive an abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ! 18Therefore, just as one trespass brought condemnation for all men, so also one act of righteousness brought justification and life for all men. 19For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous

This is what it means when it says He came to fulfill the law. He brought everything full circle back to the way it was before man first sinned. That is why the law is no longer necessary, because we are made right with God not by obeying the law, but through our faith in Jesus Christ.

When Jesus died on the cross He said "It is finished". It is translated from a greek word "tetelestai", which means paid in full. It something a merchant would stamp on a loan document that was paid up. He said that because He fulfilled the law and paid our sin debt on the cross.

This doesn't mean that there aren't any moral requirements for Christians, but they aren't the same as the ones given to the nation of Israel. We are under a New Covenant and the law of Christ:

Luke 22

19And He took the bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body, given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is poured out for you.

Galatians 6

Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.

Christ gave us commands to obey, one of which you mentioned: love your neighbor as yourself. Also, love one another as I have loved you and many others. All of the 10 commandments were reiterated although there is a deeper meaning and interpretation to some of them now. Do not commit adultery now extends to lusting after a women in your heart. Jesus also said that hating someone is murdering them in your heart.

The civil and ceremonial laws of Israel no longer apply exactly because Jesus did fulfill the law.

Treating others like you would have them treat you, the golden rule....what Jesus told you is the most important rule.

When Jesus taught us to treat others as we would have them treat us, it has force because He is morally perfect. We are morally imperfect. We tell people to do things we don't do, and tell people not to do things we do do. Can you name a single human being on whose shoulders we could place objective morals? If you can't then you can see the problem, I hope

Btw, here is a great educational site which is completely free

https://vmcontenders.org/all-courses/

Videosift hates it when I present stuff like this..

Here's a second video of Gruber explaining how they crafted the law in such a way that they could increase the tax on anyone whose health plan is deemed to be "too good," the so-called Cadillac tax. This would discourage people from getting good/robust health care plans that are better than whatever Obamacare is offering. If your employer or union, for example, offers you a good plan, you get taxed, so as to punish you for being "privileged" (unless, of course, you are a federal employee, in which case you can have as good a health care plan as they come, paid in full by The People).

And here's a third video expounding upon the thinking in the original posted above. Same idea, really: the "stupid" and/or "uneducated" American voters were crucial to passing the UnAffordable Care Act known as Obamacare (whose main thrust has always been, steal from the young, give to the old).

Guards have the power to make it what they wish. Inmates do not. The guards choose to make it gross, dehumanizing, and worse. We should NOT feel sad or understanding for them, as they did it to themselves intentionally. Feel sad for the one's with 0 power to control the situation, less and less control over their own actions and surroundings, and the one's that are the victims of the system they didn't set up, not the one's perpetrating and perpetuating the one sided system set up to punish and control rather than correct and re-habilitate. Not the one's that lobby to create MORE prisoners for smaller and smaller crimes, including the crime of poverty.
BTW....boring is NOT more humane in most cases. Lack of stimulation leads to psychosis, behavior problems, and does absolutely nothing to re-habilitate. "Idle hands are the devil's tools..." and such. Just look at any study of what happens to those in solitary, a normal 'boring' type of imprisonment today. You don't get well adjusted citizens from that, you get angry, violent, paranoid, psychotic people out of that....and they go right back in. It's perfect for the prisons, but not for anyone else. I think private prisons should have to pay back part of their 'fees' if a prisoner re-offends. (EDIT: or better yet, they should have to re-imprison them for free, since they failed the first time and 'created' the re-offender by not re-habilitating them. Guaranteed, it would change overnight if that was the case.) It means they failed completely in re-habilitation, a large part of what they're paid for, and so they should not be paid in full.
'Would rather live out west'?....as opposed to living in prison? Um...yeah, I think most people would choose that.

Obama has released 12 years of tax records. Romney claims he is following precedent, but the only people to do only 2 years in recent history (dating back to Regan) is McCain and Palin, everyone else has done 5 to 20 years.

I agree Reid is probably speaking out of turn. However, Romney, beyond the lie of following precedent has also said that if he releases them Obama and others will use the stuff in there against him... which means there is something there to use against him, which while may be legal, would paint him in a bad light. He doesn't want to disclose because there is something he wants to hide. It may even be as simple as his church finding out he hasn't paid his full tithe as he says he has paid. In the end, this guy believes in giving big tax breaks to people who have refused to hire people because they want the life of luxury. The CEO of Wal-Mart takes $36 million a year, if he only took $1 million, imagine how many people could have jobs? But no, there was a choice at some point in the company's history that employing people or paying their existing employees living wages wasn't worth while and it was better spent on those on the top... one of the local 1%'rs fires over 1000 people over 3 years and keeps everyone else with no raises (almost all at minimum wage), then goes out and buys a jet and another mansion. This is the attitude of the rich. That they deserve privilege and if they have to ruin thousands of families to do it, then they will... and then they threaten that if we raise their taxes another 3% they will fire more people so that they can maintain their ultra high standard of living, and the Republican answer is "no, don't do that, we'll in fact lower your taxes, and punish those people you fired so you could have a jet, and punish those people who you refuse to pay a living wage so you could have that second mansion. We won't cut spending on the military, god forbid, we are only spending more than the next 19 countries combined, almost all of whom are our immediate allies... we should also cut education and science and NASA... look how expensive NASA is, it almost costs as much as it costs us to give our troops in Afghanistan alone A/C... I mean if we ended the wars that would free up almost all the deficit that Bush created and we blame on Obama, we could nearly have a balanced budget by just cutting that and increasing taxes a small 3% on the top 2%, and while we say deficits are bad now, we all know they aren't when they are for our stuff, just if it helps the people we are screwing over, then it's bad..."

EDIT: Again, I think Reid needs to back it off. Its nearly as bad as Trump's whole birther thing...

You mentioned a bunch of metaphysical rules of the universe above. I'm assuming that since God created the universe and everything and everything, that he created both the physical rules and these metaphysical rules too.

* "sin" --> Rule: Sin exists and is defined by a particular set of actions/thoughts/etc.

Sin is defined as disobedience to Gods commands

* "death" --> Rule: Death exists

Natural death temporarily exists..the second death is eternal

* "Their sin brought death into the world." --> Rule: When the first person sins, death will come to everyone.

This isn't a rule, it is simply a consequence of the disobedience of Adam and Eve.

* "He bore the punishment (death) for all sins so that through Him, we could be forgiven for our sins and be given eternal life." --> Rule: For humans to be forgiven for our sins and be released from death, someone had to be sacrificed.

There is a story about a King who decreed that anyone who committed the crime of adultery would have their eyes put out. This was enforced in the land for some time, until one day the prince of the kingdom was caught in the act. The King then was faced with a dilemma. On one hand He desired to be merciful to the prince, his son, but on the other hand he had to maintain his standard of justice to maintain the integrity of his authority in the kingdom. Therefore, to solve this conflict between justice and mercy, he put one of the princes eyes, and one of his own.

This story is similar to the reasons why God sent His Son to the cross. It was the solution to the conflict between His justice and His mercy.

* "What was required was a man who lived a perfect, sinless life in total obedience to God" --> Rule: The sacrifice had to be a perfect human to be effective.

The law was given because of sin, and the law couldn't make anyone perfect. What the law did was serve as a mirror unto man to show him what sin is. What was required was someone to perfectly fulfill that law so man could be reconciled back to God. Until that point, man had been spiritually separated from God because of sin. It took a sinless person to build that bridge and restore mans fellowship with God. That is why Jesus serves as a bridge between man and God, because it is only through His righteousness that we can reach God. Our good works are not good enough; they are like filthy rags before a Holy God.

So, why did God invent these particular rules? Why did he invent the concept of sin in the first place?

Why did your parents tell you not to play in traffic or take candy from strangers? For your protection.

Why not let us rut around like the other animals doing whatever occurs to us without the need for judgement?

Because we're not animals, and because we know better. He created us in His image and gave us a conscience to know right from wrong. We are set apart for His purposes.

Why did he invent death if he loved us so much?

Death was a punishment for sin. However, it was also a tender mercy. If mankind was immortal, we would be eternally separated from God.

Why did he create the rule that when one person sinned, the whole of creation would die (especially after he created humans such that they would sin all the bloody time)?

It wasn't a rule, but simply a consequence. When He created human beings, they were not made such that they would sin all of the time. It is when man chose to sin that his nature became corrupted. It's like how traits are passed down from their parents genetically..we inherited their sinful nature.

Why did God create such a horrible place as Hell? Why not just love Satan and Satan's angels (all his creations) enough so that they would be good again as he expects from you and me?

We don't know whether there was an offer of reconciliation to Satan or not. What we do know is that today they all stand condemned. Salvation is not "God loving us enough so we'll be good again".

Why would God create such an impossible condition for the forgiveness of sins that he would have to create and send his son to be killed by his fallen creation?

I gave an explanation for this earlier. I will say that His standard for goodness is moral perfection; that is inherent to His nature.

This all sounds like plot-driving fantasy writing to me (Rule: the one ring can only be destroyed by being dropped into the fires of Mount Doom; Rule: Fairy dust and happy thoughts will give you the ability to fly; Rule: Walking into the special closet without thinking about it will put you in Narnia), and that's why I think the Bible is fiction too. They're such random rules of cause and effect (not to mention some of the random rules of sin itself) that they can only lead to disaster and disappointment... unless they're just plot devices that lead to a bunch of awesome fantasy stories. And that's what I currently believe.

As you learn more I hope you will begin to make the connections between what we have been talking about for the past year or so. Although you are developing a more in depth understanding of the gospel, it is still on a superficial level and you have many misconceptions. If you want to understand it, then instead of trying to constantly falsify it, you might actually try studying what Christian theologians (and not skeptics) have said about it. There is nothing logically contradictory about the gospel. It is internally consistent in every respect, and its depths are inexhaustible.

If God doesn't want to send us to Hell, why did he invent rules so that he would? Can't God just change or break his own rules and stop sending us to Hell?

Let's say you have a perfectly well behaved son, but one day he starts doing meth on your kitchen table and bringing hookers into his room every night. Are you going to compromise your standards and say that is okay or are you going to lay down the law and give him an ultimatum? You don't want to do anything that would harm your son, because you love him, but neither are you going to approve of his behavior, or endanger the well being of the rest of the household. You are going to let him know there are very real consequences to his behavior and enforce the rules.

God is Holy and just.

By who's definition? What can those human words of judgement possibly mean when applied to a god? And if we are following the human meaning of "just", how is it just to create the concept of sin, create death, create rules where if you sin you die, create hell as the punishment for sin, and then create humans such that we would definitely sin? That's not just in the least. And yes, you say that you and I have the chance to redeem ourselves, but what about those of us who lived and died before we had that chance? Why should they all have to suffer? They will never have the chance to accept Jesus as saviour.

God has given us progressive revelation. As I've said before, you don't go to hell for what you didn't know, you go to hell for what you do know and reject. Everyone prior to the cross was saved according the amount of revelation God had given them. For the gentiles, it would on the basis of their conscience. For the jews, it was on the basis to their adherance to the law.

The words holy and just wouldn't mean anything if God hadn't give us revelation about Himself. They mean something because of who He is. It is without Him that they would become meaningless. Essentially, it is all to say that God is perfect. Or as they say in philosophical circles, that He is a maximally great being, possessing every possible perfection.

We will experience life as God had originally designed it, here on Earth, before the fall.

That's a new one for me. Can you give me a quote? I was pretty sure heaven was up in the sky somewhere, even according to the Bible. Didn't Jesus "rise" into heaven?

Revelation 21:2-5

And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Now, because of Jesus, we can be forgiven and go free. Jesus paid our fine in full. This is the good news, that through Jesus our sins are forgiven, and that He grants us eternal life. Pray to Jesus Christ and ask Him to come into your life as Lord and Savior, and you will be saved.

If my fine is paid in full and I've been given eternal life, why am I praying for anything?

For the same reason that if you wish to enter a door you must first walk through it.

>> ^messenger

@shinyblurry

You mentioned a bunch of metaphysical rules of the universe above. I'm assuming that since God created the universe and everything and everything, that he created both the physical rules and these metaphysical rules too.

Here are the ones you mentioned --> with my paraphrasing of the metaphysical "rule" as I understand it:
* "sin" --> Rule: Sin exists and is defined by a particular set of actions/thoughts/etc.
* "death" --> Rule: Death exists
* "He created [Hell] for the devil and his angels" --> Rule: Hell exists and has those properties.
* "Their sin brought death into the world." --> Rule: When the first person sins, death will come to everyone.
* "He bore the punishment (death) for all sins so that through Him, we could be forgiven for our sins and be given eternal life." --> Rule: For humans to be forgiven for our sins and be released from death, someone had to be sacrificed.
* "What was required was a man who lived a perfect, sinless life in total obedience to God" --> Rule: The sacrifice had to be a perfect human to be effective.

The fact that these rules exist means that God decided they should exist, right? So, why did God invent these particular rules? Why did he invent the concept of sin in the first place? Why not let us rut around like the other animals doing whatever occurs to us without the need for judgement? Why did he invent death if he loved us so much? Why did he create the rule that when one person sinned, the whole of creation would die (especially after he created humans such that they would sin all the bloody time)? Why did God create such a horrible place as Hell? Why not just love Satan and Satan's angels (all his creations) enough so that they would be good again as he expects from you and me? Why would God create such an impossible condition for the forgiveness of sins that he would have to create and send his son to be killed by his fallen creation?

This all sounds like plot-driving fantasy writing to me (Rule: the one ring can only be destroyed by being dropped into the fires of Mount Doom; Rule: Fairy dust and happy thoughts will give you the ability to fly; Rule: Walking into the special closet without thinking about it will put you in Narnia), and that's why I think the Bible is fiction too. They're such random rules of cause and effect (not to mention some of the random rules of sin itself) that they can only lead to disaster and disappointment... unless they're just plot devices that lead to a bunch of awesome fantasy stories. And that's what I currently believe.

People are not sent to hell for doubting the love of God. They are sent to hell for their sins. ... God doesn't want to send anyone to hell. He created it for the devil and his angels, not human beings. He loves us, which is why God sent His only Son to bear the punishment for our sins, in our place, so we wouldn't have to go to hell. He took all of our sins upon Himself on the cross, and died in our place.

If God doesn't want to send us to Hell, why did he invent rules so that he would? Can't God just change or break his own rules and stop sending us to Hell?

God is Holy and just.

By who's definition? What can those human words of judgement possibly mean when applied to a god? And if we are following the human meaning of "just", how is it just to create the concept of sin, create death, create rules where if you sin you die, create hell as the punishment for sin, and then create humans such that we would definitely sin? That's not just in the least. And yes, you say that you and I have the chance to redeem ourselves, but what about those of us who lived and died before we had that chance? Why should they all have to suffer? They will never have the chance to accept Jesus as saviour.

We will experience life as God had originally designed it, here on Earth, before the fall.

That's a new one for me. Can you give me a quote? I was pretty sure heaven was up in the sky somewhere, even according to the Bible. Didn't Jesus "rise" into heaven?

Now, because of Jesus, we can be forgiven and go free. Jesus paid our fine in full. This is the good news, that through Jesus our sins are forgiven, and that He grants us eternal life. Pray to Jesus Christ and ask Him to come into your life as Lord and Savior, and you will be saved.

If my fine is paid in full and I've been given eternal life, why am I praying for anything?

>> ^rychan:
>> ^mentality:
"Despite this sense of loss, I really feel this should be a happy moment."
Walking away ~$30 million richer doesn't hurt either. I wish people would screw me over like that.

That is roughly the amount of money he would have earned had he fulfilled his initial contract. He's not sad to have lost money (he didn't), he's sad to have had his lifetime dream taken away from him.


No I get it. I'm not saying he'll be happy about it. I'm saying Conan getting paid his full contract amount sure helps matters.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'eric b, rakim, paid in full, 80s, old school' to 'eric b, rakim, ofra haza, paid in full, 80s, old school' - edited by EndAll

cheap bastards.

the game is already cheap (20$ IIRC), and it also lacks any drm or copy protection... you should have paid the full price, damn you.

"Second scenario -- married couple, no children, $80,000 in dividends from corporations. Same cash inflow, but from millions in stocks rather than going to work every day for 50 weeks out of the year. Their tax for the year? $200. TWO HUNDRED MEASLY BUCKS."

The couple that receives $80k from dividends pay limited taxes on it now because they've already paid the full tax on it --when they earned the capital which they invested in order to receive those dividends.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'eric b, rakim, I aint no joke, east coast rap' to 'eric b, rakim, I aint no joke, east coast rap, paid in full' - edited by kronosposeidon

In Dick Winters' war memoirs this exchange wasn't so dramatic but that's Hollywood for you. In his memoirs Winters encounters Sobel in a street in Mourmelon towards the end of the war and when Sobel ignores him Winters says "Captain Sobel, we salute and honor the rank". After Sobel salutes him Winters writes "Sobel's debt to me had been paid in full". I recommend that book to anyone who likes Band of Brothers as much as I do.