LOL, It's not what you say but how you say it. He's got a funny pen and knows how to use it.

And if you are unable to pay?

Sometimes you have to steal hearts.

Is there any way you can upload this video somewhere else or reupload it like to YouTube. I am unable to view it.

Were you raised in a Christian home? The solution to this problem is that no one is ignorant. That’s what I showed you when I quoted Romans 1:18-21. It teaches that it’s not that you are ignorant of Gods existence, its that you suppress the truth in unrighteousness and thus deceive yourself. You made the comment about the stupidity of the generation of Noahs day rejecting their own mercy, but that is exactly the same thing you are doing by rejecting Jesus Christ.

It’s not about being good enough to come to God. My heart was wretched when God found me but I did respond when He reached out to me. I didn’t respond perfectly but He used it and led me to faith in His Son. If you began to reach out to God He would respond to you in a way you will be able to perceive.

When the bible says God is good, it means He is morally perfect. That is Gods definition of good. No man except one has ever met that definition and therefore is unable to qualify for salvation without an atonement for their sins. The one who met that requirement is the man who never sinned, Jesus Christ.

Well, it’s a fallacy to say that the origin of the message dictates the truth of the message. A good message can be spoken by a bad messenger.

Secondly, it hasn’t been debunked. I know the atheist websites you visit tell you it has been, but it hasn’t. There are good reasons to believe in God that a reasonable person can and should believe .

When I say too difficult, I don’t mean by sheer human effort. Human effort is completely useless in achieving a good result as a Christian. That is why it is found to be too difficult because to come to Christ means taking up your cross and following Him. Yet properly understood it isn’t difficult in the sense that it can’t be done. We can get into a discussion about that in another reply.

You are also using fallacious reasoning to compare Jesus, a historical person, to Xenu, a fever dream of scientology or the flying spaghetti monster. All possibilities are not equal, neither are all Messiahs equally credible. The life of Jesus is a matter of history and not our imaginations. I gave you lines of evidence which you dismiss without even investigating them. Jesus is the prophesied Messiah of the Old Testament. Indeed He is the only possible person who could be the Messiah since He is the only one who fulfilled the 70 weeks of Daniel prophecy which predicted the year of the Messiahs death. Are you interested in talking about that?

When you say you’re a good person, what do you mean by that?

I hope they broke both of that little fuckers legs....badly enough that he can never drop kick anyone's back ever again.

Sucker drop kicking a 71 year old in the back, even one built like Conan, means he's abusing the privilege of being able to walk....remove the privilege. He was trying to seriously hurt an elderly man for fun. End him.

I also hope, assuming nothing serious happens to him legally because Arnold isn't pressing charges, that his classmates beat the living shit out of him daily until he's unable to finish school, and his family disowns him.

What a cowardly waste of skin. I wish Arnold (or the guards) had just broken him in half in self defense. There is zero sympathy for anything that happens to people who sucker punch/kick others, or those who attack the elderly, and nothing but seething murderous rage for those who do both.

Nail him to the tree of woe.

Edit: it's being widely reported that the attacker is known for doing this kind of thing looking for internet fame and publicity.

Yeah, like you've read it. We know that's what Dumb Donny told you. You know it's the heavily edited report, and it's still clear evidence Trump lies more often than not. Duh, Bob. Maybe don't leap before you look.

Not zero, plenty of convictions and admissions already, just not proof of prosecutable illegal collusion directly by Trump. Retweeting the Russians propaganda designed to elect him is collusion, meeting with Russian agents looking for illicit "dirt" on your opponent is collusion. Hundreds of contacts with Russian agents by his people that he outright lied about and hid, tens of millions paid to those in his cabinet by Russia that they lied about and hid before being caught and convicted.
34 guilty pleas are > zero. *facepalm
https://youtu.be/9g6M07aiozc

Obstruction charge is not a nothing burger, it's also not over by far....it was quashed here by Barr, but Mueller was clear there was action that amounts to obstruction, but he was unable to charge the president due to DOJ rules and would not make a declaration if he couldn't make a charge. The report is clear, he was not allowed to make a conclusion, and Barr is a fixer for Trump, always has been clearly and unambiguously, it's why he was nominated.
The report delineated dozens of attempts to obstruct justice by Trump that his advisors knew were illegal and persuaded him to abandon....and they were usually fired for it.


What we can see undeniably is Trump has publicly outright lied about nearly every point in the report...thousands of times....and his administration has fully fallen in line and repeated his lies to you, now admitted under oath, but we know you don't care.
You wouldn't care that Barron's real mother is his 1/2 sister. There's absolutely nothing you could learn about Trump that would change your mind about him, cultists are like that.

We now know that when Trump said "fake news" it meant "that's true" every time.

We know for a fact that not a single person working for Trump is honest or trustworthy, every single one has lied to the public for Trump's benefit at the expense of the Union....doing Russia's work to divide us.

We know for a fact that you don't care he's a pathological fraud and liar because you love Trump far more than America. I believe firmly that if he raped your pre-teen daughter you would feel honored, not outraged.


You made a boom boom....and he's the fake/illegitimate president.

Edit: So I'll assume consistency and assume you just haven't gotten around to declaring there were no Clinton crimes either then, right? She actually WAS cleared in no uncertain terms after a number of purely political investigations, he was specifically not cleared in no uncertain terms after a republican led, highly interfered with investigation. If you're willing to declare it a nothing burger, what is the Clinton investigation, a nothing prime rib with a side of nothing fries and nothing pie for desert?

http://archive.is/4CVqH

10 year plan. Twice as effective as the USSR's 5 year plans

...Fully rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, restoring our natural ecosystems (needed), dramatically expanding renewable power generation (needed, but it also doesn't mean we should be throwing money away on stupid shit like solar roadways), overhauling our entire transportation system (regional flights, which sort of make up around 70% of total flights, would be targeted for elimination and massively expensive (slower) electrical trains would be put in their place), upgrading all our buildings (most businesses are already moving to green solutions) , jumpstarting US clean manufacturing (see highly expensive and non-competitive with cheaper overseas mfg), transforming US agriculture (forcing a move from cows/pigs/chickens to plant based proteins)...

While we are at it, might as well do the following:

A job with family-sustaining wages, family and medical leave, vacations, and retirement security (Nice, but you can't just make these jobs available. They are supply and demand.)

High-quality education, including higher education and trade schools (Needed)

High-quality health care (Needed)

Clean air and water (Needed)

Healthy food (Subjective, is meat considered healthy?)

Safe, affordable, adequate housing (because this works, ie Projects...)

An economic environment free of monopolies (Technically this exists already, except in countries outside of the USA and EU)

Economic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work (SWEET! SIGN ME UP FOR THAT CHECK!!!)

I get that his spiel is comedy based, but the GND is about half reality and half looney tunes.

It is a ludicrous resolution with pie in the sky hopes. It's the equivalent of passing a non-binding resolution to end all wars or to create a machine to pull water from the air without spending massive amounts of energy.

Not only does it suggest incredibly unrealistic goals on the environmental front, especially when one considers that China/Russia will cheat their fucking asses off to prevent meeting the goals due to the enormous economic hit, it also tries to tie in socialized medical care, high paying jobs for everyone, the death of large corporations, cheap housing, and (among other things) the economic security of ANYONE who is unable/unwilling to work.

While we are at it, we should start looking into breaking the concept into five year increments. I hear that did wonders for the USSR.

The cancer.org link also says 18% increase, right before the 5%.

Not putting you down or anything, but I can see you are unable to comprehend the difference between life time risk, and increased risk statistics.

Which is why they make it super simple - your own link still says not to eat the stuff.

(So how is it propaganda when the PCRM are just saying exactly what your sources are saying?)

Your video, Unable to buy new shoes, Venezuelans rely on shoemaker's cre, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Sure if you're unable to follow the assembly steps backwards.....

Hope you're enjoying your holidays bro, take care.

Schmidt explained his points very clearly in the video.

Did you just not watch it or are you unable to process any information that doesn't put the orange king in the best light?

Nope Just enlightened.

One thing about dumb people like you. You are unable to realize how stupid you are.

Go go back to eating twinkes and watching Jerry Springer.

What would you recommend for an alternative here? There are inevitably going to be seniors who don't have family available to help them, and who reach a point where they're unable to care for themselves. I can only think of four options at that point:
1) Hope there's a local charity that is willing to take care of them, has adequate funding to do so, and isn't abusive. If this is unregulated there's a high likelihood of abuse occurring, and if it is regulated then you have government involved, which appears to be something you'd oppose. There's also the issue of unequal access - if it's charitable then it's inherently not mandated, so it's nearly certain some people will not have any such charity in their area (see #3).
2) Somehow have private, non-charitable entities handle it? I've no idea how this would work, as any non-charity is pretty much by definition motivated by profit, and a profit motive plus caring for the elderly is certain to lead to abuse (perhaps not in all cases, but I'd expect it to be quite common).
3) Nothing / good luck, oldies.
4) Government intercession.

In this case, a safety net facilitated by the government strikes me as the best of the available options. The problems highlighted in the video seem likely to stem from insufficient oversight and planning. I'd wager that's due to lack of funding, as this is exactly the sort of program which would be seen as a low-risk target when budget cuts come around, at least from an electoral perspective. After all, if the people impacted by this are those who don't already have people in their life who care for and can advocate for them, and being put under guardianship removes their voting rights, then where's the harm to a politician in reducing the funding?

It seems to me that a well-funded guardianship program, with proper oversight in place, would have the best chance of minimizing the suffering of elderly individuals who can no longer care for themselves. I can understand the libertarian preference for minimal governmental interference in the lives of the public, but this strikes me as a case where that simply doesn't work. If you can think of a viable option #5, or can make a case for 1, 2, or 3 being legitimately more helpful than a well-run option #4 (which is clearly NOT what's discussed in the video), I'm absolutely open to considering it. At the same time, implementing #4 in a way which doesn't leave it vulnerable to budgetary volatility is also a not-insignificant challenge.

Damn, I'm procrastinating really well tonight. That was long.

*nochannel
*equality
Dick, stop abusing kids.
Once again, here's the channel description-

Kids Channel by James Roe
Sandbox for Sift Tots. This is a realm for videos that are suitable for children to enjoy. Non-kid-friendly videos that simply happen to contain a kid do not belong here.

You forgot the part where the kid claimed multiple bodies of black men and kids were at this torture house, which was empty when police got there after the mother and rescuer led them to it (without ever being there themselves, and with the kid unable to lead police there).
This sounds more made up by the hour. Probably why no major news network has picked up the story, only woketv and vibe.com.

Choking is a perfectly valid submission technique for someone posing a threat to the cop or other people.

I'm not saying that happened here, because there's no context in the video.

Clearly, the guy is resisting arrest, but we have no idea whether a) the arrest was warranted in the first place or b) whether this was a proportionate response.

Neither can you deny that there's a strong possibility this wouldn't have happened if the guy was white.

As for the cop, he should be suspended with pay while the investigation is carried out. We apply the same "innocent until proven guilty" standard to police that we do to everyone else. On the flipside of that, if he's found guilty of misconduct, he shouldn't just be fired, he should face jail time for assault and abuse of power.

Finally, suggesting that crowds should "turn on police" is a recipe for disaster. There are zero good outcomes from that. At best, you have police unable to do their jobs in case of crowd violence, and at worst, you end up with people being killed.

No matter how unjustified you feel your treatment is, it's important to remember that resisting arrest is very much at your own risk. The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but even where it IS allowed, if the arrest later turns out to be lawful, you will be charged with an additional crime.