oldiesman

Thanks Raf, it was a mistake for me to post under the mod name.. complete brain fart. So yeah I go to both the Novus Ordo Mass and also the Traditional Latin Mass, and guess what I do most during those? You guess it, SIT.

Good morning folks! Hope everyone is doing great. Dropped in to find out if anything is new? Or coming back to the "proverbial soap opera" where 10 years has passed and nothing changed? I still speak in tongues much daily.... LOL...

Happy New Year Everybody http://www.icq.com/img/friendship/static/card_16961_rs.swf

My mother-in-law was getting beat up by 6 large men A stranger passed by and asked "hey buddy, aren't you gonna help."? I responded "nah, 6 are enough..."

give-em hell Catcup! Attend the wedding, stand up during the ceremony and object to the union, and storm out

yeap, returned to take part in the bitter end :o

hey bro what's happenin

I like it Raffie

I know what you mean, but still disagree with the premise that it was forced; which may lead to the thought that one had no choice in the matter. Programs like WOW were a choice. Witnessing night was a choice. ( I know folks who didn't go WOW and did not show up for witnessing night (even me sometimes :D ); those were choices too.)) I tried to see it more than simply "trying to get something" (although it IS like trying to catch fish, being a fisher of men) but doing something (I believed was) profitable that may really help someone else, something outside of my usual regular comfortable, quiet, lazy self. I saw it as a great challenge too, which it definitely was, since I hate selling anything. Think about it... its not easy to walk up to someone and talk about God, whether in a mall or at someone's door. In addition to helping someone learn more about God that made some sense I think witnessing had the potential of building character, and overcoming fear. So I view this as something "I did" as opposed to being told I had to do this. My feeling is, if it is not done willingly, it is essentially valueless in the long run anyway. The part about selling PFAL then blowing out of town not caring about who is left there, is reasonable. I guess it depends on one's own mindset? Is one there simply to sell PFAL and not care a fig about the people who God brought in one's path, or view it as God bringing these people in one's path to be responsible to serve over a considerable length of time? Both mindsets were available, no doubt.

You too!

Its that time of year again. Warm weather & bikers on the road. Please take time to look for bikes. Awareness Test

The best I've used is the following: http://www.superantispyware.com/ Comes with a free trial download and is $30 per year. I have had both norton and mcafee and this is more effective than both, really gets them all.

Paw, Congratulations on your phenomenal weight loss. Keep up the good work.

Paw, I was hoping you would consider clarifying the forum rules by adding the part about the GS mission, so all posters know the boundary of content. It still seems like the pro-twi viewpoints are welcomed, but, not at the cost of the mission, whatever that means. Its vague, but I'm not going to beat a dead horse here. Thanks for your response.

DWBH, So as not to derail this thread, why not start a new thread for each question and address it to the entire group, not just me; that way with each question, we each can see where each stands on each issue.

Here's another piece about Dodd and may give additional insight about why Dodd added those bonuses in the first place: AIG chiefs pressed to donate to Dodd

Peace be to you too. :)

Too many varying questions at one time. Do I look like an encyclopedia? Perhaps you may want to start one question at a time, one topic at a time, on one thread at a time.

I didn't change a word... go back and re-read Paw's quote. But what is wrong with defending leadership, if that is what a poster wants to do? The rules currently state the following, in part: Nothing there about discouraging the defense of TWI leadership.

Right... and you suggested it was an insult twice already; but its not my intent to insult anyone, all I'm asking for is succinct clarity in what is acceptable posting content.

No, I think this issue of posting pro-twi opinions needs to be clarified in the rules so posters know where they stand. Paws remarks to WD were clear... among other things, WD was told his pro-twi opinions were not the primary focus of this forum and that those opinions are already known. Paw said "if you want to defend TWI, that is your privilege. Here we are discussing the other side. I will even set up a site for you for free, if you want talk about the greatness of TWI and it's leadership." So why can't "the greatness of TWI and it's leadership" be discussed here? Do you see why the content is now in question? Just saying that to WD is like giving him a spanking for his content, not for his behavior.

The part about harassing behavior is already clarified and not in dispute.

If Paw's intent was the correction of intentional derailing alone, why mention anything about the content of the derail? i.e. if it were derailing alone the content of the derail would be irrelevant. But since Paw mentioned what the focus of the content should be, it is the focus of the content that I am wondering about and what I feel needs to be clarified and memorialized in the forum rules.

President Obama fires GM boss. This reminds me of Hitler and Volkswagen... a private company, being controlled by the state. I think it'd be unfair to call this Hitlerian type fascism, I mean, it isn't like he threw this guy in a concentration camp... But a softer fascism, yes. Socialism, yes. Marxist theory in action, yes. Obama says he doesn't want to run GM, but his actions speak so loudly, I cannot hear what he is saying. Where in the Constitution does a president have authority to control private industries? From Websters dictionary: Main Entry: so·cial·ism Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\ Function: noun Date: 1837 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done