published Sunday, June 10th, 2012


about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.

If all they'd do was concern themselves with religious pontifications, at least it'd keep them from trying to govern in an incompetent manner.

Since we won't get that blessing, I suggest they refrain from wasting their time with a lawsuit they're going to lose, costing the county taxpayers, and actually do the jobs they're paid to do.

I wonder if we can make them pay for it.

June 10, 2012 at 12:09 a.m.

How to pray according to the gosple Matthew. chapter 6 verse 5-6 nkjv And when thou prayest thou shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, they have thier reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy father which is in secret: and thy father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

June 10, 2012 at 12:59 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Replacing prayer with silence replaces one point of view with another; it does not establish neutrality. Which point of view is correct?

Hint: Jesus died and rose up alive. Madeline Murray O'Hair died and stayed dead.

Now if only these Christian politicians would realize how libertarian Jesus Christ the Commissioner of commissioners is, and stop trying to regulate the height of our grass and other petty details of our lives...

June 10, 2012 at 2:57 a.m.
Easy123 said...


Prove that Jesus rose again. Any corroborating secular evidence will do.

And a moment of silence is neutrality. Silence is not a point of view. It is a time set aside for anyone and everyone to say their own prayers, meditate, not pray, etc. How can you argue that "silent time" is a point of view?

June 10, 2012 at 3:52 a.m.
alprova said...

AndrewLohr wrote: "Replacing prayer with silence replaces one point of view with another; it does not establish neutrality."

It doesn't? Tell me...if you were attending one of those meetings and if there was a moment of silence, are you not capable of silently praying? If someone who was a Hasidic Jew was sitting next to you, could you both not silently pray sitting right next to each other, without interfering with each other?

Of course you could and each of you would be spiritually fulfilled without so much as an opportunity for either one of you to be offended.

Sounds neutral to me.

"Jesus died and rose up alive. Madeline Murray O'Hair died and stayed dead."

You cannot conclusively prove either assertion or theory. Faith and personal belief based on what can be read in a printed book is not fact.

What Madeline Murray O'Hair has to do with this subject is anyone's guess, but then you are way out there in la la land on a good day. For all you know, the woman is in Heaven and spends her day conversing with God over eternal bottomless cups of coffee.

You don't know what you think you know. Belief is not truth or fact.

June 10, 2012 at 4:05 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

Andrew Lohr, Humpty Dumpty fell off a wall and was put back together again - that's a nursery rhyme. Santa Claus flies through the night sky in a sleigh pulled by reindeer and slides down chimneys to deliver presents to good boys and girls - that's a myth. The virgin-born, water-walking, miracle-working man/god Jesus dying and then rising up and ascending into heaven - that's a myth, too. Your God and your Jesus are as mythological as Zeus was to the Greeks or Jupiter was to the Romans. They thought their gods were real then, with every bit as much faith and assurance that you think your Father, son, and holy ghost are real now. So, what makes your make-believe any more real than their make-believe? Oh, I's in the Bible, so it must be so, right? Of course, never mind that the Bible is just a compilation of one fairy tale after another after another after another.

As for your Jesus being a libertarian: you might be on to something there. Libertarians live in a fantasy world where the only way the libertarian lifestyle could possibly work on a nation-wide scale is if everyone did exactly what they were supposed to, one hundred percent of the time, where everyone was at all times rational and completely like minded in how to live, believe, work, and play in their no-government libertarian la-la land. Since Jesus never existed and lived only in yours and Christians' fantasy land anyway, then he could well be any ideological representation you want him to be. So why not make him a good ol' libertarian? Yeah, why not? So, okay, Mr. Lohr, your Jesus was a libertarian....if that makes you feel any better.

June 10, 2012 at 5:06 a.m.
jesse said...

it's gonna git nasty on here today!

the inmates 's will be comin outa the woodwork!

bennetts comment #'S must be low and he decided to stir up the maniacs!

June 10, 2012 at 6:21 a.m.
joneses said...

Why would the Times Free Press have an employee that is so stupid he lacks the intellect to know the difference between a simple prayer and proselytizing? Did the Times Free Press research Clay's resume? It looks as though they just hired some idiot off the street and Clay is what they got. Maybe Clay was one of those pathetic Unio members that picketed the Times Free press forever back in the 70's and they flt sorry for the fool.

June 10, 2012 at 7:04 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Andrew - I really do wish you would cease trying to wrap Ayn Rand (another atheist) in Jesus' robe.

If you really want our public officials to pray for Christ's guidance as they do their work, such prayer should reflect 1) the fact that Jesus came as our suffering servant; 2) that Jesus' second commandment is to love our neighbors as ourselves; and, 3) as DJHB noted, the prayer ought to be a private matter.

June 10, 2012 at 7:06 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

The folks that are adamant about prayer in government sessions, whether they realize it or not, insist on it because, yes, their way IS the only true way and their pastors make it clear that their only way to salvation is to bring others to their faith. They pray because it is their obligation to bring folks like me into the fold. I'm totally serious-they cannot help it and nothing anyone says can change their mind. Since sects like Church of Christ and Baptist are the most dominant churches in the area, this makes perfect sense.

June 10, 2012 at 7:10 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Need evidence? This is from Ken Orr's post on another thread:

*If Other Religions,

Which Are Indeed False, Want To Have A County Commission Meeting

Opened Up With Prayers To Their False Gods, Then Let Them Go To

Where Their Religion Is Predominate! Let Them Leave From The

Blessings Of A Jesus Christ Blessed County, and, Go Back To Where

They Receive The Just Recompense of Their Rewards.*

June 10, 2012 at 7:52 a.m.
conservative said...

The loontoonist constantly provokes atheists to vent. We already know that they hate God. It never dawns on them that they are just a whining minority who marginalize themselves.

June 10, 2012 at 8:50 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Conservative - you seem to forget that each person is the handiwork of the Creator. God loves those who think differently than you just as much as God loves you.

June 10, 2012 at 8:55 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123: Prove that He didn't.

June 10, 2012 at 9:18 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack - we believe the resurrection as a matter of faith, not as a matter of provable fact. If we could prove God as a matter of reason, God would not be God.

June 10, 2012 at 9:35 a.m.
dude_abides said...

The reasoning for the perpetual revival atmosphere is evident on this here page right here.

June 10, 2012 at 9:47 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

dude: cute. you're so avant.

June 10, 2012 at 9:57 a.m.
LibDem said...

It's curious that those who trust government least are most anxious for that government to legitimize their religion.

June 10, 2012 at 10:11 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

How does gubment legitimize a religion, Lib?

June 10, 2012 at 10:20 a.m.
joneses said...

Ten Reasons Why Liberals Hate Christians

1) Liberals are relativists and hate Christians because Christians believe in absolute truth. 2) Liberals do not want anyone to say that immorality is immoral. 3) Liberals are selfish and are more interested in their "feelings" then they are with what is right for others. 4) Liberals misunderstand what Christians really believe. 5) Since liberals see themselves as the superior enlighten ones they do not recognize that taking a position against their position is not automatically hate. 6) Liberals do not want to listen to what makes sense, they would rather listen to their senses. 7) Liberals ignore the clear evidence of the result of their philosophical positions influence on the last 40 years. It had been a social disaster and they do not want to hear it. 8) They see Christians as intellectually inferior when they lack the ability of basic understanding. 9) Liberals see Christians as wanting to impose their religion on them when in truth it is the liberals who have used the courts system to impose their secular humanism religion on all of us. 10) Liberals are spiritually lost and blind to the truth of the gospel. Consider the following bible verses: "But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." - 1 Corinthians 2:14

June 10, 2012 at 10:37 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

ANOTHER foray on prayer? Bennett's lack of intellectual depth is stunning.

We don't need to talk about warrantless, armed FDA raids on farmers and natural food suppliers.

Nothing to be gained by examining the bailout of the fourth country in Europe and the possibility of global collapse.

We don't need to talk about gender or race based feticide.

Has The Wart EVER done anything on Fast & Furious?

No Zombie Apocalypse or cannibalism cartoon?

How about the ridiculous, costly, bike share program?

Nope, just another cartoon about that evil practice of prayer. yawn……..

June 10, 2012 at 10:50 a.m.
HiDef said...

Jack Dennis, the burden of proof in your case lies with the person making the claim. The bible claims jesus rose after death. It is not up to the non-believer to prove it didn't happen, it is up to the believer to prove that it did.

June 10, 2012 at 10:58 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

joneses, most liberals I know ARE Christians.

June 10, 2012 at 11:07 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

HiDef: I don't get your logic.

June 10, 2012 at 11:10 a.m.
moonpie said...

This is for those who strongly oppose prayer as a way to open publicly sponsored meetings of any kind.....

I can understand not opening a commissioner meeting with a prayer.

Would it be ok for the commissioners to wear T-shirts saying "What would Jesus do?" at the meeting?

How about donning a cross lapel pin?

How about crossing oneself after their moment of silence? (As it indicates the God to whom they are praying.)

I'm just curious to see where other people draw the line.

June 10, 2012 at 11:16 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

I attended a graduation at a public university last month, one that has a reputation for being politically very conservative. They started with a non-sectarian prayer that thanked a creator and asked for strength to answer the many needs of the world. No names, no Jesus, no trinity. It was perfect, because there was most likely people of various faith traditions in the audience and among the grads. A prayer is religious by definition, and religions (for the most part) assume a supernatural being. As a non-believer, I have no problem with a public prayer, as it means little to me, but I recognize that it means a lot to others. However, a sectarian prayer allows people to ignore the presence of other faiths (at the least) and implies superiority (worse) or implies an official sect (worst, as it can then also imply that those who don't belong are not represented even though they are tax-paying citizens.)

June 10, 2012 at 11:23 a.m.
Yano said...

Why are holy rollers so adamant about making other people listen to their prayer?

Is it vanity? Is it because they want to rub it in people's faces that they are the majority around here? Is it a political ploy to trick others into seeing them as legitimate and wise? Are they trying to convince themselves of things they harbor secret doubts about?

If people truly want guidance from God, a moment of silence should provide ample opportunity for each individual to ask for this in his or her own way.

I personally would use that moment to reflect on the need to respect ALL of my fellow citizens, regardless of creed. You don't do that by having the government adopt one particular religion's style of prayer.

Making non-believers feel non-belonging is a proselyting tool, not a legitimate democratic act.

June 10, 2012 at 11:28 a.m.
Yano said...


The difference between a lapel pin and a public prayer is that the prayer is communal. "WE ask this in Jesus' name." It includes me whether I asked to be included or not.

If a county commissioner wants to wear a burka as a personal religious statement, I'm okay with that.

June 10, 2012 at 11:33 a.m.
jesse said...

basic law of physics jack!

it is not possible to prove a negative!

June 10, 2012 at 11:34 a.m.

Well, it's very difficult to prove a negative. But I believe that's logic or rhetoric, not so much physics.

I certainly can't prove that the County Commission members aren't Kenyan Martian Marxist Anti-Colonialists.

But perhaps if they produced their birth certificates. Perhaps.

BigRidgePatriot, whatever Clay Bennett draws, you will find he covers only a small amount of the potential material. Same with the nightly news, the paper's coverage, and yourself.

If you are relying on Clay Bennett to determine what you choose to act on, then you will be disappointed.

Not only that, but your pointless rages, even if genuine (which they probably aren't), will only serve to fail to give less attention to your issues, since you're bringing yet more into it.

Here's my suggestion: Publish your own paper, where you report the news you consider important.

Since you won't fund another cartoonist for the TFP though, I doubt you'll do that either.

Instead, you'll just keep whining here. Which just goes to show you're not interested in a solution.

June 10, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
jdavid said...

Moonpie, Jesus said that those who pray in public are hypocrits MAT 6-5/6. the other things you mention don't strike me as being as hypocritical. Your Poll is a good idea. We seem to have a surplus of hypocrits and have elected hypocrits to run our county council (according to Jesus and, as always, I'll defer to his good judgemnt). Public prayer is ingored by God, found useless by Jesus so maybe the Holy Spirit will come down on their side? You can probably tell I'm a Godless Methodist.

June 10, 2012 at noon
Easy123 said...


When you make a claim, the onus is on you to prove it. That's how it works. When YOU make a claim, YOU have to prove it. Do you get that logic???

June 10, 2012 at 12:12 p.m.
mymy said...

Different day same song. Clay hired to promote the TFP agenda. Why does the TFP not publish something of the corrupt city govenment? If TFP is for it, I'm againt it on most subjects.

Wait till Drew Johnson finds out he has made a bad career move.

June 10, 2012 at 12:23 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

happywithnewbulbs said... "Here's my suggestion:"

In case you have not noticed, this page is a horrible place for anyone to do anything but call names and spout hyperbole.

I only point out Bennett's failures as the failures they are. I cannot begin to comprehend how anyone can find it worth their while to discuss (prayer) in depth for the umpteenth time in such a hopelessly counterproductive place.

I'll invest the serious discussion where participants are actually sharing ideas and trying to find the truth.

June 10, 2012 at 12:28 p.m.
librul said...

What a hoot! Most of these posts are time-stamped during "church hours". Were all you holy rollers texting rather than listening to your god-puppets!?

June 10, 2012 at 12:47 p.m.
alprova said...

Jack_Dennis wrote: "HiDef: I don't get your logic."

Most illogical people are probably in the same boat that you are.

June 10, 2012 at 1:10 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Joneses - you are bearing false witness against your neighbor, again.

June 10, 2012 at 1:23 p.m.
MTJohn said...

moonpie said..."Would it be ok for the commissioners to wear T-shirts saying "What would Jesus do?" at the meeting?"

Moonpie - I'd rather they not wear the t-shirt. But, personally, I wish more public officials would ask themselves that question and then heeded the answer. However, were they to do so, I suspect many advocates for public prayer would initiate recall elections.

June 10, 2012 at 1:26 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"In case you have not noticed, this page is a horrible place for anyone to do anything but call names and spout hyperbole."

"I'll invest the serious discussion where participants are actually sharing ideas and trying to find the truth." - the BuRP

Now THAT'S gotta win the award for the funniest comment of the day! Thanks for the humor, burp. Coming from you, who indulges in the most childish, unoriginal, and irrelevant name-calling against Bennett, that is really rich. You usually come on here and sprinkle your witless one liners like a dog peeing on a fire plug and that's all you ever contribute to the discussion. Please tell me what other sites you visit where you "invest the serious discussion where participants are actually sharing ideas and trying to find the truth." 'Cause it sure ain't here where you do that.

June 10, 2012 at 1:30 p.m.

BigRidgePatriot: Rather than respond with something new, I'll just repeat myself.

Instead, you'll just keep whining here. Which just goes to show you're not interested in a solution.

Thanks again, you show why your complaints are void. If you truly cared, you would take the steps yourself.

June 10, 2012 at 1:37 p.m.
conservative said...


You addressed me with :

"Conservative - you seem to forget that each person is the handiwork of the Creator. God loves those who think differently than you just as much as God loves you."

I have openly acknowledged that God created man and that this creation of man and heaven and earth is recorded in Genesis. There is no forgetfulness on my part. I asked you to testify to the same specifically that God created man on the sixth day. You refused.

Evolutionists deny that God created man, heaven and earth. Which side are you on?

You have confessed to be a liberal ( I knew it from the start ) and I also know that liberals tend to be slippery and fool others as to what they truly believe.

I have asked you to give direct answers before on a couple of topics and you have refused.

Now, did God create man on the sixth day according to the Genesis record or not? Yes, or No?

I will also gladly respond to your second sentence later.

June 10, 2012 at 1:54 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

I'd say 99% of Christians keep quiet about their position. Too bad the enlightened atheists can't do the same.

June 10, 2012 at 1:58 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jack Dennis,

That is entirely false. I haven't met a Christian yet that "kept quiet" about their position on anything.


Evolution says nothing about the origin of the universe. You can believe in evolution and still believe that "God" set it all in motion.

June 10, 2012 at 2:07 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

No, it's not false. Maybe you haven't met many.

June 10, 2012 at 2:19 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Please elaborate about which issues Christians "keep quiet" on. Just to clarify, everyone I know is a self-professed Christian. I don't know a non-Christian.

June 10, 2012 at 2:26 p.m.
MTJohn said...

conservative said..."I have openly acknowledged that God created man and that this creation of man and heaven and earth is recorded in Genesis. There is no forgetfulness on my part."

Selective reading on your part, again, Mr. Conservative. You left out the part about God loving people who think differently from you as much as God loves you. And, you insist on using invectives to speak about those people whom God loves.

Conservative sai..."Evolutionists deny that God created man, heaven and earth."

That is not true. Evolutionists disagree with Bishop Usher. Science is silent on the subject of divine creation.

I believe that Scripture is the Inspired Word of God. And, I believe that Scripture reveals to us the God who made me and all creatures. If God made me, the logical conclusion is that God's handiwork is a continuous process, not a single event completed in 6 days. And, if creation is a continuous process, the presumed conflict between the Bible and the theory of evolution is not as great as you would have us think.

June 10, 2012 at 2:27 p.m.
prairie_dog said...

I learned way back as a student at Brainerd Junior High School that if you don't want to have religion stuffed down your throat, you should nod your head and ignore it.

That's how reasonable people react when confronted with things like liberal give-away causes, socialism, and gay marriage. Majority rule is still the law, and if you're in the minority, you have to lump it.

Chattanoogans have always respected religious beliefs and differences in practices. The Jewish holidays were honored by the schools even back in the 60s (and before), so hey, if some of the members of the council want to pray for guidance, let them. It's better than listening to a socialist for guidance.

So lump it.

June 10, 2012 at 2:43 p.m.
Easy123 said...

I don't believe that a deity set everything in motion. I think the universe works just fine without "god". I was just pointing out that one can believe in "god" and accept evolution.

Anyone that denies evolution is either misinformed/unresearched or overtly ignorant.

June 10, 2012 at 3:06 p.m.

tu.... I quoted 3 verses from the new testiment. Again I did not offer my opinion on the matter I simple quoted scripture. Gospel = truth. I haven't read any of this Alinski but he/she seems to be a favorite boogyman of the right. So I will ask you, Why do you think it is ok to disobey the 3 verses I quoted when it is clearly against the teachings of Matthew. Do you have any new testament references that support your claims to puplic prayer? And I will read up on Alinski at another time. Ps you may want to look at Ecclesiastes and ponder it. It concludes "Fear God and keep his commandments for this is the whole duty of man."

June 10, 2012 at 3:12 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

At least the right makes the attempt to lead a productive, moral and ethical life

Define what attributes a productive, moral and ethical life is, and then show that only the "right" lives to this standard.

June 10, 2012 at 3:13 p.m.
Easy123 said...

It has nothing to do with laws. A moment if silence is a secular alternative to open prayer.

June 10, 2012 at 3:15 p.m.
jdavid said...

DHBrainerd-- Have you noticed how much God has evolved since Ecclesiasttes?

June 10, 2012 at 3:19 p.m.
Easy123 said...

And you believe that a moment of silence is against the law or unconstitutional? Why?

June 10, 2012 at 3:29 p.m.
Easy123 said...


You do realize that every time you say that stupid quip about "worshipers of Obama", a puppy dies.

June 10, 2012 at 3:38 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Jonross, the grownups are talking. Go back to your video games.

June 10, 2012 at 3:39 p.m.

The Anti-Obama religion should apply for nonprofit status.

It does apply when a group is of no redeeming value to society, right?

But JonRoss, you know puppy mills don't abort sources of income. Since you value capitalism, you should start paying for women to have babies. It's a free market solution. Why do you want more government regulation?

June 10, 2012 at 3:42 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Your schoolboy logic and lame attempts at jokes/insults are amusing, JonRoss.

June 10, 2012 at 3:46 p.m.
Easy123 said...

So you are arguing about what a moment of silence could possibly be perceived as? You are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Would a moment of silence be more or less Constitutional than open prayer?

If the moment of silence was deemed secular in nature, would that be considered Constitutional?

You're making this harder than it is.

June 10, 2012 at 3:50 p.m.
conservative said...


You falsely accused me " Selective reading on your part, again, Mr. Conservative." after I plainly wrote "I will also gladly respond to your second sentence later."

Again, you once again refused to agree with the Biblical account of "creation" which is not evolution. Evolution is contrary to the creation account of God in Genesis. God created heaven, and earth and man in six days with man created on the sixth day. Christians believe this account.

Atheists like to believe in evolution because it denies that God created heaven, and earth and man. An atheist is one who says there is no God or lives as there is no God. I use the term God like other Christians use the term. Christians recognize the ONE and ONLY true God as proclaimed in Scripture. All other heathen gods are false gods!

You did finally deny the Biblical 6 day creation. You agree with the atheists.

You wrote "it is not true" that "Evolutionists deny that God created man, heaven and earth." That is preposterous!

I still plan to deal with you second sentence. I got sidetrack with your most recent comment to me.

BTW, you spoke of logic, you need to align your logic with God's word.

June 10, 2012 at 3:55 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

"Grownups" ... Really !! ... LMAO

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

TuQu and Jonross, the grownups are talking. Go back to your video games.

There you go, hon.

June 10, 2012 at 3:55 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Again, you once again refused to agree with the Biblical account of "creation" which is not evolution. Evolution is contrary to the creation account of God in Genesis. God created heaven, and earth and man in six days with man created on the sixth day. Christians believe this account.

conservative, you are wrong. Most conservatives do not believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. Nor do most Christians.

June 10, 2012 at 3:56 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

That sentence is sexist and degrading.

Well, duh. It was probably intentional.

June 10, 2012 at 3:58 p.m.
Easy123 said...


You haven't made an argument. How can anyone wrap their head around something that hasn't been made apparent?

It seems like you are just trying to be a contrarian. And you have yet to answer my questions.


How is it sexist? Schoolboy is a commonly used word. Maybe you mean politically incorrect? Because it isn't sexist.

And yes, it was meant to be degrading.

June 10, 2012 at 4:05 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Call again when you have less time to waste our lives.

Hahahaha....if you were worried about someone wasting your life you wouldn't come to this site.

BTW, nothing you (or anyone) says on this site gets me "riled". What a silly thing to think. Do you get riled at what is posted?

June 10, 2012 at 4:08 p.m.
Easy123 said...

That's at least moderately racist.

Please provide some evidence that Jesus actually existed. Then provide some evidence that he was actually the son of God.

June 10, 2012 at 4:09 p.m.
Easy123 said...

You are dense little fellow, JonRoss.

June 10, 2012 at 4:10 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy isn't just dense, he's nasty too. Sorta like Noogs....maybe he IS noogs.

June 10, 2012 at 4:18 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Please provide some evidence that Jesus actually existed. Then provide some evidence that he was actually the son of God. Then provide some evidence that Obama doesn't care about the future of America.


Please elaborate about which issues Christians "keep quiet" on. You must not have read this question, so I'll post it again. You're welcome.

June 10, 2012 at 4:22 p.m.
MTJohn said...

tu_quoque said..."At least the right makes the attempt to lead a productive, moral and ethical life."

Moral and ethical only if you ignore the commandments against bearing false witness and covetousness and make an exception for $$$$ in the commandment against having any other gods.

June 10, 2012 at 4:36 p.m.
Easy123 said...

And you still haven't answered the question. You are trying to be clever but you haven't given a straight answer.


June 10, 2012 at 4:38 p.m.
conservative said...


You also stated to me "God loves those who think differently than you just as much as God loves you."

Another slippery statement which could be interpreted many ways.

Now my comment was"The loontoonist constantly provokes atheists to vent. We already know that they hate God. It never dawns on them that they are just a whining minority who marginalize themselves."

Now what is incorrect by my statement? God's word makes it clear that atheists don't have love for God.

John 14:15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

Atheists don't believe in the Son, openly say or act as though God does exist :

John 3:36 "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him."

Don't gloss over "but the wrath of God remains on them"

So the atheists here mock, deny, and spew their hate for God and it's just that they "think differently" than me. It's just another opinion, just as valid as a believer!

June 10, 2012 at 4:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Such a cleric.

June 10, 2012 at 4:41 p.m.

Just another opinion? Just as valid? By law, it is.

Both federal and state.

Don't it? Go form your theocracy somewhere else.

Or see if you can come up with a free market solution.

Like Abe Lincoln did when he saved us from the Vampires.

June 10, 2012 at 4:45 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Haven't read anything on here about wanting to form a theocracy. Maybe I missed something.

June 10, 2012 at 4:46 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Is the life lived in the attempt at a perceived high moral level, having inevitable failed, of less value than the life lived with no such objective and succeeding?

no life is worth more than another. A life lived at a high moral level without religion to guide it is just as valid as one lived because of religion.

June 10, 2012 at 4:48 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Yes, you missed something.

June 10, 2012 at 4:49 p.m.

Just follow the logic of conservative's complaint about other's opinions and beliefs being valid.

June 10, 2012 at 4:50 p.m.

You're the member of the cult of Anti-Obama, not us.

It's a bit odd for one to revolve around the antithetical, but not unknown.

June 10, 2012 at 4:54 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Give me your answer. Not Wallace v. Jaffree. Answer the question DIRECTLY.


You're becoming less amusing. And a puppy just died.

June 10, 2012 at 4:55 p.m.

There's a right to speak in this country, but no right to be heard. Why are so many on here offended by those who express their faith? Nobody is forcing you to convert. Tune them out, you don't have to listen.

Funny how many of you on the left had no problem slapping the GOD label on Obama, practically worshiping the guy, but you don't like some expressing their faith. You're comfortable with demagogues, and really quick to jump on the bandwagon, yet you squirm when anyone mentions GOD and even go so far as to find ways to silence them.

June 10, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.

Why do you live in the buckle of the Bible belt? How can you stand it? It's part of the history here. Get used to it or move.

June 10, 2012 at 5:49 p.m.
Easy123 said...

What the comission is doing is unconstitutional.

Who worships Obama?

If you have a problem with people speaking against your religion then LEAVE!

June 10, 2012 at 5:51 p.m.

blondebutnotdumb, no, it's the people on the Right slapping that label on the people on the Left.

You're the ones making that accusation, in a form of dogma that is itself, more symptomatic of a religion, and is itself, nothing more than base demagoguery. It's a cult, and you're a member.

But actually, there is a right to be heard, especially in regards to actions by the government. That's why we can go to court, and not be denied access just because you would rather we let you do what you want, regardless of how intrusive we feel it is.

Easy123: As I said, it's the cult of Anti-Obama, they worship him as their Nemesis so much they've invented a religion that worships him out of their imagination.

June 10, 2012 at 6:13 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Yeah, I think Easy123 IS nooga....just as immature.

June 10, 2012 at 6:17 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

"We just want to love the lord."

Ain't nobody stopping anyone from "loving the lord."

You can love the lord on your way to work. You love the lord in your living room or in your bath room. Love Away!

You can love the lord at local football games.

You can even love the lord all the while you are hating the rest of America because the rest of America is NOT LIKE you.

Appears you can love the lord wherever you happen to be.

God be praised!

June 10, 2012 at 6:21 p.m.
Easy123 said...


You still haven't answered the question with a yes or no answer. I'm glad you are amused by yourself but you haven't made an argument and you can't answer simple questions.



Please provide some evidence for that.

June 10, 2012 at 6:22 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

Are these people so insecure in their God that they have to be so non-Christian about it?

Matthew 6:6

This is what Jesus says:

"But when you pray, go away by yourself, shut the door behind you, and pray to your Father in private. Then your Father, who sees everything, will reward you."

Seems obvious to me what Jesus wants you to do.

Don't you good folk want to do what Jesus tells you to do?

Well, maybe not. Doing what Jesus tells you to do is not always easy and people being what they are, usually want to do it the easy way.

June 10, 2012 at 6:28 p.m.
alprova said...

God gave us all a brain to think with and to question that which deserves an answer. I've wondered for years why the Biblical story of the great flood is so easily accepted, in that God once murdered all life on Earth, save for a few.

While there are many people who consider the Bible and the story of Noah's Ark to be literally true, most educated and intelligent people understand that the story of Noah's flood is most likely a myth.

Science conclusively has proven that there is no DNA evidence to show that all animals on earth came from single breeding pairs just a few thousand years ago.

If the Biblical tale is indeed true, then God senselessly murdered millions of innocent humans and billions of animals in the flood. Even if there was the remote possibility in justifying the murder of people, what possible justification could have existed for wiping out most all animal life?

Some of you may have never considered asking these questions. The flood, if true, was an atrocity of the highest order. It was mass murder on a global scale.

The idea that we are to accept a mass-murderer as an object of worship doesn't reflect well upon Christians at all. If he murdered nearly every human on the planet, God is far more heinous than Hitler. Yet Christians are to willfully worship him without question. Why?

In the book of Exodus 12:28, God supposedly claims to murder every Israelite firstborn son and the firstborn of all their livestock. Isaiah 13, Jeremiah 49:20, Hosea 13, Numbers 31, In Deuteronomy 3, and 30 other times within the Bible, there are references to God committing more questionable murderous acts.

Does this make sense to everyone?

Is it any wonder that so many Christians have killed others in the name of God? And this while so many Christians proclaim that Islam is a violent religion?

It is impossible for a "perfect" and "loving" God to also be heinous, demented and despicable. The Bible has been rewritten by evil men to instill religious fear into the minds of people as a means by which to control them. Apparently, it is still working like a charm too.

Any intelligent person with a fully functioning brain should be able to understand that.

June 10, 2012 at 6:31 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

I'm certainly seeing a lot of Christian Love coming from many of the commenters.

I think Jesus would be proud of all of you.

16 And behold, Willard came to Him and said, "Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?"

17 And He said to Willard, "Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."

18 Willard said to Jesus, "Which ones?" And Jesus said, "Willard, You shall not commit murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness;

19 Willard, You Must Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

20 And Willard said to Jesus, "All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?"

21 Jesus said to Willard, "If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me."

22 But when Willard heard this statement, he went away grieved; for he was one who owned much property.

June 10, 2012 at 6:39 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Religions don't raise taxes, raise debt ceilings, force ridiculous healthcare packages down our throats or run the economy into the ground.....Praise the great Obama!! Liar-in-chief!!

If you don't like a religion, you can find a new one. We're FORCED to put up with Obama!!

June 10, 2012 at 11:19 p.m.

In terms of our civil law, America has a long tradition, dating back to the period before and during the adoption of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, of praying Christian prayers to open official government meetings. Long before using “in Jesus’ name” as an incantation was in vogue, allusions to Old and New Testament characterizations of God’s character, will, and providential acts were commonly used in those prayers. Neither the purpose nor the effect was to proselytize. Such prayers are not inconsistent with the First Amendment. Even the less-orthodox among the founders didn’t have a problem with it. In fact, at least one of them (Benjamin Franklin) insisted on it.

Of late, the courts have misruled on this issue and their decisions should be overturned. If some citizens believe that particular phrases used in public prayers are so egregious as to violate basic human rights, they should propose an amendment to the Constitution. As it is written, specific prayers or manners of praying are neither prescribed nor proscribed in the Constitution.

Why do Christians feel compelled to acknowledge Jesus in their prayers? Christians are instructed to pray in accordance with God’s character and will. God is holy. Humans are far from it. We therefore need a mediator in order to pray to a holy God. Our account with God is in arrears. We need a co-signer. That mediator is Jesus. It is unsurprising that this is acknowledged when a Christian prays. If we truly understood our desperate need for this mediator, then our public prayers would be more humble and therefore, probably less offensive.

On the other hand, I’m having trouble finding New Testament precedence for Christians offering prayers at official governments proceedings. In nearly every civilization, political leaders use religion to legitimize their rule. Although America has a long-standing tradition of offering Christian prayers at such proceedings, Christians should think carefully about whose interests are ultimately being served by the practice.

June 11, 2012 at 12:24 a.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 wrote: "If you don't like a religion, you can find a new one. We're FORCED to put up with Obama!!"

If you don't like the President, you can vote for a new four and a half years.

The President has not raised taxes on a soul to date.

Congress voted and raised the debt ceiling.

Much good has come already from the Affordable Care Act.

More than one of every four Americans last year received a free mammogram, colonoscopy, or flu shot, thanks to a federal law that many of them despise.

3.6 million Medicare recipients saved an average of $604 as the same law began closing a gap in their prescription drug coverage.

2.5 million young adults were allowed to remain on their parents’ health insurance plans until their 26th birthday.

If the Supreme Court rules later this month that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, it will result in 16 million more uninsured individuals in 2019 than if the law survives intact, according to the CBO.

Without the effective subsidy to insurers from additional healthy policyholders, insurance premiums will rise 15 percent to 20 percent higher, the budget office states.

And would you be so kind as to cite, specifically, a thing the President has done to "run the economy in the ground?" It's a bold statement, oft repeated by so many, without anything to offer as proof to back it up.

June 11, 2012 at 12:31 a.m.
alprova said...

Oklahoma Publisher Prays With, Fires 25 Workers

"Jesus may save, but apparently he can't do much about job retention."

"That's what 25 employees at Tate Publishing & Enterprises, a Christian book and music publisher in Mustang, Oklahoma, learned after they were unceremoniously dumped from their jobs last week."

"Over Memorial Day weekend, a Tate Publishing employee circulated an anonymous email taking Ryan Tate to task for planning to lay off employees and outsource their jobs to the Philippines."

"[Tate] threatened to sue employees and file liens against their homes and automobiles if they violated their employee contracts by talking to the media or posting negative comments on places like Facebook. He said he would fire 25 productions workers after no one came forward to take responsibility for the anonymous email."

"To those of you paying an unfair price, I'm really sorry. I'll pray for you and pray for your families. I can't turn away on this one. Not at this time when we have so much to accomplish. I love you, I'm praying for all of you."

"Ryan is calculating," said an employee who left the company last year. "He thinks he can't be touched because God is on his side, he's got a good business going and no one can really hurt him. That's why he didn't think anyone would record him."

One of the 25 employees who was fired said she was "happy to be out of there" and has already gone on job interviews. "I think a lot of us are getting bonus points in our interviewes when people say, 'You were fired by that lunatic, weren't you?"

June 11, 2012 at 1:31 a.m.

TOES02800, they don't now. But they did, before reform stopped them and moved that authority into the hands of the public. Where it belongs.

Which operates under certain rules, but does indeed have the power of compulsion. If you wish to bring about a state of anarcho-libertarianism, well, you can advocate for it, but I doubt you'll get it implemented.

Seriously though, look at the state constitution, do you think the provisions in it forbidding such tithes weren't created based on actual experience? And you may be surprised to learn who brought slavery to the New World. Or who started the Crusades.

Or that there are countries that still collect actual taxes for Churches. Sure, in most of them, you can leave the church but they do have a tax if you want to belong.

whats_wrong_with_the_world, you say the courts are in error, I say they are finally living up to the law. And actually, religious tests are proscribed in the Constitution.

Pray as you like as an individual. Pray in public. Take up the service of government, then you must work hard to avoid giving official authority to any religion. The county commission has dropped the ball on this task. Now they'll waste our money getting themselves told to stop being foolish. Maybe we'll get the Roy Moore version.

I'd rather they be indicted for their crimes, but I'll take their removal from office.

June 11, 2012 at 2:02 a.m.
alprova said...

Article 9, Section 2 of the Tennessee State Constitution reads;

"Section 2. No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."

By the same token, Section 1 reads;

"Section 1. Whereas ministers of the Gospel are by their profession, dedicated to God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions; therefore, no minister of the Gospel, or priest of any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to a seat in either House of the Legislature."

For the record, according to their respective State Constitutions, Atheists are also barred from holding public office in Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, an South Carolina.

There is little evidence to suggest that in all but one of these states, that any office holder declaring themselves to be Atheist has had any attempt made against them to be disqualified. Such provisions in the above States constitutions are considered to be unenforceable.

However, in North Carolina during 2009, a newly elected Ashville City Councilman, Cecil Bothwell, found himself targeted in a court lawsuit for disqualification, despite winning the third highest number of votes ever in that city's election, as a result of wording contained in that State's Constitution.

He prevailed and is currently running for a seat in the U.S House of Representatives.

The United States Constitution prevents religious tests for public office. The Supreme Court of the United States held in Torcaso v. Watkins (1961) that such provisions violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

June 11, 2012 at 6:58 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Obama spent more money than all presidents combined. Yet this is the worst recovery ever. The liberal answer is to spend more? It boggles the mind how stupid that sounds.

If YOU were in debt, would YOU keep borrowing money you couldn't pay back to get yourself out of debt?

June 11, 2012 at 9:02 a.m.
conservative said...

You mean we can't spend our way out of debt?

Somebody ought to tell that to liberals on this site because they sure won't hear that where they now go for indoctrination.

June 11, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

There is nothing wrong with America that faith, love of freedom, intelligence and energy of her citizens cannot cure. - Dwight D Eisenhower

June 11, 2012 at 9:58 a.m.
alprova said...

The President has not raised taxes on a soul to date.

I did not make the statement that raising taxes is not a possibility or that no tax raises are being debated and/or planned.

To back up my "B.S. statement," please peruse the following article that more than fact checks any assertion that the President has raised anyone's taxes.

June 11, 2012 at 10:54 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

It seems that all the southpaws on here are either:

  1. The same person, under different names, or...
  2. All reading off the same script.

Anyone, anyone?

June 11, 2012 at 11:06 a.m.
Easy123 said...

I could say the same thing about you and your conservative sweethearts on here.

By the way, cutting the budget doesn't work to boost the economy. Budget cuts are what caused the recession. They caused the recession in Greece and all over Europe. You have to spend money to raise the economy. It is historically proven.

June 11, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.
alprova said...

tu_Quoque, you really need to get a life. Nobody but yourself gives two hoots what source people utilize when they post their points of discussion.

I'm not the first, nor will I be the last, to copy and paste something supplied in a post.

I notice that you have nothing to offer to refute the facts I presented. So that means that your entire point of contention is that I copied and pasted the information. Get over it already.

I could have typed it all out for your viewing pleasure, but I took a shortcut instead. Again...get over it.

You're demeanor and reputation to date in this forum exposes you as someone who is a waste of time to discuss anything with because, I suppose, you are clearly a sexually frustrated shell of a woman who sits in front of a computer day in and day out, spitting vitriole while banging away on the keyboard faster and faster, until you reach a simulated orgasmic frenzy in that nearly empty cranium cavity that sits above your shoulders. I'll bet you light up and/or take a drag off a cigarette every time you finish a post and click on the send button.

It's as if you are applying to become President of the She-woman's Man Hater's Club.

It takes a very small and shallow person to consistently make personal attacks on others, simply because you disagree with them. Your habit of twisting people's user names into cutesy and cleverly-worded daggers is rather lame as well.

Are you not even capable of civil discussion? There are several people who hang around in here, who also share the same problem in lacking the ability of debating on a civil level, but you are absolutely the worst.

Why don't you try growing up and try acting like an adult? Your behavior to date since you first posted in this forum has been sophomoric, to say the least.

Bang away, if you must. I'll simply ignore it.

June 11, 2012 at 11:41 a.m.
potcat said...

I made good friends with 4 Jehovah Witness and they're all black. They show up like clockwork and sometimes if i'm in the mood we will talk, usually they catch me in the yard and i take their magazines. For some reason they think i am hilarious and we talk about every thing you could imagine that i would say uncensored.

They are the first people that came and gave help to me when my house burned down. I Love them and they love me. They know i will never join their group but they have been coming for years and we always have a good laugh.... just saying.

June 11, 2012 at 11:58 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

potcat: I say props to you and to them.

June 11, 2012 at 12:25 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Glenn Beck Renews Radio Deal For $100 Million Over Five Years:

....Conclusive proof there is no justice. None.

June 11, 2012 at 12:36 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack_Dennis said..."There is nothing wrong with America that faith, love of freedom, intelligence and energy of her citizens cannot cure. - Dwight D Eisenhower"

There is a lot of wisdom in that thought, Jack. But, it shouldn't surprise you that I would say that because I am an Eisenhower Republican - which, by today's standard, makes me a liberal.

That said, there is a problem with trying to apply that quote today. I think Ike understood that personal responsibility is integral with personal freedom. Today, we - and especially the tea party folks - tend to confuse freedom with license. Too many folks insist on being "free" to fulfill their selfish wants, without regard for the consequences that their taking may have on others. That is NOT freedom as our founders intended. Rather, it is the formula by which nations throughout the ages have embraced oligarchy.

And, by the way, relying the brain trust that uses Clear Channel and Fox News as its mouth piece, does not equate with intelligence. Embracing their "wisdom" will also get us to oligarchy, and fairly quickly.

Karl Rove is just an election or two away from his dream. It will be a nightmare for most of us, including the large majority of folks who help him to achieve it.

June 11, 2012 at 12:57 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Well, MTJohn: You'd need to qualify that statement about and Eisenhower Republican. Maybe more like a CLASSIC liberal, but not like the radical left that makes up most of liberalism today. They (the neo-libs) of today talk about the R's being hi-jacked. No party has been hi-jacked more than the dems. I think they collect Lawrence O'Donnell bubble heads.

June 11, 2012 at 1:09 p.m.

alprova, you left out another section:

§ 4. Political or religious test

That no political or religious test, other than an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and of this State, shall never be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this State.

I would say that renders the Article 9 provisions void.

BTW, conservative, yes, debt is often a tool to prosperity. That's why banks make loans. Maybe you should ask Mitt Romney for his words of wisdom in regards personal finance. He used debt all the time to get what he wanted.

June 11, 2012 at 1:26 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Hey bulbs!! Wasn't it you that didn't want me to dwell on the past?

Remember our little discussions about Robert Byrd and the KKK? You said that was then this is now!

How about our exchange on Kennedy sending troops to Nam? You said, "What year is it"?

Now it seems that it's all about the past with you! How convenient!


You must live at the intersection of liberal lane clueless court.

June 11, 2012 at 1:29 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack_Dennis said..."Well, MTJohn: You'd need to qualify that statement about and Eisenhower Republican. Maybe more like a CLASSIC liberal, but not like the radical left that makes up most of liberalism today."

Jack - I'd suggest that the majority of today's liberals would have been considered pretty middle of the road folks during Eisenhower's era. Moreover, the "radical left" has not really moved all that far from where it was 50 years ago. It just seems that way because the right has moved so far to the right since then.

And, as a footnote, I'd suggest that folks like Eisenhower, John D. Rockefeller, Edward Brooke et al. would not be welcome in today's Republican Party. In fact, even Ronald Reagan might be considered too liberal by many of the tea party folk.

June 11, 2012 at 1:36 p.m.

TOES02800, seems to me you're the one trying to duck the issue now.

Instead of admitting that you were mistaken about the Churches, who did impose taxes, who did ruin the economy, and who did force healthcare packages on others, and who are still doing so in many places, you bring up another subject, which you are misrepresenting in order to try to discredit me.

But it actually serves the opposite effect, by showing how you're trying to avoid the issue, you're admitting you were in error.

Not only that, you're quite obviously not accurately representing what I actually said. As usual. You, of course, were obviously trying to make out the Democrats and Robert Byrd to be racists, in order to try to discredit the party, but doing so, you completely ignored the ensuing decades. Robert Byrd changed. So did Democrats. And so did the GOP, by welcoming all the racist Southern conservatives that had been repudiated by the Democrats.

It'd be one thing if you could show how the churches changed, how they repudiated such conduct, but I doubt you can find that, certainly not with the Catholic Church which is right now trying to write laws to get what it wants. And certainly not with those churches still accepting tax dollars to fund their programs.

And honestly, I can recall no exchanges whatsoever with you about Kennedy and Vietnam. Are you sure that was with me? I would certainly say that your phrasing is not covering my views on the war anyway, but I really do think you're confusing me with somebody else you might have had discourse with.

tu_quoque, you do know it was a Republican idea to create that fund, right? It's in the Congressional Record.

June 11, 2012 at 1:45 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote in regard to current taxes having been increased by the President:

"A 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco"

That is in no manner a forced tax increase upon anyone. One can completely avoid the tax by not purchasing tobacco.

"Obamacare Medicine Cabinet Tax"

Disallowing non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines to be deducted from one's taxes via health savings accounts is not a tax increase.

"Obamacare Tax on Indoor Tanning Services"

Same answer as it is applicable to tobacco. No one is forced to pay the tax.

"Obamacare Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike"

BCBS can claim the same previous tax deductions, resulting in no tax increase whatsoever, so long as they spend 85% of the premiums collected on payouts to the insured.

Obamacare Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals

They only pay if the hospital fails to meet new community health assessment needs, financial assistance, and billing and collection rules set by HHS.

"Obamacare Tax on Innovator Drug Companies"

Tied to the share of sales. Okay, you found a real tax increase, albeit one that is assessed on a business.

"Obamacare Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2"

This is merely a preamble to taxing individuals on their health benefits. People have argued for years that employment benefits are part of one's compensation. What's the problem?

However, this particular item will not be required to be reported until January, 2013 (It was voluntary until for 2011), AND there is nothing about the reporting requirement that causes or will cause excludable employer-provided health coverage to become taxable.


"Obamacare “Black liquor” tax hike"

Paper companies have consumed nearly all of the black liquor they produce in the making of paper for years. It has been classified as one of the leading generators of carbon-neutral renewable energy, producing approximately 28.5 million megawatt hours of electricity annually.

Congress passed a tax credit in 2005 as part of the 2005 Highway Bill. The bio-fuel credit for Black Liquor ended on Jan 1, 2010.

"Obamacare Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”"

Nothing new here. The IRS has always had the power to disallow tax deductions that it determines to be without substance.

I'll clarify my previous statement;

No one is paying a dime more in completely unavoidable taxes, on a personal level, since President Obama has been President.

June 11, 2012 at 1:47 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Liberals just despise a balanced budget.

Fools vote democrat.

June 11, 2012 at 1:51 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

TOESO: Fools, yet oh so enlightened.

June 11, 2012 at 1:55 p.m.

Describing the Republican party, the "Enlightened" people who brought us the TSA, the Birther Movement, and the endless war on drugs.

Republicans, running for office on a campaign of the failure of government, then setting about making it come true.

Thanks, so appreciated.

June 11, 2012 at 1:58 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

How does a church write laws? I don't recall the pope holding a congressional seat.

June 11, 2012 at 1:59 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tu_ disgorges...

"When The Obozo lets use keep more of our own income, by not taxes us more..."

Christ on a unicycle, you're starting your liquor orgy a little early, aren't you?

June 11, 2012 at 2:01 p.m.

The same way corporations do.

Go ask ALEC.

June 11, 2012 at 2:01 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Is that like Move-on and Acorn? .......You'll put your eye out kid!

June 11, 2012 at 2:04 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "It’s the totally unethical and dishonest stealing of other writer’s labor and trying to pass it off as your own work and not giving them one bit of credit."

For Pete's sake, the facts presented were not works that are worthy of individual credit. You only found the source I used due to the order in which they were presented on that page.

"You Libtards just can’t tolerate the fact that someone would think you stupid, ignorant, and uneducated so when you post something you want others to falsely think you are capable of that level of writing proficiency."

You Madam, exude an aura of arrogance unsurpassed by anyone I have ever had the displeasure to run across. Your projected comments reflect more upon yourself than on anyone that you attack.

"The problem for you is that when you constantly post you mindless chatter we get used to you style of inarticulate intercourse and when you try to copy and post something of substance it is readily obvious that it is not your work."

Okey Dokey, if you say so.

"Just be a little honest and note when you use other peoples work"

Sue me.

June 11, 2012 at 2:46 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "I guess its true what they say about you Libtard boys … You just can’t tolerate or rationally deal with a strong woman."

Yeah, yeah, yeah...You type that every time the issue comes up about your demeanor in here.

There is nothing "strong" about you. You simply post in a childish manner. You are someone who is suffering from a severe personality disorder. You are a very troubled, friendless, anti-social woman capable of nothing but giving the word "rude" a whole new meaning. You are someone who is unfortunately destined to die alone in your pitiful one-bedroom apartment, who will not be found until your rent is overdue.

June 11, 2012 at 3:04 p.m.
Easy123 said...


That's the funniest post I've seen all day! Bravo!

June 11, 2012 at 3:10 p.m.
potcat said...

alprova, please stop feeding the beast, its completly useless engaging with this thing. She's despertely in great need of attention and thinks abuse, impudence, impertinence, insolence, mockery, derision and invictive visage is smart, its not, she's just a sad sack.

Ah yes, i used my Thesaurus for the word insult and came up with tuluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!

June 11, 2012 at 3:41 p.m.
dao1980 said...

Ha! Good stuff indeed.

June 11, 2012 at 3:43 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Y'all hard on TuQ

June 11, 2012 at 4:20 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "I knew when you left that it wouldn’t be permanent and that you would be back for more abuse. Let’s see how long it will take to run you off this time."

I'm just gonna put you back on my ignore list again, for it is apparent that you have no intention of amending your anti-social behavior.

Try as much as I'm sure you will, it's going to take more than what you are capable of dishing out to make me go away, that's for sure.

You are without a doubt and always will be, a legend in your own mind.

June 11, 2012 at 4:24 p.m.

TOES02800, the express purpose of ALEC is in the name.

But bringing up false accusations as a distraction shows you don't have an argument.

Why don't you ask James O'Keefe for some more doctored videos?

June 11, 2012 at 4:42 p.m.

It seems man has lost his desire 4 spiratual guidence that was the reason 4 my reference to ecclisiasties. Soloman was pondering the true way asking the hard ? Today debate seems to be name calling and diversion instead of a humble search for knowledge.

June 11, 2012 at 5:29 p.m.
fairmon said...

How blessed we are to have in this very forum many bible scholars and non-believers along with the typical maybe or maybe not crowd. Either or both are willing to evaluate the intelligence of and heaven worthiness of others based on their political or religious position.

June 11, 2012 at 5:42 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I cannot believe you libs are still here trying to defend The Wart's stupid redundant cartoon and the ideas he attempts to advance. Get a life!

June 11, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.
fairmon said...

Referring to the toon. Mr. Bennett it is not right to make fun of and ridicule others. The commissioners have to do what gets the most votes whether logical or legal or not. Shame on you for making fun of the mentally challenged.

June 11, 2012 at 5:48 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I suppose the dim witted libs will be trying to license fists now...

June 11, 2012 at 5:50 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Now Obama's EPA is moving to regulate ditches on private property. The sooner Obama is removed from office the better.

June 11, 2012 at 5:52 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...
June 11, 2012 at 5:54 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...
June 11, 2012 at 5:56 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

The feds have more DOMESTIC drones than they know what to do with. Coming to a sky near you?

June 11, 2012 at 6:04 p.m.
dude_abides said...

BigRidge... what if you threw a big 'link' party, and nobody came?

June 11, 2012 at 6:37 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Great idea dude, now you can go back to fretting over prayer.

June 11, 2012 at 7:21 p.m.

Harp3339, I bet they could get a lot more votes if they built a gladitorial area.

Are there any lions in the zoo?

June 11, 2012 at 8:04 p.m.
dude_abides said...

HA! tu_, you're a puppet.

June 11, 2012 at 8:45 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

This is the most stimulating article I have read today. North Dakota is considering elimination of property taxes! What a r3VOLution for property ownership rights! I hope this catches on!

Do you really own your property when the government can tax it and take it from you for non-payment, or are you just renting it from the government?

June 11, 2012 at 9:55 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

"Everything Obama's doing is looking backwards. He's against fracking, a new way to get more oil. We've got more oil deposits in this country than the Saudis have. Now, we can't get it the conventional way. It takes new techniques, which are now viable, which are now profitable. Big Insurance is on the Kill List, Big Pharmaceutical, Big Sugar. And not just Obama's, but practically every liberal Democrat has these industries on the Kill List. So in a way you can understand the people in North Dakota. They know property tax funds certain things, and they're afraid Obama might just come shut down the source of all the revenue 'cause he doesn't like private sector revenue this way"

Such "forward" thinking liberals.

June 11, 2012 at 10:34 p.m.

Given up on actual discussion, huh?

Maybe you should ask Mitt Romney if he's congratulated the owner of the LA Kings yet.

Way to encourage people not to have "skin in the game" as they say, and putting the tax burden on others.

Perhaps that's why the governor of North Dakota doesn't support the idea.

June 11, 2012 at 11:15 p.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 wrote: "Everything Obama's doing is looking backwards."

Do tell...

"He's against fracking, a new way to get more oil. We've got more oil deposits in this country than the Saudis have. Now, we can't get it the conventional way. It takes new techniques, which are now viable, which are now profitable."

Even if you harbor the opinion that the process is completely safe, consider the fact that there are some rather shifty chemicals involved in the process. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl-benzene and Xylene are injected into the ground at each site and are never recovered.

What do you think happens to those chemicals after they manage to flow into adjacent aquifers or underground water mains? You wind up drinking it. Are you confident enough that the process is all that safe to bet the lives of yourself and your children on it?

"Big Insurance is on the Kill List, Big Pharmaceutical"

For decades, insurance companies have practically had free run of this nation to make immense profits while denying coverage and claims to people who needed their bills paid after paying money for premiums in good faith.

It's long past time for insurance companies to be held to strict, ethical standards, in order to avoid their past practices.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers used to be able to hold a monopoly on drugs for decades, charging whatever they wanted to U.S. consumers who needed their drugs to live. You probably haven't had a medical condition that required you to seek expensive medications in order to stay alive.

"Big Sugar."

To be more specific, the only product being targeted is sugar made from corn, a vile form of sugar that offers no health benefits at all, and that has led to many health ailments in many people.

"And not just Obama's, but practically every liberal Democrat has these industries on the Kill List."

No one is trying to kill anything. No one should be left to drink chemically poisoned water for the sake of drilling for oil. We are demanding ethical standards and reasonable profits be imposed on insurers and pharmaceutical companies. Every consumer has a right to be able to read factual information when it comes to deciding on any food product offered for sale.

"So in a way you can understand the people in North Dakota. They know property tax funds certain things, and they're afraid Obama might just come shut down the source of all the revenue 'cause he doesn't like private sector revenue this way"

First of all, the proposed ban on all property taxes is opposed by the majority of North Dakotans, so the proposal will likely fail. No plan has been proposed by backers of the idea in how to replace the $812 million that is collected each year in revenue, and most logical people understand the need to fund governmental expenditures, such as schools, police and fire departments, and parks.

June 12, 2012 at 1:51 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.