Stephen Joseph

Mike, we should start preaching conservative thoughts (okay im libertarian, but i can pretend) and we'll annoy everyone Bring the CE Hate baby!

Yeah, pretty much what I read on the first page. Frigid's team is a bunch of gay punk ass high school kids Zack...ain't saying shit bout right now, he's still cool Kot's biggest joke was the state. If he couldn't manage his own clique, what made him think he could do this again. douchebags...

I personally found Dat to be pretty funny, imo. Between him and big dood, I was happy. Though personally, Vos ruled.

Go Tyler. I agree That is all PS: Seriously...40+ year old internet columnist...no reason for panties to be bunched.

I just found the first one funny. Bush doesn't force OPEC to do keep prices low. 1) They're a cartel 2) Cartels regulate quantity to raise prices 3) Our exchange rate declined. Foreign prices have to rise. yeah...most of those, really don't hold water. About 5, up from Mike's 3 but the point remains.

Last I checked, AS and I had no problems...

shoot for a twosome then

Very Original FS. ::yawns::

I fail to be shocked

kkk, i think we should hold out for like, better bling bling. represent

I wonder which clique it will outlast...the state, the establishment, bankywood, wdi? or what. hell, ill be a benchwarmer.

Dood, no one them could knock over Taft.

Sent to me by my fiancee. Remarks at an Ecumenical Prayer Breakfast in Dallas, Texas August 23, 1984 Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, very much. And, Martha Weisend, thank you very much. And I could say that if the morning ended with the music we have just heard from that magnificent choir, it would indeed be a holy day for all of us. It's wonderful to be here this morning. The past few days have been pretty busy for all of us, but I've wanted to be with you today to share some of my own thoughts. These past few weeks it seems that we've all been hearing a lot of talk about religion and its role in politics, religion and its place in the political life of the Nation. And I think it's appropriate today, at a prayer breakfast for 17,000 citizens in the State of Texas during a great political convention, that this issue be addressed. I don't speak as a theologian or a scholar, only as one who's lived a little more than his threescore ten -- which has been a source of annoyance to some -- [laughter] -- and as one who has been active in the political life of the Nation for roughly four decades and now who's served the past 3\1/2\ years in our highest office. I speak, I think I can say, as one who has seen much, who has loved his country, and who's seen it change in many ways. I believe that faith and religion play a critical role in the political life of our nation -- and always has -- and that the church -- and by that I mean all churches, all denominations -- has had a strong influence on the state. And this has worked to our benefit as a nation. Those who created our country -- the Founding Fathers and Mothers -- understood that there is a divine order which transcends the human order. They saw the state, in fact, as a form of moral order and felt that the bedrock of moral order is religion. The Mayflower Compact began with the words, ``In the name of God, amen.'' The Declaration of Independence appeals to ``Nature's God'' and the ``Creator'' and ``the Supreme Judge of the world.'' Congress was given a chaplain, and the oaths of office are oaths before God. James Madison in the Federalist Papers admitted that in the creation of our Republic he perceived the hand of the Almighty. John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, warned that we must never forget the God from whom our blessings flowed. George Washington referred to religion's profound and unsurpassed place in the heart of our nation quite directly in his Farewell Address in 1796. Seven years earlier, France had erected a government that was intended to be purely secular. This new government would be grounded on reason rather than the law of God. By 1796 the French Revolution had known the Reign of Terror. And Washington voiced reservations about the idea that there could be a wise policy without a firm moral and religious foundation. He said, ``Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man (call himself a patriot) who (would) labour to subvert these . . . finest [firmest]\1\ (FOOTNOTE) props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere Politician . . . (and) the pious man ought to respect and to cherish (religion and morality).'' And he added, ``. . . let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion.'' (FOOTNOTE) \1\White House correction. I believe that George Washington knew the City of Man cannot survive without the City of God, that the Visible City will perish without the Invisible City. Religion played not only a strong role in our national life; it played a positive role. The abolitionist movement was at heart a moral and religious movement; so was the modern civil rights struggle. And throughout this time, the state was tolerant of religious belief, expression, and practice. Society, too, was tolerant. But in the 1960's this began to change. We began to make great steps toward secularizing our nation and removing religion from its honored place. In 1962 the Supreme Court in the New York prayer case banned the compulsory saying of prayers. In 1963 the Court banned the reading of the Bible in our public schools. From that point on, the courts pushed the meaning of the ruling ever outward, so that now our children are not allowed voluntary prayer. We even had to pass a law -- we passed a special law in the Congress just a few weeks ago to allow student prayer groups the same access to schoolrooms after classes that a young Marxist society, for example, would already enjoy with no opposition. The 1962 decision opened the way to a flood of similar suits. Once religion had been made vulnerable, a series of assaults were made in one court after another, on one issue after another. Cases were started to argue against tax-exempt status for churches. Suits were brought to abolish the words ``under God'' from the Pledge of Allegiance and to remove ``In God We Trust'' from public documents and from our currency. Today there are those who are fighting to make sure voluntary prayer is not returned to the classrooms. And the frustrating thing for the great majority of Americans who support and understand the special importance of religion in the national life -- the frustrating thing is that those who are attacking religion claim they are doing it in the name of tolerance, freedom, and openmindedness. Question: Isn't the real truth that they are intolerant of religion? [Applause] They refuse to tolerate its importance in our lives. If all the children of our country studied together all of the many religions in our country, wouldn't they learn greater tolerance of each other's beliefs? If children prayed together, would they not understand what they have in common, and would this not, indeed, bring them closer, and is this not to be desired? So, I submit to you that those who claim to be fighting for tolerance on this issue may not be tolerant at all. When John Kennedy was running for President in 1960, he said that his church would not dictate his Presidency any more than he would speak for his church. Just so, and proper. But John Kennedy was speaking in an America in which the role of religion -- and by that I mean the role of all churches -- was secure. Abortion was not a political issue. Prayer was not a political issue. The right of church schools to operate was not a political issue. And it was broadly acknowledged that religious leaders had a right and a duty to speak out on the issues of the day. They held a place of respect, and a politician who spoke to or of them with a lack of respect would not long survive in the political arena. It was acknowledged then that religion held a special place, occupied a special territory in the hearts of the citizenry. The climate has changed greatly since then. And since it has, it logically follows that religion needs defenders against those who care only for the interests of the state. There are, these days, many questions on which religious leaders are obliged to offer their moral and theological guidance, and such guidance is a good and necessary thing. To know how a church and its members feel on a public issue expands the parameters of debate. It does not narrow the debate; it expands it. The truth is, politics and morality are inseparable. And as morality's foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide. We need it because we are imperfect, and our government needs the church, because only those humble enough to admit they're sinners can bring to democracy the tolerance it requires in order to survive. A state is nothing more than a reflection of its citizens; the more decent the citizens, the more decent the state. If you practice a religion, whether you're Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or guided by some other faith, then your private life will be influenced by a sense of moral obligation, and so, too, will your public life. One affects the other. The churches of America do not exist by the grace of the state; the churches of America are not mere citizens of the state. The churches of America exist apart; they have their own vantage point, their own authority. Religion is its own realm; it makes its own claims. We establish no religion in this country, nor will we ever. We command no worship. We mandate no belief. But we poison our society when we remove its theological underpinnings. We court corruption when we leave it bereft of belief. All are free to believe or not believe; all are free to practice a faith or not. But those who believe must be free to speak of and act on their belief, to apply moral teaching to public questions. I submit to you that the tolerant society is open to and encouraging of all religions. And this does not weaken us; it strengthens us, it makes us strong. You know, if we look back through history to all those great civilizations, those great nations that rose up to even world dominance and then deteriorated, declined, and fell, we find they all had one thing in common. One of the significant forerunners of their fall was their turning away from their God or gods. Without God, there is no virtue, because there's no prompting of the conscience. Without God, we're mired in the material, that flat world that tells us only what the senses perceive. Without God, there is a coarsening of the society. And without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure. If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under. If I could just make a personal statement of my own -- in these 3\1/2\ years I have understood and known better than ever before the words of Lincoln, when he said that he would be the greatest fool on this footstool called Earth if he ever thought that for one moment he could perform the duties of that office without help from One who is stronger than all. I thank you, thank you for inviting us here today. Thank you for your kindness and your patience. May God keep you, and may we, all of us, keep God. Thank you. Note: The President spoke at 9:26 a.m. at Reunion Arena. He was introduced by Martha Weisend, cochair of the Texas Reagan-Bush campaign. From University of Texas

I would imagine that the decision is based on actual reasoning...not just being an idiot Probably religious issues

KKK, for you I'll give you back what part of your tax money went to pay my salary Here's a 1/100th of a cent.

I believe it has to do with embryos and bush's stance on abortion, which is where alot of stem cells come from i could be wrong

Correction: The Russian Winter beat the Germans. Also, if the US hadn't opened a second front and kept several German divisions locked there, Russia would have had problems. Where did everyone learn history from, there's more to it than your high school textbooks. I don't think anyone can make a case over which side did more. But Spiny fails to remember, Russia was allied with Germany at the start. Stephen Joseph, wishing people here actually knew something.

Que? No me compehende? Uhh, I didn't list those. And umm, I am from the government, and I'm here to help you (unless you're a taxpayer, and then I'm just taking your money to play football on the mall)

Actually "Reaganomics" never existed. He wanted a supply side method, but due to the divided Congress, didn't get the cuts he wanted alongside the tax increases. It was both a supply/demand side pull and That's why the economy booomed like crazy. I don't understand how people confuse, or think that the end result "didn't work" It obviously did. Stephen Joseph Econ Dood

Yeah umm...Pappajacks really needs to pick up a history book and read it. That's all

Seriously FS, do that shit somewhere else. Like BigJig said, this isn't the place.

*coughs* said same thing Tyler/Jobber said...thanks *cough* Marney meanie

Rumor has it OAOAST management is PISSED at SJ

BEEEERRR!

CP, just...just shut up. If anything, we want someone who's honorable enough to admit when he messed up, especially in that position. The guy did his best...the pressure probably just was too much crap for his family. My best friend who used to work @ the Agency called me up today about this. I believe em when he says Tenet was good in the position. As long as Tenet isn't a fall guy, then fine.