Jobber of the Week

"Hi, I'd love to go out and have a drink with you, but you're going to be boiled alive at the upcoming aramageddon, so I'm just going to leave you alone now. Thanks for asking." I mean, it's almost as bad as the Jehova's Witnesses and the "everyone who doesn't join us is unpure" thing.

LOL!!!!!!!!! YOU want to make extravagant claims, and then when someone asks you for some proof, you decide it's not worth wasting your time? Usually you put up a much better arguement than that, Mike.

And now you know how the French feel.

Hi there. Believing that God takes all the good people and places them in Heaven, leaving their Earthly stuff on Earth (i.e. everyone in Heaven has no clothes), while he and everyone else watches as the rest of us all sit and boil in agony as hell breaks out on Earth? Stupid.

You missed the point, which is that it's nigh-impossible to talk to us about "what Christians believe" since there's so many varying Christian opinions, especially on this thread's issue. If you want to break down all the issues that Christians universally agree upon, there's not a whole lot. Maybe something about the Bible, Jesus, and a shared belief in one God. But that's it. Otherwise, good post.

Your post would make sense except that stories do not immediately go from a journalist to the front page. They go through editors and other filters first. I generally believe the media will ultimately kiss ass with whoever's in office. They don't want to lose important connections, or be the last one to break the news when someone at a press conference said something important. Whining about liberal media bias in Washington during the Clinton years had at least some evidence to it. During this time it's pointless.

It kind of comes down to this. When you're worried because someone is saying something on another continent that might (SHOCK) boost morale in a country far far away where nobody is speaking English.. Well, I'm not a genius, but it seems kind of silly to me. I'm not an expert on what did or did not happen in Vietnam. That's a subject I've never really done a whole lot of research on, but... It kind of bothers me that nearly every fucking link I ever see on the issue is never transcript, never an actual news story. It's some opinion pundit's writing that one can never be sure is not being spun to meet their end (and appearantly yours) more conveniently. That's so irritating it makes me want to research the damn thing myself, and I would if I wasn't too busy for politically-inspired issues of the day.

I didn't mind "My Way" as much as "Crack Addict". "My Way" was a little more fitting and more people (still not many) cared about Limp Bizkit then than they did for last year. It still clicked for the Austin/Rock video package, though. And that package was clearly channeling the My Way package that everyone loves to death. The show still won't live up to the hype, but at least the hype had died down before it picks right up again the final weeks. All this "BEST WRESTLING EVENT OF ALL TIME" stuff is really too much hype for what they can honestly deliver.

There seems to be a lot of leeway in "what Christians actually believe." I mean, if you want to go on about what Christians as a whole believe and then say it's this way or that, I could play the same game and say that, as a Christian, you must believe in something stupid like, say, the Rapture.

HEAVEN FORBID! His testimony may have improved enemy morale! Obviously, we should completely disregard the validity of what he's saying and quiet him up. And then release some sort of media fabrication so all is well again. I mean, really, what kind of report does the author want? I can take a guess: The whole shredding thing seems to be skirting illegalto me. I'm sure if there's any truth to it that Rove will be tossing it out in the general election and we'll find out what gives.

I consider it civil lawbreaking, and I am sure it will not stand. But, no, I personally don't think it's the same as Moore's thing. To explain why would be too complex than I feel like going over. But, to start, this isn't costing taxpayers money like Moore did trying to fight over that stupid rock. It's similar because it's the case of someone legally flexing their position to accomplish illegal means. But really, that's not exactly a rare thing in San Francisco (again, see the feds busting up the medicinal pot clubs.) This is illegal, but is intended to initiate a review of the state constitution as to whether Prop 22 is unconstitional to add in the very same document that outlaws government discrimination. I am lax in condemning it because it's not hurting or costing or cheating anybody. Also, since you really want to corner me regarding the comparisons of this and Moore, and I'm going to admit that I'm completely biased in this arguement, since I'm biased against people tying religion into our government, and biased towards gay marriage. So you can hold the breaking news alert, because I never claimed to be a pillar of balanced judgment in this issue, or the Moore issue, in the first place.

Steve Jobs > ComCast http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/...-999660,00.html

Ah. I found it. Well, a lot of good things happened that have been illegal as well. Although obviously this one depends on your point of view. I don't believe marriage is exclusively a religious word as the government uses it.

Er? If you mean we voted on this before in 2000, then you're free to look over the list of propositions from the 2000 vote, I don't see anything about marriage in there anywhere.

In his own words: Basically, it's pressing the issue to see how the state constitution will be interpreted. One of those things where everyone is going to have to decide how far-reaching equality and anti-discrimination law actually can go. I give this current development maybe four days before a higher office (namely, Arnold) comes in and shuts it down, but the idea is to spark the state Democrats into hounding the Republicans on the issue. If they got it to the voters, I think it would win. Democrats still have a huge voter lead in this state.

Superior governments have deemed it illegal and will eventually stop it, such as the many medicinal marijuana busts over the years. But where as Moore did his actions because he personally believed our nation's government should worship God, Newsom is following a city motto regarding no discrimination in this area. It will be overruled, of course. But it actually has more legal footing in his jurisdiction than simply "I think this should be like that." While I think it's currently illegal, I think it ought to be legal (though I'm not sure if I'd approve of that on a federal level) and so I can't say I think it's a bad thing. Newom, BTW, isn't really that bad a guy. He's the one who came up with the idea that the city should be barred from giving cold hard cash to the homeless, because that would just make the problem worse.

http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle....pe=economicNews

I've found it to be a desperate need to pass the buck. Without sounding like Kamui 2.0, in the Toyota example, Japan's way of doing business is a lot different than it is here. If a manager causes something embarassing to happen, he takes the shame of it. Over here, he passes it on to another manager, a lower worker, or simply demands that his team do the near-impossible job of "fixing this." Nobody in management is willing to stake their reputation for something, so everything is crap that's somebody else's fault, because none of them care.

I think, in the long run, public opinion will agree with them. The only people who REALLY care about "the American family" are a few preachers and some stiff in suits.

Moore was trying to just throw God in the public square because it fit his personal opinion. Newsom is trying to interpret the official city documents, but I think this is a bad move which will hurt his future. I've always thought the SF mayor job is just child's play until he can get a more prominent Dem role in the federal government, although this will be used against him at that point. These efforts will be taaaaaah-minated, most likely, but it's still kind of weird. I can't say I /DON'T/ approve of it, though.

LOL. But this isn't. I guess if it's from any campaign it would be Edwards. Edwards is publically running an "all-positive" campaign and I believe that Dean is a big enough idiot that he would shout out allegations like these on national TV. It's kind of unfortunate to say that, since I'm an Edwards supporter, but his campaign would seem the most suspicious in the conspiracy game. Unless Al Sharpton or Dennis Kucinich are making a last-ditch attempt.

Uh. Okay. But we're not all inventors here. Actually, Michigan still has the air of a ghost town from all the auto factories that got up and left. And finally these jobs are starting to appear again. Toyota's more popular models (Camry, Tundra, Sienna) are built in a plant in Kentucky. A lot of the reason why these jobs disappear is, as Toyota's proven (those models are some of their most reliable and solid) is not because American engineers are sloppy. It's that American managers are idiots. Let's move some CEO jobs overseas.

Well thank YOU for controlling the direction of the thread, El Prezidente! I think it's kind of funny but it's very counterproductive. With the Mysterio song/video, the Eddie title shot, and the placement of this show in San Francisco, Vince is obviously targeting the fact that Eddie is very popular along the California coast where Latino numbers are very high. Good enough, though a little transparent in the marketing, right? I don't have a problem with the hats and the mariachi music, though I think we're starting to go overboard about how the band "swam a long way to be here tonight." I mean, I have an Irish heritage, and I have no problem with the drunken Irish guy stereotype. It's just when you move it beyond "hee hee, these people like this kind of music/food/sport/whatever" and change it to "hee hee, a group of these people do something that embarasses the whole", such as in this case, coming in illegally, you offend the paying customer. It's kind of like if I said, "Heh, this Downhome guy's a wrestling fan. He's probably some easily impressed redneck with a Southern drawl." It's kind of funny, because there's a large group of wrestling fans like that. But then if I emphasize one of the worst traits of that group and say "Heh, this Downhome guy's a wrestling fan. He probably fucks his female cousin." Well, you'd be a lot more offended. I hope this isn't going TOO off-topic, which I know is a problem in the WWE folder as of late, but considering we're talking about how wrestling presents these subjects in addition to their status as social taboos, I don't think we're TOO in the wrong.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....02105043&EDATE=