Obama Whitehouse covering things up...

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Wine is generally not referred to as a DRUG.. its referred to as an alcohol. We can argue words if you want.

Let's argue words. Wine is a beverage made by fermenting berries whose sugars break down into ethyl alcohol. Ethyl alcohol, also called ethanol, is defined as a pschoactive drug due to its intoxicating effects on the human central nervous system and brain.

Now let's argue motivation. Jesus turned water, one of the most abundant natural compounds on Earth, a liquid required for human life, into a beverage whose key ingredient is a psychoactive drug. This is an explicit endorsement of psychoactive drugs by the son of God himself. We all knew Jesus was a hippie; this just proves it.

But of course you think Jesus only exists to kill liberals and Jews apparently, so I guess you missed pretty much every lesson he was trying to teach.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Sorry CAD, you lose on this one. There is no comparison between this event and Ashcroft.

Ashcroft spent thousands of taxpayers' dollars to cover up a work of art that no one seemed to have a problem with. It was generally viewed as asinine and made him look like a fool.

Obama's staff made a request simple request for a virtually no cost, temporary arrangement that would prevent any existing symbols from being construed as having some special meaning in relation to Obama's presentation.

On the other hand, I can see many reasons why Ashcroft might not want the classic symbol of justice to be associated with his department.

You're a smart guy CAD, but you demean yourself presenting such BS as this.

So the lib outrage was over the cost? Puhleeze.

And obviously you didn't read my post - i could really care less about the why as I understand them wanting "generic". However, they could have chosen somewhere else if these things are going to create issues for them(whatever their supposed reason).

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Wine is generally not referred to as a DRUG.. its referred to as an alcohol. We can argue words if you want.

Let's argue words. Wine is a beverage made by fermenting berries whose sugars break down into ethyl alcohol. Ethyl alcohol, also called ethanol, is defined as a pschoactive drug due to its intoxicating effects on the human central nervous system and brain.

Now let's argue motivation. Jesus turned water, one of the most abundant natural compounds on Earth, a liquid required for human life, into a beverage whose key ingredient is a psychoactive drug. This is an explicit endorsement of psychoactive drugs by the son of God himself. We all knew Jesus was a hippie; this just proves it.

But of course you think Jesus only exists to kill liberals and Jews apparently, so I guess you missed pretty much every lesson he was trying to teach.

:laugh:

This is really what goes on inside his head, it's like a freakshow of idiocy and self-denial.

 

[Beanie46]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy


Now let's argue motivation. Jesus turned water, one of the most abundant natural compounds on Earth, a liquid required for human life, into a beverage whose key ingredient is a psychoactive drug. This is an explicit endorsement of psychoactive drugs by the son of God himself. We all knew Jesus was a hippie; this just proves it.

Well, you completely missed out on the true motivation of why the water was converted to wine, didn't you? Or don't you know ancient history at all?

As it stands, water back in those ancient days wasn't exactly clean and potable like what we enjoy today. But wine, on the other hand, was potable, or drinkable. So, the abundance of wine that appears throughout ancient history has little to do, in most part, with its ability to make one drunk but more with having something clean to drink and not make you violently ill from parasites and the like.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Beanie46

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy


Now let's argue motivation. Jesus turned water, one of the most abundant natural compounds on Earth, a liquid required for human life, into a beverage whose key ingredient is a psychoactive drug. This is an explicit endorsement of psychoactive drugs by the son of God himself. We all knew Jesus was a hippie; this just proves it.

Well, you completely missed out on the true motivation of why the water was converted to wine, didn't you? Or don't you know ancient history at all?

As it stands, water back in those ancient days wasn't exactly clean and potable like what we enjoy today. But wine, on the other hand, was potable, or drinkable. So, the abundance of wine that appears throughout ancient history has little to do, in most part, with its ability to make one drunk but more with having something clean to drink and not make you violently ill from parasites and the like.

Welcome to the forum. You can pick up a sarcasm meter at the door.

Or do you agree with FnE that wine isn't a drug because it's, uh, alcohol.

 

[JSFLY]

Originally posted by: Beanie46

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy


Now let's argue motivation. Jesus turned water, one of the most abundant natural compounds on Earth, a liquid required for human life, into a beverage whose key ingredient is a psychoactive drug. This is an explicit endorsement of psychoactive drugs by the son of God himself. We all knew Jesus was a hippie; this just proves it.

Well, you completely missed out on the true motivation of why the water was converted to wine, didn't you? Or don't you know ancient history at all?

As it stands, water back in those ancient days wasn't exactly clean and potable like what we enjoy today. But wine, on the other hand, was potable, or drinkable. So, the abundance of wine that appears throughout ancient history has little to do, in most part, with its ability to make one drunk but more with having something clean to drink and not make you violently ill from parasites and the like.

That makes no sense.

Water can be boiled and is as portable as wine.

Wine doesn't quench your thirst, it is not a water substitute.

 

[NeoV]

Today - Terror in the heartland was stopped


Give me an F'ing break even remotely trying to compare this to that lying, overly-fanatical Ashcroft

 

[jackschmittusa]

CADsortaGUY

You brought up Ashcroft. You made an apples to oranges comparison.

The amount of money spent on a curtain was only a collateral issue. But it did mean that: a budget had to be selected to fund it, someone had to be in charge of it, proposals for the work had to be submitted, a contractor had to be selected, a contract signed, all the permits and IDs issued for the workers, etc, which gave Ashcroft ample time to recognize what a foolish move it was. And yet, he went ahead. This is what really labeled him as an idiot in my book. If you need more clarification of what I thought about it, just ask.

You didn't mention whether Obama was invited to speak, or whether he requested the venue. I don't know. Do you? Even if he requested it, did he choose the building?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Who gives a fuck,well besides Jesus freaks.

QFT! :thumbsup:

Hey, CAD -- Your desparation is showing. :laugh:

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Wine is generally not referred to as a DRUG.. its referred to as an alcohol. We can argue words if you want.

We could if you understood them. Wine is NOT "an alcohol." To confirm Atomic Playboy's definition, wine is:

Main Entry: wine
Pronunciation: \'win\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English win, from Old English win]; akin to Old High German win wine; both ultimately from Latin vinum wine, perhaps of non-IE origin; akin to the source of Greek oinos wine
Date: before 12th century

1 a: the alcoholic fermented juice of fresh grapes used as a beverage b:b wine or a substitute used in Christian communion services

2: the alcoholic usually fermented juice of a plant product (as a fruit) used as a beverage <blackberry wine>

3: something that invigorates or intoxicates

4: a dark red

Alcohol is:

Main Entry: al·co·hol
Pronunciation: \'al-k?-?ho?l\
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Medieval Latin, powdered antimony, from Old Spanish, from Arabic al-kuh?ul the powdered antimony, from kuh?l kohl
Date: 1672

1 a: ethanol especially when considered as the intoxicating agent in fermented and distilled liquors b: drink (as whiskey or beer) containing ethanol c: a mixture of ethanol and water that is usually 95 percent ethanol

2: any of a class of organic compounds that are analogous to ethanol and that are hydroxyl derivatives of hydrocarbons

So, go home and practice. THEN, we can argue "words."

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Actually I think Jesus would strike down Obama for trying to impersonate him. He would smite him. Then he would go on to all the ATPN libs.. who would all be too stoned to really notice anyway.. then he would probably kill all the Jews.

You guys take this stuff too seriously. But Obama is still an arrogant douchebag.

And you're quickly moving from being a crazy douchebag being to a scary douchebag. :shocked:

 

[jackschmittusa]

Minor point, but wine = well known mind altering substance, drugs = well known mind altering substances. That was how I interpreted the original comment. I actually thought it rather obvious.

 

[Fear No Evil]

If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Tab3076
What was the Ashcroft thing?

He was holding a presser at the justice dept and had his staff cover up a statue of a lady justice that had a bare breast. The libs here when ape over it.

No one went ape over it, we were just laughing at Ashcroft for being a prude. It was a frikken boob on a statue, didn't mean anything.
President speaking with Jesus behind him sends a different message that Obama didn't want to send, that he is somehow endorsing a religion by speaking at a religious university with Jesus over his shoulder. It's between him and the university, and obviously the university obliged.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

This post explains why most of your other posts are so incoherent. If A -> B, that does not mean B -> A. If people who believe in Jesus should be pro drug, that does not mean people who are pro drug should believe in Jesus.

This is not difficult.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

This post explains why most of your other posts are so incoherent. If A -> B, that does not mean B -> A. If people who believe in Jesus should be pro drug, that does not mean people who are pro drug should believe in Jesus.

This is not difficult.

So at least we agree that all libs are pot smoking hippies?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

This post explains why most of your other posts are so incoherent. If A -> B, that does not mean B -> A. If people who believe in Jesus should be pro drug, that does not mean people who are pro drug should believe in Jesus.

This is not difficult.

So at least we agree that all libs are pot smoking hippies?

No, stop being an idiot.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Tab3076
What was the Ashcroft thing?

He was holding a presser at the justice dept and had his staff cover up a statue of a lady justice that had a bare breast. The libs here when ape over it.

No one went ape over it, we were just laughing at Ashcroft for being a prude. It was a frikken boob on a statue, didn't mean anything.
President speaking with Jesus behind him sends a different message that Obama didn't want to send, that he is somehow endorsing a religion by speaking at a religious university with Jesus over his shoulder. It's between him and the university, and obviously the university obliged.

Psssttt... Try actually READING the link. It wasn't "Jesus over his shoulder" -it was the letters "IHS" that had them bothered.

 

[Jack Flash]

This might be the best faux outrage yet.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

This post explains why most of your other posts are so incoherent. If A -> B, that does not mean B -> A. If people who believe in Jesus should be pro drug, that does not mean people who are pro drug should believe in Jesus.

This is not difficult.

So at least we agree that all libs are pot smoking hippies?

No, stop being an idiot.

Ok.. MOST libs are pot smoking hippies.. the rest are coke snorting freaks?

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Tab3076
What was the Ashcroft thing?

He was holding a presser at the justice dept and had his staff cover up a statue of a lady justice that had a bare breast. The libs here when ape over it.

No one went ape over it, we were just laughing at Ashcroft for being a prude. It was a frikken boob on a statue, didn't mean anything.
President speaking with Jesus behind him sends a different message that Obama didn't want to send, that he is somehow endorsing a religion by speaking at a religious university with Jesus over his shoulder. It's between him and the university, and obviously the university obliged.

Psssttt... Try actually READING the link. It wasn't "Jesus over his shoulder" -it was the letters "IHS" that had them bothered.

OK, so what? Whatever it is, the University agreed to provide the backdrop that Obama requested. They had option of not providing it at risk of not having him speak there. That is their prerogative, as it is Obama's to decide where he will or won't speak.

 

[JSFLY]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

This post explains why most of your other posts are so incoherent. If A -> B, that does not mean B -> A. If people who believe in Jesus should be pro drug, that does not mean people who are pro drug should believe in Jesus.

This is not difficult.

So at least we agree that all libs are pot smoking hippies?

No, stop being an idiot.

Ok.. MOST libs are pot smoking hippies.. the rest are coke snorting freaks?

Better a pot smoking hippy than a bible thumping, undereducated, over opinionated, moron with a shit eating grin.

 

[jackschmittusa]

I always get this culture thing wrong. Back in the '60s I was a "my country, right or wrong" "America, love it or leave it" pot smoking guy.

As I got older, I quit smoking pot and became a "live and let live" guy.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
If Jesus is so pro-drug then, shouldn't all liberals be born again?

This post explains why most of your other posts are so incoherent. If A -> B, that does not mean B -> A. If people who believe in Jesus should be pro drug, that does not mean people who are pro drug should believe in Jesus.

This is not difficult.

So at least we agree that all libs are pot smoking hippies?

No, stop being an idiot.

Ok.. MOST libs are pot smoking hippies.. the rest are coke snorting freaks?

I think you are getting Conservative Radio Show Hosts mixed up with Liberals.

 

[smashp]

Your just mad he covered it up, becasue if he hadnt, You would be crying

"look he thinks he's the mesiah"

 

[Starbuck1975]

It's getting amusing to see how every (illogical, blithering ranting) point the right makes now is required to use the word change sarcastically. It's like a template.

That's ok...I find amusing your knee jerk reaction to every thread critical of Obama.

You guys had a field day with "Compassionate Conservatism"...every elected official uses a buzzword or catchphrase to market their candidacy.

Obama promised Change.

As of late, his actions are becoming increasingly similar to those of his predecessors, or as in this case, he turned the political correctness dial to 11.

Why do conservatives laser in on change? Perhaps because it was a campaign promise you can't measure, quantify or verify...and it is amusing to watch the semantics tap dance from the left.

 

[microbial]

Well, it is still unclear wether Jesus was pro-drugs or pro-alcohol, or even if he really existed beyond legend--but it is quite apparent that this thread in general was induced and inspired by both drugs and alcohol.