PLANET Earth Goes VIRAL!!!

Can such regulations actually be cited so that those present are able to actually read them?

 

Sure. Here' the GSA guideline:
https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-construction/design-excellence/first-impressions/signage

 

Wrong! And your imagination is intensely gross and immature. Besides I grew up on LUV's not Pampers. Pampers are for the economically challenged.

 

Been a long time since I had to change diapers.... my kids grew up with cloth ones, and I both helped change and wash them. Today, people wish to avoid anything unpleasant, so they use disposable everything. They even think honesty and character are disposable when they become uncomfortable requirements.....

 

That is very true, spiritgide. Sad but true. Paper cups, Bic pens, disposable diapers are but a reflection of what we have become. Kudos to you for changing and washing. Tried a diaper service for my first son and used the entire month's allotment in less than 2 days! Was grateful for the disposable type.

 

'Twas YOU who used placing the Pres.'s pictures in federal offices as a sign of strong support among federal workers. That notion is just hogwash! Their conspicuous display is mandated! So OF COURSE I am, "admitting," that decisions on placement have nothing to do with morale. Say... are you some kind of wise guy or something?

 

We have to communicate on the level of those we address. If you wish to move that to a higher plane, please feel free.

 

But that would leave you all alone down there, sg!

 

Oh no. I said no such thing. Better revisit my post.

Then you can cite the law mandating existence and placement of portraits.

 

This is why the left gets no respect. Invite them to the table, and they just belch and fart like children.

 

Okay so here's your post:

Done and Done.

 

Children's, noises tend to be much less obtrusive than those of the adults in the room. I read once that ancient German soldiers would actually time such releases after dinner at the table in such a manner as to nearly perfectly mimic popular tunes. In some cultures it is considered an insult to the chef NOT to burp.

 

However, it is no so in THIS one.

A pretty consistent guideline is that when you act rude or childish, you get treated as rude of childish. In some cultures, that includes a trip to Woodshed College for a course in good manners. In the 70's and 80's some people decided that such behavior was a medical issue and chose to excuse the child and correct them with drugs, like Ritalin. That's how we came to have so many today incapable of self-discipline and respect for anyone or anything, except getting immediate gratification for their whims of the passing moment. No sympathy here, no excuses accepted.

 

So no one but immigrants has covid? and they all have it?

Is it genetic, and why hasn't it been noticed until now? Is it another Deep State liberal commie plot to make Trump look bad?

Just like this whole hoax, complete with thousands of actors pretending to be sick and even pretending to die and be buried. The perfidy of the left truly knows no bounds

 

If said thirteen million individuals currently residing in the united states illegally were not present, the united states would currently be experiencing far less homlessness, and a great deal less population density in numerous states.

 

And millions would show up but the MSM would refuse to cover it and then doctor photos to show empty spaces where there were actually cheering throngs. Leftists are EVERYWHERE.

 

No excuses given. No sympathy requested. Pretty much agree with the significantly more non-childish things you've said. But there is little evidence that people on your, "left," behave the way you've described any more than people on your, "right," behave. Some of the most vilely behaving folks I have called, "friends," have been conservative beer drinkers.

 

I don't think so, AU. The President openly ORDERED them NOT to show up and NOT to provide documents and did so quite proudly. The only doctored photos I am aware of are Trump showing Obama's Inauguration crowd as his own, and Bush II's flight around the Daytona 500 crowd as his own.

 

That works IF reporting donations to the IRS as a tax write-off is something you consider being done in public in front of scores of people.

Your logic escapes me. You say that the left performs charity more, but when Robert says no, studies that were printed - in the NYT no less - say otherwise, you then move the goalposts saying no, now it has to be done in complete secret. So then, how DO you prove your assertion that people on the left believe and perform charity if no one ever hears about it? It's more likely it isn't being done at all, and you're left making an unprovable statement while Robert has proven his.

I've said this several times, God would not be a follower of either or any political dogma save His own theocracy. I highly doubt He would be a member of the GOP OR the Dems and would find fault with both. I mean, I rather doubt He'd be okay with abortion, racial quota's, gay marriage, and I'm not entirely sure about Welfare as it currently exists. God's charity plan involved the poor working for their food if you look at what God commanded when the Israelites came into their own, they weren't to glean their trees more than once so that the poor could come in and take what was left. Also, there's that pesky "Them that do not work, neither shall they eat," quote. So God would likely want people working for that welfare check and food stamps/EBT/SNAP card. And then there's those quotes by Peter and Paul telling people to obey those God put in authority over them as God placed them there - and they lived in the days of Nero. Yeah guys, God placed Trump in charge. Tell that to the left and watch an atheist instantly appear where a former LW believer in God used to be.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that assigning a political side that God likes more is a fools errand. He's interested in individual souls, not political groups as a whole.

 

In Alabama they still have Hitler's photo up ( NOT really, just kidding, couldn't resist )

(That's only in the Governor's office. )

 

I'm not playing God or defining his political persuasion, or lack thereof. Nor do I care to spend time with anyone who does. But, yes, I think reporting one's charities to another party in order to obtain any monetary reward falls into the Gospel quote. And I simply quoted the Gospel. What do YOU call a nation which legislates: feeding the hungry, clothing and shelteing the naked and homeless, and providing refuge to the persecuted?

 

The "number of the Beast" is 666 and if you put 666 into its equivalent Jewish alphabet numbers, ( the Jewish alphabet can make numbers much like the Roman alphabet can) You get the words for Neron Caesar. The Jews may not have liked the people who were crucifying them for not worshipping the Emperor that much after all

 

Except you did by saying that the Left is "the Right Hand of God." Would you like me to provide the quote?

Yeah, that was it. Nah, no defining of His political persuasion there, eh?

I think you're missing the context here. Jesus stated what He did because at the time you had the Pharisees timing their daily activities so that - as an example - prayer time would occur JUST as they were in the middle of a busy intersection so that they could stop and show off how prayerful they were by doing so right smack-dab where half the town could see them doing so. Or they would quite literally make a show of making huge donations in front of as many witnesses as they could. That is what Jesus was condemning. And even THEN there's exceptions. You like Bible quotes, howzabout Zacchaeus who says in front of Jesus and half of Jerusalem "Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount." over in Luke. And Jesus - does He condemn the guy because he did it in public? Nah, He praises him - and Zac is worthy OF praise because the motivation is good. But according to you - nope. No reward for Zac, I guess Jesus was wrong, eh? And look, right after that happens, Jesus tells a parable about a bunch of guys being good stewards with their master's money. Sure sounds like He isn't against people trying to make a profit. Heck, He even tells the one guy that if he'd left the money in the bank instead of just holding onto it at least he'd have interest, so I don't see Him being against reporting charity as a tax write-off either as long as you're not placing ads in the paper showing off how generous you are about it.

The whole point here is that Jesus is looking at the motivation involved. He wants a Cheerful Giver. If someone donates money because he wants to and the write-off just happens to be a happy by-product, God's probably okay with that. God does say that by giving to Him, you will be blessed in return; how do you know a tax write-off isn't one of those ways you reap what you sow when giving to God? But on the other hand, someone donating just SO they could get a tax write-off? That's something else again. The motivation is wrong.

You missed the point. I said He would likely be against welfare as it exists in it's present form. He'd want it provided, but He'd also want people working for it in return unless they were absolutely unable to - like say, people who were paralyzed or suffering some kind of infirmity.

 

It's common sense, 13 million less people to get sick and pass it along. Anyone can get it, FYI

 

A nation that follows the precepts of the French Enlightenment, which ALL of the Founding Fathers were followers of. We're only Christian indirectly, our real Jesus is Voltaire.