Post deleted by User.
Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
[+]
Josiahkf said: »
You'd be spiteful too if someone constantly lied and acted like an idiot just so you'd reprimand them and give them attention.
And thanks to your spite, she will retire a millionaire because you let your emotions get the better if you.
[+]
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
She doesn't belong in prison, that's not what happened either. She was held in a county jail completely voluntarily, she could have either resigned her position or agreed to comply and gone home that day. There is literally no way you don't understand why she was in jail, you're just trying to get a rise out of people.
Josiahkf said: »
Don't assume I despise an entire religion just because one individual is misrepresenting them.
Christianity gives people great comfort and strength as well, this is just a sad day for it.
Don't project yourself on me just because you enjoy creating conflict here for fun, as you'd admitted repeatedly.
Christianity gives people great comfort and strength as well, this is just a sad day for it.
Don't project yourself on me just because you enjoy creating conflict here for fun, as you'd admitted repeatedly.
"You" was Jassik, Vic etc. Your post wasn't there when I began typing.
[+]
Jassik said: »
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
She doesn't belong in prison, that's not what happened either. She was held in a county jail completely voluntarily, she could have either resigned her position or agreed to comply and gone home that day. There is literally no way you don't understand why she was in jail, you're just trying to get a rise out of people.
I don't need to get a rise out of people that wake up pissed off everyday.
[+]
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
I think I'm a relatively rational person, and her punishment was appropriate. Incarceration is a common punishment for contempt of court.
First off, she was in jail, not prison. That's more than just a semantic difference. Secondly, she could not be removed from office using the standard procedure with any alacrity given that they weren't going to call a special session of the legislature, so options were quite limited in how to deal with her. What it boils down to is this:
She was an elected official ignoring the law of the land.
NOBODY should be okay with that. If you don't like the law, work to change it, but you can not have officials in power doing whatever they want with no regard for the law. Period. The 'why' doesn't even matter. The SF people should have had some consequences for what they did as well, on the opposite of the coin.
[+]
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
Jassik said: »
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
She doesn't belong in prison, that's not what happened either. She was held in a county jail completely voluntarily, she could have either resigned her position or agreed to comply and gone home that day. There is literally no way you don't understand why she was in jail, you're just trying to get a rise out of people.
I don't need to get a rise out of people that wake up pissed off everyday.
Speak for yourself, I wake up in a great mood every day.
I used to wake up pissed off every day, nowadays I'm just happy to have gotten some sleep.
[+]
Drama Torama said: »
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
I think I'm a relatively rational person, and her punishment was appropriate. Incarceration is a common punishment for contempt of court.
First off, she was in jail, not prison. That's more than just a semantic difference. Secondly, she could not be removed from office using the standard procedure with any alacrity given that they weren't going to call a special session of the legislature, so options were quite limited in how to deal with her. What it boils down to is this:
She was an elected official ignoring the law of the land.
NOBODY should be okay with that. If you don't like the law, work to change it, but you can not have officials in power doing whatever they want with no regard for the law. Period. The 'why' doesn't even matter. The SF people should have had some consequences for what they did as well, on the opposite of the coin.
Did you use the word "alacrity" before SCH on FFXI?
[+]
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
Did you use the word "alacrity" before SCH on FFXI?
I think people here have seen enough of my posting to know that the answer to that is "yes".
[+]
Jassik said: »
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
Jassik said: »
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
She doesn't belong in prison, that's not what happened either. She was held in a county jail completely voluntarily, she could have either resigned her position or agreed to comply and gone home that day. There is literally no way you don't understand why she was in jail, you're just trying to get a rise out of people.
I don't need to get a rise out of people that wake up pissed off everyday.
Speak for yourself, I wake up in a great mood every day.
Me. Every morning.
[+]
ooh that looks small on my phone
I can still stun Blaster in my sleep.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
No rational person believes she belongs in prison. You do as you despise Christianity. I cannot talk you out of your hate or the pleasure you get in watching someone suffer.
She was held in contempt of court for the former.
I hope both she and the county get their pants sued off for the later.
My god how the money rolls in.....
Ben Carson Raises $20 Million In 3 Months
Huff Po
Hillary Clinton Raises More Than $28 Million In Last Three Months
Reuters
Huff Po
There is more to both articles.
Ben Carson Raises $20 Million In 3 Months
Huff Po
Quote:
Political newcomer Ben Carson raised more than $20 million in the past three months to fuel his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, his campaign said Wednesday, a haul of campaign cash that shatters records and sets a new bar for his GOP rivals.
As other campaigns scrambled to bring in final donations before the end of the fundraising period at midnight, Carson's senior team celebrated its massive haul at its suburban Washington campaign headquarters....
Carson raised at least $20.2 million for the quarter that ended Sept. 30, Bennett said, noting that receipts were still trickling in.
That's more money than what was raised by the GOP's entire White House field combined over the same period four years ago. Mitt Romney, the establishment favorite in 2012, raised $14.2 million during that time, while the most popular outsider, former pizza chain CEO Herman Cain, brought in $2.8 million.
As other campaigns scrambled to bring in final donations before the end of the fundraising period at midnight, Carson's senior team celebrated its massive haul at its suburban Washington campaign headquarters....
Carson raised at least $20.2 million for the quarter that ended Sept. 30, Bennett said, noting that receipts were still trickling in.
That's more money than what was raised by the GOP's entire White House field combined over the same period four years ago. Mitt Romney, the establishment favorite in 2012, raised $14.2 million during that time, while the most popular outsider, former pizza chain CEO Herman Cain, brought in $2.8 million.
Hillary Clinton Raises More Than $28 Million In Last Three Months
Reuters
Huff Po
Quote:
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton raised more than $28 million in the last three months, her campaign said on Wednesday, falling short of her nearly $48 million fund-raising haul in the previous quarter.
Campaign aides said 93 percent of the donations were in amounts of $100 or less, which they said was a sign of broad-based grassroots support as Clinton fights off a challenge from the party's liberal wing led by U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
The fund-raising figure for July through September did not include a breakdown of the total number of donors to Clinton, the average donation, or how many donors have already given the legal maximum for the primary campaign of $2,700.
Sanders raised more than $24 million in the last three months. He has galvanized the party's left-leaning activists and taken advantage of Clinton's declining opinion poll ratings on honesty and trustworthiness to surge into contention.
Campaign aides said 93 percent of the donations were in amounts of $100 or less, which they said was a sign of broad-based grassroots support as Clinton fights off a challenge from the party's liberal wing led by U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
The fund-raising figure for July through September did not include a breakdown of the total number of donors to Clinton, the average donation, or how many donors have already given the legal maximum for the primary campaign of $2,700.
Sanders raised more than $24 million in the last three months. He has galvanized the party's left-leaning activists and taken advantage of Clinton's declining opinion poll ratings on honesty and trustworthiness to surge into contention.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »
I wasn't talking about Davis. I was thinking about recent fire bombings of family planing clinics.
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Assuming it's true, that's a great way to undo the positive PR he accomplished over his trip. Not that the Church's explicit bigotry is a surprise to anyone, but siding with a person that many people view as a fundamentalist lunatic is pretty low.
She is denying licences based on her faith even though her faith also condemns divorce.
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You are happy that a district court judge denies to toss out contributions from a Super PAC?
Oh **** yes.
Remember, the senator in this case was soliciting for (your article said so) the Super PAC, they never received the money from the contributions, the Super PAC did. (It's amazing what a word can do to change one's viewpoint)
How is that bribery again?
The money does not go to the candidate true, but the candidate benefits from the money. We have a quid, is there a pro quo? That is the question the judge will not dismiss out of hand.
But more important, he directly calls into question Robert's specious reasoning that there can never be the appearance of corruption as long as a PAC is involved.
There is no laws broken from a candidate soliciting to a Super PAC, even if the Super PAC is in support of him.
But hey, if you want to condemn a person for indirectly soliciting himself for campaign money, there are a bunch of "indirect donations" that the government gives to various organizations that would otherwise be illegal to fund. To condemn one and accept the other is hypocritical at best.
Garuda.Chanti said: »
My god how the money rolls in..
after perry quit his super pac donors demanded their money back...
john kasich has initiated a "no takesie backsies" policy
donate now
which I think is pretty smart
[+]
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Garuda.Chanti said: »
It is not necessarily bribery. The judge said it could be held as such and therefore did not dismiss those charges.
The money does not go to the candidate true, but the candidate benefits from the money. We have a quid, is there a pro quo? That is the question the judge will not dismiss out of hand.
But more important, he directly calls into question Robert's specious reasoning that there can never be the appearance of corruption as long as a PAC is involved.
The money does not go to the candidate true, but the candidate benefits from the money. We have a quid, is there a pro quo? That is the question the judge will not dismiss out of hand.
But more important, he directly calls into question Robert's specious reasoning that there can never be the appearance of corruption as long as a PAC is involved.
There is no laws broken from a candidate soliciting to a Super PAC, even if the Super PAC is in support of him.
But hey, if you want to condemn a person for indirectly soliciting himself for campaign money, there are a bunch of "indirect donations" that the government gives to various organizations that would otherwise be illegal to fund. To condemn one and accept the other is hypocritical at best.
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Garuda.Chanti said: »
It is not necessarily bribery. The judge said it could be held as such and therefore did not dismiss those charges.
The money does not go to the candidate true, but the candidate benefits from the money. We have a quid, is there a pro quo? That is the question the judge will not dismiss out of hand.
But more important, he directly calls into question Robert's specious reasoning that there can never be the appearance of corruption as long as a PAC is involved.
The money does not go to the candidate true, but the candidate benefits from the money. We have a quid, is there a pro quo? That is the question the judge will not dismiss out of hand.
But more important, he directly calls into question Robert's specious reasoning that there can never be the appearance of corruption as long as a PAC is involved.
There is no laws broken from a candidate soliciting to a Super PAC, even if the Super PAC is in support of him.
But hey, if you want to condemn a person for indirectly soliciting himself for campaign money, there are a bunch of "indirect donations" that the government gives to various organizations that would otherwise be illegal to fund. To condemn one and accept the other is hypocritical at best.
That last statement was a broad statement on the hypocrisy of liberal/democrats, which that judge is one of.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.