winsor

As a variant of the Messianic Movement of Judaism, there was no symbolic use of the cross at all. For a resident of Judea in the First Century to wear a cross would be about as likely as Jesse Jackson wearing a necklace with a little gold noose pendant. It turns out that, during the French Revolution, some people took to wearing necklace pendants in the form of tiny guillotines, which is on a par with wearing a cross - it is hardly the mark of solidarity with those who were executed thereby. Indeed, it was only when Christianity (tm) became the overlay of the Roman Empire that the cross became the preferred symbol. It is marvelously ironic that the symbol selected by his newfound 'followers' is the means they used to execute him. Though the Romans blamed the denizens of Judea for his death, the claim is rather transparent - execution under Mosaic Law was by stoning, while crucifixion was entirely a Roman affair. I still flinch when I see a cross, since there is an element of "this is how we kill Jews where I come from" in it, however inadvertent. It never ceases to amaze me that people can be given to idolizing one member of the family while wishing to exterminate the rest. I guess it's one of those mysteries of faith of which the Church makes such a big deal. BSBD, Winsor

Not the brightest comment I've ever read, bro. In fact, it's borderline stupid. There is historical evidence that the person known as Jesus of Nazareth existed. This is not proof of religion by religion itself, it's proof of a historical figure by historical evidence. Nah, he actually had it pretty well nailed. Most of the characters in the Hebrew Scriptures likely existed in the same sense that Heracles, Theseus and Ajax did. The point is that the mere fact that these guys once were around is hardly compelling evidence that Zeus, Apollo and He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named are the prime movers in tales of their exploits. As to the Christian Scriptures, there were quite a few who made claim to the mantle foretold by Isaiah, and it was the group that focused on one claimant in particular (see the credentials claimed at the beginnings of Matthew and Luke, which, ironically enough, required a paternal bloodline that would have been obviated by 'virgin birth') that formed the basis for the power grab of the Roman Empire, reinventing themselves by usurping what had until then been largely a movement of Judaism. Islam is only a little more blatant, with a core principle being 'this is the truth, believe it or we will kill you.' Christianity put that principle into practice repeatedly throughout its history, so it is not much better. BSBD, Winsor

Outstanding choices are: Uncle Shelby's Kiddie Corner, by Shel Silverstein Andrew Dice Clay reads Mother Goose and Mr. Mike meets Uncle Remus/Mr. Mike's Least Loved Bedtime Stories - Michael O'Donohue & Garrett Morris Wait until the kid is old enough to want comic books and gets a load of my collection of Zap Comics, Bijou Funnies, Wonder Wart Hog (like the rig) and Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers (like the Nelson Bro's theme) and the like. As a member of this family, a warped sense of humor comes with the territory. BSBD, Winsor

It's not spending reduction. $80 billion in new spending with $20 billion in cuts just says, "We were going to do $100 billion in new spending but only decided to increase it by $80 billion. That's $20 billion in deficit reduction." A spending reduction means "spending reduction." I gained 20 pounds last year. But I lost weight because I was on track for a 30 pound weight gain. Thus, weight reduction. Only in politics does it work like that. I am somewhat stunned to note, given the educational and occupational credentials of various posters, quite who shows a fundamental understanding of arithmetic. It is truly counter-intuitive.

I am a religious person, as all of my family members for the last 100 generations, on my Father's and Mother's side of the family were and are. Bully for you. Not really. 'The Bible' is a compendium of books of various origin, in various languages, with greatly varying agenda, and the books of the Christian Scriptures were included as selected by a committee. Ironically enough, the Hebrew Scriptures were intended for family consumption ONLY, yet they are used as the 'basis' for the bulk of Universal Religions out there (Christianity, Islam). Jesus was likely a Nazorean rather than a Zealot; these are movements of Judaism, rather than references to geographical origin. The difference is significant to Judeans, but largely lost on Europeans. The four 'Gospels' of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are a spotty mishmash of coverage, redacted to limit their inherent contradictions, and focused on a European (specifically Roman) audience. From a historical perspective they are of incidental utility, and have little to do with Messianic Judaism of First Century Judea. The Ministry of Information for which George Orwell worked, forming the basis for '1984,' had nothing on Roman or Byzantine handling of docuentation. I would not bother to use the term "delusional." it's more a matter of "all I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest, li la li li li li..." When someone reflexively blurts out something that has apparent connotations, their verbatim meaning can generally be discounted. When a Brit says "cor, blimey!" ("God blind me!"), you may rest assured they are not asking to be added to the ranks of the vision-impaired. There most certainly are atheists in foxholes. Vonnegut's refrain of "live for a while, die and be forgotten, so it goes" was the hard won lesson of witnessing first hand mindless death and destruction on an unimaginable scale (Dresden). Not as you think you understand it. You go with the odds: "The race may not be to the swift nor the battle to the strong. That is, however, the way to bet." As far as disregarding goes, a significant percentage of Observant Jews - to include Rabbis - are atheists. One can, for example say the Shema for its traditional value without being convinced that some cosmic entity is paying attention or even exists. This is equivocation. Faith != belief. I have faith that my parachute will open, but wear a reserve and use it when it seems appropriate Sort of. "Trust in Allah - but tie up your camel." Um, not hardly. Just a little legitimate research indicates that the timing of 'the birthday' was selected for purely political reasons. Yule festivals and other celebrations of the Equinox were very popular among the target audience for the spread of the 'Christian' power base, so they assigned that date to a replacement festival and incorporated many of the key Pagan elements into the 'new' festival. Someone from First Century Judea would be horrified by many of the commonly accepted elements of 'Christmas.' My family uses various holidays as an excuse to get together and eat heavily (we are all talented cooks and bakers). Chinese New Year is probably the favorite, since everyone gets to cook their specialty in turn, and we get to spend the day with the people we love while having wonderful food all day. For us it is an opportunity to enjoy life, rather than to plan for eternity. "This is life, this is not a dress-rehearsal..." BSBD, Winsor

MY invisible friend is greatly superior to YOUR invisible friend.

I'm reminded of an episode of South Park where Kyle says he's a Jew, Cartman tells him not to be so hard on himself, Kyle says that he really is a Jew, Cartman says it's okay, he's not that bad, and so forth. When I'm in the North, I flinch when I see such things as "Yankee Candle" and the like. There are parts of the country where being called a Yankee is a SERIOUS insult, but to some folks it is apparently no big deal. I gather there is even a sports team of some kind that goes by that name. When I lived in Switzerland, some of the Italian guys with whom I worked were investors in a joint named the "Dago Bar," and they had no problem with it at all. I refuse to mince words about race or to resort to epithets. If I like someone it has nothing to do with their familial origins, same thing for those I can't stand. Having spent infinitely more time on the African continent than the vast majority of those who fancy themselves "African-Americans," most of whom don't know the difference between Mali and Botswana, I refuse to use the term as a descriptor. In any event, if someone gets their uterus in a knot over the use of terms that are right out of Websters, and were the norm for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., then that's just too bad. BSBD, Winsor

Absolutely true. A reduction in spending is a vital part of solving our budget problem. Yet, you support someone who is "lashing out" against those would like to reduce spending. Based on what you posted, I can only make assumptions about why you might do that. Untill some one comes along and proposes a straight 50% to 60% cut in Defense (Attack?) spending, I will consider anything else just political gamesmanship. (Obviously along with many other cuts) Wholeheartedly agree. The amount necessary to provide for the common defense is a small fraction of the budget necessary to be "Team America: World Police." The U.S. Gov't tends to piss away cash in a fashion that would put any self-respecting drunken sailor to shame, but compared to the "Defense" Department the rest of the Gov't is made up of rank amateurs.

Boy, have we come a long way from "we had to destroy the village in order to save the village!" Whoever said "hindsight is 20/20" was delusional.

“If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it ought to be good enough for the children of Texas.” U.L. attributed to "Ma" Ferguson The historical character upon whom the "Jesus" myth is based would bear scant resemblance to any of the versions touted by those claiming to be followers. Similarly, the Thomas Nast variation upon the "Santa Claus" theme has nothing to do with the Nicholas of Byzantium. Not that it makes any difference. If her Jesus is Norwegian, it's as good as most any of the other Jesuses out there (kinda like Elvis in a sense). BSBD, Winsor

It's not a start. It's not a step. It's a stall. A stalling maneuver designed to say, "We took a step." A step backward is a step forward. It puts the issue down the road for someone else to deal with. Who will then kick it down the road, etc. Until someone, who thinks they're kicking it down the road, kicks it over the cliff.

Hell, he PATENTED it!

The President du jour always seems to be the best/worst due to the immediacy of their actions. While I agree that the incumbent is on the short list for most incompetent Chief Exectutive, the fact is that he has strong competition from the other contenders. Official histories that whitewash their actions and cult-like followings tend to blur the realities of various administrations. The fact is that we have been lucky to survive the tender ministrations of one President or another. Revered though FDR is in many circles, the list of his official transgressions is exhaustive. LBJ, an epically mediocre mind, inflicted damage on the body politic from which we may never recover. Carter, bless his heart, made policy on the basis of an enviable level of naivete. "Reaganomics" was a study in innumeracy. Buchanan set the gay rights movement back by a solid century. Bush 43 was/is a national embarrassment, and gives frat boys a bad name. Thus, though I agree that the narcissistic turkey in the Oval Office is woefully incompetent, he has serious competition for the 'worst ever' title. BSBD, Winsor

seems with him there will always be a next he just can't seem to stay out of the spotlight or should I say the 911 replays on the news I was advised early in my aviation career to adhere to every FAR with which I was familiar. The principle is that you will bust one or more at some time or another if you fly enough (due to poorly documented rule changes and what have you), and you are less likely to be called into account if everything else is scrupulously in order. This does not guarantee that you will never get burned, but it improves the odds that you won't. Mr. Zimmermann would be advised to take a similar approach. I would strongly recommend that he follow the rules as best as he possibly can, and to avoid ever being without surveillance video to demonstrate that fact. A video camera would have served him better than did being armed in the incident that brought him to public attention, and it would serve him well now, should he conduct himself in a legal manner at all times. I am not sure that his decision making skills are all that good, but making like a well-documented Boy Scout would be a good idea. BSBD, Winsor

Yo' mama.

no apology needed but i appreciate the sentiment. I am actually not at all a fan of the grievance police. i agree, many people are politically motivated to silence opponents using fake outrage. i assure you that was not my motivation. i felt calling the President of the US a mulatto and negroid was in bad taste. actually calling anyone that in 2013 is in bad taste. i felt it was such an obvious act of overt racism i should comment. when you purposely use a term that is meant to be hurtful, you deserve to be mocked. that was my sole motivation. i doubt any decent person would agree that mulatto or negroid is an acceptable term anymore. at least i would hope so. we agree also that people should be permitted to say what they want. i just feel i also have the right to ridicule them. except for global warming deniers. they need to shut up and go away, obviously. Everything you think you know is wrong.

It took 14 posts before anyone called foul on the use of "Christians" before a lick of research or even just reading the article below. Yes. It was about land and thugs. They look like Scientologists to me.

That's a Moo Latte from Dunkin Donuts.

Charming. "Gimme that ol' time religion..."

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/hasidic-gay-bashers-watchmen-jackets-nypd-chief-article-1.1544066 Let me here the sheep's excuses....... Excuses for what? What these guys did was reprehensible, regardless of their affiliation, and they deserve to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I don't get the gay-bashing thing, regardless of who is behind it. I suppose there may be some pockets of Orthodox Judaism that have so negative a reaction, but I know of none. If they were dressed as garbage men and pounding someone for being perceived as gay, I would not think that reflected badly on the Sanitation Department per se. If, however, the Sanitation Commissioner came out and said "This Department will not tolerate homosexuality. As part of our mandate to keep New York clean, Department personnel are hereby ordered to beat the tar out of anyone they even think might have homosexual tendencies..." I might view the actions of said garbage men in a different light. Perhaps there are Rabbis who support violence toward gays, and I think that rather pushes the limits of the First Amendment. The right to free speech stops somewhat short of allowing conspiracy, incitement to riot, treason and that sort of thing, and I suspect there is limited protection afforded clergy of any description who advocate criminal actions. I am sure there are Neighborhood Watch types that do not suffer from Little Dick Syndrome, but the ones that hit the news would appear to have terminal LDS. My sympathies to Mr. Patterson. BSBD, Winsor

I call bullshit. The mosque would be within its rights to have a neighborhood watch in accordance with United States law. If their purpose was to enforce Sharia, all bets are off. Just blown away but how little press this shit is getting. Should this be allowed? See above In that I make a point of adhering to any laws with which I am familiar, I wouldn't worry about it too much. The people who are likely to be "swamped" are those up to no good, and they would be advised not to push their luck much further. The ignorance contained in your post is rather well advanced. For one thing, Judaism is a tribal identity with religious traditions, where Christianity and Islam are Universal Religions - big difference. Oddly enough, both Christianity and Islam base their claim of authenticity entirely on Jewish tradition, but it is all about power when all is said and done. In any event, Shomrim are NOT "religious police,' whether you agree with their purpose or not. They are more akin to Farrakhan's FOI (Fruit of Islam), who are the neighborhood bouncers in the areas where Elijah "Muhammad" (Poole) held sway. I understand your loathing for things non-islamic if it is on a par with the contempt in which Islam is held in some circles. Nevertheless, if you are going to come down on the Hasidim and the Haredi (or Jews in general), you will not lack for material if you bother to get your facts straight, and your criticism could carry some weight. Your call. BSBD, Winsor

I am reminded of C. Hitchens' observation regarding Jerry Falwell to the effect that, given an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox.

In SA the common descriptor is 'zebra.' i was mocking you. thought that was pretty obvious. fyi, well mannered people use none of those descriptions. its just as easy and more accurate to say bi-racial. please do not talk to children. you will be doing the world a favor. Ah, to be so politically correct and humor impaired! I suppose you should be the paradigm of proper behavior to which I should aspire, and your permission to talk to children is a blessing for which I could only dream. What would I know about mocking? BTW, 'mulatto' is specific to negroid and caucasoid mixed parentage. 'Bi-racial' could refer to any number of permutations, each with its own connotations (Eurasian, et al.). BSBD, Winsor

In SA the common descriptor is 'zebra.'

Obama has the enviable advantage of being a mulatto. If a Negro is mad at him, it is because he had a Caucasian mother. If a Caucasian is mad at him, it is because he had a Negro father. If either agrees with him, it is because they are accepting the Truth (tm) despite their prejudices. It would be lovely if any issue had to stand on its own merits. I am fond of the Julliard audition, wherein the performer is not named and plays behind a screen so that the reviews are not tainted by any hint of prejudice. Unfortunately, the political process is never to be so impartial. I will admit to being biased toward one group over another because of a perceived commonality of purpose (for example, a County Commissioner from my town, as opposed to one from a neighboring Borough, may be expected to vote more in accordance with my interests), but acknowledge that this does not always work out in practice (said Commissioner, once in office, may turn out to have a Conflict of Interest that turns the remaining farmland into a strip mall). The whole idea that politics should be motivated by altruism is pleasantly naive. Whether or not the Capitol of Bulganistan is beset by various problems is an abstraction. Whether or not my particular County Seat does or does not have these same problems is an immediate reality. I think flying the US flag at half-mast for the death of Ho Chi Minh would have been more appropriate than doing so for Nelson Mandela on the basis of the track records of each individual. Uncle Ho fought with us against the Japanese in the Great War, Part II, and only opposed us when he was seriously screwed by Truman. Mandela, OTOH, never took a stance that was positive WRT the US of A or its inhabitants. Quite the contrary, he was not known to have a kind word regarding us at any time (maybe he did not want to wind up like Uncle Ho et al.). In any event, reserving recognition for those who have been allies, such as Thatcher, makes sense for a level of sufficiency that Mandela certainly did not achieve. BSBD, Winsor