nevermind.

Link here for anyone interested. It's a Facebook post, so nevermind if you so choose.

Not saying I hang with everything John Barcelona posted. I am simply offering a link to anyone who might be interested. It's a long post.

Andrew Frisardi:

I'm sorry if I've offended you, yet again. My post was aimed at my good friend Andrew M.

I wish I had seen what you posted before your edit.

But I was gadding about on Facebook. Regrets, regrets.

No, Bill, my "neverminding" of that post had nothing to do with feeling offended by anything, which I wasn't. I just thought twice about the content of the post, since I'm cautious about fake news these days and don't want to add anything to the thread that might be misleading.

Good idea. Slow and steady. Everyone, everywhere, must pay attention, and take heed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBGb5xNK9lU

Elton's song is not irrelevant to the thread. I could go line by line, word by word, and link to Biblical texts, just in this one song. But I won't. Just relax, have a beer, and take a listen.

I tried to listen to the song with lyrics as the focal point, but the Father of fathers directed me to this video. My headphones wouldn't work before, but suddenly, they are working.

Hmm.

Charlie, sometimes you might wish to take your "eye" from scriptures and glance around. But heaven forbid I should say the wrong thing. Like Paul said.

Keep watching.

The Watch-maker lives.

Charlie, this is a textbook example of the ad hominem logical fallacy. Instead of debating the merits of what Warren was saying, you attack her personally--with a racial epithet, no less. What on earth does Warren's racial heritage have to do with the substance of her concerns about Sessions' impartiality?

If you disagree with Warren's (and Coretta Scott King's) claims about Sessions' past intimidation of elderly black voters, please educate us. That's how civil discourse works.

If all you can do is sling insults, maybe it's because you can't counter the substance of Warren's objections--objections which seem highly relevant to Sessions's suitability for the job of Attorney General.

And the Sessions question raised by Warren isn't only a partisan issue. It's in the best interest of everyone, of every political persuasion, to be concerned about honesty and accountability in voting registration and procedures.

It's not alarmist to be alarmed about the erosion of the integrity of our election system, as this Nation article from two days ago attests.

Here's the opening paragraph:

Hi Juile,

If the suitability test wasn't administered to the occupant of the White House, do you think it's realistic to expect it to be imposed on those holding lower positions?

It's pretty easy to insult the Honorable Senator Warren, Julie. Corretta Scott King also praised Senator Sessions as a good man and a good senator. You won't hear that from the not so Native American Warren. She doesn't hold the moral high ground here quoting Mrs. King. Warren is a partisan Left-wing hack and a nut-job. If I claimed that I was a minority to get Gov't bacon to finish school when I had not a shred of Pow Wow in me, that would pretty much finish me as a wannabe politician, but the standard is different for Democrats. They embrace their falsity and their voters love them for it, or maybe not in Warren's case. She got caught with her knickers down about her heritage but she still makes the claim of being an Indian. Fake, fake, fake. She might not get re-elected next time. Hypocrisy, over and over again.


*Fauxcahontas* if you really take time to think about it, isn't a racial epithet at all. Just the opposite. It's calling out someone for pretending to be something they are not. Kind of like the Winter soldiers, Stolen Valor thing to my mind. Just sayin'.

More of Trump's necrophilous character's true intentions coming to light here.

As Publius, Anton is best-known for his September 2016 article, “The Flight 93 Election,” which argued that, like the passengers on the aircraft hijacked by al Qaeda on Sept. 11, 2001, Americans in 2016 needed to “charge the cockpit” and prevent Hillary Clinton from winning the election — or die. The article, which ran in the Claremont Review of Books, was circulated widely on conservative and white nationalist websites. The New Yorker declared it “the most cogent argument for electing Trump” but cited the responses by Ross Douthat of The New York Times that he’d “rather risk defeat at my enemies’ hands than turn my own cause over to a incompetent tyrant” and by Jonah Goldberg of National Review that its central metaphor is “grotesquely irresponsible.”

Greg

More on Bannon (Anti-Christ?)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/8c6dbdb...ieves-the.html