Administration Neglected Coal Mining Safety
Administration Neglected Coal Mining Safety
Bloomberg reveals:
Federal authorities issued 21 citations last year for a build-up of combustible materials at the West Virginia mine where 12 men died, according to U.S. Labor Department statistics.
The mining explosion should call attention to the Bush administration’s inadequate enforcement of federal mining safety regulations. Mining safety in the U.S. has improved dramatically since the Mining Safety and Health Act was signed in 1977. By the time that President Clinton signed the International Labor Organization’s Convention 176 concerning safety and health in mines, mining deaths dropped from 425 in 1970 to 85 in 2000.
Phil Smith, the communications director for the United Mine Workers of America, said that while citations have been issued, the fines assessed for safety violations are too small to force large corporations to make improvements. “The problem with the current laws is enforcement.” According to an AFL-CIO analysis, the Bush administration cut 170 positions from federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and has not proposed a single new mine-safety standard or rule during its tenure.
And there’s a reason for that. The Washington Post reported that West Virginia coal firms raised $275,000 for Bush.
Last September, Bush rewarded the coal industry by placing coal industry veteran Richard Stickler in charge of MSHA. Stickler spent about 30 years as a coal company manager with Beth Energy. Mines managed by Stickler were marked by worker injury rates that were double the national average, according to government data cited by the United Mine Workers union.
UPDATE:
Confined Space has this interesting analysis:
The fact is that President Bush has not requested budgets for OSHA or MSHA that even keep up with the rate of inflation and mandatory pay increases over the past several years while penalties for OSHA or MSHA violations remain laughably low. The highest penalty of the more than 200 citations received last year by the Sago mine was $878. But that was the exception. Most of the others were $250 or $60. At that rate, it’s hardly a good business decision to even bother fixing anything. And the administration has shut down any new worker protection standards in OSHA and MSHA.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What’s up with OSHA? Why aren’t they involved? Why were there over 200 violations and no intervention? Why isn’t the “liberal media” asking? Could this be another Brownie-type failure?
January 4th, 2006 at 11:54 amI’m not the least bit surprised that the cronyism of this administration touches this disaster as well.
Stickler is another Brownie.
January 4th, 2006 at 11:55 amI heard an interesting report today on how China is a first ever Totalitarian, Communist Capitalist Society. And how the myth that capitalism spreads democracy stems from the reality that all democracies are capitalistic.
Then I couldn’t help but sense we are more and more like China everyday.
January 4th, 2006 at 11:59 amLook, if union workers want to keep voting for anti-union candidates because of their stance on abortion and gay marriage or some macho bullshit about strong defense, it’s their right to do so.
Don’t come crying to me when the unions are no longer able to keep you, your job or your pensions safe. I only have one vote.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:01 pmMike Malloy said it best last night. Bush and the Nazi-Religious Jesus Freaks bought these dumbasses’ votes in 04 with slogans like “if you vote for Kerry, queers will be allowed to marry…”, “[Kerry] will take away your guns…” And what you have now is death for your campaign dollars. West Virginia, you voted against your own interests.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:01 pmYou people are shameless. Not a word on this blog about this tragedy until you can implicate the feds.
It is disgusting the hatred and bile that comes from this site.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:04 pmGod d@mn…just when you think the cronyism couldn’t get any worse, any more egregious, any more integrated into even the more minor staff positions, this comes along.
We’ll have a national forest burn down, then find out the fire chief was a former Bush supporter/lawyer. We’ll then suffer a huge earthquake and learn the Chief Geologist was a former Bush supporter/CFO of WorldCom. Perhaps we’ll be hit with a sizeable meteor, only to discover we couldn’t see it because the Head Astronomer was a former Bush supporter/kindergarden teacher, and all the telescopes were being used to spy on San Fransico instead of the Milky Way.
This just doesn’t end. Every month, a new PREVENTABLE disaster, and more cronyistic exposure.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:08 pmNew Repub slogan for W.Virginia: “Better dead than a ring on Elton John’s finger.”
January 4th, 2006 at 12:09 pm#6–yes, this site is shameless. Uh huh. But the 273 violations by the company weren’t. NICE logic. Surely the ~33% (WashPo) of the “significant” transgressions, that gave the Feds the opportunity to shut it down, wasn’t bile-producing. I guess I shouldn’t have any hatred at the Feds who were bought off to NOT shut down the mine…
January 4th, 2006 at 12:12 pmThose mines that have slipped out of unions have to be brought back. Workers will watch out for their own safety.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:12 pmSane Liberal,
January 4th, 2006 at 12:14 pmSo…where’s yourword about this tragedy?
But hey, hating queers and towel heads and dying in coal mines just feels right, you know?
January 4th, 2006 at 12:16 pmnot to feed a troll, (but I will) this seems to be a political site not a news site…cnn has been covering this non stop since monday – yet when the news becomes political (ESPECIALLY WHEN BUSH IS DIRECTLY AT FAULT) you can bet your insane neo-con ass that it’ll show up here
January 4th, 2006 at 12:16 pmAl Franken is talking about this now on his show.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:16 pmSeems not only did Bush cut the budget on oversite for the coal mines, but 5 top members Bush appointed to this coal safety committee, were, you guessed it – former coal mining lobbyists!
AAAAAAAHHHHHHH!
When will the madness stop?
#14, it’s bush’s strategery
January 4th, 2006 at 12:17 pmYou people are shameless. Not a word on this blog about this tragedy until you can implicate the feds.
It is disgusting the hatred and bile that comes from this site.
Comment by Sane Liberal
January 4th, 2006 at 12:21 pmSeeing as this became a tragedy @ 4:00 this am, I think TP is right on top of things.
See, they did research and got facts straight before writing about it, unlike the company’s shameless rumor of “12 miracles” that they kept going for 3 hours before telling the truth.
“What do you know about work, you and your coalmining friends?”
January 4th, 2006 at 12:21 pm#6.
Just like the conservatives who blamed the “liberal welfare culture” on the New Orleans tragedy.
Go back to your old name.
-GSD
January 4th, 2006 at 12:21 pmThe mining explosion should call attention to the Bush administration’s inadequate enforcement of federal mining safety regulations. Mining safety in the U.S. has improved dramatically since the Mining Safety and Health Act was signed in 1977. By the time that President Clinton signed the International Labor Organization’s Convention 176 concerning safety and health in mines, mining deaths dropped from 425 in 1970 to 85 in 2000.
And how many have died since … it’s relevant (unless of course the death rate has continued to decline … then this entire report would be BS). How many deaths occurred prior to the signing of the ILOC … it’s relevant (Unless Clinton was in office from 1970 to 2000 since we’re giving him credit for that reduction in deaths over the same time).
This has to be the dumbest “report” TP has ever concocted … we don’t even know why the explosion occurred yet, but already TP is ready to infer that it’s due to the Bush administration reducing the number of inspectors. That could be the reason, but it may not be …
Let’s translate this scenario to other industries … Railroads, Airlines, Boating, etc. … I’m sure we can find 1) a stat that shows that a “decline” of some sort has occurred since 2000 (or we can infer that a decline is occurring after a terrible event, but not really proove that a decline has happened) and 2) this decline and/or tragedy is related to a Bush policy somehow (it doesn’t matter that a direct relationship exists, just draw the line between them … most people here would be glad to jump aboard).
What a witch hunt … the Salem Christians would be proud.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:33 pmLook no further than your own HATEFUL, PARTISAN, and DISGUSTING comments to understand why you have no power in Washington. All the scandals in the world will not give the fanatical left a voting issue at the polls when you are trying to score points on tragedy. This isn’t Katrina you hatemongers – and any attempt to make it that will be met with disgust by the general American public.
God forbid you offer these families prayer – oh yeah, that’s right. You don’t belive in God and you despise religion.
Shame on you Faiz.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:42 pmThis has to be the dumbest “report 
January 4th, 2006 at 12:43 pmGiacomo,
I think the point is
because of the Bush Admin’s cutting of all of these services there are a host of tragedies waiting to happen.
#21 – no, it’s that you people don’t have a soul and will do and say anything to advance your anti-Bush agenda.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:44 pm“Look no further than your own HATEFUL, PARTISAN, and DISGUSTING comments to understand why you have no power in Washington.”
And look no further than DeLay, Abranoff, Cunningham, Frist, Burns, Libby, Rove, Ney, Hastert, and the sixty or so republican Senators, congressmen and their staffs, who are about to start squealing on each other to understand why you LOST it all in ‘06.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:50 pmI think the point is because of the Bush Admin’s cutting of all of these services there are a host of tragedies waiting to happen.
That might be a logical statement or inference, but it doesn’t speak to the reality of this tradgedy. It’s irresponsible to point fingers before ANY facts have surfaced … if this accident is the result of poor conditions, then one needs to check and see when the last inspection was done … if then it turns out to be a lack of inspections that caused this incident, then one needs to check why this happened … if THEN it turns out that there were not enough inspectors to do the job … THEN the logical and fair conclusion can be drawn to Bush policy.
There are hundereds of reasons that a tragedy like this can occur … lack of oversight/unwatched negligence is only one possibility … why be so hasty to lay fault prior to the facts?
January 4th, 2006 at 12:53 pm#23 – we cannot lose if you soul-less hypocrites keep up this disgusting rhetoric and hate.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:53 pmlooks like this thread is lost to trolls
January 4th, 2006 at 12:55 pm#20
Shame on you for thinking anybody here cares what you have to say. You can’t even get your screen name right. You are neither sane nor liberal.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:56 pmAnd will you be returning to your job at Servicemaster after you lose this gig? Your supervisor must be taking note of the lame, no-facts rhetoric you’re using here. Get back to the talking points, you aren’t smart enough to get by without them.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:56 pmWe’re not safe from ocean attacks, or coal attacks under this Administration. How are we going to be protected from chemical weapon attacks?
Not that the ocean or coal actually “attacks”. But under this administration, we’re clearly unsafe in every way imaginable. Our privacy is not safe, we are not safe from the environment Bush has damaged, we are not safe from terrorists slipping into the country (which are being created more and more each day BY the Bush administration). And we are not safe from natural disasters like storms.
I will not say the coal mining tragedy was natural, because those tunnels were human made, and that is where they were trapped.
Sane Liberal… I can not speak for everyone here, but I fit the description of no believing in God, because I have a thinking brain that realizes how unreal the idea is. And I despise religion, yes. But I don’t despise all who practice any religion. Some I do though… like fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Muslims.
The few positive things that religious provides for the human mind can easily be obtained without religion. It shouldn’t take the fear of eternal torture in hell to want to help your fellow man. It shouldn’t take the fear of the rapture to want to do good in life. You should do it simply because you know it’s the right thing.
You shouldn’t need an imaginary friend like Jesus to not fear death. You could take comfort in knowing that when you die, you won’t feel or see anything. So you won’t care. Or you can know that your body will disintegrate into the ground and your body will become one with the earth. Even that idea isn’t so far off.
But a Zeus character like Jesus? Nah… you don’t need that to be a good person to have morals. I don’t need two stone tablets telling me what is right and wrong.
To see Bush killing the earth, ignoring the cries of people in need of help… I don’t need a religion or any God to tell me that those actions are wrong.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:57 pm#28 – at least I have a soul.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:57 pm#20
#25
If we don’t believe in god, then why the fvck do you think we believe in souls?
Just like your screen name, you make no since.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:57 pmAbout that coal mine…
Pity that few on the right have the temerity to criticize International Coal Group, the company that owned that clearly unsafe mine…
January 4th, 2006 at 12:58 pm#28 – at least I have a soul.
Comment by Sane Liberal — January 4, 2006 @ 12:57 pm
Prove it!
January 4th, 2006 at 12:59 pmWhat I DO need however, is a few more seconds to review my typing so I can fix typos. Does Jesus have a spell checker? Oh wait, I do. I’ll use that next time.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:59 pm#21 – no, it’s that you people don’t have a soul and will do and say anything to advance your anti-Bush agenda.
well, now, that’s not very nice.
Personal attacks on people only reflect poorly on you.
I happen to be a *wonderful* person.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:01 pmHave a good day. :)
#30
If you have a soul, why don’t you give a shit about WHY these people died?
January 4th, 2006 at 1:01 pmSane Liberal-
If I were you, I’d rent “Harlan County U.S.A.” A brilliant documentary about a coal miners in Kentucky who go on strike in order to have their company accept them as union workers. The movie also addressed the issues of safety and how scabs used violence to try to stop the coal miners and their wives. One scab killed one of the coal miners and that, sadly, was how the company gave in.
Before you start sucking up to an administration that relys
January 4th, 2006 at 1:02 pmless on experience and more on lack of knowledge, remember, 12 people are dead and if you really wantto honor their memories and their families, understand their points of view with an open mind.
Pity that few on the right have the temerity to criticize International Coal Group, the company that owned that clearly unsafe mine…
If they’re to blame … then I’ll blame them.
I guess if you get in a car accident today and are injured then your car must be “unsafe” … because accidents only happen due to “unsafe” conditions and not to something like, human error.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:02 pmRunning Dog: It’s a CONSCIENCE he lacks.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:03 pmI am not totally sure I agree completely with Mike Malloy or ThinkProgress commentors Anti Warhol, and JPR from LA. Yes, some of those men may have voting against their own interests when voting for Bush. But 1) How do you know ALL of them voted for Bush? 2) Them voting for Bush doesn’t mean I want them dead! They may have just been fooled by Bush’s lies. There is no way of knowing if they had access to the kind of truth that is out there. It’s possible they did not have internet access. Maybe they don’t have time to read the Washington Post or NY Times. It’s sad, but it does happen.
My best wishes go out to them and their families. And I feel so heart broken for the one who survivied. Knowing that he has to live with the fact that all his friends perished. So awful…
January 4th, 2006 at 1:04 pm#26
Chris, guess what, the trolls lost, again, :)
January 4th, 2006 at 1:05 pmHow horribly tragic for those poor families.
I’m sure the company administrators and CEO who did nothing to fix those nearly 170 violations are sleeping just fine at night in under their silk sheets in their palatial mansions that they saved the company hundreds of thousands of dollars, even at the expense of those 12 lives.
What has happened to our priorities? Money is the criteria by which we judge and value everything. It should be humanity that we value. What a sad, sad day for this country that we will learn nothing from our corrupt Capitalistic ways.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:09 pmShame on you Faiz and TP. Absolutely disgraceful and sloppy research. Coal mining injuries and fatalities data is readily accessible but conveniently ignored it. You’re attempt to pin this tragedy on Bush has failed.
Injuries per 200,000 employee hours:
1990 – 15,825 Rate – 10.18
1995 – 9,702 Rate – 8.22
2000 – 6,429 Rate – 6.64
2001 – 6,299 Rate – 6.03
2002 – 6,039 Rate – 6.03
2003 – 5,168 Rate – 5.38
2004 – 5,129 Rate – 5.00
2005 – N/A Rate – N/A
Deaths per 200,000 employee hours
January 4th, 2006 at 1:11 pm1990 – 66 Rate – 0.04
1995 – 47 Rate – 0.04
2000 – 38 Rate – 0.04
2001 – 42 Rate – 0.04
2002 – 27 Rate – 0.03
2003 – 30 Rate – 0.03
2004 – 28 Rate – 0.03
2005 – 22 Rate – N/A
Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) National Census of Fatal Occupational
January 4th, 2006 at 1:17 pmInjuries in 2004 Report (latest available) and Mine Safety & Health Administration
(MSHA) website statistics -
Of the 5,703 total work-related fatalities that occurred in 2004,only 51 (less than 1%) occurred in coal and mineral mining.
Figures for industries/sectors were:
Trade, Transportation and Public Utilities – 26%
Construction – 21%
Agricultural, Forestry and Fishing – 12%
Manufacturing – 8%
Retail Trade – 7%
Governmental Organizations – 9 %
Coal – 0.4%
Metal/Nonmetal/Stone/Sand & Gravel – 0.4%
All Mining/Extraction (Includes oil & gas extraction per BLS definition) – 3%
Steed, your statistics confirm the point I make in my post — that as a result of the 1977 law, the safety of coal mines has increased. But the present-day issue is what to do about the small minority of unsafe mines. The Sago mine has been repeatedly cited for safety violations, and the injuries in the mine doubled since last year alone. The Bush administration’s insufficient enforcement of these unsafe mines (through small fines that aren’t followed-up or lack of will to punish violators) is sustaining a dangerous situation for many coal miners, such as those workers at Sago.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:23 pmThe reason this is on the blog is because we are concerned about fellow citizens. Bush continues to slash funding, he puts campaign donors in management positions, and when this happens, it is an unfortunate “accident.”
January 4th, 2006 at 1:24 pmIt IS indeed an accident — it’s a tragic accident that Bush is president.
The Republican/conservatives kept the voters focused on issues like Bush is a god-fearing man who will prevent gays from marrying, and girls won’t be able to have abortions willy-nilly. Reducing inspections, putting cronies with a record like Stickler in place is what they got in return for their vote.
I am very sorry for the miners and their families, as I know everyone is, but when the hurt subsides, let’s look at why this occurred. TP is providing information to the public on the background of this tragedy.
Anyone remember the 1987 film, Matewan?
January 4th, 2006 at 1:30 pmIt’s all there, unionism, racism, evangelism.
Oh boy Steed is back! Yea! We can all stop blogging now. Steed has shown us the error of our ways. Bush is the messiah and we are all lowly creatins, who are not worthy.
/sarcasm=off
Steed, thanks for making TP point.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:34 pmI see the moderators are on the job. It’s a good thing too for you Marie and JIMBO. I called you everything but a white man.
Here’s a listing of all the mining disasters caused by Democrats and their Liberal masters in the mining companies since data was collected.
http://www.usmra.com/saxsewell/historical.htm
January 4th, 2006 at 1:51 pmAnyone who is willing to dismiss the “coincidence” between the $275K in contributions and the Bush Admin’s cronies who refused to shut down their mine(s) is just plain ignorant.
What other reason is there for giving this kind of bread? The only reason is for political favors. Plain and simple.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:51 pmTHIS ADMINISTRATION SHOWS THE SAME CARE AND RESPECT FOR OUR MINERS , TROOPS , OR ANY WORKING PERSON ….THEY ARE SLAVE TO THAT VISION THING …WE PAY THEM , THEY DO WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO AND MORE , WHO CARES ABOUT THEIR SAFETY AND WELL BEING . THEY ARE HIRED HELP .AFTER WE USE THEM WE THROW THEM ASIDE . THEY OWE US . PURE BUSHIE CHRISTIANITY .
January 4th, 2006 at 2:00 pmThis mine and accident followed the exact same recipe as the New Orleans Levy system and Hurricaine Katrina – just smaller.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:03 pmhow can you be so shallow to try and pin this on Bush. Have you no decency, sir?
January 4th, 2006 at 2:05 pmI’ll be the one to say it. I really feel sorry for these people. The dead miners and their families. But at no point in this whole ordeal did I ever feel any sense of indentification with these people. It’s all very bizarre. The praying, the group praying, the emphasis on the local church as an integral part of the rescue process. I don’t identify with this behavior. And it’s all you really heard out of people that were interviewed(and some interviewers).
I felt and feel about as much sympathy for these people as I do any other complete stranger. But it is even more alienating that these people are so very different. The coalmining culture is is very Twin Peaks. I don’t find it inappropriate that the accident would bleed into the political realm.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:06 pmIt never ceases to amaze me how low liberals will go to hate Bush. If you want to blame this disaster on him, then you also have to give him credit for the turnaround in the economy and for no terrorists attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11. I know you won’t because that is not in your nature and you have no decency whatsoever. You are all acting like spoiled children that have lost their lollipop and can’t get it back. These attacks will come to back to haunt you.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:12 pmGus -
Too much snobery , Not everyone has the chance to become a specialized MD and make lots of money without much danger.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:14 pmsome people , strugle have a real hard time , give them sympathy even if they find solace in their church .What else do they have ? certainly not a goverment worth a damn .
Gus,
I feel very sorry for you as well as for the miners. Apparently, you have no belief in any God and believe it or not, you are in the minority. Most people in this country and in the world do believe in a superior being. However, in America, you have the right to believe what you want and to practice what religion you want, which makes us the envy of the world. I pray that you will find God someday.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:16 pmwelcome back steed. you left us too long alone with IRI whose style of debate is somewhat “monochrome”
January 4th, 2006 at 2:21 pmWell, Giacomo is sure trying to throw off any aspersions to the Company’s responsibilities. In the past 6 hours I have researched the Sago mines, the company that bought it, the companys past profit margin, the safety violations, the numerous lack of response to unsafe conditions reported by the employees and the lack of inspections DUE to the above reported funds and inspector cuts.
So, Go Research the same, Giacomo,Sane Liberal,etc- And Apologize. The policies of anti-unionization, and Worshipping Profits above any other god killed these miners. Read about the 27 year old and his wounds for confirmation of the explosion. Research it. And apologize not to us, for being right- But to every American that is forced into working for an unsafe company because this Administration is more concerned with Saving corporate dollars than blue collar lives.
Christians, my ass.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:24 pmno, it’s that you people don’t have a soul and will do and say anything to advance your anti-Bush agenda.
Comment by Sane Liberal
No Soul? Look at our “Leader of the free world” if you need a clear cut example of that. As for offering prayers for those families, I’m sure that this has been done by many. This is a POLITICAL site that addresses issues from a POLITICAL view. Deal with it or get the eff off of it. As for what happened with the miners, it’s tragic. And yes, it all leads back to politics and union muck. My husband is Union and I know plenty about that crap. I have sat in on many meetings where people vote on issues that go against themselves. Then things like this with the miners happens. Or OSHA isn’t doing it’s job. It appears there were alot of grievances filed and the story is deep.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:30 pmIf you want to blame this disaster on him, then you also have to give him credit for the turnaround in the economy and for no terrorists attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11.
By “.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
January 4th, 2006 at 2:36 pmTurnaround on the economy? You have got to be kidding me!
No attacks? Then I guess you’ll throw in a great big Hooray for the 8 years of terrorist free attacks Clinton gave us.
God the trolls are here are reallly bad… Please forgive them, O lord, for they know not that they serve Mammon.
They SHOULD know. Pres.Bush is all about Greed and Money and playing favorites.
Liberals are about helping the poor, not torturing, not starting wars, and helping make the world a better place by greater understanding and empathy.
Liberals are a lot closer to Christianity than these deluded fools that Believe the words of Pharisee Dubya as he sends our soldiers to be killed, bombs residences, FIGHTS to be able to sexually molest our enemies…
What part of Christianity are you Republicans From? Better get your asses out from in front of FOX tv and into a church. You might learn a little about serving your fellow man instead of “Serving him up”
January 4th, 2006 at 2:41 pmTaking a page out of Kriminal Karl Rove’s playbook, “You are either for protecting miners, or you are for killing them”.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:43 pmBush is for Killing them.
Well, Giacomo is sure trying to throw off any aspersions to the Company’s responsibilities.
Uhmm … feel free to re-read my posts, but what I said was let’s not cast blame around without knowing the facts (on Bush or the company). If the company is at fault, then they should be held responsible.
How in the world some of the people here draw these vast conclusions with zero information about what occurred is beyond me … am I to infer that this blindingly simplistic view of circumstances in politically expedient ways (instead of how they actually are) to be the modus operandi?
“Bush is bad and the death of miners is bad so Bush must’ve caused the deaths (indirectly or directly)” … how postively childish.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:49 pmIt’s irresponsible to point fingers before ANY facts have surfaced …
Facts have surfaced.
Also, is .03 deaths per 200,000 man-hours good enough? What about .03 deaths per 200,000 hours flying on a commercial airliner? The FAA set a goal of 0 deaths, and it is technically possible. Coal mines should do the same. Especially if coal is the only energy source we will have (Bush doesn’t like those hippy trippy enviro-sources).
It’s not like we’re investing a lot in finding an alternative to fossile fuels. We’re just going to be destroying more mountains and more lives with coal.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:50 pm“Bush is bad and the death of miners is bad so Bush must’ve caused the deaths (indirectly or directly)†… how postively childish.
Sorry, I can’t find that quote anywhere on this site. Can you post a link to it? Is this a citation to a real or imaginary opponent?
January 4th, 2006 at 2:52 pmGod the trolls are here are reallly bad… Please forgive them, O lord, for they know not that they serve Mammon.
Comment by fade
Ah, the trolls aren’t really so bad. I think they just get confused when we loving and non-hypocritical progressives point out that everything bad that happens in the world can and should be laid at George Bush’s feet. Don’t worry, they’ll get used to being demonized.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:52 pmThe Sago mine has been repeatedly cited for safety violations, and the injuries in the mine doubled since last year alone.
Comment by Faiz
Once again you failed to do thorough research. The OFIR (Fatal Incident Rate) for this mine has been ZERO until now. The NFDL Incident Rate for this mine in 2000 was 17.22 when 104,516 operator hours were worked. The NFDL Incident Rate for 2005 with 164,317 hours worked was 17.04. The mining injuries did not double from last year. The mine previously operated from 1999 to 2002 with 14 Non-fatal injuries. The mine did not operate in 2003. The mine has been inspected more and has received more fines total from 2004-2005 than it received in 1999-2001. You also fail to mention that penalties for each violation have not decreased under this administration. It has never been in violation of code 75.351 until November of this year.
You can do better than that, or maybe not.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:57 pmIt’s not like we’re investing a lot in finding an alternative to fossile fuels. We’re just going to be destroying more mountains and more lives with coal.
Comment by cynical ex-hippie
There is only one alternative available in the next twenty years, nuclear. But you’re wrong about the investment. We are spending billions on research that will bear fruit someday but in the meantime that money could be used to feed and house poor Mexican illegals and Africans with AIDS. It’s a quagmire I tell you.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:57 pmNot Everything can be laid at Bush’s feet but he damn sure has put his authority straight up the ass of Several Regulatory committees and Commissions- Most notably the EPA- but others as well.
Any President that tries to repeal the Bacon-Davis act JUST so Halliburton could make a better profit and homeless Louisianans would have to work for less than minimum wage- is Definetly Not “for” the Average American.
Blue Collar men and women can thank Congressman George Miller (a democrat) and a bi=partisan effort including several Republicans that ACTUALLY give a damn about blue collar workers for beating back Bush on that one…
January 4th, 2006 at 3:02 pmWest Virginia Mining Tragedy – Part 2
A collection of posts that talks about safety violations and why the families of the victims are so angry.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:04 pmSteed sounds like one of those accountants working in the back office of the CEO. Why don’t you turn on MSNBC and listen to a few of the WORKERS AT THE SAGO MINE comment about their working conditions?
OH – I know, you will probably say they are just whiny Democrats and they deserved to die because their parents were not rich and they didnt get an education.
So, Steed’s reasoning is: There’s nothing wrong with this mine. No one Died til NOW.
So, Even though, Better working conditions and Safety regulations will have been found by this time next week to have COMPLETELY PREVENTED this tragedy- It’s no ones’ fault but the miners, I guess.
I don’t think so.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:07 pmSuccess! Fewer poor people and injured workers to file claims….. PARTY BEFORE COUNTRY=REPUBLICAN MANTRA
January 4th, 2006 at 3:16 pmThis is a very sad tragedy, that was made worse by people who failed to tell the truth for 3 hours, after letting miners families believe their loved-ones were OK!
Failure to tell the truth immediately, has caused more hurt!
President Bush like usual praised a fellow Repub Governor like he did for Brownie of FEMA!
If this tragedy was compounded by Bush cutting back on mine
January 4th, 2006 at 3:23 pmregulation enforcement funds, then this event can be added to the list of impeachable crimes on George!
I’m not a snob. I’m a working-class stiff. I cringe when anyone discusses prayer in public. Especially my own family. The public is not the place for prayer.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:24 pmFacts have surfaced.
OK … let’s hear em. So far, only Steed has posted any facts. What’s the direct line between Bush and this tragedy … there is none yet. No one even knows what happened. For Marie to say that she’s “concerned about fellow citizens” is perfectly appropriate, but Faiz has drawn a conclusion based upon a possibility and not actual facts.
Also, is .03 deaths per 200,000 man-hours good enough? What about .03 deaths per 200,000 hours flying on a commercial airliner? The FAA set a goal of 0 deaths, and it is technically possible.
You’re changing the argument. Faiz cited Clintons law and the decreasing deaths … then spoke about Bush’s slash of the budget and the number of inspectors. The fact that deaths have still decreased means Faiz’s thesis is total BS. All gov’t agenices should shoot for 0 deaths but Steed was correct to point out that Faiz failed to report the current death/accident rates and their continued improvement. Perhaps we should congratulate Bush for saving tax payer money while continuing to improve accident rates and death rates?
Sorry, I can’t find that quote anywhere on this site. Can you post a link to it? Is this a citation to a real or imaginary opponent?
This whole comments section is full of A could cause B therefore if B occurred it must’ve been caused by A … surely you see this?
Steed sounds like one of those accountants working in the back office of the CEO. Why don’t you turn on MSNBC and listen to a few of the WORKERS AT THE SAGO MINE comment about their working conditions?
Everyone agrees that this tragedy is horrible … I’m not ready to point fingers at Bush or the company until the facts come out … those who are willing to do so are engaging in a witch hunt …
Better working conditions and Safety regulations will have been found by this time next week to have COMPLETELY PREVENTED this tragedy
Feel free to shout from the mountain tops once (or if) that occurs … until then, it just like politcal pandering and expediency.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:26 pmYou know what? F*CK you, hardass. Telling people what to think is snobbery.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:29 pmMy, what a big skimmable post you have there, Giacomo.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:30 pm54-57, etc. I have lived in WV for 25 years. It is a fact that in 2000 and 2004 West Virginians, especially those living in mining and rural areas were sent letters telling them to vote for Bush because first Al Gore and then John Kerry would take their guns. In 2000 they were told that the democrats were going to outlaw the Bible. People have told me that they voted for Bush because their minister/pastor/preacher told them to. This may seem unbelievable, but it is a prime example of the danger of “blind faith”.
Coal companies (as well as oil & gas) are BIG contributors to political campaigns and their influence doesn’t stop there.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:31 pmHere’s a sample:
http://www.ohvec.org/press_room/press_releases/2004/11_08.html
http://www.wvcag.org/issues/overweight_coal_trucks/index.htm
On the subject of a coal alternative:
Rather than nuclear power (which is neither safe or clean), solar and wind power (safe, clean and renewable) is the answer for WV and the planet. Although nearly every surrounding state offers incentives and subsidies for installation of renewable energy systems, WV has NONE. Most states have netmetering (homeowner sells excess power back to utility company) WV DOES NOT. Thousands of good paying jobs could be created in the renewable energy industry. o do you think stands in the way of this?
Rare moments of truth on the Today show this morning.
This morning I watched as Matt Lauer interviewed the grown son of one of the dead miners. He reported that his father complained continually about routine safety violations in the mine, that literally hundreds of safety violations were cited in the last year or two, and that the mineworkers’ union was powerless to advocate for the basic necessities of its members.
This “accident†was no accident, people. The reason why the mining company did not address core safety issues is simple, and readily understandable to any first-semester MBA student: there was no financial incentive to do so.
The way large corporations operate is clear. If it is more profitable to pay fines than improve safety, then safety improvements never happen. The people that matter are the shareholders, not the consumers, employees or their orphaned children and widows. The rhetoric about the “family of employees†or the prayers the CEO sends to the hapless families of his dead workers are meaningless. The stock price and the market share are all that matter. The workers toil in the shadows.
Where were the regulatory agencies, the watchdogs we turn to when workers are placed in danger again and again, in clear violation of the law? Where were the union leaders, who once upon a time ushered in an age of wealth, safety, and middle-class prosperity through the power of collective bargaining? Where were the activists to stand up and remind the world that America does not treat its workers like animals, and that a robust share price on the commodities market is not an acceptable reason to disregard human life?
The answer is simple: they are gone.
Let’s talk about the nineteen-eighties, when the death sentences of these miners, it may be argued, began to be written. Ronald Reagan declared open war on labor unions, and turned our nation into a criminal state by refusing to enforce the labor protections established by international treaty as basic elements of human rights. Prior to that time, industry had experienced a heyday. Meaningful safety regulations were being enacted and unions were able to fight for the quality of life needs of workers, so that everyone prospered.
At about the same time, ideologically driven right-wing millionaire businessmen began the long campaign to take control of the federal government in order to destroy it (that campaign realized its fruition under our current president, a corrupt business insider who has identified himself time and time again as the spiritual child of Reagan). Their movement doesn’t feel it is appropriate for the government to be in the business of helping or protecting people.
Look it up. Ask them yourself.
The pattern is now etched in stone: corporate interests and the need for ever-increasing profit rule the day. Screw the worker, the consumer, the law, the naïve and quaint concept of “human rights.†The rhetoric fed to the people for decades has been that “government is not the solution to the problem, it is the problem.â€
Well, government did not kill those miners. Corporate greed in the name of the shareholder and stock price above all other human considerations killed those miners.
Back to the interview between Matt Lauer and the dead miner’s son:
The son explained that every day he begged his father not to go back to the mine, but that he always did. He knew that a sword of Damocles hung over his head every moment he was in the mine. The man worked under tons of rock and earth for thirty years and knew full well the dangers he had to endure to wrest a living for himself and his family. He also knew that those dangers could have been reduced and that a decision had been made somewhere that they would not be.
He was killed five months before retirement, although in America today, it goes without saying that had he lived, his “retirement†was likely to be a dicey affair anyhow. You see, the same large corporations who disregarded safety rules as inconveniences that could be endured by paying modest fines for so long are now routinely withdrawing the good pensions and benefits that used to be a staple of American workers’ lives.
This is your legacy, America. You voted for it. Enjoy.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:35 pm#6 – Then go.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:42 pmI notice Steed’s screen name has changed slightly. I’m sure an oversight as you post under so many. Really bad, man.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:46 pmYou know what? F*CK you, hardass. Telling people what to think is snobbery.
Was this directed toward me? If so, not sure what got your panties in a wad but perhaps it was comments or opinions stated in a manner not unlike “The public is not the place for prayer ” Physician … heal thyself.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:51 pmThe reason why the mining company did not address core safety issues is simple, and readily understandable to any first-semester MBA student: there was no financial incentive to do so.
Well … while I do agree that some companies don’t give a crap about there employees, I’d assume that 12 dead miners has serious financial repurcussions (and thus ample incentives).
The pattern is now etched in stone: corporate interests and the need for ever-increasing profit rule the day. Screw the worker, the consumer, the law, the naïve and quaint concept of “human rights.â€
This is not universally true, but is far too often the norm. There are plenty of businesses that don’t exploit the environment or their workers.
This is your legacy, America. You voted for it. Enjoy.
Your post is very sobering and insightful … I would challenge one more small part though … this is not just a Bush issue (the statement “you voted for it” infers this, if I’m wrong, I apologize) … it’s one that has been building and is an ugly side effect of Capitalism. Consumer demand speaks far more strongly than government action … which is a good thing. When the consumers aren’t apathetic to a corporations failures … you’ll see change. Speak with your wallet … I have for some time now (yes, conservatives can have a conscience).
January 4th, 2006 at 3:58 pmGiacomo and I-RIGHT-I,
Jesus would be very sad that you vote Republican. He was a liberal after all (well, the myth he is based on was liberal… he largely came from the Hindu god Krishna… you know, peace, love, vegetarianism and Gandhi?? You do know they are pretty much the same, or are you in denial about that as well? And Indians are very liberal… holy cows, don’t walk on paper because it’s disrespectful to trees, no nukes, be kind to others, forgiveness, and all the stuff you’ve said that Christianity is supposted to mean. You honestly didn’t think that the idea of Jesus, the liberal peace-monger, came from the same flat-earth people who brought you the war-mongering, human sacraficing and abhorrent murdering of the Old Testament did you?)
January 4th, 2006 at 4:01 pmWell … while I do agree that some companies don’t give a crap about there employees, I’d assume that 12 dead miners has serious financial repurcussions (and thus ample incentives).
Are you kidding? There’s this thing called insurance. If the miners had any, the insurance companies pay. If they had none, their families pay. At no point do the companies pay directly. Unless it goes to court, and really, unless an attorney volunteers out of the need for publicity, do you think miner’s families in West Virginia can afford to hire legal anything?
Though wasn’t John Edwards a coal miner’s kid? With a law degree? And isn’t he currently unemployed? Hmmm…
January 4th, 2006 at 4:06 pmThis is not universally true, but is far too often the norm. There are plenty of businesses that don’t exploit the environment or their workers.
Start naming them. I bet you can’t come up with ten…
January 4th, 2006 at 4:07 pmThere is only one alternative available in the next twenty years, nuclear.
And you have the gall to say Democrats have no new ideas? The 1950s called, they want their energy plan back.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:14 pmHurricanes, floods, mine collapses — sure all are not directly Bush’s fault, but indirectly they are all the results of his mismanagement of everything. Cutting funds for programs, and eliminating jobs of expertise, placing incompetent campaign donors and cronies in high places, not to mention the false and hysterical reasons why voters were persuaded to vote against their own best interests and vote Republican — all of these are responsible for the disasters.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:18 pmIf we are hit with a terrorist attack, Bush will want to gather support for his leadership, but in reality he has done nothing to strengthen us and in fact has increased our vulnerability with his good-ol’-boy presidency.
Giacomo and I-RIGHT-I,
Jesus would be very sad that you vote Republican. He was a liberal after all (well, the myth he is based on was liberal
You honestly didn’t think that the idea of Jesus, the liberal peace-monger, came from the same flat-earth people who brought you the war-mongering, human sacraficing and abhorrent murdering of the Old Testament did you?)
Comment by unbelievable
One in the same. Scary thought isn’t it? The God of the Old Testament is returning.
comment by an idiot woman
January 4th, 2006 at 4:19 pmGood post Gun-toting liberal- Giacomo- I guess you can play Devil’s advocate til the facts are laid out before you. But by that time, i imagine you will probably be changing the subject once again.
From everything I have researched just this morning, it makes a pretty damning case. I have worked in Texas manufacturing plants, and also with the TNRCC(Texas EPA) as a board member of a hazardous waste hauling corporation that my family owns. I know that the owners = in one case my father, don’t give a damn about anything but their Bottom line. If the fines are low, you hope you don’t get caught, do it illegally and hope nothing happens. If the fines are too high, you take care of the safety issue. And thats’ it. President Bush- no one else, raided the EPA regs. I don’t have any more time to lead you to it= But feel free to look. He appointed cronies in key positions and Effective government employees quit in protest when their hands were tied by corporate interests one too many times.
I don’t see why in this West Virginia rural area with a semi-monopoly on employment there that it would be any different. And judging from the sheer number of violations and the lack of anything done= Its just another example of how our Government does less and less for our people and more to help increase big business profits under this administration. If you love Dubya, fine= But be aware what his policies are doing= The next big issue we are looking at is destined to be a major Plant polluting America with some Severe adverse results. Big Business knows Bush cant last forever- They are going to milk this term for as much money as they can make and get away with as little safety regulation as they can while Dubya is running interference. They will hold their breaths, hope they don’t get caught. If you are counting on the Pragmatism and common sense of manufacturing companies to “do the right thing” without regulation you are simply clueless to how big business REALLY works.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:19 pmJesus would be very sad that you vote Republican. He was a liberal after all
I agree with you … he was very liberal for his time. Certainly you would admit that one man’s liberal is another man’s conservative though and that those terms vary greatly depending on one’s location or time period. I’m not sure about the myth part … there certainly was a man named Jesus around 3 to 30 AD … that’s not the part that is usually up for debate. Now, as for his deity stature ………… wide open on that one.
I may have told you this before but most “conservatives” think me to be liberal … (God knows what they’d think if they encountered you, unbelievable ;-]) My stances on the death penalty, gun control, corporate accountability and the environment usually cause their statements. I’m more of a Rockefellar Republican than a Bush Republican.
Are you kidding? There’s this thing called insurance. If the miners had any, the insurance companies pay. If they had none, their families pay. At no point do the companies pay directly. Unless it goes to court, and really, unless an attorney volunteers out of the need for publicity, do you think miner’s families in West Virginia can afford to hire legal anything?
That’s true … but insurance companies will only cover negligence to a point … and what if criminal misconduct could be proven? Also, many insurance companies won’t cover miners … they maybe had a group policy but given the nature of their work, how much will that be? I’m sure there will be plenty of attorneys willing to pro-bono in this case … if it turns out that these deaths were due to negligence, I’d say criminal charges should be sought.
Start naming them. I bet you can’t come up with ten…
Well here goes …
The Body Shoppe
Ben & Jerry’s (they were at least)
Patagonia
Timberland
Apple (some disagree here)
A. G. Edwards
U.S. Bancorp
Intel
Callaway
Lucasfilm, Ltd.
Petco
Halliburton … just kidding
Those are off the top of my head … there are many more socially and environmentally conscious firms.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:31 pm#6
“You people”
Sounds like bigotry to me.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:35 pmGiacomo,
You are fooling yourself if you think Itel in evironmentally friendly.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:39 pm#92
You forgot PIXAR.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:47 pmI have to agree that it’s rediculus to believe nuclear power is the only other option to fossil fuels. It’s the only other option for the current establishment.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:49 pmThe fact that I-RIGHT-I thinks nuclear is the only other option shows how little he knows.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:55 pmdoesn’t IRI know that the “Nuclear Option” has nothing to do with an energy policy
hardy har har
January 4th, 2006 at 4:57 pmRather than nuclear power (which is neither safe or clean), solar and wind power (safe, clean and renewable) is the answer for WV and the planet. Although nearly every surrounding state offers incentives and subsidies for installation of renewable energy systems, WV has NONE. Most states have netmetering (homeowner sells excess power back to utility company) WV DOES NOT. Thousands of good paying jobs could be created in the renewable energy industry. o do you think stands in the way of this?
Comment by vesparia
You know nothing about energy. Wind and Solar couldn’t replace coal and nuclear if you covered the entire planet with the gadgets. It’s a tax break boondoggle and fuel to run greenies little power plays, nothing more.
January 4th, 2006 at 4:58 pmGiacomo,
Thank you for your kind words and for being a reasonable and thoughtful person. We need more of us in this forum. I have read your posts often and am happy to hear from you.
My rhetoric sometimes takes flight on its own, I admit, yet I do believe that the latter third of the 20th century (as well as the few years of the current one) give us an object lesson in how not to elect leaders.
Those on the Right call again and again for deregulation of business. They don’t mention that business started out unregulated, and that the era of unrestrained capitalism is known, with good reason, as “the robber baron era.” There was nothing halcyon about those days, unless you happened to be the industrialist rather than the worker. A gradual accumulation of workplace and market protections is what created the fertile environment for the prosperity of the middle class in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.
Corporate executives saying that regulation is an unwarranted intrusion into business is the same as a pickpocket calling for fewer police on the streets.
There is no species in nature about which it can be said that the weak exploit the strong, yet that is what these very smart business executives – cum-politicans would have us believe. Less regulation means less protection for the workers, the environment, etc.
Are there crooks on the Left? Sure. Is the corruption equal?
Wait until the numbers come out of the Abramoff case before you judge. Republicans are terrific crooks, the best. If there’s a nickel, they’ll find a way to get to it. Hell, they can even sell you toxic lead in the water and make you believe you’re buying Jesus!
Justice Brandeis said, “you can have wealth collected at the top, or you can have democracy, but you can’t have both.” My politics are more nuanced than my screeds but basically I am a champion of the middle class and a believer that wealth and power cannot police themselves.
BTW, I work with mentally ill people, rich, middle class, and poor, and I see what our culture does to people across the spectrum. If I thought that the gratuitous wealth of the rich made them happier, or better off in some way, I might back off a little.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:00 pmThe fact that I-RIGHT-I thinks nuclear is the only other option shows how little he knows.
Comment by Spudge_Boy
My partner is a nuclear engineer and he’s showed me the numbers. There is no technology than can generate the energy this nation or any nation larger than a small town demands. I’ve told you before that fuel cells are on the way to replace gas engines but we’ve got nothing but fossil fuel and nuclear that will handle the rest, nothing.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:02 pmI agree with you … he was very liberal for his time.
Comment by Giacomo
There is Zero Liberalism in either the Old or New Testament that is not used as a figure of evil. In fact the Bible defines conservatism and totally rejects and condemns Liberalism on nearly every page.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:08 pmI-RIGHT-I
Nonsense. Wind and Solar could 100% replace all fossil fuels. Where did you get that ‘lie’, from the ‘intelligent design’ or was it the book of ‘creationism’.
To meet the current U.S. needs with solar power would require sun collectors covering some 1,000 square miles. That’s with the current generation of solar, which is only about 1/6 of the potential of solar efficiences based on technologies demostrated in labs. Considering how much of the country is covered in ‘roofs’, this alone would be very easy to accomplish.
When you consider that the average home is capable of running on solar with a small fraction of the roof being covered, the ‘rationality’ of these numbers quickly make sense. Then when you add wind which can provide all of the power needed for a home with a very small turbine, then your statement is all the more off the mark.
Anyone who doesn’t realize how EASY it would be to replace fossil fuels with biomass, solar and wind is just sniffing glue… The fossil fuel industry doesn’t want to change, and they’ve used abramoff to buy off the the politicians to prevent responsible energy choices. That’s the TRUTH, what you posted is nonsense…
January 4th, 2006 at 5:11 pmFuel cells need hydrogen and currently, that comes from fossil fuel.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:12 pm“My partner is a nuclear engineer and he’s showed me the numbers. There is no technology than can generate the energy this nation or any nation larger than a small town demands.” I-RIGHT-I
Your pillow talk isn’t at question, what’s at question is the fact that your source is ignorant. The problem with nuclear power engineers is that they’re given ‘propaganda’, that a slight bit of rational thinking debunks.
If a tiny solar panel on a roof supplies all of the power that a home needs, then the entire roof of that house would supply energy to the grid that could be used for helping to power industry, etc.
Whoever your lover is, he clearly didn’t attend an accredited university.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:13 pm#101
First off, you ever heard of the Hoover damn? That uses what is called Hydro power. As in water. Your friend needs more education.
Secondly, there is no way you are the real I-RIGHT-I. I am on I-RIGHT-I’s balck list and deserve a “your an idiot” or “you are a liberalcommiemofobastard” or something. You need to develope your I-RIGHT-I character a little more.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:14 pm“There is Zero Liberalism in either the Old or New Testament that is not used as a figure of evil. In fact the Bible defines conservatism and totally rejects and condemns Liberalism on nearly every page.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I”
That’s really funny. If you’re serious, then you’ve clearly never read the bible…
January 4th, 2006 at 5:14 pmBob Loblaw,
Hydrogen is the H in H2O. It comes from water. You don’t need fossil fuels for that.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:15 pmNo wonder you people are so fvcked up in the head. DO you actually believe that? Have you read the bible? I highly doubt it. The New Testament is nothing but how to be a liberal. It is a training manual for liberalism.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:17 pm“There is Zero Liberalism in either the Old or New Testament that is not used as a figure of evil. In fact the Bible defines conservatism and totally rejects and condemns Liberalism on nearly every page.
Comment by I-RIGHT-Iâ€
I’ve never bothered to get into mythology but if that is your source of the definition of conservatism then I feel sorry that your stuck in the year 0.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:17 pmSpudge_Boy,
Yes the H is in H2O but what method is used to separate the H’s? Currently, fossil fuel is the major source of energy. Of course, you could use energy from wind, solar or hydro, but still, we are grossely dependant on fossil fuels.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:20 pmI’ve never bothered to get into mythology but if that is your source of the definition of conservatism then I feel sorry that your stuck in the year 0.
Comment by Bob Loblaw
I’m sure there’s a lot of things you haven’t bothered to get into Bob. I know that TV and XBox take up a lot of time…
But I think your confusion centers around the defenition of Liberalism and Conservatism. Allow me…from Russell Kirk’s, “The Conservative Mind”.
“Any informed conservative is reluctant to condense profound and intricate intellectual systems to a few portentous phrases;
he prefers to leave that technique to the enthusiasm of radicals. Conservatism is not a fixed and immutable body of dogma,
and conservatives inherit from Burke a talent for re-expressing their convictions to fit the time. As a working premise,
nevertheless, one can observe here that the essence of social conservatism is preservation of the ancient moral traditions.
Conservatives respect the wisdom of their ancestors…; they are dubious of wholesale alteration. They think society is a
spiritual reality, possessing an eternal life but a delicate constitution: it cannot be scrapped and recast as if it were a machine.
[...] I think there are six canons of conservative thought–
(1) Belief that a divine intent rules society as well as conscience, forging an eternal chain of right and duty which links
great and obscure, living and dead. Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems. [...]
(2) Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of traditional life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity,
egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems. [...]
(3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes. The only true equality is moral equality; all other attempts
at levelling lead to despair, if enforced by positive legislation. [...]
(4) Persuasion that property and freedom are inseparably connected, and that economic levelling is not economic progress.
Separate property from private possession and liberty is erased.
(5) Faith in prescription and distrust of ’sophisters and calculators.’ Man must put a control upon his will and his appetite,
for conservatives know man to be governed more by emotion than by reason. Tradition and sound prejudice provide
checks upon man’s anarchic impulse.
(6) Recognition that change and reform are not identical, and that innovation is a devouring conflagration more often than it
is a torch of progress. Society must alter, for slow change is the means of its conservation, like the human body’s perpetual
renewal; but Providence is the proper instrument for change, and the test of a statesman is his cognizance of the real tendency
of Providential social forces.
He contrasts these core beliefs with those of conservatism’s opponents on the Left, the radicals of all stripes, who believe in :
(1) The perfectibility of man and the illimitable progress of society: meliorism. Radicals believe that education, positive
legislation, and alteration of environment can produce men like gods; they deny that humanity has a natural proclivity
toward violence and sin.
(2) Contempt for tradition. Reason, impulse, and materialistic determinism are severally preferred as guides to social
welfare, trustier than the wisdom of our ancestors. Formal religion is rejected and a variety of anti-Christian systems
are offered as substitutes.
(3) Political levelling. Order and privilege are condemned; total democracy, as direct as practicable, is the professed
radical ideal. Allied with this spirit, generally, is a dislike of old parliamentary arrangements and an eagerness for
centralization and consolidation.
(4) Economic levelling. The ancient rights of property, especially property in land, are suspect to almost all radicals;
and collectivist radicals hack at the institution of private property root and branch.
Thus, the playing field. He then goes on to an erudite, idiosyncratic and altogether beguiling discussion of the chain of men who have defended conservative ideas and resisted radical impulses from Edmund Burke, the sine qua non of the Right, to T.S. Eliot, the great poet and critic. Among the others whose thought he surveys are : John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Sir Walter Scott, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, John Randolph, John Calhoun, James Fenimore Cooper, Alexis de Tocqueville, Orsestes Brownson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Benjamin Disraeli, Cardinal Newman, Henry Adams, Irving Babbitt, Paul Elmer More, and George Santayana. Their styles, their particular concerns, their errors, their failures, their successes all vary widely, but the core principles that they seek to vindicate remain, unchanging. Pluck Edmund Burke from the mists of time and plop him down on Meet the Press this Sunday and he’d voice the same concerns about our society as he voiced about his own in the 18th Century. On the other hand, put Karl Marx on the Today Show and even Katie Couric would tear him apart. The enemies and the fetid ideologies that the conservative mind had to contend with were ever changing, a vast array of utopian daydreams discarded one after another by a Left that never admits the error of its ways, but merely moves on to the next destructive iteration of radicalism, secure in the delusion that this next attempt will achieve a “perfect” society, right here on Earth, while instead leaving piles of corpses in its blood-soaked wake. “
January 4th, 2006 at 5:23 pmIn the 1930s, my grandfather died as a result of injuries suffered in a coal mining “accident.” My mother, the third of 5 children, was 12 years old. The company refused to acknowledge any responsibility and the family received no compensation. Before long, their savings were exhausted and they lost their house. What was left of their meager possessions were thrown in the street. The poverty they suffered was beyond belief. Upon finishing high school at the top of her class, my mother was offered a full academic scholarship to attend college. Unfortunately, she couldn’t afford suitable clothes or transportation — and instead took a job to support the family. She got through most of that first winter (Pennsylvania) getting back and forth to work without a winter coat.
Fifty years passed before a man came forward and told us he’d witnessed the incident, and verified it was not an accident but a recurring equipment malfunction that the miners all knew about. No one would stand up for my grandfather because they all had families and were afraid they’d lose their jobs.
Capitalism has contributed to a standard of living few could have imagined, but unchecked, it destroys lives.
Mom, now 81, e-mailed me this morning. She cried all night for the families of the West Virginia miners, just as she does every time one of these incidents occurs. She’ll probably be crying when I talk to her tonight.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:27 pmHydrogen fuel cells are a long way from use in part because of the energy needed to crack the water to extract the hydrogen,it’s still worth pursuing and it is.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:27 pmWind and solar are useful for home uses but the kind of step-up transformers needed for industrial uses aren’t practical.
Co-generation programs were given significant tax breaks back in the late 70s and early 80s and if they were viable,they’d be all over. Those programs included trash to cash as well as methane driven. Just not big enough. Nuclear is very clean and very safe but the industry hasn’t solved that pesky disposal of the spent fuel rods problem. TMI wasn’t nearly as bad as the hysteria although Chernobyl shows the risks of poor maintenance and poor training. Doesn’t France get 70% of their electrci from nukes?
See what I mean when I say that some conervatives think me liberal … look at IRI’s comment about what I said
I guess I will continue to sit on this lonely island in the middle of the extremes … sigh (snark).
January 4th, 2006 at 5:29 pmI-RIGHT-I
Russell Kirk is an idiot hack, and this book is 40 years out of date, and riddled with inaccuracies, assumptions and idiotic beliefs. Kirk’s ideas can be summarized as the belief that ‘man’ knows more than ‘a man’, and that you should therefore relegate yourself to the machine without question, and without conscience. Only a fool would buy into his claptrap – thanks for telling us at what level of social and mental development you reside.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:38 pmGiacomo,
You aren’t in the middle, you’re just not 100% at the end of the right. I’ve read your postings, you’re an apologist of evil men, and evil deeds.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:39 pmWho cares what someone’s book says? All religions have some book that tells them what good is and what evil is and how to behave. Every religious person ooohs and aahhhs over some book and how you’re not obeying it and they are, or whatever. Don’t drop it, don’t touch it, ooh, it’s so holy… honestly.
This is America. I’m free. I’m not going to obey some damn book. I follow my conscience and the rule of law. In this great country that’s enough. My religion is none of your damn business and don’t wave yours around as if it meant you had morals or brains. It’s just a book. How you behave is how I will judge you.
Screw your book. The first two-thirds of it (what Christians call the Old Testament and what Jews call The Holy Bible)is translated from the ancient Hebrew all wrong anyway. The Christians even rearranged the books to suit their motives. Want to read the real bible? Read the Jewish Publication Society bible. It’s translated directly from the original ancient Hebrew, as Jesus himself read it and understood it, in the orginal order, by expert linguists who make understanding ancient languages their top priority. Christians decided what was in it then translated it accordingly to prove what they knew already.
In other words, the Christian translations are a fraud. Your priests and ministers know this but you’ve been indoctrinated and trained not to ask. Go ahead – ask a priest about the origins of the new testament and the re-translation by Christians of the Old. They’ll back me up.
There never was a “Jesus.” There was Y’shua – which translates to English as “Joshua.” How did you arrive at “Jesus”? Go ask your scholars if you don’t know, and shame on you for not knowing since you seem to think your book is the be all and end all of morality in the world. Never you mind that a billion Buddhists don’t agree, or millions of Muslims, or thousands of Jews, to name but a few. In the meantime, just pay, pray, and obey. They didn’t build the church for you to go inside and ask questions.
Using the bible to back up your assertions is a cheap, disingenuous, intellectually backward thing to do and you know it. What if I told you it’s only gospel truth if it’s in the Upanishads?
We don’t need ancient books to follow the golden rule. We don’t need religion, in fact, to get to God.
As far as politics go, it’s the bottom of the barrel of intellectual life to assert that the book proves that “Republicans Are The Best!”
Was Martin Luther King not a Christian?
How about Jimmy Carter?
Christianity states that the poor and not the rich were Jesus’ concern. How you get this perverse trickle-down, cruel, punishing supply-side Social Darwinist Saviour is beyond me.
And by the way, why is the Jesus on the cross in church completely free from body hair? Did Mary Magdalene give him an armpit wax for his “special day?” It has nothing to do with how this man lived or preached and entirely to do with the group’s psychosexual unconscious hangups. I’m telling you: Jews in Judea were a hairy breed. Jesus had pubic hair, armpit hair, nostril hair… back hair too, most liekly.
Go on and say it! JESUS HAD BACK HAIR!
Screw your book. Just behave yourself. This is America.
January 4th, 2006 at 5:42 pmliberal = change
liberal = innovation
liberal = growth
liberal = reform
liberal = democracy
liberal = freedom
conservative = stagnation
January 4th, 2006 at 5:56 pmconservative = aristocracy
conservative = oppression
conservative = contraction
conservative = corruption
#99 Not only are you incorrect, you are ignorant.
January 4th, 2006 at 6:06 pmYou aren’t in the middle, you’re just not 100% at the end of the right. I’ve read your postings, you’re an apologist of evil men, and evil deeds.
Too bad you couldn’t add some menacing theme music to punctuate your statement … like I said in an earlier post, liberals call me a nazi righty and conservatives (some of them, not as many as the liberals though) think I’m an ignorant liberal.
By the way, your post 119 sounds like a word association contest done by a third grader … grow up. Not all Conservatives are evil and not all Liberals are good (and, yes, there is no Santa Claus)
January 4th, 2006 at 6:16 pm“By the way, your post 119 sounds like a word association contest done by a third grader … grow up. ” Giacomo
I can see that your social skills around name calling are as well honed as your conservative brethren. The fact is those word associations are accurate to the values of the two movements. Conservatives believe change is bad, power structure (and corporate structures) are good, that ‘democracy’ is dangerous, therefore my statements were accurate. Perhaps you should reflect on your own understanding of maturity and quickly discover it’s as inaccurate as your sensibility for what is ‘conservative’.
“Not all Conservatives are evil and not all Liberals are good (and, yes, there is no Santa Claus)” Giacomo
That’s true, but the conservatives and liberals alike that don’t defend american values, and ‘rationalize’ hateful and evil acts are themselves evil. And this was exactly my point, that based on what you’ve written so far on this site, you are just as evil as the men who undermine our democracy from washington, irrespective of their political parties. America belongs to us, not to abramoff, bush or exxon.
See it’s ME that’s in the middle, you’re just so far to the right you don’t realize it…
January 4th, 2006 at 6:39 pmSteed, I would point you to the following research:
It’s hard to argue that MSHA was serious about addressing safety at the Sago mine, despite being aware of the problem.
January 4th, 2006 at 6:57 pmPost #112 (IRI)
Regurgitated:
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1008/Conservative.htm
Any original thoughts, IRI?
January 4th, 2006 at 7:18 pmOne in the same. Scary thought isn’t it? The God of the Old Testament is returning.
comment by an idiot woman
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 4, 2006 @ 4:19 pm
Again, show me proof. All I see is Evolution and one missing-in-action ‘Lord and Savior’. If anything is idiotic it is your belief in something so unwilling to save lives and help people.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:22 pmHere’s a listing of all the mining disasters caused by Democrats and their Liberal masters in the mining companies since data was collected.
http://www.usmra.com/saxsewell/historical.htm
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 4, 2006 @ 1:51 pm
Hilarious- putting a link up to prove a point that contains absolutely no information to support your purported argument.
Here’s proof that I-RIGHT-I is a Ham Sandwich: http://www.vittlesvamp.com/images/hamsandwich.bmp
January 4th, 2006 at 7:24 pmI told you it’s true! I swear it! And IT’S ALL CLINTON’S FAULT!!!
My partner is a nuclear engineer and he’s showed me the numbers. There is no technology than can generate the energy this nation or any nation larger than a small town demands
Yes, the Wright Brothers talked to their partners who said that trains are the only technology that can move people across the country. You’re real smart there buddy.
Now follow me on this. That is why John Kerry proposed a Manhattan Project to develop alternatives to fossil fuels. It won’t happen overnight, it wil take decades. That’s why it is vitally important to start now, while we stil have fossil fuels. Once we burn all the fossil fuels, we won’t have the power required to investigate new sources. Then we’re stuck taking the train. And I know how much you Republicans hate trains.
Get it? Or should I dumb it down another notch?
January 4th, 2006 at 7:27 pmLucasfilm, Ltd.
Giacomo – he was a client in the last architecture firm I worked for. I assume you, he is NOT environmentally correct. And the people who worked with him said he was extremely egocentric, and had bad taste to boot.
I won’t accept a single financial corporation on your list. By nature the financial institution places money first – and that is never good for the environment because environmental protection is expensive by nature.
I’ll have to look into the others… Remember, I’m not about blind faith.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:28 pm#122 It doesn’t matter if you’re in the middle or not. What matters is if you engage in honest debate. Something George W Bush refuses to do. He deliberately mistates his critics’ arguments.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:29 pmMy partner is a nuclear engineer
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 4, 2006 @ 5:02 pm
See, he is gay… You can stop bashing homosexuality now IRI.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:30 pmIRI, Jockamoo and Sane Lib are the same troll. A very sad, small troll….with a very bad grasp of theology.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:31 pmThere is Zero Liberalism in either the Old or New Testament that is not used as a figure of evil. In fact the Bible defines conservatism and totally rejects and condemns Liberalism on nearly every page.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 4, 2006 @ 5:08 pm
Giacomo, IRI represents Christianity also – and unfortunately he is much more common that I think you’re willing to admit.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:32 pm” I’m not sure about the myth part … there certainly was a man named Jesus around 3 to 30 AD … that’s not the part that is usually up for debate. Now, as for his deity stature ………… wide open on that one.” Giacomo
There is no proof of this historically, other than accounts written ~100 years after his death. There is no contemporary account of Jesus by known historians of his age.
The first mention of Jesus in any texts was by CORNELIUS TACITUS, a Roman historian, ca. 112 AD. There is no record of his martyrdom, execution or existence anywhere in Roman history before that point.
I suggest you do more research on this matter, you might be surprised at what you find.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:36 pmAny informed conservative is reluctant to condense profound and intricate intellectual systems to a few portentous phrases;
So there are no informed conservatives in the public sphere today. Thanks for clearing that up.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:37 pmThese are the 12 foundation statements of the Q gospels that are ‘unfiltered’ by the Catholic Church and the conservative forces that chose to rewrite the Gnostic teachings of Judaism.
1 Love your enemies (6:27)
2 If struck on one cheek, offer the other (6:29)
3 Give to everyone who begs (6:30)
4 Judge not and you won’t be judged (6:37)
5 First remove the beam from your own eye (6:42)
6 Leave the dead to bury their dead (9:60)
7 Go out as lambs among wolves (10:3)
8 Carry no money, bag, or sandals (10:4)
9 Say, “God’s rule has come near you” (10:9)
10 Ask and it shall be given to you (11:9)
11 Don’t worry about living (12:22)
12 Make sure of God’s rule over you (12:31)
The ‘Q’ community lived as ‘poor monks’ in modern terms, very similar to the Hindu variety that clearly spawned this group (there were Hindu and Buddhist missionaries in the near east at this time). Imperial Rome wouldn’t have any of this poverty nonsense, and much of the modern religion is very different as a result.
The only previous mention came from Josephus a Jewish Hitorian who wrote in 95 AD a history of the Jews, at which point he spent considerable time discussing the teachings of John the Baptist, but only briefly mentioned the ‘Jesus’ figure as a wise man who had created the ‘christian’ sect, and had been killed. He only wrote one brief paragraph and concludes with this simple statement of “…the tribe of Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared (18.3.3).” Once again, a century after his death, and you get a footnote.
So much for your ‘profound’ proof that Jesus ever existed. There’s more proof of bigfoot!
January 4th, 2006 at 7:50 pmAnd now the REALITY we live in, is that corporate regulations have become so lax, that scandals like Enron, and this mining disasters are just ‘accepted’.
It’s a sad state of affairs where Conservatives care so little about america, our lives, and our social and economic viability, just to make a fast crooked buck. It’s just ridiculous and unworthy of us.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:54 pm#133, additionally a Christian historian forged some historical records of Josephus (a prolific Jewish historian who lived at the time Jesus was supposedly living). Nothing else exists.
Also, Bethelhem was a necropolis (grave yard).
Seriously Giacomo, if you don’t question what you believe how can you expect those of us who have to take you seriously?
The reality of Jesus is that he is an abstraction that has been taken literally…
GOSPEL ZODIAC
The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun.
—Thomas Paine
If Jesus was an historical character, he was one of a number of cultists who at that time were preaching Armageddon. The spin meisters who wrote the Gospels had no information on him except what grew to legendary proportions after several decades of oral story telling. The man, if he existed, was a nobody. It’s what was written about him, combined with the brutal efforts of Church fabricators that made him so famous.
Fortunately, centuries of Christian book burning cannot erase the stars. By looking at the Gospels through the eyes of an astrologer, we can understand why the Gospels follow the same story outline. The tale of Jesus takes place within one Zodiac year. By breaking down the Gospels according to each of the twelve Zodiac constellations, we can track Jesus as the sun through references to each motif that the constellations correspond to.
Astrological timetables are enumerated into twelve ages based on a great cycle spanning almost 26,000 years. The age of Pisces began around 6 BCE, which is why the latter parts of the Gospels refer often to fish. Approximately in 2012 we enter the Age of Aquarius. Christians have been waiting for Jesus immediate return for 2,000 years. Luke gives hope that he might return in the Age of Aquarius.
CAPRICORN, THE SEA GOAT, DECEMBER 22-JANUARY 19
The sun’s position starts at lowest point in horizon and ascends upward as the days get longer. Goats are known to habitat rocky mountains which stand higher than the sun on the horizon at this time of the year. Rocks symbolize barrenness and goats can be associated with dark places like mangers, where they are kept. This is a time of darkness when evil forces are in control.
1. Capricorn symbolizes the scapegoat used to carry away the sins of the people of the wilderness (Lev. 16:8, 10).
2. Matt. 1:18-2:23 tells us when Jesus was born; Herod tried to have him killed.
3. Luke 2:12 refers to Capricorn when he tells us the baby was born in a manger. Mangers can be seen as dark places where there is no lighting.
4. The sun is not born until December 25 when days start to grow noticeably longer.
5. It’s a new sun in its virgin stage. This is similar to the term, new moon, which survived from the days of ancient moon worshipers.
6. Since the entire sky can be seen as God’s universe, the sun of God is referred to as the son of God.
7. The three magi in (Matt. 2:1) symbolize the three stars forming a waist belt in the winter constellation of Orion.
8. The star of Bethlehem (Matt. 2:2) is symbolized by the brightest star in the winter sky, Sirius, in the constellation, Canis Major. To Egyptian astronomers, Sirius’ rising marked the beginning of their new year.
9. The three stars in Orion’s belt are aligned along a southeast direction, pointing towards Sirius. Since stars, like the sun, always rise from the east, it would appear as three stars were following one bright star. Or as the star of Bethlehem guiding the magi.
Ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising (Matt. 2:10).
10. If the magi were on land, they couldn’t come from the east and follow a star from the east. But if both are in the sky, it makes sense.
11. The constellations would appear to stop when they are directly overhead. The magi entered the “house†[of Capricorn] (Matt. 2:10).
12. In the first twelfth of the cycle, he was a child prodigy at twelve years old (Luke 2:42-47). Jesus tells his parents, Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house? (Luke 2:49). In other words, he must enter each house of the zodiac.
13. As constellations, the magi could not return to Herod. They had to continue west.
14. Capricorn covers Matt. 1:18-2:23
AQUARIUS, THE WATER BEARER, JANUARY 20-FEBRUARY 18
Water and light is the essence of all life (Gen 1:2-3). The sun needs water to bring new life into the world.
1. 30 degrees on the Zodiac.
30Jesus is 30 years old when he begins his mission… (Luke 3:23).
2. Jesus is baptized by John the Baptist (Matt. 3:13-17). John can be seen in the constellation Aquarius. See John the Baptist’s Stars.
3. Jesus temptation in the wilderness Matt. 4:1-11. The sun is too weak to overpower Satan, but it hasn’t reversed into darkness.
4. Aquarius covers Matt. 3:1-4:11
PISCES THE FISHES, FEBRUARY 19-MARCH 20
The sun needs food to sustain it on its journey. There are no grains or meat at this time.
1. The sun is rising on the horizon, but there is still more darkness.
2. Jesus collects his disciples. The first are fishermen. Matt. 4:18-22
3. Pisces covers Matt. 4:12-4:22
ARIES, THE RAM/LAMB, MARCH 21-APRIL 19
Starts with the spring or vernal equinox, when days and nights are equal. This is when the sun’s strength starts to become apparent.
1. Time of year when lambs are born. The flock begins to increase.
2. Sermon on mount (Matt. 5:1-7:29). His spiritual guidebook.
3. Jesus attracts followers by performing miracles (Matt. 8:1-9:38).
4. He’s gathered as many followers as he could by himself.
37Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few;
38pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.†Matt. 9:37-38).
5. Aries covers Matt. 4:23-9:38.
continued at http://www.usbible.com/Astrology/gospel_zodiac.htm
January 4th, 2006 at 8:00 pmI can see that your social skills around name calling are as well honed as your conservative brethren. The fact is those word associations are accurate to the values of the two movements. Conservatives believe change is bad, power structure (and corporate structures) are good, that ‘democracy’ is dangerous, therefore my statements were accurate. Perhaps you should reflect on your own understanding of maturity and quickly discover it’s as inaccurate as your sensibility for what is ‘conservative’.
My intentions weren’t to call names but to point out that such a polarizing and simplistic view is childish … you’re branding “conservatives” and “liberals” when, in point of fact, there’s no checklist of beliefs that one must adhere to in order to be labelled as such. There’s a huge continuum with extremes on either end … my point is that while I definitely lean right, those further right than me consider me liberal … I’m well aware that “liberal” can’t encapsulate an individual because people who are liberal don’t all agree.
That’s true, but the conservatives and liberals alike that don’t defend american values, and ‘rationalize’ hateful and evil acts are themselves evil. And this was exactly my point, that based on what you’ve written so far on this site, you are just as evil as the men who undermine our democracy from washington, irrespective of their political parties. America belongs to us, not to abramoff, bush or exxon.
I’m happy to defend American values (don’t you think that’s a tad ambiguous) … I don’t excuse evil men nor do i apologize for their actions. I may disagree with you on who’s evil though … I find it odd that while many progressives here claim to be atheists or agnotics, the term “evil” (def. – morally bad or wrong) gets thrown around a lot. How can something be “moral” and without standard to compare (for without a religious or faith based code, what’s the measure of morality … personal opinion?). The entire concept of “moral” is religious in nature, but I digress. I don’t think you’re evil … I think you’ve got “internet muscles” and no repurcussions for calling someone something you wouldn’t say to their face. America does indeed belong to “us” … unfortunately for you, “us” includes me. I do wish you’d give examples of how I’m evil, instead of just spouting it without any proof or at least a quote that substantiates your opinion.
I won’t accept a single financial corporation on your list. By nature the financial institution places money first – and that is never good for the environment because environmental protection is expensive by nature.
I’ll have to look into the others… Remember, I’m not about blind faith.
Look away … I think you’ll find that your assumptions about financial companies is off base, but perhaps not.
There is no proof of this historically, other than accounts written ~100 years after his death. There is no contemporary account of Jesus by known historians of his age.
The first mention of Jesus in any texts was by CORNELIUS TACITUS, a Roman historian, ca. 112 AD. There is no record of his martyrdom, execution or existence anywhere in Roman history before that point.
Well, considering that at least one Roman Emperor converted to Christianity, I think he’d be surprised that Roman History didn’t account for the existence of Jesus. Add to that the accounts by Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, or Romans Pliny the Younger, and Thallus in addition to the reports about Pilate and the crucifiction Justin Martyr and Tetullian (perhaps you haven’t heard of all of them, eh). And considering that the Jews often engaged in “oral history”, etc. And considering there is mention of the disciples in other ancient texts (were they made up to). Moreover, to the Roman’s Jesus was a nobody … a rabble rouser if you will … the early church understood and felt his significance … the Bible isn’t just a religious book but a historical book first. As you can see, I have researched the matter … except, more so than you appearantly (which is as it should be since it is my faith after all)
Giacomo, IRI represents Christianity also – and unfortunately he is much more common that I think you’re willing to admit.
I’ve asked him to cool it in the past … he won’t. I also told him that he was giving Christians a bad name with his manner (or lack of manners) … must not have gotten through.
January 4th, 2006 at 8:08 pmFrom a completely different source:
Many of the world’s crucified godmen have their traditional birthday on December 25th (”Christmas”). This is because the ancients recognized that (from an earthcentric perspective) the sun makes an annual descent southward until December 21st or 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops moving southerly for three days and then starts to move northward again. During this time, the ancients declared that “God’s sun” had “died” for three days and was “born again” on December 25th. The ancients realized quite abundantly that they needed the sun to return every day and that they would be in big trouble if the sun continued to move southward and did not stop and reverse its direction. Thus, these many different cultures celebrated the “sun of God’s” birthday on December 25th.70 The following are the characteristics of the “sun of God”:
The sun “dies” for three days on December 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops in its movement south, to be born again or resurrected on December 25th, when it resumes its movement north.
In some areas, the calendar originally began in the constellation of Virgo, and the sun would therefore be “born of a Virgin.”
The sun is the “Light of the World.”
The sun “cometh on clouds, and every eye shall see him.”
The sun rising in the morning is the “Savior of mankind.”
The sun wears a corona, “crown of thorns” or halo.
The sun “walks on water.”
The sun’s “followers,” “helpers” or “disciples” are the 12 months and the 12 signs of the zodiac or constellations, through which the sun must pass.
The sun at 12 noon is in the house or temple of the “Most High”; thus, “he” begins “his Father’s work” at “age” 12.
The sun enters into each sign of the zodiac at 30°; hence, the “Sun of God” begins his ministry at “age” 30.
The sun is hung on a cross or “crucified,” which represents its passing through the equinoxes, the vernal equinox being Easter, at which time it is then resurrected.
Contrary to popular belief, the ancients were not an ignorant and superstitious lot who actually believed their deities to be literal characters. Indeed, this slanderous propaganda has been part of the conspiracy to make the ancients appear as if they were truly the dark and dumb rabble that was in need of the “light of Jesus.” The reality is that the ancients were no less advanced in their morals and spiritual practices, and in many cases were far more advanced, than the Christians in their own supposed morality and ideology, which, in its very attempt at historicity, is in actuality a degradation of the ancient Mythos. Indeed, unlike the “superior” Christians, the true intelligentsia amongst the ancients were well aware that their gods were astronomical and atmospheric in nature. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle surely knew that Zeus, the sky god father figure who migrated to Greece from India and/or Egypt, was never a real person, despite the fact that the Greeks have designated on Crete both a birth cave and a death cave of Zeus. In addition, all over the world are to be found sites where this god or that allegedly was born, walked, suffered, died, etc., a common and unremarkable occurrence that is not monopolized by, and did not originate with, Christianity.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins5.htm
January 4th, 2006 at 8:11 pmLook away … I think you’ll find that your assumptions about financial companies is off base, but perhaps not.
Not assumptions. Quit assuming that I am assuming. I base my view on reality and experience, not theory.
I’ve asked him to cool it in the past … he won’t. I also told him that he was giving Christians a bad name with his manner (or lack of manners) … must not have gotten through.
But he does represent, and as I said, more commonly than not. There are negative Christians Giacomo. And he proves this repeatedly.
January 4th, 2006 at 8:15 pmBy looking at the Gospels through the eyes of an astrologer, we can understand why the Gospels follow the same story outline.
Look, given that Astrology itself is about as ambiguous and wide open as possible … I’m sure I could align Islam, Buddhism, heck whatever faith I wanted to, to it. I can’t believe you can’t see what a huge reach this is … the Bible is what, thousands of pages long and you think by cherry picking a few verses that can relate to astrology that this is some how convincing?
The spin meisters who wrote the Gospels had no information on him except what grew to legendary proportions after several decades of oral story telling. The man, if he existed, was a nobody.
Have you actaully read the gospels or are you cutting and pasting from some website … of the original 12 disciples, were you aware the 10 of them were martyred for failing to recant their beliefs? I’m not sure about you, but I’m quite unwilling to die for a ruse of my own creation … 2000 years of history and this “Jesus” endures … in spite of the fact the many in the church have hijacked him for selfish gains, he endures.
I don’t expect any of you to become Christians tomorrow, but don’t somehow believe that because you read a lot (or knew Christians once) that you know more about it than someone who is an authentic Christian … that would be extremely pompous and unenlightened of you. If you want to ask me questions … fire away. I’ll be glad to answer as this forum allows, but don’t presume to actually know more about it than I do.
January 4th, 2006 at 8:20 pmIn some areas, the calendar originally began in the constellation of Virgo, and the sun would therefore be “born of a Virgin.â€
The sun is the “Light of the World.â€
The sun “cometh on clouds, and every eye shall see him.â€
The sun rising in the morning is the “Savior of mankind.â€
The sun wears a corona, “crown of thorns†or halo.
The sun “walks on water.â€
The sun’s “followers,†“helpers†or “disciples†are the 12 months and the 12 signs of the zodiac or constellations, through which the sun must pass.
The sun at 12 noon is in the house or temple of the “Most Highâ€; thus, “he†begins “his Father’s work†at “age†12.
The sun enters into each sign of the zodiac at 30°; hence, the “Sun of God†begins his ministry at “age†30.
The sun is hung on a cross or “crucified,†which represents its passing through the equinoxes, the vernal equinox being Easter, at which time it is then resurrected.
These have to be the weirdest arguments against Christianity I’ve ever seen … obviously Christian tradition would be influenced by other traditions (ie. December 25th). How do you reconcile that not one author wrote the New Testament (nor were they together) yet, phrases and stories are remarkably consistent. For the above to be true, then ALL the authors needed to be inspired in the similar ways, at the similar times to make up a history based upon the same clever uses of astrology … this doesn’t make any sense, but why would it. It’s a crackpot theory.
January 4th, 2006 at 8:28 pmHow can something be “moral†and without standard to compare (for without a religious or faith based code, what’s the measure of morality … personal opinion?).
Comment by Giacomo — January 4, 2006 @ 8:08 pm
Your implication that atheists and agnostics are immoral people is way off base: There is a whole lot to morals and ethics than following a set of rules listed in a book written several thousand years ago. Book which, by the way, is not a consistent guide to becoming moral -but you already knew that.
Furthermore, religious people and religions in general do not have the morality market cornered.
I would add that, given the fact that all religions and cultures have codified morality in one way or another and all have come up with codes of conduct, it seems to me that moral behaviour is inherently human, irrespective of your culture and religion.
To give you a better idea of what secular or atheistic morality is, check the following link:
An Introduction to Atheism
January 4th, 2006 at 8:30 pm“Well, considering that at least one Roman Emperor converted to Christianity, I think he’d be surprised that Roman History didn’t account for the existence of Jesus. Add to that the accounts by Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, or Romans Pliny the Younger, and Thallus in addition to the reports about Pilate and the crucifiction Justin Martyr and Tetullian (perhaps you haven’t heard of all of them, eh).” Giacomo
1) Check the dates, they’re all 1+ century AFTER christ, including Josephus which was ~95 AD.
2) The emperor that converted did so 3+ centuries after the life of Jesus, and do you believe he checked roman historians before conversion? Please, you didn’t, so why should he? He said he converted because he saw a ‘vision’ on the battlefield, clearly history books weren’t his top priority at that moment.
3) Pliny did not write of Jesus, only the ‘plague’ of the christians ~100 AD.
4) Thallus is as mythical as Jesus was. All we know of Thallus came from 2nd Century Christians.
5) Martyr – 2nd century christian apologist
6) Tetullian – 2nd/3rd century apologist
Once again, you prove my point. All references you give are PAST the date of Jesus life. There are no written records that exist from the time of Christ, but instead they’re virtually all fabrication in the 2nd and 3rd century based on what we can see.
As for the ‘oral’ tradition, that’s a bogus argument. The romans were meticulous chroniclers. If Jesus created as big of an event as Christians say, it would have been Chronicled at the time – it wasn’t.
January 4th, 2006 at 8:53 pm“These have to be the weirdest arguments against Christianity I’ve ever seen … obviously Christian tradition would be influenced by other traditions (ie. December 25th). How do you reconcile that not one author wrote the New Testament (nor were they together) yet, phrases and stories are remarkably consistent.” Giacomo
Actually Dec. 25 is chosen, because of the rebirth of the ’sun’, being the shortest day of the year. This is similar to the myth of the ‘rebirth’ of christ, which in fact was borrowed from the Egyptian myth of Osiris and Horace (father, son & re-born son).
As for the ’similarity’, that’s largely the work of editors such as St. Augustine, and the subsequent translations who mercilessly ‘edited’ the translations to produce coherency. In fact the christian gospels were chosen from the hundreds that had sprung up in the gnostic world (many of them that even downplayed or discredited the role of Jesus) by Augustine because they were the ‘most’ consistent. Even they contradict each other however.
You’re in the rabbit hole, dive deeper only if you’re brave!
January 4th, 2006 at 9:01 pm“the Bible is what, thousands of pages long and you think by cherry picking a few verses that can relate to astrology that this is some how convincing?” Giacomo
Thousands? Wow, in the ‘new testament’? You must have a largely ‘expanded’ edition? No wonder you have such funny beliefs.
Thought you’d enjoy this:
“It is notable that many books of the New Testament, especially the gospel of Mark and the book of Revelation, are written in relatively poor Greek. They are far from the refined Attic Greek or Classical Greek one finds composed by the higher classes, ruling elites, and trained philosophers of the time. Relative exceptions to this include the gospels of Luke and John and the Acts of the Apostles, the latter probably written or redacted by the same person who wrote or redacted Luke.”
Redacted, you know what the means don’t you? Look it up if you don’t…
FYI, the names of these books were ‘given’ by Augustine. They are unsigned, and unattributed to a particular source, and for the most part are ‘untitled’ as to their origins.
I’m not saying that there isn’t value in Christian teachings – I personally think there’s lots of wisdom captured in its pages. There’s also lots of unwise statements, and teachings that are just as harmful. In otherwords, it’s a book, and a useful book, but to attribute it the kind of mythologically pure standards that Christians do is completely delusional.
January 4th, 2006 at 9:11 pmYour implication that atheists and agnostics are immoral people is way off base: There is a whole lot to morals and ethics than following a set of rules listed in a book written several thousand years ago.
That’s not what I said … If one is to be moral, then that is to say one lives by a standard of morality (unless of course one believes that their own internal compass is the standard, in which case there really is no standard). The word evil implies morality and morality is definitely a word rooted in religious (be it Biblical or Koranical or whatever) standards. If morality is a personal standard then I can say it’s moral to kill hamsters with a fork (or something wild like that) and you can’t disagree because there’s no real external standard. That’s not morality …
I would add that, given the fact that all religions and cultures have codified morality in one way or another and all have come up with codes of conduct, it seems to me that moral behaviour is inherently human, irrespective of your culture and religion.
I agree … it is codified though (and not some internally guided vision). Perhaps it is ingrained in all of us because 1) we’d likely kill each other without it 2) it’s given to us by God … maybe that’s a reach for me to convince you of.
All references you give are PAST the date of Jesus life. There are no written records that exist from the time of Christ, but instead they’re virtually all fabrication in the 2nd and 3rd century based on what we can see.
Well … of course they are or else they’d all be clairvoyant … that said, you should re-check your dates on Justin Martyr and Tetullian … I’ve got them at 50 to 60 AD. As for Thallus being “mythical” there’s no way to prove he was or wasn’t really.
As for the ’similarity’, that’s largely the work of editors such as St. Augustine, and the subsequent translations who mercilessly ‘edited’ the translations to produce coherency.
I’ve found no evidence that this claim is true (although there are several that claim it). The writing styles are not even close to similar … among many other things.
It is notable that many books of the New Testament, especially the gospel of Mark and the book of Revelation, are written in relatively poor Greek. They are far from the refined Attic Greek or Classical Greek one finds composed by the higher classes, ruling elites, and trained philosophers of the time. Relative exceptions to this include the gospels of Luke and John and the Acts of the Apostles, the latter probably written or redacted by the same person who wrote or redacted Luke
I think this point actually helps my point … Matthew and Mark would’ve been unrefined for their day … Paul, not so much. Luke was a physician … he also is believed to have written Acts. Your expert actually adds credence to my assertion that there were many different writers of various backgrounds … “redacted” is conjecture given that we don’t have any evidence of what was removed.
FYI, the names of these books were ‘given’ by Augustine. They are unsigned, and unattributed to a particular source, and for the most part are ‘untitled’ as to their origins.
Well, considering that much of the NT was written by Paul (and he actually states who he is in the letter) this unattributed comment is somewhat false.
There’s also lots of unwise statements, and teachings that are just as harmful. In otherwords, it’s a book, and a useful book, but to attribute it the kind of mythologically pure standards that Christians do is completely delusional.
Which statements would be unwise? Please don’t quote me the OT because you know what I’ll say to that … you are, of course, free to think that Christianity is “mythological” … seems to me that you went into your study of Christianity with this belief and were able to find “evidence” that helped you substantiate that ideal … not very good science, but I suppose we all fall victim to it.
January 4th, 2006 at 10:04 pmOne more point though … I’m not a Christian because of overwhelming archeological evidence, or Biblical continuity, or written verification … it’s because of the personal experience I’ve had with God. I do believe that there’s historical evidence, and or other relative “proofs” but they aren’t the primary factors really. We can argue all day long about the semantic evidence for and against, and I don’t think it’s heresy to do so (like many Christians may), but when trying to argue faith with someone that doesn’t share that faith … well, let’s just say it’s supremely hard to relate personal experiences in an internet forum. I respect your opinion, but find your “evidence” to not be persuasive given that I’ve already encountered those ideas from others long ago. At least you’re, mostly, civil and informed about what you post ….
January 4th, 2006 at 10:10 pm#118, GTL,
January 5th, 2006 at 12:00 amAmen.
The word evil implies morality and morality is definitely a word rooted in religious (be it Biblical or Koranical or whatever) standards.
Comment by Giacomo — January 4, 2006 @ 10:04 pm
There you go again, implying that moral people necessarily have a religion. You also seem to suggest atheists are either hypocrites or liars when they use the words “morality”, “moral”, and “evil” to describe their actions or those of others.
Fact is, one can be moral and not follow a religion. Just to give you an example: Plato was perhaps one of the very earliest philosophers to address the subject of morality. In his Republic he discussed morals and morality in non-religious terms, but rather in quantifiable, social ones; that is, a moral person is one who conforms to societal norms, and one who fully satisfies their role in their community.
In a nutshell: What is good for the community is moral, and anything bad is immoral. The determination of what is good or bad is reached through the use of one’s senses and one must then use dialectic in order to attain a supreme objective truth. No word of a god handing down any of these precepts.
If morality is a personal standard then I can say it’s moral to kill hamsters with a fork (or something wild like that) and you can’t disagree because there’s no real external standard. That’s not morality
Here you are using a strawman and a hyperbole. Morality is both personal and external, in that it is not moral to harm others (as it would harm the community, to borrow Plato’s idea), nor it is moral to inflict pain for the pleasure of it -empathy is not a religious concept either.
For a person to be truly moral, the concept of morality bust be understood, accepted and internalised. To follow a moral guide that was handed down without ever pondering its validity or questioning its principles, is not to be truly moral for one would be blindly (dis)obeying an imposed code of conduct. Which is the reason I suspect so many laws are broken all the time.
January 5th, 2006 at 1:49 amI noticed you quickly and cowardly ran from your statement of a ‘historical’ jesus when I proved you wrong. That condescending tone of yours that pretended to know something seems to have evaporated in the face of actual facts.
Hardly … I can spout 500 “proofs” of the historical Jesus and you’d say something akin to “those don’t count” … I cut that off at the proverbial pass b/c I wasn’t going to prove anything and you weren’t going to recognize my proof.
When people like you claim to have Personal experience with ‘god’, it is a common symptom of psychological disorders and pathological tendencies. Go get a checkup. It would do you ‘good’.
And I’m the one that’s condescending … would you say the same to Mother Theresa … how about the Pope … or perhaps to Jonh Kerry (who claims to be a Christian). Likely, you wouldn’t. I didn’t say I heard voices, I said that I had experiences that were personal … every Christian would echo this sentiment.
Fact is, one can be moral and not follow a religion. Just to give you an example: Plato was perhaps one of the very earliest philosophers to address the subject of morality. In his Republic he discussed morals and morality in non-religious terms, but rather in quantifiable, social ones; that is, a moral person is one who conforms to societal norms, and one who fully satisfies their role in their community.
In that case then, the morality is still an external code and I was more railing against the personal morality tome that’s often represented here. People constantly try to move the definition of morality from external missives/ideals to an internal locus of control … I guess I should say that without God, in my opinion, there is still no standard since public consensus is often not a consensus (ie. societal norm – what’s really normative).
Here you are using a strawman and a hyperbole. Morality is both personal and external, in that it is not moral to harm others (as it would harm the community, to borrow Plato’s idea), nor it is moral to inflict pain for the pleasure of it -empathy is not a religious concept either.
For a person to be truly moral, the concept of morality bust be understood, accepted and internalised. To follow a moral guide that was handed down without ever pondering its validity or questioning its principles, is not to be truly moral for one would be blindly (dis)obeying an imposed code of conduct. Which is the reason I suspect so many laws are broken all the time.
Hyperbole to be sure, but I don’t believe it’s a strawman fallacy given that I was speaking to the concept of personal morality. It may not fit in your case since you clarified as to having both internal and external locus of controls (as it should be, I think … I just see God as the source of mine)
I also agree that to be moral is to understand the roots of the ideal and to challenege it’s authenticity … I would disagree that the reason laws are broken is because of a lack of internalization, but, rather, the afroementioned “personal morality” in practice to the worst degree. As always, thanks for being civil …
January 5th, 2006 at 6:45 amWest Virginia voted for Bush and look what they got – the loss of loved ones all for greed by the mining companies. Bush don’t give a rat’s a$$ about the miners of West Virginia.
January 5th, 2006 at 8:06 amWest Virginia voted for Bush and look what they got – the loss of loved ones all for greed by the mining companies.
Blaming the victim, eh?
“She wore a short skirt so she got raped” … tell me why your statement is any different than that BS one.
January 5th, 2006 at 8:31 amLook, given that Astrology itself is about as ambiguous and wide open as possible … I’m sure I could align Islam, Buddhism, heck whatever faith I wanted to, to it. I can’t believe you can’t see what a huge reach this is … the Bible is what, thousands of pages long and you think by cherry picking a few verses that can relate to astrology that this is some how convincing?
I am genuinely amazed at what an expert you are on everything.
You cherry pick verses. Every time I mention the Old Testament you deny it has anyting to do with Christianity. So, if it’s acceptable for you to do it, then it’s just as acceptable for others… Besides, this makes far more sense than most stuff coming from the church… Devils, angels, miracles, Santa Claus, Virgin birth, Immaculate Conception, wine as the actual blood of Christ, etc… and none of that strikes you as bizarre? Stars are less weird to me.
January 5th, 2006 at 2:29 pmI don’t expect any of you to become Christians tomorrow, but don’t somehow believe that because you read a lot (or knew Christians once) that you know more about it than someone who is an authentic Christian … that would be extremely pompous and unenlightened of you. If you want to ask me questions … fire away. I’ll be glad to answer as this forum allows, but don’t presume to actually know more about it than I do.
Comment by Giacomo — January 4, 2006 @ 8:20 pm
Giacomo, I WAS an authentic Christian – whatever that means… I attended church weekly and studied the Bible. For 33 years. So, yes, I do consider myself just as much of an expert on Christianity as you.
Where we differ is that I reject it all because it’s just a bunch of nonsense that does far more harm than good in the world. And I will never convert back. I am much happier as an Atheist, and far more moral.
January 5th, 2006 at 2:34 pmThese have to be the weirdest arguments against Christianity I’ve ever seen … obviously Christian tradition would be influenced by other traditions (ie. December 25th). How do you reconcile that not one author wrote the New Testament (nor were they together) yet, phrases and stories are remarkably consistent. For the above to be true, then ALL the authors needed to be inspired in the similar ways, at the similar times to make up a history based upon the same clever uses of astrology … this doesn’t make any sense, but why would it. It’s a crackpot theory.
Comment by Giacomo — January 4, 2006 @ 8:28 pm
Weird arguments for a weird religion… astrology is no less insane than Noah’s ark, Moses parting the sea, burning bushes, and so forth. The difference is that you were born into a culture that accepts angels and demons as real, so of course that premise makes sense to you. You’d also think invisible purple unicorns and magic beans were normal if some one had been telling it to you your entire life.
I started to question it. And if you ever did, you’d see that Christianity is no less weird than all the other supernatural suppositions out there.
January 5th, 2006 at 2:38 pmYou’re in the rabbit hole, dive deeper only if you’re brave!
Comment by RightPunch — January 4, 2006 @ 9:01 pm
I’m pretty sure that this is why they are required to have ‘blind faith’… no one with his or her eyes open can buy into it.
I used to work with this serious zealot who constantly called other religions ‘weird’. He had no ability to step back from his own beliefs to consider them and see that they were just as equally ‘weird’. To me that is always the most laughable aspect of their arrogance and egocentricity.
January 5th, 2006 at 2:45 pmYou cherry pick verses. Every time I mention the Old Testament you deny it has anyting to do with Christianity. So, if it’s acceptable for you to do it, then it’s just as acceptable for others… Besides, this makes far more sense than most stuff coming from the church… Devils, angels, miracles, Santa Claus, Virgin birth, Immaculate Conception, wine as the actual blood of Christ, etc… and none of that strikes you as bizarre? Stars are less weird to me.
I wish i could just talk with you in person … it’d be a lot easier. Something making sense is not the qualifier of it’s veracity … “sense” is based upon experience and knowledge … which we know, as far as humans are concerned, is limited. In reference to your OT statement, I’m not dismissing the OT … I’m speaking to the concept of progressive revelation in the Bible. Jesus came to “live” and “fulfill” the law … which is why I bring you to then NT more often.
I am genuinely amazed at what an expert you are on everything.
I know I’m no expert but I happen to not talk about stuff that I don’t know anything about (or else I’ll say so). Even still, this reeks of a backhanded compliment ;-0
Giacomo, I WAS an authentic Christian – whatever that means… I attended church weekly and studied the Bible. For 33 years. So, yes, I do consider myself just as much of an expert on Christianity as you.
I can’t argue with the authenticity of your Christianity but I will say that if you qualify authentic as “attending church and reading the Bible” then you missed the more important (and meaningful) aspects of it.
The difference is that you were born into a culture that accepts angels and demons as real, so of course that premise makes sense to you. You’d also think invisible purple unicorns and magic beans were normal if some one had been telling it to you your entire life.
Perhaps, but you’re assuming that I didn’t ask hard questions about these aspects … I’m kinda fond of magic beans ;-) As I said before, the Bible is a book inspired by God but written by men … I’m not one of those “infallable Bible” Christians because the Bible isn’t meant to be a science book or a medical book or a psychology book … we get those truths from other sources. I don’t believe in a 7 day creation (that may surprise you) but evolution, I don’t believe in a fiery hell but a place where God doesn’t exist that could only be described as fire (the worst thing the writer could imagine), I don’t believe that the Bible holds 100% of the answers for life but is the story of God’s revelation to man.
January 5th, 2006 at 2:53 pmThe word evil implies morality and morality is definitely a word rooted in religious (be it Biblical or Koranical or whatever) standards.
I thought you didn’t believe in the Devil?
If morality is a personal standard then I can say it’s moral to kill hamsters with a fork (or something wild like that) and you can’t disagree because there’s no real external standard. That’s not morality …
Not so… we are social animals. Social animals require morality in order to be social. As I have pointed out previously – other apes such as chimps and gorillas do not have religion, but morality. You’ll not find one killing hamsters for fun, because you know that’s just not acceptable. In fact, a National Geographic special covered the journey of one man into the heart of virgin African forest where he encountered naive gorillas (those who’d never come in contact with humans). Know what they did? Recognized him as a fellow primate and after some initial skepticism of a stranger, welcomed him into their community and treated him like a guest. This wouldn’t have happened if they were without morals.
Occasionally, we have devients in our midst – but they are not evil, they are either born with deficiencies or they were abused in some format in their youth. And, interestingly enough, many of the more infamous sociopaths have been Christians…
January 5th, 2006 at 2:53 pmI think this point actually helps my point … Matthew and Mark would’ve been unrefined for their day … Paul, not so much. Luke was a physician … he also is believed to have written Acts. Your expert actually adds credence to my assertion that there were many different writers of various backgrounds … “redacted†is conjecture given that we don’t have any evidence of what was removed.
Helps your point that a superstitious group of desert dwellers wrote badly? That’s a stretch, even for you…
Look, if an impoverished 9th grade drop-out with poor English skills wrote a book and presented it as divine gospel today, he’d be laughed at, and then ignored. You choose to take the writings (which might have just been some entertaining bedtime parables for their kids or a science fiction novel for the second century), and live your life by the poorly scribed ramblings of some unverifiable folks you know nothing about. Do you get why we think you’re without merit?
January 5th, 2006 at 2:59 pmit’s because of the personal experience I’ve had with God.
Giacomo… you can’t have a personal relationship with an invisible myth. You can want one so much that you convince yourself of anything. In fact, my niece recently told me that she knows for a fact that unicorn exist because of her personal experience and relationships with them. She believes they exist with every ounce of her being. It doesn’t make them real.
Evolution, however, I can experience, study and prove. It doesn’t require any rituals, tithings or suffering in return. It doesn’t require me to do or be anything inconsistent with human nature. It doesn’t expect or demand anything from me. How you can not see that as preferable to many people stems from your inability to consider anything but your way. You’re the one who twists and turns things to fit what you want them to, not us. We consider many things and then reject Christianity. You only consider Christianity, so there’s nothing else for you to accept.
January 5th, 2006 at 3:06 pmWhen people like you claim to have Personal experience with ‘god’, it is a common symptom of psychological disorders and pathological tendencies.
Make sure you’re clear on what sort of relationship you have ‘with god’, because from where I sit, you sound way to osama for my comfort.
Comment by RightPunch — January 4, 2006 @ 11:55 pm
For instance, Joan of Arc. She was not inspired by ‘god’, but was mentally ill from schitzophrenia and bipolar disorder.
January 5th, 2006 at 3:15 pmEvolution, however, I can experience, study and prove.
Comment by unbelievable
Evolution isn’t proven. If you can prove it you’ll be the richest third rate high school teacher in the world.
January 5th, 2006 at 3:21 pmPerhaps, but you’re assuming that I didn’t ask hard questions about these aspects
Nope, I’m going on personal experience from talking with you. You will not consider any alternative to your personal view. You think there is one way and you know it. You have told me I’m wrong, that means you think you are right. No assuming necessary, I have experience to validate my statements.
As I said before, the Bible is a book inspired by God but written by men …
As I said before, no it isn’t. Burden of proof lies with the one who states the claim. So far, you’ve given zero proof.
I don’t believe in a fiery hell but a place where God doesn’t exist that could only be described as fire (the worst thing the writer could imagine)
You mean, assumes is the worst thing. Well, from personal experience as a hardcore Atheist, I can in fact certify that not only is it not the ‘worse’, but is in fact the ‘best’ thing I have experienced in this realm.
I don’t believe that the Bible holds 100% of the answers for life but is the story of God’s revelation to man.
Comment by Giacomo — January 5, 2006 @ 2:53 pm
This is crazy. A perfect, all-powerful god can’t do it himself, so he has some desert dwellers with bad writing skills do it in a confusing way in a language foreign to most of the world? How does that even remotely make sense to you?
January 5th, 2006 at 3:25 pmI wish i could just talk with you in person … it’d be a lot easier.
It wouldn’t make any difference. You’re not the first Christain whose ever tried to convince me that he had some great knowledge that I was missing. You have nothing I want. Even I if were interested and believed you, I don’t want to live a life that includes your religion. It’s a horrific way to exist when you could have ultimate freedom instead.
Something making sense is not the qualifier of it’s veracity … “sense†is based upon experience and knowledge … which we know, as far as humans are concerned, is limited.
And your experience and knowledge is significantly less than mine because you’ve never experienced anything else, while I have. And it’s not an assumption, because you’ve admitted so.
In reference to your OT statement, I’m not dismissing the OT … I’m speaking to the concept of progressive revelation in the Bible. Jesus came to “live†and “fulfill†the law … which is why I bring you to then NT more often.
You are not understanding – you are picking and choosing and then condeming us for doing the same. Make up your mind.
January 5th, 2006 at 3:30 pmI can’t argue with the authenticity of your Christianity but I will say that if you qualify authentic as “attending church and reading the Bible†then you missed the more important (and meaningful) aspects of it.
No you can’t. Because you are incredibly arrogant to assume otherwise. I know what it means. Stop discounting my experiences because you cannot accept that someone who was a true Christian is now an Atheist.
January 5th, 2006 at 3:31 pmEvolution, however, I can experience, study and prove.
Comment by unbelievable
Evolution isn’t proven. If you can prove it you’ll be the richest third rate high school teacher in the world.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 5, 2006 @ 3:21 pm
Why do you set yourself up like this? Really? The appendix, for starters… the coccyx, the ‘backward’ design of the eye, the engineering nightmare of the skeletal system, pseudo genes, male nipples, the opposable thumb, 97% genetic similarity to chimpanzees… and there is so very, very much more beyond the human body. It’s all proven, your refusal to accept reality because you want to be eternal doesn’t make it not so.
Okay, fork over the dough…
January 5th, 2006 at 3:37 pmBack on topic – Faiz, let’s just cut to the chase and say what brilliant, conspiracy theory progs everywhere already know – EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE is GEORGE W. BUSH’S fault. (One conspiracy whacko overheard whispering behind their hand t another lefty conspirascy whacko…” Pssst…. I heard from $0&$0 that Dubya called each of those men’s homes – and personally ordered them to the mine so he could cause a methane explosion from a.) a spark… b.) lightning or c.) some New Age goddess.”
January 5th, 2006 at 4:13 pmI urge every one to READ the Bloombery story Faiz cites. The story Faiz represents and the story on Bloomberg are vastly different. (Gosh, Faiz – when you get down to the last papragraph….and factor in the larger number of coal mines….you MIGHT actually blame the most inept Pres of all, James Earl Carter.
January 5th, 2006 at 4:19 pmShoo, Aphro, nobody reads your goofy rants. Get a life already or go shopping at Wal-Mart. You have used up all the words and irritating punctuation you know.
January 5th, 2006 at 4:24 pmSPLAT!!!! That was me just swatting you away, PP. (I find “shooo” so ineffective!!!) I think we should devote a whole thread to the !!OUTRAGE!!! of “one-note” progs and the disgust and revulsion they are (or aren’t) shrieking about regarding the betrayal of their representatives. The ones’ who SHOULD be screaming are the Indians and the partners at the law firm who got a royal $crewing from Quick-Cash-Jack.
January 5th, 2006 at 4:57 pmStop discounting my experiences because you cannot accept that someone who was a true Christian is now an Atheist.
Your experiences are your own … I can’t really speak to them or discount them. You do sound like one who followed the rules and attended church, but never really experienced what it’s like to be a Christian. Ask yourself, does Jesus (from the Biblical account of course) sound like someone who’s being controlled and who teaches a brand of hate and legalism … certainly not. You say you were a Christian, but then you argue as one who has no real experience with the Bible or the Christian faith.
I’m not trying to be a jerk … you sound happy to be an Atheist. I too am extremely happy and would wish for others to experience what I have … it doesn’t sound to me that you share this experience …
January 5th, 2006 at 5:22 pmA perfect, all-powerful god can’t do it himself, so he has some desert dwellers with bad writing skills do it in a confusing way in a language foreign to most of the world? How does that even remotely make sense to you?
Well as you state it … it doesn’t. Of course, you being a Christian for 30 plus years already know the answer to that question.
Helps your point that a superstitious group of desert dwellers wrote badly? That’s a stretch, even for you…
Again, for a former Christian … you seem to have a hard time understanding the basics of Biblical canon and authorship. They had families , jobs, lives … they were called to follow Christ … they did. They learned from him … he was killed … they hid. He arose … they became different men. They were simple men, but they started a revolution of sorts. Again, even the newest “Christian” understands these points … the fact that you don’t believe them shouldn’t change your understanding.
But you continually attack Christian doctrine like someone who’s not very well versed with the ideas and the scripture … why? 30 years is plenty of time for you to anticipate most of the answers I give … why then do you ask the questions … ?
January 5th, 2006 at 5:29 pmYour experiences are your own … I can’t really speak to them or discount them. You do sound like one who followed the rules and attended church, but never really experienced what it’s like to be a Christian.
Yes I did! I didn’t just go to church… I did everything that you do. But it was just self-deluding. I wanted to believe so I believed. It wasn’t until I left my comfort zone that I began to see discrepancies and disparities and thread by thread over the course of years, it unravelled.
Ask yourself, does Jesus (from the Biblical account of course) sound like someone who’s being controlled and who teaches a brand of hate and legalism … certainly not.
I do not think there was a real person, so how can a myth, martyred or otherwise be influential? It can’t. Parables hold no authority to me. It’s like me trying to convince you of somethig based on the actions of Mickey Mouse.
You say you were a Christian, but then you argue as one who has no real experience with the Bible or the Christian faith.
Becuase I no longer have faith. Once upon a time, I sounded just like you. Now I don’t. And I think you can’t stand that. That what you have isn’t real if it can be over turned. Deny it all you want, because that’s all in your bag of tricks that will convince you I wasn’t a ‘real’ Christian. But I was Giacomo. And your just going to have to accept it and that I found someting far better.
I’m not trying to be a jerk … you sound happy to be an Atheist. I too am extremely happy and would wish for others to experience what I have … it doesn’t sound to me that you share this experience …
Comment by Giacomo — January 5, 2006 @ 5:22 pm
I did experience what you did. But it was delusional. It was based on things that don’t makes sense. And it was based on lies. If ignorance is bliss, then it’s why blind faith thinks it’s happy. But you have nothing else to compare it to so how do really you know?
January 5th, 2006 at 9:07 pmAgain, for a former Christian … you seem to have a hard time understanding the basics of Biblical canon and authorship. They had families , jobs, lives … they were called to follow Christ … they did. They learned from him … he was killed … they hid. He arose … they became different men. They were simple men, but they started a revolution of sorts. Again, even the newest “Christian†understands these points … the fact that you don’t believe them shouldn’t change your understanding.
But you continually attack Christian doctrine like someone who’s not very well versed with the ideas and the scripture … why? 30 years is plenty of time for you to anticipate most of the answers I give … why then do you ask the questions … ?
Comment by Giacomo — January 5, 2006 @ 5:29 pm
Because I want to see how those things sound from this side. Curious to how I sounded to other people and why some people used to say the things to me that I’m nowsaying to you and how I rationalized them. Guess I wanted to gage how far I have come. Not validation, I don’t need that, I just wanted to see what ignorance sounds like from the other side. Sorry, but not very good. These conversations just lend further credibility to the new things I am discovering. I’m still trying to tear down walls that were created by my having been born into the culture I was. I don’t like it. Blindness is a terrible thing. Something I would never wish upon anyone. But I am very elated that I was able to wake up and not waste my life in such denial and delusion.
January 5th, 2006 at 9:14 pmIt’s like me trying to convince you of somethig based on the actions of Mickey Mouse.
I’m actually quite fond of Mickey Mouse so it may work if you tried.
Becuase I no longer have faith. Once upon a time, I sounded just like you. Now I don’t. And I think you can’t stand that. That what you have isn’t real if it can be over turned. Deny it all you want, because that’s all in your bag of tricks that will convince you I wasn’t a ‘real’ Christian.
I admit I’m perplexed by it but not vexed by it … it makes me sad more than uncomfortable really. I don’t judge the veracity of my faith by your decision to leave it or not … Mostly, I enjoy the give and take (and the fact that Ryan isn’t here to flame me … i don’t think he should’ve been banned though).
If ignorance is bliss, then it’s why blind faith thinks it’s happy. But you have nothing else to compare it to so how do really you know?
Well … 3 of my 4 years of college were spent living a life that was as far from Christianity as I could get (I pretty much tried most anything) … I haven’t told you that before, I know, but I found that I felt really empty and not whole when I was acting in a manner that wasn’t consistent with my faith. I spent much of that time challenging the Bible and people of faith … many of them didn’t have answers so I had to find them on my own. It was then that I embraced my faith fully … like I said, I feel quite liberated and secure in what I believe … I’m sorry you feel this is delusional and it’s sad for me to wonder what life would be like if I thought I could never again see deceased loved ones or I did not have a larger purpose outside of my own ambitions.
As always, your candor and civility are appreciated.
January 5th, 2006 at 9:20 pmOne more thing … having faith is actually extremely difficult and not the crutch that some would think it to be. For example, a loved one gets cancer … approaching that scenario as a Christian means one believes 1) God could heal the person and 2) He might not heal the person.
The inevitable questions of why not heal them … if you love us humans, why allow those that follow you to suffer … etc. Based upon circumstances like this (and others) I’ve learned that God isn’t as much interested in our comfort or pleasure as He is in who we are becoming as a person (which is why I think Pat Robertson has lost his mind) … as far as my experiences go, being a Christian means one must deal with ambiguity and wrestle with faith … it’s not blissful by any stretch (but can be joyful in spite of these challenges).
January 5th, 2006 at 9:30 pmGiacomo,
I’m sorry you had such a difficult college, but just growing up and taking accountability is just as effective if not more effective than religion. The problem with religion is that teaches people to have blind faith without question – and this is both antithetical to reason and science, as well as being irrational to progress and accountability. If you always have a devil or a god to blame or attribute the world to, it protects you from accepting reality. It sounds like you looked for an escape from yourself, and religion offered you that escape and that crutch. Good therapy would have done a better job, you should consider it some time.
January 6th, 2006 at 1:24 am“if you love us humans, why allow those that follow you to suffer … etc.” Giacomo
Did he tell you that himself? Why do you believe any god is interested in your suffering or love? If we were so important, why did it take 15 billion years to create us? And why are we in a backwater of the universe. Your statements just demonstrate a primitive need for anthropomorphism of a ‘deity’ figure that just makes absolutely no sense. I have to agree with unbelievable that it is very delusional and pretty silly to believe this way.
Especially when you consider there’s no historical basis for the beliefs, or the claims. It’s a nice set of myths, but frankly there are better myths than christianity. It’s ‘average’ on the scale of myths. The single most useful moral is the golden rule, and that is generally attributed to Zorastrianism.
“Whatever is disagreeable to yourself do not do unto others.” – Shayast-na-Shayast 13:29, Zoroastrianism.
January 6th, 2006 at 1:33 am“Faiz, let’s just cut to the chase and say what brilliant, conspiracy theory progs everywhere already know – EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE is GEORGE W. BUSH’S fault. mighty aphrodite”
I didn’t know you did impressions of Sean Hannity. That’s almost identical to the sad little rant Hannity gave on his show when Jack Spadaro was his guest. Clearly you’re force fed from the same trough, and I’m sad for you that this is the extent of your narrow world. Poor thing.
You know, there’s enough blame to go around. After all, the mine owners, the Bush budget and personnel cuts. Then we have the general disdain and undermining of unions by republicans. It’s funny how Republicans trust corporations, but they forget that the reason the laws were passed during the 1970s was because corporations had to be forced to provide worker safety.
The fact that you would even write such a non-sequiter argument is a really sad statement. You and your fellow republicans prefer to hold ranks, than take accountability for deaths produced from your mismanagement. Whether it’s Katrina, Iraq, 9/11 or this, republican mismanagement is rampant, as are the apologists. It’s really sad how you put your party ahead of the well being of americans. Are you sure you actually like this country and its people? I’m unconvinced.
January 6th, 2006 at 2:08 amThe problem with religion is that teaches people to have blind faith without question – and this is both antithetical to reason and science, as well as being irrational to progress and accountability.
But this is my point in my previous posts … blind faith doesn’t exist because humans doubt and are troubled when bad things happen. Faith isn’t blind … it’s based upon a culmination of experiences … not simple escapism.
January 6th, 2006 at 7:24 amThe single most useful moral is the golden rule, and that is generally attributed to Zorastrianism.
If I believe that ALL truth comes from God, then it’s not difficult to see that others will realize these truths … their universality is not in doubt. I’d be pretty stupid to believe that Christianity had a corner on “truth”.
January 6th, 2006 at 7:26 amtheir universality is not in doubt. I’d be pretty stupid to believe that Christianity had a corner on “truthâ€.
Comment by Giacomo
We have the corner on the only truth that matters.
Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
There is no truth in the Filthy Left, in fact they deny the existence of absolute truth. If you ask them if they believe that they’ll tell you; “Absolutely”.
January 6th, 2006 at 9:29 amWhy let a little thing like facts get in the way of a good bush-bashing, eh? Data can be found here…
http://www.msha.gov/fatals/fabc.htm
and here…
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/statistics/images/cb4.gif
Geez, did a bit of intellectual skepticism never hurt anyone?
January 6th, 2006 at 10:33 amI admit I’m perplexed by it but not vexed by it … it makes me sad more than uncomfortable really. I don’t judge the veracity of my faith by your decision to leave it or not … Mostly, I enjoy the give and take (and the fact that Ryan isn’t here to flame me … i don’t think he should’ve been banned though).
Sad that I’m happier? That does not bode well with the rest of your statement. People who are sad over someone else’s personal decision to reject their own perspective are always vexed by it. Doesn’t make sense the other way.
Ryan hasn’t been banned. He posted some stuff around here earlier this week. He’s just probably had enough of the frustration in dealing with the ignorance of the conservatives who post here. As long as IRI is still here, no one’s been banned.
January 6th, 2006 at 3:26 pmWell … 3 of my 4 years of college were spent living a life that was as far from Christianity as I could get (I pretty much tried most anything) … I haven’t told you that before, I know, but I found that I felt really empty and not whole when I was acting in a manner that wasn’t consistent with my faith. I spent much of that time challenging the Bible and people of faith … many of them didn’t have answers so I had to find them on my own. It was then that I embraced my faith fully … like I said, I feel quite liberated and secure in what I believe … I’m sorry you feel this is delusional and it’s sad for me to wonder what life would be like if I thought I could never again see deceased loved ones or I did not have a larger purpose outside of my own ambitions.
As always, your candor and civility are appreciated.
Comment by Giacomo — January 5, 2006 @ 9:20 pm
The fact that you are just NOW mentioning this – I don’t buy it.
You were born into a culture who told you things. To give that up will always seems empty at first. You know the five phases of healing. But what does it matter if you’ll never see your loved ones again if you yourself are dead and gone? You won’t know. And that carrot causes those of us free from religion to make the most of this life. That makes us not pine for eternity. We get what we need in this existence, so tomorrow is no longer somethig to regret.
I do think you’re delusional. I think all people who ignore the lack of proof of a mythical existence are. And I think you’re missing out on the appreciation for the reality in which we actually reside.
January 6th, 2006 at 3:39 pmas far as my experiences go, being a Christian means one must deal with ambiguity and wrestle with faith … it’s not blissful by any stretch (but can be joyful in spite of these challenges).
Comment by Giacomo — January 5, 2006 @ 9:30 pm
I personally find this self-destructive.
I have another definition for you:
masochism
n.
The deriving of pleasure, or the tendency to derive pleasure, from being humiliated or mistreated, either by another or by oneself.
A willingness or tendency to subject oneself to unpleasant or trying experiences.
January 6th, 2006 at 3:43 pmI-RIGHT-I
Throwing Bible quotes at non-religious people is as pointless as throwing quotes from the Qu’ran at you.
You don’t know that Jesus existed or ever said that. You take it upon pure blind faith. Then you criticize Evolution which is far more substantial and validated for being a ‘theory’. You really do see the hypocrasy in that don’t you?
January 6th, 2006 at 3:51 pmWell … 3 of my 4 years of college were spent living a life that was as far from Christianity as I could get (I pretty much tried most anything)
This shows that you miss understand Atehism. It’s not in total opposition to Christianity. We’re not hedonistic heathens who take pleasure in doing drugs (I haven’t), being promiscious (to IRI’s dismay I am also not), in reeking havoc and mayhem (no crinimal record here). We are actually vey loving and kind people with morals and a sense of humanity. So if you were living a life where you were trying anything, it was not a life of free thought, Atheism or liberalism. And you cannot compare your experience with mine. I’m not self-destructive. Which is what you described. And self-destruction never feels good…
And, everything that Right Punch said above.
January 6th, 2006 at 4:14 pmI was wondering how long it would take before Pres. Bush was blamed for the mining accident by Dems and libs. Katrina and Rita happens: Bush did it. Grass fires in Texas and Oklahoma: Bush did it. A leaf falls from a tree: Bush did it.
You get the picture!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:12 pmyou guys are all wrong, about Abramoff. He is a democrat and is trying to bring the Republican party down. You can’t believe a thing he says. Tom Delay never met him and he has only given money to democrats. Why is everybody always pickin on the poor Republican Party. We are the Party who doesn’t take illegal money like the democrat party. We are as clean as the driven snow. Don’t believe the press, Abramoff is a plant. I don’t believe he is even a real person, he may be a computer generated image created by democrats to bring us down.
We don’t take bribes! By the way you and your friends are all invited to our new fund raiser and we “will do favors for money”, but don’t tell the press.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:14 pmI’m confuesd…. so Bush cut jobs from the MSHA… so, therefore we Lost safety…. like we aren’t as safe as we were when Clinton was when office???? So is it Bush’s fault for this? By saying that the 200 citations only got a SMALL fine, that means that the bill to fix the stuff is MORE than the bill for a citation. It doesn’t seem right to me. Please e-mail me or something so I’m not so confused. Thx. – Lindz.
March 21st, 2006 at 10:35 pm[...] Oh you are good, young Jedi. First, I think it is important to note that while the economy is “up,” as Ben says, when real wages are actually down and federal regulations are gutted or largely ignored by corporate cronies. At this rate, the leadership of this country is turning America into a third world nation of low-wage earners. Secondly, Shapiro is only providing half the story on Iraq War deaths. American deaths are down but Iraqi deaths are up. Ben would have his readers believe that the reduced American deaths are a sign of improvement on the ground when the reality is that the crosshairs were just placed elsewhere. Ben is either intellectually dishonest or non-American deaths are not as important. Both explanations are disgraceful. Thirdly, building up the “zero terrorist attacks” talking point is just silly. Despite a number of convenient false alarms, the authorities thwarted the plot to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge with a blow torch and a recycled claim that terrorists planned to crash a plane into a Los Angeles tower in 2002, of which some have questioned the illogical details of the plot. Ben is poppin’ the collective conservative collar for protecting America from threats that have not come to forition. If there were legitimate terrorist plots planned for within the United States that were stopped, Bush would be on television in a flight suit faster than you can say “rock bottom poll numbers.” The fact is that his numbers are so low that Bush needs a major thwarted terrorist plot to reverse the trend. The Democratic Party cannot be trusted with national security. This is a party more concerned with health care than terrorism, more concerned with global warming than Al Qaeda. They complain about President Bush’s use of wartime powers to order wiretapping on domestic to international phone calls between suspected terrorists, complaining that civil liberties are being violated. Democrats are more worried that the government will monitor calls between a mother and her daughter backpacking in Europe than that the government will ignore calls between deputies of Osama bin Laden and terrorists like Mohammed Atta. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) attempts to have President Bush censured for protecting the American people. [...]
April 19th, 2006 at 6:13 am[...] 4th, 2007 · No Comments Think Progress back in January 2006: Bloomberg reveals: Federal authorities issued 21 citations last year for a build-up of combustible [...]
March 4th, 2007 at 9:47 pmInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 8:44 pmJim
This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards designed to stop the latter practice. (Blogger now has backlinks
March 15th, 2008 at 2:08 amBlack Pussy Black Lesbian Porn Fat Black Pussy
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 10:33 pmAnne
I just wanted to tell you that your site is really awesome and is of a fantastic quality. The content is great and I will be returning.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:29 amHardcore Sex Gay Hardcore Sex Hardcore Blowjob
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 2:30 amCum Asian Cum Ass Cum
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 12:01 amKatie Lohmann
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.
March 18th, 2008 at 6:59 amAss Round Ass Tight Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 2:22 amCum Gay Cum Shot Cum Whore
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 2:57 amRheba
A friend is someone who sees through you and still enjoys the view.
March 19th, 2008 at 4:20 amPaige Davis
Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !
March 19th, 2008 at 4:44 amNatalia Sokolova
Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !
March 19th, 2008 at 10:34 pmFaxless Payday Loans
Loyal advocates of the excellent New York Times might access user friendly a no faxing payday loan for $1600 even with abominable credit, you should submit you application today at work for no faxing payday loans.
March 20th, 2008 at 3:25 pmGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 6:57 pmFishing Rods
Thanks for the helpful post. I have visited many sites that have been a complete waste of time. It is good to come across a site that actually helps and informs the users… I have included another really good site at the bottom that also helps me ou…
March 21st, 2008 at 3:09 amBurt Reynolds
Did you get this off MSN?
March 21st, 2008 at 4:10 pmJay
If you ever need a helping hand, you’ll find one at the end of your arm. As you grow older you will discover that you have two hands. One for helping yourself, the other for helping others.
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:18 amYoung Girls Young Teens Angus Young
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:54 amwholesale clothes
Thanks for the input
March 23rd, 2008 at 8:29 amAss Thick Ass Babes Kick Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 10:50 amCum Swallowing Cum Cum Eater
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 10:20 pmlighting traditional towel
Nice Post… do you know what is the first? Maybe You can se My Post Here
March 24th, 2008 at 7:00 amJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 12:22 ammd background check
I’m with the earlier poster, this seems like a good idea.
March 25th, 2008 at 11:17 amDistance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 8:53 amblue cross health insurance texas
I found your post comments while searching Google. Very relevant especially as this is not an issue which a lot of peaople are conversant with.
March 28th, 2008 at 10:03 amwholesale fishing equipment
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:19 pmProm Dresses Hat Hollister Clothing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 8:40 pmGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 11:50 pmCompare Home Insurance Quotes
I don’t mean to be too in your face, but I’m not sure I agree with this. Anyhow, thanks for sharing and I think I’ll come to this blog more often.
March 29th, 2008 at 1:16 amGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 8:39 amHealth Insurance California Health Insurance Michigan Health Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:07 amGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:26 pmSebastian
in work, pleasure in its result and the knowledge of the value of the result to the
April 5th, 2008 at 2:22 amHealth Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 12:57 amGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 8:05 amCleotilde
Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. To keep our faces toward change and behave like free spirits in the presence of fate is strength undefeatable.
April 6th, 2008 at 10:28 amFalse Fuel Saving Gadgets
Can it be that your server is infected with a virus – I get an Virus warning when I open your site with Firefox – Just for your Info.
April 7th, 2008 at 8:05 amCrown Car Hire
This article sounds well, but how everything is related together?
April 7th, 2008 at 8:10 pmJessie
This is real good info. Thanks for sharing.
April 8th, 2008 at 12:49 pmAaron
I will dream of your poetic words tonight.
April 9th, 2008 at 8:16 amcardinal health supply
I came across your site while I did a search on Google for %KEYWORD% and your article on %TITLE% was informative.
April 9th, 2008 at 5:26 pmGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 12th, 2008 at 4:29 pmRobinson Atwood Brown
April 13th, 2008 at 9:00 pmJoan Of Arc
April 14th, 2008 at 10:05 am