No Greater Love by Rachel Lampa:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN2vyy__os8

Before I knew your name

You knew my every breath

Before I found my way

You knew my every step

Before I knew everything that I need

You gave it all to me

I am going to remind people that we already have threads where you can post links to articles and videos. If you want to occasionally post a link here that is fine, but mostly they should go in those threads.

I was thinking about Black Friday today, and how soon after, I found this sub-forum. My first 500 posts are almost exclusively from the HUSNG forum. I was studying HUSNG poker for a solid year and had memorized Nash and probably had reviewed almost every single hand posted in that forum. I had just moved up to the 30's and was taking occassional shots at the 50's. But as far as I was concerned, there was only NVG and HUSNG. But poker was gone (except for a month of full-time play live, which I would never recommend to anyone). And now I just have RGT and a few bucks on Cake.

So there is my random **** for the day. I miss Pokerstars

Mods why are atheists debating in the quote and article (sticky) threads?

Lol...I ran a thread on Chomsky a while back and we went off on an Obama birth certificate tangent.

Many people in RGT argued Obama's birth certificate was valid but now Obama's own lawyer is claiming it's a forgery.

If you google "Obama's Lawyer Admits" you get pages and pages of hits on it.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama...ineligible.asp

Snopes.com plays semantics with Examiner Obama eligibility article by Jeffrey Phelps
http://www.examiner.com/article/snop...bility-article

Quote:

"Instead of actually taking the case head on and trying to truly determine whether or not the birth certificate is actually real or not, Snopes.com’s team of very questionable “researchers” merely decided to argue semantics Friday, instead of facts."

Dumb law in any case. If i want someone who was not born here to be my president i should be able to vote for them.

What law?

The law/rule/whatever you want to call it keeping non naturalized citizens form being president.

There's still a Constitutional requirement. A personal preference like you've expressed still requires a Constitutional amendment and there is none.

Then there should be one because its a dumb law.

What's dumb about ascertaining loyalties? When they wrote the Constitution they had just fought a war, the American Revolution, which included internal insurgents.

The President of the United States commands the Armed Forces.

Imagine if the Germans could have ousted Hitler (he was Austrian not German) on a technicality which might not be such a technicality. We could have averted WWII.

And what's with his inability to produce a birth certificate?

Did you know the Armed Forces take an oath to protect against both foreign and domestic enemies?

Since you dont like to debate or argue i wont. GL with your birther thing.

FSTDT

Is it fundie to notice the absence of a birth certificate?

How about Obama dismissing his legal counsel in the case is that fundie?

Quotes:

"Genova further explained to Apuzzo that Hill had been removed from the Obama eligibility case, and he would henceforth handle the legal representation in the Obama eligibility case personally."


"What precisely Hill (Obama's former counsel) had stipulated was that the birth certificate had never been presented by Obama’s presidential campaign to the New Jersey secretary of state or to Judge Masin as evidence Obama was eligible to be president."

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/obama-att...-be-on-ballot/

I'm fairly confident this isnt' the first time she's brought something here debunked by Snopes.

I wish I could say I'm surprised she's a birther... Then again, if anyone turned out to be a birther here I suppose she'd be the most reasonable pick.

You should read above where the Examiner debunks Snopes.

Snopes is really only 2 people.

The statements of Obama's counsel are all a matter of public record. Check the videos. They tried to pull'em off the net but couldn't since Obama's counsel didn't make the videos.

You know bad things do go down in history only to be revealed as bad later in spite of all the people defending them in the present.

I believe that is addessed in the Snopes article.

The number of people at Snopes is irrelevent to anything.

You (one person) have a long history of believing whatever ridiculous nonsense you want. Snopes case is well laid out and easily verifiable. While the Examiner article is clearly written as an inflammatory piece mean to incite the fringe of the right. I see they hit their target.

Most rational and discriminating readers would realize, for instance, that anyone writing a piece that says:
"In a direct assault on everything the citizens of the USA take for granted, in laymen's terms, his attorneys literally made the argument during a hearing on April 10th that because the document was so obviously faked and could not possibly be considered proof of citizenship, the document itself should not be allowed as evidence in the case."

For this to be true Obama's lawyers would literally have to the dumbest lawyers in the history of the profession! Furthermore, if true, EVERY NEWS OUTLET IN THE WORLD WOULD HAVE CARRIED THIS PIECE. Yet, only this writer... the one that Splenda of course uses as her source, carries this? We all know that this would have been a matter of public record and easily verifiable.

Please continue to link to quacks. Its part of your charm.

The world's media is a Zionist conspiracy, keep up

How much of the media is controlled by politics? I don't know and afaik nobody does.

You know where everybody slips up. In their thoroughness. They never check sources and they never follow up.

Well in this case somebody is following up.

^^ I am a prophet

It is?

Never heard that one before but I've heard Fox and CNN are both partisan.
One's Democrat and one's Republican.

I'm British btw. I only come here because Christians in my country are so educated* and moderate it's hard to keep up the motivation for my secular-humanist world domination plans

*

Media can be used differently and to different degrees throughout the world.

China censors it.

Quote:

"Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China is conducted under a wide variety of laws and administrative regulations. In accordance with these laws, more than sixty Internet regulations have been made by the People's Republic of China (PRC) government, implemented by provincial branches of state-owned ISPs, business companies, and organizations. The apparatus of the PRC's Internet repression is considered more extensive and more advanced than in any other country in the world. The governmental authorities not only block website content but also monitor the Internet access of individuals."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interne...ublic_of_China

And they've just had several social media led events in the Middle East.

The Christianized world is the free world.

The Muslim countries and the atheistic ones are the ones being socially repressed.

Could it be the Word of God thrives where things are free...wonder why that is....hmmmm

Btw, I know this personally and when they couldn't bully or force me off the board to shut me up they turned on their ignore buttons.