An OPEN box of chocolates for the Tuesday thread

.....Advertisement.....

« Tuesday’s column: ‘You can fight City Hall’ | Ron takes the Post of Day with some questions for Santorum »

2012.02.14

Wikimedia Commons

“I claim there ain’t Another Saint As great as Valentine.”
Ogden Nash

Posted at 09:00 by Dan Casey | Category: open thread, Quote of the Day | 117 Comments

117 Comments »

Happy Tuesday, folks! Get ready, ladies, because Del. ‘Taliban’ Bob Marshall’s ‘personhood’ bill is set to pass today and you will be expected to allow Virginia access to your fallopian tubes to make sure every sperm that unites with an egg gets to vote.

Comment by Saintbridge — February 14, 2012 @ 9:21 am
Obama has a great budget ready to go!

Cut Defense spending even more with the issues in Iran and Syria, with troops in Afganistan. GREAT IDEA!

BORROW more money and give Billions to community colleges!! Boy that will jump start the economy.

Lets see.. the new budgets say SPEND 4 trillion, and CUT 3 Trillion.

LETS HAVE MATH CLASS!

Comment by Pistol Pete — February 14, 2012 @ 9:31 am
President Jackass’ budget shows he has learned absolutely nothing about what’s killing the economy. He has no plans to curb his drunken spending spree, as he expanding and adding programs right and left. He has every intention on adding to his record $5 trillion deficit increase. He learned nothing from the downgrading of our credit rating or from the Greek debt crisis.

One can only conclude he wants the United States’ economy to collapse like Greece’s, because he’s doing the exact same things Greece did.

Santorum needs to bust his ass on this at every opportunity, and I think he will.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 9:33 am
On Valentine’s Day it seems appropriate to flashback a few years. Here’s a song from long ago by none other than Connie Francis. Not Sandra Dee, but still a pretty good song.

Happy Valentine’s Day fellow bloggers!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNwzsrGBns&feature=related

Comment by Ron — February 14, 2012 @ 9:41 am
Maybe Suzie Q would like this flash back better??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlGeKdUFjB4&feature=related

Comment by Ron — February 14, 2012 @ 9:44 am
Workfare rather than welfare, and practical infrastructure investment. Finally something that benefits actual working people instead of “too big to fail” entities.

Comment by tass — February 14, 2012 @ 9:49 am
IMO, Obama has done the exact right thing. The TP/GOP is going to fight him on every inch, fight their own ideas even, if Obama backs them and not offer any real governance other than obstruction, so mow them down and move on with your election agenda and let the people of America decide.

Enlightening article: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/economic-experts-gather-in-dc-to-explain-why-politics-has-doomed-us.php

“As the U.S. government and governments in Europe respond to the global economic slump with conservative austerity measures, it’s easy to forget that the overwhelming professional economic consensus is that depressed countries that can afford to should be doing the opposite — ramping up government purchases of goods and services and putting off the budget cuts and tax increases for a few years.

This isn’t even close to what’s happening. And as the space between what these experts think should happen and what global elites are actually doing grows, the experts’ forecast is becoming more and more pessimistic.

Nowhere was this gloominess more clearly worn than at a symposium hosted by the New America Foundation in downtown Washington Wednesday evening.”

People who are busy digging political trenches and tightening blinders are missing what that very activity is doing to our nation. The people tasked with doing the nation’s business do not want to see the nation succeed because it might give Obama a modicum of a sliver of looking like he might be a half-way decent President. When in the nature of a healthy nation could such a thing ever be good or make us prosperous and confident? This kind of destructive politics was bound to take America down with it.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 9:58 am
And speaking of Santorum…he leads!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57377175-503544/poll-rick-santorum-takes-slight-lead-in-gop-race/

Is God answering prayers? Is the improbable happening? This would spell annihilation for the Democrats, and I think they know it.

Lots of silence in here, I notice. LOL.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:06 am
Oh doubtless God will ignore the prayers of the desperate, sick and dying to answer your political prayers. That is the way it works, no doubt about it. You blaspheme and keep right on pretending to be Christian.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 10:22 am
#8 Silence, suzie? Why do you keep making up lies? We’ve said repeatedly we’d rather have him than Romney.

Now why don’t you just shut up until you can post something with a grain of truth in it?

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 10:26 am
I see that Roanoke County has done such a bad job of planning, even when it knew huge state cuts were coming, that it might have to close schools. And I also see that TPers tried to turn the Montgomery Supervisors meeting into a shout fest. Typical.

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 10:29 am
#3 most ill-informed

You probably have no idea what is in the 2013 budget submitted by President Obama as you seem to have difficulty reading more than on sentence at a time, so here is a short compilation for you [these few sentences will seem like "War and Peace" to you, but try to wrap your mind around it.]

President Obama’s 2013 budget was greeted on Monday with Republican catcalls that it is simply a campaign document, but election-year budgets are supposed to explain priorities to voters. This one offers a clear and welcome contrast to the slashing austerity — and protect-the-wealthy priorities — favored by Republican Congressional leaders and the party’s presidential candidates.

The president’s budget calls for long-term deficit reduction, but its immediate priority is to encourage the fledgling economic recovery. Instead of trying to stabilize the budget on the backs of the poor, it would raise taxes on the wealthy and on big banks and eliminate many corporate tax loopholes.

To put Americans back to work, it would invest $350 billion in constructing roads, rail lines and schools, and encourage manufacturing through tax incentives and research spending. It would maintain the Pell grant program for low-income college students and add new spending for teacher improvement and education reform.

Republicans, on the other hand, would cut taxes for the rich and cut almost all of that spending, heedless of the pain that it would inflict on the economy and the millions of Americans still reeling from the downturn’s effects. IN POLL AFTER POLL, THE PUBLIC HAS MADE CLEAR THAT IT PREFERS THE PRESIDENT’S APPROACH OF REBUILDING THE ECONOMY NOW AND TACKLING THE DEFICIT WHEN THE FUNDAMENTALS ARE STRONGER.[my caps]
Read the entire article here

now he/she/it will dismiss this out of hand because it doesn’t comport with faux Fox News’ viewpoint…
On Fox News, Charles Krauthammer columnist of the Washington Post likened Obama’s budget proposal to “being worthy of the beleaguered Eurozone nation Greece.”
http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/13/krauthammer-calls-obama-budget-worthy-of-greece-truly-scandalous/

Sound familiar? Evidently, most ill-informed doesn’t have an original thought.

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 10:30 am
The President could have submitted a budget that eliminated welfare the Medicaid and slashed spending and taxes — all things the GOP says it wants — and they would still criticize it. They would find a way to criticize him if he figured out a way to end abortion and birth control.

Comment by Dan Casey — February 14, 2012 @ 10:35 am
Suzie, the silence is because everyone is stifling a laugh at your Santorum nonsense. I’m not sure this guy would even carry his home state–he got blown out in his last election there! Even a far-right (CPAC) poll said 20% of Republican voters would vote for Obama no matter who he’s up against…add in a possible 3rd party (Gingrich or Paul), and the GOP loses even more votes there.

Is God answering prayers? Yes, for us left-leaning Christians who vote for more than one issue! Speaking of God, why do you suppose He told Cain, Bachmann, and Perry to run for the presidency? I think it was to expose the hypocrisy and ignorance that defines today’s GOP; anybody else have theories?

Comment by Say What? — February 14, 2012 @ 10:38 am
#12 Repubs criticize Obama’s budget as merely a campaign document. And guess what they’ll present in return? A campaign document. How can any of these people keep a straight face?

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 10:39 am
Republican budget plans — I will balance the budget in a couple of years, lower taxes (well, maybe not for the 160 million poorest), spend more on the military than all the next closest countries combined, and maintain SS and Medicare for all you older voters who might vote for the Dems if we don’t. Don’t ask how we’ll accomplish all that at one time. Please.

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 10:45 am
To put Americans back to work, it would invest $350 billion in constructing roads, rail lines and schools, and encourage manufacturing through tax incentives and research spending.

Oh wow. MORE spending to supposedly create jobs? Is this the 5th or 6th time he’s done this? Meanwhile America has LOST jobs since Captain Moron was inaugurated.

But the blogmorons continue to hail the same expensive failed policies that have NEVER worked.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:59 am
Has anybody figured out how much per reelection vote this new budget is costing us?

Comment by John Wilburn — February 14, 2012 @ 11:05 am
Let’s face it. The LAST thing the Democrats want is a united enthusiastic Tea Party majority all behind one candidate. The 2012 tidal wave would make 2010 look like a ripple in a kiddie pool.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 11:10 am
Like Candidates Jackass have anything better to offer. You should be a comedienne.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 12:12 pm
No such thing as a Left leaning Christian. Its an Oxymoron and hypocritical!

If God and God’s word are first in your life, then you put those things first when voting. BTW, Proverbs also talks about not having debt.

Here is a nice video done by ABC news comparing Obama’s BUDGET to a family BUDGET. I think the voter’s in America are sick of pumping China’s money into America.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/what-if-obamas-budget-were-your-familys/

Comment by Pistol Pete — February 14, 2012 @ 12:16 pm
Santorum has a “slight lead”? Chuckle…That doesn’t surprise me. The “slight lead” in that curious selection process has changed so many times and in such strange ways that I wouldn’t be surprised to see Sleepy or Dopey take a “slight lead” at some not too distant point.

Comment by Chip Woodrum — February 14, 2012 @ 12:50 pm
Chip Woodrum, I believe Sleepy and Dopey have already had their turns at the front of the pack. Remember Bachmann and Cain?

Comment by Dan Casey — February 14, 2012 @ 1:04 pm
Wrong again Pistol Pete. The truth of the matter is that those who truly follow Jesus and believe in the Bible teachings as a whole, are by far, more liberal than those who follow the parts they like and the teachings they ascribe to. It is really that simple.

Conservatives like you and Suzie are trying to forget the mission of Jesus, the whole point of salvation by Grace and the teachings of Jesus. He told you specifically what to do with “that which is Caesar’s”. He told us to pay taxes and respect authority and the told us the old laws of the Jews did not apply to the Gentiles who were saved by grace and grace alone. His death only has meaning if we believe Him. Jesus was the ultimate liberal. His Diciples were also. They did not bow down to and associate with the wealthy and the elite, they constantly challenged and even condemned them. You are simply wrong.

Submission to Governing Authorities
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV

Also:
“ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.

For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”
Romans 1:16-17

DO NOT try to use your Bible as a weapon, to divide and impugn, that is NOT the purpose!

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 1:11 pm
#21 Well you might tell that to Dorthy Day and if you do not know who she is then do a search.
There are many left leaning Christians as in the case of the Berrigan Brothers who took a stand against war.
Heck, I guess you might even call Jesus a lefty but that might not fit into your thinking.

Comment by billhudson — February 14, 2012 @ 1:14 pm
And Pete, just in case you need a refresher on “Grace” versus “the law”:

Faith or Works of the Law
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%203&version=NIV

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 1:18 pm
“Liberal media watchdog group Media Matters once contemplated harassing Fox News employees with yard signs in their neighborhoods, hiring private investigators to dig into their personal lives and retaining a “major law firm” to study legal action against the network, according to a report Tuesday in the Daily Caller.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/14/media-matters-memo-reportedly-detailed-plan-to-target-fox-news-staff/#ixzz1mNj5McS0”

TSK TSK TSK, how impotant and sad..

Comment by pammala — February 14, 2012 @ 1:21 pm
Good point…and I think Grumpy is still in the running…no, wait…that’s Ron Paul!

Comment by Chip Woodrum — February 14, 2012 @ 1:23 pm
Judge much, Pete? What does the Bible say about that? (Hint, see Matthew 7).

So you’re telling me (based on everything the GOP holds dear), that Jesus would approve of us torturing our enemies, killing a million Iraqis because someone else attacked us on 9/11, letting people die because they can’t afford health insurance (that was the consensus of the GOP debates based on applause), and making sure that the rich folks get huge tax cuts even if that means millions of poor people go hungry and homeless. If that’s the case, I’m glad we don’t serve the same Jesus!

Is Matthew 25:31-46 in your Bible?

How about this verse, from John 13: “So now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other. Your love for one another will prove to the world that you are my disciples.”

Comment by Say What? — February 14, 2012 @ 1:25 pm
Remember Bachmann and Cain?

We know the conservative frontrunners have not survived the media hatchet jobs. We also know the dirty tricks squad will be coming full force at Santorum. We further know since the left has nothing on Rick, they l will make stuff up out of thin air about Santorum and hope it sticks in their effort to get the weaker Romney nominated. It’s called the Sarah Palin treatment.

My prediction: Notice the left has changed the debate from “abortion” to “birth control”. They are now going to try to claim Santorum has said he will try to eradicate all birth control, which of course is a lie. The left knows they have lost the abortion debate. That is why they are trying to shift the debate.. Suzie is batting 1000 on predictions so far and I’ll be right on this.

I will continue to pray that the left won’t be able to succeed in their lies this time. Never underestimate the value of prayer! I think God has great plans for Rick.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 1:34 pm
#21 Just what we need, somebody else passing judgment as to who is and isn’t Christian.

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 1:58 pm
It is beyond doubt a sad choice for the Republicans. I wish I could say I was surprised but considering that they went around the bend in 2008, I guess this is the best they could muster.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 2:06 pm
@#3–”and I think he will.” That’s your problem–you think with your keyboard instead of reading the whole situation for comprehension.

@#21–so the Christians who take the love your neighbor commandment literally by serving their fellow humans in places like the Rescue Mission, Ram House & natural disaster areas don’t exist?

Comment by Laura — February 14, 2012 @ 2:17 pm
“BTW, Proverbs also talks about not having debt.”

If you have a mortgage, you have debt.
If you have a car payment, you have debt.
If you use credit cards, you have debt.

Comment by Contrasuzie — February 14, 2012 @ 2:40 pm
Lest we forget
Eleven Februarys ago, in his first major speech to Congress, Bush vowed that the entire national debt would be paid off by … well, by right now. However by the time he left office eight years later, the debt had nearly tripled, to $2.7 trillion
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/George_W._Bush%27s_First_State_of_the_Union_Address

More proof that Republicans never keep their promises…

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 2:47 pm
So I guess God sent the dirty tricks squad after Bachmann and Cain, after he told them to run for president, for some greater purpose.

Comment by Dan Casey — February 14, 2012 @ 3:10 pm
Hillary @#35, we might also remember that it was ten years ago today, Feb. 14, 2002, that radical Ann Coulter wrote that the “war against the rich” was “really getting old”. (in a column reprinted in her book “How to Talk to a Liberal). Proof that it was stale rhetoric even then. Even though the Bush tax giveaways were already passed, the party that controlled government back then apparently didn’t do enough to satisfy the fears of the money lovers, who have continued trying to convince some credulous middle class and poorer folks that “war on the rich” was a huge problem, and now they speak as though it dates to 2009. Given Coulter’s audience, it’s easy enough to believe they follow Falwell and Limbaugh in living as though Jesus taught “accumulate for oneself and let the benefits trickle down”.

Stale rhetoric sells to the gullible

Comment by Warren — February 14, 2012 @ 3:41 pm
Hillary,

It is true that GW Bush made that promise. Pres. Clinton and Congress worked together to move us in the right direction. To be fair to Bush, however, the total national debt when he assumed office was $5.768 Trillion. When he left office it was $10.626 Trillion. He only doubled the national debt during his 8 years. My source for that information is the Bureau of the Public Debt.

Comment by Ron — February 14, 2012 @ 3:47 pm
Santorum is the Democrats’ dream candidate. The rabid right loves him, but middle of the roaders such as myself will run away screaming. Republicans, you don’t like President Obama? Fine. Run a candidate who can actually win, not one who simply mollifies your lunatic fringe.

Comment by Old Blue — February 14, 2012 @ 3:55 pm
Excellent point Warren, you and Hillary are always on point. Thanks!

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 4:11 pm
“Jesus was a Liberal” NO I HAVE HEARD IT ALL!

Sandi, I will be praying for you and all of your followers on here who have no idea of true Christianity or the teachings of the bible. You have skewed it, just like everything else in your beliefs to fit with today’s worldview.

If you have a true Biblical Worldview, then you CANNOT believe in Abortion, Homosexual relationships, GOVERNMENT PROVIDING EVERYTHING (which is NOT charity by the way)..

Comment by UnLost — February 14, 2012 @ 4:15 pm
Say What?

I GIVE TO THOSE WHO NEED, I GIVE TO CHARITY.. NOT THE GOVT’S JOB

Comment by UnLost — February 14, 2012 @ 4:18 pm
I understand you now Sandi, you are one of those new age church goers that brings only their NEW TESTAMENT to church.

Do you believe in the whole bible or just parts that you want to believe?

If you are against the Law (Old Testament) then you would say that “Thou Shalt Not Kill is outdated.

You either believe all of it, or none of it. It is God’s Word

Got it.

Comment by UnLost — February 14, 2012 @ 4:23 pm
Save your prayers Unlost, I am a child of God and try as you (and others) might, you cannot change that. I have read the Bible and heard the Word of God all of my life. I KNOW what Jesus came for, what he brought to us and what he took away. I am sorry that you cannot understand the simple truth but yes, Jesus was not only a liberal, he was the original “community organizer”. He made his point and his mission so clear, even a child gets it. Your OT Leviticus Laws might work with Orthodox Jews still waiting on their Messiah, but the rest of us know that the Grace we have was paid for with the Blood of Christ and like I said, you do not have to like it, but you cannot refute it, and you cannot change it. Go talk to Paul in Romans and Galatians and leave me alone.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 4:28 pm
#39 Thank you for some kind of sanity there. While I may not agree with you you have a good point your GOP party has been taken over by the far right wing and they will be paying for it.
#41 Here is a hint, Jesus do not hang out with the rich but the poor. He also hung out with women which at the times was a no no. He was all about love, not hate. Something those in the far right needs to absorb.

Comment by billhudson — February 14, 2012 @ 4:34 pm
No, apparently you understand very little of what you have read in God’s Word” and it is not my job to explain it to you. I will offer some advice though, try reading it with an open mind and heart and not taking it out of context. Your gripe is not with me.

“1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.
2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?
3 Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh?[a]
4 Have you experienced[b] so much in vain—if it really was in vain?
5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?
6 So also Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”[c]
7 Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham.
8 Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”[d]
9 So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”[e]
11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”[f]
12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.”[g]
13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.”[h]
14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.”

You can take it from there.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 4:35 pm
My daddy, an elderly (white) Southwest Virginia farmer, has always been leary of those he says try to “put God in a box”. I know of no better Christian alive than this man who, by the way, voted for Obama and will do so again.

Comment by Blacksburg Suz — February 14, 2012 @ 4:45 pm
To anyone who thinks the gunners are dangerous, THIS thread is where I feel the need to wear kevlar!

gdad:

“And I also see that TPers tried to turn the Montgomery Supervisors meeting into a shout fest. Typical”

Might I remind (or inform) you that when Morgan Griffith most recently came to Montgomery County for a town hall meeting, he allocated 1 hour for the whole room working from the audience’s left to right. He unknowingly started in an obnoxious, very rude group of lefties and they refused to allow time for anyone else in the auditorium, practically fillibustering the event. They were out of line. I asked his assistant my question, got in the que, was patient, and followed the rules, but there was no time to get to me or 75% of the others who had questions because of them.

Typical.

Differing views and holding their congressman accountable is fine, but their behavior was not acceptable.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 14, 2012 @ 4:57 pm
Any of the right-wing Christians have an exegesis handy on Acts 2:42-45? That’s where we learn how the apostles (who had just spent 3 years or so following Jesus around and witnessing his miracles and lifestyle) thought it best to live and share together (hint: it doesn’t sound like capitalism).

“All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper), and to prayer. A deep sense of awe came over them all, and the apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders. And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need.”

I’m not saying the government is solely responsible for the poor; I contribute my tithes and as much disaster response and other physical work as I can. However, unless churches REALLY step it up, there’s no possible way for us to meet the needs of those who are hungry, sick, homeless, etc. Most barely meet the budget as it is (and the “mega-churches” who do have “mega” salaries and other issues).

Our modern, selfish lifestyle (whether right, left, or in between) is very far from where it should be if we truly aim to follow the example of Christ and the apostles.

Comment by Say What? — February 14, 2012 @ 4:58 pm
Sandi, I guess than I can call you a Nazi.

Why would I call you that?, because you will now tell me that you don’t believe in anything they are about.

It is the same as you calling yourself a Christian, but don’t believe in ALL biblical principles.

Let the Bible fit my life the way I want it…not live according to God’s word.

Comment by Pistol Pete — February 14, 2012 @ 5:02 pm
#42 Unlost – how “unChristian” of you…
Matthew 6:1-34
“Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. “Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others.

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 5:06 pm
Sandi wrote- “Jesus was not only a liberal, he was the original “community organizer”.”

Actually in Rules for Radicals, I think Saul Alinksy gives Lucifer credit for that role.

Comment by John Louis — February 14, 2012 @ 5:28 pm
Pistol Pete – boy you sure travel to the bottom of the heap quickly – not original calling anyone a Nazi – we all have heard this before, shows an actual lack of historical comprehension.

actually, good old Hitler was raised a Catholic, dare I say Christian?…and quite the role model that Nazi, eh?

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 5:36 pm
Un Lost (and others), the King James bible, with all its’ contradictions, brutal instructions and dubious historical/mythological episodes, is just one standard work that guides people of faith. Mitt Romney not only believes in the New Testament, but also in the additional holy words of various American men of the 19th and 20th century. Rick Santorum believes that what a man chosen by other men says is the holy word (though we see that he selectively chooses his devoutness). Eric Cantor does not believe in the New Testament at all, but instead thinks the messiah is yet to arrive. Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush don’t believe in the Pope’s infallibilty or doctrine, yet follow the same bible as the Pope in shaping their own beliefs.

So what is the basis for what you believe is “true Christianity”? How was it shaped by the circumstances of your birth and upbringing? And specifically who are the people who have amended your chosen bible over the two millenia since the carpenter from Nazareth, and what were their motives?

Let me repeat a stanza from a poem:

Un Lost, I’ve found,
is sincerely bound
to one of man’s great ideas of the Lord.
But those who dissent
prefer a bigger tent
and aren’t leaving their God unexplored.

One gets the sense from Christians like Sandi that they understand the bible to matter for it’s meta-message, whereas with those like you, UnLost, it seems to matter most as a tangible weapon, shield, or club handbook. It’s as if you feel God is not an idea to be explored as we’re living, with the bible as a venerable guide, which is what more ecumenical minds accept. You may be relying on faith even more than you realize, and in ways that you haven’t examined.

Inquiries and answers need not threaten faith. Avoiding that fact may indeed make life easier; it’s the enduring appeal of what we call blind faith. And the blind have no need for mirrors.

Comment by Warren — February 14, 2012 @ 6:13 pm
Mitt Romney has so much trouble identifying with people because he doesn’t know who he is. He has become so confused in his own mind by taking so many different positions on the issues and trying to appeal to whatever group can help him get elected at the moment that he truly no longer knows himself. That is assuming of course, that there ever really was a “self” to know and not just some construct put together by backroom strategists and political handlers. Romney is taking all the heat from Democrats and the left because they truly lust for the nomination of Rick
Santorum. They know that Santorum will produce the biggest landslide for Democrats since Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Comment by dave — February 14, 2012 @ 6:22 pm
Eric Cantor doesn’t believe in the New Testament? Isn’t that unAmerican or something?

Comment by Dan Casey — February 14, 2012 @ 6:46 pm
Pistol Pete, you may call me anything you like, what you say I am and what you say I am not have exactly the same effect. None.

Again, your argument for me not being saved by Grace is with Jesus and the New Testament (and the old Testament that foretold a savior), not me. Nothing I can say will change your closed mind, but I am not the one you need to worry about pleasing.

I believe the Bible you claim to believe in explains it all quite clearly. The teachings of any credible Christian cleric will tell you the truth. Christians do not show up in the Bible for 1500 years after the Laws in Leviticus were given to the “Children of Israel” (Jews). Now if you are Jewish, Unlost and Pete, then you have every reason to feel the Leviticus Laws may still apply to you. I am under no such “curse” and the Bible told me so.

I am a follower of Jesus, and like the Disciples, I am to be called Christian because I believe in God and in Jesus. Jesus is the New Covenant, he died to fulfill the law (among his purposes for coming). Jesus’ death gave us the Grace that we lacked. You can try to explain keeping the Law that Jesus’ new covenant changed as you like, you may even try to convince me that you keep it (good luck with that). What you cannot do is confuse the truth, it will set you free. Jesus explained the way we honor the Ten Commandments in Matthew and they are a lot more restrictive than the originals, so yes, his admonitions most assuredly apply to us all.

I live according to the Words of God and Jesus to all Christians. I do not live according to the words of God to “the Children of Israel”, or the Prophet Mohammed. I do not condemn anyone who does so, but I do not believe their Scripture is written to me.

If you believe that only keeping the laws means being a Christian, what purpose was Jesus’ life and death to you? Either your Messiah came sacrificed for your Grace and you are waiting on his return, or you are still waiting for his first visit. But I do not know a Christian who argues Christ did not sacrifice himself for us to have a way to God.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 6:49 pm
I snicker over all this Jesus speculation. Perhaps he was a community organizer for the same reason he was an avid walker.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 14, 2012 @ 6:52 pm
John Louis, I know Saul Alinsky is big with you folks, but in all truth, Lucifer was the original “influence peddlar” which would make him the Koch Brothers in modern parlance, not a community organizer. Like buying pols, he worked with single individuals and to my knowledge never lead or worked with a group at all. Maybe you, or Saul, have evidence otherwise?

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 6:54 pm
Excellent point Warren, this election offers a plethora of candidates with differing faith walks that most people know little to nothing about. If it matters, people should be more informed. Of course when you are uninformed on your own faith that leaves little hope for a mind open enough to explore another.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 7:11 pm
Christianity’s foundation was actually the pagan beliefs of ancient times. During the Greek dominance, the word Atheist referred to early Christians…monotheism was new to the world with the spread of Christianity and they folded into their own beliefs many of the practices of earlier paganism – lit candles, “offerings”, religious festivals and even burial practices.

Disagreeing on religious practices and beliefs is as old as humankind.

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 7:17 pm
However, unless churches REALLY step it up, there’s no possible way for us to meet the needs of those who are hungry, sick, homeless, etc. Most barely meet the budget as it is (and the “mega-churches” who do have “mega” salaries and other issues).

Our modern, selfish lifestyle (whether right, left, or in between) is very far from where it should be if we truly aim to follow the example of Christ and the apostles.

The government is keeping people from giving more of their personal resources than they would if they had to. Government-extorted handouts stifle generosity and creates a less compassionate society–as well as hurts the economy.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 7:31 pm
actually, good old Hitler was raised a Catholic, dare I say Christian?…and quite the role model that Nazi, eh?

One of the dumbest things liberals claim in that Nazi Germany was a Catholic regime because Hitler was raised Catholic. This monster executed priests. As with all leftwing dictatorships, the state IS the church.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 7:37 pm
In addition to being right on every issue, and 0bama being wrong on every issue, I can’t think of one area in which Santorum is weaker than 0bama. And no, running a country into the ground for three years does not give Idiot Boy a leadership edge. If anything it has hightlighted what a weak non-leader 0bama is.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 7:42 pm
Eric Cantor worships one God-Mammon. The holy to him are the ones with the most money. We should bow down and worship them and beg for the scraps from their tables, their discarded robes, and the occasional penny that they drop in the dust.

Comment by dave — February 14, 2012 @ 8:00 pm
#63 most ill-informed. Hitler was raised Catholic. Fact. Hitler was a Nazi. Fact. I never mentioned “that Nazi Germany was a Catholic regime” – you made that up therefore you LIED.

What you said is, as always, wrong but it is your opinion, please do not treat your ignorance as facts. You truly are Most ill-informed and that is just a fact.

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 8:23 pm
Yes Dear, we are well aware that you “can’t think”. It is the consequence of wearing those blinders and walking in lock step for so long. Like the Chimps they keep in the research facilities for over 30 years, you just don’t know any different. Don’t you worry your little head about it, the rest of us have it all figured out. When Santorum finally folds and go home, you just blame the “godless liberals” and keep on spewing. No need to try and process facts and pesky things like the truth. Why start now?

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 14, 2012 @ 8:37 pm
” I never mentioned “that Nazi Germany was a Catholic regime” –One of the dumbest things liberals claim in that Nazi Germany was a Catholic regime because Hitler was raised Catholic.” NO! Suzie never said that YOU did it, Hillary. Suzie wrote, “One of the dumbest things liberals claim in that Nazi Germany was a Catholic regime because Hitler was raised Catholic.” Personally, I have heard this many times as a knock on religion. I’ve never heard a smart person try make the argument, though, and probably never will.

“….you made that up therefore you LIED.” Your smugness and tone, while being demonstrably incorrect, make heaping scorn and ridicule down upon you….joyous.

Comment by Phil Chitwood — February 14, 2012 @ 9:18 pm
So the Republicans don’t want the government to force people to buy health insurance, but they don’t mind forcing women to have a vaginal probe inserted into their bodies? Or that the GOP contends the state has no business urging young girls to be vaccinated against a virus that can later cause cervical cancer, but are willing to force women to undergo an invasive in-body medical test? There is something seriously demented about the Republican party’s values.

“The ultrasound legislation would constitute an unprecedented government mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies, legislative opponents noted. Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell, a socially conservative Roman Catholic, has said he will sign the ultrasound bill. “We’re talking about inside a woman’s body,” Del. Charnielle Herring, a Democrat, said in an emotional floor speech. “This is the first time, if we pass this bill, that we will be dictating a medical procedure to a physician.”
http://hosted2.ap.org/PAWIC/APUSnews/Article_2012-02-14-Virginia%20Abortions/id-7b3743bf6527476ea520273559b61754

Comment by Hillary — February 14, 2012 @ 9:22 pm
Ok..Here is the point.

Christian – One who accepts Jesus as Savior and God lives in their heart.

If Christ lives in one’s heart, then they strive to exhibit Christlikeness. Following the law is easy if you “try” to live SINLESS as Christ did

How can one LIVE like Christ by promoting abortion and homosexuality. Where living with someone is ok if you are not married.

I apologize for seeming judgmental. But this is the problem with Christianity. Churches have watered it down to fit how MAN wants to live, not how GOD wants us to live.

Comment by Pistol Pete — February 14, 2012 @ 9:33 pm
I was not calling Sandi a Nazi by the way, my point was I can say I believe in anything…but do we truly live that way?

Comment by Pistol Pete — February 14, 2012 @ 9:36 pm
#66 Yes, Hillary, suzie constantly makes up stuff, accuses people of saying things hey never aid, and lies all the time. She really need to just shut up.

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 9:55 pm
#66 BTW, I think suzie is still trying to deal with the concept that Billy Joel was just chasing that hot chick around in the video, he caught and married her.

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 10:09 pm
#68 Sorry, Phil, troll suzie implied that Hillary was one of the folks saying that. Same bull she pulls all the time. Keep on defending her. It’s funny stuff.

Comment by gdad — February 14, 2012 @ 10:41 pm
but are willing to force women to undergo an invasive in-body medical test?

I love that. Tests are invasive, but abortions aren’t.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:43 pm
#66 Yes, Hillary, suzie constantly makes up stuff, accuses people of saying things hey never aid, and lies all the time.

Gee, that’s exactly what you do, Gdad. You’re as pesky as an old stink bug.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:45 pm
#66 BTW, I think suzie is still trying to deal with the concept that Billy Joel was just chasing that hot chick around in the video, he caught and married her.

Yeah, and she ditched him in a few years and moved on to the next one. As usual, Gdad missed the point. My point was that Joel posed as a hood, a tough guy. But instead he was a little wimpy-looking shrimp. I never he didn’t get good-looking women. Most male celebs can.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:50 pm
I apologize for seeming judgmental. But this is the problem with Christianity. Churches have watered it down to fit how MAN wants to live, not how GOD wants us to live.

Well said, Pistol Pete. It’s funny the so-called “Catholics” and others in here claim such-and-such percent of Catholic women use birth control, therefore the Church’s position is somehow invalid. The church’s position doesn’t and shouldn’t change.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:53 pm
It’s funny. Everybody is concerned about whether Santorum does or doesn’t follow his church’s beliefs, but not one lib brings up that 0bama doesn’t even attend church.

Of course the godless libs think it’s a plus that he doesn’t. But notice they hold conservatives to a much higher standard.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:56 pm
I notice some diehards like Kristen and Art have been absent a few weeks. That tells me my ideas are prevailing. They realize they can’t compete. It’s a pretty cool feeling to win like that.

Comment by Suzie — February 14, 2012 @ 10:57 pm
Sandi – It’s interesting that I point out a famous quote that differs from your opinion and I become a “you folks” and thrown in with the Koch brothers. Nothing in my original post indicated my political leaning and as it is my first post I’m not quite sure where your assumption of “you folks” comes from. I suppose to disagree with you instantly makes me a “mean evil right winger.” It’s nice that you are so open minded. (Sarcasm intended.)

Alinsky’s point was that in Judeo-Christian literature, Lucifer organized a group of Angels to rebel against God and was thrown out of heaven for it. In doing so Lucifer gained his own empire. In these terms, Lucifer would be the first successful “community organizer.” His quote is more of a tongue in cheek shot at the establishment and doesn’t mean that community organizers are Satan worshipers.

The big joke is for any political affiliation liberal or conservative to try to claim Jesus. Last time I checked his only affiliation was God.

Comment by John Louis — February 14, 2012 @ 11:21 pm
@80. Something tells me you are quite comfortable talking to yourself. That might just happen.

Maybe folks are just sick of your outrageous rhetoric and staying away. Frankly, I’m not happy that you evoke serious feelings of revulsion very time I read one of your sick posts. I check in less and less for that very reason. When I do check in, instead of sharing meaningful ideas with intelligent folks I find myself having to beat back your lies and propaganda. It is getting old.

Comment by Cold n P — February 14, 2012 @ 11:25 pm
Well, it’s obviously way past 7:00am and you’re winning like Charlie Sheen.

Comment by Steve C — February 14, 2012 @ 11:27 pm
“I never he didn’t get good-looking women. Most male celebs can.”

Yeah, winning again at that on-line thingie. Perhaps Hillary is on to something about drunk-posting…

Comment by Steve C — February 14, 2012 @ 11:32 pm
Suzie says:

“…not one lib brings up that 0bama doesn’t even attend church.”

No, the conservatives do that. Who can forget Reverend Wright?!

I’ve also noticed that Sandi’s tag team partner Kristen hasn’t been around. Hope she’s okay.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 14, 2012 @ 11:36 pm
“Suzie says:
I notice some diehards like Kristen and Art have been absent a few weeks. That tells me my ideas are prevailing. They realize they can’t compete. It’s a pretty cool feeling to win like that.”

What kind of pathetic life do you lead whereby you try to get some weird sense of fulfillment from antagonizing people on an anonymous blog, including people who haven’t posted in a while? In what screwed up corner of your mind does the absence of a couple of regular posters constitute a victory for you? It must be the same screwed up corner that caused you to use a girl’s picture who is 25 years your junior as your profile pic. And such a fine Christian girl at that. It’s very difficult to find a photo of that young lady where she’s not prominently displaying her breasts. It’s like the 11th Commandment for her is: ”Thou shalt pose for all pictures with an arched back, cocked hip, or both. Pouty duck lips optional.”
For real though, Screwzie. People choose profile pics because they identify with the pic somehow. I find it very disturbing that, at your age, you chose this young lady’s photo. Something is sorely lacking in your life.

Comment by Contrasuzie — February 15, 2012 @ 12:40 am
If she doesn’t start adding any substance to her posts, graphic designers are going to start using Suzie’s comments in place of lorem ipsum.

Comment by Aaron — February 15, 2012 @ 1:16 am
“not one lib brings up that 0bama doesn’t even attend church”

I suspect he attends as frequently as Ronald Reagan did.

Comment by Mike Scott — February 15, 2012 @ 5:55 am
“I never get good-looking women. Most male celebs can.”

No shi*t, Steve. You don’t get women of any kind.

Comment by Suzie — February 15, 2012 @ 7:14 am
What kind of pathetic life do you lead whereby you try to get some weird sense of fulfillment from antagonizing people on an anonymous blog

Remember, folks. This is the person who created a screen name directed at one person on the blog, and 90% of whose posts are directed at that one person…..and he/she is talking about a “screwed-up individual” LOL.

Comment by Suzie — February 15, 2012 @ 7:19 am
I check in less and less for that very reason. When I do check in, instead of sharing meaningful ideas with intelligent folks I find myself having to beat back your lies and propaganda. It is getting old

Notice how the worst offenders are the worst complainers. It’s OK, Skippy. Nobody’s begging you to stay. When you stop checking in altogether….Suzie has won!

Comment by Suzie — February 15, 2012 @ 7:22 am
Pistol Pete, no need to apologize to us, we are not the ones who advised you not to judge.

John Louis, “It’s interesting that” you do not know that what passes for political talking points are telling. Whether it is your first post or your millionth, your words tell on you. I do not need a road map. I said “you folks” and you read into that what you wanted to read into that.

For the record that “famous quote” is only famous in certain circles. The truth is that Lucifer does more closely resemble the Koch Brothers and other people of money who buy pols and influence legislation than he does Jesus Christ who actually met with people and tried to lead them into the right direction. I am not sure how anyone could disagree with that. I do not read or “follow” Saul Alinsky, he is as free to have his opinion on Lucifer as you or I.

To disagree with me is anyone’s prerogative, to use right wing parrot points is as well.

I absolutely agree that the joke is on anyone who tries to claim Jesus would have any “political affiliation”. Since we are discussing open and closed minds, perhaps you can notice that “liberal or conservative” can be used in more than just a political context. I never said or would say that Jesus was a Democrat. I said Jesus was a liberal. I believe he was. I believe the Founding Fathers of this nation were liberals as well.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 15, 2012 @ 8:12 am
#82 Do you really read her posts? She once called me a “jackass” and I really haven’t bothered with her since. Once you start with the name calling you’ve lost me. She’s like the kid in the back of the class in 3rd grade,starved for attention and can only get it by annoying other people. Remember your mother’s advice, “Just ignore her”.

Comment by scott whitaker — February 15, 2012 @ 8:14 am
Phil, if you are that desperate for a point to be made, you have already lost the game. It matters.

The bottom line, is that this blog suffers because of Suzie’s participation.

Pistol Pete, you are simply embarrassing yourself. I offered you the Scripture to check and there are myriad clergy and Christian sites who can explain what you refuse to see, but no, “the Law” was not and is not “easy”. It was very, very hard for anyone to keep. Even the religious leaders struggled and could not do so. That is why it was used as as barrier to God and that is also why Jesus said it was not for us.

What is it exactly that Paul is speaking of in Galatians if not what I am saying? You keep dancing around the truth and ignoring what is offered. Put up or shut up dude. Are you even trying to say that you keep the Leviticus Laws? I say BS and a big pile of it. You, like Suzie and most sanctimonious “judges” keep the ones that feed your prejudice and ignore the rest. Where is the Scripture that gives you leave to do that? You don’t sound “judgmental”, you simply sound ignorant of what you speak.

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 15, 2012 @ 8:53 am
Suzie:

“When you stop checking in altogether….Suzie has won!”

Now that’s the first compelling reason to silence Suzie. I don’t want to run anyone off.

Sandi:

“I said Jesus was a liberal. I believe he was. I believe the Founding Fathers of this nation were liberals as well.”

I think in a lot of ways God was a conservative and Jesus was a liberal. Kind of like some of the parent-child relationships of today, ironically. Jesus did tell his disciples to sell their cloaks to buy swords, so he was a liberal that wasn’t opposed to being armed. That’s growing more and more common.

As for the Founding Fathers, liberal, yes, but they were far more into real liberty and truly believed in being armed too. Liberals and Conservatives both want to claim them, but I think they’d be appalled at where each group has gone away in principle.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 9:37 am
Hey Dan,
Are UnLost and Pistol Pete the same person? I noticed they both have a link to some Fox News OWS clip as their website. Oops.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 9:55 am
I’m out. Btw the way suzie, you need to post 3 extra times a day to make up for my hits. Ya’ll have fun.

Comment by Cold n P — February 15, 2012 @ 10:42 am
@97 Cold n P – Please don’t go. (Or at least return after a few days vacation)

Comment by Miriam — February 15, 2012 @ 11:03 am
Cold n P,
That was cruel.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 11:15 am
Oh good grief, now liberal means pacifist too? You people are too much.

I think Cold n P is right, this is such a complete waste of effort and time. You are determined to spoil this blog and damned if you are not succeeding!

Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 15, 2012 @ 12:05 pm
Sandi, the only thing that could spoil this blog for you would be no one to argue with.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 12:43 pm
Made it to Starbucks at Valley View yesterday to participate in the Brady Bunch protest.

http://s9.postimage.org/vir7p7gxb/431610_3360337127900_1253215066_33266555_2144147.jpg

Comment by Jack — February 15, 2012 @ 12:59 pm
@102 Jack, that just cracks me up. I don’t even know why…but it just does.

Comment by Miriam — February 15, 2012 @ 1:09 pm
Sandi – I supposed you are right Saul Alinsky is probably mainly known in certain circles. Of course that circle would include Cesar Chavez, Dick Army, Hillary Clinton, and Barak Obama among others. The methods and creative ideas he used to organize labor, civil rights, and other community groups are pretty amazing. He very much wrote the book on grassroots organizing. Of course “you folks” would only associate references to Alinskiy with Glen Beck’s right wing rhetoric. I encourage you learn a little about Alinsky. You would probably find him interesting.

Comment by John Louis — February 15, 2012 @ 1:28 pm
Me too, Jack. I stopped by the Christiansburg Starbucks in the morning and Blacksburg Kent Square Starbucks in the afternoon wearing an orange “Guns Save Lives” sticker. Gotta remind them who their customers are.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 1:39 pm
We all must make sacrifices in our lives. I just sacrificed Starbucks coffee until they adopot a no guns policy.

Comment by dave — February 15, 2012 @ 1:50 pm
“74.#68 Sorry, Phil, troll suzie implied that Hillary was one of the folks saying that. Same bull she pulls all the time. Keep on defending her. It’s funny stuff.”

1)Suzie did not imply it…you inferred it. Big difference.

2)When you accuse someone of a transgression, make sure the example you cite is actually an example of the stated offense. Hillary didn’t and her example wasn’t.

In calling Suzie a liar, Hillary, for whoknows what reason, ended up lying…in a demonstrable way.

Ya’ll say, “It’s ok…it’s just Suzie.” Not here, not today.

Comment by Phil Chitwood — February 15, 2012 @ 2:01 pm
“We all must make sacrifices in our lives. I just sacrificed Starbucks coffee until they adopot a no guns policy.”

Guess that’s what they get for being a welcoming, non-discriminatory company.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 2:34 pm
#107 IMO, suzie implied or inferred it. IYO, she didn’t. Even if she weighed in to claim what it was she meant, it wouldn’t count because she lies so often we couldn’t trust it. End of that.

Comment by gdad — February 15, 2012 @ 2:38 pm
Phil Chitwood – you are a dolt. The most ill-informed implied by using my post that I had said blah blah blah. I certainly did not – therefore, making her point using my post is what one would call “infer”. Not too difficult a concept if you are able to think. Most ill-informed is always taking someone else’s post and putting her spin on it. Disingenuous is you prefer – but still untrue.

Comment by Hillary — February 15, 2012 @ 2:45 pm
I generally don’t drink coffee at Starbucks, but did my part to show them my appreciation for staying NEUTRAL on gun issues.

Email FROM STARBUCKS regarding their stance:

Thank you for contacting Starbucks.

Thank you for your feedback regarding Starbucks’ policy on open carry laws. I am truly happy to hear that you support and appreciate our gun policy!

At Starbucks, we deeply respect the views of our customers and recognize that there is significant and genuine passion surrounding the issue of open carry weapons laws. We comply with local laws and statutes in the communities we serve. Our long-standing approach to this issue remains unchanged and we abide by the laws that permit open carry in 43 U.S. states. Where these laws don’t exist, openly carrying weapons in our stores is prohibited.

As the public debate around this issue continues, we encourage customers and advocacy groups from both sides to share their input with their public officials. We are extremely sensitive to the issue of gun violence in our society and believe that supporting local laws is the right way for us to ensure a safe environment for both partners and customers.

We are very happy to see you in our stores today for Valentines Day! Thanks again for writing us to share your feedback and also for your support, have a beautiful day!

If you ever have any questions or concerns in the future, please don’t hesitate to get in touch!

Sincerely,
Christina
customer service
Starbucks

Comment by Jack — February 15, 2012 @ 2:50 pm
Made it to Starbucks at Valley View yesterday to participate in the Brady Bunch protest.

http://s9.postimage.org/vir7p7gxb/431610_3360337127900_1253215066_33266555_2144147.jpg

Comment by Jack — February 15, 2012 @ 12:59 pm

What the photo proves Jack is that you had a firearm in your car.

Comment by Ron — February 15, 2012 @ 3:40 pm
Goodness. They allows guns at the Starbucks drive-thru?

Comment by Dan Casey — February 15, 2012 @ 3:50 pm
Yes Dan, and at the drive-thru of your local K-12 school too. We’re working on the rest.

Comment by John Wilburn — February 15, 2012 @ 3:59 pm
I took the picture after I got back in the car. Went inside Starbucks to order the drinks, open carrying.

I was not going to remove my gun from the holster in Starbucks, despite being an irresponsible gun owner.

Comment by Jack — February 15, 2012 @ 4:01 pm
Re: Starbucks Gun Photo

“They’ll take my coffee when they can pry it from my cold, dead hands.”

Sorry, Jack. Couldn’t resist.

Comment by Contrasuzie — February 16, 2012 @ 8:59 pm
You know, Contrasuzie, the coffee at Starbucks doesn’t impress me that much. If someone tried to steal it from me, not only would I not defend it with a gun, I’d probably just tell them they can have it.

It’s really not that great. I only went there to show them my support.

I should have just bought a bag of coffee to have them send to the troops instead.

Comment by Jack — February 17, 2012 @ 9:27 am