"Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Athetotheist · Post by **Athetotheist** » Sat Sep 09, 2023 1:54 pm

What are we to make of this?

Do they not realize that they're making Jesus out to be a liar?

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."
(Matthew 24:35)

"He that loveth Me not, keepeth not My sayings. And the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Fathers who sent Me."
(John 14:24)

marke · Post by **marke** » Mon Mar 24, 2025 6:22 am

Athetotheist wrote: ↑Sun Mar 23, 2025 9:09 pm [Replying to marke in post #149]

Let every official disprove the massive evidence of fraud instead of offering nothing but his unsupported opinion.
The cases claiming widespread fraud were dismissed because there was no evidence of it. Lawyers bringing the cases had to admit that there was no evidence of it.

Marke: The massive evidence of apparent fraud that I am concerned about has never been investigated and never been taken to court. For example no court has ruled that thousands of unexamined voting machines did not flip votes from Trump to Biden like the one that was examined did.

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-n ... nce-fraud/

Think back to the first time you remember ever hearing of Trump----a time before 2016, back when he was accusing the Emmys of being political because The Apprentice didn't win. What did you think of him back then? Now think of the time since then and try to remember the last time you heard him say something without backing it up [as he frequently has] and thought to yourself, "Hmm, that doesn't sound right."

You seem to ascribe a godlike infallibility to him, to the point of demonizing his critics, and that isn't a healthy way to think about anyone.

Marke: I do not have an unjustifiably high opinion of Trump but I do thank God for much of what he is doing as President.

Athetotheist · Post by **Athetotheist** » Mon Mar 24, 2025 11:12 am

[Replying to marke in post #151]

I do not have an unjustifiably high opinion of Trump but I do thank God for much of what he is doing as President.

Then I take it that you don't rely on Social Security....

https://fortune.com/2025/03/21/doge-pla ... -official/

....or veterans' benefits.....

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ma ... rcna193127

"Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves...."
(1 Samuel 8:18)

marke · Post by **marke** » Mon Mar 24, 2025 1:51 pm

Athetotheist wrote: ↑Mon Mar 24, 2025 11:12 am [Replying to marke in post #151]

I do not have an unjustifiably high opinion of Trump but I do thank God for much of what he is doing as President.
Then I take it that you don't rely on Social Security....

https://fortune.com/2025/03/21/doge-pla ... -official/

....or veterans' benefits.....

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ma ... rcna193127

"Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves...."
(1 Samuel 8:18)

Trump and Musk are purportedly saving social security from fraud and abuse and I totally support that. The wonder is that so many other administrations never bothered to clean up the government waste and fraud like that.

Athetotheist · Post by **Athetotheist** » Mon Mar 24, 2025 7:13 pm

[Replying to marke in post #153]

Trump and Musk are purportedly saving social security from fraud and abuse and I totally support that.

To raise again a question I posed in another thread, why aren't they saving the billions of dollars in subsidies which go to the already-lucrative fossil fuel industry instead of shaking down the SSA for chump change?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/d ... rcna192217

marke · Post by **marke** » Tue Mar 25, 2025 3:21 am

Athetotheist wrote: ↑Mon Mar 24, 2025 7:13 pm [Replying to marke in post #153]

Trump and Musk are purportedly saving social security from fraud and abuse and I totally support that.
To raise again a question I posed in another thread, why aren't they saving the billions of dollars in subsidies which go to the already-lucrative fossil fuel industry instead of shaking down the SSA for chump change?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/d ... rcna192217

Marke: Lefties oppose the industry that delivers home heating oil to millions of poor Americans, but that does not prove oil companies are stealing from the government like leftist democrats and their thousands of fake NGOs getting fat through corrupted government funding.

Athetotheist · Post by **Athetotheist** » Tue Mar 25, 2025 11:01 am

[Replying to marke in post #155]

Lefties oppose the industry that delivers home heating oil to millions of poor Americans, but that does not prove oil companies are stealing from the government like leftist democrats and their thousands of fake NGOs getting fat through corrupted government funding.

"Lefties" oppose the industry that's wrecking the environment with greenhouse gases which are driving global temperatures dangerously above normal levels (seen enough hurricanes lately?).

And oil companies certainly don't have to "steal" from the government. The government has been giving the farm to them on a silver platter for decades, on top of the billions in profit they make on their own. Why is "getting fat" through government funding supposed to be bad if NGOs do it, but not if CEOs do it?

"Subsidies are intended to protect consumers by keeping prices low, but they come at a substantial cost. Subsidies have sizable fiscal consequences (leading to higher taxes/borrowing or lower spending), promote inefficient allocation of an economys resources (hindering growth), encourage pollution (contributing to climate change and premature deaths from local air pollution), and are not well targeted at the poor (mostly benefiting higher income households). Removing subsidies and using the revenue gain for better targeted social spending, reductions in inefficient taxes, and productive investments can promote sustainable and equitable outcomes. Fossil fuel subsidy removal would also reduce energy security concerns related to volatile fossil fuel supplies."
https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/climate-c ... -subsidies

And why do you assume that NGOs are "fake"? Because that's what you've been told?

marke · Post by **marke** » Tue Mar 25, 2025 12:22 pm

Lefties deny poor Americans basic necessities because the leftists foolishly think providing those necessities will destroy the earth in just 14 years or less

marke · Post by **marke** » Tue Mar 25, 2025 12:28 pm

All Americans should be outraged at the tens of thousands of NGOs that Musk is finding that are receiving billions of dollars in government money under false pretenses when the real intent of the NGOs seems to be little more than making the recipients rich.

Athetotheist · Post by **Athetotheist** » Tue Mar 25, 2025 2:53 pm

[Replying to marke in post #157]

Lefties deny poor Americans basic necessities because the leftists foolishly think providing those necessities will destroy the earth in just 14 years or less

It seems that your sources have oversimplified the science.
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/climate-ti ... ce-thought

Athetotheist · Post by **Athetotheist** » Tue Mar 25, 2025 3:10 pm

[Replying to marke in post #158]

All Americans should be outraged at the tens of thousands of NGOs that Musk is finding that are receiving billions of dollars in government money under false pretenses when the real intent of the NGOs seems to be little more than making the recipients rich.

Tens of thousands of NGOs? How many of them can you name?

Billions of dollars? False pretenses? How much of that can be verified?

Debating Christianity and Religion

"Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

"Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

Re: "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."