No Daithi, that was what is known as an accident, and as we all know, accidents happen. But God saw to this man through his wife. However, it's nice to see that you can find something negative in a story as nice as this, that's a wonderful trait.
No, but He did allow it. I remember in the Bible someone was blind, and it says they were blind so that God would be glorified when his blindness was healed. Sounds kind of like now.
No. God does not start problems, but He can end them.
Amen. Another example is this.
God lets some go blind to improve their hearing, and others go deaf to improve their eyesight. Those who are both deaf and blind have a better sense of touch and feel.
Article said JACK as in fell off the jack AND A NEIGHBOR RESET THE JACK,..The guy WAS ABOUT TO WIN A Darwin Award for getting under a car alone w only a jack..fool
As it is he wins the Bucky Lastard Award for this week
Maybe. Maybe not. I wouldn't claim to know what the Creator is or isn't responsible for. I could see it as a possibility, though. Due to the ordeal the couple will certainly grow closer together and more strongly value each other's presence. Perhaps the man will think about his life and how short it is, and start doing something different with his time left.
Who can say.
God’s love is unconditional; we all live in the same world. It’s how we live and by whom we are motivated that makes the difference. Sometimes, it’s just rain.
“But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.” —Matthew 5:44-45
"God is light and in Him is no darkness at all" (1 John 1:5b). We live in a fallen world and forces other than God Almighty have authority to bring calamity, sickness and misfortune, which they do with systematic regularity.
The main reason for prayer is, as God's will is always done in Heaven, it isn't necessarily so on earth. Prayer is (among other things) a request for God to act on earth, which in this case manifested in the woman heeding the urging of the Holy Spirit to go check on her husband. In NT terms, it is called receiving "a word of knowledge".
Yes! That guy needed to have that experience!
[-2] April 20, 2015 at 12:55am
I was wondering this as well. She said she gave him what she had in her pocket — enough for an ice cream. Uhhh… didn’t the kid just hand you some money? It almost sounds like he handed her back some serious cash, and she thought a $50 (or whatever) was too much of a reward.
— Yeah, kid, that $50 is mine. Here’s $1.35 reward. Now run along and get yourself an ice cream or something.
She said the wad of money she dropped was CHANGE from her son buying another kid a present. I doubt she's spending Benjamins on a kid's b-day present! So it was probably more like change from a twenty, less than 10 I'm guessing.
she said she gave him 1/2 of what he found. Try actually reading before trashing people
 April 20, 2015 at 12:42am
This is what I suspected. The doll that is “worth thousands” is actually worth between $5 to $47 — assuming you can get someone to even pay you that amount. (The Beanie Babies met Holland tulips along time ago.)
You can fart in a jar and put it on eBay for $30,000, but that doesn’t mean that’s what it’s worth.
But wait, it gets even better, a fraud alert has been issued… http://fox2now.com/2015/04/19/couple-pays-15-for-beanie-baby-at-flea-market-discovers-could-be-worth-93000/.
“There’s a sucker born every minute” – David Hannum
 April 18, 2015 at 7:41pm
Well, at least he wan’t shamed by having any Jewish ancestors.
 April 17, 2015 at 12:28am
I don’t think we know the whole story. We have no idea which woman got nasty and rude with the other one first, but I’m betting both women were getting and giving hell to each other. The tow truck woman was the one doing the recording, so she edited out her comments and then released the video to shame the ESPN host. It worked — everyone is slamming her.
I’ll cut the ESPN host some slack since I don’t know the whole story, and as a man, I give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who is blonde, pretty, and has big “eyes”.
It’s possible the towing company did something underhanded, maybe towing the car illegally (some of these companies are criminal) and the wench behind the desk made matters worse with a snooty attitude.
Marie harf is available.
 April 17, 2015 at 12:16am
Good sportsman, but at the time the guy is yelling “he’s out” the guy on the bottom had his head off the mat and didn’t look out. When the fighter stood up it was clear the guy was out the ref immediately stepped in. I can’t blame the ref here.
April 15, 2015 at 7:32pm
Yes! Yes, I am disgusting. hahahahaha,
 April 15, 2015 at 7:30pm
Silverman is wrong! This is the perfect example of the wage gap.
There is almost always a reason for the difference in pay. Most families need to make a decision as to whether the mother or father needs to take time away from work to deal with children and family. In most families it is the mother that takes time from work to deal with family issues and the father concentrates on providing the family with an income. The mother may lose out on some pay, but the father loses out on missing plays, sports events, caring for a sick child, etc. There are plenty of other reasons for a pay gap, but this is probably the biggest one.
Another big factor- men choose professions that generally pay more because they're more dirty, dangerous or require higher levels of training than most of the fields women typically go into. After norming for the asymmetry in hours worked and variance in the compensation for different types of jobs, any remaining disparity in aggregate income is statistically insignificant.
 April 14, 2015 at 6:47pm
I was in Burger King the other day, and they asked me for “a name for my order.”
Why do I need to give my name for an order? What is wrong with #46 which they can print on my receipt? I went ahead and gave them a name — “Ronald McDonald”.
 April 14, 2015 at 2:24am
Have you tried putting tinfoil on the rabbit ears?
Nah, he just thought it would be white privilege if he won based on his own efforts, that's why he let the black guy win. It was to offset the oppression of slavery.
LOL... I'm sorry nobody else has picked up on your joke!
 April 13, 2015 at 7:13pm
@Minorityone, and you think math and logic are unrelated. How sweet.
 April 13, 2015 at 6:42pm
Chuck Todd says, “I could have praised Hillary for being a pure genius if it wasn’t for those pesky ‘everyone’ and their dog too.”
 April 13, 2015 at 6:30pm
Time to get another illegal alien nanny.
 April 13, 2015 at 6:25pm
I think Obama already has someone in mind for the next President —
Just wait. Hillary will continue to implode, the other candidates all suck, so watch Jarrett step up with Obama’s strong backing.
I’m not advocating for her. In fact, I’d hate to see her as President, but Republicans would be idiots if they didn’t prepare for her — and we all know Republicans can be idiots.
April 12, 2015 at 1:03am
As far as I’m concerned DZ, you win TheBlaze comment section.
 April 12, 2015 at 1:02am
Huh… I thought it was Scanners.
 April 10, 2015 at 12:46am
Salishhawk makes a great point. If you run from a cop then the situation escalates to the point where the cop is justified shooting you in the back 5 times. The cop also missed 3 times, but if one of those bullets had hit a child in that park it would be the perps fault as well.
Yes, the cop had the guys license. He had the guys car. He only pulled him over for a broken tail light. BUT THAT DOESN’T MATTER! If you run then the cop is completely justified in shooting you. It is that simple. Don’t talk back to cops either, or they would be justified to shoot you in the face.
Do I sound like a moron? Hmmm…. maybe alishhawk and I should rethink our position.
Say what? No, I am firm in my belief hat the officer was justified to use lethal force, given all the evidence we have seen so far. In legal terms, there is a standard of reasonableness at play here. According to Graham v. Connor, objective reasonableness must be evaluated in light of the particular circumstances “from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight”. 109 S.Ct. at 1872. The important factors to be considered when deciding how much force can be used to apprehend a suspect include “the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” So, given the fact that the suspect fled on foot after the initial traffic stop, and then given the fact that when the officer caugh up to the suspect in a foot chase, the suspect then fought with the officer and grabbed at/gained control of the officer’s taser, the suspect then became an immediate threat to the officer’s life as well as to the life of other officers and the general public. Furthermore, the officer was not given the opportunity to verify if the suspect was unarmed, perhaps carrying a pocket knife. So who is to say the suspect if allowed to flee wouldn’t take a hostage, or use a weapon he could pick up and use in his flight. Obama said it is easier to get a gun than groceries in most places right?
 April 8, 2015 at 11:58pm
Yet one more reason to NOT support Jeb Bush. Why on earth would a Republican support this crap.
 April 8, 2015 at 12:23am
If it was truly profitable for cable companies to offer their programming a la carte they would so. Instead they usually offer a core group of stations, followed by a larger group, and maybe a larger one still, and then maybe premium stations on top of that (HBO, Showtime, etc).
In addition, the cable companies are usually obligated to bundle some stations together. For example, if a cable company wants Fox News then they have to also buy Fox Sports and the new Fox Hispanic channel as well. This is a contract demand by Fox News, not the cable company.
The only way to prevent this is to have Congress pass a law that outlaws the practice and forces the cable companies to offer their shows a la carte. As a result the small stations disappear and then we end up paying the same amount were paying today but for just a handful of stations. Think about it. If Fox can’t get paid for Fox sports and Fox Hispanic — they will raise the price for Fox News.
In addition, the show Archer is on FX, which has a lot of other shows that you may want to watch. Justified is a great show. Sons of Anarchy was also a great show. Both are on FX. Do we really want congress to pass a law that specifies cable companies must offer billing packages that allow customers to even pick shows, or not pick shows, within a single station?
Error on the side of Freedom, and having congress pass laws that force companies to offer something is not freedom — even if you think you have more choices.