Meet Jeff Barth — He May Have Just Made the ‘Greatest Political Ad Ever’

User Profile: JediKnight

Member Since: February 15, 2011

CommentsDisplaying JediKnight's 10 most recent comments.

  • Anyone notice that she really went off when he said “He’s just a man. He is not God.”

  • Check out the McMillan Plan. Looks like a well decorated cross to me. I’m sure it was a complete accident, especially since every designer of DC wanted the Capitol building at the center of the design (which would be the foot of the cross) :P

  • @Seede: Jesus forgave the woman because the Pharisees were ready to stone her and do nothing to the man. The law applies equally to both. In fact, the law gave the option of stoning or payment. The Pharisees were testing Jesus to see how well he knew the law. He IS the law. So yes, he forgave her. He forgave her to send a message to the Pharisees that were continually preaching about how sinful everyone else was all the while they weren’t even living by the same book that they preached from. Hence why they also condemned Jesus for healing a sick man on the Sabbath. For them, it was all about works with no love or mercy.

  • Of course Jesus Christ knew about the area. But there was no reason to talk about it. Just like there was no reason to talk about Soviet Russia or China. He talked about accepting him in order to gain salvation. Why would he have talked about this future area where all men would be free when what was important was accepting him as saviour in order to go to Heaven?

  • Washington was a Methodist. He was not a regular attendant of church, but he was a Methodist.

  • Thank you LukerW for making it simple for him.

    Yes, there are people within the different denominations that will pick fights with other denominations. They don‘t see that if we’re fighting each other, we can’t also be protecting ourselves from the secularists. Once they take a step back and realize that our core beliefs are the same (Jesus Christ is our saviour and we believe in God) and that only our practices differ, then we stop fighting and start protecting ourselves.

  • Pushed on you? No. Used to protect you? Yes.

    Someone kills you or your family member, you use Judeo-Christian based laws against murder to prosecute them. Someone steals from you, you use Judeo-Christian based laws to prosecute them. The list goes on and on because those laws go back to the beginning of time.

  • @CYKONAS: You apparently have not read the Constitution. Anarchy is not less government, it is no government. What you advocate for is much closer to the Articles of Confederation, not the Constitution. The AoC kept the Federal government out of the States entirely unless the States explicitly gave them the right to come in. Unfortunately, no state ever wanted the feds interfering and chaos erupted. If you think trade wars taking place between states is a good thing, take a look at what’s happening over in the EU right now. Yes, the Constitution calls for far less Federal government, but it does not call for less State government. It would be nowhere near Anarchy and the fact that you mention that term shows your agenda loud and clear.

    God help us if we ever come to that. It’ll be every man for himself and it will not end well.

    As far as knowing what 1.15+ billion Catholics believe, as a Catholic, the person responding to you is correct. If you do not believe what the Catholic church teaches and you are not willing to follow it, find a new church. No one is forcing those “catholics” to go to Catholic Church. I call them CINO’s (Catholic In Name Only) because not only do they not follow the church, but when informed that they are not following the beliefs of the church they don’t care and keep calling themselves Catholic.

  • I think everybody is missing something here. Everyone keeps saying “she was resisting arrest” and whatever else. What you all seem to be missing is that she would’ve gotten out of the car herself. She said “I have to pee.” right after she dropped her kid off. Do you think she was going to go home? Hell no. All the officer had to do was take a step back, let her out of the car, escort her to the bathroom. When she’s done, don’t let her back into the car until the ticket is signed. If she still refuses, then you can pull her hands behind her back and cuff her. No tasing necessary.

    They KNEW tasing was a bad idea. “Do it on her thigh”. They KNEW IT and they did it anyway. Next time, use some critical thinking. Take a step back (make sure you’re clear from the vehicle) and let her out. If she takes off, chase her down, but she’s probably not going to do that (you did tell her to shut the car off before writing the ticket, right?).

    I‘m betting they simply didn’t want to let her go to the bathroom and thought it would be too much of a hassle over a speeding ticket. Just tase her instead, right? That’ll make it a lot easier.

  • While that makes for a good sound bite and I don’t particularly like the 9th circuit, as a percentage they handle more cases than the others, hence why more cases get overturned.