Oroborus

dnatree · Guest

This does not effect us on this forum. (well it didn't.. edited in)This is an ongoing synch with anger that is building and that it will come out in a way that will spark something big. I want You to look at this HOT subject like the Spirit has me look at it. As a spark to REACH YOU, and the Poem about the

Coming Fire so hot it will melt the veil separating You and I on this planet and leave those hiding behind religion with nowhere left to hide.
http://www.stephentree.com/predict1.htm Originally posted in 2003
The anger synch is growing and now includes two synchs with National Lampoon's bagboy and the girl Bambie as well as the Hulk.

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS158120+13-Mar-2008+BW20080313

dnatree · Guest

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-onthemedia9-2008nov09,0,7065480.story?track=rss

Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity dive shamelessly in, talking about the 'Obama recession' and other partisan lines.

By JAMES RAINEY, On The Media
November 9, 2008
You have to give Rush Limbaugh a perverse kind of credit. At least when he is demonizing Barack Obama, fabricating Obama policies, blaming Obama for single-handedly causing the recession and the stock market crash, he doesn't pretend to be fair.

Opening his first post-election rant against the president-elect, Limbaugh launched in with a certain relish. "The game," he told his radio listeners, "has begun."

Obama relies on a close-knit inner...Religious voters helped Obama to victory
Democrats set sights on Texas
Sean Hannity, on the other hand, insisted on feigning a post-election detente, telling his Fox News television audience last week, "I want Barack Obama to succeed."

Didn't he think anyone would notice that, just a moment later, he was back parroting the failed campaign argument that Obama is a "mystery"?

"I fear [this] is the guy that has these radical associations 20 years ago," Hannity added, an odd way of demonstrating support for the new commander in chief.

A healthy skepticism is not only the media's right but its obligation. Indeed, commentators at many mainstream outlets -- including the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal -- have already argued that Obama's best bet to succeed will be if he hews to a centrist path.

But many on the losing end of last week's election want to hold on to their anger. And there are those in the media -- led by the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity -- only too ready to feed that animus, along with their own ratings.

"The Obama recession is in full swing, ladies and gentlemen," Limbaugh told his radio audience of 15 million to 20 million on Thursday. "Stocks are dying, which is a precursor of things to come. This is an Obama recession. Might turn into a depression."

Apparently the tanking of the real estate market, record losses in the auto industry, and massive failures in the banking and investment industry have very little to do with our problems. The economic system is collapsing, Rush wants us to know, because it anticipates the tax increases Obama has pledged on capital gains and for the highest income earners.

But maybe that shouldn't be so surprising, because radio's Biggest Big Man also assures us that the Democrat welcomes "economic chaos" because it gives him "greater opportunity for expanded government." In a time when the nation calls out for cool leadership and rational discussion, Limbaugh stirs the caldron, a tendency he proved in a particularly grotesque way last week when he accused Obama's party of plotting a government takeover of 401(k) retirement plans.

"They're going to take your 401(k), put it in the Social Security trust fund, whatever the hell that is," Limbaugh woofed. "Trust fund, my rear end."

A slight problem with Limbaugh's report: Obama and the Democrats have proposed no such thing.

The proposal, in fact, emanated from a single economist, one of many experts testifying to a congressional committee.

The president-elect has thus far shown as much interest in taking over your 401(k) as he has in moving the capital to Nairobi. (If you look hard, you might find that one somewhere out there in the blogosphere, too.)

To broadcast such a report -- so drained of context as to constitute a lie -- would be a shameless act at any time. But Limbaugh needlessly stirred the fears of the millions he holds in his thrall -- making the 401(k) thievery sound like nearly a done deal. Shameless.

Hannity and Limbaugh filleted Obama's selection as chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, in a way that exposed their partisan gamesmanship.

Mainstream newspapers have filed plenty of unflinching accounts of Emanuel's tough, occasionally ruthless tactics as a Democratic congressional leader and onetime operative in the Clinton White House. That assessment of bare-knuckle partisanship Hannity seized on. But it wouldn't do to report another aspect of Emanuel's record -- his Clintonesque bent for the political center.

So the Fox-man simply created a new persona for Emanuel as, you guessed it, "one of the hardest left-wing radicals on the left."

Ever open-minded, Hannity concluded, "I think they're going to overreach, and I think we're going to see the person that I think Barack Obama is. I think he is hard, hard left."

Then, I kid you not, Hannity ended with this pledge: "We'll see. We'll give him an opportunity."

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham apparently didn't get the memo requiring Obama's opponents to sink immediately and mindlessly into rank partisanship.

The South Carolina senator, one of Sen. John McCain's closest allies in his bid for the presidency, praised Obama's selection of Emanuel as "a wise choice." He added that the new chief of staff could be a tough partisan, but was also "honest, direct and candid" and willing to "work to find common ground where it exists."

Perhaps Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest of those intent on poisoning the soil before bipartisanship can take root might recall words of wisdom from Brit Hume, a veteran newsman who is close to leaving the Fox anchor desk for semi-retirement.

The problem with the accusations of Obama being "dangerous" and "radical," Hume said on election night, "was that it just didn't fit with the man you saw before your eyes."

Rainey is a Times staff writer.

james.rainey@latimes.com

dnatree · Guest

http://hjnews.townnews.com/articles/2008/11/10/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/letter02-11-09-08.txt

Radio host the real great divider

I turned on a local news radio station this morning, trying to catch the headlines. This station has a blurb just before the top of the hour by a popular conservative radio talk show host. He was describing the aftermath of the election, and in the process of bad-mouthing the president-elect and the press — one of his favorite pastimes — he used a term for a sexual function in an extremely vulgar and derogatory way. My wife reached over and shut off the radio. “I’m sorry Honey, I’m not going to listen to that guy!”

This got me thinking about some of the things I’ve overheard in local conversations these few days since the election, from children as well as adults: “President Obama is going to wreck things even worse than Bush did, and then what will we do? Barack will divide this nation. He’ll pander to the left and ignore the right — or just steamroll them. He’ll set up a racially biased agenda. He’s a terrorist. He’s Muslim. He hates America. He’ll turn our country over to al-Qaida. He’s a socialist, a communist, the antichrist. He doesn’t honor the flag, wants to get rid of our warlike national anthem, doesn’t drink milk or like warm cookies, hates apple pie — even baseball.”
Why are the left and right so hardened against one another? Why the knee-jerk distrust and skepticism?

Might I suggest that this radio talk show host, and a few pundits and authors like him, are a root cause of a nasty divide in our country? I sometimes listen to his program in an attempt to understand his point of view, but I can only take it in small doses — vulgarity, profanity, name-calling, divisiveness, sarcasm, mocking, inciting hatred, encouraging anger, deliberately misrepresenting and twisting views of the opponent (bearing false witness, one might call this), blasphemy, repeating meaningless mantras like “drive-by media” to the point of brainwashing, sowing distrust, consciously cultivating contention.

You may think I exaggerate, but the honest listener will agree. Just one example from a randomly chosen transcript of a recent broadcast — the opening line, no less: “Now we turn, ladies and gentlemen, to The Messiah, Lord Barack Obama, yesterday at Powder Springs, Ga. ... ”

Let me contrast all of this with a tenet of faith for many of us: We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, and in doing good to all men … if there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Search your hearts. Revisit the word “benevolent” in a dictionary. Unless you are past feeling, you will likely agree that perhaps the time has come for us to get our political information from sources more in the pattern of our Great Exemplar.

Eric W. Jensen

Prestons

dnatree · Guest

The "self RIGHT" are starting a fight just like the wife that hated me and wanted to shift blame in the end in order to lie to my children. Poetry of present harlot known as Christianity and the right.

This kind of outright intention to start fights could be a war crime Rush Limbaugh. They are revealing the true intentions of their hearts.

Rush Limbaugh You are inciting violence.

Get Ready for the Wild Ride!!!!

Bojickwoman · Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject:

Rush Limbaugh is a coke head. I'm surprised he has any listeners left.....

dnatree · Guest

dnatree · Guest

They misunderstood, few heard. The size of the pending fire is relative to what has happened here.

“God sent me before you to preserve life”

http://www.lifeskillstraining.org/synchronicity_8.htm In the google cached version

SYNCHRONICITY IN THE BIBLE

Joseph was the youngest son of the 12 sons of Jacob. He was the favored son. He bragged about his dream of seeing 11 shocks of grain bowing to his shock of grain in the field. All this made his brothers resent Joseph. Thus, when he came to where the brothers were tending sheep, the brothers wanted to kill him. [They misunderstood the true intention of his heart, they did not realise what he was saying... dnatree inserted this line]
By coincidence some Ishmaelite traders just happened to come that way. After some strong bargaining, Joseph was sold into slavery and taken to Egypt. Joseph resisted temptations, remained Godly and became ruler (Genesis 41) The Bible record indicates that the brothers had done for “evil” but Joseph said, “God sent me before you to preserve life” (Genesis 45:5 RSV).
How many years went by before Joseph finally saw meaning in his being sold into slavery? How many years did Joseph try to connect the fateful coincidence of the Ishmaelites bargain and the trust of people making him ruler? Meaning in the soul (psyche) ties coincidence and consequences together.

dnatree · Guest

Image taken from http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12599247

Political parties die from the head down

dnatree · Guest

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/08/sarahpalin-republicans-rushlimbaugh

Palin in spotlight as Republicans turn on each other

As the implosion of the defeated Republican campaign continued yesterday, the landscape of American conservatism was dotted with signs that these were very strange times indeed.

Rush Limbaugh, behemoth of rightwing radio, took to the airwaves to declare war on two enemies: Barack Obama and the Republican party. Bloggers at FreeRepublic.com, an internet hub for conservatives, announced a boycott of Fox News and John McCain's aides fell over one another to leak embarrassing details about the campaign to the press.

Liberals, indulging in what the writer Andrew Sullivan termed "Palinfreude", were presented with a smorgasbord, ranging from the tale of how McCain's pro-Palin foreign policy adviser had his Blackberry confiscated in the closing days of the race, to how the party had paid for Todd Palin's silk boxer shorts.

The fighting consuming the McCain and Palin camps threatened to derail broader efforts to overhaul the Republican party after Tuesday's decisive defeat, for which some insiders blamed Sarah Palin. Veterans of the right gathered in the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia, on Thursday for a summit on the movement's future, but even as they did so, the blame went on.

"Ladies and gentlemen, it is worse than I thought," Limbaugh told listeners. "What the Republican party, led by disgruntled and failed McCain staffers, is trying to do to Sarah Palin, is unconscionable ... There are country-club, blue-blood ... Republicans who want nothing to do with a firebrand conservative [who] can fire up people." He added: "We're going to be taking on two things here [over] the next four years: Obama, and our own party establishment."

John Fund, a Wall Street Journal columnist, said he had received multiple calls from campaign aides wanting "to use me as a conduit for their complaints".

"Some on the McCain campaign staff seem more eager than most to settle scores," he noted.

The main ammunition in the war was a lengthening list of allegations against Palin: that she thought Africa was a country; that she failed to inform the campaign about a scheduled call with Nicolas Sarkozy which turned out to be a prank; that she refused to undergo coaching prior to her disastrous interviews with CBS anchor Katie Couric; that she couldn't name the three countries in the North America Free Trade Agreement; and that the party had spent up to $70,000 (£45,000) on "wardrobe items" for Palin and "luxury goods" for her husband, in addition to the $150,000 already reported. (Some of the claims were revealed by Fox, hence the boycott.)

The New York Times reported that when Palin met McCain in Phoenix on Tuesday night, she held the text of a speech she planned to deliver, in defiance of campaign convention, and had to be overruled.

The attacks are partly ideological: some blame Palin and her social-conservative supporters for blunting McCain's appeal to independents, while others believe Palin could be the populist, hawkish figurehead of a revitalised Republican future.

But there is plenty of self-interest at stake. "This blame game is the consultants - the people who make their living running campaigns and don't want to be blamed, because they need another job," said Al Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator, and former president of Regnery Publishing, the company behind many recent rightwing bestsellers.

At Thursday's summit, he said, "there was a lot of discussion about these people, who always seem to come back, whether they win or lose, and get paid a lot of money. We said we thought our side would be much better off without them."

The sniping at Palin has provoked a backlash. One influential website,

RedState.com, announced Operation Leper, designed to blacklist campaign staffers believed to be responsible. "We intend to constantly remind the base about these people, monitor who they are working for, and, when 2012 rolls around, see which candidates hire them," it explained.

There was speculation that the culprits may be former aides to Mitt Romney, positioning their hero for a future presidential run.

The collapse of the McCain-Palin alliance began long before election day, Steve Schmidt, a senior McCain adviser, speaking to reporters on the candidate's plane, was making little effort to hide his disdain for Palin. Asked if her presence on the ticket had been a disadvantage, he twice refused to answer.

Randy Scheunemann, McCain's foreign policy chief, this week denied reports that he had been fired in the final stage of the campaign for siding with Palin and leaking "poison" on McCain to the pro-Palin columnist William Kristol. But even one of his allies, Michael Goldfarb, told reporters that Scheunemann's Blackberry had been confiscated in the days before the election.

Kristol, who in one column advised McCain to "fire" his campaign, scoffed at reports that he had advised Palin. "I'm afraid it shows how paranoid some of these McCain aides have gotten - they should take a good rest after a tough campaign," he told Fox.

He had met Palin once in his life, he continued, and interviewed her once by phone. "You know why this is really disgusting and disgraceful?" he said. "It's disloyal to John McCain. Who selected Sarah Palin? John McCain. Who defended Sarah Palin for the last three months? John McCain."

Returning to Alaska, Palin dismissed the criticisms, attributing them to "a small, bitter type of person". Instead, she has emphasised perhaps the only thing that still unites her and her supporters with McCain loyalists: hostility towards the media.

She had "a little bit of disappointment in my heart about the world of journalism today", she said, while McCain's closest aide, Mark Salter, told Politico: "Maybe if the media had been fair, we still would have lost. But there were two different standards of scrutiny for us and Obama."

Palin offered to help reporters confront their problems. "I want to ... help restore some credibility there," she said.

dnatree · Guest

Wives will turn on husbands, Republicans will turn on Democrats, Islam and Christian, East and West. There is only YOU and I and this Veil that is only separating us.

Churchies spewing hate.
Tempe Arizona Pastor Says: "Obama Should Die"

dnatree · Guest

The Division and the Anger in this country

Barbara Walters on the View this morning.

The right reminds me of the woman that felt guilty in a marriage and so she set out to make him guilty even if it destroyed the home.

They love their interpretations more than they love each other and will destroy the union competing to be right.

Throw both these sides out and reach for a mutual benefiting solution before all is lost.

©®™ · Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 5445

I’ve been talking on another forum about taking possession of the words that enter your mind.

There’s this belief that words belong to people that speak them, but actually words become the property of any mind they enter, and the mind that believes the words are not part of the mind, is easily controlled.

People use words to activate the energy contained in other people’s bodies.

Take control of the words in your mind, and your body becomes your own.
_________________
Natural disasters, major attack on the U.S., martial law, civil war, WWIII, foreign invasion/occupation, and then survival on our own.

Brock · Joined: 20 Sep 2006 Posts: 6315

nana · Joined: 20 Sep 2006 Posts: 247 Location: here and there

healing words heal the heart and mind..

.the best thing IMO is to avoid negative 'us and themer type scenarios like the plague...come to think of the divisiveness 'as a plague' to be healed and erased....really it's not 'us and them' it's just 'us and us'...

be well
nana

dnatree · Guest

There have been a number of indicators on this forum and in Washington that a blaze is catching. Practice leaving the Struggle and using intention which is better than a bullet at reaching the truth.

Islamic Curriculum and the growing hate from without and within. Where can You hide when the great fire begins.

http://www.stephentree.com/change/

The coming fire between You and I/us and them

©®™ · Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 5445

Bojickwoman · Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:21 pm Post subject:

There IS a lot of anger out there right now. I'm done with politics. The two party system needs to go away forever. It does nothing but separate people. Many people are angry right now and I think it is valid. We all just need to relax and not let it affect our health in a negative way!

dnatree · Guest

When raw anger at government turns violent

By CALVIN WOODWARD and EILEEN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 1 min ago
WASHINGTON – The river of discontent running through America turned toxic in the fevered mind of the Pentagon shooter and others of his ilk. In a culture awash in conspiracy theories and raw anger at government, they are lone wolves who find a sense of community for their hate — yet act alone.
They are, in some ways, more unsettling than organized and trained terrorists because they come from us.
Their diatribes and smoldering grievances are familiar and homegrown. For the Texan who steered a small plane into IRS offices last month, it was taxes. For the Nevadan who shot at a courthouse in January, it was his Social Security.
In these times, disgust with authority — a president, a tax law, a health plan, one political party or both — comes with a hard-edged hallelujah chorus.
Few kill. But many rant.
The litany that made accused Pentagon attacker Joseph Patrick Bedell smolder and rant is varied, and still coming to light. His history was one of mental illness, not fringe-group agitation.
In an Internet posting, Bedell had suggested an act like the 2001 terrorist attacks could have been the work of a criminal organization controlling the U.S. government, accepting a "sacrifice of thousands of its citizens ... as a small cost in order to perpetuate its barbaric control."
His poisonous view of the government appears well out on the extreme — until you see what some people close to the center of power are saying these days.
"America is teetering towards tyranny," Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina told the Conservative Political Action Conference last month. He accused the governing Democrats of peddling socialist policies "that have been the enemy of freedom for centuries all over the world."
Republicans have been branding Democratic policies as some form of socialism for generations, par for the course.
But tyranny? America has real issues with that — it violently overthrew that enemy at the start.
However outrageous the notion that the government would sacrifice its citizens "as a small cost," it's not limited to warped malcontents.
It was California Democratic Rep. Pete Stark who said, late in the Bush administration, that Republicans want to spend money "to blow up innocent people — if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."
Multiply rhetoric like that and you have the new public square, swarming with bloggers and broadcasters reaching for the provocative and feeding the grievances of the like-minded.
Altogether it's a rage against the machine. Activists such as the tea party movement tap that rage for political and policy ends — stopping the health overhaul, getting supportive politicians elected.
But it's surely not been lost on the lone wolves, whether it fuels their acts or not.
The Pentagon gunman, who wounded two police officers and was himself shot to death, joins two other men with anti-government sentiments who have attacked the government since the beginning of the year.
Just last month, Joseph Stack flew his small plane into an Austin, Texas, IRS building. In his online turn on the public square, Stack had railed about U.S. tax laws.
In January, a Nevada man, Johnny Lee Wicks, fired shots at a Las Vegas courthouse, killing a security guard and being shot to death soon after. Wicks was angry about losing a lawsuit challenging a cut in his Social Security benefits.
All three men appeared to have acted alone, without ties to the militia or patriot groups that gained traction in the early and mid-1990s.
That was another era of rising anti-government sentiment and a decade marked by the domestic terrorism of Timothy McVeigh, who in 1995 blew up a federal building in Oklahoma City and killed 168 people.
Mark Potok, co-director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which published a report that listed 363 new patriot groups that appeared in 2009, said the Pentagon shooter does not fit the profile of radical organizations.
Not an activist himself, Bedell appeared to be one who absorbed the ideas of those groups and twisted them to his own ends, Potok said.
Oddball ideas alone are no red flag. True, Bedell subscribed to conspiracy theories about "the September 11 demolitions."
But Debra Medina, too, said last month there were "some very good arguments" for believing the U.S. was involved in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And she won 19 percent of the votes in Tuesday's Texas Republican primary for governor.

©®™ · Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 5445

I can understand that a lot of the attacks on Obama are balancing out the attacks on Bush, but this is really odd.

joyful · Joined: 16 Jun 2007 Posts: 846

Thank you for this thread Tree!!!

the first part just got a good laugh out of this girl who needed it! I'll read the rest later - thank you.

Joyful

joyful · Joined: 16 Jun 2007 Posts: 846

PostPosted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 6:43 pm Post subject: Anger synch growing and the Hulk Reply with quote

This does not effect us on this forum. This is an ongoing synch with anger that is building and that it will come out in a way that will spark something big. I want You to look at this HOT subject like the Spirit has me look at it. As a spark to REACH YOU, and the Poem about the

Coming Fire so hot it will melt the veil separating You and I on this planet and leave those hiding behind religion with nowhere left to hide.

Oh Boy, hope that I am not disrespecting you Tree, this is what got me laughing sooo hard and helped shake this twirl about someone else's preach!

Thank you again,

Joyful

dnatree · Guest

Joyful, I just did not want to be misread at that time about my intentions for posting at that time. Now the anger has grown and it does effect us now in this forum. But at the time I posted that it was necessary. Now it is effecting us more and more related to this forum as well as this planet.

joyful · Joined: 16 Jun 2007 Posts: 846

blessings tree !

all of it affects us here and we must try very hard to respect each other - we are together for a reason -

joyful

dnatree · Guest

All of You know the passion of this post. (if You read the first post in 2008 above then it may help put these times more in perspective. Here I posted it as early as 2003

DNATREE Quote:

joyful · Joined: 16 Jun 2007 Posts: 846

I have to spend more time reading and looking before I respond - at first glance it truly looked to me like someone else was posting under my name and I reacted instead of responded - will go through closer later.

There ARE some weirdnesses afoot on this site and it makes me feel uneasy.

Joyful

©®™ · Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 5445

joyful · Joined: 16 Jun 2007 Posts: 846

Thomas,

Am not 100% sure so that's why I changed it - will look later or just get the heck out of dodge for a while.

Joyful

©®™ · Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 5445

There’s been quite a few things to creep me out about what’s happening to my computer and accounts, so I closed a whole bunch of them down.

I’ve been really careful about what’s on my computer, because the hackers are getting so good at what they do anymore.

Brock · Joined: 20 Sep 2006 Posts: 6315

good lord, how invasive. I noticed the person posting on Tavistock Productions, changed their name to bre...so they must read here too.
_________________
"It is better to deserve honors and not have them than to have them and not deserve them."

Mark Twain

Momlvsducks · Joined: 23 Oct 2008 Posts: 2422

It makes me wonder if this is not a common hacker, but rather a professional disinformation agent.

One would not need to take down the internet to sqelch information--

all one would need to do is what has been discribed here.

People would not want to post once their posts have been altered and people reading would not know if there were authentic posts or altered posts on a forum.

Online banking comes to mind also -- just how far might they hack?
_________________
I wish us...
Peace, harmony, companionship and profitable business adventures.

May humanity emerge a winner, undecieved in a deception game...

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

dnatree · Guest

Anger can be a good thing, thanks for the added passion!!!!!!!!!!

As I began to post this Pam wanted to tell me what she was reading and she did not know what I was posting.

From Brain Scientist's Stroke Recovery Brings Insight

dnatree · Guest

dnatree · Guest

They’ve been bred to abuse men. This is what I have said about Alabama women and I have intended to reach my own daughter so that she will not use the same manipulations that cause such separation in her own life as I see in the lives of folks in the south especially.

Why Are Men So Angry?

NEW YORK – Men in their twenties and thirties are fed up with women, but author Kay Hymowitz says you can’t blame them when women are demanding equality except when it comes to romance.
About a week ago, The Wall Street Journal published an excerpt of my new book, which argued that the new stage I call pre-adulthood—the twenties and early thirties—was not bringing out the best in single young men. Some men didn’t like it. As in, “cancel-my-subscription-the-writer-should-contract-such-a-bad-case-of-carpel-tunnel-syndrome-she-never-writes-again” didn’t like it.
But a lot of the responses unwittingly proved my point—and another one: Men are really, really angry. Consider: “We’re not STUCK in pre-adulthood, we choose it because there aren’t any desirable American women. They’ve been bred to abuse men.” This fairly typical response that appeared at the Seattle Post Intelligencer website: “Sorry ladies. In the age of PlayStation 3s, 24-hours-a-day sports channels, and free Internet porn, you are now obsolete. All that nagging, whining, and stealing our hard earned cash have finally caught up to you."
Shocked? I wasn t. During the last few years researching this age group, I’ve stumbled onto a powerful underground current of male bitterness that has nothing to do with outsourcing, the Mancession, or any of the other issues we usually associate with contemporary male discontent. No, this is bitterness from guys who find the young women they might have hoped to hang out with entitled, dishonest, self-involved, slutty, manipulative, shallow, controlling—and did I mention gold-digging?

dnatree · Guest

Actually it is the best it has been in a long time. This was in the yahoo news yesterday.

dnatree · Guest

As for feelings towards others (especially of the opposite sex) all will deny You but there are those that have won Your heart.

Like You feel about "most men" a man feels similar about the nature of "most women." But loved ones such as Pam and daughters are seen differently as they have proven their intent towards those they love. It is the same thing in the writings of Jesus that until one shows their passion and love for the Spirit they have not begun to REACH the Spirit. And the Spirit would not reciprocate towards them except for what they expect as we are first loved. I feel this is a natural mechanism that isolates those that are hiding from those that posses love for one another.

Other
The amount of FLESH that has gone from this planet in the form of wild animals and amphibians would astound humans. I want to make money and government acknowledge to the masses this fact which would be dramatic as it has not stopped. The arrogance of humans to see only what we want to see is leading to "all flesh" being destroyed and it is not the beast as the deluding interpretation suggests but the deluding influence as the interpretation without Spirit is the beast they have sought.

The Leaf · Joined: 09 Sep 2011 Posts: 294 Location: United States

Monty Python and Anger Management

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwgRY1mDZKA
_________________
Because words won't reach you http://dnatree.blogspot.com/2013/04/thunder-and-lightning-at-crucifixion.html