RobertNashville

I am very accepting of those who come here with a desire for freedom, follow the rules, and who want to become "Americans". I am very unaccepting of those who come here by breaking the rules and who simply want to bring their culture with them rather than become part of the "American culture" or who want to "remake" our culture into their own. My main problem with what Coca-Cola did with this commercial is that I'm not sure which of those two they are celebrating - if it is the former that is fine but if it is the latter it is not fine.

I think the "problem" is suspicion about what Coke's real intent was; not just the fact that different languages were used.   Some, or at least I, feel it was done to be provocative (and not in a "good" way). It almost seems as a slap in the face to take something so uniquely "American" and sing it in different languages. It's reasonable to ask "why" they would do that?  What purpose does it really serve? Others just see it as an endorsement of America's position of embracing other heritages and maybe that's all it is and if so; fine.   Only Coke can answer to their real intent although, since they obviously want to offend no one and put as good a "spin" on it for themselves as possible I have doubts that we could take their answer at face value.

I think this was a more than correct decision by the DA. Anybody who breaks down my front door and invades my home is probably going to be facing some significant fire coming their way. I may well wind up dead but I'm not going to just assume the people invading my home are supposed to be the "good guys". Further, if they're breaking down my front door and invading my home I'm not sure I can consider them to be "good guys" no matter what badge they might have on underneath their bulletproof vests.   Let us not forget the 61 year old man shot to death in Lebanon during a raid on the WRONG HOUSE! http://www.datehookup.com/Thread-212688.htm   Perhaps the Judge says it best...   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24Yl904di34

While I realize I'm coming very late to this thread and also realize that it apparently got very off-topic I'm going to comment anyway. In my opinion, there is a significant difference between being accepting of people from other cultures moving to the United States to become citizens compared to those who come here and seem to only want to continue with their own countries traditions and customs about picking what they can get from us. I welcome and encourage the first group and detest the other; most especially those who come here illegally. I have no idea what Coca-Cola intended by doing the song this way but I found it quite offensive when I heard it. Perhaps I took it entirely wrong way but it seemed to me to be done as a slap in the face to the meaning and intent of the song. "America the Beautiful" is considered by many to be our national him; meaning it's almost sacred - there has even been a long-standing movement to make the song our national anthem rather than the Star-Spangled Banner. Last night at the opening ceremonies of this year's Olympic games I heard the Russian national anthem sung in Russian. It was absolutely stunning the way it was performed. I can know more imagine America the Beautiful being sung in multiple languages than I can the Russian national anthem being sung is English or some other language. In my opinion both would be disrespectful of the song and disrespectful of the nation the song was written for.

It should. Any country that will not respect it's language or maintain its borders or maintain his culture is not really a country at all.

I always worry a bit when you agree with me whether I'm drugged or not! :)

First of all, I would suggest separating the positions/doctrine of "the church" from what individual MEN have done because one is not equal to the other. While either could be at fault for wrongs; it isn't fair to judge the church for what some men have done nor to judge some men by what the church (the organization) has done.   Secondly, off hand I can't think of any organization or collection of people; especially one that's been around as long as the Catholic church, that doesn't have plenty to be ashamed of but there is no reason to overlook the tremendous good that has been done by Catholic's and other Christian variants over the centuries.  Regardless of what one believes about God or organization religion, much of the real charity done in the world since Christ walked the earth has been done in His name by people who believed in his teachings...many if not most of existing humanitarian organizations that exist today trace their roots to Christian sources. Further; most early scientific research and discovery was done in the name of Christ in order to better understand the world around us. No one is giving a "pass" to what the church has done wrong and there are plenty of examples; most especially when it comes to pedophilia and protection of priests but some here seem to want to throw the baby out with the bathwater (to use a much overused phrase).   Also, the UN or anyone connected to it calling out the church for its "sins" makes about as much sense as Planned Parenthood complaining about child abuse or someone who smokes 3 packs of cigarettes a day complaining about the negative health impact of someone who overeats.       PS: If any of the above doesn't make sense then I plead "drug induced dementia" as I'm on some significant pain killers after having broken my leg last Thursday night! :)

:drama:   I find it amusing that you would use such a morally bankrupt organization like the UN as a jumping off point to rag on the church (and on a gun forum no less) - it seems to show that you to have a significant need to denigrate the church; one might even say an intense need to do so.   I suspect that most everyone here, Catholics included, find the acts of the Catholic church, with respect to how they've handled priests who have molested boys, to be reprehensible yet, other than you, no ones else sees the need to bash the church just because there is an opportunity to do so.   If you hate organized religion in general and/or the Catholic church in particular I'm sure that there are any number of places where you could go to vent. :shrug:

So you want to rag on the church but you think the UN has credibility when it comes to morals and ethics?  :wacko:

You are wasting your time...the rhetoric is going to flow.

IC - you just want a forum to use so that you can flame the church. :rolleyes:   I guess you really are just being a dick. :ignore:

Yuup...you read the heading right...school officials are DEEPLY TROUBLED because a "gun" is shown on a sigh that bans guns on school property.         LINK: http://news.yahoo.com/school-officials-deeply-troubled-over-guns-appearing-signs-044012095.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory   Aside from the sheer idiocy of these people it's just another reason why no one should send their children to a public school and why it's criminal that the government steels our money every year to fund hogwash like this.

Well gosh...this may be some sort of a record!!!   This one went 10 whole posts before someone decided to chime in with the same old rhetoric

I think you are giving these a-holes; especially Ron Ramsey, far too much credit.  I don't believe the problem is that what they think/believe about the current law...I think they just truly don't give a ####. Haslam/Ramsey/Harwell set out to pass "firearms legislation" that did almost nothing so as not to piss off their big corporate campaign donors while still being able to claim that they did "something" so as to shut-up the TFA and as far as they are concerned, they are "safe" come election time.   Batesvilel Casket Co in Manchester - they put up a big "NO WEAPONS" sign on the front gate last summer (where there had been none before) but I believe their policy has always been the same (they just didn't have the sign). No action taken against anyone that I know of.

Your accuracy is questionable but I don't see that as the point.   Just a couple of posts ago you accused a poster of being "butthurt about their religion"' as if you have some special insight into the person or even know if the person is a member of the Catholic church (or any church for that matter); at best that seem presumptuous to me.   If you think the Catholic church has handled the issue of priests abusing children poorly I won't argue that but it seems to me that you've got some kind of significant personal beef with the Catholic church that is really the issue for you and are just using this thread as an excuse to unload on them.   The Catholic church is far from perfect (as is every organization, religious or otherwise) but the corrupt, worthless organization known as the UN telling anybody how they should do anything is insane.

The UN, most especially when it comes to "human rights" has zero credibility or moral authority to be telling anyone anything.

Good article:   http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/4/beretta-seeking-the-respect-of-the-second-amendmen/

If what they are doing is illegal (and I don't know for sure if it is or isn't) then the responsible thing to do is call the police and let them sort it out; not go shooting at it and especially not shooting at it in a residential neighborhood which, if I read the stories correctly, where this incident happened.

As I understand it he had gone into rehab and been clean for over 20 years but recently got hooked again. I enjoyed his acting...I don't know what it is that drives so many talented people (actors and others) to drugs but it's such a waste.

For "history" to mean anything to a person that person must have a working brain with which to understand its importance.  Given that this is California and political hacks/government employees of California to boot I doubt you would be able to find two working brain cells between/among tham all; much less a actual working brain.

I think what we need to do is to get our own helicoptors and when we see these privacy-steeling "drones" we can use our own drones to attack them and force them down...sort of like we see in the movies when one country's fighter jets force down an airliner that has violated that country's air space! If we have cameras on our drones we can post it to YouTube and those videos would probably be a big hit!  Besides, I think a anti-helicoptor helicoptor would be a lit easier to explain to LE than firing off a 12ga in your backyard!  LOL

Obviously these remote controlled helicopters are evil; after all that's why they are being called drones now...if they are "black" then they are doubly evil. LOL

A very satisfying Super Bowl for me! I lived across the sound from Seattle (Port Orchard) Washington when the Seahawks were created as an expansion team and went to the Kingdome many times for games (Seahawks and Mariners). I must say I felt a little sorry for Denver with it being such a one-sided game tonight but that is what competition is about and why we play games rather than just assume they will turn out the way the "experts" think they'll turn out! Congratulations to the Seattle Seahawks!

Having retired from a major competitor of KIA I've watched they grow a lot as a company and in their quality/engineering...I find them to be an excellent vehicle for the money. There are better vehicles out there but in terms of raw value for the $$$ I think they are hard to beat.

From "Futurama" (paraphrasing a bit)...........   Fry (to park ranger talking about the possibility of the existance of "Big Foot":  "Why don't you just put out cameras everywhere and that way, if a Big Foot walks by you'll have lots of pictures of him?"   Ranger: "Well, that would cost a l of money and and most people who believe in Big Food don't have any money".