On Jan 18, 3:50*pm, "Canuck57" wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message

...

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
hk wrote:

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...action=view&cu...

Parallels? What parallels.

Perhaps if you had stayed in school a little longer...

I went to Yale and graduate with a BA.

Did no one ever tell you about BA... Bugger All.

MBA, More Bugger All.

Most BA and MBA I know, I don't care for and they can't even articulate what
they have been tought. *Some even mix up credit/debits and can't balance
their own cheque book.

I am not saying BA/MBA are bad, not at all. *But I consider it a "soft"
degree.

Kind of like the BS and the PHD.... Bull****. Piled Higher and
Deeper..

On Jan 18, 9:38*am, BAR wrote:
hk wrote:
* *http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...action=view&cu...

Parallels? What parallels.

The ones Hollywood is making up... This is getting rediculous.

On Jan 18, 8:38*am, BAR wrote:
hk wrote:
* *http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...action=view&cu...

Parallels? What parallels.

agreed. I watched the entire vid and saw no parallel to anything.

Great tribute to Abe, though.

On Jan 19, 8:22*am, Tim wrote:
On Jan 18, 8:38*am, BAR wrote:

hk wrote:
* *http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...action=view&cu...

Parallels? What parallels.

agreed. *I watched the entire vid and saw no parallel to anything.

Great tribute to Abe, though.

That's because you're not a dilusional narcissist like Harry!

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:29:41 -0500, hk wrote:

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...n_Portrait.flv


The Cannonization Process -- just a matter of time. Usually not done until
the individual is deceased, but in Obama's case, death is not a
requirement.

Although once chosen by the democratic method of public acclaim,
the Pope took over the process in the 10th century. Pope John Paul II
further amended the process to follow three main stages.

Stage 1 Veneration

The candidate will be a Catholic who was regarded as being particularly
holy in life. A local Bishop will first examine their life, works and holy
virtues for evidence of saintliness. If he feels them a likely candidate
the findings will then be passed to a panel of theologians at the Vatican
and then to a group of Cardinals called the Congregation for the Cause of
Saints. After these three levels of scrutiny they will then finally be
named "venerable" by the Pope, meaning that they are heroic in nature and
have reached the first level of being sacred.

Stage 2 Beatification

The second stage is called "beatification" and is a stage necessary for
non-martyrs only. A martyr in this sense of the word is someone who has
been murdered or put to death in the name of their Christian faith. For
this stage evidence is needed of one miracle which has happened after the
candidate's death and as a result of a specific request to them. This is
seen as proof that they can intercede for those on earth and act as their
voice in heaven. "From our lips to God's ear" so to speak.

The candidate will then be proclaimed as "beatified" and so can be
venerated by a region or group for whom the candidate's life holds special
significance (much like a Patron Saint).
Stage 3 A Final Miracle

The third and final stage is for both martyrs and non-martyrs alike. For
this stage one more miracle is required. The candidate is then canonized
and officially named as a saint by the Pope.
A New Saint

Once a person becomes a saint their name is added to the catalogue of
saints, they are invoked in public prayers, churches can be dedicated to
their memory, Mass can be offered in their honour, feast days celebrate
their memory, images of them may have a halo and their remains become holy
relics which are publicly honoured.
--
* Procrastinate Now! *

John H

"hk" wrote in message
m...
http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...n_Portrait.flv

Obama wants to send the blacks out of the country? That was the viewpoint
of Lincoln. He said he would not free the slaves if it preserved the union,
he would free the slaves if it preserved the union, He would free some and
keep others slaves if it saved the union. He was a lot like Obama in one
bad way. He was all for big Federal control.

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:29:41 -0500, hk wrote:

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...n_Portrait.flv

Another liberal arts major who doesn't know or remember his college
course in American History.

"There is a physical difference between the white and black races,
which will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of
social and political equality.'' - Abraham Lincoln - 1858.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery - it was about preserving the Union
- that above all was Lincoln's primary goal. His Emancipation
Proclamation only served those who weren't under his control - namely
the Confederacy. He didn't free slaves under his own control.

Abraham Lincoln did not believe in the equality of black people. He
did, however -- and this was no minor distinction in his era --
believe in their humanity. He also abhorred slavery. But he was
willing to countenance it if doing so would have vindicated his
primary goal: to save the Union. For him, nothing mattered more.
--

Happy Holidays and Merry Whatever It Is
That ****es Liberals Off.

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:29:41 -0500, hk wrote:

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...n_Portrait.flv

Another liberal arts major who doesn't know or remember his college
course in American History.

"There is a physical difference between the white and black races,
which will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of
social and political equality.'' - Abraham Lincoln - 1858.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery - it was about preserving the Union
- that above all was Lincoln's primary goal. His Emancipation
Proclamation only served those who weren't under his control - namely
the Confederacy. He didn't free slaves under his own control.

Abraham Lincoln did not believe in the equality of black people. He
did, however -- and this was no minor distinction in his era --
believe in their humanity. He also abhorred slavery. But he was
willing to countenance it if doing so would have vindicated his
primary goal: to save the Union. For him, nothing mattered more.
--


Yeah, Tom, I've seen that same crap quoted on about every right-wing
site I visit, along with commentaries telling everyone what a "bum" MLK was.

hk wrote:
Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:29:41 -0500, hk wrote:

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...n_Portrait.flv


Another liberal arts major who doesn't know or remember his college
course in American History.

"There is a physical difference between the white and black races,
which will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of
social and political equality.'' - Abraham Lincoln - 1858.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery - it was about preserving the Union
- that above all was Lincoln's primary goal. His Emancipation
Proclamation only served those who weren't under his control - namely
the Confederacy. He didn't free slaves under his own control.

Abraham Lincoln did not believe in the equality of black people. He
did, however -- and this was no minor distinction in his era --
believe in their humanity. He also abhorred slavery. But he was
willing to countenance it if doing so would have vindicated his
primary goal: to save the Union. For him, nothing mattered more.
--


Yeah, Tom, I've seen that same crap quoted on about every right-wing
site I visit,

I have never read any of the right wing sites you are talking about, but
you have no idea what you are talking about. The Emancipation
Proclamation did not end slavery in the United States. It ended Slavery
in those states that did not voluntarily return to the Union before
Jan. 1, 1863. Any state that returned to the Union, would have been
exempt from the Proclamation. There were slave states in the Union
where slavery was legal and the E.P. had no effect on them. In fact,
any area of the Southern States under the Union control were not
effected by the Emancipation Proclamation.

It is very hard to understand what Lincoln's personal view on racial
equality was, because it changed depending upon who he was talking to.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:56:45 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

hk wrote:
Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:29:41 -0500, hk wrote:

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...n_Portrait.flv


Another liberal arts major who doesn't know or remember his college
course in American History.

"There is a physical difference between the white and black races,
which will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of
social and political equality.'' - Abraham Lincoln - 1858.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery - it was about preserving the Union
- that above all was Lincoln's primary goal. His Emancipation
Proclamation only served those who weren't under his control - namely
the Confederacy. He didn't free slaves under his own control.

Abraham Lincoln did not believe in the equality of black people. He
did, however -- and this was no minor distinction in his era --
believe in their humanity. He also abhorred slavery. But he was
willing to countenance it if doing so would have vindicated his
primary goal: to save the Union. For him, nothing mattered more.
--


Yeah, Tom, I've seen that same crap quoted on about every right-wing
site I visit,

I have never read any of the right wing sites you are talking about, but
you have no idea what you are talking about. The Emancipation
Proclamation did not end slavery in the United States. It ended Slavery
in those states that did not voluntarily return to the Union before
Jan. 1, 1863. Any state that returned to the Union, would have been
exempt from the Proclamation. There were slave states in the Union
where slavery was legal and the E.P. had no effect on them. In fact,
any area of the Southern States under the Union control were not
effected by the Emancipation Proclamation.

It is very hard to understand what Lincoln's personal view on racial
equality was, because it changed depending upon who he was talking to.



Sounds like he and Harry have a lot in common.
--
* I Have a Degree in Liberal Arts; Do You Want Fries With That? *

John H