[TheRealVille]

Thursday night's "Daily Show" featured Jon Stewart doing what he does best: calling out hypocrisy in the media. After a segment on the intensified battle between Gov. Scott Walker and Wisconsin unions, Stewart took a look at how Fox News was reporting on the story, specifically compared to how they covered similar threats to the Bush tax cuts and bailed-out bank CEOs' salaries.

Stewart showed plenty of pundits saying that when it comes to taxing those who make $250,000 a year, you're taxing people who are "not rich" and even "close to poverty" if they have a family of four with kids in college. But when it comes to teachers in Wisconsin, the same pundits say they, as government employees, should expect to see cuts in their ample $50,000 a year salary plus benefits.

In other discussions on Fox News, cuts in teachers' salaries were compared to those of Wall Street executives. Megyn Kelly argued teachers don't deserve as much money because they "don't work as much." Stewart totally understood:

"See the difference? Regardless of the greed-based, almost slightly sociopathic job bankers did wrecking our economy, those people were there every single day, 12 months a year. Not that nine month bullsh*t!"
Stewart took it even further by showing another level of hypocrisy. Clips showed the same people on the network who agreed with the government limiting teachers' benefits also said that limiting the salaries of government bailed-out CEOs would be detrimental to the industry and "isn't a good way of attracting talent in the future."

"Absolutely, we have got to pay those bailed-out firm CEOs top dollar! Otherwise, those companies could wind up being run by a couple of jacka**es who f**k things up so royally, it torpedoes the entire global economy!"
We wouldn't want that to happen, now would we? Watch the full segment below.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/04...=fb&src=sp

[Amun-Ra]

He usually makes the most sense out of anybody but I am sure someone will disagree with him.

[Wildcatk23]

Their not big shot teachers with their.............. "desk" lol

[Wildcatk23]

"Absolutely, we have got to pay those bailed-out firm CEOs top dollar! Otherwise, those companies could wind up being run by a couple of jacka**es who f**k things up so royally, it torpedoes the entire global economy!"

[Hoot Gibson]

Public-sector unions and the corrupt politicians who depend on their dues to further their careers are bankrupting governments at all levels in this country. I have some issues with Fox News but this is not one of them. None of the other cable news networks reports honestly on deficit spending.

(My issue with FNC is employing likely presidential candidates as commentators.)

[vundy33]

Hey guys...there's a commercial on TV right now about a company that predicted the 2007-2008 bailouts and a few more big economic disasters and what-have-you, the commercial is telling people to go to http://www.endofamerica2011.com to watch a video about the next huge economic disaster in this country. I think the name of that site is pretty stupid, but the video shows some valid points about how the U.S. debt and how if the dollar goes down, we all go down.

I'm curious as to what some of you think about this video and what could/will happen, and I don't know all that much about economics so I don't know whether to take this with a grain of salt or not. I'm really curious as to what you think about it Hoot because I know you know your ****.

This is the link to the site, it's the same page as the "endofamerica" URL, but I don't like that link. Here it is:

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/10...PSIM300/PR

As most of you know, I'm about as American as it gets, but this guy has some valid points. The video is a bit long, and if you'd rather read all that then all you have to do is try to exit the link and then click "Cancel" when the prompt pops up trying to keep you on the page. I think it's worth the time to read or listen to the video.

Also, if any of you want to make this into a thread, be my guest. I'm back to work now so I've been pretty busy, don't have time to start a thread about it right now.

[Beetle01]

Hoot, the Greedy and Corrrupt CEO's and boards of a lot of these banks, firms and corps have done 100000000 times more damage to this economy than any union. Im not saying there is not some issues to take with some of these unions. Unions are obviously necessary but the political machine they have become is going to far.

A good local example is KDMC, look what has happened there with the greed and poor decisions coming from the top.

[Hoot Gibson]

Hoot, the Greedy and Corrrupt CEO's and boards of a lot of these banks, firms and corps have done 100000000 times more damage to this economy than any union. Im not saying there is not some issues to take with some of these unions. Unions are obviously necessary but the political machine they have become is going to far.

A good local example is KDMC, look what has happened there with the greed and poor decisions coming from the top.

CEOs have not made the cost of doing business in this country and especially in states dominated by liberal politicians increasingly cost prohibitive. Greedy, corrupt politicians and their union allies have. There is a good reason why people are streaming out of states like New York, California, Michigan, and New Jersey and heading to states that are not dominated by socialist elected representatives. Government policies are wrecking the economies of the blue states, not corporations.

You have swallowed the "greedy CEO" mantra of the liberal media and Democratic Party, hook, line, and sinker. If you were interested in learning some basic economics, you would already have done so. Otherwise, I would urge you to read one of Milton Friendman's works.

The budget deficit for February was larger than the budget deficit for the entire year of 2007. That is the greatest threat to this country's well-being - not "greedy CEOs." In fact, we need far more CEOs in this country than we have because somebody is going to be needed to pay the tab when it starts coming due.

No doubt there are some greedy and corrupt people running some corporations in this country but the damage that they do pales in comparison to what the crooks who are selling us out in Washington are doing. That has never been more true than it is today and it has never received less media coverage than it does today.

When the economy collapses, whenever that inevitable day arrives, I imagine that left-wing politicians will have fully convinced you that capitalism and "deregulation" caused the collapse. It is ironic that businesses have never been regulated or taxed more than they are today and yet people like you are eager to blame job providers for joblessness. Stop asking "How high?" when these left wingers tell you to jump.

[Hoot Gibson]

Hey guys...there's a commercial on TV right now about a company that predicted the 2007-2008 bailouts and a few more big economic disasters and what-have-you, the commercial is telling people to go to http://www.endofamerica2011.com to watch a video about the next huge economic disaster in this country. I think the name of that site is pretty stupid, but the video shows some valid points about how the U.S. debt and how if the dollar goes down, we all go down.

I'm curious as to what some of you think about this video and what could/will happen, and I don't know all that much about economics so I don't know whether to take this with a grain of salt or not. I'm really curious as to what you think about it Hoot because I know you know your ****.

This is the link to the site, it's the same page as the "endofamerica" URL, but I don't like that link. Here it is:

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/10...PSIM300/PR

As most of you know, I'm about as American as it gets, but this guy has some valid points. The video is a bit long, and if you'd rather read all that then all you have to do is try to exit the link and then click "Cancel" when the prompt pops up trying to keep you on the page. I think it's worth the time to read or listen to the video.

Also, if any of you want to make this into a thread, be my guest. I'm back to work now so I've been pretty busy, don't have time to start a thread about it right now.

Very interesting link. I have not listened to the entire presentation yet and I am skeptical about the predicted 12-month timeframe - but I agree that current state and federal government policies are destroying our financial security. I do not understand why so many Americans simply do not believe that hyperinflation could ever happen here. I do not understand how it could not happen here if the size of our budget deficits continue to climb at an ever increasing rate.

What our government is doing (federal and most states) is the equivalent of spending money at will using credit cards and continuously ordering new credit cards to pay our debt. There will come a time when nobody will issue us any new credit cards and that is when our dollars will become worthless.

[Wildcatk23]

250k a year is borderline poverty? How many vets does your kid need?

Oh how fox news people are stupid. Fire teacher pay these CEOs thhat we bail out.

[Bob Seger]

Hoot, the Greedy and Corrrupt CEO's and boards of a lot of these banks, firms and corps have done 100000000 times more damage to this economy than any union. Im not saying there is not some issues to take with some of these unions. Unions are obviously necessary but the political machine they have become is going to far.

A good local example is KDMC, look what has happened there with the greed and poor decisions coming from the top.

From someone who once worked union for a long time, I can honestly say I absolutely detest of what the union of "today" stands for, but there is also some truth to what you are saying as well Beetle. If I had more time I would go into more detail, but this morning I dont. There is no need for a union today "in most respects" as the government now has the ability to keep the sweatshops in check and the basic human safety concerns of what the John L. Lewis's once campaigned for. Truth is the greedy common stock holder is just as guilty as any one. Everything in this country is based on short term gain and profits from all associated. It is doubtful that the greedy nature of mankind, being what it is will allow for a balance for all to co-exist in reasonable terms.

[Bob Seger]

250k a year is borderline poverty? How many vets does your kid need?

Oh how fox news people are stupid. Fire teacher[B] pay these CEOs thhat we bail out[/B].

Who of Fox News advocated Corporate/CEO bailouts? I think that was an Obama/Congress/Union agenda, wasn't it?

[TheRealVille]

Who of Fox News advocated Corporate/CEO bailouts? I think that was an Obama/Congress/Union agenda, wasn't it?

No, that was on Bush's watch, remember? He got the ball rolling on this one, and it was passed on his watch.

[Bob Seger]

No, that was on Bush's watch, remember? He got the ball rolling on this one, and it was passed on his watch.

Yes, that is true. To set the record straight, I am certainly no Bush fan. Personally I didn't agree with it then and I dont agree with it now. The point I was making is that it was the White House, supported by those named that pushed the agenda, not Fox News.

[Hoot Gibson]

No, that was on Bush's watch, remember? He got the ball rolling on this one, and it was passed on his watch.

Democrats were behind the push and provided most of the votes in Congress necessary to pass the legislation for the bailouts. Of course, Juan McCain and his fellow RINOS were on board, but most of the opposition to the bailouts came from Congressional Republicans, not Democrats. Democrat House members voted 172 to 63 in favor of the TARP, while Republicans voted against it by a margin of 108 to 91. 15 Republicans voted against TARP in the Senate, while 10 Democrats did the same.

However, you are right about Bush. He delivered a lesson in political cowardice on TARP.

[Hoot Gibson]

Beetle,

It was late last night when I stopped posting and I realized this evening that my post #8 to you got a little too personal. Not a good approach when trying to change minds and hearts, so please accept my apology.

If you have time, I do encourage you to watch some of Milton Friedman's Youtube videos or read one of his books like [B]Capitalism and Freedom[/B]. It amazes me just how on target the warnings he issued in the early 60s were.

[TheRealThing]

Hoot, the Greedy and Corrrupt CEO's and boards of a lot of these banks, firms and corps have done 100000000 times more damage to this economy than any union. Im not saying there is not some issues to take with some of these unions. Unions are obviously necessary but the political machine they have become is going to far.

A good local example is KDMC, look what has happened there with the greed and poor decisions coming from the top.

I can understand unions in the workplace. Take the mining industry for example. That environment is fraught with hazards that can adversely affect the worker immediately or even through long term cronic illness. In that case, and in the construction trades and industry in general, unions are good and even neccessary.

When one considers the professional ranks among us though, it seems unlikely they are neccessary. When teachers go to school to work what hazards do they really face? Spitballs? Likewise in state, federal and other professional work environments, they are a gross misapplication of what unions were created for. Really, what parent is going to insist that their kids must go to school 12 hours a day including weekends? Or require lawmakers from Wisconsin to stay in Wisconsin in lieu of Illinois? LOL

Giving firefighters certain power down in Georgia resulted in some firechief or captain or whatever making the decision, at the scene or the tradgedy no less, to allow a families' house trailer to burn to ground because they hadn't made their fire protection payment yet. Fearing the same rationale by other crucially important service providing entities, certain things in our society are not acceptable. Medical workers shouldn't strike, police shouldn't strike, firefighters shouldn't strike, teachers shouldn't strike or go off and protest for days or weeks on end. Why workers at a steel mill and not government employees? Because, workers have the right to say hey, I'm not rolling steel for chevys for $25.00 an hour anymore. I want $27.00 and I'm willing to stop working till I get that. On the other hand many professional people are paid very well, thank you very much. So, do people who provide life and death services to our nation's citizenry morally have the right to hold those folks hostage untill they get their way, ala some bank robber caught in the act?
I mean what's next? Will police departments in Texas go on strike for luxury pensions during an invasion of drug lord forces from Mexico saying we won't defend you all till we get what we want?

Everybody wants everything. To use unions as the springboard to Shangra-La is unrealistic to say the least. When state, federal and local government officials have to start answering to the unions things have indeed gone too far.

[TheRealThing]

250k a year is borderline poverty? How many vets does your kid need?

Oh how fox news people are stupid. Fire teacher pay these CEOs thhat we bail out.

Okay so Bush and Obama decide to bail out business.

Mistake? Probably. There are a lot of corrupt dealings by arrogant self inflated and totally self serving CEO's, and there is no doubt about that. But IMO the CEO's are the ones who gave themselves and thieir VEEPs and bosses the absurdlly underserved bonuses. This shows one of the positive functions of the viable and ethical union proccess. Somebody needs to hold these guys accountable and the union folks can do just that.

Teachers, don't work for The Man, they are paid by taxpayers and regulated by the state governments of whom they are employed. Negotiating collectively is a much needed regulatory force in our country. But taking union ideology to the government level can't work. Governing is a lofty, sacrificial and selfless act. Ideally to be carried out by unbiased patriots who want to uphold the constitution and serve the greater good. Those same public servants are not going to in any way runover state workers. I can't remember a time in my life when getting a state job was not to die for. Teachers are among them. Education though, to some extent is a matter of funding, how can America allow teachers to dictate class room size or cirriculum?

FOX News to me offers at least one check and one balance. About 20% of America is liberal of them about 2-3% are the exteme ultra liberals who believe they can legislate mankind into a heaven created by their own hand and until that objective is achieved, they believe they can legislate all the rest of us into submission from the federal level. I for one, appreciate at least one alternate point of view

[TheRealVille]

I can understand unions in the workplace. Take the mining industry for example. That environment is fraught with hazards that can adversely affect the worker immediately or even through long term cronic illness. In that case, and in the construction trades and industry in general, unions are good and even neccessary.

When one considers the professional ranks among us though, it seems unlikely they are neccessary. When teachers go to school to work what hazards do they really face? Spitballs? Likewise in state, federal and other professional work environments, they are a gross misapplication of what unions were created for. Really, what parent is going to insist that their kids must go to school 12 hours a day including weekends? Or require lawmakers from Wisconsin to stay in Wisconsin in lieu of Illinois? LOL

Giving firefighters certain power down in Georgia resulted in some firechief or captain or whatever making the decision, at the scene or the tradgedy no less, to allow a families' house trailer to burn to ground because they hadn't made their fire protection payment yet. Fearing the same rationale by other crucially important service providing entities, certain things in our society are not acceptable. Medical workers shouldn't strike, police shouldn't strike, firefighters shouldn't strike, teachers shouldn't strike or go off and protest for days or weeks on end. Why workers at a steel mill and not government employees? Because, workers have the right to say hey, I'm not rolling steel for chevys for $25.00 an hour anymore. I want $27.00 and I'm willing to stop working till I get that. On the other hand many professional people are paid very well, thank you very much. So, do people who provide life and death services to our nation's citizenry morally have the right to hold those folks hostage untill they get their way, ala some bank robber caught in the act?
I mean what's next? Will police departments in Texas go on strike for luxury pensions during an invasion of drug lord forces from Mexico saying we won't defend you all till we get what we want?

Everybody wants everything. To use unions as the springboard to Shangra-La is unrealistic to say the least. When state, federal and local government officials have to start answering to the unions things have indeed gone too far.

:Thumbs:

[Old School]

Hey guys...there's a commercial on TV right now about a company that predicted the 2007-2008 bailouts and a few more big economic disasters and what-have-you, the commercial is telling people to go to www.endofamerica2011.com to watch a video about the next huge economic disaster in this country. I think the name of that site is pretty stupid, but the video shows some valid points about how the U.S. debt and how if the dollar goes down, we all go down.

I'm curious as to what some of you think about this video and what could/will happen, and I don't know all that much about economics so I don't know whether to take this with a grain of salt or not. I'm really curious as to what you think about it Hoot because I know you know your ****.

This is the link to the site, it's the same page as the "endofamerica" URL, but I don't like that link. Here it is:

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/10...PSIM300/PR

As most of you know, I'm about as American as it gets, but this guy has some valid points. The video is a bit long, and if you'd rather read all that then all you have to do is try to exit the link and then click "Cancel" when the prompt pops up trying to keep you on the page. I think it's worth the time to read or listen to the video.

Also, if any of you want to make this into a thread, be my guest. I'm back to work now so I've been pretty busy, don't have time to start a thread about it right now.

This guy made some interesting points, if they are true or not I don't know.

Toward the end of the video he suggest that we should invest our monies in gold and silver and not the stock market. The video is basically a sales pitch for his information which he offers for $49 for a one year subscription.

[Deathstar 80]

Hey guys...there's a commercial on TV right now about a company that predicted the 2007-2008 bailouts and a few more big economic disasters and what-have-you, the commercial is telling people to go to http://www.endofamerica2011.com to watch a video about the next huge economic disaster in this country. I think the name of that site is pretty stupid, but the video shows some valid points about how the U.S. debt and how if the dollar goes down, we all go down.

I'm curious as to what some of you think about this video and what could/will happen, and I don't know all that much about economics so I don't know whether to take this with a grain of salt or not. I'm really curious as to what you think about it Hoot because I know you know your ****.

This is the link to the site, it's the same page as the "endofamerica" URL, but I don't like that link. Here it is:

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/10...PSIM300/PR

As most of you know, I'm about as American as it gets, but this guy has some valid points. The video is a bit long, and if you'd rather read all that then all you have to do is try to exit the link and then click "Cancel" when the prompt pops up trying to keep you on the page. I think it's worth the time to read or listen to the video.

Also, if any of you want to make this into a thread, be my guest. I'm back to work now so I've been pretty busy, don't have time to start a thread about it right now.

That's a good link. I haven't watched the entire video yet, but I hope to.

Just to get organized, what I'm thinking will happen is this: There will be a global economic collapse soon. Both Glenn Beck and Grant Jeffrey claim that there are a group of people who want a one-world government. When the global economic collapse occurs, this group of global elites who want world government will have a solution to the global economic collapse. They could present this solution to the world and, therefore, create a one-world government. According to the bible, there will be a one-world government during the Tribulation Period. Therefore, the rapture could be soon.

And I know a lot of you disagree with me about this, but I just wanted to post (for organization's sake) of what I think might happen soon.

[tvtimeout]

That's a good link. I haven't watched the entire video yet, but I hope to.

Just to get organized, what I'm thinking will happen is this: There will be a global economic collapse soon. Both Glenn Beck and Grant Jeffrey claim that there are a group of people who want a one-world government. When the global economic collapse occurs, this group of global elites who want world government will have a solution to the global economic collapse. They could present this solution to the world and, therefore, create a one-world government. According to the bible, there will be a one-world government during the Tribulation Period. Therefore, the rapture could be soon.

And I know a lot of you disagree with me about this, but I just wanted to post (for organization's sake) of what I think might happen soon.

That is an interesting thought! I just have a few questions 1. Where is the idea of the rapture come from? Can you point me to a verse saying there will be a rapture?( I am not trying to be a smart guy or anything like that, just again asking).

The second question: If Glen Beck or this other gentleman was around during the fall of the Persian, Greek, Roman, British Empires (end of the Renaissance period), the Great Depression, could they not have said the same thing that they are predicting now?

I picked each of these events to show that nothing has ever really changed (my opinion) and that cycles do happen. I think that these two gentlemen have understood their history books and studied. What do you think?

[Amun-Ra]

Does anyone on here agree with Fox news on this subject?

Anyone here agree with Bill Reily in that teachers lead "lavish" lifestyles or when they said teachers are "part time workers"?

Thats what this whole thread was about. Does anyone defend this stuff?

[tvtimeout]

[quote=Amun-Ra]Does anyone on here agree with Fox news on this subject?

Anyone here agree with Bill Reily in that teachers lead "lavish" lifestyles or when they said teachers are "part time workers"?

Thats what this whole thread was about. Does anyone defend this stuff?[/QUOTE

The first part of the quote teachers living a "lavish", lifestyle depends on perspective. For an example, 80% of the world lives under a house hold making less than $50,000. Compared to this 80% yes we do, however, compared to the standards that Americans have no we do not.

The second comment is very close to being correct for a languistic standpoint. Most teachers contracts are for 175-180 days, which is about half a year, so if you consider a part time worker working half the year than yes.

However, if Bill wants us to work more extend the contract with pay of course. I actually like the arguement to pay us private sector pay, I will make a whole lot more money, just use the example of just child care alone, or a baby sitter service. However, politicans and Bill never want to talk about child care for one child a week. Now if you times that number the average class size, you will see that we stand to make alot more money. But that is logical, and sometimes Bill, Republicans, and the Democrats do not apply this principle.

[Old School]

Does anyone on here agree with Fox news on this subject?

Anyone here agree with Bill Reily in that teachers lead "lavish" lifestyles or when they said teachers are "part time workers"?

Thats what this whole thread was about. Does anyone defend this stuff?

I don't agree with everything that Fox is saying, but I do agree that if the states are broke then they have to cut their spending. These cuts should be from top to bottom and since the teachers of Wisconsin pay absolutely nothing into their retirement it seems like a good place to start. I also think that the politicans at the state and federal levels should take a pay cut and be required to be covered by Obamacare.

What did O'Reilly say about teacher "lavish lifestyle"? Several members of my family including my wife are teachers and I've always give them grief about being part time workers.

Teachers are contracted to work 183 days give or take a day or two, most full time private sector workers work at least 260 days not counting Saturdays, so if you break down what they make into an hourly wage then on average it is considerably more than most other occupations. Of course their salary depends on number of years taught and if they have a Master degree or a Rank 1.

[TheRealThing]

That is an interesting thought! I just have a few questions 1. Where is the idea of the rapture come from? Can you point me to a verse saying there will be a rapture?( I am not trying to be a smart guy or anything like that, just again asking).

The second question: If Glen Beck or this other gentleman was around during the fall of the Persian, Greek, Roman, British Empires (end of the Renaissance period), the Great Depression, could they not have said the same thing that they are predicting now?

I picked each of these events to show that nothing has ever really changed (my opinion) and that cycles do happen. I think that these two gentlemen have understood their history books and studied. What do you think?

For question #1- Rev 3:10 " Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth." This verse promises to deliverance to all the saved of the earth from the time of Jacob's trouble otherwise known as the Tribulation Period.

If you want to see the sign of his coming as described by Christ in the book of Matthew you will need to read vs 29-44. I would note here for clarity the following two verses from the above noted passage in Matt vs 40 & 41
vs 40-"Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left." and verse 41-" Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left." These two verses clearly describe the time of his coming when people will disappear. The word Rapture means to be caught up and this disapperance of the 'saved' of humanity will be caught up to forever together with Him. This is stated in I Thesslonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. So people use the word RAPTURE when speaking of this time when folks will be caught up in the air to be with Him forever. It's just much easier.

Question # 2 You're right that the argument can be made that historical events in the record could be mistaken for what we are talking about, the Second Coming, but, it's getting harder and harder to pooh pooh the prophetic onrush of current events. There is one verse that does come to mind to that end however, 2 Peter 3:4 says-" And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation." After all, it will be in an hour when you think not.

[TheRealThing]

Does anyone on here agree with Fox news on this subject?

Anyone here agree with Bill Reily in that teachers lead "lavish" lifestyles or when they said teachers are "part time workers"?

Thats what this whole thread was about. Does anyone defend this stuff?

You have to remember that Bill O'Reily Was in fact a teacher by vocation. It would seem to me that he would have the inside track on understanding the true nature of the whole argument.

The teachers up in Wisconsin look like a bunch of spoiled brats. I'll tell you one thing, I personnaly have walked the union pickett line from Texas to Dresden Ill. to West Virginia and down in Kentucky. You want to know what I never saw in any of those pickett lines? Not so much as one teacher. This whole idea that labor is in lockstep with professional people is a new one as far as I have seen.

Collective bargaining for wages and conditions in the work place I understand. Collective bargaining for state employees, teachers, and government employees is like scubba diving on Mars to me, I don't understand it and can't see the need for it. Seriously, do you really want teachers to be able to dictate classroom cirriculum through the unions? How about when to teach your kids their idea of sex education? In the workplace Architects spell out spicifically what they want in a building project. How stupid would it look to have a bunch of union workers trying to dictate what types of building materials to use? Their job is to do the work not decide what color a building is or how many stories it will be or how much parking is neccessary or anything else, just do the work.

[tvtimeout]

You have to remember that Bill O'Reily Was in fact a teacher by vocation. It would seem to me that he would have the inside track on understanding the true nature of the whole argument.

The teachers up in Wisconsin look like a bunch of spoiled brats. I'll tell you one thing, I personnaly have walked the union pickett line from Texas to Dresden Ill. to West Virginia and down in Kentucky. You want to know what I never saw in any of those pickett lines? Not so much as one teacher. This whole idea that labor is in lockstep with professional people is a new one as far as I have seen.

Collective bargaining for wages and conditions in the work place I understand. Collective bargaining for state employees, teachers, and government employees is like scubba diving on Mars to me, I don't understand it and can't see the need for it. Seriously, do you really want teachers to be able to dictate classroom cirriculum through the unions? How about when to teach your kids their idea of sex education? In the workplace Architects spell out spicifically what they want in a building project. How stupid would it look to have a bunch of union workers trying to dictate what types of building materials to use? Their job is to do the work not decide what color a building is or how many stories it will be or how much parking is neccessary or anything else, just do the work.

I bolded the part that confuses me about you statement. You say that you understand the work conditions and wages, but in the very next statement you say that it should not be held for teachers and state workers.

My question is this: why?

If you say because it is considered a service, is not the medical field a service or air traffic controllers a service. If you say because you should not because you are working with someone elses money, but I would say doesn't everybody. If you say you signed up for this type of service, you are right but now people are changing the rules in midstream, at which point I did not sign up for.

So again ask why is a teacher not allowed to have the same benefits as say a union employee in any other field?

[tvtimeout]

For question #1- Rev 3:10 " Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth." This verse promises to deliverance to all the saved of the earth from the time of Jacob's trouble otherwise known as the Tribulation Period.

If you want to see the sign of his coming as described by Christ in the book of Matthew you will need to read vs 29-44. I would note here for clarity the following two verses from the above noted passage in Matt vs 40 & 41
vs 40-"Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left." and verse 41-" Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left." These two verses clearly describe the time of his coming when people will disappear. The word Rapture means to be caught up and this disapperance of the 'saved' of humanity will be caught up to forever together with Him. This is stated in I Thesslonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. So people use the word RAPTURE when speaking of this time when folks will be caught up in the air to be with Him forever. It's just much easier.

Question # 2 You're right that the argument can be made that historical events in the record could be mistaken for what we are talking about, the Second Coming, but, it's getting harder and harder to pooh pooh the prophetic onrush of current events. There is one verse that does come to mind to that end however, 2 Peter 3:4 says-" And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation." After all, it will be in an hour when you think not.

Thanks! Usually, people can not back up what they believe with straight scripture.

However, most scholars think that the book of Revelation (sp) has already come to pass with the early persecution of the christians/church and again with the mark of the beast, another sign for Nero. Most literature during the time of persecution comes out like the Book of Revelation/Daniel.

However, that is one interpratation, what you and I can agree on is that out of 6.2 billion people, roughly on 20% of that is saved and over 50% has not even heard of the Gospel.

[Bob Seger]

I bolded the part that confuses me about you statement. You say that you understand the work conditions and wages, but in the very next statement you say that it should not be held for teachers and state workers.

My question is this: why?

If you say because it is considered a service, is not the medical field a service or air traffic controllers a service. If you say because you should not because you are working with someone elses money, but I would say doesn't everybody. If you say you signed up for this type of service, you are right but now people are changing the rules in midstream, at which point I did not sign up for.

So again ask why is a teacher not allowed to have the same benefits as say a union employee in any other field?

The others are employed by private enterprise. Teachers, and other state, and federal workers are employed by the tax payer. They have no right, IMO, to hold the tax payer hostage by striking and walking out . Nobody forced anybody to work for the government. My opinion is if they are not satisfied with their employment, they should seek employment in another field in the private sector. By the way ,that's really working out great right now, isn't it?. Should the ones that are footing the bills have to live at a substandard way of life than those they are paying? I would say that the great percentage of teachers acquired their jobs coming straight out college, and have never held a real private sector job to begin with. Most probably dont have an inkling as to what those paying their salaries have to deal with to make their livings. They may find out they dont have it all that bad.