Don't worry soon as the brown people take over they'll destroy it as a craven image.

Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)

I saw the guy in Gunsmoke as well, he was playing the same role of the poor downtrodden negro who had endured being enslaved by Whites. He seems like a good actor but his roles were always the same. lol.The guy probably had the role down pat and was probably typecast after Mockingbird. Even in The Incident the cops go to arrest the innocent dindu nuffin first before someone tells them he isn’t the one.

Where do Blacks get their ideas? From the Original (((Dindu Nuffins))) and (((Hollywood)))

Without receiving any hints, how many people reading this could name what city the pro-sports team known as the Aces plays in? How many could name the sport?

"Does the Aces winning another championship make it die nasty even if no one is watching the WNBA?"

Gosh I hope so.

Go Set a Sequel
Written prior to its prequel.
To revise it Lee was willing,
And the Bird did make a killing.
Lee had won, but by a Yank
Who told the girl her Watchman stank.
Eustace Tilley raised his pen:
Imagined South did live again.

Very interesting take, especially since in NYC the NAACP was a Jewish organization using blacks as crash dummies in the former’s war against their Christian hosts. The only non-token blacks that would have been allowed in the NAACP’s offices back then would have been black “shines” on their knees doing the Jews’ shoes for a nickel or sweeping the floors.

The editor wrote it basically.

I think it's hilarious that her publisher took advantage of her when she was 89 years old and got her to allow them to publish her first draft and sell it as a "sequel." My commie lib relative got all excited and pre-ordered it. When she read it she was shocked and disgusted. "Hey wait a minute, you mean Atticus Finch was in the KKK and hated Negroes?"

https://www.ibtimes.com/racist-atticus-finch-go-set-watchman-slings-racial-slurs-attended-kkk-meeting-new-2004086

I liked Kathy Shaidle's take that Harper Lee probably got more people killed than Rachel Carson.

https://www.takimag.com/article/to_mock_a_killing_bird_kathy_shaidle/

https://www.takimag.com/article/to_mock_a_killing_bird_kathy_shaidle/2/


As far as the Capote story goes, I had heard that also, but this woman claims Lee co-wrote In Cold Blood and got no credit.

https://www.biography.com/authors-writers/harper-lee-truman-capote-friendship-jealously

Who to believe, the fag or the Negro lover?

Replies: @Che Guava

Many years ago I came to the conclusion that Truman Capote wrote Mockingbird for Harper Lee in order to enter the book into a NY literary contest that was specifically for young girls. Remember, back then a homosexual man could not dress as a women and then compete in women's events....I theorize that Lee and Capote collaborated together and they sent the book to NY whereupon it was looked at by the editors and found to be exactly what Progressive Hollywood Jews were looking for. In no time, a few weeks, it was funded and promoted nationwide and then quickly made into a big time Hollywood movie full of anti-Southern White hatred and pushing very hard White guilt propaganda into a 90 percent White country....after winning the competition Capote went on to write many best sellers and Lee went on to prove that she could not write, but they promised to keep it a secret and kept their promises.

Replies: @Priss Factor, @Rufus Jones

The only implausible part is that Capote could have ever kept mum about anything he could boast about.

Replies: @John Johnson, @Gemini

"And only if they have shown evidence of repentance."


I would appreciate the scriptural references that support the statement.

I'll switch out of Roman Numerals, though I have a penchant for using them wrt the US Constitution.

I did mean 16, not 14, Mr. Poulin. I refer to Lincoln having levied an income tax to support the war, and that it was nearly a half century later that THE United States (singular), afterward, no longer the united States (plural) codified the Income Tax as legal with Amend. 16.

I am no fan of 14, and as I wrote in my summary* of lots of posts about these post-Bill-of-Rights Amendments, most of them sucked. In fact 10 of the 17 expanded the powers of the Feral Gov. One of them, 21, was OK, in that it repealed another (18 prohibition of alcohol). 27, the last one, ratified in the early 1990s was a decent idea, but too late for the kinds of things that go on in Congress now. (It was pulled out of moth balls from 2 centuries back! here's more on XXVII. I've reverted back...)

.

*... coincidentally post #1984 of my now 3333 posts up on Peak Stupidity.

I say, good luck with that, the latter, while in agreement. When it comes down to it, a large majority of the 17 Constitutional Amendments ratified after the Bill of Rights were changes for the worse. 5 of them, in fact, involved transferring control of the franchise, who gets to vote, from the States to the Federal Government.

Amendment XVI was the biggest abomination, a codifying of the earlier "work" by Lincoln, as Adam Smith described above. There are 5 big evils of it that I see, and "The MONEY, stupid!" is not even #1. #! is the flow of the money. Then, XIX on women's voting was a big mistake. XVII on the vote for Senators sounds like just some "housekeeping", but it was yet another transfer of power.

Sorry, I got somewhat O/T, but I agree that "The Reconstruction" was an evil, and not too many people would even have heard about it now.

Replies: @G. Poulin

Amendments passed at gunpoint have no legitimacy. The so-called Civil War Amendments will have to be repealed at some point. They’re garbage, all of them.
 

One of my favorites is when people “cut the mustard.”

Merci, Monsieur Poulin.

I walk the big city among boring "Bauhaus" boxes, carefully avoiding "art" museums displaying 20th Century kitsch that everyone knows is ugly and meaningless. The Emperor has no clothes.

I pay taxes, so I feel that I am duty-bound to vote. My votes weighs 1/300,000,000th of a (rigged?) election. They give me a round sticker saying "I voted today", which is almost the same as saying "Another sucker for the System". I stick it on my arse.

What can I do to uphold the civilization of my ancestors and the culture which I would wish to bequeath my descendants but make a feeble effort to keep our language from continuing its media-fueled slide towards barbarism?

Irregular verbs (in German, they are called "strong" verbs) are now a "threatened" species. The "imperfect" ("simple past") form of ""shine" is "shone"; now even the dictionaries are allowing "shined" as an acceptable alternative. The imperfect of "spit" is "spat" ("The demonstrator spat at the ICE agent"), but it's being displaced by "spit". "Clove" (the imperfect of "cleave"; "Beaver Cleaver clove the pepperoni in two") has long since been displaced by "cleaved", although we still hear "animals with cloven hooves" thanks to the Bible.

The "subjunctive mood" is an "endangered" species. Journalists and their ilk now think nothing of writing: "If Gavin Newsom was President...", although people still say, "I wouldn't do that if I were you!".

The imagined taboo against ending a sentence with a preposition is a fake rule made up by Latinists such as John Dryden who felt that English should follow Latin in this regard. But no anglophone feels that there's anything wrong with saying "Take the trash out" or "What are they arguing about?" or "You won't have a pot to piss in."

🌿My writing's done, my song is sung, my message sent, my farthing spent.🌿

Replies: @Blanc de Chine, @Achmed E. Newman, @Corrupt

We could legitimately say that Christian society carried within it the seeds of its own destruction, but I suspect that we could say that about any type of social organization.
 

Replies: @Etruscan Film Star

You know, even 10 years ago, I wouldn't have had to make sure if that was a joke or not...

Yes, OK, LOL

"His foot was on the bag! Are you blind, ump?!"
"Yes, as a matter of fact, and I'm feeling pretty uncomfortable right now hearing these slurs."

they were chased out by irate Egyptians, for committing various swindles, for corrupting Egyptian boys, grooming Egyptian girls for prostitution, and not paying the taxes they owed.
 

LMAO!

Yes, after he agreed to take a trip to Africa with her.

Guess which one is harder to fix?
 

Swiss?

This woman has a severe mental illness

LOL

Great comment.

That reminds me of the white woman who went down to Haiti after the earthquake in 2010 to help them, and got gang raped by niggers. She then excused their behavior because of systemic White racism.

dumb cunt:
A person who makes basic errors and is easily confused or very gullible, and is usually a rescidivist in doing so.

There’s a clear, deceptive pattern in all of Trump’s moves:

1. Trump said he wanted peace with Russia and yet continues sending weapons and intelligence to Ukraine.

http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2015/03/17/the-truth-about-the-conflict-with-russia/

2. Trump agreed to ceasefire with Lebanon, and lets Israel break the agreement.

3. Trump agreed to ceasefire with Gaza, and lets Israel break the agreement.

4. Trump was in negotiation with Iran on nuclear issue, but conspired for an Israeli strike on Iran while US warplanes bombed the nuclear sites.

5. Trump pretended there was a rift with Netanyahu at one point, and then there really wasn’t.

http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2015/07/28/how-the-ashkenazi-jews-conquered-the-west/

6. Trump promised to release Epstein (and JFK) Files, then reneged on his promises.

http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2019/08/10/special-trump-epstein-suicide-israel-and-the-pedophilia-ring/

Conclusion: America is cursed with a curse, which its government always expresses in lies, bloodshed, and destruction because the country has moved away from its Christian roots to a Satanic/Jewish worldview.

http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/07/17/is-america-cursed/

Replies: @Midwest peasant, @Druid

Everyone who displays poor basic citizenship should be stripped of citizenship and deported.

 

Replies: @Corrupt

The Marranos and other crypto Jewish groups in Spain at that time went on to form the Jesuit order. Crafty buggers, them cryptos.

Saying that someone who practices poor citizenship citizenship should lose their citizenship is turning a major legal issue into a hobbyhorse issues.

I have heard, voting in foreign elections is one of the reasons a U.S. citizen can lose their citizenship. Serving as a sworn member of another country's military is definitely a reason.

If you want to stand on your soapbox or go charging around on your hobbyhorse, you are free to do so. Expect to get called out on it every now and then.

By hook(nose) or crook(financier). Freudian slip.

How could anyone be free without the right to discriminate?

Discrimination is the essence of life and freedom.

Replies: @Mike Tre

“For sixty years Americans have been denied their godgiven right to discriminate”

The Bible tells us that God cares about all people regardless of ethnicity, nationality, education level, or social status (Deuteronomy 10:17-19). The Bible tells us that God is not partial but accepts everyone from everywhere as long as they do what is right and fear him (Acts 10:34-35).

So, no.

“in favor of fictional “civil rights” made up by lawless politicians and judges.”

Not fiction, reality. Civil rights is who we are as a nation. We were founded as a nation in it.

Francis, who like most Catholic clergymen was a Scriptural illiterate, thought that Christian charity is supposed to be universal and extended equally to everyone. But that is not what we find in the New Testament
 

4But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5“Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.” 6He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.
7 “Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. 8You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me.”
 

Replies: @JM

First of all, Thanks for all that.

Even though I am (sorta, at least) some version of a practicing Catholic, I am generally reluctant to speak out in a "teaching" manner, for fear that I could be saying something that is In Error.

But this particular bit of business really gets my goat, so maybe there is an exception to be found somewhere.

I was educated first as a kid by the Franciscan nuns and monks, who taught above all else Humility and Charity.

Then in high school I was taught by the Jesuits, who among other things said Be ye wise as serpents, and innocent as doves.

My view on the matter goes back to what Our Lord said to the Rich Young Man in the Gospels. This rich kid was trying to sort of scam his way into the Kingdom, and he asked Jesus "I obey every single damn thing that is required in scripture, what the heck else do I have to do?"

Jesus saw into his heart and saw that he was governed by Ambition rather than by Humility and Charity, and so he gave him the worst advice imaginable: Go, sell everything you have, and give it to the poor, then come back and follow me."

Note that it was personal spiritual advice, not political or societal advice: He didn't say, "Go destroy your entire country and give away your children's future to hostile strangers, just out of sheer perversity."

In true charity, you can only give what it is yours to actually give. If you give away somebody else's stuff, then that is not charity, that is theft.

The dipshit people who promote mass immigration thinking that they are giving a "better life" to some Third World moocher, as if it were an illimitable construct, are not giving what is theirs to give. They are giving away social and economic capital which they themselves did not accumulate: it is NOT theirs to give.

Guess what, asshole? *I* want a "better life" TOO, and I am entitled to it because it is my actual patrimony, because it was MY forefathers who created it and bequeathed it to me, and by you giving it away randomly to some illegal diabetic Guatemalan, you are actually STEALING from ME.

Get THAT through your heads, and then maybe we can begin to talk. Maybe.

https://i.postimg.cc/V6YFBMzX/Ordo-Amoris-consequences.jpg

"'Love one another' means 'love your fellow disciples', not 'love everyone'

No. Just...no. How illiterate does one have to be to spout cherry-picked nonsense like this? Because inasmuch as that phrase was indeed issued to his apostles right before his gruesome death, that wasn't the only time Jesus commanded his followers to love others, was it?

For example, is the parable of the good Samaritan about someone showing love to a "fellow disciple"? No, it isn't, and isn't the very fact that the Samaritan (i.e. the ipso facto reviled outsider and disreputable deplorable and foreigner) is portrayed by Jesus as a hero (a Christ-figure, so to speak) who selflessly and lovingly reaches out and helps a brutalized stranger in a ditch (while fellow Jews just walk on by) an essential part of the parable's message? But you want to claim Jesus was really telling everyone they gotta love their own and let the rest hang?

More to the point, Jesus also specifically commanded his followers to "LOVE YOUR ENEMIES". It's a direct quote -- lo0k it up. How does that square with your new-and-improved version? Spoiler alert: it doesn't. Not at all.

Finally, even with regard to the specific passage you cited, the rest of it -- i.e. the part that you omitted -- is key: It's "love one another AS I HAVE LOVED YOU". Got that? Jesus could have said, hey, everyone -- look at me, I'm the Son of God whereas the rest of you are just dirtbag sinners -- grovel before me all you worthless dregs. But he didn't, did he? He stepped outside his comfort zone, and humbled himself down to our level, just like that good Samaritan helping the poor brutalized stranger lying in a ditch. Or, as Paul himself put it: "God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." So when Jesus tells us to love in the way that he loved, you really think it's directed at people already in the in-group?

I may not be much of a Christian, but I've evidently read and retained the entire source code a lot better than you have. Which means I happen to know that this time, the beanie-wearer got it right.

Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

“Francis, who like most Catholic clergymen was a Scriptural illiterate, thought that Christian charity is supposed to be universal and extended equally to everyone. But that is not what we find in the New Testament.”

Nope.

Galatians 6:10 states, "Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to the family of faith," according to Bible Hub. This verse encourages Christians to prioritize their fellow believers, but it also includes everyone as a part of their sphere of influence. Moreover, Jesus instructs his disciples to "love your neighbor as yourself," and this extends to everyone, not just those who share the same faith.

Also you have to remember what the nation is made up of after the War of Independence. I'm talking many decades after, even a century or more after and still continuing. 1st from the old world some of the lowest life forms of ochlocratic shit known, i.e. jews from eastern European ghettos, then sub-saharan african shit and their primitive ways, then look at the last 4 years under biden and all the illegal invaders a number of them vicious criminals from 3rd world countries. This is the racial and ethnic make up of this ex-country now. Nuff said..

Clearly, you have no concept of what this article is about. If the US is a nation of laws, then the laws have to be followed. What is happening does not follow the law(s). If a US Federal Agency is created by Congress for a purpose, who the eff is Donald J. Trump to alter the purpose or shut down the Agency? Government hiring freezes or lay-offs have happened before. Departments have been reorganized resulting in job loss. None of that is new. The opposition is, and has been, about process, something Trump believes doesn't apply to him.

yr sentiments are a far cry from hate speech laws.

https://i.imgur.com/FgasgvE.jpeg

He sued to have a Kaiser mustache before that, Yagoda also had a toothbrush mustache :

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/1936_genrich_grigorijewitsch_jagoda.jpg

They probably were Charlie Chaplin fan !

Replies: @John Johnson

If one conceives a Christ, it follows that to be a Christian one must follow His injunctions. Striving to be like Him does not make one a Christian. Being like Him makes one a Christian.

Purchasing say, skis and all of the related equipment does not make one a skier.

Claiming love for another is not the same as feeling loved.

Strumming a guitar does not make one a musician.

Graduating from a university does not mean one is educated.

Replies: @anon

How about we have an annual You-can-say-Nigger Day?
 

Replies: @G. Poulin, @True Blue

You can always say "nazi."
24/7/365.
In fact, you are encouraged to do so.

In this case, "nazi" has nothing to do with the (German) National Socialist political party.
It is strictly a pejorative term for humans of (even partial) German heritage, as well as a description of a Marvel Comics super villain type, based on the alleged evil character traits of all such humans.

Replies: @Anonymous, @arbeit macht frei

How about we have an annual You-can-say-Nigger Day?
 

Yes, I'd like to see those movies.

He certainly was the only guy there, or in all of America then, sporting a Beatle haircut -- and the mod style, for that matter. I wonder if he got any reactions.

I just love how nobody there had any idea who he was.

A year later though...

No one wants our priests and bishops to be perfect. We just want them not to be such complete ass holes.
 

I disagree. The American liberal was the lickspittle of the Jew. The Shabbos Goy.

Just as much as Paul Ryan or Mitch Romney as Bill Clinton and Joe Biden.

Let’s say they felt constrained by the Jewish Reality.

Maybe this idiot could find some time in his busy schedule, take a break from telling the world how it should be arranging its affairs, and, you know, preach the gospel instead?
 

The Catholic bishops, no doubt, will have a snit fit over this.
 

Like her mother, Caroline probably smokes to stay thin.

Replies: @G. Poulin

That bird who got hit by Randy’s pitch should have been awarded first base. Not that the bird would have appreciated it.
 

https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.thewinfieldcollection.com/images/uploads/12278_14140_large.jpg

As they should forever be in my opinion. Throughout the history of baseball, the large majority of the rules that have changed over time were for the benefit of the hitter. For when left alone, the pitching slowly begins to dominate or find a way to be more effective within the rules. There are so many changes over the history of the game but I will list a few more recent ones:

Lowering the mound, allowing hitters to wear more and more armor, lighter, more dangerous bat specifications contributing to higher exit velocities, putting the pitcher's head at even more risk since it is difficult to pitch effectively with a helmet on. Most pitchers don't want to hurt anyone, but to compete at the highest levels, you need to take advantage of ever edge you can get. Intimidation is one of those tools, but so is being able to utilize the inner-half.

Currently, even though players these days are in better physical shape than ever before, carry more muscle on average than ever before (except maybe for the steroid era), and can utilize a juiced ball (yes, it is still juiced, just not as much as a couple of years ago) the fences at the major league stadiums now resemble high school fields and in some cases they are even smaller than this. So the total acreage that fielders have to cover is forever shrinking, while the league tries to find out why averages keep going down.

While some of this is surely due to the fact that pitchers are averaging over 94 M.P.H. in the Majors for the first time ever, I believe you could easily raise the number of hits if you simply had a more size appropriate playing surface like you could find in the past when individual ballparks had much more character and more unique dimensions.

Remember when Camden Yards started the new era of retro parks that were supposed to be great for the game because they are unique and no longer saucer shaped? Well, in 2025 the ballparks are more uniform than ever before, and baseball is poorer for it.

Thank you for this interesting article, sorry for the rant.

Listening to Bergoglio, where is the sign of supernatural faith, or how could anyone imagine his teachings are the continuation of those who came before him?

The Vicar of Christ (does he even recognize the title?) is responsible for SAFEGUARDING the Deposit of Faith. Who can believe the saints, clergy, religious, and Catholic faithful of the past, if given a view of these people bowing and scraping to the Jews and hanging the rainbow flag, would say "These are the true successors of the Apostles upholding the eternal truths of the Faith" - there are barely a few weeks go by that Bergoglio does not make some flagrantly Anti-Christian remark or gesture. As if he's on marionette strings, doing exactly what is expected by those who are seeking the destruction of the Catholic Church.

There are many who suggest that prophetic visions of the past gave us a view of these days (although others might counter that the Anti-Christians are mocking us by acting so as to fulfill these prophecies).

Not endorsing the Dimonds, but this is remarkable, in that it might be intended to fulfill the prophecy in apocalypse, in a mocking manner. (time stamp at 173)

https://youtu.be/G1o4V6gxXpk?si=GhAF_bqn_6u3W6QX&t=173

This is unquestionably sacrilege. Sacrilege is a matter of course among the rainbow flag endorsing clergy.

I was surprised to hear that Dylan wrote a song as cogent and catchy as Wagon Wheel, but when another commenter clarified that Dylan’s only contribution was the words to the chorus it made perfect sense.

“Rock me, mama like a wagon wheel”. What the hell does that mean? Typical Dylan non sequitur looking for a rhyme. Like “who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat”

And this guy won a Nobel prize? Puleeze…

Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D, @Dave Pinsen, @The Germ Theory of Disease, @YetAnotherAnon

Leonardo Da Vinci believed that Musuc was the most feeble of the arts. In that it vanished into silence. He did not reckon on the recording of sound. Thought he figured out the problem.

Yes, popular music is a confidence trick. It relies on the charisma of the performer. It can’t really outlast the death of fans who moon over the star.

Given all that popular tunes will have longevity. In what form they stick is a big question though. My guess is that their melody or progressions are recycled into new songs.

Replies: @G. Poulin

My uneducated guess is that the Beatles will still be listened to one hundred years from now. Dylan no, Stones maybe.

But more books and papers will be produced about Dylan's music.

In a way, Beatles and Dylan were opposites but were also complementary, yearning for what the other had in spades. Not just in the style of music but effect on the audience.

Beatles were a phenom and teenyboppers shrieked so loud that the Beatles couldn't even hear themselves play. It was pandemonium, a real mania. It was fun, it was exciting but also tiring and ultimately agonizing, planting the seeds of doubt in the Beatles, especially Lennon. Were they really making good music or turning on teenyboppers who just wanted to scream?

The Dylan scene was the opposite. The audience was respectful and attentive to the point of muted-ness. They listened to every word from Dylan's lips as churchgoers listen to a sermon or college students to professors; it was as if the audience wanted to take notes, as if Dylan had something important to say and worthy of concentration. Dylan no doubt appreciated such commitment among the fans, but he wasn't a square but a hip guy, which meant he also resented such dullards. In the documentary Don't Look Back, you can hear a pin drop in the concert hall as the audience listen with rapt attention. No mindless mobs of teenyboppers were they but serious youth into poetry, ideas, and how the world turns, aka pain in the behind. At times the audience laugh when Dylan jokes but it's almost on cue. There's hardly any spontaneity.

In their first success, the Beatles were too excited to care about their 'deficiencies', but the mania eventually became a routine, and respectable people didn't seem to take them seriously. And the mania couldn't last for long as no mania does. So, Beatles craved respect, the kind that Dylan had in spades. To last beyond the mania phase, they had to make music that people actually listened to with care. Then, no surprise that the Beatles finally quit touring in 1966 and focused solely on making music worthy of serious appraisal.

But Dylan faced the same problem from the opposite direction. He had the support of serious youth and was being written about in the arts/culture sections, but he saw where the cultural was going. Just like manias come and go, serious/earnest stuff also grow stale and dated. If Beatles had to sober up, he had to loosen up if he was to survive his initial incarnation as a folkie, protest singer, and social poet-critic.
It simply wasn't very cool(for long) to have as audience a bunch of kids who listened to every word as if it's going to appear on a quiz or exam. As a folkie, Dylan's every word was audible, but Rock music used words more like paint on a canvas than ink on paper. The feel counted more than the meaning. So, Dylan went electric, and his act got looser and more eccentric irrespective of audience expectations, albeit with mixed results as hecklers kept showing up to boo and denounce him, as recounted in "Once Were Brothers: Robbie Robertson and the Band".
Dylan too more or less left the concert scene shortly after the Beatles did. But the new sound made its mark and staked Dylan as a real player in the culture.

Thus, both the Beatles and Dylan were able to survive their initial incarnations.

The Stones had an interesting role to play between the Beatles/Dylan dichotomy. Though Stones fans were wild too, there was nothing like Stonemania. And like Dylan, Jagger was more literary-minded. Already by 1965, Stones's lyrics were beyond that of the Beatles. So, while Beatles and Dylan could be seen as cultural opposites, Stones were easily situated somewhere between them from the start. Paying tribute to tradition, more bohemian-intellectual in sensibility, but also pandering to the teenyboppers, especially the 'bad girls' among them.
And it helped that Jagger was perhaps the most playful character in all of Rock music, a naughty diplomat, a kind of bandit-aristocrat.
Also, his style of performance probably contributed to a richer range of sound. Dylan and Beatles were essentially singers only. They hardly moved on stage, whereas Jagger, a very expressive performer in concerts, felt the music in every inch of his body.

The style of performance surely also defined the music of the Who, almost unique in having three equally powerful showman on stage. Daltrey belted out songs and swung the microphone like a helicopter blade as if he's gonna take off, Townshend played a loud guitar and leapt all over stage, and Moon competed for dominance every step of the way. Luckily, Entwistle provided the stability to anchor the band.

Replies: @Colin Wright

I also wish the pope would shut the hell up, but for different reasons: he is ignorant about nearly everything, and largely unacquainted with Christianity.
 

The powers-that-be don't like Christian schools and would like to destroy them by any means. Forcing them to take in every sideshow freak and with the concomitant results that would come out of this, the hope would be that the publics' opinion of Christian schools would go down. They did this with the Catholic Church now their wanting to do it with all Christian churches and institutions. The aim is to have no public trust in any traditional institutions.

"The bread and wine don’t become “literally” the flesh and blood of Jesus."


Clearly wrong, although putting "literally" in parentheses could give you wiggle room.

There is a change in the SUBSTANCE, which has at times become visibly apparent.

https://youtu.be/OEq2JAszRWA

Replies: @deejay

They have been led to believe that there is a divine promise guaranteeing that the institutional structure of the Church will never lead them astray. In fact there is no such promise
 

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. [...]

In his defense, he's quite accustomed to being bit on the fanny... In between stuffings of course....

Good point. These members of Congress giving Netanyahu fifty-eight standing ovations to celebrate his slaughter of tens of thousands of defenseless women and children in Gaza are the same moral lepers crying out in pain over Russia’s defense of persecuted, helpless Russians in the Donbas—as if any of these disgusting members of Congress or talking heads on TV give a shit about anyone but themselves.

What you are failing to mention is that both Ukraine and Israel were both attacked first and both are trying to protect their people and will continue to attack wherever the enemy is located.

Replies: @Dumbo, @dagobaz

Pope Francis is not exactly my cup of tea either. He's put me through the paces of outrage, etc. Yet, the end result may be better than we think. He has helped many homosexuals change their mind about that path... and that has been his intention. He does not promote homo and the Church can never go that direction no matter what any alarmist might think. His encyclicals are beautiful. He urges us to make sure we always thoroughly understand the position of our opponent before we proceed. He's convinced people involved with various problems that he's really listening which helps them to trust him. So lets consider that the Holy Father is receiving light.

Replies: @Tennessee Jed

Too many “practicing Catholics” think and act like members of some third-rate personality cult. They need to grow a brain and learn how to use it.
 

"Israel seizure of Syrian territory"

look on the bright side: so far, by seizing Syrian land adjacent to Golan Heights (which is also territory stolen from Syria) and continuing to bomb out former SAA weapons warehouses, the Zionists seem to be going out of their way to antagonize the new - and supposedly Izrahell-friendly - Jihadi regime.

to continue: if Zion continues on this path, and if the current Jew-stooge Sunni regimes in Jordan and Egypt are eventually overthrown and replaced (remember, the Cairo blob was briefly knocked over by Islamists during the Arab Spring back when) there might eventually be an anti-Izrahell SUNNI "axis of resistance" a good deal more effective than the now-collapsed Shi'a fakery. That is, we'd see Sunni warriors going to bat for fellow Sunnis in Palestine (if the Jews don't kill them all in the meantime)....not Shi'a whom, as I pointed out repeatedly along the way, were not going to walk the plank for a hostile faction they've been fighting for the last 1,000 years.

Biden's statement before Bork was nominated for the Supreme Court, that he was just so good as a lower Federal court judge that Biden would have to vote for him if he was nominated, reminds me of this Hunter Biden pardon mess.

His handlers told him what to say and do, and he did it.