Why would anybody vote for such stupidity? You know the reason. Think about it if you do such a thing.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Monday, November 2, 2026
The commies want the refiners to come back
Yeah, they want the refiners to work for nothing. Get this, they want the refiners to risk everything and get nothing back for their risk and all their work. Typical thieving attitude. But if they need to, they can act nice for a little while in order to fool the public. For some of the public, that ain't hard.
Why would anybody vote for such stupidity? You know the reason. Think about it if you do such a thing.
Why would anybody vote for such stupidity? You know the reason. Think about it if you do such a thing.
The closing argument for Republicans
American Thinker, Howard J. Warner:
Comment:
One of the commenters on that site said if the health care is free, then how come our taxes will be going up??? But that won't happen if we win. By all rights, we should win BIGLY. It may not happen, but if it does, those who are voting against the progress of the last two years will regret it bigly.
Good point about the taxes. There's no such thing as a free lunch, and it is yet another one of the commies' lies.
With record numbers of early voting then, it is incumbent upon the Republican candidates to know exactly what’s at stake.
Comment:
One of the commenters on that site said if the health care is free, then how come our taxes will be going up??? But that won't happen if we win. By all rights, we should win BIGLY. It may not happen, but if it does, those who are voting against the progress of the last two years will regret it bigly.
Good point about the taxes. There's no such thing as a free lunch, and it is yet another one of the commies' lies.
Dubya hasn't endorsed Paxton
11/2/26:
Given the new information that has arisen, shouldn't Dubya endorse Paxton like his father did when he made a mistake? He should apologize for his mistake in not doing so sooner. That would show good character, which he claims that he has.
You might say it would be a death-bed conversion. Evidently he cannot admit mistakes. It seems that I've heard that criticism before about Dubya. It's getting late, and the time for smirking is over. If he wants to have any credibility left, he should apologize while there is still time for it to matter. Confirmed no endorsement as of this writing.
10/31/26:
But a front organization has. Not only that, a bit of a scandal has surfaced?
These days, it is a resume enhancer for theDems commies.
The folks who are supposed to be impressed with Talarico's religious "bonafides" might be somewhat embarrassed, but who knows?
Given the new information that has arisen, shouldn't Dubya endorse Paxton like his father did when he made a mistake? He should apologize for his mistake in not doing so sooner. That would show good character, which he claims that he has.
You might say it would be a death-bed conversion. Evidently he cannot admit mistakes. It seems that I've heard that criticism before about Dubya. It's getting late, and the time for smirking is over. If he wants to have any credibility left, he should apologize while there is still time for it to matter. Confirmed no endorsement as of this writing.
10/31/26:
But a front organization has. Not only that, a bit of a scandal has surfaced?
These days, it is a resume enhancer for the
The folks who are supposed to be impressed with Talarico's religious "bonafides" might be somewhat embarrassed, but who knows?
From the treasured tomes of Whatsomatta U: ( updated)
I submitted the question to the guru of all knowledge, and henceforth is its reply:
10/29/26:
The movie "Book of Daniel", starring Lance Herikensen and directed by Anna Zielenski, depicts the prophet Daniel in the Bible. Can you determine how accurate this story is?
Brave AI:
The 2013 film The Book of Daniel, directed by Anna Zielinski and starring Lance Henriksen, is widely considered **biblically accurate** regarding its adaptation of the first six chapters of the Book of Daniel. Critics and reviewers note that the film sticks very closely to the scriptural account, faithfully depicting key events such as the fiery furnace, the writing on the wall, and the lions' den.
However, the movie takes some **creative liberties** for narrative structure:
* It frames the story as Daniel recounting his life to King Cyrus, a dramatic device not found in the Bible.
* It elevates the role of Cyrus, depicting him as being convinced by Daniel to allow the Jews to return to Jerusalem, whereas the biblical text attributes this decision solely to Cyrus.
* It includes a Christ-like figure in the furnace, interpreting the "fourth man" through a Christian lens rather than leaving it ambiguous as the text does.
Overall, while production values are modest and some historical details are stylized, the film is praised for its **faithfulness to the core biblical narrative** and its avoidance of altering the theological messages of the source material.
Comment:
The prophet Daniel fits in with the Messiah, does it not? Actually, this question is not posed to Brave AI; but rather, one in which I just thought up...
I'm writing this because I'm not that knowledgeable about such questions. Assuming that the AI can do this competently, it should be a easy and fairly comprehensive source in order to acquaint someone who is ignorant with the Bible.
I might get myself in a bit of hot water for writing that. Update later in the morning:
More movies analyzed here using the GAB AI. It is perhaps more efficient to just link to the page as opposed to reproducing it here.
I looked at some Biblical movies, including one that I mentioned before, and maybe one or two that I haven't. One has to be careful about the information that one partakes in. The goal is to be ACCURATE and PRECISE. Hopefully that can be accomplished thusly without having to consult Biblical Scholars directly. Of course, this may not be the BEST WAY, but it may be better than nothing providing that it is in accordance with the aforementioned goal.
11/2/26: P.S. :
A little background on where Daniel is mentioned in the New Testament. It appears that the education on this subject is sorely needed.
To wit, the New Testament text:
BRAVE AI:
**Matthew 24:15** (ESV):
> "So when you see **the abomination that causes desolation**, spoken of through the prophet Daniel, **standing in the holy place** (let the reader understand)…"
This is the pivotal sign in Jesus' **Olivet Discourse** (Matthew 24:3–28), answering the disciples' question about the temple's destruction and the sign of his coming. It functions as the trigger for the "great tribulation" (v. 21) and the command to flee (v. 16).
**Key details of the verse:**
- **"Abomination"** (*bdelugma*) — something that causes loathing; an idolatrous offense against God.
- **"Of desolation"** (*eremōseōs*, genitive) — the abomination *causes* desolation; it is the agent of devastation.
- **"Standing in the holy place"** (*hestōs en tō topō toῦ hagiou*) — the abomination is set up *in* the temple itself. The verb *hestōs* is flexible enough to refer to either an idolatrous image or a person establishing himself there.
- **"Let the reader understand"** — a parenthetical urging the reader to recognize the Danielic allusion. Luke's parallel (21:20) effectively decodes it: "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies."
**The Danielic source:**
Jesus draws on Daniel 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11, where the phrase describes a pagan ruler who halts the daily sacrifice and sets up an abomination in the sanctuary. The first historical fulfillment was Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 BC, who erected an altar to Zeus in the Jerusalem Temple.
**Main interpretive positions:**
| View | Referent | |---|---| | **Preterist** | The Roman armies and their idolatrous imperial standards during the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Luke 21:20 is taken as the inspired clarification. | | **Futurist / Dispensational** | The Antichrist (or his image) desecrating a future rebuilt temple at the midpoint of a seven-year tribulation period (Daniel's 70th week). | | **Two-stage** | Antiochus was a type; AD 70 was a partial fulfillment; a final, greater desecration is still future. |
The verse is the hinge point of the entire discourse — everything before it (vv. 4–14) describes general signs, and everything after it (vv. 16–28) describes the urgent escape and the coming "great tribulation."
10/29/26:
The movie "Book of Daniel", starring Lance Herikensen and directed by Anna Zielenski, depicts the prophet Daniel in the Bible. Can you determine how accurate this story is?
Brave AI:
The 2013 film The Book of Daniel, directed by Anna Zielinski and starring Lance Henriksen, is widely considered **biblically accurate** regarding its adaptation of the first six chapters of the Book of Daniel. Critics and reviewers note that the film sticks very closely to the scriptural account, faithfully depicting key events such as the fiery furnace, the writing on the wall, and the lions' den.
However, the movie takes some **creative liberties** for narrative structure:
* It frames the story as Daniel recounting his life to King Cyrus, a dramatic device not found in the Bible.
* It elevates the role of Cyrus, depicting him as being convinced by Daniel to allow the Jews to return to Jerusalem, whereas the biblical text attributes this decision solely to Cyrus.
* It includes a Christ-like figure in the furnace, interpreting the "fourth man" through a Christian lens rather than leaving it ambiguous as the text does.
Overall, while production values are modest and some historical details are stylized, the film is praised for its **faithfulness to the core biblical narrative** and its avoidance of altering the theological messages of the source material.
Comment:
The prophet Daniel fits in with the Messiah, does it not? Actually, this question is not posed to Brave AI; but rather, one in which I just thought up...
I'm writing this because I'm not that knowledgeable about such questions. Assuming that the AI can do this competently, it should be a easy and fairly comprehensive source in order to acquaint someone who is ignorant with the Bible.
I might get myself in a bit of hot water for writing that. Update later in the morning:
More movies analyzed here using the GAB AI. It is perhaps more efficient to just link to the page as opposed to reproducing it here.
I looked at some Biblical movies, including one that I mentioned before, and maybe one or two that I haven't. One has to be careful about the information that one partakes in. The goal is to be ACCURATE and PRECISE. Hopefully that can be accomplished thusly without having to consult Biblical Scholars directly. Of course, this may not be the BEST WAY, but it may be better than nothing providing that it is in accordance with the aforementioned goal.
11/2/26: P.S. :
A little background on where Daniel is mentioned in the New Testament. It appears that the education on this subject is sorely needed.
To wit, the New Testament text:
BRAVE AI:
**Matthew 24:15** (ESV):
> "So when you see **the abomination that causes desolation**, spoken of through the prophet Daniel, **standing in the holy place** (let the reader understand)…"
This is the pivotal sign in Jesus' **Olivet Discourse** (Matthew 24:3–28), answering the disciples' question about the temple's destruction and the sign of his coming. It functions as the trigger for the "great tribulation" (v. 21) and the command to flee (v. 16).
**Key details of the verse:**
- **"Abomination"** (*bdelugma*) — something that causes loathing; an idolatrous offense against God.
- **"Of desolation"** (*eremōseōs*, genitive) — the abomination *causes* desolation; it is the agent of devastation.
- **"Standing in the holy place"** (*hestōs en tō topō toῦ hagiou*) — the abomination is set up *in* the temple itself. The verb *hestōs* is flexible enough to refer to either an idolatrous image or a person establishing himself there.
- **"Let the reader understand"** — a parenthetical urging the reader to recognize the Danielic allusion. Luke's parallel (21:20) effectively decodes it: "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies."
**The Danielic source:**
Jesus draws on Daniel 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11, where the phrase describes a pagan ruler who halts the daily sacrifice and sets up an abomination in the sanctuary. The first historical fulfillment was Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 BC, who erected an altar to Zeus in the Jerusalem Temple.
**Main interpretive positions:**
| View | Referent | |---|---| | **Preterist** | The Roman armies and their idolatrous imperial standards during the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Luke 21:20 is taken as the inspired clarification. | | **Futurist / Dispensational** | The Antichrist (or his image) desecrating a future rebuilt temple at the midpoint of a seven-year tribulation period (Daniel's 70th week). | | **Two-stage** | Antiochus was a type; AD 70 was a partial fulfillment; a final, greater desecration is still future. |
The verse is the hinge point of the entire discourse — everything before it (vv. 4–14) describes general signs, and everything after it (vv. 16–28) describes the urgent escape and the coming "great tribulation."
James Carville endorses El Sayed for US Senator from Michigan
Funny, I read that wrong the first time. The first time, I read it like he endorsed the GOP guy Mike Rogers. But no. I verified who he endorsed in this Brave AI dialogue here.
What does it mean? To me, it means that Carville is a communist. He has gone full blown commie. Not only that, but in true commie fashion, he's a liar. Not only a liar, but a damned lying sack of pooh.Why would Michiganders choose a commie to lead them? I call it another doofus move to do that.
The Doofus factor: The Wealth Tax and other foolish economic policies
Collyfornia's proposed wealth tax highlights their anti-business attitude, and is fostering the out migration to other states. Electorally, it may figure in the outcome of the mid-terms, as voters sour on socialist excesses.
It is a doofus move if it is intended to raise taxes. If you destroy the tax base, then how do you raise tax revenue? The wealth tax would do far worse than just drive people out. It may well drive the state into bankruptcy. How? The question is how do you run an economy if you are forcing people to pay taxes on monies that haven't even received yet, and thereby forcing them into bankruptcy or default for failure to pay this tax?
Another doofus move was to drive out 2 oil refineries in the past year. They did this with their anti-oil attitude. How does it make gasoline more affordable if you don't refine it, and have to have it transported into the state?
It is a doofus move if it is intended to raise taxes. If you destroy the tax base, then how do you raise tax revenue? The wealth tax would do far worse than just drive people out. It may well drive the state into bankruptcy. How? The question is how do you run an economy if you are forcing people to pay taxes on monies that haven't even received yet, and thereby forcing them into bankruptcy or default for failure to pay this tax?
Another doofus move was to drive out 2 oil refineries in the past year. They did this with their anti-oil attitude. How does it make gasoline more affordable if you don't refine it, and have to have it transported into the state?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)