dakine let me make myself clearer on what I meant by religious issue. Christians consider homosexuality a sin and marriage is between a male and female only. The same sex marriage will NOT FORCE any Christian preacher to marry a same sex couple nor will they be FORCED to open their church up to such a wedding.
That is not in the Bill. As a believer I would have no problem going to a same sex marriage held where it is held. I would have no problem with a married same sex couple coming to the church I went too. I would not attend a church that would not allow a sinner to enter its door would you? The Christian Church 100 years ago had a totally different doctrine about divorce and divorced people even 50 years ago it was different than it is today. The bible has not changed the church has changed. This Bill does not change the church at all and religious freedom is not hurt in the least. I think Jesus would of went to a same sex marriage and He surely would want same sex married people going to church or homosexuals or adulterous people, divorce people and people who are shacked up. People who are selfish, greedy, and all other nature of sin.
What the GOP is doing is pandering to the religious vote. Does Donald Trump care what Jesus wants in a marriage or a divorce? How many of those running for president as Christians understand that Paul's letters were written to Christian's ONLY about behavior. No Christian should marry one of the same sex but Paul says we are not to avoid people of the world. I think for a Christian who runs a business to refuse service to a same sex wedding is to avoid a chance to show the Love of God to them and leave them alone to do business with someone who does not know God. You will not "catch" same sex marriage.
Same sex marriage is between consenting adults. Pedophilia is viewed as wrong by a vast majority of people believers or not and you really use a terrible apples and oranges example.
Grump you ask Lake that efforts by "LIBERALS" to eradicate symbols of the CSA is like ISIL. Do you call the present Gov of SC a liberal? The 4 Govorners who signed on to her idea as all Liberals? You actually see this as Liberal verses Conservative issue do you? So ALL you conservatives like to fly the battle flag do you?
I doubt that and many clear thinking conservatives would join and have joined in an effort to end this long overdue practice. I guess the Governor of Miss or was it Ala. a Liberal lol.
You are so centered on your THEM Vs US idea on everything you see that you use the term Liberal to on this issue cover a lot of not even RHINO GOP but hard core conservatives that see this as not a Liberal vs. Conservative issue but as one of right or wrong. You may disagree and be a liberal or a conservative can you not or is this Flag a bedrock of Conservative idealism?
How about it you conservatives do you consider any Conservatives who favor removing the battle flag a Liberal? Or perhaps just an American that sees the downside that the flag represents to millions of other Americans?
dakine clearly Lake is a little upset with the judge as he can't even get his name correct. I prefer to look at the logic the judge uses in his decision. He almost always is a States right kind of guy.
I doubt he would rule that slavery should still be up to the states but that and Jim Crowe laws were based on the right of the State to control the FREEDOM of the folks of that State and not the Federal Gov. Freedom a word often used by GOP types when it comes to gun control not so much when considering the Freedom of a women to have an abortion which again the States are trying their best to wittle down the Federal law as much as they can get away with.
Now we come to back to State rights, Gay union question. Instead of looking at this as a Freedom issue the GOP looks at it as a religious issue although they do not have the honesty to admit. So they fall back on Marriage has always been between male and female and thus what has always been should always be. Slavery was Always been until it was done away with. Women rights was always never and now they have rights. So much for the always was always will be as logic it fails the logic test totally. Time changes all things except Gay unions I suppose. Now let us look at Jim Crowe laws controlled by the states. Freedom to eat where you want denied. Freedom to sleep where you want denied. Freedom to get equal education denied. Freedom to get a drink of water anywhere there is water denied. All denied by the State rights doctrine. All declared long ago by a SC to be unconstitutional. Now comes the 4 judges and rules that the states should have the right not to control who a person loves as even the GOP right wing knows this can not be done. But they do believe the states has the rights to tell folks who love each and care for each other and share their lives together and all that protected by Federal Law and upheld now the 4 say Yes but they can not marry. Logic? none at all.
This make the second time that Chief Justice Roberts has shown that while he is indeed a conservative thinking individual he seems to be the old style conservative. He dives into a law like a lawyer first and a conservative second which is exactly what a judge should do. He clearly comes out in today decision as a guy that tends to be a deep thinker. He turned the words of the other 4 conservative judges words against them in the last ACA case to base this decision. In other words he said to his 4 other conservative judges you can't have it both under law it does not work that way. He took their own reasoning as they furnished in writing to base his decision on this latest case on ACA. Rather you agree with Justice Roberts or not one thing for sure he established himself as a justice who knows how to dive into the words of a law and let the chips fall.
The GOP has long cried that the SC is not suppose to write law or create law and that is the job of the Congress and yet in the last 4 years we see case after case being filed by the GOP supports to try to get the SC to rewrite the law to suit the agenda of the GOP. Roberts clearly said today if you want me to do that you better be able to show me by law why I should.
It will be interesting to see what the vote is on same sex marriage. 6-3 on ACA surprised most who follow the court and was expected to be the closest of the two cases. I can honestly say I am awaiting to see what Roberts has to say on his findings on the case.
scs I said long ago that the South was racist and the south voted Demo across the board. However if you think that GOP voters and elected officials in the south were not racist then you are deluded. In order to win an election in the south you had to be a racist because racism was the LAW. Both Parties in the South were racist. If you were black in the South back in the day you voted for either a racist Demo party or a racist GOP party. However the Demo party even while racist gave the blacks labor laws and SS and some states provided "charity Hospitals" paid for by the state for poor of every race. Huey P. Long was like all of his age a racist politician but he was considered pro working man (black and white) and taxed the rich to give poor folks more benefits so he got not only the poor white votes but blacks as well.
In Texas back in the 50's and 60's the only party to win was the Demo. It had two factions within it. One the old conservative Demo party the other the Liberal Demo party. John Tower was the first Senator of GOP since the post civil war days of reconstruction. Tower was GOP and Yarborough was the Demo, Yarborough was the last Liberal Demo to be elected to the Senate in Texas. He was the only Senator in the South of either party to vote Yes to the CRA.
I am not going to let you try to change what I posted that the South was racist in Both parties. The rest of the Nation that was not the case. Both Demo and GOP had racist and non racist outside the South the Demo party just had more non racist than the GOP as my post about non South voting on the CRA proved.
Live with it you can not change facts and they are clear. Both Lake and I agree that the South was racist and they were by Law. If you were elected to office you had to obey the law. The Demo party was not any more racist than the GOP as both obeyed the racist Jim Crowe laws until the SC struck it down. (Demo controlled SC too)
My point which you refused to admit was the SOUTH was almost 100% against the CRA in both parties.
The south was totally racist at that times are you going to deny that? So you had elected racist officials in the South that of course were going to vote against as their racist voters demanded of them.
Take away the South from that and the Demo party indeed did have more Senators and House members voting for it than against it. Take away the still racist South from the National scene and you would have a totally different country as the backbone of GOP is the South. They have increased their strength in other areas I will admit that but without the South and its racist voters the GOP would not be able to be the extreme right party that it has become on the Strength of the Southern vote. The West has helped them but the South has remained the area they count on regardless who they run for president and why it will be hard for any Southern GOP to get the nod. They do not need a canidate from the South to carry a state with fla. being the possible exception as the South will vote GOP regardless of who the Demo's run.
Just to set the record straight scs you know in the interest of truth I have never said that with the South included the GOP % for the CRA was not more than the Demo %. It was by my posting of the vote outside of the South to show the true way the Nation was going. Answer me this? Do you consider the vote against the CRA to be a racist vote? I do do you? Look and see how many of those in the Demo party in the South went over to the GOP after that vote. The South was racist to the core and remains racist today perhaps not by the same % but racism is easy to find down South.
scs you can't admit when your wrong can you lol typical of you boys on the right. The fact is that the RED STATE represent the REDS who sent them to office while the Blues do the same to represent the Blues interest and belief's. There long since ceased to be a NATIONAL interest except when FDR declared war on Japan and Germany. GW Bush distorted ideas about Iraq got the majority of Congress to support War but even that was more a party line vote. The Parties determine what the national interest will be. And the parties know that in order to get elected and have power they must pander themselves to the desires of the people in the Area that Congressman and Senators run for elections.
Your little cute display of How the US is governed is a joke and you are hopeless if you actually believe that in realty that is the way it happens. The GOP panders to the rich, religious issues, racial issues and gun control and so called FREE MARKET. That is supported more in the South than in any other area and always has been even when south was Demo it was the same issues. The Demo party MOVED away from its old issues and left behind the South when they did. The Demo party was the party of the working men and still is and the GOP is the party of the ownership of those that hire workers. In order to get workers to vote against their own interest the GOP brings into its platform religion, guns, abortion, anti gay and stances that are anti minority and anti poor. 47% of America does not matter to the GOP as Romney said this to a crowd of very rich GOP backers who gave money to win power to make sure the 47% continued to be overlooked.
You go and quote your little civics class info like you alone discovered that and maybe one day you may wake up and see how Power, money and the real world run things but you already know surely?
scs Congress does not represent our nation as you claim. Each congressperson reppresents their dist. first or they would not get reelected. Each Senator represents their State first or again they would not get re elected. Congress Votes on what will be National Law and National interest that is true but unfortunely their first loyality is not to the USA but the area that elects them. Since you are not a native Texans and did not take Texas History in school I guess you know little about Sam Houston who while President of Texas and later Senator of Texas put the USA ahead of Texas or considered them both the same and thus did not vote to succeed from the Union and resigned from the Senate Seat instead of joining the Traitiors of Texas that went against Houston's beloved USA. Ralph Yarborough was the Demo Sen of Tex. and John Tower the GOP at the Voting rights time. Ralph voted yes the ONLY Southern Senator of either party to do so and was not reelected the next race and Tower continued on his political career.
The point that the votes clearly shows is that the South both GOP and Demo were racist to the core and most remain so today or they would not get reelected. Take the southern votes away and the other 37 states voted yes Demo more than GOP in the voting rights vote. The south was and remains racist thinking. Today NO Southern politician of either party would dare vote against such a bill as it would expose them as the racist they feel their dist. and State are but by flying a confederate battle flag on state grounds shows that the voters want to see it and it will show up in the votes to end it if in fact it does pass in SC. They will tell every lie they can to try to make it for other reasons than racism but in the end that flag stands for what the Klan uses it for in their rallies and EVERYONE born and raised in the South understands that.
scs If you want to go back to 1861 or even 1964 to prove your point and ignore the 50 years since A Demo President passed the Civil rights act. Here is the actual break down on the votes in the house and Senate.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
As you can tell not one Southern GOP voted for the act. and more Demo's in the north that GOP in the North voted for the act. So much for your idea that it was a Demo only resistance. It was and remains a SOUTHERN resistance. After the vote the South changed from Demo to GOP because the white vote changed due to the civil rights act and other civil rights issue that were championed by first JFK then LBJ both Demo's. In a capitalist country like America equality can not be seperated from MONEY. If you want true equality among the races or sex for that matter then the first step must be eco equality. Without money their is not private schools or higher eduction not to mention ivy league schools or other "high dollar and sought after named U. degrees. Only Laws forced the civil rights act and the voting right act not some humane concern for "equality" as you bleat out. Without Gov. troops with bayonets Little Rock would not of integrated and without Federal Marshals and troops the South would not of accepted this desired "equality" you talk about. Ask your buddy rje if he favors "equality" for all races.
Nice try on ships at sea but before 1861 there was no CSA to flay a flag and Northern states had laws against slavery.
nikk unfortunely your question about the morals, integrity and character of those who value a job over all other things is spot on. Slavery had been illegal in England for years before the civil war and even when legal it was not considered proper behavior for a "Proper Englishman" to engage in (In England in the colonies OK)
So those in Manchester understood what American's today refuse to understand. By buying slave produced cotton they were aiding and abetting the illegal act of slavery. Today American's aid and abet the abuse of children in foreign countries with any concern at all. It is illegal in the USA as it was in Manchester however in the USA we will buy whatever we want made by child labor or slave labor without any guilt. The good folks of Manchester were not to be in the same class of people as low life American's are today. God bless them.
So if I don't mind for my benefit seeing a child abused or the use of slave labor in the name of Globalist Capitalism then why should I care about what I do to make money? Is one who knows children are being abused and slaves are being made to make my sneakers or shirt or whatever "Toy" I have to have then why should I not sell drugs to some adult who wants them or pimp out a women to another who wants her?
Oh no I am too good to do that is my cry. I will turn a blind eye to child abuse but be offended by the idea of selling weed to someone or providing money to a willing women and a willing client. It seems to me that real free inter-prize capitalism is in the latter where labor is not forced and buyers are free to choose and pay an agreed price for the product. No slave or child has such options while working for Globalist contractors.
Walt Disney hired contractors who abused children and if you believe they didn't know then you are excusing yourself as much as them. Your right humanity has lost a lot since Lincoln wrote that letter to folks of Manchester. All for the worse.
dakine Slavery is far from over and the Globalist Corp's know this and make a ton of money off of slaves every year. They don't provide on cent toward medical or any other humane treatment since most of them have "shadow" contractors that do the dirty work for them. Children are being "slaved out" in more way than the sex trade which gets all the attention. A sex slave child will be clothed and keep healthy enough to make money will a Nike slave or ADM slave or you fill in the name of the Globalist child abusers that we encourage and buy from every day care nothing about their "contract labor" and dismiss their any abuse as "We didn't know that was going on" when they get caught.
Who owns them is of no concern to me the owning of slaves is what keep the system going. A few good examples of "Good Masters" does not excuse the fact that humans are not cattle and anyone who employees or uses another human as a worker should be required to provide a safe humane work place and pay enough money for the labor to live. To do less is exploitation of the worse kind and that is what the American min wage payers are doing and then saying to tax payers you pick up the humane part of what we do not furnish as good little capitalist. Then folks like scs and others on this list see no wrong in such an eco system. I doubt they would of had a problem with owning slaves back in the day they were legal. Clearly it is not a matter of humane treatment but of people at the core but pure capitalism to exploit those caught in low pay slavery in the USA and PURE SLAVERY in other countries that Globalist exploit. Excuse it if you like but the day will come when folks will look back at our generations of abuse of children and wonder "What kind of people were they for money they exploited children and others how inhumane" Just as we say about slave owners today from the days of old when money ruled and slavery was legal. We really haven't changed that much have we?
xray I picked a 3 buck price for before or during the next quarter. If rates go up or stay where they are or do not drop below 50,000 and 30,000 I think you will see 4 bucks within 6-9 months. That to depends on how many new tankers they flood the market with. Greed usually is their undoing if the past repeats itself. Granted the flow of oil out of the Middle east area should indeed pick up not go down from where it is now. However nothing in the Middle East is for certain is it? The supply and demand of oil will continue to drift toward balance as long as the prices stay below 70 bucks. OPEC will be able to keep the flow going as it is now to make sure they control the price and I do not think they want to see it go above 65 bucks at least for a while. I am not convinced that the USA and SA are doing this as a political objective as well. SA is helping us put the screws to Russia and we are once again carrying the water for them in the Middle East with our boots on the ground protecting them and going against their enemies. I could be off base on this but it sure seems strange that all of sudden as Russia was doing a lot of aggressive behavior paid for by selling oil that the bottom drops out of oil. If not planned it sure worked out well for the USA Gov. maybe not US oil companies and investors but the Gov sure got a lot of help with Russia.
I think only a day trader would be selling FRO now and anyone will make money that buys FRO now IMHO.
oropan So lets say we make it a non grandfathered law that anyone who burns a US flag and who owns a Confederate flag both be shot for traitors? Be a lot less GOP voting in 2016 if we could get such a law passed. Viet Nam triggered almost all the flag burning and once it was over with so was the flag burning. Now 150 years later #$%$ ant USA right wing racist still fly proudly their Losing flag. Only a real losers would associate with a losing flag and a losing cause. but such is the mind set of right wing racist who wave them with pride.
How about it oropan you for such a law lol.
No way that FRO, NAT and SFL are not going to have as good a quarter as last quarter with these kinds of rates. The share price may not be showing it right now but the closer we get to the quarter the more the price will show it is my guess. Over 3 bucks sooner than later
Grump nice try to twist and bend when I back you into a corner you buddy Lake will try to make you the winner on this even if he has to take up for the GOP to do it lol. The fact is that both those agencies were created by a Demo controlled Congress and both Nixon and Ford are Rhino's by today GOP standards and we are talking about FOX and the GOP of today not over 35 years ago but nice try Mr. Deceiver.
I you read my post which you did you would of noticed that I used Texas as an example of a state controlled by the GOP for the last 20 years and how much they have fought both EPA and OSHA by granting state exemptions after exemptions to get around the State of Texas on clean air and water act. The GOP controlled state of Texas by a huge vote prohibited any city or county in Texas from making Fracking illegal as several cities had already done. So much for them being for small local Gov. and against Big Gov. The same bunch of nut jobs also refused to pass a law against texting and driving saying they were afraid of unneeded big Gov law (their own state ran big Gov I guess) You love to point out hypocrites here is your chance.
Once again you assume that I do not pray for more understanding I do and unlike you do not imply that I have all the truth. Most of what I believe I read right from the word of God and take it for what it says.
It says that anyone who can not say Jesus Christ is Lord is not of Him and you are unable to say that so I merely say what the word of God says. All you would have to do is say that Jesus Christ is your Lord and you are a Christian but you do not. Don't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Even Lake says what he is with pride but you avoid, hide and twist and distort. as you attempt to do in this post.
But that is what you always do when you reply to a post of mine. Jesus Christ is Lord of my life and I pray one day you can say that about your life more than that I need not know right now.
scs I have reread your post on forgiveness and I can not find anywhere on it where you talk about any benefit other than to the person doing the forgiving. But as you said you agree with me in what I posted about forgiveness I will accept that and move on. The person to be forgiven does not need to ask or even think that they need forgiveness as the guy in SC clearly thinks he did right at least at this time.
As you Forgive others you will be forgiven is pretty clear but it is not a Command that Must be done but a revaluation of how God will be reflected by our behavior in forgiving others. To be Christ like in our life we should become or strive to become a person of forgiveness. I see no way that a Christian should EVER set on a capital punishment jury, be a judge or in any way get involved in judgement of others. Judgement is God's the bible clearly teaches. To in anyway be a part in taking a life of a non believer is to end any chance of repentance and salvation for that person which is not going every where to preach the gospel to save lives not take them. I understand that the Gov. has the right to take a life by law if they choose to have such a law. Most of the rest of the world does not practice capital punishment. A life without parole I have no problem with at all as they will as long as they live have a chance to receive Christ and can in fact have a powerful minister within prison as many have had. Many Christian have appeared before a judge to plead for mercy to the person who was convicted of the death of one of their love ones. This is forgiveness in action and mercy and compassion in action all attributes of the fruit of the Spirit in a believers life. God does not want justice he wants mercy and so should we. Yes even to the guy in SC who killed those brothers and sisters of mine and maybe he will come to salvation while in prison?
grump you keep saying what I have said over and over again. I do hypocritial things which make me a hypocrite so do you but you don't admit where I do and I ask for forgiveness and try not to repeat my error and yes I often do I am not perfect and always correct like you.
As far as EPA and OSHA are concerned go back and look at the voting record of the GOP on those two agencies. Look at which party members always want to cut funds and manpower or do away with altogether.
You are being hypocritical in your answer as you being a GOP voter know good and well that the party is anti Gov regs which is what EPA and OSHA are known for. It was the GOP who voted against clean air and water act not the Demo party. It is the GOP in Texas that fight against anything that threatens business interest such fracking recently when the state ran by the GOP totally made it against the law for its own counties and cities to enact laws within their Governmental area of RESPONSIBILITY to their citizens that would stop fracking. Two studies by well known and respected Universities have said that waste water injected deep into the ground does cause earthquakes.
Anyone on this list knows which party fights against anything the EPA and OSHA does but you somehow try to deny it. You are either totally without a clue or a Liar and your not stupid but you are driven to be a Liar.
I will continue to pray for you since pray is your only hope.
trader I do not think a .10 cent dividend would cause a double but it would add value. Frankly if next quarter does not include a dividend then I will start taking some profit from FRO and putting it into NAT or SFL which does produce a dividend. If they end up making 15-25 next quarter which they should then a 10 dividend should be on the table if not more. Mr. F used to do business this way and if he has changed it may be time to change with him.