Ah, the piglet post of disdain...
Posted By: Observer on 2007-12-27
In Reply to: I borrowed that statement from you by the way. - piglet
I can always count on you.
If you had read the post a little closer, you would have seen that I said that John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson did NOT run from war...the word "except" is the big one you missed. You might try reading the whole thing and understanding it before going off on me...but you are so eager to do the latter you won't take time to do the former. John Kennedy put all the players in Nam including helicopter support and Green Berets on his watch...Johnson picked up the ball after Kennedy was assassinated. So he actually started it.
That being said, other than that ill-conceived venture...I think John Kennedy was a good President and a decent man, and if liberals now were more like he was then...suffice it to say I would understand them much better.
You keep saying conservative party. There is no conservative party that I know of. I would agree that the Republican party right now is NOT conservative (at least the upper level politicos) and I have said that numerous times...and I am not a registered Republican except at primary times...as I have also said numerous times. Selective memory, piglet?
And I don't really CARE if you want to call emancipation a LIBERAL idea, and voting for African Americans and women LIBERAL ideas. You can say that until you are blue in the face. It was conservatives who put them into motion, made them work, and they are sustained today. Abraham Lincoln was as conservative by description as there is. He was a deeply religious man and a deeply moral man. His opposition to slavery was on the basis that it was a deeply moral wrong. Until the government got into the social programs business, the majority of programs geared toward the poor and disadvantaged were...GASP...religious programs, also prompted by a deep moral provocation from a place of humility, to serve the needs of the less fortunate, and they did a good job of it. And you can say those are LIBERAL ideas, but they were put into action by CONSERVATIVE people. Ideas are fine, but ACTIONS are what counts.
You have very little tolerance for anyone who does not share your beliefs. No wait..I take that back. Zero tolerance. lol.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
GREAT post, Piglet....you said it 4 me..sm
this sentence you said....you summed it up for me, what I feel and my thoughts
*Pro-life to me means anti-war, anti-starvation, anti-subjugation, etcetera, for all living things.*
YOU_GOT_IT!!
Fantastic post Piglet. From Whorn s/m
Thanks for your post piglet. It seems a number of us share concerns regarding the current system. I currently have health insurance, but due to my age of over 55 and a few minor preexisting conditions I am unable to secure health insurance for below $13.000,00 a year. I am able to deduct 100% of my premiun on my taxes. I pay no federal tax as a result, but the lessened dollar amout off of off my taxes is about $150.00 a year, and does really make a dent in my $!3,000 annual health premium.
Nice post piglet. All your points are well made.
I agree 100% with what you had to say. Too many Americans have been brainwashed by fear, and I think many Americans who are against universal healthcare are just buying into the Chicken Little syndrome that is so prevelent in this country lately. The sky will fall if all of our citizens have access to affordable healthcare!
As you said, using France's system as a model does not mean we have to do everything exactly as France has, but they are a great example of a system that is working.
My disdain for you and your ignorance
How DO you live with yourself?
Disdain? I could think of a few other choice descriptives.
Yes, I know you are not registered republican. But you are most definitely the definition of a modern conservative. You like to pretend that you are different than who you really are for the simple reason of applying it to your arguments which tend to sway in the wind depending on where the pressure is coming from. You are just as guilty as I in jumping on my posts without reading them thoroughly and lambasting them. The difference between us is that I post my liberal views on the liberal forum. You post your conservative views on the liberal forum.
If the conservative government is so righteous, and it is only through conservative politics that our country has thrived, do you feel the need to constantly defend it? This has gotten so far from my original post it's ridiculous. If you are so opposed to liberal ideas, why do you bother reading the posts? and why do you feel the need to constantly rebut them?
Perhaps because you are nothing more than afraid. Afraid of intellectual difference. Afraid of the possibility that your convictions are wrong, and because you can't face that possibility, you are compelled to discount it. Discount it as hyperbole. You cannot deny the fact that all of the major changes in the course of US history is based on liberal ideas. Just because they were inacted during a conservative government, does not make it is a conversative idea. It simply means that society wanted it, and Washington couldn't ignore it anymore. It is called progressive society. Things can only remain stagnant for so long, and then a liberal idea is pushed forward.
These posts are the epitomy of why our country is going down the tubes. You are so busy trying to force your ideas on people that don't want or need them, you create unnecessary dissension. Just can't leave well enough alone. Because we think different and you don't understand it, you have to try change it, and when you discover that you can't change it, you discount it as ignorance. Because this or that country is not democratic, we have to change it. Not realizing that those type of changes cannot come from the outside and be sustainable, but that change needs to come from inside. We as a government have not embraced cultural, social, or economic differences. This is why the Middle East is against western ideas. We keep pushing it on them through ultimatums and sanctions, forces from the outside. They need to come to the idea on their own, and if they don't, we have to respect it. We don't have to like, nor do we have to change it.
Thanks for this Piglet! Here's one that sm
I read last night regarding voters and pocketbook issues. In this survey 2/3 polled want universal health care. Those graphs are great! The health insurance companies are largely the culprit. The Teflon Don would be less greedy than BCBS, Aetna, etc.!!!
Poll: Pocketbook Issues Rising
By JIM KUHNHENN and TREVOR TOMPSON – 1 day ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Kitchen table worries pushed ahead of the war in Iraq over the past month, a shift toward pocketbook issues that has gained currency as the election year dawns.
More than half the voters in an ongoing survey for The Associated Press and Yahoo News say the economy and health care are extremely important to them personally. They fear they will face unexpected medical expenses, their homes will lose value or mortgage and credit card payments will overwhelm them.
Events, however, can quickly change public opinion. Thursday's assassination of Pakistan opposition leader Benazir Bhutto could draw more attention to terrorism and national security, an issue that still ranked highly with the public and which 45 percent of those polled considered extremely important.
This latest AP-Yahoo News survey of more than 1,800 people by Knowledge Networks offers a unique opportunity to track changes in public attitudes as the presidential campaign unfolds. The first poll was last month and set a base line to measure national sentiment.
In the new results, men and women approaching retirement were especially attentive to the economy and health care, with six out of 10 ranking both issues extremely important. Politically, the attention to such domestic issues hangs darkly over Republicans. Voters say they are far more likely to trust Democrats to handle the economy and health care.
Consider Linda Zimmerman, a 50-year-old sheep farmer from Thurmont, Md. Her daughter and son-in-law are having trouble keeping up with two mortgages on a town house, she said. One street in her neighborhood has five homes for sale, and one has been on the market for two years.
Registered as a Republican, she's ready to reconsider.
"We're Republicans and I'm very unhappy with them, and I've been watching the Democrats," she said. "We did better when (Bill) Clinton was in than we did with Bush. It's just terrible."
The Democratic edge on such issues illustrates the predicament Republicans face going into a presidential election. Iraq doesn't dominate the news as it used to, replaced by headlines about slumping home sales, high gasoline prices and a credit crunch.
The impact of Bhutto's assassination on public opinion depends on whether Americans perceive her death as an added threat to the United States. Terrorism was the only issue polled that Republicans were more trusted than Democrats to handle well.
Republican Rudy Giuliani had benefited most from people's fears of terrorism. But over the past month his level of support dropped, even among voters who said terrorism was an important issue. Giuliani is now trying to get some of those voters back, releasing an ad Thursday that uses images of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on New York.
All in all, though, voters appear to be weighing other issues at least as heavily as the country heads into the first voting of the presidential election.
Financial worries have risen in prominence. Forty-eight percent of those polled said Social Security is extremely important to them, up from 42 percent in November. That's virtually the same as the 46 percent who considered Iraq extremely important.
These new public concerns are reflected on the campaign trail, where candidates are hitting domestic topics hard. There too, Democrats have an edge over Republicans when it comes to connecting with their core voters.
Overall, 42 percent of Democrats are very or extremely satisfied with the amount of attention their favored candidates are giving to the issues that matter most to them. Only 32 percent of Republicans feel that way about their candidates. Of all the candidates, Democrat Barack Obama gets the best rating among his supporters.
Bill Hine, a 65-year-old Vietnam veteran from Warrenton, Va., considers himself a "soft Republican" who is partial to John McCain. But the nation's health system needs fixing, he said, and he's not happy with what he's hearing.
"A lot of Republicans are just anti-anything, anti-changing anything, and that's one of the things I'll be looking at," he said.
Six out of 10 people polled said they believe it is at least somewhat likely that the U.S. economy will enter a recession next year. Slightly more — 64 percent — said they worried about a major unexpected medical expense, and 55 percent worried that the value of their stocks and retirement investments would drop.
Forty-four percent said they were concerned that the value of their homes would decrease during the next six months. That sentiment was especially strong in the mountain states.
"Middle-class America is being chipped away at," said Edward Lemieux, a 57-year-old pattern maker from North Smithfield, R.I., who plans to support Obama for president.
His view is influenced by the flight of manufacturing jobs from his state, by the "For Sale" signs that outnumber the "Sold" signs on neighborhood lawns and by his mother's health care needs.
"We're all of a sudden becoming a country of rich and poor," he said. "The middle class is eroding."
Despite those worries, respondents have grown slightly more optimistic about the direction of the nation during the past month. Nearly three out of 10 say the country is on the right path, compared with 24 percent last month. This uptick in the national mood is evident in both parties, though it's much stronger among Republicans. Still, more than seven out of 10 said they believe the U.S. is headed down the wrong track.
Interest in immigration — a major issue in the Republican presidential contest — remained the same as last month, with 37 percent saying it was an extremely important issue. But for all the candidates' efforts to distinguish themselves on that issue, the poll found that none of the leading contenders holds an advantage among Republicans who feel most strongly about immigration.
Sentiments on health care and the economy could make a difference in the Democratic contest.
Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards supporters have much stronger feelings about the economy and Social Security than Obama voters. Edwards has staked his campaign on a message of economic populism, while Clinton draws 40 percent of her support from people with household incomes of less than $25,000, far more than her rivals.
Clinton, Obama and Edwards have been feuding over who would provide the most comprehensive health care plan.
Nearly two-thirds of voters polled said the United States should adopt a universal health insurance program "in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers." Fewer, but still a majority at 54 percent, said they supported a single-payer system whereby all Americans would get their health insurance through a taxpayer-financed government plan.
Lynn Haynes, 42, of Huntington, W.Va., works in the state government's welfare department where she sees clients who can't afford health care. What's more, she has a 35-year-old sister who is developmentally delayed and "falls into the cracks" of government assistance programs. She's a registered Republican, likes Giuliani but supports universal health care and is giving Democrats a hard look.
"I see too many people at work especially who just don't get any health care," Haynes said. "I look at what they get for retirement and Social Security, and I don't see how they live on that and afford their prescriptions."
The survey of 1,821 adults was conducted from Dec. 14-20, and had an overall margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. Included were interviews with 847 Democrats, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3.4 points, and 655 Republicans, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.8 points.
The poll was conducted over the Internet by Knowledge Networks, which initially contacted people using traditional telephone polling methods and followed with online interviews. People chosen for the study who had no Internet access were given it for free.
AP News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius and Associated Press writer Christine Simmons contributed to this report.
Now, now, piglet....did I EVER say you or any other...
liberal was evil? I just have a differing opinion on some issues. Why some cannot handle that, why it is such a thorn in some sides...why there is such intolerance on this board for a differing opinion...one does wonder.
Have a good day! :)
Like your POV, piglet
Ahh, the paradox of what is God's will. "Thou shalt not kill" being one of the commandments, I find it really strange how many bloody battles are chronicled in the Bible and of course, God's team always wins. So what's that message - don't kill unless God tells you its cool? How do you know GOD is the one telling you to kill - maybe its a demon impersonating god and trying to get you sin by killing without God's express permission?
Certainly our president must have a direct line to God and has direct permission to go kill - it can't possibly be God's will for those people to stay alive (yet strangely he created them in the first place, hmmmm).
And what about bugs and vermin? Its OK to kill them - right? Its OK to kill animals for sport and food, right? Don't need God's permission to kill them - even though it is presumably God's will for them to be alive or they wouldn't be here?
Let pro-war anti-abortionists clarify that one, please!
Yeah Piglet!!
You make my point so much more eloquently than I can!
Protection, piglet.....
if we remove the US military presence and full blown insurgency left to take over, the people we are protecting with patrols in Baghdad will no longer have that protection. If they are killing as many of them as they are with us there, you really expect that to just stop when we leave? What bubble are YOU living in?
My way of thinking is not to abandon them now that we are there, regardless of how we got there. You can't turn back time. It's done. And yes, I think we owe it to the Iraqis who welcomed us (and they did in the beginning) and trusted us (and they did in the beginning and some still do...I see it because I don't just watch liberal media)...yes, I think we owe it to those people not to abandon them. If that means a continued military presence for awhile, then I think we should do that. You don't agree. Fine. I think the pain the Iraqi people will feel will be multipled many times over if we pull out now. You don't. Fine. Not sure how you arrive at that conclusion, but I don't need to. We will just agree to disagree.
And..as a side note...I don't really think you are in a position to call ME arrogant.
Going, having a nice day. lol.
Oh duh well gee thanks piglet for doin that...
fer me. Now maybe I kin understan it. Yer so kind.
I suppose I didn't get through all your post, to coin your words, too much recycled "wind."
Bottom line...if they ever DO get past the posturing stage and impeach the man, and if he is proven guilty, he should be removed from office. I have said that time and time again. Because I do believe in innocent until proven guilty, no matter what political bent someone is. And if he is proven guilty, I sure won't be defending him and yelling hatchet job and vast leftwing conspiracy. You can't say that honestly, you know you can't. If he was found innocent you would be screaming those very things just like everyone else on the liberal blogs. There is no objective thinking anymore. There is no equal application of the law anymore. And that only bothers you on your own side. You could care less what happens to people who do not agree with you. And there is something very, very wrong with that picture.
You have an inability to think objectively anymore. Everything is colored by your political idealogical bent. If a Republican, or a "conservative" says it, it has to be a lie. Cheney is guilty in your mind no matter what an impeachment trial would bring out. Bush is guilty in your mind, it does not matter what evidencce to the contrary might be presented. At least have the guts to admit it. You don't believe if equal justice for all. You don't believe in the concept of justice unless it applies to your side of the fence.
And that, my friend, is why I, and a lot of other Americans, are sick to death of politics. And which is why I am hoping that if Paul does not get the nomination, or another person who shall remain nameless, I hope one of them will run on Independent ticket and send a real message. I hope someone has the guts to tap that resource. I would really like to see that happen. So I am taking your advice, piglet. I am looking to change things. And it is about darned time someone did...thank you SO much for the motivation. Perhaps what I can do here will help. Movements start somewhere, with someone.
We shall see...have a great day, piglet, a REALLY great day!
One more thing, piglet...
you don't find 48 million dead babies just the least bit sad??
Oh pulleeezzzzzz piglet....do you hear yourself??
I don't CARE if the liberal posters cross over. I have said that ad nauseam. You cannot help yourself. You have to twist and put yourself back on that lofty perch. I said nothing about them being ashamed of themselves. I have absolutely no issue with cross posting.
JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD...okay....protesting in the streets with antiwar signs...screaming at people who pass...having die-ins...when I protested that saying that sometimes just because you can do something doesn't mean you should...I was attacked. Now you are attacking me for the same thing.
It is so transparent it borders on the ridiculous. Bottom line...you do not want dissent. Period. Just like I would counter a sign carrier I did not agree with in person, or if I chose to carry a sign to protest something I did not agree with...I will do the same thing here.
And here I thought that is what liberals represented...and would argue emphatically for someone's right to stage a die-in with a dead soldier's name pinned to their chest...but let one lone conservative come to an anonymous board and it is get out, we don't want to hear it, exercise your rights if you want but NOT HERE.
Antiliberal and unAmerican.
Piglet, thank you for your voice of reason
It's very refreshing. Thanks again...
Piglet touched on a point in one of her....
posts that is important to understand the profound difference in liberals and conservatives...while I don't agree with the exact wording...it is in the right vein. She said "liberals view it as a human issue and conservatives view it as a business." That is not entirely true, because that suggests conservatives do not view it as a human issue at all. They do. The difference is, I believe, that while conservatives do have the same compassion, that is tempered with sober thinking. Thinking about what it will cost. Thinking about the long-term effects. Thinking about how it affects everyone. There has to be that balance. One part of the family needs to try to keep the other part of the family from giving away the farm, to put it simply. You make similar decisions in your personal lives. Your kids want a lot of things. You can't afford to give them everything they want, so you have to make choices. There just needs to be that balance. That is obvious from the postings. Any long-term effect or cost of an entitlement is not entertained, and if it is brought to light, it is greeted with, for lack of a better phrase, "Why do you want to rain on the parade?" And that really is not the intention. Conservatives are not against everyone having health care. Conservatives are not against helping those truly in need. Conservatives are against keeping people in poverty and beholden to the central government for their every need. That is a dangerous path.
Why can't we ask the government, instead of just adding yet aonther entitlement, to look at how much money comes in from income taxes as they now stand. Then look at how much is spent on entitlements. If it is the consensus of the nation that national health care is the most important to them, then that should be funded first. Without raising taxes. That would be reform; you say you want reform.
Why not reform the welfare system? Much money could be saved there. Tighten it up. Stop making assistance permanent if the person is able to work. Give them a check, and with that check mandatory participation in job training and placement program, and when they place you, the check stops. No more endless welfare checks for people who are able to work. If it is a low wage job, then other entitlements can help...food stamps, etc. Get people off the government tab who are able to work. I think we would all be amazed at how much money that would free up for other more important entitlements. That is what I am talking about. Let's not create yet another entitlement and raise taxes yet again. Let's tighten up the government belt.
All that being said, I still have great reservations about national health care from a socialism point of view. Reform health care, introduce more free market negotiation to get the cost of health care down....all those things I am not against. We don't know if it will work or not, but I would think we should try that first before starting down the slippery slope of socialist programs.
In closing, I would just like to say....we are all Americans, and we do have that in common. Our lives are probably very similar and we probably come from about the same economic group. We have differing views, but that doesn't mean we can't treat each other respectfully and not take postings personally, and yes, I am guilty like others of the "pouty postings." I would like to start away from that, and am going to make a concentrated effort to do so. I hope others will join me. We can have discussions, disagreements and lively debates...without disliking someone we don't really know because their opinions differ. AsI have said and others have said...we have friends or family members with opposing views, but we manage to get through that. My stepdaughters both are verryyy liberal gals, and we have lively discussions, I agree with them occasionally and they agree with me occasionally...and in the end...we all know where we would like to go, we just differ in how to get there.
God bless, and have a great day!
LOL. Piglet jumped off the carousel and
LOL. I'm finding you two and myself a little too amusing today. Think I've been staring at a computer screen too long today because I'm finding this conversation funny all of a sudden. Oh well. Laughter is good for you right?
Umm...2003...isn't that the PAST, piglet....
I thought you were interested in NOW. :-)
um tara, she didn't write the article (piglet)...sm
what is up with you? Take your nasty pill today? As a newbie to this particular board (liberals) - I'm offended to read your waste-of-bandwidth attacks/reactions. Hope the rest of the year 2008 is better for you than the first couple of days appear to be.
Piglet: Kasparov calls Russia's elections...s/m
meaning the recent Putin reelection.....the *dirtiest* in their history.....
http://newsfromrussia.com/news/russia/03-12-2007/102126-kasparov_elections-0
To Piglet....Gary Kasparov was released from jail
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/11/29/kasparov.jail.ap/
P.S. Please scroll down after reading above post. Washington Post article included.
Reprinted in Boston Globe. Sorry!
I wrote: I second JTBB's post, 'watcher's post is misinformed crap...sm
pYou have also to read what's posted 'inside' the message.
Oops, meant to post this under the loose trolls post...
I'm going to keep ignoring these troll posts. It's kind of fun, actually, just pretend you don't see them.
Post the direct link. I don't see the post you're referring to.
t
The post I quoted was the entire post. It was not taken out of context. sm
I imagine there are as many emotions and thoughts going on with our troops as possible and each does not feel the same as the other, which is obvious by the posts here.
Sorry gourdpainter, my other post should have been under the wacky Pakistan post (nm)
xx
Why did you post this? Republicans have been asked NOT to post here..Bye Bye.
Why did you post this? Happy Thanksgiving is enough but to be so happy we have a republican president? Why did you post that? I would like to remind you, you are on the liberal board. Are you trying to start trouble? If so, let me know and I will report you immediately. No, Im not happy we have a republican president, a warmonger chickenhawk president. Does that answer your question? Now, go back to the republican board. We dont want you here and actually the moderator and administrator have asked republicans not to post here..Bye..bye..
Forgot to post a link in 1st post. Sorry.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
Please refer me to any post where I referred to either the post...
or the poster as ignorant. And I certainly never sunk to the levels you did at the top of the post, against a man who is ill in a wheelchair. Pot calling the kettle black...?
I re-read your post, and I stand by my post.
You are twisting his words by saying that he wants to make friends with terrorists. That is not what he said.
Ya gotta understand the rules. We have to post on this board only. They can post on any board they
The above post explains a lot about everything else you post!
Your revelation about being married to a career Army guy explains why your views are skewed so drastically to the far right! I thought it had to do with small-town Pennsylvania, but now I truly understand where you are coming from. Thank you for explaining that us. We will read your posts in a completely different light now that we know the truth.
If you want to post something on the subject, post
objective views. This is a one-sided publication that asks for donations to keep it going. Nothing I read in there posts anything against any democrats, just republicans. It is not a fair-minded reporting.
I like to read both sides of the aisle but this publication spews hatred for anything not democratic in order to sell books. To those who can't see both sides, this blog, or publication as they like to state, is just up their aisle. I shake my head at one-sided news. Taken from their web site:
"Indeed, a founding idea of the Consortium for Independent Journalism was that a major investment was needed in journalistic endeavors committed to honestly informing the American people about important events, no matter what the political and economic pressures.
While we are proud of the journalistic contribution that this Web site has made over the past decade – and while we are deeply grateful to our readers whose contributions have kept us afloat – we also must admit that we have not made the case well enough that this mission is a vital one.
Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His new book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.' "
I second your post and 'watcher's post
is misinformed crap.
My post was a direct answer to the direct post...
of Democrat. It was not a blank open-ended statement. And dial it back a notch...it is certainly your right to protest anything any time you want to. Just like it is my right to protest you protesting while men and women are still in harm's way, because you are in effect aiding the enemy. Apparently the Viet Nam experience taught you nothing. Americans protesting in the streets heartened the enemy and when they were about to surrender decided not to, based a lot upon what was happening in the American streets. I believe that the protesting in that war prolonged the war and cost more American lives. Hanoi Jane should have been tried for treason. That being said...lessons were not learned and the protestors are doing the exact same thing now. Exercising the very right bought for them by shedding of American military blood. And I still say common courtesy should keep people out of the streets and off the TV until the military are home safe. But it just proves the same thing to me over and over...the selfISHhness of the protestors vs. the selfLESSness of the military. They continue to put it all on the line for your right to protest anything you want to protest...it is up to YOU to decide where and when that is appropriate, and it is up to you to take the heat for same. It is up to me and others like me (in my opinion) to apply that heat. Go ahead and do whatever your conscience or lack thereof moves you to do. But do not expect those of a different mind not to protest the protest.
Thanks for the post. I think I will look up that
article.
And thanks for pointing out all the other "results" of his administration that, as you say, benefit nobody but the rich and/or the corporations or, as he himself once publicly bragged, "his base."
I know for a fact that when he ran for President in 2000, I told every single person I knew that if he becomes President, we're going to go to war with Iraq. (Nobody's gonna treat his daddy like Saddam did and get away with it.)
I didn't have a crystal ball. I had common sense and a good memory from the Gulf War when his father was President and how he didn't "finish the job." Seems a lot of other Americans forgot about that.
I really enjoyed reading your post and all the facts you raised that I failed to raise in mine. Thanks for the mention of the LA Times article. I'm going to try to look that up on the web.
I know they don't. I said that in my post. NM
//
Actually, that post is right on. sm
You sound like a total lunatic, out of control and full of hatred. You sound like someone who could do just what "vs" says. You had best take a look at your behavior. YOUR posts are the ones who should be reported. You are one frightening person.
Re your post
From your post:
"Did you read Mein Kampf? Would that be good enough evidence for you, because he wrote about it in there."
Wrote about what? That the Jews were socialists?
This is an entirely different post.
Really wasn't directed to you anyhow.
your post is just sad
I'm actually feeling sad for you right now gt. You obviously don't know what Christianity is about. Pat Robertson does not speak for me, and I don't endorse what he said. I'm sorry you are so bitter and hate filled that you would wish anyone to burn in hell. There are some evil people in this world but my first wish for them is that they find Christ and turn from their evil ways with His help. I too hope one day you find Christ, gt, and quit letting misguided Christians and Christian leaders keep you from HIM. Their blunders are not worth your eternal soul.
thank you for your post
What a great post, so heartfelt and I thank you for it.
Yes I do. see my post below. nm
x
The post.
You think there is only one patriot here? Get a trip on your sour shrivled heart and try not to speak.
Whoops! I made a mistake. My bad.
This is the post where the NEOCON tells the LIBERAL not to speak ON HER OWN BOARD!
They can't show a post of a liberal telling Army Mom not to speak because it doesn't exist.
Where did you get that from my post?
Really? I did? Where do you read that in my post? I talk about taking care of the middle class and that the rich really dont give a darn about the middle class. I talk about a friend who is quite smug and out of touch with real America. No where do I mention anything about Kerry or Kennedy.
please post
I would appreciate it if you could post statements from Black Americans that they are okay with Bennetts comments.
What does that have to do with gt's post
I said if we had posted something like that we would have been castigated. You're just proving that point. I'm not in a pissing contest with you...really
And another *right-on* post!
I agree with every single word you said. America is becoming a very scary place indeed. I believe, as you do, that there are people who are eagerly awaiting the *Rapture* and indeed believe they have the *inside track* to heaven. Unfortunately, it look as if this country might actually suffer from their self-fulfilled prophecy if it continues going backwards in time under Bush's completely inept leadership.
Please keep posting. I really enjoy reading your posts.
Thanks very much for your post.
It makes me feel a lot better to hear someone say they're against this. When express outrage at my posting about the issue, instead of expressing outrage about the issue itself, it truly makes me wonder.
I honestly do not recall any threads on the conservative board about this issue. All I recall is total silence (or attacks) when the issue is mentioned.
I also wasn't trying to imply that the crime of child molestation is more prevalent in one political party or another. Obviously, that's irrelevant, and I have a hard time even associating a criminal like that with any political views one way or the other.
It's just that this seems to be a no-brainer, an issue on which virtually everyone can agree, yet the right seems to be eerily quiet when this topic comes up.
Thank you for this post!
Thanks for this post!! I heard about it somewhere but in the chaos that has become my life lately, I probably would have completely forgotten about it..so glad you submitted this..
Please see my post to you above.
I made a mistake and posted my reply in the wrong place. Sorry.
|