And your point is?
Posted By: Liberal2 on 2006-11-09
In Reply to: Merv's Rolling Stone interview. sm - Brunson
I dont understand your post. I never said Merv Griffin did not like Bush or his crew, I said he stated the American people overthrew the government Tuesday. He did not elaborate whether he liked Bush or not.
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
I think BB has a point here in that the main point on the board is political discussion, and let'
face it, there is SO MUCH going on right now, changes, problems, disasters, and so much debate on what should/could be done, but so many tims the political discussion disintegrates in a finger-pointing, name-calling exercise, spouting religion all over the place. Yeah, our spiritual beliefs are dearly held and we would all strive to be the best we can be, and do whatever we can whatever the ideology is, but sometimes I wonder, since we have a board EXPRESSLY for Faith isuues, where relgious debates/discussions/forums, etc are welcome, why does THIS board have to be turned into RELIGION BOARD PART II, especially if one ideology wants to dominate or ridicule/condemn those who come on here for lively inteligent discussion, debate of issues in Congress and in our lives, and just want their beliefs held separately? CNN is not EWTN or any other Christian network, and there are constant informative, bright, lively, balanced discussions from all over the political spectrum on the credentialed news stations, as well as C-Span, but they are not constantly hiding behind a cross, rosary, bible, star of David, or whatever....can we not strive to do the same and put religious debate on the Faith board?? Just a thought to ponder, MHO, it might work beter, who knows?
is the the starting point or the end point for the middle class?
x
I answered your post point-by-point and
all you can come up with is a lame tit-for-tat? Can you provide some sort of substantive response that would argue against the point I am trying to make here? Of course not.
Please show me what part of my post reflects bigotry or ignorance? I have made a few statements based on my own life experience, rather than the hook-line-and-sinker method of forming my world view. Then the impotence of your suicide bomber reference was buried under concrete evidence of informed, researched and factual data that would suggest an oppressed, occupied, half-starved population does not have the upper hand when it comes to defending themselves against Israel's US-bankrolled arsenal of pain, misery, death and destruction. They are just a tad out-gunned, wouldn't you say?
I answered your post point-by-point and
all you can come up with is a lame tit-for-tat? Can you provide some sort of substantive response that would argue against the point I am trying to make here? Of course not.
Please show me what part of my post reflects bigotry or ignorance? I have made a few statements based on my own life experience, rather than the hook-line-and-sinker method of forming a world view. Then the impotence of your suicide bomber reference was buried under concrete evidence of informed, researched and factual data that would suggest an oppressed, occupied, half-starved population does not exactly have the upper hand when it comes to defending themselves against Israel's US-bankrolled arsenal of pain, misery, death and destruction they employ in order to "secure" themselves.
The Palestinians are just a tad out-gunned, wouldn't you say? This might just account for the lop-sided fatalities/injuries ratios between the Israelis and the Palestinians. In closing, it is worth noting that even with the advantage of all those terrorist toys and tools our tax dollars have bestowed upon them, security and peace of mind just seem to be further and further beyond their reach. Wonder why that is?
If your point is that it was 7 years ago, that's not much of a point is it? sm
Not long ago at all in the scope of things. The point is that the same thing could and probably would happen here. 9-11 happened 7 years ago too....I guess that couldn't happen again, huh?
I get your point, but my main point is -
why should the government be allowed to tell people what they can and can't eat? Everyone says the government is too involved in our business anyway, so if they should stay out of one part of our lives, they should stay out of all parts of our lives!
and your point is??
Your point is?? Bush is the one who waged this immoral illegal wrong war, not all the democrats you have posted quotes on. It is BUSH, the chimp boy, who waged the war and used every kind of excuse possible, flip flopping back and forth over the reasons. Now that we know there are no WMD and we have gotten Saddam, what is the excuse for being there and not setting a time plan to leave?? Of course the reason has always been the murderous foreign policy of the US, to have its bloody hands in every country it possibly can. They are just salivating in DC over the fact that we will have control over the Middle East and OIL. Bush and his group are war criminals, just as bad as Saddam.
the point is
If these brave soldiers did not have to go to Vietnam, a useless, wrong war (it has been PROVEN, DEBATED AND PROVEN AGAIN AND AGAIN, EVEN BY THOSE WHO WERE IN THE MILITARY), their physical and emotional illnesses never would have happened..and there would have been no people turning against them. There were thousands upon thousands of protestors telling Nixon, bring our boys home and a few turning against the soldiers. The war is what scarred and has continued to torture these soldiers..the wrong war of that day just like the wrong war of now, Iraq..And where is the VA to help those of Vietnam? Bush continues to cut the budget for the VA, even though we will have thousands once again home from a useless, immoral, illegal war..I read an article the other day how the soldiers coming home are divorcing quite a bit..another thing these soldiers have to deal with..physical ailments, mental ailments, not adjusting to society, divorce..these were happy job holding family people before Bush got his blood hands on them. Thanks Bush.
You see, that's my whole point...
...the truth of this quote is why it's important. You can't ignore the inherent truth in an observation simply because you don't like the bearer of that message. I believe that if one truly examined history and discarded labels such as socialist, liberal, yes, even conservative (these labels change with time and are not static philosophies) I believe history would show that the the last part of this quote is right on about what it takes to be successful in uniting a country/party against a supposed "foe." Some have said hatred is the biggest uniter of a people that there is.
The point.
While there were quite a few issues in this article that were noteworthy, to me at least, the main point was that the Bush/war supporters are going to have a chance to participate in the war that they love. Since we broke Iraq we have to fix it and we can't afford to and the military can't do it so, in its infinite wisdom, the administration has come up with a "Peace Corps" type scenario where professionals of all vein VOLUNTEER to go to Iraq and work, for free. This is just too good. How many of those on the conservative board do you think will volunteer to go, or their husbands, sons, relatives? And like he said, if you voted for Bush put your money where your magnet is, smack dab in the middle of the Sunni triangle.
We have and have had for a long time alternatives energy resources. You can destroy the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska and wherever else you want but in a few years we will be right back here. The oil supply is finite. Get used to it. Time to switch gears and explore the alternatives. But again, I can't wait to see who signs up for volunteer duty...next stop is Vietnam (Oh, I mean Iran, no I mean Iraq...).
Well, to each his own, which is exactly my point.
I can not discount your points here without discounting mine. I can't explain why people sign up, but my guess would be that some need money, jobs and opportunities and are praying if they do go to Iraq they will make it back in one piece. There are obviously a lot of people who believe in the cause of this war, I'm just not one. And like I say, some have fallen hook-line-and-sinker into the justification for this war, or believe it is important to free the Iraqis and somehow this is going to protect America.
I say again, to each his own. May God be with them all!
That is not the point! sm
The point is, expect the unexpected. Don't get all hyper about guns. I should never have mentioned that here, I am sure. I was making a point where has, yet again, been twisted! Good grief!
There is no point to THAT. SM
Everyone knows that paper is and always has been anti-Bush. I'm sorry, but you guys won't take stuff from NewsMax and FrontPageMag, which are both WAY WAY BIGGER than this little rag. Don't expect me to take this seriously.
It's my point.nm
x
And your point is
 It's all Bush's fault, by the way. It's the evil Republican's fault, but especially Bush. It's ALL his fault. It's America's fault, too! IMPEACH AMERICA. You are my hero.
But, at what point...
do you just toss your arms up in the air and give up on teaching people how to use birth control. It's not rocket science. How many decades of teaching do we need? I think we already have a cornucopia of information available everywhere on how to use birth control. It's not like it's a taboo subject. I have to think that the computer saavy youth of today, who can jump through hoops on the internet, if interested, could find out with the click of a button just exactly how to use any given birth control. We can fund education to the hilt, but stupid careless people will always be stupid careless people. It's sad.
You got a point there...nm
I know all I need to. I see no point in this.
.
But the point is, we believe what we believe.
In this instance, you feel the war is morally illegal and I don't.
Yes....that was my point.
I think what you said is exactly the point.
With everything going on, and it keeps getting worse and worse, the leader of the free world shows himself to be crude, have no table manners ... the forever frat boy. In itself giving an uninvited neck rub and talking with one's mouth full are certainly not newsworthy but in the context of where he was, what he was participating in ( participation questionable) what is happening to our world, our leader, without his spinners and handlers and speech writers was exposed as the uninformed, disinterested, unegaged person that he is and always has been. He was obviously bored throughout the entire conference, displayed his ignorance of geography (again), displayed his total lack of understanding of the Middle East, a process that has been evolving for 100s of years, way before Israel appeared on the scene. The history of the Middle East appears to bore him. Actually, everything but clearing brush at the ranch seems to bore him. And this guy wants free reign to do anything he likes, no checks, no balances, no congressional approval; its like he thinks this is the old board game War, or little green soldiers he can play with. He is such an embarassment.
to further my point
They are even making Pat Buchanan look like a liberal. I have never agreed with Buchanan until recently. This is an excellent example of what I'm talking about.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/VIDEO__Matthews_Buchanan_Slam_Neocons_0720.html
My point WAS sm
Newspapers dropping her column aren't hurting her. I don't care about the other stuff. I don't even like her.
Exactly the point...sm
There are plenty things that sell in America that are no good for America. I happen to believe Ms. Coulter (not just her books but her persona and work, collectively) is one of them.
The point is. sm
Why share something like that on this board? For what purpose?
Well some of that was my point.
I don't think he went to school in Africa ever, don't know for sure but I know he was born in Hawaii, his mother was white, his father from Kenya. His father returned to Kenya and he (the father) may have been the Muslim. His mother remarried and moved out of the country with her new husband and I believe that Obama lived with his white grandparents in the midwest somewhere; something like that. At any rate, I was saying that anyone, not Obama specifically, anyone at all who had a really good working knowledge of Islam, Arabic and all 13 of its dialects and the Muslim lifestyle would be an asset at this point, in my opinion, whoever he or she may be.
The point is. sm
Does it really matter how old the picture is? It is in San Francisco at a rally. If it was 1000 years old, it would still be horrible. And I am not pro this war or any war.
What's your point?
It was a group of very rich Democrats who were in power at the time and who were going to lose their livelihoods making these decisions, and there were many northern republicans who voted for it as well. Not all northern republicans believed in this reform. Need I remind that Lincoln made a great deal of bi-partisan enemies because of this liberal belief? I believe it to have been a bi-partisan liberal movement which afforded this change.
If your point
was to say 'liberals' were not necessarily always 'Democrats', then fine. I don't think anyone would argue that the parties have changed over the years.
However, your posts, intentional or not, are coming across very offensive. OBVIOUSLY, every person should be ashamed at that part of our history. Democrats and Republicans alike. One party was not responsible for causing it and one alone was not responsible for rectifying the injustice. You love to argue that Democrats voted for the war in Iraq too - yes they did, together the parties sent us into war. It took both parties to get in and it will take both to get out.
Yes, if you polled African Americans they may not know what happened back then, but they sure know what happens now and I'm sure, in the grand scheme of things, that's what they care about at the moment.
I think the point was ...
Don't judge someone by his name. Everyone is up in arms because of his middle name and that is just crazy. Judge someone by their acts, not the name they were given by someone else.
ha - I see your point
Guess it's time to turn back on the travel channel and travel off to some far off place in the world. It is hard not to get heated up over politics. Glad this only happens once every four years. P.S. - I love the little icon with the finger waving.
I see your point
Reading your post I felt like I was in an Inspector Clusoe movie or Agatha Christie. :-)
Great post. Gives me something new to think about. Thanks.
I think the point was...and well taken...
it is a thumb your nose at Bush exercise. They do not intend to impeach him. They do not want to deal with all the issues it would raise. Like focusing the public on how one man could possibly fool the entire world...especially one whose brain is not firing on all cylinders, according to most Dems you talk to. They are not going to go there. So, no matter what they call it....it is going nowhere.
My point is different...sm
If it is a thumb your nose at Bush exercise, I'd like to see that. Don't care what the intent is. I'd still like to see that. Don't care if they don't want to deal with the issues it would raise. I'd still like to hear the issues being debated for myself. The discussion over the pros and cons of the answers to the question of how one man could fool the whole world is of interest to me, regardless of how many cylinders his brain is firing. I'd still like to see that. They are already "there" if the conversations are taking place. Whether or not it goes anywhere depends on issues raised, the quality of the presentation and the rebuttal. I'd still like to see that. It is disturbing to me that somebody somewhere has decided that I don't need to see it. That is the point.
point taken.
!!
What point?
My father died when I was 16 years old and my mother had no choice. My brother and I turned out fine. Society hasn't been BURDENED with us. And, by the way, Ms. RIGHTEOUS, we were not unsupervised, even as teens.
The burden lies when young girls continue having children, while I pay for them, one after another. I feel pretty confident in saying I won't be paying for Palin's grandchild.
Our society is going to the dogs because of crackhead parents, locked up parents, sorry no good parents. Now, unfortunately, they do produce children who, through no fault of their own, end up with a lot of problems because no one cares, not because no one is home all day with them.
I haven't seen your point at all as to why Palin has to stop her career because of her daughter's pregnancy.
And your point
Jealous much?
Point is we know nothing of what the
truth is in this matter....We have no viable information on the woman who would be, should I say, VP? She has to answer questions about these allegations with her own mouth.
What is your point?
I quit reading after the first sentence.
Thank you, Sam. That was my point.
nm
Your point? nm
.
another point here
Of the hundreds of media representatives vying for the first interview, the mccain campaign CHOSE Charlie Gibson. If you think he was liberally biased, you certainly have to question the judgment of the people who selected Gibson. Once again,you cant have it both ways.
Point well taken! Thank you! (nm)
:)
I think the point was
that Obama thinks that babies are punishment.
PUNISHMENT?
Weren't YOU a baby once???
If life is not respected, then what is the point?
You don't, and you know that. You know that is not the point nm
x
My point being.....sm
Unfortunately, most people are not really going to go out and pick and choose people to help. Most people unfortunately are just going to talk about it and not do it. That is why it has to be taken out in taxes and dispersed. Also, each person giving cannot possibly go through the life file of each person and find out if they really need their help or not. It's impossible.
What's your point? They ALL lie!
I don't like the woman, I really dislike her stance on many issues, but this "so and so is a liar" crap is really annoying me.
Say it with me now:
ALL POLITICIANS LIE.
and the point is?
??
That's not the point -sm
The point is Sen. McCain is putting country first. Obama is putting Obama first. And he's not giving us the answers we need. One more thing to validate he is not thinking of putting the American citizens before himself. Obama - it's all about the me.
My point is....sm
He sounds like a stuttering fool when he doesn't have a prepared speech.
I know he isn't, really, but he sounds like it.
You know, the way we all treat Bushie because he can't talk well most of the time (with a speech or without, in truth...I will admit)....
Sheesh....get it?
My point exactly
When people interject this "oh my god he's going to die while in office" is a huge scare tactic because the people who already don't like him don't like Gov. Palin (go figure). There is longevity in McCain's family and he could live to be in his 90s also. The question is do you trust McCain/Palin or do you trust Obama/Biden. Whoever you trust whether democrat or republican is fine, but stop with the "be afraid". Biden is about the same age as McCain. Don't pull the age game here.
|
