Banned..not me
Posted By: gt on 2005-09-23
In Reply to: Where's gt anyway? - hmmmm
Sweet honey, Im here..banned? For what? I dont break rules or laws and try to keep my posts respectful..**wish the conservatives would take the same hint**..I just state the FACTS in America right now..No, sweetie pie..to your dismay, I was not banned..I was just cooling my heels in Mexico, Tijuana for a few days as Tijuana is only two hours from my home and I frequent the town quite a bit..and have friends down there..But......IM......BACK....**Kiss.Kiss..Kiss..*..
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
Maybe they were banned. nm
xxx
No, what's hard is not getting banned from
People are not banned by their sig,
they are banned by their e-mail address.
I risk getting banned, but all I can think of
reading your post is: STUPID and living in a sdmall village in the MIDWEST, right?
Hehehehehe!
If hate was banned, this would be
NM
For people who wanted me banned ....
you certainly want to continue to engage me.
There is media bias. They want Obama elected. They did it to Hillary too, just not to this degree.
How is this coming out swinging? How is this different from posting pro Obama items?
Are you really this intolerant?
Watch out, you'll get BANNED.......
I didn't say anything hurtful toward you and I don't want to be banned.
I'm didn't make any comments to you and did not get nasty in any of my posts (most are defending myself). I post some information and am brutally attacked for it. I am in agreement with a lot of black democrats and I wanted to share some things I have heard, just like you share things about McCain & Palin, however my post did not say any nasty comments about Obama. I'm not attacking you but you are attacking me. Yeah it does shock me and made my eyes water that someone could be that mean towards me (especially when they don't know my nationality). There are two nasty posts about something about being home schooled and the one above it (3 if you include the one who yelled at me that I'm a racist) but I'm just skipping over them and not reading them as I can tell by the message what the content must be (p.s. home schoolers are quite highly intelligent). So I will follow the moderators message and just skip all the nasty comments about me. This will be my last post I make.
"anybody would have" will hopefully be banned from the board soon
that is how the moderator comes
I ask that 'sm' is banned due to this message!..nm
nm
Nice! You are kidding about the 'being banned.?...nm
nm
Why did Michael Savage get banned?? I know the answer....
Because Michael Savage calls a spade a spade and a terrorist a terrorist. He has no use for the Muslim religion whether they are the rabid haters or the mealy-mouthed ones who say nothing. He denounces the so called "religion of peace" every chance he gets; and right so. He is allowed to have his opinions. You know exactly where he stands on a subject. THus, because Britain has caved in to the Muslims as far as sharia law, sharia financing, etc, they hate Michael Savage because he lets the Brits know what they have become and what will happen to them down the road. As a famous line in a movie went...."You can't handle the truth!!!!"
Oopphhs..an editorial against bush..am I gonna be banned?
Shockingly unprepared
The countless questions about the unfolding catastrophe in the Gulf states are all variations on a simple theme: This disaster was all but scripted; why wasn't the response?
News reports from the region have shown the situation getting worse, not better.
This inability to regain control, or at least to rally against the disaster, has shocked the country's sense of itself. Predictably, recriminations mounted Thursday, even as federal officials delivered more aid. State and local officials in Louisiana were particularly critical of the response from Washington, complaining that the feds were slow to provide the help needed to feed and evacuate survivors and halt criminals.
Defenders of the Bush administration said it was doing everything it could. They're facing problems that nobody could foresee: breaking of the levees and the whole dome thing over in New Orleans coming apart, former President George H.W. Bush said Thursday on CNN. People couldn't foresee that.
In fact, emergency planners have been thinking about a catastrophic levee breach for years. Many saw it as an inevitable consequence of a high-powered hurricane such as Katrina hitting the city. And in early 2001, the Federal Emergency Management Agency said that one of the three most likely disasters to strike the U.S. was a catastrophic flood triggered by a hurricane hitting New Orleans. (The other two: a terrorist attack on New York and a major earthquake in San Francisco.)
It's certainly true that by the time forecasters knew that Katrina was a threat, it was too late to shore up the levees. And by the time they knew Katrina was going to come ashore near New Orleans, there was not enough time to evacuate the city completely.
Still, much of what happened this week in New Orleans had been foreseen by federal and state emergency planners, as the city's newspaper, the Times-Picayune, laid out extensively three years ago. Survivors will end up trapped on roofs, in buildings or on high ground surrounded by water, with no means of escape and little food or fresh water, perhaps for several days, one story predicted with eerie accuracy.
That's why the complaints from Louisiana about the official response are so troubling. Why did it take so long to evacuate the poor, the elderly and the tourists unlucky enough to be caught with no way out of town? Where was the food and water? Why were the police left to choose between rescuing people from the floods and saving them from predators?
Critics of the administration, including former FEMA officials, say Washington's focus since late 2001 on potential terrorist targets has come at the expense of its ability to respond to natural disasters in other parts of the country. FEMA no longer helps prepare communities for disasters — it just responds to them. Other critics have pointed out that the administration diverted money from a levee project in New Orleans to fund priorities within the Department of Homeland Security.
One lesson of Hurricane Katrina, though, is that preparedness and response go hand in hand, whether the disaster is natural or man-made. Washington's response to Katrina is likely to gear up notably in the days to come, but the question of why it took so long will linger longer than the floodwaters
Hellooo....your compatriots just asked that I be BANNED from this board...
for posting on their threads. They obviously did not want me posting on their threads. I was trying to get along. Now I am being attacked for trying to get along.
If you want to rebut me, start a new thread. Why start the bashing behavior all over again? What is the difference in attacking me on your thread or on mine? Why attack at ALL?
As for me, I don't want a man with a 20-year alliance with an agenda that is antiAMerican. I don't want someone in bed with the Chicago political machine to be my President. I want a President who does not take money or share relationships with terrorists who have bombed our own buildings and police stations.
The most corrupt President was the one before Bush. He is the one who should be in jail on a felony perjury conviction. That has actually been proven. We actually KNOW that is the truth.
As far as McCain not being a maverick or Bush minion...Obama is not an agent of change, he is Washington politics as usual, the most liberal senator in the senate followed closely by his running mate at #3. Neither have any interest in reaching across the aisle to get things done and fix the gridlock in Congress. He is a hypocrit also, he does not care about the country, he puts party first, he cares about using the Presidency to advance his own agenda. He is a DNC minion.
Whoever posted this nasty reply to 'abc' on 11/16/08 should be banned.nm
nm
Michael Savage banned from Great Britian...(sm)
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/michael-savage-banned-from-great-britain
GOOD FOR THEM!!!! LOL. We need to do the same thing. I can think of 2 right off the top of my head. How about Hannity and O'Really?
I thought hateful people were banned from this forum
|