Do a search on this board. This is old news, debunked. nm
Posted By: geek on 2008-10-19
In Reply to: what part of reading don't you get? - JD
.
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
A search of the archives from this board
Every single time you are challenged, you cannot dial it back even for a moment until you have had the last word. It is pathetic to think that you actually believe that you can bully your opponents into submission, but not suprising. Par for the course of a right-wing fanatic.
Again, search this board's archives to see
nm
If some people on this board wasn't so against Fox News,
I never would have started watching it. I didn't even know I could get Fox on my TV. During the political campaign everyone complained about "Faux News", so I got curious, found it on my TV, and started watching.
Up until then, I was watching MSNBC including Chris Matthews and other opinionated commentators (who is going to lecture 5 miles from here today), ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.
Found out it doesn't matter if you watch the big 3 or the so-called MSNBC. They all had a sprinkling of news if it was broadcast at all, while Fox was usually FIRST with the news...and I mean real news, not just political news..They had exclusive reports and interviews with both sides, whereas the big 3 had 1-sided interviews.
Also, during the campaign, I was curious about O'Reilly, Hannity, Cavuto, and others. Started watching them to see what they were all about. Turns out I LIKE Hannity and Cavuto, but the one I really like is Bret Baier (sp).
Tried to watch Olberman and Matthews. Bitter, bitter guys and hardly truthful.
I still watch the big 3, but rely on Fox for truth and fairness. Say what you want, but view them with an open mind and you will be surprised.
Over and over, this has been debunked
Why can't we have intelligent discussion of the issues that need to be sorted out by the candidates. Where do they actually stand and yes, BACKED BY FACT. We should try. This is an important election.
who debunked it?
The fine drivebys, like NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, etc.? A female caller on Rush Friday said it was on her credit card bill. So debunk that.
The drive-bys are SO in the tank for Obama they're literally desperate. I pity you.
Shame on you....as been debunked.
http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/08/30/dailykos-rumors-debunked-here-is-sarah-palin-pregnancy-photo-on-feb-10th-2008/
IT has been debunked. The woman who...
said she was a member has recanted. She has always been registered republican. Her husband was a member several years ago.
Obama's pastor as recently as last year said "God dam* AMerica." Both Obama and his wife attended that church for 20 years.
Comparing the statements...and the person who made them...I would say there is no room to accuse Sarah Palin about her husband than to accuse Obama and his wife about their pastor/mentor/friend who married them and baptized both of their children.
Can we leave this nonissue now?
All of this has been debunked! Link inside. sm
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y
debunked. The woman who said she was a member...
recanted. Sorry. Maybe you should have vetted your source a little better.
Debunked. Woman recanted....
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/alaska-party-official-says-palin-was-not-a-member/
There was no surplus. That was debunked years ago.
And the Democrats are largely responsible for the shape we are in. John McCain tried to pass legislation in 2005 to regulate Fannie/Freddie. However, Chris Dodd (head of banking and commerce committee, and largest recipient of Fannie/Freddie contributions) and the Democrats blocked it. Fannie/Freddie started this freefall in the economy. Obama is #2 on the contributions list. John McCain is wayyyyy on down the list. Then the democrats (the ones sitting now) pushed by Chris Dodd and Barney Frank in turn pushed fannie/freddie to give all those subprime loans to minorities and lower income folks, to people with either no credit or bad credit, knowing full well most of them didn't have a hope in heck of paying it back...it is THOSE mortgages we are going in hock to pick up.
Franklin Raines, James Johnson, Jamie Gorelick, Timothy Howard...all Democrats, two of them Obama advisors...ALL walked away from Fannie with golden parachute of MILLIONS after cooking the books.
And WE are picking up the tab.
NOBAMA, NODEMOCRAT, NO WAY, NO HOW!!
Debunked? see inside for link
Associated Press, 10/15/08. Click link below.
We insist bc issue has NOT been debunked because
Still waiting for the courts to decide.
Actually Bill O'Reilly debunked this.
ACORN is not taking over the census for entire states or the entire US......however, they will be conducting the census for certain areas. So they won't be in charge of the whole shebang, but they will be doing this for some areas.....which in itself is scary considering the fraud that went on during this past presidential election.
People keep insisting BC issue has been debunked
You really do need a reality check here. Obama "could be" the next president? The electoral college is going to confirm the WAY more than comfortable 192 electoral vote lead he holds over McCain (365 vs 173). I hate to break this to you, but the pubs' October surprise is not going to be a November surprise, December surprise, a 2009 surprise or any other kind of surprise. I have answered your BC ramblings before and will not take any more of my time to try to get this through your thick skull again. Like I said, if I were you I would not hold my breath. Everything else in your post is pure fantasy. I prefer to take my politics with some semblance of substance.
Phoney outrage over baseless, debunked accusations
x
Don't have to search
I have just noticed in reading the boards over the past month or so, you often bring up cigars and sex in the same sentence.
No searching necessary!
BTW, Popular Mechanics pretty much debunked all the myths you speak of.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
google search
The simple minded are so easily entertained.
Do a Google search...
apparently the liberal media shielded you well. If Bill Clinton was fair game, he had no one to blame but himself. The saddest thing of all is that he never learned from his mistakes.
Do a Google search
for what the winning Pick 3 lottery numbers were on November 5th.
That is not what I said. I will have to search for the specific case...
in this case, the school had a rule banning any kind of religious symbol. A girl wore a cross to school and she was told to take it off and not wear it again. The same school tried to ban a Muslim student from wearing a head covering on the same basis. The ACLU took the school to court (actually I think it was settled out of court) on behalf of the Muslim student to be able to wear her head covering. They did this without being hired by the Muslim student. They did not argue on behalf of the Christian girl at the same time. The Muslim got to wear the head covering but the other girl still could not wear the cross. That is what I am talking about. I did not say that the ACLU sought to ban it. I am saying that they took on the cause of the Muslim girl, but not the Christian girl. And to me, that is discrimination.
I don't know it to be a fact, but I think if that Christian girl specifically asked the ACLU to support her case they would have refused. The last thing the ACLU wants to do is argue on behalf of a Christian to practice Christianity, even in something so small as wearing a cross to school.
And yes, there are many schools who ban religious symbols because of that gross misinterpretation of the first ammendment...the free exercise thereof totally left out, and the words separation of church and state supplied, which do not even exist in the constitution.
Get on the net and search. Apparently there are a lot of schools...
who ban such things.
This is from OneLook Dictionary search. sm
partial-birth abortion
n.
A late-term abortion, especially one in which a viable fetus is partially delivered through the cervix before being extracted. Not in technical use.
The following is my OPINION on the whole issue:
PRACTITIONERS OF THIS BARBERIC PRACTICE SHOULD BE TRIED AS MURDERERS by the state in which they live.
Search Engine by Kim Komando
This is today's Cool Site by KimKomando.com. It's a nice change from google, as it has pictures, etc.
TO VISIT TODAY'S COOL SITE, GO HERE:
www.viewzi.com
I know. You gotta want to KNOW the truth to search for it. nm
nm
I just did a search for it. That is extremely scary. nm
x
Oops, bad search engine -------------------->
Please do google search on Bob Nardelli
and you'll see whose fault it is that Crysler has to close all of thier plants. You can search Bob Nardelli-Home Depot and Bob Nardelli-General Electric.
If you do a search on gender dysphoria
as I have, you will learn that human sexuality occurs across a very wide spectrum, not just gay, straight or bisexual. My 10yo son never picked up a truck or gun or whatever you might consider "boys" toys. Even before he could speak a word he was playing with dolls. That was nature, not a choice. At this point, we cannot say for certain that he is gay; we can only rely on his statements that he is angry and sad that he was not born a girl. If I thought "fixing" him would make him happier, I would do it, but all my husband, my family and I can do is provide support, love and a really good therapist to help deal with those feelings of isolation and loneliness.
auditors search for unrecorded liabilities
because just because it's not on somebody's books doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I wasn't saying anything about proper protocol or transparency. I was only saying we still owe it even if they hide it. Sheesh.
A search warrant under FISA prior to 9/11
As you can see from the article cited below, Holder did not have that evidence. He was not the only person responsible for "not allowing" the laptop contents search. Seems there was a problem with intelligence sharing between the US and France. His decision was also defended by the FBI director. Unless being able to predict the future is a qualification for the AG, it seems that you could find a better reason to be losing sleep.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/08/60II/main508362.shtml
It has been noted as a casual aside on many search sites......
That the mega-wealthy are trying to "hide" their wealth. Clothing catalogs for the rich are pushing "dressing down." Those fancy cars are getting garage duty. They did the same thing during the depression - no one drove their Duesenberg (sp?), i.e., "made to order" cars. They can sit out decades in relative comfort, they have high-tech security on their homes. Wouldn't it suck if we didn't dare venture out of our homes? What kind of "freedom" is that!!!!
Comic relief anyone? Put "failure" into google (reg search
Ya'll are gonna love this!!
So did Obama. The search for Black identity, heritage,
Renewing American Leadership: Foreign Affairs. He also made contributions to The State of Black America, Portrait of a Black male. Whether you realize it or not, these subjects are of interest many Americans and Transcend gender, race, ethnicity and religion.
the link did not work. It gave me a "do you want to try snopes search engine" msg. nm
nm
So you and your buds bash us on *your* board and suddenly, once you reach this board,
some respect?
You publicly post on the other board that you *try not to visit the bog of eternal stench.*
Well, doesn't look like you are trying all that hard. Or is that another example of Conservative honesty, like your buddy on the other board lies 3 times before suddenly deciding to be *up front* (in her own words) about the whole bogus line of crap she was spouting.
You and your 2 friends don't respect anyone unless they're a member of your little club, think exactly as you think, belong to the same political party as you belong, and believe in the very same little narrow SUBsection of one particular religion.
That's what I interpret from YOUR WRITTEN WORDS. Your posts don't show respect. They only show twisted *facts*, ignorance, anger and hatred.
You can't be *respectful* on your own board but suddenly, when you come here - HERE - the place YOU call *the bog of eternal stench* you suddenly discover some respectability during your mouse click from there to here?
Please. Some of us aren't as stupid as you think we are.
You're becoming quite a bore. You and your friends stated you don't want us on your board, but you're not happy unless you're picking a fight. You and your *gang* told us to leave and not to post on *your* board. Maybe that should work both ways.
Out of ALL the problems with radical Conservatives, maybe the most annoying thing is that you don't believe in equality at all. You believe in SUPERIORITY. Somewhere along the line, someone made you think you were special and above everyone else. Sheesh! You're not happy unless you're dictating to everyone else in the country what they're allowed to do in their own personal lives regarding life, death, science, etc. You even think YOUR GOD IS BETTER than everyone else's.
You want to make the rules, censor people and tell them which boards they can and cannot post on, but YOU want to invade them all and spew your ignorance and hatred.
In my heart, I believe there are sincere, honest, intelligent Conservatives out there who are capable of a sensible debate. I've seen them. (I hope you don't chase them away, too.) But and your crew don't fall in that category, and this will be the last of your inane posts I will subject myself to.
Talk about stench. Just read your very own posts.
Can we bring the board back to the true reason for the board
Can we get the political board back to the true purpose of this board – to share opinions of why we like our candidate. Not bash and cut down others because they don’t agree with you.
I stayed away from this board for the past couple days because anyone who had anything positive to say about Sarah Palin got slammed, bashed, kicked down, etc. After awhile I found it all too draining, and was not seeing any reason to come. Yes, I did see some of it towards people who favored Barack Obama, but if you read the posts again it is mostly towards anyone who favored Sarah Palin/John McCain.
I thought the political board was for posting information regarding politics and candidates. What I have seen for the past few days is that it has been an attack board. Especially if you have anything positive you want to share about Sarah Palin. You say something good about her and you get attacked, you answer back, and you get attacked more, and then when you get mad and pretty much say stop attacking me, they come back with this “Geez, I’m allowed to have an opinion”.
Another thing I am tired of seeing is the slanderous, hate filled, really off the wall comments about Sarah Palin. The latest was something about her daughter actually had her baby. Talk about just bizarre comments. I thought what’s next, she’s an alien from another planet? The more I kept reading the more the comments were getting just really weird and bizarre. Of course nobody ever having any proof of any of these allegations. I then came to realize that the posters were just trying to get a fight going.
I also saw posts that had nothing to do with politics but attacking a poster named Sam. Again, probably trying to get another fight going for no good reason and on things that have nothing to do whatsoever with politics. I’ve read “Sam is like an annoying nat that you sway away”, “Sam, please let me know where you work” or “she must have her quota” or “sam is to the politics board as oracle is to the” This childish rhetoric is getting old. I’m not defending sam she is a big girl and I can see by her posts she can take care of herself, but my point is that this has nothing to do with politics. If you want a fight maybe you could request that the administrator create a separate “fight and degrade” section.
I’ve read the administrators post a couple different times called Beware of Flaming. She/he said as long as we realize that not everyone is going to agree we shouldn’t wear our feelings on our sleeves and a little more oversight on here would be good. Let people express his or her opinion and move on. If you don’t like someone just ignore that person. “It’s not rocket science, you know” (I liked that statement) 
I consider posting on this board a privilege and not a right. If you don’t agree with something and you post that you don’t agree and state the facts why (and are civilized about it) that’s one thing, but when you bash and degrade others without showing proof and just want to start fights and belittle others it just seems a bit juvenile to me.
I come to the politics board to hear ideas and stuff (facts) about the candidates. That is how I’m learning about each one, but I don’t want to read people attack other posters for no good reason. I'd like to hear about Obama/Biden & McCain/Palin, but I want to hear facts.
If you like to fight so much why don’t you pick on people that you can fight to face to face.
Your on the wrong board - you need to preach on the faith board
You just delivered a sermon (or quote). Either way it doesn't belong here. What does this have to do with politics. The democrat and republican party did not start up until after the 1800s. Socialism also wasn't created until the 1800s.
To me your post describes the way humans should treat other humans. This has nothing to do with politics - imho.
Because you posted on the Main board not Politics board.
It was removed, as we do not have an option of moving from Main to Politics.
This could have easily been avoided had you posted on the correct board.
The response from another poster to not post political viewpoints on this board was becuase you posted it on the Main board.
the conservative board is a liberal board now
you all aren't happy until you infect everyone out there with your hatred. It's not something I'd very proud of.
FOX news IS the news. The only 1 that tells BOTH
nm
It's all over the news - and I mean ALL news stations.
not just the ones you don't like.
Politics board = political topics. Faith board = religious topics.
Please keep all religious/faith topics and discussions on the Faith board. This would involve your beliefs, whether Christian or atheist, etc.
The Politics board is strictly for political topics and discussions.
Moderator
Ya gotta understand the rules. We have to post on this board only. They can post on any board they
If you leave our board, I'll leave your board.
Do you get any news except at the DU? ????? NM
Believe it or not, I do keep up with the news.
I realize this is an old story, but it has a new twist to it because now Gary Bernsten is now giving the specifics surrounding it.
When the news first came out that he was..sm
hosting a fundraiser for her I thought it was weird, but now that you bring it up (and it's a good question) I did some research and it appears that old Ruppert has a history of switching his backing between parties. Some believe his main objective is monopoly in broadcasting, not party loyalty or belief in party ideals (aka Big Business 102).
Excerpt from wsws.org: 'When it comes to politics, Murdoch, known in media circles as the “dirty digger,” is equally adaptable in pursuing his personal gain. The most loyal right-wing Tory and friend of Margaret Thatcher during the 1980s, as he built up his media holdings in Britain, he switched his loyalties to “New Labour” when he saw that Tony Blair could provide a fresh face for even more reactionary politics and was more than willing to further Murdoch’s interests in return for editorial backing. He made similar swings in his native Australia between the Labor and Liberal parties to further his efforts at monopolizing the print and broadcast media.'
Actually, I saw it on ABC News....
the footage of Obama not putting hand over heart for pledge. In all fairness, that is the only footage I have seen of him not doing so....never was a recipient of whatever chain email you are speaking of. Believe it...yes, saw it with my own eyes. Why he did it, have no idea. There could be a multitude of reasons why he didn't do it. Here is the big BUT...it does make one a but curious when coupled with the fact that he dispensed with wearing of the flag pin on his lapel. I heard his explanation; I am just not sure I buy it. Each thing alone not such a big deal...together, it does make one wonder, so I can see why nanna might have reservations. It is good to question things and not take everything at face value...be the candidate Dem, Repub, Inde...whatever.
Fox news
A propanganda machine for repubs. No one is obligated to appear on that network. There are plenty of other media outlets. Fox's ratings are dropping and MSNC's are climbing. Fox disguises these facts by including their entertainment ratings in with their "news" ratings. As far as ALL OTHER MEDIA being liberal, that is a transparent technique to keep viewers from getting opinions from ANY OTHER source than Fox. I certainly wouldn't fall for that bunko. I also notice that they concentrate on certain sites such as Media Matters and NY Times specifically because those sites are excellent at presenting the truth about distorted information disseminated by the propaganda machine. To each his own.
|
