How sad for all of us, only 1/3 of people wanted to break away from England too. nm
Posted By: MT17 on 2009-06-18
In Reply to: OMG, so boring, I fell asleep in the middle of it...nm - ()
xxx
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
It is about what the PEOPLE want - and they wanted this
Finally the legislators vote what the people want!!!
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?
Information on only 1/3 of people wanted American Revolution SM
History Channel. Those figures are based on evidence collected by historians from the surviving documents of the era and are, at best, "guess-timates". Loyalties changed according to which side held a particular territory. If you were a farmer or local merchant and wanted to keep your property (or just stay alive), you signed an oath to King George or the Continental Congress or both if necessary.
Lynndie England
Lynndie deserves an apology
By Richard Cohen |
|
|
Before being sentenced to three years in prison and a dishonorable discharge, Lynndie England apologized to just about everyone in sight. She apologized to coalition forces and all the families and to the detainees she and others had abused at Abu Ghraib prison - England was the smirking soldier holding the leash, you might remember - and to the families, America and all the soldiers. What she did not do is demand an apology in return. She's entitled to one.
A stronger person, maybe one with some political fiber, would have demanded an apology from her superiors - starting with the commander in chief, George W. Bush: How dare you send me into war for reasons that now seem downright specious? She might have demanded an explanation as well - not that she would have gotten one. After all, none of us really have. It was, it seems, some sort of mistake.
She might have demanded from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld an apology for a military plan that no one, with the possible exception of Mrs. Rumsfeld, thinks called for enough troops and which was implemented before all of the troops were on the ground. How dare you, sir, send me to war so exposed?
She might have demanded an apology from the Army for sending her to work in a bad and chaotic place without proper training. Who says they're sorry about that? Not the President. Not Rumsfeld. Just salute and shut up.
She might have demanded an apology for not being told if the Geneva Convention applied to her detainees. From the President on down, the unspoken message had gone forth that the war on terror was something new under the sun. And the prisoners in Abu Ghraib were not real soldiers because the actual war was over and the enemy defeated - or so said the President. The detainees were something else, terrorists maybe, linked if only by rhetoric to Osama Bin Laden and the darkest of evil. A little fun at their expense - a pyramid of nude men and some sexual abuse - is what they had coming. If she got that message, who can blame her? Better yet, who will apologize for it?
The Washington Post on Wednesday published a letter written to Sen. John McCain by an Army captain, a West Pointer at that. In it, Capt. Ian Fishback says that for 17 months he's been searching for the Army's standards regarding the humane treatment of detainees. He cannot find them. Surely, torture is applying a hot poker to some poor guy's rear end. But is it putting a leash on a nude man? Is it mocking his genitals? Is it, in fact, any of the things Lynndie England did and which, thanks to digital photography, so offended the Muslim world?
It's impossible not to be revolted by what England did and to insist that no American should need special training in the humane treatment of fellow human beings. But she is, as she says, weak and passive and the sort of woman who is an easy mark for a man with the gift of fibbery. This was Charles Graner, her superior, boyfriend and the father of her child. As is very often the case in life and literature, the perpetrator is often also a victim. No reading of England's life story can stand any other interpretation. She is one of life's losers.
Nonetheless, she deserves her punishment. So do the others. But at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and elsewhere, the buck stops suspiciously low in the chain of command. Somehow, no one higher up is responsible for the situation England found herself in or for what she did. She's apparently accustomed to this sort of thing - just another example of getting stuck with the baby. Maybe someday she'll realize that a whole lot of very important people did her wrong. Who will apologize for that?
|
The post says ENGLAND threw out
//
Prayers and thoughts to our friends in England
We are thinking of them
She;s right, it is serious. There was one student from England who voted early...sm
in Ohio. I would definitely call that voter fraud, wouldn't you?
Heaven knows what they'll find out when they finally get down to it.
Acorn is really messing things up for everybody, both parties included. No matter who takes Ohio, obviously, there's going to be fraud going on. Not to mention all the other states with the same problem.
And before you go off on the fact that the link is from FoxNews below....try to remember the facts, that none of the other networks will cover this....because they're all in the tank for Obama.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/10-16-2008/0004905682&EDATE=
Typical sentiment from the party of no responsibility. Cohen that is, not England.
Brown's Economic Plan in England Mirrors Obama's
As you read the piece (see link below) in the London Times, substitute "Obama" for Brown, and "Geithner" for "Darling". Then multiply the billions in pounds by 1.5 to change them to US dollars. You'll think you're reading about the US plan - and the same catastrophic results, among which the worst are:
1. A burden on future generations of unparalleled and unprincipled proportions.
2. An outflow of investment capital to other countries that do not penalize the engines of the economy.
What struck me about Brown's plan was his "soak the rich" approach, which exactly mirrors Obama's - i.e., hitting the "upper 2%" of the "wealthy". It is more than passing strange to me that this is the precise percentage that Obama proposes - and is equally doubtful. Given Brown's recent meetings with Obama, no one will ever convince me that he didn't get some tutoring from our superclown...er, I mean, superpresident.
Another thing that's striking is how Brown's proposals are structured so that the real pain will be imposed after the elections in GB next year. In Obama's case, most of the real pain has also been scheduled for the "out years" - meaning that the public won't begin to feel them until beyond 2011.
And finally, there is the criticism that Brown's program is based on a lot of rosy "recovery" predictions which are very doubtful. Exactly the same criticism has been leveled at Obama's program, and in our case the criticism has come not from the opposition party but from within the government itself, i.e. the Office of Management and Budget - which is considered to be a very credible source of information on this sort of thing
Cut and paste, or follow the link at the bottom: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article6168950.ece?Submitted=true
.
I never said I wanted the
government to take care of everything and everybody. I want the government to be responsible to its citizens. They work for us. Expecting elderly retirees to get a job or go to college is ridiculous. These people deserve better. I am not complaining about my life. I am reiterating to you what I see here in the Sunshine State. It is all about money all the time. Many people I know will be able to regroup and hold their lives together but I don't understand why the collapse of the middle class is just all right with you. That is my point. No need to go into the pull yourself up by your bootstraps argument. We will never see eye to eye on that. This is about our country being in debt out the wazoo, borrowing money from China to fight a war no one wants in Iraq and middle class people being downsized into poverty. It is not about being lazy or having choices. It is about the sad sorry state of our union.
Yep, just like the DNC wanted you to...
to move the cLintons on their way out. The DNC did not want Hillary from the get-go, and the media helped them accomplish it. And here you are rewarding them by electing the perps. LOL. sigh. Poor Hillary...pilloried by her own.
Thank you - that was all I wanted to know (sm)
sad how many people don't know the answer and just want to dismiss it without even knowing though.
Just wanted to add
I in no way mean to indicate that everyone receiving any type of public aid spends the whole day watching soaps and eating bon bons. Just that a large portion of them (at least in my area) do just that and have lived off it for years as opposed to using it as a temporary crutch while they try to get back on their feet.
Yep, I know....just wanted to be sure all...
of the information was out there and that what Bush did is vastly different than what Obama is proposing. And apparently it is working because they are lining up for the ice cream and defending him right down the line...lol.
Just wanted to say.................. sm
Merry Christmas!
That's not what I wanted to see.
DH has been talking about moving there for a couple years. He loves Canada.
I hate the cold. Think I'm going to show this to him? Nah. 
I just wanted to say thanks.
This is the first time that a discussion on same sex marriage has been a good discussion without personal attacks, etc. Thanks for sharing your point of view with me.
I wanted to, but DH said no.
We have 50 tomato plants in containers, 25 pepper plants (green, hot, hotter, and hotter then he!!), 10 potato plant containers (x6 cuttings in each), and 10 containers of cukes. The only thing we planted in the ground was beans, onions, and radishes. All doing fantastic. Already have a hot pepper and some tomatoes and this weather sucks this year, only 60 damp, dreary, rainy all week...again. Surprised the plants are doing so well.
We also have about 5 tomato plants coming up in the ground from last year.
I was wondering how your garden was doing. Thanks for letting me know.
Well, call me what you want, but I wanted to know.
I say use God's name when you're speaking the truth. If it's truth point it out to me.
What I wanted to know to start with...
is how can I know that Democrats/liberals/the left, WHOEVER, will keep this country safe, when half of them deny there is a threat and the other half have no idea how to deal with it? What I said it was not political, I meant it. Both sides should be trying to protect this country, but frankly I only see one who seems to understand the threat. As I have said numerous times, I am not a registered Repbulican. I am not thrilled with any party in this country right now, but I have to register as SOMETHING to vote, so I am registered independent. Yes, I am conservative, I have conservative moral values and I believe if we had stuck closer to moral values we would have a lot fewer issues these days, but I digress. My concern is, Dem, that I don't think your party and many of its members grasp what a real threat radical Muslims are, and if you don't perceive the threat you don't take steps to fight it, and that is the reason I referred to Clinton, because in all honesty I do not think he perceived the threat. I do not want to think that he did and ignored it. And my point is, I don't think your party to this day perceives the enormity of the threat, and yes, that scares me. This is not rhetoric. This is the way I, me, personally, feel and has nothing to do with left or right Dems or Republicans, other than the Republicans do seem to have a better grasp on the threat than the Dems do. What I would like to see is America united against the threat, with politics out of it. That is what I would REALLY like to see.
Yes I did, and I never said I wanted free...
healthcare for myself. I want free or more affordable cost healthcare for American children. My children are already covered. My husband has worked for the same company for over 12 years, and he has decent insurance. You are impossible to argue with because you refuse to admit that we can afford $333 MILLION PER DAY FOR A WAR IN IRAQ, AND WE CAN AFFORD $19 MILLION PER DAY FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH CARE. How are your taxes going to be raised to 70% of your income for the health care? Have they been raised that high for the war? NO, so your argument is not valid.
Just wanted to say I agree with you. sm
Thanks for saying it. I think it bears repeating: We are animals too (sorry, can't say I care what it does or doesn't say about that in the Bible), the human race is highly overrated LOL, and yeah, what about population control?!
Humans are already using up 30% more of the Earth's resources each year than the Earth can replace (according to a report by Anderson Cooper I saw some months back), and that's at the current worldwide population, which is only expected to increase. What ARE we going to do when we run out of space, and food, water, trees...?
If we're not animals and we're "above" them, we should be smarter about the Earth and all the creatures on it than we have been, and I just don't see the evidence for that.
someone wanted to see SP interview?
well sunday night on fox, greta vansusteren will interview her. greta is a v. good interviewer too, (with good questions, listens to the answers, etc, if you are not familiar with her).
THe way he was smirking....I would not have wanted to...
look at him either. Not very Presidential. lol.
When did I say I wanted to live in
a Socialist society. I don't. Neither do I want an unstable person with a fiery temper with his hand on the nuke button.
I think he meant he wanted it available to everyone -
he never said he would require you to buy what the government offered - that was more Hillary's plan. He just says he wants it available if you don't have insurance.
They wanted Bush to do that and he said no because
it would lower the value of our dollar.
If China wanted to do that...(sm)
they would have already done it when the economic crisis hit. We already owe them tons of money. I think they would make out better collecting interest off us than spending their resources trying to "control" us, which would eventually lead to yet another war. What I think should be in the bill is help for those who need it immediately (the ones who have already lost jobs and extending state funds to make budgets) and infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure, green job advancement. This can't be outsourced, it generates revenue, it provides jobs, and its needed. The more people we put back to work or keep at work, the better chance we have of paying these bills off through taxable income.
I know it looks like an enormous amount of money to be going into debt for (and it is), but at this point I don't think we have any choice. If you want to talk national security, a depression would leave us much more vulnerable than being in debt. Being vulnerable is not an option at this point.
Whoever wanted what.., the fact..
is that from 1995 to 2001, the Republicans were in control of Congress with a Democratic president, and from 2001 to only 2 or 3 years ago, there was both a Republican president and a Republican congress. So, I think it's pretty obvious what party to point a finger at for the economic mess we are in now, not to mention the other problems. Also, the majority of the bad loans that turned sour were not made to simple homeowners, but speculators and 2nd home buyers. How many people do you know that are losing their actual home? And how many do you know that are losing a 2nd home or investment properties? Compare the figures and you will see. Personally, I don't know of anyone personally losing their actual home. But I know of a dozen or so personally who are losing their investment properties.
Maybe she wanted an Ipod? LOL...sm
http://mediamatters.org/items/200904020002
Can you possibly be more trivial?
I wanted actually to know your thoughts. Not an article. nm
?
In one paragraph you have not only told me more than I ever wanted to know.
You have outlined and described in perfect detail the problem with why your arguments can never be recognized as anything but dividing. Gt, believe me, this is not all about you, which it always seems to end up being about in your posts. The fact that you refuse, not fail, but refuse to accept anything, any explanation, any single example of the image you project as well as your close-minedness, is illustrated in every post that you make.
Yeah, you're right...but if he really wanted ...
publicity he could have had Britney Spears' guy design him a set and he could have announced it from there.
McNasty wanted to suspend the RNC, too., sm
because of the hurricane. Guess he's going to be The Suspender! There's more to this than meets the eye. He's running scared, poor old man.
Poster below is correct: He needs to learn how to multitask--that's what the presidency is all about.
Personally, I'm looking forward to the Biden/Palin debate. Since she compares herself to a pitbull, hunts helpless animals from a helicopter, stuck "her" 3-day-old infant under her desk so she could work, I hope he rips her a new one! She ain't no lady and certainly does not have my respect.
Have you ever thought maybe she wanted a baby
My cousin at 16 wanted a baby. Her parents tried talking her out of it. Explained what her life would be like. Told her about safe sex, birth control, etc. She still got pregnant and had a beautiful baby and she's a good mother. My other cousin (her sister) wanted a baby. Again my aunt and uncle talked to her. At 17 she had her baby and she is a wonderful mother.
So think people....it is possible her daughter wants a baby. Especially if all of her friends are having babies.
If you really wanted to you would have put Clinton on the ticket.
nm
What do you mean? I thought that was what Bush wanted to do.
nm
Good grief is right. I just wanted to
read any cases he cited myself because this is a very gray area and I would like a better understanding of the law.
Excuse me for asking for cases.
Yeah, right. You checked what you wanted to see.
I saw her on an interview the other night. The host did not tear her to shreds like Gibson and Couric did. He asked sensible questions and she gave sensible answers. Gibson and Couric set her up big time to make a fool out of her and don'cha know they're for the O? They were downright spiteful.
Katie did it to up her ratings since she's not doing so great at CBS. Gibson did it because he was told to do it. (NBC=MSNBC)
I decided then that I would not watch either of those 2 so-called reported again. To each his own and this is MY opinion.
That's okay, too. You just stated you wanted our reasons
why, so I stated mine. Won't let that happen again, though. From now on, I think I'll just read and not post. I didn't think my reasons would be dissected. I thought this was only a poll. Have a blessed day! 
Bin Laden wanted to bankrupt the US. sm
Supporters of the Bush administration like to say that there have been no terrorist attacks on US soil since the tragedy of September 11, 2001, suggesting that President Bush has kept the country safe from terrorism. What they forget is that Osama Bin Laden clearly outlined his strategy for battling America, not by flying more planes into new buildings, but by driving the US into bankruptcy.
It was BUSH and MCCAIN who wanted to
not the dems, check your facts
If Bush wanted to lead s/m
I think a nice black tie BBQ would have satisfied protocol. Beer goes real well with BBQ and it doesn't cost $300 a bottle. Maybe Bush is still clinging to "the economy is fundamentally sound." Maybe he'd like to tell that to my single parent neighbor who was laid off from her manufacturing job yesterday after 15 years because they're moving the plant to MEXICO.
I wanted to glue her backside........sm
to the chair! I am not saying that Obama didn't deserve applause during his speech, but every sentence he uttered was not "standing ovation material." I agree....and there were a couple of times I thought Joe might say something to her but either he didn't or it didn't do any good. She looked like a cheerleader!
I, too, was waiting for some kind of financial scarifice on the part of the President and congressment, but I knew it would never happen. They could certainly save the country a bundle by yanking the Golden Fleece program. They have 4 former Presidents and who knows how many former congressmen still on the payroll. That should save the country a few bucks! But those are scenarios that you will never see come to pass.
So, if Obama wanted to "truly" get us in the right
nm
Clinton wanted every one to own a home
OH MY GOSH, BLAME IT ON BUSH.
http://thevirtuousrepublic.com/?p=1439
Link plays a video by Pelosi.
By the way, the dumb witch lies about the Bush record and she goes on about deregulation, but in reality, President Bush did try to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but was stymied by a minority of Democrats in the Senate:
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
SO MUCH MORE READING ABOUT THE TRUTH.
I say GOOD FOR HIM! They wanted change...
XX
Right - LOL Guess she wanted one for both hands.
x
The "rabble rousers" they wanted to keep out with the
00
I just wanted to post the same. The fact that they
were released is proof that they are innocent.
How would you react if somebody imprisoned you, tortured you, waterboards you, keeps you in a box with caterpillars, kicks you, beats you, puts you into stress positions until your 'eyes fall out,' affixed to electrical current and God knows what else about we are kept uninformed, and this for years and years? And this only on grounds of 'suspicion?'
Finally your innocence is proven and you are released.
Wouldn't you thank your rescuer on your knees and thank God?
What feelings would you have toward your torturers?
I know, it is a waste of my breath and my energy, because now the whole vicious cycle with bashing, insutls, tit-and-tat and playing grammar- and spelling-police starts all over again.
It is sooooooo frustrating.
It is all about justice, torturing innocent people and taking away from their innocent life 7 (seven) years.
Don't tell me again that
'terrorists are not covered by the Geneva conventions.'
because 90% of the prisoners in Abu Ghraib and Gitm were innocent!
Why are you still loyal to your leaders who authorized the torture in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo? Those detainees are innocent, now they are released and now SOME are after YOU. You, we, the American citizens are the victims of these wrong decisions taken by the former administration.
My post contain no bashing and no insults, jsut disagreements with other posters.
Disagreement is not bashing or insulting, as long as it does not ontain foul language and slander!
Let's see who throws the first stone, this will be the guilty one.
If I wanted to see a vulgar hand gesture
I'd just merge onto the freeway in rush hour. Big whoop.
|
