I'm assuming you are quite young, am I correct in
Posted By: vn on 2009-06-21
In Reply to: it's a typo, stupid, and I do not make 'fun' - ()
that assumption?
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
And you also I am assuming? What would...
your reaction have been if Obama had announced he was suspending his campaign to return to Washington (his job actually, campaign not withstanding...he IS still a senator and we are still paying him)to deal with this crisis? Be honest. What would your reaction have been?
now who is assuming
talk about ass-u-me ...
Because I am a Jew I am pushing sex, violence, other "worldly" things on you? Are you saying a Jewish life is corrupt because we aren't christian? Never said you should put up with it. You should voice your feelings to the stores, television stations, magazines, etc.
I didn't say you shouldn't have your "christian things" out in public, I said, don't assume Ben Stein speaks for the Jewish community. Got your feathers a little ruffled there, didn't ya? LOL!
I'm assuming you mean....
that it would be a bad thing to be a Muslim? It's been proven for 2 years that he is not a Muslim but a Christian, but that's not the point. What exactly makes it bad to be a Muslim?
You know what they say about assuming don't you?
I'm originally from Florida, which is the melting pot of the US for race dear. I have black, white, asian, indian, hispanic, etc etc friends. My problem is with the fact that people still want to whine about "oh unequal treatment" when really all that has happened is a reversing of treatment. Now white people can't get any help or decent positions if there is a minority going for the same help or position.
But hey, you must know everything, so I digress.
There you go again. Assuming.
I spent many days writing and calling my reps.
McCain and what happened with his first wife has noting to do with voting.
You also do not know who I voted for.
O is rushing too fast in his decision making from my point of view. He's putting the cart before the horse. He's not thinking of consequences of closing Gitmo, the stimulus package, ending the war in Iraq too early, letting Geithner become head of IRS, and choosing Emanuel.
We shall see what happens, and I hope its for the best, but he should slow down and take his time before making decisions that will affect all of us in the coming years.
Assuming that you are serious in your inquiry,
my response follows:
I have, thus far, seen no credible evidence to corroborate the notion that Bush willingly lied about the situation in Iraq. The information available at the time regarding WMD may or may not have been incorrect, but it was information that was accepted at that time by the world community, and I can no more condemn Bush for believing it than I can condemn Clinton or the UN for believing it. Given the state of the country in the aftermath of 9/11, it seems to me that allowing any country to disregard a 14th or 15th UN resolution with regard to accounting for WMDs would have been seen as insanity.
Another poster said something to the effect that the truth has not been presented, and I think this is true. We hear about the activities of the insurgency in Iraq, but we do not hear about the day-to-day successes there because bombings are more sensational and a better news story. A troop of soldiers building a road or delivering medical equipment or school supplies isn't a story. Iraqis working alongside American soldiers is not a news story. Suicide bombings and allegations of prisoner abuse are more sensational, and so that is what the public sees, and the Bush administration has done a really poor job of keeping the public updated on what the military is actually doing in Iraq and what advances are being made in the war on terror, thus allowing the media to be the only voice heard.
As far as prisoner abuses go, I don't think conservatives have their heads in the sand, but I think they (I) have a somewhat more cynical attitude toward such abuses. While such abuses should never be tolerated, they will always happen. There are bad eggs in any basket, whether it be a prison or any other community of people. When those people break rules and do bad things, they deserve to be investigated and appropriately punished, but allowing and encouraging the entire community/effort to be indicted by the actions of those few is counterproductive. In the instance of prison abuses, I consider it irresponsible and counterproductive for the mainstream media to engage in what seems to me to amount to broad-scale bashing of the administration on the basis of these incidents.
I also think conservatives are more inclined to weigh these incidents against the larger picture, whereas liberals seem more inclined to see the actions as unacceptable (and rightly so) and thus to condemn the entire system (not justified, IMO). In other words, the possibility that some Iraqi detainees are being mistreated is concerning, and the situation should be corrected, but it is not an indictment against the entire military or the entire administration. Such abuses must be minimized proactivly, and when they do occur, they must be dealt with, but it is unrealistic to expect that they will not happen at all or that they are any indication of acceptable behavior standards of the military or the administration.
As far as embryonic stem cell research, I personally believe that this is an area in which agreement is never going to be possible because the basic difference is more theological than anything else. I tried to explain my position on this on the conservative board, but I did it poorly. Most social conservatives/pro-life people approach the abortion and embryonic stem-cell research issues with the innate presumption that life - the presence of a new soul - begins at conception.
Regarding your above example of weighing the cells in the Petri dish versus helping the patient with Alzheimer's, the statement of the pastor you cited seems kind and loving IF one assumes that the Petri dish contains nothing more valuable than a few cells - in other words, if you assume that it does not contain a human soul. On the other hand, in the pro-life viewpoint, if I assume that the Petri dish contains a new human soul that is to be deliberately destroyed in order to help the woman with Alzheimers, I cannot be anything but horrified that one life, through no fault of its own and through no action on its part, is considered disposable for the benefit of the other.
Many conservatives find a puzzling dichotomy between the liberal abortion/stem-cell research position and the position regarding Iraq. The liberal position seems willing to accept the possibility of killing a human soul if we don't have firm proof that it exists, but the continuing US presence in Iraq in a situation in which premature withdrawal would almost certainly lead to chaos and, quite likely, the development of a Taliban or Iran-like theocracy is anathema.
Why do these divisions exist? I think that is probably a matter of who one listens to and believes, and what mindset one takes into their research. If you approach research with the mindset that America is at fault for most of her problems, that can be supported. If you take the position that America is basically just, that position can be supported. If your morality tends to focus most on social justice, that can be supported. If your morality focuses more on individual liberty, that can be supported. With the mainstream media being considered less reliable by both sides (considered a liberal mouthpiece by conservatives and a Bush puppet by liberals), I think more people are turning to online sources for their information. The danger of that, though, is that is very easy online to find sources that cater to one's preexisting position, thus widening the divide.
If I have said anything inflammatory or disrespectful above, my apologies.
You are stereotyping and assuming......
I believe you have never taken the time to reach out to gay people and see that the lifestyle is not any different from yours. Unfortunately, your bible thumping gets in the way.
You have a lot of nerve assuming these women
xoxoxo
I'm not assuming you are white. I simply
meant put yourself in the role that she was in, a minority in college. You are right though, I assumed that you weren't a minority for that scenario and I apologize. And, I didn't mention anywhere in my post about Wright, I was simply referring to her as a college student and the fact that I did not think her thesis was racist.
You people on the left are always assuming you
nm
That’s all you got??? I was completely honest – you’re the one who did the assuming
My words were “DH works in stocks/trading”. Which he does. Not everyone who works in stocks/trading goes into an office in Wall Street or a stockbrokers office. There are many people behind the scenes that research companies, and other jobs dealing with the markets, trading, buying, selling, foreign currencies, etc. Many of them write articles for the companies who have clientele with big $$$ to be trading and selling. Many of them attend meetings, sit in on conference calls, etc. Also, many people when dealing with portfolios whether they are your own or various clients know what is going on in the world of the markets/finance. I never said he buys or sells “just for ourselves” and I never once said he went into an office or even eluded to the fact that he went into an office, so there you go again “assuming”. I didn’t divulge any information about his clients or anything, and I never said what he did except that he works in stocks/trading, which he does. By the way… there are many people out there who buy/sell stocks and currencies for themselves and makes or loses $$$ a day. Tell them they “don’t work” in trading. Your too busy wanting to defend yourself and make excuses and you’re doing a poor job at it. Next time maybe you should read a post slowly before assuming anything.
One thing I do know is there is a lot more going on behind the scenes and if the markets go up or down it is not just because of who is the president. But you only like to point that out when the market goes up. You praise the enlightened one when the markets go up and claim he has now walked on water and the stock market has gone up just because of him and he along, and yet you remain as silent as the wind when the markets go down. Can’t have it both ways.
I'm assuming you've never watched....(sm)
the full versions of his sermons, just the sensationalistic clips on Fox.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw
It's all about context.
I'm assuming that was supposed to be a picture sm
of an angry mob, but I was unable to view it, but I get it!! That's hilarious. But I will say the comment about "first they laughed and then they died" will haunt my nightmares -- not so funny.
JTBB, I have to admire your tenacity dealing with these people. Tell me, what is it like being a pariah? I know this won't jive with your atheist beliefs, but you know that Jesus was the most famous pariah, so your're in good company!! LOL
Assuming I am the nameless one....and also for the umpteenth time...
not a Republican...I call Barack Obama a socialist because he is one, not because he supports social programs (the accused Republicans do also, to a point, otherwise there would be none), but because he wants to practice redistribution of wealth...taaxing one group of people and redistributing that money to people who did nothing to earn it...including people who already do not pay taxes.
I never said Obama was a communist. He has had communist influences in his life, that is proven, he mentions the man in his book Dreams of My Father. But I have never said Barack Obama was a communist. I don't know if he is or not. I do know he is a socialist.
There you go again assuming everyone who marries is are christian heterosexuals
The middle east people don't marry according to our bible. The jews have their version, and so do all other religions. Even the bush people from Africa and Australia marry, and they don't marry based on the bible of christianity.
Talk about being screwed up! Trying to make a point with nonsense.
I sure can't want for all the states to follow suit and make marriage legal for homosexuals.
If you believe in christianity and the bible that's fine and good, but don't push your beliefs on everyone else, because we believe you are wrong.
Correction - I meant wait before assuming, not "want"
x
As a mom of 3 young men, I remember
vividly the day my oldest left for the Air Force. He was 19. There was no war. Then son #2 left in the National Guard in 1991 during Desert Storm.
I have to give her credit for even being able to speak, let alone hold up under fire, right after sending her son off to war!
You may be too young to remember, but that is what..sm
they said about John F. Kennedy and we all know what happened with that election and Nixon's loss, eventual election, and ultimate disgrace to our country. Most would have said Nixon was more qualified and had more experience. What do you think?
You must be quite young. It is an old saying originating..sm
from an actual doll that talked when you pulled the string. Chatty Cathy
Okay, pull it on.........young man said it with
xx
Wow you were married that young!
That's the crazy thing I read in any of your posts. LOL. Just kidding. Been with my DH since I was 18 but didn't get married until I was 25 and we decided to have kids. Good luck.
You must be too young to remember the 50s and 60s.
Can't get past the first laughable faulty premise that would have us believe there has never been an illegal election in the US. Discredits your entire post.
Thank god Im still young enough for someone to tell me to Grow up
LOL
PS I did not hear that on TV
Did you see the one about the young guy who worked
at McDonald's for 4 1/2 years? He couldn't get another job and wanted to know what O was going to do about it. I was absolutely shocked!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TptsP4ryido&feature=related
You must be pretty young if you
.
They not only *prey* on young people
but they are so desperate to find kids to die in Iraq that they even take kids on drugs and teach these kids how to pass a drug test so they can get in the military.
I think you underestimate the young minds...sm
Thought I'll agree the walkout probably was not for political reasons so much so as for what they believe is right. Do you think they probably have a lot of respect for this teacher? Maybe. It is possible to be passionate about something other than cutting class as a teenager. I know I was, and so is my daughter who just turned 13.
I also have to give you the point that the teacher should have stayed on the subject matter of the class. If you're hired to teach geography then teach geograpy BUT we don't have the privlege of seeing the course outlines, book, etc. It may not be so cut and dry as capitols, states, and what have you. So before you call for his head on a plank you should at least know that much. Whose to say that this course was not comingled with history and this teacher was within his right to bring up subjects to provoke thought. I don't see the problem with that.
Listening to the message in a whole, I don't see a problem in what the teacher said excpt that he may have deviated from the subject matter. And the fact still remains that we don't know the totality of the course description.
Young soldiers I know personally and on TV. Many
many of them felt very differently when they first went to war. After coming back they seem to come back with a very different view. Most of the soldiers I know think the war needs to end. I don't think most Americans think we should stop funding the war until the soldiers come home, and that's just it, many of us want them to come home! I watched a documentary on Showtime called Semper Fi, and it was a really moving account of a proud Marine's time in Iraq. I would definitely recommend watching it if you want to hear a first-hand account of how one patriotic soldier was disillusioned by the war and how he was given false information over and over again by his higher-ups. I don't claim to know the solution, and I know none of the candidates on either side have the perfect solution either, but I just feel that we are not making the progress we should be making, kids' mothers and fathers are dying every day in Iraq, and it makes me incredibly sad. Simple as that. I don't think we have any right to be there. I do believe we had a right to go to Afganistan, but not Iraq. That's just my feeling, and I really don't feel like getting into a huge debate about the war. I just want it to end.
She's that young? I figured McCain was at
encouraging young people to
become involved in the election process -- can anything be more CHILLING!!!!!!
I loved him in Young Riders
He's a good actor (he can play some real creepy characters). Not sure about his political viewpoints because I'm not very conservative.
the reason for young chickens...
is to keep costs low, so we can afford them--remember that chicken used to be very expensive. However, withdrawal times on steroids are such that chickens are not given steroids because they won't pass FDA standards. They are fed antibiotics in their water because with SO many in one chicken house, they are very vulnerable to disease, but no growth hormones or steroids. The faster maturing birds are due to selective breeding (short gestation=fast change). That is also why everything tastes like chicken. With the faster maturing young birds we eat, the meat actually has very little taste, so it is not as much that other things taste like chicken as it is that chicken does not really taste like anything. (I spent many unhappy classed in STINKY chicken houses in college). I HATE chickens! and Turkeys! but I do like to eat them.
right, al the young and educated, progressive
people voted for Mousavi. Even before all the votes were in, the government already announced a landslide win for Ahmedinejad. Definitely fraud, Ahmedinejad's ratings before the elections were very low, high unemployment rate. How could he win?
Recruiters *prey* on young people. sm
You do realize recruiters are part of the military you scream so loudly that you support. Recruiters have always come to high schools. I happen to think that the military is a fine career. No one is twisting anyone's arm. Military has been a part of our existence since we settled here and had the calvary. You are suggesting that high school students have no free will. That isn't logical in the least.
Young black man said he signed up 73 times
xx
Do you know how many young people BUSH KILLED FOR OIL? sm
Even Palin admitted in her interview with the moron Glenn Beck that the war was at least partially about energy resources. Wise up!
Who was rude? I just said she sounds young. You are just mad cuz Obama is winning
so everything i say is hateable from your point... well you can kiss my grits lady...you cannot come to my victory party... no snotty argumentative loser rednecks allowed.
It is new kid on the block as a national entity. 60 years young.
I don't need to consult Wikipedia. I've witnessed and dealt with Israeli atrocities first hand over the past 40+ years. Palestine has always been of interest to me. Israel's theft of Palestine occurred in my birth year.
In response to your oh-so-typical anti-Semite accusation, my issues are not with the people of faith in any religion. Rather, I take strong exception to the ugly politicized version of Jewish nationalism/Zionism in much the same way I do with politicized Islam. Palestinians did not make this into a religious war. For them, it is a question of national identity, as you very well know. So let's not pretend this is about hatred of Jews. The shame is on you to try to drag God into the ungodly.
My artificial intelligence includes 4 decades of dedicated research, personal acquaintance with scores of Palestinians, too numerous to count Arabs and progressive Jews who do not identify with the blood-thirsty behavior of their so-called leadership, political activism, association by marriage, relatives and the fact that I have lived in the region and experienced first-hand the devastation exacted at the hand of Israel.
Sabra and Shatila took me off any high horse I may have ever been on. You might want to remember that horror and dismount yourself. You are not talking to some ill-informed US media drone here, so don't try to clobber me with your "we were there first" nonsense. You and I both know that is hogwash and from where I sit, you are the one who is riding around in that bubble of blather.
Bottom line time. It's the occupation, stupid. Zionists will never have a moment's peace as long as they can't deal with that one universal truth. One only has to inspect the bloodshed statistics at the hands of the Israelis and the history of the wars they have fought to understand who the terrorists are and who cannot deal with the very notion of peace on earth. The ice water that runs through your veins and your lack of responsibiity and remorse over the pain and suffering Israel has caused speaks volumes about the humanitarian aspects of this tragedy.
I'm not in this for the support I may or may not get from them. For me, it is a simple question of right and wrong, but for the record, I enjoy open acceptance among my Arab friends and relatives. My relationships with them have enriched my life beyond measure.
of course he lied - but no one died - he had a young daughter to protect...
All men would lie - when, in fact, it was nobody's freakin' business........that was Hillary's problem
Obama drank and snorted cocaine when he was a young person....
does that mean you are not going to vote for him? Geez, what a cheap shot. You accept the same behavior in him and you want to rip kids who aren't even running for office. Just nasty little rascals, aren't you?
Yes - there was a young surgeon featured on one local TV program about this mess. SM
I didn't catch the first part of the segment, but he is having to think about joining the military medical corps because he had just opened his practice when the recession hit and can't pay his loans, and there aren't any openings in other practices around here now.
Young Voters Fall for Obama’s Promises Without Any Historical Perspective..sm
Election 2008: Young Voters Fall for Obama’s Promises Without Any Historical Perspective
By Liz Peek
Financial Columnist
Today we will almost surely elect Barack Obama President of the United States. A new generation will vote for Mr. Obama –- a generation that has grown up with the Internet. This new crop of voters has access to more information than any that came before, and yet has swallowed Obama’s impossible campaign promises and contradictory policies just as trustingly as those who in earlier times looked for a chicken in every pot.
Welcome to the disillusionment of another generation. I don’t anticipate this inevitable consequence of today’s election with any glee, believe me. To see young people turning out in droves to vote for this eloquent, attractive young man is inspiring. To hear them buy into his promises, though, is sobering.
For instance, we are told that the image of the United States has suffered mightily under George Bush, and that Obama is going to usher in a veritable global love-fest. Would those falling over themselves to herald our new president include the peoples of South Korea and Colombia –- allies both — whose much-needed free trade agreements with the U.S. Obama has opposed?
How about our neighbors in Canada or Mexico; will Obama’s promised re-write of NAFTA endear them to the U.S.? Is it possible that Obama’s opposition to free trade demonstrates his gratitude to labor unions –- groups that aroused his ire by donating to the Clinton and Edwards campaigns but suddenly were much more warmly welcomed when they began shifting funds his way?
Over a year ago I wrote a tongue-in-cheek column defending the status quo against the pressing demand for “Change” writ large. While politicians of all stripes were heralding new directions, they were ignoring, for example, that the U.S. has been blessed for many years with low inflation. Voters in their 30s and 40s could not be expected to remember the devastating inflation of the 1970s. They couldn’t be expected to understand how double-digit price hikes threw the fear of God into retirees on fixed incomes and created the same kind of paralysis in lending that we are witnessing today.
They might not connect the dots between Obama’s enthusiasm for the Employee Free Choice Act, a resurgence of unionization, and wage-driven inflation. They might not realize that restricting trade with China, re-writing NAFTA and barring adoption of free trade agreements with Colombia and South Korea will indeed drive prices higher.
The United States has also enjoyed a period of stable employment. The new generation has never seen serious unemployment. True, they have witnessed shifts in employment as manufacturing jobs have been lost to lower-priced locales. But they have never seen unemployment rates go much above 6%, where it is now. In 1982, when unemployment reached 9.7%, Obama was 21 years old. I doubt he was much focused on the dismal state of the economy. Voters, however, were focused, and gave Ronald Reagan a mandate to set the country on a new course –- one which encouraged growth through lower taxes, expanded trade and deregulation.
That program was adopted by both Democrats and Republicans because it worked. People in their thirties and forties cannot imagine that raising taxes on successful people might harm the economy. That’s because they weren’t around to witness the exodus of talent from England –- a country wherein punitive marginal tax rates squashed incentives and drove out anyone who could locate elsewhere. Margaret Thatcher didn’t just join the Reagan Revolution –- she clung to it for dear life.
What young voters have seen, and have responded to, is the collapse of Wall Street. Because bankers, politicians and speculators conspired to create the worst investment bubble in modern times, we are about to abandon the policies that brought millions of people around the world into the middle class. Policies that gave people real hope –- not just its rhetorical facsimile. This is a tragedy.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/04/lpeek_1104/#more-2415
If Palin is unable to supervise her young ones, how can she supervise a nation?
When I saw the picture of her daughter who is pregnant, my heart broke. She has the look of an adolescent. What in the world is she doing having sex? How could her mother miss the signs that her daughter was taking part in adult activity with dire consequences? Because she failed to provide supervision, this child woman will now be forced to forego a young adulthood in which Bristol discovers herself during the difficult phase called identity crisis all young people go through, disocvering the world and entering academia without the huge responsibility of raising a child, and making the choice of when to have a child when she is mature enough. This is a monumental failure.
You are correct
the thing is we can find common ground with people who we don't always agree with 100%. Blair tends to be more socialistic, but he is unified in the fact that terrorism is the worst threat to our world right now, and we have to stop it at all costs. Social agendas come second to him. Safety is 1st.
You are correct
I'm sure there are some wonderful people in Iran!! You included. It's good that you can the government is scary though. Here are some words from Iranian president AhMADinejad from just yesterday...
Ahmadinejad warned the West that trying to force it to abandon uranium enrichment would cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians.
From your comments it sounds as if this a false statement since you love America. You of all people I'm sure appreciates America!!
Yes, of course you are correct
However, my post topic was literally just a couple posts below yours and it seemed unlikely that you would have not noticed the duplication in monikers. This board may indeed be available world-wide, however, there is a fairly small group of folks who routinely post.
My point was simply that your posting may have erroneously led folks to believe that I was posting both pro and anti-liberal messages within a few posts of each other. That would be rather confusing to say the least and it would be thoughtless to confuse and/or mislead anyone who might be using this board, whether in the U.S. or outside of the U.S.
You are correct about the $40K....
that is the SCHIP program as it has been over the past 10 years (although income levels have gone up some from the start of it). The expansion of the program was to include the $80K families. This bill was about expansion of the program. Letting the program continue as it was was not the issue. The expansion was the issue. Bush would not have vetoed it if they had not sought to expand it that much. They knew he would veto it if they left that in, and they wanted him to veto it to score political points. That I do not understand. Yes, some Republicans voted for it too, also for political reasons, so if the fallout was really bad they could come back and say "Oh i voted FOR it." Kinda like the Iraq war resolution...lots of Dems voted for it...yada yada.
I want to correct myself on the above...
I was wrong about the poverty level. The figure quoted for a family of four at 300% of the poverty line is $62,000 so he was close on that. However, the bill does not state those people over that level will not get on it. It says the matching rate from the feds might not be available. Then we have the EXCEPTION...the waiver. That opens the door for New York and every other state who wishes to, to expand the program as high as they want to go. That is what Bush was talking about. The waiver makes it possible, and not only possible, probable.
Just wanted to be sure my facts were correct.
Thanks.
Yes you are 100% correct!!!
By george you are right!!! EVERY SINGLE POSTER ON THIS BOARD IS ME!!!!!! Except for Observer, of course, and a few old American Girl postings! I admit it, I am guilty, you have caught me. I have authored every single post you read on here. It keeps me very very busy but it's worth it!!!
There I have "fessed up and I feel sooooooooo much better. Whew! Thank you Observer for helping me to do the right thing.
You are correct - however, you were the one...
Yes, you are correct, a lot of people don't give middle names second thoughts, and certainly there is nothing to worry about when mentioning his name in full, but when you smear it like its a dirty word, I call that a dirty shame. I was simply stating why don't you say Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton or John Sydney McCain, no you don't, therefore it seems when people don't treat one candidate equal to the other they are up to something. I have no problem with his middle name. I think its a beautiful name. I also think Sydney is a beautiful name.. Second just because someone posts a long post does not mean they copy from other articles. I happened to write the post myself, however, if you would like a much longer one there are plenty that I can copy and paste from - just let me know....happy to oblige. :-)
Correct!
Strange how it's permissible to spread all kinds of rumors about McCain but off limits to mention the facts about Obama's past and present associates, such as the Reverend whose sermons he claimed he never heard.
|
