I said you profess because you have said it many times on this board (sm)

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

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?

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.

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.

This is really getting out of hand on this board. All you CONS do is lie. This is crazy.

Okay, so please cite the 100 times I have accused someone of lying. This is your chance to squash us libs once and for all. I am waiting.

reporting that there is nothing to report...over...and over...and over, and repeating the information they DO have over, and over, and over? Going to the suspect's neighborhood, place of worship, high school, etc. trying to interview the ex-wife, parents, other people he knew, speculating like crazy just to fill air time and keep a big story alive? Or investigating the victim of the crime, going to his neighborhood, interview family, etc., to make the victim seem either a saint or a stinker?

The press never takes no for an answer. Denied hard facts from court or cops, they generally just make pests of themselves messing around in the suspect's personal life to find nuggets to report, then blather on and on. But they apparently do not consider this a big story. That they are not following their usual pattern in itself is a big story.

Please keep all religious/faith topics and discussions on the Faith board. This would involve your beliefs, whether Christian or atheist, etc.

Great article in opinion section of LA Times (you can get it online). Dated 06/24/2005, "Hustling on K Street" by Jonathan Chait, concerning Bush paying back the lobbyists and big business.

Reps. John Conyers and Maxine Waters are trying to get a meeting going in Congress tomorrow with Republicans joining in this time to debate and discuss the Downing Street Memos. Dont know if it will be covered on C-Span, sure hope so.

And if you cannot see the obvious differences in writing, well, you appear to be quite ignorant or unobservant or else you are not telling the truth. But that is your problem and I am not going to make it mine!!!

Notice what affilitation the top 6 are! - N wonder they don't care if we're in a recession.

He actually provides enough goofs to keep 2 channels busy -- MSNBC and Comedy Central.

I have to watch O'Reilly. It's like watching a train wreck. How else would I know what Jon Stewart and Colbert and talking about....LOL.

can't get away from them. Even this tax probably won't help. You name it, I've tried it except Chantix (sp) but I need a doctor to prescribe it and I don't have a doctor yet.

My mom smoked until she was 79. Died 4 months later. DH doesn't care if I don't quit after that because his mother died 6 months after she quit. Doesn't make sense, but it did happen.

accused of sexual harrassment? I mean seriously. You've got Edwards cheating on his wife who was dying...what is up with that anyway....she is still alive and wrote a book. Is she not dying now?

This kind of crap happens on both dems and pubs side. I'm not saying that either side is right when doing it. I frankly find it disgusting but if you are going to go after pubs it might be nice to look at your own party first and see that people in both parties pull this kind of crap. What is truly sad is that people only seem to go after the politicians in the opposing party rather than holding them all accountable for this kind of crap.

Neocons Accuse �Liberal� New York Times of Treason

Monday June 26th 2006, 8:05 am

Michelle Malkin, neocon blogger and concentration camp advocate, has posted a spate of converted WWII posters on her site, taking the New York Times to task for reporting the news, albeit a year late.

According to Malkin and New York representative Peter King, the New York Times stands accused of treason �for reporting last week about a secret financial-monitoring program used to trace alleged terrorists� and disclosing �a secret domestic wiretapping program,� according to CBC News, never mind both programs violate the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. �No one elected The New York Times to do anything,� King told the New York Daily News. �They�re breaking the law to satisfy their own arrogant, liberal agenda.�

In Bushzarro world, newspapers are �elected� to report the news. If newspapers report the trashing of the Constitution, this is treason. In Malkin�s world, it follows that traitors should be thrown in concentration camps, especially if they resemble in any way Arabs or Muslims.

It would seem Mr. King and Malkin suffer from memory loss. It was Judith Miller�s �arrogant, liberal agenda� that brought us the neocon lies about illusory Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. As Antony Loewenstein writes for the Sydney Morning Herald, the �vast majority of [Miller�s] WMD claims came through Ahmed Chalabi, an indicted fraudster and one of the leading figures in the Iraqi National Congress (INC), the group keen to militarily overthrow Saddam. Miller relied on untested defectors� testimonies (usually provided by Chalabi) to write several front-page stories on this information,� stories that did not pass the smell test at the time and have found the memory hole since.

Ahmed Chalabi, convicted bank fraudster installed as a deputy prime minister in Iraq, was a neocon darling. His Iraqi National Congress, created by the CIA, was the primary source of Judith Miller�s �journalism.� In short, Judith Miller was a hack for the neocons, thus making the New York Times a neocon conduit for lies and propaganda.

Even though the New York Times serves as a shameless shill for the �arrogant, liberal agenda� of the neocons, this does not change the fact the newspaper is protected under both the First Amendment and statutory procedure (see the Supreme Court case, Bartnicki v. Vopper). In 1971, the Supreme Court ruled in a per curiam decision that prior restraint (censorship) was not warranted in a government effort to stop the New York Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers. �There�s a tone of gleeful relish in the way they [the Bush neocons] talk about dragging reporters before grand juries, their appetite for withholding information, and the hints that reporters who look too hard into the public�s business risk being branded traitors,� Bill Keller, New York Times Executive Editor, told the Washington Post.

King and Malkin, of course, have nothing but contempt for Supreme Court rulings. It is irrelevant that NSA whistleblower Russell Tice (the source behind revelations published in the New York Times) is protected by federal law. King and Malkin believe the unitary decider and his Machiavellian operatives have the right to look through your financial, medical, and library records, listen in on your telephone calls, read your email, and sneak and peek your computer hard drive and while they�re at it rifle through your underwear drawer because �we are at war� with an enemy never sufficiently documented or designated, an enemy who worked for the CIA in Afghanistan and is not specifically �wanted in connection� with the nine eleven attacks, as his FBI wanted poster reveals.

Obviously, King and Malkin, and the whole of the neocon choir, believe the phony �war on terror,� rechristened the �long war��i.e., it will last a century or more, or long enough to provide obscene profits for the death merchants�gives the �permanent revolution� Jacobins the right to trash the Constitution.

Quite naturally, this brings to mind Hitler�s Erm�chtigungsgesetz, or Enabling Act, an element of the Reichstag Fire Decree nullifying the civil liberties of German citizens after the Reichstag was torched (a fire planned by Goebbels and executed by G�ring, according to SA man Karl Ernst).

Bush, not unlike Hitler, feels he has the authority to by-pass Congress (mostly corporate purchased whores, so this is a moot point) and use the Constitution as a doormat where the unitary decider wipes off his shoes, mucky with the blood a few hundred thousand Iraqis.