I use your words...this response is laughable...
Posted By: sam on 2008-09-26
In Reply to: This post is laughable and pitiful - me
and in many ways...yes...pitiful.
I don't know how any American can support any politician getting up and stating that a war still going on is lost. What a slap in the face for those with their lives on the line in Iraq. He should be ashamed. He is a representative of the United States of America. You think that comment did not enhearten the terrorists were were fighting? And yes, we were fighting AL Qaeda in Iraq within 2 weeks after going in, and I am sure that in your democratic talking points world you think they were able to mount an insurgency in that short a time and were not there until we went there. Pollyanna comes to mind.
War lovers. That is such a laughable and pitiful statement, won't go there other than to say NO ONE loves war. Good grief. Were you absent when the Iraq Liberation Bill was passed? During the Clinton administration, which he signed? Saying that Saddam should be removed? Clinton a war lover too? He went into Somalia...(Clinton)...soliders died there too. Remember them dragging the bodies behind Jeeps? Perhaps if he HAD fought the war there, there would have been no 9-11 and no Iraq invasion. I would suggest doing some real research before you start fling accusations.
As to Harry Reid...the wingnut comment is one day saying you have to support it, and when McCain comes to work on it, Harry Reid says go home. THAT is a wingnut flip flop no matter HOW you look at it.
Again with the multitasking...and this is the most laughable statement of all. We have an economy on the brink of crisis, and instead of Obama wanting to be right there to actually SEE the proposal being proposed, he prefers updates on his blackberry so he can continue to campaign. And you think he made the correct prioritization of his multitasking? Campaigning instead of trying to help the failing economy? You honestly think that was the correct prioritization??
It is not a secret why we are in this mess. Google fannie mae and freddie mac and see who has been warning about this very situation for years...that would be John McCain and the Bush administration. And who blocked it...Democrats, chiefly Chris Dodd and Barney Frank...and Obama advisor James Johnson who walked away from Fannie with millions after helping run it into the ground...Franklin Raines, another Obama advisor, walked away with millions after it was determined fannie had cooked the books. Did he do a day in jail? No...he PROFITED. Chris Dodd and Barack Obama the top two recipients of fannie mae/freddie mac contributions. Come ON.
We know who had a staggeringly large direct part in this mess we find ourselves in, and to hear them on TV accusing Republicans of being to blame and not acknowledging their direct involvement in it...is the HEIGHT of hypocrisy. Sorry, but that is the truth, no matter how pitiful and laughable YOU find it.
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
In other words you don't have any response to the truth..(sm)
Exactly which topic that I have discussed is so revolting? Abortion, US adoption, Bush's unjust wars, separation of politics and religion? I'm sure there are more to pick from. Or did you just assume that I would be an easy target? I don't think it's any of the above. I think you have nothing to say because you know I have said the truth.
Another classy response. I won't say liberal response,
because I don't think you and these pile-on posters are indicative of liberals as a whole. Don't know why they let you speak for them...but that is up to them. Obviously you don't think compassion is a personality trait...obviously you feel that it can be turned on and off to suit your agenda. So be it.
quite laughable, I think
You know, Lilly, it has gotten to the point of pure ridiculousness..If I posted that the sky was blue, the neocons would say I am dissing God cause the sky is overcast today..or whatever..It has gotten so **out there** with their nasty hostile posts it is beyond belief. LOL..I, however, can see the humor in it all because as their political beliefs and hopes crash around them, what can they do but strike out at strong democrats/liberals who believe in the complete opposite of what they have been brainwashed to believe..So sad. Because they do not have open minds and are not able to judge things rationally and fairly, they are left to strike out at anything that represents change from what they have been told to believe..It is really quite sad and I thank the powers that be that I am a liberal democrat who has always had an open free thinking mind and has never walked in lock step with political leaders..
This is just laughable to me.
Big tycoons wallowing in money. I'm sorry but I do believe that Obama is wallowing in money himself. He doesn't seem to have a problem with earmark spending, he wants the government to spend more money if he is elected, and he got the second highest amount of money from FMFM. To me....that doesn't show any change in how things are done now other than MORE government spending and we most absolutely cannot afford that.
I just think this is laughable.
Yes....I am angry. I'm angry at the government as a whole. Will I be angry if Obama wins.....no. I will be very upset though because I feel he lacks so much and his character should be investigated instead of swept under the rug.
I'm sure there will be some people who might throw a wrench into things just so Obama would look bad. But that goes both ways and to suggest that is just something pubs would do is ridiculous. The democrats have been the majority in congress and they have done jack sh1t here. They keep talking about changing things but they won't change things and actually do anything until one of their own gets in office because they surely don't want Bush to get credit for doing something good.
Also, I do believe it will be more likely that Obama and his supporters will raise holy he11 if Obama should lose. The race card will be thrown up into the air and I fear riots may break out. I do believe that there are people who will strictly NOT vote for Obama because he is black, but that doesn't define everyone voting against Obama. There are just as many people voting for Obama just because he is black and that isn't right either but it goes both ways. Just look at those video clips of Wright and Flager talking about blacks superiority and how whitey is evil and look at all those people cheering, standing up, and agreeing with those statements. Those are going to be the people to cause major destruction and start riots if Obama should lose and that is really scary.
We can't change what happens whatever it may be. I just hope and pray that both sides keep a cool head and don't do anything seriously stupid. No matter what happens we still have to stick together and try to make a better country for ourselves.
this is laughable...nm
nm
Those types of words are unnecessary and actually ARE racist words. sm
Those types of phrases are offensive and are intended to be offensive. This election should not be about race. If it is about race for you, then you are probably one of the ignorant people using those words. Very rude!!
This is a laughable source of
.
Boy, is that a laughable remark, *the
Fox News! And you claim to be unbiased! You knew you were never unbiased. Even the *regular news* have now admitted they were in favor of Obama during the campaign, as if it was not evident!
Hahaha. you are laughable. Let me know when
nm
I did. A week vs 18 months? Laughable.
nm
Where in the world did you get that I am racist? That is laughable! sm
Nowhere, no way, do you have any indication that I am racist. I am not making fun of the disabled, I am making fun of you. The disabled have a reason for the way they behave - you're just silly by choice.
This post is laughable and pitiful
First of all, the FAKE war *was* lost before bush started it - and our standing in the world is likely permanently damaged because of it. So Reid is right when he says it's LOST. PUTTING COUNTRY FIRST means not staring fake wars that HURT our economy and kill innocent citizens and good soldiers. G-d forbid the war lovers get a clue or any education about what is really going on with U.S. foreign policy.
And Reid is saying is that McBush(cain) needed to 'BACK' the bailout - so that it would pass. Without his support, a bailout won't pass. Nothing 'wingnut' about this comment.
But OBAMA is right on this one: McCain needed to show he could/can multitask -its a joke to suggest he had to suspend his campaign in this crisis - simply do both by letting his VP candidate cover the campaign anytime he PHYSICALLY needed to be in DC to vote, etc.
BOTH PARTIES are politicizing this crisis BUT THEY ARE NOT TELLING you the truth - our economy is in trouble for a LOT of reasons - and they don't want you to know all of the reasons because then you'd understand how things *really* work in the good old US.
The suspension of his campaign was laughable
What was suspended? The talking heads were out there. The campaign offices were all open. Ads still ran (too late to pull) McCain brought campaign aides with him to the White House, not Senate aides. Campaign daily note was given to reporters.
(Since when does making fun of a laughable candidate
to do with AIDS?) Do you even know anything about it? Robot, I don't think you have Clue-One.
Obama put those religious ties behind him. Hopefully SP can do the same.
What's laughable is the notion that the pubs
This coming from the party that gave us 8 years of W.
Gore is laughable and pathetic anyway.
nm
Obama's "Budget Cuts" Laughable
So - you think it's impressive that Obama plans to ask his department heads to cut $100,000,000 from their budgets? Let's put aside for a moment the question of why he's asking them for cuts at all when he's the one who says that MORE government spending is the solution to our economic crisis.
Obama is crowing about this because he knows that Americans don't know how to translate "huge" numbers into percentages, and also that Americans have grown used to hearing numbers in the $trillions. I mean - millions, billions, trillions all sound pretty much alike! Let's prove him wrong, shall we?
If Obama were asking for $100 million to be cut from a $3.5 billion budget, it would represent 1/35th of that budget. 1/35 is about 2.86%. So even on a $3.5 billion budget this wouldn't be much.
But wait. Obama's budget is $3.5 TRILLION, which is 1000 times larger. (A trillion is 1000 times larger than a billion.) Conversely, that makes $100 million a thousand times smaller of a percentage of the budget. In other words, we're not even talking about 2.86%, but one-thousandths of 2.86%. Here's what that looks like: 0.00286%.
In other words, if Obama made NEW cuts of $100,000,000 from his budget every day for over 300 days, he still wouldn't have even cut 1% from his budget. So you may now be forgiven if you're underwhelmed by Obama's $100 million budget cut.
It's kinda like someone crowing about how they've reduced their carbon footprint by disconnecting their doorbell. And this little object lesson showing how little $100,000,000 is compared to Mr. Obama's budget also gives you a little bit better idea just how disgustingly gargantuan his budget really is.
You're right....words are just words...so are Obama's...
...and don't/won't mean anything to many people, myself included.
He is no MLK.
It is a historic moment, of that I have no doubt. And yes, he has come far.
However, one still needs to have strength of character to back the words up for true meaning, and he is sadly lacking in that area.
Me, sexist? That's laughable, being a very strong independent woman myself, but
I am afraid of a woman who has some sort of God complex and has nothing to lose. We should all be very afraid by somebody like that!
I do not think, with all the witnesses and evidence to the contrary, that this laughable, narcissist
say to help himself---what credibility does he have at all?? The only thing I give him points for is the amount of self-delusion he has been able to create for himself, what a piece of work!
Nothing but words hon, and we know how Obama's words
nm
no response ....
No response
We are not supposed to cross post, so I am respecting the administrator's request.
My response
There is no sound byte answer about Rev. Wright. I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the fact that men of his generation experienced life in America differently than the whites did. Historically, many black churches have been and are political forums, stemming from the days of slavery, when the churches provided a refuge where freedom of speech was possible. I don't know what Obama did or did not hear, and neither do you. What I do know is that he has written extensively about the confusion he had over the "black" part of his identity and part of his search for meaning, purpose and belonging in his younger days was played out in South Chicago. If you have read anything about the church at all, you will know that they have been engaged in many extensive and successful outeach programs in their community and I suspect his "association" with Trinity was focused and centered around that. Too bad a person cannot be judged but his deeds, rather than wild speculation, innuendo and smear campaigns about the company he keeps.
A response from.....sm
To the first 4 paragraphs decrying the decay of black leadership while attempting to lay the blame at the feet of the democratic party, encouraging blacks to bail and proclaiming the dawn of a new day for black conservatism, all that needs to be said is yeah, right. The proof is in the pudding. Black voters are backing Obama 94-1, according to this random poll citation: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1192 …6% stampede, and we have not even made it through the convention. Great big whoop.
The abortion graphics let us know that the minister is pro-life. OK. Fine. Next, we have this twisted accusation that Obama supports partial birth abortion. That is not his position on abortion, and it is laid out in no uncertain terms on his website and countless times in his speeches and townhall meetings. What he said is that he supports the notion that things should stay as they have been and that those issues should be determined on a state-by-state basis at the local level. Same thing with regard to same-sex marriage and the federal government not being in the business of defining the meaning of marriage, which he clearly believes is a union between a man and a woman (not exactly the most popular position in the gay community).
Yet despite this, the pastor insists he is champion of the gay agenda and the abortion "industry." Never mind that the democratic party platform includes many pro-active initiatives that conservatives will continue to obstruct regarding abortion prevention through sex education, birth control, encouraging and enabling single parents to keep their children with parenting education, job skills training and making adoption laws more user friendly. Most democrats perceive the conservative views on abortion as caring about unborn right from conception to the moment of birth. Beyond that, the babies kind of fall off the radar screen.
For this radical stance (i.e., preserving status quo), the pastor evokes the Barack HUSSEIN Obama slur and is all indignant that Obama puts himself out there as a Christian. Champion of the dead horse drumbeat. This guy is not looking real credible at this point. Performer, he calls him, doubting Obama's sincerity. The "God's on our side" mantra rings hollow as well, considering the conservative pathologic disdain for poverty and conflicts over notions such as the measure of a nation's moral character is only as strong as it's care for the least among us.
He then proceeds to twist the words of THE greatest black leader of modern times…MLK. The infanticide he referred to was the practice of killing female infants/gender selection in biblical patriarchal societies.…a practice emphatically condemned by the Islamic Prophet Mohammed in the Quran back in the day. Twist, turn, spin.
Lets see. Obama is evil incarnate because homophobic interpretations of the Bible do not impress him as much as the Sermon on the Mount? That would be the moral teachings of Jesus, to include the Lord's Prayer, the injunctions to "resist not evil" and "turn the other cheek", as well as Jesus' version of the Golden Rule. Other lines often quoted are the references to "salt of the Earth," "light of the world," and "JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED." These are the core beliefs of the Christian doctrine. Drag out the tar and feathers and hang him high for that sacrilege.
Then another call to arms for those 6% black conservatives, a 2nd reference to Barack HUSSEIN Obama. As for the upcoming black conservative youth, it is the youth vote from the remaining 94% blacks and whites alike that just might boost Obama over the top, last I heard.
Then of course, there are a few paragraphs of closing prayers. If this is what it means to be "right," this guy ends up making the Obama nation look better and better.
response
So you are saying all other media outlets except Fox are liberal and therefore cannot be trusted to provide accurate information. Therefore, you can only get true information from their network, because they tell you that is so. I see where you are coming from.
response
All the examples you use about being make to hate, if the individuals mentioned being indoctrinated resisted by using their minds to seek broader or alternative information could simply resist the information being forced on them and resist hating. Poor sentence structure, I admit.
response
McCain did the same thing when he was defeated in N. Caroline because Rove used dirty tactics like push polls calling people and asking if they would vote for McCain if they knew he had a biracial baby. McCain had to suck it up and stand next to Bush and announce that he would support him. I thought he was ethical enough to resist using such tactics when he the chance to campaign. but I was wrong.
response
Of course I believe they can. Luckily you tacked on white supremacists right there at the end or I would have been appalled at the assumption that non-caucasian, non-christian people are incapable of thinking for themselves.
response...
Both Bush and McCain supported privatizing social security IF a person wanted to...neither have advocated making it mandatory. Perhaps if that had been done in the first place, it would not have been a fund that a Democratic congress could have raided to fund other programs. I personally would like to have control of my own funds (except congress has already spent them) and put in a CD..not the stock market. So that govt grubby paws could not get at it anymore. But that is just me.
I think the operative word is McCain said he did not disagree. He did not say he himself would re-start the draft. In the world the way it is, if enlistment really dropped off, it might be necessary just so we would have the size Armed Forces we would need, should the need arise. That just makes good sense. A peace time draft might be a good thing...two years in the service might change the direction some kids might choose to go. Would also provide some skills training and the ability to go to college after their service...instead of gangs...instead of being on the street...learn a trade, get a job...I don't necessarily think it would be a bad thing. The Armed Forces have been good careers for a lot of men and women...the Armed Forces are not just for war. But again...that is just me.
See my response above. And you are right - sm
I think both sides need to leave the experience thing alone.
The rep response is
lie, lie, lie and CYA. This whole SP story is going to blow up in their faces. At least, that's what I'm expecting, but sure will be amusing to watch over the next couple of weeks. Joe Scarborough, a former republican representative, said he would have never chosen her with just 1 1/2 years of governership and a mayor of a small town as experience. The media is not expected to ask questions or interview Ms. SP at least for two weeks yet. What are they hiding? Why can't the media ask her questions? This is quite as someone said before "a sideshow." Very entertaining.
response (sm)
Let the oil companies bail them out since they directly benefited from some of the bad management decisions.
This would never happen. I doubt the oil companies care if the US auto industry goes down. If it does go down, then we will have imports, for which we will also have to buy gas (which would actually be a better alternative for the oil companies as opposed to us building vehicles that would not be dependent on oil).
Don't bail out the companies. Give the money to the workers for re-education, etc., while the auto companies restructure.
Re-education takes time. If these workers are already or soon to be out of work, they need jobs yesterday. They have families to feed, and that can't wait for a new career.
I think the best approach is to go ahead and bail them out (as much as that stinks), but set criteria they have to meet that would show re-tooling and progression to non-gas vehicles. I like the Pickens plan myself.
You know, that was my first response too.
but would like to see him cut loose a little and put it against a contrasting charcoal gray shirt. I think he's a knockout....nothing sexier than a confident, intelligent man with a heart of gold.
and your response to GP was so much
Your original post to wasn't an attack on the pubs? Hypocrit.
Response
Yes, we do only have one president at a time.
However, both the incoming and outgoing Presidents have a responsibility -- they are handling the nation's business.
As Obama comes into power, it is very transparent of him to keep the nation apprised of what he is doing, thinking, planning.
Good for him! I hope we hear from him every single day!
It doesn't matter whether it is Obama or it would have been McCain -- we need to hear what the incoming President is planning and doing.
response (sm)
Move to Russia----that's the problem. If you guys are confronted with any sort of ideas that are not part of your belief your first instict seems to be to just remove it. That's not tolerance -- that's segregation.
As far as kids go, I would challenge you to show me 1 child 4th grade and up (probably lower than that) that does not know what *gay* means, and homosexuality is not being taught in schools now. As far as the TV, mine came with a remote with little buttons for changing the channel and a handy dandy on/off switch. Toy dispensers in gas station bathrooms: Yes, there are some of those out there. However, they are no where near as common as you would make them out to be.
Marriage -- what is it to you if they call it marriage? You do realize there are christian gays and lesbians? The problem is that on this issue christians seem to think that everyone should live by their rules when everyone else has a different set of rules. What about Muslims who are married? Is thier marriage worth anything in your eyes? They didn't get married with God as a witness as you would discribe Him. I'm married and yet I'm and athiest. Is my marriage worthless?
Christianity is an all or nothing proposition. When it comes to laying down legislation for a nation as diverse as ours, that all or nothing mentality does nothing but divide the nation.
Response...(sm)
Whether you aggree with Al Jazeera or not, they are a valid news organization. They show the viewpoint of others in the region. In order to understand a situation I feel it is important to understand both sides of it, and then make an informed opinion. Your unwillingness to even consider what they say as a different viewpoint is pretty typical of Americans, which in my opinion is to only concern themselves with the viewpoint that best suits thier agenda.
Why is it that your only response....(sm)
to any discussion is just one-line BS? Do you have any evidence to show that the people being held at Gitmo are what you say they are? Can you show where this defense attorney is incorrect? Do you perhaps have inside info on exactly what will happen to the prisoners? Or better yet, do you even have any kind of rationale for your opinion other than your obvious paranoia concerning bringing the prisoners here? There is the concept of us having to pay for their upkeep, but hey, guess what? We're already paying for that. In addition to that, how much do you think it costs just to keep Gitmo open, not only financially but in political capital as well?
Helpful hint: If when responding to a post if you click inside the big white box underneath the subject line, it will allow you to type in a more detailed note, thereby, possibly (and I use that term loosely), giving more credibility to your posts.
Well, at least YOU got a response.
I wrote to them, as well, and didn't receive a reply at all (not that I was expecting one of any substance).
I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who wrote to them.
Response...
1. You'll find it useful to look at the upcoming budgets and then re-discover the notion of percentages.
2. If unions infested the transcription industry, you might very well not have a job. Don't believe me? Tour Detroit.
3. Trash talk that typifies political discourse today, says nothing, doesn't advance your cause, and doesn't merit response.
4. More of #3.
Response...
You have a very narrow view of taxes, my friend, and obviously have no idea what's coming down the tracks.
We are already seeing increases in taxes (on everyone) at the state and local level, for one thing, and many more are in the works. Look for higher sales tax rates, higher car license fees...oh, who knows where your piddly little "increase" will wind up going?
You can't possibly - even if you're no economist - believe that the government can print $trillions and obligate the nation to $trillions more in debt and none of the cost is going to come home to roost on your doorstep. You're just going to float along while someone else ("the rich") pay for all of this, eh? You're a politician's dream come true.
Politicians count on people who will look no further down the road than this week's pay stub and scream for joy at the $23.48 increase. "Lord, let them never realize that we're going to take it all back away from them at some other level of government - and so much more besides", pray the politicians.
My response is --
President Obama's sequel came out during his presidency. His first book was actually released in 2005 before he even entered politics. The income was listed on his taxes that were released as a presidential candidate.
His charitable contributions were also listed, but the information I just quickly googled said his 2006 contributions amounted to a little over 6% of his income.
He was of interest to folks before he became involved in politics.
what is this in response to?
The original post was not about George Tiller or William Long?
in response --
I have been duly chastised and I accept that. However, i saw no need for him to be "protecting" himself. Noone was bothering him. They stool calmly by and watched him do what he did. Secondly, there was no need to cut the flag down, he could have just removed it. Then, as he removed it, he could have folded it in some way other than just wadding it into a ball.
There was never any confrontation wher he had to be scared or feel threatened - so that is not an adequate defense. I understand that he was upset, I agree that he very well should have been, and I myself am upset about the way things are going in this country and the things that are being allowed to happen.
Yes, I very well do get it!!!
Thanks for an intelligent response
and for the information you supplied. 
Sorry. This was supposed to be in response to LOL
Someone should actually read an article before saying untrue things about it. But that doesn't surprise me. It's in line with the way this administration lies about everything.
Nasty response, I see.
You became nasty. Too bad. Guess you couldn't help yourself and couldn't stay reasonable and even-handed for more than a post or two. I was starting to think I'd been too hard with my thinking that some of the conservative posters were...well...kind of mean-spirited. Apparently I was wrong.
shameful response
But..you see, we liberals arent supposed to point fingers or ask questions, at least that is what the radical right wing is spouting..however, there is no doubt if there was a democrat in the White House, the radical right wing would be asking for his head on a silver platter.
vs, I don't think this response was directed at you...nm
|
