It took only 2 years to create this mess? You missed your meds.
Posted By: sm on 2009-02-07
In Reply to: Why was the economy good until TWO years ago - when democrats took control of Congress? huh?nm
x
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
Obama didn't create this mess
I am amazed at the criticism directed at Obama regarding the current economic crisis.
1. Did he run up our huge debt with China?
2. Who blew billions on Wall Street without any oversight - Bush/Paulson - ring a bell?
3. Who gave us the stimulus checks last year that the government couldn't really afford to give?
4. Who got us into a $10 billion a month Iraq war when our allies and the UN Security Council could see that the "evidence" was total b.s.? Wasn't it McCain who said we would keep at it 100 years? How much has that and would that fiasco cost us?
I speak as a former Republican/turned independent. Both parties have sold us down the river to appeal to the interests of big multinationals interested in "free trade". How could we possibly hope to keep our economy healthy by allowing trade with people making pennies an hour? Our own profession is a microcosm of the maladies caused by the "global economy". We make far less and work much harder - finding it difficult to pay bills. It had to crash sometime.
I agree with you that this stimulus package will probably not do the trick, but to blame Obama for it is ridiculous. It would be the equivalent of having been sent in a barrel over the side of Niagara Falls, and halfway down Obama tries to figure out a way to soften the landing. He didn't put us in the situation - and maybe he can't get us out.
One thing is certain - McCain could not have done better. He would have kept us bleeding billions in Iraq that we simply do not have.
We are likely going to see runaway inflation. The government is committing itself to compounding the effects of the disaster - starting with Bush allowing Paulson to throw billions to his Wall Street buddies and the continuing effort to stave off the inevitable crash of our economy. The only way they can afford these megabillion plans is to print more money - and the money will become worth a lot less. Get ready for a $100 loaf of bread.
You must have missed your afternoon meds.
Your thought process is scattered all over the place. The stimulus package and Gitmo....2 entirely different subjects, but hey, blind hatred does have that effect on some folks, not being able to stay on task, just throwing any and every venomous vapor out there to see what will stick. Didn't work well during the election (or hadn't you noticed?) and it's even less effective here.
Check your watch, sweetie. I think you missed your meds.
Maybe she's off her meds? ;o) nm
nm
Off our meds, are we?
x
Are you off your meds again?
Perhaps you should seek professional help.
create another board
You know, what this bulletin *system* needs is a bashing board. I used to post at a relatively calm board and some wanted to pick fights no matter what..The owner in her wisdom created a bashing board where those who have anger, upset, whatever and wanted to bash could and could also leave those other boards alone which did not want turmoil. Maybe the owners here could do that. I dont know who owns this board. I have been told it no longer is owned by the owner of MTstars..Maybe if the owner reads this, he or she will create another board for **Political wars**..
take your meds, sweetie
Once again delusions and hallucinations that gt is all over the conservative board..Honey, take your antipsychotic medications and rest for the evening, cause you are truly delusional..I DO NOT AND WILL NOT POST ON THE CONSERVATIVE BOARD..I stay here and frequent other political boards..Conservative board? Nah, you all give me enough angst by coming over here..I have no reason to go to your board..One way to prove it, ask the administrator to track down the address of posters you think are me..You will see, they are not me..
Please tell me, what did the "libs" create. sm
We have had a republican president for 8 years and a republican congress for 6 of those years, and 2 just barely on the dem side. When Bill Clinton's presidency was over, we had a multimillion dollar surplus and low unemployment; however, the republicans thought it was more important to impeach him for "sex crimes". Just think of all the good he could have done if time was not wasted in defending himself, not to mention all our tax dollars that were spent. Hello? Their marriage has obviously survived and it is no ones business but theirs.
You are trying to create something that did not happen
His picture is colored in on the coins. You sure did misinterpret what she said and you turned it into a racial thing. This is not racial. These coins are colored/painted in and they are CHEAP!!!! Maybe you should take a look at them and you will see what she means. Your trying to make it a racial thing where there is no racial tendencies in her message.
I think you're the one who is bigoted, prejudice, etc. Give the race relations a break. There is no room for your kind of behavior on this board. Period!
You know if they want to create jobs
why aren't we drilling for oil? Why aren't we getting wind farms going? If our government would take more money to look into alternative fuels, not only would that stop our dependency on foreign oil but we will need workers to maintain those things, etc. Those will be jobs that will last. It won't be like construction work like Obama wants. Once the roads are repaired and bridges fixed, etc....then what? I just think we are going in the wrong direction and I just don't understand why. We need to tap our resources with offshore drilling. We need to drill Alaska. While we are doing that, we need to look for alternatives to oil. The sooner they do that, the sooner car companies can make environmentally safer cars and vehicles. I mean....come on.
Here's a thought, take your meds
take a nice deep breath and compose your thoughts into a coherent post based on facts. Present those facts in a manner that does not make you sound deranged, and perhaps people will take the time to consider what you post. Then maybe you will get responses from people that don't think you are totally off your rocker.
there are meds against paranoia, don't you know?...nm
nm
Did someone miss their morning meds?...nm
Time for your meds, dear.
xx
The money is certainly not going to create jobs
This will not create jobs for anyone.
Time for your meds, dear....
!
BWAAHAHAHA, somebody needs their meds today! Good one! nm
.
His plans are to create bigger government, which
nm
It would just create a huge black market, and
Bush didn't create the federal reserve......
xx
Obama to create Iran outreach post...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/19/obama-will-create-iran-outreach-position/
Yup, they actually admitted that if the "outrage and publicity" they create gets their message
I agree with their founding sentiments, but sickening sensationalism is a turn-off to me, it seems like fanaticism, and I have a beautiful daughter, I find it all so offensive. Also, I do not want my two sons ever to objectify women like that in their minds, sooooo sick! PETA cares for physical health with vegetarianism, but what about mental health with healthy body image, healthy relationships, and healthy respect in life, not important?
wow, you are demented and full of hate...take your meds and go back to bed!
//
Why does the Government have to create Laws to make people Volunteer?...
http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/03/15/meet-the-compulsive-service-orwellian-give-act-to-be-voted-on-this-week/
Next up on the agenda this week is the GIVE Act, short for the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act”.
The ABC News headline ‘GIVE’ Act Would Give Back. Volunteer Programs Would Provide Jobs to Unemployed, Assist Those in Need says it all.
In his address to Congress last month, President Barack Obama called on lawmakers to expand federally funded national service opportunities.
“To encourage a renewed spirit of national service for this and future generations, I ask this Congress to send me the bipartisan legislation that bears the name of Sen. Orrin Hatch as well as an American who has never stopped asking what he can do for his country — Sen. Edward Kennedy,” the president said.
Democrats say they may be able to respond to that call by the end of this month.
The Senate is working on the Kennedy/Hatch Serve America Act of 2008, and the House is working on a similar bill, called the Generations Invigorating Volunteering and Education (GIVE) Act.
Kissinger: Obama's 'task' is to help create a 'new world order'
"New World Order," the phrase previously attributed to "whacky conspiracy theorists," is now being PUBLICLY advocated by this senile old man. I hope Obama is too smart and too reasonable for this "NWO" stuff because this is one of the reasons I voted for him.
Kissinger: Obama's 'task' is to help create a 'new world order'
RAW STORY
Published: Tuesday January 6, 2009
|
President Nixon's Secretary of State, the aging Henry Kissinger, recently told CNBC that he believes the current world economic crisis is a "great opportunity" for President-elect Obama to help create a "new world order."
"What do you think the most important thing is for Barack Obama?" Kissinger was asked. "... If you had to say, this is going to be the country, or the conflict, or the place that will define the Obama administration, what would it be?"
Kissinger replied: "The President-elect is coming into office at a moment when there are upheavals in many part of the world simultaneously. You have India-Pakistan. You have, ah, a jihadist movement."
"But," continued Kissinger, "he can give new imputus to American foreign policy, partly because the ascension of him is so extraordinary and admirable.
"I think that his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period, when really a "New World Order" can be created. It's a great opportunity. It isn't such a crisis."
In response to a parting question, Kissinger added that Obama's cabinet is an "extraordinarily able group of people."
"The phrase 'new world order' traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government," writes Drew Zahn. "The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used the phrase in a 1989 speech."
In that 1989 speech, the elder Bush told Congress, "A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective –– a new world order –– can emerge: A new era …… in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony."
It is a quote echoed across the Internet by those who believe a non-elected governing body is forming at the very top of the world's elite, and spreading.
Kissinger previously spoke at some length about this "new world order" during an interview with Charlie Rose.
"I think that when the new administration assess the position in which it finds itself it will see a huge crisis and terrible problems, but I can see that it could see a glimmer in which it could construct an international system out of it," Kissinger told Rose in a Dec. 2008 conversation.
"The jihadist crisis is bringing it home to everybody, that international affairs cannot be conducted entirely by drawing borders and defining international politics by who crosses what borders with organized military force," he said. "This has now been reinforced by the financial crisis, which totally unexpectedly has spread around the world. It limits the resources that each country has for a foreign policy geared to an assertion of its own pure interests."
Kissinger publicly supported McCain for President in 2008.
The following video was aired on CNBC on Jan. 5, 2009.
Find story and video at:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Henry_Kissinger_Obama_should_act_to_0106.html
For this you have to wait at least 3 years and 8 months , maybe 7 years and 8 mohths...nm
nm
Not quite- 2 years Catholic, 2 years Muslim. NM
X
This is a really BIG mess....
instead of talk radio or Gore's electrice bill. I am referring to Libby's trial,
Well....he was convicted of perjury and if he in fact did lie under oath to the grand jury, he should go to jail. That being said...why not pardon him? Clinton was cited for exactly the same things...lying under oath (perjury) before a grand jury and obstruction of justice. He is free as a bird, finished his term as President, making money hand over fist....yes, for that reason alone I think Libby should be pardoned to level the playing field again. If liberals were happy that Clinton walked, they should not scream bloody murder if Bush does pardon Libby. Because it is the very same thing and would expose the hypocrisy BIG time. But, that has never stopped them before, has it?
the firing of 8 judges,
I am having a hard time finding much usable information about this. What I can find are various blogs that lean hard right or hard left and not much fact. I saw where it was stated that they were fired for cause, citing one refused to file death penalty cases, one refused to file immigration cases, yada yada. But I did not really find anything compelling and not in a blog that compelled me to fall either way on this. I don't see any reason to think they were not fired for cause...don't see anything in writing to convince me either.
Pete Domineci,
If you are talking about the firing of David Iglesias, I am not much buying it that the administration fired him because of something he did or did not do back during the presidential election. I can't find any evidence to prove that. It is of concern to me that Iglesias held that information all this time, and now that he has been fired brings it forward. He said himself, or at least was quoted as saying, he had no proof that his firing was related to that. It sounds like sour grapes for being fired to me. Typical, human reaction to being fired. But because it is a political position, the sour grapes are made public.
the unnecessary and ever rising numbers of dead - everywhere, 40 towns in Vermont calling for impeachment (of course this won't go anywhere but the gesture is telling),
Nothing much to say about this. Wars kill people. Most of the Iraqi deaths are at the hands of other Arabs. You can blame that on America if you wish. I choose not to. More Iraqis are coming forward and fingering the bad guys, and that is what it is going to take. We have had a lot of successes. Of course, you have to watch Fox to see them. CNN studiously ignores such things as it does not fit their agenda. As do the networks. I hope you are not going to suggest that Fox has a soundstage where they fake the reports.
a pardon for Libby (and does he have to admit guilt to be pardoned which he has not done), the fact that Libby was the attorney to the much maligned Marc Rich who was pardoned by Clinton, which was also much maligned. Was Scooter as evil as Clinton for having defended him in his dealings with Iran and his tax evasion as Clinton was for pardoning him ?? If all this was just about infighting between the FBI and the administration and George Tenet, then why did Libby lie at all; wouldn't be important enough to lie about, IMHO. Throwing it out there.
This whole thing smacks of getting back, to me. More interesting to me than Scooter and Marc, is Fitzgerald and Comey. Fitzgerald and Comey were both prosecutors working on the Marc Rich case. Obviously they were not happy when they were on the eve of an indictment when Rich ran (wonder who leaked to him that the indictment was imminent) and were even more UNhappy when Clinton pardoned him. And who should be now prosecuting Scooter? And who did most of the investigation? Why, that would be Fitzgerald and Mr. Comey. Which is why I think they went for Scooter's throat and did not indict the man who REALLY leaked the information, Richard Armitage. Payback in politics is hael, my friend!!
No he isn't. He's trying to mess up
my debate party!
Yep...that's a mess....(sm)
I will have to admit though that I don't know that much about that aspect of it. I do know there is some controversy surrounding the whole Hezbullah vs Hamas and Lebanon vs Gaza. I obviously have some catching up to do on that one...LOL.
I do think, however, that Hamas kind of got a bad rap because they couldn't keep up with the demands for food, housing, etc, and particularly the distribution of aid....? However, I also think that it's kind of hard to keep that flow of aid going when Israel is attacking incoming ships that carry that aid. With that and the constant bombardment from Isreal in a military sense on the ground, I think it kind of put them on shaky ground to begin with.
I think in the end the success of whoever wins will be very dependent upon us being able to control Israel.
The only guy that made a mess is
So the ends justify the means when it come to rebpulicans, abuse of power and the ethically challenged ethics maid? Said it once, will say it again. Divorce/custody issues are typically played out in family courts without interference and manipulation of the Governor's office. Marginalized? Is that the best spin you can think of for cold, hard fact? No backs up against the wall here. You see, JM has made life a whole lot easier by his latest senior moment. This decision smacks of "he just doesn't get it." Alienated women with his token showcase and moved the party straight back to the far right. If there were any doubt that he would be 4 more years of the same before, now it is plain as the nose on his face. We knew he would self destruct sooner or later, but noone expected it would come in the form of his VP pick. Nothing petty and vindictive about it, but if you feel the need to insult, bash and vent a little, by all means, knock yourself out. You, like your candidates, are underestimating the Clintons, their supporters and their party. She may have the same genitalia, but she is about as far from Hillary as it gets.
why do you care what I think so much? (No/mess)
@
More on the Acorn mess....
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/the-democratic-acorn-bailout/
What a mess! More bad news about ....sm
the economy. Cooporations starting to lay off and anticipate many more lay offs next year, affecting local and state governments, police, fire and rescue operations due to a fall in tax revenues, precipitating more foreclosures. Wow, all frowning faces and gloom and doom. I really think we are on a runaway train into the second great depression, something we have no idea about other than stories from our parents and grandparents. Very scary. I think that we MTs are pretty secure in our jobs but so many people's jobs are at risk. 
To top it all off, the treasury department has decided to not use our tax bailout money they way they promised, rather are taking a different tactic without telling any of us or congress. I sure hope they know what they are doing because I sure don't understand it. 
Where are you hearing this mess? It's
absolutely not true. What, 1 or 2 whackjob republican electorates are nervous about it? LOL.
The BC is a NON-ISSUE, he won by a large margin, and he will be inaugurated. This has all gotten so SILLY.
Yeh, your' re right, he's gone and look at the mess he left!
But yet you people begrudge O taking his wife out for for dinner and theater (which he paid for), promoting and supporting the arts. How dare he? Ticket sales tripled the nights following their appearance there. I'm quite sure the theater industry didn't hate the boost they got from that appearance. Get over it. Focus on something that is actually important.
You're a mess. nm
nm
what a mess bush has created
Iraq's Fig Leaf Constitution
By Robert Scheer
The Los Angeles Times
Tuesday 30 August 2005
Who lost Iraq? Someday, as a fragmented Iraq spirals further into religious madness, terrorism and civil war, there will be a bipartisan inquiry into this blundering intrusion into another people's history.
The crucial question will be why a preemptive American invasion - which has led to the deaths of nearly 2,000 Americans, roughly 10 times as many Iraqis, the expenditure of about $200 billion and incalculable damage to the United States' global reputation - has had exactly the opposite effect predicted by its neoconservative sponsors. No amount of crowing over a fig leaf Iraqi constitution by President Bush can hide the fact that the hand of the region's autocrats, theocrats and terrorists is stronger than ever.
The U.S. now has to recognize that [it] overthrew Saddam Hussein to replace him with a pro-Iranian state, said regional expert Peter W. Galbraith, the former U.S. ambassador to Croatia and an advisor to the Iraqi Kurds. And, he could have added, a pro-Iranian state that will be repressive and unstable.
Think this is an exaggeration? Consider that arguably the most powerful Shiite political party and militia in today's Iraq, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and its affiliated paramilitary force, the Badr Brigade, was not only based in Iran but was set up by Washington's old arch-foe, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. It also fought on the side of Iran in the Iran-Iraq war and was recognized by Tehran as the government in exile of Iraq.
Or that former exile Ahmad Chalabi is now one of Iraq's deputy prime ministers. The consummate political operator managed to maintain ties to Iran while gaining the devoted support of Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon, charming and manipulating Beltway policymakers and leading U.S. journalists into believing that Iraq was armed with weapons of mass destruction.
Chalabi is thrilled with the draft constitution, which, if passed, will probably exponentially increase tension and violence between Sunnis and Shiites. It is an excellent document, said Chalabi, who has been accused by U.S. intelligence of being a spy for Iran, where he keeps a vacation home.
What an absurd outcome for a war designed to create a compliant, unified and stable client state that would be pro-American, laissez-faire capitalist and unallied with the hated Iran. Of course, Bush tells us again, this is progress and an inspiration. Yet his relentless spinning of manure into silk has worn thin on the American public and sent his approval ratings tumbling.
Even supporters of the war are starting to realize that rather than strengthening the United States' position in the world, the invasion and occupation have led to abject humiliation: from the Abu Ghraib scandal, to the guerrilla insurgency exposing the limits of military power, to an election in which our guy - Iyad Allawi - was defeated by radicals and religious extremists.
In a new low, the U.S. president felt obliged to call and plead with the head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, Abdelaziz Hakim, to make concessions to gain Sunni support. Even worse, he was summarily rebuffed. Nevertheless, Bush had no choice but to eat crow and like it.
This is a document of which the Iraqis, and the rest of the world, can be proud, he said Sunday, through what must have been gritted teeth. After all, this document includes such democratic gems as Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation, and No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam, as well as socialist-style pronouncements that work and a decent standard of living are a right guaranteed by the state. But the fact is, it could establish Khomeini's ghost as the patron saint of Iraq and Bush would have little choice but to endorse it.
Even many in his own party are rebelling. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur, said Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel last week, one of a growing number of Republicans who get that we should start figuring out how we get out of there.
Not that our what-me-worry? president is the least bit troubled by all this adverse blowback from the huge, unnecessary gamble he took in invading the heart of the Arab and Muslim worlds. What is important is that the Iraqis are now addressing these issues through debate and discussion, not at the barrel of a gun, Bush said.
Wrong again, George. It was the barrel of your gun that midwifed the new Iraq, which threatens to combine the instability of Lebanon with the religious fanaticism of Iran.
Let's see if we can make a little sense out of this mess....
You said:
The subject is not the name of the proceedings, the intent of the inquiry, whether or not you think he should or should not be impeached or any of the other distractions you have thrown up in this thread.
Answer: I know what Dennis Kucinich says. It is not new. I have heard it. I have heard it from any number of Democrats. All I am saying is if they think they have the evidence to impeach him, why the heck don't they do it?? That is not a distraction, it is a valid question. I don't care what they call it...all I said was, what they are doing now, even the chairman said was not an impeachment hearing. HE said it, I didn't, so why don't you accuse HIM of throwing up distractions and circling around, yada yada. Perhaps because when Democrat throws up distractions and circles around that is fine in your books??
You said: You circled around the subject when you thought you could gain some traction/advantage when trying to refute the accusations against Bush regarding lying about WMDs/yellowcake uranium intelligence, trying to make it appear that total exoneration would be a piece of cake..as if that were the only thing the democrats have on the table.
Answer: Geez, stop putting words in my mouth and assigning agendas to me I don't have. In going and doing some of the research you shouted at me to do, I found excerpts from the impeachment-trolling-factfinding-whatEVER the heck makes you happy to call it committee, I found where one of the lone Republicans on the committee made mention of a document recently declassified by the CIA that supposedly corroroborates (and I said supposedly because I don't know, because I haven't seen it, because it is part of the blacked out stuff) Bush's story about Niger and yellowcake and exposes Joe Wilson's story about the same. I did not say it myself, and I did not make it up. One of the committee members said it. Yes, I would be interested in it. I would be interested in any evidence Kucinich has other than speechifying about it. That is why I would be interested in a real impeachment trial, if that is what they want, so we can hear from ALL witnesses, see ALL the documents, and make our OWN decisions. I want more that Kucinich's word and Vincent Bugliosi's book. I want the CIA declassified document and the whole ball of wax. I want people under oath when they testify. Although, after Bill Clinton, even that is not always helpful since he chose to lie anyway, but still...not everyone is willing to perjure himself/herself. If that means I have my head in the sand, so be it. LOL.
YOU SAID: The subject is the CONTENT of the hearings, otherwise known as the ISSUES. It makes no difference where you get them from. DK is the best when it comes to explaining the positions concisely. The prosecuting parties are all amazingly consistent in their identification of what their contentions are and how they back them up.
ANSWER: Well excuse me, but didn't I read the hearings were closed and blacked out? So how do you know what the content is??? As I said, I have heard what Kucinich says. It is not new with him. I just need more than his word for it.
YOU SAID: What you are refusing to do is examine the other side of the story (that is to say, the specifics as laid out by the democrats)...that side of the story that takes you out of that safe place where you always stay...
ANSWER: Look that that finger in the mirror, points right back at you. You are completely unwilling to entertain any thought that you, and these Democrats, might just be wrong. If I was terrified, as you state, or did not want to hear anything about Bush maybe being guilty, I would not be hawking for his impeachment. What you are doing is make me the enemy, classic attack mode. Turn that mode off and try to hear me this time: I DON'T KNOW if Bush lied. NOBODY does. I don't know if he did or he didn't, but I DO KNOW that I need more than Dennis Kucinich's word or interpretation of whatever evidence he has to believe that Bush lied. You are so consumed with hatred for the man and the so-called right wing that you are ready to move right to "you're guilty." You believe he is guilty and you have not heard any of the defense. You do not WANT to hear any of the defense. How, pray tell, is your attitude any different from the one you accuse me of? If this was a Democrat president instead of a republican president, would you be on here righteously indignant presupposing his guilt based on a Republican-dominated committee and a lawyer's book who was not even close to the events that took place? Of course you wouldn't! You would be here saying it was a railroad hatchet job. Don't bother denying it. It would ring pretty hollow.
YOU SAID: that support your arguments, making nice with those who agree with your ideas, the condescending "let me enlighten you" instructions (i.e., "read up on Marxism, but let me interpret it for you if you don't see it my way" passages) and the inevitable name-calling, innuendoes, half-truths, misprepresentations, statements taken out of context, jumping to far-fetched conclusions when making degrading statements about democrats, and the vitriol that issues forth in your endless Obama bashing.
ANSWER: Talk about throwing up a distraction. As to condescending, when that tone is used with me I respond in kind. If you don't like it, don't condescend to me.
As far as that other litany, it would apply to Dennis Kucinich and Vincent Bugliosi as well. If they have documentation and not opinion to back up what they are saying, then why (and please stop dodging this fundamentally important question as you have so artfully what, three times now?): If they have the evidence, all these "prosecutors," why don't they go to trial?? That is a simple question. Answer it, please. As I said, I would WELCOME a trial, where BOTH sides are heard, under oath, all the documents in evidence, and no opinion, just fact. I mean that. And if it was proven that Bush lied, that he cooked intelligence, abused executive privilege or whatever and they convict him he should be thrown out of office (which would be largely symbolic, doncha think, since he has what, about 3-4 months left? Sheesh). I have no problem with that. My question is why don't they do it?? And if they are unwilling to, why are you so incensed at me? It is not MY fault they won't impeach him.
You can sure see the splinter in my eye, but the timber in your own seems to escape you.
As to Obama bashing, I gave opinion on what are known facts. His association with Reverend Wright...his church's association with Louis Farrakhan...his church's black liberation theology...his radical way left pro abortion stance...all facts. There is plenty of McCain bashing going on too. I don't hear any righteous indignation on your part concerning McCain bashing. So it is okay to bash Republicans? I see.
YOU SAID: Obstruction is something the right-wingers have down to an art. You have mastered well.
Answer: Ahem. Seems like the Democrats are the obstructive ones. Last time I looked, Pelosi was a Democrat, and she is obstructing an impeachment. Take your rant to her where it might do some good. I would tell them if you think you have the goods, bring it on. Ms. Pelosi is obstructing that.
You said: At the same time, it is an extremely transparent and ineffective way to address issues that are vital to our country.
Answer: Issues vital to our country? Impeaching a president who only has 3 more months in office is vital to our country? For everyone to just assume dennis Kucinich and these prosecutors are telling the truth and the accused has no opportunity for defense? That sounds more like Russia than America.
You said: Clearly, you are unwilling to attempt to look at, let alone participate in any kind of real debate that excludes the tactics you use in these posts.
Answer: Debate involves both sides being willing to hear both sides. You are not willing to entertain the thought of Bush not being guilty. In fact, absolutely will not entertain it. I, on the other hand, said let's have the impeachment trial and get it all out in the open once and for all, both sides. That sounds like I am very willing to hear both sides. Unlike you.
YOU SAID: That would involve actually knowing what you are talking about...and the only way to get that is to peek inside the hearings and focus on the ISSUES under discussion. Somehow this seems to terrify you. No problem. There are plenty of places beyond this forum where really informed discourse is available.
Answer: Peeking inside hearings where only one side is presented is NOT debate, and it is NOT the way to find the truth. Anyone with a reasoning OPEN mind sees that. Impeachment would be televised. We would hear testimony first hand. We could see documents first hand. None of this behind the door whispering stuff. Get it ALL out in the open. THAT seems to terrify you, not me. Seems to terrify Democrats, otherwise Nancy Pelosi would not be blocking it. That is common sense.
As to knowing what I am talking about...you only know what Dennis Kucinich is talking about and what little leaks out of those closed hearings. One-sided without anything from the other side. That is decided UNdemocratic for someone who calls himself/herself a Democrat. I am just amazed that you cannot see that everything you accuse me of, you are in spades. LOL. Amazing.
You said: Go head. Stick your head in the sand, and keep it there, if that's what makes you happy. That's what a comfort zone is...a world where you can be right 100% of the time and live under the pretense that you know all there is to know.
Answer: Sheesh. Dial it back a notch will ya. You just described yourself to a tee. "Your comfort zone where you can be right 100% of the time and live under the pretense that you know all there is to know." You have basically been lecturing to me paragraph after paragraph that you know all there is to know, YOU know the truth, and I just refuse to see it. You say honest debate, yet you have no intention of entertaining any such thing. If you did, you would want to hear both sides in an open forum. You don't. You want a select committee comprised of majority partisan Democrats calling witnesses they know are going to support their aim without asking anyone who might refute any of it...come ON. Talk about transparent. Lynch mob mentality, hang him and ask questions later. All this drama over a man who is leaving office in 3 months. All this anger....
I will try to say this again, and maybe you can dial back your disdain and condescencion just long enough to hear it...I have stated emphatically and will state it again: I DON'T know all there is to know. I have heard stuff from both sides, both sides equally convinced of innocent and guilt, but neither able to prove it definitively. Which is why I said...impeach the man. If you feel like they have the goods, then you should be lobbying the Democratic leadership not to block impeachment, little obstructionists that they are. Let's get it ALL out in the open. Both sides. ALL of it. And if they are not willing to do it...then in my opinion, they should fold their tent and HUSH. And that is the difference between you and me...if this was a Democratic President I would be saying the same thing to a Republican committee...if you aren't going to do anything other than a political exercise, fold up your tents and HUSH.
And I bet you voted for George who got us in this mess.
Hiliary could have handled this. Obama is our only hope. Taxes is the issue people and you know what mccan't will do - give the rich their tax breaks along with corp america, cut funding to states, causing state taxes to go up. Oh yeah, McCann is not working for you, and your support of him is a slap in the face of middle america.
It didn't bother them to cause this mess....
won't bother them to perpetuate it. Amazing...and people just lap it up. Amazing, ain't it?
distraction. don't let it mess your mind.
nm
It was too lenient on the ones that caused this mess (sm)
That's why it didn't pass last week. It was too one-sided.
There is absolutely nothing in the entire mess this
Their greed, and the greed of those who so stalwartly support every move they make, is the root of most of the problems we face today.
It's not my party. Clean up your own mess....
oh...what am I thinking. You don't see any mess. Got it.
Don't have a range rover; 6 cylinder jeep. No leather. don't smoke, never have.
Class envy is really ugly.
The subprime mess sm and iraq too
Really started about 5 years ago when the mortgage brokers were given money incentives to sign on subprime even to people who qualified for conventional loans. They fraudulently did not offer the conventional loans to people who didn't even need subprime. It was all about the commissions. And your precious GW is the one who kicked off the loans with NO DOWN PAYMENT...!!! He saw this mess coming and he figured SS dollars going into wall st, which he TRIED TO DO in 2005 but got voted down... he figured our SS money would bail out Wall St.
Yes, so I do blame him. I also blame him for pretending this Iraq war was for our security when it was about oil and cheney getting richer and oil men getting richer. $350 million a day and thousands of young people's lives lost. For what? He pretended there were WMD which there were not. He pretended it was related to 911, which it was not. Bunch of dips following him, waving a flag, when he has dragged our beautiful country way down.
I found this interesting too. What a mess this will
nm
It will take a long time to get out of this mess.
That is for certain. I don't blame it on the unions though. My family (not my husbands) have been involved with unions for years and I see it as a positive thing.
I do have a problem with the higher-ups in these companies pulling in millions and using company jets, etc. for personal needs. Instead of laying off 50 factory workers they could do away with 5 high-paid workers. It's a well known statement that the higher up you get, the more you deligate and less work you do - in any company. The middle class is falling away and this needs to stop. Perfect example, the guy from GM (I think) making his way to ask for bailout money in the companies private jet. What kind of hotel you think these people have been staying in while fighting to stay out of bankruptcy - probably enough to pay a few factory workers wages for a month or two.
He was hired to SOLVE the mess.
nm
and you blame Obama for this mess?
Oh... God forbid... going on Leno resulted in thousands of dead and more thousands maimed Americans in an illegal war that put us where we are now. Americans forgotten. Earth forgotten. Money he does not have? GW spent money he did not have to murder. At least Obama's intentions are inherently not evil.
So much more I could say, but it would go on deaf ears.
|
