Like I said, weak enough to follow
Posted By: don't be fooled by polls on 2008-10-13
In Reply to: So, ho wlong have you been feeling this hostile - Toward 52% of your fellow voters?
"
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
Follow the yellow brick road....follow....
the yellow brick road. The great and powerful O will take care care of you. Watch out for those flying monkeys he is surrounding himself with tho....LOL. You folks kill me. This is ALL on you. You gave him the power. Remember that....
Weak and willing?
At least she is well-versed on the issues and doesn't bash like some "radical" posters out there. Gimme a break. Oh, I'm sorry. Are you too weak and willing? Didn't think so.
Yes, we are weak. nm
x
That's weak...
The laws do not affect you. The only way that law would affect anyone is if they chose to marry their partner of the same sex. You have always had the choice to marry whomever you choose as long as they are of the opposite sex. HOW WOULD IT AFFECT YOU PERSONALLY? No one seems to be able to answer that.
weak
and ineffective.
Be weak?....(sm)
Since when has showing restraint and exercising morals been weak?
indeed, other than a few weak
statements from a few muslims that *islam is a religion of peace* where are the denunciations of the actions of radical muslims?
i think jews, christians and muslims probablyy all worship the very same god by different means and with differing degrees of zealotry or tolerance. try explaining the trinity to a jew or muslim, and how that actually does not mean there are 3 gods.
just as that god did not step in and stop some of the horrors committed in his name by christians, he will not do so when muslims commit them. it is up to us to police ourselves. don't be looking for god to smite anybody real soon...
How much more weak
can you get than to not care about the unborn on this planet? I don't believe God makes any of us suffer. I believe most suffering is brought on by ourselves. Drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, unhealthy diet, along with multiple other abuses all in the name of "doing what feels good." We suffer because of our own choices which God gives us freely. He didn't create robots. So why shouldn't the unborn be allowed to have the privilege of suffering like the rest of us? ;-)
We are weak - see message
I believe we are weak because people would rather sit around and watch Survivor, American Idol and other reality & TV shows than to do something and stand up to government. I have a 32yo BIL who believes that his 14 year old niece should go to war and not him because he works at a hi tech company and is too important and too intelligent to be in the military, and there are literally thousands of people in this country who think like him. Americans (not all but a majority) will not do without. They live in the now (gimmee gimmee gimmee, I want I want I want). As for our government I honestly do not know what to think. These are the same people who gave a 700M bail out the other week and now upon finding out the companies who received the bail outs are not using them to help the people (the reason they were intended for), but instead they are pocketing the money for themselves and taking lavish holidays at resorts with thousand dollar "spa" retreats, and walking away with $90M bonuses. And the government is not demanding the money back or for them to use it for what it was intended for. I think a lot of democratic politicians think the same way Obama does (or close to it) and they will give Obama whatever he wants. My grandfather who was in WWII told me that when war started up everyone signed up. They all wanted to serve and they knew it meant the could be killed in action. Now adays nobody feels the same patriotism they did back then. He said patriotism is a lot more than hanging a flag from your car or in front of your house. So I do believe a lot of America (not all but a lot) is weak.
Right. This seems a very weak choice.
nm
just fodder for the weak
truthfully, no ill will intended. It's so easy to manipulate the weak - they get all bound up and ATTACK. Do I care? Not in the least. Do they pay my rent? Not this month. I enjoy the bitter nastiness of those who have nothing else to offer. Nobody REALLY wants to have polite discourse, they just want to attack anything that does not meet their idealology - quite amusing, really. All it takes is an inane comment......
Pretty weak charge if you ask me.
It'll probably be dropped in a few days but not until the media is allowed to have their way with them, and the liberal bloggers tar and feather him. Does anyone remember travelgate and the Clinton land deal scandals. I'm sure you dems/liberals don't recall that at all....
Before you start condemning one Republican politician to hell you better take a look into your own party's closet.
Hmm, this confuses me. It is the meek (not weak)
Difference in meaning, with meek meaning humble, docile, compliant and weak meaning no strength, vigor, or spiritually lacking strength.
This post seems written by someone else, someone who believes in God and the teachings of Jesus, but your other posts are borderline mean toward conservative voters, many of whom are Christians with Christian ideals very much like the ones you claim to possess in the above post. This seems very contradictory and as such, almost disingenuous.
What you are seeing below is a weak attempt at damage control 101...
That announcement sucked all the air out of the big speech, everyone is talking about Sarah Palin, not Barack Obama. And the best they can do is take potshots at Alaska and that she was in a beauty pageant...and oh I thought the rampaging moose thing was REALLLYYYYY funneeeee. Obama is not the only one front and center that people are excited about...and if these folks think the PUMA folks are going to fall into line because the DNC tells them to....they have another think coming. Just my opinion of course....
i agree. It makes McCain look weak and
what a great leader he would make...McBush...
A "different approach". Go ahead, be weak.
nm
sam, weak argument based on semantics, that reporter's
implication was all too clear, and just another stupid accusation in order to mislead yet more uneducated, misinformed voters.
It shows you have a biased opinion and a weak mind.
I'm sure the Hitler Youth loved their newsletter just as much as you hate-festering libs love your Huffington Post.
And you really need to spend a second to look up the definition of "terrorist."
If a "terrorist" was anyone who commits murder, your Saint Tiller (may his stinking corpse rot in his grave) is the prime example of a TERRORIST. 60,000 infants executed. And yet all you can focus on is your hate for anything Christian.
How pathetic.
Pretty weak - Johnson was a product of Texas politics,
....just like Bush, Rove, Delay, and a slew of other Suite F-8 Texans now strangling our democracy. Kennedy didn't like him, and Johnson went into fits of rage over his brother, Robert Kennedy, who he never referred to as anything but that son of a b****. Johnson was financed throughout his unstoppable career by Brown & Root (today KBR, a subsidiary of Halliburton). Politically he was a far closer match to the current Republicans both in ideology and political technique (woo them with money, destroy them if they won't cooperate with the agenda, and remember to feed that war machine at every opportunity).
Johnson was a Democrat because 60 years ago that was the Texan standard. But, he paved the way for the current breed of southern Republicans to take control. It's no surprise that Johnson leapt right into Viet Nam or collaborated with people who wished to deceive and manipulate the American people - that is what these people do. Kennedy was the true Democrat - but that just wouldn't do for either Johnson or the rest of his political soulmates who are, of course, Republicans.
I don't follow you? nm
.
Then it would follow that .........sm
conservatives not idjits since we cannot see that Obama is a natural born citizen! 
And no actually, if you follow the thread SM
I was posting to American Woman.
Hope you follow him
/
Here is a follow up to the first story... sm
http://www.lonestaricon.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?a=448&z=56
I don't follow your reasoning...because there are a lot of
gays you think God made them that way? Years ago, sex before marriage was unheard of, but so many people over the years have done it openly now it is accepted. The Bible speaks frankly against it. Same with adultery. The Bible speaks frankly against it. People still do it. And it is still wrong. The Bible speaks against homosexuality. People still do it, it is still wrong. More people kill and steal nowadays. Does that make it right? There are more serial killers today than 20 years ago. Does that make it okay? I believe you are rationalizing. Why would God call something an abomination and then make people that way? That is like saying people are thieves because God made them that way...people are killers because God made them that way...sorry, we will have to agree to disagree big time on that kind of reasoning.
And you wonder why those people follow
xx
You don't follow the board much, do you?
This has been discussed way below
You sound terribly misinformed.
you need to follow your posts a little better
I didn't refer to the word "aspire" in my post and neither did the "the big bad"
Find somewhere else to troll.
If you are not able to follow my thread,
at least try to follow your own. I was replying to your right-from-wrong post where, in an attempt to avoid the points I had made about Israel, you stated I had listed all of Palestinian atrocities. My reply followed consecutive order.
The first item on the list you were trying to attribute to them began with occupation. Since you made the blanket, all-encompassing statement that I had just listed ALL of their atrocities, I began my reply with occupation and followed point-by-point with responses to the other listed items. You would probably have a vague understanding of that if you actually engaged in debating substance rather than simple vollies of empty, vacuous put-downs and denials.
Follow up to Tammy (Tom)
Okay Clarence Thomas!! You would have made a good house person back in the day. Ever heard of the word "Tom," as in Uncle Tom??
Hey there follow Oregonian
We may be heading up closer your way. Nothing down here in GP. No hopes for a future here but we hear further north it is better. Hoping within a couple weeks we're out of here.
That's what happens when you follow blindly....
you go in circles. By the way, wagon has only one "g." And quite frankly, all conservatives are not "pubs." The last election cycle should prove that convincingly...if you can look away from the blinding light that is your leader long enough to have an independent thought...key word here being independent. You might want to wait and see what JTBB has to say before you answer. :-) Blah blah about sums it up...lol.
I do not follow the 'party' system. sm
Consider myself true conservative (not Republican or a religious zealot), libertarian. Colbert shoved the truth in the face of power, media & government. Somebody needs to do it. The mainstream media does not have the guts to really put the truth in Bush's face. They are afraid of him, just like the rest of the world and America. Definitely something wrong with that.
May I suggest that you follow your own *instruction...*
and read a book before YOU spout off.
The National Socialist German Workers Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (help·info), or NSDAP, commonly known as the Nazi Party), was a political party in Germany between 1919 and 1945. It was known as the German Workers Party (DAP) before the name was changed in 1920.
The party's leader, Adolf Hitler, was appointed Chancellor of Germany by president Hindenburg in 1933. Hitler rapidly established a totalitarian regime known as the Third Reich, under which the party gained almost unlimited power.
THAT is what happens when an entire nation is tied to the government for every need...a check, health care, education, and on and on and on. Then they have you, my friend, and that is when socialism turns into totalitarian dictatorship. It happened in Cuba. It happened in Venezuela. It happened in Germany. It happened in Italy under Mussolini. So, I would suggest, my friend, that YOU do your research before attacking someone else.
Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that visualize a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community[1] for the purposes of increasing social and economic equality and cooperation. This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by socialized (state or community) ownership of the means of production.
The modern socialist movement had its origin largely in the working class movement of the late-19th century. In this period, the term "socialism" was first used in connection with European social critics who criticized capitalism and private property. For Karl Marx, who helped establish and define the modern socialist movement, socialism would be the socioeconomic system that arises after the proletarian revolution where the means of production are owned collectively. This society would then progress into communism.
A diverse array of doctrines and movements have been referred to as "socialist." Since the 19th century, socialists have not agreed on a common doctrine or program. The various adherents of socialist movements are split into differing and sometimes opposing branches, particularly between reformist socialists and communists.
Since the 19th century, socialists have differed in their vision of socialism as a system of economic organization. Some socialists have championed the complete nationalization of the means of production, while social democrats have proposed selective nationalization of key industries within the framework of mixed economies. Stalinists, including those inspired by the Soviet model of economic development, have advocated the creation of centrally planned economies directed by a state that owns all the means of production. Others, including self-titled Communists in Yugoslavia and Hungary in the 1970s and 1980s, Chinese Communists since the reform era, and some Western economists, have proposed various forms of market socialism, attempting to reconcile the presumed advantages of cooperative or state ownership of the means of production with letting market forces, rather than central planners, guide production and exchange.[2] Anarcho-syndicalists, Luxemburgists (such as those in the Socialist Party USA) and some elements of the U.S. New Left favor decentralized collective ownership in the form of cooperatives or workers' councils. Others may advocate different arrangements.
NO THANKS.
For those who follow foreign politics...
I just heard on NPR that Gary Kasparov has been arrested in Russia during a marching and protest of Russia's voting practice. This is NOT good. Putin is a very dangerous individual who has been funding the middle east conflict and selling weapons to those who really shouldn't have them. Kasparov is a potential light at the end of the tunnel for a more democratic and liberal Russian state. I am afraid for him.
Doubt they will follow your suggestion.
nm
And a follow up question for McPain,
WHICH country do you put first? (Heeheehee (McPain laughing) with his teeth all out there with that queer little grin.)
You both are absolutely right. Sheep(le) will follow each
other right over the cliff and we are heading that way quickly. If it was happening in another country people here would wonder why the citizens are so dense; not here, they just hear the mantra of change, hope and promises (that cannot be kept) and are so addicted the first time they hear it they don't take the time to educate themselves about the possible ramifications until it is too late.
Follow the link, oh lazy one.
You can see the Senate requistions for yourself. Barack's name is there there, along with the amount doled out, what the money is going toward, and WHO THE MONEY IS GOING TO. Doesn't take a braniac to copy and paste a recipient's name in and Google their relationship wtih Barack.
And I notice you didn't offer a link with any rebuttal informationl. Typical. "Ladies and gentlemen, I have 'investigated' this and the allegations are 'pure garbage.' What a joke. How much did YOU get from that corrupt dolt?
Sweep, sweep, sweep. The Dems shove ANOTHER Obama dirty little secret under the rug.
Just NOT smart enough to NOT follow the sheeps
__
Perhaps you should follow your own advice (last line)
nm
What you meant was don't follow links that
//
Try to follow the thread. OP said he/she was bored....
and felt compelled to post that he/she was bored. I merely said it was boring to read posts about people complaining that they are bored. If you are bored by my posts, don't read them. Simple fix.
follow up to the free part -
This information came from Obama's website. It says that people will have to do community service in exchange for that $4000 they are given for school and the free part means that $4000 would pay for a community college - nowhere does he say that a university education would be free.
Higher Education
Create the American Opportunity Tax Credit: Obama and Biden will make college affordable for all Americans by creating a new American Opportunity Tax Credit. This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university and make community college tuition completely free for most students. Recipients of the credit will be required to conduct 100 hours of community service.
Simplify the Application Process for Financial Aid: Obama and Biden will streamline the financial aid process by eliminating the current federal financial aid application and enabling families to apply simply by checking a box on their tax form, authorizing their tax information to be used, and eliminating the need for a separate application.
Sorry Lauren but I couldn't follow that (sm)
You are not born into being a Christian. Being born to Christian parents does not make you a Christian until you convert, that is not true. You are not a Christian until you make a conscious decision to be one.
I was just saying to follow the lead of your hero
he lost but he is moving past it, unlike the RRs on this board
You did not follow who I was responding to!!!! YOU READ IT
dip
It's about time and other states should follow
Still is beyond me why all people who fall in love cannot marry the person they love because of their gender. I always think, what's next, you can't marry someone of a different race. It is beyond me why people dictate who can and cannot marry based on their religious beliefs. It should not even be a topic up for discussion. You want to marry someone then you should be allowed the same rights anyone else is. Talk about de-humanizing someone because of who they love.
More states need to follow suit
x
Would much rather intelligently question than blindly follow. NM
I follow the Old Testament and those rules aren't too
NM
|
