My thoughts
Posted By: Just me on 2008-10-27
In Reply to: ABORTION - Am I the only one
This is not going to any poster in specific and certainly not the OP - these are just my thoughts. I have many feelings about this. While I think it's wrong and would never have an abortion myself, I also believe in a woman's right to choose. If the abortion happens before the baby starts to develop (and please don't reply with a step by step guide to the stages of a baby's life from conception to birth - I know it already and no pictures or videos either - have seen them all too and I won't even open it if someone replies with those). What I'm saying is I (personally) believe that if you have an abortion at a time before the baby starts to develop (brain, nerves, etc) that is the time to have one. Once the baby starts to develop then I believe it is harming the baby. I know a lot will not agree with me, but that's my own opinion. Whether it is considered murder or not is between the mother and the Creator. Seeing as nobody has been to "heaven" and spoken directly to our Creator and lived to come back and tell us all about it, nobody knows. Options - yes there are a lot of options like adoption (I'm childless and would have loved to adopt). However, whatever a woman chooses with her doctor is their rights as a woman and as human beings. A lot will argue that it is a sin, the bible this or that, but a lot of us are not christians or believe in the bible and that is our right as human beings too. I think (again only my opinion) if anyone is going to "force" someone to have a baby because of what they believe the bible says (according to their interpretation that is), then you are also forcing your religion on them and telling them they have to have this baby no matter what the circumstances because your bible (your religion) says so. Maybe those people who are doing the "forcing" should be "forced" themselves to take the baby and raise it yourself (no you don't get to get out of it and let someone else pay all expenses (health, food, clothing for the rest of the baby's life (until they are old enough of course), and you don't get to let someone else get up in the middle of the night to do everything you have to do with a baby. YOU will take the baby yourself and YOU will be forced to raise it. Seeing as you are trying to force someone to have a child (because of your religious beliefs) that child then be your responsibility. Maybe after 20 or so kids you'd finally let people live their own lives and face whatever challenges they have to face in lives by themselves. To me this is what life is all about. We face certain challenges in life that our Creator gives us. How we handle them determines what becomes of us after we are gone. Again, until we face "Him" after we have departed nobody will know. I do understand that people feel they are the voice of the unborn child and that's all fine and good and I respect all for that, but I also respect the mother and her physician for their choice they have to make in a difficult time. As for the ones having abortions as a form of birth control - that's a whole nother argument and for that there is a technique called sterilization. IF I am wrong one day when I meet my Creator I will find out and I'll take my Creator's answer any day over anyone who is reading something from a book I don't believe in. Again, all of this is my own opinion.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
- ABORTION - Am I the only one
- My thoughts - Just me
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
...more thoughts
My feeling is that there aren't many cartoon characters that are as scary as he is. And he does appear to be a remorseless person, capable of just about anything. He has been a big orchestrator of the untruths Bush has mouthed, especially during the campaign. I can't believe he is as ignorant as it appears he was in this Plame case and that's why it's so interesting as it slowly unfolds. He seems much too devious to be caught up in something like this.
My thoughts on this
This is a twerpy, paranoid person with a tiny mind who is trying to be a tyrant on this board, as are most of the rude posters who appear on here from time to time. Unfortunately on some level they always succeed in their need to upset this board because they are very hard to ignore, like an annoying insect.
My thoughts
Unfortunately even though many of us feel we are responsible citizens on this earth, we can't rely on all our neighbors (whether globally or down the block) to also take the same care we do. Recycling still is random from state to state and lots of folks still choose not to recycle....and therefore over time it has to become a mandate. Historically that is when laws are needed, when some folks can be responsible but others can't. It seems an odd riddle that older laws we easily embrace and defend (many which are kind of silly but still on the lawbooks), but yet as the need for new or revised ones crop up we resist and feel our liberty is at risk.
I'm not sure why anyone would balk at conservation.....or even many aspects of environmentalism. My greatest hope is to leave this earth in as good of shape as possible for my children and grandchildren as well as other's children and grandchildren. Unfortunately at this point I am hoping we can at least leave a habitable planet in 50 years to our future generations. It is my true belief that our human discord will very soon become secondary to a global environmental breakdown that is a greater threat than any war has ever been. Hope I am wrong.
Thanks for you thoughts
It's not that I dislike Hillary, it's just that I have some misgivings about her and admit I know little about her political stance....and I like Obama and Edwards without any reservation. I would gladly vote for her if she gets the nomination...that I do know!!
a few thoughts
Although I tend to be Pro-Choice I am very much against abortion. The whole idea of it is disturbing for me, to say the least. As far as the death penalty, I think that's a bad idea also, but there are times when I find it hard to feel sympathy for the person being put to death.....I guess I'm human.
Anyway, I've always wondered why the political belief systems align in such an odd manner, as you have alluded to. It seems one group is totally against abortion but support the death penalty, support aggression in our foreign policy, support most military actions, and take a negative, hard line on government funding of programs to help the poor, particularly children of the poor. Alternately, liberals seem to be more peaceful, war-as-a-last-resort, question the ethics of a death penalty, generosity toward those less fortunate by choice or by circumstance, yet also support Pro-Choice. This has always puzzled me.
I am an agnostic and happy to let the mystery be without pretending and hoping to know the answers to the unknowable. I find spiritualism most evident in nature and feel that man needs to protect and love his/her planet. After all, it's all we have. We need to be as conservation-minded as possible and reign in overpopulation to start with.....
Some other thoughts
I agree that if she is running for the white house and it is a very close race she had every right to stay in. Nobody was telling her to get out, they were simply pointing out the mathemetical facts that there is no way she can win because she is too far behind. I've never heard any news people saying she should get out. So her & Bill's argument that everyone is picking on her and everyone is telling her to get out does not have a leg to stand on (especially because when asked to name who in the news is saying she should get out they don't have a name to give). She has fought hard (sometimes dirty - but then again each candidate fights dirty). So while I agree that she should stay in when it is so close, what I don't agree with is just ignoring the facts and treating Obama like he doesn't matter and that his supporters that voted for him don't matter. I don't agree with her doing "fuzzy math" and saying certain states that voted for him - well they don't matter. When she does her math about her having more votes, she is not counting Maine, Iowa and some other state, and she is giving some reason why she is not counting their vote (as though it's a legitimate reason). She says Michigan counts but Iowa doesn't? And New York counts but South Carolina doesn't? And this other state she won counts but one that Barack one doesn't? And she thinks that is legitimate??? And she thinks it perfectly fine that she had her name on the ballot but he didn't when they both agreed not to. They said today that the people who wanted to vote for Obama couldn't because his name was not on the ballot. And they had a total id*iot today saying, yeah, so? That is the most demoralizing thing to say as a reply. Everyone was in an uproar when Cheney said "so" when they said 1/3 of America doesn't agree to the war. Well the people should be equally in an uproar when not both candidates name is on the ticket when they BOTH agreed that it would be that way (i.e. neither name on the ballot). She and her supporters are just coming outright saying...only my votes count. If you voted for Obama, well your votes don't count. And I'm going to fight hard so that only the people that voted for me will be counted. To heck with the rest of you. That is very disrespectful and that is what angers me. Especially since she is saying "every vote should count". I also do not like being in the same category that she is saying all white women are voting for her. The fact is more white woman over 55 are voting for her. The white women under 55 and a lot of the "white" people who have had some college education are voting for Obama. She likes to inflate it to include all white people. She makes it sound as if only black people are voting for him. She doesn't care if the Obama supporters are upset or not, only her side matters to her. Which again it is a race and while I do understand what she is doing I don't approve. She has had a hard campaign (so has Obama). I also think its funny that so many republicans are trying to push people to vote for Hillary. That is because they know McCain will win hands over Hillary. Yes nobody wants another 3rd Bush term with McCain but there are so many more that do not want a 3rd Clinton term. Has to make you think, why are the republicans so determined to get her in? Because they know they will win. They don't want Obama in there because they know they can't win against him. As for her supporters...they are saying they won't vote for Obama, but when it comes down to it they will vote for him. The reason I believe they will is that Hillary has said through her campaign the most important thing is getting a Democrat in there. I hope (I was going to say I have no doubt, however, I do have a little doubt so hope is a better term), I hope that she does everything to bring a Democrat (Obama) into the white house. A lot of people support her and if they support and believe in her then they should support her decidion to get Obama elected and will vote for him. On the other hand, that little bit of doubt that creeps into my mind is that I have a sinking feeling she is going to sabatage his campaign so that McCain will be elected due to her actions and she will run again in 4 years. I guess her attempts at smearing Obama with the Rev Wright didn't work (it was her senior campaign officials that pushed that story) and now they are trying something else. We'll see how it goes. One thing she definitely needs to do is quell some of supporters into not looking like total id*iots with their screaming rampages of how its being stolen from her by a "black man" and what they say about "nobody is going to vote for a black man" and that it is just handed to Barack because he is black then McCain is going to win. This argument is biggotted and stu*pid and she should make a speech to her supporters telling them the truth and they need to put their difference of opinion aside and do the right thing. This is a contest and he is winning fair! That's the plain and simple truth. It's time to bring the democratic party together, not tear it apart for their own personal gain.
Just a few thoughts.
First of all, if your sister has been attending the same church that long and doesn't know what they are preaching about......that is just sad. As for Rev. Wright, he is all about African American Theology. Look it up.......that kind of belief is downright scary. It is all black power and no equality to it. It is racism and that is that.
Finally, my husband and I use the comment of being thrown under the bus all the time. The has been around long before the McCain campaign.
my thoughts
hatred comes from within; it is a fear-based, primitive emotion. No one can MAKE you hate. You have to come to that conclusion based on the way you view the world. Please do not project such things on a good man.
My thoughts
I will try and make this short (ya - right) . I'm reading the responses below and I am laughing. Maybe because it's late right now, but I'm reading the responses and trying to picture what you all look like and the shock that must come across your faces with the responses you receive (because I know the face I make when someone throws me a line). Just is making me giggle right now - like I say it's late.
Okay, with that said this is my feelings about both sides. I was anxious to watch the DNC this week and I will be anxious to watch the RNC next week. I want to hear what everyone has to say on both sides. I want to watch the movies about JM's life. I saw BO's film about his life and I enjoyed it. Barack seems like a very nice person who has worked hard to get where he is and has helped a lot of people (that is normal people like me, my family and friends who have lost jobs, housing etc). It sounds like he was raised on the same values I was (about caring about other people, helping those you can). I believe with the community service and past jobs he's had, and the time he has spent in the senate, he does have the experience and the common sense that a Commander in Chief needs to run a country.
At first I was hesitant to even watch tonight because the whole set up I felt was getting out of hand. People were throwing out the terms rock star, greek, temple, etc, etc. When I first saw it coming together I thought well that's a bit odd and why didn't they just have it where the convention has been all week, but once it filled in with all the people it didn't look like anything greek or a temple. I just looked like a stage on a football field filled with lots of people, and he didn't come across as a rock star. He looked very statesman like, and I could really look up to him as our Commander In Chief. Listening to him speak I was reminded of how I felt when I watched Ronald Regan talk. I felt very patriotic. To me it looked like a lot of people just wanted to hear him speak. I also didn't watch all the stuff before Barack came out because I can't stand Sheryl Crow, Bruce Springsteen (which for the life of me I wish someone could tell me the words to his songs - I listened to the music they played last night and honestly there was not one single word in his songs I could identify - not an "it" "and" or "but" it was all mumbled together - anyway...that's a whole other story). And I certainly can't stand Algore so there was no way I was going to listen to anything he had to drone on about, so I waited until the story of Barack's life and that's when I watched. I did feel that Baracks speech tonight was truly one of the more inspiring speeches I have heard in a long time. I do believe he has the American people's best interest at heart. He is a very caring person and has dedicated his life to trying to change Washington so it works for American's. He has plans that will help get the American economy back on track. It's not going to be instantly but at least I feel there will be someone who understand that America should not continue into a depression while we continue to send $1.8 billion dollars every week to Iraq when they have a surplus. I sit back and think about that and am thinking when is the madness going to end. Iraq has a surplus, we're heading for a depression yet we continue to send money to them. I believe Barack has a responsible plan to bring our troops home. The republicans are now coming out saying that the war has been a success and we won. So if we won we don't need to be there anymore. So I thought overall Barack's speech was very inspiring and gave me some hope for the future.
Also I listened to the commentaries tonight. Not all cos I had to work, but I listened to the republican commenters from Fox and two of them said that Baracks speech was inspiring and they were saying that they (DNC) spent a lot of time and effort preparing for tonight and he came through and gave one of the best speeches and really pulled it through.
My mom told me that you will never agree with a candidate on every issue, so you just vote for the one that you agree with most of the issues on. For me right now I'm seeing that I agree with more of Barack's issues than JM's, but I need to hear more.
On the economy I believe Barack is more knowlegable. I don't believe McCain knows what's going on with the economy. He seems to be stuck on how the economy is great but ask him specific questions and he does not know the answers. When he does not even know how many homes he owns how do you think he would even know how the economy is doing? He's not in touch with what we are going through as Americans. He doesn't know what it's like to worry if your going to be able to put food on your table, or put gas in the car to go to work or even have a job. As for jobs, he has voted and supported jobs going overseas and those companies getting tax breaks for doing that.
Foreign affairs. While Barack may not have years and years of experience, Joe Biden does. I think John McCain isn't very knowlegeable when it comes to foreign affairs (not when he has to constantly be corrected by Lieberman and others close to him).
Heath care - I don't know where John McCain stands on this so I can't comment.
But those are the issues I face everyday. Am I going to have a job with income to pay my bills and where is the economy going. And it's time to bring our troops home with dignity and give them whatever help they need. That's another issue I don't agree with John McCain/Bush about. I do not believe the republican party is doing as much as they can to help our troops, especially when its time for them to come home where they belong.
I do not feel that America is any safer than we were before 9-11. I know we have really p.o.'d other countries sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong trying to dictate to them how they should live and trying to force our viewpoints and political system on them making them fashion theirs as we do ours.
Also, lying in a POW camp for 5 years does not make you qualified to run a country.
More thoughts
I've read all the posts below and it's getting confusing, so I don't want to post something to the wrong person but I have some more thoughts I have to share.
First...I used the word "lying" instead of "being". That does not make me discipicable. I just used the wrong word (it's been done before on other posts so please don't attack me for that). It took away from my message which I still stand by...solely being a POW does not automatically make you qualified to run a country. Balancing the budget, getting the economy back on track, fixing the housing problem, etc, etc. To me that is what makes you qualified. Everytime someone says that being a POW does not make you qualified (which it does not), there is a poster that gets on the defensive. Nobody here is judging McCain's character or patriotism, or heroism, but it sounds like you are basically saying forget everything else, he was a POW he should be president. I just don't buy that. We all know he is a patriot. Nobody is taking that away from him but for me I need to know what your voting record is like. Second I'm reading posts and it sounds like your also saying that he is qualified because he was a POW at Hanoi Hilton. When someone brought up what about the other people being tortured your saying no they wouldn't be qualified because they weren't tortured at Hanoi Hilton and only John McCain knows what torture is. Well tell that to Jessica Lynch. Are you saying that her torture is any less because she wasn't tortured at Hanoi Hilton?
I was in the military, married military, father in military, uncle & grandfather in military. One thing they teach us in the military is torture is torture. They also teach us how to best endure it if we have to go through it (although endure is not the right word, but they tell us what we are supposed to and not supposed to do). We all have to face that possibility when we join.
Being tortured also does something to your mind. That is fact! You are never the same person you are than before you were tortured.
As for John McCains service one poster said he commanded hundreds of soldiers. I read McCain's story. He was a military officer and pilot. He was in a POW camp, but no where in his time in the service did he command hundreds of soldiers. Not all military officers command soldiers.
Lastly, of all people who know what torture is - he voted against (that's right - AGAINST) the bill to ban waterboarding (which is torture!). So he is basically saying no to other countries torturing Americans, but yes to us torturing other people. What?????? To me that tells me something about his "character". Patriot? Yes he is most definitely Patriot. Hero? Yes he is most defintely hero. Character? He has none in my book. Also, his time in the senate and how he treated his fellow senators diminished his character too. Sorry if that offends you but someone who votes that we can torture other people? Well I guess he developed a motto as a POW - "Do unto others as they do unto you".
Again - solely being in a POW camp and being in the military does not make you qualified to be President but how you vote in the senate, what you do to help other Americans, and the plans you have to bring the country out of recession does.
Exactly my thoughts......
@
Some thoughts
Oh my...Charles Manson...now that's creepy for you. When I lived in the Mohave Desert I actually was driving on some highway or road (forget where right now), but I didn't feel right. I just had this creepy feeling. When I told my friend about it she said that was the same road that Manson had travelled on on his way to murder the Tates and others. I didn't know that at the time. Manson is one case I believe the death penalty was warranted in.
You are correct. Ayers is not running for President, but Ayers did start Obama's political career in his home. Ayers and Obama worked closely together. I believe (as do many others), that Obama's ties with Ayers are just temporarily stopped while he is campaigning. No doubt in my mind he will get back with him once the campaign is over. But then you have Acorn and the Annenberg Foundation, the money Ayers/Obama distributed, etc, etc.
As for Obama's drug use in the past. I don't care about that. A lot of people did drugs (Bill Clinton did drugs and I voted for him). In our youths a lot of us do things we don't realize we will regret in the future. I don't believe Obama does drugs now AND McCain also does not do drugs now.
As for McCain and his first wife. You don't know the whole story. None of us do. Things happen in life that are tragic. People do fall out of love. My mom was a very beautiful lady (she was ballerina), and my mom and dad divorced. And they DID remain friend after that and even when she was in the hospital dying he came to visit her every day and even though they were divorced you could see they were good friends (laughed and talked about old times). People don't divorce each other just because of looks. Besides people heard John comforting his wife when she told him she was not pretty anymore he said he was not the most handsome himself. If John's first wife says she admires him and they are best friends I believe her. Why wouldn't I. I am sure the divorce had more to do with "looks", and there are people that say the marriage was over long before that. Nobody knows the "real" reason behind the divorce and I guess that would be a question to ask John McCain instead of trying to incite hatred toward a guy you have no idea about the history of. Right now McCain has been married to Cindy for 28 years and they are totally in love with each other. Always have been.
We do have 9 more days and I can't wait for the election to be over.
Just some thoughts...... sm
2. The US Department of Energy last time I checked was a page or two before the "funnies."
I was referring to Obama's web site.
3. Within the same time (or probably less) that we could drill for more oil here in the US (which wouldn't even come close to producing the quantity we use, and would not stand a chance on the market due to taxes that are already in place) we could implement other sources of energy. In the course of this we would be providing renewable energy, decrease the horrific environmental impact on the environment, and create new jobs.
Sure, we could grow corn or soybeans or other alternative fuels. We could go with T. Boone Pickens' windfarm ideas, but these would all take years to implement as well as billions upon billions of dollars to bring to fruition. Oil fields create jobs in the fields themselves, the refineries that are already in existence and other industries that use petroleum products in their manufacturing process. Coal already comprises a large portion of the portfolio of electric companies. Do away with the coal mines and coal plants and you do away with a lot of jobs in already economically depressed areas. What are we gonna do, move all our West Virginia coal miners out to the mid west to grow soy beans? You are basically taking jobs away from one sector to provide them to another sector so, in fact, are not creating new jobs but just shuffling them around.
My point is not so much that we should not investigate other fuel alternatives, but until we have them in place, don't fine the coal plants for producing the energy our country needs and don't stop the drilling to save the caribou (they are amazingly adaptive critters). Personally, I don't think energy concerns are going to be on anyone's minds in a few short years. They will have other things to worry about.
My thoughts exactly.
nm
Your thoughts on this?
Please take note to the heading and paragraph 3. Aren't we trying to put people to work? Don't white male construction workers need employment, too? Please read some of the comments, too. The people that made comments seem to have a handle on the construction job market. I found some of their comments very interesting.
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/01/stimulus-how-to-create-jobs-without.html
My thoughts
Reading all the posts below I didn't know who to respond to so just posted here. I do not believe Obama said they should die, but one poster is insisting he did but not providing the link. Not fair! Another poster said the pubs are getting pathetic. Also not fair, and in my opinion pathetic especially since nobody actually said that Obama said the elderly should die. What I'm seeing here is "pubs" are giving examples and "crats" are attacking the "pubs" because, well just because they don't agree with them. This is the "elite" attitude as though they are better (I get it all the time from some of my inlaws). But on this board I'm not seeing the hate from the pubs towards the crats like I'm seeing on the other side. The attitude that some crats have for anyone who is a pub just oozes and is getting quite nauseous (yes I know, I'll save those the trouble of writing a nasty - I'll go take a tums or pepto bismol) The only one who actually provided an actual quote to anything was Just the Big Bad.
My viewpoint is that government does not belong involved in our health care system. There are ways to fix the system without having the government in charge of it. Doesn't anyone remember the disastrous plan Hillary tried to pass off when Bill was president? All I know is I don't want Hillary or any government agency in charge of my health care telling me how many more pills I'm allowed to take to stay alive. The only thing I do know is that during his campaign Obama said no to bigger government, yes to smaller government, but now he keeps it growing and growing.
My thoughts exactly...nm
x
exactly my thoughts................nm
nm
My thoughts
Even though I wrote below I have a couple other thoughts.
As much as I hate cigarettes, and I don't drink alcohol (maybe one beer or a glass of wine once every two or three months), I am against govt getting their grimy little fingers in it. I think by now people know what cigarettes do to them and excessive alcohol drinking.
I have mixed feelings though. I think tobacco should be regulated more, and maybe if more kids were to watch videos of the lung cancer victims or alcoholics in the end stage of their lives and hear the pain and suffering they are going through maybe they wouldn't start to begin with. So maybe the govt should have a preventative plan so kids don't get hooked to start with. As for adults smoking...if they smoke they are going to smoke (just keep it away from me). Same with drinking. Although not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic.
I just don't like the govt in everything. So after tobacco it's alcohol, then we move on to fast food (bad for you so the govt should be telling you whether or not you can have it, right?), then lets see, it will be soda pop, or other sugary drinks bad for you (leads to obesity and obesity-related disease, so the govt should be regulating that for you too. Right?). Then lets see we can continue it into clothing, what people can and cannot wear (I hear in Florida they are already doing that, some underwear law or something).
All I say is people have free will. If they want to smoke or drink then that is their choice and the govt should not be able to tell them what they can and cannot do. As for diseases related to their addictions, if you think about it probably most any disease anyone gets (not all of course, but a lot of them) could be related to a poor choice of habits whether it be smoking, drinking, overeating, etc). I don't know what the answer is for costs of treating these people. Maybe there is nothing we can do for those who already do it, but just try to educate the young on the effects it will have on them in the end. All I say is govt needs to stay out of people's personal lives.
Interesting....here's my thoughts
I made the comment at the local cafe the other day that this nation was so concerned with another President's sexual dalliance and subsequent lies that we wanted to impeach him. But Bush and the "Vulcans" and their need for this war and all the "irregularities" in how its been presented and undertaken -- the general American public doesn't seem to notice or care all that much if there have been untruths or lies. At least that is how it seems. I certainly hope I am wrong. In essence, it seems as though we as a nation are more concerned about sex than war and death.
And, geez, I practically wanted to move to Canada when this war started because I was so sick at heart. I just had an overwhelming feeling that we didn't understand what we were getting into, and believe me, I'm not a Middle East expert. My other question now is, how can we lend credence to and trust the judgment of this administration when they have shown such grievous lack of judgment with such poor advisors and "experts." It seems to me, once again, that it doesn't take a genius to realize that "liberating" Iraq was not going to be like liberating France in 1944 (or maybe it was 1945). I know that the administration was warned by many who know the Middle East that this was a grave mistake at the outset because of the innate political precariousness of Iraq and its warring factions.
As I said, I have been able to figure this out and I am certainly not a huge brain. Why has it escaped those leading our country who are supposedly the most informed and best equipped to make these kinds of decisions? And saddest of all, I do hope most of all it is not really about oil/money and power. The idea of that makes me ill, but more and more it appears that this somehow played a major role.
Would appreciate hearing opinions.....
Much appreciation for your thoughts.....
I particularly liked your last paragraph and thought it showed some common ground that hopefully we all COULD agree on!! I also appreciate the time and thought you put into this posting.
Some thoughts on Bush...
I admit I probably need to have my head examined but.....I'm starting to see Bush as kind of a tragic figure. Kind of like a puppet-boy. He was a spoiled and wealthy party guy who never seemed to have to be accountable for anything he did, not terribly bright (but kind of crafty), who somehow got in this position of power, HOWEVER, he is just the front for a bunch of scary neocon folks. I wonder if he ever gets fed up with all this - though I really doubt it. Anyway, I'm just rambling and my point is that my problem is not so much Bush as the Vulcans who control him and this country. As for his wife, well, I don't agree with her philosophically or politically but she seems intelligent and like a real and at times unscripted personality and I keep waiting for her to say wait a minute -- this ain't right about a lot of things. I'll just have to keep waiting though as I doubt it will ever happen.
Please do not spin my thoughts on CSK
I stated in my posts that I admire Mrs. very much. You have a very jaded view of Republicans and conservatives, so having a further conversation with you would not be productive and/or would not change your mind. I'm not trying to anyway but just trying to refute some of the gross misstatements in your posts. From your thoughts you think Repubs are the essence of evil. I think putting every Republican in the evil box implies that you are very polarized. I am not. There are some Democrats that I admire greatly as well as there are some Republicans I think should fall off the face of the Earth and vice versa.
I didn't sit and watch the whole funeral (I have to make a living). I heard Sen. Kennedy was there and spoke. I could be wrong on that one. I know there were some very upbeat and positive moments during the funeral. It definitely wasn't a dire depressing event. I'm only making comments about the politicans. You may think that no one was put off by Carter's comments, but please be assured talk radio is abuzz about the inappropriateness of the comments during Mrs. King's funeral and how classless it was. I'm sure the majority of the audience agreed with Carter. Our present Commander in Chief attended the funeral and to insult him nearly directly was definitely inappropriate and classless to say the least, especially at a funeral.
I think you need to get your facts about the Wellstone funeral straight. The Wellstone funeral turned into a Republican bash-fest by Democrats, so I don't see your point in bringing that up as an example of Republicans desecrating a funeral, because Democrats did that all on their own.
Anyway, I think America sees what is going on. I know that many people don't agree with Bush, but most people don't have the deep seated hate for Bush that you and other liberals seem to share.
This is my last post on the subject here...have a nice evening.
My thoughts this morning
I don't know why I find certain posters/postings so darn disturbing. I know in my heart they do NOT represent most right-wingers. I have two very close friends who are right-wingers and quite a few acquaintances. These folks in no way resemble the posters I refer to. I also know they are pretty much a lunatic fringe. I know I should just ignore them....but I can't sometimes, especially when I see postings that are so grievously factually erroneous (i.e., this country takes care of its poor - which I might add in many ways this country TRIES to help its poor but there is still much to be done). I just think I could address these factual errors without becoming personally embroiled.
The up side is that I learn so much from the research I have ended up doing as well reading some of the eloquent and inspiring posts I have seen on this board. That by itself is worth a lot.
Yesterday I felt my blood pressure rise and felt sick to my stomach for a while. But at sunset I took my three ill-behaved dogs-of-uncertain-heritage for a walkl in a snowy woods out here in the boonies where I live and my appreciation for the world that l am able live in came back to me....and I mean my own personal space, my mental place as well as geographic world.
My thoughts on what you wrote about
I have heard same thing about his life might be in danger, and think it is so horrible that this country still could be remotely about that. But, as you have experienced and witnessed, it is still there. And some rural and other places are saturated with it. I don't live in an area where it is obvious. I haven't heard that word that you mentioned in forever, and I am thankful for that.
Here's the thing. Though many and even me have said/thought that this country is not ready for a black president - he is getting overwhelming support from Democrats and Independents. This makes me think or wonder that either people who are afraid of him or are indeed some form of racists are 1) not voting (in the Democratic primaries), 2) they are more afraid of Hillary (which doesn't make sense if they are truly racist), or, 3) they are mostly Republicans (I know that sounds like a slam on Rep, but I don't mean it to be) and they will vote for McCain anyway... ? Maybe I am naive here.
So even though we may not be ready, it seems that we better hurry up and get ready? ;-)
What are some of your thoughts on Obama?
I am interested to hear what the other Democrats on the board think of Barack Obama thus far. I know Republicans have a right to speak up as well, but I don't expect them to agree with him on much, so I am most interested in hearing what other Democrats think of him. I have nothing against Hilary (I think she is highly intelligent and could do the job just fine), but I just am so inspired by Barack and think he is just what this country needs. I think he can bring about positive changes that are long overdue!! He is an exceptional man.
He gave a powerful, electrifying speech over the weekend in Iowa. I am posting the link below if anyone wants to check it out and see some of the reasons I think he is so very grand. :)
(The link is also asking for donations, but that's only because it was in an email that I signed up for - I'm not trying to get you to donate, honest!)
To zoesnana. My thoughts are
Hope the racist crazies did not keep you away from the forum. Last night in the midst of history in the making and again tonight, while the excitement builds as the moment of the presidential nominee acceptance speech draws near, I find myself thinking of you and remembering the anger and pain you were expressing last week about this time in response to those reprehensible Buchanan posts. I want to share a few thoughts with you.
I am watching the coverage on CSPAN, minus all the reporter's and network's hidden agendas, spin, drama, bias and play-by-play punditry. This kind of coverage helps the viewer feel that they have a front-row seat with wings that transports them all around and above the scene, giving them the bird's eye view of all the best this joyous, beautiful, uplifting, spiritual event has to offer as it plays itself out. It is being shared by men, women and children from all walks of life, all classes, varieties of gender, creeds, colors and cultures, one big beautiful mass of humanity, all gathered to witness and celebrate this one single moment, unparalleled in the history of our country, as we watch Barack Obama accept his party's nomination for the highest and most honorable office in the land and be acknowledged worthy to lead our nation.
For all those who played a part, no matter how small, this is their time to stand up and be proud to have participated, on any and all levels, in the struggle that brought us to this place in time. It is by the Grace of God we come to know that His blessings are now bestowed upon us. It is my heartfelt wish that you can take the comfort I take in believing the in the notion that when one is on the "right side of history," as Mr. Clinton so eloquently stated, good things can happen and all things are possible. Take care of yourself.
Responses for M and Some thoughts (sm)
M:
If they don't show progress and default on the loans, then the gov would have a controlling interest because they gave out those loans. This would lead to restructuring, and probably more of a government run industry. And yeah, they could mess it up just as bad, but we have to at least try something.
Some thoughts:
Even if they are supported financially during re-education, what would they go into? Just about every industry across the board is being hit with this financial mess, so their options would be limited. Also, we're talking about millions of people, and not everyone is cut out for higher education, which is a good thing because we actually do need workers in this country.
This also leaves us with an auto industry that would consist of imports, so we would still be oil dependent.
My thoughts exactly. Nonsense. How can he?
But he says 95% of american workers, not american workers who PAY TAXES. He has never said that, his website doesn't say that. You are classified as a worker if you work a week a year. Some people draw wages so low they don't pay federal income taxes after deductions. A LOT of people, in fact, 30 to 40% of all workers. The top 4-5%, the richest folks, pay the lion's share of ALL taxes now, well over 60% of ALL taxes. And he wants to hit them harder. But I digress.
95% of workers..his words. 30-40% of american workers DO NOT pay federal income tax now. So HOW is he going to give a tax break or cut to them? Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to cut checks. Please, someone, anyone, of the Obama faithful, explain to me how he is going to do that.
If he means 95% of people who PAY taxes, he completely MISSES his target group!!!
I'm glad to know I'm not alone in these thoughts
He lost any chance or respect a long time ago. He should not be where he is at right now - period! The media has had a love affair with him and some of the posters on this board too. Nobody will face the truth and if you try to bring anything up you get bashed for your opinions.
The problem is he is not going to be able to lie out of everything, although he's trying to do one heck of a job. Unfortunately the lies one tells to cover up the previous lies always come back to bite you in the end. He's a slick lawyer with a lot of money and a lot of powerful friends. Can we say obstruction of justice? Can we say liar? Can we say Sheister? How about distrustful, con man, and as I heard a preacher say long-legged Mack Daddy.
Some of My Thoughts for the New Year
Some of my political views are not the norm here, but that is ok, viva LA difference! I will just explain a couple,
1- I do not understand why anyone, particularly women, would vote for the Republicans- they are sort of like the Chinese Communist Party, or the govt. in 1984. For example, a few years ago, the said Murphy Brown was a terrible influence. Never mind that the character was financially well established, and a mature woman actually making a decision, rather than a teenage whoops! This year at the convention, lots of folks wore buttons talking about how much they support unwed mothers. My feeling is they only support them while pregnant, and don’t care about them once the baby is born. In fact, they scorn them. If a woman works, and something happens to her child, she is viewed as an unfit mother because she should have been home. On the other hand, the whole “welfare mom “was demonized because she just “sat at home making babies rather than working”
In addition why support a party who does not have your best interests at heart? Most people are middle/lower middle/ and lower class… why support the elite few?
2- Roe v. Wade is a very smart ruling, and anyone who really understands constitutional law, would agree. “Roe v. Wade was decided primarily on the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights. The Court's decision in this case was that the Ninth Amendment, in stating that "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people," protected a person's right to privacy.”
No one has the right to say that their belief should supersede mine. I believe life does not begin at conception, ergo, no one should legislate my body, worry about your own.
3- I believe in gun control. No one needs anything more than a hunting rifle (if that) in their home. Period. No one is keeping the government in check by keeping a gun- it is a load of malarkey. Crime has decreased- not because of guns, but because people were more prosperous. That has ended. We need social programs, and for corporations to be a part of society and not just answer to share holders so that we can all work together to turn things around. That will keep crime down- not everyone owning killing machines.
4- Everyone is entitled to health care. It should be a right, not the privilege of the few. We call ourselves civilized, yet we have people starving or dying from lack of health care right in our midst.
5- I am against the death penalty. I never got the eye for an eye thing. Yes, I have been the victim of a violent crime, but a violent reaction doesn’t undo what happened, it only re-enforces the whole cycle.
What spin - these are my thoughts
There is no spin to ones thoughts and feelings. I'm not sitting here trying to get you to believe one thing or another. I posted about a news story I read and my feelings. That is not spin.
The car industry....just some thoughts.
My DH and I were talking the other day and we were talking about the criticism of GM. For one, we are both so sick and tired of hearing people say that GM was stupid for building bigger trucks and SUVs. Once again....GM built these because that is what consumers wanted.
Remember back when your parents had a smaller vehicles and we used to cram 5 kids in the back seat. How many of those kids were in car seats? How many even had their seat belts on? Nowadays....you can't do that. Kids have to be in a booster seat until they are 4 feet 7 inches and all people must wear a seat belt. Now tell me this.....how many car seats can you fit in a small car? If you have more than 2 children....you are really pushing it.
I've heard numerous complaints about why GM didn't make more fuel efficient vehicles. Well....let's discuss this a tad bit shall we. The government regulates certain safety standards for vehicles. They go through several crash tests to see which cars are safer. What does this mean.....this means more reinforcement in the vehicles frame which makes vehicles heavier. What does the weight do? Well, the extra material as well as the crash testing causes prices to go up and the extra weight makes the vehicles less fuel efficient. GM made the vehicles it did because at the time....that is what consumers wanted and they also had to meet Government safety standards.
Compact cars are great for single people or married couples without children, but I'd like to see you take a trip in one of those with three kids in car seats plus all of your luggage, etc.
Thoughts on hypocracy
Palin said she did not believe in abortion. When she found she had a late-in-life Down syndrome pregnancy, she did not have an abortion. When her daughter became pregnant SHE did not abort. I see no hypocracy there.
As for letting the boy move in, it may have been to ensure the health and safety of Palin's daughter and grandchild. You know how at that age you think you cannot live another second without the object of your affection? Her daughter might have moved out, lived and delivered the child God knows where. Maybe her daughter even threatened do do this to be with her boyfriend.
Knowing what political hay would be made of all this, Palin stood by and protected her child. Not an ideal situation, but maybe preferable to the alternative. I'm sure Palin would much have preferred her daughter not be knocked up out of wedlock, but presented with a done deed, not sure how most of us would have handled it. I don't see hypocracy there either.
People we love will often disappoint and/or embarrass us, and we cannot control their actions. All we can control is how we handle the situations they present us with. Hypocracy would have been for Palin to slip away for a secret abortion of her Down syndrome baby, or sneak her daughter out of town for the same procedure. Or send her daughter and the boyfriend off somewhere to live incognito or, try to hide the daughter's pregnancy.
Thanks for your thoughts, will check out Ford.
I'm in my 50s and never paid much attention to politics until just before this past election. Now I'm trying to make up for lost time, I guess......it's too bad that the abysmal condition politics is in right now is what finally prompted me to get interested!!
I wanted actually to know your thoughts. Not an article. nm
?
Well here are some thoughts for the right wing bigmouths
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2006/02/spare-us-lectures.html
I have posted pretty much the same thoughts. sm
However, as much as I have been through in this forum over the years, I see little changing. I didn't and still don't believe my post was insulting. I should have used another word, I guess. How about ill informed? Because for the life of me, I can't see how anyone who was truly informed about stem cell research (embryonic vs adult vs umbilical) could so vehemently defend stem cell research. Maybe you can explain that to me so that I can understand it.
Hi anon....just a couple of thoughts....
right or wrong, there are more people in this country who do not consider themselves "citizens of the world," having never been outside our borders and have no desire to do so. That does not make them bad or wrong. And they have a mistrust of someone who says he is a citizen of the world who is married to a woman who was never proud of the US in her adult life until her husband ran for President. That does not make them bad people either. That is just the way they feel. I am one of those people. I have never traveled outside the US and have no desire to. I do not call myself a citizen of the world. If you want to, if anyone wants to, that is fine by me. However, if someone is running for President of the United States, to lead our country, I personally...and again, a personal feeling of my own, feel that he should be here in this country, talking to Americans about what he wants to do for this country, here. There is plenty of time, if and when he gets the job, to go abroad and talk to the other leaders, as Presidents have done before him. I think it smacks of a little arrogance that he chose to do this, but again...that is MY perception. And the fact that one of his senior advisors said to the press corp on the plane on this trip in a briefing"When the President of the United States goes..." and had to be reminded that Obama did not have the job yet...well, kinda sealed it for me. I just don't trust the man. I don't think he has this country's best interests at heart...because he and I disagree about what that is.
I whole-heartedly agree about the campaign managers. Y'know, anon, I just wish we could have a debate where we inject both of them with truth serum before they start, and gag all their advisors until all questions had been answered, and let regular folks like us ask the questions. Only THEN will we know the truth. LOL. Have a great day!
I see your point - here are a couple thoughts
I do see your point. I don't want to believe someone would be that vulgar and call his wife that, but seeing as nobody is either denying or confirming it, it could be or could not be true. But two things I do find odd that leads me to believe that it is possible he said it.
1. They are not denying it. If it was me and I'm running for president I would sure as rain be up there adamently denying it saying that it is not true.
2. People can't make up stuff like this and not expect to be sued. The author of the book could be forced to reveal the sources and then if it came up that it was false the reporter (author) would be in deep doodoo.
3. We know what McCains history is like. It's a well known fact that he is a hot head. He slams his fist on desks, lunges at people as though he's ready to "duke it out". He's just a mean and nasty person all around.
In all truthfulness if someone came out and said Obama said that, I would most likely not believe it because of the kind of person Obama is. If you said he did this or that tied to black militant groups or stuff like that I would believe it, but not with saying something like that about his wife.
Lastly, if I was in the senate and I heard McCain say that or if I heard the way Clinton talked to her secret service I would never pubicly come out and say it because they are know for "pay back" and I would not want to be on their wrong side.
My thoughts exactly! You're voting for him, right? nm
nm
Thoughts on illegal immigrants...
Are they working on getting their citizenship. If so, what is the time frame to getting citizenship. Isn't that the name of the game?
Here in ATL, it is a hot topic on the news. I just want what is fair to happen. I do want secure borders, however. My reason is to keep out terrorists. They can blend in with neighboring borders and pretend to be a citizen from that country.
Remember that guy who said he wanted to learn to fly a plane but didn't want to learn how to land. why didn't red flags go up with that comment. It seems we work extra hard at keeping airports safe but not borders. and I know people get offended when you want the borders safe but those people should also want safe borders from the terrorists for their families.
Don't want to offend, just want to be fair to everybody.
I believe this is all Tech Support's own thoughts.........sm
an easy way to tell is to copy the first line and paste it into Google.
I personally find Tech Support's posts to be insightful, well thought out and intelligent with a bit of witticism thrown in for good measure. I always enjoy reading his posts.
Prayers and thoughts to our friends in England
We are thinking of them
Thoughts on war, immorality and Robert McNamara
Some of the inflammatory posts lately popping up do not appear to originate from people capable of seeing the global consequences of our country's actions (as well as Israel's). I guess what I find most disconcerting is the general trend of thought that the only way to fight terrorism, or any group whose ideology is different, is with more killing, more bombs, more war. I also think that this is where America is going wrong.....that by following the old methods of war/killing/bombs to quell unrest we are inciting more terrorism and more hatred. Maybe we need to rethink the very phrase War on Terror. Perhaps we need to entertain thoughts of a different method than war. But it seems the trend of thought that is echoed rather eerily in some of the posts that appear here reflect the philosophy of if they don't agree with us then they deserve to die/not go to heaven/not be smiled upon by our god, etc.
I recommend folks watch The Fog of War which features Robert McNamara, former Secretary of Defencse and architect of the Vietnam War, among other roles. I copied below his thoughts on Vietnam where one could easily substitute Iraq for Vietnam as McNamara also points out. On war in general as well as WWII he states:
Proportionality should be a guideline in war, which refers to McNamara's role, with General Curtis LeMay, in the 1945 firebombings of 67 Japanese cities — before the bombs were ever dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. McNamara wrote the report on the inefficiency of conventional bombing campaigns that may have inspired LeMay to take his B-29 bombers down to under 5,000 feet and rain fire on cities built of wood, killing nearly 1 million Japanese. In the film, McNamara says, In a single night we burned to death 100,000 civilians — men, women, and children — in Tokyo. I was part of a mechanism that in a sense recommended it. He goes on to recount how LeMay admitted, 'If we lost the war, we'd all be prosecuted as war criminals.' He — and I — were behaving as war criminals … What makes it immoral if you lose but not if you win?
Robert McNamara's 11 lessons from Vietnam
• We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries … and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions.
• We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience … We totally misjudged the political forces within the country.
• We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values.
• Our judgments of friend and foe alike reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders.
• We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces and doctrine…
• We failed as well to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture.
• We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement … before we initiated the action.
• After the action got under way and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course … we did not fully explain what was happening and why we were doing what we did.
• We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people's or country's best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.
• We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action … should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community.
• We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions … At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world.
• Underlying many of these errors lay our failure to organize the top echelons of the executive branch to deal effectively with the extraordinarily complex range of political and military issues.
Head in the sand....final thoughts
You said: I am truly sorry that any of you on the right equate not wanting to fight, not wanting to kill, eshewing revenge shrouded as justice and preferring diplomacy to preemptive attacks with **lily-liveredness.**
My answer: First of all, to say that going into Iraq was revenge does a huge disservice to the people who died on 9-11 and to the soldiers who have died in Iraq since. I think a statement like that is unconsciable. It is your right to say it, my right to disagree strongly, which I do. I have a hard time understanding how any American could think that.
Second, I have never referred to anyone as lily-livered. No one WANTS to kill. You and the left keep saying that like Republicans or anyone NOT liberal (sound familiar?) WANTS to kill. That is just nuts. However, some people do believe that our way of life, our country, are worth dying for or killing for if necessary. That being said, for diplomacy to work, both sides have to be interested in a peaceful outcome. In what alternate reality do you imagine that Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda, Al-Zawahiri, the Taliban, or ANY terrorist would be interested in a peaceful outcome, when their stated purpose is the destruction of the United States and Israel, and eventually anything not Muslim? Where in there do you see ANY room for diplomacy? THAT is what I mean when I (not others who post, I cannot speak for them) say *head in the sand.* Do you actually believe that diplomacy will work with these people? I do not for the life of me understand how you can look at the history of terrorist attacks, their escalation, and say that somehow talking with these people will make a difference. Perhaps you can clue me in on the possibility that you see in diplomatically stopping the terrorist threat? How that could possibly happen? I would be willing to listen.
You said: I see those as strength of character, the courage of conviction and fairhandness.
I say: Strength of character is also standing tall and saying *your plan of terrorizing and separating this country and her people will not work. If you plan to attack us, know that we will fight back.* Strength of character is also not kowtowing to bullies. Common sense tells you bullies do not respond to diplomacy. Bullies win by intimidation, sneak attacks, and fear. It is impossible to negotiate with these people, because you cannot give them what they want. Saddam violated how many UN resolutions before 9-11? His word was worthless, absolutely worthless. Simply because YOU desire that kind of diplomacy and YOU have those kinds of values, if they are absent on the other side, you might as well chop your own head off and save them the trouble. Yes, I remember how you said you did not fear having your head chopped off. The trouble is, it is not just YOU they are after, and your seeming lack of caring for what happens to your country and other Americans is pretty darn scary. THAT is what I mean when I say the left has become about me, me, me and the heck with the rest of you. And look at Kim Jong Il and Admadinejad...diplomacy is really working with them, isn't it? When are you and the left going to learn, for it to work both sides have to WANT it to work.
Please demonstrate to me how terrorists will respond to courage of conviction or fair-handedness. When did they ever show fair-handedness? They make cowardly craven attacks designed to murder as many as possible in one strike. There is no courage or fair-handedness in 9-11, in the Achille Lauro, in Beirut marine bombing, in the Cole, and the gazillion suicide bombings over the years, the embassy bombings...where in ANY of that do you think diplomacy would work? They are not of a country with whom you CAN negotiate. And you are willing to just keep the courage of your convictions, even knowing there is no possibility that will work, and allow yourself AND your fellow Americans who might not be like-minded to be murdered? And that is okay with you? No, sorry, I will NEVER understand that.
You said: No need for you to comment on this because I already know **I have my head in the sand** and do not need to hear you tell me again what a naive person I am, but they are my beliefs and I honor them and are proud of them because, no matter what happens, they are good and decent values and Iraq will not change my mind or my values.
I say: I do not believe you are naive. I believe you just choose to ignore and or rationalize what does not fit with your stated ideals, and I believe you have some noble ideas, and perhaps with a strong charactered, fair-handed enemy those ideals would be fruitful. They are not. They are the antithesis of strong character and fair-handedness.
But, I am sure you will be relieved to hear, I get it. I will not be foisting my opinion on you any longer, because as you say, there is no changing your mind, which is EXACTLY the point I am trying to make. As married as you are to your ideals, multiply that by about a gazillion and you know how the terrorists are married to their ideals. THEY are not going to change THEIR minds either, and we are NOT going to change THEIR minds by talking to them about strength of character and fair-mindedness.
And the rest of the story is that as long as there are still some Americans like us remaining, who are willing to go to the mat for America and ALL Americans, perhaps you will not ever have to give up the country and the way of life that let you form and hold those ideals.
You're welcome.
God bless.
gourdpainter - your thoughts are not lost on a lot of us - so not to worry
you will not get anywhere trying to reason or at least share thoughts with some of the posters for sure. they seem to only know fight or flight (they want to fight with whoever disagrees with them and want everyone else to flee). Alas, there are some of us who enjoy debating issues and sharing thoughts...
While she does deserve our thoughts and prayers, I dare say...
some will say she deserves as much respect as the left showed to Mrs. Palin's handicapped child and pregnant daughter.
Thinking good thoughts and holding him up...:-) nm
nm
This is an unfortunate circumstance and sad, my thoughts go to his family -
It's sad whenever anyone has an affair no matter who it is or what party they belong to. We all know democrats have their fair share too. Am sure we can name as many crats as republicans who have had affairs. It's sad that this happens to any family and surely nothing to be happy about because it happened to someone in the party that one doesn't support.
However, his having an affair does not change my viewpoints about what he stands for in his political career. He is still one of the good guys and stands up for what is right and what is good for the American people. His ideas are good and him having an affair doesn't change how I feel about what he has done in his political life.
We should all leave his personal life alone (especially since the crats didn't want to discuss John Edwards, Bill Clinton, Barney Frank, Daniel Inouye, Fred Richmond, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.)
You cannot say one is better than the other because one of them "might" have run for President (especially when it had not been decided that Sanford was going to be chosen as the next candidate- and funny how last week everyone here was talking as though Ensign was the running candidate - none of that had been decided yet), however, Edwards actually was chosen and was running for VP and President, and even Clinton, the President himself.
Some comments I read on different sites were...
Democrats cherish anything that focuses off Obama's failures as a President. Very pathetic if you ask me.
Liberalism is a disease that destroys brain cells due to the ingestion of kool aid. Thus, they are forced to forget about their own idiotic and stupid leaders and focus their hate and anger on anyone that disagrees with them
I know! Republicans are humans, and they make mistakes just like everyone but what defines them is how they apologize (hence we forget Clinton's pathetic excuse and attempt to apologize).
When Republicans have an affair, the Democrats scream "They must be held accountable and resign." When Democrats have an affair, they go through a media circus, but all is forgiven and they stay in office.
Lots of interesting other comments but way to many to post.
Any thoughts on Joe Lieberman endorsing John McCain....
just wondering. I think that could have a real effect on undecided Independents as to which way they fall. Might result in a lot of Independents registering as Dem or Repub now to vote in the primaries who might not otherwise have done so. Very interesting development.
|
