Palin is substance, if that's what you're referring to!
Posted By: nm on 2008-09-01
In Reply to: novelty VP choices always lose - bounder
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
Are you referring to McCain and Palin inside
he going to go in that poor child's home every day and tell their momma to get her butt home from the whorehouse and the bar and take care of her children? He gonna tell their daddy to get off his sorry lazy butt and take care of his children and stop knocking up every girl he can?
Please copy the post you're referring to that says she's not
I can't find it.
Don't know which board or which specific Iranian you're referring to.
If you want me to read something, then post it, so I can, but please don't suggest that I go on some kind of wild goose chase on some other unnamed *board* for a post by some unnamed *Iranian.* I simply don't have that kind of time.
If you don't think the Iranian president is nuts, then blame the media and the administration because that's he way he's been portrayed by both, and his actions sure suggest that he is. Please post his redeeming qualities as you see them.
I posted this because I thought it was humorous, yet dead on accurate in the way a lot of Americans feel.
Get the picture? 
Post the direct link. I don't see the post you're referring to.
t
Boy.......you're STILL jealous over Palin.....
xx
Now you're playing Sarah Palin games--
I'm perfectly on point. My reasoning is that there is no reason to fear 1 man, because it takes a lot more than 1 man to make a change. Members of either party don't always back their party's bills. In fact, a lot of them don't, as the case was Monday.
The hard part for you here is that what I am saying is true and you don't want to admit that, ergo you would be admitting that there should be no fear.
what substance
I don't see any substance in McCain at all.
Do you have anything of substance to say?
fu
nothing of substance to say so..
you attack the poster. Is that how we are supposed to use this board?
Substance of course being in lockstep
with you. Do you not see that as many talking points, right-wing quotes and such are seen on the conservative side as you purport are on the left. You guys talk a lot of right-wing recycled trash as you say we do left. Siiiiiiiigh.
This was an add with no substance or "facts.."
just a bunch of innuendo and although I am not voting for Obama and am concerned about the "connection," I applaud Fox for not running the ad. I have not seen it, but if Fox chose not to run it they must think there is not much truth to that particular ad. You can still research on the internet, and a bunch of papers were just released from Columbia University that might shed some light on the relationship, and Fox will cover that.
All that being said...people attack Fox all the time for being one-sided (which they are not, there are more two-sided than ANY other outlet), but choosing not to air this ad should send a message to people that while they are the most conservative network, they do hear the other side and they are fair.
Anything of substance she's reading from the
She is very nervous obviously.
Got a whole lot more going in the substance department
his campaign jumping from one smear to the next, lurching around trying to find his trajectory, running from the issue of the economy ("is not my strong suit and if we talk about it, we'll lose), has yet to come up with a coherent campaign theme except the change slogan he highjacked fromm Obama and cannot articulate one single sentence on the subject of how he would handle his 90% self any differently than the shrub.
Speaking of substance, Sally, that is what your
nm
your post has no political substance either
nm
If you want to vote personality over policy and substance
nm
O is "just words, just speeches", little substance.
nm
Thats good cos dems give no substance to
the conversations here. Just attacks at those who don't agree with them. Take a look at all the postings. Its the dems going after the republicans.
Then maybe you should stick to facts, substance and issues
The liberals attack those who do not agree with them. And it's not attacks on issues or facts it's personal name calling attacks.
No big loss. That poster added nothing of substance and sounded like he/she is a
troll from the conservative board. 
Sarah Palin fans are as whack as Palin.
Even John McCain's top adviser referred to Sarah Palin as a whack job.
Vote McCain and Palin! -oh and why does Palin
nm
Palin over Biden any day. Make fun of Palin all you
nm
Not what I was referring to...
Anyway, I'm beginning to be sorry I mentioned this. The whole point was that a poster said TWICE that it was easy enough for her to check ISPs to find out who was using multiple monikers in order to find out what was posting as whom, etc. I was just questioning that comment, that's all.
As far as the hacking on the protestwarrior.com website, that is a separate issue from what I was referring to. Someone revealed some folks' personal information on the forum. I wasn't blaming the owners of the website for that.....
Time for me to give this a rest.
LOL! I was referring to
Bush's invasion of Iraq to *spread freedom* (#2 reason after the failed WMD excuse). I'd consider it kind of a *gander invasion* (as in what's good for...). Could you imagine an America where, regardless of wealth, everyone received medical care, nobody starved, everyone had adequate housing? An America that didn't throw its poor to the wolves (or the *waves* of a hurricane, as pointed out below in the areas that Bush included in his Louisiana plan)? An American government that allowed personal freedoms, didn't force one set of religious beliefs down your throat via politics, didn't try to control your personal life/death issues, didn't condemn you to unequal rights and eternal damnation because you love the *wrong* person?
I wouldn't object to living in that kind of America.
Actually, I was referring to
money/evil as it regards George W. Bush, et al.
The UAE has a very unstable history of *loyalty* to the United States, and I believe allowing this deal to go through is very risky business and completely contrary to the man who said *If you're not with us, you're against us,* who, to me, is now completely against us and in favor of big money. The 9/11 Commission is totally against this deal. But anything to defend Dubya, right?
Let me guess...you *accidentally* posted on the liberal board again, right?
I was actually not referring to you.
You are not the message-syntax-style-similar person.
I was not referring to these 2
individuals exclusively. I said there are those who are able to see a problem from all sides. These are the people who will lead us to peace if we can ever achieve it. As far as liars et al, PULEEZE, take a look at our current Congress, take a look at many of our **ministries.** Take a look at our leaders of industry. Take a look at our professional sports and news people and newspapers.
My point was that one can actually have a viewpoint that is diametrically opposed to yours and still love America, love democracy and disapprove of this administration AND say so out loud. I admire people who can put their personal feelings aside and see incendiary events objectively. I am not able to do that but there are those that can. My post was not a defense of anyone in particular.
I was referring to myself...
the things I have gotten mostly on the C board but some here. I did not say you said any of those things. I just know they have been said to me. I am not championing anyone. I wanted to let Teddy know that she has a place here as does everyone (except if you denigrate W) and some pretty nasty things have been said on both sides. I did not want her to leave because she was, it appeared, standing alone yesterday. The more people are here the better it is.
I don't think that anyone probably deserves some of the rhetoric that appears here and I am amazed at the viciousness sometimes...both sides...but we are representative of a larger picture and that is a good thing.
My apologies, I was not referring to you in any way. I was telling Teddy that I knew how she must feel. It's tough to go it alone sometimes or be the only one on your side (or so it seems). I have been there where I am the only left voice and besides being difficult, it gets really confusing about answering what to who about what. That is all.
This is what I was referring to...
I should probably refrain from any dialogue and perhaps just correct posts that are obviously erroneous (like the one about poverty in the U.S.). Correcting factual errors on their posts would probably be a full time job. Besides I enjoy the research and learn lots!!
Don't know what you are referring to. nm
nm
I am referring to....
The missionary story told in the "Wow. This is impressive. I agree." post, the point being that there are a multitude of Christian viewpoints, especially when it comes to interpreting the Bible (or any other holy book, for that matter) and reconciling more secular political beliefs.
To whom are you referring?
First, I would like to know exactly to whom you are referring. Second, I would like to know who gave you the power to tell people to go elsewhere? If you are offended by a post or posts, you certainly are free to go elsewhere yourself, but I do not believe you have the right to tell others what to do!
Perhaps she's referring to
A fictional character, John McClane of Die Hard fame. We know she's out of touch with reality.
But why are you referring to....sm
republicans as being rabid tonight? I imagine that term could be used both ways for both parties, but why are you so vehement tonight about only Republicans? Did something happen?
(at least in the posts that I have read...might have missed some, as I don't go back when I've missed a day or so of posts....)
You're usually very level headed, although as you said above on a different post, it sounds like you go right and left on different issues.
And I keep meaning to ask you how your gourd painting is coming along, now that Halloween and fall are upon us. I hope you're having fun with that, as I saw you post on a different board a while back about your hobby....
I was referring to the very same NWO...
...that is the goal of the PNAC that everyone was afraid Bush would cause.
That's what I was referring too....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450445,00.html
The Atheist organizations ran "Why believe in a god" ads in D.C.
I mean if we as Christians can't run ads in secular areas, why should atheists?
By the way, Atheism is becoming a lot like it's own religion nowadays....
That's right - I was referring to him
and should have credited Bubba's name to the quote. Everyone should remember though, Mr. O is not the first black President we've had, according to many Bubba was.
First of all, I was referring to the GOP going . . . .
down the toilet, NOT Fox News. Secondly, the only reason Fox has the highest ratings on non-cable networks is because all the intellligent people are gleaning their information from the more intelligent cable networks. I reckon those people in the boonies can't get those fancy cable stations, and so they are forced to pick between the big 3, and besides, Lamebaugh, Beck, et al, are more to their likin', since birds of a feather (or smaller brains) stick together. So, you all can keep harping on Fox's ratings -- I don't give a rat's behind because I am not impressed (and I am not brainwashed), and I actually have a mind of my own. I think it is disgraceful that they are even allowed to call themselves a news network -- more like hate-inciting network.
If you are referring to me....
I haven't posted anything since January. So I think you may have me confused with someone else. I really just lurk and laugh. Thanks though! 
I think I see now what you're referring to about my post.
I don't find one thing funny about it. I'm outraged about it because blaming anyone BUT the priests is giving a green flag for that behavior to continue.
And I totally agree with you that it's gone on too long, with the church's apparent blessing. They know what these priests are doing, and they just transfer them to another parish so they can continue with a new set of children.
As far as the "headline" comment about my post, see what you mean about it coming up as a "headline" when you log onto this site. I didn't realize it was going to come up that way.
Please rest assured that I'm outraged by all this. Our children in this country are molested and killed every day in what seems to be an epidemic, and nobody is doing anything about it.
OK. But, I wasn't referring to this. That's all I'm trying to say. nm
x
Wasn't referring to you....nm
fdfdf
The 'jokes' I was referring to
were in your previous post. I guess I'm breaking your mold because, while I've never heard AL Franken, I'd break his nose too because what he said in the quote you just provided is hateful. I do not defend one side and slam the other.
Sounds like you are referring to a
certain group of people. Correct me if I have misunderstood. Who are you talking about? The vast majority of conservatives who believe the Bible is divinely inspired support the Constitution and don't want it meddled with. Your observation truly has me confused. 
I know...I was referring to my typo (nm)
xx
I still have no idea to whom you are referring!
Why don't you give specific examples, so I can understand what you are talking about? I am not psychic and truly don't know who you are targeting here. Everyone on the board has the ability to post under whatever name they choose. For example, Sam admitted to posting under the name Indy Observer yesterday. No one knew it was her until she revealed it in one of her posts. Do you have special powers that allow you to know who is posting under various names?
I was referring to the war in Iraq being
a waste. The man who was behind our 09/11 massacre is still at large. We should have put more time, resources in money going after him. Not going after Iraq, but then they had all that great oil. Again, Afghanistan is one thing, Iraq another. Bush and his admin. mislead and lied to everybody saying that Iraq had anything to do with 09/11. So, now we have pumped billions of dollars into an Iraq war when it should have put into getting the man/people would attacked us. So yes, the fact that it is Afghanistan does make the difference IMO.
I shudder to think of all the things the Republicans have done in the 6 years that they had majority that we don't even know about yet. It does not excuse this current fiasco though and as I stated earlier, no I do not overlook what hand the Dems had it in either.
Who are you referring to by "they" ?
I am also a Christian and don't condone any of it either and I think most people probably do not. "they" fear Muslims because all they know of Muslims is the small portion of them who are terrorists. They don't realize it is a peaceful religion. All of these things that were done in the name of religion over centuries were done by radicals one way or the other looking for an excuse. No one's God, not the God we Christians believe in, not the God Muslims believe in, condones killing and hatred. That is something we humans have done all by ourselves.
Which lies are you referring to
Would you please be specific. I understand you are not defending either candidate, but you came on and pretty much said that whatever we wrote were lies, so I would like to know which "lies" are you referring to. I'm sure you're probably referring to the people who wrote about their concerns and posted articles that were against Obama.
I came on this board to read people's "opinions", why someone liked or disliked a candidate and for what reason. Also a lot of excellent links and articles were posted. Some written by lawyers, journalists, etc. People with degrees and who have been studying the economy, foreign affairs, laws, and presidential races for 20 years or more. Are those people lying? They've done their research, and for many of us we posted links to those sources for people to read themselves and make their own determinations as to whether they belive it or not.
What I saw constantly was if it went against Obama people said it was a lie. We posted articles and were told the source is not credible. Then when we posted some from CNN or MSNBC nothing was said. So people gave no reason as to why they were not credible except for the simple fact that it did not praise Obama. They chose to ignore the truth instead.
So as for people "making things up". It all depended on if you were for or against Obama. I never heard one Obama supporter question any of the stuff Obama was saying or doing or his shady background and questionable associations. But the McCain supporters did question him. We did say time and time again we weren't really happy with the republicans choice, but the other was worse.
P.S. - The stuff we post... we do back up with a credible source.
So please tell me which lies you are referring to so we can answer you with credible sources.
This is referring to an off shore rig..... sm
when it talks about taking 20 years to bring one to production. People need to understand that this is from the seismographic investigations until the first drop of crude comes from below the ocean floor.
I am talking about land rigs, and I believe I stated this in my post. I live in an oil and gas rich region of our country and have a very good friend who is a consultant for one of the major drilling companies in the region. When I asked him how long it takes to bring a rig to production, his answer was that it used to take upwards of 6 weeks to 2 months but that they now have the technology to bring one in within 14 days from rig up to rig down. The higher ups in the business push for a figure closer to 10 days. I have watched the oil drilling activity in my area, and I mean physically watched it and not just reading about it in the newspaper, for the last 3 years and have literally counted the days from rig up to rig down several times and it generally does come in at around 10 to 14 days.
I also looked at the front page for your source. Did you? It has Obama written all over it, so any "facts" that are posted there are going to be slanted in his favor to advance his legislation and party. Even the first sentence is an outdated statement. Gas prices have plummetted in the past couple of weeks. It is currently down to below $2 in several towns in my area. My mother's royalty check this month was only 25% of what it had been in previous months.
So, I believe I know my facts pretty well and I don't need Obama's website decrying what Bush did or did not do to substantiate them.
|
