Response taken to the top of the board.
Posted By: Thanks for that link. on 2008-08-17
In Reply to: You're right, all democrats are not socialists - but Obama is........sm
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
Another classy response. I won't say liberal response,
because I don't think you and these pile-on posters are indicative of liberals as a whole. Don't know why they let you speak for them...but that is up to them. Obviously you don't think compassion is a personality trait...obviously you feel that it can be turned on and off to suit your agenda. So be it.
So you and your buds bash us on *your* board and suddenly, once you reach this board,
some respect?
You publicly post on the other board that you *try not to visit the bog of eternal stench.*
Well, doesn't look like you are trying all that hard. Or is that another example of Conservative honesty, like your buddy on the other board lies 3 times before suddenly deciding to be *up front* (in her own words) about the whole bogus line of crap she was spouting.
You and your 2 friends don't respect anyone unless they're a member of your little club, think exactly as you think, belong to the same political party as you belong, and believe in the very same little narrow SUBsection of one particular religion.
That's what I interpret from YOUR WRITTEN WORDS. Your posts don't show respect. They only show twisted *facts*, ignorance, anger and hatred.
You can't be *respectful* on your own board but suddenly, when you come here - HERE - the place YOU call *the bog of eternal stench* you suddenly discover some respectability during your mouse click from there to here?
Please. Some of us aren't as stupid as you think we are.
You're becoming quite a bore. You and your friends stated you don't want us on your board, but you're not happy unless you're picking a fight. You and your *gang* told us to leave and not to post on *your* board. Maybe that should work both ways.
Out of ALL the problems with radical Conservatives, maybe the most annoying thing is that you don't believe in equality at all. You believe in SUPERIORITY. Somewhere along the line, someone made you think you were special and above everyone else. Sheesh! You're not happy unless you're dictating to everyone else in the country what they're allowed to do in their own personal lives regarding life, death, science, etc. You even think YOUR GOD IS BETTER than everyone else's.
You want to make the rules, censor people and tell them which boards they can and cannot post on, but YOU want to invade them all and spew your ignorance and hatred.
In my heart, I believe there are sincere, honest, intelligent Conservatives out there who are capable of a sensible debate. I've seen them. (I hope you don't chase them away, too.) But and your crew don't fall in that category, and this will be the last of your inane posts I will subject myself to.
Talk about stench. Just read your very own posts.
Can we bring the board back to the true reason for the board
Can we get the political board back to the true purpose of this board – to share opinions of why we like our candidate. Not bash and cut down others because they don’t agree with you.
I stayed away from this board for the past couple days because anyone who had anything positive to say about Sarah Palin got slammed, bashed, kicked down, etc. After awhile I found it all too draining, and was not seeing any reason to come. Yes, I did see some of it towards people who favored Barack Obama, but if you read the posts again it is mostly towards anyone who favored Sarah Palin/John McCain.
I thought the political board was for posting information regarding politics and candidates. What I have seen for the past few days is that it has been an attack board. Especially if you have anything positive you want to share about Sarah Palin. You say something good about her and you get attacked, you answer back, and you get attacked more, and then when you get mad and pretty much say stop attacking me, they come back with this “Geez, I’m allowed to have an opinion”.
Another thing I am tired of seeing is the slanderous, hate filled, really off the wall comments about Sarah Palin. The latest was something about her daughter actually had her baby. Talk about just bizarre comments. I thought what’s next, she’s an alien from another planet? The more I kept reading the more the comments were getting just really weird and bizarre. Of course nobody ever having any proof of any of these allegations. I then came to realize that the posters were just trying to get a fight going.
I also saw posts that had nothing to do with politics but attacking a poster named Sam. Again, probably trying to get another fight going for no good reason and on things that have nothing to do whatsoever with politics. I’ve read “Sam is like an annoying nat that you sway away”, “Sam, please let me know where you work” or “she must have her quota” or “sam is to the politics board as oracle is to the” This childish rhetoric is getting old. I’m not defending sam she is a big girl and I can see by her posts she can take care of herself, but my point is that this has nothing to do with politics. If you want a fight maybe you could request that the administrator create a separate “fight and degrade” section.
I’ve read the administrators post a couple different times called Beware of Flaming. She/he said as long as we realize that not everyone is going to agree we shouldn’t wear our feelings on our sleeves and a little more oversight on here would be good. Let people express his or her opinion and move on. If you don’t like someone just ignore that person. “It’s not rocket science, you know” (I liked that statement) 
I consider posting on this board a privilege and not a right. If you don’t agree with something and you post that you don’t agree and state the facts why (and are civilized about it) that’s one thing, but when you bash and degrade others without showing proof and just want to start fights and belittle others it just seems a bit juvenile to me.
I come to the politics board to hear ideas and stuff (facts) about the candidates. That is how I’m learning about each one, but I don’t want to read people attack other posters for no good reason. I'd like to hear about Obama/Biden & McCain/Palin, but I want to hear facts.
If you like to fight so much why don’t you pick on people that you can fight to face to face.
Your on the wrong board - you need to preach on the faith board
You just delivered a sermon (or quote). Either way it doesn't belong here. What does this have to do with politics. The democrat and republican party did not start up until after the 1800s. Socialism also wasn't created until the 1800s.
To me your post describes the way humans should treat other humans. This has nothing to do with politics - imho.
Because you posted on the Main board not Politics board.
It was removed, as we do not have an option of moving from Main to Politics.
This could have easily been avoided had you posted on the correct board.
The response from another poster to not post political viewpoints on this board was becuase you posted it on the Main board.
the conservative board is a liberal board now
you all aren't happy until you infect everyone out there with your hatred. It's not something I'd very proud of.
Politics board = political topics. Faith board = religious topics.
Please keep all religious/faith topics and discussions on the Faith board. This would involve your beliefs, whether Christian or atheist, etc.
The Politics board is strictly for political topics and discussions.
Moderator
Ya gotta understand the rules. We have to post on this board only. They can post on any board they
no response ....
No response
We are not supposed to cross post, so I am respecting the administrator's request.
My response
There is no sound byte answer about Rev. Wright. I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the fact that men of his generation experienced life in America differently than the whites did. Historically, many black churches have been and are political forums, stemming from the days of slavery, when the churches provided a refuge where freedom of speech was possible. I don't know what Obama did or did not hear, and neither do you. What I do know is that he has written extensively about the confusion he had over the "black" part of his identity and part of his search for meaning, purpose and belonging in his younger days was played out in South Chicago. If you have read anything about the church at all, you will know that they have been engaged in many extensive and successful outeach programs in their community and I suspect his "association" with Trinity was focused and centered around that. Too bad a person cannot be judged but his deeds, rather than wild speculation, innuendo and smear campaigns about the company he keeps.
A response from.....sm
To the first 4 paragraphs decrying the decay of black leadership while attempting to lay the blame at the feet of the democratic party, encouraging blacks to bail and proclaiming the dawn of a new day for black conservatism, all that needs to be said is yeah, right. The proof is in the pudding. Black voters are backing Obama 94-1, according to this random poll citation: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1192 …6% stampede, and we have not even made it through the convention. Great big whoop.
The abortion graphics let us know that the minister is pro-life. OK. Fine. Next, we have this twisted accusation that Obama supports partial birth abortion. That is not his position on abortion, and it is laid out in no uncertain terms on his website and countless times in his speeches and townhall meetings. What he said is that he supports the notion that things should stay as they have been and that those issues should be determined on a state-by-state basis at the local level. Same thing with regard to same-sex marriage and the federal government not being in the business of defining the meaning of marriage, which he clearly believes is a union between a man and a woman (not exactly the most popular position in the gay community).
Yet despite this, the pastor insists he is champion of the gay agenda and the abortion "industry." Never mind that the democratic party platform includes many pro-active initiatives that conservatives will continue to obstruct regarding abortion prevention through sex education, birth control, encouraging and enabling single parents to keep their children with parenting education, job skills training and making adoption laws more user friendly. Most democrats perceive the conservative views on abortion as caring about unborn right from conception to the moment of birth. Beyond that, the babies kind of fall off the radar screen.
For this radical stance (i.e., preserving status quo), the pastor evokes the Barack HUSSEIN Obama slur and is all indignant that Obama puts himself out there as a Christian. Champion of the dead horse drumbeat. This guy is not looking real credible at this point. Performer, he calls him, doubting Obama's sincerity. The "God's on our side" mantra rings hollow as well, considering the conservative pathologic disdain for poverty and conflicts over notions such as the measure of a nation's moral character is only as strong as it's care for the least among us.
He then proceeds to twist the words of THE greatest black leader of modern times…MLK. The infanticide he referred to was the practice of killing female infants/gender selection in biblical patriarchal societies.…a practice emphatically condemned by the Islamic Prophet Mohammed in the Quran back in the day. Twist, turn, spin.
Lets see. Obama is evil incarnate because homophobic interpretations of the Bible do not impress him as much as the Sermon on the Mount? That would be the moral teachings of Jesus, to include the Lord's Prayer, the injunctions to "resist not evil" and "turn the other cheek", as well as Jesus' version of the Golden Rule. Other lines often quoted are the references to "salt of the Earth," "light of the world," and "JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED." These are the core beliefs of the Christian doctrine. Drag out the tar and feathers and hang him high for that sacrilege.
Then another call to arms for those 6% black conservatives, a 2nd reference to Barack HUSSEIN Obama. As for the upcoming black conservative youth, it is the youth vote from the remaining 94% blacks and whites alike that just might boost Obama over the top, last I heard.
Then of course, there are a few paragraphs of closing prayers. If this is what it means to be "right," this guy ends up making the Obama nation look better and better.
response
So you are saying all other media outlets except Fox are liberal and therefore cannot be trusted to provide accurate information. Therefore, you can only get true information from their network, because they tell you that is so. I see where you are coming from.
response
All the examples you use about being make to hate, if the individuals mentioned being indoctrinated resisted by using their minds to seek broader or alternative information could simply resist the information being forced on them and resist hating. Poor sentence structure, I admit.
response
McCain did the same thing when he was defeated in N. Caroline because Rove used dirty tactics like push polls calling people and asking if they would vote for McCain if they knew he had a biracial baby. McCain had to suck it up and stand next to Bush and announce that he would support him. I thought he was ethical enough to resist using such tactics when he the chance to campaign. but I was wrong.
response
Of course I believe they can. Luckily you tacked on white supremacists right there at the end or I would have been appalled at the assumption that non-caucasian, non-christian people are incapable of thinking for themselves.
response...
Both Bush and McCain supported privatizing social security IF a person wanted to...neither have advocated making it mandatory. Perhaps if that had been done in the first place, it would not have been a fund that a Democratic congress could have raided to fund other programs. I personally would like to have control of my own funds (except congress has already spent them) and put in a CD..not the stock market. So that govt grubby paws could not get at it anymore. But that is just me.
I think the operative word is McCain said he did not disagree. He did not say he himself would re-start the draft. In the world the way it is, if enlistment really dropped off, it might be necessary just so we would have the size Armed Forces we would need, should the need arise. That just makes good sense. A peace time draft might be a good thing...two years in the service might change the direction some kids might choose to go. Would also provide some skills training and the ability to go to college after their service...instead of gangs...instead of being on the street...learn a trade, get a job...I don't necessarily think it would be a bad thing. The Armed Forces have been good careers for a lot of men and women...the Armed Forces are not just for war. But again...that is just me.
See my response above. And you are right - sm
I think both sides need to leave the experience thing alone.
The rep response is
lie, lie, lie and CYA. This whole SP story is going to blow up in their faces. At least, that's what I'm expecting, but sure will be amusing to watch over the next couple of weeks. Joe Scarborough, a former republican representative, said he would have never chosen her with just 1 1/2 years of governership and a mayor of a small town as experience. The media is not expected to ask questions or interview Ms. SP at least for two weeks yet. What are they hiding? Why can't the media ask her questions? This is quite as someone said before "a sideshow." Very entertaining.
response (sm)
Let the oil companies bail them out since they directly benefited from some of the bad management decisions.
This would never happen. I doubt the oil companies care if the US auto industry goes down. If it does go down, then we will have imports, for which we will also have to buy gas (which would actually be a better alternative for the oil companies as opposed to us building vehicles that would not be dependent on oil).
Don't bail out the companies. Give the money to the workers for re-education, etc., while the auto companies restructure.
Re-education takes time. If these workers are already or soon to be out of work, they need jobs yesterday. They have families to feed, and that can't wait for a new career.
I think the best approach is to go ahead and bail them out (as much as that stinks), but set criteria they have to meet that would show re-tooling and progression to non-gas vehicles. I like the Pickens plan myself.
You know, that was my first response too.
but would like to see him cut loose a little and put it against a contrasting charcoal gray shirt. I think he's a knockout....nothing sexier than a confident, intelligent man with a heart of gold.
and your response to GP was so much
Your original post to wasn't an attack on the pubs? Hypocrit.
Response
Yes, we do only have one president at a time.
However, both the incoming and outgoing Presidents have a responsibility -- they are handling the nation's business.
As Obama comes into power, it is very transparent of him to keep the nation apprised of what he is doing, thinking, planning.
Good for him! I hope we hear from him every single day!
It doesn't matter whether it is Obama or it would have been McCain -- we need to hear what the incoming President is planning and doing.
response (sm)
Move to Russia----that's the problem. If you guys are confronted with any sort of ideas that are not part of your belief your first instict seems to be to just remove it. That's not tolerance -- that's segregation.
As far as kids go, I would challenge you to show me 1 child 4th grade and up (probably lower than that) that does not know what *gay* means, and homosexuality is not being taught in schools now. As far as the TV, mine came with a remote with little buttons for changing the channel and a handy dandy on/off switch. Toy dispensers in gas station bathrooms: Yes, there are some of those out there. However, they are no where near as common as you would make them out to be.
Marriage -- what is it to you if they call it marriage? You do realize there are christian gays and lesbians? The problem is that on this issue christians seem to think that everyone should live by their rules when everyone else has a different set of rules. What about Muslims who are married? Is thier marriage worth anything in your eyes? They didn't get married with God as a witness as you would discribe Him. I'm married and yet I'm and athiest. Is my marriage worthless?
Christianity is an all or nothing proposition. When it comes to laying down legislation for a nation as diverse as ours, that all or nothing mentality does nothing but divide the nation.
Response...(sm)
Whether you aggree with Al Jazeera or not, they are a valid news organization. They show the viewpoint of others in the region. In order to understand a situation I feel it is important to understand both sides of it, and then make an informed opinion. Your unwillingness to even consider what they say as a different viewpoint is pretty typical of Americans, which in my opinion is to only concern themselves with the viewpoint that best suits thier agenda.
Why is it that your only response....(sm)
to any discussion is just one-line BS? Do you have any evidence to show that the people being held at Gitmo are what you say they are? Can you show where this defense attorney is incorrect? Do you perhaps have inside info on exactly what will happen to the prisoners? Or better yet, do you even have any kind of rationale for your opinion other than your obvious paranoia concerning bringing the prisoners here? There is the concept of us having to pay for their upkeep, but hey, guess what? We're already paying for that. In addition to that, how much do you think it costs just to keep Gitmo open, not only financially but in political capital as well?
Helpful hint: If when responding to a post if you click inside the big white box underneath the subject line, it will allow you to type in a more detailed note, thereby, possibly (and I use that term loosely), giving more credibility to your posts.
Well, at least YOU got a response.
I wrote to them, as well, and didn't receive a reply at all (not that I was expecting one of any substance).
I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who wrote to them.
Response...
1. You'll find it useful to look at the upcoming budgets and then re-discover the notion of percentages.
2. If unions infested the transcription industry, you might very well not have a job. Don't believe me? Tour Detroit.
3. Trash talk that typifies political discourse today, says nothing, doesn't advance your cause, and doesn't merit response.
4. More of #3.
Response...
You have a very narrow view of taxes, my friend, and obviously have no idea what's coming down the tracks.
We are already seeing increases in taxes (on everyone) at the state and local level, for one thing, and many more are in the works. Look for higher sales tax rates, higher car license fees...oh, who knows where your piddly little "increase" will wind up going?
You can't possibly - even if you're no economist - believe that the government can print $trillions and obligate the nation to $trillions more in debt and none of the cost is going to come home to roost on your doorstep. You're just going to float along while someone else ("the rich") pay for all of this, eh? You're a politician's dream come true.
Politicians count on people who will look no further down the road than this week's pay stub and scream for joy at the $23.48 increase. "Lord, let them never realize that we're going to take it all back away from them at some other level of government - and so much more besides", pray the politicians.
My response is --
President Obama's sequel came out during his presidency. His first book was actually released in 2005 before he even entered politics. The income was listed on his taxes that were released as a presidential candidate.
His charitable contributions were also listed, but the information I just quickly googled said his 2006 contributions amounted to a little over 6% of his income.
He was of interest to folks before he became involved in politics.
what is this in response to?
The original post was not about George Tiller or William Long?
in response --
I have been duly chastised and I accept that. However, i saw no need for him to be "protecting" himself. Noone was bothering him. They stool calmly by and watched him do what he did. Secondly, there was no need to cut the flag down, he could have just removed it. Then, as he removed it, he could have folded it in some way other than just wadding it into a ball.
There was never any confrontation wher he had to be scared or feel threatened - so that is not an adequate defense. I understand that he was upset, I agree that he very well should have been, and I myself am upset about the way things are going in this country and the things that are being allowed to happen.
Yes, I very well do get it!!!
Thanks for an intelligent response
and for the information you supplied. 
Sorry. This was supposed to be in response to LOL
Someone should actually read an article before saying untrue things about it. But that doesn't surprise me. It's in line with the way this administration lies about everything.
Nasty response, I see.
You became nasty. Too bad. Guess you couldn't help yourself and couldn't stay reasonable and even-handed for more than a post or two. I was starting to think I'd been too hard with my thinking that some of the conservative posters were...well...kind of mean-spirited. Apparently I was wrong.
shameful response
But..you see, we liberals arent supposed to point fingers or ask questions, at least that is what the radical right wing is spouting..however, there is no doubt if there was a democrat in the White House, the radical right wing would be asking for his head on a silver platter.
vs, I don't think this response was directed at you...nm
The obvious response would be
if it bothers you so much, why do you watch it? I assume you possess free will. No big bad mean Republican has super-glued your dial to Fox News, I am assuming?
My response is to Hmmmmm.
who hates cats, blah blah blah and the woman accuser/suer who insists that the cat be euthanized. I don't think the owner was the one who brought this to the public forum. There are many things that can be done other than killing the cat as the first and only measure. I read that the cat was being kept confined to home but this was not okay with the accuser. She wants the cat euthanized, nothing less. So.......the extremes I see are a woman who will not agree to consider compromise and another person who hates cats because they behave as they have been designed by the Almighty to behave. I do agree that those who drop off animals somewhere rather than take them to the pound fit into the dangerous category (no pun intended) as well. It makes me wonder how they treat their kids or neighbors. These are the cats who become a nuisance. It takes one generation for a cat to become feral and in order to survive they hunt for prey....also not a rocket scientist level deduction. These cats carry disease because of the prey they kill and the fact that no one is taking care of them so they obviously are not vetted. Usually these cats would rather walk on broken glass than even approach a human and that is 1 good thing. But again, it is the people, not the animals, who are the culprits. Lewis, the cat in question, however, can be kept housebound. The cat can be declawed and defanged (cruel and unusual punishment but it is done and I suppose it is better than being dead). The cat can be medicated...also just a better-than-dead solution. People who feel extremely negative towards animals and would just as soon kill them as look at them as a viable and even desirable solution are those Francis, Kant, Gandhi and I are referring to. I could go into the serial killer thing but I'm sure you know that.
About the response I suspected
You infer that you know how and where I get my information. If you're so freaking clairvoyant then what are you doing here?
The elitism just oozes from you.
Thanks for a great response.
I happen to agree with you, but does this also mean:
That all liberals aren't as bad as they are routinely portrayed on the conservative board?
That all Muslims aren't death-seeking people?
That extremist fringes in any group are bad?
Muslims are routinely portrayed on this board and by the media and by Bush as lumped together in one violent clump. This is unfair, untrue and does nothing to promote peace and understanding.
All religions need to be respected and tolerated in America. Isn't that what America is supposed to stand for?
I should not be surprised by your response. sm
But I have to admit it sickens me more than a little. People like Ward Chamberlain, who has not been found to be a plagiarist, a liar (he is NOT Native American) and he made up his service record, among other things, don't deserve to be defended. Unless you are a socialist and have no problem with liars and thieves. I guess that says it all.
Wow! Loooong response there....
Honestly, I am not even going to take the time to read it. It would take too much effort for something I care little about.
Weird response...to say the least.
Response to Justme sm
Don't believe everything that you read in the news. I am certain that both Hillary and Bill are upset and dispirited after losing such a close primary election. But, the truth of the matter is that Hillary, in spite of losing so close a race picked herself up, dusted herself off and is now actively helping Obama in just a very short couple of weeks. Bill will too. The goal here is to get Obama elected. The Clinton's are Democratic party members first and foremost and know full well what the stakes are in this election.
Give the Clinton's credit. They are not out to "get" Obama and will be a huge help to him in uniting the party behind him.
It's quite an emotionally tough thing to go out campaigning for 15+ months, get that close and within a very short period of time start actively endorsing another candidate, yet they are doing just that.
I don't think you could ask more of either of one of them. They are doing the right thing here, and doing it very quickly.
Thanks for your response. That is probably what would happen....
just did not know for sure.
Taking this response
x
In response to your post...sm
Now let's see. In the absence of a living minimum wage, benefits for impoverished Americans to provide health care, food security, subsistence income for the disabled, shelter for the homeless, low-income housing programs, educational/job training assistance, aid to families with dependent children/temporary assistance to needy families, provision of clean, healthy day care services for single parents who are attending job training programs
Versus
Funding for a delusional "pre-emptive" war/invasion of a sovereign nation and subsequent illegal 5-1/2-year illegal occupation under the pretext of WMDs that to this day cannot be proven, bogus claims of state-sponsored terrorism (the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis and bin Laden/Al-Quaeda, Afghani), the ever popular spread of democracy hogwash (i.e., lets bomb them into democracy) that has resulted in more than 107,000 fatalities that left millions of grieving mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, children, aunts, uncles, cousins and friends it its wake, the destruction of the country's infrastructure and most cherished religious/historical shrines, the installation of countless private war profiteers/mercenaries (are we that greedy and that desperate to increase corporate profits?), the rising gas prices, runaway inflation, collapsing economy, housing crisis, political divide, loss of standing in the international community, the loss of all moral authority/credibility and the embarrassment of a leader and his party's 2008 candidate who have the gall to exhibit the pretense self-righteous indignation on an international stage when Russia behaves in exactly the same manner, not to mention the multi-trillion dollar subsidy of Israel over the past 60 years that has created and supported their nuclear arms for that American military outpost, the resulting Palestinian body count that is nearing 2,000,000 along with all those who grieve their loss, and let's not forget all the other failed Middle East foreign policies that have destabilized the area to the point where Islamic fundamental governments assert their own justification for 9/11 and amassing their own nuclear arsenals in self defense?
Hmmmm. I opt for helping impoverished Americans with the war chest after the troops are withdrawn.
Please read my response below. nm
nm
Exactly the response I would have expected....
if you see no difference in the way conservative posters are treated vs the way Dem posters are treated...I would not expect you to understand. It is not condescending. It is the simple truth. Your party preaches inclusion, it preaches individual freedoms, it preaches freedom of speech...yet those who post here do everything in their power to quell it, including piling on and attacking everyone who disagrees. And the more you refuse to back down, the worse they get. So they talk the talk, but they don't walk the walk. That is a double standard.
That should be our standard response to Sam! (nm)
No soup for you!
|
