Since when does questioning a stance on a single issue
Posted By: constitute on 2009-02-06
In Reply to: Interesting because of the CNN news - media have been stating this too.
"changing his mind?" In fact, it is media's JOB to exercise both sides of an argument (in the same way that debaters are required to argue both sides of a premise). The mere fact that a reporter is doing just that during a broadcast does not necessarily say anything whatsoever about his personal beliefs.
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
Typical pub. Can't address a single issue directly.
nm
I am questioning that 75%
Where did you get that from? I think he only won the vote by a 5% margin.
The ad is questioning his judgment
not whether he was exonerated.
Questioning is one thing
going on and on and on and on and on is ridiculous. There is nothing that is going to convince some of these people that Obama is going to be the next president.
I think we are in quite enough trouble in this country without adding to the division and that is exactly what is going on. Anyone with eyeballs in their head can see the b/c is authentic.
I don't have peace with Bush, Obama can have peace with him if he wants to. He has run this country down the tubes. I don't trust him or his sleasy VP. Remembers WMD????
They aren't saying questioning
Obama because if things fail, they will still blame Bush. That is their plan. If they totally screw this country up worse than it already is, they will say that this was all unavoidable because of the stupid stuff Bush did. They will not take responsibility for anything. That is why we still have crooks like Nancy Pelosi in office and Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, etc. We have crooks like Geithner running the IRS now. Obama's own aunt is here illegally. There are different sets of rules for politicians obviously and even more so when it comes to dems and pubs. The dems ridicule Bush and turn around and so something ignorant and still blame it on Bush.
That questioning thing goes both ways, ya know.
Who is "ranting"? People are questioning. They
nm
not questioning your ideas or beliefs -
I am just wondering how is that? Are you and your husband both American? I am just being nosy and I guess you don't have to answer me if you don't want to... just curious how that happened or how it works and if it was something you chose.
That's not "grilling" it's called questioning what is wrong
Do you get it? There is so much wrong going on. You think we are suppose to just sit back and watch our country be destroyed? I had to turn the freakin news off because every day it got worse and worse and instead of blowing a gasket I turned it off.
If you agree with JTBB then yes, you might think her posts are "insightful and intelligent", but I've seen many of them that were not and were just trying to start fights and keep everyone divided. It's this elitist attitude that is not very becoming.
We are not "grilling Obama for anything and everything", what people are doing is when something is wrong and should not be done they are finally standing up and saying "hold on a minute, you just can't do whatever you want and think there will be no consequences" (or maybe he does think that). Either way he (and congress) needs to be held responsible for the mistakes they are making and the sleezy behind closed door deals they are making. And last thing I knew it is in the Constitution that it is our right to do just that. You might want to read the constitution sometime.
P.S. - You sure had your hay day when Bush was in office and you thought that was okay to grill him about every single little thing. So as the saying goes "What's good for the goose is good for the gander"
Well, here is my stance on the subjects.
1. Homosexual marriage: For it. If homosexual couples are afforded other freedoms, I am for this one too. If they are allowed to adopt children, they should be allowed to get legally married in the eyes of the state.
2. Welfare: Not for it. I do, however, believe in subsidies to provide help for those in need. Welfare needs an upgrade.
3. Abortion: I am for the right of choice and the right to privacy on these matters.
Hope your poll helps clarifies things for you.
Here is my stance and my reasoning
for what I said above. Government shouldn't have 80% of AIG. They should have let AIG fall on its face. They shouldn't have given them money in the first place.
Here is a little blurp I've copied: I will provide the link below.
On March 5, New York Fed officials forwarded to the Treasury Department a summary of AIG’s bonus and retention payment issues, including details of the retention program for officials of the Financial Products. This information included that $165 million in payments were expected that very month, as well as the fact that the contracts were in place in the first quarter of 2008, and so not covered by the limitations in the stimulus bill as articulated by an amendment to the stimulus bill offered by Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
As ABC News' Capitol Hill Correspondent Jonathan Karl reported, in February, the Senate unanimously approved an amendment restricting bonuses over $100,000 at any company receiving federal bailout funds, but during the closed-door House and Senate negotiations the provision was stripped out and replaced with a measure by Dodd exempting bonuses agreed to prior to the passage of the stimulus bill on February 11, 2009.
You can read the whole article at this link: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/03/obama-adminis-1.html
So this basically shows that these bonuses were pushed through by Dodd and so the government had its hand in giving out these bonuses and now they are going to turn around and take that away. It is a contract. I understand that AIG got butt loads of money from the government.....which was wrong in the first place.....but don't you see how scary it is for our government to have this kind of control and power. To give and take away at the drop of a hat. To null and void a contract that someone in government (Dodd) pushed through to make happen and then they turn around and want to tax it to death or just take it from them.
Why in the he!! did Dodd get this slipped in there in the first place? that is the real question. This wouldn't even be an issue. Dodd slips this in because he received the highest amount of money from AIG. So of course he wanted to pay back the hand that fed him...so to speak. And guess who had the second highest amount of contributions from AIG.....Barrack Obama..... So Dodd slips this through and allows a loophole for the AIG execs to get their big ars bonuses and now that it has gone public and people are furious......now government wants to take control and make them give the money back. Isn't it the governments fault in the first place....first for bailing them out and then for letting this loophole slip by to pay back AIG for contributions to campaigns.
This is why our government sucks. They don't care about Americans. All they care about is getting money back to the groups, etc. who contributed money to their campaign. That is why we can't get away from wasteful spending and earmarks.
Joy isn't happy unless it's HER stance
on politics. She forever tries to make a laughing stock out of everyone who doesn't share her views. I think she is ridiculous and I get a kick out of her when she cracks a "supposed funny" but no one laughs. She is he11 bent on views so much, she makes me sick. I don't see where or why she is part of that program. It's supposed to be open topics, but when someone she likes it on the program, she keeps her mouth shut. I just wish she would keep it shut more often.
WE KNOW Observer. You have made your stance
.
Obama stance on terrorism....
This latest quote of his just says to me he doesn't get it, especially where Muslim extremists are concerned:
At a fundraising luncheon, he said he told Gilani "the only way we're going to be successful in the long term in defeating extremists ... is if we are giving people opportunities. If people have a chance for a better life, then they are not as likely to turn to the ideologies of violence and despair."
What kind of opportunities is he talking about giving them? And it does not matter what you give them...it is not about despair. I guess he did not see the poll done recently of Muslim students in London...way over half polled said it was okay to kill in the name of Islam, in fact it should be done; and way more than half thought Sharia law should be part of English law and supercede it in most cases. These Muslims are not in despair. Obama does not get it, he does not understand it, and that makes him plenty dangerous. Just like he says we cannot drill our way out of the energy crunch (and I disagree with that...might not drill our way out completely but certainly could take a bite out of our foreign oil dependance while working on those alternative forms of energy, which I do support...but there are no immediate answers there either)...we cannot talk Muslim "extremists" out of their extremism. And to think we can is naive at best and that is the nicest way I can put it.
Here's one. Palins' stance on war and peace.
nm
How is posting his stance bashing?
People are not supposed to compare the two?
OMG! Check out O's stance on immigration
Please note, these are from 2008 before the election, but I think they still hold true.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Immigration.htm
In fact, you can also check out Emanuel, Holder, McCain, Napolitano, Clinton, here:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Immigration.htm#Headlines
ok, here goes - I know I'll get flamed, but I am firm on my stance. SM
Well over 50% of the American population is either Hispanic or African American (I am being conservative because it is probably higher). This population IMO voted for Obama because of his skin color, without researching his view on major issues that revolve around being capable of tackling the presidency of the U.S. I think it is only a matter of time when this will come back and kick all who voted for him in the "you know what." It's not about our ethnicity or religion, but rather about a candidate who is experienced enough to tackle the job. I just cringe at the fact that someone as inexperienced as Obama is now running this country.
It would be even funnier if it was written by the guy with the "wide stance"
what is it with those guys and airports? Larry Craig - what a twit! At least Spitzer likes women! In this economy, it's probably the only guaranteed job - and tax-free!
The no-political-stance rule applies both ways
this is not exclusive to just anti-war speakers. To remain non-profit pastors cannot endorse a political party or agenda, eventhough Reverends Jesse and Al do it all the time and they seem to get away with it. There is a church in my area who was threatened with having their non-profit status pulled due to the fact the pastor urged people to vote for Bush. Believe me this is not unilateral nor one sided.
Do you agree with this analysis of Jewish abortion stance? sm
Jewish beliefs and practice not neatly match either the "pro-life" nor the "pro-choice" points of view. The general principles of modern-day Judaism are that:
The fetus has great value because it is potentially a human life. It gains "full human status at birth only." 2
Abortions are not permitted on the grounds of genetic imperfections of the fetus.
Abortions are permitted to save the mother's life or health.
With the exception of some Orthodox authorities, Judaism supports abortion access for women.
"...each case must be decided individually by a rabbi well-versed in Jewish law." 5
Historical Christianity has considered "ensoulment," the point at which the soul enters the body) as the time when abortions should normally be prohibited. Belief about the timing of this event has varied from the instant of fertilization of the ovum, to 90 days after conception, or later. There has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens. It is regarded as "one of the 'secrets of God' that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes."
I understand the moral stance, but feel the rhetoric is over-the-top.....sm
This man is NOT pro-abortion, as many of us are not. He is preserving the right of choice for ALL women, and does not believe that a poor woman who has undergone a rape, incest, domestic violince/intimidation situation, or even has just accidentally gotten pregnant with a child she cannot carry for medical, emotional, or financial reasons....I hate abortion also, but if Americans are to be equal, then a poor woman needs to have resources available to her which would be available to others, or you are damning her to the back-alley abortionists. That is reality. I, Myself, married 18 years, vigilantly spacing my children and on birth control, came up with an unexpected, very difficult pregnancy. Yes, we made the choice to love and take this baby into the world, but we also had SOME resources and family, some girls do not.
There are not many folk who are PRO ABORTION, but preserving the individual choice, though abhorrent to many of us, is part of true liberty. And God Himself will judge as appropriate.
And I do feel that those few who use abortion as a means of birth control, well there should be restrictions and a definite "no."
I think Larry Craig has the weird butt..he even has a wide stance! nm
x
No issue is no issue. Denying that
nm
Not a single new job
(unless we are talking about hiring new staff to do all that teaching....wonder if it takes a PhD....) And since PA is a liquor 'control state' i.e. the State runs the whole booze operation, it's not as though the customer can go get their hard liquor from some private enterprise down the street where the help might be more knowledgeable. No matter where you buy whiskey in a control state, you are getting it from the State.
Businesses only need to spend money on marketing and product education if they have to compete for your money.
so every single pub voted for it and no pub
I've answered several of your questions. Now try 2 of mine. Did every single pub vote to pass it and did no pub receive any type of benefit from this situation?
Yes, and EVERY SINGLE THING he did to TRY to
nm
Not a single Nay vote. He's gone and
Then they're going to vote on whether he can ever hold office in the state again.
Oh, My. I just read every single
comment on the site. I haven't seen hardly any good comments for this program. So.....
This one I copied because I thought it was very insightful:
"I’m a 25 year mortgage veteran. I just got off a 2 hour call with Fannie, Freddie and Treasury.
Trust me when I tell you that this is a complete non-starter.
The modification criteria are VOLUNTARY. There is very little in it for the banks - so they are NOT going to offer these mods. Just trust me on that.
The banks don’t have enough capital to incur the losses these modifications would require.
And the refinance component is a similar waste. If you can refinance today - then you will get ZERO benefit via this program.
At the margin, some folks who find themselves upside down (but are still current on their loan) will be able to refinance - but this is far from a pancea."
Why do you single out Muslims?
I quote from your post:
'If you go back in history, the Muslim religion has ALWAYS been a religion of violence and this has been going on since the Crusades and before.'
Who slaughtered whom during the Crusades?
Who slaughtered the Palestinians in Gaza in the year of 2008?
And there are hundreds of other examples.
It All Comes Down to ONE SINGLE THING
YOU LOST.
AMERICA WON.
STOP YER WHININ'!!!!!
Filing single, no dependents?
*
All getting so depression. I doubt there is a single
nm
To same OP: Show me one single thing that is not
For starters, I am not the original poster you think you silenced with your question. I would be happy to step up and point a few things that would lead many people to the conclusion that at least the message in your post is racist, and to the more general conclusion that people who post racist messages are very likely, well....racist.
It is difficult for some to distinguish the difference between prejudice, bigotry and racism. There is a reason for that. They are all forms of intolerance that vary only in degree and basis. Consider for a moment the definitions as they apply to the context of this post:
Prejudice: a: an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b: an instance of such judgment or opinion c: an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.
Bigotry: The state of mind, action or beliefs of a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
Racism: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race; racial prejudice or discrimination
Now, to begin with, there is not a shred of truth to one single thing you have said here. That would qualify you as prejudiced on the basis of "without just ground, before sufficient knowledge." The conclusions you have drawn from your unfounded accusations would also suggest irrationality directed against an individual and the supposed characteristics, in this case, religion.
Obstinate, intolerant and devoted to you own opinions and prejudices, exhibiting hatred and intolerance, yesiree, we can check that off and confidently pronounce you bigoted as well.
Racist...your assumption that ACORN is a "racist organization." Unfounded, untrue and without proof. I challenge you now to show us one thing in your post that is not prejudiced, bigoted and racist, keeping in mind that you have no leg to stand on whatsoever until you can PROVE your accusations. Ball's in your court, dear.
He tells us who he is every single day. And it isn't pretty.
Your mother really was right, wasn't she? She always taught you to judge character by what people do and not what they say. BO exemplifies Mom's wisdom.
I believe in a single payer system.
It's not being "rushed." It's not even on the table. If you like your insurance, you should have a right to keep it. Others of us would like the option of a single-payer program.
HR676 has been in Congress collecting dust for a very long time now. It's not being rushed. It's being ignored.
Single payer = bad idea.
I just don't trust the government to take care of my health needs. I don't want them controlling any aspect of it, including what procedures need to be done and whether it's cost-effective (meaning will I live long enough to recoup the cost) to have the procedure done.
I agree something needs to be done about insurance and health care and I speak as one of the millions without health care (my husband and I are both self-employed, but cannot afford full coverage). Single payer (meaning the government pays) is just not the answer - look at how they've screwed up everything else!
Every single thing you posted is true.
And it's not just the veterans, either. It's their entire FAMILIES and their friends. It's all the people you will never hear about (assuming you're allowed to hear about the veterans). It's about families that will be fractured, causing divorce, only to be criticized by the radical right about having no family values.
I assume you are referring to a single photo of him...
and I assume you don't know the exact moment that picture was taken - maybe before or after the actual pledge was recited? Regardless, I support Obama 100%, and as I have said many times: No candidate is perfect, but he is an exceptional human being and can literally help "save" this country, and Lord knows we need some savin up in here! I am very optimistic about the outcome in Iowa.
Well you didn't clarify a single thing,
just restated your point all over again. Which I still don't understand. Never mind. 
"Ms" is a moniker that denotes neither single
It is used by thousands of women this way. also, how many Mary Smiths are in the phone book. These letters are not yours to claim.
I'd rather eat glass than spend a single minute
nm
That would explain why the libs were single-handedly
the rise of the Beat Generation, the counter-culture revolution of the 60s, the success of the civil right's movement and the VietNam, Gulf War and Iraq anti-war movements, not to mention the fact that they have been champions of all sorts of dissenting opinions/movements. Advocating for Palestinian statehood comes to mind.
There is no credibility in any single part of this story
including at the $800,000 expense claim, since the whole thing is based on a fantasy whichg arises out of a false premise. You may have noticed that the other 2 posts directly below regarding this trash have gone unanswered all day long, and you will not be engaging me in any further beating of this dead, dead horse. The fanatic/broken record comment is all I care to post as the rest of it is simply a huge waste of time and energy. We all know that when the Supreme Court dismisses this tomorrow it will not phase a single solitary fanatic and they will continue their quest to nowhere until they run out of money. Fanatics, every last one of them.
Show me one single thing in your post that is not
For starters, I am not the original poster you think you silenced with your question. I would be more than happy to step up and point out a few things that would lead many people to the conclusion that at least the message in your post is racist, and to the more general conclusion that people who post racist messages are very likely, well....racist.
It is difficult for some to distinguish the difference between prejudice, bigotry and racism. There is a reason for that. They are all forms of intolerance that vary only in degree and basis. Consider for a moment the definitions as they apply to the context of this post:
Prejudice: a: an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b: an instance of such judgment or opinion c: an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.
Bigotry: The state of mind, action or beliefs of a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
Racism: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race; racial prejudice or discrimination
Now, to begin with, there is not a shred of truth to one single thing you have said here. That would qualify you as prejudiced on the basis of "without just ground, before sufficient knowledge." The conclusions you have drawn from your unfounded accusations would also suggest irrationality directed against an individual and the supposed characteristics, in this case, religion.
Obstinate, intolerant and devoted to you own opinions and prejudices, exhibiting hatred and intolerance...yesiree, we can check that off and confidently pronounce you bigoted as well.
Racist...your assumption that ACORN is a "racist organization." Unfounded, untrue and without proof. I challenge you now to show us one thing in your post that is not prejudiced, bigoted AND racist, keeping in mind that you have no leg to stand on whatsoever until you can PROVE your accusations. Ball's in your court, dear.
and you agree with ever single thing Obama says
Knock yourself out--but I prefer to think for myself. I only pick the candidate I think is best--not perfect
By my read, not a single negative response among them.
x
Our countdiwn has entered into single digits.
Pretty soon we'll get to count in hours instead of days, post every hour, too, beginning with the double digits at 8 am EST THIS coming Friday...99, 98, 97.
I get the single rate deducted from my pays (nm)
.
The one, single thing that took the worst toll on US
nm
Now you're speaking my language. Single parenthood
world void of credit cards. Never used one. Not once. Have only paid off one car loan in my entire (long) life...the rest of it, cash and carry, pay as you go. Paid for my condo that way and became proud owner of Acura 2.2 CL in the absence of interest back in the 90s, good ole days from where I sit now. Passed these survival skills along to my son. Credit crunch has left us unscathed. We are wondering how the rest of the folks will fare once the recession (let's not quibble and say it OUT LOUD) sets in. Guess they will have to see what it feels like to live like the great unwashed underbelly. We expect the tables will turn on some of them but will be happy to help them out and give them a "hand up," when the time comes.
|
