So how do you explain cap-and-trade.
Posted By: Trigger Happy on 2009-06-25
In Reply to: Simple question....(sm) - Just the big bad
Once this is voted on and if it passes....we will all pay. Gas prices will go up. Obama himself said utility prices would skyrocket....not including all the prices of goods and services will go up. Will that not be a tax to everyone....not just the rich. It will also hurt an already hurting economy.
Common sense....you cannot tax just the rich for all the spending our governemt has done, is doing currently, and wants to do in the future. There aren't enough rich people to fund all of that. He campaigned on people making less than 250K would see no raise in taxes and yet dropped that number to 235K. Yet no one seems to be holding him accountable for that either. It isn't fearmongering to look at all the money that our government has spent during Bush's administration and now Obama's. It isn't fearmongering that our deficit keeps going up and will go higher. That is fact......not fearmongering.
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
he is for balancing trade, not free trade.
x
Then explain his church and minister. Explain that to me. nm
x
What do you think cap and trade is? It's a tax!!!
xx
Cap and trade....(sm)
This actually explains it better than I can here:
http://www.factcheck.org/politics/cap-and-trade_cost_inflation.html
The bottom line is that the GOP estimates are way off, and they don't account for relief programs.
I understand cap and trade. You are the
misinformation. Try reading The Economist. You might find it enlightening.
Cap and Trade for Dummies
Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that spewing fossil fuel carbon into the air is a sin and should be stopped. It pollutes the atmosphere, it heats the planet, creates acid rain, yada, yada, yada. And let's just suppose that some group of geniuses comes up with this idea:
We can let you increase your privilege to commit sin by buying somebody else's privilege if they aren't using all of their sin ration. Or if you are very virtuous, we can let you sell your allotment of sin to someone. Or maybe you can pay me some money to plant a tree for you, and that will 'offset' your sin, so now we're all even, sin-wise.
Holy cow! I think I've just described the Catholic 'selling of indulgences' that Martin Luther started the Protestant Reformation over!
Add to that the fact that with cap and trade,
electric will cost more, so you'll be adding to your use if you have a hybrid that you have to plug in. Doesn't make much sense, does it?
I do believe the world has gone crazy.
Cap and trade - in some of it's glory
Here's where you can find the first 900+ pages of the bill. I haven't yet found anywhere that has up the 300+ pages of addendums that were added, but I'm still looking. Please try to read some of it if you have the time - I'm about 200 pages in and there's nothing good as far as I can see yet.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h2454ih.txt.pdf
Don't forget to email and/or call your senators about this one - it's not too late to stop this thing. Go to congress.org, put in your zip code and you'll get the names and email addresses of your senators and for most of them, you can email them directly from this site or there will be a link to thier personal website and you can email them from there.
Can you say "cap and trade"? Now learn what that is...
nm
Thanks for your suggestion, but I don't want to trade one non-secure site for another.
I'm looking for a site where the administrator is neutral and ethical and doesn't threaten people with their ISP numbers.
If there is one out there, I'd appreciate knowing about it.
As far as your posting here, that's your decision. I couldn't care less because I'm only staying on this board long enough to see if anyone else it appalling that an administrator would track ISP numbers of posters for telling the truth about their employer. Then I won't be coming back any more, to any of the boards here.
And thanks for finally being honest and saying it's your preference, instead of the disingenuous I'll leave. Are you happy now? type comments that I doubt anyone believed, anyway.
You are aware that Obama has always been pro-free-trade?
Granted, not nearly as much so as McCain who wants to expand free trade as much as possible.
"Senator Obama: "I believe in the Free Market. I believe in Capitalism. I believe in Free Trade. I am not worried about us being able to compete anywhere on earth with American workers"-Obama." Too bad, at least Hillary does."
One of the many links to this quote: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/17/171927/342
And now we have a huge trade imbalance with china..
because China has bought up all of our securities in the form of loans. That's why kids toys are full of lead. If you're smart, you will check the labels on ALL products you buy. Did you know that in China they string their chicken coops over shrimp ponds? The chicken feed is supplemented with shavings, dust, particles from plastics and fiberglass plants (to save money) and the chicken droppings are what the shrimp feed on. Crest toothpaste is made in Mexico. Hepatitis A outbreaks came from Mexico. Dollar store brands? Check the labels on vitamins, aspirin, EVERYTHING (China - they put ANYTHING in their products). Even Birdseye frozen vegetables are grown and packaged in Mexico. The only store I have found that the labels inevitably say: Grown and manufactured in the USA is SAVE-A-LOT!!! What happened to the FDA? Remember when Bush said we couldn't buy our medications from Canada? Guess who is making most of our meds now................
So...how's "cap & trade" like the House just passed
Here's an eye-opening article:
http://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/cap-and-trade-woes-in-europe/
Building of New Trade Center Starts (see article)
Without Fanfare, Building of New Trade Center Starts
Published: November 4, 2005
When are they ever going to start building the new World Trade Center?
Yesterday.
Thirty-nine years after the first concrete was poured into the first trench for the first telephone vault for the first trade center, carpenters built a 168-foot-long wooden trough in a gentle S curve through the south tower footprint at ground zero. From this sinuous sprout, Santiago Calatrava's PATH terminal and transportation hub will emerge.
Skip to next paragraph
![src=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/11/04/nyregion/04rebuild184.1.jpg]()
Fidel Oliver/Port Authority
Carpenters prepared a wooden trough at the World Trade Center site Thursday.
Don't laugh; it's a milestone day, said Charles A. Gargano, vice chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the trade center site and is building the $2.21 billion terminal over the next four years.
Until now, milestones at ground zero have tended to be ceremonial.
There was not a hint of ceremony yesterday. Prince Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, were nowhere to be seen in the 70-foot-deep pit. The Freedom Tower cornerstone of July 4, 2004, sat hidden under a blue plywood box.
But anyone looking out from a PATH train screeching around the corner into the temporary World Trade Center station would have seen a crew from the Beaver Concrete Construction Company of Brooklyn.
They're finally doing something with this big hole, said Anthony Martelli, one of the workers, standing inside the newly completed trough. It's about time.
It was Mr. Martelli's first day back at ground zero since early 2002, after a six-month tour cleaning up debris and pulling out pieces of steel. Yesterday, he was building again - he and Paul Klein and Frank De Guida and Robert Manella and Tonino Sacino.
Starting at 7 a.m., they built a trough 18 inches high and 6 feet 3 inches wide out of thick wood planks. Cagelike frames of steel reinforcing bars, or rebar, will be set into the trough beginning today. Then concrete will be poured over the rebar.
That will form the footing of a seven-foot-high concrete retaining wall. The wall will hold about four feet of fill, on top of which ballast will be laid for a temporary PATH track, No. 6, alongside the future Platform D, the fourth and westernmost platform.
Currently, there are five tracks among three platforms, two of which occupy a corner of the south tower footprint, as they did in the original station. Platform D would take up more space in the south footprint and a tiny bit of the north footprint.
Once Platform D and Track No. 6 are usable, in early 2007, other tracks can be taken out of service temporarily to allow construction of the permanent terminal while commuters are traveling through the tubes to and from New Jersey.
The construction manager is a joint venture of Parsons Brinckerhoff, which counts the first New York City subway line among its earliest achievements, and the URS Corporation. A general contractor is to be chosen in the next few months.
Icanda was the contractor in 1966 when the first concrete was poured, at West and Cortlandt Streets. John M. Kyle, the chief engineer of the Port Authority, threw in a silver dollar, a 100-lire coin from Italy, a 5-franc coin from France and a British penny.
Asked about the absence of fanfare yesterday, Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority, said: I think people have become so jaded by the inordinate amount of ceremonies that have occurred at that site - disproportionate to what's actually happened - that I didn't want to add to that. This is about actually building.
There is a potential snag, however. A lawsuit filed last month by the Coalition of 9/11 Families seeks to halt the project on the ground that it violates a federal law requiring that historic sites not be used for transportation projects unless there are no feasible or prudent alternatives.
Anthony Gardner, one of the plaintiffs, whose brother was killed on 9/11, said the authority had never justified the need for Platform D.
Our focus has always been to ensure the maximum preservation and access to the remains of the footprints for the American people and future visitors to the site, Mr. Gardner said yesterday.
The Port Authority and the Federal Transit Administration have yet to answer the complaint, he said. A spokesman for the authority said it would not discuss pending litigation.
But Steven Plate, deputy director of the priority capital programs department, did talk about the authority's sense of stewardship as he inspected the site, pointing out that the tower footprints had been covered by polyethylene liners and 12 inches of stone fill to protect them during construction. We're very committed, personally and professionally, to preserving the site, he said. Eighty-four of our own perished here.
I don't want to sound melodramatic, but there is no monopoly on caring for the site. This is the Port Authority's home.
Even Al Gore thinks caps and trade is a bad idea!!!
xx
"He (MCSAME) will expand free trade so we can be even more competitive.” NM
1
Please explain to me what we are not
doing to protect ourselves here? You just assume there's nothing in place here to protect us because you believe all the unsubstantiated liberal talking points that come out ever day. Believe it or not part of protecting us here at home is making the world a more stable place. We can't just hope they won't make the long journey over here like they did in the 1700 and 1800s. Today, in just a few short hours they can walk off of any commercial airline or private plane. We are in Iraq for a myriad of reasons including protecting our own boarders. Why does this have to be explained over and over again to you? A lot of liberals call conservatives narrow minded, but many of you have tunnel vision to a degree I've never seen before.
Let me explain how I can say that.
I agree with you that there were inciting posts from both political viewpoints on the conservative board, myself included. However, I think what is being pointed out was a general trend of "anything goes" for the conservative posters and high deletion/banning rates for the liberals. This has been apparent for a long time and complained about many, many times (usually complaints are deleted so they are virtually impossible to document at this point). I personally was warned once for "picking on" Nan, when objectively, it really was more the other way around. There is a sickness of spirit on the conservative board at times. I was drawn into this and became "ill" also at times. I am not proud of this.
As far as the moderator or administrator, she did post in the Christian board some time ago regarding her beliefs. They were evangelical Christian, kind of extreme. That, coupled with occasional comments on the political board in addition to deleting LOTS of liberal posts and actively supporting and not reigning in the Conservatives is, well, just common sense as to her political leanings.
Explain please
I don't have ESP...
So please explain this:
If marriage is for procreation, and Mary and Joseph were married, why and how was Mary still supposedly a VIRGIN when Jesus was born?
Well, then perhaps you could explain to me
why Saddam's atrocities didn't seem to bother us in the 80s when we wanted his help against Iran?
This might help explain why.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/washington/07recruit.html?ex=1309924800&en=1be0e7d4e2aac8d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
7, 2006
Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts
A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist and right-wing militia groups, estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines.
We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad, the group quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying in a report to be posted today on its Web site, www.splcenter.org. That's a problem.
A Defense Department spokeswoman said officials there could not comment on the report because they had not yet seen it.
The center called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to appoint a task force to study the problem, declare a new zero tolerance policy and strictly enforce it.
The report said that neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance, whose founder, William Pierce, wrote The Turner Diaries, the novel that was the inspiration and blueprint for Timothy J. McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, sought to enroll followers in the Army to get training for a race war.
The groups are being abetted, the report said, by pressure on recruiters, particularly for the Army, to meet quotas that are more difficult to reach because of the growing unpopularity of the war in Iraq.
The report quotes Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, saying, Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members.
Mr. Barfield said Army recruiters struggled last year to meet goals. They don't want to make a big deal again about neo-Nazis in the military, he said, because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they'll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists.
The 1996 crackdown on extremists came after revelations that Mr. McVeigh had espoused far-right ideas when he was in the Army and recruited two fellow soldiers to aid his bomb plot. Those revelations were followed by a furor that developed when three white paratroopers were convicted of the random slaying of a black couple in order to win tattoos and 19 others were discharged for participating in neo-Nazi activities.
The defense secretary at the time, William Perry, said the rules were meant to leave no room for racist and extremist activities within the military. But the report said Mr. Barfield, who is based at Fort Lewis, Wash., had said that he had provided evidence on 320 extremists there in the past year, but that only two had been discharged. He also said there was an online network of neo-Nazis.
They're communicating with each other about weapons, about recruiting, about keeping their identities secret, about organizing within the military, he said. Several of these individuals have since been deployed to combat missions in Iraq.
The report cited accounts by neo-Nazis of their infiltration of the military, including a discussion on the white supremacist Web site Stormfront. There are others among you in the forces, one participant wrote. You are never alone.
An article in the National Alliance magazine Resistance urged skinheads to join the Army and insist on being assigned to light infantry units.
The Southern Poverty Law Center identified the author as Steven Barry, who it said was a former Special Forces officer who was the alliance's military unit coordinator.
Light infantry is your branch of choice because the coming race war and the ethnic cleansing to follow will be very much an infantryman's war, he wrote. It will be house-to-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood until your town or city is cleared and the alien races are driven into the countryside where they can be hunted down and 'cleansed.'
He concluded: As a professional soldier, my goal is to fill the ranks of the United States Army with skinheads. As street brawlers, you will be useless in the coming race war. As trained infantrymen, you will join the ranks of the Aryan warrior brotherhood.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Like I said....we all only have to explain our
own decisions to God. Remember your argument here to me. It may come in handy.
God bless.
Someone explain this to me...
If you are a suspected terrorist or suspected terrorist sympathizer you can go to Gitmo or sent out of the country to a place where torture is A-OK for the rest of your life w/o being given a reason for the incarceration or access to our legal system, even if you are an American citizen but....if you are on a list of terror suspects, you can buy a gun just like everyone else.
Published on Saturday, May 5, 2007 by Associated Press
NRA: Don’t Ban Gun Sales to Suspected Terrorists
by Sam Hananel
WASHINGTON - The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms. Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., “would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere ’suspicions’ of a terrorist threat.” 0506 07
“As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word ’suspect’ has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties,” Cox wrote.
In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.
Hertling also notes there is a process to challenge denial of a sale.
Current law requires gun dealers to conduct a criminal background check and deny sales if a gun purchaser falls under a specified prohibition, including a felony conviction, domestic abuse conviction or illegal immigration. There is no legal basis to deny a sale if a purchaser is on a terror watch list.
“When I tell people that you can be on a terrorist watch list and still be allowed to buy as many guns as you want, they are shocked,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports Lautenberg’s bill.
In the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, lawmakers are considering a number of measures to strengthen gun sale laws. The NRA, which usually opposes increased restrictions on firearms, is taking different positions depending on the proposal.
“Right now law enforcement carefully monitors all firearms sales to those on the terror watch list,” said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. “Injecting the attorney general into the process just politicizes it.”
A 2005 study by the Government Accountability Office found that 35 of 44 firearm purchase attempts over a five-month period made by known or suspected terrorists were approved by the federal law enforcement officials.
© 2007 The Associated Press.
Will someone please explain to me -
Why do you keep saying our vote does not count and that the next President has already been chosen?
I for one, have too much to do, to try to explain it....sm
to you, because frankly, I'm getting so I don't care.
There's nothing to find out, and they're making stuff up, so until you have something substantial, I have work to do.
However, if you would have posted about the screaming witch woman from up north and her rag on her, I would have really busted a gut being upset.
As it is, I'm just letting it all go, because Gov. Palin is better than you, better than me, and better than the media.
She will rise above it all, and come out on top. Of this, I have no doubts whatsoever.
That's all I have to say on the matter, cuz I have too much to type for more here....
Look at who you are trying to explain this to
xx
Please explain...
Please explain exactly how Democratic voters are misled. How are they being misled??? What, can they not read the English on the voter card? All I know is Ohio had 200,000 dead and nonexistant voters voting for Obama. I don't think it's the Democratic voters who are being misled, I think it's the American people, who don't realize what a complete scam is going on with this ACORN group.
Would someone please explain
How McCain can "guarantee" he's going to win as he said on Meet The Press yesterday?
Perhaps this will help explain....
Remember him talking about the tax "credits?" That is his way of floating giving tax rebates to people who pay no taxes. This is the opinion from someone on the other side of the pond...and explains it pretty well.
OBAMA TAX PLAN – 95% BULL?
Obama’s tax plan is receiving much praise from some elements of the Tory blogosphere. Promising tax cuts for everything and everyone is certainly a very attractive position, and I can see why so many ObamaCons are attracted to it; but does the claim really stand up to scrutiny?
Firstly, if you look at Obama’s promise of tax cuts for 95% of Americans and then look at the billions of dollars needed for the government programs that he has pledged to implement or expand, and common sense should tell you that thing simply do not add up.
Secondly, the 95% of all Americans figure is suspect. Since more than 30% of working Americans don't pay any income taxes now - many in fact get a welfare check - how can they get a "tax cut?" So how does Obama back up this 95% claim? Well those of you with long memories may remember Bill Clinton’s battle to change the definition of what “is” is? What we are witnessing here is an attempt to change the definition of tax cut. To me, and I am guessing to most people, a tax cut means you get to keep more of what you earn. But for the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts disguised by the infamous "tax credit." All but one of these tax credits would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for an income transfer -- a government check -- from taxpayers to non taxpayers. In other words, increased welfare, a Demogrant if you will. Obama's marketing genius is to call this increase in welfare a tax cut; and given how UK conservatives have watched the collapse into failure of Gordon Browns tax credit system, I am mystified why they would support Obama’s.
That being said...he says it expands welfare. I say it is socialist. Same end result. Marxist redistribution of wealth. But it is working...LOL. He is sure hiding it from YOU.
Let's see if I can explain this to you..
most blacks voted for Obama; most are against gay marriage, as their vote points out. How hard is that for you to comprehend? The black vote FOR Obama hurt the gay marriage vote. Is that simpler for you to understand?
I really tried to explain to you......... sm
in my other response to you above that I don't hate you and that I don't hate gay people or teach my sons to hate them. I don't know in exactly what way you think I should reach out to gay people. I do know some gay people, and as much as I may like them as a person, I would have to tell them if they presented the subject my feelings on it and why.
Please explain....(sm)
why you think it would be *trickle-up poverty* and how that works. I can't wait to hear this one...LOL.
explain to me
all their "tax breaks" then
because maybe im missing the bigger picture.
the middle class... (ME included) got a tax break... my first one EVER... so until I see a better one under Obama's administration, I'll stick with what I believe is a tax break for everyone that pays taxes...
and how is it a fact that the "rich" pays what, like 80% of the taxes?
That would explain why
why a clear 7.2% margin of victory mandate was handed over on Nov 4, why seas of humanity were jumping for joy that night, why DC is filling up to the rafters as Jan 20 approaches and why the rest of the world is joining in our single-digit T-minus-9 countdown. The transition is coming off without a hitch despite your best efforts to protest otherwise, the guy has assembled a blue-ribbon team, has plans in place and is ready to roll. Like I said, you are not handling defeat very well and cannot stand to see REAL leadership emerge after W's scorched earth administration.
Please explain this one........ sm
"*..., even a black man.....*
That's right....even a black man. Is it so hard for you to fathom the idea that someone of a different skin color would be of equal standing to you? Do you just completely reject the ideas of civility and equality? Has it ever occurred to you that this *black man* has every intention of trying to help YOU keep your job and help you keep food on your table?"
Why is it that this inauguration is being tauted, especially by the Democrats, as "an historical event" in which the first African-American man will become POTUS and that is supposedly politically correct, but when a Republican or non-Obama supporter dares utter that he is a black man, they are jumped on like white on rice for being racist and bigoted?
Please explain.....nm
x
Please explain something to me.
It this is taxpayer money were are fronting and president and Congress are our electd representatives, why SHOULDN'T they regulate the use of that money to safeguard against excess, mismanagement and misuse of the funds?
Please explain to me how this is
all W's fault? Creating a breeding ground? What....do you want us to kick out all arab looking people and their arab children so we don't have homegrown terrorists? We can't do that.
As for terrorists threats....don't we generally get a lot of those? How do we know which ones are real and which ones are pure BS?
W is out of office. Now it is Obamarama's turn. What will you do if we are attacked and Obama fails to listen to warnings? Are you going to rake him across the coals too or are you still going to blame W?
Why does this guy know all this stuff about terrorists and attacks? Who are his sources?
Please explain....(sm)
How a stimulus package with spending (not the pub tax cuts) will encourage a depression. 
Could someone explain to me........... sm
why it is really necessary for Obama to go on the trail around the country to promote his stimulus package? Shouldn't he be doing this with the Senate and working with them to reach some sort of middle ground? Seems to me that, whether the people support it or not, if it passes, we are stuck with it in whatever final form it takes. Why not just save the cost of loading up Air Force 1 and work it out in DC?
I'm not trying to pick a fight over Obama's use of AF1 (certainly, he is entitled to use it). I am just asking what is the point in trying to garner public support when he should be working with the Senate on this.
Please explain!
I've never heard "trout pout" before in my life? What is that all about and why it is a racial insult?
Okay...so explain to me
why Pelosi went to Italy on taxpayer's money! What I am saying, which you obviously failed to see, was our government needs to cut back as well. I think it would allow Americans to see that they are cutting back and willing to sacrifice in order to set things straight just like they want the CEOs to do. Instead, they continue to point their fingers at the CEOs and lecture them and yet they make no effort at all to change their spending ways as well.
Let me see if I can explain it this way, sm
Say I give you a birthday gift of $20 out of my pocket. That is a gift and you are welcome to use it in any way you see fit. I gave it of my own free will.
However, if I am forced to pay taxes to a government agency to give you help in buying groceries, I feel that the funds should be regulated inasmuch as what they will buy. If I am forced to pay taxes to support another person, it is not of my free will.
So many people see food stamps and Medicaid as a "gift" from the government when it is not that at all. It is taking money that I worked for and earned and giving it to someone else who did not work for it. "Gift" and "give" are not necessarily interchangable.
Can someone please explain why -
Mrs B thinks calling someone a miserable little wretch is better than nasty little wretch and why that is not insulting????
And what a bunch of hooey on the Darwin, Einstein or Newton comment. It was meant as an insult so I wouldn't even try pulling that...
You want to know what I mean when I say Mr. Dean talks through the mouth of a horse - it means he doesn't know what he's talking about. Did I say in my post "you" are the one doing the talking. No, I did not insult you. I spoke of my distrust of Mr. Dean, so what it was the wrong Mr. Dean, who cares and that's not the point.
You said you didn't insult me? Calling me Darwin, Einstein and Newton was certainly an insult. Tell me I'm talking like an a@@ is an insult and sure as you can bet calling me an miserable little wretch is certainly an insult.
I challenged you to provide the links where I started in with the name calling and you didn't. You can't and you treat anyone on this board who has a different opinion than you with rude comments (yes I read some of the other comments you made to other people). When you can't argue with something you resort to name calling. Yeah, whose a "miserable..." now.
I'll explain this because you obviously don't understand it. This is a political board where people can share opinions, articles and talk about politics. Moderator has said time and time again no personal attacks, no name calling. People here have tough skins, but when every post they make is met with calling them names like "snake, prophet, newton, einstein, darwin and miserable little wretch (all used in a derogatory sense), and others you have used" that's when it's time to say enough.
If you don't understand that maybe I can ask the moderator to explain it to you. Better yet you should read her messages at the top of this board because you have not yet. One is titled "Message for all posters on Political Board", and the other is titled "Beware of Flaming. Moderation is Kept Minimum on this Board".
Oh yeah, Don't bother answering.
Can someone please explain why -
Mrs B thinks calling someone a miserable little wretch is better than nasty little wretch and why that is not insulting????
And what a bunch of hooey on the Darwin, Einstein or Newton comment. It was meant as an insult so I wouldn't even try pulling that...
You want to know what I mean when I say Mr. Dean talks through the mouth of a horse - it means he doesn't know what he's talking about. Did I say in my post "you" are the one doing the talking. No, I did not insult you. I spoke of my distrust of Mr. Dean, so what it was the wrong Mr. Dean, who cares and that's not the point.
You said you didn't insult me? Calling me Darwin, Einstein and Newton was certainly an insult. Tell me I'm talking like an a@@ is an insult and sure as you can bet calling me an miserable little wretch is certainly an insult.
I challenged you to provide the links where I started in with the name calling and you didn't. You can't and you treat anyone on this board who has a different opinion than you with rude comments (yes I read some of the other comments you made to other people). When you can't argue with something you resort to name calling. Yeah, whose a "miserable..." now.
I'll explain this because you obviously don't understand it. This is a political board where people can share opinions, articles and talk about politics. Moderator has said time and time again no personal attacks, no name calling. People here have tough skins, but when every post they make is met with calling them names like "snake, prophet, newton, einstein, darwin and miserable little wretch (all used in a derogatory sense), and others you have used" that's when it's time to say enough.
If you don't understand that maybe I can ask the moderator to explain it to you. Better yet you should read her messages at the top of this board because you have not yet. One is titled "Message for all posters on Political Board", and the other is titled "Beware of Flaming. Moderation is Kept Minimum on this Board".
Oh yeah, Mrs. B - don't bother answering.
Maybe somebody can explain this...
...in Islam (the 'one true faith' that all mankind must be converted to) the worst sin is to leave and join another religion. It merits death, preferably beheading I believe, (though stoning might do, or maybe bombing if you can't get close). Obama was raised a Muslim, then became a Christinan, he says. Why is all of Islam not calling for the customary penalty against this infidel?
Please, explain what you mean by this.
What has she done, or not done, with her own family at home that would in any way whatsoever effect her political leadership?
You know, my oldest grandchild was conceived by 2 high-school teen-agers. My son has always been a part of her life as have I and my husband. She is a freshman in college, going on a full 4-yr scholarship and a cheerleader scholarship. Yes, we were crushed when we found out, but the minute she was born we fell in love with her and recalled what a miracle a child is.
My point is, that happened, as did other things with my children. But, those things had nothing to do with my abilities to carry out my job at work.
How can you say she cannot lead her own family for one thing? And, even if there was anything to that, what would it have to do with fitness on the job. Now, think about your answer first, be sure you throw in any double standards, considering folks already in or have been in political office.
Then just explain to me
why this should not be investigated. That's what I am asking. Why should they block the investigation into this. I don't think you can make this accusation without at least attempting to uncover the truth. And I will say it again - blocking the investigation only makes the Dems look more guilty. And if the Dems value the truth, then who are these lying _____ sitting in Congress masquerading as truth-loving Democrats (and republicans)? There is no more truth in our government, and I am saying we can no longer tolerate it - Democrat or republican. Perhaps if they were held accountable, they might think about their behavior, rather than just knowing there is no one holding them accountable. In this case, the Dems just said go right ahead and keep on lying and covering up 'cuz we won't make you prove what you say.
Please explain WHY being against
Israel (or, more accurately, holding them accountable for their actions), is a place that no one in their right mind should want to be.
Seriously. I'd like an answer because I don't understand.
Can someone please explain to me
why all of a sudden NK wants to blow us off of the face of the planet. I mean...I know they have never been big fans of ours but why all of these threats all of a sudden? We aren't the only ones who don't want NK to have long range missiles and nuclear weapons. What gives?
I know a gal who was a foreign exchange student to my school. She was from South Korea and super nice girl. I truly wonder what has happened to her and if she is okay.
|
