Sorry, I missed the part where she said all that, why do things have to get twisted and nasty...sm
Posted By: Cyndiee on 2009-02-01
In Reply to: The list is so long, but just to name a - few, true happiness,
when there is an ethical disagreement? Shots below the belt that assume way too much are low, ignorant, and taunting like a little disgruntled child. Perhaps there are others who are misssing a life, it seems to be on here, constantly inflaming, goading, ridiculing, but not saying much in the way of alternative ideas to DO something for this country. Bitter rhetoric just helps to tear things down and cause further division, nothing will ever get done either way. IMHO
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
time to grow up - both sides have said things they don't mean or regret or get twisted
There's a whole slew of things everyone has said that they wish they didn't and on important issues. One party is not free from that.
EVERYONE has faults. Whether your democrat OR republican, man OR woman, black OR white. They all have said things they don't mean or didn't come out right, or was totally twisted by the other side. Fact of life in politics.
If your going to go there be prepared to listen to all the things "your" candidate has said in the past. Then you'll whine when someone brings it out.
I sure am glad I'm not part of your nasty little world..
Not sure why you'd be proud of being thick-skinned.
Maybe that's why Iraq doesn't bother you right-wing folks.
As an example of you guys being thick-skinned, I remember someone on the conservative board boasting what's happening in Iraq is hardly a slaughter. If 10s of thousands of people being killed - including babies, toddlers and pregnant women - isn't a slaughter, then exactly what is a slaughter in your violent minds? Never mind, I don't want to hear.
Wow. Looks like I missed that part.
One blurb just said Bush will speak via satellite and RG was "bumped." Still curious about why. Please post if you hear anything.
I think you missed the part where I said...
*and I do believe in making stipulations for how that money is spent.*
I think you missed the part.....(sm)
where I was being sarcastic. I actually think she's being completely ridiculous. Yes, I do believe it's her business how she raises her child, that is, until she decides to post it online, thereby opening it up for discussion...LOL. What the OP doesn't seem to understand is that THE GAY is not a disease. It can't be spread like the common cold.
The reasonable thing to do is to discuss it with your child and explain to them what your feelings are about it (whatever they may be) instead of "leaving it in the closet." If the OP actually were to manage to raise her child without her child knowing about gays, exactly what do think is going to happen when that child goes to college or comes out of her mother's closet and sees the real world?
I wonder if the OP ever watched a movie with Rock Hudson or some other gay actor in it? I would actually think it would be hard not to at some point in time. If so, did watching that movie make her gay? This just shows the ridiculous nature of the OP.
why dont you get a clue before you post nasty things
I have a mixed family and a BLACK boyfriend not that is any of your business
so i have plenty of knowledge in what the girls think of me
not just black girls but ALL Girls.
including you apparently.
how was i spewing race hatred? why dont you read ALL MY POSTS about the one i just wrote about atlanta?
god you people make me SICKKKKKK
im so used to jealousy it just slides off my back!!!
Guess you missed the part about
Afganistan is where it's at. Obama gets that. He also gets Islamic parties, politics, principles and culture and knows precisely how to use that knowledge to get the Moslem world to isolate their own fringe elements. Bush and McCain know how to promote policies that anger and empower terrorists to declare WWIII and turn the whole world up-side-down.
Must have missed the part where this stupidity was
nm
Excuse me. You must have missed the part about
For starters, Obama did not dismiss these charges, Susan Crawford, described as a TOP LEGAL AUTHORITY for military trials did. Obama orders were to simply FREEZE the court proceedings (hello) PENDING the results of ongoing reviews of Gitmo operations.
Crawford's dedcision seems perfectly appropriate to me since dismissing the charges (ahem) WITHOUT PREJUDICE means he can be charged again once the results of the reviews are in, ESPECIALLY in light of the fact that Abd Al-Rahim will remain in custody.
You are the one who needs to clean up your potty mouth and pay attention. Of course, that's assuming that you even read the article at all instead of simply reacting to a headline or lifting somebody else's diatribe off another wingnut site.
I guess you missed the part in his . . .
speech where he proudly mentioned that HE is a CHRISTIAN!!! Seriously, does that really sound like downplaying religion? GET REAL.
I guess I missed the part where she was...
conspiring to rid the world of gays. I read that she simply wished her daughter to not be exposed. Unfortunately, I agree with you that she is probably fighting a losing battle, but why is everyone so hard on her trying to keep that kind of thing away from her daughter? If she feels that strongly about it, then I would think that it is not only best for her to shield her child from such things, but her duty to keep her child from things that she views as harmful. Everyone has the right to protect his/her children from outside influence that he/she believes could be detrimental.
I guess you missed the part where he said one thing....
and voted another way. The teachers union in Chicago is responsible for the short days and skyrocketing salaries, but it is not translated in better educated kids. Did you not see the testing scores, the graduation rates, etc.? Of course not. When it got to the parts about Obama looking bad, skimmed right over that "substance." LOL. Sigh.
You must have missed the part where Gaddafi and Bush
These links are for you:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1194766,00.html
Why Gaddafi's the Good Guy now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4701772.stm
Gaddafi's Son Back Bush on Reform
Gaddafi is hardly in the same league as Al-Quaeda. This doge indicates to me that you are unable to address their endorsement of McCain directly. Furthermore, his comments about Obama are typical of how Moslem define themselves. Gaddafi's comments simply addressed the kinship he felt with Obama because of his African ties and the fact that his father is from Kenya and is a Moslem (albeit, not that religious, and certainly not fanatic or radical). It is the red camp that has taken this and made a runaway train to nowhere over it. Gaddafi is far more vocal in his acceptance of the shrub.
I guessed I missed the "hate" part that others ..sm
are accusing you of. I agree with you - and it's your right to monitor the music and celebrities your child admires.
I taught my children tolerance - but also that they did not have to approve of everything and everyone's behavior - politically correct or not.
I steered mine away from Madonna and Spears.
different things...he consented to that part.
x
And you twisted what I said also....
the reason we have to abort not 100-200 a year but 1.2 million a year is because of the permissive society liberals have ushered in...no accountability...no right or wrong, only shades of gray...near porn in prime time, all in the name of freedom of expression. Have sex with anybody, as many anybodies as you want, anythings you want, freedom to express yourself...with no consequences because we stand ready to abort 1.2 million "oopses" a year.
Nice cigar hole remark. However, I think another permissive or should I say prominent promiscuous liberal has that one sewed up.
...of twisted logic.
Your theory is twisted
Maybe that's what they teach in the socialized education system nowadays (I heard plenty from my cousin who would tell me what her professors in the university were spewing). But what you stated is not the theory (that after 2 terms of one party the other party is supposed to be elected). What kind of screwed up site did you get that from (probably MSNBC or some other hate-filled station). If that was the case then there would not be a race and the opposite party would just be placed in - which is exactly what the democrats are trying to do.
I do agree that there is both far right and far left wingnuts. That is why the country needs someone who is a moderate. Unfortuntely the country will never elect someone from the Independent, Constitution or other party that is down the middle, but at least John McCain is more down the middle. Obama is the farthest left that you can get. It just astounds me how many Americans would rather have the country move to socialism and live under a dictator rather than have a free country.
Also, people forget that America is a Constitutional Republic, NOT a democracy. Nowhere in the contitution or Declaration of Indpendence is the word "democracy" even mentioned. Our founding fathers were extremely knowledgeable about the issues of democracy and feared it. They understood that the only entity that could take away people's freedom is their own government (which we will see if Obama is elected).
There are people who are bent on destroying our sovereignty by creating the North American Union (which means Canada, US & Mexico will become a single country). The NAFTA agreement was just the beginning of this. Obama admits to support of this. Obama's policies are that of Stalin's. Stalin's economic philosophy was socialism, which involved taking property from the rich in order to redistribute it to the poor. Sounds exactly like what he was telling the plumber guy and others. I think last night John McCain made a very clear connection that Obama's polices and core beliefs are the same as Joseph Stalin's.
We cannot go down that road. We need to continue on as a free country. To think that now that because you have two terms of one party it's the other parties turn is wrong. Especially if the other party is and believes in socialism.
We need to have a republican (or another party other than a democrat) elected as president as the senate and house already are democrat. This is what they call "balance of power". Americans prefer that the checks-and-balances evisioned by the founders be facilitated by having different parties control Congress and the White House. Put in a democrat president mixed with a democratic congress and a democratic senate and you have tyranny. They will pass every pork filled bill possible, tax you more and the country will go down the same dark road we hit with Carter and Clinton.
Yes, the country is in a state of turmoil one we haven't seen for not sure how long. I wouldn't go back to the depression, as we all know Obama is trying to scare people into believing if he is not elected we're going to hit a depression - another blatant lie of his. That is why we need a moderate in the office. We need someone to keep the democratic senate and house in order, that is why we need McCain.
People should not vote for the other party with your theory that if they vote for McCain we are all wealthy. A lot of us are voting for McCain because we don't want to be taxed over 45% of our paychecks like we were under the last democrat president Mr. "Liar, depends on what the meaning of is is" Clinton. It is a fact that under Bush most American have received tax refunds (not the richest of rich - people like me and others who make around $25K or so). Something I never saw once under any of the 8 years the last democrat president was in. McCain and Palin have more knowlege of how to run the country. How to create jobs, how to not tax the small business people, how to generate income for America, how to win the war and not rush everyone back because you think more people will vote for you if you keep pushing that, when in truth you will turn around and after elected send them all back.
I say if you want to be free. If you want to be able to start your own business or have any money left from your paychecks to build a future for yourselves. If you care that the country is now a safer place since 9/11. If you care that our next president doesn't hang around with people like Wright, Ayers, Farrakan, and has friends in the countries that want to see us wiped off the planet and will do so under an Obama presidency, then vote your conscience and vote John McCain.
After last nights debate no matter who you think won or lost, I'll be voting for a man who has the knowlege and experience to lead the country to better times and will continue to remain free. Otherwise you should learn how people in Cuba and North Korea and other communist/socialist countries feel. Why do you think they're all trying to come to our country. And the ones who immigrated to here to get away from there. I'm sure they will not be voting for someone who will make this country into what they risked their lives to get away from.
No, it might be you who is twisted, sistah!
x
Another twisted notion...
.
O'Reilly: Twisted spin, again.
A quote:
O'REILLY: Massive neglect? Let's take a look at that bit of overstatement. Halfway through President Clinton's tenure in office, the poverty rate was 13.7%. Halfway through President Bush's tenure the rate is 12.7, a full point lower.
[COMMENT According to statistics obtained from the U. S. Census site, when Bill Clinton began his term as President in 1993, the poverty rate was 15.1%. By the time Clinton left office the poverty rate was 11.7%. By 2002, under George Bush the rate began to rise again to 12.1% in 2002, 12.5% in 2003 and 12.7% in 2004.
According to the Christian Science Monitor this most recent increase was unforeseen by analysts who expected the number to drop along with unemployment and may indicate a disturbing trend. While the poverty level for Asians declined and it remained stable for Hispanics and African-Americans, the only group that saw an increase was non-Hispanic white Americans living in the midwest. In other words there are 1.1 million poorer red state residents this year than there were last year.]
O'REILLY: In 1996 the Clinton budget allotted $191 billion for poverty entitlements. That was 12.2% of the budget. ... However, the Bush 2006 budget allots a record-shattering $368 billion for poverty entitlements - 14.6% of the entire budget - a huge increase over Clinton's spending. Did the elite media mention that? Jesse Jackson mention that? Of course they didn't. Because it's much more convenient for Evan Thomas and others to imply that America under President Bush has turned its back on the poor. But it's absolute nonsense. Even in the midst of the war on terror [Note: Did he mean the war of choice in Iraq?], this country is spending a massive amount of money tryin' to help the poor. So why the lie? Because political gain can be made off the suffering of others, that's why. Those who oppose the Bush administration don't care about the truth. They only want to advance their own agenda, so once again the No-Spin zone rides to the rescue.
Hard-working Americans are providing the poor with Medicaid, food stamps, supplemental security income - that's free money - child nutrition programs, welfare payments, child daycare payments, temporary assistance to needy families, foster care, adoption assistance and health insurance for children. But, it will never be enough for the Jesse Jacksons and Howard Deans of the world. Never! If they told you the truth, they'd go out of business.
Now, I fully expect to be attacked by the far-left media for tellin' you all this. I'm sure they'll label me a racist, a shill for Bush, stuff like that. But, I don't care. The dollars don't lie. We are a generous nation. And that is the truth.
COMMENT
Most of the poor in this country WORK, many of them hold down two and three jobs. If you want to read a damning book on this topic, I suggest you get Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickeled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America. Ms. Ehrenreich went underground and worked at minimum wage jobs for a year. She discovered a few unpleasant facts about life on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. Self-satisfied, replete, rich men like Bill O'Reilly sit in their posh offices and scare hard-working Americans into believing that their taxes go to indigent scofflaws who sit at home guzzling beer, smoking pot, eating chips and watching TV. Those of us closer to homelessness know this is not the case.
When he mentioned that SSI (social security supplemental income) is free money, he neglected to say that it is money that goes to disabled Americans or that providing health coverage for children reduces trips to the emergency room!
Sometimes I wonder how many poor people Mr. O'Reilly actually knows or has associated with on a long-term basis? For the past 15 years I've been involved in a local program that offers music scholarship to needy families. In that time I've taught 7 different children from 7 different poverty situations and I came to know the families personally. Most of the adults in the family work really hard. Sometimes the kids worked, too, after school. Some had parents trying to break a drug habit (yes, they held down a job) or schizophrenic parents (who were incapable of working) or an abusive parent (who worked, then took it out on the family), but most were blessed with caring parents who were doing the best to provide for their children against almost impossible odds.
So when I hear guys like O'Reilly spout their simplistic tripe implying that the poor are sucking the lifeblood out of hard-working Americans, I see red.
Also, I don't trust O'Reilly's numbers on entitlement programs simply because he never once used the words inflation-adjusted dollars. If he was simply quoting raw numbers, I'd like to remind him that 15 years ago the dollar went farther. Additionally, he did not indicate through graphics or verbally whether or not there was parity between the two budgets, i.e., was he citing figures that included exactly the same programs in both figures?
Given O'Reilly's dubious track record, one cannot accept his statements without independent verification.
Spoken like a truly twisted fool nm
nm
Human rights is getting way twisted
I go by the Bible and a much higher authority.
typo - meant cite things as hoax, not "site" things
Just thought I'd correct that before I get pummeled by the people who want to believe snopes is a truthful organization.
As we can see, there is no reliable source. Twisted, misleading passages out of context
rasberries
What........your twisted or hateful idea of truth, grow a heart, okay?...nm
nm
only part saved was the ignorant part
You can read the whole article. This quote was saved to show what she said that was so stupid.
Auntie Em, Auntie Em.....twisted sister!!
I won't be nasty. sm
American Woman, if I wuz to venture a guess, I'd say you and gt were definitely the same person, but I don't really care. I really don't. And I don't care if you believe me either. GT did tell us both not to leave. I am sorry that you don't feel the need to verify that, but GT just as much admitted to it above, so there you go. Have a safe holiday weekend.
Why be so nasty? sm
I mean really. Why is that necessary? Why? Can you tell me? Is it something you can't help. I have been civil the entire time I have posted here. When I go to school, one person, ME, will not be posting. I can't speak for the rest. So let it go. Take a deep breath, let it out. Let it go. Let all that anger go. You will feel better.
Nasty. (nm)
nm
no need to get nasty as the same could be said about you.
,
wow - sam -- you really do get nasty
I don't know about you, but I'm American, not dem or pub, just American. I refuse to shut up or put up, as you so kindly put it, about anything. I have to admit the last election I voted pub, and I'm still paying for that one. But seriously sam, keep playing the blame game. You'd make a good politician. See where it gets us.
Fact is 140 dems did vote to pass it, while only 65 pubs voted for it. Maybe because the pubs didn't feel they were getting enough out of it for themselves or because of fear of its failure. It's a shame that pubs can't even support their own party, ie Bush, who wanted this to pass.
cause you are nasty
You were so nasty in your first post. I was answering questions to someone who asked about my faith and you come bouncing in with h*ll fire and damnation. I don't believe in heaven or h*ll, so I'm not real worried about it. Give your prayers to someone else. I certainly don't need someone as hateful as you praying for me. I don't believe what is in the NT and you screaming about it isn't going to change that. I bet you are the top evangelizer at your church, aren't you?
Why do you believe the KJV is right? Do you know the history of it? Have you studied original texts? Probably not ...
why be so nasty?
What's your point? If you didn't like it, no need to read it, but why be nasty for the sake of being nasty?
Why do you have to be so nasty
and stoop to attacking people? Attack the politician if you like, but this is just so juvenile.
And it's still nasty (nm)
n
My my - how nasty can you get
Very I see.
Your above post is very nasty....
Calling democrats "traitorcrats."
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.
Dang you are nasty.
read ur post again. U R talking about it like its true. Maybe U can't see it but i can.
I did read it. No need to be nasty.
I have tried to keep an even tone here. That wasn't necessary. I think it stands to reason when you get men like Jong and the leader of Iran who have openly said they wish for our death, that the next step would be nuclear weapons.
Oh, got your hackles up I see. Nasty
I am not making excuses for anyone. Clinton and his presidency with all the bull is over. I know it, he knows it. You know it. Get over it already. He is washed up and has little to no credibility left. Don't mean jack to me right now. Others get away with far more in our justice system every day. I am not defending them either, it's just the way it goes. Am I going to cripple myself because of it? No way.
I could say the same for you in the predictability arena. You've reduced yourself to being flippant once again. You get downright nasty. Morals my foot.
It is not just about the Plame case. It is much bigger and wider, and it is growing every day.
Here is a part of it:
http://www.nlg.org/convention/2007%20Resolutions/Impeachment%20resolution.pdf
This was put together by the National Lawyers Guild. It is just one of many. It will get to the point where it can't be ignored. I can send you batches more if you like.
Nasty and proud of it.....obviously. And...
definitely not someone who should be calling someone else ignorant. But, since your opinion means les than nothing to me...knock yourself out.
Vicious and Nasty
Just vote early and get over yourselves. Unbelievable.
But you are beyond nasty to anyone who disagrees.
in your posts.
You cannot even practice what you preach, the happy, joyous hopeful part.
Just downright nastiness is your party line.
The nasty thing
is your wishing misery on fellow Americans because you have your nose in a snit (or something darker and moister).
nasty on all sides
Can't we just state our opinions without calling each other "idiots" and "children?" Does that really enhance the argument? Ever?
wow, nasty this morning,,,
in our area there are people struggling but not to the extent that seem to be here on this board every day. Certainly don't live in a glass house; have struggled before in the past and have figured out a way not to. We are in a fortunate situation at the moment and have taken steps to ensure that we will be okay financially should the rug be pulled out from under us; so be it if that is considered snooty. Bash away as is your style; it humors me.
Boy, sis, you have a really nasty 'tude there...
my world is anything but gloomy. I know I am not responsible for that fella in the White House. That lets me sleep nights. Much Palin's carpet? Change parties? If you read any of my posts as you claim you have, either you have no retention or you would know I have never been a "pub" or a "Dem." Independent from day one. Conservative, yes definitely; "pub" no. Democrat...no way,not ever in this lifetime. The Democrats of my parents' days and Zell Miller are gone forever it would seem, and too bad. Too darned bad.
Yeah, it breaks my heart (not) that you are unimpressed. I know what impresses you and that is sure not where I desire to be.
It does not take a prophet to see where this is going. However...one has to remnove the blinders...ahem.
Just what was his nasty behavior?
I'm curious...........
|
