Sorry...meant to put a message inside....sm please

• Barack's grandmother died - Dee
  • One day before the election. This is so sad.n/m - Stardustst
  • That's sad - Just me
  • I am sorry to hear that. nm - m
    • Sorry...meant to put a message inside....sm please - m
      • YES INDEED I am with you! - gourdpainter
      • Yes I agree....sm - ms
  • Oh that's awful - sbMT
    • I'm sorry to hear that...and sad timing (sm) - MeMT
      • I pray for his family as well. - gourdpainter
        • So true. n/m - stardust
          • Yes, it is a very sad thing for him - sweetpea

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

I thought so, too, when I first read it, but there's a whole website dedicated to nothing but this kind of hatefulness. How could anyone communicate reasonably, intelligently and productively with a follower of this kind of religion? 

Sad, isn't it?

I don't think there's anything wrong with laughing at something that is not only very funny but also happens to be true.  Unfortunately, this Administration hasn't given us very much to smile about.

When I read this, nothing led me to believe that Google has a liberal's brain.  By the way how much DID that "poor schlump" part with, since you seem to have all the answers? 

From your posting:

"So if you and Chomsky are comfortable with putting every man, woman and child in this country at risk to satisfy whatever beef you have against freedom and democracy, fine.  Your freedom of speech had a most terrible and high price tag.  Something tells me that many of these fine men and women, if they could speak now, would not thank you for your thoughts."

I do not recall stating anything related to your above quote.  As I said, you may have me confused with another poster. 

In the first place, I'd like to say thanks for posting here, and you're welcome here any time.

As far as supplying topics to discuss, YOU seem to be the one who is actually supplying the topics.  Today the Conservative board is a pleasant place to be, and even I felt safe responding to a post in your thread.  The topic was excellent, and nowhere have I seen you attack a poster for his or her opinion. 

You haven't come across as confrontational and hateful.  Unfortunately, to a lot of people, these three have done so.

People can debate without personally attacking a poster that doesn't agree with them.  You seem to have done that.  I hope the Conservative board is able to get more posters like you.  You've made it a comfortable place to be.

Chill!  LOL.  Gee, you sure are defensive.  I wonder where that came from!

You are NOT on the conservative board any more, and you don't have to walk on eggshells here (although I seem to have acquired a "fan" who has been following me around on this board, taking swipes at everything I say and just generally being unpleasant and contributing nothing of value to any conversation).  If you read the posts here, it's obvious to see whose agenda it is to discuss and debat and whose agenda is restricted to creating discomfort and attacking.

I thought your post was great, and there wasn't one word or phrase in your post above that would imply any lack of respect for a soldier. 

Some people just can't understand that others support the troops by wanting to keep them alive, honor their lives by only placing those lives in jeopardy when absolutely critical and necessary to protect America.  It's obvious you're not "against" our troops, but instead you're trying to fight FOR THEM while they are fighting for HIM and what I believe in the core of my soul to be his personal grudge war.  I believe more and more people are coming to this realization every day and share your thoughts (and mine), as well.

I come here because I like to see what a few certain posters write.  I've been reading these posters' thoughts for a few weeks now, and I find them to be genuine, original and heartfelt.  (If you have any doubt as to who these people are, just follow the long trail of the hateful responses to their posts.)  It's a source of relaxation to me after I finish working.  I've actually made a list of whose posts aren't worth reading any more because they totally lack value and are designed to do nothing but attack and harass.  I'm no longer willing to feed their addiction to hate, and I simply won't respond to them any more.  Again, if you read the board, I'm sure you will see who I'm referring to and why.  Wouldn't surprise me at all if you are their next target.  They can be very upsetting and cause normal, intelligent people to become very defensive.  They bait posters, and it seems to me if they're ignored, their posts will just stand alone, making their motives very, very clear.  (Just my personal opinion, and I only mention it because I don't want anyone to get to you or chase you away from here because they simply aren't worth it.)

I'm really glad to see you here.  Now I have one more reason to continue visiting this board.  I hope you have a great day! 

P.S.  I noted in your first post you mentioned you're a "military brat."  I'd just like to personally thank you and your family for the sacrifices you made for your country and for me as one of its citizens!

I'm posting the entire post, since I'm not sure if I copied the link correctly.  It was posted by vs, followed by additional attacks on gt and Brunson complaining of the *bog of eternal stench* that she claims *tends to drift on over here* on the Conservative Board, after nobody from the Liberal Board has bothered them.  Not once.

This is the post on the Conservative Board from vs, but it's not the only objectionable one.

Sorry to see you go

[Post a Reply] [View Follow Ups]      [Politics] --> [Conservatives]

Posted By: vs on 2005-11-28,
In Reply to: I agree with you, MT. SM - Brunson

I understand why though. It's a darn shame that one or two people make this an intolerable place for everyone. Well, if the post count goes down on the boards then maybe they will revisit their policies. At least on these boards the two-initialed Nazi is allowed get away with her genocide of anything conservative, but that's not helping the post count on the board at all.

BTW, I went to the Extremely Politics board, and only a person with a self-esteem death wish would dare post there. I can see why the two-initialed Nazi likes it there. She's free to practice her hate. It's not a place I would want to touch with a 10-foot pole.

http://www.forumatrix.com/ads/frame.cgi?action=main&target=www.forumatrix.com/Channels

Yes, forgiveness does mean that we have to realize our sins and confess them.   But, unless you are either George Bush himself, his pastor, or his God, how do you know he hasn't?  That is conjecture on your part.  None of us knows what has transpired between this man and his God.  I realize what I am saying will not be popular here, but I don't see a whole lot of Christianity in what I am seeing. Quoting from written sources is not addressing the fact that you are sitting in judgement of someone who is not you.  We aren't supposed to do that.  I hope you all have a blessed Sunday. I am off to church and will certainly pray that God releases from your hearts the hatred you carry.  

Here is some more from the conference.  So shines a light in a sometimes dim world.    

The sanctity and infinite worth of every human being is a quintessential Jewish value, grounded in the biblical notion that man is made in the image and likeness of God. Against this background, it is ironic and vexatious for many pro–life activists that American Jews tend to line up on the pro–choice side in the struggle over abortion. Affirming the Sanctity of Human Life, a conference held November 12 in Washington, D.C., brought together a hundred or so Jews who are troubled by the Jewish community’s stance toward the unborn, particularly concerning the gruesome late–term procedure known as partial–birth abortion.  The morning session consisted of panel presentations by three Orthodox Jews and a maverick Reform rabbi. Marshall Breger, a law professor and political writer, lamented the fact that Jews support abortion rights more than any religious or ethnic group: they are consistently 15 to 20 percent above the norm, he said, even when controlling for various factors such as religious belief or unbelief, political ideology, social class, etc. He attributed this support, in part, to fears that governmental restrictions on abortion would abridge personal autonomy and impose Christian religious standards on Jewish life. He said that gray areas in Jewish law—its combination of silence and ambiguity regarding the fetus’ status, its handful of exceptional situations allowing abortion—have confused Jews about the permissibility of abortion in general.

Barry Freundel, an Orthodox rabbi from Georgetown, seconded Breger’s sociological account of Jewish fears about abortion as being symbolic of the wider Jewish culture clash with conservative Christian movements. It’s hard to have a conversation about abortion, he said, that doesn’t become a conversation about something else. Even among his own Orthodox congregants, Freundel said, his pro–life preaching is treated as the rabbi getting up on his soapbox again. Nevertheless, he said, he feels obliged to inform them that the absolute license to abort, as practiced in the United States today, is simply impossible to reconcile with traditional Jewish teaching. Judaism, he said, permits abortion in a few limited circumstances, such as to save the life of the mother. He indicated that there is some difference of rabbinic opinion about these circumstances, but stressed that there is no warrant for the overwhelming number of abortions now performed in the U.S. He said that classic Jewish sources really don’t say much about the general moral or metaphysical status of the fetus; but, he added, we have an intuitive response that the fetus is not like an appendix or an in–grown toe nail that can simply be removed at will.

I'm forwarding this to Alan Combs, Greta Van Sustern (sp) and Bill O'Rielly.  Thanks.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

AIKEN -- The 6-year-old Aiken girl who'd been dead for up to 14 hours before being taken to a hospital was beaten to death, authorities said Thursday.

And the woman who called Chaquise Gregory her life and her baby is being charged with homicide in the child's death.

1 / 2

Special

Aiken County Department of Public Safety officers lead a handcuffed Kathy Salley away from her residence in the 500 block of Abbeville Avenue. She is charged with homicide by child abuse.

Aiken police arrested Kathy Salley, 26, at her Aiken home Thursday evening and booked her into the Aiken County Deten¤tion Center.

She'll be charged with homicide by child abuse this morning, Aiken Public Safety Sgt. David Turno said.

Police arrested Ms. Salley on an outstanding warrant for fraudulent checks to get her in jail, he said.

An autopsy found that Chaquise, who'd moved to a home in the 500 block of Abbeville Avenue in Aiken with Ms. Salley in May or early June, died from a severe beating, he said.

Authorities had already revealed that Chaquise had been dead between 10 and 14 hours when Ms. Salley took her to an Aiken hospital June 23.

"That's all we can tell you," Sgt. Turno said. "I do not believe they're going to go into the full evidence of the case, but we do know it was from a severe beating."

Aiken County Coroner Tim Carlton said he couldn't release many details about what killed Chaquise, except that the beating "caused some internal-type malfunction in the body that caused her death."

Mr. Carlton said there were no drugs found in the child's system, but "there were some older injuries that we're looking into that may or may not have been related to previous abuse."

The autopsy found no broken bones, but there was evidence of past breaks.

Mr. Carlton said the initial results indicate that the child was not sexually abused, but he would not rule it out completely.

She was not molested "that I'm aware of at this point," he said.

Capt. Maryann Burgess, who has been the investigator in the case, said she can't say how many others may have been involved in Chaquise's death or what charges they face.

"We know where they are," she said.

She said investigators also have not been able to verify that Ms. Salley had legal custody of Chaquise, which she claimed.

If convicted of homicide by child abuse, Ms. Salley faces between 20 years in prison and a life sentence.

In an interview with The Augus¤ta Chronicle on June 27 - five days after Chaquise was pronounced dead - Ms. Salley denied any wrongdoing in her death. Ms. Salley said she'd raised Chaquise since she was 3 years old.

"She was the only child I could ever have," she said, and questioned how the girl's biological family could think she was responsible.

Ms. Salley hinted that another person living with her and Chaquise - and who m she said she'd left the child with the night before - may have had something to do with the little girl's death.

"I can't point fingers when I don't know what went on in this house while I was gone," she'd said.

According to preliminary autopsy results that were released soon after her death, Chaquise had been dead between 10 and 14 hours before Ms. Salley took her to Aiken Regional Medical Centers.

Capt. Burgess said the additional autopsy results she received Wednesday led to Ms. Salley's arrest.

Ms. Salley told The Chronicle that authorities found bruises on Chaquise's arm and bottom, and cigarette burns on her shoulder and back.

Mr. Carlton said investigators are still trying to determine whether those marks were cigarette burns.

"It's just a tragic incident that was visited on a defenseless child," Mr. Carlton said. "And if the allegations are all true, then we certainly hope that the law and criminal justice system will be the defender of this child's rights."

What you copied and pasted was an opinion which I stated.

Nowhere in any of my posts do I claim to have an *inside track* to anything.  That's YOUR ridiculous claim, not mine!

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1107-20.htm

While Moore does bring up some very good points, he rarely follows through to a logical conclusion and seems to go off in every direction possible.  He also had his facts in Sicko very incorrect.  He is saying there are 47 million people uninsured.  He did not take into account the people who are eligible and refuse to apply for Medicare or Medicaid and all the illegal aliens.  SO, when you take them out of the equation there are 30 million without proper health insurance, still quite a few to be sure, but he does not represent the facts with his numbers on this. 

Sorry for involving everyone in what turned into a personal confrontation.  In stepping back as some of you have suggested, I examined my feelings and I do feel badly.  I took it too personally and I should not have, though when someone says "you this" and "you that" it is hard not to take it personally.  It is hard not to take it personally when someone calls you a bigot, ignorant...and many other not-so-nice names.  I got my back up...but that is a human reaction in my opinion.  I jus should have shut it down sooner, I agree.

In GW's defense, I think she is very frustrated with the immigration situation because of incidents close to her, understandable, and I became the personification of all she hates about Republicans, conservatives etc., in effect, the object of venting.  Again, I should not have taken it so personally and tried to understand more where that hatred was coming from.

So, I apologize to GW, I apologize to all of you, that I let it get out of hand.  Hard as it may be for some of you to believe, I am not a confrontational person.  Every one of us, at some point, gets all we can stand and feel like we have to stand up.  I just should not have kept it going so long.  We were beating a dead horse and we should have stopped...both of us.

So...sorry, GW.  I know we do not agree on many things and never will.  However, I am as responsible as you for it going on for so long.  And for that I apologize, to you and to others on the board.

And I appreciate the wise moderator who just let it play out.    Cooling myself off.  :)

Please see the below link for the previous time this was brought up.

They say he wouldn't put his hand over his heart and say the Pledge of Allegiance.  If this is true.....why would anyone want him as our president?  There has also been rumors that he refused to wear an American flag pin.  I've heard others as well.  I just can't remember what they were.  Just so much talk about how he doesn't/won't hold on to our age old American beliefs and traditions.  I don't hold too much to rumors and stuff but this picture speaks volumes to me.  I looked it over carefully to see if I could tell if it was photoshopped but I'm not seeing anything.  The shadows look right and so does everything else.  I'd just like to get some opinions and try to make sense of why we would want a man as our president who won't even support the most American thing there is?  If this rumor and the others like it our false I really would like to know.