Stand down. If you respond, she will repeat herself
Posted By: over and over and over and over and over and over on 2008-08-28
In Reply to: gurl....I really don't care if he wants to be a rock star... - sam
an over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
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
Repeat - Factcheck is not a reliable source, Repeat - no reliable
You keep citing Factcheck and we keep having to tell you Factcheck is not reliable. Why is it not reliable? Because it is funded by the Annenberg Foundation in which Obama is part of. AND because Obama was Chairman of the Board. It really is like talking to a wall. So let me repeat and read this nice and slow. Factcheck...not a reliable source. Cheese-o-Pete...you might as well just say you asked Michelle Obama and she said it's real. Additionally....the b/c they put up there was found to be a forgery. So...once again...factcheck not reliable...b/c submitted was a forgery.
So are you a fortune teller? You don't know if he will be elected or disqualified and neither do I. If the SC comes back and says he is legite I will drop the subject. If they find anything out of the ordinary then I will most likely say I told you so. If they say he's not legite but we'll change the constitution just for him, then I will be madder than a hornet and you'll hear from me. But all in all I will be satisfied with what the SC says. We won't know what their decision is until they make it.
If it comes back that he is ineligible and he lied, he better do some explaining to this country about why and he better calm his worshippers down. I think overall the country will be okay. For as many supporters that he has there are an equal number of people who don't support him and view him to be ineligibile. There are even people who support him, but are saying...wait a minute here, things are not adding up. Just show us the certificate and be done with it. In fact more so now since all this info came out and many people upset about it that they didn't know ahead of time.
As for what I think will happen. I really don't know. I do believe that quite possibly Hillary will step in and become President because she is the one that he wronged by campaigning when he knew he did not meet qualifications. So I believe probably she will become the next President and Biden will remain VP, or Biden will step in as President and she becomes VP.
I highly doubt the SC will just elect McCain because the republican party did not win and now that we have a congress/senate that's all democrat (or mostly democrat) they would prevent that somehow.
As for McCain? Heck no I didn't want him in there. I wanted one of the following - Chuck Baldwin from the constitutional party (but he had no chance whatsoever). I was also interested in Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich. I really like Dennis Kucinich. I agreed with a lot of his ideas (especially impeachment of Bush) and I have agreed with a lot of what he has voted on in the past.
So maybe what I would really like to see happen is if the O is disqualified to have another "mini" campaign. All the candidates can run again and then the public decides after one or two months of campaigning. So, instead of having a President inaugerated in January they could be inaugerated in February or March. It would be different, but nothing like this has ever happened before.
I'll just say this on the whole b/c issues and this is why I say this and I hope you can understand where I'm coming from.
1. Let me first say I voted for Obama in the primaries. So in no way do I hate him or a racist or whatever else people want to throw out. I voted for him because he has some ideas I thought were good (thought is the key word).
2. After he was elected I read about the stolen election from Hillary (even though I was way so not supportive of her). I started learning about his lies to the people. His dealings with Ayers, ACORN, Wright, Farrakhan etc, etc.
3. He funds different groups who create websites to detract from the issues.
4. The media treated him like a prince while trashing McCain/Palin. I was no fan of theirs by all means but what happened to them was uncalled for.
5. The b/c he put up on the "factcheck" site was found to be a forgery.
6. We find out he's born in Kenya and legally goes and has the records sealed, along with his school records. He is hiding something and that is not very reassuring for over half the country here.
7. His grandmother was in the room when he was born along with his sister and brother.
8. His sister mentions multiple hospitals he was born at, while Obama mentions something totally different.
Those are only a few of the issues that are my concerns about his legitimacy.
On the other hand you have the issues/policies of his that I don't agree with and am finding out more and more how unsafe our country is going to be.
The incident in India has the you know what scared out of me and the thought of that happening here in our country is a real issue for me.
I was in the US Army. I spent 8 years in the service defending the country. It just makes me a bit upset to hear that people don't care if the Constition is not upheld, just so Obama gets in no matter what. All I want is the Constituion protected. That's all I'm asking for. Our founding fathers created it for a reason and we need to abide by it and not change it. I saw where Barney Franks tried to change it so that a foreign born could become president as long as they had been a citizen for 20 years (it was quite odd timing because not too much longer after that Obama decides to run and then we find there is a forged b/c. Timing of all this is just way too suspicious. All I say is let the supreme courts decide. That is what they are there for. I have read articles that say The Supreme Courts job is to protect the constitution and even if it means that a decision they make is not going to be popular, they are bound by their duty to defend the Constitution and they will.
So, once more I want to repeat that Factcheck is not reliable source because Obama/Annenberg Foundation and Factcheck are one in the same.
I'm sorry, I just HAVE to respond here...
This is just bunk. How arrogant can human beings be? To think that we can manipulate this planet in such profound ways is ridiculous. This is a dynamic planet. These things have always happened, and always will. The world has reinvented itself at least twice. It will shake us all off like fleas off a dog, if it chooses to do so. Not that we shouldn't be good custodians of the planet, but we don't even come CLOSE to having the kind of control that the environmental loons seem to believe. Reminds me of that movie Armgageddon where Bruce Willis is standing out on that oil rig hitting golf balls at a Greenpeace boat screaming at them asking them how much diesel does that boat you've got there use?
And lastly, the United States cannot be single handedly blamed for a supposed case of global warming? That people think that, specifically liberals, shows you just how political the whole thing is, and very little to do with science. Last time I checked there was a great big huge INHABITED world beyond our shores, and they're also especially good at polluting this planet that we all share.
cant respond right now
Im sorry, first thing in my morning reading your post after watching thousands without anything and knowing they are going to DEMAND what they need..Geez, Im sorry, I cant post response right now..Im too upset..Later today, I will however respond, I promise.
So why did ya respond?
If ignorance is bliss, the Obama-land is the happiest place on Earth! Screw Disneyland!
Respond away.
You claimed I was the first to bring it up and I wasn't.
Dixie Dew: Please respond to this!
Okay. Now you're back on the right.... er left.... er CORRECT board! Please stay here, okay?
Wow. I really don't know how to respond to your post. sm
But you support the troops...right?
Please do not respond observer
Please do not respond to my posts *Observer*. This is the liberal board and my posts are to my fellow democrat/liberals not to a ring winger. I have nothing in common with you or right wingers, in fact, I cannot stomach right wingers, their ideas, what they have done to this country under their president. Do youself a favor, go back to the conservative board or just skip over my posts and dont even read them.
It is immaterial to me if you respond to me or not, LD...
still a free board, still a free country, still able to state an opinion. You do not have to waste your time or energy reading my responses. With all due respect of course.
Know you are not going to respond, don't mind....others might want to know...
any fire department employee is paid for by some branch of government...city, county, etc. They are all in essence government employees. Like any other city or county employee...like law enforcement. Los Angeles County FD, Orange County FD, they were the most heavily involved in fighting the Malibu fire, I believe. Generally volunteer firefighters are used where the municipalities cannot afford to pay firefighters, or for outlying areas that town firefighters do not cover. So I suppose that means firefighting is socialized anywhere the town, city or county government can afford it...not sure that qualifies as socialized firefighting. They are not universal firefighters all controlled from Washington, so really not similar to what socialized medicine would be. Control is at the local city or county level.
Would like to respond, but need more info....
I have been a bit out of touch the past week or so (looking for a job) and have not heard about Obama's latest remarks regarding sanctions, coalitions and the like. Could you please cite your sources for this information? It sounds like spin to me, but I like to keep open mind. You are right about much food for thought and I would like to enter this discussion once I know where this is coming from.
IMO, the sanctions against Iraq have very little to do with "punishing" Sadaam and more to do with serving US interests in destabilizing the region as a whole, thus facilitating US ambitions of securing and maintaining "oil"igarchy in the Middle East. We have been doing that ever since the late 1940s. Examples abound. Don't get me started.
The Iran sanctions discussion is a moot point. We have imposed sanctions against Iran ever since the Islamic revolution in 1979. Over the years, these have been extended and have become so harsh, there really is nothing left to sanction. This has succeeded in fueling the hatred Islamic extremists hold toward the West and emboldened their leaders, who have been quite resourcesful in bypassing US sanctions by forming alliances with other western and eastern countries.
With regard to "international coalitions" against Iran, I would be more worried about the Bush Administration covert operations as described recently by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/04/17/060417fa_fact) than anything Obama may come up with.
Still, I would be interested in learning more about these remarks you find so troubling.
911 Widows Respond to Coulter
Statement of September 11th Advocates Response to “Godless” For Immediate Release -- June 6, 2006
We did not choose to become widowed on September 11, 2001. The attack, which tore our families apart and destroyed our former lives, caused us to ask some serious questions regarding the systems that our country has in place to protect its citizens. Through our constant research, we came to learn how the protocols were supposed to have worked. Thus, we asked for an independent commission to investigate the loopholes which obviously existed and allowed us to be so utterly vulnerable to terrorists. Our only motivation ever was to make our Nation safer. Could we learn from this tragedy so that it would not be repeated?
We are forced to respond to Ms. Coulter’s accusations to set the record straight because we have been slandered. Contrary to Ms. Coulter’s statements, there was no joy in watching men that we loved burn alive. There was no happiness in telling our children that their fathers were never coming home again. We adored these men and miss them every day.
It is in their honor and memory, that we will once again refocus the Nation’s attention to the real issues at hand: our lack of security, leadership and progress in the five years since 9/11.
We are continuously reminded that we are still a nation at risk. Therefore, the following is a partial list of areas still desperately in need of attention and public outcry. We should continuously be holding the feet of our elected officials to the fire to fix these shortcomings.
1. Homeland Security Funding based on risk. Inattention to this area causes police officers, firefighters and other emergency/first responder personnel to be ill equipped in emergencies. Fixing this will save lives on the day of the next attack.
2. Intelligence Community Oversight. Without proper oversight, there exists no one joint, bicameral intelligence panel with power to both authorize and appropriate funding for intelligence activities. Without such funding we are unable to capitalize on all intelligence community resources and abilities to thwart potential terrorist attacks. Fixing this will save lives on the day of the next attack.
3. Transportation Security. There has been no concerted effort to harden mass transportation security. Our planes, buses, subways, and railways remain underprotected and highly vulnerable. These are all identifiable soft targets of potential terrorist attack. The terror attacks in Spain and London attest to this fact. Fixing our transportation systems may save lives on the day of the next attack.
4. Information Sharing among Intelligence Agencies. Information sharing among intelligence agencies has not improved since 9/11. The attacks on 9/11 could have been prevented had information been shared among intelligence agencies. On the day of the next attack, more lives may be saved if our intelligence agencies work together.
5. Loose Nukes. A concerted effort has not been made to secure the thousands of loose nukes scattered around the world -- particularly in the former Soviet Union. Securing these loose nukes could make it less likely for a terrorist group to use this method in an attack, thereby saving lives.
6. Security at Chemical Plants, Nuclear Plants, Ports. We must, as a nation, secure these known and identifiable soft targets of Terrorism. Doing so will save many lives.
7. Border Security. We continue to have porous borders and INS and Customs systems in shambles. We need a concerted effort to integrate our border security into the larger national security apparatus.
8. Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Given the President’s NSA Surveillance Program and the reinstatement of the Patriot Act, this Nation is in dire need of a Civil Liberties Oversight Board to insure that a proper balance is found between national security versus the protection of our constitutional rights.
###
September 11th Advocates: Kristen Breitweiser Patty Casazza Monica Gabrielle Mindy Kleinberg Lorie Van Auken
Kudo's to you. I was hoping you'd respond
to the tactics of those who try to silence others who don't agree with them.
Mom always told me you don't like the channel change it, you don't have to watch something you don't want to. Same with the posters. If they don't like what you have to say, ignore it and move on.
Life's too short.
Glad you can laugh....I should know better than to respond to you...nm
I hesitate to respond to this because I'm an Independent and see good and bad
in both liberals and conservatives.
Believe it or not, liberal/independent people can be pro choice, believe in God, love America, would like to see all nations free, and most of all, supports our troops.
First of all, we love our country so much that we have respect for the Constitution. Being pro choice or pro life is a direct result of your religious/spiritual beliefs. The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion for ALL people, even those who don’t subscribe to the same religion as YOU. The concept of when life begins relies 100% on religious beliefs. If I believe that life begins at the moment of conception, then the best way I can honor my God my religion is to not ever have an abortion. What I DON’T believe is that I have the right to impose my religious beliefs on every American in this country via laws. If I do that, I’m infringing on THEIR religious beliefs. The same hold true for stem cell research. If you don’t believe in it, then don’t participate in it. But don’t prevent others who don’t agree with you from reaping the life-saving benefits it may offer. In fact, some of us might think those against this research are anti-life, rather than pro-life, since they don’t seem to care at all about saving the people who are already here. A reasonable person of any faith might ask why in the world God gave us the technology if he/she didn’t want us to use it.
We further believe in the Constitution’s promise that we have freedom of speech. There is no doubt in my mind that you were surrounded by pro Bush people at a pro Bush rally. Were you actually in the same room with President Bush, though? You may have been. I, on the other hand, would never be allowed to attend one of his "town hall" meetings because he prescreens people and doesn’t let anyone in who doesn’t agree with him or might challenge him. Some of us would definitely think this is a very anti-American practice.
As far as other moral values are concerned, I personally don’t believe in lying. My personal God doesn’t care for that very much, either. The entire world was lied to by President Bush concerning the war in Iraq. What’s much worse than that is that he used the tragedy of 9/11 to propagate a war against the leader of a country that wasn’t associated with 9/11 in any way. He used the vast support he received during the Afghanistan invasion after 9/11 to achieve the goal he had before he was even elected President: To declare war against Saddam Hussein. He did this on the blood and backs of every victim of the Twin Towers attack. My personal God really has contempt for that kind of behavior.
As far as getting rid of God "from the publics views," I have yet to hear of one church/synagogue/mosque or other public religious building being shut down by a liberal. Liberals have EQUAL respect for all religions and are against one particular religion receiving favor over another. To bring Jesus’ name into the political arena or an arena paid for by the tax dollars of everyone diminishes other religious beliefs. There are people whose religious beliefs don’t include Jesus, and some liberals see the "My God is better than your God" game to be very dangerous in a country that claims to provide freedom of religion for all.
Finally, regarding our troops: Nobody has more respect for our troops than I do. It’s the President who seems to have no respect. The difference between me and President Bush is that I place much more value on each of their lives. I would never be so reckless with the lives of our children as to send them into an unplanned war, refuse to provide them with adequate equipment to fight that war and protect themselves, and lie to them about their release dates in order to hold them hostage. For several months in a row now, the military has failed to reach their recruitment quotas, which is no surprise to me. I want our troops to come home, ALIVE AND WELL, and that is a direct result of the respect I have for him all. Their lives should not be sacrificed casually for a false reason. Their lives should only be on the line when we are protecting ourselves from a direct threat. Perhaps if Bush cared enough about this country 30-some years ago and served combat duty in Vietnam, he would have more respect for our troops. But his wealth and privilege came to his rescue, and he was able to wiggle out of it. He never had to know firsthand what it’s like to wake up every morning (if indeed you’re that lucky) to wonder if this day is going to be your last. Perhaps if he did, he’d have more respect for our troops today.
Everyone supported the President when he sent troops to Afghanistan after 9/11. Unfortunately, we can’t leave Iraq right now. Bush "broke it," and now WE are MORALLY obligated to fix it. God only knows when that will happen. It’s not, as he and his cronies promised in the beginning, going to be a quick war, and contrary to what he declared in his well-planned photo op, "Mission Accomplished" by a long shot. The terrorists must figure that the odds are pretty good in their favor if only ONE suicide bomber can kill multiple people, Americans and Iraqis, in a single hit. And they’re not going away. They’re only getting stronger all the time because Bush created a haven for them in Iraq. So much for respecting our troops. And how are we going to "fix" the mess he made in Iraq when we simply run out of troops because young people refuse to enlist because they’ve lost faith in him and don’t trust our government any more? He promised he wouldn’t impose a draft. If/when he ultimately DOES impose it, I think a GREAT photo op for him would be when he accompanies Jenna and Barbara as they enlist. I don’t think I’ll hold my breath for that one.
Did you know that part of the Iraq war budget includes a comprehensive health care plan for every Iraqi citizen? I personally think it's very immoral for a President to take care of others in another country when his own Americans are in the midst of such a health care crisis.
He’s apparently too concerned about "spreading freedom" all over the world to guarantee that same freedom is safe from peril here at home. I recently heard that al Qaeda is now joining drug lords from Central America to cross our carelessly unprotected borders and enter the country. They figured out they can do this successfully because their complexions are similar, and they can easily pass as someone of Latin descent. There is a myriad of other things this President should have done to make this country safer. But he’s too busy obsessing on his personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein. If he had put 1/100th of the effort into finding Osama bin Laden, we would have captured him by now. If he had put 1/100th of the effort into taking precautions concerning nuclear plants and other entities in this country, we actually WOULD be safer today.
Just because someone has tolerance and respect for all religious beliefs; perhaps has his or her own style of respect and support for our troops by wanting to keep them alive and using their service carefully, thoughtfully, and judiciously; believes a person already born and living in this country is a citizen and that an embryo isn’t; believes that we should clean up our own country before trying to clone more like it all over the world; and believes that the Constitution should be the written document that is relied upon to form laws and that religious documents should be left to churches and other houses of worship, doesn’t mean he or she doesn’t love this country, doesn’t believe in God, doesn’t have morals, isn’t a good person and doesn’t have values, and, most importantly, doesn’t support our troops.
The fact that you seem to think it does and would even ask that question, though, makes me wonder somewhat about you.
Just a hint. Next time respond to a post,
read it first.
This isn't about the ACLU, or an agency LIKE the ACLU.
I think you would be hard pressed to find a liberal who agrees with NAMBLA or any organization like them that is in favor of sexual exploitation of children. I don't think prison is even good enough for them. I think they should get the death penalty.
Maybe if you would have actually taken the time to READ the post, you would see it has nothing to do with your response.
Oh, before you call me a liar. I did respond to the flat tax,
but I brought my responses back here.
You didn't respond to Yepper's post.
I don't feel the need to make the choice. It's a child, not a choice. n/t
I am unable to respond to leaps in "logic" that
rasberries
I made a mistake and was trying to respond to the post below by *LOL* when I wrote that.
in the article you posted, nor did I see the word *impeach* anywhere in the article.
I agree with your comments and with the article you referred to, and I understood the comments of LOL to mean that the article was responding to some sort of "talking points" and using the word impeach often, when in fact, it can't be found once in that article.
As far as impeaching Bush, I believe time will tell. I personally believe he's guilty of war crimes, and that his war will be judged to be illegal before the end of his "reign as King of the USA." (if we all manage to survive that long).
The mere fact that he led us into this war based on lies should be enough to impeach him.
If I offended you, then I truly apologize. I agree with you and I'm glad you posted this article. I surely wouldn't have referred you back to the very article you obviously read and posted and tell you to educate yourself, and in no way, shape or form do I believe you are ignorant; far from it.
If you posted the LOL statement below, then I apologize for misunderstanding what you meant by it.
I made a mistake when posting my post, and instead of winding up under the intended post, it wound up under yours instead. Again, I'm sorry if I offended you.
LOL! Not bright enough to respond intelligently to a wonderfully written
If you know some good democratic blog sites, please respond to this post with the links. nm
Thanks.
repeat - sm
If checking the adoption records is part of the normal background check, then the only reason this is a problem is because the media is making it one.
Again, and I repeat. sm
This is NOT how MJF is every day! I thought I explained this above. I am not diminishing the disease. My mother-in-law died of it a year and a half ago. It's a terrible disease. But he controls much of the symptoms with medication, which he did not take, or so the word was last night. Now I am reading that he actually had overmedicated himself. Now, having said that, you have proved my point about apologies. I didn't hear anyone on the left mentioning when the famous leftie Ben Affleck, made fun of people with cerebral palsy. He never apologized either, that I know of. But, of course, that's different. It's only bad when conservatives do it. It's bad all the way around, I say.
repeat after me
fair and balanced . . . fair and balanced . . . fair and balanced . . . obama is a muslim . . . economy is fundamentally strong . . . fair and balanced . . .
Anything.... I repeat - ANYTHING! is better
Biggest embarrassment this country has ever had in office. Time for Retardo to HIT THE ROAD.
Let me repeat myself
Because you're not getting it.
"Where did I say in my post to watch Fox News"
Where??? It didn't.
"Better to stay silent and remain a food, then to speak and remove all doubt" - Benjamin Franklin
Looks like I have to repeat AGAIN -
Snopes.com is not a credible site to verify truths/falses. They have been noted time and time again to say something is false when it's true and vice versa. It is a site run by two very liberal people. So if I go and create a website with a relative of mine and we put up a bunch of false claims as long as it veers in the positive towards the viewpoint we like your going to start telling us that we are credible? I don't think so. If you want to believe Snopes, then you might as well tell people to go read it in the National Inquirer, Star or any of those other sites you can access on line.
Here's a repeat one more time for those that do not get it.... do not come back here and tell us that something is truth or fiction because it said so on Snopes. Research many many sites. Do not judge things just by a liberal or a conservative site. Read, read, read and judge for yourselves. Find out who is behind these websites and what agenda are they fulfilling. Then make up your mind.
I could care less that the article has to say right now. What I am telling you and others is that Snopes has been wrong about many issues time and time again. Do not believe them, or if you do pull up their site pull up other sites as well to verify information, but don't come here and try and tell us something is or is not true because Snopes said it was or wasn't. Okay, got it now???
I'm not judging. All I did was repeat what she herself said.
I don't wrap myself in the Bible and the flag and justify my actions by saying that Jesus doesn't care if I act like a hateful person because he forgives me for every single thing I do, giving me free rein to act like a thug. I take responsibility for my own actions.
I repeat...have as much right to be here and post as you do...
And until this becomes Venezuela North, I will exercise it. You can have all the opinions you want, and so can anyone else, along as they agree with you. If you have issues that are important to you, post them, defend them....don't spend so much time trying to silence me and put forth those issues that you are concerned about. No one is stopping you from doing that.
Will history repeat?
If Senator McCain is elected, wonder what excuses will be used to keep him away from the convention in 2012?
I repeat....there was no surplus...
that was just clever use of word. It was a "projected" surplus, and it was contingent upon a cap on federal spending for 15 years, and no added federal programs. There was no real "surplus" sitting around.
Mea culpa on the borrowing. I have already said Bush spent like a drunken sailor. Spending needs to be curbed. Neither candidate is willing to say what I think needs to be done...no more new programs and stop the ones that are not working. When we get back in the "black" again, then we can look at increasing programs. Throwing more money at stuff is obviously not the answer.
again why do i have to repeat this over and over WHO SAID IM CHRISTIAN!
IVE NEVER said that and in fact in my first post said "not all people against gay marriage are christian".
sacred to me means something i believe strongly in no matter what "faith" has to do with it, sorry you have nothing like that
Then I repeat...why doesn't your guy....
the prez candidate on the other ticket...go to a venue where actual Americans ask the actual questions and communicate with "us" directly??
Could you repeat the question?
Cause I can see Russia over there and they aren't too happy about having to loan Iceland money I can tell ya.
GP - how many times do we have to repeat
It is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and is funded by the Annenberg Foundation. Obama, Bill Ayers, and Factcheck.org all have ties to the Annenberg Foundation.
Obama has ties to Factcheck.org. In 1995 Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Annenberg Chicago Challenge - A branch of the Annenberg Foundation.
Factcheck.org is part of the Annenberg Foundation. Factcheck was also chosen by the Obama campaign as the arbitrar of Obama's birth certificate.
Anyone can put two and two together and see that Obama and The Annenberg Foundation pays Factcheck.org to put out the false information.
Factcheck claims it has "verified" the O's bc, but other sites has found several inconsistencies which call into question whether the certificate is authentic.
Before you tell anyone they should quit reading blogs that have any useful information, you should not be citing a website that is clearly misleading people and feeding them false information, and that is paid for by the Annenberg Foundation which = Obama.
Disregard this repeat.
x
I repeat - take it offline if you want to
Otherwise, any post on this board is fair game for anyone to read and reply to.
...and how could I have guessed that an individual's qualifications to post on a particular topic (in this case, terrorism, 9/11 and related intelligence matters) would be meaningless to you? Well, because you've already proven that you're the kind who's invited to a steak dinner and prefers to eat out of the garbage can.
If you can repeat yourself a zillion times..
Hearings where grounds for impeachment are the only topic of discussion are accurately referred to as imjpeachment hearings. Your attempts to distract do not change anything. The issues and evidence are up there for you to read. The links are provided. Dennis Kucinich can do this better than any of them. Watch the CSPAN interview and then come back and tell me there's nothing there.
This video is propaganda. Repeat...
nm
Oh I see....just drive by and repeat the same opinions over and over.
Thank you for clarifying that for me.
Repeat: DNC phenomenal success.
nm
Yes I have. I repeat, he is a patriotic American first..sm
I also think that McCain is a patriotic American and have no desire to stomp on him and drag him through the mud just because he is not what I want for president.
Brainwashed. Rinse. Repeat.
xx
Whew - guess it's not a repeat then.
I don't always keep up with this board, but I thought this was interesting.
She did not repeat O's words, but that is is plan.
nm
I see he couldn't even repeat the oath...
of office without it being repeated for him twice. Get the teleprompters ready!
"Socialism!" Boo, Hiss, Repeat......
The government pays for police departments, other law enforcement agencies and the military, so I guess we have socialized security. The government pays for public schools, so I guess we have socialized education.
The government pays for cleaning the streets and waste disposal, so I guess we have socialized sanitation. With any luck, someday, the government will take on the responsibility of truly providing health care for everyone in the country, so I guess if that’s socialized medicine, I can hardly wait.
If conservative Republicans are trying to make a fear of socialism their rallying cry to upset the Obama administration’s efforts to deal with our economic crisis, that pitiful effort will only make them look even more ridiculous in the eyes of the general public.
Michael Spielman
"Socialism!" Boo, Hiss, Repeat......
The government pays for police departments, other law enforcement agencies and the military, so I guess we have socialized security. The government pays for public schools, so I guess we have socialized education.
The government pays for cleaning the streets and waste disposal, so I guess we have socialized sanitation. With any luck, someday, the government will take on the responsibility of truly providing health care for everyone in the country, so I guess if that’s socialized medicine, I can hardly wait.
If conservative Republicans are trying to make a fear of socialism their rallying cry to upset the Obama administration’s efforts to deal with our economic crisis, that pitiful effort will only make them look even more ridiculous in the eyes of the general public.
Michael Spielman
Will this then be a repeat of Sodom and Gomorrha?....nm
nm
To answer this I would only repeat my prior statements..nm
|