Then maybe you should stick to facts, substance and issues
Posted By: But you don't on 2009-01-18
In Reply to: Garbage out, garbage in. - You want a toxic-free forum?
The liberals attack those who do not agree with them. And it's not attacks on issues or facts it's personal name calling attacks.
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
please stick to the issues
x
Can we please stick to issues
And not come here to start a fight. I see a lot of issues being talked about below, and then we have the messages put out evidently to begin a fight with the "you republicans".
I want to hear about health care issues, TARP, job loss, Iran, and other issues affecting my life. Not the rantings of lunatics who want to instigate something.
For all those who are "you republicans" there are equal who are "you democrats".
Issues people, issues.
Cant' you stick to issues and not personally attack
Bwaaaahaaaaahaaaaa.
Yeah...almost asridiculous as yours, I admit...so shall we cease and desist and stick to real issues
nm
Oh please, spare the drama and stick to facts.
g
Nice post. Stick to the facts and away from...
the "opinion" pieces for your information. Watch the pundits and commentators for entertainment. lol.
Facts, stick to the facts...sm
The subject here is the media and their treatment of Gov. Palin, which continues to this day, to this minute, by the liberal left.
Tthe media threw down their gauntlet as soon as she was picked on that Friday, and hounded her for almost a full week.
And you think she should have waved a white flag at them in her acceptance speech? She put them on notice, that she is above them. And continues to be, with grace and style.
She's not whining, and neither are we.
I just shake my head at your audacity.
The media is the one that started this with her, and you would do well to remember the facts in her case.
Issues people, issues. I need issues
I'm not seeing any discussion about issues. Can we stick to the issues. Jeeze - I want to hear good and bad about both candidates but with facts to back whatever is being said.
P-L-E-A-S-E.....I want issues. How can I make any kind of determinatons about who I'm going to vote for if I don't hear about the issues. Reading some of this I'm thinking I'd get more truth if I read the National Enquirer.
what substance
I don't see any substance in McCain at all.
Do you have anything of substance to say?
fu
nothing of substance to say so..
you attack the poster. Is that how we are supposed to use this board?
Substance of course being in lockstep
with you. Do you not see that as many talking points, right-wing quotes and such are seen on the conservative side as you purport are on the left. You guys talk a lot of right-wing recycled trash as you say we do left. Siiiiiiiigh.
This was an add with no substance or "facts.."
just a bunch of innuendo and although I am not voting for Obama and am concerned about the "connection," I applaud Fox for not running the ad. I have not seen it, but if Fox chose not to run it they must think there is not much truth to that particular ad. You can still research on the internet, and a bunch of papers were just released from Columbia University that might shed some light on the relationship, and Fox will cover that.
All that being said...people attack Fox all the time for being one-sided (which they are not, there are more two-sided than ANY other outlet), but choosing not to air this ad should send a message to people that while they are the most conservative network, they do hear the other side and they are fair.
Anything of substance she's reading from the
She is very nervous obviously.
Got a whole lot more going in the substance department
his campaign jumping from one smear to the next, lurching around trying to find his trajectory, running from the issue of the economy ("is not my strong suit and if we talk about it, we'll lose), has yet to come up with a coherent campaign theme except the change slogan he highjacked fromm Obama and cannot articulate one single sentence on the subject of how he would handle his 90% self any differently than the shrub.
Speaking of substance, Sally, that is what your
nm
your post has no political substance either
nm
If you want to vote personality over policy and substance
nm
Palin is substance, if that's what you're referring to!
x
O is "just words, just speeches", little substance.
nm
Thats good cos dems give no substance to
the conversations here. Just attacks at those who don't agree with them. Take a look at all the postings. Its the dems going after the republicans.
No big loss. That poster added nothing of substance and sounded like he/she is a
troll from the conservative board. 
Facts are facts - sorry you don't like it cos it doesn't support your candidate
You can't change facts. That's what makes them facts. You may not like it but that's the way it is.
Facts are facts. No bash intended.
It will be this stellar record from which voters will be assessing her and her running mate.
If you're offended, too bad. Facts are facts...
I know Muslims in this country who have turned from the hateful evil beliefs that were forced down their throats. They did not have the freedom to learn anything else growing up. But after they gained their freedom and came here, they were able to receive the Word of God and they have told me that NEVER were they taught anything about loving others, just other Muslims, and that the God they learned about spoke of nothing but killing and hate... so if Obama is receiving large donations from those middle eastern countries, as you say, and he is grounded in Muslim culture, being taught this in school for years as a child, do you honestly think he doesn't carry some of those beliefs with him? He's never denounced it.
Here ya go.........
http://bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm
stating facts folks, just the facts....if it's getting
xx
Folks want facts, you give'm facts and still
xx
This poster wants facts, facts, facts...
xx
Poster wants facts, facts, facts.....
xx
Yes, better stick with
your characature of Obama because it always makes sense to take something and run with it.
Have to stick up for him already...nm
//
Stick around
I got a million of 'em. I'M HERE ALL WEEK, FOLKS! Be sure to tip your waitress!
Just stick it to grandma,
that there medication..she's a fakin'..we'll slash her Medicare benefits! 'Sides we can always borrow more money from China..uh,what's his name? Oh and we'll let the grandkids pay....Huh? What deficit? Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and the war? Bake sales! Doin' a heckuva job! Just keep dem hands off doze tax cuts! 'Scuse me, gotta do more speechifyin' 'bout what a good job I'm doin'. {{{smirk}}}}
Ah, the Bush way...good plan. It would be funny if it wasn't so freakin' pathetic. Heaven help us.
Take this website and stick it
you know where. We all know PUBS are the ones who cheat. Please, what is wrong with you, really???
I will stick up for Sam, too. -not a bully.
nm
So I should stick myself in a room
and never go anywhere because it's everyone's right to display sex drugs and violence everywhere? Where is my right to live in a society that doesn't bombard us day and night with those lifestyles?
The least you could do is stick to the subject...(sm)
As far as how I could vote for Obama after 911. Well, probably because he won't go running all over the middle east starting illegal wars in the name of fighting his "the axis of evil." My guess is once he straightens out Bush's mess, which is a job all by itself, he'll do what this country needs him to do -- restore credibility.
Did you stick your tongue out at me too?
x
I will stick with my moniker...
Liberal, Pro-Choice, Agnostic.
Nah....I think I'll stick to the ones...(sm)
who would encourage violence. Maybe Hannity -- which violent revolution would you pick was the question on his website. How about Glenn Beck? How many people have been killed because of him now? Loved the gas can circus show, BTW. And then there's Limpbog -- the defacto leader of the pub party. 
because conservatives stick to the old,
boring stuff and it is the independents and liberals that breathe fresh air into life.
I think he should stick to his speech writers.
I can't hardly believe something as potentially volatile was discussed amongst that staff before he let that one go! Personally, I think its nothing more than a diversion to get people thinking and talking about something other than the war in Iraq.
Enough. Stick the with political discussions..
If your posts are directed towards posters and NOT a political issue or discussion, you will be banned. We've asked nicely, we've posted it on here.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE, just stop the childish behavior of attacking people on this board.
...except for all those straight-laced, stick-up-their
@rses republican biddies. They think anyone who isn't just like them is a witch. Sometimes it feels like Salem all over again.
OK. You stick with equating O with satan and
Like I said before. Gloom and doom does not seem to be working for the camp.
Sorry, Tech - but why don't you stick up for yourself with these no-nothing harpies? nm
NM
Where's my dead horse beating stick???
The US went to war with Iraq for a number of reasons, including concern over Saddam's failure to account for WMDs, which put him in violation of the treaty that ended Gulf War I, and violation of several UN resolutions - I can never remember if it was 14 or 17.
If you really want an answer to this question, a search for the resolution permitting use of force in Iraq should be relatively easy. I'm not sure it's worthwhile, though, since the matter is essentially moot, since we are there now.
My question to you: There is a lot of discussion lately about possibly increasing troop levels in Iraq to try to bring the security situation under control. What are your thoughts on that? Do you support it? Would you support it if you could be persuaded that there was a reasonable possibility of success?
Personally, I'm a bit ambivalent. I don't have a problem supporting more troops, but I think it's as much a PC problem as a troop number problem in Iraq. In other words, I don't think US forces can do much to bring security to Iraq if they are forced to always act in the most P.C. manner possible so as not to risk offending any single faction or, heaven forbid, creating negative spin in the press.
I certainly think we could be effective there in securing the country, but only if we realize that we might have to leave a heavy footprint in Iraq in order to accomplish that goal. For example, I think we should have taken out al Sadr, even if it meant leveling significant portions of Sadr City, when he first became a major underming influence to the new Iraqi government. Some may think that makes me a flag-waving member of the Death Squad, but I have to wonder how many lives could have been spared in the long run had we stamped al Sadr out then, when we had a good tactical opportunity and could have done so fairly easily.
If we're going to send our troops over there in harm's way to fight for the security of Iraq, the dream of democracy, and the creation of a competing vision for the future of the Middle East, then we must let them fight to win.
RW should stick to comedy and leave politics out
I saw him interviewed on the Graham Norton show. He was about drooling at the mere mention of the name Obama. His eyes glazed over and you could almost see him enter a trance. I like RW as a comedian very much. Funny as anything and I will LMAO at his comedy routines, but when he starts interjecting his opinion of politics, well lets just say he should stick to comedy and funny voices. That's what he does best. I do agree with the poster who said "another ignorant celebrity". Many of them are ignorant about the issues. 98% of the Hollyweird people live in their own little world and don't know what it's like to live in the real world like we do. But they think because they have millions, live in mansions, and that their fans worship the ground they walk on they are more knowledgeable about politics. Unfortunately because RW spouts off at the mouth with his little knowledge of politics, it really ruins it if he acts in a movie. Very similar to Tom Cruise and his Scientology taking over his life. Doesn't make me want to watch any of his movies.
Your stick-up-your-butt rigidity and intolerance -
What goes around, comes around, and people who think with their retentive anuses instead of their minds, usually get what's coming to them in the end. So if that's the thinking and the politics you align with, then I'm just so very happy for you.
You've been spouting off for weeks with reams and reams of copied and linked material that you think was written by God himself. You criticise every post that suggests that the poster is of another party, or even that they are open to ideas other than YOURS.
And the REALLY sad thing is, you actually think that what you write actually MATTERS, and that people listen to what you say and think, and that they actually care. Well know what? Most people on here don't give a flying F_ _ K what you think.
I agree. It's like a sharp stick in the eye, but it's important to
nm
I stick by my statement - doesn't make it right
And the lady who set fire to him is just as bad as he is.
|
