This is NOT true - I challenge you to prove it- see message
Posted By: Kaydie on 2008-11-12
In Reply to: I think you have it backwards, backwards typist! - sm
You show me one post by republicans that are "despicable racial slurs". Are you that same person that acused me of being a racist and told me I posted racist things and when I challenged you to show me one post that I made that was racist, you just kept screaming at me I was a racist then when I pointed out I was black you stopped? So I will challenge you again. You show us. Everytime a conservative, independent, or republican posts an article they want to share that does not favor Obama they are immediately bashed and called names (I should know!). I've seen too many of it. There have even been posts by democrats trying to stir the pot and calling us rabid and just posting negative posts against republican, conservative and independent posters for absolutely no reason. If your going to say we post despicable racial slurs I hope your going to back it up and prove it.
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
I don't have to prove anything. Those of us who were here know it to be true. nm
How true that is -see message
Who doesn't love Maxine. She's a kick and right on about a lot of things.
However, right now I would for once in my lifetime like to see someone as president who is competent and really works for the people. I'm sick to death of it being filled with rich lawyers, oil tycoons, etc. And I don't care how old the constitution is. We need to have a US President that was actually born in the US. Heck why not next time just elect Khadafi, Akmandinijob, or any one of those.
I'm just sick of being lied to by the candidates so we will vote for them, and then once they get in they do whatever they want and break their promises to us, then basically turn around and say "I'm gonna screw you, so what. What are you gonna do about it".
This is true, but the message and the percentages sm
are getting to the powers that be. The Rocky Mountain News poll mentioned above and the Scripps poll (owned by RMN) made the front page. It was 87% yes, 13% no. I think they have 280,000 subscribers. The Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News are #1 and #2 papers in Colorado, definitely a red state.
we could challenge them
Since we have history on our side and the #s to accompany it, we could make a friendly bet with these utopians as to how the tax rate will change, etc. It'll all play out (perish that thought)!
Did you hear Rush today on his show or when he was on with Greta? He pointed out some very valid things about O and his desire to hold up the war in Iraq until Jan. What he's proposing is unconstitutional. He wrote an op-ed in the WSJ (Friday), which is no doubt on his w/s. I got the link for it when I got my "Rush In A Hurry" for the day, which gets sent out after his show and before his site gets completely updated to reflect the contents of his show.
BTW, I purposely put Rush into this mix. He just makes the libs crazy! All I can say to them is "temper, temper!"
I would like to challenge you
Tell me which one of my posts below comments on Obama's race, and that I'm not voting for him because he's black. Where have I called him a black man or made any reference to his race? Prove it to me and I'll admit I was wrong. Yes, I have said he plays the race card because he does play it. That is not a racist remark, that is just a fact. I've said insistently over and over I don't care what color he is. I never compared him to Adolf Hitler. I posted articles of people who have, but I have never compared him to Hitler and I challenge you again to show me the post where I said he was like Adolf Hitler.
How can you be a racist against a black if you are black???? I don't need to explain my ethnicity to you. Are you assuming because I don't write like a black person I am white. That right there is racist to me. Know someone else who doesn't talk like a black person? Michelle Obama. And tell me are all the other blacks who aren't voting for Obama racists because they aren't voting for him. There are plenty out there.
I don't "hate" McCain. I just am not happy we didn't get a different republican in there to run. And I don't "hate" Obama. I just think he is not qualified and is the worst possible candidate on the democrats side. If the right qualified person was running on the democratic side I'd vote for them (I voted for B. Clinton the first time), and if the right republican person had won I'd consider voting for them. But I don't like either and I'm not voting.
I've said before and I'll say it again. I think Obama is okay, he's a good looking man, dresses nicely, has a beautiful wife and 2 cute daughters, but then again I don't vote for someone because of the way they look or dress or their fancy talk, I vote for them because of their policies and experience.
So please, be my guest and tell me which one of my posts did I make any remark about Obama being black. If I said something derogatory against him because of his race I'll eat my words. I highly doubt it though (as my mama says "I'll slap the snot out of you")
And as for Casper the Friendly Ghost. No I wouldn't vote for him but am sure he has been registered as a democrat.
I believe the challenge was to ask someone....(sm)
who lives in a place with universal health care what they think of it. Michael Moore did this. What republican has ever done this? Wonder why.....
I believe the challenge was for you to ask someone...
I am a republican and I have. The answer was not favorable. Of course, I'm no Michael Moore (thank God). For people who demand that references used are not conservative, I sure see a lot of liberal citations.
I responded to the challenge in the OP.
I have responded to this by adding comments to each item. Don't need to check my facts. I already researched my points the first time around. I put them out there the way I see it. Items 1 through 8 occurred prior to 1995 under a democratic majority Congress. Number 9 was a cooperative international initiative that played out in UN International Tribunal and did not involve direct participation by the US congress. A lengthy explanation by way of disclaimer appears in #10. Numbers 11 and 13 have no comment as I am certain the republicans would like to take all the credit for those. Bill Clinton went against his own party's best efforts to oppose numbers 11 and 13 and did employ line vetoes to them or otherwise obstruct these laws. He signed them into law. That's all I was trying to say, in response to the challenge from the original poster
1. Family and Medical Leave Act.
2. Established web-based information and communication systems in the White House, federal agencies, US Courts and military.
3. Brady Bill requiring background checks on handgun purchase.
4. Expansion of earned income credit.
5. Balanced the budget.
6. Cut taxes for low-income families.
7. Cut taxes for small business.
8. Restricted government spending.
9. In cooperation with NATO, Slobodan Milosevic convicted for crimes against humanity for ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavian Republic.
10. Communications Decency Act to regulate pornography on the Internet.
11. Welfare reform.
12. Increased minimum wage.
Defense of Marriage Act (right-wingers ought to love that one).
13. Maintained high approval ratings throughout his presidency, leaving office with record-breaking 73% approval ratings IN SPITE OF unsuccessful impeachment proceedings.
14. Booming economy.
15. Creation of $559 billion budget surplus.
So what exactly are you trying to say…that Bill Clinton had absolutely nothing to do with any legislative initiatives that transpired after the so-called Republican revolution in 1995? Looks like trying to hog the spotlight to me.
Why is it such a challenge for conservatives to
and take personal responsibility for their actions and their consequences? This has nothing to do with libs. It has everything to do with the connections between racial, bigoted hate speech, violence, crime and cold-blooded murder.
Not bashing, not going to challenge, just have question...
you say Obama talks about the things that mean the most to your family...what are those things? You say he has what it takes to bring the country together...can you be more specific? What is it that he has that makes you believe he can bring the country together? Thanks.
Reply to pub challenge to show O's
This is posted in response to pub spin that would assert SP is better qualified to lead the country because of O's lack of experience. Of special note are the numerous foreign relations committee diplomatic initiatives listed below. Of course, I would be interested in any comparable experience SP may have that the pubs can produce. I have saved this post and will be using it in reply to any similar assertions made by pubs in the future whenever I encounter them. Hope format is not too seedy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama
In Illinois senate O Worked to get BIPARTISAN support on legislation on:
1. Ethics reform.
2. Health care reform.
3. Sponsored bills for earned income tax credits for low-income workers.
4. Provisions for $100 million in tax cuts to families.
5. Provisions for early childhood education.
6. Welfare reform.
7. Childcare subsidies.
8. Funding for churches and community groups.
9. Chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee.
10. Instituted requirement for transparent videotaped police interrogations of suspects in capitol cases after a number of death row inmates were found innocent.
11. Measures against racial profiling.
12. Campaign finance reform.
13. Restrictions on lobbyists activities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama
In US Senate:
1. Senate Committee (SC) on Foreign Relations.
2. SC on Health.
3. SC on Health.
4. SC on Labor and Pensions.
5. SC on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
6. SC on Veterans' Affairs.
7. Member of Congressional Black Caucus.
8. Chairman of the Subcommitte on European Affairs.
9. Border security and Immigration reform. Cosponsor "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act introduced by JM.
10. Added 3 amendments to the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act.
11. Supported Secure Fence Act for security improvements along US-Mexico border.
12. Cosponsored Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006.
13. Introduced expansions to Cooperative Threat Reduction Program to secure and dismantle weapons of mass destruction and their associated infrastructure in former Soviet Union states.
14. Sponsor of Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security and Democracy Promotion Act, signed by Bush, to restore basic services like clinics and schools, train a professional, integrated and accountable police force and military, and otherwise support the Congolese in protecting their human rights and rebuilding their nation.
15. As member of Foreign Relations Committee, he made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa. His 2005 trip to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan focus on strategy planning for the control of world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons and WMDs and defense against potential terrorist attacks.
16. January 2006, met with US military in Kuwait and Iraq. Visited Jordan, Israel and Palestinian territories. Asserted preconditions that US will never recognize legitimacy of Hamas leadership until they renounce elimination of Israel.
17. August 2006, official trip to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad where he made televised appearance addressing ethnic rivalries and corruption in Kenya.
18. Worked on Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, signed into law, to eliminate gifts of travel on corporate jets by lobbyists to members of Congress and require disclosure of bundled campaign contributions.
19. Cosponsored bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections to include fraudulent flyers and automated phone calls.
20. Cosponsored climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050.
21. Promoted liquefied coal production of gas and diesel.
22. Introduced Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007 to cap troop levels as prelude to phased troop withdrawal and removal of all combat brigades.
23. Cosponsored amendment to Defense Authorization Act safeguarding personality disorder military discharges.
24. Sponsored Iran Sanctions Enabling Act in support of divestment of state pensions funds from Iran's oil and gas industry.
25. Introduced legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism., provisions of which were added as amendments to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.
26. Sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance program providing one-year job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries, which passed both houses of Congress with bipartisan support but was ultimately vetoed by fearless George.
Obama has been told this challenge will not
--
I challenge you to find any reference in any of
my posts referring to Barack Obama as a messiah. Just one more example of the vicious twisting of words done by your ilk to suit your own agenda.
Lamont Says He'll Challenge Lieberman..sm
March 13, 2006
Saying voters deserve a choice and reiterating his opposition to the Iraq war, Ned Lamont (D) formally said today that he will challenge Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) for the Democratic nomination this year, the AP reports. Lamont will be Lieberman's first opponent from within the party during his three terms in the Senate. Lamont hopes to garner support from Connecticut Democrats dissatisfied with Lieberman's pro-war stance and his perceived closeness with President Bush's administration.
No, I challenge you to show me mean, narrow minded,
shallow, pure hatred from the reps to the dems on this board.
I think you libbies have it won down pat. Same on other boards, not just this one.
And for that matter, show me anywhere, that same degree of "hatred" toward Obama, that is now being shown to Gov. Palin.
I don't mean mere dislike, or spoof of his lack of anything, either. I mean the hatred.
Republicans don't act that way. But if they have, please give me an example, please.
Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/23/AR2008102302081.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Duo take Obama birth challenge to Court
Wow, I believe we have some sore losers!
From NBC’s Pete Williams
When the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court meet on Dec. 5th, in their regular private conference to decide which cases to hear, two lawsuits that have captivated a segment of the blogosphere will be up for discussion.
Both urge the court to consider claims that President-elect Obama is not qualified to be president, because he is not a natural-born American citizen.
Persistent concerns about the qualifications of both major party candidates rank among the oddest aspects of 2008's historic campaign.
Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides that "No person except a natural born citizen" is eligible to be president. John McCain's status was questioned because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone and various theories have been advanced to cast doubt on Obama's.
Lawsuits over the inclusion of their names on state general-election ballots popped up around the country and were quickly dispensed with by local courts. But two challengers have pursued their cases to the Supreme Court.
Pennsylvania lawyer Philip Berg claims that the circumstances of Obama's birth are vague and that he may have been born in Kenya. Obama's mother, Berg asserts, later flew to Hawaii to register the birth.
Leo Donofrio, a New Jersey lawyer, contends that election officials in his state failed to ensure that only legally qualified candidates were placed on the ballot. Obama may have been born in the United States, Donofrio argues, but "natural born" status depends on both parents being American citizens. Obama's father was Kenyan.
The justices are unlikely to take up these cases for a host of reasons, not the least of which is the invitation to overturn the results of an election in which more than 66 million Americans voted for Obama. An equally high hurdle is the issue of whether Berg or Donofrio have the legal right to sue claiming a violation of the Constitution.
In dismissing Berg's complaint, a federal judge in Pennsylvania found that he failed to meet the basic test required for sustaining a lawsuit, because he couldn't show how the inclusion of Obama's name on the ballot would cause him -- apart from others -- some particular harm. Berg's stake, the judge said, "is no greater and his status no more differentiated than that of millions of other voters."
Other courts presented with similar challenges have reached the same conclusion, ruling that there is no general legal right to sue over the Constitution's eligibility requirements. Federal courts typically reject claims of legal standing based simply on a litigant's status as a voter or taxpayer.
The Obama campaign had hoped to end the controversy last spring by releasing his actual Hawaii birth certificate. But that prompted further questions about its authenticity, which were compounded when state authorities in Hawaii said they could not vouch for it, because they were constrained by the privacy laws.
Then, on Oct. 31st, the director of Hawaii's Department of Health issued a statement, proclaiming that he had personally seen and verified that the state has "Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record," which shows that he was born there.
The most daunting challenge this country has ever faced? LOL!!!
Wow. You apparently know nothing about US History, do you?
But thanks for the laugh, Chicken Little.
Obama's just another dude in the chair, no matter how much 'celebrity' status you want to endow him with. He'll face challenges like all the other presidents. He'll succeed at some things and fail miserably at others, like all other presidents.
Why is everyone so quick to knight this guy, who hasn't done anything yet but flash his pearly whites at the camera and pump out a bunch of campaign promises?
Here's an idea. Let's let the dude take office before we award him the title of saviour of the planet?
He may be great. He may stink. But you simply can't tell yet. The countdown on this forum just shows how desperate people are to believe their problems are not their fault.
Somewhere in the past century, America went from being the Land of Opportunity to being the Land of the Big Handout. And now Brother Obama is gonna save us from ourselves. Is that right?
Time will tell, Chicken Little.
Time will tell.
I know he has nothing to prove to you....
but to the 48% of us who don't trust him, he does. I will believe it when I see it. There is nothing in his past to indicate he wants to wipe out party lines, unless that means bring us ALL into HIS light. His entire career has been hard left towing the party line. His votes have all been hard left toeing the party line. And now he wants us to believe that all disappears? He has undergone some miraculous change himself? I would feel better if he used the word "compromise" as much as he used the word "unite." All "unite" means to me is that he wants everyone to come to his side. His entire agenda is diametrically opposed to most of what I believe in. How is he going to "unite" people like him and people like me if he doesn't compromise?
Like I said...I am waiting to see what he does. He said himself he had to earn my trust. So far he is not doing so well. That could "change." Only time will tell.
BTW, this is not an attack. It is just my open and honest concerns about the POTUS. Concerns about any POTUS. I would have held McCain's feet to the fire too. He was certainly not my ideal candidate...but he beat the alternative. Now that the alternative has won...he has to prove himself to me and 48% of the country.
prove it.
Where is your proof that satan does not exist? Where is your proof that the Bible is a fairytale? Where is your proof that Jesus doesnt exist? Until you can show me some proof, this is just your opinion and doesnt really mean much or hold any water.
You would have to prove a ............. sm
genetic predisposition for this to be logical. Even if you did prove such a theory, the fact that a person has a particular gene does not necessarily mean that that gene will develop into a behavior.
Prove it
Yes he had to use Air Force 1 I think he and the Secret Service would look a little conspicuous on Continental, don't you? But he paid for everything else himself.
This is such a small, petty argument, I can't even believe you people are talking about it. Oh wait...yes I can....
Prove it
I have not seen one bit of proof that it was taxpayer money. Only Air Force 1 was a government expense and that could not be helped.
Where is your proof?
Then prove I said what you accused me of saying.
Show me the post I wrote where I claimed to have *inside info on rapture. She said so* as you accused me of in your post above. Just copy and paste it and show me where I said I have inside info on the rapture.
You can't prove it because I didn't say it. So who's really the liar here?
What, may I respectfully ask, does this prove?
Lebanon and Israel have a long and colourful history of conflict. I am not quite sure what this letter is meant to prove. Hezbollah has used Lebanese residential areas to set up their missles and attack bases. Israel retaliates for the abduction of their people. But first, they drop leaflets, warning civilians to leave. Really, quite a first for this sort of thing. I'm very sorry, but I, for one, am bloody tired of Israel being made the aggressor here. Hamas and Hezbollah have pounded them nearly to oblivion and all you can worry about is a letter from the Lebanese?! I am astounded.
In Massachusetts we have to prove
we have health insurance when we file our state income taxes. We get a form from insurance company that we have to file. Otherwise you lose your personal exemption. I believe at one point part of the plan was they could garnish your wages but not sure on that.
This is all part of the insurance plan Romney came up with as governor, and he is supposed to be a conservative.
Once again...you prove my point.
liberals are NOT about tolerance. There is nothing but INtolerance in your post...you, my friend, are a bigot. Only it is not a race, it is a belief system. "right wing rags" is NOT an example of tolerance of someone else's viewpoint. It is obvious for anyone who would care to, to see. Attack, attack, attack. If you are not like me, go away. I am not interested in another point of view,nor am I interested in debating any points.
You say equality, you say tolerance, you say no bigotry. Yet you do not tolerate opposition, you want to quell dissent, and you discriminate against conservatives.
Which leaves me with the impression that your lofty ideals are just that. Because you do NOT practice them. NOW I understand what the other liberal poster meant when they posted there are no true liberals in the Democratic party. Amen to that, poster, wherever you are!
Prove to me that it is a rumor!!!
.
Prove to me it is not!! Are you so jaded that you...
can't even give a 16-year-old the benefit of the doubt??
To what end? Prove a communist
nm
DOn't have to prove it....HE SAID IT. Geez...
did you read his letter? And I have been doing more research...you should too. This is not the end of the Saul Alinsky connection.
I am not the one who needs to prove or disprove it....
I accept it on its face. She did what she was supposed to do...look out for the interests of her state. Why would that surprise anyone? And she did a good job of it. Like I said, if she applies that same principle at the federal level, good for us, right?
If you lived in Alaska, wouldn't you want the $1200 as your part of the revenue Alaska oil generated? Or would you rather that was redistributed to the lower 48? Just asking.
cant prove a negative
pure speculation. Not been attacked by little green people from Mars either.
You prove my point. Thank you. nm
nm
don't have to prove a thing
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/6817.html
can you prove that it's a fake?
nm
If they win, it'll prove there's really no God.
.
No he can't but papers are there that prove he was
@
Nope, he has to prove a lot because
He claims to be born in Hawaii, which he cannot prove yet, and then he was adopted by a Kenhan man, which according to their laws, made him Muslim, and a citizen of Kenya. According to OUR laws, he cannot just come back and claim citizenship. He would have had to go through immigration process all over again and there is no immigration papers to find.
Still waiting for his proof.
Even if he could prove citizenship, which he
a citizen once he was adopted by the Indonesian stepfather. Once a child is adopted by someone from another country, they cannot claim citizenship to that country any longer, even if they were born there.
He has yet to produce immigration papers which show he applied for citizenship to this country, just like any "illegal" would have to do.
what do supporters prove?
What do you mean by "He'll make a fine President... He's going to do great and he's got the supporters to prove it." That only means he has people who think he will do well. Can't really say until he is in office and we see what he does. Unless you think all these people can predict the future.
unless you can prove the daddies do it
Unless you were there in the delivery room, I am guessing that his American mother gave birth to him.
you prove my point so well
Hindsight is 20/20. If we would not have allowed millions of people to buy houses that could not afford them, we would not be here. If we would have decided that subprime loans were unstable and that a person should actually be required to be able to pay for what they want and be able to afford what their dream is, we would not be here. America has adopted the mentality somewhere along the way that equality shouldnt be just about race or religion but about everyone having the right to the same things in life. People have a false sense of entitlement. These people that have helped our ecomony fail are the ones who have been living in a manner they should not have been. This starts with the people who can work but dont. The people who feed off of the states and have children for a business but do nothing to give back to the economy. They are takers. It also goes to the CEOs and the loan officers and the banks and all the big guys who have decided that it was okay to make billions off of the people in our society who are sponges and are willing to take any handout given to them, even if it means failure down the road. They have made their fortunues based off of greed and lies. They built us a false ecomony. So if there are no jobs now and no credit to be had, you can thank them. Problem is Obama wants to give to the takers and make us pay, the exact people who have done the right things, lived the way they should within their means, and the very working people who build our ecomony. How is an new, strong economy going to be built off of welfare recipients who have never worked? What economic stimulation are they going to offer? It is simply crazy to me and I cannot see how people refuse to see this.
Hahahahahahaha!!! - PROVE IT!
nm
Ever try to prove a negative?
The government can ''guestimate'' a number and send you a bill for what you ''owe''. Then I guess it's up to you to prove they're wrong? Not an enviable position to be in.
You continue to prove my point. (nm)
nm
Is that your mission in life? To try to prove that
Rather sad, really.
Obama in a lawsuit to prove his
36. Obama is a representative of the Democratic People. However, Obama must meet the Qualifications specified for the United States Office of the President, which he must be a “natural born” citizen. Additionally, Obama must be at least a “naturalized” citizen to hold his Office of U.S. Senator for Illinois. Unfortunately, Obama is not a “natural born” citizen, nor is he a “naturalized” citizen. Just to name one of the problems, Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen, Lolo Soetoro who legally “acknowledged” Obama as his son in Indonesia and/or “adopted” Obama, which caused Obama to become a “natural” Indonesian citizen. Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro relocated herself and Obama to Indonesia wherein Obama’s mother naturalized in Indonesia. This is proven by Obama’s school record with the student’s name as “Barry Soetoro”, Father’s name: Lolo Soetoro, M.A., and Citizenship: Indonesia
38. Defendant Obama claims he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961 and it is uncertain in which hospital he claims to have been born. Obama’s grandmother on his father’s side, his half-brother and half-sister all claim Obama was born not in Hawaii but in Kenya. Reports reflect that Obama’s mother traveled to Kenya during her pregnancy; however, she was prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii at her late stage of pregnancy (which, apparently, was a normal restriction, to avoid births during a flight). By these reports, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama gave birth to Obama in Kenya, after which she flew home and registered Obama’s birth. There are records of a “registry of birth” for Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii.
39. Upon investigation into the alleged birth of Obama in Honolulu, Hawaii, Obama’s birth is reported as occurring at two (2) separate hospitals, Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital. The Rainbow Edition News Letter, November 2004 Edition, published by the Education Laboratory School did a several page article of an interview with Obama and his half-sister, Maya. The Rainbow Edition News Letter reports Obama was born August 4, 1961 at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. More interesting in February 2008, Obama’s half-sister, Maya, was again interviewed in the Star Bulletin, and this time, Maya states Obama was born August 4, 1961 in Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children.
You continue to prove my point.
Can YOU prove it's taxpayer money?
What's the president make? $140,000 yr.? But, it's the perks that are part of his salary - rent free, utility free, a BUDGET for the president to live on. You can simplify it to simply "frivolous" partying, but I do not believe that is the case - there is far more to it than that. There are traditions and a decorum that is expected. I think our president more than fits the bill.
Prove it - You evidently have done your research
I just went back through the last three pages to when I first began posting. Never once did I start off badgering posters calling them names. Not to Mrs. B or anyone else on this board. I have even posted that I was wrong on some issues. I'm never disrepectful of posters. Just because I have a difference of opinion with someone doesn't mean anyone should be disrespectful and I'm not.
So seeing as you are acusing me of having a nasty attitude I want you to find the post and prove it. I've just gone through every single post. I have not been the one initiating anything. But call me Newton, and yes I'll reply by calling you Einstein. So I guess that makes me the nasty name calling and not her?
Telling someone I think they are wrong and explaining why is not having a nasty attitude. Calling someone names for no reason is.
|
