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 Oprah
My understanding is that Oprah is also a member of Trinity and a friend of Wright? If so, why isn't she also in the headlights, along with Obama? If so, why is she staying so quiet about this whole issue? OR... Did I misunderstand this about her?
are not in a position to force the rest of us to share our wealth, punish us if we do not, while keeping their wealth for themselves. Not a good comparison at all.
Oprah is on record saying that (even with her multi-millions) she does not just hand money to individuals who tell her they need it. Why should she think that would help someone who obviously failed to take care of their own money? They want money? They can go make it the hard way, as she has. (Then she supports Obama. Go figure!)
Obama is more like the minister who preaches fidelity, while having affairs with his parishioners. He's someone who says that to help public schools, all children should have to attend them (except his own.) Lectures on the evils of tobacco, raises taxes on it, while sneaking cigarettes. Gets his own sweet deal on a mortgage, supports the bailout of deadbeats, yet penalizes those who have been responsible with their money. Criticizes company executives for use of corporate jets, then flies on his own jet to Arizona just to sign a bill.
I found this article on Oprah's website and thought this excerpt was powerful on the anti-child abuse/molestation movement. The underlined areas are links, please help out with this as you can.
*This is a full circle moment for me. For me to have been raped at 9 years old … this is so big and so gratifying that I now get to put people behind bars who did to me what they've been doing to other children. This is it. And so I am going to spend my own resources, and I am going to work with law enforcement, and I'm going to change, with your help, the laws in this country state by state by state by state.
We are not going to be a country that talks the talk about how we care about children, and then we let these people back out on the street. It's Joseph Duncan all over again. We have got to let Shasta Groene and all the others be the last children. Let their lives not have been in vain. Let's stand up, and change the laws.
This is an attack against a Christian group, plain and simple. Once the Christians are sufficiently quieted, they will move on to the next group that threatens the reign of the government.
Should I report the Mormons down the street who gather every week?
Or what about the girl scout leader who has sleep overs all the time and meetings at her house once a week? And they sell cookies! That should definitely be considered a business!
Anyone trying to twist this around to building codes really needs to pull the wool off of their eyes. It's infringement on our rights, plain and simple.
Big brother is starting to look over EVERYONE'S shoulder. All of you who make excuses for it now, please remember this when they start infringing on your rights.
I wonder how long it will take before they stop letting returning soldiers gather together? Since they are also on the list of suspected domestic terrorists...
Oh and I remember how much the Jewish community down the street from where I grew up loved to get together on a weekly basis to socialize, eat, etc., wonder when they will be stopped?
I wonder how long it will take before we all have to sit at home with our thumbs up our butts before enough citizens get their heads out of the sand and tell government that enough is enough!
Please try to De-program
Please try to change your mind set from the negative programming of the campaign. The whole world is able to celebrate that America has chosen a man of integrity and intelligence to be our leader. Believe me things are going to be so much better now that we have at the helm a thinking person who has the people's interest as his guiding principle. Just as he surrounded himself with the best and brightest to organize and run an honorable and successful campaign, he will use those same resources to bring our nation to honor and success...President-elect Obama's success is all of our success
Oops! Jill Biden spilled the beans on Oprah...sm
today. Joe was offered either Secretary of State or VP by Obama, his choice. Everyone was shocked and laughing and she so, "well its true", and Joe said, it's OK, you're right it is true. I predict that skit will be portrayed on SNL this weekend.
Oops! Jill Biden spilled the beans on Oprah...sm
today. Joe was offered either Secretary of State or VP by Obama, his choice. Everyone was shocked and laughing and she so, "well its true", and Joe said, it's OK, you're right it is true. I predict that skit will be portrayed on SNL this weekend.
SCHIP program
First, let's get the story straight. Republicans are not voting against Childrens Health Care. The SCHIP program has been in effect for several years, and Republicans DID vote to start the program. And like most government-run programs it is wasteful and was not administered properly. Millions of illegals' children are enrolled in the program, taking funds that should go to American children. That is one of the things Republicans want watched before expanding the program. Expansion might not be necessary to the tune of 6 billion if the illegals got taken off. All the Republicans asked was that the Democrats extend the program for another 6 months as it stands now (they NEVER voted to stop it completely) and work on a solution to remove illegals and make sure no more illegals get on, etc. This has never been about voting against health care for children. They are not voting to stop SCHIP, just tighten it up. Of course, because of the liberal bias of media, all you see are headlines saying BUSH TO VETO CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE PLAN and REPUBLICANS WANT TO STOP CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE PLAN. Both of these are lies. The 'socialized medicine' comment, I believe, was directed toward the Democrat plan to stop all private health care and make the whole thing government run. And when they do that, the quality of health care will tank and the ability to get superior medical care for catastrophic incidents, high-risk surgery, etc., will drop dramatically. Ask Canada. Ask why Canadians come to the US for that kind of care? Because they don't want to be on government waiting lists for months/years. Do some research. It HAPPENS. Socialized medicine hurts the middle class and poor, because richer folks can still pay cash and get the higher standard of care. Believe me, folks, we don't need socialized medicine in this country.
As I have stated in other posts, tighten up the SCHIP program to exclude illegals and monitor the program properly so that it does what it is designed to do...provide health care for American children whose parents cannot afford to buy it. Look at all social programs here (fraught with waste), tighten them up, and prioritize. Put Childrens Health care at the top of the pile. Use common sense, like American families have to do inidividually. We know we can't provide everything for our families we would like to, so we have to prioritize, to make sure the most important things are taken care of first. Government should run the same way. If government is going to provide health care for kids (and I believe if we are going to have social programs that one should be FIRST), then do so, and make that the FIRST priority of social spending. If that cuts into lesser needed programs, so be it. First things first. If we do not start being fiscally responsible with spending, we are going to dig ourselves into a hole. The more people who get on assistance and do not pay into the tax system, the bigger the burden is on the rest of us who do have to work and pay taxes. Personally I think 35-40% off the top of my wages is enough. I think the government just has to prioritize and be more careful about the way they spend it.
Making Home Affordable will offer assistance to as many as 7 to 9 million homeowners, making their mortgages more affordable and helping to prevent the destructive impact of foreclosures on families, communities and the national economy.
The Home Affordable Refinance program will be available to 4 to 5 million homeowners who have a solid payment history on an existing mortgage owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Normally, these borrowers would be unable to refinance because their homes have lost value, pushing their current loan-to-value ratios above 80%. Under the Home Affordable Refinance program, many of them will now be eligible to refinance their loan to take advantage of today’s lower mortgage rates or to refinance an adjustable-rate mortgage into a more stable mortgage, such as a 30-year fixed rate loan.
GSE lenders and servicers already have much of the borrower’s information on file, so documentation requirements are not likely to be burdensome. In addition, in some cases an appraisal will not be necessary. This flexibility will make the refinance quicker and less costly for both borrowers and lenders. The Home Affordable Refinance program ends in June 2010.
The Home Affordable Modification program will help up to 3 to 4 million at-risk homeowners avoid foreclosure by reducing monthly mortgage payments. Working with the banking and credit union regulators, the FHA, the VA, the USDA and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Treasury Department today announced program guidelines that are expected to become standard industry practice in pursuing affordable and sustainable mortgage modifications. This program will work in tandem with an expanded and improved Hope for Homeowners program.
With the information now available, servicers can begin immediately to modify eligible mortgages under the Modification program so that at-risk borrowers can better afford their payments. The detailed guidelines (separate document) provide information on the following:
Eligibility and Verification
Loans originated on or before January 1, 2009.
First-lien loans on owner-occupied properties with unpaid principal balance up to $729,750. Higher limits allowed for owner-occupied properties with 2-4 units.
All borrowers must fully document income, including signed IRS 4506-T, two most recent pay stubs, and most recent tax return, and must sign an affidavit of financial hardship.
Property owner occupancy status will be verified through borrower credit report and other documentation; no investor-owned, vacant, or condemned properties.
Incentives to lenders and servicers to modify at risk borrowers who have not yet missed payments when the servicer determines that the borrower is at imminent risk of default.
Modifications can start from now until December 31, 2012; loans can be modified only once under the program.
Loan Modification Terms and Procedures
Participating servicers are required to service all eligible loans under the rules of the program unless explicitly prohibited by contract; servicers are required to use reasonable efforts to obtain waivers of limits on participation.
Participating loan servicers will be required to use a net present value (NPV) test on each loan that is at risk of imminent default or at least 60 days delinquent. The NPV test will compare the net present value of cash flows with modification and without modification. If the test is positive – meaning that the net present value of expected cash flow is greater in the modification scenario – the servicer must modify absent fraud or a contract prohibition.
Parameters of the NPV test are spelled out in the guidelines, including acceptable discount rates, property valuation methodologies, home price appreciation assumptions, foreclosure costs and timelines, and borrower cure and redefault rate assumptions.
Servicers will follow a specified sequence of steps in order to reduce the monthly payment to no more than 31% of gross monthly income (DTI).
The modification sequence requires first reducing the interest rate (subject to a rate floor of 2%), then if necessary extending the term or amortization of the loan up to a maximum of 40 years, and then if necessary forbearing principal. Principal forgiveness or a Hope for Homeowners refinancing are acceptable alternatives.
The monthly payment includes principal, interest, taxes, insurance, flood insurance, homeowner’s association and/or condominium fees. Monthly income includes wages, salary, overtime, fees, commissions, tips, social security, pensions, and all other income.
Servicers must enter into the program agreements with Treasury’s financial agent on or before December 31, 2009.
Payments to Servicers, Lenders, and Responsible Borrowers
The program will share with the lender/investor the cost of reductions in monthly payments from 38% DTI to 31% DTI.
Servicers that modify loans according to the guidelines will receive an up-front fee of $1,000 for each modification, plus “pay for success” fees on still-performing loans of $1,000 per year.
Homeowners who make their payments on time are eligible for up to $1,000 of principal reduction payments each year for up to five years.
The program will provide one-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 to servicers for modifications made while a borrower is still current on mortgage payments.
The program will include incentives for extinguishing second liens on loans modified under this program.
No payments will be made under the program to the lender/investor, servicer, or borrower unless and until the servicer has first entered into the program agreements with Treasury’s financial agent.
Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner refinances.
Transparency and Accountability
Measures to prevent and detect fraud, such as documentation and audit requirements, will be central to the program.
Servicers will be required to collect, maintain and transmit records for verification and compliance review, including borrower eligibility, underwriting, incentive payments, property verification, and other documentation.
Sorry, I'm still venting from the SCHIP garbage that was on today. They absolutely want to pass this immediately without looking at amendments, etc. They want an additional 11 million children covered ( nothing wrong with that) EXCEPT they want to put it on the smokers to pay for it. Now, with the way they are trying to get smokers to quit, I would think that's a stupid and absolutely wrong idea.
Like James Webb (NC) stated, "Do we really want an unhealthy habit to pay for a healthy habit?"What happens when the smokers quit because of all the taxes they have to pay to keep these programs going? Who is going to pay for it if every smoker quits? You have nothing to back it up. There would be a black hole and eventually, every citizen would have to pay for it.
I agree totally with his statements. Why is it they expect an unhealthy habit to cover healthy habits? It makes no sense. At least this rep has his head together, yet the others don't think about the future costs.
When are the American citizens going to wake up and start thinking for themselves? Why, oh why, do we keep voting in people who don't even think for themselves, just vote by party affiliation?
Glenn Beck stated we have to keep the phone lines to Washington and keep calling in to our reps to stop the nonsense (sp). I agree.
I watched the jerk put in the Senate by fellow voters from my state today and I had to turn him off (I didn't vote for him-he knows nothing). I am going to write to the newspapers in that area and ask them WHY did they vote for him? Betcha my answer will be "He gave us so much money to get our projects done." "He's the son of our late governor." "He's from our area." That's no reason to vote for somebody. If it is, then I must be totally wrong for voting the way I do. I vote who I think will do the best job, not if he's from our area. That's part of the problem with politics today.
I'll get off my now. Thanks for reading. I promise no more venting today.
The Other Big Brother The Pentagon has its own domestic spying program. Even its leaders say the outfit may have gone too far.
By Michael Isikoff Newsweek
Jan. 30, 2006 issue - The demonstration seemed harmless enough. Late on a June afternoon in 2004, a motley group of about 10 peace activists showed up outside the Houston headquarters of Halliburton, the giant military contractor once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. They were there to protest the corporation's supposed war profiteering. The demonstrators wore papier-mache masks and handed out free peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches to Halliburton employees as they left work. The idea, according to organizer Scott Parkin, was to call attention to allegations that the company was overcharging on a food contract for troops in Iraq. It was tongue-in-street political theater, Parkin says.
But that's not how the Pentagon saw it. To U.S. Army analysts at the top-secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), the peanut-butter protest was regarded as a potential threat to national security. Created three years ago by the Defense Department, CIFA's role is force protection—tracking threats and terrorist plots against military installations and personnel inside the United States. In May 2003, Paul Wolfowitz, then deputy Defense secretary, authorized a fact-gathering operation code-named TALON—short for Threat and Local Observation Notice—that would collect raw information about suspicious incidents. The data would be fed to CIFA to help the Pentagon's terrorism threat warning process, according to an internal Pentagon memo.
A Defense document shows that Army analysts wrote a report on the Halliburton protest and stored it in CIFA's database. It's not clear why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention—although organizer Parkin had previously been arrested while demonstrating at ExxonMobil headquarters (the charges were dropped). But there are now questions about whether CIFA exceeded its authority and conducted unauthorized spying on innocent people and organizations. A Pentagon memo obtained by NEWSWEEK shows that the deputy Defense secretary now acknowledges that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens and groups that never should have been retained. The number of reports with names of U.S. persons could be in the thousands, says a senior Pentagon official who asked not be named because of the sensitivity of the subject.
CIFA's activities are the latest in a series of disclosures about secret government programs that spy on Americans in the name of national security. In December, the ACLU obtained documents showing the FBI had investigated several activist groups, including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and Greenpeace, supposedly in an effort to discover possible ecoterror connections. At the same time, the White House has spent weeks in damage-control mode, defending the controversial program that allowed the National Security Agency to monitor the telephone conversations of U.S. persons suspected of terror links, without obtaining warrants.
Last Thursday, Cheney called the program vital to the country's defense against Al Qaeda. Either we are serious about fighting this war on terror or not, he said in a speech to the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. But as the new information about CIFA shows, the scope of the U.S. government's spying on Americans may be far more extensive than the public realizes.
It isn't clear how many groups and individuals were snagged by CIFA's dragnet. Details about the program, including its size and budget, are classified. In December, NBC News obtained a 400-page compilation of reports that detailed a portion of TALON's surveillance efforts. It showed the unit had collected information on nearly four dozen antiwar meetings or protests, including one at a Quaker meetinghouse in Lake Worth, Fla., and a Students Against War demonstration at a military recruiting fair at the University of California, Santa Cruz. A Pentagon spokesman declined to say why a private company like Halliburton would be deserving of CIFA's protection. But in the past, Defense Department officials have said that the force protection mission includes military contractors since soldiers and Defense employees work closely with them and therefore could be in danger.
CIFA researchers apparently cast a wide net and had a number of surveillance methods—both secretive and mundane—at their disposal. An internal CIFA PowerPoint slide presentation recently obtained by William Arkin, a former U.S. Army intelligence analyst who writes widely about military affairs, gives some idea how the group operated. The presentation, which Arkin provided to NEWSWEEK, shows that CIFA analysts had access to law-enforcement reports and sensitive military and U.S. intelligence documents. (The group's motto appears at the bottom of each PowerPoint slide: Counterintelligence 'to the Edge'.) But the organization also gleaned data from open source Internet monitoring. In other words, they surfed the Web.
That may have been how the Pentagon came to be so interested in a small gathering outside Halliburton. On June 23, 2004, a few days before the Halliburton protest, an ad for the event appeared on houston.indymedia.org, a Web site for lefty Texas activists. Stop the war profiteers, read the posting. Bring out the kids, relatives, Dick Cheney, and your favorite corporate pigs at the trough as we will provide food for free.
Four months later, on Oct. 25, the TALON team reported another possible threat to national security. The source: a Miami antiwar Web page. Website advertises protest planned at local military recruitment facility, the internal report warns. The database entry refers to plans by a south Florida group called the Broward Anti-War Coalition to protest outside a strip-mall recruiting office in Lauderhill, Fla. The TALON entry lists the upcoming protest as a credible threat. As it turned out, the entire event consisted of 15 to 20 activists waving a giant bush lied sign. No one was arrested. It's very interesting that the U.S. military sees a domestic peace group as a threat, says Paul Lefrak, a librarian who organized the protest.
Arkin says a close reading of internal CIFA documents suggests the agency may be expanding its Internet monitoring, and wants to be as surreptitious as possible. CIFA has contracted to buy identity masking software that would allow the agency to create phony Web identities and let them appear to be located in foreign countries, according to a copy of the contract with Computer Sciences Corp. (The firm declined to comment.)
Pentagon officials have broadly defended CIFA as a legitimate response to the domestic terror threat. But at the same time, they acknowledge that an internal Pentagon review has found that CIFA's database contained some information that may have violated regulations. The department is not allowed to retain information about U.S. citizens for more than 90 days—unless they are reasonably believed to have some link to terrorism, criminal wrongdoing or foreign intelligence. There was information that was improperly stored, says a Pentagon spokesman who was authorized to talk about the program (but not to give his name). It was an oversight. In a memo last week, obtained by NEWSWEEK, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England ordered CIFA to purge such information from its files—and directed that all Defense Department intelligence personnel receive refresher training on department policies.
That's not likely to stop the questions. Last week Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee pushed for an inquiry into CIFA's activities and who it's watching. This is a significant Pandora's box [Pentagon officials] don't want opened, says Arkin. What we're looking at is hints of what they're doing. As far as the Pentagon is concerned, that means we've already seen too much.
Fox New Program on Obama - Sunday night 10/12
HELLO EVERYONE: IMPORTANT INFORMATION!! > > SEAN HANNITY, OF HANNITY & COLMES ~ FOX NEWS, IS GOING TO AIR A VERY > IMPORTANT DOCUMENTARY ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, SUNDAY NIGHT AT 9:00 PM. HE > STATED ON THE AIR THIS EVENING THAT NO ONE IN THE NEWS MEDIA WAS WILLING > TO DO THIS. HANNITY IS GOING BACK TO OBAMA'S EARLIER DAYS, SHOWING EVEN > THEN HIS TIES TO RADICAL PROFESSORS, FRIENDS, SPIRITUAL ADVISERS, Etc., > HE STATED THIS EVENING THAT HE WILL SHOW IN DETAIL HIS TIES TO REV. > WRIGHT FOR 20+ YRS (which we all > know) HOW HE WAS PARTICIPATING WITH THIS MAN, AND NOT FOR THE REASONS HE > STATES! HE HAS UNCOVERED MORE OF OBAMA'S RADICAL LEADERS AND WE WILL SEE > THINGS THAT NO ONE IN THE MEDIA IS WILLING TO PUT OUT THERE.&nb sp; THIS > WILL BE A NIGHT THAT YOU WILL KNOW MORE ABOUT OBAMA THAN EVER BEFORE. > HANNITY IS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS PROGRAM AND ASKED THAT EVERYONE > PLEASE, PLEASE WATCH~~ SUNDAY NIGHT, 9 PM. > > HANNITY IS DETERMINED THIS INFORMATION BE PUT OUT THERE BECAUSE AS > AMERICAN'S, WE STILL DO NOT KNOW ABOUT OBAMA!! WAKE UP AMERICA !! THIS > IS SERIOUS,EVERYONE. I KNOW MOST OF YOU WATCH FOX NEWS, AND YOU KNOW WHO > YOU ARE VOTING FOR, BUT IF YOU CAN, PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE YOU > KNOW. THIS IS CRITICAL FOR OUR COUNTRY. MY PRAYER IS
THAT WE, ALONG WITH > SEAN HANNITY, WILL REACH SOMEONE/ANYONE BEFORE NOV. 4th. WE MUST NOT > GIVE UP!!! the only thing I can find is a scholarship program
for students with good grade, which I am in no way opposed to. This is different than guaranteeing a free ride to anyone.
On 2/16 on history channel a program about Lincoln
Think its called Stealing Lincolns body. Looks interesting.
I'll be sure to watch this one tonight. I saw it advertised the other night when I was watching Sense and Sensibility.
WC is not a government program - it is insurance that the company's pay
nm
Debate, lets debate
Honey, I dont know if your problem is Alzheimer's or Parkinson's but I have debated all over this board..I have tried and tried again and again to debate with your cohorts..It starts out okay and then your conservative friends start attacking and it continues through the debate to where then there is no longer a debate. I ask for you to check the archives and you will see this..nothing but personal attacks against me, which then I attacked back..Debate..lets debate..I WOULD LOVE TO DEBATE WITHOUT ATTACKS..Place an issue and lets debate..Who knows..my consciousness might be raised or yours might be..Lets do it,,
US program unveils man behind Iraq weapons story sm
U.S. program unveils man behind Iraq weapons story
Thu Nov 1, 7:12 PM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - An Iraqi defector made up his claim that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons, a threat cited by the Bush administration as a key reason for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the U.S. news program "60 Minutes" said on Thursday.
Rafid Ahmed Alwan, codenamed "Curve Ball" in intelligence circles, claimed to be a chemical engineering expert but was instead an accused thief and a mediocre student, the program said. He arrived at a German refugee center in 1999.
"To bolster his asylum case and increase his importance, he told officials he was a star chemical engineer who had been in charge of a facility at Djerf AL Nadaf that was making mobile biological weapons," "60 Minutes" said in a statement.
President George W. Bush and senior U.S. officials argued that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction that threatened the security of the United States.
But no such weapons have been found and what was supposed to have been a short U.S. engagement in Iraq is now in its fifth year, with more than 3,800 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands Iraqis killed.
"60 Minutes" said it found an arrest warrant for Alwan in relation to a theft from the Babel television production company in Baghdad where he once worked. It said he studied chemical engineering at university but got low marks.
The report, a culmination of a two-year investigation by journalist Bob Simon, is due to be broadcast on the CBS network on Sunday.
"The (then) CIA director George Tenet gave Alwan's information to Secretary of State Colin Powell to use at the U.N. in his speech justifying military action against Iraq," "60 Minutes" said.
That was, the program said, despite a letter from German intelligence officials saying that although Alwan appeared to be believable, there was not evidence to verify his story.
"Through a spokesman, Tenet denies ever seeing the letter," "60 Minutes" said.
"Alwan was caught when CIA interrogators were finally allowed to question him and confronted him with evidence that his story could not be as he described it," the program said.
"Weapons inspectors had examined the plant at Djerf al Nadaf before the fall of Baghdad and found no evidence of biological agents."
I have a real difficult time knowing who to believe. Bush has paid the media to present his point of view. This tactic used to be called propaganda when it referred to Communists. Communists were supposed to be the ones who wanted to take over the entire world and force their form of government on everyone.
Today it's America doing the very same thing.
It's not difficult to find an ever growing list of Bush lies.
If you can provide me with a similar list of lies told by Ahmadinejad, I'd love to read it.
The issue here is credibility and who has the biggest history of lying. Unfortunately, a pack of lies is what got us where we are in Iraq today. To me, it looks like Bush is trying the very same tactics to get us into a war with Iran.
Although Ahmadinejad is a terrible, psychotic, murderous, dangerous individual, Bush is the person who has the five-year history of lying to the American people and to the world.
Quite frankly, if I were the president of Iran and saw my neighbor, Iraq, invaded based on a pack of lies, I believe I'd want to flex my muscles and try to scare the USA into backing off and not attacking my citizens as they did in Iraq.
Israel has nuclear weapons (that I believe WE paid for). The USA has nuclear weapons. Why is that okay?
The real threat is Korea, but Bush is too much of a coward and doesn't have the courage to address that threat.
The propaganda machine of George W. Bush has cast Syria in a very negative light, yet Syria was responsible for saving American lives the other day by thwarting a terror attempt.
That, in and of itself, in addition to Bush's refusal to get the Taliban that were in plain view the other day, has me questioning every single word that comes out of this lying president's mouth.
Yes, I'll say it again. He is a liar. A LIAR! Maybe in your neck of the woods, lying is an accepted form of communication. Where I come from, it does nothing but destroy credibility and create distrust in the person who is doing the lying. You can respond with all the snappy **you hate bush** and **you're on the side of the terrorists** comebacks you want (seems to be the usual conservative talking point response), but the bottom line is he is a chronic liar. I don't hate Bush, but I sure as heck don't like (or trust) liars.
you are the biggest hypocrite ever. I was debating with you, but just because you didn't like what I said you said I was attacking you.
Again, you're are a sad individual....hateful sad individual.
As far as I see it, there is no debate.
This country has gone to the dogs. We are now just another *invading* country, with no morals, no Constitution, nothing of which to be proud. We have a lying, warring regime taking us down with them, taking our freedoms, spitting on the Constitution, tearing the very fabric of this country, and you see nothing evil about that? That, my fellow American, is what I cannot comprehend. Furthermore, Iraq was not our enemy. The Bush Family MADE him our enemy so that our very DEMOCRACY would be eroded to the point that we won't even recognize by the time he is out of office. And you don't see any EVIL in that? WAKE UP, Smell the coffee, or even the stench that wreaks from this regime.
Debate
One of the biggest problems that we have today is our inability to have intellegent discussions. The previous commenters irrational, over-wrought statements, frought with conspiracy theory, does an excellent job of proving that point. There is plenty of grist for calling those in power to task for their actions and decisions without foaming at the mouth. Oh, how I long for the days of the old boy's club of the congress before the eighties when people of conscience could disagree on substance, still be fast friends and treat their political opposites with respect and decorum. I'm contuinally amazed how the most vocal and extreme ascribe nefarious motives to others. This seems to be, almost exclusively, an affliction of the left. Without this intellectual pollution, we might be able to actually find common ground. Debate me...
First it was that **we couldn't debate,** now it is ** persecution.** When did I say I was persecuted. I merely said the Crusades have been seen in a negative light for as long as I can remember and suddenly they are being seen in a good light. That's all, kaput, the end. Martyr...don't think so.
I don't know how you can live with such disdain for all liberals and all Arab peoples and have any peace or joy in your life. That is a full-time job, being angry.
debate
Hillary all the way -
No need to debate this...because I see it as the same and you do not....
I listened to AL Franken on Air America quite a few times...that was mild, and it was not a joke. He meant it when he said it. I find that offensive. You do not, probably because Ann Coulter did not say it talking about Democrats. Face it, if Ann Coulter had made the same comment Al Franken did, substituting Democrat names and Democrat for Republican, you would not say Ann Coulter was obviously joking and ignore it. That is what I am talking about...you can see exactly what Ann COulter did wrong, but blow off Al Franken as obviously joking. I just don't get that kind of rationalization, sorry. No offense meant...just don't understand it, and it seems so prevalent on the left side of the house. I mean, I can say Ann Coulter was wrong and that both statements by both people were offensive and wrong. You can agree that what Franken said was tasteless and classless, yet he gets a buy as *obviously joking." I just don't get why you can't just say both were wrong and leave it at that...Coulter has to be worse and Franken gets a buy.
Debate
Once again, this is a subject I feel very strongly about. I applaud anyone who broadens their education by learning a foreign language or learning anything new for that matter.
That being said, I believe that anyone who wishes to immigrate to THIS country should wish to embrace our language, our customs and our way of life, not the other way around. I am speaking here of the illegal INVADERS. I imagine that those who become citizens through legal channels, most likely learn English. I am sick to death of hearing babbling everywhere I go, to the grocery store, to restaurants, everywhere. My ancestors immigrated LEGALLY from Ireland and Germany. The other side of the ancestors were herded up and driven to a reservation like so many cattle. I live next door to the Cherokee Nation and not once have I heard them speaking in their native tongue outside of their Powwows, although they strive to keep the language alive. They don't require a press 1 for Cherokee on every telephone message system.
If this language issue isn't enough, it infuriates me that the Mexicans can come here to OUR country and march in their demonstrations while waving their MEXICAN flag.
Unfortunately, the reason we have to learn THEIR language to commuicate is most likely the majority who enter our country illegally are ignorant in even the most basic education and thus not likely to be able to learn a foreign language i.e. English.
You are correct, if we aren't willing to stand up for the heritage of our country; we may as well learn the language as one day we will most likely be part of Mexico and Spanish will be the official language.
debate
i will probably watch on cnn. i do not want to miss a word or a fumble/jumble confused silly look on anyone's face. I am my own best commentator and so will listen to the commentators after the debate.... one candidate is really not overly intelligent. i will see how well he was briefed...looking forward to the comedy !
I too think that this debate could have
been more indepth and not just the same old ho hum we have been hearing since the start. Then again, it was only the first debate and hopefully they will get better. We have a right to hear specifics from both candidates. We have a right to see them put on the spot to see how well they handle themselves. I want specific questions directed to each candidate and I was specific answers with details. I don't want just a pleasant little Q&A session of fluff.
I was kinda struck by how Obama kept harping on the 10 billion a day (was it?) spent in Iraq...but talking about more troops to Afghanistan. Three brigades I think he said he would send. Okay. So, we are just going to transfer the 10 billion a day to Afghanistan instead of Iraq. Still going to spend it, just in a different place. I was almost yelling at the TV at McCain...ASK HIM ABOUT THAT. lol.
All kidding aside....what I took away from it was Obama leans heavily on Joe Biden for the foreign policy stuff because he is just out of his element. I thought Obama looked uncomfortable, and I got really tired of the smirk after awhile.
On the other hand...in all fairness, John needs to drop the "Miss Congeniality" line. I was talking to the TV again..."we know, John, we KNOW." lol.
I think what makes Obama dangerous is his world view. I do not say that to be mean....I just don't think he is realistic about it. On the one hand he praises General Petraeus (that he got right), and turns right around and won't own up to the fact that the surge worked (even though O'Reilly got him to admit it). Just goes back to the war was wrong. The country is still divided on that. You can't turn back time...and to lose it now would be wrong. Petraeus DID say Obama's plan for a timetable was wrong. I would think more of him if he would say "okay john, you were wrong about the war, but we're there and can't change that. And I was wrong about the surge." I know...dream on...lol.
It was a little alarming to me, facing what we are facing with this "rescue" bill, he STILL talked about spending bazillion dollars. He would not, when pressed, name ONE thing he would put on hold. That just makes NO sense to me, with the "rescue" bill, the deficit, owing money to China yada yada....and wants to fund that stuff with stiff taxes for business...in a down economy. Sorry, I think that's NUTS. Sorry....that also tells me he is either not real smart, or trying to get the vote of people who can't see past "he is going to lower my taxes and give me free health care." I really don't think he is not really smart, so if he gets selected he will be saying "I wanted to do these things, but the economy won't let me."
I have heard people talk all morning (on the Dem side) about how he mentioned the middle class and John McCain didn't. Frankly, the way it appeared to me, was Obama was pandering to the have nots and McCain is not going to promise something he knows he couldn't deliver in the economic situation we find ourselves in. I thought it was kinda patronizing actually. McCain understands that small businesses and yes, nasty corporations, drive this economy and employ a huge number of Americans. In an economic downturn higher taxes on businesses does not work.
Another thing I think McCain should have JUMPED on is that Obama supports the Hank Paulson rescue plan endorsed by Bush and John McCain doesn't like it as it stands. Obama is siding with BUSH! Oh well....lol.
After watching the debates I have finally made up my mind. We can not afford to have the angry, unstable John McCain in the White House. He was not only angry, he was sarcastic. My husband and I kept laughing waiting for him to explode. I happen to live in a state that is leaning toward McCain. I notice on the local TV station's forum, 5 people who have been avid McCain supporters have said they changed their mind after watching the debates. It was evident that Obama was angry a couple of times, and I don't blame him but he never lost his "cool."
The race issue is going to play a part in this election but I wonder, has anyone considered that Obama is both black and white? Maybe, just maybe, he could be the one to finally put the race issue to rest. Many blacks will vote for him because he is "black." Many whites will not vote for him because he is "black." Ridiculous. He is equally black and white. Since Lou Dobbs is not running in the first place, he has no chance of being elected. I have decided I will take a chance on Obama. If he turns out to be the worst president in history, well, I'll come back and say I helped elect him. The only real issue I have with him is that of his church affiliation. I noticed that was not brought up in the debate so I can only assume that McCain has investigated that thoroughly and found that there is nothing there that would benefit him.
And as for "Joe the plumber"........I have no doubt that with his notoriaty he will own his own plumbing company but what about my son, "Bill the plumber" who also aspires to own his own plumbing company? My son, "Bill the plumber" has been inclined to vote for McCain but doesn't think either candidate will help him own his own company and neither do I.
I didn't hear anything about "Jane the MT." What about all the MTs who can't find a job? That might be a good talking point.......did anyone notice that Obama wants to reduce medical costs by putting medical records on the internet? Can anyone say bye-bye medical transcriptionists? Of course that is already in the works so really won't make much difference.
debate
I agree. McCain cannot hide his shifty, deceiving body language. He blinks more often and quicker, and he doodles on paper rather than being comfortable making eye contact with Obama.
No one in this world can perform miracles, per se, but I feel that Obama has integrity and diplomacy and really wants to try and better the multitude of conflicts this nation is under, in a realistic but motivated fashion.
Actually during the last debate
He said "when I am president" quite a few times. Just FYI.
Thanks for the debate, its been fun
I think we both have valid concerns. Here's hoping things turn out better than they are now.Almost a different debate entirely
This thread was started with no differentiation made between Radical Islam and the more moderate practitioners. Do you believe that evangelical christians are a religion? How about the fundamentalists? I personally consider all of them (radical, evangelical, fundamentalists) to be a religion, albeit one that may not necessarily hold the same values as the broader category they fall under.
Why won't you debate the issue
because you can't back up what you are saying, I assume. You just point fingers and call names like that's winning a debate.
They don't want debate or dissent, although....
that is the biggest cry from the left, that dissent is good. Unfortunately they only tolerate dissent that THEY agree with. I actually find it quite boring to simply say on my own board and preach to the choir. That's what's fun about politics, the debate and the banter. But I see far less tolerance for differing opinions from the liberals in this country even though they claim to be all for choice and dissent and all those other nifty little words they volley about.
marks the location of current message within thread
Sorry, I'm still venting from the SCHIP garbage that was on today. They absolutely want to pass this immediately without looking at amendments, etc. They want an additional 11 million children covered ( nothing wrong with that) EXCEPT they want to put it on the smokers to pay for it. Now, with the way they are trying to get smokers to quit, I would think that's a stupid and absolutely wrong idea. 
![Reuters](http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/nws/p/reuters120.gif"){kind=small}
