This paragraph is in my post...I guess you forgot to read it...nm
Posted By: ms on 2008-09-24
In Reply to: Guess you didn't read this part . . . - The Whole Story
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
Guess you didn't read the post I made from a few days ago.
Sorry, but I haven't been able to post lately due to some problems, but the FOIA report I posted and said to pay attention to certain pages....Clinton KNEW there were WMD's in Irag in 1996! Did he do anything? Nope. He left the country he was visiting right before a bombing; i.e., he knew it was going to happen. The jist I got of the report was that he knew and did nothing.
Did you read that report? Don't want to dredge up old presidents but you seem to do it every chance you get, so I just have to respond to that. Bush also knew but did nothing because the CIA,DOJ, FBI and whatever other departments were to keep him informed but never worked together on anything so he got conflicting reports all the time. Was he a mind reader? Doubt it or 911 would not have happened.
Sorry, but this post does not hold water IMHO.
I like this paragraph in your post....
'For the most part I will find people who live in other countries and are observing what is going on here to be a lot more credible because they do not have an agenda.'
Right, and they are more objective as they are far away from it all.
Forgot to post a link in 1st post. Sorry.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
I forgot to say, I will answer your post in more depth later.
I am most definitely a conservative, though. You are correct.
Obviously u didnt read, I said NONE of them are moral. Read the post before spouting off.
I guess you did not read your own posts --
In this second posting, you will see that it sends you to the USA.gov website, which has a link to the office of hte president elect...
also, in your first link (in the first posting), it clearly states: "It is an office -- it's just a quasi-government office for planning the takeover of the government," said Stephen J. Wayne, a professor at Georgetown University's department of government."
It also states that President Bush had his transition team in place a whole month before the election was even over. Obama is doing nothing wrong trying to get ready to hit the ground running. With the way things are in our country right now, we don't need somebody waiting until the last minute to get ready to assume his role.
Guess you didn't read this part . . .
From Wall Street Journal and other sites:
"At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal," Mr. Burton said in an email to reporters. "At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details."
McCain released statement minutes after responding to Obama.
I guess we didn't know it was a joke...if you go back and read (sm)
you said you have a very strong opinion and you keep it to yourself...which sounded like you were saying that is what we should all be doing too. But the point in response to you was that the board is for political opinions to be expressed and if it bothers anyone, they don't have to come on here. I am sorry you got your feelings hurt though. I am sure it was just a communication problem.
I guess I didn't take B's post that way. SM
I use God as a comparison when I am really trying to make a point. I think that is what was going on, but only B can answer that. At any rate, I agree with B.
Guess you didn't see the post I did below
showing that Bush tried to regulate the industry as far back as 2001, but the dems would have none of it....those most opposed were all on the "take"; i.e., getting thousands of dollars in contributions from FM/FM.....or don't you believe it even when it comes from their own mouths?
Open your eyes and listen, or do you need a hearing test?
I guess we better all rememer your post, the next time
Double standard? Sheesh.
I guess I missed your earlier post....sm
because I'm not the 1 poster who did respond, lol. I am an Independent who happens to be voting Rebulican this election year (but I guess that is no secret, lol).
I agree....If a person, no matter who it is, is found to be constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of POUS then he/she should be impeached on grounds of treason and jailed immediately.
I re-read your post, and I stand by my post.
You are twisting his words by saying that he wants to make friends with terrorists. That is not what he said.
sorry, should read I did not read post that way.
,
I did read the post that way.
One poster asked who would join in rebuilding Iraq and this poster answered she would join. I am not quite sure why the quibbling of semantics. Do you do that to all posters who post here? If so, it's disturbing.
I don't think your read my post
I said the main reason for newspapers' decline was the internet, but your insinuation that people don't read the newspaper simply because they can't read well really doesn't make any sense and is frankly, condescending.
Read the post Ex....
you can disagree without mocking and ridiculing...and yes, sometimes, you CAN take the high road and just ignore a post by someone who posted emotionally and took personally a post because her son is serving in Iraq and tells a different story. What could that possibly have hurt, just to let that one slide? Or respond to it in a less personal or ridiculing way?
And then "think Liberal" asserting to me that she had the right to disagree and criticize something she did not believe it...but berating "sick and fed up" in a rather personal manner for doing the same thing. THAT sounds pretty one-sided to me. And not necessary.
Thanks for your post.
Did you even read the post???
we are talking about a program that is already in place, the money already there...lots of red cents as a matter of fact. We have more social programs than any country in the WORLD = millions of red cents. What pray tell are you talking about? Billions for killing Iraqis? Are you prez of Michael Moore's fan club? Sigh.
You obviously did not read my post...
Air America failed because not enough people listened to it. Simple as that. I thought your original post said something about Republicans in the minority...not all Republicans are conservative and not all Republicans are Christians. And, there are a bunch of Democrats who are Christians. So what are you talking about? Christians or Republicans?
LOL ... if you read my whole post ...
I have said I have not made up my mind about who I am voting for.
I SAID I have not formed an total opinion on Palin.
I have watched many of O'Bama's interviews ... ... I read his book ... I'm evaluating his "judgment" ...
And to me, he comes across as arrogant. AND, THIS IS JUST WHAT IT IS -- MY OPINION. And I am entitled to it, just like you are entitled to yours!!!
That does not make me stupid. But if it makes YOU feel better to call anyone who doesn't agree with you and your opinions stupid, go ahead -- go for it! I can take it.
Also, glad to see now I'm a mina bird .. Love It!
no, make that a "stupid mina bird" ...
.... too bad I have to go to work now .. who names what other names I could be called ... just because I have my own opiniosn and they are different from yours!
good day!
ROTFL .... outta here
At last. Some who actually read the post.
nm
Read the other post again.
If you were not in a chat room, but rather were in an office setting with co-workers, you would not be in a situation where you could openly discuss religion or politics. It is a work setting. Noone said anything about religion not be the "fabric of your life." Good for you. Go for it. Whenever you decide to impose your religious or political beliefs on somebody else, you are going to hit a snag. Point it, the founding fathers explicitly expressed "congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of reigion." This is the FIRST directive in the FIRST amendment. They then proceeded to establish a secular federalist system, not a theocracy. Congress, though the may have agreed among them to say a prayer before their session, are to check their religion the moment they start to make law...which is, after all, their jobs.
read 2nd post from top
nm
Read my post below........
.
Please read my post above and ....
read the snopes link info. The meaning is very different when looking at the entire context. And I am not an O fan but posting information taken out of context is just wrong no matter what side one is on. If the first post was an honest mistake/
misunderstanding, hey, that happens, but the snopes link demonstrates the truth of the quote so don't compound the mistake by continuing it.
I did read you whole post and all I can say....sm
is what is wrong with you? Get a grip! Why so much negativity? Give the guy a chance. Are you hoping and praying he will fail so you can be right? We all have questions and no one knows how all this will pan out. The country is in a crisis and he is going to be the POTUS. Not having to join a bread line will be a plus for me. That being said, yes, I do have hope he is the right person at the right time for our country, and I pray for his to have the strength, intelligence and compassion to see us over this rough road.
Did you even read the post
Doesn't sound like things are going to be much better from what I read.
Should have read the WHOLE post
and then you would know why I said what I said.
Should have read the WHOLE post
and then you would know why I said what I said.
Again--read the whole post...
"I should have written that I am more concerned with lying, if it turns out that he is lying"
I believe you need to actually READ the post!
VV
Perhaps you need to re-read my post
Nowhere did I say I had the right to smoke anywhere I chose. I didn't even try to insinuate it. So before you get all righteously indignant on me, perhaps you'd better clarify whether I even made the claim you seem to want to argue.
I can also read them and post responses to them
if I like and sometimes I choose to, and I don't use use rage to get my point across like you do. You are the one that needs to take a serious chill pill...that is if you want to, but I seriously doubt it. You revel in your rage.
It might help if you actually read my post before so inaccurately
characterizing what I said.
Unless, of course, you're simply choosing to believe that I think bringing Jesus Christ into people's lives is a bad thing, even though I said the opposite in my post.
You've incorrectly pegged my very clear post in the very same way you incorrectly pegged Phil Donahue.
Please post where you read of the stench
Could you please post the sites/newspapers/whatever where you read about the stench of the anti war people? The wide sweeping generalization can be thought of as ignorant and bigoted. I would hope the places where you got the information are legitimate news sites and not freeper baloney. I assure you, liberals/democrats/anti war people smell just as good and bad as conservatives/republicans/pro war people.
Perhaps you didn't READ my post
I said -- keep it the hell out of politics.
You're welcome to claim whomever you'd like as your Saviour in the privacy of your own home and the community of your own church.
Then you read my post wrong.
I don't know what conversations have occurred on either board. I was mainly interested in why you and gt would made the assertion that somehow conservatives don't care about child molestation. Frankly, I was rather taken aback. I have never even seen the far left pin that one on conservatives. My posts have been respectful totally. I thought you wanted debate. I made that mistake one other time on this board. I won't make it again.
Maybe you should actually read the post before responding.
Bush is claiming they are working on nuclear weapons.
Iran has always claimed they are working on nuclear energy.
Who's lying? Which country has the track record for lying when it comes to reasons for declaring war on a country that didn't attack it first??
You didn't read my post
I was referring to people I talk to, as I stated. I don't generally talk to Churchill or Chomsky. In fact, I don't even pay much attention to them, nor should you. Just as I don't pay much if any attention to crazy right-wingers. Just common sense.
You read my post wrong
It is strange that this particular vet has had reported so many incidents with anti-war folks. The death threat was from a white supremist, by the way.
Once again, you did not read my post before ranting...
and why do you resort to name-calling? Does it make you feel good to call me ignorant? Well, that is a stupid question..of course it does.
Demonstrate to me that you DO really care about the soldiers. Do you think the liberal harping away, cut-and-run attitude, right up to a congressional resolution does not state emphatically to the enemy that we are weak and have lost our will to fight for what we believe in? If you answer no to that question, you better re-think your *ignorant* comment and take a long hard look at yourself.
I did not say in my post anywhere that it was impossible for a Muslim to live in harmony with a Christian...I said when is the last time you saw one carrying a sign that says so, or even one publically saying so? I have heard nothing. I have heard no Muslims calling for peace between Christians and Muslims. Not a murmur. It is they, who by their silence, lead me to believe they have no interest in it.
Well I am glad you did admit that CBS is biased. You are the first one on this board to actually admit it. I will give you points for that one.
MY trash talking? Oh please. I have called no one names here, and you call me names every time I post here.
Yes, it is the liberal board, but as the monitor has posted ad nauseam, we are allowed to post here. This is still a free country, hard as you are trying to change that.
Yes, I did, Teddy....read the whole post.
I said show some that were not responses to baits or barbs thrown at me by piglet primarily. That is exactly what I said. Again, out of context.
As to Teddy/Taiga...I knew you only as Teddy (and a few other monikers by style of posting), and I do lean back toward that moniker when the posts lean in that direction, because under that moniker is when you were more likely to bait, demean, and ridicule. In short, "Teddy" seemed to be more "cranky" more often than does "Taiga."
As to posting as Observer....I don't know about that. No one was posting as Observer when I started posting using that moniker. Which has been quite some time now.
As to when someone does it first, why respond in kind? For a long time I did not. But I guess, like you, after a prolonged period of being baited, demeaned, and ridiculed, I got "cranky" too and responded in kind. So I guess we have that in common. Like I said...I am learning at the feet of the masters.
Some who post here tho, do not appear to be "cranky." Baiting, demeaning, and ridiculing seem to be in their nature (hence the Ann Coulter of the liberal board comment). I don't appreciate Ann Coulter's brand of humor either, by the way. I don't find baiting, demeaning, and ridiculing amusing. By anyone, on any side of any aisle.
Honest? I can't read this post.
Too windy, not enough time. I got as far as hippocracy, not true. Just waiting for our day in court that's all. Quite frankly, their crimes, if given the chance to be brought to light, and hopefully proven, will be far worse than anything Clinton did.
We don't need a hero. Waiting for the savior on the white horse? Doesn't exist. WE are the heroes.
Re-read the post before you pile on....
I was making a point that the child is alive, whether the pregnancy is a planned, wanted pregnancy or a pregnancy that was an accident, unplanned, yada yada. Because a woman who has a planned, wanted pregnancy knows that even in the early stages she is carrying a growing, living, CHILD. Not a blob of tissue. And if a woman chooses to abort a child, isn't it obvious that she doesn't want it? Why on earth would you abort a child if you wanted it? If a woman has chosen abortion, for whatever reason, she does not want to continue the pregnancy...she does not want the child. Is there some reason I am not aware of that a woman would abort a child she wanted?
Read the post again. Nothing said about how I vote..nm
nm
I don't think you read my post completely.
I said the post about Bill Ayers locking someone up in his basement and forcing them to have sex with his black roommate was as important as Bill Ayers in the Weather Underground and his association with Barack Obama when Obama was an adult. And yes I am concerned about it...I have posted about it multiple times. It DOES matter to me. I don't trust him.
I have been talking about his association with Ayers for several weeks/months. It has ALWAYS concerned me.
Read post below. Who is asinine now?
nm
WOW did you even read the rest of my post?
It's called a JOKE...hence the LOL and the j/k (which means just kidding btw)
Has anybody read the post their threads are under yet...
x
You stop and re-read my post....sm
He has never been on a Presidential race ballot BEFORE. How much more clearer do I need to make that?
Sheesh....even when research is proven and from "credible sources" at that, the sheeple refuse to listen.
Read your post above about the "real"
hate rhetoric is going to hurt our country. Gov. Palin is not an opponent of Obama's now, she too is praying for his success.
|
