Ummm....Oldtimer has posted several times
Posted By: under her original post. sm on 2008-12-10
In Reply to: Your post is so full of holes that I won't even....... sm - m
You and I are on the same page when it comes to rude and inflammatory posts. I will be responding to them whenever the spirit moves me. You should do the same...or not. Whatever. BTW, I for one could give a rat's bottom about maintaining a "reputation" on a forum where many, many people make a choice to remain anonymous. It's just one of those things in life you have to learn to deal with. If name-calling and throwing tantrums gives you some sense of releif, go for it, but do not expect the target to go stand in the corner and hide out until you are done.
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
Ummm....Oldtimer has posted several times
You and I are on the same page when it comes to rude and inflammatory posts. I will be responding to them whenever the spirit moves me. You should do the same...or not. Whatever. BTW, I for one could give a rat's bottom about maintaining a "reputation" on a forum where many, many people make a choice to remain anonymous. It's just one of those things in life you have to learn to deal with. If name-calling and throwing tantrums gives you some sense of releif, go for it, but do not expect the target to go stand in the corner and hide out until you are done.
Ummm.. this has been posted a couple times
nm
Ummm....wasn't me who posted about easy on the eyes... nm
nm
Ummm....ummm....nope, I'd best not touch that one. nm
x
oldtimer.....
Obviously you didn't see the interview with this doctor. There was no breech delivery with the cervix clamping down on anything. It was flat out a decision to abort a late-term pregnancy because the mother simply decided that is what she wanted. This murderer agreed to do these abortions and did them quite frequently. Now,if you want to believe that only well meaning doctors do these only for the reason you keep listing, go ahead, but the doc himself made it clear this was not a life or death situation, simply the mother deciding she no longer wanted the baby. The procedure he performed had absolutely nothing to do with necessity. It WAS to just "GET RID" of a viable baby in the true sense.
Now, you're saying this doctor didn't know what he was doing? These are murderers who perform these acts NOT OUF OF NECESSITY but for money, plain and simple, it's money. Mother didn't want the baby, so she found a doctor who obviously has absolutely no conscience at ALL and should be tried as a murderer.
He has not tried to hide the fact that he is performing these murders because he says the law is on his side.
to oldtimer
I totally agree with you...
Hey oldtimer, from another oldtimer!
I just wanted to thank you for posting the link to this article. I found it fascinating. It makes me feel more hopeful about the future of the USA, and it's nice to read an article on occasion that stimulates genuine thinking.
Oldtimer - I enjoy your
posts - don't let the extremists bum you out.
At least you were kind about it, oldtimer....sm
The three dems above you, are not kind at all.
Oldtimer, I know you are an Obama
supporter, and I am definitely not an Obama supporter. That aside, I tip my hat to you as you speak with more sincerity and maturity than anyone else on this board! Thank you.
BTW, I am probably an older timer than you!
amen, oldtimer! n/m
sx
I agree with oldtimer. So in your eyes, we should go right in,
In that case, I think your initial question was posed only in hopes of baiting an Obama supporter. I sure hope that's not the case.
Oldtimer was the original poster
You would have probably gotten that had you not been in such a hurry to jump my post. I have nothing to hide, nothing to get away with and see no real reason to dumb down the phrasology, tone or content of my posts. I respond in kind to to folks who have no real interest in viable political issues, are constantly in attack mode, have pronounced adversions to logic, reason and facts and who haul out the holier-than-thou, pious, elite accusations when trying to avoid any sort of intelligent discourse.
There will always be opposition around who can be as in-your-face as the you choose to be...or not. If I "bother" you somehow, so be it. Right wingers bother me too, but you don't see me going around trying to kick them off the board or telling them they post more than they should.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Give respect and get respect. That's the way it works in the grown-up world. It's your choice.
I was speaking to you, "sm" not oldtimer. (nm)
That was kind of rude, oldtimer. nm
nm
You are definitely not a right-wing wacko, oldtimer!
I was not referring to anyone in particular as a right-wing wacko, especially you. In fact, I find your posts to be very thoughtful and intelligent.
I agree wholeheartedly with you oldtimer -
My child struggles every week to pay her bills, her childcare, buy groceries for the kids - all on her own because at $10 an hour she makes too much to get any kind of help, but at the same time the doctors she works for are all driving nice new Hummers, Range Rovers, building million dollar buildings. And of course, they will be the first ones to complain about having to pay higher taxes.
I don't think that because she is their employee that she is working any less than them. Of course, they deserve to be paid good, but I think the "little people" who make it possible for you to run your business should get something along the line.
You said it oldtimer! Obama won by majority and
It's time for people to back the new president and be patriotic. Stop the same old vitriol.
Sorry, oldtimer, sounds like passing the buck to me...
you would think you would want to clean your party up. But I guess not. Whatever, your choice. I do not turn a deaf ear to what any Democrats say on this board...I just refute what is not truthful. And they pound me pretty good as well. And as to tuning me out...do whatever makes you comfortable. It is a free country, after all.
But oldtimer...the fact remains...if those 94 democrats...
had voted yes, it would have passed ANYWAY, no matter what the Republicans did. enough Republicans voted for it that the 94 democrats would have made the difference. It would have passed. Not all republicans voted against it.
Oldtimer, it is used in late-term abortions. To get rid of babies.
nm
Ummm...yes you did....
You said take it to the conservative board. And I do not see what in the post was bashing. It was stating an opinion, which anyone, no matter what their political affiliation is, still has the right to do on this board or any other to my knowledge. If you perceive the truth as bashing, that is your prerogative. And the truth IS, liberals continue to defend Clinton even though he was and is a morally corrupt individual who broke the law of the United States while a sitting President. He did it, that is the truth, there is no way around that. Yet your party continues to say it was about sex. I will try this one more time...perjury is perjury no matter what it is ABOUT. It is a felony. He broke the law and his oath of office. Never apologized for either. And took his last hours in office an opportunity to pardon all the crony crooks he could. And yet you continue to defend him as a great man. Pardon me if that seriously undermines the credibility of your party. That is NOT bashing. That is the TRUTH.
ummm
The way I read that is these units would be activated in case of natural or manmade diaster, not out on the streets everyday. Good greif.
Ummm, so maybe they can
Then the guilty can be punished, and the innocent prisoners who are not terrorists (or at least weren't when they were initially locked up) can be set free.
Kinda a no brainer, dontcha think?
Ummm....
source of the info and the fact that you "don't know anybody who would think it's right" yada yada yada, chances are you and the author are jumping to conclusions that are most likely a tad over-stated. It might be helpful to keep in mind that the "government" is not some block of concrete buildings or master computer somewhere. They are flesh and blood just like the rest of us and are not likely to be party to placing "control" of the heath care of themselves, their parents and their own children in the thoes of such a scheme. Sorry. Jury's still out on this.
Ummm....
source of the info and the fact that you "don't know anybody who would think it's right" yada yada yada, chances are you and the author are jumping to conclusions that are most likely a tad over-stated. It might be helpful to keep in mind that the "government" is not some block of concrete buildings or master computer somewhere. They are flesh and blood just like the rest of us and are not likely to be party to placing "control" of the heath care of themselves, their parents and their own children in the thoes of such a scheme. Sorry. Jury's still out on this.
Ummm...no....
Get over yourself. If you have something intelligent to say, I'm all ears, but until that time.....
Ummm....(sm)
So you don't think waterboarding is illegal -- even though it goes directly against at least 4 existing treaties? If we aren't going to be held accountable by treaties that WE agree to, what's the point of being in them?
This is actually where I do disagree with Obama. He doesn't want to make this into a partisan thing and is seemingly not too interested in prosecutions. My opinion is that its not partisan to enforce existing laws. As far as I'm concerned the whole bunch from the Shrub gang need to be prosecuted. Maybe we can just extradite them to Spain. That would work for me.
Ummm....(sm)
Doesn't this belong on the gab board? What's wrong....don't want to talk about your heros, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld going down for torture?
Ummm....(sm)
I think I would go with conventional interrogation techniques...you know....the ones that actually worked on KSM before the waterboarding.
Ummm....(sm)
"what right does the government have to take MY money and give to an organization like ACORN to pass out to democratic candidates for their campaigns"
Well, that was straight out of O'Reilly's mouth. LOL. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's just about exactly what he said last night.
So you think that there is a direct funnel that takes our tax dollars and just hands them over to Acorn? Here's a news flash --- as the ladies noted last night on Billo's show, they are a nonprofit organization and have to apply and compete for grants and loans just like everyone else.
As for whether they are completely on the up and up, I have no idea, but I don't think I'll base that judgment on the commentary of a right-wing show host.
Ummm....(sm)
Exactly how is it that Fox's ratings prove that O'Reilly is not far right? LOL.. Ratings have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion.
However, since you mentioned Obama and fulfilling his promises, it may not turn out like you think. For the most part people who voted for him are pretty happy with how he's handling the economy and foreign affairs. However, there are a few things that have gotten to a lot of dems. For example, he hasn't gotten rid of "don't ask don't tell" yet. He hasn't fulfilled promises he made to the LGBT community. He's carrying on seemingly with "indefinite detention." He ran on a platform that promised these things would be fixed. Granted, he hasn't been there long and can still come around on these things. However, if he doesn't my guess is that the country will go even farther to the left than they did this time. Now that is what you should be worried about, not Fox ratings.
And just as a side note, if he gets healthcare reform through, it will be decades before a pub sets foot in the White House.
ummm.
Now who's making assumptions? You don't know what he paid for either. Secondly, I am fully aware of what is going on in this country. Spending, printing money, spending, printing money, etc., etc. Get over Bush He is gone. Obama has in four shorts months spent more money than the 43 presidents who preceded him COMBINED. So yeah, I worry about the cost of his date. Because it's just plain wrong. You want logic - you don't spend taxpayer money on a DATE in this failing economy. Logic would be to lead by example, not telling other people to sacrifice and then do something so excessive. Furthermore, who said I voted for Bush? You? Shows what you know. Next time don't vote in Obama and maybe free enterprise in this country will survive so we will all have jobs.
Ummm....(sm)
Obama has writtent 2 books ---- the first, "Dreams From My Father," was published in 1995. The second, "The Audacity of Hope," was published in 2006. --- Both before the election.
Ummm....actually it does...(sm)
The Declaration of Independence is not and was not a legal document. It simply stated the intent of the US to separate from Great Britian and why. It did not define any rules or regulations to be imposed in this nation.
Explain the Treaty of Tripoli that says "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
Another note: Not everyone in this country is in the business of impressing your god and therefore has no need of any kind of "blessing" from your god. What if I were a pagan and told you that the sun god was going to scorch the US unless everyone prayed to him/her. Would you do it? That's what you expect everyone else to do to impress your god. Why? Because YOU don't want to be in the mix when your supposed wrath of god experience comes. I would put that in the category of trying to make others do something they don't agree with just to save your behind. Don't even bother with the "but we want to save you too" speech. Believe me, we don't want or need saving.
Ummm...no....(sm)
Your main point was what you initially stated, and that was that there was no mention in the MSM about this incident. Unfortunately for you, I can undoubtedly come up with even more proof of MSM coverage if you'd like, but that would only serve to embarass you further.
As far as Obama not saying much about it, I think that was a good choice. At the time he was only a couple days out from his speech in Cairo. --- That would be the speech where he is seeking to calm tensions between our religous nuts and their religious nuts. Yeah....that would have been just a perfect time to bring that up. How about using your brain for a change instead of just spitting out the right wing talking points.
Ummm....(sm)
I do believe I've more than proven I can take the heat on this board....LOL, even from the loons like you who just lurk around waiting for me to post something so you can jump on it, which is rather funny and pathetic all at the same time, as well as from the paranoid lunatics like Patty.
BTW, you can now take "paranoid lunatic" out of the insinuation box and put in the statement box......just so you don't get confused.
Ummm....(sm)
A gag order was issued:
http://www2.arkansasonline.com/news/2009/jun/08/gag-order-issed-shooting-case/
The whole point of the gag order (which the prosecutors asked for, btw) is so they can come up with a jury that has not been overexposed to the case. I guess Fixed Noise wants to ensure that everyone hears about this so we can have a really hard time prosecuting this guy. Way to go Fox! 
Ummm....no. The link says sm
it contains a malformed video id. That's what it says when you paste it into the address bar and it takes you to You Tube.
Ummm...Which America would that be?
nm
Ummm....they do, actually, just as they take issue with
and ran with it.
Ummm....for starters
managed to assemble more than a dozen transitional economic advisors in 3 days, and I am certain he will not confine himself to those guys before it's all over. He has a 15 cabinet positions, 6 cabinet-level administrations positions and 3 Level 1 Executive Schedule offices to consider.
He's not been sworn into office, so there is not a whole lot he can do directly except to articulate his intent. No time for ego for a man who is preparing to face one of the greatest challenges as president in the history of our country. BTW, the Office of the President Elect has been around since 1963...not O's idea.
Ummm, think we should be concering ourselves
nm
Ummm...you surely know!!
.
...jealous?...ummm....
asdf
Ummm, this may come as a surprise to you
There are between 1.3 and 1.6 BILLION Moslems in the world. Estimates of how many live in the US are widely disputed, but range between 2 and 7 million. Among them, only a very small percentage of them are extremist. That leaves about a BILLION of them, give or take, for Obama to "win over." Got it?
Ummm....it goes with the territory...
It is their responsibility to entertain ambassadors, foreign heads of state, etc., etc. Use you freaking brain box. At least they didn't REDECORATE.
Ummm....I have a question...(sm)
Exactly what is it that Obama is doing that causes fear?
Ummm..Martha my dear
Woo..Hoo..is this gonna be a **Martha Stewart moment**?
Ummm....let's see....Howard Wolfson....
Lannie Davis, Bob Beckel, Susan Estrich, Greta Van Susteren, Geraldo Rivera...all of those are Democrats and all of those are liberals. Greta was at CNN before Fox. There are many others, I can't remember all their names. Fox has had the highest ratings during the democratic convention and they have covered the whole thing...so much for never reporting on issues important to Democrats. They covered Obama and McCain equally during the campaign season, and while I realize that to please this poster a network would have to be all Obama all the time, THAT is the definition of bias. And decidedly UNDEMOCRATic.
Fox has the highest news ratings in the country by a pretty hefty margin, so I am thinking that while "many" Democrats "despise" Fox News, many others don't mind seeing both sides of an issue. Imagine that!
Ummm...my analogy refers to
I have looked beyond the pretty face. Problem is, I don't see a whole lot there, unless she is trying for her old position as PTA chairman. The depth of your analysis, as you insist on trying to deflect this away from the issue of her paper-thin resume and toward some sort of cat fight over "looks" demonstrates exactly what kind of follower she will attract. Do you think that slam about envy and being unattractive has any bearing on anything of substance? Trust me. These are not some isolated ramblings from an envious, malcontent, ugly, what's-her-name/Cindy McCain wannabe. You and she will have to be answering some really tough challenges from all those groups named in the previous post. Guess you missed that as your post disintegrated into name-calling that has absolutely nothing to do with the very serious issues at hand. In terms of her preparedness to lead this nation, she strikes me and many, many others as being a Bobo. My little post….just the tip of the iceberg. You'd better find some bigger guns than lipstick and nail files.
|
