Voters do this when candidates spout fvalues.
Posted By: Media too...at least in the real world. nm on 2008-09-01
In Reply to: In your world....thank God not in mine. nm - sam
nm
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
WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SPOUT?
*I forget this forum doesn like apostrophes*
Are you trying to say that you should have posted *aren't* instead of ARE?
Or are you trying to say that this forum won't LET you post an apostrophe, say, in a word like *DOESN'T* and that's they you omitted it above???????
Or are you just getting too POd because the Bush *house of lies* is crumbling right before your eyes?
I'd much read an intelligent, sensible, HONEST diatribe than insults from someone who constantly defends and finds some sort of ethical character in a man who is a pathological liar with an ego the size of Cleveland.
He lies and deceives. His goons try to sneak religion in a science class by LYING and DECEIVING (as the very perceptive BUSH-NOMINATED Judge noted). Yet the Bush worshippers defend immoral deeds and blast the people who believe in HONESTY. Ergo, you have no credibility, as well.
Walmart is now being investigated regarding handling of hazardous waste. Normally, I would think this is a good thing. Instead, I have to wonder if they're being *punished* because they refuse to follow orders chant *Merry Christmas* to everyone. I have to wonder if this is yet another Bush-sanctioned *get-even* tactic, since this is the MO Bush has used since before he was (s)elected president.
And, no, I can't say for certain that he was ever elected president, because the 2004 election is being investigated by the GAO for election fraud.
The simple fact that I don't BELIEVE (based on HIS OWN ACTIONS) that your president is ethically *above* cheating or lying speaks volumes to the character, honesty and integrity of the man you continue to defend.
And one more thing before I end my *diatribe.*
HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
What bullsh!t you spout.
That is nothing more than a left-winged wacko response and from where I'm sitting....there is plenty of enthusiasm for McCain as there are a lot of people who don't trust Obama with his terrorist associations, his money giving to ACORN who is assisting in voter fraud, his sketchy ability to buy his property at a cheap price through Rezko, his cousin in Kenya who Obama campaigned for and gave money to and when his cousin lost the election....his people rioted and killed people. This is a man who has dodged every sketchy association until things were pointed out and he had to change his story several times. A man who can't possibly keep any of his promises he makes to the American people if he is elected but all people hear is Change. There is no change in making lies during a campaign just to get elected. His plans will NOT help the economy.
Do you people realize that he wants to tax businesses more? Our taxes are higher than other countries now.....that is why companies are going to other countries and Americans are losing jobs. They can run their companies elsewhere for a cheaper price. So raising taxes on them most certainly WON'T keep jobs in America!!! It will make more of them go elsewhere. That will lead to more people receiving that monthly welfare check Obama wants to dish out to people. That will be more people getting government money who don't pay taxes. Do you see the snow ball getting bigger here cause I sure as he11 do.
Go ahead and spout gt if makes you feel better
however, you are only making a fool of yourself along with the namby pamby liberals who write stuff like this.
Why does Ann spout all this Christian stuff but look like a hooker?
Surely someone else has noticed this. She also appears to be and sounds like a very very nasty person. Icky.
We feel like we deal Obama fanatic zombies who only spout
hope and change, change and hope, ad nauseum. You guys have too much kool aid on the brain to make sense to anyone but yourselves.
Where were all the voters before?
Good point. I vote in every election, whether it be for president or town dog catcher. It is really pathetic to see the low turnout time after time unless it is the presidential election or a tax overide on the ballot. And I live in a town with a majority of senior citizens, can't imagine how low the turnout would be without them.
When my Dad was alive and we lived in the same town, he would check the list when you first signed in to make sure our names were crossed off indicating that we had voted. Look out if you had not. He was a big bad Boston police officer and you did not want to cross him!
It also comes down to those voters
who had no clue what they were voting for and did no research at all and just voted for the celeb candidate. How many people did interviewers stop and question about Obama and McCain and they had no clue who was for what or who their VPs were, etc......but they were voting for Obama.
I know that all people have a right to vote but I think sometimes we should really restrict that. LOL! Too may ignorant people not knowing who they are voting for but they are voting just to vote.
All voters should consider this regardless of which side
It should be very troubling that the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama since day one. Ask Hillary Clinton or anyone else who ran (again, R, D, or I).
With that in mind, who gave them the right to choose our next President?
Incidentally, the media (left-wing, of course) actually selected McCain, too. They were absolutely certain that he would be the weakest candidate. Mitt scared the holy hanna out of them. I personally hoped for a Rudy-Fred ticket, in no particular order.
It should be interesting as to how many honest people there are reading this stuff to see how they'll react. Based on what I've read since Palin's speech, she's certainly changed quite a few minds.
The thing that surprises me the most is that the bulk of people on this board is women, yet so many of them put party above the person. I personally don't vote by genitalia. I think it's foolish.
tell that to the voters who are only voting for O
There were thousands of voters........ sm
who voted in this election who were not informed or educated on the issues or the candidates. I don't see much of a difference, do you?
American voters do not trust
the fact that this is a real "crisis". Don't want to allow Bush to force congress into another debacle like the funding for the war before he is dragged from the WH kicking and screaming. McCain is asking for time out so he can rest and catch his breath.
the voters don't decide the election- sm
Perhaps you forgot, or don't even know, that it isn't the voters who actually decide the election anyway. It is the electoral college. We could all boycott (although that would be stupid beyond belief as our voices would not be heard at all) and it would not affect the election results anyway. Get it??
If it weren't for uninformed voters
NEITHER candidate would have a chance.
VOTING BY WRITE-IN VOTE FOR LOU DOBBS!!!!!!!!!
Too bad that over half the voters disagree with you.
.
There are a lot of voters across America who make
$250,000 or more who are voting for Obama. These are the same folks who will pay more taxes under Obama's tax plan. It goes to show even the wealthy who will be taxed more by Obama's tax plan, still want him to be President. I hear JTP complain but he is not making much money and he owes back taxes. There must be something right about Obama if the wealthy who are going to get a tax increase, are voting for him.
Of course they did. But at issue here is showing voters
I did not call you an imbecile. I said your posts are imbecilic. Being a hot-headed Obama supporter, according to the red camp, I have no character to degrade, so evidently I have nothing to lose by calling it like I see it. BTW, I've probably done all the growing I'm gonna do by age 64.
Belittling intelligent voters
just end up making you and yours look very, very small. It is sad to see the other party's apparent complusion to tear down something they cannot quite understand. Better luck next time with your candidate, your campaign strategy and your capacity to muster up the hope and inspiration so many Americans are feeling today. Maybe you too can find a way to feel a bit more proud of who you are and who seeks to represent you.
Speaking of stupid voters....(sm)
http://www.break.com/index/redneck-woman-rails-on-obama.html
stupid voters are an embarrassment to all of us huh!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUC3ORbhjTg
candidates
I think they will both be true in the future to who they are now (as well as they can be with having to work with Congress to get things done), but "what you see" depends on where you're looking and who's doing the talking.
Candidates
Why not let felons vote? No different than providing amnesty to millions of illegals to get their vote, which is going to happen whether we like it or not.
Obama certainly talks the talk. I have a couple of problems with him. One his pastor. He might also consider running as an AMERICAN, not an African-American. It matters not that he happens to be a black AMERICAN. Let's be done with racism on BOTH sides. Sometimes I think the only way we, who happen to be Caucasian, can ever satisfy the African-American community is to become slaves for a few hundred years. Let it go already. There is not one person alive today who ever was a slave or ever owned a slave. Let's move on.
McCain.........while I honor his service to this country, if I hear about his POW years one more time I think I'll vomit. I saw him on a talk show where he was asked about how many houses he owns and he immediately launched into his "years as a POW where he didn't even have a table much less a house".
God save this country, neither candidate is going to help Him.
Yes...too bad the candidates don't
talk to real Americans, not the CEOs, the Hollywood elite (why anyone take any political advice from a so-called movie star is beyond me) when cameras aren't around. Most candidates perceive us as being sheeple, say some pretty things and we will follow, no matter how high the cliff is you're brining us over. I don't care how many houses you own, what faith your father was, if you had an affair or if you wear a flag pin. Get to some frickin' issues when you debate each other, don't give us the run around and jab each other. Neither one of you are stellar candidates. You both have faults, you both have good points, but for cripe's sake, talk about something that matters to us!
candidates
instead of obama or mccain, any other candidates you may vote for?
http://www.votesmart.org/election_president.php
Voters Send a Pro-Choice message
I read this in my local paper this evening. The entire column is a bit too long to post, but I personally found it interesting. Some highlights:
In three states, abortion was literally on the ballot. In South Dakota, a ban amounting to outright criminalization of the procedure was defeated soundly, going down by a yawning margin in a deeply red state. In California and Oregon, voters turned back efforts to mandate parental involvement in abortions for teenagers -- it's the second time California has rejected the proposal.
---
As Democrats seized control of the Senate, abortion-rights supporters gained ground. Incoming Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Jon Tester of Montana, Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Jim Webb of Virginia all support abortion rights. They all are set to replace anti-abortion Republicans -- and will vote in the chamber that decides on the fate of nominees to the Supreme Court.
In the House, at least 22 new pro-choice members are to replace lawmakers whose records were either anti-abortion or mixed on the issue, according to a count by NARAL Pro-Choice America. Final results in a few races still are unknown.
---
In Arizona's 5th Congressional District, where anti-abortion Republican incumbent J.D. Hayworth was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell, residents received fliers mocking Hayworth's support for letting pharmacists who say they personally oppose contraception to refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions. ``Sleeping pills? I don't believe in sleeping pills,'' a genial-looking middle-aged man in a white coat says in the flier. ``Try counting sheep.'' Tying incumbents to the pharmacist-refusal issue, as well as to their widespread opposition to emergency contraception, showed these lawmakers to be precisely where they are: Outside the mainstream.
Any comments?
I do not think there will be anything negative from family values voters...
I do not believe they will react negatively to this. What kind of man would McCain have been to decide not to choose her just because her daughter was pregnant and not married. What if she was pregnant and married? This whole thing just reeks. Like Obama said...children should not be involved in politics and this will not affect her ability to function as governor or as vice president. At least one on the left is being decent about this.
Yeah, and a large number of those new voters are
coming out saying they will vote for McCain now.
to foster relations with the Muslim voters...
both campaigns are needing those votes - not just Obama. There are Muslims in this country that are American citizens and they do get a vote too.
Probably because after 35 years, voters probably feel confident
Guess Biden's appearance in front of 3875 University of Northern Colorado students earlier today was just our/their collective imaginations. Tune in tomorrow for his 8:30 am stop in Colorado Springs, his afternoon stump in Pueblo or perhaps Thursday's in Raleigh NC rally. There is no reason whatsoever for Biden or the campaign to blink an eye over Biden stating the obvious about a new president being tested. He can also comfortably shine light on the experience issue (double-digit lead an all) since McCain gave up any credibility on that subject the minute he picked SP. Did you see the new polls top pick regarding what McCain's greatest liability is? But there should be no suprise there. Voters would have to be crazy to think she is ready to lead when she does not even understand her own job description and didn't have the sense to read the Constitution after the last 2 times she botched that question.
Typical pub. Underestimates the intelligence of US voters.
x
Obama has played the voters for fools...
http://exposingliberallies.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-has-played-voters-for-fools.html
To think that conservatives have viewed Bill and Hillary Clinton as unethical politicians who would do anything to get elected. When we are as disgusted as we think we possibly can be, on to the political stage steps Barack Obama. The senator from Illinois makes Bill and Hillary look “not quite so bad”.
Though they enjoyed paling around with Yasser Arafat, we didn’t have the all-consuming fear that they would completely sell-out Israel, nor did we have to worry about them supporting infanticide, though they saw nothing wrong with partial-birth abortion.
Yes, Obama keeps his pants on when away from his “bitter-half,“ Michelle, but that’s not much comfort when he has campaigned for Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga who made a pact with Kenyan Muslims to institute Sharia law.
http://exposingliberallies.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-funds-odinga-who-promises-sharia.html
Thomas Sowell has written an article in National Review describing how Obama has played the American people for fools.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTQ5YTM3M2UzMjY3N2M3YWRiMDI0NzNmMTNhNjJlNTc=
“Although Senator Barack Obama has been allied with a succession of far-Left individuals over the years, that is only half the story. There are, after all, some honest and decent people on the Left. But these have not been the ones that Obama has been allied with — allied, not merely ‘associated’ with.
ACORN is not just an organization on the left. In addition to the voter frauds that ACORN has been involved in over the years, it is an organization with a history of thuggery, including going to bankers’ homes to harass them and their families, in order to force banks to lend to people with low credit ratings.
Nor was Barack Obama’s relationship with ACORN just a matter of once being their attorney long ago. More recently, he has directed hundreds of thousands of dollars their way. Money talks — and what it says is more important than a politician’s rhetoric in an election year.
Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger are not just people with left-wing opinions. They are reckless demagogues preaching hatred of the lowest sort — and both are recipients of money from Obama.
Bill Ayers is not just ‘an education professor’ who has some left-wing views. He is a confessed and unrepentant terrorist, who more recently has put his message of resentment into the schools — an effort using money from a foundation that Obama headed.
Nor has the help all been one way. During the last debate between John McCain and Barack Obama, Senator McCain mentioned that Sen. Obama’s political campaign began in Bill Ayers’s home. Obama immediately denied it and McCain had no real follow-up.
It was not this year’s political campaign that Obama began in Bill Ayers’s home but an earlier campaign for the Illinois state legislature. Barack Obama can match Bill Clinton in slickness at parsing words to evade accusations.
That is one way to get to the White House. But slickness with words is not going to help a president deal with either domestic economic crises or the looming dangers of a nuclear Iran.
People who think that talking points on this or that problem constitute ‘the real issues’ that we should be talking about, instead of Obama’s track record, ignore a very fundamental fact about representative government.
Representative government exists, in the first place, because we the voters cannot possibly have all the information necessary to make rational decisions on all the things that the government does. We cannot rule through polls or referendums. We must trust someone to represent us, especially as President of the United States.
Once we recognize this basic fact of representative government, then the question of how trustworthy a candidate is becomes a more urgent question than any of the so-called ‘real issues.’
A candidate who spends two decades promoting polarization and then runs as a healer and uniter, rather than a divider, forfeits all trust by that fact alone.
If Ronald Reagan had attempted to run for president of the United States as a liberal, the media would have been all over him. His support for Barry Goldwater would have been in the headlines and in editorial denunciations across the country.
No way would he have been able to get away with using soothing words to suggest that he and Barry Goldwater were like ships that passed in the night.
If Barack Obama had run as what he has always been, rather than as what he has never been, then we could simply cast our votes based on whether or not we agree with what he has always stood for.
Some people take solace from the fact that Senator Obama has verbally shifted position on some issues, like drilling for oil or gun control, since this is supposed to show that he is ‘pragmatic’ rather than ideological.
But political zigzags show no such moderation as some seem to assume. Lenin zigzagged and so did Hitler. Zigzags may show no more than that someone is playing the public for fools.
Some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. But Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe. He does that very well.”
Right on, brother! Right on! It’s refreshing to see a black conservative who stands on principle and doesn’t support Obama just because of his dark pigment. I’m speaking of you, General Powell.
To all well-educated voters and free thinkers...
On Tuesday night, If and when Barack Hussein Obama wins the 2008 United States Presidential Election, please join me in announcing that "The tribe has spoken, and that John McCain, Sarah Palin, and the ubiquitous Sam have officially been voted off the island!"
No, Obama voters will be stomping and kicking
nm
I think Obama will ask his voters to vote for who he wants in; I hope not though! nm
I hope each one of these candidates
wins! They've been there, done that, and in my opinion, should have the strongest voices. I just hope it isn't too late for this country by next election day!
then again, they ALL scare me - all the candidates
   
Presidential candidates
I think MTs should run the country!!! 
Candidates cars
This was fun to read
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160091
Do either of the candidates have a plan
for this financial crisis that does not involve the taxpayers bailing out the US?
Independent candidates have to
have at least 15% in opinion polls in order to participate in the presidential debates. Right now....the only candidates eligible to participate in the debate are, of course, McCain and Obama. To me....that says that no independent has enough backing to do any good except for take votes from the other two. There is nothing wrong with voting for an independent though. If you feel Ron Paul is a better candidate, you have the right to vote for him. However, some say it would be throwing your vote away since the likelihood of him actually win is slim. You never know though. Do what you feel is best and go with your gut. If you truly believe in Ron Paul, vote for him. No one can knock you for that.
If one of the candidates was not Obama I would be...
tempted. However, in my view, it is way too important for the future of this country to doa protest vote. same reason I am voting a straight republican ticket. The thought of Obama as president and a majority in congress...makes it way too important for a protest vote this cycle...at least for me.
Here are some other parties and their candidates.
The Libertarian Party has nominated former Congressman Bob Barr, the Constitution Party has nominated pastor and radio talk show host Chuck Baldwin, and the Green Party has nominated former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Ralph Nader declined to seek the Green Party nomination and is running as an independent candidate. That is in addition to the Ron Paul fans as well as McCain and Obama.
What did we get out of the debate last night? That same ole crap Obama and McCain have been throwing around since the get go. Imagine what that would be like with all these other people thrown in the debate as well.
They only cover 2 candidates because
we don't demand that they do otherwise. Power to the people!!!!
I wish there was a rule that the candidates HAVE TO
avoid them and go off in a direction of their own choosing. Especially when it's something they already said before. This second debate had me yawning.
here are a few if my candidates lose -
1. Get up Wed. AM, after election, turn on TV. See my faves didn't win. My reaction: 'Oh, cr@p!'
2. my actions: Eat cereal and drink coffee.
3. Where to go from thERE?
BACK TO BED!
4. What will I flee? My low-paying MT job, which most likely will never get any better.
Now I know how the candidates feel!
Say one thing and everyone wants to dissect your every move! LOL
sbMT for President! who wants to be my running mate???
HAHA J/K
Voters who actually read party platforms and plans
the distinctions between $250,000, $200,000 and $150,000. The figures apply to a variety of tax structures which have been clearly laid out for those interested in something other than basing their vote on dead-end issue-dodging, obsfucation, misinformation, character slurs and the like. You can read up or not. The information is there for the taking.
Anyone interested in the candidates houses? SM
On the www.apartmentherapy website, they feature the candidates homes. I love that site. Anway...spoiler alert, if anyone cares.
________________________________
What I found interesting is Mitt Romney lives in a comptemporary home on the water, which is pictured next to Barack Obama's conservative georgian style home.
OK, not of vital interest, I just love looking at homes. 
Scary that you would support either of those candidates.
p
and now they've found out all 3 candidates'
Reminds me a lot of LA hospital employees getting fired for snooping in Britney Spears' medical records. I don't know what exactly there is to snoop in passport records, but it's still a privacy breach.
Differences in Wives of the candidates...
So I have only seen Michelle and Cindy speak few times.
However I have noticed something that sticks out to me tremendously, and this was the attitude of the two.
Last night Cindy was calm, sweet, and caring.
Michele seems hard, negative, and loud.
Obviously I am a Republican, but I pride myself on trying to be objective. Do we see these things differently or is this agreed upon? Cindy definitely seems like a weak little doe, and Michele a tough ox.
I'm not saying either is worse, just something I observed.
Polls promising for both candidates
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26627956#26627956
|
!["](http://www.blogger.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif"){kind=icon}
0 comments:
Post a Comment