Whatever...you are so clueless...You wouldn't know the right context...sm
Posted By: Democrat on 2005-10-03
In Reply to: Just playing by liberal rules - Rep
if it bit you on the butt. Too bad, soooo sad.
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
Oops, meant "not clueless." Perhaps I'm not clueless but need to brush up on
nm
New Movie Out.. Not just Clueless but Totally Clueless
starring gt as the whining liberal elitist with the chihuahua.
I'd say I'm clueless at all....
What is with the aversion to telling the truth, or at least providing sources for your claims? Please, do a different dance than most of the neocons and provide some worthy evidence!!!! That is all I'm asking.
Not really a hateful person at all....just tired of folks who do not value honesty, that's all.
Clueless!
//
Clueless!!!!!
no wonder the democrats are in such bad shape. you have no idea of the workings of the dow! Man on manoschevitz!
You are obviously clueless since you have
remotely intelligent. I have a feeling it's because you haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about and you are only here because you love to stir up trash. You enjoy wallowing in that heap. I'll find someone who is capable of engaging in true debate and not looking to get their kicks with juvenile behavior.
TO clueless........
I am sick and tired of putting money in the hands of people who refuse to get off their butts. I do not want to pay for their many many children while they sit at home and wait for the Headstart bus to give their child curbside service so they can have a babysitter for their child all day long, while they do nothing to better themselves, even though they can go back to school during this time, get an education, H@LL FIRE, get a job. Most of these folks are within walking distances to a job but they don't want one because that would mean having to pay their own way in life. They have better than many members of my family who have actually worked their entire lives and haven't asked for a handout while they sit and watch neighbors living in HUD houses, tear them up, party all day and all night, children running rampant all over the place....it's sickening really.
When you see your paycheck dwindle to nothing, just know you can be proud in saying you contributed to the welfare roll.
Wow - you really ARE clueless.
I don't give two poos about gay marriage. So YOUR negaitive energy is misdirected.
I have this mental picture of you.
It looks a lot like Gollum.
You are truly clueless..........
I said there are blacks in my community that do NOT take advanatage of the opportunities afforded them. And, please, no kid around here is choosing to sell drugs to support their families. I was born very poor and I have better since than to sell drugs or steal.
You need to get off your righteous high horse and get a clue. Being poor is no excuse, NO EXCUSE, for murdering innocent people because you want a dollar in your pocket. I didn't have a say in when I arrived either, but I sure as heck know the difference between right and wrong.
BTW, these poor kids's government is not there to SUPPORT them, even though my tax dollars do just that! That attitude is the problem with the thinking of those that think they are "entitled" to more free money. You obviously feel you need the government to make your living and do your thinking for you as well as these kids. Their government is supposed to be there for the purpose of providing a strong military to support the safety of our country, not pay their way through life!!!
There are plenty of poor white kids around here....I spend time in our schools and believe me, there are many poor kids of both colors. Crimes are committed by those of both races, but the greatest number are by blacks. If you don't like those numbers, too bad; those are the facts. Those gangs which you seem to think so highly of only support one thing......more CRIME!
You need to get yourself into one of our schools around here and ask some of the children what they want to be when they grow up......you would be shocked to hear the answers. Some people just live in a dream world. Continue to feel sorry for their situation and encourage that behavior; your attitude does just that.
Clueless......
And who voted for GW? Hahahaha! I'm glad we have mental giants such as you who can sum it all up for us! You sho must make a LOT of money to support all those lazy people out there.
CLUELESS = NOTHING TO SAY!
@@
Clueless
Why don't you stick to commenting on things you actually have a clue about? I'm sure that the president was intricately involved in all aspects of the strategy for this rescue operation, even though you didn't hear about it.
LOL.....totally clueless. So, gt.....sm
It only matters to you if a Republican's ancient ancestor was in cahoots with Hitler. But Democrats can skate, right? Right! Gotcha!
You are clueless and hateful
and EVERYTHING stated in that article is LIES!
You just proved how clueless you are
Are your paranoid or have you been drinking again? I love confusing liberals, but then it's not too hard to do.
She's as clueless as the president...nm
They are clueless on purpose ...
it's almost laughable.
clueless...idiots...
x
You really are clueless aren't you?
There is a word for rising up against your government and our founding fathers made sure the CITIZENS of this country, who OWN their government, had in place a constitution which actually ALLOWED us to rise up and speak AGAINST our government if EVER we felt our government was out of control.
That's why the 'right to bear arms' was put in there or did you overlook that too?
You are so diluded in your thinking that you actually BELIEVE no one is supposed to speak out against their government. Do you know WHY our founding fathers wanted to make sure Americans had firearms? To stand up and resist a tyranical government when it is out of control.
You better be glad somebody cares enough for your backside that they still understand what your rights are, cause you SURE DON'T!
You have no problem with anyone speaking against our government; you have a problem with someone speaking against THIS president, cause he is black and you can't stand it! If you do nothing else, be honest about that at least.... it's so obvious!
You are truly one clueless person.
You are truly one clueless person.
You are welcome. (and totally clueless but who cares). nm
Yet more confirmation that Georgie is clueless.
Bush Unaware of Ports Deal Before Approval
By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer 45 minutes ago
President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.
Defending the deal anew, the administration also said that it should have briefed Congress sooner about the transaction, which has triggered a major political backlash among both Republicans and Democrats.
Bush on Tuesday brushed aside objections by leaders in the Senate and House that the $6.8 billion sale could raise risks of terrorism at American ports. In a forceful defense of his administration's earlier approval of the deal, he pledged to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement involving the sale of a British company to the Arab firm.
Bush faces a rebellion from leaders of his own party, as well as from Democrats, about the deal that would put Dubai Ports in charge of major shipping operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.
While Bush has adamantly defended the deal, the White House acknowledged that he did not know about it until recently.
He became aware of it over the last several days, McClellan said. Asked if Bush did not know about it until it was a done deal, McClellan said, That's correct. He said the matter did not rise to the presidential level, but went through a congressionally-mandated review process and was determined not to pose a national security threat.
The president made sure to check with all the Cabinet secretaries that are part of this process, or whose agencies or departments are part of this process, the spokesman said. He made sure to check with them — even after this got more attention in the press, to make sure that they were comfortable with the decision that was made.
And every one of the Cabinet secretaries expressed that they were comfortable with this transaction being approved, he said.
Commerce Secretary Carlos Guiterrez, told The Associated Press in an interview: They are not in charge of security. We are not turning over the security of our ports. When people make statements like that you get an instant emotional reaction.
The sale's harshest critics were not appeased.
I will fight harder than ever for this legislation, and if it is vetoed I will fight as hard as I can to override it, said Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. King and Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record) of New York said they will introduce emergency legislation to suspend the ports deal.
Another Democrat, Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, urged his colleagues to force Bush to wield his veto, which Bush — in his sixth year in office — has never done. We should really test the resolve of the president on this one because what we're really doing is securing the safety of our people.
McClellan dismissed any connection between the deal and David Sanborn of Virginia, a former senior DP World executive whom the White House appointed last month to be the new administrator of the Maritime Administration of the Transportation Department. Sanborn worked as DP World's director of operations for Europe and Latin America.
My understanding is that he has assured us that he was not involved in the negotiations to purchase this British company, McClellan added.
In terms of David Sanborn, he was nominated to run the Maritime Administration because of his experience and expertise, the spokesman said. Sanborn is a graduate of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. He is an operations professional.
Earlier, several lawmakers determined to capsize the pending sale said they would not be deterred by Bush's veto threat.
Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), D-Del., said the bipartisan opposition to the deal indicated a lack of confidence in the administration on both sides. Sure, we have to link up with our Arab friends but ... we want to see and those in Congress want to know what ... safeguards are built in, Biden said on ABC's Good Morning America.
Bush's veto threat sought to quiet a political storm that has united Republican governors and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee with liberal Democrats, including New York Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Schumer.
To assuage concerns, the administration disclosed some assurances it negotiated with Dubai Ports. It required mandatory participation in U.S. security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials; roughly 33 other port companies participate in these voluntarily. The Coast Guard also said it was nearly finished inspecting Dubai Ports' facilities in the United States.
Frist said Tuesday, before Bush's comments, that he would introduce legislation to put the sale on hold if the White House did not delay the takeover. He said the deal raised serious questions regarding the safety and security of our homeland.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., asked the president for a moratorium on the sale until it could be studied further. We must not allow the possibility of compromising our national security due to lack of review or oversight by the federal government, Hastert said.
Bush took the rare step of calling reporters to his conference room on Air Force One after returning from a speech in Colorado. He also stopped to talk before television cameras after he returned to the White House.
He said that members of Congress need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully.
A senior executive from Dubai Ports World pledged the company would agree to whatever security precautions the U.S. government demanded to salvage the deal. Chief operating officer Edward Ted H. Bilkey promised Dubai Ports will fully cooperate in putting into place whatever is necessary to protect the terminals.
Lawmakers from both parties have noted that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base. In addition, critics contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.
___
Associated Press writers Ben Feller, Will Lester, Terence Hunt, and Devlin Barrett in Washington, Matthew Verrinder in Newark, N.J., and Tom Stuckey in Annapolis, Md., contributed to this report.
Why are people clueless?! Because they don't agree with YOU?!
xx
You are clueless or you would realize the point!!!
--
I would say as long as you are willing to walk around clueless.
xx
I would say as long as you are willing to walk around clueless.
Oh, and by the by, I don't remember addressing this to whatever your name is.
Out of context? Hardly, LOL!
Oh, the quote definitely is not out of context and the world and most of America realizes it, that is, the part of America that isnt brain washed by the radical neocons or radical christian movement, you know, the normal Americans, not the Bush sheeple..Posting on other boards? Many years experience here, also many years experience on Yahoo groups and political chat rooms, so I dont need *lessons*. Thank you. Oh, also years experience in the local democratic party and government..Been a political person since high school.
take what she says out of context, yet again....
and go ahead, bring up the beauty accessories, yet again....ho hum....you're the ones that keep it alive and are so transparently unable to talk real issues.
Please put them all in context, then, please...sm
. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Please give surrounding text of these statements.
They don't want to see the context
They say dems don't want to do research, but it goes both ways.
I don't know exactly the context...sm
but I did hear something on the news regarding "white male construction workers" did not need to apply for something...like I said, I am not sure of the context but I did hear something like that on the news.
All the while telling us how hateful WE are. Totally clueless. nm
More clueless brain death from fringe.
x
Obama supporters are the most clueless people
nm
W's clueless response is equally as disturbing.
"So what if the guy threw his shoe at me?" Bush told a reporter in response to a question about the incident.
"Let me talk about the guy throwing his shoe. It's one way to gain attention. It's like going to a political rally and having people yell at you. It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers. ...These journalists here were very apologetic. They ... said this doesn't represent the Iraqi people, but that's what happens in free societies where people try to draw attention to themselves."
So what? How many agree that this guy was seeking attention? Only on the W planet would the alleged leader of the free world be so unconscious and so casual about this deepest of insults. Who cares? Not W, evidently.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/14/bush.iraq/index.html
yes, calling ppl idiots and clueless is pathetic
x)
There is NO CONTEXT that can make it better.
You all keep saying taken out of context but you don't offer one iota of evidence to show this makes a bit a difference, or say why. Anytime someone is quoted the words are taken out of context.
Why don't you put your point on the line and explain why it makes a difference in this case?
Taken COMPLETELY out of context
You liberals will go to any all lengths to take down this president down even lying. Personally, the president can take care of his self, and he doesn't need me to defend him, but you took so many statements out of context here it's not funny. Most people have been thankful for their evacuation, but the media has targeted the ingrates. This is not the issue here though. The issue is that you all have it in for the president, conservatives or any one who doesn't think exactly like you. If someone disagrees or has an opinion different than you you immediately yell attack. Your agenda is very clear, pathetic but clear.
The words out of context...sm
Were the words he spoke himself on NBC Nightly News. His words were not altered. They were followed by an opinion with which he does not agree, but that does not make the documentary a LIE.
The words out of context
When you twist someone's words and give an opinion following that cannot be contested by the speaker, fully intending that your opinion be attributed to the speaker as truth...that, my friend, is a lie. And it is not the only lie in that mocumentary. Michael Moore never has had taste (Bowling for Columbine) and he never will. The fact that people buy into his anger and hatred and gloss it over as a documentary still boggles the mind.
A little context before retreat.
Yes, I know your post appeared before Cease Fire. As soon as I pressed the Post Reply button, there you were, right back up there taking one last “shot”…your words, not mine. Cease fire…broken before it even began. That would suggest that the 3rd person rules of engagement never applied either. You have made it quite clear that you prefer the garbage-out/garbage in approach…again, just dancing to your tune. Remember the part about someone always being around to answer bigotry’s call-to-arms? Thus, the gloves stay off for the time being. Besides, your rejection of the olive branch is fairly apparent by now.
He’s my friend, not my therapist. He still has so many issues of his own, he would be the first one to say that he’s the one who needs the couch. He is brilliant when it comes to helping others, just not when it comes to helping himself. We have known each other for 42 years. He actually seeks my advice, and I his..it’s personal, not professional.
The economics is way to vast to get into for the time being. May another time, but in terms of what we spend to “support” illegals, that amount is a drop in the bucket when compared to the profits generated for transnational corporations (those guys who actually run the country) in the maquilidoras in Mexico and the cheap labor pool they create once they cross that porous border. So yeah, I got some 4-letter words on that subject. Just ask yourself this fundamental question. Who stands to gain/profit from all this? As long as the transnationals’ bottom line is in the black, they have no motive to “fix” this “problem.” Don’t hold your breath. This is what global economy looks like.
The yada, yada, yada was not referring to the path to citizenship. I was talking about entering with legal status. Let’s put a face on a case. I had a Filipino friend (fellow MT) back in 1983, who entered on a work visa and applied for permanent residence. That took 3 years. She waited. No problem. Then she tried to apply for her 5 children. By 1986, the laws relative to family unification requirements had changed. In 1983, she only would have had to wait another 5 years (AFTER becoming a resident) for approval to sponsor HER OWN CHILDREN. Whoops. No so fast. By 1986, that generous 5-year wait had been doubled to (count ‘em) 10 years for Filipinos. She traveled back and forth over those years while immigration did its thing to see her children and husband, who had stayed behind to raise them in her absence.
Her kids were school age when she when she started this. By the time they were all together again, her youngest was a sophomore in college. She waited. She did it all nice and legal. Excuses, excuses, excuses? Good things come to those who wait? What’s so great about a mother missing 13 years of her children’s lives? Was it worth it? The price they paid was way too high. They had all become so disillusioned and had lost so much, within 5 years after completing the process, the entire family turned around and went back to the Philippines. So much for THEIR Ameican dream and playing by the rules. Maybe good riddance to some, a tragic shame to others. That’s just one case….and yeah, there are plenty of 4-letter words that reveal just how many others there were. Things have gotten a whole lot worse since then, but your party still insists these arcane laws are “too liberal” to suit them. Puh-leeze. So no, I don’t pick and choose laws that suit me. Simply stated, bad laws need to be changed, or eliminated all together.
No national spokesperson here. Just a lifetime of experience (sorry, Sam, you left yourself wide open by trying to be so cute). U of H, 1967…that pesky urban academic forum you love to hate. Free speech for all students was encouraged and accommodated back then. Alongside Viet Nam War, civil rights and nascent women’s lib protests were the highly visible and vocal Arabs and Iranians, here on student visas, nice and legal, the way you claim you like it. Their issues were:
- The 6-day war, when US-backed Israel stepped up its bloodthirsty quest to drive an entire Palestinian population into the refugee diaspora by expanding its illegal occupations of Syria and Egypt. They created some great future killing fields in Golan and Gaza by rearranging a few borders and chopping up the West Bank like a piece of cheap mortadella, sending millions of refugees fleeing into Jordan, which has never been the same, Syria, Europe and the US.
- The pros and cons of Arab political unity as an appropriate response to such blatant aggression and invasion. Now this idea scares the pants off the US. If the Arabs were ever to unify, and especially if they ally themselves with Iran, the world power that would create could crush US superpower ambitions with its eyes shut. US was really nervous about that prospect. Not hard to figure why they have spent trillons of dollars since 1948 (Israel's birthday) and turned a blind eye to all that bloodshed in an effort to keep that region just as destabilized as possible. Where's the outrange over that expense? Oil makes countries do some crazy stuff.
- The formation of the OPEC states as organized by the Shah of Iran, the puppet monarch the US backed after their successful early 1950s coup that removed Mosadegh, the secular democratic prime minister who wanted to eliminate Western control and nationalize Iran’s oil. Democracy in the Middle East? Right. “Oil”agarchy? Nothing new under the sun. Imperialism? Old as the hills.
- The subsequent withdrawal of US backing for the Shah when he had the audacity to take a page out of Mosadegh’s book to suggest that Iran should control it OWN oil resources.
- The rise of a multitude of Iranian political parties, including the strengthening and empowerment of those nasty Islamic fundamentalists that eventually seized control.
- The overthrow of the US puppet monarch who, by that time, had systematically imprisoned, tortured and executed his opposition behind the scenes, ultimately turning Islamic party leadership into national martyrs, making it really easy for them to step right in and take over. Not a great choice for a puppet. Can you say "human rights?"
- The outpouring of refugees from Iran in the aftermath, trying to escape the same-song-second-verse torture, imprisonment and executions under the new leadership. My husband was one of the lucky ones who made it out in time. Things were a bit hectic for him in the middle of the blood bath, there being a revolution and all. No time for a visa. Declared asylum when he got to Germany and was approved.
- The 1951-1952 CIA-backed coup has been acknowledged by our own government and US tax dollars transfered from the US to the Israel treasury...a matter of public record, so "frankly, I don't believe it" isn't going to cut it. I could give you some more 4-letter words, but time is short. As you can see, this is not exactly democratic party line I'm spouting here. No mouthpiece on this mouth. This is information that is not served up by the US news media outlets either. You can hear a lot about it from news broadcasts from other countries and there is a ton of information to sift through on the net should one feel so inclined.
This is not some angry tirade or “tude” I harbor. Not trying to condescend or educate anyone here. History simply is not your friend, Sam, so keep those elitist accusations on the tip of your tongue where they belong. In any case, I was just like you, at first. Beat my patriotic chest, fought tooth and nail, until I finally started to acknowledge my own bias and prejudice against “foreigners” and decided to look into it all. Started reading up on the subject, listening more and talking less, checking facts, etc. Picked up a keen interest in all flavors of foreign policy. Changed my life for the better forever. Made friends along the way of all sorts and persuasions, over many decades, by now, way too numerous to count. Studied together, had lots of fun, ate dinners with them and their families, baby sat their kids, went to weddings, house warmings, baby showers and funerals, shed bucket of tears, learned respect for their customs and cultures.
I married once to an Arab for 12 years, went overseas and lived with the family for 2 years in Madaya, a RURAL village 40 miles west of Damascus in the Bekka Valley. Most beautiful orchards you ever laid eyes. Too bad the skies over this particular pastoral scene were often darkened by the storm clouds of war. That was the year Israel tried to push itself all the way to Beruit, a mere 45 miles to the west of us, decimating whole villages in the wake of that land grab (been so many, I've lost count)…but not quite as gory as their most recent offensive into Lebanon. Israeli fighter jets (bank-rolled by good ole’ American tax dollars,) would often fly so fast and so low under the radar screen they sounded like they were getting ready to crash into the house. This would send us all scrambling to the floor, nose to the ground and hands clenched tightly behind our heads in a hopeless attempt to somehow feel safer, where we would cower for a couple of minutes until it was over. Kind of reminiscent of those war photos from Sadr City and Mosul when American soldiers ransacked those villages in search of insurgents, going door-to-door, breaking in with the butt of their rifles, sending civilian old men, women and children dropping like flies in the absence of all military-age male family members (out trying to protect everybody), as the GI planted his boot into the small of an Iraqi teenager’s back, shaking like a leaf. Just how proud, safe and strong do you think that “should” make me feel?
Later married that Iranian refugee I spoke of earlier. Got in-laws abroad and here. My husband has difficulty accepting the idea that he may never see his mother, father, 3 brother(s), sister(s)-in-law, nephew and neice, aunts, uncles and cousins. We make do with weekly phone calls. My son is a native-born citizen, with very much of a westernized hyphenated Iranian side to his identity….American-Iranian, according to him. My sister lives in Tehran with her husband and her own 12-year-old American citizen American-Iranian/Iranian-American son. Hope they don’t get caught up in the aftermath of the latest nuclear flap and proposed American diplomatic efforts. You’ll forgive me if I a bit suspicious of Bush’s stunning reversal of “we don’t negotiate with terrorists” mantra. An “American interests section?” Indeed. Don’t look for the Iranian madman to agree to another CIA spy dugout in the middle of his capital city any time soon. Shades of ignored WMD inspector reports and manufactured “intelligence” (give me a break) findings. I take little comfort in the fact that he is running out of time for another Middle East invasion/fiasco.
Through it all, I have engaged myself with immigration law, starting back in college, trying to help different nationalities navigate the stormy waters of the LEGALIZATION process. Furthermore, because of my husband’s political refugee status, we are well acquainted with Homeland Security (DHS) issues. One of our friends is a DHS regional director. He is an advocate for immigrant rights and reform, legal and illegal…a position he takes after his retirement from INS after 30 years and 5 years with DHS. Probably knows a thing or 2. He can’t wait for the inauguration. Says his job will be a lot easier and kinder once McCain or Obama take office, since they both support immigration reform. Looking forward to going to sleep with a cleaner conscience, he says.
Anger? Not exactly. Passion? You bet. Please forgive me if I feel like I might have something of substance to bring into this debate. I take these issues very seriously since were are talking about my families, my friends. In my experience (not some passage out of some old dusty textbook), these are matters of life and death. I may be a little far out in left field to suit you, but I feel I have at least earned my stripes. I am no less American than anyone else born and raised here. Keep in mind that I am not by myself here either. The last 2 elections were too, too close to support that notion.
You will be relieved to hear this. That’s all the time I have right now. One thing we all can see about you is you somehow feel if you get the last word, it must be the best word. Ain’t necessarily so, but at least for the time being, you can have it your way. Have no intention to leave the remainder of your slanderous post unanswered. Debate is suspended from this side due to the job hunt thing, but certainly not finished by any means.
One thing I look forward to is the (un)Cival War discussion. Maybe you can enlighten me as to how to construe a war which produced more than half a million deaths of various sorts in 4 years was about anything except some of the same fundamental issues that divide us to this day…the economics and human rights issues that surrounded slavery then, the common thread that divides us, then and now, being the bigotry of it all. Will follow your advice and read up on the Republican party, but before playing the Abraham Lincoln was a Republican card, better bone up on how your party platform has reversed itself on most issues since it formation in the early 1850s. HisRepublican Party in no way resembles the GOP of today. Confusing? Yes. Alas, another 4 letter word for you.
I appreciate your parting “shot.” Wouldn’t want to let a little thing like a hurricane sink OUR hot air balloons (pleural). now, would we? Enjoy your last word and the sabbatical. Gonna get swallowed up by poverty if I don’t find a job soon.
The real context for this
manufactured outrage is to create the impression that O and media are against SP. That way, as more and more damaging information is revealed with investigations by reporters in alaska, hopefully the limited-information voters will disregard the facts that are revealed.
Let's put it in proper context....
she said if Georgia became a member of NATO, then according to the NATO agreement all NATO signatories (US is one of them) have to come to the aid if any of the NATO countries are invaded. She gave the correct answer.
You do know that Obama intends to see the war in Afghanistan continue and wants to send troops from Iraq there, right? The anti-war candidate?
She didn't take anything out of context. - sm
I saw the speech too, and that's exactly what she said. I'll bet there were a lot of surprised looks and people going 'Huh??' in the audience.
pulled out of any context
whatsoever to inflame prejudice. shameful, shameful behavior.
then give us the context
and prove your point.
See link for context.
It took one quick Google search to find!
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
In the true context.
I see you have no comment regarding the blatant inaccuracy of the original post.
in the true context
of the True Believers, oh grand puhba. Everyone grab match.
I heard him say it too, and the context he said it in...
so I know what he meant by it.
Wanna talk connections?
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/obamas_iraqi_oil_for_food_conn.html
|
