Whew! That kid's good, and so is the message.nm
Posted By: A.Nonymous on 2009-05-28
In Reply to: Terrific video by high school student in Alabama - me
x
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
Good post - see message
This was a great post. It is disturbing to me that a lot of democrats (not all, but all the ones I know including my mother) would rather have our country taken over by radicals, would rather in a socialist country, have government tell them what to do and what they can't do and when they can do it. They don't mind paying higher taxes rather than to have a republican in. I just don't understand it. My mother infuriates me to no end. She calls and tries to get me involved in an argument. When I point out facts to her she says she has to run off (she suddenly has to go to the bathroom or get something to eat, or something is burning on the stove or someone is at the door). She throws at me the same exact talking points I hear on MSNBC and CNN "word for word". I told her mom, vote for someone you believe in. If you believe Obama is going to be the best man then vote for him, but don't vote for him because the media is telling you to vote for him. She also will attack Palin, but she has no knowledge of what she has done. Again she just repeats what the media says. When I ask her about this policy or that policy she can't answer me because she doesn't know. I told her that she can look up these people on her own but to at least please look at sites that are both pro & con for all 4 people.
Putting aside any feelings you have towards McCain, Palin & even Biden take a look at Obama. Forget what he looks like or how he dresses. Look at him as a person. Look at the people he surrounds himself with (Ayers, Farrakan, Wright, and others). Look at the people who are his advisers. Look at his connections to the middle east friends he has in known terrorist countries. Look at his connection to Acorn (ask yourself this - if Republicans were cheating and creating voter fraud, getting their pets names registered, dead relatives, etc, and even in some cases there are more people registered than actually live in a town. What would you be doing. You'd be on this board, you'd be writing your congressman/woman, you be screaming bloody murder calling the republicans every name in the book. So why do you feel its okay if its being done by the democrats. Don't people realize that there is a reason as to why you register to vote and then at a later date vote (not at the same exact time). These people then can go to the next county, register and vote there too, and so on and so forth. A lot of democrats will scream that the cheaters are ONLY the republicans. Voter fraud infuriates me no matter which side it happens on.
So aside from his radical viewpoints look at his voting record. Everything he has voted for has not been good for middle income people, including the votes to raise taxes on middle income families, but now because he is running for President he said the middle income will not be taxed. Sound a little too familiar to the "Read my lips" states made years earlier.
Then on top of that what I think is even the most dangerous aspect is having an all democrat congress/president.
This is a good post - see message
We all have our opinions based on what we have read, seen on TV, heard on radio, and what we have researched and found. Those are our opinions and nobody will change them. The undecided I'm sure are not going to base their decision on who they vote for based solely on what people say on this board, especially when people get cut down and called names for no reason other than having an opinion that is different than those doing the cut down.
People have posted articles they want others to read because as we all know the MSM is not putting out the truth about the candidate they want to win, so a lot will post articles for others to see, but it is replied to by others as not credible or a lie or whatever term they use while at time smearing and calling the poster names.
Your post is so true. "Some require our opinions be backed up by documented proof" and then if they don't like it they will say it's not credible. I just say contact the reporter of the newspaper or article and tell it to them. Tell the lawyers, judges, reporters, scientist, etc. Tell them they are not credible.
Good question - I did some research (see message)
I posted below because the poster was wrong when he/she said he did not take anything from big guys. His whole campaign was financed by the "big guy" - special intersest groups, Goldman Sacs, Bilderberger, Brzeidski (sp?), and lobbyists, etc. One of the many lies that Obama told in his campaign "My campaign is funded by you - the American people who sent me $5 and $10" - When you think about it 52% of America (and not every person from that 52% that voted for him donated) does not equal up to the HUGE sums of money he received.
I found an article below and particularly of interest is page 2 the first two paragraphs. It talks about the money he received from special interest groups. So to answer your question - those are the people he is beholden to.
Oh yes, if you read the very last paragraph on page 2 he did indeed recieve money from lobbyists.
One last note - after I read the full article I went back to page one and read some of the comments people made - interesting comments.
http://www.alternet.org/election08/77492/
I also found another article from CNN that shows that Obama did receive money from Lobbyists.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/29/lobbyists/
Here's another article that shows he did not get his money only from 5 and 10 dollar donations. He received it from lobbyist. Guess being a laywer you do know how to "hide" info from the public.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/22/681
There are many more articles. In Google I typed in - did obama take lobbyist money - and a bunch of articles came up.
whew
Childish? Try me in a debate. Not childish here. Childish is to think we could invade a Middle Eastern country whose only mind set is being ruled by religious leaders and to think they will meet us in the street with flowers and hugs..childish and crazy is to think we will win the war on terror when terror is an ideology, not a person, not a country, an ideology. Give me a break. Childish? No, concerned about American and where it it headed? Yes. Concerned about terrorism that we have caused that will affect us and the world for decades to come? Yes. Concerned about the conservatives taking back rights of the people and going backwards when it comes to Affirmative Rights, pro choices rights, right to marry whomever you choose, right to worship whatever you choose without having a christian ideology plastered all over govt buildings, right to be able to die as you choose, right to be able to take marijuana with a doctors prescription when that is your only alleviating factor of pain..on and on..Childish? I dont think so. You with your head in the sand, yup. Either you are politically inexperienced or a republican in sheeps clothing to post like this..
Whew!
Sounds like someone has issues.
WHEW!
I'm glad I don't have a mortgage. I rent, and renting is a much better deal compared to how things have gone downhill nowadays with mortgages and folks losing their houses left and right. Good luck to those who own still own homes!
Whew! As an ex-Houstonian s/m
I'm wondering which Houston you're talking about. Surely not Houston, Texas! I still visit there frequently as I still have children and grandchildren there. They tell an entirely different story. Isn't Sharpstown, or example, a high crime community??? Inhabited by Mexicans and Asians? Maybe you live in River Oaks???? Otherwise, Houston is one of the highest crime cities in the country. Obviously not all of the melting pot is as happy as you appear to be.
Wow....whew. The coldness of that hit me for a minute....
Okay, I get it. The wholesale slaughter of babies does not bother you. You have no care for them whatsoever. Better they are sliced and diced than to add to the population problem. What if some of them were serial killers? Sheesh. What if some of the dead Iraqis were going to be terrorists? Good grief!
Talk about oversimplification. Are you saying that every war that has been fought was for naught and should not have been fought? Is that your stand? Or is it just Iraq you are concerned about? I have asked numerous times and you have never answered. Should we never for any reason go to war?
Personally I think Roe vs Wade SHOULD be overturned, because it is unconstitutional on its face. It was enacted by activist judges overturning a state law ad taking it nationwide, which they have no right to do. Only Congress at state or local level can enact law. For that reason alone it should be overturned. Then, if individual states want to change/stop/whatever abortion law they should be able to do it. We are talking about killing of human beings here. You can shoot someone in your house who is a danger to you in some states and face jail time for it...yet we slice and dice innocent babies in the womb who are defenseless and say no harm, no foul? How contradictory is that may I ask? And when, oh when, can we just ask people to show more responsibility? With all the birth control methods there are available, we should not be seeing half a million abortions a year that are second, third, and fourth abortions. That is just nuts. And, though it probably does not matter a hoot to you, my work is done with women who find themselves in a situation where a choice has to be made, and work with organizations who offer a different choice. I would like to change minds because that is where the true answer is.
All that being said, my active work is not going toward overturning Roe v Wade, though it should be for the reasons stated above. Judges need to be reined in. At least then if people are going to condone abortion (pro choice) then let them go to the polls and put their vote where their mouth is, so that we know the true will of the people. If, as you say, over half the country does agree that abortion should be legal, that thought should not scare you and I don't know why it does. And if abortion remained the law of the land, then I would continue the work I am doing, and that is trying to change minds and hearts, and give women in that situation a choice different from abortion. Because I do believe in following the law of the land. Hence, no picketing of abortion clinics, no bombings, no shooting doctors, no demonizing women in that situation. I want to offer a different choice, to give them time to think about what they are doing and the long-reaching effects. And I see nothing wrong with that. If a woman decides to go ahead with an abortion, she is certainly able to do so and receives no condemnation from us. It saddens us, of course. But the women/girls we work with are not sent away with ridicule and condemnation and if they return later with regret they are welcomed and counseled. And we see a fair amount of those as well. And, wonderfully, we are beginning to see more women making a choice for life, whether keeping the child herself or choosing adoption. I realize on the national level it is a tiny, tiny drop in the bucket...but one life saved, to me, is worth it. I cannot concentrate on the many who are lost, or I would never get anything done. I have to concentrate on the ones saved.
The real purpose of an abortion law is to encourage responsibility, because obviously something is haywire when half a million abortions a year are repeat abortions. If that is not using abortion as birth control, kindly tell me what is.
And as a final note....the June Cleaver thing is a really old chestnut. You can't tell me that 1.2 million women a year would turn into horrible mothers and the child would be better off dead than alive with their mothers. There are far more success stories than not, and there are many, many families looking to adopt newborns. There are many stories of girls/women who make that hard choice, and instead of the their lives being ruined, the child is the impetus for change in their lives. The good stories far outweigh the bad. And like I said...I am a glass half full kind of person. If we can save even a portion of those 1.2 million lives, then I believe the efforts are worth it. I certainly cannot just stand by and act like it does not matter to me. Because it does.
We are never going to agree on this subject. You can't understand why I would want to save babies and still think defending this country is okay, and I can't understand how you feel such empathy for casualties of war and feel none for aborted babies. I certainly feel empathy for casualties of war. However, I feel that war is sometimes necessary. I have no trouble with that decision. And I cannot equate the two...abortion and war. And I don't know how you can.
I personally don't make the decision to go to war. You don't personally make the decision to get an abortion. Either way, people die, although the numbers dying are much higher on the one side. And, frankly, I don't think even with the war the number of dead Iraqis has caught up to what Saddam did when he was in power. And that was not collateral damage, that was planned wholesale murder...very similar to abortion. Gas them all, men women and children, defenseless and unable to fight back. Line them up on the side of a pit, shoot them all, cover them up. Torture, beheading. Slice and dice, partially born, suck their brains out. There is a similarity. Murder. Barbarism. Same result. Dead human beings. When all is said and done, if a free Iraq emerges and that sort of behavior does not occur again, then I am willing to bet the Iraqis, down the road, will believe that it was worth it. They thought so when they were waving American flags and hugging soldiers and toppling Saddam statues. Just like we believed after the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, horrible and bloody though they were, were worth it.
I sleep well at night and am comfortable with my decisions. I assume you do too. So at least I will agree to disagree.
:)
Whew....don't have the time or inclination...
to respond to all this "drivel"...let's just hit the high points, shall we?
I suppose I am to assume that this is your normal response to someone not agreeing with you and not the result of someone pushing your buttons. Aha. Got it.
I would suggest you look up the words "obnoxious," and "personal attacks," "cliched catch phrases," "dodges" (especially dodges), deflections and deceptions and then re-read your own post. I would also suggest you read your own definition of "bigot" and then look at your reactions to what Hannity says and what I said. Uh-oh...
Y'know...sticks and stones, trotter. You have stuff in this diatribe I never said...like that "pure race" "drivel" (to use your word). Never said a word about a pure race. What in the world have you been reading?
Yeah, like you, I have better ways to spend my time. Oh and by the way...you don't have to be "rich" or "entitled" to speak in an elitist fashion or have an elitist attitude...you don't have to have a dime. You just have to have the 'tude. And believe me when I say this, with all due respect, you definitely have an elitist attitude and a definite condescending view of people you feel are not what you perceive as intelligent or enlightened. And there are many who speak in this way, which is why generally what you say is lost in the way you say it. One has to dig past the "gotchas" hunting for substance, and one rarely finds it. You are so angry about so many things, even if someone is not talking about those things you find a way in insert them in the conversation and ascribe to people things they never said or even implied. One wonders why you do that, but no matter. As you so skillfully stated, I have better things to do than try to figure it out.
Bless your heart for having to "sink to my level." That just screams elitism. LOL.
Good luck in your job search. And in dialing it back a notch. Perhaps we should leave the subject of illegal immigration...well what am I talking about. You left that after the first post. But, again...seriously. Good luck in your job search. Cya when you get back.
Whew - guess it's not a repeat then.
I don't always keep up with this board, but I thought this was interesting.
Whew! Cramer is really peeved that
the government appointed Geithner. Watch the video. He is correct in his evaluation that if it was you or I, we'd be put in jail quicker than sh--- if we didn't pay our taxes. He talks about Thain, too.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28813742
Whew!! Brown eyes here. (sm)
But ya know what they say about people with brown eyes, so we're not safe, either. 
You GOT to feel better gettin' all that out of your system. Whew doggies! ....
.
Whew....glad to see I am not the only long-winded poster here....
Did you actually see the tape of when Obama said what he said: He said "instead of worrying whether immigrants learn English, YOU (with great emphasis on the you) should be making sure YOUR (great emphasis on the word your) children learn to speak Spanish! Now you can throw all the multicultural high-brow rhetoric at me you like, that is basically saying we should require our children to learn Spanish to get along with those who are immigrating instead of "worrying about" the immigrants learning English because they would learn English. All this came about from the "national language" debate with immigration. Let's keep it in context here. Obama was NOT talking about multiculturalism. Yes, he said he was embarrassed that he himself could not speak another language and it was embarrassing to him that French people who come here are multilingual (not sure why he chose French people) and we go over there and can only say merci beaucoup. Well...frankly I don't know why he is embarrassed, and that is a ridiculous statement. Anyone who goes to France to do business on a regular basis does speak French. Most people who go there regularly as tourists learn the language as well. And if I went to France to live, to become a citizen of that country, I would expect to learn French and that would be my first language. That is understood. So there would be no need for France to establish a national language. And france, frankly, nor any other european country, have our particular immigration problem, now do they? NO.
I do not see the big deal in asking immigrants to this country to make English their first language. Does not mean I want to say you can never speak Spanish again (ridiculous), but to do business and in everyday life, you should learn English.
Frankly, it is thinking like this that will usher in what that little bald-headed Russian Kruschev said, banging his shoe on the table, basically saying "One day this country will be taken over without firing a shot." Open the door and hand them the keys, globetrotter. If you don't mind them having national pride, why does it chap you for Americans to have national pride, and why shouldn't we? France can be multicultural without giving up ther national pride...but again...they don't have the immigration problems we have. If they did...a VERY different story.
Good post....truth doesn't always sound good
@
Good for you! Most people would not recognize good...sm
character if it hit them over the head, just sheep who follow along without thinking for themselves, believing the political pundit spitting out garbage.
Good post - good research (sm)
History does repeat itself at times. I had forgotten about the 50s and Russia.
Very scary times we live in and so many new enemies. This is definitely not a scare tactic but a very clear warning. You can't ignore facts, they are there.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
rasberries
Good point, good post. Thanks.
see message
I think the behavior you describe is pretty common for ignorant folks. Just because they voted for him, they feel they have to uphold every stupid decision he makes.
Thank you - please see message
I'm glad you felt comfortable responding to my post. I didn't realize how heated things had gotten but could tell from what remains on the conservative board that it had gotten pretty ugly, and I thought the tax issue was a fairly safe issue to broach to provide a cooling period while discussing an issue that pretty much everyone agrees on - a need for tax reform.
Note, though, that it was one post on one topic and the first I have submitted in some time. Most of the threads on the board begin with an issue/article posted by Nan or AG.
However, regardless of who contributes most to the conservative forum, I must agree with Brunson and thank him/her for recognizing that the conservative forum is the conservative forum. I realize that tempers have flared there and things got out of hand, but the conservative posters have given no worse than they received. It seems to me that, at any time, liberal posters tired of dealing with Nan and AG (and MT, as well) on the conservative board could have done as Nan and AG did - remained on the forum dedicated to their point of view.
Thank you for your welcome to this forum - you have been very congenial, and I have enjoyed the discussion today. Frankly, I cannot see myself fitting into this liberal forum - as I said, my views on most issues tend to be pretty conservative. I don't see much point in hanging around the conservative forum if there isn't anybody there, so it looks like I'll probably just be peeking in now and again to see if/when discussion resumes. If I reply again on this forum, I will certainly try to do so with as much respect and kindness as you have shown me today, even though my opinions will probably differ.
Hey.....see my message!
I live in a rural area, have three dogs and do weight training also!!!
Actually it is said by the experts that if you are inexperienced with a gun you're better off not having one. It's kind of complex, but check out the info if you're interested.
I used to have military mace (actually from when I lived in a big city) - not sure if it's available to the public - probably easier to use than a gun and just as effective. Otherwise, not sure who we're supposed to be afraid of here.....I generally am not afraid of intruders and I don't have any weapons in my house other than my dogs and my mouth!!!
See Message.
Maybe if you were more tolerant and didn't pose such a rude message, someone would be interested in debating with you. I think it's just human nature to not want to associate with people who approach others in such a nasty confrontational way. If you were nicer to others, others would be nicer to you.
See message.
I can't wait to see what Fitzgerald's investigation unfolds.
Libby and Rove both were sources for the leak of Plame's occupation.
This was after Joe Wilson made public that Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein was purchasing uranium to make nukes was FALSE. The administration KNEW it was false, yet Bush used this fake threat of nukes in his State of the Union address to scare the heebie-jeebies out of the American public so they would support this bogus war.
That's how Bushies handle people who cross them. Don't DARE tell the truth or expose the administration for what it truly is. If you do, they'll not only put the life of a CIA agent in danger, but every single person she worked with around the globe pertaining to WMD. Why isn't this treason? It's the Bush way of doing things, and Karl Rove is an expert and accomplished thug.
I hope this goes beyond Rove and Libby and goes straight to Bush and Cheney. This is definitely an illegal war, brought on totally false premises, and Bush and Cheney should be personally held accountable for all the deaths (American and Iraqi) that have resulted from their lies.
It's truly sad when the only man on earth who can make Saddam look not so bad is GEORGE W. BUSH. I'm very ashamed of my government. 
See message.
I'm writing to my Congressman and Senator and see if this is true, express my objection and see if they can BOUNCE the *blank check* they gave him regarding Iraq and require Congressional approval for air strikes.
The article you posted included the following:
After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the former official said, he was told that Bush felt that “God put me here” to deal with the war on terror. The President’s belief was fortified by the Republican sweep in the 2002 congressional elections; Bush saw the victory as a purposeful message from God that “he’s the man,” the former official said. Publicly, Bush depicted his reëlection as a referendum on the war; privately, he spoke of it as another manifestation of divine purpose.
Someone needs to tell Bush that God thinks Bush is too engulfed in his own ego to fully understand God's REAL message to him, and that's why God gave us POLLS.
See message.
I don't believe religious symbols of ANY kind belong in schools (unless they're religious schools) or government buildings. If Walmart or Target wish to be inclusive to all religious beliefs, more power to them. Private businesses should be free to do as they wish. If they want to limit it to the religious Christmas and exclude the secular *Christmas,* some people might not want to shop in that kind of *exclusive* shop. You can bet their profit margin is the bottom line for them.
For every religion out there, there are buildings: churches, mosques, temples, etc. where like-minded people gather to worship. Trying to control the very WORDS people say isn't going to work unless and until you guys figure out a way to implant a chip in every American that will force them to speak, think, believe and worship just like you do. Maybe some of us think you'd do that if you had the ability, and maybe THAT'S the underlying thing that people are fighting.
OMG!!! (see message)
That mental image HURTS.
I am so SICK of this man's lies. Bush needs to get them straight. When he said the following in 2004, he was clearly lying and KNEW IT, as we now all know. I just wonder if there's ever been just ONE TIME in the last 5 years when he's actually told the truth. Have you seen this?
Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order, he said on April 20, 2004 in Buffalo, New York.
Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so, he added.
On April 19, 2004, Bush said the Patriot Act enabled law-enforcement officials to use roving wiretaps, which are not fixed to a particular telephone, against terrorism, as they had been against organized crime.
You see, what that meant is if you got a wiretap by court order -- and by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example, he said in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Please see message.
I totally agree this absolutely reaches across the board. This monster repeatedly raped this child for 3 years, but the damage he's done to her is going to affect her entire life. How about putting him in jail FOREVER so he can't hurt anyone else??? I also wouldn't have a problem with the death penalty for animals such as this.
I've recently seen this judge on TV, actually defending his actions, as if there is a defense for them. Thank God for Bill O'Reilly (I don't usually care for him) and Joe Scarborough and Dan Abrams (and others, I'm sure) who are publicizing this. Hopefully, this judge will be removed soon so maybe more children won't suffer. This judge, in my opinion, is just as guilty as the molester himself.
I sat here, trying to put myself in the parents' shoes, and I wonder how many parents will begin to feel that taking the law into their own hands and killing these rabid animals is the only way to keep their children safe in lieu of a judge that cares more about the criminals than their victims. If and when that happens, I'm not sure I could blame them.
I've written to Vermont's governor, as well. I'm glad so many people are writing and publicizing this issue. It's the only way things will change.
See message.
Number one, despite what is so *obvious* to you, I do not hate my country. In fact, I miss it very much. And I don't hate Bush because I don't *hate* anyone. When he took over the Presidency, I began my impressions of him on an even keel. Slowly, bit by bit, he has corroded any good impressions I ever may have had of him with his constant lying, dirty tricks, contempt for the Constitution, total and complete refusal to admit that he is NOT PERFECT, blatant disregard for the security of our borders, presiding over an econmy where people can barely afford gas but oil company executives get richer and richer, etc., etc. I truly and sincerely believe he poses a HUGE threat to the security of every American citizen.
Regardless of what the Iranian President (his name is Ahmadinejad, by the way) claims to have, they don't have the capacity to nuke anyone, but the USA does, and Bush has a ZERO record when it comes to diplomacy. Again, both Bush and Ahmadinejad are whack jobs, and neither can be reasoned with. I believe this is a very dangerous combination of two out-of-control egos, and the end of humanity could very well be imminent. I'm not going to apologize for caring if my grandchildren might not have the opportunity to reach voting age in this country because of a president who doesn't care about his legacy because, when asked, he said Who cares? We'll all be dead, anyway. That statement, combined with his love of war, I find to be quite chilling.
As far as being *lost in my world,* I can see very clearly a President who is losing more and more credibility, not on a daily basis any more but on an HOURLY basis. I have ZERO faith or trust in this man. Again, contrary to your implied intimate knowledge of me, my brain, my heart and my soul, these aren't because of any preconceived notions I might have about Bush. These are because the actions of Bush himself. As polls are evidencing more and more each day, I'm not alone in my skepticism of him.
Regarding where I got the quotes, if you are genuinely interested, I would suggest you Google them. You've already indicated an inclination to not believe them, so I'm not going to waste my time by going back to the multiple sources I found, simply to provide you with a link that you've already decided not to believe. If your interest is sincere, you'll look it up. 
Regarding your response to my *shopping spree* statement, I'm sorry, but it didn't come across as a joke to me. It sounded like a negative character judgment regarding someone who doesn't agree with you, which is a common Neocon MO from Bush and his cronies all the way down to the lowest peon on the totem pole who is convinced Bush is on his or her side. 
Likewise, you can't possibly know the extent of my intelligence since you don't know me, have never met me and aren't qualified to offer such an opinion. Inherent in your assessment that I'm *not that stupid* is the notion that you feel I do possess a certain degree of stupidity, which leads me to your comment that I feel I have to *label everyone who disagrees* with me as *uninformed and unthinking.* I respectfully point out that these *labels* are YOUR words, not mine, and I would challenge you to point to those words in my above post to you.
Have a very pleasant day. 
Please see message.
I try to get my information from a variety of sources. These days, it's hard to find a completely neutral source.
The main thing I'm interested in is finding the truth, and it seems that the party with the most to hide is the least likely to provide it.
When Clinton was President, I listened to a lot of right-leaning news sources for the very same reason. I thought the lack of respect Clinton showed in the Oval Office was terrible, and I was actually in favor of impeaching him for that. I didn't buy into and agree with the notion that what he did in his private life was his business. In my opinion, the Oval Office doesn't belong to the President; it belongs to every American tax-paying citizen.
I voted for Ronald Reagan, and to this day, I still think of him as a wonderful President. Historians may disagree with me on that point, and they may be right, because I'm obviously no expert in that field. I even voted for George Herbert Walker Bush, so I'm not some hardline lefty who hates the United States, is godless and has no moral values.
(I just wanted to share a thumbprint of who I really am because some people want to crucify me on this board simply because they see my name and couldn't care less what I have to say. You, on the other hand, have been posting here in a very respectful, intelligent manner, and I'm very appreciative of that and hope you continue to do so. I'm beginning to look forward to reading your posts after the last day or so.)
I believe that many people were looking for a big change in the White House when they voted for George W. Bush. I believe they wanted some sense of decency and honor restored to it. I was one of those people.
When I look back at the thing Clinton did that I thought was so terrible, and I look at what Bush has done, I guess the only thing I can say to sum it up is what Jay Leno said in his monologue the other night: At least Clinton only screwed one American at a time (I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it).
What amazes me the most about (what seems like) blind loyalty to Bush is that I wonder what they thought they were voting for, compared to what they got. I thought Republicans (conservatives) were supposed to beiin favor of less spending, smaller federal government and fiscal responsibility. After really disliking President Clinton, I actually feel that when it came to things important to the everyday lives of Americans, Clinton was a far better President.
I feel no sense of trust for President Bush. I don't feel he is on the side of the average American. I truly believe he wants to get rid of the middle class altogether, so the only ones left are the rich (who he referred to as his *base*) and the poor.
Whether he made the pejorative comment about the Constitution or not, he ACTS like he has no respect for it (as was also mentioned in the article). There is truly no need any more for Congress, regardless of whether it's a Republican or Democratic Congress because it doesn't matter what laws they write, if Bush doesn't like it, he will simply issue a *signing statement* expressing that he will do what he wants, anyway.
We have a system of checks and balances for a reason, and he seems to totally disregard it. To me, it's ironic that he seeks to search and destroy all dictatorships -- except the one that is of his own creation here in the United States.
There's a growing history of how he treats those who either tell the truth or simply don't agree with his policies. He *Swiftboats* them.
There are many stories out there about the Diebold machines being rigged so that a certain political party wins. I have a friend who voted on a Diebold machine that produced a paper receipt. Sure enough, it reflected that she voted for the other party, when, in fact, she did NOT.
I'm completely against his views on immigration. I believe we should have immediately tightened and secured ALL our borders after 9/11 and, at least for the time being, not allow ANYONE in. Instead, we used that money to go to war with Iraq, not because Saddam Hussein was a threat but because Bush needed a war to insure a *successful Presidency.* Did you know that the President's itinery was found by an ex-con in a trash can last week? Why was that allowed to happen?
Did you know that part of his Iraq war spending includes a comphrehensive healthcare plan for every Iraqi? Look at the healthcare system in the United States. Shouldn't the healthcare for Americans take precedence over the healthcare of Iraqis?
Do I want our troops to come home? You bet I do. I believe the best way we can support them is to get them out of there.
Having said that, I also believe we simply cannot *cut and run.* We simply cannot go into a country and completely destroy and then leave without fixing what we broke. I believe we morally owe it to the people of Iraq to leave their country in a better place than when we found it. I wish democracy would have worked in Iraq INSTANTLY. Then maybe Bush would have hopefully begun to worry about fixing the massive problems in his own country. Having said that, I have serious doubts that a long-lasting democracy will survive in that region. I believe that many of them view us as being evil and having no morals. (I can't really disagree with this view, considering some of the things that go on in this country.) I think Joe Biden had an excellent idea of dividing Iraq into three provinces (which is supported in the Iraqi Constitution).
Instead, I believe this war was a whim, based on his own personal goals, without regard for one single soldier he sent to die. To me, that is unforgiveable.
Should he be allowed to spy on innocent Americans during wartime? I guess that depends on the definition of *innocent.* I sure don't know any terrorists. Heck, I don't even know my own neighbors. But I have repeatedly expressed my disagreement with his policies, and I've read how innocent Americans whose only *sin* is disagreeing with this President, so I have no reason to believe that I won't find myself being *investigated* by some agency eventually, maybe even the IRS in the form of an audit or some other intimidating tactic that this President is so fond of using.
As far as the Democrats are concerned, I personally can't stand Hillary Clinton and would never vote for her (even if I DID live in a country where my vote actually counted). I'm as disgusted with the Democrats as I am with the President.
I'm not some Godless heathen without morals simply because I don't agree with Bush. I very much believe in God. In fact, I believe God has been sending Bush a series of *signs* that he has chosen to ignore. What I don't believe is pushing my religion down everyone else's throats. What I believe in most of all is tolerance and respect for everyone, regardless of their religious beliefs. When one religion acts as if it is superior to all others, that concerns me and automatically forces me further to the left. Freedom of religion in this country is a wonderful thing, and nobody's religion is better than someone else's (including those who simply don't believe at all). Yet, the fallacy that all Democrats (or anyone else who doesn't believe in Bush) are godless heathens is alive and well. Ann Coulter, who can't seem to remember her address and is under investigation for voter fraud (see http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002807.htm, complete with the complaining document) plans on releasing a book outlining evil devils (such as myself and other millions of Americans she's never met) on none other than 6/6/06. I believe that one particular religion has no place in government. Do I have a problem with *In God We Trust* on our money? Of course not. When the word *God* is used in a generic term, it's INCLUSIVE, not EXCLUSIVE. But whether or not I can read it as I purchase a newspaper is irrelevant to what I feel in my soul and my heart. I can assure you my morals are very high, and it truly hurts (thus turning to anger) when certain conservatives accuse people like me of being evil and Godless. They say that most anger is the result of fear. The times I'm most angry is truly when I'm the most frightened. It's really hard to carry on a dialogue with someone who has labeled you so negatively, a sense of self-defense kicks in, and often arguments and more name-calling ensues, none of which is productive and all of which is hurtful and fruitless.
I'm sorry this is so long, but as I said, I enjoy reading your posts. Although I don't know you or your political beliefs, you seem to be conservative. You also seem to be intelligent and respectful and don't resort to personal attacks on posters, which is very refreshing on these boards. I was just trying to give you some insight into who I am and the reason I don't like Bush. In fact, I'm very frightened of him.
As I've said before, if I felt my President was honest, trustworthy, ethical and truly had the interests of ALL Americans foremost in his mind, I would have no problem at all with his obtaining lists of my telephone calls because I truly have nothing to hide, and if it saved one life, to me, it would be worth it. I just don't trust him to do the right thing, and that isn't based on anything I've heard or read from any left-leaning media. It's based solely on his own actions in the last six years.
I'm no far left-leaning whacko. In fact, I'm truly a middle-of-the road kind of thinker. I think there are a lot of us out there. Speaking personally, it's just that the *righter* he goes, the *lefter* I automatically wind up, not because I voluntarily choose to, but because in order to maintain my original thoughts, that's where he pushes me.
I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact, I fully expect you not to agree with me, and I hope you respond because I am very interested in hearing your views. Again, I thank you for being respectful and not resorting to name calling. You have opened the door to serious, honest and intelligent debate, and for that, I thank you.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
Please see message.
I hope you had an opportunity to read the article I posted before it was censored. It certainly explains the few bad apples in an otherwise wonderful military and also answers the question you raised regarding the recruiting tactics.
Please see message.
It was just a very angry hateful person who wished bad things on America. Just a one-line post on the subject line with a red angry face in the text portion of the post. (I don't want to repeat it because it might cause this thread to be deleted again.)
See Message...
I have decided to lock this thread. I do not believe the OP had bad intentions, but I do not like the direction in which this thread is going.
Moderator 
See message....
Please watch your comments. This is the second post of yours I have edited based on inappropriate remarks. Let this serve as a warning to you.
Moderator
See message...
Your comments about race were inappropriate. They were bound to offend, and it is best to leave those kind of remarks off this site.
Moderator
Please see message.
You've just summed up exactly my impression of Hillary Clinton, and my impression wasn't formed by anybody who is anti-Clinton. It was formed by Hillary's own self-portrait that she eagerly showed to the world.
Thanks - see message
Thanks - its such a breath of fresh air to hear more people feel the same way I do. I'm am sick to death of her people trying to push her in the VP slot (which just is not going to happen) but seems thats all that's on the news just can't wait for it to end. If it does happen well they can be assured that McCain will definitely win. The Clintons should not be allowed anywhere near the white house. Don't people remember what they did the last time they were in there? I listen to the people who support her and think...why? there is not one good quality about that woman. People are saying she's a good role model for their children??? People think that someone who is a liar, cheater, thief, bribes people, gives people false hope, walks all over people not caring who she steps on just as long as she is on top, is a sore loser, not humble, has a foul mouth to match her attitude, is just downright nasty to people when she doesn't get her way, etc, etc, well I then question their character. Never mind all the people whose lives and careers have been destroyed because they went against the Clintons. And another thing they talk about the Clinton Dynasty or Clinton Legacy? I always thought a Dynasty was if you have a long line of people in the family who have been in politics (like the Kennedys). It is only the two of them. Nobody in their family is in politics or is decent. These two came out of nowhere and they've only done harm to the democrat party. They are tearing the party apart for their own personal gain and they don't care.
See message...
The portion that I edited were not statements made by Hillary Clinton. Those statements were made by you. They were aggressive and strange, to say the least, and those kind of comments have no place on this site.
Moderator
Please see message.
Well, it worked just as well for me during this occasion. I think different people react differently, depending on the dosage, their tolerance, and how tired they might be. It might work differently for you than it does for me. Heck, it might (and does) work differently for ME, depending on the above. I have an illness which may (and usually does) awaken me in the middle of the night. If it's not too bad, I can take a pain pill and actually even be able to work a little. (If it's hospital-worthy, then I slap on a Fentanyl patch, and once that enters my system, I'm usually out like a light for a couple days. If that doesn't work, then it's back to the hospital again, which I try to avoid.) However, when this stuff happens, I wind up in a backwards sleep cycle and wind up being awake all night. This is what happened to me Friday/Saturday, and if you'll note, I began the post by stating I had been up most of the night.
Secondly, it was not a two-hour nap. Please read the post again and note the difference between 10:26 a.m. and 7:14 P.M.
Thank you OP - appreciate your message.
Thanks.
Sam (see message)
 If you can't stand the heat....Get out of the kitchen!
NS - see message
no soup.
see message
Arf.
No, SS. I use sm for see message.
Not to worry. I have a thick hide. Have to when hanging around this place. Kinda reminds me of when docs use abbreviations to confuse and confound and sends me plunging into the dictionary unnecessarily on a dead-end word search!
See message.
It has occurred to me that I would not associate with any of these right-wing religious fanatics in my personal life, nor would I waste my time debating political or religious concepts with such people. Therefore, it would be hypocritical of me to take part in discussions with them on this forum. I will continue to read some of their posts for the shock value only (akin to watching a train wreck), but I will no longer attempt to engage them in reasonable dialogue. I will, however, continue to take part in discussions with open-minded, intelligent posters who think for themselves and are not following the flock and blinded by religion.
Right - see message
Right, the guy is going to be running for president. You really think he's going to write about his life when he was a Muslim. He should have because there is nothing to be ashamed of (but the fact that he didn't makes me pretty leery of what his intensions are and what else he is not telling us). However, most Americans want a Christian president (why I have no idea), but that's the unfortunate truth, so Americans want a Christian president, he wants to be president, of course he's going to write he's a christian. You also have to research back further and not just believe what someone writes about themselves. If that were true then you probably believe that Hillary's plane landed in Bosnia under direct fire with gunshots going off all around her as she ran and ducked for cover in her vehicle. Which is of course as she says why Bill didn't go to Bosnia. According to her there's a saying among Presidents that if its too dangerous to go then send your wife. I'd research both liberal and conservative papers, and also what his family members have to say about him.
see message
(Didn't know what to title this so just wrote see message)...
I have never heard of Bobby Jindal. Thanks for the links I will look at them.
You know I think this is a good point. There are politicians that are good and are trying to do good for the country/city/state or whatever, but they are unknowns and don't get a lot of familiarity. One candidate I really liked was Ron Paul. He seemed to be the most knowlegable about issues, economy, etc and I really like him a lot and still listen to what he has to say.
I do miss sam and her messages. Does anyone know what happened to her. Maybe she got sick of being bashed, slammed, ridiculed and cut down all the time and just stopped coming. I myself have not been posting as much as I used to mainly for those reasons. Kind of had to take a "de-tox" from this board. HA HA
Anyway...the one good thing I'll have to say about Obama being in is at least now it paves the road and Arnold Schwartzeneger will be able to run in four years, so looking forward to that. I know he tried to get the constitution amended once before and they didn't pass, but now that they have for Obama, Arnold will be able to run. GO AAAHNOLD!!!!!
I still say I think all politicians in WA should be fired and replaced with the more honest "less celebretized" ones out there.
should have been see message...sm
...and our savings did grow.
Savings, however, is fast dwindling these past two years, though. Haven't saved anything at all lately.
Please see message -
'as long as they do not try to push their lifestyle off on me.'
That's a direct quote from you. So don't you think that same request should go both ways?
Just my opinion......
See message
Instead of posting all over this place to all the people who replied I'll just post one message here (am sure I'll get chewed up and spat out by the liberals) but here goes...
First on the OP's question. To me its more serious what a candidate says, not someone else who is not running. Obama's comments were offensive because to me it showed how little he thinks of American people like me, you, my dad, neighbors, etc. Obama is very weathy, no doubt about that, and that is who he surrounds himself with. To think he is going to help the little people (us) well its time to pull your head out of the sand. The only thing he sees us for is so he can tax us more and continue the spending. As for Rothschild's comment - who cares. If your going to go after things she says, then you need to go after things Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan said. Not fair to say you'll go after anything your opponent says, but you blatently disregard the things your own candidate says.
Second to the people who didn't even give a decent answer to this board but instead type silly nonsensical words that make no sense to this board it goes to show how childish and uninformed you are. If you've done any reading or research you might just have something decent to say instead of attacking just for the fun of it (although I can't see where you think that is fun).
Third, polls are polls and that's all you can say about that. One day Obama's up the next day McCain's up. On MSNBC they were saying that McCain has a slight lead in the polls, on Fox news they said Obama had a slight lead in the polls. They change on an hourly basis and all depends who is pushing for who.
As for McCains campaign "fall down around his knees"? Where in the world did you hear that? I know you wish it to be so, but the truth of the matter is McCain's campaign has soared and you can't dispute the truth that Sarah Palin has energized the party and because of her and the issues that John McCain and Sarah Palin are talking about a lot of Obama supporters are moving over to John McCain/Sarah Palin, and her poll numbers have not dropped 10%. You can spread any rumor and lie you want to, it isn't going to change the fact that it isn't true. If anything her ratings have gone up (and I'm seeing that even on the most liberal stations). Especially after her latest interview with Sean Hannity. If people had little confidence in her before they are waking up to the fact that this governor knows what she is talking about, knows how to stimulate the economy, and knows that the government should be working for Americans, not against them like the democrat party by taxing us all through the roof. She's intelligent and well informed on on all subjects asked of her. If your going to say anything you should admit that all Obama has to say is uh, um, uh, uh and he gets tripped up enough on his own words (but I'm sure you've forgotten all of that).
As for John McCain's age and health there are a few myths being spouted by the democratic party and it would be good for you to know the truth.
1. He doesn't have skin cancer. He gets regular checkups. Second if your worrying about cancer you should worry more about your candidate "smoking" Obama. That guy smokes like a chimney and I wouldn't be surprised to hear any day now he has lung cancer. My mom had lung cancer and it was not a pretty site. It eventually went into her brain (not to mention all the other side effects). So I'd be a bit more worried about someone who smokes like a chimney, then someone who used to have some skins spots that were cancerous but treated and no longer is.
As for his age...Biden is not much younger than he is. And like someone said years ago when Ronald Regan was running (maybe it was Regan himself who said it), "I'll take age and experience any day over youth and inexperience".
So you know who looks like the desperate fools (yes there are more than one). The desparate fools are the democrats who attack for no reason. Who have deployed over 50 lawyers and other dishonorable people to try and find any little piece of dirt on Gov. Palin. The ones who if they don't find anything they will make it up. The ones who said she is not qualified because she has never had an abortion. The ones who say she has no experience but won't admit Obama doesn't have any experience. And the ones who are complaining because she has a tanning bed. Those are the desparate fools.
I was an Obama supporter up until a couple weeks ago. Then I started learning more about him, the groups he affiliates himself with, his voting record, what his wife has done (we have heard that she is the biggest contributor to giving Barack information on what to do, so yes, I want to know what her background is). I've read what his plans are regarding taxes, housing crisis, war, etc (which he has changed his mind and is now for keeping troops overseas and is in approval of a draft).
You want to talk about an "honesty issue" then you need to start talking about your own candidate. He's telling so many lies and being deceitful to the public, and you never know where he stands because he changes his mind every day. Obama and Biden are in an absolute panic right now because McCain and Palin are so close in the race and they are ahead in most of the polls, even in others, and below in just a couple. States that have alwasy voted democrat in the past are now starting to lean towards republican and its becoming a full blown meltdown for them.
I like what Gov. Palin said in her interview. She said she was thick skinned and tough and the insults and lies just bounce right off because she knows the truth, but it's the American people that matter and they are more important than anything.
I did not ask - see message
This is not an answer to my question. I did not ask for the standard "relax it's a scare tactic" statement the liberals usually throw back. We all know Obama is a socialist. Just a plain fact. Not a scare tactic. The democratic party is not the same as the democratic party of times past anymore. Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves because the modern day democrats have destroyed the party. Yes, the democratic party is "supposed" to be a party of the people, by the people, and for the people. It is not that anymore. Take a look at the far left/socialists who have infiltrated it (Clinton, Obama, Dodd, Pelosi, Franks, and others). Our founding fathers warned and fought against everything they are proposing for America. No matter how much (I am a registered democrat), we want to believe our party is for the people it is not anymore. So once again if all your going to do is attack the republicans (who are more democratic than the democrats) then that does not answer my original question - what will it be like to live in a socialist country if Obama is elected. A lot of us are too young to know what that is really like, and most people won't care as long as they keep getting fed American Idol and Survivor on TV.
|
