You obviously didn't take time to...(sm)
Posted By: Just the big bad on 2009-01-02
In Reply to: must be rough... - dnh
actually look at the links (evidenced by the fact that one is a 9-min video and you replied within 2 min), so do you have any idea what you are even replying to? All you have provided is yet another baseless knee-jerk reaction.
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
Your time out didn't make you
Tax cuts/credits, progressive tax system and social programs aimed at creating opportunities are as American as apple pie. Those policies and initiatives can be found punctuating the pages of our country's history since the time of its inception.
Tax schemes that move the wealth of the masses upward toward an exclusive, elite power class (as in the now defunct Soviet Union), government ownership/takeover of banking and lending institutions and massive buy-outs of privately held properties (homes) such as John McCain proposes to "fix" the mortgage crisis smack of communism and are not exactly what you would call traditional American values. Got it?
That's the second time you addressed something I didn't post. sm
I thought the Chickenhawk article was brilliant though. I wish I had posted it.
If he didn't believe in God he wouldn't devote so much time
trying to disprove Him.
It's typical of self-professed athiests. Sad. But typical.
So if McCain didn't vote 64% of the time
how can he vote with Bush 90% of the time? LOL! 
She didn't make it up. In fact, it's not the first time
these domestic terrorists bought an abortion clinic. Now, they "need a bigger office."
Operation Rescue president Troy Newman said that his group has discussed the idea of buying the tan, windowless clinic in east Wichita. He made the comment after the Tiller family announced that the clinic would be closed permanently.
"I would love to make an offer on that abortion clinic, and that's some of the discussion that we're having," Newman said in a telephone interview Tuesday from his group's headquarters in Wichita.
Tiller was shot May 31 while serving as an usher at his church. Scott Roeder, a 51-year-old Kansas City, Mo., resident, has been charged with first-degree murder and aggravated assault.
Tiller attorney Dan Monnat declined to discuss Newman's suggestion.
"I'm just not going to respond to every irreverent publicity stunt or comment by these extremists," Monnat said.
Newman's group bought another former abortion clinic in Wichita in 2006 for its headquarters, but he said the group needs to expand. "We need a bigger office," he said.
Balance at: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/10/national/main5079658.shtml?source=RSSattr=U.S._5079658
It's really too bad you didn't take the time to read the entire transcript
of what William Bennett said, Democrat. But I am not surprised.
What if Obama didn't hang around with terrorists? What if he was not a long-time follower of a r
Then I would be voting for him.
Conservatives believe Bush didn’t act in time because God told him to get rid of poor black people
on welfare and old people on Social Security because they cost taxpayers too much money.
A radio talk show host just said that…and I agree. They can’t admit that Bush has shown us all how he will refuse to protect Americans in a national emergency, even though he used that as a campaign promise, and that Bush doesn’t even have to care any more since he can’t be President again. I hope they can live with their collective conscience. That is if they have one. I’m starting to believe they don’t.
Yep, but it was straight time. No time and a half
DHL is GERMAN OWNED. And, company was located on Snotsdale, I mean Scottsdale, AZ which means. Labor laws in Arizona suck. Right to work state. Basically a company can do whatever they want to do with you and if you do not like it, then quit and find another job.
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't
his own personal reasons.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php
The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.
Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."
Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.
In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.
"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"
Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.
Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.
Conversations With Bush The Candidate
Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.
The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.
I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."
Debating The Timeline For War
But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.
The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.
On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"
I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."
"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …
"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.
Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.
Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"
Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.
Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."
Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.
Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.
same time?
Well, if these posts are showing up at the same time, how could it be me? I cant post everywhere at the same time, LOL. You are idiots if you think that. For you to even try to connect me with other posts..what for? Dont you have better things to do with your time? It makes me laugh that you actually have taken the time. It would not even occur to me to try to link up your posts and initials with other posts and initials. Gosh, guess I could take it as a compliment that you are spending so much time obsessing about me. I have a better suggestion for your time. Spend it researching this murderous lying administration.
Goes on all the time.
Does not surprise me at all, all politicians are crooks, that is why they had the wearwithall to get into it, smart, but all crooks. Bill Clinton was a sex addict, no doubt, but he did more to help me than any other president. I am a swing vote, I vote for the man not the party. I don't like the current President, I can see he has no soul in his eyes, but yet, they claim they won "two elections", he only won one, and I still doubt that considering that his brother was the gov of one of the highest electoral votes. But I do believe he won the last election, and his supreme court nomination has to be respected. I am not happy with Dudley Do Right, but Dubya did win one election, (we think), and he as president has the right to appoint whomever he wants.
It's about time this was done
While I don't agree that this is all the president's fault, and while I think some of what these governors are doing is political positioning it's about time somebody does something about this. A lot of the immigration could be handled at the state level other than the border patrol which is solely in the federal government's hand. This is where we as citizens must demand our leaders both dem. and rep. to stand up and do their jobs, and this does include the president. While I am a great fan of Bush this is one of the areas I think he's lacking in along with the majority of our leaders at the federal, state, and local levels. I hope these states go one step further and call in the National Guard. This is going to be the issue that I think will determine elections in 2006 and 2008 along with the issue of soaring gas prices and oil demand.
One time only
Where did she ever state she hated Bush? Could you please post that article or lead me to it. She wants to ask some tough questions which, obviously, he does not have the answers to. I would like to know what our **mission** is too. It changes so often. Talk about flip flops. I think we have had about four different reasons for pre-emptively invading Iraq and, of course, they still try to link Iraq to 9/11. Didnt know it was written in stone that you can only meet with your servant, the president, one time. However, it is working out okay, as most of America backs Cindy and quite a few Europeans too. I think it is great that finally most of America is finding its voice once again and screaming to the warmonger in the WH, bring our troops home. To stay the course is ridiculous but then, again, having invaded Iraq was monsterous and wrong, based on nothing but lies..That to me is RIDICULOUS BIG TIME. I also find it quite sad that Bush is taking a five week vacation, bicycling around his property, clearing brush, yet he cant spare 10 minutes or more to speak with Cindy and answer the questions she has, which many of us have..shows where his priorities are. Last time I took a vacation was in 2000 and it was only a weekend. This person in the WH is so out of touch with reality and the hopes, needs and worries of most Americans. He is pathetic.
Once upon a time. sm
You and the rest of the nameless posters here hounded two posters from the conservative board. And what you said and did to them was far far worse than this. And then when they were gone, you rejoiced and sang songs, ding dong the witch is dead. Remember? ON THE CONSERVATIVE BOARD YOU SANG. Hypocrits.
LOL! Nor did I (either time).
 Too bad they're just not bright enough to see how pathetic and desperate they've become. I've gotta admit, though, their idiocy does provide a LOT of laughs for me. (I don't want to emphasize that because if they think they're doing ANYTHING to make my life more pleasant, they'll stop!)
Its about time!
The 2005 International Commission of Inquiry
on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by
the Bush Administration of the United States
The Bush Crimes Commission
Friday 14 October 2005
When the possibility of far-reaching war crimes and crimes against humanity exists, people of conscience have a solemn responsibility to inquire into the nature and scope of these acts and to determine if they do in fact rise to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. That is the mission of the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity. The first session will be held October 21-22 in New York City. This tribunal will, with care and rigor, present evidence and assess whether George W. Bush and his administration have committed crimes against humanity. Well-established international law will be referenced where applicable, but the tribunal will not be limited by the scope of existing international law.
The tribunal will deliberate on four categories of indictable crimes: 1) Wars of Aggression, with particular reference to the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. 2) Torture and Indefinite Detention, with particular reference to the abandonment of international standards concerning the treatment of prisoners of war and the use of torture. 3) Destruction of the Global Environment, with particular reference to systematic policies contributing to the catastrophic effects of global warming. 4) Attacks on Global Public Health and Reproductive Rights, with particular reference to the genocidal effects of forcing international agencies to promote abstinence only in the midst of a global AIDS epidemic.
The Commission's jury of conscience will be composed of internationally respected jurists and legal scholars, prominent voices of conscience, and experts and monitors in relevant fields. The tribunal's legitimacy is derived from its integrity, its rigor in the presentation of evidence, and the stature of its participants. Representatives of the Bush administration will be invited to present a defense.
Prior to the meeting of the Commission, teams with sufficient expertise will prepare preliminary indictments in each of the four areas, setting forth the scope of the Bush administration's actions and how they contravene legal and moral norms for international behavior. At the meeting of the Commission, there will be four prosecution teams that organize the presentation of the evidence. This evidence will be documents as well as eyewitness testimony by victims and observers of the crimes alleged. The formal proceedings will be held in a public venue and all attempts will be made to publicize and broadcast its deliberations internationally. The Commission's jury of conscience will come to verdicts and its findings will be published.
The holding of this tribunal will frame and fuel a discussion that is urgently needed in the United States: Is the administration of George W. Bush guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity? The Commission will conduct its work with a deep sense of responsibility to the people of the world.
The Commission is sponsored by the Not In Our Name statement of conscience, joined by the following individuals and organizations:
- James Abourezk, former United States Senator
- As'ad AbuKhalil, professor of politics & public administration, California State University-Stanislaus
- Dirk Adriaensens, Brussells Tribunal executive committee and coordinator SOS Iraq
- Dr. Nadje al-Ali, social anthropologist at the University of Exeter, founding member of Act Together: Women's Action on Iraq and member Women in Black UK
- Anthony Alessandrini, organizer with the World Tribunal on Iraq and New York University Students for Justice in Palestine
- Edward Asner
- Russell Banks, novelist
- The Rev. Luis Barrios, Ph.D., associate professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice & Anglican Priest
- Amy Bartholomew, professor of law at Carleton University
- Greg Bates, Common Courage Press
- Phyllis Bennis, Institute for Policy Studies
- Michael S. Berg, grieving father of Nick Berg killed in Iraq May 7, 2004, and one man for Peace
- Ayse Berktay, from the organizing team of the World Tribunal on Iraq
- William Blum, author of Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II and Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
- Francis Boyle, author of Destroying World Order and professor at the University of Illinois College of Law
- Jean Bricmont, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and executive vice president of National Lawyers Guild
- Lieven De Cauter, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Patrick Deboosere, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Michael Eric Dyson
- Peter Erlinder, William Mitchell College of Law and lead defense counsel, United Nations Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Arusha, Tanzania
- Larry Everest, author of Oil, Power & Empire: Iraq and the U.S. Global Agenda and Behind the Poison Cloud: Union Carbide's Bhopal Massacre
- Richard Falk, professor emeritus of International Law, Princeton, and Visiting Professor in Global and International Studies, UC-Santa Barbara
- Thomas M. Fasy, MD, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City
- Lawrence Ferlinghetti, member, American Academy of Arts & Letters and founder & editor in chief, City Lights Books, San Francisco
- Ted Glick, former coordinator, Independent Progressive Politics Network
- Dr. Elaine C. Hagopian, former president of Association of Arab-American University Graduates (AAUG) and primary founder of the Trans-Arab Research Institute (TARI)
- Sam Hamill, director, Poets Against War
- International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Malaysia
- Abdeen Jabara, past president, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
- Dahr Jamail, U.S. independent journalist who has reported extensively from Iraq since the invasion
- C. Clark Kissinger, contributing writer for Revolution and initiator of the Not In Our Name statement of conscience
- The Reverend Doctor Earl Kooperkamp, Rector, St. Mary's Episcopal Church, West Harlem, New York City
- Joel Kovel, editor-in-chief, Capitalism Nature Socialism: A Quarterly Journal of Socialist Ecology, and author of The Enemy of Nature
- Jesse Lemisch, professor of history emeritus, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
- Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine and author of The Left Hand of God: Taking Back America from the Religious Right
- New Jersey Civil Rights Defense Committee
- New Jersey Workers Democracy Network
- National Lawyers Guild
- National Lawyers Guild, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
- Rev. Davidson Loehr, Ph.D., First Unitarian Universalist Church of Austin, Texas
- Robert Meeropol, Executive Director, Rosenberg Fund for Children
- Barbara Olshansky, deputy legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author of Secret Trials and Executions
- James Petras, professor emeritus of sociology at Binghamton University, New York
- Jeremy Pikser, screenwriter
- Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author with Ellen Ray of Guantanamo: What the World Should Know
- Stephen F. Rohde, civil liberties lawyer and co-founder of Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace
- Marc Sapir MD, MPH, co-convener of the UC Berkeley Teach In on Torture and executive director of Retro Poll
- Sister Annette M. Sinagra, OP
- State of Nature on-line magazine
- Inge Van de Merlen, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Gore Vidal
- Anne Weills, civil rights attorney in Oakland, National Lawyers Guild
- Leonard Weinglass, criminal defense attorney
- Naomi Weisstein, professor emeritus of Neuroscience, State University of NY at Buffalo
- Howard Zinn, historian
--------
The 2005 International Commission of Inquiry on War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration of the United States: Sessions take place Friday, October 21, 4-10pm, and Saturday, October 22, Noon-6pm, at the Grand Ballroom of the Manhattan Center, 311 W. 34th Street, New York City, NY.
Only time will tell. nm
x
I never take time off.
My pursuit of literacy is as endless as my pursuit of honesty and integrity. 
One mo time..... 1 example
This board will return to a dead state too
[Post a Reply] [View Follow Ups] [Politics] --> [Liberals]
Posted By: huh? on 2006-03-10,
In Reply to: Oh, she revealed it on the Conservative Board - ??
The stupid rules have made these boards a place where only crickets chirp. Its sad that people are so childish and cannot discuss things like mature adults. This is why these boards will remain a snoozeville, because some people are not capable of mature conversation and get insulted by anyone who does not believe exactly like they do, but if you like it dead here...by all means enjoy the silence.
Well this time it is ..
someone else. Thanks for the holiday greeting. Merry Christmas to you too, and a happy, healthy, joyful new year.
One last time....
I watched a TV broadcast; it evoked thoughts in my mind. The thoughts irritated me. I FELT uneasy and I THOUGHT I could print the same on this board and why. This is, after all, still America despite the speech police and this is, after all still the liberal board.
I'm sorry you feel the need to throw the little personal zingers in.
In this day and time you really can't have it all...sm
There is always going to be something or someone out of sorts, so I say just do you (Mrs. Obama). No one else can do it for her. If I were in her shoes, I would do the same thing.
yes, but she has done it time and time again and yet. sm
She is castigating Obama for MAYBE changing his mind. So what's with that?
I will try this one more time...
There IS money for childrens' health care, if we prioritize. Anyone with half a brain knows there is waste galore in the social programs we have now. They are not administered properly, rules are not followed, people get on who should not thereby taking the funds for people who really need them. All I suggested is that they go ahead and do the cigarette tax, and then prioritize how to spend the rest of the social funding and make sure childrens' health care goes first. As to agreeing or disagreeing to the war...won't go there as childrens' health insurance seems to be the issue. If they would clean up the SCHIP program now and get all the illegals off it, there would be that much more funding for insuring American children. Then if the illegals want to get legal, seek citizenship and pay taxes into the system like the rest of us, then yes, I think their children should be covered too. I really don't see why Democrats seem to have a problem with prioritizing spending. We do it on a personal basis every day; why can't the government do it with OUR tax money? We all know we can't do everything we would like to do. Therefore we should do the most important things first. That is just common sense. Just like parents are not made of money where their own families are concerned, the government (that being your tax dollars and mine) is not made of money either...and prioritization as far as social programs needs to be done. I really don't see why everyone seems to have a problem with that.
Sorry...it would not have been the first time...
a poster used the same moniker and posted as liberal and conservative...guess they like to start a fight and then watch it develop...kinda like people who flock to wrecks. lol. Could not be sure that was not the case and still cannot be sure...but I will take your word for it. lol.
Well, time will tell...
I couldn't disagree more. I think Obama is going to be torn apart if he is the nominee, more so than Clinton would. Really, I just do not like the guy. I think he is totally arrogant, along with his wife  , and I do not believe for a minute that he is honest. Of course, Clinton isn't either. They're both lousy.
Yes, Ron Paul is out of the race...that's what I said, loooool. In my opinion, he was the only person who ran that would be worthy of the presidency.
How do you know how much time she
THere is a first time for everything. :)
nm
did that the first time.
x
next time they have a
cuddle session for the cameras he can whisper it into Bush's soft, pink shelllike ear.
Yes, because you have had some time...
to make up your mind. They are registering people who have never really thought about it until that minute. And then putting them on a bus to go vote hearing Obama speech all the way there. Now you tell ME if that is fair. If you heard Republicans were doing that you would be yelling voter fraud at the top of your lungs. Who knows if these people are EVEN eligible to vote? The people registering them aren't asking. They are just signing them up.
Don't you think that greatly increases the chance of voter fraud?
still time
Before the first vote the email boxes and switchboards were flooded. I wonder if the same is true for this 2nd vote. Urge everyone you know to continue to contact the officials for their districts. I failed to contact my senator before the 2nd vote, but he did vote no on it. You can bet I have not neglect to contact our representative! I am asking, begging, everyone to please do the same and to ask everyone you know to do the same while there is still a little time.
Unfortunately, I did the first time. sm
Woke up before his second term. He did campaign on small government.
why, you need more time?
xx
Of course you won't take the time because
you can't find the facts to back up your words.
The words are on the pages, unless you're saying those words are lies as well.
I can give you Muslim after Muslim who will tell you after leaving those countries to learn abroad, they only then realized Christianity is a good thing and teaches love, something their Q'ran does not.
When was the last time your mom
How many times have you been divorced? Do you have any friends with triple-digit IQs?
Time will tell
I doubt that sincerely. I love your criteria...The way he walks? Perpetual smirk? What the? It's nothing compared to Bubba's s***-eatin grin. And the Dems just LOVE him. His presidency was an embarrassment.
Thank you! Any time!
Too bad ignorance isn't painful. Love those drive-by media types. They're about as subtle as a trainwreck!
Libs are so angy and bitter all the time. Also, let's not forget ACORN, voter fraud, the stolen election, etc. The list goes on and on. If McCain-Palin win, just watch what happens. It'll be that crap all over again.
I don't have time either but
looking at McCain's voting record I was shocked. Hadn't checked it before but looked to me like he hadn't voted since sometime in early 2007 if then. No bashing, just checking facts for myself.
there was never such a time
Sex before marriage has been happening for all times, as has abortion. If we go back to a time that didn't happen, we would go back to a time when there were no humans...
Seriously, I don't have time to go
through and post every single link that has been posted on these boards in the last 60 days or so. It's my responsibility to be an educated voter, as is yours. Unfortunately, you didn't read my post very well or you would have seen that my beef isn't who you're voting for, it's the constant denial of both party's accusations. I know that neither candidate is perfect, and who I choose to vote for is my choice. My post was to gourdpainter specifically because GP seems to change her vote from day-to-day and when given the info she constantly asks for, she consistently denies it as "horsepuckey" or argues to the point of fatigue. I'm tired of it. Vote for who you want, but quit asking others for validation of your vote.
I'm secure in my vote. My reasons are my reasons. I don't expect your approval or anyone else's when I get in that little booth. Take your anger and spew it elsewhere. I'm not interested.
Too bad you can see that the post was directed to GP and not you. I'm guessing that you just like to argue, too. 
Big time
*
Time to get over yourself
Apparently you slept through the last 8 years.
Was Obama the right choice? Maybe, Maybe not but I can tell you have have choked long enough on the crap that has been tube fed to all of us by the Bush administration. Something has to change.
By the way... the banking fiasco? You should point the finger where it needs to be pointed. The people who can't seem to live within their means.
The pie man is selling pies. Does that mean you absolutely MUST buy one? Don't be ridiculous!
Exactly when was the last time....
you saw American "casualties," as they like to call them on the news? Did you see the HUGE protests in Great Britian when Bush went there? No. That would be due to government censorship. There's a difference between that and liberal media. This is not a partisanship issue! For a long time most of the world has hated US government but had sympathy for its citizens. Why? Because in thier eyes we are ignorant to what goes on in the rest of the world, even what WE do in the rest of the world.
OK one more time
My point was this..... HE SAID IT WAS REQUIRED. He said this on HIS website. Does required not mean mandatory????? I read his website with my two eyes and it said REQUIRED. He would REQUIRE this. I am not against community service. My children are involved in our community. They CHOOSE to do this. My post is about O REQUIRING this.
It's about time for a
than YouTube. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
or perhaps this one
http://chicagoist.com/2008/12/04/obama_birth_certificate_case_heads.php
I especially like the part about how the Supreme Court only heard 60 of the 842 cases presented to it in the past 8 years....and not all of the 60 were successful. That would give your BC nonsense about a 7% chance of being heard....actually less, since it is so patently ridiclous.
It might be time to
get over the stuff about who O hung around with and his B/C and get to the business of TRYING to head off what is coming. You can bet your boopers that McCain/Palin are right there in bed with Bushes/Clintons/Obamas. Or...you can keep railing about how things would have been different with your beloved McCain/Palin. Wouldn't have made a nickle's worth of difference. I can admit that I was wrong in thinking Obama MIGHT do good but I for darned sure am not going to turn over and wish I had voted for McCain. There is still no doubt in my mind he was and is in Bush's pocket. I only HOPED Obama would not be part of destroying what little is left of our constitution and our country. He isn't even in office yet but I see the handwriting on the wall and it is NOT GOOD. Won't surprise me to see McCain in Obama's cabinet.
I think it is time to get out of MT all together.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,453825,00.html
What would this do to us MT's if doctors are quitting?
Maybe physical therapy would be a good field?
whatever....goes for just about everyone at one time
|
