You people on the left are always assuming you
Posted By: know everything. NEWSFLASH, -you dont.nm on 2008-09-25
In Reply to: He's obviously trying to get out of it. If he actually - WANTED to debate, he'd find the time,
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
No wonder people are leaving the left in droves. nm
/
My point of view was stated quite clearly. People on the left may be blinded....
Kind of sad, actually.
My point of view was stated quite clearly. People on the left may be blinded....
And you also I am assuming? What would...
your reaction have been if Obama had announced he was suspending his campaign to return to Washington (his job actually, campaign not withstanding...he IS still a senator and we are still paying him)to deal with this crisis? Be honest. What would your reaction have been?
now who is assuming
talk about ass-u-me ...
Because I am a Jew I am pushing sex, violence, other "worldly" things on you? Are you saying a Jewish life is corrupt because we aren't christian? Never said you should put up with it. You should voice your feelings to the stores, television stations, magazines, etc.
I didn't say you shouldn't have your "christian things" out in public, I said, don't assume Ben Stein speaks for the Jewish community. Got your feathers a little ruffled there, didn't ya? LOL!
I'm assuming you mean....
that it would be a bad thing to be a Muslim? It's been proven for 2 years that he is not a Muslim but a Christian, but that's not the point. What exactly makes it bad to be a Muslim?
You know what they say about assuming don't you?
I'm originally from Florida, which is the melting pot of the US for race dear. I have black, white, asian, indian, hispanic, etc etc friends. My problem is with the fact that people still want to whine about "oh unequal treatment" when really all that has happened is a reversing of treatment. Now white people can't get any help or decent positions if there is a minority going for the same help or position.
But hey, you must know everything, so I digress.
There you go again. Assuming.
I spent many days writing and calling my reps.
McCain and what happened with his first wife has noting to do with voting.
You also do not know who I voted for.
O is rushing too fast in his decision making from my point of view. He's putting the cart before the horse. He's not thinking of consequences of closing Gitmo, the stimulus package, ending the war in Iraq too early, letting Geithner become head of IRS, and choosing Emanuel.
We shall see what happens, and I hope its for the best, but he should slow down and take his time before making decisions that will affect all of us in the coming years.
Assuming that you are serious in your inquiry,
my response follows:
I have, thus far, seen no credible evidence to corroborate the notion that Bush willingly lied about the situation in Iraq. The information available at the time regarding WMD may or may not have been incorrect, but it was information that was accepted at that time by the world community, and I can no more condemn Bush for believing it than I can condemn Clinton or the UN for believing it. Given the state of the country in the aftermath of 9/11, it seems to me that allowing any country to disregard a 14th or 15th UN resolution with regard to accounting for WMDs would have been seen as insanity.
Another poster said something to the effect that the truth has not been presented, and I think this is true. We hear about the activities of the insurgency in Iraq, but we do not hear about the day-to-day successes there because bombings are more sensational and a better news story. A troop of soldiers building a road or delivering medical equipment or school supplies isn't a story. Iraqis working alongside American soldiers is not a news story. Suicide bombings and allegations of prisoner abuse are more sensational, and so that is what the public sees, and the Bush administration has done a really poor job of keeping the public updated on what the military is actually doing in Iraq and what advances are being made in the war on terror, thus allowing the media to be the only voice heard.
As far as prisoner abuses go, I don't think conservatives have their heads in the sand, but I think they (I) have a somewhat more cynical attitude toward such abuses. While such abuses should never be tolerated, they will always happen. There are bad eggs in any basket, whether it be a prison or any other community of people. When those people break rules and do bad things, they deserve to be investigated and appropriately punished, but allowing and encouraging the entire community/effort to be indicted by the actions of those few is counterproductive. In the instance of prison abuses, I consider it irresponsible and counterproductive for the mainstream media to engage in what seems to me to amount to broad-scale bashing of the administration on the basis of these incidents.
I also think conservatives are more inclined to weigh these incidents against the larger picture, whereas liberals seem more inclined to see the actions as unacceptable (and rightly so) and thus to condemn the entire system (not justified, IMO). In other words, the possibility that some Iraqi detainees are being mistreated is concerning, and the situation should be corrected, but it is not an indictment against the entire military or the entire administration. Such abuses must be minimized proactivly, and when they do occur, they must be dealt with, but it is unrealistic to expect that they will not happen at all or that they are any indication of acceptable behavior standards of the military or the administration.
As far as embryonic stem cell research, I personally believe that this is an area in which agreement is never going to be possible because the basic difference is more theological than anything else. I tried to explain my position on this on the conservative board, but I did it poorly. Most social conservatives/pro-life people approach the abortion and embryonic stem-cell research issues with the innate presumption that life - the presence of a new soul - begins at conception.
Regarding your above example of weighing the cells in the Petri dish versus helping the patient with Alzheimer's, the statement of the pastor you cited seems kind and loving IF one assumes that the Petri dish contains nothing more valuable than a few cells - in other words, if you assume that it does not contain a human soul. On the other hand, in the pro-life viewpoint, if I assume that the Petri dish contains a new human soul that is to be deliberately destroyed in order to help the woman with Alzheimers, I cannot be anything but horrified that one life, through no fault of its own and through no action on its part, is considered disposable for the benefit of the other.
Many conservatives find a puzzling dichotomy between the liberal abortion/stem-cell research position and the position regarding Iraq. The liberal position seems willing to accept the possibility of killing a human soul if we don't have firm proof that it exists, but the continuing US presence in Iraq in a situation in which premature withdrawal would almost certainly lead to chaos and, quite likely, the development of a Taliban or Iran-like theocracy is anathema.
Why do these divisions exist? I think that is probably a matter of who one listens to and believes, and what mindset one takes into their research. If you approach research with the mindset that America is at fault for most of her problems, that can be supported. If you take the position that America is basically just, that position can be supported. If your morality tends to focus most on social justice, that can be supported. If your morality focuses more on individual liberty, that can be supported. With the mainstream media being considered less reliable by both sides (considered a liberal mouthpiece by conservatives and a Bush puppet by liberals), I think more people are turning to online sources for their information. The danger of that, though, is that is very easy online to find sources that cater to one's preexisting position, thus widening the divide.
If I have said anything inflammatory or disrespectful above, my apologies.
You are stereotyping and assuming......
I believe you have never taken the time to reach out to gay people and see that the lifestyle is not any different from yours. Unfortunately, your bible thumping gets in the way.
You have a lot of nerve assuming these women
xoxoxo
I'm not assuming you are white. I simply
meant put yourself in the role that she was in, a minority in college. You are right though, I assumed that you weren't a minority for that scenario and I apologize. And, I didn't mention anywhere in my post about Wright, I was simply referring to her as a college student and the fact that I did not think her thesis was racist.
That’s all you got??? I was completely honest – you’re the one who did the assuming
My words were “DH works in stocks/trading”. Which he does. Not everyone who works in stocks/trading goes into an office in Wall Street or a stockbrokers office. There are many people behind the scenes that research companies, and other jobs dealing with the markets, trading, buying, selling, foreign currencies, etc. Many of them write articles for the companies who have clientele with big $$$ to be trading and selling. Many of them attend meetings, sit in on conference calls, etc. Also, many people when dealing with portfolios whether they are your own or various clients know what is going on in the world of the markets/finance. I never said he buys or sells “just for ourselves” and I never once said he went into an office or even eluded to the fact that he went into an office, so there you go again “assuming”. I didn’t divulge any information about his clients or anything, and I never said what he did except that he works in stocks/trading, which he does. By the way… there are many people out there who buy/sell stocks and currencies for themselves and makes or loses $$$ a day. Tell them they “don’t work” in trading. Your too busy wanting to defend yourself and make excuses and you’re doing a poor job at it. Next time maybe you should read a post slowly before assuming anything.
One thing I do know is there is a lot more going on behind the scenes and if the markets go up or down it is not just because of who is the president. But you only like to point that out when the market goes up. You praise the enlightened one when the markets go up and claim he has now walked on water and the stock market has gone up just because of him and he along, and yet you remain as silent as the wind when the markets go down. Can’t have it both ways.
I'm assuming you've never watched....(sm)
the full versions of his sermons, just the sensationalistic clips on Fox.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw
It's all about context.
I'm assuming you are quite young, am I correct in
that assumption?
I'm assuming that was supposed to be a picture sm
of an angry mob, but I was unable to view it, but I get it!! That's hilarious. But I will say the comment about "first they laughed and then they died" will haunt my nightmares -- not so funny.
JTBB, I have to admire your tenacity dealing with these people. Tell me, what is it like being a pariah? I know this won't jive with your atheist beliefs, but you know that Jesus was the most famous pariah, so your're in good company!! LOL
Assuming I am the nameless one....and also for the umpteenth time...
not a Republican...I call Barack Obama a socialist because he is one, not because he supports social programs (the accused Republicans do also, to a point, otherwise there would be none), but because he wants to practice redistribution of wealth...taaxing one group of people and redistributing that money to people who did nothing to earn it...including people who already do not pay taxes.
I never said Obama was a communist. He has had communist influences in his life, that is proven, he mentions the man in his book Dreams of My Father. But I have never said Barack Obama was a communist. I don't know if he is or not. I do know he is a socialist.
There you go again assuming everyone who marries is are christian heterosexuals
The middle east people don't marry according to our bible. The jews have their version, and so do all other religions. Even the bush people from Africa and Australia marry, and they don't marry based on the bible of christianity.
Talk about being screwed up! Trying to make a point with nonsense.
I sure can't want for all the states to follow suit and make marriage legal for homosexuals.
If you believe in christianity and the bible that's fine and good, but don't push your beliefs on everyone else, because we believe you are wrong.
Correction - I meant wait before assuming, not "want"
x
you mean left wing....it's a left wing ding website on the messiah....the right wouldn't bothe
So you and your daughter have no problem with people who wish for people and their children sm
to burn in hell, call people's children ugly, etc. etc. Well, you might not BE gt, but you might as well be. Even the liberals don't agree with gt, or hadn't you noticed? You might want to check that out and while you are at it, the conservative board has been a regular play pen since the liberals stopped their hateful dive bombing. In fact, some really good conversations are taking place over there between both sides, which DOES NOT happen on this site.
No need. I can't think of who else left besides Nan before. sm
That's why I didn't name their name. Either way, my point was they'll be back.
Actually what the left
expects and the right should too is not to be lied to on a continual basis, to have our constitution upheld. We didnt go into this war to spread democracy we went because this administration lied. WMD remember? THATS why we went into Iraq, that and the fact that due to republican spin fully half of Americans believed Saddam did 09/11. and meanwhile the real perp of 09/11 runs free. If Iraq had no oil, we never would have gone in there. Sadly, Mr bush has made one huge mess that is costing us billions and killing our soldiers. Yeah a whole lot of America is furious and upset and we have good reason to be.
Look what the left does..
maybe this was posted before but it just goes to show how biased the media is and what liars they really are. the quote in red was the actual quote. Look how the media decided to butcher it.
The media is trying REALLY hard to paint Sarah Palin into an evil religious zealot. The AP is willing to break the typically utilized laws of printing the English language to do it.
According to the AP, Sarah Palin said this about the troops while at church:
“Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,"
According to real life, Sarah Palin said this about the troops while at church (with the AP’s selective quoting underlined):
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God,”
The AP quote means “Iraq is a mission from God.”
The actual quote means “We pray Iraq is a mission from God.”
The headline is even more misleading.
Palin: Iraq war 'a task that is from God'
The AP not only doesn't mention the previous sentence, or the first part of the sentence they quote, they also essentially ignore the meaning of the very next sentence as well. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
This is a statement of humble reflection from Palin. To translate into terms the media might understand, its "I hope we're doing the right thing."
This story is bad enough that the AP really should issue a correction on it, if not a full retraction. There's no story unless you butcher the quote. It's based on half (or a quarter) of a quote, mentally ignoring the previous and following sentences, and even presenting the trimmed quote as the start of a sentence --forcing them to capitalize a word that actually appeared in the middle of the sentence.
Really bad.
you left off
spinning his wedding ring. And everyone knows what a married man is thinking when he does that . . .
If you have next to no $ left now
you must be one of the ones that the rest of us will be supporting with our tax money.
I will if you put the left one in.
nm
Left behind
I am just wondering if either of you read Tim LeHaye's "Left Behind" series. It is fictional but deals with the rapture and those left behind. I had read it many years ago but was just thinking the other day how scary it is that I find so many similarities between the books and our current situation and my feelings about what we as a country may be facing after this election. Part of it also deals with a "one-world" religion, another thought I find scary. Have you read it?
She is the only one left on there with
decency and common sense! She is definitely no twit and there is nothing to hate about her. Just my opinion of course, and I feel like all the others are twits.
Does anyone have anything left in their
those to the far left seem to think
we are to be all-tolerant of them and their lunatic ideas, but the tolerance doesn't work the other direction. Don't worry, those who counted on Obama for the gay/lesbian legislation -- i'm sure he'll come through for you before its all over.
Yes, I know someone who left the
country because Bush was reelected. So, in answer to your obnoxious question, YES!
I'm about as far left as you can get ....
and Dubya didn't have anything to do with prompting the 9/11 attacks. He just had the bad fortune to be the sitting president at the time. Those attacks were years in the making. Years. It's foolish to blame any one president or any one administration for it.
Is this what the left always does when they have no
nm
Oh, come on! Both can be mean, but the left can
nm
What will they do when there's no one left to pay
This, of course, is the major flaw in all socialist dreams and schemes. Sooner or later, the camel collapses under the weight of hauling everyone else's load. And my hump is already getting rubbed raw.
Here is one, but it's partisan left! sm
Neighbors for Peace to "Raise the Bar" for Democratic Candidates
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
St. Paul, MN – June 17, 2003 – When national Democratic leaders visit St. Paul next week, Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace and other Minnesota organizations will be on the scene to question presidential candidates, raising the electoral bar for peace, justice, and environmental issues.
The Association of State Democratic Chairs and the Democratic National Committee will convene this weekend at the Radisson Riverfront Hotel at 11 East Kellogg Boulevard in St. Paul. Gearing up for the 2004 presidential elections, Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace will be outside the hotel on Friday, June 20, from 2:30 to 5:30 p.m. to invite the candidates to join concerned Minnesota Democrats in dialogue about critical issues.
"People are leaving the Democratic party in droves, because in recent elections the candidates have become so centrist that they are almost indistinguishable from the Republicans," comments Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace co-founder, Anne Benson. "We want to see the Democratic party return to its progressive roots—to stand up for working people and poor people, and to fight against the regressive domestic and foreign policies of the Bush administration."
The neighbors from the Merriam Park area of St. Paul hold that in recent elections, Democratic candidates have lost their chance to take office because they've neglected the concerns of their own voters.
"It has always been said, 'There are more Democrats than Republicans; we just need to get out the vote,'" states member, Steve Schwarz. "We, however, need a reason to get out the vote. Many Democrats have felt alienated and misrepresented by the party and have looked instead to other alternatives. We believe in the principles that made the Democratic party what it was and still can be today. Remember, we in Minnesota have supported a long line of Democratic politicians who voted on principle and not on predictions of popularity. We expect our candidates to make peace and justice issues a priority."
Adds Benson, "We're encouraging candidates to ask themselves the hard questions: Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Was I misled by the administration when I voted for the War Powers Resolution? How do we get out of this quagmire in Iraq? Does the PATRIOT Act infringe on too many civil liberties?"
Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace has invited all Democratic candidates to meet with them after their sessions conclude on Friday to answer a series of fourteen questions regarding issues of pre-emptive war, international relations, arms development, military spending, V.A. benefits, U.S. economy, social programs, employment, globalization, education, health care, civil liberties, terrorism, and environmental policy. They invite all Minnesotans with these concerns to join them in St. Paul on Friday in addressing the candidates.
"We're not endorsing a particular candidate," group member, Jeanne Schnitzen, notes. "We're giving them all a chance to look us in the eye and answer to the issues we vote for. If they're really in this race to turn the tides, we'll make sure they get that chance. I want to believe there is a Democratic candidate who is capable of sowing the seeds of change."
So much for the tolerance of the left. nm
Looks like you left your *objectivity*
on the Conservative Board. Might be time for you to return.
Left leaning.
I am well aware that I am on a *left leaning* board; however, how can you ever possibly gain a true picture of real facts if you only visit left leaning sites? It isn't possible. I don't do it. In fact, on the other political boards I post on, some left and some right, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, News Max, Fox, are not used as sources.
You misunderstand me about the Constitution and Iraq.
The left really hates this guy
This is so laughable that with all that's going on the world the left stoops to National Enquirer style reporting. Get a life and a clue.
Why do you think everyone not for Bush is left?sm
I guess compared to those over on the conservative board, I am a little left. I was a registered Republican up until 4 years ago. Because their policies and actions conflict with my beliefs, I can no longer support the party. There are many many more just like me.
I think there is still dispute over even when they left sm
and why planes were allowed to come into US airspace to pick them up when all other aircraft were grounded. Also, why they were not questioned by FBI, etc.
Also, researchers requesting information from the FBI about their disposition with Osama, and were told that Osama is wanted by the FBI, but not for 911. So my question would be, well then who is?
Too bad folks, it's not just the left...sm
Like Lurker said, the gig is up! People are pushing for change in Iraq. Personally, I would have rather seen us release the full fury on terrorist who are invading that country and clean it up before leaving. However, if our strategy is to keep peddling around like street police then something has to give. We have our own country to fix and too much attention has been given to Iraq in the past 3 years.
On to the economy for a sec. Republicans have been boasting on how good the economy is doing, but guess which group is reaping the benefits. You guessed it - the rich. So sorry if the working man, you know those of us who punch the clock, are not feeling so thankful for the Dow and Nasdaq earnings. What's funny is that the *beltway boys* as AG calls them can not seem to figure out why 50% of Americans tend to feel the economy is not so hot.
What is typical of the left?
It kind of got lost in the point you were trying to make, something about Lurker not answering your question the way you wanted her to...or somethin' like that.
What I want to know is who left you in charge?
nm
Posters like this need to be left alone
nm here
Would that be left or right bias?
nm
The left does it all the time.
nm
No, not at all...it started on the far left rag...
the dailykos. That is where it broke. And then the rest of the far left picked it up and ran with it.
I was the first to congratulate Obama on his renouncing of the behavior. But even with him saying that, his supporters continue the salvos at Palin's family. Big time Dem pundits on TV still taking shots at her. Blogs still taking shots at her. Posters on this board still taking shots at her. Now you take people who are not committed yet, they see this happening, and you are left with only two conclusions...either Barack was very serious and meant what he said (which I believe) and his followers and pundits and the media are still going to attack regardless; or that he just made that statement to take the political high road while all the time in the background he is saying "sic her." It has to be one of the two...but either way, if his supporters and big Dem pundits continue the attack it reflects badly on his candidacy. I realize that he cannot control what people do...but one would think they would heed what he says (they claim to believe everything he says) and just lay off...but, to each his own.
Has the left ever put "country first"?
nm
|
