Your first sentence really shows was a mean hate filled shallow person you are.
Posted By: Sickening. on 2005-09-30
In Reply to: Bush drinking again??? - Libby
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
- Bush drinking again??? - Libby
- Your first sentence really shows was a mean hate filled shallow person you are. - Sickening.
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
well actually 15 of the hate filled showed up from the sm
church from Kansas carrying signs reading, "God hates America," "Thank God for dead soldiers." It was ridiculous. The police had blocked them off a section and in front of them were a group holding the US flag so as to block them out of site from the family and friends.
What a hate filled post.
:-(
What a hate filled post.
:-(
Thanks so much for proving my point about the angry, hate-filled left. sm
You did a perfect job of it. You are incapable of thought other than that driven by hate. Your debates are screeds and your voice is strident and laced with the same adjectives...the word liar comes to mind. Which, of course, you are.
I don't hate her so maybe wrong person to answer
but, I don't think she was the most qualified person McCain could have found out of the whole Republican Party. I also thought Lieberman was his personal choice but McCain was talked out of it?? I voted for McCain in 2000 in the primary, but won't vote for him this time because I am not convinced he will live out his term, and I don't want her as president. Every president ages drastically during their term, and he already seems old to me. Look at Bush, he looks much more than 8 years older.
My views on abortion, stem cell research, etc., do not jibe with hers. I have a 3YO nephew diagnosed at 14 months with juvenile diabetes so stem cell is a big issue with me. I don't want someone with her conservative views appointing Supreme Court justices.
Another reason I don't want her as VP or potential VP is because of her husband. They remind me of Bill and Hilary. He seems too involved in her governing business. I don't want a repeat of co-presidents or co Vice-presidents if you will. He should stay home and take care of the kids and let her govern.
In summary then, I would say I don't want her because her views are too conservative to me and I am afraid McCain will not live out presidency and she would be #1. And I do not want a repeat of The Bill and Hill show.
Please don't blast me. You asked for my opinion. If you disagree, fine.
Could you be any more shallow?
I didn't make fun of Bush for mispronouncing words, I despised his ACTIONS! Also despised the fact that a COURT-APPOINTED moron was given the power of the highest land in the country. And that my friend is what should concern YOU and all patriots!!
Bush will go down in history not just as an ignorant (not the same as unintelligent) war lover who lied us into an immoral war - but who also deregulated industry to the point wee are in free fall economically.
Did the Democrats do anything to stop him? NO. They are equally to blame.
But the poster scares me a bit: He or she thinks the issue is about the correct pronunciation of "words"!!
Did it ever occur to you poster, that Mr. Bush DESERVES our disdain becausee of his sick policies?
He also DESERVES a fair TRIAL, here's hoping he gets one.
Just as shallow as you I guess - see message
Read your own post. You said "it'll be music to my ears just not to hear the word new-cu-lar anymore". Your the one who said it. Now you say you didn't make fun of Bush for misprouncing words???? Excuse me, that is exactly what you did and that is what I call shallow.
Yeah, I despise Bush's actions and what he and congress has done to our country, but I'll post on issues, not the way he prounces words. That's why I said I can't wait til Obama misprounces a word. So I guess in your opinion it's shallow to make fun of the way Obama prounces words, but it's not shallow to make fun of the way Bush pronounces words. You don't like the fact that Bush was elected? That's would be a whole different issue. Most democrats still to this day believe what they want to believe no matter what the facts are. What's worse is having the filmakers and hollyweird people with money be able to make movies to support their viewpoints, whether they have the facts right or wrong, and then unfortunately some igs will believe it. But then again that is not what your post was about. Your were making fun of the way Bush pronounced nuclear.
You keep saying he's ignorant. Well that's your opinion. I have no love for Bush whatsoever. Can't stand the guy and didn't vote for him. But I don't like him based on what has happened to the country.
I do agree with one of your statements...Did the democrats do anything to stop him? NO. They are equally to blame. However, makes me wonder what dirt does he have on them that they won't do anything. I'm just sick of politics altogether - both sides.
If he deserves our disdain because of his policies and actions then fine, state that, not how he pronounces words. Those were your words in your post.
I believe we are on the same side. We both can't stand the guy, but to make fun of someone because of how they pronounce words? That's exactly what you did.
Here's another tidbit of information.
As I posted a message earlier, an ad to take an IQ test pops up. It says Obama's IQ score is 125. Are your smarter than Obama. Another time I posted the same place to take the IQ test popped up and it said George Bush's IQ is 125. Are you smarter than George Bush. Looks like they both have the same IQ according to this place. I didn't believe it of course, after all the thousands and thousand of people saying that he is so unintelligent. So I researched further and found various websites that say based on his SAT's Bush's IQ is 129.
On other sites I'm finding that based on Obamas SAT scores he has an IQ between 115 and 120. However, in all honesty there are sites that say Obama refuses to release his IQ score. Other sites are saying it is higher, but they all say the same thing. Obama won't release his IQ score. Then I think...Obama not releasing information????? Naaaaa say it ain't so. :-)
No, shallow Sally. Repubs are smart, but lefties
nm
completely filled
The main board used to be completely filled with them...and I mean completely. You apparently missed all that. Not sure if there are still there or not.
I filled in the blanks s/m
with Republican rather than profanity. Of course I'm almost to the point where I say Republican=profanity judging from the excuses made for Saint McCain. LOL
That's because our government is filled with more and
-
Your *information* was filled with insults...sm
Sorry I don't meet your level of debate.
But he just signed a bill filled with earmarks???
x
To the pubs: Your fantasy-filled hatefest
Americans are tired of fear; they're voting for HOPE.
Americans are tired of lies; they're voting for TRUTH. (Truth is not found on the tabloid pages, nor on internet "dot-com" pages claiming to be the gospel).
Americans are tired of a dwindling and endangered middle class; they're voting for its SURVIVAL.
Americans are tired of being screwed by big business; they're voting to screw it right back.
Americans are voting for a leader who remembers they exist and will work FOR them, not AGAINST them, as the past 8 years have gone.
Americans are voting for NEW IDEAS to solve our problems; not the same old bull-caca that's been kicked back and forth through the halls of the White House in recent years.
As an MT, I'm voting with the hope of maybe, just MAYBE, saving my future employment; and NOT giving someone free rein to send the next wave of jobs to Mexico or Bolivia.
After tonight, I remain more optimistic than ever that a NEW DAY is coming to America, and that certain washed-up politicians will finally be put out to pasture.
Wow,you're so filled with self-loathing and bitterness s/m
you're incapable of accepting that there are people out there that are not. To be called a suck-up for being nice and telling someone I appreciate them for being so? Are you kidding? You have proven my point to Marmann exactly. What a shame to go through life so miserable that the only way you can feel good about yourself is to tear down someone else -- but for being nice? There is plenty of nastiness on this board as it is, so really, you should be ashamed for contributing to the toxicity. I bet you pull the wings off of butterflies, too, don't you?
yes, the first person did....the person replying to that post...
was talking about the founding fathers...who came along a long time after the witch trials. You replied to the second post, not the first one. I was replying to you based on that. Purtianism came first...Christianity was the religion practiced by the founding fathers. It is evident in their writings and in most of our original documents.
I think we can stop whipping this dead horse now.
English not so good. Sad for you. So much hate. Life too short hate.
x
Oh I see....you hate small town folks, you hate Christians...
and you hate the military...you are also coming into real clear view.
Sheesh, you not only hate Bush, you hate PEOPLE!
x
Your first sentence says it
It's a question of who is shouldering the burden. Well apparently you're a billionaire,'cause I know many hardworking, responsible, professional middle-class people (no one looking for a handout)working pretty darn hard just to stay afloat...people with degrees who are delivering pizza. Our local food pantries can't keep up with the demand and this was before Katrina. There are Meals on Wheels volunteers, who pay for their own gas, have had to stop because they simply can't afford it. And the meals that WERE being delivered weren't even hot, because THAT was cut back. Go, good for you on your shiny throne passing judgement on who is or isn't looking for a hand-out, but I can tell you that even with every kind of insurance and adequate income, I pray my husband or I don't get sick or have some unforeseen catastrophy, because in many cases that is all it takes.
You said it all in one sentence...
Hindsight IS 20/20, something Democrats tend to forget. The pre war intelligence was very ominous, and it was international intelligence, not just ours. If an attack had come our way which was then traced to Iraq, you would have placed the blame squarely on the back of GWB. Of course, now that we have hindsight, he's blamed for the war being not worth it, wrong war, ad nauseum. Apply a little logic and you can see that it's a no-win situation. I believe the man did what he had to do, AT THE TIME. You can't play Monday morning quarterback. The prominent Democrats were all on the same page before the war, just read some of their quotes.
I think the last sentence says it all..sm
Either way, even if you believe McCain's health plan is a train wreck and that none of his math adds up, he proposes to fix that with Medicare savings, not with $882 billion worth of "cuts."
Tell me what the difference is, one says medicare savings and one says medicare cuts. Both mean less money for medicare, no? Semantics on both sides I think.
We can sum all of the above in one sentence:
LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!
me neither......Your sentence that
I quoted in my former post reminded me so much of the situation between Israel and the Palestinians, therefore I swerved away from the issue at hand.
Ahmadinejad should step down and give his position to Mousavi. Same with Khatami.
On what are you? In your last sentence
of your post you contradict what you wrote in your subject line!
Hahahaha! LMAO !
You are a joke, 'Backward typist,' are you really .....?
Confused or imbibed?
Your last sentence tells it all
Your last sentence concerning ammo, in my opinion, sums up your beliefs, i.e., republicans, versus democrats. Everything to you righties is fight time, attack time, war time whereas we lefties post something for people to read or debate, not to fight. I cant speak for all, but I believe negotiating, talking out problems, trying to understand each other works better than slinging insults, attacks, and using ammo. A nonpartisian person reading these posts would be able to see, the attacks more often than not are from the right wingers.
I do believe that the last sentence is especially true.
Isn't it amazing. So many here with ties to Vietnam veterans and so many differing viewpoints. Nearly every male in my family has served in the Armed Forces and this down to third cousins. Many of them served in Vietnam. Every one of them has bad feelings towards the peace movement in the 60s and 70s.
I will finish your sentence. sm
an impossible thing for YOU.
regarding your list sentence
your body might not be there anymore.
is there a subj in that sentence?
just does not make sense. Please proofread what you post so you don't look illiterate.
I just went to the link and the first sentence
states it was from January. I am not even sure he is saying rates will skyrocket, but that will be the argument against his plan to cap greenhouse gases and retrofitting.
Your last sentence of the third paragraph was just as...sm
uncalled for, I believe, and untrue.
ADD time. The end of that sentence should be
shares in the responsibility at this point.
Whoops....A person....not I person.
.
Don't need to explain to you, you explained yourself in your last sentence.
t
Thanks for the post. I was especially impressed by the last sentence...
of the article. At least they showed both sides (good for them), albeit three paragraphs on Palin and 1 line on Obama. Big sentence tho.
Can't ge past the ignorance of the first sentence here.
the constitution is not a static document and is, in fact, a living, dynamic, changing, vital document. To wrap you brain around this concept, consider this. The orignal Constitution contained 10 amendments. Amendments 11 through 27 commenced over time as such: 1795, 1804, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1913x2, 1919, 1920, 1933x2, 1951, 1961, 1964, 1967, 1971 and 1992.
There. You see? The (progressive) authors of the constitution in their wisdom provided the mechanism of amendement, that would allow for change and growth. That makes it a living, breathing, dynamic document. Got it?
Next time you try to interpret Obama's book, watch your step.
That last sentence just didn't EVEN sound right! sm
And I think the missing sheep brains is the main thing in this picture.
Did you forget to finish our sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Did you forget to finish your sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Your very first sentence, "Trying to bomb...
... a grassroots political force into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy," reminds me very much of a quote by Michael Corleone in Godfather II, where they're in Cuba trying to "do business" while in the midst of unrest and rebellion of the people.
Michael Corleone: I saw a strange thing today. Some rebels were being arrested. One of them pulled the pin on a grenade. He took himself and the captain of the command with him. Now, soldiers are paid to fight; the rebels aren't.
Hyman Roth: What does that tell you?
Michael Corleone: It means they could win.
Although Israel has very sophisticated American-made weapons, maybe, as above, that won't be enough. 
Interesting sentence construction.
I would have gone with the adjective ''grammatical'' to modify the noun ''mistakes'' rather than using the noun ''grammar'' to modify another noun, or perhaps ''bad mistakes in grammar.'' Then again, I might have linked ''bad-grammar'' as a compound modifier, but then that's just me (as well most who are truly English literate.)
The last sentence is particularly worrisome for Michigan.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061804053.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Senate's Health-Care Draft Calls for Most to Buy Insurance, Nixes Obama's 'Public Option'
By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 19, 2009
A draft proposal in the Senate to overhaul the nation's health-care system would require most people to buy health insurance, authorize an expansion of Medicaid coverage and create consumer-owned cooperative plans instead of the government coverage that President Obama is seeking.
The document, distributed among members of the Senate Finance Committee yesterday afternoon, addressed none of the funding questions that have consumed House and Senate negotiators in recent days. But it included an array of coverage provisions that were drastically scaled back from earlier versions, as lawmakers seek to shrink the bill's overall cost. The proposal, for instance, would reduce the pool of middle-class beneficiaries eligible for a new tax credit meant to make insurance more affordable.
The absence of a "public option" marks perhaps the most significant omission. Obama and many Democrats had sought a public option to ensure affordable, universal coverage, but as many as 10 Senate Democrats have protested the idea as unfair to private insurers. In its place, the draft circulated yesterday outlines a co-op approach modeled after rural electricity and telecom providers, subject to government oversight and funded with federal seed money.
Yesterday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) met with four Republicans, including Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa), the ranking GOP member on the panel, along with two Democratic colleagues in an attempt to find bipartisan consensus. Baucus dubbed the group "the coalition of the willing."
Meanwhile, in the House, Democrats are exploring a range of funding options, including a surtax on the rich and an increase in the payroll tax imposed on all U.S. workers. The list also includes new taxes on sugary drinks and alcohol, along with broader levies, such as a national value-added tax of up to 3 percent.
The Senate's preferred option -- taxing the health benefits that millions of Americans receive through their employers -- is also on the House list. So is Obama's favorite idea: limiting the value of itemized deductions for the nation's wealthiest 3 million taxpayers.
Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee charged with developing a financing plan, said lawmakers have not "embraced any particular source of revenue." But he confirmed that big, broad-based taxes like the payroll tax and a value-added tax are under discussion, mainly because they have the potential to raise "a lot of money" for an expansion of health coverage expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
The House will not unveil a financing plan until after the July 4 recess, Neal said, though House leaders were expected to release an outline of the rest of their plan today, with a goal of putting a bill to vote later this summer. The Senate is aiming to debate its legislation in July as well, and is seeking a bill that would cost less than $1 trillion.
Maintaining that tight schedule could prove difficult, though, because daunting issues remain in both chambers. One area of contention is the extent to which private employers must subsidize public coverage for their workers if the companies don't offer their own plan or if the premiums are unaffordable. The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if lawmakers don't find the right formula, employees may flee their company plans for federal coverage, sending government costs soaring.
The draft in the Senate committee spells out one possible solution: It would require employers to pay 50 percent of Medicaid costs for workers enrolled in the low-income program and 100 percent of the cost of health-insurance tax credits for eligible employees. Workers could forfeit employer coverage only if the cost exceeds 12.5 percent of their income.
The draft, earlier reported on by washingtonpost.com blogger Ezra Klein, spells out four options for requiring employers to provide coverage, with exemptions for firms with up to 200 employees. It would fine individuals who do not purchase coverage, though certain groups, including Native Americans and undocumented workers, would be exempted.
It also would loosen eligibility requirements for Medicaid, a proposal certain to alarm many governors who are grappling with budget crises.
Proves you don't read anything..Says in the 1st sentence he is Gov. Lynch of
x
oops, ignore the last partial sentence....nm
Did you just use the name Rush and the word honesty in the same sentence? (sm)
Limbaugh lied about 9-11 Commission report
Limbaugh falsely claimed "Nobody ever said there was" a connection between Iraq, 9-11 attacks
Limbaugh misrepresented Duelfer report on Iraqi WMDs
Limbaugh lied about AIDS
Limbaugh overstated the minimum wage
Limbaugh made false claims about the Democratic National Convention
Limbaugh distorted the Kyoto Protocol
Limbaugh falsely accused Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Limbaugh claimed Clintons are funding Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
Limbaugh lied to defend Swift Boat Vets
Limbaugh misstated Pew report on journalists
Limbaugh mischaracterized the federal deficit
Limbaugh misstated federal education spending
Limbaugh lied about Bush's false uranium claim
And that isn't even the tip of the iceburg for him. And by the way, what's with the *he owns his problems* junk? Does that mean that since he admits he's a drug addict then he's not a bad drug addict? Give me a break.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180006
oops...first sentence posted twice by accident.
:)
Haha! I so agree, she summed it up in 1 sentence, there is nothing more to say!..nm
nm
That wasn't my whole message - you just picked out the sentence you wanted to
But that's no surprise. There was one sentence in those two paragraphs about how the crats always blame the pubs, but they never take responsibility and blame the people in their own party who are at fault too. So you take one sentence out of the whole two paragraphs and say that's what the whole message was about. Nice try. My message was about this admistration so far being a disaster in less than one month. The only ones who see it okay are the kool-aid drinkers, and that I'm sick of all the people acting as though there was never a United States until Obama came along. Since you evidently did not read my message I'll repeat it now.
American has been around for over 200 years. We've had some good presidents and we've had some bad presidents, but Obama did not discover a new country here.
Since McCain was not elected nobody can say whether or not he would have been a better president or not, so time to put that dog to rest.
In the last sentence of her post she retracts what she said in her subject line, lol!..nm
nm
Too bad McCain can't form a sentence w/o gagging, slurring, making faces
That is his problem. Obama is eloquent... oh well
|
