Short article on some real legends and also a reply to ....
Posted By: lurker on 2007-01-29
In Reply to:
that endless droning on about supporting the troops.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0129-01.htm
http://killfile.newsvine.com/_news/2007/01/29/542577-the-hell-i-cant-supporting-the-troops-not-the-war
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
short reply
So the success in Iraq apparently means nothing. Wow.
Granny Accused of Looting Freed...see short article.sm
KENNER, La. — A 73-year-old diabetic grandmother and church elder who fled Katrina's floodwaters for the safety of a hotel ended up in prison instead for more than two weeks — all over a bite of food.
Police in this New Orleans suburb arrested Merlene Maten (search) the day after the hurricane on charges she took $63.50 in goods from a looted deli. Though never before in trouble with the law, her bail was set at a stiff $50,000 and she was shipped away to a state penitentiary.
Family and eyewitnesses insist Maten's prison odyssey was unwarranted, claiming she only had gone to her car to get some sausage to eat when officers cuffed her in frustration, unable to catch younger looters at a nearby store.
Despite intervention from the nation's largest senior lobby, volunteer lawyers from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (search) and even a private attorney, the family fought a futile battle for 16 days to get her freed.
Then, hours after her plight was featured in an Associated Press story, a local judge on Thursday ordered Maten freed on her own recognizance, setting up a sweet reunion with her daughter, grandchildren and 80-year-old husband.
Get real, I read the entire article. Bush had NOTHING to do with it!
My gosh, the lengths you will go to. Shame on you! Obviously, German would not give him up, as Democrat says. Next you will post that Bush is responsible for orginal sin. And you would believe it, too! 
Did you read the article? It says the video was doctored and not real - nm
x
No, goofy. Republicans are REAL people, real
nm
If the real folks, with real hope, faith, and
and for our country's future who participate here on this forum were just a tad as healthy, wealthy and wise as this poster considers herself, we probably wouldn't be sitting in front of these silly computers trying to make a living!! Can't figure why she is here other than tell us how healthy, wealthy and wise she is and we are not!
Each brown place in the link takes you to a different article that supports this article...nm
x
Well said! Short and to the point! LOL
It's the best I could do on short notice. sm
Suffice it to say, I am not comfortable with portraying the US as the Great Satan and whatever role we have or have not played, everyone turns to us in time of need, now don't they. And I mean EVERYONE, every single country. So how bad are we really? Just as I do not believe the Islamofascists are jealous of us for what we have, and they aren't, I do not believe that portraying the US as the Great Satan is going to win us any brownie points with terrorists who already hate us. So if you and Chomsky are comfortable with putting every man, woman and child in this country at risk to satisfy whatever beef you have against freedom and democracy, fine. Your freedom of speech had a most terrible and high price tag. Something tells me that many of these fine men and women, if they could speak now, would not thank you for your thoughts.
Short answer would be
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040420-2.html
In 2004: **Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. 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. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.**
Actually is first name is D!ck (yes I know - short for Richard)
But, I've never heard him to be called Richard. But D!ck is a bad word and it wouldn't let me say it in the message. HA HA HA - I think thats too funny.
Did you see the short interview she did with ...sm
reporters where she was asked to comment on her censure by the Alaska legislature? She totally ignores the fact that she was censored for unethical behavior in the interference she allowed to occur trying to get the trooper fired. She just said she was grateful to the Alaska legislature for absolving her of unethical or criminal behavior in the firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, no mention of what she was actually censored for. Unbelievable!
"Sarah Palin unlawfully abused her power as governor by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper, the chief investigator of an Alaska legislative panel concluded Friday".
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOTk11gvqDAgD0cY3i4WjI_2YOxwD93O25DG0
And, it is a very short drive!
xxx
Short quiz...(sm)
Who was the president on 09/11/2001? People seem to forget that for some reason.
I have a lot to do, therefore my postings are short....
and I am young, not senile.
In four short months
(1/3 of a year, 1/12 of his term) O has put this country further in debt than any previous president. With the complicity of congress he is printing money like a drunken counterfeiter. He has stood the US on its head and emptied its pockets. He is actually running some of its businesses as well. He has his eye on controlling healthcare. He is trying hard to disarm and silence dissenters, subtly at first, but this will become more heavy-handed as time passes.
Do the math. Must we really wait a full year (let along his full term) to figure how much deeper this hole is going to get? The laws of economics have not been suspended just because of his miraculous election. Government is not the answer, it is the problem.
Let's try this experiment: I'll keep doing what I've been doing (laying in food supplies, planting a garden, stacking firewood, saving money, storing other necessities, preparing to care for and defend my own family) and the rest of you keep doing what you've been doing (waiting for Obama's ''plan'' to work or for him to take care of you). We'll check back in a year and see who's preparations worked better. Okay?
Short attention span?
Yes, it would be simpler as it would be a very very short list!
nm
Short memory span?
Is there a reason why you repeat yourself over and over and over and over and over and over again? Rehashing the same ridiculous complaints over and over and over and over and over and over again?
Why don't you post the butt in a chair thing a few more times? You guys have called us more or less drugged out hippies with references to what we must be smoking, what we must have been doing in the 60s and our hookahs. You ain't exactly perfect. Now if I post this paragraph about ten more times you might get the idea, right?
My take on the subject, the short version.
Every country has some form of socialized medicine. Ours is comprised of the poor, the elderly, and those giving service to our country (military and political of which number in the millions) both past and present that encompasses their family members as well through different benefit packages depending on where they fall within the system. I believe the major argument is about extending those benefits in a social manner outside of what is already in place.
You said a mouthful in a few short words.
nm
A day late and a dollar short......
xx
well....I stop short of calling him the....
antichrist. But the fact that seemingly intelligent people lose all sense of reason when he opens his mouth does give one pause. That's for sure.
This has George Soros written ALL over it.
Short clip (less than 3 min.) Please watch this.
http://www.youtube.=om/watch?v=rUEQz5dltmI
I think he's a few chocolate chips short of
;D
I just voted too...very short line :-) nm
x
Pertaining to the short 03/10/09 duel
between A.Nonymous and North to Home.
A.Nonymous made general comments about three groups of people who will still feel entitled to be on the public dole under O’s regime and also said that anybody wanting to get ahead in this country needs to be able to speak standard English and not Ebonics, Spanish, ... etc.
North to Home felt personally attacked, resorted to personal name-calling and hurled accusations such as: Inflammatory, blatantly racist, underlying hatred, prejudice and hatred of all people different from you, cowardly, insulting, nasty, racist bigoted rants, sickening, [more bigotry, more hatred, more prejudice, blah, blah, blah.]
I’ve been waiting for others to weigh in on this but nobody wants to touch it. It’s a tough job but somebody’s gotta do it. So I will.
North to Home: The only one making personal attacks is you. Toughen up, baby. To participate on this board you have to develop rhino hide. [No that is not a slur against anybody with African roots. Don’t start up with me about it.] This is a place for reasoned political opinion and discussion, not angry overreaction. Chill. Don’t post when you are so obviously angry. Anyone who resorts to name-calling in a political argument needs to work on objectivity. We argue, we don’t attack.
A.Nonymous: You used the term ‘bitter 200-year descendents of ex-slaves’ and the word Ebonics, both of which got North to Home’s knickers in a twist. [Not exactly a diplomatic choice of words and by my math only about 144 years since the end of the Civil War.] But the pertinent word was ‘bitter’. I agree that those still bitter about slavery after 100+ years and about segregation after 40+ years need to examine their own prejudices, then get on with improving their own lives and their children’s lives. None of us on this board has ever bought or sold another human being and I am not accepting collective guilt because a centuries-ago ancestor may have.
North to Home: You are apparently still angry about your father's treatment while serving in the segregated US military during the Korean War 50 years ago. Yet he was able to bring you up right, educate you and teach you the value of hard work. Weren't his experiences what made it possible for him to do that?
Short blog from watershed wordpress...sm
Mon 21 Mar 2005
a culture of life?
I don’t know what it is about this Schiavo case that is driving me nuts and pissing me off to no end. It just seems like the epitome of contradictions, hypocrisy and doublespeak. Even beyond the implications for the “sanctity of marriage” and the over 17,000 Iraqis, and over 1500 US soldiers killed in the Iraq War as I ranted about in this post.
There’s a great article in the Washington Post about Bush’s record on life and death here.
Bush on Schiavo: “…we must err on the side of life…”
Bush on Karla Faye Tucker: “Please,” Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, “don’t kill me.”
Let us not forgot Bush oversaw 152 executions while the governor of Texas.
And let’s not forgot about the baby who was taken off of life support against his parent’s wishes, in Texas as a result of a Texas law (passed by none other than our president) that states the hospital can make decisions about the termination of life over the family. (as I post this, Keith Olberman has started talking about the same thing!). You can read about this here (link not in repost).
Wait, I am comparing someone like Terri Schiavo, to a convicted killer like Karla Faye Tucker, to thousands of Iraqis, to US soldiers, and to a little baby? You bet I freakin’ am. Isn’t that what a “culture of life” would be all about?
-------
Nope MT, he has done some things wrong :(
Short clip on world government. sm
People have been warning us including Presidents it is coming, and getting called kooks and conspiracy theorists. Little by little, it is all starting to show up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JATcBFbvcI
Obama bailout up to just short of a trillion....
and he has been in office HOW long? lol. Doesn't count the billions we already spent. This is new spending. Talk about spending like a drunken sailor....lol. Hello democratic majority. LOL.
Hey, don't lose heart....look what he has done in 3 short weeks with...
the power you folks gave him. He has a LONG time left to do his O magic. When we are all lining up for the checks (well, that is if you lose your job and don't have to pay taxes as those are the folks who are going to get the biggest handout), just remember who put the great benefactor in Washington there and gave him carte blanche. Uh...that would be you. :)
your view is naive, short-sighted and simplistic
I don't want to get caught up in a debate here. Americans can buy whatever they want. You are right. But then when your job is gone, don't complain about it because you fed the problem instead of solving it. If you don't support American companies, you are supporting some other economy instead of your own. How can the American economy ever survive if Americans do not support it? There is a bigger picture here, and I believe you are missing it. The failure of the automakers would affect every other business and service in this country, including ours, by a ripple effect. So when you lose your job because the number of hospital and physician visits is reduced since none of them has insurance anymore and no one can afford medical care anymore, remember what you said here. If they fail, we all will lose from it.
Stimulus plan...the short version....no one talks about....
Obama: I'm going to give you a one-time $500 tax rebate check.
I'm also going to give those people who don't work for a living, or pay into the system, a $500 check too.
Oh, did I forget to mention.....
You're going to owe the govt. $10,000 in taxes, once I can get away with asking you all to foot the bill for my stimulus package.
Stimulus plan...the short version....no one talks about....
Obama: My trillion dollar stimulus package, very dire, we must do something NOW, right now, before it gets worse. Therefore I'm going to......
I'm going to give you a one-time $500 check.
I'm also going to give those people who don't work for a living, or pay into the system, a $500 check too.
Oh, did I forget to mention.....
You're going to owe the U.S. govt. $10,000 in taxes, once I can get away with asking you all to foot the bill for my stimulus package.
Nope - just deploring the short-term thinking of
Usually, this means that whoever replaces the Dear (Departed) Leader will be just as bad or worse.
Oh, I know what the Brotherhood of Amalgamated Assassins Union will say - that sometimes whoever follows can't possibly be as bad. To this, I would reply "Never underestimate the capacity of any politician to be far worse than you ever imagined he could be."
...and forget the line of succession. Consider the possibility that the Widow Obama could then run in 2012, snaffling the sympathy vote! GAK!!
Quality is Job One.
Short attention span explains alliance with Bush.
Now it's all starting to make sense. See article. Don't bother to read article. Form knee-jerk negative opinion based on prejudice against liberals rather than facts. Refuse to read/accepts facts (too time consuming). Ignore all gray areas in life; deal in only black and white. Vote for Bush. When things get worse, vote for him again because neocons are never wrong.
She was vetted several months ago, back when she made his short list.
He has shown a short-form fraud piece of garbage. I
nm
So does someone's comment at the end of the article, discredit the whole article??
Unbelievable.
Bush's Iraq Speech: Long On Assertion, Short On Facts
Bush says "progress is uneven" in Iraq, but accentuates positive evidence and mostly ignores the negative.
June 30, 2005
Standing before a crowd of uniformed soldiers, President Bush addressed the nation on June 27 to reaffirm America's commitment to the global war on terrorism. But throughout the speech Bush continually stated his opinions and conclusions as though they were facts, and he offered little specific evidence to support his assertions.
Here we provide some additional context, both facts that support Bush's case that "we have made significant progress" in Iraq, as well as some of the negative evidence he omitted.
Analysis
Bush's prime-time speech at Fort Bragg, NC coincided with the one-year anniversary of the handover of soverignty to Iraqi authorities. It was designed to lay out America's role in Iraq amid sinking public support for the war and calls by some lawmakers to withdraw troops.
The Bloodshed
Bush acknowledged the high level of violence in Iraq as he sought to reassure the public.
Bush: The work in Iraq is difficult and dangerous. Like most Americans, I see the images of violence and bloodshed. Every picture is horrifying and the suffering is real. Amid all this violence, I know Americans ask the question: Is the sacrifice worth it?
What Bush did not mention is that by most measures the violence is getting worse. Both April and May were record months in Iraq for car bombings, for example, with more than 135 of them being set off each month. And the bombings are getting more deadly. May was a record month for deaths from bombings, with 381 persons killed in "multiple casualty" bombings that took two or more lives, according to figures collected by the Brookings Institution in its "Iraq Index." The Brookings index is compiled from a variety of sources including official government statistics, where those are available, and other public sources such as news accounts and statements of Iraqi government officials.
The number of Iraqi police and military who have been killed is also rising, reaching 296 so far in June, nearly triple the 109 recorded in January and 103 in Febrary, according to a tally of public information by the website Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, a private group that documents each fatality from public statements and news reports. Estimates of the total number of Iraqi civilians killed each month as a result of "acts of war" have been rising as well, according to the Brookings index.
The trend is also evident in year-to-year figures. In the past twelve months, there have been 25% more U.S. troop fatalities and nearly double the average number of insurgent attacks per day as there were in the preceeding 12 months.
Reconstruction Progress
In talking about Iraqi reconstruction, Bush highlighted the positive and omitted the negative:
Bush: We continued our efforts to help them rebuild their country. . . . Our progress has been uneven but progress is being made. We are improving roads and schools and health clinics and working to improve basic services like sanitation, electricity and water. And together with our allies, we will help the new Iraqi government deliver a better life for its citizens.
Indeed, the State Department's most recent Iraq Weekly Status Report shows progress is uneven. Education is a positive; official figures show 3,056 schools have been rehabilitated and millions of "student kits" have been distributed to primary and secondary schools. School enrollments are increasing. And there are also 145 new primary healthcare centers currently under construction. The official figures show 78 water treatment projects underway, nearly half of them completed, and water utility operators are regularly trained in two-week courses.
On the negative side, however, State Department figures show overall electricity production is barely above pre-war levels. Iraqis still have power only 12 hours daily on average.
Iraqis are almost universally unhappy about that. Fully 96 percent of urban Iraqis said they were dissatisfied when asked about "the availability of electricity in your neighborhood." That poll was conducted in February for the U.S. military, and results are reported in Brookings' "Iraq Index." The same poll also showed that 20 percent of Iraqi city-dwellers still report being without water to their homes.
Conclusions or Facts?
The President repeatedly stated his upbeat conclusions as though they were facts. For example, he said of "the terrorists:"
Bush: They failed to break our coalition and force a mass withdrawal by our allies. They failed to incite an Iraqi civil war.
In fact, there have been withdrawals by allies. Spain pulled out its 1,300 soldiers in April, and Honduras brought home its 370 troops at the same time. The Philippines withdrew its 51 troops last summer to save the life of a Filipino hostage held captive for eight months in Iraq. Ukraine has already begun a phased pullout of its 1,650-person contingent, which the Defense Ministry intends to complete by the end of the year. Both the Netherlands and Italy have announced plans to withdraw their troops, and the Bulgarian parliament recently granted approval to bring home its 450 soldiers. Poland, supplying the third-largest contingent in the coalition after Italy's departure, has backed off a plan for full withdrawal of troops due to the success of Iraqi elections and talks with Condoleezza Rice, but the Polish Press Agency announced in June that the next troop rotation will have 200 fewer soldiers.
Bush is of course entitled to argue that these withdrawals don't constitute a "mass" withdrawal, but an argument isn't equivalent to a fact.
The same goes for Bush's statement there's no "civil war" going on. In fact, some believe that what's commonly called the "insurgency" already is a "civil war" or something very close to it. For example, in an April 30 piece, the Times of London quotes Colonel Salem Zajay, a police commander in Southern Baghdad, as saying, "The war is not between the Iraqis and the Americans. It is between the Shia and the Sunni." Again, Bush is entitled to state his opinion to the contrary, but stating a thing doesn't make it so.
Terrorism
Similarly, Bush equated Iraqi insurgents with terrorists who would attack the US if they could.
Bush: There is only one course of action against them: to defeat them abroad before they attack us at home. . . . Our mission in Iraq is clear. We are hunting down the terrorists .
Despite a few public claims to the contrary, however, no solid evidence has surfaced linking Iraq to attacks on the United States, and Bush offered none in his speech. The 9/11 Commission issued a staff report more than a year ago saying "so far we have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." It said Osama bin Laden made a request in 1994 to establish training camps in Iraq, but "but Iraq apparently never responded." That was before bin Laden was ejected from Sudan and moved his operation to Afghanistan.
Bush laid stress on the "foreign" or non-Iraqi elements in the insurgency as evidence that fighting in Iraq might prevent future attacks on the US:
Bush: I know Americans ask the question: Is the sacrifice worth it? It is worth it, and it is vital to the future security of our country . And tonight I will explain the reasons why.
Some of the violence you see in Iraq is being carried out by ruthless killers who are converging on Iraq to fight the advance of peace and freedom. Our military reports that we have killed or captured hundreds of foreign fighters in Iraq who have come from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and other nations.
But Bush didn't mention that the large majority of insurgents are Iraqis, not foreigners. The overall strength of the insurgency has been estimated at about 16,000 persons. The number of foreign fighters in Iraq is only about 1,000, according to estimates reported by the Brookings Institution. The exact number is of course impossible to know. However, over the course of one week during the major battle for Fallujah in November of 2004, a Marine official said that only about 2% of those detained were foreigners. To be sure, Brookings notes that "U.S. military believe foreign fighters are responsible for the majority of suicide bombings in Iraq," with perhaps as many as 70 percent of bombers coming from Saudi Arabia alone. It is anyone's guess how many of those Saudi suicide bombers might have attempted attacks on US soil, but a look at the map shows that a Saudi jihadist can drive across the border to Baghdad much more easily than getting nearly halfway around the world to to the US.
Osama bin Laden
Bush quoted a recent tape-recorded message by bin Laden as evidence that the Iraq conflict is "a central front in the war on terror":
Bush: Hear the words of Osama bin Laden: "This Third World War is raging" in Iraq..."The whole world is watching this war." He says it will end in "victory and glory or misery and humiliation."
However, Bush passed over the fact that the relationship between bin Laden and the Iraqi insurgents – to the extent one existed at all before – grew much closer after the US invaded Iraq. Insurgent leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi did not announce his formal allegiance with bin Laden until October, 2004. It was only then that Zarqawi changed the name of his group from "Unification and Holy War Group" to "al Qaeda in Iraq."
In summary, we found nothing false in what Bush said, only that his facts were few and selective.
--by Brooks Jackson & Jennifer L. Ernst
Researched by Matthew Barge, Kevin Collins & Jordan Grossman
Yeah, just heard today he decided to cut his vacation short to deal with the
huricaine. Sheesh.
Stimulus plan...the short version (fine print)....no one talks about....
Obama: My trillion dollar stimulus package, very dire, we must do something NOW, right now, before it gets worse. (I can sell anything...just tell me what to say.....) Therefore I'm going to......
I'm going to give you a one-time $500 check.
I'm also going to give those people who don't work for a living, or pay into the system, a $500 check too.
Oh, did I forget to mention.....
Each one of you taxpayers are going to owe the U.S. govt. $10,000 in taxes, once I can get away with asking you all to foot the bill for my stimulus package. (2 years down the line or so.....when we have to become fiscally responsible)
Reply
Any so-called knowledge can later prove to be wrong. There are very few absolutes in this world. I do know that the 1990s saw a dessimation in our human intelligence gathering. We need to get back to being good at that. If a threat is there, I'm not willing to wait until people die to do something about it. If you are, then I hope it's not one of my loved ones in the next airplane or subway or building. As for Al-Qaeda, there has been much damage done to that organization. Of course the news doesn't play that up very much, but it's happening. We're still looking for Bin Laden, we're still chasing Al-Qaeda, and we're planting a seed in the middle east that will hopefully someday (and it may take longer than your of my lifetime to accomplish) make a change in the middle east that will hopefully keep the horror of terrorism at least under control. We fought the Japanese, we fought the Nazis... I think we can handle Iraq and Al-Qaeda. As for N. Korea, you can't do anything there because they already HAVE the nukes. At least we can cross Iraq off the list for sure in the nuke department.
Thanks for the reply. (nm)
nm
Reply....
You missed my point also, because you are still harping on abortion "against God's will." No matter how many times I say it, you will not hear it, because it does not further your agenda to hear it.
I am not against abortion because it is against God's will. I am against abortion because it is murder, and it is murder of the most innocent life that exists. That is a deeply moral issue, and it does not stem from what or what is not God's will. You said you and God parted company a long time ago, but I am willing to bet your morality did not part and go with God...you kept it, right? Of course you did. Because we all have basic morality, whether or not you choose to believe in God. Belief in God validates and enhances that morality, but even those of you who do not believe in God have morals...right? Of COURSE you do. There are people who are NOT religious who oppose abortion on a strictly moral level. As that article said that I posted, if I lost my faith today, I would still morally oppose abortion. Yet it is more comfortable for you to claim that I am against abortion "in the name of God." I am against abortion because it is morally wrong. PERIOD.
Being pro choice does mean being pro abortion. If you vote for the right to choose, you are putting the okay stamp on it. You can spin it however you like, but the truth remains. It is your choice to do so, yes, but at least have the guts say so.
I have already said that I work toward supporting women who decide to make a choice for life. If they decide to go ahead with the abortion, they do not get condemnation from me, but they certainly know were I stand, and they also respect what I am doing and understand why I am doing it. Much unlike you ladies.
Again....try to let this sink into your closed mind. I am trying to give the CHILD a choice. The CHILD has no voice. You are taking that away from them. They have no recourse, no place to run, no place to hide. All they can do is endure being sliced and diced to have their brain sucked out. You want the MOTHER to have the choice, the voice, the power. I am merely saying that the CHILD deserves SOMETHING here, doesn't it? Doesn't something in your moral structure scream out to you that the CHILD deserves SOME consideration in all this?? That is where I and others like me come in. Because we believe the child DOES deserve consideration, DOES deserve to have a voice.
You say "I have intolerance for those who cannot take another's opinion or perception without tearing it down." Is that not EXACTLY what all your posts do to my opinions and perceptions? Including completely ignoring what I am actually saying and trying to put words in my mouth to suit your anti-God agenda.
You can't see the forest for the trees.
my reply
was meant in a humorous, light tone. Sorry you are so unhappy with current events.
reply
As far as who can accomplish all these goals -- a journey begins with a single step. Barack is willing to start the journey. McCain stubbornly refuses to change course. If he does not live up to his hopes - another election in 4 years.
Experience -- time and time again current events have proven Barack's thoughtfulness and judgment have proven true. Even the current administration is following the course for a time-table that Barack proposed so long ago.
I do not see Barack as a savior -- I see a fine man with a vision for our country that matches my own.
Reply...
THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both of these claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where McCain called Alaska the largest state in America, he could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.
MORE FACTS: She is responsible for negotiating any drilling of those resources. "Primary power" may be taxation, but she also has to oversee environmental issues, etc. She cracked the monopoly and forced oil companies to bid again, and she made a necessary portion of the bid that they address environmental issues. That was left out of the FACTS. While the population of the state may not be in proportion to the size of the state, her latest approval rating is 86%. That is unheard of. None of the other candidates enjoy that as senators from their respective states. That was also left out of the FACTS.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.
MORE FACTS: When the National Guard is called up within a state, the governor does have the primary responsibility of mobilization and oversight. Since she is 50 miles from Russia, having control of the National Guard in that state is certainly central to our national security. And the operative word is AFTER the unit is deployed. Making the decision to call them up and send them to war IS her decision, and DOES affect national security.
THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January of 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.
MORE FACTS: This is true. But if Democrats truly believe in hope and change, they have had since January to actually do it. Have seen zip, zilch, nada. Got news for you...Bush is not a true conservative, especially fiscally obviously. McCain is.
THE FACTS: It's true that Obama voted "present" dozens of times, among the thousands of votes he cast in an eight-year span in Springfield. Illinois lawmakers commonly vote that way on a variety of issues for technical, legal or strategic reasons. Obama, for instance, voted "present" on some abortion measures to encourage wavering legislators to do the same instead of voting "yes." Their "present" votes had the same effect as "no" votes and helped defeat the bills. Voting this way also can be a way to duck a difficult issue, although that's difficult to prove.
MORE FACTS: Nice spin. He still voted "present." If he can't make a decision on those bills, he is going to be able to make the big ones to run the country? You can't vote present in the oval office. However, he did show up to vote NO to the Infants Born Alive act...twice.
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes over $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
MORE FACTS: Look at this and digest it. First paragraph...Obama's plan will raise income for middle income taxpayers by 5% by 2012...he does not define "middle class." McCain's plan is going to CUT taxes across all levels and still raise the "middle income" by 3%. I think I will take the tax cut and the 3%. No brainer.
Obama wants to provide 80 billion in tax breaks to people who already pay almost 0 taxes. Where, pray tell, is that $80 billion going to come from?? Taxing the "rich" which will trickle down to loss of jobs and depression of the economy. Won't work. Never works. Case in point..small businesses that make more than $250,000 would see taxes rise. That is about every small family business in this country, who employ a lot of people. Just throw them all under the bus in order to cut taxes for people who pay the least taxes of all of us ANYWAY.
NO THANKS.
Reply
You know what truly amazes me? EVERYONE srcutinizes Obama for EVERY LITTLE THING from the b/c issue to his education, whether he is muslim, is he a terrorist, does he believe in this or that,etc but while GWB did pretty much whatever he wanted especially outside of the law whether it be national/international and the level of scrutiny bestowed upon him when he was first elected to office up until now has been been pretty much nonexistent.. or people saying 'i don't trust him', ' he frightens me' 'he is scary'. Should have been afraid of Bush and truly fear what you MAY NEVER know regarding the true state of this country of the last eight years..truly amazing
reply
Throw that hood in the wash, its getting dingy. 12 year olds, we know what you are saying there.
I made no "moral judgment" on SP's premarital pregnancy - merely pointing out the historical precedent she set.
I did reply, it is below....but I will reply again here...
I cannot find anything where Republicans voted for this issue before they voted against it. If you can, present it. I looked. In the case when McCain co-sponsored the bill that I have posted information about, where he predicted this exact thing happening, it never made it out of the committee. All the Republicans on the comittee voted for it, all of the Democrats on the comittee voted against it.
This is what the bill would have done:
1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and (2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board.
Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting.
Sounds like the bailout bill doesn't it? Would have been nice if they had not blocked the legislation that would have fixed the problem and not stuck us with it?
|
