Sorry, with all due respect, you are the one who doesn't "get" it....
Posted By: sam on 2008-08-23
In Reply to: Even if that were true (NOT), they still had the - Wisdon to separate church and state. Got it?
this country was founded by Christians looking for religious freedom, away from a government that forced you to worship only one way in the state church, in this case was the Church of England. No one WA allowed to practice any other belief. The founding fathers did not separate Christianity from government. That is why our founding documents have God's name in them. That is why it is on our money. That is why it is on the walls in Congress and even the Supreme Court (supreme irony). The constitution says there will be no formation of a state sponsored church...meaning that the newly formed government would never establish one religion and force people to follow it, because they had just escaped from that very thing. And that is what Christianity is about. God doesn't want to force anyone to love him or follow him. It is about free will. It was NEVER intended to remove Christianity from everyday life...because to the founding fathers, it WAS everyday life. That was the way they lived their lives. Not just on sundays or days of worship...every day. It was part and parcel of the development of this country. Read the actual quotes of the founding fathers. No matter how much secularists would like to deny it.
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
At least "get over it"...... sm
is not as bad as being called fools and worse by some of the rightward posters on this board who, come to think of it, don't use monikers either for at least part of their posts.
As far as what we will talk about once this situation is put to rest by the SC, that remains to be seen and will probably be determined by what O does once he is in office or what the current state of national affairs are at that time. But I would like to mention that I have introduced other topics of conversation here over the past few days in hopes of having something to talk about other than the BC and very few, if any, have had any response from either the right or the left. So please don't think that the left is the only side insistent on driving the BC thing into the ground.
Oh no, I "get it" quite well. It's just so
.
I don't expect you to "get it."...(nm)
x
Nice try. Question was "get more pay?"
Whites 4.9 and African Americans 10.2. Facts trump subjectivity every single time.
http://www.bls.gov/lau/ptable14full2008.pdf
The question was in which United States do African American males get more PAY than white males? Any answers?
Ayers doesn't regret the bombings, doesn't feel like they did enough sm
In a story that appeared in the Times on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, Ayers told a reporter while promoting his memoir "Fugitive Days": "I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough."
Mr. Ayers, now a professor of education in Chicago, was a founder of the Weather Underground, which bombed government buildings in the early 1970s. He was indicted on conspiracy charges that were thrown out for prosecutorial misconduct.
He served with Mr. Obama on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, a charitable organization, and, along with his wife, the former Weather Underground member Bernardine Dohrn, hosted Mr. Obama at his home in 1995 when he was running for state office.
Mr. Obama has called Mr. Ayers "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old."...so because it was 40 years ago, and Ayers is still proud of what he did, how is it justifiable for a US presidential candidate to now be friends with this man? Unless he has the same view of America.
Let me rephrase that. It doesn't *seem like* my vote doesn't count...sm
It does not count because its in the bag that our 3 electoral votes will go to the republican party.
With all due respect,
all the posts I've seen you post have come across to me as very confrontational. You seem to be limited to posting only posts that defend these three, and I haven't seen you post anything on any political issue -- just confronting posters and complaining about their behavior, sympathizing with poor AG, Nan and MT. That's ALL you've posted on this board, and to say it was YOU who was attacked shows, at the very least, the very same mindset that precludes you from seeing things objectively. Afraid I have to agree with GT above. I, too, smell a conservative in liberal clothing, and it also wouldn't surprise me if you were either one of those three or one who is very closely allied with them.
But I will take you at your word that this is your last post. In addition, I will make this my last post to you. I'm happy that at least temporarily we're free of all the intolerance and hatred and rage and battles that ensue when those three are around. I refuse to get back into that, and I feel that you're trying to take me down that path, and I'm not buying it.
Have a blessed day.
With all due respect.
One source is a personal blog. Those are strictly opinion pieces and carry no weight on either side. The Chicago Sun piece is more interesting, but merely makes vague statements without a single name of anyone who is bashing. Now don't get me wrong, I have serious concerns with President Bush, stem cell research not being one of them. I am alarmed at the big government policies and also at the illegal alien fiasco (which I am reading has some surprises in store). At any rate, this really is a nonstory. Remember when Lieberman gave the speech on the Senate floor criticizing Clinton. It happens. I feel no connection to the country club wing of the republican party (any more than the country club wing of the democratic party). They certainly don't speak for me.
With all due respect..
... it doesn't say very much about an Army mom who would use his service -- his putting his life on the line -- in order to try to bully, shame and coerce people who would rather see her son home with his family and safe.
It doesn't say very much about an Army mom who would sacrifice her own flesh and blood because she's too busy worshiping a very false idol in Bush.
But most of all it doesn't say very much about a president who couldn't care less about her son, a president who has recklessly, negligently and uncaringly tossed America's young people into harm's way for an unnecessary, very possible illegal war.
I honor her son, and I respect his courage very much. I thank him for putting his life on the line in service to his country. And I profusely apologize to him for the way his life has been devalued by Bush. Maybe if Bush had the integrity and courage to actually serve in a war himself, he wouldn't be so hasty about killing our young people. Her son, by virtue of having the courage to serve, is way, way, WAY above George Bush in the integrity and courage categories. Wouldn't we be fortunate if someday her son went on to become president? He's already more fit to serve than Bush is.
I hope and pray that he can return home to his family (where he belongs) and that his return is safe and without injury. I'm just very, very sorry that his mother can't see that just because we don't worship an idiot like she does, that doesn't mean we don't support our troops because we want them safe and home with their families instead of fighting an unnecessary, immoral war.
No respect
No respect for the owners of this board who have requested republicans/conservatives to not post here..Do I have to report you?
With all due respect...yes you did...
you posted that you loved to find the errors and do the research. That certainly implies that you enjoy trying to prove people wrong. And that is fine, if that is what trips your trigger. Again, what I said was we had more social programs, and again, the comparison to other nations, I would like to know what other nations and their population in relation to ours before I put a lot of stock in the data. Respectfully.
With all due respect...sm
*Civil debate* has not gotten us anywhere. In order for there to be debate BOTH sides would have to listen to each other, and meet somewhere in the middle.
With all due respect, I
disagree. I have read the words Dems and lefties and socialists used interchangeably. Look through the archives and I did not say it was you.
Respect
Well, I find the posts title a bit disrespectful. I mean, I wouldn't come to the conservative board and post with a title "Glad to not be a republican." Seems to me like "Me" was looking to stir the pot with that title.
With all due respect...
the moderator has posted several times that we can cross post. Apparently the moderator does believe in freedom of expression.
If "most of you" want to speak among yourselves, don't answer my posts, don't pile on with the crass remarks that are totally unnecessary. To coin your own words, ignore me. Quash dissent. Be intolerant of other views. To each his/her own.
There are those on the liberal board who do not mind a discussion and are actually able to do so in true liberal fashion without the personal gotchas. And as far as the gotchas...I only gave as I got. At least there were those true liberals who did not mind...but I believe you quashers have run them all off too.
So, if you do not wish to have a discussion, certainly your right. Don't answer my posts.
And...just a side note...liberal posters cross over too, and I have yet to ask them to get on back to their "own" board or stay on their own board. You see...I don't just say I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of expression...I act on it...unlike you.
With all due respect....
Your quote of:
"What is wrong with this picture? First, it should be obvious that it is not the job of the U.S. government to tell people what version of Islam to embrace on pain of permanent incarceration. As long as people are not committing or fomenting acts of violence, it is not our role to pressure them into changing their faith. When did it become acceptable to set religious conversion of any kind as the price that frightened people must pay for their freedom?"
These kids at Camp Cropper were committing acts of violence..setting roadside combs, firing at soldiers, etc. Your quote came from a different article about a different program dealing with adults...not with children. Two different programs I think. No one is asking them to change their faith. Are you saying that all Islam is radial jihadist? Of course it is not. These children are being taught by Iraqi teachers, not Americans. The article I posted describes it more clearly.
If it can turn a few away from jihad to what most Muslims call "true Islam," that is a good thing, right? If it can get sunni and shiite teens talking with one another, listening to one another, interacting with one another...is that not where change begins? Like you rightfully said, it was the young people in Venezuela who helped turn the tide in that country. Perhaps the same can happen in Iraq. Are you saying it is a bad thing to present these kids with a different view of Islam, that perhaps killing other Muslims is not a good thing to do? When it is presented to them by other Muslims, not by Americans? How can that be a bad thing by any stretch?
Again...we are there, piglet. Whether we leave now, next week, next month, or next year, we are there. Why should we not try to help while we are there? Like the soldier said...it is a positive thing and he is proud of what he was able to accomplish. If it turns one kid, two kids...they may be the future of Iraq. Someone had to start teaching kids in Venezuela another way...why can't we show those kids another way while we are there? If we can stop one from strapping a bomb to himself or getting his arms and legs blown off trying to set a roadside bomb...is that not a good thing? I don't see the down side to this. Honestly.
I have a lot of respect
for any man or woman in the armed forces. I think that their opinion in our next president is very important. However, even with military personnel, there are still going to be some of them who vote strictly because of race or political party.
If our votes don't really count....this is pointless, but you can't screen people and question their motives for voting and who they choose to vote for and why before you let them vote.
with all due respect...
the only one WITHOUT a voice here is the child. We are speaking for the child. If that chaps you so severely, I'm sorry. No one is judging anyone. When Scott Peterson killed laci and connor, 12 people judged him and he is in jail for the rest of his life. It is somehow different because Scott chose to kill the baby instead of Laci? Please tell me how that makes sense. If it is wrong to kill, it is wrong to kill, and it certainly wrong to let one person have the choice to arbitrarily kill another. It is the act and the procedure that is being judged here...or that is what should be judged here.
Moral wrongs are judged by people every day. Stealing is wrong. Murder is wrong. Killing someone is murder. Cutting a defenseless baby to pieces with no one to defend it and nowhere to run to is horrific. At least admit it. If you want to give a person a right to murder another person, at least call it what it is.
With all due respect...
I don't think making it through an ivy league school on student loans indicates character. But to each his own and you are entitled to think so.
Yes, this is a democracy, and frankly I don't think there should be any parties. I don't think there should be an electoral college. I think it should really be up to the people. But that is just me.
I beg to differ...majority may rule but majority is not always right. I refer you to the Carter years.
Again, with all due respect, Obama's speech last night, was nothing new. It was the same thing Democrats always promise. The same things Bill Clinton promised. He had the country for 8 years and none of the promises happened. That happens on both sides, I realize. But it is politics. It is give them what they want to hear and when we get elected we do what we want. No matter which man is elected, that is what is going to happen. The only thing that makes Barack Obama different from any other Democrat who has run is that he is African American. And yes, he did make history last night, and he should be commended for having the will to work his way up to where he is. That should tell him he should be backing off social programs and figure out a way to instill that ambition in other folks, instead of rewarding people by keeping them dependent on the government for everything. If he can do it, why not others? But that is not the Democrat way.
We are up to our eyeballs in China because of Bill Clinton, not a Republican. If the truth really matters to you, check it out. Bill forged alliances and trade with China during his administration. You don't remember the big flap about the contributions gotten for Clinton by the Chinese. And I don't look for Obama to change anything about how we trade with the Chinese. Have not heard anything about him doing that, and I have listened to most of his speeches. Didn't see anything about it on the website either...but I could have missed it.
Please...the Democratic party is as corrupt as the Republican party. They are both corrupt. That is the nature of the beast, because they are controlled by money people who all have agendas and while they pay lip service to the little people, they do whatever they want, including trashing their own, as was so eloquently demonstrated in Denver this week.
I say this to your party...STOP TRYING TO MAKE the US A SOCIALIST STATE and destroy the greatest nation on earth.
Like I said....I don't want your respect nor do I need it.
Your posts prove constantly that what I say is right. Keep piling it on.
With all due respect....
if providing birth control to teenagers would stop teen pregnancies we would not have 1.2 million abortions every year. I do not want to start an abortion thread...just making a point.
I respect you even more - your the first....
to say anything of substance that is positive about Obama without cutting down McCain.
I do agree with you 100% I can't afford to pay any more taxes. Food, gas, and cost of living expenses are skyrocketing but my pay isn't. Do you think we paid so much in taxes the last time we had a democratic president (Clinton) because of congress. It was absolutely horrible during his pregnancy. We were being taxed over 40% of our pay (we didn't own our own place, we drove a used car, could only afford to live in a 1-bedroom apartment, so it was not like we were living high off the hog), but we were getting taxed so much when Clinton was in that we could hardly afford to do anything. When Bush became president our taxes went down and we started getting rebates, so wondering if it has anything to do with a different congress/senate (the real people who vote). The presidents in my opinion are a bunch of talking mouths but don't make any real decisions. They are told what they will do. They are there just to look pretty (ooh, is that a sexist remark HA HA).
I totally agree that corporations are not paying their fare share and jobs keep going overseas - that absolutely has to stop or we'll be forced to move overseas just so we can get a job.
I'm just scared all round because in the past both democrat and republican have always said on their campaign trail it will be better, yet it just seems to get worse and no president ever keeps the promise they made during their campaign trail.
I like the idea of new ideas, but I also like for people to be truthful too. I think why I'm starting to fall away from supporting Obama is because he keeps changing his mind and that's starting to scare me. Now I hear he's not bringing the troops home. He said he plans to keep them there for at least 5 years, and, he said he's for the draft. When will our tax money start coming back to the US to be used to rebuild the US, not support military in countries we don't belong in and a war we should not have started in the first place.
Thank you again for your opinions on Barack Obama without being cutting down John McCain. One of them will be president and I just hope whoever gets in will make America a better place than it's been. I'm open to everything.
Respect
I respect your opinion even though we disagree. What I am looking for in a leader is a moral man or woman with a HUGE dose of common sense and honesty. I don't think we have that in any of the candidates. That's just my opinion and I thank God every day that we have the right to express and differ in our opinions. I have to wonder how long we will have that freedom. I don't think many of us realize just how much freedom we actually lost with the Patriot Act.
So, in the same respect,
do you admire Sarah Palin for standing up against her own party in Alaska for the good of her state?
Probably not, I would guess. Double standard.
With all due respect,
I care what she thinks. That is different than I don't care for what you think.
I had a lot more respect for him
before I watched the video of him being VERY ugly to the lady who was testifying before the senate committee wanting to know what happened to her SON who is still MIA!!!. He had absolutely no compassion for her whatsoever. I also had more respect for him before he started every other sentence "I was a POW and have the scars to prove it." He is no more deserving of credit for his military service than the many POWs and MIAs. His military service is no greater than the lowest boot in the military, many who have and are continuing to make the ultimate sacrifice. If you want to think I'm "cheapening" his service, go ahead and think what you will With his "experience" one would not think he would have been so quick to side with Bush to send our young men and women into harm's way in this ridiculous Iraq war, many of them have made a much greater sacrifice than he and he promises to keep it going for "100 years if necessary." How many more will die? I would think being a POW would be preferable to being DOA!!!
Respect...........sm
is something that is totally lacking in our society today, Kendra, and not just in displays of drunkeness and the likely ensuing brawling and revelry such as what sounds like is the plan for the inauguration, but also in our families and work and practically every area of society. It's time we started showing a little less "me-me-me" and started thinking of what we can do to help each other and how we can show honor for those in positions of leadership at all levels.
Out of respect
could we not give this man a rest and let him mourn the passing of his grandmother without all the rhetoric? I'm sure even John McCain would agree with that. . I think by now most people have made up their minds how they are going to vote and posting this old tired stuff over and over and over and over and ........is not going to change anyone's mind that I can imagine.
look, I can respect
the man because he is president of the US. I have no problem with that. I didn't vote for him OR McCain for that matter. The problem is such that when you speak up and say you have a good point, but what about this? There are some on these boards that take it as an attack and state you are uneducated, a sore loser, fascist, misinformed or whatever. I respect the fact that Obama stepped up and tried to reassure us as a nation when Bush did not. I have no problem with talking to someone as it can help me to learn something I may not have known. What I do have a problem with is a bunch of adults that cannot tolerate anything negative said.
You don't have respect for
us. As Joy Behar says, "Who cares? So what???
I respect your views
eventhough I don't mirror all of them. I am a Republican but I tend to me more libertarian in my views. I think privacy rights are a big issue, but my views part ways with yours when it comes to abortion. I also really disagree with you about the Terri Schiavo case. I don't agree with euthanasia in any form. I don't think feeding Terri was a heroic measure, but that's not the point. When when we as mere humans start judging whether innocent people should live or die or not I think we've crossed a huge moral boundary, and Roe versus Wade was that boundary. The morals in this country have been riding a snowball to hades since that time. I see things from a spiritual perspective. I believe that everything that happens has spiritual consequences, and every decision we make has spiritual consequences...that's just the way I believe, and yes, Libby you have every right to state your views, and I will fight for your right to say them to the death...I hope you would do as much for me.
I respect your views, as well.
That's what makes America so great. The freedom of all people to have different views, based on different principles (religious or otherwise). And I would certainly fight to the death for your freedom of speech to say whatever you believe. 
I firmly believe in a woman's right to choose as much as I firmly DON'T believe in partial birth abortions. That's my opinion. That doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make it wrong. It just makes it my opinion.
As such, I don't feel I have the right to force my opinion on someone who might feel differently. I believe this is a privacy issue, based on an individual's religious/spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof if that is the case) and not an issue that should be overturned because one Supreme Court Judge believes her religious views should be imposed on an entire nation. Harriet Miers answered a questionnaire (I believe) in 1989, wherein not only did she say she's against Roe v. Wade, but she also promised to use the *influence* of her elected office to ban abortion. If she has, in the past, promised to use the influence of her elected office to effect such a ban, why wouldn't she do the same with an appointed office? The only solid *qualification* she has is her anti-choice religious views, which happen to coincide with those of Bush's *base.* America has a lot of brilliant legal scholars and attorneys and judges who have devoted their entire careers specializing on Constitutional issues. Why wasn't one of THOSE people considered for this appointment?
Regarding euthanasia, I can promise you right now that if I am ever terminally ill with an incurable disease and my pain progresses to the point where I just want to die with some dignity and not endure agonizing pain any longer, I certainly will not permit a bunch of people who have never met me to claim they know what's best for me and force me to obey THEIR religious beliefs and die on THEIR terms. This notion is so arrogant on its face, it's even hard to write about. I would hope my physician would be caring and compassionate and assist me in ending my suffering if I were to reach that level of agony. Why do we show more kindness and compassion to our pets than we do to our humans? My own spiritual beliefs would not preclude me from doing that, and I refuse to be forced to obey YOUR religious beliefs. If forced to do so, then MY freedom of religion ceases to exist.
These are definitely privacy issues that, in my opinion, should be left to individuals. What if the *right* religious belief in this country doesn't believe in contraceptives? Will they be outlawed, as well? That's not as far-fetched as it sounds.
As far as dwindling morals in this country, I agree there are more heinous crimes being committed, particularly against children, than I can ever recall, and I'm outraged that our children are allowed to be raped and murdered, with the perpetrators of those crimes receiving what seem to be minimal prison sentences.
I also think it's clearly immoral that our ability to live or die is directly related to the number of dollars we have in our wallet. Healthcare in this country has become a very immoral commodity, along with legal care. I find it disgustingly immoral that American children are starving to death every day.
Morality has to come from someone's heart. It can't be forced, and it can't be legislated. Each of us has our own conscience, our own soul, and our own *creator.* Mine might not be the same as yours. It doesn't mean one is right or one is wrong. Just different. That's the beauty of America: Freedom of religion for all.
I can only end this as I started it, by saying that's what makes America so great. The freedom of all people to have different views, based on different principles (religious or otherwise).
Thanks for posting. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a debate with someone who is friendly and respectful and doesn't resort to calling names. And I do respect your opinion and especially your right to say it, even though I respectfully disagree.
I respect someone who stands for what they believe in...
and you obviously do, and I appreciate that you also respect my stand. While we agree to disagree on certain things, we have had this exchange without making it mean or personal. Be Blessed!
With all due respect, and I am sincere in that....
how can you learn new things if you only talk to people who agree with everything you say? I come here to the liberal board for that very reason...if I wanted someone to rubber stamp my ideas I would be talking to people I knew would do that. That is not how you learn. Debate forces you to go to different sources, listen to differing views, and help you make informed decisions. I am not a rote party person. That is why I am not a registered Republican. I registered Independent only because you have to register as one of the three to be able to vote. I have voted for Democrats before (though I admit, not often). I admire Joe Lieberman tremendously and I hate that the Dem party is so far left they forced him to run as an Independent this time. I thought that was very short-sighted on their part. Because there are Democrats out there in small-town America who have not taken the same hard left turn that the Dem base seems to have taken. If I were a Georgian, I would have voted for Zell Miller in a heartbeat. Not because of his political affiliation, but because of his views, and because of he had the guts to stand up for those views when the hard left sought to highjack his party. My parents were lifelong Democrats. Sadly they are not longer with us, but I am telling you my friend, they would NOT recognize the Democratic party of today. They would be horrified at the hard left turn it has taken. Much of the Republican party has abandoned their core platform as well. Most of those running are not true conservatives. What I want is less government interference in the lives of individuals, more power at the state level where it belongs according to the constitution, the Supreme Court to keep their noses out of state's business and not legislate from the bench...encourage individual responsibility again instead of everyone looking to the government to supply every social need. The more we move toward that, the more we move toward socialism...and that is the agenda of the hard left in this country today. And friend, it does not work. Look at Venezuela. Look at Cuba. Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy...both started as socialism and ended in dictatorship. That is where socialism inevitably goes...when you take power away from individual states and give to the federal government, and make the entire populace depend upon the government to supply everything. Believe me...that is NOT where any of us should want to go.
Thanks for listening.
With all due respect, you are wrong...
even when abortion was "illegal," there were provisions if the life of the mother was in danger. Any law can have exceptions. We have thousands of laws on the books with exceptions. On killing someone...murder one, murder two, manslaughter, and on and on. I don't know of many laws that are completely cut and dried. If all abortions cannot be stopped, then stop the "convenience ones." That would save a staggering amount of babies and let's face it...if there were consequences for the action, many might make difference choices and for pete's sake be more responsible. You know that as well as I do...that is human nature.
God bless!
With all due respect....way off on figures...
Abortion in the United States - Statistics
There have been over 48 million abortions since 1973.
The annual number of abortions went from 744,600 in the first year of legalization, to a high of over 1.6 million in 1990. In 2003, there were 1,287,000.
There were over 3,500 abortions per day in 2003, 146 per hour, about one every 25 seconds.
For every 1,000 live births, there were 312 abortions in 2003.
There were more than 148,000 second and third trimester abortions in 2003. (that is appalling)
In 2003, more children died from abortion than Americans died in the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf Wars combined (This is a true statement, even if you go only by the CDC number of 853,000 plus (the million plus is the AGI numbers...contributed by all abortionists. The CDC readily admits their numbers are probably way off due to reporting mechanisms). The total number of Americans killed in all wars was 653,708. Add the 3192 killed in Iraq so far and you get roughly 657,000. So, in one year alone more babies died than all Americans in all wars. That 653,000 figure includes the Spanish-American war, indian wars, etc. ALL American wars.
A 2004 survey of women seeking abortions indicated that only about 7% of women cited typical “hard cases” (rape, incest, or some health concern with either the baby or the mother) as the primary reason they were seeking abortion.
An April 2004 Zogby Poll found that 56% of respondents support legal abortion in only three or fewer circumstances: when the pregnancy results from rape or incest, or when it threatens the life of the mother.
At an average cost of $372, the abortion business is a $400 million a year industry.
Nearly half of all abortions are obtained by women who have already had at least one abortion.
(The good news is that the number of abortions is going down. However, it will take several MORE wars to come close to the number of babies killed by abortion in this country.)
It was estimated back in 2003 that at that point over 48 million babies had been aborted in this country. How you can say you are okay with that and slam me because I say a country has a right to defend itself is beyond me. I have no more to do with the war thanyou do with abortions, yet you think it is inconsistent to be against abortion but for defense. By the same token, I think it is inconsistent to say you are against abortion but for giving the woman the right to kill the child. I frankly see no difference in your position than mine.
The Civil War...the bloodiest of all the wars...was that one worth fighting? WWI? WWII? The Revolutionary War? Surely that one was worth fighting...so is it some wars are worth fighting? Some aren't? I don't know what wars you feel are justified or if you feel none are justified....I don't know if you would feel fighting was worth it if we were attacked again like 9-11....of if you feel it is ok to fight in Afghanistan....or what you would have us do if they flew over and dropped bombs on NY? I just don't know. What I do know is that many more thousands of babies have died than Americans in wars, and as long as all abortion is legal we will continue as a country to kill babies at a horrifying rate, war or no war. And yes, the thought of that is sickening to me. No war...yet the numbers dying are HORRIFIC. Where is your outrage about that? Justified in the name of choice? Yep....I don't get it...and am glad I don't.
What I also know is that we have not had to fight any wars other than the Civil War on our own soil, and I believe that is because we have taken the fight to the enemy rather than wait for the enemy to come to us.
Don't want to fight with you, piglet...I still feel that someone needs to speak for the babies. You speak for the mothers. They have many to speak for them. Some of us believe we need to speak for the babies. And I will continue to do so.
While I respect your opinion...
While I respect your opinion I disagree and sorry to hear you feel that way. Out of all the candidates the Obama's are the best chance we have of putting some decency and good values back in the white house. While the senate and house are the ones who make the decisions we need a decent President who can speak well and appeal to everyone around the world (all countries need to get along and be neighbors). We need republicans, democrats, and independents to work together and Barack has the most experience and is by far is the best person for that job. McBush is just a relic (and his wife the dragon lady) and he's ready to keep us at war for the next 100 years. Hillary is Hillary...a bold face liar that cannot be trusted. She lied through her 8 years as First Lady, she lied through her time in the senate and her lies just keep going and going like the Energizer bunny. She had these ads claiming that she'll fight for middle class. Give me a break! She has never and will never care about the middle class. They gave the biggest tax breaks to all their friends (which just so happened to be the top 1% of the wealthiest in the country). And we won't even start to begin on all the lies, all the broken promises, her foul mouth, their vicious and cruel attacks on people who are not voting for her, etc., etc...and her voice grates on my nerves like fingernails on a chalk board. And we do not want that impeached piece of dirt husband of hers anywhere near the white house again. Finally got rid of him and now he crawls back out of his hole. Barack can speak without having to read every word from a cue card like Hillary. He is intelligent and his wife is graceous. I'm sorry you have bad feelings about her, but I have read stories about her and she is by far (to me) the most decent person for First Lady. She's gracious, elegant, intelligent, hard working, knows what a gallon of gas, loaf of bread, and cup of coffee costs (something neither Clinton or McCain know). She will do a great service to the white house and finally clean up after the mess that was left for the past 16 years...that's right 8 of Bush AND 8 of those Clintons. What a mess they left it in before the Bushes even got in there. So, am glad for our country that Obama is pulling forward and glad the people with some knowledge of what is going on politically wise are finally being heard.
I do respect your opinion
and also thank you for respecting mine.
My mom always told me nobody always agrees on everything. That's what makes us unique and interesting people.
Still have more respect for him that I do Obama,
nm
That's how they are -only respect people
nm
Respect has to be earned...it is not a God-given right!
You cannot demand respect, you must earn it! I have the right to respect or not to respect whomever I want! If you are one of the people I do not respect...too bad! Apparently, I do not feel you are worthy of my respect, which is my right!
And I respect yours. Personally,
if I had to be in a foxhole with someone, it would be McCain no question. I have a feeling that Obama would look out for himself.
Having respect for faith all around?
I do. Faith and religion, two different things. I respect everyone's right to pray. I just don't think it should be made into a political issue like it has been done on this board. If it was truly a prayer request, why wasn't it on the prayer request board and the faith board?
I have all the respect in the world
for your opinion. Why not respect mine or do I not deserve respect because by NO MEANS do I agree with you? One question though was your Dad a union member and, did he benefit from the union workers strike? 
Out of respect to his grandmother
but did he quit campagning since he worships her?
I'm sorry, but if my grandmother died, I'd be one of the first people there and cancel everything. In due respect, did he go to Hawaii? Who knows? All we're hearing is the same old, same old.
I feel bad that she died on the eve of th election. It's really sad.
He has my respect, but not my trust....
he needs to EARN that and show us what he is made of. This, to me, was more of a vote against republicans than a vote for Obama; had the economy not tanked as badly, he wouldn't have had a chance. I do wish him well, as he is getting into a mess even bigger than he anticipated. We are all Americans first and should stand behind our president.
O doesnt have my respect, yet. That must be
nm
I used to have such respect for Oprah.
nm
I used to have respect for her and watch
her show all the time. Since she turned her show into a political agenda, I'll pass. The remark that got me was when she stated she would have Palin on AFTER the election. 
I hope (but know it won't happen because there are many who idolize her) that people wise up and realize what she's doing.
Respect? He needs to show some
x
I respect your opinion...
and am curious why you support him.
|
