Well, I wouldn't but that's what makes horse races. n/m
Posted By: gourdpainter on 2008-10-07
In Reply to: Well....if I was fighting for my life.... - sam
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
What Bible states no mixing of the races?
x
You seem to remember wrong, and why would I be changing races...sm
Find this and post it.
I don't have a horse
and I don't have any boots.
you could always marry a horse
x
horse and pony
Hmmm........seems to me she has been decrying her innocence on this issue since it was brought up. What struck me the most during the convention when giving her speech written by Dubya's speechwriter - was the fact that she paraded her poor pregnant daughter in front of the masses - the girl looked terrified - and then they passed that tiny 4-month-old baby around like he had something big and stinky in his diaper (evident by the pained expression on Cindy McCain's face). I think they should be ashamed of themselves for USING her children like circus freaks. And.....Lord have Mercy........people are falling all over themselves for this soap opera.
high horse?
nm
Oh, get off your high horse.... I'm sure you
have had nothing to say when McCain and Palin are being kicked about here. Your true colors are showing!
Horse feathers! sm
"This country was not founded on Christianity or any other religion." What cave have you been living in, JTBB?
The preamble to our constitution written by our nation's founders states that we are endowed with certain inalienable rights by our CREATOR. While it does not mention God by name, obviously the founders of this nation believed in a higher being who created this world and all that is in it. Washington and Franklin and Jefferson, as well as others, may have been deists rather than Christians of a particular religion such as Baptists or Methodists, but they did believe in a supreme God who created the universe. So please stop it with "we were not founded on Christian beliefs." It really is wearing thin.
A nation that trusts in God, as our currency says we do, enjoys the benefits of the protection of a benevolent and loving God. I don't think that we should trust in God just to be seen in any particular way by other nations but rather so that we may receive blessings of God so that we may be a prosperous and moral nation, something that we are ceasing to be as we are increasingly turning our back on God.
He's beating a dead horse.
Even Bush finally came clean and said there were none. That's when the *reason* for the war changed from WMDs to freeing the Iraqis (while ignoring bin Laden in Afghanistan).
I find it very, VERY interesting that his sudden *find* came less than 24 hours after PBS aired a very revealing show (*The Dark Side*) about the Iraq war, Bush, Tenet, Rumsfeld and Cheney, with the majority of the people interviewed being CIA agents, who generally had more than 20 years of service with the CIA, and they said some pretty shocking (but not too surprising) things about this whole war. (If you'd like to see this show, you can view it in its entirety on line by going to http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/; I'd personally recommend it.)
When it's all said and done, though, regardless of how many facts are presented, Santorum could have declared to the world that there's evidence that Saddam had SLINGSHOTS, and some unfortunate souls on these boards would still say, *See? We told you he had WMDs.* It's really difficult to even be upset, frustrated or angry with them any more. I just mostly feel sorry for them. 
Obama, The Trojan Horse...
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200812032845/editorial/obama-the-trojan-horse.html
You are beating a dead horse! (nm)
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Better the high horse than the low road....nm
nm
They just want to see us come down from our imperial high horse.
That's all.
Straight from the horse's mouth... sm
Did you not watch the video???? That is EXACTLY what Obama said. So now you are saying that Obama himself is not credible???? 
What I found even MORE ridiculous is what he said before having said "I am the change." 
You can lead a horse to water...
You can teach teenagers abstinence, but you can't make them practice it! Therefore, teaching birth control makes much more sense. If Bristol Palin had been given access to birth control, she wouldn't be in the predicament she's in.
Where's my dead horse beating stick???
The US went to war with Iraq for a number of reasons, including concern over Saddam's failure to account for WMDs, which put him in violation of the treaty that ended Gulf War I, and violation of several UN resolutions - I can never remember if it was 14 or 17.
If you really want an answer to this question, a search for the resolution permitting use of force in Iraq should be relatively easy. I'm not sure it's worthwhile, though, since the matter is essentially moot, since we are there now.
My question to you: There is a lot of discussion lately about possibly increasing troop levels in Iraq to try to bring the security situation under control. What are your thoughts on that? Do you support it? Would you support it if you could be persuaded that there was a reasonable possibility of success?
Personally, I'm a bit ambivalent. I don't have a problem supporting more troops, but I think it's as much a PC problem as a troop number problem in Iraq. In other words, I don't think US forces can do much to bring security to Iraq if they are forced to always act in the most P.C. manner possible so as not to risk offending any single faction or, heaven forbid, creating negative spin in the press.
I certainly think we could be effective there in securing the country, but only if we realize that we might have to leave a heavy footprint in Iraq in order to accomplish that goal. For example, I think we should have taken out al Sadr, even if it meant leveling significant portions of Sadr City, when he first became a major underming influence to the new Iraqi government. Some may think that makes me a flag-waving member of the Death Squad, but I have to wonder how many lives could have been spared in the long run had we stamped al Sadr out then, when we had a good tactical opportunity and could have done so fairly easily.
If we're going to send our troops over there in harm's way to fight for the security of Iraq, the dream of democracy, and the creation of a competing vision for the future of the Middle East, then we must let them fight to win.
LOL I think that high horse is going to start bucking
and it's a long way to the ground.
if it were a "Dead Horse" the Supreme Court ...sm
would not be still considering it further, which they are. Perhaps that should be your first dose of reality.
meant "through" the mouth of a horse
Typo....oops.
Bridger, you put the cart before the horse. Read my
lips. DO NOT post the entire article. Post only excerpts from it with link to it.
Do you want the owners of this board in a legal battle? All it takes is someone reporting one of your posts for that to happen. I am warning you for your own good. If you don't care about the owners of this board, others of us do.
Get a grip, will ya? And, get legal.
I'll wait to hear it from the horse's mouth. sm
Though it really makes no difference to me one way or the other. I never considered him a Republican. I think he is a fiscal conservative. He said on another link he is apolitical. Should be interesting.
Heroe..like - He can't take the high horse and then claim the low road.
Bushisms
I appreciate that question because I, in the state of Texas, had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative eroding the important bridge between church and state.
I mean, there needs to be a wholesale effort against racial profiling, which is illiterate children.
See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.
The law I sign today directs new funds and new focus to the task of collecting vital intelligence on terrorist threats and on weapons of mass production.
http://www.wisdomquotes.com/cat_bushisms.html
Since Homeland security was a horse and pony show.....
there was really little Bush could do. But, he did promise to catch Bin Laden but never did - he invaded Iraq instead. I think Katrina gives a birdseye view on how a catastrophe would be handled by Bush. He screwed that up AFTER 9/11. Like they say - NEVER FORGET.
JBB, I like your thinking, but at the risk of "beating a dead horse," .......
Buy new computers = putting money in the economy = jobs for people to build computers.
Those computers are built in Japan, China, Korea, and almost every place in the world BUT the USA.
Just like last year when we got our "stimulus check." The only economies jump started, if any, were the ones overseas when everybody bought their TV's, computers etc.
Mr. Dean talks thought the mouth of a horse
Yeah, like anything he has to say is valuable. This is the guy who screamed out all those states - HEEEEE-YAWWWWWW?
Mr. Dean is a spiteful crat to the bone and did not do his job properly. He didn't stand on the side of the people, who stood with the big money people.
If he's going to call anyone a murderer he best go back to Billy boy himself with those wars he started that he had no place involving the US troops. Lots of innocent people were slaughtered because of him back then and no he did not follow the Geneva code.
To paraphrase, you can lead a horse to the facts, but you can't make it think. nm
nm
I wouldn't want to be on the
O'Reilly Factor either. Bill O'Reilly never lets the people talk. He is always cutting them off to speak his opinion. Kind of annoying really. I am no Obama supporter, but I think as a person in general.....I wouldn't want to be on his show. If people have opposing ideas....fine....but let them talk.....stop talking over them. 
Wouldn't we all??
LOL in regards to Christmas, very few people actually celebrate the *true* meaning anymore. Our neighbor has already put their lights up for heaven's sake!
Do Jews believe that he was crucified? I mean is it up until the resurrection that is disagreed with? Or is that just based on who you are talking to?
I mean my belief is that Jesus died and rose again and he had to die for our sins to pay our sin debt so we can go to heaven. I also believe he is the only way to heaven, because if not then it was senseless for him to die. But I do believe he is coming back and we will be gathered with him and after the tribulation heaven will be here on earth and those who didn't believe will be "ashes under our feet" as the Bible says.
I know that a lot of "Christians" now don't believe all of the Bible, or believe there are errors, which just amazes me, but hey, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. To me God cannot lie, and if God said the Bible is the Truth, well, it's the Truth then.
I'm sorry if I got heated before. I am a new Christian (I was baptized last November, but I would say I didn't get serious until January) and I knew before that a lot of people are against Christianity (in general) but it amazes me how so many people are just downright hateful about it! I mean yes, I can understand, because there are a lot of hypocritical Christians, a lot of Christians who profess Jesus and then go out into the world and do the same old things they used to, and those were my very same arguments before I believed in Him. But I have met so many more Christians that are just CONCERNED! I mean do people not understand that our belief in Jesus is just as strong as our belief that a chair is really there when we go to sit in it?
I'm ranting again. But what I was discussing with you I am just curious because it seems like Jews and Christians agree on a lot up until the point of whether Jesus was Messiah or not. I guess my biggest question is why don't they believe he is the Messiah?
I wouldn't know.
Since we've never cared enough about the average American to try universal healthcare. We could probably find out how it works from the Iraqis, though, since part of Bush's war budget was to provide comprehensive universal healthcare to THEM.
It's sad that some people are okay with paying for Wall Street crooks to get richer and richer.
We're all about greed, greed, greed. Even with all the publicity about Bush's bailouts, I just heard on the news that the end-of-year bonuses are still in place for the Wall Street crooks.
Seems to me that when a government runs around and buys up banks, that's FASCISM, so if we move to SOCIALISM (which will never happen and which is a ridiculous statement), that move will be a giant step UP from what we have now.
I'm sick and tired of eight years of greed. By the looks of things, the majority of Americans are sick of it, as well, which gives me some hope for what is left of humanity.
Obama is right. "Trickle down" hasn't worked. It's time to try "trickle UP."
Well of course! Why wouldn't I? I, too, am
LOL
I wouldn't be so sure about that
The Catholic heads are really pushing this issue, as are a lot of other Christian leaders. Most people don't like either candidate (like me), but they'd rather vote for the one that settles their conscience.
Add that to the fact that Americans like their guns and McCain has a strong chance. He's really been coming up in the poles (not sure if it'll be enough, though).
You would think so, wouldn't you....sm
or at least grouped by party, which wouldn't really be fair to the minor parties because they would probably wind up on the back of the ticket. I have never used a "punch" voting machine, so I am not familiar with the way that they are read, but wouldn't there be a chance the name punched on the back could be read as being for a candidate that appears on the front of the ballot?
I wouldn't say......... sm
that I'm "un-narrow", DB, because I am probably about as narrow as they come short of those who bomb abortion clinics, etc., but I do understand what you are saying. I appreciate you understanding my point as well.
Wouldn't this have all come up
when his background investigation was done when he was elected Senator? If there was truly a birth certificate issue, I am sure it would have come up during the DSS (Defense Security Service) investigation process.
I wouldn't go that far...lol..(sm)
While Obama is very popular worldwide, he still has to prove himself. I believe he will do an excellent job, but we have a lot of work to do yet.
No, actually they wouldn't do that...(sm)
Keep in mind that Reid was actually trying to stop him from getting into the Senate but couldn't find any legal grounds to do so, and it was both pubs and dems doing the investigation into Blago. Dems don't want him in the senate anymore than the pubs do. From our point of view, he's a has been and can't win an election.
If you want to talk about those all important votes for the stiumulus package, you might want to check out how long pubs have been holding up Franken in Minnesota with court battles. How many times do they plan on counting that vote anyway?
They certainly wouldn't be
let off easy and appointed to a government position. Normal people not paying taxes would not only have to pay their taxes but the interest as well. We would go under. Government wouldn't help us or give us a pass like so many in Washington who haven't paid their taxes. Makes me sick. Such double standards. And they wonder why we don't trust them to run our country and why we don't want government to get bigger than it is. sheesh.
Normally I wouldn't do that, but...(sm)
a good rule of thumb to remember is this: If you're going to try to insult someone's intelligence, then you should at least try to be literate in the process.
Love the definition, BTW.
Of course you don't. They wouldn't put up with you in a
And they tolerate almost everyone.
Why wouldn't it be?
Not trying to argue, but wouldn't any bill the Congress would submit have to be signed by the president? (And then, behind everyone's back, the signing statement "magically" appears after the signing, sometime without anyone knowing unless they specifically looked for it.)
For example, Bush signed the "no torture" bill and then later added, basically, "unless I want to."
Why would this bill be any different? Again, not trying to argue. I'm just trying to learn the difference between those two examples and what I'm missing here.
Why wouldn't you?
??
They wouldn't be any better if they were
X
And owning a gun wouldn't have help either one of them.
That's the point.
Wouldn't suprise me none.nm
x
You wouldn't be someone AKA DixieDew, are you? If so,
x
Wouldn't surprise me if he still is.
Nothing the Bush administration does surprises me any more.
It wouldn't matter what we said.
Their reaction would be the same. I suppose I could have raged against a thousand perceived wrongs, assumed that everyone knew my history, and called a poster who dared to question -what makes you think we haven't- as some kind of insensitive heartless slam. The real truth is much deeper and darker than that. I am not quite sure why people choose to tell their deepest darkest secrets on chat boards. Is it so that later on, someone might forget something they never knew, in order to attack that person with out of control fury, as some on this board are wont to do. Of course, my sympathy goes out ot anyone who loses a loved one NO MATTER WHERE THEY WERE WHEN THEY DIED. But perhaps my sympathy should be more reserved for those who feel the need to constantly attack, denigrate, misinterpret (deliberately?), hound, and judge those who challenge an ideal. Having said that, I find some on here who post disturbed. Merry Christmas to all. My last post here. If anyone cares to respond, I will not see it.
I wouldn't worry about it
Honestly, I think the last thing he needs to worry about is Hillary. I doubt he will get into the White House to begin with. The Rethugs will do anything to put a stop to that. I think they are the bigger threat in this picture.
No I don't. But it wouldn't make me any less of a
"real woman" if I did. Just curious here, are you male or female?
i wouldn't go down that road
When you start knocking down spouses, but especially children, of politicians that's pretty low. Not all families "look similar". My BIL was not his father's son, but he claims he looks the most like his father. There is a definite non-resemblance there but he doesn't see it.
As for Chelsea? Oh please, I've heard her speak and she is too infatuated with her mother and how great she thinks her mother is she doesn't understnad the issues, and she doesn't sound all too intelligent. Makes me wonder where that education money went her parents spent on her education.
I think McCain's daughter is a pretty and doesn't look "challenged" as you call it, but to start commenting on who you think is pretty or not pretty or whose hair color is nice or not nice. I woun't go down that road, cos we could really get into Hillary's hair color and others.
Wouldn't be the first time he has
nm
|
