What the original post stated
Posted By: Abbie on 2008-09-16
In Reply to: I don't imagine you bothered to read... - sam
is that one of the issues that should be foremost on people's minds is why did we go to war with Iraq after 9/11 when Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11? At the time the Bush administration linked Iraq to 9/11 as justification for going to war with them. He lied. He knew the people of this Country were vulnerable after 9/11 and he used that vulnerability. Look at what his lie has cost us. Not only should the people in this Country be outraged, they should be asking why.
John McCain supported this war, as did many others at the time. Barack Obama did not. He knew the facts, understood the situation and made the right choice, though it wasn't a popular one at the time. Why didn't John McCain?
Read Bob Woodward's books. He got his information directly from interviews with Bush and his admininstration. Remember the 9/11 Commission Report? These are not opinions - they are facts.
People are being diverted from the issues for a reason. John McCain doesn't want people to think about his lack of sound judgment at such a crucial time.
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
I stated in my post that I had
posted that below. If you find it a waste of time, please feel free to ignore what I've said instead of being hateful.
Your right - I should have stated it in my orginal post
Democrats won't stop spending. They tax us more while at the same time continue to spend.
My mom told me once, if you don't stop spending your not going to have anything for retirement or pay off your bills. I would think its the same way with government. If they keep taxing us more and more and more, why isn't the deficit going down? Every president that gets in promises us he will get the deficit down and have a balanced budget. Not one president (to include Bill Clinton) as done this. The deficit keeps growing and growing and the following president inherits it.
Where does it say that in the original post?
Please read the post again, and show me where it says that I am sick of hearing about anything.
Extremely well-stated post! I agree with you 100%
Most importantly, it was YOUR decision, along with your doctor. It was NOT the decision nor the business of anyone else.
Hats off to you!
The original post was about the judiciary...
committee wanting to talk to Scott McClellan about the Plame case and whether or not perjury or obstruction of justice happened. There is all kind of crap rolling around out there, but what the judiciary committee is looking at that had everyone so excited is about the Plame case and nothing else. THAT was my point and that is what the thread was about.
You are the one who made the innocent until proven guilty comment. And now you have to backpedal because you don't actually believe nor adhere to what you yourself posted. That is the truth, and if that is nasty, so be it.
Well, I don't know how you define morality,piglet. You will have to tell me. Being for the law and innocent until proven guilty for only people who espouse your beliefs...in my book that does not equal particularly high moral values. My opinion, just as it is yours to call me nasty. As if you have never been nasty. But I digress.
And like I said...over and over again. IF and when either of them is impeached, and if they are proven guilty, I will be the first to say they should be removed from office...as I have said over and over today. We all know because we witnessed it that Clinton did the crime. Just because the Congress did not have the guts to convict does not make him any less guilty. If they impeach Cheney and I see evidence that convinces me he is guilty I will say so whether or not Congress has the guts to. Again...difference betweenou and me.
They can list charge after charge after charge. Until they prove it, they are innocent, according to your own post (which you don't believe across the board, but I do).
So we will wait and see. And I still say that the reason Pelosi and the hierarchy are against is because they don't want to open Pandora's box. At that point they will not be able to control what comes out. Give me another good reason why, if she really felt like they were guilty, she would not go forward with impeachment.
Actually, it was your own typo in your original post...nm
nm
I did not post the original comment -
and I do not feel that way. I was on the fence myself about which way to go until McCain picked Palin. That toppled me right off...
I was speaking of the original post
My response was to the original post.
As to the Palin thing (no where does it mention McCain, who was also implicated in the original post), did they expect the campaign to make no references to O's shady past? Maybe they should have handled him with kid gloves, like the media did. If O can't handle the scrutiny, maybe he shouldn't have run for office.
Part of the original post by Anon.
If memory serves, the poster did advocate looting and was encouraging it.
My source was cited in the original post
I'm not being presumptuous because I don't assume anything. What I am waiting for is the debates. I want to see how they all equal against each other.
so, just like I thought, the original post was pointless!
nm
I didn't post the original message
just love how people don't post facts, whether McCain or Obama supporter.
FYI - her original post didn't contain *****, it was changed
x
you missed the point of the original post
The supreme court has not ordered him to produce the original; they are simply reviewing the lower court's ruling regarding Berg bringing the suit in the first place. There is no order to produce the document. This is simply a measure that Berg and the other attorneys requesting the writ are now hoping will bring pressure on the electors to force them to demand the document be presented. But at this point there is no order to produce.
The original post was about Bush not Clinton.
Bush is the one who is trying to claim that he has kept the United States safe from terrorist attacks, not Bill Clinton. You are right about one thing. I cannot stand George W. Bush. He he has been an embarrassment to the United States, destroyed our economy, and sullied our reputation throughout the world.
Re-red the original post with the CBS link/article on his
At least it wasn't Fox covering it, so you should believe eyewitnesses, shouldn't you?
Nope....she just stated she was here to post issues for her fellow liberals...
(or he, whichever the case may be), and I just mentioned I had not seen any issues posted. Are YOU the posting police?
Original post is not true - see link for truth!
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
By the way, we have not heard peep from the original poster since the quotes she posted were proven to be, at best, grossly inaccurate and completely out of context, and, at worst, downright lies!
I picked up the quack word from the original post.
No double standard here...unless only Obama detractors are allow to use the quack word. Since you have a hard time talking about more than one thing at a time, let's not divert our attention to include the third subject of homosexual marriage, OK...just keep it simple so you can keep up.
I meant to post this link in the original message
Really connects the dots
http://patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-annenberg-foundationobamafactcheckbrady-center-connection/
Please see original post, link for video included..nm
x
The price of shampoo or McDonalds WAS NOT my original post at all.....sm
Wow, someone tries to come up with a viable solution to just one of our myriad of economic problems in this country, something that will work in the long haul, and we cannot have an intelligent,respectful discusion, sharing ideas and thinking aloud? When all anyone can contribute is insults, put-downs, etc., this board starts to look like worse than the floor of Congress, and these days that is saying a lot. What we have been doing in this country has OBVIOUSLY not been working, has it? So perhaps new persepctives would work. I am not new. the minimum wage battle has been going on forever. If no one can see that giving workers a fairer wage, an incesntive to work hard, pay into the tax system federal and state, become consumeers of good, housing, etc., if you think that one-shot tax refunds are the answer, you are sadly wrong, because that has been the status quo for years and has led us into this giant hole. I am just saying, when it is more profitable for someone to be on welfare and foodstamps than to work what we now have as pitiful minimum wages that WILL NO LONGER in today's economy feed, cloth, and shelter a family today adequately, then I believe an overhaul and new solutions might be in order. And the shampoo thing was a metaphor, if you can understand THAT concept. When you are keeping a household of five going, on a budget, in the North East, and not surviving on credit and borrowing, loans, etc., but truly working for it, and putting kids through college as you go (even state colleges), it is tough, we pay our bills on time, don't get behind, are trying to teach our kids fiscal responsibility, and live within our means and our budget. Bully for your vacations and restaurant meals, it is a luxury for us, and I am not ashamed to say it but proud....perhaps we are relatively poor according to you, but we are honest, hard working, don't owe anyone, and we are rich in family and friends. Guess it is your prespective, dear.
The price of shampoo or McDonalds WAS NOT my original post at all.....sm
Wow, someone tries to come up with a viable solution to just one of our myriad of economic problems in this country, something that will work in the long haul, and we cannot have an intelligent,respectful discusion, sharing ideas and thinking aloud? When all anyone can contribute is insults, put-downs, etc., this board starts to look like worse than the floor of Congress, and these days that is saying a lot. What we have been doing in this country has OBVIOUSLY not been working, has it? So perhaps new persepctives would work. I am not new. the minimum wage battle has been going on forever. If no one can see that giving workers a fairer wage, an incesntive to work hard, pay into the tax system federal and state, become consumeers of good, housing, etc., if you think that one-shot tax refunds are the answer, you are sadly wrong, because that has been the status quo for years and has led us into this giant hole. I am just saying, when it is more profitable for someone to be on welfare and foodstamps than to work what we now have as pitiful minimum wages that WILL NO LONGER in today's economy feed, cloth, and shelter a family today adequately, then I believe an overhaul and new solutions might be in order. And the shampoo thing was a metaphor, if you can understand THAT concept. When you are keeping a household of five going, on a budget, in the North East, and not surviving on credit and borrowing, loans, etc., but truly working for it, and putting kids through college as you go (even state colleges), it is tough, we pay our bills on time, don't get behind, are trying to teach our kids fiscal responsibility, and live within our means and our budget. Bully for your vacations and restaurant meals, it is a luxury for us, and I am not ashamed to say it but proud....perhaps we are relatively poor according to you, but we are honest, hard working, don't owe anyone, and we are rich in family and friends. Guess it is your prespective, dear.
Original pledge by forefathers didn't include God. I agree with keeping the original.
http://www.usflag.org/history/pledgeofallegiance.html
The original Pledge of Allegiance
I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands- one nation indivisible-with liberty and justice for all.
On September 8,1892, the Boston based The Youth's Companion magazine published a few words for students to repeat on Columbus Day that year. Written by Francis Bellamy,the circulation manager and native of Rome, New York, and reprinted on thousands of leaflets, was sent out to public schools across the country. On October 12, 1892, the quadricentennial of Columbus' arrival, more than 12 million children recited the Pledge of Allegiance, thus beginning a required school-day ritual.
At the first National Flag Conference in Washington D.C., on June14, 1923, a change was made. For clarity, the words the Flag of the United States replaced my flag. In the following years various other changes were suggested but were never formally adopted.
It was not until 1942 that Congress officially recognized the Pledge of Allegiance. One year later, in June 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite it. In fact,today only half of our fifty states have laws that encourage the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom!
In June of 1954 an amendment was made to add the words under God. Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.
you stated this better than I could have.
I sickens me how the victims of this disaster are now being blamed and vilified by people on the conservative board!
My son (age 20) told me that he met some people last night who were speaking the same way - in essence, that it was the fault pf the citizens of New Orleans for not getting out in time, etc, that they deserved to not be rescued sooner, and that the government was not to blame at all.
And I'm sure those conservative posters on the other board probably consider themselves good Christians and not racist at all.
Meanwhile, it is apparent that our president could do (or not do) anything at all and they will blindly defend him...
I'm going to focus on the positive and not visit that board at all.
We have sent money to the Red Cross and all my children donated clothes to the Salvation Army. This morning our priest said that some evacuees may be relocating to our area, and our parish will welcome them! These are our brothers and sisters in Christ...
good night and peace to ya'll
As I stated above.......... sm
if this situation were to occur, and it does seem that it is with the advent of ASR, then our line rates would be lowered to those paid to Indian MTS, just as the UAW was offered what is paid to foreign auto workers. I could not survive on 0.05 cpl or less in our economy. I doubt anyone else could either.
I'm really sorry to hear about your hubby's situation. I know anyone in the housing industry is facing much the same situation. There is really not a lot of new house construction going on and there is no much call for a trim carpenter in most commercial building.
My opinion is to bring MT back inhouse and pay us a decent HOURLY salary. We deserve it as much as the next person.
he also stated that he
respects other people's beliefs that are different from his own and supports separation of church and state. I guess all we can learn from this issue is that Joe Biden will never personally have an abortion. Good job, Joe.
As stated above . . .
according to her a heterosexual relationship can be equated to a plastic cup and a turkey baster.
You stated
"My point is proven by your post. You stated that when Obama gets into office, for me to look around and see how many names I can pronounce.. "
This happened under Clinton before Bush. Can't pronounce half the names now. Guess I fell down on my research a bit as I didn't see anything about the "Muslim for Stowe, OH" appointed by Bush.
VERY well stated!! :-) thank you
this is just too awesome on SO many planes!!!
Very Very well Stated
Yes, the moral compasses do seem to change from day to day on here, you are right.
Thank you for this post. It is very well put.
Excuse me? JM has clearly stated his will be
nm
What would be a lie about verses stated
xx
Where is that stated, and what does nawnaw mean??
nm
Yes, that is what he stated, but it was not true....
hospitals were allowing babies to die. And that was his SECOND excuse when the first one about Roe v. wade didn't fly. Do you take EVERYthing he says at face value?
You mean 120,000, not 250,000 as stated on Fox news.nm
x
I do believe that to as I stated in my message
But we have been told over and over that we have been lying about Obama, and these are not the two issues that keep coming up. We ask what lies are we being accused of telling so we can provide credible sources but nobody comes back with anything. Most likely because what we expressed as our fears and the sources we provided were truths.
But they are "credible" as you stated above. sm
yeah, right.
More accurately stated, this is
the disaffected, sour grapes poor-me's, hand-wringing over-wrought imaginary concept of O's plan, courtesty of the eve-of-destruction clan who does not have the courage to depict it accurately or conduct an informed pros-and-cons discussion since they are trying to promote their recently out-voted world view.
What is racist about what the OP stated?
//
Bristol also stated that she would...
have preferred getting pregnant 10 years later, having finished her college education and having landed a job.
Sounds to me that she was prevented to make her choice.
He stated they have already identified....
numerous projects and programs that are outdated or do not work, which he will be eliminating, that will save us 2 trillion dollars........I believe he will cut our deficit. That savings right there more than pays for the current stimulus bill. 
Oh come on! She stated she was nervous.
at that age and up in front of an audience and national TV. Oh please!
I did see the original s/m
and he didn't appear to be to be joking. If he was, I didn't see the humor in it when so many are losing their homes and can't afford to fill up their vehicles to get to work.
No that was original.
I have my original
birth certificate and I have my son's as well. I also have my step son's and my husband's and they are all locked in our fire proof gun safe along with our social security cards.
Very well stated. LOL. I have always like Ollie North. nm
nm
MSNBC just stated that the FEC is is going to audit (sm)
Barack Obama. Supposedly, he accepted donations from foreign nationals. Most of these donations were made over the internet and they are going to check into this.
FEC ordered O's compaign to provide more information about large sums of money coming into his campaign recently. Someone donated $11,000 to his campaign under the name of Good Will, and that he worked for YOU. Plus gave the address of Good Will Industries. When contacted, GWI stated they did not donate this money.
Another donation was supposedly by a liquor store in NY, but when contacted, they knew nothing about it.
Although they do not have to disclose small donations ($100-$250), Good Will donated the $11,000 in small increments thinking they would not be found out.
Could it be that the sh## is going to hit the fan soon...hopefully?
Biden stated 150K.
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/10/31/obamas-tax-threshold-slips-again/
I am sure they will figure it out if O wins. I also heard it could go to 41,600K.
The last presidental speech with O and M, Obama stated 200K and not 250K. It came right out of his mouth.
That's okay, too. You just stated you wanted our reasons
why, so I stated mine. Won't let that happen again, though. From now on, I think I'll just read and not post. I didn't think my reasons would be dissected. I thought this was only a poll. Have a blessed day! 
Oh--as I've stated many times...
I back the war 150%. I think that taking down Hussein will be something that Bush will be commended for in times to come. We just happen to have a society that is so against fighting for anything, that we forget that fighting for other people's rights is important. Hussein killed many many people and I think that Bush did a great thing in getting rid of him, no matter the reasoning. If only it had been done sooner...
|
