A simple "I refuse to hear the truth" would do.
Posted By: sm on 2008-08-21
In Reply to: Let's see if we can make a little sense out of this mess.... - sam
What Conyers is doing is playing by the rules. This is a HJC hearing, not a congressional hearing. There have been a number of ridiculous restrictions on what they can or cannot say imposed on this process. For example, they are not allowed to utter the word "impeachment" and Bush's name in the same sentence. Absurd. In spite of all the obstacles, he opened the hearings and has vowed to see it through and to bring the truth into the public discourse once the investigation is concluded. He is quite aware of the fact that he is putting his reputation as a senior member of Congress on the line, so it would make sense that what goes on there is compelling. He is doing nothing to distract or circle around THE ISSUES. He is moving the process along. He is chairing the committee. All the details of the restrictions, who put them there and why, Conyer's position, etctera, can be found in the numerous links that have been provided and is well summarized in DK's interview.
The difference between him and you? Are you serious? He is familiar with every single player, position, stance, viewpoint, piece of evidence and rebuttal. He is a fact checker. He is not considering this evidence on the basis of hearsay. He is evaluating the integrity of the proof as it is presented. You, on the other hand, say you know all you need to know because you have "heard it from other democrats." In other words, you are not willing to even listen to the prosecution case or its evidence as it is presented directly from the source. Instead you talk all around what is really taking place inside those chambers. You are still doing it, trying to twist this into something it most definitely is not. Here's the deal. When you can't win on the issues, out comes the smear and smut.
No one said anything about your having made anything up about Niger. No matter how hard you try, you cannot make this about that one single subject. There are literally scores of talking points and hundreds of pieces of evidence to sift through. You are not the least bit interested in any evidence. If you were, you would watch the interview and post you rebuttals. You're not doing that. You are obsfuscating. It's what you do. What possible difference could it make in terms of valid claims and conclusive evidence whether this process occurs in formal or informal impeachment hearings? Truth is truth. Proof is proof.
You are not interested in hearing from all the witnesses or seeing all the proof. Exactly the opposite. You want to see no witnesses and no proof, unless of course it backs your own contentions. Stop trying to imply that the process is rigged. In the post 9/11 politics of fear world, the republicans would classify the White House address, if they could get away with it. Preponderance of the evidence usually is all that is required to achieve majority vote. If that evidence is incomplete, you have the republicans to thank for that. Do you really think that all that info held in secret is vital to national security? The only thing it is vital to is covering the neoCONS behinds.
You doest protest too much. More obstacles. Be honest. This is not about you want this and you want that. It's what you DON'T want that is plain to see. You don't want to face the reality that they just might be onto something. Another pot shot at Clinton. You really think that lying about an affair is a more serious impeachable offense than misleading an entire nation on the reasons for going to war? One thing is for sure here. As long as you continue to refuse to view the process as it is happening, instead of what you speculate about what may or may not be going on, you really do not have any way to justify anything you are saying about it. You say you have heard what DK has said. Okay. Did you watch the interview? What was in it? You must have skipped over the stuff about the live blogging from inside the chambers. The information is available for those who are interested. Go to the links. It's all in there….including information on how to follow it on a day-to-day basis.
Since the rest of this post has disintegrated into non-stop personal attack, I will not waste my time with it. Clearly, you will not engage yourself in any direct, honest, informed dialogue on this subject. This is still about your comfort zone. This just goes to show how extremely intolerant you are whenever anybody tries to challenge your ideas and how terrified you really are with what might be coming out of those chambers.
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
See how simple the truth is. :-) nm
nm
You just don't want to hear the truth
Facts is what we get from FOX News. Unlike the other stations which only give you fluff and lies.
Why do you call it cut down when all they want is to hear the truth
I don't get it. Whenever the truth is trying to be had if it goes against the crats it is called a "cut down" or mean spirited. All we want is the truth and Fox news is the only place I'm getting to hear the actual news story. Shepard Smith and others report news from all over the world. I stopped watching MNSBC a long time ago because if something favored poorly to the crats they wouldn't report it. I am surprised CNN came out with this but maybe that's because the Clinton News Network is mad that Obama's administration is giving Hillary Clinton a bad deal and making her position less important than it should be.
All I know is I want to hear the truth. I get that from Fox news, hence I watch Fox news and sometimes a little bit of CNN, but forget MSNBC. They are the worst at reporting news - only their hate-filled spew.
BTW - I was watching O'Reilly last night and he had a guest on that said he was making fun of Helen Thomas and the way she looks. Bill O'Reilly had made a comment that Helen Thomas' voice sound like the Wicked Witch of the West (and it actually does) but he never said anything about her appearance, but this guest kept saying O'Reilly was making fun of Helen Thomas' appearance (which he wasn't because I heard the comment he made). However, when O'Reilly asked her where she was when the liberal media was trashing Palin and Saturday Night Live was making fun of the way Palin dresses and talks where was she and her group. This lady kept coming back with the standard "I believe all woman have the right to run in politics, blah, blah, blah". She never answered O'Reilly's questions because she couldn't. They didn't come to Gov. Pailins defense when she was being trashed and made fun of but they attack O'Reilly because he made fun of a voice and now they are lying about what he said. He called it like it is - they are hypocrits.
Wanting to know the truth is not a "cut down". Right now the only truth I'm getting is from the news stories on FOX NEWS.
Obama is a wonderful man and people know the truth when they hear it nm
People know the truth when they hear it.
Bush worshippers don't want to hear the truth repeated
They just want us to forget what a mockery and mess that buffoon made of our country.
Oh, but watch out for Obama - that Democrat might just FIX everything and then the Pubs will have no one to point fingers at.
What a joke that anyone thinks they can defend that jerk!
Closing Gitmo is not as simple as simple
nm
simple exercise or simple mind
ever heard of thyroid dysfunction, ever heard of drugs that cause weight gain (such as steroids) or any other cause for obesity? Don't be so self-righteous.
I refuse to discuss
religion with Moonies or Scientologists. There is just no common ground. The same way as I refuse to discuss politics with people who actually consider Fox a news station. They are indoctrinated and innoculated from the truth by daily coordinated talking points to distort any event (such as saying Charlie Gibson looking down his nose at SP or was too rough on her) to favor their desire to keep the corrupt repubs in power. It's a waste of my time.
I'm sorry you refuse to see their teachings as
I can give you confession after confession of Muslims who have denounced those teachings once they were free from that country. They admit they are teachings of hate; even though they believed some of them were similar to Christian teachings, they couldn't understand why they were taught to hate by their teachings. I can give you many who say this....but of course I suupose you will say they don't know what they're talking about either.
Pay close attention to a paragraph under the head of Christianity and Islam, where he quotes a verse from Sura 5:51......and what he has to say after that.
http://www.everystudent.com/wires/abdul.html
But they refuse to understand.........
He has yet to prove citizenship.... and for those that say he IS a citizen, even if he were born in Hawaii, his stepfather (who is Muslim) adopted him in Indonesia. Once he was adopted by his stepfather, his stepfather renounced Obama's U.S. citizenship. The United States does NOT recognize dual citizenship with Indonesia....never has in the past either. Indonesia does NOT recognize dual citizenship, so Obama cannot have dual citizenship. The only way to reclaim his U.S. citizenship is to go through the Immigration Dept just like anyone else, fill out the necessary paperwork, and wait for his hearing. He has no paperwork to prove that either. He knows he does not. If he did, all he would have to do is show his immigration papers but he can't because he doesn't have them.
You can only have dual citizenship with a country that allows that. Obama's stepfather renounced Obama's U.S. citizenship and claimed him Muslim, as was his father. His stepsister even says he is Muslim through and through....
Now, that being said, supposedly Indonesia had tried to begin a new dual nationality law as of ག or so, but Obama hasn't filled out any paperwork for that as an Indonesian either. As of གྷ the new law in Indonesia had not even been implemented. There is a lot of red tape and still many who object to dual nationality allowances.
Our law says in order to be a "natural born citizen"..
The U.S. Law in effect during Obama's birth stated if you are born abroad to one U.S. parent and a foreign national, the U.S. parent must have resided in the United States for ten (10) years, five (5) of which were after the age of Fourteen (14) in order to register the child's birth abroad in the United States as a "natural born" U.S. citizen.
Either way.....he AIN'T a citizen of this country....
I refuse to waste my
time reading biased, inaccurate opinions. Got a prob with that? Yours only.
I did....you refuse to accept it.
Go tweak someone else for a while.
No, I refuse to try and debate you anymore
because you can't be anything but condescending and ugly.
Those who refuse to learn from history..... sm
are doomed to repeat it. The following is a link written by an elderly woman who grew up in Nazi Germany. See how many dots you can connect.
http://carylmatrisciana.com:80/x2/content/view/74/1/
I refuse to conform and I just don't fit in," .......so he was fired!!
'TOO PATRIOTIC'?? That's reason for dismissal from a job? What the h@ll is this country coming to?
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=576612
I was trying to illustrate that you REFUSE to see what's in front of your face, that you must twi
it and turn it and manipulate it until it becomes something completely different and ugly, and you adopt THAT as the truth, when it isn't even close to what the real truth is.
Three fingers are three fingers. Nothing more. Nothing less. No hidden meaning. Just three fingers that the rest of the sane, intelligent, reasonable WORLD sees and recognizes as THREE FINGERS, as I said in my post.
Just ignore them, ms, obviously they refuse to read the whole thing....nm
x
And yet you STILL refuse to condemn child sexual abuse!
When this was first posted, it was posted before there were separate political boards. Still, there was no response.
You people have done nothing by drive-by sniping posts for the last couple weeks, to the point where some of them had to be removed by the moderator.
Yet you're AFRAID to post outrage over child sexual abuse?
I guess we can leave it at that. You're obviously more outraged that I posted regarding this subject than you are at the subject itself.
And THAT speaks volumes.
Yeah, guess Obama supports refuse to look at all
nm
Yeah, agreed. Obama supporters refuse to see his
nm
It's actually more distracting to refuse to do someting that is a traditional symbol of our count
You are an American, right? You better enjoy your free speech while you still have it.
Facts are always called opinions by the left when they refuse to acknowledge them...sm
The facts within the article are true. No matter how much you want to ignore them.
You are so blind.
I refuse to forget history...can't afford to be "condemned to repeat it"
He created this cluster with his cronies and they should be held accountable.
Soldiers and peace officers pledging to refuse to obey sm
An invitation to soldiers and peace officers across the United States to pledge to refuse illegal orders – including "state of emergency" orders that could include disarming or detaining American citizens – has struck a chord, collecting more than 100,000 website visitors in a little over a week and hundreds of e-mails daily.
Link to article: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91530
Oath Keepers website: http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html
The truth sounds rude when put bluntly but still is the truth. nm
!!!! hahaha
Hear, hear! He is an exceptional person for an ....sm
exceptionable time. They say that God is watching us from a distance and I believe that is true. I think that Obama has a good pure heart, extraordinary intelligence, does truly want to improve our lives, and my prayers are with him. How about that he has Bobby Kennedy's desk (my hero).
Liberal truth vs. Conservative truth.
x
Hear ye, hear ye. We don't want to be scared.
nm
The truth, the whole truth and nothing but...It's probably the biggest...sm
reason why I am voting democrat...they seem more honest than the the republicans and it looks like people are starting to get smart and *bailin' Palin*... We don't need to keep hearing her *greatest hits" version of her acceptance speech over and over and McSame's POW story...that was then, this is now...we need REAL change and we need it NOW. I don't need someone to push the red button, I need someone to fix the economy!
Truth? The truth is she is nuts!
nm
Here, here!!! It sure isn't that simple.
I remember when I used to be 18 and the world was black and white, and I thought I knew everything.
The older I got, the more gray I saw, and the less I knew.
I figure at this rate, in a few years, I'm not gonna know nuttin!!! LOL
I know exactly what you mean about screaming out at the TV, too!!! LOL. (I wonder, if I turned down the sound on the TV and opened the windows, whether I'd hear a bunch of other people screaming, too.)
I still don't know if I can bring myself to watch him. I just hope that every single soldier, whether seeing him personally at Fort Bragg or watching him on television somewhere, is able to return to their families safely and without injuries. I have a feeling it's going to be the soldiers who really attract my attention, and I always cry when I see them, knowing how they've been betrayed by their "commander in chief." Our military deserves much better than "chimpboy." (Laughing at and agreeing with that term.)
It isn't that simple. sm
When Chavez held Chomsky's book up at the UN, the headlines the next day said his book was selling out. Exactly who has the power here?
Yes, very simple.
Plainly speaking, why do you post in a political forum if your posts are not politically motivated?
Look, it is very simple....
Bush has not broken the law. Clinton did. He committed felony perjury. I don't care that he jumped Monica Lewinsky. Ihate it for her and I hate it for Hillary but that is nothing to impeach a man for. What he was impeached for is obstruction of justice and felony perjury. If Bush had done that you would be calling for his head on a pike. So let's not pretend you wouldn't...waste of time. That is the difference between you and me. Nixon, a Republican, broke the law. But he had at least one iota of integrity left and resigned. Clinton lied through is teeth, broke the law. If he had just said, yeah, I jumped Monica, sorry, no harm no foul, it would have gone away. But he chose not to. And even after the impeachment hearings proved him guilty, they all ADMITTED he was guilty, they did not (Congress) have the guts NOR the integrity to convict him, and I mean Dems AND Republicans. That is the difference, again, between you and me. If it is wrong, it is wrong, and the political party of the person makes no difference to me. If George Bush committed perjury on national TV I would be calling for his resignation as well. One would hope he would have the integrity to resign BEFORE he was impeached if he did so.
Bashing Clinton? Did I lie? I stated the truth, in response to someone posting, for no apparent reason, that Bush was a dumba$$ and an embarrassment. I countered and said that I felt like a morally bankrupt lying perjurer was just as embarrasing.
Why aren't you getting on the other poster for bashing Bush? Ohhhhhh I understand...okay to bash Bush, NOT okay to bash Clinton. What is that again about liberal tolerance, no bigotry, freedom of speech, we love everybody doctrine? How does that go?
Simple as that.
It's very simple
Obama is the #1 most liberal Senator, which you can check. He leaves Ted Kennedy and the rest in the dust by comparison. Many Democrats fear him. John McCain is pro-life, regardless what you think of him. I'm no cheerleader for McCain, but holy hanna would freeze over before I either voted for or sat idly by over something this serious, and I don't even have kids.
If you want to try to spin it so someone you think maybe, kinda could sorda be for this barbaric procedure, so ahead and either not vote or keep your head in the sand.
My guess is that you could track down this nurse if you really wanted. It's possible that she could no longer take it and then said "enough."
Like the old saying goes, if you don't vote, then don't complain.
When is enough enough?
Simple
Check his voting record. He voted with Bush 90% of the time on important issues that he VOTED on.
Simple...
He isn't a white flag waving wimp, he doesn't want to censor the media, he has experience, he can speak without needing a script, though he probably has some questionable associates, none are like the Obama associates, most military people respect him, and most importantly, he is not a Marxist or Socialist hiding in sheeps clothing in order to get everyone to follow him.
But still not simple enough
Many people refer to the SS system as a pyramid/Ponzi scheme for the very reason that the money paid to retirees now is not from the money they paid in, but rather the money current workers are paying in. In addition, your benefit payment is determined by what you earned, not what you paid into it. Wikepedia, while I'm not a big fan, does a good job of explaining this is in fairly simplistic terms. Theoretically at least, SS moneys cannot be used for anything but SS and even investment of it is limited to government-secured bonds.
And just to be clear, I don't want to take anyone's benefits or even end Social Security as we know it now. All I'm saying is that there is no money to fund an increase at this time and that at this moment in time, I would rather see each recipient's $30 SS increase go toward putting people to work so that next year, the increase can be funded without bankrupting the system further.
simple minded? Nah.
Nah, the simple minded and hateful are on the conservative board..you got the wrong board..sorry, sweet cakes..
Just that simple. No problemo, yea right!
Unfortunately, some of us do care that the prez would appoint a person to a position of that magnitude with a whopping NO EXPERIENCE. The leader of this organization has the ability and is required to make decisions that can save American lives, and many, and NO EXPERIENCE is just a no biggie to ya! Oh, OK.
Why I am relevant...very simple!
This is the liberal board and I am a liberal. You are not. You and your playmates enjoy degrading the liberal posters on this board. It gets really tiresome. You and your bully friends need to find a different group to pick on, as it obviously brings you very much perverted pleasure as you CANNOT seem to stop and you REFUSE to quit bashing the posters on this board even when asked to by the moderator multiple times.
It would be wonderful if it was that simple....
so let's just make it REAL simple. If you want on SCHIP, you have to pay an additional 3% off the top in your income taxes. Democrats in Congress want to expand it, 3% off the top of all their salaries from now on to fund it. That would probably take care of it for years to come. If not, then start down the registered Democrats' tax rolls and if they favor the program, 3% off the top of their salaries to pay for it. Don't force it on people who are not going to use it, who pay their own premiums, to pay for it. Let those who want to expand it fund it. Simple as that. Sounds fair to me.
yes, you sound simple.
nm
simple remedy
like someone posted earlier. Open. Close. Open. Close. Then you can read what other posters have to say because new posts are in blue.
Simple ? What does it say about a man's character when he
1. Dumps his crippled wife and mother of his children to have affair with wealthy heiress, then turns around to apply for marriage license before his divorce is final.
2. Calls his wife C-word.
3. While speaking at a biker's rally, volunteers his wife as a contestant in the "Miss Buffalo Chips" topless modeling contest, including it's legendary banana competition.
4. Tries to blame his wife for the Keating 5 scandal when it becomes public.
5. Screams at and thoroughly humiliates a young pub volunteer who set up his podium at a rally.
6. Jokes about ape rape and killing off Iranians with cigarettes and "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb."
7. Describes Arizona's elderly as "seizure world."
8. Throws temper tantrums, punctuated with the casual use of the F-word.
9. Calls fellow senators Aholes and sh-heads.
10. Ignites a culture war to get elected.
11. Questions the patriotism of his opponent and fails to renounce his supporters who question his faith, endlessly insinuate he lies about it and portray his wife as a militant with hidden agendas to stage a socialist/Black Power takeover of the country.
12. Embraces endorsement from a pastor who disparages Catholics, women, African Americans, Muslims and LGBT Americans, believes that Hurricane Katrina was punishment from God because "New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God," announced a "slave sale" at the church to raise funds and believes that "the coming nuclear showdown with Iran is a certainty,"
13. Overlooks the Bush-Rove campaign strategy of unleashing a landslide of racist attacks on him, including calling his own daughter an illegitimate half-black love child, turns around in 2004 to campaign for W's second term, throughout it all supported 9 out of 10 of his disastrous policies that has brought the nation to it knees and then embraces Rove as senior campaign adviser in 2008.
14. Stood silently by while fellow war hero/veteran John Kerry was swift-boated without mercy.
Before any rebuttal ensues that would seek to deny, dodge and deflect, keep in mind that character assassination has been a benchmark of JM's campaign and of his supporters, so no whining allowed. Finally, this is legitimate inquiry, given that 90% is striving so diligently not to be 90% and has hawked character as his main qualification for presidential leadership.
Simple answer...
#1. Anything that passed Congress required votes from both sides to carry. So both parties did.
#2. Obama voted against. Biden voted for.
#3. Obama, according to his website it was January. Trouble is, Gen. Petraeus said to commit to some kind of a line in the sand date was the wrong thing to do. I vote with Gen. Petraeus.
#4. I imagine several Republicans lobbied against it...I think David Petraeus knows more about whether a timetable will work than Barack Obama does.
#5. Gen. David Petraeus said: WASHINGTON: General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, has said that US forces could hand over control of the entire country to the Iraqi military by the end of next year.
That could coincide with Obama's withdrawal timetable. If you are saying General Petraeus is trying to highjack Obama's timetable...I don't think so. It is his recommendation that drives what the administration says. Since he is the architect of the surge, which has worked "beyond anyone's wildest dreams" (Obama quote), he is in the best position to know what is feasible. But even he does not call it a timetable. COnditions on the ground dictate how something plays out. Or it SHOULD.
And that is the rest of the story.
A simple poll, sm
Who Would You Hire
You are The Boss... which team would you hire?
With America facing historic debt, multiple war fronts, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, skyrocketing Federal spending, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc. etc., this is an ***unusually critical*** election year.
Let's look at the educational background of your two options:
McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism
(verified through Anchorage Daily News adn.com 1981-1987. 5 schools in 6 years!
vs.
Obama:
Occidental College - Two years.
Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
Now, which team are you going to "hire" ?
for simple god-fearin'
salt-of the-earth christian folk, you and your alter egos certainly disdain and/or hate many people.
Let's keep this simple this time around.
Here's a staight answer: Go here first and read the extensive fact check information and view detailed copies of the HAWAIIAN birth certificate which you can blow up and inspect if you like.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Naysayers will decry the source as biased. You can make up your own mind.
Mr Phillip Berg does not accept the authenticity of this valid birth certificate. We can go around and around about dual citizenship, age of mother, etc. Irrevalent. Certificate has been submitted and disputed. Bottom line. As in all legal actions heard in US courts, the BURDEN OF PROOF is on the prosecution, not the defense. Berg now needs to prove not only that the BC is a forgery, but that Obama was born in Kenya. Good luck with that.
BTW, my husband is a foreign national. I was automatically given naturalized status from his country of origin by virtue of my marriage to him...did not even have to apply. Does not make me any less of a US citizen. Just got back from early voting. In terms of qualification to run for office, the dual citizenship arguments center on the Indonesian side of the assertions...another irrevalent point. What matters is whether or not the US recognizes dual citizenship. I am living proof that that argument is false. In fact, if you examine how many inconsistencies and irrevalant points have been raised during the course of this legal action and the contoversy that surrounds it, you may draw your own conclusions about the pattern that will emerge. Frivolous lawsuit.
Here is a simple equation
Sex = babies. Birth control = 99.9% chance of no babies. Don't want babies? Get on birth control. Don't want to take a chance of having a baby even on birth control? Don't have sex.
It's pretty simple
x
|
