ADD time. The end of that sentence should be
Posted By: sm on 2008-12-17
In Reply to: And inject a healthy dose of reality of the consequences - sm
shares in the responsibility at this point.
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
Your first sentence says it
It's a question of who is shouldering the burden. Well apparently you're a billionaire,'cause I know many hardworking, responsible, professional middle-class people (no one looking for a handout)working pretty darn hard just to stay afloat...people with degrees who are delivering pizza. Our local food pantries can't keep up with the demand and this was before Katrina. There are Meals on Wheels volunteers, who pay for their own gas, have had to stop because they simply can't afford it. And the meals that WERE being delivered weren't even hot, because THAT was cut back. Go, good for you on your shiny throne passing judgement on who is or isn't looking for a hand-out, but I can tell you that even with every kind of insurance and adequate income, I pray my husband or I don't get sick or have some unforeseen catastrophy, because in many cases that is all it takes.
You said it all in one sentence...
Hindsight IS 20/20, something Democrats tend to forget. The pre war intelligence was very ominous, and it was international intelligence, not just ours. If an attack had come our way which was then traced to Iraq, you would have placed the blame squarely on the back of GWB. Of course, now that we have hindsight, he's blamed for the war being not worth it, wrong war, ad nauseum. Apply a little logic and you can see that it's a no-win situation. I believe the man did what he had to do, AT THE TIME. You can't play Monday morning quarterback. The prominent Democrats were all on the same page before the war, just read some of their quotes.
I think the last sentence says it all..sm
Either way, even if you believe McCain's health plan is a train wreck and that none of his math adds up, he proposes to fix that with Medicare savings, not with $882 billion worth of "cuts."
Tell me what the difference is, one says medicare savings and one says medicare cuts. Both mean less money for medicare, no? Semantics on both sides I think.
We can sum all of the above in one sentence:
LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!
me neither......Your sentence that
I quoted in my former post reminded me so much of the situation between Israel and the Palestinians, therefore I swerved away from the issue at hand.
Ahmadinejad should step down and give his position to Mousavi. Same with Khatami.
On what are you? In your last sentence
of your post you contradict what you wrote in your subject line!
Hahahaha! LMAO !
You are a joke, 'Backward typist,' are you really .....?
Confused or imbibed?
Your last sentence tells it all
Your last sentence concerning ammo, in my opinion, sums up your beliefs, i.e., republicans, versus democrats. Everything to you righties is fight time, attack time, war time whereas we lefties post something for people to read or debate, not to fight. I cant speak for all, but I believe negotiating, talking out problems, trying to understand each other works better than slinging insults, attacks, and using ammo. A nonpartisian person reading these posts would be able to see, the attacks more often than not are from the right wingers.
I do believe that the last sentence is especially true.
Isn't it amazing. So many here with ties to Vietnam veterans and so many differing viewpoints. Nearly every male in my family has served in the Armed Forces and this down to third cousins. Many of them served in Vietnam. Every one of them has bad feelings towards the peace movement in the 60s and 70s.
I will finish your sentence. sm
an impossible thing for YOU.
regarding your list sentence
your body might not be there anymore.
is there a subj in that sentence?
just does not make sense. Please proofread what you post so you don't look illiterate.
I just went to the link and the first sentence
states it was from January. I am not even sure he is saying rates will skyrocket, but that will be the argument against his plan to cap greenhouse gases and retrofitting.
Your last sentence of the third paragraph was just as...sm
uncalled for, I believe, and untrue.
Don't need to explain to you, you explained yourself in your last sentence.
t
Thanks for the post. I was especially impressed by the last sentence...
of the article. At least they showed both sides (good for them), albeit three paragraphs on Palin and 1 line on Obama. Big sentence tho.
Can't ge past the ignorance of the first sentence here.
the constitution is not a static document and is, in fact, a living, dynamic, changing, vital document. To wrap you brain around this concept, consider this. The orignal Constitution contained 10 amendments. Amendments 11 through 27 commenced over time as such: 1795, 1804, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1913x2, 1919, 1920, 1933x2, 1951, 1961, 1964, 1967, 1971 and 1992.
There. You see? The (progressive) authors of the constitution in their wisdom provided the mechanism of amendement, that would allow for change and growth. That makes it a living, breathing, dynamic document. Got it?
Next time you try to interpret Obama's book, watch your step.
That last sentence just didn't EVEN sound right! sm
And I think the missing sheep brains is the main thing in this picture.
Did you forget to finish our sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Did you forget to finish your sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Your very first sentence, "Trying to bomb...
... a grassroots political force into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy," reminds me very much of a quote by Michael Corleone in Godfather II, where they're in Cuba trying to "do business" while in the midst of unrest and rebellion of the people.
Michael Corleone: I saw a strange thing today. Some rebels were being arrested. One of them pulled the pin on a grenade. He took himself and the captain of the command with him. Now, soldiers are paid to fight; the rebels aren't.
Hyman Roth: What does that tell you?
Michael Corleone: It means they could win.
Although Israel has very sophisticated American-made weapons, maybe, as above, that won't be enough. 
Interesting sentence construction.
I would have gone with the adjective ''grammatical'' to modify the noun ''mistakes'' rather than using the noun ''grammar'' to modify another noun, or perhaps ''bad mistakes in grammar.'' Then again, I might have linked ''bad-grammar'' as a compound modifier, but then that's just me (as well most who are truly English literate.)
The last sentence is particularly worrisome for Michigan.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061804053.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Senate's Health-Care Draft Calls for Most to Buy Insurance, Nixes Obama's 'Public Option'
By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 19, 2009
A draft proposal in the Senate to overhaul the nation's health-care system would require most people to buy health insurance, authorize an expansion of Medicaid coverage and create consumer-owned cooperative plans instead of the government coverage that President Obama is seeking.
The document, distributed among members of the Senate Finance Committee yesterday afternoon, addressed none of the funding questions that have consumed House and Senate negotiators in recent days. But it included an array of coverage provisions that were drastically scaled back from earlier versions, as lawmakers seek to shrink the bill's overall cost. The proposal, for instance, would reduce the pool of middle-class beneficiaries eligible for a new tax credit meant to make insurance more affordable.
The absence of a "public option" marks perhaps the most significant omission. Obama and many Democrats had sought a public option to ensure affordable, universal coverage, but as many as 10 Senate Democrats have protested the idea as unfair to private insurers. In its place, the draft circulated yesterday outlines a co-op approach modeled after rural electricity and telecom providers, subject to government oversight and funded with federal seed money.
Yesterday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) met with four Republicans, including Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa), the ranking GOP member on the panel, along with two Democratic colleagues in an attempt to find bipartisan consensus. Baucus dubbed the group "the coalition of the willing."
Meanwhile, in the House, Democrats are exploring a range of funding options, including a surtax on the rich and an increase in the payroll tax imposed on all U.S. workers. The list also includes new taxes on sugary drinks and alcohol, along with broader levies, such as a national value-added tax of up to 3 percent.
The Senate's preferred option -- taxing the health benefits that millions of Americans receive through their employers -- is also on the House list. So is Obama's favorite idea: limiting the value of itemized deductions for the nation's wealthiest 3 million taxpayers.
Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee charged with developing a financing plan, said lawmakers have not "embraced any particular source of revenue." But he confirmed that big, broad-based taxes like the payroll tax and a value-added tax are under discussion, mainly because they have the potential to raise "a lot of money" for an expansion of health coverage expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
The House will not unveil a financing plan until after the July 4 recess, Neal said, though House leaders were expected to release an outline of the rest of their plan today, with a goal of putting a bill to vote later this summer. The Senate is aiming to debate its legislation in July as well, and is seeking a bill that would cost less than $1 trillion.
Maintaining that tight schedule could prove difficult, though, because daunting issues remain in both chambers. One area of contention is the extent to which private employers must subsidize public coverage for their workers if the companies don't offer their own plan or if the premiums are unaffordable. The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if lawmakers don't find the right formula, employees may flee their company plans for federal coverage, sending government costs soaring.
The draft in the Senate committee spells out one possible solution: It would require employers to pay 50 percent of Medicaid costs for workers enrolled in the low-income program and 100 percent of the cost of health-insurance tax credits for eligible employees. Workers could forfeit employer coverage only if the cost exceeds 12.5 percent of their income.
The draft, earlier reported on by washingtonpost.com blogger Ezra Klein, spells out four options for requiring employers to provide coverage, with exemptions for firms with up to 200 employees. It would fine individuals who do not purchase coverage, though certain groups, including Native Americans and undocumented workers, would be exempted.
It also would loosen eligibility requirements for Medicaid, a proposal certain to alarm many governors who are grappling with budget crises.
Proves you don't read anything..Says in the 1st sentence he is Gov. Lynch of
x
oops, ignore the last partial sentence....nm
Did you just use the name Rush and the word honesty in the same sentence? (sm)
Limbaugh lied about 9-11 Commission report
Limbaugh falsely claimed "Nobody ever said there was" a connection between Iraq, 9-11 attacks
Limbaugh misrepresented Duelfer report on Iraqi WMDs
Limbaugh lied about AIDS
Limbaugh overstated the minimum wage
Limbaugh made false claims about the Democratic National Convention
Limbaugh distorted the Kyoto Protocol
Limbaugh falsely accused Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Limbaugh claimed Clintons are funding Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
Limbaugh lied to defend Swift Boat Vets
Limbaugh misstated Pew report on journalists
Limbaugh mischaracterized the federal deficit
Limbaugh misstated federal education spending
Limbaugh lied about Bush's false uranium claim
And that isn't even the tip of the iceburg for him. And by the way, what's with the *he owns his problems* junk? Does that mean that since he admits he's a drug addict then he's not a bad drug addict? Give me a break.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180006
oops...first sentence posted twice by accident.
:)
Haha! I so agree, she summed it up in 1 sentence, there is nothing more to say!..nm
nm
That wasn't my whole message - you just picked out the sentence you wanted to
But that's no surprise. There was one sentence in those two paragraphs about how the crats always blame the pubs, but they never take responsibility and blame the people in their own party who are at fault too. So you take one sentence out of the whole two paragraphs and say that's what the whole message was about. Nice try. My message was about this admistration so far being a disaster in less than one month. The only ones who see it okay are the kool-aid drinkers, and that I'm sick of all the people acting as though there was never a United States until Obama came along. Since you evidently did not read my message I'll repeat it now.
American has been around for over 200 years. We've had some good presidents and we've had some bad presidents, but Obama did not discover a new country here.
Since McCain was not elected nobody can say whether or not he would have been a better president or not, so time to put that dog to rest.
In the last sentence of her post she retracts what she said in her subject line, lol!..nm
nm
Your first sentence really shows was a mean hate filled shallow person you are.
Too bad McCain can't form a sentence w/o gagging, slurring, making faces
That is his problem. Obama is eloquent... oh well
Yep, but it was straight time. No time and a half
DHL is GERMAN OWNED. And, company was located on Snotsdale, I mean Scottsdale, AZ which means. Labor laws in Arizona suck. Right to work state. Basically a company can do whatever they want to do with you and if you do not like it, then quit and find another job.
blah, blah, blah, I read only the 1st sentence and
here we go again...blah, blah, blah...broken record!
Whom do you Republicans try to convince?
Youselves?
Like McCain and Cheney who
are hoping and even wishing for further attacks on the American soil, so that they can prove that all the B* they did during these 8 years was justified?
And to prove that O's strategy is wrong and they were right.
The 9 years are over!
same time?
Well, if these posts are showing up at the same time, how could it be me? I cant post everywhere at the same time, LOL. You are idiots if you think that. For you to even try to connect me with other posts..what for? Dont you have better things to do with your time? It makes me laugh that you actually have taken the time. It would not even occur to me to try to link up your posts and initials with other posts and initials. Gosh, guess I could take it as a compliment that you are spending so much time obsessing about me. I have a better suggestion for your time. Spend it researching this murderous lying administration.
Goes on all the time.
Does not surprise me at all, all politicians are crooks, that is why they had the wearwithall to get into it, smart, but all crooks. Bill Clinton was a sex addict, no doubt, but he did more to help me than any other president. I am a swing vote, I vote for the man not the party. I don't like the current President, I can see he has no soul in his eyes, but yet, they claim they won "two elections", he only won one, and I still doubt that considering that his brother was the gov of one of the highest electoral votes. But I do believe he won the last election, and his supreme court nomination has to be respected. I am not happy with Dudley Do Right, but Dubya did win one election, (we think), and he as president has the right to appoint whomever he wants.
It's about time this was done
While I don't agree that this is all the president's fault, and while I think some of what these governors are doing is political positioning it's about time somebody does something about this. A lot of the immigration could be handled at the state level other than the border patrol which is solely in the federal government's hand. This is where we as citizens must demand our leaders both dem. and rep. to stand up and do their jobs, and this does include the president. While I am a great fan of Bush this is one of the areas I think he's lacking in along with the majority of our leaders at the federal, state, and local levels. I hope these states go one step further and call in the National Guard. This is going to be the issue that I think will determine elections in 2006 and 2008 along with the issue of soaring gas prices and oil demand.
One time only
Where did she ever state she hated Bush? Could you please post that article or lead me to it. She wants to ask some tough questions which, obviously, he does not have the answers to. I would like to know what our **mission** is too. It changes so often. Talk about flip flops. I think we have had about four different reasons for pre-emptively invading Iraq and, of course, they still try to link Iraq to 9/11. Didnt know it was written in stone that you can only meet with your servant, the president, one time. However, it is working out okay, as most of America backs Cindy and quite a few Europeans too. I think it is great that finally most of America is finding its voice once again and screaming to the warmonger in the WH, bring our troops home. To stay the course is ridiculous but then, again, having invaded Iraq was monsterous and wrong, based on nothing but lies..That to me is RIDICULOUS BIG TIME. I also find it quite sad that Bush is taking a five week vacation, bicycling around his property, clearing brush, yet he cant spare 10 minutes or more to speak with Cindy and answer the questions she has, which many of us have..shows where his priorities are. Last time I took a vacation was in 2000 and it was only a weekend. This person in the WH is so out of touch with reality and the hopes, needs and worries of most Americans. He is pathetic.
Once upon a time. sm
You and the rest of the nameless posters here hounded two posters from the conservative board. And what you said and did to them was far far worse than this. And then when they were gone, you rejoiced and sang songs, ding dong the witch is dead. Remember? ON THE CONSERVATIVE BOARD YOU SANG. Hypocrits.
LOL! Nor did I (either time).
 Too bad they're just not bright enough to see how pathetic and desperate they've become. I've gotta admit, though, their idiocy does provide a LOT of laughs for me. (I don't want to emphasize that because if they think they're doing ANYTHING to make my life more pleasant, they'll stop!)
Its about time!
The 2005 International Commission of Inquiry
on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by
the Bush Administration of the United States
The Bush Crimes Commission
Friday 14 October 2005
When the possibility of far-reaching war crimes and crimes against humanity exists, people of conscience have a solemn responsibility to inquire into the nature and scope of these acts and to determine if they do in fact rise to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. That is the mission of the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity. The first session will be held October 21-22 in New York City. This tribunal will, with care and rigor, present evidence and assess whether George W. Bush and his administration have committed crimes against humanity. Well-established international law will be referenced where applicable, but the tribunal will not be limited by the scope of existing international law.
The tribunal will deliberate on four categories of indictable crimes: 1) Wars of Aggression, with particular reference to the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. 2) Torture and Indefinite Detention, with particular reference to the abandonment of international standards concerning the treatment of prisoners of war and the use of torture. 3) Destruction of the Global Environment, with particular reference to systematic policies contributing to the catastrophic effects of global warming. 4) Attacks on Global Public Health and Reproductive Rights, with particular reference to the genocidal effects of forcing international agencies to promote abstinence only in the midst of a global AIDS epidemic.
The Commission's jury of conscience will be composed of internationally respected jurists and legal scholars, prominent voices of conscience, and experts and monitors in relevant fields. The tribunal's legitimacy is derived from its integrity, its rigor in the presentation of evidence, and the stature of its participants. Representatives of the Bush administration will be invited to present a defense.
Prior to the meeting of the Commission, teams with sufficient expertise will prepare preliminary indictments in each of the four areas, setting forth the scope of the Bush administration's actions and how they contravene legal and moral norms for international behavior. At the meeting of the Commission, there will be four prosecution teams that organize the presentation of the evidence. This evidence will be documents as well as eyewitness testimony by victims and observers of the crimes alleged. The formal proceedings will be held in a public venue and all attempts will be made to publicize and broadcast its deliberations internationally. The Commission's jury of conscience will come to verdicts and its findings will be published.
The holding of this tribunal will frame and fuel a discussion that is urgently needed in the United States: Is the administration of George W. Bush guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity? The Commission will conduct its work with a deep sense of responsibility to the people of the world.
The Commission is sponsored by the Not In Our Name statement of conscience, joined by the following individuals and organizations:
- James Abourezk, former United States Senator
- As'ad AbuKhalil, professor of politics & public administration, California State University-Stanislaus
- Dirk Adriaensens, Brussells Tribunal executive committee and coordinator SOS Iraq
- Dr. Nadje al-Ali, social anthropologist at the University of Exeter, founding member of Act Together: Women's Action on Iraq and member Women in Black UK
- Anthony Alessandrini, organizer with the World Tribunal on Iraq and New York University Students for Justice in Palestine
- Edward Asner
- Russell Banks, novelist
- The Rev. Luis Barrios, Ph.D., associate professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice & Anglican Priest
- Amy Bartholomew, professor of law at Carleton University
- Greg Bates, Common Courage Press
- Phyllis Bennis, Institute for Policy Studies
- Michael S. Berg, grieving father of Nick Berg killed in Iraq May 7, 2004, and one man for Peace
- Ayse Berktay, from the organizing team of the World Tribunal on Iraq
- William Blum, author of Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II and Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
- Francis Boyle, author of Destroying World Order and professor at the University of Illinois College of Law
- Jean Bricmont, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and executive vice president of National Lawyers Guild
- Lieven De Cauter, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Patrick Deboosere, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Michael Eric Dyson
- Peter Erlinder, William Mitchell College of Law and lead defense counsel, United Nations Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Arusha, Tanzania
- Larry Everest, author of Oil, Power & Empire: Iraq and the U.S. Global Agenda and Behind the Poison Cloud: Union Carbide's Bhopal Massacre
- Richard Falk, professor emeritus of International Law, Princeton, and Visiting Professor in Global and International Studies, UC-Santa Barbara
- Thomas M. Fasy, MD, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City
- Lawrence Ferlinghetti, member, American Academy of Arts & Letters and founder & editor in chief, City Lights Books, San Francisco
- Ted Glick, former coordinator, Independent Progressive Politics Network
- Dr. Elaine C. Hagopian, former president of Association of Arab-American University Graduates (AAUG) and primary founder of the Trans-Arab Research Institute (TARI)
- Sam Hamill, director, Poets Against War
- International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Malaysia
- Abdeen Jabara, past president, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
- Dahr Jamail, U.S. independent journalist who has reported extensively from Iraq since the invasion
- C. Clark Kissinger, contributing writer for Revolution and initiator of the Not In Our Name statement of conscience
- The Reverend Doctor Earl Kooperkamp, Rector, St. Mary's Episcopal Church, West Harlem, New York City
- Joel Kovel, editor-in-chief, Capitalism Nature Socialism: A Quarterly Journal of Socialist Ecology, and author of The Enemy of Nature
- Jesse Lemisch, professor of history emeritus, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
- Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine and author of The Left Hand of God: Taking Back America from the Religious Right
- New Jersey Civil Rights Defense Committee
- New Jersey Workers Democracy Network
- National Lawyers Guild
- National Lawyers Guild, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
- Rev. Davidson Loehr, Ph.D., First Unitarian Universalist Church of Austin, Texas
- Robert Meeropol, Executive Director, Rosenberg Fund for Children
- Barbara Olshansky, deputy legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author of Secret Trials and Executions
- James Petras, professor emeritus of sociology at Binghamton University, New York
- Jeremy Pikser, screenwriter
- Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author with Ellen Ray of Guantanamo: What the World Should Know
- Stephen F. Rohde, civil liberties lawyer and co-founder of Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace
- Marc Sapir MD, MPH, co-convener of the UC Berkeley Teach In on Torture and executive director of Retro Poll
- Sister Annette M. Sinagra, OP
- State of Nature on-line magazine
- Inge Van de Merlen, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Gore Vidal
- Anne Weills, civil rights attorney in Oakland, National Lawyers Guild
- Leonard Weinglass, criminal defense attorney
- Naomi Weisstein, professor emeritus of Neuroscience, State University of NY at Buffalo
- Howard Zinn, historian
--------
The 2005 International Commission of Inquiry on War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration of the United States: Sessions take place Friday, October 21, 4-10pm, and Saturday, October 22, Noon-6pm, at the Grand Ballroom of the Manhattan Center, 311 W. 34th Street, New York City, NY.
Only time will tell. nm
x
I never take time off.
My pursuit of literacy is as endless as my pursuit of honesty and integrity. 
One mo time..... 1 example
This board will return to a dead state too
[Post a Reply] [View Follow Ups] [Politics] --> [Liberals]
Posted By: huh? on 2006-03-10,
In Reply to: Oh, she revealed it on the Conservative Board - ??
The stupid rules have made these boards a place where only crickets chirp. Its sad that people are so childish and cannot discuss things like mature adults. This is why these boards will remain a snoozeville, because some people are not capable of mature conversation and get insulted by anyone who does not believe exactly like they do, but if you like it dead here...by all means enjoy the silence.
Well this time it is ..
someone else. Thanks for the holiday greeting. Merry Christmas to you too, and a happy, healthy, joyful new year.
One last time....
I watched a TV broadcast; it evoked thoughts in my mind. The thoughts irritated me. I FELT uneasy and I THOUGHT I could print the same on this board and why. This is, after all, still America despite the speech police and this is, after all still the liberal board.
I'm sorry you feel the need to throw the little personal zingers in.
In this day and time you really can't have it all...sm
There is always going to be something or someone out of sorts, so I say just do you (Mrs. Obama). No one else can do it for her. If I were in her shoes, I would do the same thing.
yes, but she has done it time and time again and yet. sm
She is castigating Obama for MAYBE changing his mind. So what's with that?
I will try this one more time...
There IS money for childrens' health care, if we prioritize. Anyone with half a brain knows there is waste galore in the social programs we have now. They are not administered properly, rules are not followed, people get on who should not thereby taking the funds for people who really need them. All I suggested is that they go ahead and do the cigarette tax, and then prioritize how to spend the rest of the social funding and make sure childrens' health care goes first. As to agreeing or disagreeing to the war...won't go there as childrens' health insurance seems to be the issue. If they would clean up the SCHIP program now and get all the illegals off it, there would be that much more funding for insuring American children. Then if the illegals want to get legal, seek citizenship and pay taxes into the system like the rest of us, then yes, I think their children should be covered too. I really don't see why Democrats seem to have a problem with prioritizing spending. We do it on a personal basis every day; why can't the government do it with OUR tax money? We all know we can't do everything we would like to do. Therefore we should do the most important things first. That is just common sense. Just like parents are not made of money where their own families are concerned, the government (that being your tax dollars and mine) is not made of money either...and prioritization as far as social programs needs to be done. I really don't see why everyone seems to have a problem with that.
Sorry...it would not have been the first time...
a poster used the same moniker and posted as liberal and conservative...guess they like to start a fight and then watch it develop...kinda like people who flock to wrecks. lol. Could not be sure that was not the case and still cannot be sure...but I will take your word for it. lol.
Well, time will tell...
I couldn't disagree more. I think Obama is going to be torn apart if he is the nominee, more so than Clinton would. Really, I just do not like the guy. I think he is totally arrogant, along with his wife  , and I do not believe for a minute that he is honest. Of course, Clinton isn't either. They're both lousy.
Yes, Ron Paul is out of the race...that's what I said, loooool. In my opinion, he was the only person who ran that would be worthy of the presidency.
How do you know how much time she
|
