Basically what that means is (sm)
Posted By: Zville MT on 2008-12-10
In Reply to: Dems took over? - Marmann
that the Dems have a majority so the Repubs can fillibuster all they want to, but when it comes to the final vote, if every Dem votes yes and every Repub votes no, the yes vote goes through because there would be more yes votes. It's just that there are more Dems than Repubs - they have the majority vote, just not enough to stop a fillibuster.
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
Basically,
Get off my back is about as simple as I can put it. I never said Laura Bush was drunk, so I don't see why you keep responding to my posts asking me to post a credible link to prove this.
There are "internet rumors" about her being drunk, mostly on liberal sites.
The link I posted in this thread is for liberal entertainment a "what if it was Hillary idea" so to speak. What I find ironic and even hypocritical is how you boast on the "TRUTH" in the "you probably are a liberal if..." article on the neocon board, but then come over here and throw your weight around about my post (the thread we're in now - let's not get it confused).
Hope you can understand this better, or even better you are staying on the conservative board so you will not get this response. Geez Louise.
You basically got that right.nm
x
Okay, so basically what you are saying is that
in a nutshell... 
I think we need change and I'm sure Obama will make mistakes, but McCain might as well said "I totally disrespect women." By picking Palin with no experience tells me he doesn't really care. JMO.
Protestwarrior.com is basically pro-war.
Read their website. Many of the conservatives are members on the conservative board.
Basically, that is what I am digging for...what you just said...
I am a registered Independent as well. I am a conservative, registered as an independent, and towing party lines for the sake of doing so is not for me either. When I said the "far left wing of the Democratic party"....I meant within that party are so-called far left wing, moderate Democrats and Conservative Democrats...according to the Democrats I have spoken with. And, as you say...it is the same with Republicans. Not all Republicans are conservative...Guiliani isn't. Thank you for your honest answers. Just trying to learn. Whatever we call ourselves politically, we are all Americans...just wanting to understand individuals and what they believe. Thank you again.
So basically anyone who does not agree...
with Mr. Obama is talking garbage....how open-minded of you. If Obama stood up and said "destroy all who disagree with me" would you be the first one to go after your shovel to storm the castle? LOL. Geeezzzzz. lol.
That's basically it in a nutshell. - sm
It truly doesn't matter. None of it. We citizens lose, no matter what happens.
Basically we do only have 2 choices s/m
Our whole election process needs to be revamped. To start with how about doing away with the electoral college? The popular vote should do just fine. Then there was the matter of redistricting under Clinton? Bush Sr? Junior? Bush Sr, I think, since the redistricting made it easier for the Republicans to win the electoral college vote. Our government corruption, I believe, begins with the election process.
So basically we are screwed either
way this plays out? My biggest fear is having democrats in total control of everything. I don't like idea at all. I know a lot of people are just wanting to get republicans out of the way since they blame Bush for everything.
The big picture is that government as a whole (all parties) were involved in this crisis and it really is going to take all parties to pull us out. We need a split to keep things under control. Our country cannot afford to let everything go extreme left like it appears to be doing. We need some contrast and balance. If Obama were more middle of the road and not so extreme left.....I might consider voting for him. But he is way too extreme left for me. As a conservative.....I don't like that at all.
So, you would basically destroy the US, (sm)
I think splitting the country up like that would do much more harm than good. We would wind up in the same situation as in the middle east....just a bunch of small factions (if you will) and total loss of control. Not one of these individual factions would be able to fend off foreign threats, much less threats from other factions. Individual factions would not be able to compete in a global economy. We have gained the power that we currently have by being a united country, and that would be totally lost. This would put us back to civil war days and in my opinion would not serve any real purpose other than to appease those who encourage separation of the country now.
Basically, you do have to be compensated......... sm
but if you want to keep your land because, for example, it is family land or your source of income, etc., you would lose it anyway.
Eminent domain
What you just said is basically racist.
nm
They e basically being saying the same thing for days, that is why I am...
.
So basically the poorer I stay
the more I get?
Talk about your backwards logic!
Here is a whole list that basically fits
antichrist which some believe it could be the O. I had a study if this in the Book of Daniel, not only in Revelations. No matter who it is, better be ready. Some state middle age, 40's and 50's.
http://www.theprophecies.com/antichrist.html
Basically, it is the Democrats' fault...
if they would stop with the "gimme" programs and attach all of it to the public works that Obama is concerned about, make them accept a little responsibility with the free health care, foodstamps, and welfare checks...in hopes of getting them OFF those things...THEN Democrats would be doing something GOOD for people. Try lifting them OUT of poverty and teach them to work for what they get instead of REWARDING them for staying in poverty?? Hellooooo???
Basically it is the dems fault.
They are the ones who pushed the bailout of Wall Street. They are the ones who is giving more towards the bailout. They are the ones who made up this whole stimulus package that they are trying to push through by FRIDAY.. tomorrow. They promised O that this will pass with or without pub support. So, who's fault is it? The independent party?
Ogden basically feels that
censorship is unconstitutional. That was his reason for not having restrictions on certain websites in libraries and schools. However, as a parent, I do not feel comfortable knowing that people can go to porn sites in libraries where my child might see this or at school where children might pull this stuff up. If people want to look at porn on the internet, they can feel free to buy their own computer and watch it from the privacy of their home, but not where children can see. Also, I do not see why it was important to Ogden to oppose a law stating porn distributors had to verify with documentation the age of their models. Doing away with this law would make child pornography easier to do. Having a law making them prove the models age, to me, is a responsible thing to do and also will prevent underage children being used in lewd sexual acts.
I just cannot support a man who would not allow restrictions for obscene sights in public libraries and schools and not see why it is important to have laws to verify that a person is of legal age to be involved in pornography.
Seriously, pornography is intended for the privacy of our homes with adults. Not in public places or involving children whether those children be watching or actually involved in the porn.
This is not a personal attack on Obama. I honestly wouldn't like anyone if they had these views on pornography. I personally feel that all appointees should be scrutinized whether it be dem or pub. I think if we hold them to higher standards than we have, maybe we will start getting some honest people in Washington.
So basically we shouldn't capture
anyone for fear of picking up an innocent person. Kind of hard to do that since most of these terrorists blend right in with civilians and have no problem using civilians as human shields.
You still have not answered my question about how many in Gitmo were "tortured."
So there are no innocent people in our local prisons? I'm sure there are some but the majority of them are guilty.......just like Gitmo.
What was done was done in an attempt to protect Americans whether you want to believe that or not. Terrorists are NOT covered under the Geneva Convention. How fast we forget the horrible things that were done to use by terrorists. We weren't waterboarded or electrocuted. We were either beheaded or just simply blown up. Which would you prefer?
I believe that it refers to the work ethic basically...
not everyone is born rich, and we all have choices in life. We can "pull ourselves up with our bootstraps," work hard and try to get head, and it has worked for generation after generation of Americans. It worked for Barack Obama. He is someone who pulled himself up by his bootstraps, came from a very middle class family, worked through school, worked for scholarships, borrowed money, got an education and he is running for President of the United States.
Sarah Palin grew up as a child of two teachers in Alaska. She worked her way up, eventually worked as a sportscaster, then decided to work in public service because she wanted to serve. She started as a community advisor (same way Obama did), moved up to City council, to Mayor, then to governor, and now she is running for Vice President of the United States.
That is pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and succeeding, working hard for everything you got and not expecting someone to hand it to you.
That is what bootstrapping means to me.
Obama is basically a socialist. Look at his record
nm
Obama's tax plan basically takes away any
nm
So basically it's a freedom of speech thing?
That's a scary thought! It would be illegal to say you're against people who are pedophiles? Because according to this bill (if this is what it means) they have the same rights as gay people.
So basically it's a freedom of speech thing?
That's a scary thought! It would be illegal to say you're against people who are pedophiles? Because according to this bill (if this is what it means) they have the same rights as gay people.
That's right China. We basically support China in everyway, and
don't hear two words uttered about their communist society. But, no mention of any wrong doing from China, I mean where else can you get a shirt made for ten cents?
Robertson though has hijacked a good Christian show (I guess it's his show), but it would be a good show to watch if he wasn't on there throwing politics everywhere. I don't like the mix.
I think you know what she means...nm
Oh, by all means, it is I who thank you.
''
This means nothing to me
I have seen this and it has been debated as naseum.
As far as winning in Iraq, I am not sure what we are supposed to win.
And please, don't EVER call me your DEAR again. Keep your patronizing on our own board.
Thank you.
It means nothing to you. sm
Yes, by all means, save your anger for being called dear when there it is posted in black and white what the antiwar movement did to our soldiers in Vietnam. Lord love a duck, but I have seen it all now.
Oh, I know what it means....
It is just an uneducated, goofy thing to say...that's all. And you should apologize to all those "grandmas" on this site who you just offended. You are so negative! 
Thanks - that means a lot
Was wondering if anyone would comment. I always question what the government feeds us, but I truly never have in my entire life ever heard our enemies say they hate us because we are free. I always think - how absurd. They just want us to leave them along and stop imposing our viewpoints on them. Thanks again.
I did not know what this means
I'm not sure if you're implying this is a good thing or not and because I didn't know what it means I looked it up. I'll write what I found out and then you can tell me if you think its a good thing or not.
Black theology refers to a variety of Christian theologies which has at its base in the liberation of the marginalized, especially the injustice done towards blacks in American and South African contexts. Black theology mixes liberation theology and the work of Paulo Freire with the civil rights and black power movements.
I had to keep researching certain terms in this because it was still confusing, so I looked up liberation theology and it states that liberation theology is a school of theology within Christianity, particularly in the Roman Catholic Church. Two of the starting points of Liberation theology are first, the question of the original sin, and second, the idea that Christians should make good use of the talents given by God, and that includes intelligence in a general sense, and in particular science.
I then looked up who Paulo Freire is and it says he was a brazilian educator and influential theorist of education. He became familiar with poverty and hunger during the 1929 depression and these experiences shaped his concerns for the poor and would help to construct his particular educational viewpoint.
There's way to much information on both these topics to write here, but to me it sounds like another positive for the Obama's Trinity Unity Church.
Sure you can. :) Means I am doing something right. lol. nm
nm
It means something to me. Obviously not to you....
stop reading my posts if they aggravate you so much. It is a free country. No one is forcing your little mouse to click but you.
Well, that certainly means you are NOT
me his character. Show me one close friend in his past without a shady background, one he does not have to defend. Everyone who has touched his life and made any sort of impression on him has warped his character. Yet, no one who is enamored with him seems to care. They do not care that he stands for nothing, they cannot tell you what his plans for this country are or how he is going to accomplish them. And, they certainly do not want to listen to anything from his past.
Ah, that means you definitely know one or more
xx
maybe she means
congress???
no it means
that I don't wish to spend the time to indulge you
By all means...............sm
let me get that door for you.
It means......
Why didn't you run for election, YOU MIGHT HAVE BECOME THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO BE ABLE TO EVEN TELL THE 44TH PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BARACK OBAMA, WHAT TO DO.
I guess that when it comes to foreign policy you are in the la-la-land.
It means I won't lie....
But because "several in your town" exist, presumably, that doesn't make you an expert except for maybe in your own grandiose dreams.
Oh, by all means...
Let's jump on this bandwagon instead of discussing the train wreck that IS in the White House.
And, to be honest, this post does NOT deserve to be on the political board. It has nothing to do with politics, just the sore winner Dems continuing to skewer the loser. Palin LOST, people. Let it go.
What she means to say....(sm)
is that I am one of a handful of liberals left on this board. Most everyone else is a republican, so therefore anything I say on here is typically not understood, taken out of context, or simply replied to in terms of character assassination, like the post that I'm responding to now. Just look down the board and you'll see what I'm talking about.
russell means
Russell Means Visits Camp Casey II
Means Says He Understands Power Of Women
By Gene Ellis
ICONOCLAST REPORTER
CAMP CASEY II — Russell Means’ appearance on the stage at Camp Casey II in Crawford yesterday was a surprise to many. For background on this famous Indian (who eschews the government term “Native American”), see brief additional biographical information at the end of this story.
Means, a long-time activist, arrived in Central Texas to support the efforts of Cindy Sheehan and her Iraq war protestors. He well understands the power of women. He spoke, both on stage and in a later interview with the Iconoclast, of the matriarchal society of the American Indian.
Motherhood in America has an inkling of the meaning of this, Means mused, but the Indians live it.
He explained that in a family, the mother is the only member who cannot be replaced. Women live longer than men, can stand more pain, have more endurance, he said. At about this point, Means introduced his wife, Pearl, and received a hug from Joan Baez, who was sitting on the floor of the stage with Cindy Sheehan, listening to Means’ remarks.
Means said that America has a patriarchal society where men rule alone and in fear of the unknown because they are alone. Matriarchy, he pointed out, is not fear-based. In a matriarchal society, each sex is celebrated for its strengths, and there is local control, male/female balance.
During the later interview with the Iconoclast, Means made a point of saying that he is sincere about women taking control of their power, providing a balanced and positive culture. The Blue and Gold Star mothers have an innate understanding of matriarchy, according to Means, even though, as members of a patriarchal society, they have been brainwashed for many years.
In a matriarchal society, all must be responsible.
“If the government of this country imposes so many rules, we feel no responsibility for ourselves, and we become careless,” said Means. To illustrate his point, he used the example of the lack of traffic rules in Italy. Because there are no rules, each person must take it upon his or herself to be responsible, not to be careless, to ensure his or her own safety.
When asked to speak about military recruiters targeting low-income youths, including Indians, Means said that it follows the history of a patriarchal society that the poor kids are to be the common fodder. Even after the Civil War, when Americans wouldn’t join the military, European immigrants were pulled off boats and forced to do two years of subscripted service to obtain citizenship. The poor are always a target for military induction, Means concluded.
Means reiterated that if men rule alone in their citadels of power, they are fearful.
A libertarian, Means paraphrased George Washington, “Government is force, nothing more, nothing less.”
Means added to this his own thoughts, “This government is evil. How can patriots support a president over the Constitution? That is treason. The purpose of the first amendment is to encourage dissent. Without dissent, it is impossible to live free.”
His comments were reminiscent of Margaret Mead’s quote that has graced the back of many a tee shirt in Crawford over the last two weeks. It reads, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”
The Los Angeles Times has described Russell Means as the most famous American Indian since Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse.
Means is a life-long indigenous rights/constitutional rights activist, actor, artist, and author. His best selling autobiography “Where White Men Fear to Tread” is currently on its eighth printing. He has a doctorate in Indian Studies, and is also a practicing attorney on the Sioux Indian Reservation in South Dakota.
For more than 30 years, Means has remained active with the American Indian Movement and has traveled and lectured extensively throughout the world while working for over 12 years with the United Nations.
Means became the first national director of The American Indian Movement (AIM). He is known for helping lead his people to stand against the United States government at the Siege of Wounded Knee in 1973.
His vision is for indigenous people to be free — free to be human, free to travel, free to shop, free to trade where they choose, free to choose their own teachers — free to follow the religion of their fathers, free to talk, think and act for themselves, and then, says Means, they will obey every law or submit to the penalty.
About The Siege at Wounded Knee, he wrote, “Our aim at Wounded Knee was to force the U.S. government to live up to its own laws. From that, one can draw the real lesson of our stand there: It is the duty of every responsible American to ensure that their government upholds the spirit and the laws of the United States Constitution. After all, what freedom really means is that you are free to be responsible.”
|
RUSSELL MEANS (right) gets a hug from singer Joan Baez at Camp Casey II on Saturday.
— Iconoclast Photo By Gene Ellis
|
Home
Copyright © 2005 The Lone Star Iconoclast |
Please enlighten me as to what it means.
Considering we will never leave Iraq if Bush plans on placing a permanent military base there.
Actually no, that isn't what Neocon means at all. sm
And I wasn't the one who wrote the things you are responding to, but here is a really good definition of Neocon and perhaps you can see why AG and I and others have stridently objected to being labeled Neocon in the past. Though I have some Neocon friends and I admire most of their beliefs, I am no Neocon. Neither, for that matter, is President Bush, who has been labeled a neocon ad nauseum on these boards.
From Chris Jones:
It would appear that you are unfamiliar with the history of the neo-conservative movement, a history which explains why some folks associate it with Jews and why the use of “neo-con” as a pejorative seems to some to smell of anti-Semitism.
The original “neo-conservatives” were a group of left-of-center intellectuals who became disillusioned with their liberal politics and became conservatives — mostly, but not exclusively, on foreign policy and national security issues. Many, but not all, of these intellectuals were Jewish, and the “center of gravity” of the nascent neo-conservative movement was Commentary magazine and its editors and writers. Prominent among the early neo-conservatives were Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz (who are Jewish) and Jeanne Kirkpatrick (who is (I think) a Gentile). Commentary magazine played the role in the neo-conservative movement that was played by National Review in the broader conservative intellectual movement of the 1960s and 1970s.
The contemporary conservative journalists Bill Kristol and John Podhoretz are the sons of the early neo-conservatives Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz.
The defining characteristic of neo-conservatism, properly so called, is a belief in a robustly activist foreign policy by people who were formerly left-of-center. The movement is associated with Jewish-ness because many of its early leading lights happened to be Jews; but Jewish-ness is accidental to the movement, not characteristic of it. To use “neo-con” as a sort of vaguely anti-Semitic slur is not only dishonorable, but a misuse of language. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen, though.
Regardless, this means we kill them all?
It is their right to live the way they chose. We can't go attacking every one who is a possible threat on more levels than I'm going to go into here. I would rather see our leaders spend the time and money on securing things here rather than wage war there. We are just formulating more hatred. We CAN change whether we are the ones in the war by not going to war, and I shall not blindly trust our leaders to do the right thing because it has been proven time and again that they rarely do.
UM BEFORE YOU KNOW YOUR PREGNANT MEANS...
before you've missed a period! you totally contradicted yourself. i never said at the instant of sex you're pregnant. I said the heart is beating before "MOST" women know they are pregnant, and you JUST VALIDATED MY POINT!!! even going as far as to say they are developing at week 4! (which is when women miss their periods) you do know how this works don't you?
Never noticed that before. Not that it means anything of course.....
but it IS freaky. lol.
By all means....don't view it. You might actually have to really know...
what you support. Can't have that, can you?
Of course not. It just means she doesn't use it herself.
nm
|
