Changing the subject does not change
Posted By: prosecutor's burden of proof. Dead thread. on 2008-10-21
In Reply to: Don't stop at birth cert issue, read the whole site - of factcheck.org. Good info on BOTH. sm
I agree. Any undecided voter should read the entire fact check site AND both candidates issues platforms on their websites.
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
Not changing the subject.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/13/poll-obama-facing-high-expectations/
Poll: Obama facing high expectations. Refer to the "overall approval rating" paragraph toward end of article.
http://www.gallup.com/video/111904/Most-Expect-Obama-Make-Effort-Republicans.aspx
Most Expect Obama to Make Effort With Republicans
Yet again changing the subject...(sm)
My original post merely pointed out that Olberman had a good question (which has yet to be recognized on this board). Just as a refresher, the question was, why is Coulter trying to get on NBC to promote her book (in which she talks badly about NBC) when she has such a low opinion of the network. This is not a battle of the networks, just a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can see.
I guess it's easier to change the subject than to actually answer a question or post an opinion on the subject matter. 
Yet again changing the subject...(sm)
My original post merely pointed out that Olberman had a good question (which has yet to be recognized on this board). Just as a refresher, the question was, why is Coulter trying to get on NBC to promote her book (in which she talks badly about NBC) when she has such a low opinion of the network. This is not a battle of the networks, just a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can see.
I guess it's easier to change the subject than to actually answer a question or post an opinion on the subject matter.
Changing the subject to the tax rant
nm
why do you insist on changing the subject
when Bush was in and we mentioned Clinton we'd be hemmed and hawed at that Clinton and Gore were gone and to get over it. Now that we say something about Mr. Messiah and we get Bush/Cheney comments.
Give it a rest. They are gone.
Kindly stop changing the subject. Still waiting for examples.
You made the charge, so back it up or admit that you can't. And if you don't even have that much integrity, then at least please stop saying things that you can't support.
Yes, let's change the subject, shall we? NOT
nm
Change the subject? LOL
I thought we were talking about ILLEGAL. Isn't that what you've been ranting about....Obama not being a "legal" citizen? So how is asking about ILLEGAL parents natural born citizens changing the subject? I don't notice any explanation as to where in the Constitution it says ILLEGAL parents can give birth to legal citizenship to their children. I do believe that the Constitution just might be referring to kids born to LEGAL immigrants being automatic citizens.
Change the subject? You are the one
can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. If no one believes this, who are all those people interviewed that voted for O and cannot tell you why? They all had a fairy tale image of him. That, my dear, is much more documentably effective than your stereotyped opinions.
Wasn't trying to change the subject
I personally, don't think that Coulter is a bottom-feeder. She directs her barbed remarks towards adults who should be able to take it and not innocent children. However, I believe Al Franken and Michael Moore, and most of the folks at Daily KOS and The DU are just as vicious. You all love Molly Ivins here, and she's just as rough around the edges as Coulter too. However, I defend their rights to free speech just as much as I do Coulter, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly etc. The left's problems with the latter three (and more) is the fact they tend to pull the highest ratings. It makes them litigatory and ready to censor. The left wants to stack the deck in their favor.
I wasn't trying to change the subject
just stating something that I thought I had observed. I'm sorry for being so stupid and uninformed and I will go crawl back in my hole now. Good luck to you, Sam. My heart can't handle being talked to this way, especially when I didn't respond in a manner deserving of such a tone.
Awww you just know I'm right so try to change the subject ... and also sm
Were you upset your raggedy post was deleted?
The subject did not change. I will address you concerns
You remember the one about the fact that our tax system has always been progressive and the table posted above shows you just how moderate in comparison Obama's proposed tax rate is. What I want to know is were those 7 republican presidents between 1932 and 1981 all MORE socialist than Obama or what?
Change and Hope: Obama wants your change and hopes you enjoy starving.... sm
...while he's partying like a rock star with the glitterati.
Meanwhile, some little old lady is hoping he doesn't get a dog and sends her the dog food instead.
Yes, they're all nuts. The change they'll get is not the change they thought
I want change. Chump change. I'm voting for Obama as far as the pollsters go.
Obama is change you can believe in until you have to take it to the bank.
Our jobs have been offshored until now because of greed. Under Obama and his taxation of small businesses, they will be offshored not because of greed but because of survival.
You could make a difference for our country by not voting for Obama, but instead, if you vote for him, you are selling out to deception. You are embracing a socialist, a communist, a Marxist, a liar, a cheat, and someone who legally cannot run as President of the U.S., much less the Illinois senate. But, you make your choice. You believe the consumate liar and his lies who sat for 20 years under the teachings of a black racist preacher filled with hatred for the U.S., whose association with Bill Ayers is recent and documented down to the fact that Ayers himself wrote Obama's best-selling book (best-selling in the eyes of far left liberals that is), who is a documented member of the socialist party, whose friends and close allies are extremists who not only bomb innocent people and are unrepenetent but who intend to eliminate (kill) 25 million Americans who they cannot "re-educate" in communist ideaology (gosh dog it, those dreadful capitalists), who refuses to hand over a certified copy of his birth certificate and educational records (my goodness, don't you have to provide your birth certificate to any number of entities who want to know if you are legal, i.e., social security, DMVs, etc., and your educational records would show if you had received aid as a foreigner and in 1963 would have shown you were a negro instead of an African-American which Obama's falsified record shows, please speck up on history), and who thinks Joe the Plumber is so stupid not to realize that if he wants to achieve the American dream, he is going to achieve it only if he lets Obama take what he makes to give to those WHO WILL NOT WORK. I'd like to see you, liberals, give a share of your 7.5 cpl to those who don't work as hard as you, but then with Obama, that's what you will have to do. Don't be fooled by his rhetoric that only those making over $250,00 will be taxed. We will all be taxed, and there will be no incentive to work for any of us because we will all have to give up a piece of our pie so those who do not work can have a piece of our pie.
Here is the dividing line, folks. We are at a crossroads in our history. The Lord Jesus puts it this way, "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction; and there are many who go in by it."
Choose which gate you enter, the wide or the narrow. It not only determines your eternal destination, but it determines the destination of this country. If anyone here calls themself a Christian and can vote for Osambo, I daresay you are a liar and cheat just as he. One cannot be a Christian and vote for a party and a political candidate who is in total rebellion to God's Word. That is a fact, and if you think any differently, then you, too, like the Obamanation, call God a liar. May He have mercy upon your soul. As He makes the rain fall on the just and the unjust because He is no respector of persons, we will all suffer as this country is destroyed and our Constitution that guarantees our freedoms is trampled just as Bill Ayers is pictured standing upon our flag in total disrespect, and we will thank you liberals that we are all in bondage, reduced to third world status, just as the Israelites were in Egypt. Only Obama ain't no Moses but a Muslim and has no favor with God, and there will be no one to lead us to the Promised Land coming from the Democratic party.
It isn't changing, it's in the details
Obama says if you are making under $250K you will not see your taxes go up a dime. If you are making under $200K you will see your taxes decrease. Basically if you are between $200K and $250K it's a no-change. He always gets this right, it's just that the wording on it seems similar so people get confused (or think he is).
Consider changing your moniker to IAlwaysGetTheLastWordNoMatterWhat. nm
Ummm. Fox is changing its tone and now
"a problem with semantics," trying to slither out from under its legendary erroneous biased reporting.
Man, what a sick reason for changing
Here is a blurb from an article I read..........changing a vote just IN CASE Obama becomes president........what a sell out.
Among the 21 converts was Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Illinois, his chief of staff, Kenneth Edmonds, said.
Edmonds said Jackson was changing his vote because "he received assurances from (Sen. Barack Obama) that, if elected, his administration will aggressively use authority in the bill to prevent foreclosures and stabilize the housing market."
You're changing your tune
You make comments you want to make with no regards to anyone feelings and you call it being funny but someone else makes a comment you don't like and you call it racist and start yelling for the moderator. Maybe they thought their comment was funny.
I give up...I keep typing 7 and it keeps changing it.
xx
I agree with change....change to socialism...
NO THANKS.
You seem to remember wrong, and why would I be changing races...sm
Find this and post it.
Yeah, Obama also keeps changing his definition
nm
LoL! Must be changing of the guard in crasher-trasher land.
The solution is pretty simple. If you don't like the liberal sermon, then don't attend the liberal church.
Other than that, I couldn't care less what you think. Have a nice day.
Bush starts changing his tune/rhetoric.....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061112/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq
LOL...off the subject
Don't know if that's true about Bill or not, but the graphic showing the top 3 newsmakers with Mr. Floatie--join the movement gave me my much needed gut laugh for today.... 
What can I say...I like potty humor...please don't flame me 
On every subject
one can see good and bad. All people will never agree on anything.and there is good and bad in all people. I most certainly do not think blacks need to be compensated for their ancestors but count on it, that will happen no matter who is in the White House. I don't think slavery was right either but you know what? I wasn't around 150 years go to own any slaves so I'm not accepting any guilt trip. The repatrition (or whatever the word is), if that gets seriously considered in CONGRESS, you can bet my Senator and Representative will get an ear full from their old "friend" the gourd! LOL
I certainly don't mean to start a race war but blacks have the same opportunities in this country as whites. Have a look at one of the presidential candidates.
Do you even know what the subject is here?..(sm)
Yeah, I think I'm through with this board. The incoherent ramblings from pubs on here is getting boring.
He already has been subject to a different
standard. He had to run a campaign with little or no mistakes, which he did. He has always been held to a higher standard. If he had run a campaign like Clinton's or McCain's, he would have been a laughing stock. Being held to a higher standard will probably make him the best president we've seen in our lifetimes.
Just a little touchy about this subject.
Get so darn mad about the whole Iraq mess we are in, and wish it would go away. Bin Laden is a thorn in Bush's side because of the friendship between their families that it would be obscene for him to kill his friend. So transparent. Makes me ill to think of what he has done to this country, when there is a REAL threat with Iran. Now what? Our troops in Iraq fighting a war that can't be won, but Iran is now free to do whatever they want. Sorry about the harsh words earlier, just sick of the whole matter, and where we as a nation are headed. And it is good to see that his lying is finally coming out, what dispicable things he has said and done, and what a can of worms! Thank goodness it is coming out.
The subject in this thread is a cat.
How did we get to this? And is it really necessary to call names? I mean, we are civilized people after all. It's rather hard to understand why you attack someone even when they are AGREEING with you. I try to be respectful here, but it's very hard to communicate when the subject is changed constantly in a thread. Perhaps an I hate Bush and all conservative thread would be best started and all posts to that effect might go there. Nothing is being furthered here except what seems to be a very bad grudge. In a public forum. Really not cool.
On the subject of Plame...
what about Richard Armitage? Certainly no conservative, certainly no Bush lover, definitely against Iraq war...he said HIMSELF that he talked to the Washington Post about Plame being in the CIA before Libby said anything to Novak. He felt comfortable doing so because "it was common knowledge around Washington that Wilson's wife worked for trhe CIA." Wilson himself brought all this on with the op ed piece he wrote in the times trying to smear the administration. That is what made Novak say...hmmmm....why would the administration send a Bush hater to Niger? Welllll because the CIA suggested him...and whoooo in the CIA suggested him? Valerie Plame. But no one, including the illustrious Patrick Fitzgerald, paid a lick of attention to that.
Agendas, agendas, agendas. Wilson and Plame out to get the administration, Patrick Fitzgerald to get a name for himself...no matter what the cost. And poor old Scooter took the fall, along with the first amendment.
Oh well....all for the cause right? Get Bush no matter what. Sigh.
Looks like you want to keep arguing on a subject that's old and done with
We don't need to keep going over issues on abortion. We all know what abortion is. I started reading your post and didn't know if you were trying to give us a medical course on "what to expect when your expecting" or if you were preaching to us from a religious standpoint. This issue was discussed and debated and argued over extensively below. It looks like you were'nt satisfied and want to argue some more - and from what it sounds like from others this has just bored all of us to sleep. I thought the political board was for political discussions, not pregnancy lessons or religious beliefs about when a fetus actually becomes a human being.
Move on...too many other topics to discuss. BTW, no need to shout at us with your headline.
Well, on the subject of sex education...
I doubt Bristol thought what she engaged in could not cause pregnancy. I feel sure she knows what makes babies.
Now I am sure that out here in real america there are many thousands of families who have had a pregnancy like this in their families or know of one in close acquaintances. I don't think this argument is going to hold any water with them and I think they would be insulted by this.
Your Candidate knows that, that is why he just wishes that all his supporters who think they are helping him would just stop.
Your subject is JM's temper....sam's is
media bias, which is rampant, 100 to 1, if not more on the side of democrats. It's a fact. Period. No amount of spinning off subject can change that.
NP. This is most definitely a touchy subject
You got the right idea. Wish I had that kind of self control to just say no.
Not going to broach the subject with you nm
x
the subject is deregulation
of insurance companies which would result in collapse of the industry. Can you image the results of that? Do you think it might affect your teeny tiny job in any way?
the subject is mccain's
suitability for president not your sick interest in Bill Clintons sex life. Contemplate it as much as you want to; the issue today is McCain vs Obama.
We are getting off the subject here...your point was...
why should anyone be afraid of him because he is just one man and he would have to get past Congress. My point was...they will have the majority. THere is no getting past then...clear sailing. Whatever agenda he wants...goes through. THAT was my point.
what does dancing have to do with the subject?
nm
Try reading up on a subject
See post under sam's blather.
This is just a very emotional subject
It definitely isn't for the weak at heart. ;)
Don't take anything on here personally.
The least you could do is stick to the subject...(sm)
As far as how I could vote for Obama after 911. Well, probably because he won't go running all over the middle east starting illegal wars in the name of fighting his "the axis of evil." My guess is once he straightens out Bush's mess, which is a job all by itself, he'll do what this country needs him to do -- restore credibility.
obviously no one wants to talk to you on this subject.
There's no law against it
What's wrong...don't like this subject? LOL...nm
x
Read the posts below about the subject
President Bush has thrown more money at poverty than Clinton, and I do not dispute the fact that Clinton went a long way in reducing poverty. Workfare is one of the best programs to come along in a long time, and one thing Clinton did right, however, it needs to be to be expanded.
Poverty is not solely a lack of financial means for many people (not everyone), but poverty in this country seems to stem from moral poverty in many cases.
The subject in this post is bashing...nm
My take on the subject, the short version.
Every country has some form of socialized medicine. Ours is comprised of the poor, the elderly, and those giving service to our country (military and political of which number in the millions) both past and present that encompasses their family members as well through different benefit packages depending on where they fall within the system. I believe the major argument is about extending those benefits in a social manner outside of what is already in place.
|
