Hardly. Consorting with vs direct quote? Supports succession
Posted By: while spouting country first? Hypocrisy matters.. on 2008-09-03
In Reply to: This is a nonissue. Whether it was she or her husband or both... - sam
The quote thing, whether SP or her husband is not the only example of the problems SP will be facing once the convention is over and the campaign goes into high gear. So far, this morning, you have managed to dodge every single effort to elicit a response to SP's OWN words. Dismiss the pastor, but not her own preaching on video. That just won't fade away no matter how much spin you are able to produce. These are land mines waiting for detonation.
With regard to the "got not use for America's damned institutions" and support of succession question, these issues will not play well for yer in terms of country first, in the context of ethics (can't practice what is preached) and when it comes to change versus same old stuff.
Before pronoucing this as a nonissue, suppose we give this a little time to play out in the political arena? Your guilt by association campaign has already run its course, and Obama managed to clench the nomination. In the light of the blaring negative publicity that will be issuing forth in the weeks to come with SP being the newest rock star on the block, how much political mileage do you really think that empty tank is going to give you?
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
that was a direct quote from
Ronald Reagan. How SHAMEFUL that you make fun of a dead man and one with Alzheimer's to boot. I am appalled at your lack of manners.
I believe this is a direct quote from big O
'The buck stops here.'
Don't want to direct quote, can't stand to watch it again sm
The point being, cutting unnecessary procedures to seniors who "would not get any better anyway." I was so fuming angry that I would like everyone to hear it, but I for one could not stand watching it again. We are bailing out all these losers and he's going to deny our seniors. If he touches their benefits, I will march on Washington. Most of them paid their way all their lives and now they're being "cut" because he thinks it's frivalous as they "wouldn't get any better anyway." Who the blazes is he to make that decision???? Everyone deserves a choice of care, even Gramma and Grampa. I don't care how old they are!
Country first/Palin support of Alaska succession=topic.
nm
My post was a direct answer to the direct post...
of Democrat. It was not a blank open-ended statement. And dial it back a notch...it is certainly your right to protest anything any time you want to. Just like it is my right to protest you protesting while men and women are still in harm's way, because you are in effect aiding the enemy. Apparently the Viet Nam experience taught you nothing. Americans protesting in the streets heartened the enemy and when they were about to surrender decided not to, based a lot upon what was happening in the American streets. I believe that the protesting in that war prolonged the war and cost more American lives. Hanoi Jane should have been tried for treason. That being said...lessons were not learned and the protestors are doing the exact same thing now. Exercising the very right bought for them by shedding of American military blood. And I still say common courtesy should keep people out of the streets and off the TV until the military are home safe. But it just proves the same thing to me over and over...the selfISHhness of the protestors vs. the selfLESSness of the military. They continue to put it all on the line for your right to protest anything you want to protest...it is up to YOU to decide where and when that is appropriate, and it is up to you to take the heat for same. It is up to me and others like me (in my opinion) to apply that heat. Go ahead and do whatever your conscience or lack thereof moves you to do. But do not expect those of a different mind not to protest the protest.
I do believe that there is a direct
response to the OP with the title of "You're Whack." The inside message said, "Who cares? So what? Get a life."
Seriously...if you have nothing constructive to add, why waste your time responding with that?
I guess I just don't get why some of you hate Christians so much? I admit that there are those who try and force their religion upon others. I don't do that. If someone doesn't want to believe in what I do, like my husband, I don't push my views on him. However, he doesn't ridicule me for believing either.
It just seems like every time someone mentions something about religion the bashing and name calling, etc. starts. I'm beginning to think that maybe Christians should be placed on the hate crime list because it sure sounds like a lot of people hate us.
LOL. They think everyone supports Bush...sm
I am a former Republican and I wouldn't consider posting over there. It all falls on deaf ears.
I never said all the military supports the war.
That is a flat out untruth.
well, either is a guy who supports infanticide...
and McCain has always supported rehab not incarceration for first-time offender users and harsher penalties for dealers and international cartel kingpins. His wife is not a dealer and is not an international cartel kingpin. Get your facts straight.
Biden, not too long ago, said he would be proud to be on a ticket with John McCain. Yes, WITH. And now he is going to have to do a major flip flop and cut him to ribbons. Any respect I EVER had for him is gone.
He is not fit to be vice president either.
75% accounts for the former McC supports
to realize what "country first" means in the face of an election defeat. Think about it. BTW, the 6.8% was injected into the mix for the sake of accuracy.
Supports his lifestyle?
So you're saying if he's poor, he won't be gay anymore??? You don't have to have money to be gay. How are you supporting his lifestyle?
Supports his lifestyle?
So you're saying if he's poor, he won't be gay anymore??? You don't have to have money to be gay. How are you supporting his lifestyle?
Can someone direct me to a site (sm)
that states the candidates' detailed respective platforms at a glance? I've watched most of the debates, as much as I can anyhow, but I've not been able glean and distinguish a lot of specifics.
I'm in FL and vote on Tuesday. Believe it or not, I am undecided. I liked Dennis, but he pulled out today and probably wouldn't have voted for him... won't go into why, but I'm sure I don't have to :-)
Dennis says to go Obama.... not sure if I want to. What I want is to have a Dem president. I like Edwards...
My demographic falls into Hilary's (female 45 and over lol).
Input appreciated.
Ann only supports her own aspirations of fame...sm
and she leaves no photo op or video shout out unturned. She's ignorant, prejudiced and her followers buy it, literally.
Maybe it is my small sense of pride in where I lay my head, but I have to respectfully disagree with you about America commiting genocide throughout the world. Were we wrong for entering Iraq preemptively, YES. Have their been atrocities that we should all be ashamed of, YES. But I'm not aware of any genocide commited by America.
Darfur, that's genocide.
Anyone who supports Bush is a neoconservative sm
Neoconservatism is a political agenda that concentrates on militarily enforcing an aggressive US foreign policy. Everyone from the other board that posts here support these aggressive policies.
The neoconservatives advocate a paradigm shift in which the United States spreads American values by asserting American power-by force, if necessary. The big movers of the neoconservative movement have all at one time shared the same roof under the Project For a New American Century (PNAC).
Some of them include & have served in both Bush administrations:
Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense)
Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense)
Peter W. Rodman (Assistant Secretary of Defense)
Dick Cheney (Vice President)
Elliott Abrams (National Security Council)
Steve Forbes (Forbes Magazine)
Zalmay Khalilzad (special envoy for Afghanistan)
Jeb Bush (Governor of Florida and brother of President George W. Bush)
There is a lot of information on their webpage:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
There is one page on there of particular interest where they talk about their need for a new Pearl Harbor called Rebuilding America's Defenses. It was written 1 year before 9-11.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
She supports birth control and ..
supports abstinence-only education in schools, but she has also said she does not support tax payer dollars to distribute birth control in schools. She is a member of Feminists for Life, which is an pro-life group.
Feminist for Life is a pro-life group that has had its positions distorted to show that they are against birth control. Palin critics (including many in the media) have cherry picked in order to smear Gov. Palin.
Lieberman supports McCain
I heard about that and also Juliani also supports him. I think that's great.
No, it is not, but US supports Israel every year with
billions of dollars and the newest military technology.
Former Israeli administrations already agreed to a 2-state solution. The Palestinians would get the Westbank as their state. Instead of keeping their promise, Israel started to build the 20-meter-high separation wall and building settlements for the Israelis.
Obama wants this to stop and Netanyahu does not want to comply as a hardline right-winger. It is Netanyahu who wants the whole occupied Palestine for Israel and does not want a 2-state solution. He wouldn't even 'utter' the term ƈ-state solution,' not even when he was discussing this issue with Obama in Washington; he just circled around it.
This does not come out of my head, I am very literate, informed, I look around what is going on in the world, always, I am tolerant and fair.
May I politely and respectfully direct you
back to God's word? Obviously a little more study and maturing will do you no harm.
You know, I hate hypocrisy. You want to direct me
back to God's Word?
When you can show me in God's Word where He approves of what Osambo approves, then we can talk.
Let's talk abortion, gay marriage, taxes, lying, cheating, subversion of government, indoctrination of preschoolers, redefining marriage, etc., a whole litany of what Osambo stands for and compare it to God Almighty's Word.
I warn you in advance. You are up against an adversary you do not want to tackle with because you are ill prepared to defend your comments and beliefs in the light of Scripture.
Ready to go for it, old girl?
I didn't say he blindly supports Bush.
Scarborough is objective and honest, and if something is wrong, he tells people. He doesn't blindfold himself and play follow the leader like so many Bush supporters. He's not a Bush apologist.
Who supports Obama? Everybody in the democratic party
it appears. I was a Clinton fan as I know she takes care of business and knows how to get things done in the Senate and Congress.
McCain and Palin will lead us to a supreme court nominee which will be a republican and we cannot afford that.
LIke Palin supports said about Michelle last summer?
x
John McCain supports overturning
x
Please direct me to the bible verse where it is written
about the right to bear arms. I missed this.
"They are no more pro war than God is. They do believe in the right to bear arms..."
Terrible debate! Jim was not direct or specific enough in his ...sm
questions and allowed too much of the same old retoric from both candidates.
You give me a direct answer. You dodge it like he does.
How can he give 95% of AMericans a tax cut if 30-40% of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to use refundable tax credits. How else can he do it? PLEASE, PLEASE, explain that to me. If I am wrong, all you have to do is explain to me HOW he is going to give tax cuts to 95% of people, 30-40% of whom DO NOT PAY federal income taxes, wITHOUT cutting them a check. Please, please explain that to me.
Sam understands the basic principles of socialism and Marxism just fine. Most of which Mr Obama taught me in his books and associations. Which you are willing to ignore.
So please...very simply. Explain to me how he is going to give tax breaks or cuts to 95% of Americans if 30-40% of that group don't pay taxes. You said yourself, he can't. So either he is lying about the 95%...or he is going to cut that 30-40% a check.
PLEASE explain his tax plan to me since you are such an expert on it. HOW is he going to do it without cutting checks? HOW?
Are you not able to answer a simple direct question?
It's obviously over your head.
Yeah, direct me to some homosexual "scientific"
site. Believe me, if that were the case, it would be well publicized, especially in the New York Times.
Don't you even know that the first "scientists" who "came out" with a gay gene were homosexuals? You don't think they have an agenda, my dear?
Yeah, guess Obama supports refuse to look at all
nm
Obama is a CHRISTIAN. He supports equal rights...sm
for all people including gay people. I think that the radical Christian right are the gay haters.
Palin supports aerial hunting of wildlife
Even if I preferred McCain (which I don't) I would use my vote to keep this thug out of office.
Nan-ism post was in direct reply/rebuttal to the two posts above it.
Surely you would agree that when accused of something we should have a chance for rebuttal? And that our rebuttal would surely include proof/evidence of why we took a particular stand? Would you deny the liberal board that right? SOME of us may be tolerant (or as Nan put it, "sissies") but some of us are very capable of speaking up for ourselves.
I have read Nan on this board (and others as well) for almost two years so I think I have a pretty fair grasp of her opinion and style of posting.
Feel free to direct your concerns to the Administrator. sm
You can reach the adminstrator at Admin@MTStars.com. As far as deleting, since the incident of several weeks ago, I have made a concerted effort on BOTH boards to keep the bashing to a minimum.
Still waiting for a direct answer to a simple question.
nm
The huge emphasis on tomorrow is in direct proportion to
Finally. A President we can all be PROUD of, instead of hide-your-head-in-a-bag EMBARRASSED.
Paying close attention. Sidestepping direct debate.
nm
Must also be hard for some people to give direct answers after making a statement like that.
nm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)...sm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)
May 12 (Bloomberg) -- United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan today said the U.S. needs to follow up on Iranian offers of direct negotiations in order to resolve peacefully their dispute over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
``I've asked all sides to lower their rhetoric and intensify their diplomatic efforts to find a solution,'' Annan said at a briefing in Vienna. ``I think it's important that the United States comes to the table.''
The U.S. has let French, German and U.K. diplomats lead talks with Iran over the atomic dispute. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a meeting of the Developing Eight group of Islamic countries in Indonesia, said Iran is ready for direct talks and will comply with any UN decision on its atomic program based on international rules. A U.S. State Department spokesman in Vienna declined to comment.
The U.K. and France, backed by the U.S., have proposed a resolution under Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter to compel Iran to stop its nuclear work. A Chapter 7 resolution can invoke economic sanctions or military force against ``any threat to the peace'' of other countries. Iran says it's developing nuclear technology to generate power, while the U.S. and European countries accuse Iran of trying to develop atomic weapons.
China and Russia, veto-wielding members of the Security Council, oppose a Chapter 7 resolution for Iran.
Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said he didn't have any information about an Agence France-Presse report that inspectors found traces of highly enriched uranium in his country.
Uranium Particles
``I haven't been informed of any such findings,'' Aliasghar Soltanieh said in a telephone interview.
Particles of weapons-grade uranium came from sample swipes that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors took at the Lavizan-Shian site in Tehran, where a physics research center was dismantled and topsoil removed in 2004 after suspicions were raised about activities there, AFP said.
The IAEA reported to the Security Council on April 28 that inspectors took environmental samples at suspected nuclear sites in their most recent visit to Iran. The samples were to undergo testing for uranium particles at IAEA laboratories. IAEA spokespeople declined to comment.
The Iranians won't ``put everything on the table'' until the U.S. joins the European-led negotiations, Annan said. Negotiations should be around a ``comprehensive package'' including economic and regional security concerns, he said.
`Engaged in Dialogue'
Annan's call for direct talks between Iran and the U.S. followed those of Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA. ``Once we get to security issues, the U.S. should be engaged in the dialogue,'' ElBaradei said March 8.
The Security Council's five permanent members plus Germany will meet in London May 19 to consider new incentives for Iran to renounce its atomic program, AFP reported, citing unidentified diplomats. The permanent five are the U.S., U.K., France, Russia and China.
The U.S. and Iran broke off diplomatic relations in 1979 after Islamic revolutionaries overthrew the government of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and kept 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. |
To contact the reporter on this story:
Jonathan Tirone in Vienna at jtirone@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 12, 2006 10:33 EDT |
Each brown place in the link takes you to a different article that supports this article...nm
x
Post the direct link. I don't see the post you're referring to.
t
meant is against abortion...didn't mean supports abortion (NM)
That's not the whole quote.
Quote of the Day
The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too. ~Oscar Levant
Quote of the Day
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user. ~ Theodore Roosevelt
Quote of the Day
If the person you are trying to diagnose politically is some sort of intellectual, the chances are two to one he is a Democrat. ~Vance Packard
Quote of the Day
If you can't convince them, confuse them. ~ Harry S. Truman
Quote of the Day
Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. ~Ronald Reagan
Quote of the Day
Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear. ~ Harry S. Truman
Quote of the Day
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. ~ John F. Kennedy
Quote of the Day
Too bad that all the people who really know how to run the country are busy driving taxi cabs and cutting hair. ~ George Burns
|
