I'm assuming you've never watched....(sm)
Posted By: Just the big bad on 2009-06-10
In Reply to: This man shouldn't be preaching to anyone. - Trigger Happy
the full versions of his sermons, just the sensationalistic clips on Fox.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw
It's all about context.
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
I've watched all the others.
ABC, NBC, CBC, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC. Any others I haven't thought of?
Most are the same; well, except for CNBC which is mostly stock and financial news. All the others report their one-sided take on the news or don't report it at all.
You've watched his show?
Unless you are a 24/7 member (which I highly doubt due to the fact you hate him so much) how could you WATCH his show....it's a radio show? I think you're confused.
I've watched clips of
Barrack Obama at the Chicago Obamafest. As per usual, Obama gave no definite answers to some lingering questions but each time he made a statment about doing something the crowd would chant "yes we can." I didn't think much about it at the time until they kept doing it and it suddenly hit me......it was like Bob the Builder. Can we fix it.....YES WE CAN! LOL!
Yep, I've watched his show...(sm)
and laughed all the way through the drama. Other than that, all I can say is that its pretty sad when the commentator of a news show winds up being the headline because of ridiculous stunts.
I agree. I've watched ABC,NBC,CNN,MSNBC, etc.
during the election phase and I tend to believe Fox News was the most unbiased of all of them. They give both sides of the story. I'm not talking about Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, etc. I generally watch the news portions in the morning, Brit Humes, and Nick Cavuto in the afternoon.
Some posters on this board tend to only watch the biased stations and then call Fox News trash. Well, I don't think so, not when I compared them to the others, and believe me, I didn't find much different between any of the stations where the O was concerned. Same old, same old, whereas Fox reported not only on the O, but Bush, Palin, McCain, and didn't mince words.
I'm not about to get in an argument with anyone over TV stations, but I stand by my judgment.
I've listened, watched and read
about as much as anyone and I believe the 95% applies to people who PAY taxes. Common sense.......how can you give someone a reduction in taxes who doesn't pay taxes. Nonsense.
Your buddy Rush. I think I've watched his show 1 time.
Yeah, I watch the Factor and Hannity and Coombs most days. I like to see all sides of a story.
But on to Rush who I don't give a raiting point and if this is the kind of babbling he does he would lose me everytime...
"You (liberals I assume he's talking about) are offended by all that, claiming they don't have the right to make such decisions, while you sit around and make no decisions whatsoever because you're willing to totally put your life in the hands of some liberal politician and that will take you off the hook for having to make any decision about your life or anybody else's...."
How does he know that? He's making a big ASSumption. Just another right wing nut trying to convince himself and anyone else who will listen that the left has no values and that you "the people" have all of the values, are the only ones who are God fearing, raise your families and care about America. People like Rush do America a big DISservice, with this kind of garble being the #1 rated radio station there will never be any kind of unity among Americans.
"You hope we lose it. You want to lose it because you want to embarrass the leaders of the country. What must your lives be like?"
I have never met or talked to a person who said they hope we lose the war. This is nonsense. What I think most opposers of the war believe is WE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO WAR IN THE FIRST PLACE, but that we have to at least stabilize the Iraq and start an aggressive pullout plan. Iraqis have been freed of the terrible regime of Sadaam Hussein and once their country is stabilized, we have no reason to be there, you know seeing as if there are no WMDs there. Iraqi National Security is their responsibility not ours. We need to get our focus on American National Security.
And you also I am assuming? What would...
your reaction have been if Obama had announced he was suspending his campaign to return to Washington (his job actually, campaign not withstanding...he IS still a senator and we are still paying him)to deal with this crisis? Be honest. What would your reaction have been?
now who is assuming
talk about ass-u-me ...
Because I am a Jew I am pushing sex, violence, other "worldly" things on you? Are you saying a Jewish life is corrupt because we aren't christian? Never said you should put up with it. You should voice your feelings to the stores, television stations, magazines, etc.
I didn't say you shouldn't have your "christian things" out in public, I said, don't assume Ben Stein speaks for the Jewish community. Got your feathers a little ruffled there, didn't ya? LOL!
I'm assuming you mean....
that it would be a bad thing to be a Muslim? It's been proven for 2 years that he is not a Muslim but a Christian, but that's not the point. What exactly makes it bad to be a Muslim?
You know what they say about assuming don't you?
I'm originally from Florida, which is the melting pot of the US for race dear. I have black, white, asian, indian, hispanic, etc etc friends. My problem is with the fact that people still want to whine about "oh unequal treatment" when really all that has happened is a reversing of treatment. Now white people can't get any help or decent positions if there is a minority going for the same help or position.
But hey, you must know everything, so I digress.
There you go again. Assuming.
I spent many days writing and calling my reps.
McCain and what happened with his first wife has noting to do with voting.
You also do not know who I voted for.
O is rushing too fast in his decision making from my point of view. He's putting the cart before the horse. He's not thinking of consequences of closing Gitmo, the stimulus package, ending the war in Iraq too early, letting Geithner become head of IRS, and choosing Emanuel.
We shall see what happens, and I hope its for the best, but he should slow down and take his time before making decisions that will affect all of us in the coming years.
Assuming that you are serious in your inquiry,
my response follows:
I have, thus far, seen no credible evidence to corroborate the notion that Bush willingly lied about the situation in Iraq. The information available at the time regarding WMD may or may not have been incorrect, but it was information that was accepted at that time by the world community, and I can no more condemn Bush for believing it than I can condemn Clinton or the UN for believing it. Given the state of the country in the aftermath of 9/11, it seems to me that allowing any country to disregard a 14th or 15th UN resolution with regard to accounting for WMDs would have been seen as insanity.
Another poster said something to the effect that the truth has not been presented, and I think this is true. We hear about the activities of the insurgency in Iraq, but we do not hear about the day-to-day successes there because bombings are more sensational and a better news story. A troop of soldiers building a road or delivering medical equipment or school supplies isn't a story. Iraqis working alongside American soldiers is not a news story. Suicide bombings and allegations of prisoner abuse are more sensational, and so that is what the public sees, and the Bush administration has done a really poor job of keeping the public updated on what the military is actually doing in Iraq and what advances are being made in the war on terror, thus allowing the media to be the only voice heard.
As far as prisoner abuses go, I don't think conservatives have their heads in the sand, but I think they (I) have a somewhat more cynical attitude toward such abuses. While such abuses should never be tolerated, they will always happen. There are bad eggs in any basket, whether it be a prison or any other community of people. When those people break rules and do bad things, they deserve to be investigated and appropriately punished, but allowing and encouraging the entire community/effort to be indicted by the actions of those few is counterproductive. In the instance of prison abuses, I consider it irresponsible and counterproductive for the mainstream media to engage in what seems to me to amount to broad-scale bashing of the administration on the basis of these incidents.
I also think conservatives are more inclined to weigh these incidents against the larger picture, whereas liberals seem more inclined to see the actions as unacceptable (and rightly so) and thus to condemn the entire system (not justified, IMO). In other words, the possibility that some Iraqi detainees are being mistreated is concerning, and the situation should be corrected, but it is not an indictment against the entire military or the entire administration. Such abuses must be minimized proactivly, and when they do occur, they must be dealt with, but it is unrealistic to expect that they will not happen at all or that they are any indication of acceptable behavior standards of the military or the administration.
As far as embryonic stem cell research, I personally believe that this is an area in which agreement is never going to be possible because the basic difference is more theological than anything else. I tried to explain my position on this on the conservative board, but I did it poorly. Most social conservatives/pro-life people approach the abortion and embryonic stem-cell research issues with the innate presumption that life - the presence of a new soul - begins at conception.
Regarding your above example of weighing the cells in the Petri dish versus helping the patient with Alzheimer's, the statement of the pastor you cited seems kind and loving IF one assumes that the Petri dish contains nothing more valuable than a few cells - in other words, if you assume that it does not contain a human soul. On the other hand, in the pro-life viewpoint, if I assume that the Petri dish contains a new human soul that is to be deliberately destroyed in order to help the woman with Alzheimers, I cannot be anything but horrified that one life, through no fault of its own and through no action on its part, is considered disposable for the benefit of the other.
Many conservatives find a puzzling dichotomy between the liberal abortion/stem-cell research position and the position regarding Iraq. The liberal position seems willing to accept the possibility of killing a human soul if we don't have firm proof that it exists, but the continuing US presence in Iraq in a situation in which premature withdrawal would almost certainly lead to chaos and, quite likely, the development of a Taliban or Iran-like theocracy is anathema.
Why do these divisions exist? I think that is probably a matter of who one listens to and believes, and what mindset one takes into their research. If you approach research with the mindset that America is at fault for most of her problems, that can be supported. If you take the position that America is basically just, that position can be supported. If your morality tends to focus most on social justice, that can be supported. If your morality focuses more on individual liberty, that can be supported. With the mainstream media being considered less reliable by both sides (considered a liberal mouthpiece by conservatives and a Bush puppet by liberals), I think more people are turning to online sources for their information. The danger of that, though, is that is very easy online to find sources that cater to one's preexisting position, thus widening the divide.
If I have said anything inflammatory or disrespectful above, my apologies.
You are stereotyping and assuming......
I believe you have never taken the time to reach out to gay people and see that the lifestyle is not any different from yours. Unfortunately, your bible thumping gets in the way.
You have a lot of nerve assuming these women
xoxoxo
I'm not assuming you are white. I simply
meant put yourself in the role that she was in, a minority in college. You are right though, I assumed that you weren't a minority for that scenario and I apologize. And, I didn't mention anywhere in my post about Wright, I was simply referring to her as a college student and the fact that I did not think her thesis was racist.
You people on the left are always assuming you
nm
That’s all you got??? I was completely honest – you’re the one who did the assuming
My words were “DH works in stocks/trading”. Which he does. Not everyone who works in stocks/trading goes into an office in Wall Street or a stockbrokers office. There are many people behind the scenes that research companies, and other jobs dealing with the markets, trading, buying, selling, foreign currencies, etc. Many of them write articles for the companies who have clientele with big $$$ to be trading and selling. Many of them attend meetings, sit in on conference calls, etc. Also, many people when dealing with portfolios whether they are your own or various clients know what is going on in the world of the markets/finance. I never said he buys or sells “just for ourselves” and I never once said he went into an office or even eluded to the fact that he went into an office, so there you go again “assuming”. I didn’t divulge any information about his clients or anything, and I never said what he did except that he works in stocks/trading, which he does. By the way… there are many people out there who buy/sell stocks and currencies for themselves and makes or loses $$$ a day. Tell them they “don’t work” in trading. Your too busy wanting to defend yourself and make excuses and you’re doing a poor job at it. Next time maybe you should read a post slowly before assuming anything.
One thing I do know is there is a lot more going on behind the scenes and if the markets go up or down it is not just because of who is the president. But you only like to point that out when the market goes up. You praise the enlightened one when the markets go up and claim he has now walked on water and the stock market has gone up just because of him and he along, and yet you remain as silent as the wind when the markets go down. Can’t have it both ways.
I'm assuming you are quite young, am I correct in
that assumption?
I'm assuming that was supposed to be a picture sm
of an angry mob, but I was unable to view it, but I get it!! That's hilarious. But I will say the comment about "first they laughed and then they died" will haunt my nightmares -- not so funny.
JTBB, I have to admire your tenacity dealing with these people. Tell me, what is it like being a pariah? I know this won't jive with your atheist beliefs, but you know that Jesus was the most famous pariah, so your're in good company!! LOL
Assuming I am the nameless one....and also for the umpteenth time...
not a Republican...I call Barack Obama a socialist because he is one, not because he supports social programs (the accused Republicans do also, to a point, otherwise there would be none), but because he wants to practice redistribution of wealth...taaxing one group of people and redistributing that money to people who did nothing to earn it...including people who already do not pay taxes.
I never said Obama was a communist. He has had communist influences in his life, that is proven, he mentions the man in his book Dreams of My Father. But I have never said Barack Obama was a communist. I don't know if he is or not. I do know he is a socialist.
There you go again assuming everyone who marries is are christian heterosexuals
The middle east people don't marry according to our bible. The jews have their version, and so do all other religions. Even the bush people from Africa and Australia marry, and they don't marry based on the bible of christianity.
Talk about being screwed up! Trying to make a point with nonsense.
I sure can't want for all the states to follow suit and make marriage legal for homosexuals.
If you believe in christianity and the bible that's fine and good, but don't push your beliefs on everyone else, because we believe you are wrong.
Correction - I meant wait before assuming, not "want"
x
I watched this ....
interview. It was downright scary but Dean has pegged so many people so well...describing the followers of authority, no matter who or what gets hurt...the ones who will march off the cliff right behind their leaders because they are **right** (no pun intended), the people who hate liberals ***who is just about anyone who disagrees with them*** and this from John Dean. This explains so much about the things I read in places that shall remain unnamed. When asked about fascism Dean said we are not there now but we are closer than we have ever been. Again, I wonder if we can last until 2008. Hopefully 2006 will give us a little relief.
I watched it all the way through.
I hope you did too, because it puts this whole mess directly at the feet of the Democrats.
The bill was effectively killed by the Democrats, and it was not McCain's choice not to take it to the floor for a vote. The Democrats on the committee voted against it to a man, none of them voted for it. So, it was dead, and taking it to the floor would have been an exercise in futility. However, if it had, it is obviously how McCain would have voted.
Obama did not "weigh in" on the issue, did you note?
This video is an indictment of the Democrats. Every time I think about the culpability and where we are now and how smug and superior they all act, like they had nothing whatsoever to do with it...I want to hurl. Preferably on their expensive Italian shoes!
I just watched
the time for campaignin movie again and it cheered me up :)
LOL
http://sendables.jibjab.com/sendables/1191/time_for_some_campaignin#/teaser/1191
BTW, if you actually watched Fox
instead of just pulling up blogs by people who continually bash Fox and spin things to make Fox look bad.....you would know that they did show the full clip including Obama wanting someone who will follow the constitution, etc. However, no matter how you look at it....someone in that position is there strictly to follow the constitution, etc. Empathy isn't something that really should be desired for one in that position. People are naturally going to empathize with certain things but for that to be something you are looking for.....I don't know. IMO, it just doesn't have it's place behind the bench. Justice needs to be served and the constitution needs to be followed.....empathy needs to be checked at the door.
Once again people.....Fox is totally kicking other networks butts in ratings. Why don't you actually turn off MSNBC or the We Love Obama Network and think for yourself.
Okay, now I watched the video
and all I can say is I don't know what that guy was on, and I don't even know his show, but I don't think he's going to replace Bill O'Reilly in the top spot anytime soon. Maybe Jon Stewart, but not Bill...uh uh... He is funny. I'll give him that! 
Thanks. Watched it last night, and
 they have the entire program on there too. Didn't have time to see it all but intend to watch it when I get the time. Thanks again, very kind of you to direct me there.
I watched in on youtube.com...sm
She is a good speaker, very influential, and her voice needs to be heard in the Arab community. However, nothing she said convinced me that war in Iraq has brought stability there.
I watched Hardball too
I saw the gentleman that you are talking about. I almost can't watch those shows anymore because it is so scary. I have a feeling that the candidates will have to discuss this issue more and more as the time goes by. Our economy is on the verge of very big trouble and the rising gas prices are a significant part of that. Hopefully, people will start demanding that the candidates come up with a plan.
watched the SP interview
I felt very uncomfortable for her. She was clearly out of her depth and Charlie really give her general questions, not detailed-oriented questions he could have asked. The blank look she had at "Bush Doctrine" was the worst; the way she tried to get a hint from Charlie about what he was talking about was squirm-inducing. A commentator noted she agreed with Obama's policy on Afghanistan rather than McCain's. I am hoping that voters will view her sympathetically as an uniformed foreign policy neophyte who simply cannot cram the vast knowledge required to deal with potentially explosive affairs in a few weeks time. I am hoping voters are willing to give her a few more years to grow into a national position. I am hoping voters will not put our children at risk by electing someone they "like" to be understudy to a man who is clearly being worn down physically by this campaign. We need well-informed, knowledgable leaders. If voters want to reward people for service and likeability, they can do so with the numerous reality shows where viewers vote for candidates.
watched a documentary
on SP last night. Did you know she went back to work 2 days after giving birth to little Flip? Have mercy, any of us who have been blessed with children (not punished by them as Obama would think) knows that all the uterine tenacles have not even been detached in that short of a period. I hope she wore a big old set of bloomers on her first day back.
I just watched whatever channel it is that has
channel working on my TV tonight. (No cable). Coverage seemed pretty unbiased, each person had their say, no eye-rolling by commentators or anything along those lines. I thought it was pretty good for a first debate. Not enough nuts 'n' bolts for me on either side, but ah, well. Hopefully that'll come later.
I watched a little of MSNBC afterwards
and they were calling it a tie. I figured they would have just called it for Obama. I am a liberal-leaning moderate and do watch MSNBC so I am well aware of their bias, but I was refreshingly surprised to see them be fair on this one.
On another note, any other libs out there been watching the Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC? She is great, totally unabashedly liberal, but funny and not in-your-face confrontational. Really smart too, Stanford and a Rhodes Scholar. Yikes, I sound like a commercial!
You have GOT to be kidding. Have you watched....
any of the video from Ohio? "have you registered to vote?" "No." "Well, here register. Here's your ballot, you can vote today. Here's the bus. Let's go."
Pulleezzzeeee.
watched it the first time
didn't change my mind. Too many inconsistencies.
Anyone who watched her on Couric knows that and
Her town of Wasilla, tiny as it is, has 42 meth labs. Good job.
I just watched this. Can honestly say it was
nm
I just watched it on this link
He was funny in this and poked fun at himself. I think that's a strong character trait. I agree with you, sbMT!
Fox news and CNN. I just watched it.
It is just now coming out. It surely will be a big hit tomorrow. Some of the news reporters could not believe it and had to listen to it a few times. Could not believe their ears, they stated. It will ruin our economy for sure, they stated. God help this country.
If you had watched his rallies on a
NEUTRAL TV station, you would have been informed. I knew what McC wanted, I saw O's rallies, and that's why I didn't vote for him.
That's part of the problem. Too much one-sided media for the O, none for McC. Sickening.
FYI: I watched most of the stations
I didn't stick to just one. I found MSNBC to be the most one-sided, and that includes NBC. Hours devoted to the O.
Have you ever watched Fox News? (sm)
I'm not talking about the COMMENTARY programs. I'm talking about the real news. Or do you listen only to the commentary programs that down Fox all the time? Are you brainwashed as to what you WANT to hear or do you really want to hear the truth?
Truthfully, you ought to take a look at a GOOD news program that is fair and balanced. Your eyes might be opened to the truth.
Early in the campaign, I only watched your so-called balance news and switched over to Fox out of curiosity because everyone was down on it...and guess what? I found them to give fairness in reporting. So...here I am watching now. They are equal in reporting between Obama,dems, and repubs.
Plus they are usually first in reporting world news while other stations spew the same-old-same-old and only an hour or two later cut in with "breaking news" that Fox already has the handle on for hours.
I will always come to Fox News first if I want to know what's going on in the world.
You have watched Fox News? Hmm..
nm
I watched GMA last week and they
had 3 American born Mexicans on whose parents were deported because they were illegal. The eldest girl is now supporting her brother and sister (how?). They want the law changed that if the children are born in America, even if the parents are illegal, they get instant citizenship.
They were so sad because they only see their parents once a month. Well, you are right. My first question was why the children didn't go to Mexico with their parents? You don't have to answer that. I know that answer.
I try to look at both sides of the coin, but there's no way I can feel sorry for illegals putting their children in this position.
What truth? You have watched too many war movies. SM
The trauma to the Vietnam veterans was as much from the way they were treated when they returned home and the war protestors they listened to when they were dying in the fields as from the war. Many MANY books have been written about this. Educate yourself. As far as calling people "pukes" I won't even comment on that. You make all liberals look bad. Please stop it.
Has anyone watched the HBO show on Central SM
High School in Little Rock? It is the 50th year of the desegregation of that school. It is a very intesting show and I wondered about others thoughts of it.
I watched about half of it. Very funny.
I don't watch the show often, but I always enjoy it when I do, so I might just start watching more. I watched his comedy special on HBO the other night and laughed my butt off.
Who watched last night's debate?
Looking for feedback of what you thought of last night's debate. I found it highly entertaining to say the least. HIllary was very strong and showed herself well. Obama seemed to talk a lot but didn't say much. Kerry drives me nuts, and I have come to the conclusion that if Kucinich had more of a personality, he would probably beating out Kerry. I think the one that impressed me the most was Biden. Anyone?
No problem. Glad you watched it.
I was totally riveted with it too. I find it difficult to watch films about the war or any tragedy, but this film was so good I didn't want it to end. I actually watched all the bonus footage too, which was very informative. A must-see movie for sure!
|
