I didn't post the original message
Posted By: hate drive bys on 2008-10-13
In Reply to: Boy, you really love stirring the pot.... - nothing like starting and
just love how people don't post facts, whether McCain or Obama supporter.
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 meant to post this link in the original message
Really connects the dots
http://patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-annenberg-foundationobamafactcheckbrady-center-connection/
FYI - her original post didn't contain *****, it was changed
x
Original pledge by forefathers didn't include God. I agree with keeping the original.
http://www.usflag.org/history/pledgeofallegiance.html
The original Pledge of Allegiance
I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands- one nation indivisible-with liberty and justice for all.
On September 8,1892, the Boston based The Youth's Companion magazine published a few words for students to repeat on Columbus Day that year. Written by Francis Bellamy,the circulation manager and native of Rome, New York, and reprinted on thousands of leaflets, was sent out to public schools across the country. On October 12, 1892, the quadricentennial of Columbus' arrival, more than 12 million children recited the Pledge of Allegiance, thus beginning a required school-day ritual.
At the first National Flag Conference in Washington D.C., on June14, 1923, a change was made. For clarity, the words the Flag of the United States replaced my flag. In the following years various other changes were suggested but were never formally adopted.
It was not until 1942 that Congress officially recognized the Pledge of Allegiance. One year later, in June 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite it. In fact,today only half of our fifty states have laws that encourage the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom!
In June of 1954 an amendment was made to add the words under God. Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.
Why didn' you post a message?
I'm not sure why you wrote Henry Kissinger but then didn't write anything. If Obama can come up with when Henry Kissinger said that to him I will take back my original post. All I'm saying is Kissinger was interviewed and he said he never said it. You should take him at his word. If Obama says something I believe him. Maybe Obama really believed Kissinger said this.
Obama says he cares about the people. He cares that people needs jobs, decent healthcare, and not to lose their homes. He said he is going to work towards getting this fixed. I believe him.
original message regarded
the myth that the poor little christian conservations are constantly being abused by the powerful liberal media. Yet if the liberal media is so almightly powerful, why can't even one liberal radio network survive? you can't have it both ways.
I mean ignore the original posters message
Not mine of course. :-)
I am all for freedom of speech and letting us decide for ourselves. Obviously the OP is not.
I didn't know "under God" was not in the original pledge. sm
And I don't know the circumstance underwhich it was amended, but yeah you make a sound case and I can't help but agree that it should be taken back out and separation of church and state is a good thing.
When you make the case this way it makes sense to me because I have been very neutral about the 10 commandments in government buildings and the pledge being recited in the classes. But, people can spread the Word and fellowship on private time, but this should be off school property, off government property, etc. That would be true separation of church and state.
Where does it say that in the original post?
Please read the post again, and show me where it says that I am sick of hearing about anything.
The original post was about the judiciary...
committee wanting to talk to Scott McClellan about the Plame case and whether or not perjury or obstruction of justice happened. There is all kind of crap rolling around out there, but what the judiciary committee is looking at that had everyone so excited is about the Plame case and nothing else. THAT was my point and that is what the thread was about.
You are the one who made the innocent until proven guilty comment. And now you have to backpedal because you don't actually believe nor adhere to what you yourself posted. That is the truth, and if that is nasty, so be it.
Well, I don't know how you define morality,piglet. You will have to tell me. Being for the law and innocent until proven guilty for only people who espouse your beliefs...in my book that does not equal particularly high moral values. My opinion, just as it is yours to call me nasty. As if you have never been nasty. But I digress.
And like I said...over and over again. IF and when either of them is impeached, and if they are proven guilty, I will be the first to say they should be removed from office...as I have said over and over today. We all know because we witnessed it that Clinton did the crime. Just because the Congress did not have the guts to convict does not make him any less guilty. If they impeach Cheney and I see evidence that convinces me he is guilty I will say so whether or not Congress has the guts to. Again...difference betweenou and me.
They can list charge after charge after charge. Until they prove it, they are innocent, according to your own post (which you don't believe across the board, but I do).
So we will wait and see. And I still say that the reason Pelosi and the hierarchy are against is because they don't want to open Pandora's box. At that point they will not be able to control what comes out. Give me another good reason why, if she really felt like they were guilty, she would not go forward with impeachment.
Actually, it was your own typo in your original post...nm
nm
What the original post stated
is that one of the issues that should be foremost on people's minds is why did we go to war with Iraq after 9/11 when Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11? At the time the Bush administration linked Iraq to 9/11 as justification for going to war with them. He lied. He knew the people of this Country were vulnerable after 9/11 and he used that vulnerability. Look at what his lie has cost us. Not only should the people in this Country be outraged, they should be asking why.
John McCain supported this war, as did many others at the time. Barack Obama did not. He knew the facts, understood the situation and made the right choice, though it wasn't a popular one at the time. Why didn't John McCain?
Read Bob Woodward's books. He got his information directly from interviews with Bush and his admininstration. Remember the 9/11 Commission Report? These are not opinions - they are facts.
People are being diverted from the issues for a reason. John McCain doesn't want people to think about his lack of sound judgment at such a crucial time.
I did not post the original comment -
and I do not feel that way. I was on the fence myself about which way to go until McCain picked Palin. That toppled me right off...
I was speaking of the original post
My response was to the original post.
As to the Palin thing (no where does it mention McCain, who was also implicated in the original post), did they expect the campaign to make no references to O's shady past? Maybe they should have handled him with kid gloves, like the media did. If O can't handle the scrutiny, maybe he shouldn't have run for office.
Part of the original post by Anon.
If memory serves, the poster did advocate looting and was encouraging it.
My source was cited in the original post
I'm not being presumptuous because I don't assume anything. What I am waiting for is the debates. I want to see how they all equal against each other.
so, just like I thought, the original post was pointless!
nm
you missed the point of the original post
The supreme court has not ordered him to produce the original; they are simply reviewing the lower court's ruling regarding Berg bringing the suit in the first place. There is no order to produce the document. This is simply a measure that Berg and the other attorneys requesting the writ are now hoping will bring pressure on the electors to force them to demand the document be presented. But at this point there is no order to produce.
The original post was about Bush not Clinton.
Bush is the one who is trying to claim that he has kept the United States safe from terrorist attacks, not Bill Clinton. You are right about one thing. I cannot stand George W. Bush. He he has been an embarrassment to the United States, destroyed our economy, and sullied our reputation throughout the world.
Re-red the original post with the CBS link/article on his
At least it wasn't Fox covering it, so you should believe eyewitnesses, shouldn't you?
Original post is not true - see link for truth!
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
By the way, we have not heard peep from the original poster since the quotes she posted were proven to be, at best, grossly inaccurate and completely out of context, and, at worst, downright lies!
I picked up the quack word from the original post.
No double standard here...unless only Obama detractors are allow to use the quack word. Since you have a hard time talking about more than one thing at a time, let's not divert our attention to include the third subject of homosexual marriage, OK...just keep it simple so you can keep up.
Please see original post, link for video included..nm
x
The price of shampoo or McDonalds WAS NOT my original post at all.....sm
Wow, someone tries to come up with a viable solution to just one of our myriad of economic problems in this country, something that will work in the long haul, and we cannot have an intelligent,respectful discusion, sharing ideas and thinking aloud? When all anyone can contribute is insults, put-downs, etc., this board starts to look like worse than the floor of Congress, and these days that is saying a lot. What we have been doing in this country has OBVIOUSLY not been working, has it? So perhaps new persepctives would work. I am not new. the minimum wage battle has been going on forever. If no one can see that giving workers a fairer wage, an incesntive to work hard, pay into the tax system federal and state, become consumeers of good, housing, etc., if you think that one-shot tax refunds are the answer, you are sadly wrong, because that has been the status quo for years and has led us into this giant hole. I am just saying, when it is more profitable for someone to be on welfare and foodstamps than to work what we now have as pitiful minimum wages that WILL NO LONGER in today's economy feed, cloth, and shelter a family today adequately, then I believe an overhaul and new solutions might be in order. And the shampoo thing was a metaphor, if you can understand THAT concept. When you are keeping a household of five going, on a budget, in the North East, and not surviving on credit and borrowing, loans, etc., but truly working for it, and putting kids through college as you go (even state colleges), it is tough, we pay our bills on time, don't get behind, are trying to teach our kids fiscal responsibility, and live within our means and our budget. Bully for your vacations and restaurant meals, it is a luxury for us, and I am not ashamed to say it but proud....perhaps we are relatively poor according to you, but we are honest, hard working, don't owe anyone, and we are rich in family and friends. Guess it is your prespective, dear.
The price of shampoo or McDonalds WAS NOT my original post at all.....sm
Wow, someone tries to come up with a viable solution to just one of our myriad of economic problems in this country, something that will work in the long haul, and we cannot have an intelligent,respectful discusion, sharing ideas and thinking aloud? When all anyone can contribute is insults, put-downs, etc., this board starts to look like worse than the floor of Congress, and these days that is saying a lot. What we have been doing in this country has OBVIOUSLY not been working, has it? So perhaps new persepctives would work. I am not new. the minimum wage battle has been going on forever. If no one can see that giving workers a fairer wage, an incesntive to work hard, pay into the tax system federal and state, become consumeers of good, housing, etc., if you think that one-shot tax refunds are the answer, you are sadly wrong, because that has been the status quo for years and has led us into this giant hole. I am just saying, when it is more profitable for someone to be on welfare and foodstamps than to work what we now have as pitiful minimum wages that WILL NO LONGER in today's economy feed, cloth, and shelter a family today adequately, then I believe an overhaul and new solutions might be in order. And the shampoo thing was a metaphor, if you can understand THAT concept. When you are keeping a household of five going, on a budget, in the North East, and not surviving on credit and borrowing, loans, etc., but truly working for it, and putting kids through college as you go (even state colleges), it is tough, we pay our bills on time, don't get behind, are trying to teach our kids fiscal responsibility, and live within our means and our budget. Bully for your vacations and restaurant meals, it is a luxury for us, and I am not ashamed to say it but proud....perhaps we are relatively poor according to you, but we are honest, hard working, don't owe anyone, and we are rich in family and friends. Guess it is your prespective, dear.
Didn't you see my message below?
I said it was getting down to the wire and didn't realize how fast the time is coming up. Seems like its a long way away.
I do still diagree with you. Everything I'm seeing and reading does show that McCain is catching up. If you support McCain that's hopeful (yes we can hope and one never knows), and if you support Obama you'll deny it, but I'm reading a ton of websites (I don't listen to the polls because there are a ton of them and they all differ so much), so I read news website on the computer and I watch CNN, MSNBC & Fox.
I still sit here with my ballot not filled out because I don't know who I want. It may just come down to me not even voting this year. Still undecided even though I am leaning towards McCain. I figure it this way. Whoever gets in if the country goes to pot I will not be blamed for voting for them. HA HA HA
Palin, so much to hate! I didn't see the message sm
you refer to but I will look for it. She is a caricature of a person.
Nope, didn't think you'd read my message
Let me repeat....
Actually Cavuto didn't say Fox News. He said Fox.
Murdock and Fox have been in the business since 1985.
I watched the videos.
See my message under the post below (nm)
Above post should be see message.
xx
I think your post would have done better - see message
on the faith board. Your stating your views based on your religious ideas and values and that is all fine and good, but that is where this post belongs. If you post there I'm sure you will get a lot of the support you are looking for. It sounds to me you didn't want anyone to oppose your viewpoint. You labeled them "ugly responses", my viewpoint on reading them is that they are how other people feel about the issue. Because they don't agree with yours of course they seem "ugly" to you.
Also reading your post above you say you now know Jesus is real, and you stated "...I can tell you that I pray God forgive you for your blindness and hate just as He forgave me when I surrendered my life to Him." etc, etc, etc. That is your faith and like I said that's all fine but it is your faith-based opinion and beliefs, not everyone else believes the same way you do. Again if you take it to the faith board you will find the much support you are looking for.
Your last paragraph you mentioned that someone made a choice of life for me. Yes they did. I had parents who wanted to have children and hence here I am. The statement "why would you want to deny that for another innocent baby" That statement is just silly. You'd rather see a child spend 18 years or more living a life of he!! in a drug/alcohol induced family situation with the possibility of being abused emotionally or physically. You'd rather see a child feel unloved and unwanted. That's a little sadist if you ask me. If the embryo is aborted there is no one to feel like they are being deprived of anything.
As for you calling our president "evil"???? I don't consider someone who is fighting for woman to have the right to choose evil. He celebrates death instead of life????? Oh please, sorry but that statement is not going to win you any support here.
BTW - I may not agree with some of the presidents policies that he's passing, but in no way is he evil. Again, that is another "faith-based" emotion and belongs on the faith board.
oops above post have said sm message, not NM
sorry 'bout that.........
Good post - see message
This was a great post. It is disturbing to me that a lot of democrats (not all, but all the ones I know including my mother) would rather have our country taken over by radicals, would rather in a socialist country, have government tell them what to do and what they can't do and when they can do it. They don't mind paying higher taxes rather than to have a republican in. I just don't understand it. My mother infuriates me to no end. She calls and tries to get me involved in an argument. When I point out facts to her she says she has to run off (she suddenly has to go to the bathroom or get something to eat, or something is burning on the stove or someone is at the door). She throws at me the same exact talking points I hear on MSNBC and CNN "word for word". I told her mom, vote for someone you believe in. If you believe Obama is going to be the best man then vote for him, but don't vote for him because the media is telling you to vote for him. She also will attack Palin, but she has no knowledge of what she has done. Again she just repeats what the media says. When I ask her about this policy or that policy she can't answer me because she doesn't know. I told her that she can look up these people on her own but to at least please look at sites that are both pro & con for all 4 people.
Putting aside any feelings you have towards McCain, Palin & even Biden take a look at Obama. Forget what he looks like or how he dresses. Look at him as a person. Look at the people he surrounds himself with (Ayers, Farrakan, Wright, and others). Look at the people who are his advisers. Look at his connections to the middle east friends he has in known terrorist countries. Look at his connection to Acorn (ask yourself this - if Republicans were cheating and creating voter fraud, getting their pets names registered, dead relatives, etc, and even in some cases there are more people registered than actually live in a town. What would you be doing. You'd be on this board, you'd be writing your congressman/woman, you be screaming bloody murder calling the republicans every name in the book. So why do you feel its okay if its being done by the democrats. Don't people realize that there is a reason as to why you register to vote and then at a later date vote (not at the same exact time). These people then can go to the next county, register and vote there too, and so on and so forth. A lot of democrats will scream that the cheaters are ONLY the republicans. Voter fraud infuriates me no matter which side it happens on.
So aside from his radical viewpoints look at his voting record. Everything he has voted for has not been good for middle income people, including the votes to raise taxes on middle income families, but now because he is running for President he said the middle income will not be taxed. Sound a little too familiar to the "Read my lips" states made years earlier.
Then on top of that what I think is even the most dangerous aspect is having an all democrat congress/president.
This is a good post - see message
We all have our opinions based on what we have read, seen on TV, heard on radio, and what we have researched and found. Those are our opinions and nobody will change them. The undecided I'm sure are not going to base their decision on who they vote for based solely on what people say on this board, especially when people get cut down and called names for no reason other than having an opinion that is different than those doing the cut down.
People have posted articles they want others to read because as we all know the MSM is not putting out the truth about the candidate they want to win, so a lot will post articles for others to see, but it is replied to by others as not credible or a lie or whatever term they use while at time smearing and calling the poster names.
Your post is so true. "Some require our opinions be backed up by documented proof" and then if they don't like it they will say it's not credible. I just say contact the reporter of the newspaper or article and tell it to them. Tell the lawyers, judges, reporters, scientist, etc. Tell them they are not credible.
Great post Sam - see message
I saw a nasty post by just me. That poster is not me. I've been agreeing with you on most issues throughout this time.
You are correct. He needs to earn respect before it is given. Like you I do not trust this guy. He lied to us so much it was like watching Bill Clinton all over again. And we all know what we got when Clinton took office - The Shaft! Clinton was one of the biggest disgraces of all Presidents and he lost all respect shortly after he took office and broke all his campaign promises. So in mine (and many of my friends and acquaintances) Clinton was not a real president but just someone who held the office and sat in the chair.
I hope Obama does good for the people like he has promised. Time will tell. Still uncomfortable about having to work more hours so that way they can give it to the people who don't want to work. You know that sounds like such a good system I told DH he should jump on the bandwagon. At least the extra money I'd be paying in taxes, he would get as a free check for not doing anything. Then at lease we could keep it in the family.
I listened to O's speech last night and he already started talking about some of his campaign promises are going to have to be broken. Funny how he has a way with words that he can say he's going to screw you and everyone feels good about it.
Excellent post - thanks (no message)
x
I stand by my post as before - see message inside
I'm reading posts and you are all acting as though the child is living and outside the body already in school and is then taken away to be murdered.
I read another post that said "before you even know you are pregnant the heart is beating". This is totally false! Week 4 is when the brain, spinal cord, heart and other organs begin to form and continue to form. To suggest that at the instancy of sex you now have a live breathing baby whose heart is beating and brain is fully developed is absurd. - which by the way they can't speak for themselves so that is what you are all here for. Having an abortion before the baby is developed is the safest. You can call it as you like to. Most of you have a heart so cruel you like to label people as murderers. This embryo is not someone, it is an embryo. Full term abortions and killing babies outside the womb I believe is disgusting and vile. As for Laci Peterson - she was getting ready to give birth to a baby. If that baby was born it would lived. Yeah, but that's a whole different topic, but to have an abortion before the organs are fully developed and the child's brain has developed and they have no nerves so cannot feel anything is a different story.
Lastly, I would never have an abortion myself, but if by chance I did and the embryo has not had time to develop (first trimester) then you keep your nose out of my business where it does not belong. I answer to one higher being (our creator) not you!!!!!
I stand by the original poster. Keep your noses out of where they don't belong.
P.S. - I certainly am not going to listen to a bunch of hipocrites who will murder innocent animals so they can devour them at their meals. Now that is disgusting to me!!
I guess I didn't take B's post that way. SM
I use God as a comparison when I am really trying to make a point. I think that is what was going on, but only B can answer that. At any rate, I agree with B.
Perhaps you didn't READ my post
I said -- keep it the hell out of politics.
You're welcome to claim whomever you'd like as your Saviour in the privacy of your own home and the community of your own church.
Brunson didn't post that. someone else did.
.
You didn't read my post
I was referring to people I talk to, as I stated. I don't generally talk to Churchill or Chomsky. In fact, I don't even pay much attention to them, nor should you. Just as I don't pay much if any attention to crazy right-wingers. Just common sense.
FYI--I didn't post the comment above this.sm
I think this was a mistake. Is this you Observer?
P.S. If there is another person posting with the Democrat moniker let me know and I will change mines.
I didn't post this.....someone used my initials...sm
x nice try.
link didn't post
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/30/palin_pity/
You didn't address your post
to Christians exclusively. If that was what you wanted, maybe you should take it over to the faith board, will everyone will gush and agree with you.
It didn't post for some reason; will try again
Very Good for Today: cartoon from 50 yrs ago "Count your Isms"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY
Does anyone else have this happen as well? It says it posted successfully, & doesn't show up. Just curious.
Thanks!
Why didn't you post this yesterday?
Or the day before? Didn't feel the love until Obama got elected?
Actually, you didn't read the post then
Didn't say she was a liar. There is a difference with calling someone a liar and saying you don't believe them.
She over did it with the drama. Sure maybe she donated to charities on her own, but all the drama about contributing to the greater care, organizing for charity, painted and nailing carpeting in "poverty stricken homes" as her "gift to her children" oh yes, all while she didn't have a pot to you know what in, all while making only 5.30 an hour. And on top of all that she moved in with her parents to take care of her dying father while herself working full-time as a supervisor several states away (wow what a commute each day that must have been). On and on an on an on. Could it have happened? Sure anything could happen. Do I believe it personally? Not in my lifetime. But that's not saying it didn't happen. Just sounds like she should be awarded the model citizen of the century award.
BTW - there is a clear difference between saying you don't believe someone and them attacking you personally.
So I'd boo-hoo on yourself.
Guess you didn't see the post I did below
showing that Bush tried to regulate the industry as far back as 2001, but the dems would have none of it....those most opposed were all on the "take"; i.e., getting thousands of dollars in contributions from FM/FM.....or don't you believe it even when it comes from their own mouths?
Open your eyes and listen, or do you need a hearing test?
you really didn't need to post describing yourself
we had enough of you yesterday. Sometimes it's best to leave things alone and not comment at all.
Sorry, the link didn't post.....
In a nutshell, Hawaii has passed "Islam Day" law....
Where is their "Christianity Day"?
Where's the loud mouth ACLU on this?
This country is heading to he!! in a handbasket!
You obviously didn't really read her post...what's happened
You used to be a pretty straightforward poster even though we were often at odds. Now you seem nasty.
|
