I do agree with you - see message
Posted By: madmt on 2009-03-14
In Reply to: you obviously did not read the article - - Amanda
I do agree with you. Here are some of my points I'll try to explain why I'm mad... Superbowl party? Who cares everyone has them and yes I can see hot dogs, etc there. However, what makes me upset is that this is not a good time to be having weekly parties using taxpayers money to be funding the parties, and if he has a budget the same goes (but from the articles I'm reading, it's funded by taxpayers dollars). He needs to cut back on spending. Weekly parties for staff is unnecessary spending. I understand the necessity for entertaining, but he should have enough sense to know this is not the ideal time to be having weekly parties. And also to show some respect for the WH. It's heartbreaking to know our founding fathers sacrificed to make this country great and the white house is supposed to be a symbol of respect, but it's not anymore.
Entertaining to a certain degree is one thing, excessive unnecessary spending and partying while the country is going down the tubes is another. Reminds me of that commercial...
Cost to have high-priced entertainers weekly at the WH - $25,000
Dinner per plate for each person - $5,000
unnecessary spending while the country goes down the tubes - Priceless
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 agree thanks. - see message
I always love hearing other people's opinions as long as they don't attack me personally and you don't. That's what makes us a great country - freedom! I'm glad you did submit the link with the awful "decoration". I think there is a point where people go to far. It's one thing to express your opinions, a whole other issue when you set up displays. If it's halloween and you want to hang something, how bout a ghost or a pirate (like in the movie Pirates of the Carribean), not political figures that could be our next leader and VP. As for the fraternity hanging Obama that is quite distasteful and the dean should bring whoever did it into the ofce and explain to them what is wrong about it. As for the Obama one sitting in front of the skeleton, I couldn't quite figure out the meaning of it, but upon looking at it you could tell it was from someone who hates Obama, and I'm sure lots of others knew the meaning. She should take it down either way. I say at Halloween political figures should be off limits in being used as "decorations". I too would like to keep talking with you, and I knew there was no argument in what you were saying, just bringing something equally revolting to my attention and I thank you for that.
I agree with you. (no message below)
i agree with you - no message
x
I agree with you - see message
I posted above but I specifically wanted to reply to your message. There has been no racism. I've said it all along when democrats/liberals start losing an argument the next thing they do is scream at you that your a racist. They don't even know what nationality you are and they'll call you a racist simply because you didn't vote or agree with Obama.
On another note about your comment about Gov. Palin - the hatred is absolutely horrible and disgusting. I'm on this site and I see at least 20 to 30 posts bashing her and none of them are for issues of substance. None of them are because of choices or issues. It's all because of clothes, her hair, the way she looks, her glasses, all surface stuff - nothing of substance.
I am hoping this board would be for bring issues to the table and having a reasonable discussion. Not bashing someone because they don't vote or support who they do.
I agree too. No Message
x
I agree with you so much - see message
There were too many issues going on. One day I'd be supporting Obama, the next day I'd support McCain. It's not a matter of "bipolar" or whatever insulting remark a crat is trying to do, it's a matter of each candidate had good and no so good attributes. Not voting for McCain had nothing to do with his age at all. In fact I probably defended him on that issue more than others. I wanted someone who had experience, not someone who was inexperienced and didn't know what they were doing. It came down to the last day just closing my eyes and voting. I was not sold on the whole Obama thing, but I did not see the whole congress thing coming. Next I know the dems have control of everything and now it's just getting worse every day. And it's not from past administrations, it from actions that are going on today, yesterday, and what is going to be happening in the future. I'm sorry to say I voted the way I did, but I thought if everything is bad we need someone reasurring and not calling us "my friends" in every other sentence. McCain did not build a lot of confidence I had in the party, and if it was Ron Paul or Mit Romney that had won it would have been a whole different story and I would have been more solid in my choice. I just remember what my DH keeps telling me. Who we see giving the speeches are not the "real" ones in charge (who have the power).
I have probably more conservative values than liberal (except on religious, abortion, and gay issues - then I lean more liberal), but as for financial and security issues I am most definitely conservative. I guess I probably should not have voted for Obama, but then again if I didn't maybe my vote would have been the one that McCain would have won with. HA HA HA.
Last thought is... I am helping my families who are unemployed and need money for food. Why would I want to give it to the people I don't know who refused to work for the handouts the liberals have promised them. If I want to support them it should be my decision and who, not forced on me. I don't depend on others to help me and they should not depend on us for their handout. I know that even a lot of people who supported Obama feel the same way. So at least I consider myself in good company. It's the kool-aid drinkers that give them a bad name.
And Mrs. B's attitude? She can keep it.
I don't agree - see message
There is not just 2 sides (pro or anti). It's more than just "for or against" him. There are many of us in between. There are many who were (past tense) for him. Liked his ideas on the campaign trail, etc. (and voted for him). Since coming into power he has not kept his promises. He instituted programs he never talked about on the campaign trail (probably cos he knew he would not get elected if he told us ahead of time that he would increase taxes on the middle income, send more jobs overseas, triple our deficit, take away or right to bear arms, destroy the constitution, and all the other things he's doing now) - how many people do you think would have really voted for him if they knew ahead of time the destruction he would bring to the country? Also, printing money as if it's monopoly money, he's made the country less safe, embarrassed us by bowing to his leader, apologizing to other countries for how "ignorant and selfish" we are, brought into his cabinet tax cheats and people who are not qualified to fill the positions they hold, has the crats pitted against pubs (not the unity that he professed he would be the only one who could bring both sides together). He fell back against his word of making things more transparent, giving the people a chance to look through things before approving, flip/flop, flip/flop, one day it's this then the next day he goes back on his word, he is taxing the middle income higher than we have seen since Clinton (we have to pay for all those programs he's giving away). He went back on his word about bringing troops home, increased our deficit triple (no, it's not Bush's fault, it's President Soetoro's fault).
Now, with that said I think Barry is a very nice person in person. If I went out to dinner with him and Michelle and their kids I'm sure I'd have a great time and would want them as friends to hang out with. However, I don't like the decisions he (or should I say the people running the country) are making.
People can like him (I do) but not like the policies the administration is putting in place (we have to remember, he is not the one making the decisions - he is just the messenger).
As for if Michelle is pretty or not, I've never seen any posts here talking about that (I did see talk of what she wears, but that goes along with being a first lady and Laura Bush got the same criticism, as did other first ladies before her), but I haven't seen posts asking if she's pretty or not), but you know what...who cares. That's the argument I get into with my mom all the time because she bases her decisions on what someone looks like. I told her it's all a matter of personal opinion. Besides there are many people who are not "good looking" but they have a heart of gold and are a good person on the inside, and there are those who are the pretty on the outside but they have an evil/nasty personality to them.
I fully agree with you - see message
Three months is definitely enough time for a mother to decide whether or not to have the baby. After that I say no way. After that time there is always a practice called adoption.
What I take offense to is someone who claims they know what God's intentions are, and then claims that someone who mows down a person in cold blood is a messenger of god and doing his work and this is what god wants, blah, blah, blah.
I think people should think before they write. When someone professes to know exactly what god wants (and considers killing someone in cold blood an act of god) then its time for some serious medication.
I say if you agree or don't agree that's one thing, but to get on and say "oh yeah, that's what god wanted" (for someone to be mowed down in front of family and friends).
Opinions like that just tend to irritate me a bit.
I agree to a certain extent - see message
I too could care less who has affairs nowadays. Doesn't make me think any less or more of them. However - my little however :-) - He was not the President of the US - Clinton was. Clinton should have been removed from office (although then Gore would have been in charge, so I take that back now) :-) Anyway...it was the fact that Clinton had an affair that got him in trouble, it was the lies, manipulation, lies, and all the other illegal stuff he did that went along with it.
I don't particularly think they are being any less or more hard/lenient on this guy than they had with others who did the same thing. Remember John Edwards? The democrat who WAS running for VP? My point is more that you can't say "this guy was a republican that might have possibly run for VP the next election, and that's why its so bad", when you don't bring up Edwards who DID run for VP.
I feel this way...if it's a republican who is caught having an affair the liberals are sure dragging them through the mud, and if it's a democrat who is caught having an affair the conservatives drag him through the mud. I don't feel either side gets a free pass when it comes to being raked through the coals. I'm sick to death of hearing about this republican who had an affair about as sick as I was hearing about that NY guy, and Edwards, and that guy who got caught in the bathroom at some airport, etc, etc., but your making it sound like only the democrats getting picked on and that's just not true.
P.S. - We really don't need Biden to have an affair to have a field day with him, every time he opens his mouth and speaks he does a doozy on himself. HA HA HA
I totally agree with you - see message
II fee the exact way as you. If people don't agree with them they scream "racist", when they have no clue what a racist is (they use it in the form of a threat). There are plenty of racists on both sides. Voting for someone just because they are black is as bad as not voting for them because they are black. I also see that when republicans and independents talk about issues regarding not agreeing with certain issues or policies they get blasted with "your a racist" - still can't figure out that one. I'll tell you something - Martin Luther King would be ashamed of the lot of them. What I learned about Dr. King was that he was for equality for ALL people regardless of race or anything. He wanted equality to whites (not less, not more - equality). "ALL men are created equal" is what he used to say in his speeches. I hear too many times the crats something think that MLK would be a democrat, blah, blah, blah, speaking as if they knew him personally. They just so happen to like to skip over that one little truth that Dr. Martin Luther King was a registered REPUBLICAN. Whether or not he would have changed parties NOBODY knows because he is not here any longer, although I highly doubt he would have but again, NOBODY, knows. All we know is that he was a republican when he was alive. How I wish he was still here though because I believe he would tell them a thing or two. But the plain truth is they simply do not know what MLK would have done in today's time since times have changed so drastically as have the people in each party. And you're right...they don't care. They throw his name around like it's some sort of a threat. Even Chris Rock talked about that in one of his comedy routines (I think the messenger routine he does).
I would like to see more topics being discussed instead of coming here reading posts starting in with "you this or you that" calling people names and blasting anyone that does not agree with them. It's all childish rhetoric.
I'm also tired of hearing people jump on the "glee wagon" and get pure enjoyment out of seeing someones life destroyed when they are a republican, but when a democrat has been caught doing something equally (if not worse) bad then nobody is supposed to say anything.
So, like you I am sick to death of it.
I'd like to hear about issues, not that someone had an affair, but how about issues that are going to affect our individual lives, like the wasteful spending the crats keep doing, the taxes, growing govt, etc, etc. There is plenty wrong going on.
And since it was okay to bash Bush and cut him down on every single thing he did, they better quit their whining when the bad about their lord comes out. As some on this board said "Payback is a byatch". They sure don't like it when it happens to their guy.
I agree with a couple things you say - see message
I stopped coming to the board for awhile for a couple reasons. First, I got way behind on my work (shame on me). Second because I keep going back between voting for JM, then BO, then JM, then BO, etc. Everytime I hear something new about one or the other I decide to switch, so rather than look the fool and write good or bad on one thing I just stopped. I do not believe people hate Obama. It's more like we are afraid of what will happen to the country if he gets in. And yes we are also concerned what will happen if JM gets in too, but more afraid of BO (BTW - I think I will be voting for the constitutional party). I don't like either choice and I think they are both bad for the country.
I do agree with you that I feel like I'm in school again with people fighting with you but not offering any solutions. And you know what - it's more of the Obama supporters that are bashing the McCain supporters. I know people don't want to hear that because I find more people who are democrats live their life in the "victim state" and like to always blame the republicans for everything bad that's happened and will never look to their own party. I truly believe it is Franks, Cox, & Dodd who are a lot to blame for what has happened economically, but it is easier to bash Bush because it happened while he was in office, but honestly this is not his fault whether you want to believe that or not. Also it isn't McCains fault either because he warned everyone 2 years ago. Also, I haven't read any of the posts, but I found out yesterday that Franks was boyfriend to one of the top people at FMFM that got a big kickback.
So, at this point I'm getting to the point where I don't care who is president. Whether it is McCain or Obama I will continue to get up each day, brush my teeth and work (hopefully).
But you know what is ugly to me on this board is the people who defend McCain are being bashed by the Obama supporters and then they turn around and say they are being picked on (again their stuck there in the victim mode).
Everyone is allowed their opinions, but don't bash the other side and then say poor me, we're being picked on and then call the other side intolerant and ugly.
I agree totally with you. A very negative message. nm
.
Definitely agree and my apologies to the democrats - see message
Didn't mean to insult any by saying she was in the same group. I do know quite a few really good democrats with level heads and are trying to do better for the country (still wish Kucinich had made it further. I think he's a very decent person) - as are some good republicans too (Ron Paul and others) - its the left wing nuts and I always forget that not all democrats are like that. (and not all republicans are like the uber-conservatives in their parties.
So sorry democrats that I put her in the same group with you.
Hey JTBB - I agree with you for once in a long time - see message
Too many posts to reply to so I'll reply here - I read the article. This is not a once in awhile family gathering, BBQ or picnic. This is weekly business meeting. Yes, that's right - business. Religion is a business. If you just had a few people every once in awhile coming to your house that would be one thing, but the article stated they have regular meetings in the home. I think the person who wrote the article did a little bit of "fibbing" with saying they were asked if they say "praise the lord" and if they pray. Could have happened, but I highly doubt it (again that's JMO). The concern the county has is that the home is being used as a business without a business permit. What they are doing is something that should be held in churches - which by the way ALL churches should be taxed seeing as they are all businesses.
I do agree very much with your assessment that these are the same people trying to take away the rights of the LGBT community. It does seem to be a one-way avenue. For the most part all the communities I have lived in the Christians want their rights, but they are also the first to want to remove the rights of other groups if they don't coincide with their beliefs.
If religious people want to have a small gathering in their home that's fine, but bringing a congregation of people into your home is a business, especially if it is on a regular basis.
People have bible meetings all the time in their own homes, but they don't have them on a regular basis and they don't have large groups making them stand out. They should keep their religious assemblies where it belongs - in the churches - and because its a business it should be taxed.
One other note is that the article mentioned what about tupperware parties or baseball games. Well those are not regular business meeetings going on.
I am sick of the hypocracy they have. I'm tired of hearing about "poor us, we can't pray, we can't do this, we can't do that, their trying to take away our rights". Yet everytime when I hear what is really going on I find the story has been exagerated to fit the "poor us" philosophy. Good example is this story. It started out with "poor us, we can pray in our own homes", when the truth comes out they are holding regular business meetings with their congregation meeting at their home residence. Two entirely different things.
I agree, that goes for both sides. I don't agree with those starting trouble over...sm
on your board either, but then some of you come and take it out on the people who only post here and we have nothing to do with the fights over there.
I enjoy communicating with liberals and occasionally do learn something from conservative posters, so I refuse to let the driveby, no moniker, one-sided finger pointers, self-indulging posters drive me off.
Rush is right. I agree. Somebody's gotta agree.
....in many of his policies in his attempt to completely socialize America.
I hope he fails.
I hope he succeeds, however, in the office of president, and doing the right thing, and moves to the center.
However, it's not looking good. He's left of left so far, isn't he. Showing who he truly is, in his first acts as president.
see message
I think the behavior you describe is pretty common for ignorant folks. Just because they voted for him, they feel they have to uphold every stupid decision he makes.
Thank you - please see message
I'm glad you felt comfortable responding to my post. I didn't realize how heated things had gotten but could tell from what remains on the conservative board that it had gotten pretty ugly, and I thought the tax issue was a fairly safe issue to broach to provide a cooling period while discussing an issue that pretty much everyone agrees on - a need for tax reform.
Note, though, that it was one post on one topic and the first I have submitted in some time. Most of the threads on the board begin with an issue/article posted by Nan or AG.
However, regardless of who contributes most to the conservative forum, I must agree with Brunson and thank him/her for recognizing that the conservative forum is the conservative forum. I realize that tempers have flared there and things got out of hand, but the conservative posters have given no worse than they received. It seems to me that, at any time, liberal posters tired of dealing with Nan and AG (and MT, as well) on the conservative board could have done as Nan and AG did - remained on the forum dedicated to their point of view.
Thank you for your welcome to this forum - you have been very congenial, and I have enjoyed the discussion today. Frankly, I cannot see myself fitting into this liberal forum - as I said, my views on most issues tend to be pretty conservative. I don't see much point in hanging around the conservative forum if there isn't anybody there, so it looks like I'll probably just be peeking in now and again to see if/when discussion resumes. If I reply again on this forum, I will certainly try to do so with as much respect and kindness as you have shown me today, even though my opinions will probably differ.
Hey.....see my message!
I live in a rural area, have three dogs and do weight training also!!!
Actually it is said by the experts that if you are inexperienced with a gun you're better off not having one. It's kind of complex, but check out the info if you're interested.
I used to have military mace (actually from when I lived in a big city) - not sure if it's available to the public - probably easier to use than a gun and just as effective. Otherwise, not sure who we're supposed to be afraid of here.....I generally am not afraid of intruders and I don't have any weapons in my house other than my dogs and my mouth!!!
See Message.
Maybe if you were more tolerant and didn't pose such a rude message, someone would be interested in debating with you. I think it's just human nature to not want to associate with people who approach others in such a nasty confrontational way. If you were nicer to others, others would be nicer to you.
See message.
I can't wait to see what Fitzgerald's investigation unfolds.
Libby and Rove both were sources for the leak of Plame's occupation.
This was after Joe Wilson made public that Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein was purchasing uranium to make nukes was FALSE. The administration KNEW it was false, yet Bush used this fake threat of nukes in his State of the Union address to scare the heebie-jeebies out of the American public so they would support this bogus war.
That's how Bushies handle people who cross them. Don't DARE tell the truth or expose the administration for what it truly is. If you do, they'll not only put the life of a CIA agent in danger, but every single person she worked with around the globe pertaining to WMD. Why isn't this treason? It's the Bush way of doing things, and Karl Rove is an expert and accomplished thug.
I hope this goes beyond Rove and Libby and goes straight to Bush and Cheney. This is definitely an illegal war, brought on totally false premises, and Bush and Cheney should be personally held accountable for all the deaths (American and Iraqi) that have resulted from their lies.
It's truly sad when the only man on earth who can make Saddam look not so bad is GEORGE W. BUSH. I'm very ashamed of my government. 
See message.
I'm writing to my Congressman and Senator and see if this is true, express my objection and see if they can BOUNCE the *blank check* they gave him regarding Iraq and require Congressional approval for air strikes.
The article you posted included the following:
After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the former official said, he was told that Bush felt that “God put me here” to deal with the war on terror. The President’s belief was fortified by the Republican sweep in the 2002 congressional elections; Bush saw the victory as a purposeful message from God that “he’s the man,” the former official said. Publicly, Bush depicted his reëlection as a referendum on the war; privately, he spoke of it as another manifestation of divine purpose.
Someone needs to tell Bush that God thinks Bush is too engulfed in his own ego to fully understand God's REAL message to him, and that's why God gave us POLLS.
See message.
I don't believe religious symbols of ANY kind belong in schools (unless they're religious schools) or government buildings. If Walmart or Target wish to be inclusive to all religious beliefs, more power to them. Private businesses should be free to do as they wish. If they want to limit it to the religious Christmas and exclude the secular *Christmas,* some people might not want to shop in that kind of *exclusive* shop. You can bet their profit margin is the bottom line for them.
For every religion out there, there are buildings: churches, mosques, temples, etc. where like-minded people gather to worship. Trying to control the very WORDS people say isn't going to work unless and until you guys figure out a way to implant a chip in every American that will force them to speak, think, believe and worship just like you do. Maybe some of us think you'd do that if you had the ability, and maybe THAT'S the underlying thing that people are fighting.
OMG!!! (see message)
That mental image HURTS.
I am so SICK of this man's lies. Bush needs to get them straight. When he said the following in 2004, he was clearly lying and KNEW IT, as we now all know. I just wonder if there's ever been just ONE TIME in the last 5 years when he's actually told the truth. Have you seen this?
Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order, he said on April 20, 2004 in Buffalo, New York.
Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so, he added.
On April 19, 2004, Bush said the Patriot Act enabled law-enforcement officials to use roving wiretaps, which are not fixed to a particular telephone, against terrorism, as they had been against organized crime.
You see, what that meant is if you got a wiretap by court order -- and by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example, he said in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Please see message.
I totally agree this absolutely reaches across the board. This monster repeatedly raped this child for 3 years, but the damage he's done to her is going to affect her entire life. How about putting him in jail FOREVER so he can't hurt anyone else??? I also wouldn't have a problem with the death penalty for animals such as this.
I've recently seen this judge on TV, actually defending his actions, as if there is a defense for them. Thank God for Bill O'Reilly (I don't usually care for him) and Joe Scarborough and Dan Abrams (and others, I'm sure) who are publicizing this. Hopefully, this judge will be removed soon so maybe more children won't suffer. This judge, in my opinion, is just as guilty as the molester himself.
I sat here, trying to put myself in the parents' shoes, and I wonder how many parents will begin to feel that taking the law into their own hands and killing these rabid animals is the only way to keep their children safe in lieu of a judge that cares more about the criminals than their victims. If and when that happens, I'm not sure I could blame them.
I've written to Vermont's governor, as well. I'm glad so many people are writing and publicizing this issue. It's the only way things will change.
See message.
Number one, despite what is so *obvious* to you, I do not hate my country. In fact, I miss it very much. And I don't hate Bush because I don't *hate* anyone. When he took over the Presidency, I began my impressions of him on an even keel. Slowly, bit by bit, he has corroded any good impressions I ever may have had of him with his constant lying, dirty tricks, contempt for the Constitution, total and complete refusal to admit that he is NOT PERFECT, blatant disregard for the security of our borders, presiding over an econmy where people can barely afford gas but oil company executives get richer and richer, etc., etc. I truly and sincerely believe he poses a HUGE threat to the security of every American citizen.
Regardless of what the Iranian President (his name is Ahmadinejad, by the way) claims to have, they don't have the capacity to nuke anyone, but the USA does, and Bush has a ZERO record when it comes to diplomacy. Again, both Bush and Ahmadinejad are whack jobs, and neither can be reasoned with. I believe this is a very dangerous combination of two out-of-control egos, and the end of humanity could very well be imminent. I'm not going to apologize for caring if my grandchildren might not have the opportunity to reach voting age in this country because of a president who doesn't care about his legacy because, when asked, he said Who cares? We'll all be dead, anyway. That statement, combined with his love of war, I find to be quite chilling.
As far as being *lost in my world,* I can see very clearly a President who is losing more and more credibility, not on a daily basis any more but on an HOURLY basis. I have ZERO faith or trust in this man. Again, contrary to your implied intimate knowledge of me, my brain, my heart and my soul, these aren't because of any preconceived notions I might have about Bush. These are because the actions of Bush himself. As polls are evidencing more and more each day, I'm not alone in my skepticism of him.
Regarding where I got the quotes, if you are genuinely interested, I would suggest you Google them. You've already indicated an inclination to not believe them, so I'm not going to waste my time by going back to the multiple sources I found, simply to provide you with a link that you've already decided not to believe. If your interest is sincere, you'll look it up. 
Regarding your response to my *shopping spree* statement, I'm sorry, but it didn't come across as a joke to me. It sounded like a negative character judgment regarding someone who doesn't agree with you, which is a common Neocon MO from Bush and his cronies all the way down to the lowest peon on the totem pole who is convinced Bush is on his or her side. 
Likewise, you can't possibly know the extent of my intelligence since you don't know me, have never met me and aren't qualified to offer such an opinion. Inherent in your assessment that I'm *not that stupid* is the notion that you feel I do possess a certain degree of stupidity, which leads me to your comment that I feel I have to *label everyone who disagrees* with me as *uninformed and unthinking.* I respectfully point out that these *labels* are YOUR words, not mine, and I would challenge you to point to those words in my above post to you.
Have a very pleasant day. 
Please see message.
I try to get my information from a variety of sources. These days, it's hard to find a completely neutral source.
The main thing I'm interested in is finding the truth, and it seems that the party with the most to hide is the least likely to provide it.
When Clinton was President, I listened to a lot of right-leaning news sources for the very same reason. I thought the lack of respect Clinton showed in the Oval Office was terrible, and I was actually in favor of impeaching him for that. I didn't buy into and agree with the notion that what he did in his private life was his business. In my opinion, the Oval Office doesn't belong to the President; it belongs to every American tax-paying citizen.
I voted for Ronald Reagan, and to this day, I still think of him as a wonderful President. Historians may disagree with me on that point, and they may be right, because I'm obviously no expert in that field. I even voted for George Herbert Walker Bush, so I'm not some hardline lefty who hates the United States, is godless and has no moral values.
(I just wanted to share a thumbprint of who I really am because some people want to crucify me on this board simply because they see my name and couldn't care less what I have to say. You, on the other hand, have been posting here in a very respectful, intelligent manner, and I'm very appreciative of that and hope you continue to do so. I'm beginning to look forward to reading your posts after the last day or so.)
I believe that many people were looking for a big change in the White House when they voted for George W. Bush. I believe they wanted some sense of decency and honor restored to it. I was one of those people.
When I look back at the thing Clinton did that I thought was so terrible, and I look at what Bush has done, I guess the only thing I can say to sum it up is what Jay Leno said in his monologue the other night: At least Clinton only screwed one American at a time (I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it).
What amazes me the most about (what seems like) blind loyalty to Bush is that I wonder what they thought they were voting for, compared to what they got. I thought Republicans (conservatives) were supposed to beiin favor of less spending, smaller federal government and fiscal responsibility. After really disliking President Clinton, I actually feel that when it came to things important to the everyday lives of Americans, Clinton was a far better President.
I feel no sense of trust for President Bush. I don't feel he is on the side of the average American. I truly believe he wants to get rid of the middle class altogether, so the only ones left are the rich (who he referred to as his *base*) and the poor.
Whether he made the pejorative comment about the Constitution or not, he ACTS like he has no respect for it (as was also mentioned in the article). There is truly no need any more for Congress, regardless of whether it's a Republican or Democratic Congress because it doesn't matter what laws they write, if Bush doesn't like it, he will simply issue a *signing statement* expressing that he will do what he wants, anyway.
We have a system of checks and balances for a reason, and he seems to totally disregard it. To me, it's ironic that he seeks to search and destroy all dictatorships -- except the one that is of his own creation here in the United States.
There's a growing history of how he treats those who either tell the truth or simply don't agree with his policies. He *Swiftboats* them.
There are many stories out there about the Diebold machines being rigged so that a certain political party wins. I have a friend who voted on a Diebold machine that produced a paper receipt. Sure enough, it reflected that she voted for the other party, when, in fact, she did NOT.
I'm completely against his views on immigration. I believe we should have immediately tightened and secured ALL our borders after 9/11 and, at least for the time being, not allow ANYONE in. Instead, we used that money to go to war with Iraq, not because Saddam Hussein was a threat but because Bush needed a war to insure a *successful Presidency.* Did you know that the President's itinery was found by an ex-con in a trash can last week? Why was that allowed to happen?
Did you know that part of his Iraq war spending includes a comphrehensive healthcare plan for every Iraqi? Look at the healthcare system in the United States. Shouldn't the healthcare for Americans take precedence over the healthcare of Iraqis?
Do I want our troops to come home? You bet I do. I believe the best way we can support them is to get them out of there.
Having said that, I also believe we simply cannot *cut and run.* We simply cannot go into a country and completely destroy and then leave without fixing what we broke. I believe we morally owe it to the people of Iraq to leave their country in a better place than when we found it. I wish democracy would have worked in Iraq INSTANTLY. Then maybe Bush would have hopefully begun to worry about fixing the massive problems in his own country. Having said that, I have serious doubts that a long-lasting democracy will survive in that region. I believe that many of them view us as being evil and having no morals. (I can't really disagree with this view, considering some of the things that go on in this country.) I think Joe Biden had an excellent idea of dividing Iraq into three provinces (which is supported in the Iraqi Constitution).
Instead, I believe this war was a whim, based on his own personal goals, without regard for one single soldier he sent to die. To me, that is unforgiveable.
Should he be allowed to spy on innocent Americans during wartime? I guess that depends on the definition of *innocent.* I sure don't know any terrorists. Heck, I don't even know my own neighbors. But I have repeatedly expressed my disagreement with his policies, and I've read how innocent Americans whose only *sin* is disagreeing with this President, so I have no reason to believe that I won't find myself being *investigated* by some agency eventually, maybe even the IRS in the form of an audit or some other intimidating tactic that this President is so fond of using.
As far as the Democrats are concerned, I personally can't stand Hillary Clinton and would never vote for her (even if I DID live in a country where my vote actually counted). I'm as disgusted with the Democrats as I am with the President.
I'm not some Godless heathen without morals simply because I don't agree with Bush. I very much believe in God. In fact, I believe God has been sending Bush a series of *signs* that he has chosen to ignore. What I don't believe is pushing my religion down everyone else's throats. What I believe in most of all is tolerance and respect for everyone, regardless of their religious beliefs. When one religion acts as if it is superior to all others, that concerns me and automatically forces me further to the left. Freedom of religion in this country is a wonderful thing, and nobody's religion is better than someone else's (including those who simply don't believe at all). Yet, the fallacy that all Democrats (or anyone else who doesn't believe in Bush) are godless heathens is alive and well. Ann Coulter, who can't seem to remember her address and is under investigation for voter fraud (see http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002807.htm, complete with the complaining document) plans on releasing a book outlining evil devils (such as myself and other millions of Americans she's never met) on none other than 6/6/06. I believe that one particular religion has no place in government. Do I have a problem with *In God We Trust* on our money? Of course not. When the word *God* is used in a generic term, it's INCLUSIVE, not EXCLUSIVE. But whether or not I can read it as I purchase a newspaper is irrelevant to what I feel in my soul and my heart. I can assure you my morals are very high, and it truly hurts (thus turning to anger) when certain conservatives accuse people like me of being evil and Godless. They say that most anger is the result of fear. The times I'm most angry is truly when I'm the most frightened. It's really hard to carry on a dialogue with someone who has labeled you so negatively, a sense of self-defense kicks in, and often arguments and more name-calling ensues, none of which is productive and all of which is hurtful and fruitless.
I'm sorry this is so long, but as I said, I enjoy reading your posts. Although I don't know you or your political beliefs, you seem to be conservative. You also seem to be intelligent and respectful and don't resort to personal attacks on posters, which is very refreshing on these boards. I was just trying to give you some insight into who I am and the reason I don't like Bush. In fact, I'm very frightened of him.
As I've said before, if I felt my President was honest, trustworthy, ethical and truly had the interests of ALL Americans foremost in his mind, I would have no problem at all with his obtaining lists of my telephone calls because I truly have nothing to hide, and if it saved one life, to me, it would be worth it. I just don't trust him to do the right thing, and that isn't based on anything I've heard or read from any left-leaning media. It's based solely on his own actions in the last six years.
I'm no far left-leaning whacko. In fact, I'm truly a middle-of-the road kind of thinker. I think there are a lot of us out there. Speaking personally, it's just that the *righter* he goes, the *lefter* I automatically wind up, not because I voluntarily choose to, but because in order to maintain my original thoughts, that's where he pushes me.
I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact, I fully expect you not to agree with me, and I hope you respond because I am very interested in hearing your views. Again, I thank you for being respectful and not resorting to name calling. You have opened the door to serious, honest and intelligent debate, and for that, I thank you.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
Please see message.
I hope you had an opportunity to read the article I posted before it was censored. It certainly explains the few bad apples in an otherwise wonderful military and also answers the question you raised regarding the recruiting tactics.
Please see message.
It was just a very angry hateful person who wished bad things on America. Just a one-line post on the subject line with a red angry face in the text portion of the post. (I don't want to repeat it because it might cause this thread to be deleted again.)
See Message...
I have decided to lock this thread. I do not believe the OP had bad intentions, but I do not like the direction in which this thread is going.
Moderator 
See message....
Please watch your comments. This is the second post of yours I have edited based on inappropriate remarks. Let this serve as a warning to you.
Moderator
See message...
Your comments about race were inappropriate. They were bound to offend, and it is best to leave those kind of remarks off this site.
Moderator
Please see message.
You've just summed up exactly my impression of Hillary Clinton, and my impression wasn't formed by anybody who is anti-Clinton. It was formed by Hillary's own self-portrait that she eagerly showed to the world.
Thanks - see message
Thanks - its such a breath of fresh air to hear more people feel the same way I do. I'm am sick to death of her people trying to push her in the VP slot (which just is not going to happen) but seems thats all that's on the news just can't wait for it to end. If it does happen well they can be assured that McCain will definitely win. The Clintons should not be allowed anywhere near the white house. Don't people remember what they did the last time they were in there? I listen to the people who support her and think...why? there is not one good quality about that woman. People are saying she's a good role model for their children??? People think that someone who is a liar, cheater, thief, bribes people, gives people false hope, walks all over people not caring who she steps on just as long as she is on top, is a sore loser, not humble, has a foul mouth to match her attitude, is just downright nasty to people when she doesn't get her way, etc, etc, well I then question their character. Never mind all the people whose lives and careers have been destroyed because they went against the Clintons. And another thing they talk about the Clinton Dynasty or Clinton Legacy? I always thought a Dynasty was if you have a long line of people in the family who have been in politics (like the Kennedys). It is only the two of them. Nobody in their family is in politics or is decent. These two came out of nowhere and they've only done harm to the democrat party. They are tearing the party apart for their own personal gain and they don't care.
See message...
The portion that I edited were not statements made by Hillary Clinton. Those statements were made by you. They were aggressive and strange, to say the least, and those kind of comments have no place on this site.
Moderator
Please see message.
Well, it worked just as well for me during this occasion. I think different people react differently, depending on the dosage, their tolerance, and how tired they might be. It might work differently for you than it does for me. Heck, it might (and does) work differently for ME, depending on the above. I have an illness which may (and usually does) awaken me in the middle of the night. If it's not too bad, I can take a pain pill and actually even be able to work a little. (If it's hospital-worthy, then I slap on a Fentanyl patch, and once that enters my system, I'm usually out like a light for a couple days. If that doesn't work, then it's back to the hospital again, which I try to avoid.) However, when this stuff happens, I wind up in a backwards sleep cycle and wind up being awake all night. This is what happened to me Friday/Saturday, and if you'll note, I began the post by stating I had been up most of the night.
Secondly, it was not a two-hour nap. Please read the post again and note the difference between 10:26 a.m. and 7:14 P.M.
Thank you OP - appreciate your message.
Thanks.
Sam (see message)
 If you can't stand the heat....Get out of the kitchen!
NS - see message
no soup.
see message
Arf.
No, SS. I use sm for see message.
Not to worry. I have a thick hide. Have to when hanging around this place. Kinda reminds me of when docs use abbreviations to confuse and confound and sends me plunging into the dictionary unnecessarily on a dead-end word search!
See message.
It has occurred to me that I would not associate with any of these right-wing religious fanatics in my personal life, nor would I waste my time debating political or religious concepts with such people. Therefore, it would be hypocritical of me to take part in discussions with them on this forum. I will continue to read some of their posts for the shock value only (akin to watching a train wreck), but I will no longer attempt to engage them in reasonable dialogue. I will, however, continue to take part in discussions with open-minded, intelligent posters who think for themselves and are not following the flock and blinded by religion.
Right - see message
Right, the guy is going to be running for president. You really think he's going to write about his life when he was a Muslim. He should have because there is nothing to be ashamed of (but the fact that he didn't makes me pretty leery of what his intensions are and what else he is not telling us). However, most Americans want a Christian president (why I have no idea), but that's the unfortunate truth, so Americans want a Christian president, he wants to be president, of course he's going to write he's a christian. You also have to research back further and not just believe what someone writes about themselves. If that were true then you probably believe that Hillary's plane landed in Bosnia under direct fire with gunshots going off all around her as she ran and ducked for cover in her vehicle. Which is of course as she says why Bill didn't go to Bosnia. According to her there's a saying among Presidents that if its too dangerous to go then send your wife. I'd research both liberal and conservative papers, and also what his family members have to say about him.
see message
(Didn't know what to title this so just wrote see message)...
I have never heard of Bobby Jindal. Thanks for the links I will look at them.
You know I think this is a good point. There are politicians that are good and are trying to do good for the country/city/state or whatever, but they are unknowns and don't get a lot of familiarity. One candidate I really liked was Ron Paul. He seemed to be the most knowlegable about issues, economy, etc and I really like him a lot and still listen to what he has to say.
I do miss sam and her messages. Does anyone know what happened to her. Maybe she got sick of being bashed, slammed, ridiculed and cut down all the time and just stopped coming. I myself have not been posting as much as I used to mainly for those reasons. Kind of had to take a "de-tox" from this board. HA HA
Anyway...the one good thing I'll have to say about Obama being in is at least now it paves the road and Arnold Schwartzeneger will be able to run in four years, so looking forward to that. I know he tried to get the constitution amended once before and they didn't pass, but now that they have for Obama, Arnold will be able to run. GO AAAHNOLD!!!!!
I still say I think all politicians in WA should be fired and replaced with the more honest "less celebretized" ones out there.
should have been see message...sm
...and our savings did grow.
Savings, however, is fast dwindling these past two years, though. Haven't saved anything at all lately.
Please see message -
'as long as they do not try to push their lifestyle off on me.'
That's a direct quote from you. So don't you think that same request should go both ways?
Just my opinion......
See message
Instead of posting all over this place to all the people who replied I'll just post one message here (am sure I'll get chewed up and spat out by the liberals) but here goes...
First on the OP's question. To me its more serious what a candidate says, not someone else who is not running. Obama's comments were offensive because to me it showed how little he thinks of American people like me, you, my dad, neighbors, etc. Obama is very weathy, no doubt about that, and that is who he surrounds himself with. To think he is going to help the little people (us) well its time to pull your head out of the sand. The only thing he sees us for is so he can tax us more and continue the spending. As for Rothschild's comment - who cares. If your going to go after things she says, then you need to go after things Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan said. Not fair to say you'll go after anything your opponent says, but you blatently disregard the things your own candidate says.
Second to the people who didn't even give a decent answer to this board but instead type silly nonsensical words that make no sense to this board it goes to show how childish and uninformed you are. If you've done any reading or research you might just have something decent to say instead of attacking just for the fun of it (although I can't see where you think that is fun).
Third, polls are polls and that's all you can say about that. One day Obama's up the next day McCain's up. On MSNBC they were saying that McCain has a slight lead in the polls, on Fox news they said Obama had a slight lead in the polls. They change on an hourly basis and all depends who is pushing for who.
As for McCains campaign "fall down around his knees"? Where in the world did you hear that? I know you wish it to be so, but the truth of the matter is McCain's campaign has soared and you can't dispute the truth that Sarah Palin has energized the party and because of her and the issues that John McCain and Sarah Palin are talking about a lot of Obama supporters are moving over to John McCain/Sarah Palin, and her poll numbers have not dropped 10%. You can spread any rumor and lie you want to, it isn't going to change the fact that it isn't true. If anything her ratings have gone up (and I'm seeing that even on the most liberal stations). Especially after her latest interview with Sean Hannity. If people had little confidence in her before they are waking up to the fact that this governor knows what she is talking about, knows how to stimulate the economy, and knows that the government should be working for Americans, not against them like the democrat party by taxing us all through the roof. She's intelligent and well informed on on all subjects asked of her. If your going to say anything you should admit that all Obama has to say is uh, um, uh, uh and he gets tripped up enough on his own words (but I'm sure you've forgotten all of that).
As for John McCain's age and health there are a few myths being spouted by the democratic party and it would be good for you to know the truth.
1. He doesn't have skin cancer. He gets regular checkups. Second if your worrying about cancer you should worry more about your candidate "smoking" Obama. That guy smokes like a chimney and I wouldn't be surprised to hear any day now he has lung cancer. My mom had lung cancer and it was not a pretty site. It eventually went into her brain (not to mention all the other side effects). So I'd be a bit more worried about someone who smokes like a chimney, then someone who used to have some skins spots that were cancerous but treated and no longer is.
As for his age...Biden is not much younger than he is. And like someone said years ago when Ronald Regan was running (maybe it was Regan himself who said it), "I'll take age and experience any day over youth and inexperience".
So you know who looks like the desperate fools (yes there are more than one). The desparate fools are the democrats who attack for no reason. Who have deployed over 50 lawyers and other dishonorable people to try and find any little piece of dirt on Gov. Palin. The ones who if they don't find anything they will make it up. The ones who said she is not qualified because she has never had an abortion. The ones who say she has no experience but won't admit Obama doesn't have any experience. And the ones who are complaining because she has a tanning bed. Those are the desparate fools.
I was an Obama supporter up until a couple weeks ago. Then I started learning more about him, the groups he affiliates himself with, his voting record, what his wife has done (we have heard that she is the biggest contributor to giving Barack information on what to do, so yes, I want to know what her background is). I've read what his plans are regarding taxes, housing crisis, war, etc (which he has changed his mind and is now for keeping troops overseas and is in approval of a draft).
You want to talk about an "honesty issue" then you need to start talking about your own candidate. He's telling so many lies and being deceitful to the public, and you never know where he stands because he changes his mind every day. Obama and Biden are in an absolute panic right now because McCain and Palin are so close in the race and they are ahead in most of the polls, even in others, and below in just a couple. States that have alwasy voted democrat in the past are now starting to lean towards republican and its becoming a full blown meltdown for them.
I like what Gov. Palin said in her interview. She said she was thick skinned and tough and the insults and lies just bounce right off because she knows the truth, but it's the American people that matter and they are more important than anything.
I did not ask - see message
This is not an answer to my question. I did not ask for the standard "relax it's a scare tactic" statement the liberals usually throw back. We all know Obama is a socialist. Just a plain fact. Not a scare tactic. The democratic party is not the same as the democratic party of times past anymore. Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves because the modern day democrats have destroyed the party. Yes, the democratic party is "supposed" to be a party of the people, by the people, and for the people. It is not that anymore. Take a look at the far left/socialists who have infiltrated it (Clinton, Obama, Dodd, Pelosi, Franks, and others). Our founding fathers warned and fought against everything they are proposing for America. No matter how much (I am a registered democrat), we want to believe our party is for the people it is not anymore. So once again if all your going to do is attack the republicans (who are more democratic than the democrats) then that does not answer my original question - what will it be like to live in a socialist country if Obama is elected. A lot of us are too young to know what that is really like, and most people won't care as long as they keep getting fed American Idol and Survivor on TV.
me too - see message
In the past I have voted Carter (he was the first president I was old enough to vote for). Next election I was in the army and we could not vote. Then after that I voted for Regan, Dukakas, Clinton, Dole, Bush, Kerry (and one of those elections I almost voted for Ross Perot). I can't say that I'm for either party, just the one who I feel is better for the job. My post was replying to yours that you said most of the democrats got bored and left. That is a totally false statement. The democrats are the ones on the board bashing the McCain supports. You've got to read all the posts. Yes if your for one side or the other you will say the other side is picking on you and everyone is bashing you, but reading all the posts it is mostly dems bashing the republicans. I'm going down the board line by line and reply by reply reading all of it. I too am getting sick of it but your placing all the blame on the republicans and it just is not true. So when you wrote "That is exactly what I am talking about some people like to argue", I thought you were agreeing with me. Didn't realize you were the same poster.
So, I like you am sick of hearing the same old arguments over and over and getting sick of one party putting all the blame on the other especially when they are the majority doing the wrong doing they are acusing the other side of doing.
When I say you are closed minded I mean you will not objectively look at all the posts. It seems to me that you feel as though the republicans should be bashed and put down because of our feelings that we believe McCain would be a better president and we should not defend ourselves or beliefs with facts otherwise then you will say we are bashing those who started putting us down in the first place. That is why I said you have a closed mind. But no more shocking when I was voting for Clinton and my mom for Bush Sr. and she said to me "boy you sure have a closed mind".
I'm not saying that the message did not
come from AL Quaida, just that I don't think that they are stupid people and it WOULD be stupid for an enemy to come right out and say who they want us to elect because it would then be unlikely that this would happen. I am not saying we can't trust that it is a genuine message, just that the content can't be trusted because it comes from people who cannot be trusted.
M - see message
Reasons I'm for McCain:
1. Tony Resco
2. Jeremiah Wright
3. Acorn
4. The love-fest for Obama by the media while hiding who and what he really is.
5. Akmada Jimajab (Iran dude - don't feel like opening new window to see how to spell it correctly), and how buddy buddy he wants to get with him.
6. Socialized health care.
7. Socialist re-distribute wealth.
7. Farrahkan (and his statements about Obama being the Messiah, among other things he stands for).
8. Abortion viewpoints.
9. Creepy obama singers
10. His lies that his funds are just from little ol grandmas giving $5. here and $10. there (he is receiving money from people not in our country to buy his way in).
11. Increase in taxes (won't just be the wealthy, it will trickle down to me).
12. Inexperience in foreign matters.
13. Born in Kenya (not Hawaii with the fake bc) - His grandmother was even in the delivery room with his half brother and half sister when he was born in Kenya. She said she is so proud to have watched him being born and now he is running for president.
14. His ties to his Indonesia and middle eastern family/friends.
15. His lack of knowledge on basic economics that you can't just keep printing money and hand out welfare checks to people who don't give into the system - it just doesn't work.
16. His poor misjudgment on many policies he voted for.
17. His trip to Pakistan in 1981 when no Americans were allowed in the country. He was an Indonesian citizen (and Muslim), and that's the only way he was allowed in (and remained safe).
18. His records at Harvard/Columbia have been sealed.
19. His lies about not studying in an islamic school in Indonesia.
20. All the people in the Arab and Islamic world and in Africa applaud him. They pray for his success and have been involved in campaign contributions to enable him to win the presidency.
21. Leader of other countries even admitting that Obama is ignorant of international politics and not familiar with the Middle East conflict.
22. When he was enrolled in a catholic school the documents say he was enrolled as a muslim. Again his lies that he was not and now his trip to try to suppress the documents.
23. Obama supporters attacking McCain supports and one thug even carving a "B" on the cheek of a lady.
24. The outright lies that the election is about race when the only ones making it about race are the Obama supporters if you don't vote for him.
25. The fear that is trying to be instilled that if Obama is not elected there will be riots. "Elect him or else".
Okay, those are only a few of the reasons I'm voting for McCain.
|
