I don't recall Obama making
Posted By: Trigger Happy on 2009-05-29
In Reply to: Ummm....(sm) - Just the big bad
any promises to the gay and lesbian community. He himself is against same sex marriage.
As for this healthcare BS.....when it comes to pass and it isn't as great as he professed it to be and we are getting taxed out of the ying yang to pay for it....I'm sure many will be ready to get rid of Obama and any fellow cronies on the dem party. So don't count your chickens before they hatch.
As for the promises he has broken. Gitmo is still open. We are still in Iraq and now in Afgan. He promises he wouldn't raise taxes on 95% of Americans which is a downright lie especially if he is going to pay for this healthcare plan of his. He said lobbyists wouldn't have a place in his administration and yet he appointed some. Obama is nothing but a liar. The reason a lot of people still love Obama is because the mainstream media continues to portray Obama as doing no wrong. If some of these people would actually pay attention to what is going on and actually do a little research as well as lay off the kool-aid.....I'm sure more people would not be satisfied with Barry.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Not ridiculous - Obama should be the one making this statement.
Rumors have a way of getting out of hand and no, it's not just the right-wing. I know Pelosi didn't introduce anything into the into legislation, but just making the comment is bad enough.
Obama lives in a fantasy land of his own making.
Unfortunately, he is also a gifted speaker and is leading many people down the yellow brick road to a magical make believe land. Too bad Obama can't see the big picture of anything.
Obama's mother is white, his father was black, making him an oreo.
nm
Really? I don't recall seeing that in my
xx
As I recall
those pubs in Congress along with their bush leader didn't do a thing for the good of the country and they were replaced by the Dems but with Daddy Bush as the "decider" it was unlikely he was going to let them get away with anything for the good.........not that they tried either.
I don't recall ever
defending Bush no matter what. There are a lot of things that I don't agree with Bush on as well. I think both parties need a good cleaning out. I'm not a Cheney fan either but I do get what he is saying. If they want to let out part of those memos....let them all out so we know what happened and what we got in return that may or may not have benefited. How are we to know for sure if only half of this is opened up and looked at. You have pubs lying and dems lying alike. If the dems want the pubs to go down.....then the dems involved should go down with the ship as well. I'm tired of the double standards and the finger pointing.
However, I still say this is all best left alone until after our troops are home. It does no good for anyone to have us fighting amongst ourselves at home and releasing information that could endanger our troops even more than they are.
I also don't really think that our tactics as far as treatment of prisoners should be out there for all to see because, like I said before, what is the point of anything if terrorists know they are going to be treated well with no threat to their life. They would have no reason to spill the beans. They would just have to be patient until they got out.
I'm not here defending the GOP and Bush and Cheney. However, I personally see nothing wrong with waterboarding in an attempt to save lives.
Obviously this is something that you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on. As per my research and understanding, terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Convention and therefore Bush didn't order anything unlawful in that instance. But seriously....this is something that should be investigated after our troops are home and safe. I don't think Bush is worth putting our troops at higher risk.
I don't recall saying in my post that you were gt. SM
What an odd thing to say. Anyway, I don't like posting over here. I just happened to see that you were ungracious when I apologized and talking about slander when you did the exact same thing to me so, in other words, nothing has changed here. And you are not funny.
I do not recall saying that I did not agree with...
abortion because God would never approve of it nor want it. I may have said God would never approve of it or want it, because I believe that to be true. However, I do not remember saying that was the only reason I was opposed to it. What about people who are not religious who think abortion is morally wrong? Again...you do not have to be religious to be opposed to abortion. There are a lot of people (nonreligious) who are against the death penalty for the same reason. Frankly, what difference does it make anyway? My point all along was that opposition is on moral grounds, and I certainly was a moral person BEFORE I came to know God. Are you saying you are not a moral person because you are not religious? Did I miss something??
Ah. Well, then perhaps we should sterilize everyone right now to make sure the antichrist is never born. That is how much sense that argument makes.
For the last time, piglet. I perceive abortion to be wrong because it kills what to me is a person. I don't need God or anyone else to tell me that life begins at conception. If it didn't, the child would not grow and mature. Whatever the stage the life is in, it is necessary to kill it so that it does not continue to grow. If you want to equate that with plants and animals, that is certainly your prerogative.
Again, I don't know why it chaps you so much for someone to have a different opinion.
The moral police? You mean like saying theft is wrong? Like saying war is wrong? Like saying assault is wrong? Like saying rape is wrong? That kind of moral police?
Again...there are laws on the books right now that you can be charged with two murders if you kill a pregnant woman. Do you oppose that too? Scott Peterson...charged with Laci and Connor's death. Connor was certainly not viable outside his mother's womb. You are saying it was okay if Laci wanted to kill him, but murder because Scott killed Laci and therefore terminated Connor's life at the same time?
Try telling a pregnant woman who WANTS her child the instant she finds out she is pregnant, that that child will not become a child and is only alive like a plant or an animal until it takes a breath. Tell her that when she mourns if she loses it, oh it wasn't a child anyway, it was an embyronic sac so get over it. Two women, 6 weeks along, one wants it, one doesn't. One knows it is alive and can't wait for it to be born. The other one wants to abort it. What makes the wanted child anymore alive than the unwanted child? Nothing, because they are BOTH alive. You can justify it in the name of choice if you want to. Just call it what it is. You want a woman to have the right to kill the living child within her, because her choice trumps the child's right to live. I just don't happen to agree.
I did notice this also and never did before. Can anyone recall? nm
.
And you know, Zville, as I recall, at one
point in his life, Mr. Obama was addicted to some form of illegal drug, and I don't believe it was a prescription drug. I don't recall if he ever went through any type of rehab or not like Rush did.
I don't recall MTPockets
saying they were leaving the board. Just saying goodbye to others who were leaving. I think several of us on this board could grow up a bit. This is getting ridiculous. Enough already and let's discuss important things instead of this elementary drama.
I don't recall ever sayin that
I agreed with the Bush administration 100% either. I'm not a pub. I'm an independent who personally thinks that our government has a whole is doing a p!ss poor job. Bush and Cheney weren't perfect by any means but they are out of the White House now. They cannot be blamed for the bad decisions Obama makes during his administration.
I don't recall saying I was on the left. Newsflash:
Do you recall the pre-Patriot Act world?
when diverse viewpoints were at our fingertips and not dictated by Mega-Media outlets riding around in the pockets of political status quo? Not only has this dummed down American audiences nationwide, but it has been a direct assault on the democratic process.
Patriot Act provisions:
1. Law enforcement agencies authorized (and sometimes forced) to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial and other records without a warrant. This has been exercised against their own citizens, the most recent instance being voyeuristic easedropping on intimate conversations between American troops serving in Iraw and their spouses...right to privacy in 1st, 4th and 5th admendments notwithstanding.
2. Eased restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States. This has allowed them to expand their definition of terrorisim to include individuals and groups exercising their 1st amendment right to redress the government via political dissent.
3. Expanded the Secretary of the Treasury's authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities. An example of this would be freezing funds of a first generation natural born citizens sending money to their family members who still live overseas.
4. Enhances the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting SUSPECTED (not proven) of terrorism-related acts. This has not worked out well for many perfectly innocent citizens and permanent residents whose only crime is to have a Moslem name.
5. The act also expands the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which the USA Patriot Act’s expanded law enforcement powers can be applied.
Abuse of the Patriot Act has been rife and is the stuff of legend, as is the controversy that surrounds it. The erosion of civil right stemming from this one piece of legislation is breath-taking, but the mindset that created it....even more so. I will be voting for a candidate that shows at least some sort of awareness of civil rights. Those are the freedoms I worry about.
Really? I don't recall seeing his pinky finger.
He's only showed us his middle one.
P.S. I don't recall anyone posting a near death threat to the
remote to that.
Why is it you are the only ones who are "free" to display your anger on your board?
If you take a look at the posts on this board, the only time they get nasty is when a troll from your board comes here and begins spewing your hatred and rage.
Why are you so angry? Your guy won.
Whenever a liberal raises an issue concerning a Bush administration policy or decision, I seldom see an intelligent thoughtful response come from most of you. Instead you attack the poster on a personal level when that poster never personally attacked YOU. They complained about Bush. Are you BUSH??
Time and time again, most of you come back with "all liberals" insults and rarely, if ever, address the question or issue that was raised.
If you can begin to understand that it isn't YOU PERSONALLY that we are referring to, maybe then we can begin to have an intelligent conversation on this board.
If you are a conservative, I respect your right to your opinions, and I'd like to learn more about them. I can't do that if all you do is throw insults, which you are "free" to do on your board, but if we are angered or insulted by them, we are not likewise "free" to express that.
I had hoped that these new boards would eliminate the personal favorites that seemed to exist on the other board. Looks like that isn't the case.
And as far as approaching the administrator about fairness, if I can't do that, then I truly don't belong in a forum like this one. I belong in one that doesn't play favorites, where intelligent discourse can occur, where personal insults and attacks are prohibited for everyone, not just for some.
I just wonder how many people you've chased away from here, besides me.
seem to recall someone else protecing herself again a WITCH...haha
hmmm, real sound judgment there. So if Palin wins and decides to seek advice from shamans or witchdoctors, you are okay with that?
I recall Bush on a train with the press
not long after the 2004 election stating that he had 3 1/2 years to go...with a heavy sigh, thoroughly disgusted me. He should have recused himself then, and we would have been much better off.
And I think I recall reading about sperm doners
test tube babies, IVF, etc. The complete ig that people have that you have to have 1 man and 1 woman to have a baby. You know what? I can't have kids. We tried for over 30 years. Nothing worked, adoption never worked either. That's why they have other means (like sperm doners, etc.)
You know you can still have your "traditional marriage" between a man and a woman and call it traditional marriage, and for the gay and lesbians let them have a marriage to the person they love and want to spend the rest of their lives with just like you do.
Leave the tradition of marriage alone? Gee why not segregate whites and blacks in schools, and why don't you tell us whether different races can marry? How much further are you going to take it? If two people love each other they should be allowed to marry. They are human beings and have feeling just like you or I do. If I ever find myself without my husband in the future I have some woman friends that I share deep affection with and if we want to marry its nobody else's business and what we do in our own home does not affect you. Does that change the way you feel for your spouse? Has all your vows and trust for each other gone down the drain now because two people of the same sex love each other and want to share the same human rights that everyone else takes for granted. Talk about discrimination and making someone feel totally inferior and less of a human being, oh and what's next, only catholics can get married but mormons and lutheran or Jewish people can't. Man, now I know why I am not a Christian. So let there be two branches of marriage. Traditional branch where you say "I Marge take Fred to be my lawful partner, blah, blah, blah" and then you have another branch of marriage where you can say "I Judy take Barbara to be my lawful partner. I promise to take care of her when she is sick and dying. I will love her til death do we part". And this allows her to be able to make the decisions and have the same rights that all other human beings can. If you believe in a loving God, then he loves all people no matter what. He doesn't discriminate. He doesn't need any spokesperson interjecting their opinion as to what they "think" "he" wants.
Also, our lives on this planet are too short. Why wouldn't you want other people to be happy and share in the same happiness you share with a partner. Their getting married doesn't affect you.
I don't recall saying I was right or left for that matter. What happened to your ability to sm
consider that and not label?
If I recall, Mahatma Ghandi resided in the country...
where the fighting was going on that he protested against. He did not move to, say, the US and bus to DC and protest and then bus back to home sweet home safe and sound. I challenge you and the other *peace* protestors to PLEASE stop preaching to the choir. It is idiotic to say that anyone (other than terrorists who seem to) WANT war. I certainly do not want war. I certainly do not want to have citizens killed 3000 in one day either or to allow my way of life (and yours) endangered by peaceniks. Umm....try dropping daisy in the barrel of a terrorist gun. See how far that gets you. You do not have to convince me peace is better when nations can live in harmony. Problem with that, Lurker, is that all the nations involved need to be of one mind. Despite what is being portrayed by many of the peaceniks posting, we did not bring 9-11 on ourselves. It was a cowardly, craven attack. You need to convince the people who are the real threat to that peace..the terrorists. Tehran. Kim Jong Il...picky any of them to start. Go to their capitals and protest and carry your signs. Talk to THEM about giving peace a chance. If you are serious about it, do something more than carry a sign and sing silly songs.
As to supporting the troops but not the mission...the person who wrote that opinion piece has no clue. There are a good many people who do join the military for purely patriotic reasons and because they love their country. A good many joined after 9-11 for that very reason. I will try one more time to make the point. When you do not support the mission, when you protest and hold signs that 9-11 was an inside job, that the President of The United States lied them into the fight, that they are fighting and dying for a lie, fighting and dying for nothing, ...if you think that does not affect morale and is anything but hurtful to the real live human beings with feelings putting their lives on the line for this country that they swore to defend against enemies....helllooooo. That is NOT in any way, shape, or form supporting. And you don't seem to give a rat's patootie what effect it has on them. In fact, it seems like you could not care less. Because, in case you and your peacenik friends don't realize it, they are there and they are staying there for the forseeable future. Why is it sooo hard for you to just support them while they are there? For people who are supposed to really care about others....that shows an amazing lack of empathy. Common decency should keep you from doing that while they are still over there.
Saw the spot in the NY Times about the protestor spitting on the disabled veteran. Way to go, support the troops!
Tell me again how noble the protest is. Get off the bus and on a plane to terrorist central. Talk to them. They may not doubt your sincerity as much as I do.
I recall junior high being full of tattle-tales.
Speak for yourself.
Just making sure
because many of those on the side of "we're sending kids to war" are the exact same people that think 13-year-olds should be able to have abortions without their parents knowledge or consent...glad that's not you.
Boy, you just keep MAKING our
don't you? Because the middle east has been unstable was only 1 of many reasons not to start a war there.
they are making all the $$$ they can because they know
fossil fuels will be exausted in about 10 years. For the record it doesn't matter if the average joe stops buying gas, truckers and airlines will still need fuel. it's quite ignorant of someone to assume they can really affect big oil buy not buying gas for one day. They know you will just buy it later; they are like a drug dealer and you need your fix---you will eventually come back.
since you are obviously making
over $250,000 a year if your taxes are being raised, can't feel too sorry for you.
It's you or them and when making
the split decision to save your life, I am sure you would choose LIFE. That's where a gun would come in real handy. I don't think our founding fathers needed counseling, do you?
I don't know? Just making a
suggestion? Don't get your ruffles in a twist?
Are you making this up?
It sounds you are making it up. If not point me in the right direction. I'm on his website searching everywhere and I am not finding these 3 type of revolutions you are claiming are on his site.
What I am reading is that he has been hearing that a lot of people want one, not that he's inciting them. But he is trying to get to the bottom of what it would mean and what it would be like.
Besides, what do you think a revolution is all about? A revolution is standing up to a govt of Tyranny. It is up to them (govt) whether they make it violent or not. The people need to hold them accountable for what they are doing.
I like the flag that Texas has
http://galleryoftherepublic.com/txflags/goliad.htm
Someone stated it means "I would rather cut off my right arm than serve under Tyranny".
the reason they are making
the reason they are making a big deal about the drilling about to happen in alaska is because tyhey think that it is going to interuppt the migration of one of the biggest elk herds in all of alaska, and because if it did, that would not only kill the animals, but a local tribe depends on that herd for food........lol.another contradiction in their thinking.
i personalluy believe that the drilling there is going to be a huge step towards our energy independence.because it will provide over 3 million barrels of oil for over thirty years.wich is ten percent of what we would have used...............
AR making a habit of that, LOL
Just can't seem to help him/herself!
This is a kid you're making fun of
Why does this upset you so? If a student had taped a pro-Bush student would you be making fun of him? I highly doubt it. This kid was concerned that he was being continually being taught a particular political viewpoint in geography class. It happened more than once. I think the kid showed a lot of courage--it wouldn't have mattered to me what his political persuasion was. He should been learning geography and not subjected to political rants on either side.
and you keep making mine
So if something is amiss in the word you don't try to fix it at all you just hope that it goes away?
Would you rather deal with Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas before they get nukes or after? Should we have let Saddam get nukes too?
This whole *Bush was too preoccupied with Iraq to deal with this situation* the Dems are crying is bull. Just like everything else they say in fact. This situation has been ongoing for years. The cease fires so touted by Madeline Albright and Clinton have never been true cease fires. This is a conflict that has been going on ever since there were Jews and Arabs. This is one situation you cannot historically place the blame on Bush. Doesn't hold water. So, if you are so concerned about our President supposedly not knowing history or geographics then I suggest you do some studying of your own, because your history and your perception of it is a little skewed itself.
You are making it an issue
You are trying to defend Merv Griffin when no one said anything bad about him or that he was not a conservative. All that was stated was what he commented about the vote, nothing more or less. You are reading much more into it than I ever intended. Dont waste your time looking up more information about Merv, who cares? His comment is what his comment was. Goodness, LOL. Dustin Hoffman also made a comment on Letterman that the democrats taking over the House and Senate was a historic day. It was a comment nothing more. I must state, though, that the audience also clapped, whistled, cheered when Dustin said that.
Thank you for making my point...
"their crimes, if brought to light and hopefully proven, will be far worse than Clinton ever did." Sigh. They are guilty in your mind as I knew you thought (was in the windy post you did not read). Which makes your comment about innocent until proven guilt worthless and the "wind" you refer to. It only applies to those you want it to apply to. Yes, that IS hypocrisy.
Worse than Clinton did? In a FAIR world, perjury is perjury and is a crime. No matter what they were lying about. Obstruction of justice is obstruction of justice. Which is what they are talking about impeaching Cheney with. The judiciary committee is talking about the Plame case, nothing else. That is what is on the table. Obstruction of justice and perjury. Same thing we already know Clinton is guilty of, because we saw him do it.
And yet you make excuses, as I knew you would. Sigh. You are nothing if not predictable.
Again...I wish the WOULD investigate. I wish they WOULD impeach if they think they have the goods. And if he is proven guilty of perjury and obstruction, then I hope he is removed from office. You CANNOT, and WILL NOT, EVER say that about Clinton (oh because he only lied about sex), and that is a BIG difference between you and me. Maybe I was wrong about your morality. Maybe I gave you too much credit.
You are the one making an issue (sm)
out of his middle name. So what if someone posts his middle name? What do YOU have to be worried about? It appears that she cut and pasted an article written by someone else. Had you not written a huge post about the name *Hussein,* many would not have even given it a second thought.
i am making light of the
attempts to discredit Barack by calling him a celebrity. You will see the same issue repeated over and over on this board, only by those who seriously consider that a valid issues.
That is too funny..thanks for making my day!
xx
I think she was just being sarcastic not making fun of
x
Seems JM has no problem making POW
and this qualifies him to run the country how?
racist and making fun of
the disabled. Little Flap Palin would be so disappointed with you.
what's wrong with making
your money and paying your taxes and not whining about it?
the bailout IS making
the US a socialist country - compliments of your beloved GWB and McPalin. congratulations you got your wish.
And you don't see this making the headline
xx
are you actually making this comparison
Obama to JFK? No way. 'nuff said.
You are right. People are making way too much...sm
of this "Keating 5" thing. He was only reprimanded for poor judgement, not a crime. That was the way of politics then, private planes paid for by corporations, no oversight. There is much more oversight now and McCain agrees that it was not right. He admits to poor judgement. Has no one made a poor judgement in their lives? Give me a break!
Must be the HDTV making her look that way
x
making right decision
This is my first post on the Politics board. I'm struggling with my decision between voting D or R.
I'm a registered Democrat and have been pro O'Bama 100%... until this past week when I read "They Must Be Stopped" by Brigitte Gabriel, founder of ACT! For America at www.actforamerica.org.
First, I am in no way saying O'Bama is Muslim, I do not believe that, but I am concerned with his voting record regarding bills that would protect us here at home. I'm middle class and believe me, I want to support the tax cuts and programs he is talking about...
I do not understand why either side will not stand up and call the "War on Terror" what it really is. I see the American traditions I grew up with disappearing and being replaced with "politically correct" traditions. A supposedly holy book (Koran) calling for my death or to strip me of my rights as a woman. On and on and on.
I haven't seen anything mentioned about this issue and I am interested in how other women/men feel.
The plumber would be making $250 k and
it would be 36 percent tax and 39 percent, which is 3 percent more, on the amount over 250K. That's pretty rich. Keep on typing, dope.
Making political hay.
These dadgone Republicans will make hay out of anything even if it makes them look like idgits.
I'm just making an observation (sm)
If there are any FACTS (and I'm not talking about an interpretation) relevant to this election from pubs on here, please feel free to point them out. I am honestly trying to understand why people would vote for McCain.
|
