I was trying to illustrate that you REFUSE to see what's in front of your face, that you must twi
Posted By: American Woman on 2005-08-30
In Reply to: Okay if you weren't shooting me the bird - Reality check
it and turn it and manipulate it until it becomes something completely different and ugly, and you adopt THAT as the truth, when it isn't even close to what the real truth is.
Three fingers are three fingers. Nothing more. Nothing less. No hidden meaning. Just three fingers that the rest of the sane, intelligent, reasonable WORLD sees and recognizes as THREE FINGERS, as I said in my post.
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
How can she be ready to face our nation's problems when she won't even face any questions on h
she is just a big gimmick to get the women voters that were bitter about Hillary's loss.
She's supposed to be this tough pitbull but she won't campaign out on her own or is allowed to talk to the press ?!?! More like a chicken if you ask me than a pitbull.
Abiding with the moratorium....I think if we all worked face-to-face (sm)
We could all talk about our differences as friends. Some we would get along with and others not but we could talk about all of it respectfully with each other. Having the anonymity makes us all probably take things up a notch or two higher than we would in person, but I suspect we would all be making the same points, just in person. That said, with election day being tomorrow, I hope that all of us, no matter who is elected, will make the best of the situation and try to be kind to our fellow human beings regardless of race or religion.. Good night and Amen...lol 
Perhaps you could illustrate for the class
how cap and trade is not a tax?
Thank you for helping illustrate just how impotent
x
Bush just the front man
I agree that Bush is not the brains behind his administration and just the front guy..Cheney, however, scares the dickens out of me. Do you see how he talks..teeth clenched, just out of the side of his mouth. This guy is neocon in flashing letters..
Thanks for bringing this to the front...nm
On the healthcare front........sm
Nearly half the respondents in a survey of U.S. primary care physicians said that they would seriously consider getting out of the medical business within the next three years if they had an alternative.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/11/17/primary.care.doctors.study/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
It's on Fox News' front page
right now. That makes it true then, right?
I don't care who they stand in front of and...
what they say or if they wear dresses, tuxedos, or both at the same time, for that matter. the ceremony is not the problem. Anyone can hold any kind of ceremony they feel like having at any time. This is not what they are fighting for. As far as the law goes, I am all for any gay person marrying someone of the opposite sex--same right that I have.
When Ann Coulter gets in front of a mirror
there is no reflection. She's a bottom feeding, blood-sucking vamp, pale and gaunt, dark, depressed, pathologic and maniacal, allergic to the light of day, mistress of the shadowland and fairy princess to the furthest fringes, a dying breed, bound for extinction.
Bush WAS a "uniter" on one front:
Before he "liberated" those nonexistent WMDs from Iraq, Iran and Iraq were mortal enemies, which kept the region relatively quiet.
But thanks to Bush's occupation and war against Iraq, Iran and Iraq are now much friendlier with each other.
WTG, Bush!
And I as well. especially those on the front line...the mayors...the governors...
and at the federal level as well...it will take all of them. This is somewhere where party lines need to disappear. This is where we all need to pull together.
It wasn't condescending, and the man in front of him was nodding...
I had heard of them but certainly not to the extent I know about them now. I am sure there are lots of people in the US who had no clue who Fannie/Freddie were.
Wasn't that a front-page headline in the
n/msg
More like she thinks she should be the one up front giving the speech.
That would have been great to see Obama turn around and smack that simpy smirk off her face. She wanted to make sure she got her camera time because she thinks she's more important. I can't stand that woman!
I refuse to discuss
religion with Moonies or Scientologists. There is just no common ground. The same way as I refuse to discuss politics with people who actually consider Fox a news station. They are indoctrinated and innoculated from the truth by daily coordinated talking points to distort any event (such as saying Charlie Gibson looking down his nose at SP or was too rough on her) to favor their desire to keep the corrupt repubs in power. It's a waste of my time.
I'm sorry you refuse to see their teachings as
I can give you confession after confession of Muslims who have denounced those teachings once they were free from that country. They admit they are teachings of hate; even though they believed some of them were similar to Christian teachings, they couldn't understand why they were taught to hate by their teachings. I can give you many who say this....but of course I suupose you will say they don't know what they're talking about either.
Pay close attention to a paragraph under the head of Christianity and Islam, where he quotes a verse from Sura 5:51......and what he has to say after that.
http://www.everystudent.com/wires/abdul.html
But they refuse to understand.........
He has yet to prove citizenship.... and for those that say he IS a citizen, even if he were born in Hawaii, his stepfather (who is Muslim) adopted him in Indonesia. Once he was adopted by his stepfather, his stepfather renounced Obama's U.S. citizenship. The United States does NOT recognize dual citizenship with Indonesia....never has in the past either. Indonesia does NOT recognize dual citizenship, so Obama cannot have dual citizenship. The only way to reclaim his U.S. citizenship is to go through the Immigration Dept just like anyone else, fill out the necessary paperwork, and wait for his hearing. He has no paperwork to prove that either. He knows he does not. If he did, all he would have to do is show his immigration papers but he can't because he doesn't have them.
You can only have dual citizenship with a country that allows that. Obama's stepfather renounced Obama's U.S. citizenship and claimed him Muslim, as was his father. His stepsister even says he is Muslim through and through....
Now, that being said, supposedly Indonesia had tried to begin a new dual nationality law as of ག or so, but Obama hasn't filled out any paperwork for that as an Indonesian either. As of གྷ the new law in Indonesia had not even been implemented. There is a lot of red tape and still many who object to dual nationality allowances.
Our law says in order to be a "natural born citizen"..
The U.S. Law in effect during Obama's birth stated if you are born abroad to one U.S. parent and a foreign national, the U.S. parent must have resided in the United States for ten (10) years, five (5) of which were after the age of Fourteen (14) in order to register the child's birth abroad in the United States as a "natural born" U.S. citizen.
Either way.....he AIN'T a citizen of this country....
I refuse to waste my
time reading biased, inaccurate opinions. Got a prob with that? Yours only.
I did....you refuse to accept it.
Go tweak someone else for a while.
A voter in front of me was asked to show a picture ID.....sm
I was not and the voter in front of her was not. I think that, even in a small place where the election judges know most of the population, picture ID should be required. The guy behind me was the one I mentioned in my other post that apparently was not on the list. Maybe, in our democratic process, every other voter gets some kind of hassle? lol
No, I refuse to try and debate you anymore
because you can't be anything but condescending and ugly.
Those who refuse to learn from history..... sm
are doomed to repeat it. The following is a link written by an elderly woman who grew up in Nazi Germany. See how many dots you can connect.
http://carylmatrisciana.com:80/x2/content/view/74/1/
I refuse to conform and I just don't fit in," .......so he was fired!!
'TOO PATRIOTIC'?? That's reason for dismissal from a job? What the h@ll is this country coming to?
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=576612
sorry the link didn't work - its on MSN front page today
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29697096
A simple "I refuse to hear the truth" would do.
What Conyers is doing is playing by the rules. This is a HJC hearing, not a congressional hearing. There have been a number of ridiculous restrictions on what they can or cannot say imposed on this process. For example, they are not allowed to utter the word "impeachment" and Bush's name in the same sentence. Absurd. In spite of all the obstacles, he opened the hearings and has vowed to see it through and to bring the truth into the public discourse once the investigation is concluded. He is quite aware of the fact that he is putting his reputation as a senior member of Congress on the line, so it would make sense that what goes on there is compelling. He is doing nothing to distract or circle around THE ISSUES. He is moving the process along. He is chairing the committee. All the details of the restrictions, who put them there and why, Conyer's position, etctera, can be found in the numerous links that have been provided and is well summarized in DK's interview.
The difference between him and you? Are you serious? He is familiar with every single player, position, stance, viewpoint, piece of evidence and rebuttal. He is a fact checker. He is not considering this evidence on the basis of hearsay. He is evaluating the integrity of the proof as it is presented. You, on the other hand, say you know all you need to know because you have "heard it from other democrats." In other words, you are not willing to even listen to the prosecution case or its evidence as it is presented directly from the source. Instead you talk all around what is really taking place inside those chambers. You are still doing it, trying to twist this into something it most definitely is not. Here's the deal. When you can't win on the issues, out comes the smear and smut.
No one said anything about your having made anything up about Niger. No matter how hard you try, you cannot make this about that one single subject. There are literally scores of talking points and hundreds of pieces of evidence to sift through. You are not the least bit interested in any evidence. If you were, you would watch the interview and post you rebuttals. You're not doing that. You are obsfuscating. It's what you do. What possible difference could it make in terms of valid claims and conclusive evidence whether this process occurs in formal or informal impeachment hearings? Truth is truth. Proof is proof.
You are not interested in hearing from all the witnesses or seeing all the proof. Exactly the opposite. You want to see no witnesses and no proof, unless of course it backs your own contentions. Stop trying to imply that the process is rigged. In the post 9/11 politics of fear world, the republicans would classify the White House address, if they could get away with it. Preponderance of the evidence usually is all that is required to achieve majority vote. If that evidence is incomplete, you have the republicans to thank for that. Do you really think that all that info held in secret is vital to national security? The only thing it is vital to is covering the neoCONS behinds.
You doest protest too much. More obstacles. Be honest. This is not about you want this and you want that. It's what you DON'T want that is plain to see. You don't want to face the reality that they just might be onto something. Another pot shot at Clinton. You really think that lying about an affair is a more serious impeachable offense than misleading an entire nation on the reasons for going to war? One thing is for sure here. As long as you continue to refuse to view the process as it is happening, instead of what you speculate about what may or may not be going on, you really do not have any way to justify anything you are saying about it. You say you have heard what DK has said. Okay. Did you watch the interview? What was in it? You must have skipped over the stuff about the live blogging from inside the chambers. The information is available for those who are interested. Go to the links. It's all in there….including information on how to follow it on a day-to-day basis.
Since the rest of this post has disintegrated into non-stop personal attack, I will not waste my time with it. Clearly, you will not engage yourself in any direct, honest, informed dialogue on this subject. This is still about your comfort zone. This just goes to show how extremely intolerant you are whenever anybody tries to challenge your ideas and how terrified you really are with what might be coming out of those chambers.
Just ignore them, ms, obviously they refuse to read the whole thing....nm
x
And yet you STILL refuse to condemn child sexual abuse!
When this was first posted, it was posted before there were separate political boards. Still, there was no response.
You people have done nothing by drive-by sniping posts for the last couple weeks, to the point where some of them had to be removed by the moderator.
Yet you're AFRAID to post outrage over child sexual abuse?
I guess we can leave it at that. You're obviously more outraged that I posted regarding this subject than you are at the subject itself.
And THAT speaks volumes.
Yeah, guess Obama supports refuse to look at all
nm
Yeah, agreed. Obama supporters refuse to see his
nm
It's actually more distracting to refuse to do someting that is a traditional symbol of our count
You are an American, right? You better enjoy your free speech while you still have it.
Facts are always called opinions by the left when they refuse to acknowledge them...sm
The facts within the article are true. No matter how much you want to ignore them.
You are so blind.
I refuse to forget history...can't afford to be "condemned to repeat it"
He created this cluster with his cronies and they should be held accountable.
Soldiers and peace officers pledging to refuse to obey sm
An invitation to soldiers and peace officers across the United States to pledge to refuse illegal orders – including "state of emergency" orders that could include disarming or detaining American citizens – has struck a chord, collecting more than 100,000 website visitors in a little over a week and hundreds of e-mails daily.
Link to article: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91530
Oath Keepers website: http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html
i wish we could be face to face
man lady you are something you know that? did you get on here to stir the pot or something? i am a woman that can conceive and I will tell you that I think you are a horrible person for thinking it is okay to get rid of your baby. There, I said it. that is MY opinion. Gonna try to get me banned now? Go ahead. Cry about it why dontcha?
Here it is, right in your face!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's from the documentary "Media Malpractice - How Obama Got Elected"
Ever heard of YouTube? Or the internet? Amazing that you're the only one in America who hasn't seen the footage.
Go to www.howobamagotelected.com if you're interested in seeing the truth (which I doubt).
And here's an quote from the Zogby poll that inspired the film.
"UTICA, New York -- Just 2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day aced the post election test which gauged their knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the presidential tickets during the campaign, a new Zogby International poll shows.
Only 54% of Obama voters were able to answer at least half or more of the questions correctly.
The telephone survey of 512 Obama voters nationwide was conducted Nov. 13-15, 2008, and carries a margin of error of +/- 4.4 percentage points.
Obama voters did not fare nearly as well overall when asked to answer questions about statements or stories associated with Obama or Biden --
83% failed to correctly answer that Obama had won his first election by getting all of his opponents removed from the ballot.
88% did not correctly associate Obama with his statement that his energy policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry.
Nearly three quarters (72%) of Obama voters did not correctly identify Biden as the candidate who had to quit a previous campaign for President because he was found to have plagiarized a speech.
In addition to questions regarding statements and scandals associated with the campaigns, the survey also included a question asking which political party controlled both houses of Congress leading up to the election -- 57% of Obama voters were unable to correctly answer that it was Democrats."
Ignorance elected Obama. You're a prime example.
Well, on the face of it....
a "national security force" and Obama's statement about it does sound "Hitler-ish." Hitler's national security force was Gestapo. You really think we need a national security force in the US? We have the National Guard...ahhhh but the National Guard is in control of the individual states and that would not serve the same purpose as a "national security force" operating under the President...does it? Basically a military strength and trained force that functions as a police force gets around posse comitatus. That little statement of Barry's didn't give you the least bit of pause?
On face value, no exploitation. But
nm
And you better be glad that someone is willing to get in their face....
because that is all they understand, and that is why we have not had another attack in this country. It is precisely THIS kind of thinking that we DO NOT need in the white house. Diplomacy is fine...and many times it works. But your enemies have to know that if hit, you will hit back hard. I have no faith that Barack Obama would act decisively (like Clinton with Khobar Towers, the first world trade center bombing, the COle, and on and on and on). I don't want things like that happening again. I want them sitting back on their heels like they are now. John McCain will keep them there and he won't be having tea with Ahmadinejad without rules. It just shows that Barack Obama has no clue what he is dealing with. No clue.
Yes, that is very true....but now he has to face everyone...
not just Democrats. Personally, the association with Wright did not put me off Obama. What put me off was the Marxist tones of the theology taught in that church, Obama's teaching of Alinsky's techniques, and already trying to implement Marxist principles. I admit, that is alarming to me. I can't hold Obama personally responsible for what his pastor said and never did...I can hold him responsible for his actions. As can we all with ANY candidate...be it McCain, Palin, Obama, or Biden.
It is not a slap in the face.... sm
take it however you like, that is my personal opinion. We have a lot of great women leaders and yes a lot of women have fought for our rights as women, but that has nothing to do with a women running this country. Again, my personal opinion and why should I go and be a man because that is how I feel. Different people with different opinions, part of what makes the world go round. I feel the way I feel and I am not ashamed of it.
You really just proved the exact reason I stated women are not ready to lead this country. You reacted with emotions stating I should be ashamed and I am a disgrace, you were GUIDED by your EMOTIONS/FEELINGS. Goodnight!!
...where they don't have to face the truth.
xx
That face was priceless!!!
nm
let's face it, none of those people
buy their clothes from wal-mart and it would not take much to rack up 150,000, especially when identical suits were bought in 2 or 3 sizes just to make sure one would fit. I don't think we got all the truth of that one; without a definite source being named, I am suspicious.
Ok, let's try another face on this whole thing.....
SO IT IS OKAY TO KILL BABIES BUT NOT TORTURE TERRORISTS?
Somewhere we have gotten our priorities wrong. We should be more worried about the unborn than a bunch of terrorists who could give a fat rat's backside about anybody but themselves.
Here's something to wipe the smile off your face. sm
She is an extremist as far as being pro-life. 
Did you see the look on George & Laura's face?sm
You know George bounced off the walls when he got home. There is only one look I found more hilarious, and that was the look on Mike Myer's face when Kanye West made the famous statement George Bush does not care about black people.
It sounds good on the face....
but I don't see American physicians taking a 3x cut in their income. It boggles the mind to think what the initial cost of that billing system they are talking about would be. And the big thing that concerns me is the "broad taxes on earned and unearned income." Like I have said over and over...if they can find the money without taking more than 35% off the top of my wages, I am all for it. However, I am not willing to go to 50-55%. I don't know many who are.
I guess you don't like to face the facts
There is a link that I included. His half brother and he were raised as muslims. If your a Christian that's a big deal, if your not religious at all its no big deal (or maybe it is).
You are the one who needs to get with the program. You don't want to face the facts about Obama and his background and what he believes in, stands for, or has voted for/against. Your hatred for one candidate blinds you to what the other candidate is really about.
Sorry but this is not "crock" and it was not refuted, just the democrats tried to cover it up. So you need to "get with the program" and stop believe all hogwash you are being fed by the liberal media.
There is a link. There is picture. And there is proof - his own brother! What part of this don't you understand.
Face it, this is a political issue.....NM
.
Bush tries to save some face --
It looks like our wonderful govt is thinking about another stimulus -- remember those tax rebates we got back in the spring of this year? It was $600 an individual and $1200 a couple. The govt doesn't want to do quite the same kind of stimulus as last time because -- get this -- 80% of the Americans who received it used it to either pay down debt or bolster savings. Here's what they want the new stimulus to do:
•The extension of unemployment benefits and possibly food stamps from 39 to 52 weeks.
•A boost in infrastructure spending, despite the problems of getting the money to work quickly.
•Some relief for state and local governments facing tighter budgets because of lower tax receipts and rising Medicaid costs.
God forbid we give something to the middle class -- let's extend the food stamps and boost the "infrastructure spending" -- what is that anyway? I'm guessing it's a way to line the pockets of the suits even more. When is it going to end?
|
