I will address one thing. s/m
Posted By: gourdpainter on 2008-10-29
In Reply to: sm - I take offense to that
I did not intend to insult YOUR intelligence. I was speaking of American people in GENERAL. Obviously from your post you agree, whether you agreed in words or not, it's there between the lines i.e. your BIL's employees who complain. I was not speaking of people who bought off more debt than they could chew, I have NO sympathy for them. As far as I'm concerned these people who are living in 5000 sq. ft houses as you said and can't afford it, get what they deserve and I am certainly not in favor of bailing them out. I was speaking of people who are having trouble paying their heating/electric bills, buying groceries and gas to get to work on their $10 an hour jobs.
I say the outsourcing of American jobs is inexcusable. You proved my point regarding your BIL. If he, a small business, can give good jobs to his employees don't tell me the big businesses can't do likewise. You are correct, some people would complain if they were in God's pocket with their head sticking out! His employees who complain as far as I'm concerned, he ought to fire them and hire people who appreciate a good job in this day and age.
Please don't think anything I say personally. I do not mean it to be personal to anyone but if the shoe fits..........then I guess people can wear it.
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
So why are you here? Address the
their homes if they are so liberated?
Here's a web address regarding that.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html
So, does that mean no, you do not want to address it? NM
I will address it
Neither McCain nor Palin ever brought up assissination.
Hillary Clinton did! Fact - on tape - cannot deny it.
Obama suppporters loathed McCain/Palin. Many times I heard people saying they wished they would die. - Fact.
McCain supporters loathed Obama/Biden. I have heard people say some really bad things about him too. I have never once heard on tape anyone saying assassination except Hillary Clinton. - Fact.
net address, not link
I dont know why the link wont work, brings me to another MTstars page anyway, the site is www.capitolhillblue.com. Do a search for this net address and you will find the site. The article is on the first page. Enjoy.
why don't you address the issues here instead of
nm
Any of you Republicans want to address this? s/m
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America........given to us by Bush, "the decider." And you find Obama "scary?"
Obama's 12/06 address......... sm
Hope everyone is crosstraining in some other career........
—ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS: “In addition to connecting our libraries and schools to the Internet, we must also ensure that our hospitals are connected to each other through the Internet. That is why the economic recovery plan I’m proposing will help modernize our health care system – and that won’t just save jobs, it will save lives. We will make sure that every doctor’s office and hospital in this country is using cutting edge technology and electronic medical records so that we can cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help save billions of dollars each year.”
More in the link below.
I will address only one point s/m
As a long-time wife of union workers, I will tell you for fact that when union workers get raises and better benefits, non-union workers also get raises and better benefits. So just exactly who is it that doesn't benefit? Except, of course, big business....like Wal-Mart who will keep unionization out at any cost. Why? Because they would have to treat their employees fairly. The late great (NOT) Ronald Reagan, himself a card-carrying union member, vowed to break the unions and he did what he promised. Do you think workers are better off today?? Union members STILL have affordable health care AND pensions as do their retirees. I know..........thanks to my husband's long time union membership. His employer, Consolidated Freightways, established a non-union company (Con-Way Freight) and bankrupted the union arm of their business....with the exception of their Mexico and Canadian operations....so they could get out of their union contract and pay their workers less. The Teamsters back Obama and, yes, their fat cats want to further enrich themselve, but in so doing they have to drag the common workers along with them. POWER TO UNIONS!
OK, send me his address
He SHOULD have been told this before he was enlisted as cannon fodder for the war mongerers who were planning this fake war BEFORE the Supreme coup gave them the WhiteHouse.
No one doubts your nephew's good intentions for serving in the military. IN FACT, WE SUPPORT him so much, that we think he ought not be used as BAIT to secure more riches for the military industrial complex.
PLEASE do some research: This 'war' was manufactured and worse, 9/11 should have been and COULD have been prevented. IF THEY HAD DONE THAT, HOWEVER, they would not have been able to inflame a nation to war with a country that never attacked us.
SHAME on Americans who believe WITHOUT verifying or thinking for themselves!
We can't address the current....(sm)
economic nightmare without also addressing those who are already suffering from it. If that is not addressed while we are setting up new jobs, then we go straight into a depression. It's a whole lot harder and longer to get out of a full-blown depression that what we have now....and right now we're on the edge.
NASA = The 50 million Obama allotted for NASA is for them to repair facilities in Houston from hurricaine Ike (which should have already been done, btw) and non-space activities. Again, job creation. NASA wants more, but I doubt they'll get it.
Funny, but these don't seem to address
By which, of course, I mean the fact that socialism hasn't worked ANYWHERE, at ANY TIME.
Just a small omission, of course.
This is the last time I am going to address your posts. sm
The administrator and I have posted and reposted the rules. I don't care what publication approved what. The administrator will not allow extremely inflammatory posts regarding the President and these rules have been outlined to you repeatedly. As the administrator has said, this board is read worldwide. Have a care for what you post. No one has run to me asking to have posts removed. I remove the posts that do violate the rules. I suggest you post in another venue if you cannot manage to respect the rules of this board.
This really doesn't address my post
It appears to be another excuse to vent your dislike of all things liberal. It contains misguided and erroneous assumptions, as usual.
But I do appreciate the time you took to compose it. Just wish your time could be spent on something more constructive or insightful...something that could educate or enlighten the reader rather than leaving them scratching their heads thinking....what in the heck is she ranting about.....sure makes me think those neocons are bonkers..... I wish for once one of your posts would make me think golly, she might have a point there instead of feeling like someone had defecated on me. Understand?
Way too juvenile to address this flap.
nm
BTDT. Please address views of the
nm
I did address it directly. In the post above....
and you proved my point about the attacking. Typical dem.
So what's to address? I haven't liked the idea
I don't so much have a problem with Canada as I do Mexico. Of course, I've never cared for NAFTA. I do go for the Canada-US Smart Border Declaration but why don't we have one of those with Mexico? No, instead we have the US-Mexico Partnership. I partner enough with Mexico every time I support one more illegal in this country.
Now since they want to call it an ongoing dialogue, they can call it whatever they want, but wanting to preserve each country's sovereignty is a joke unless we close the US/Mexico border and if the border is crossed, shoot!
I do not want a major thoroughfare going from Mexico across this country and into Canada. Any idiot could see we are just asking for more trouble there. Encouraging drug smuggling and illegals and terrorists to boot. Anything and everything come right on into this country and they don't even have to brave those terrible old conditions on foot...they can just drive right in.
As much as this sounds great..
"Cooperation in intelligence, border management, law enforcement and transportation security is intended to reduce criminal activity and terrorist risks, thereby making our communities safer, facilitating legitimate trade and travel, and protecting our quality of life. Collaborative planning and prevention strategies will help ensure reduced impact, coordinated response and faster recovery from disaster situations, whether public health, cyber, natural, human error or terrorist in nature", it ain't happening. I do not care to do business with Mexico until they secure their own borders and stop letting their illegals in this country. They need to be coming up with their own plan to educate and employ their own population.
The list of things I don't care for go on and on. What else would you like to know?
Address the name but ignore the quote?
use the exact same terminology and the exact same ideology that you have been slamming and slurring Obama for now for weeks? Heard it with my own ears...hot off the trail.
You guys can't have it both ways. He is promising to redistribute offshore drilling revenues from oil companies to "Talahassee." He was directing his comment to a rally full of Floridians. He was not proposing to give the Tallahassee state govt, but rather was speaking of the citizens right in front of him.
If Obama's spread the wealth is socialism...which McC camp has been yamering and hammering into our skulls for days and days and days now, then it would make perfect sense to assume that Palin's (out of the moose's mouth) "share the wealth" and "collective ownership of resources" is every bit as socialist, wouldn't it? This question requires a direct answer.
You didn't address your post
to Christians exclusively. If that was what you wanted, maybe you should take it over to the faith board, will everyone will gush and agree with you.
opps, didn't get the whole address in there (sm)
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
It would be a waste of time to try to address
Do you folks never tire of being scared and scaring each other? There is bigotry and there is racism, both of which pervaded during this election cycle in the media and at pub rallies. To deny this is so is truly beyond ridiculous. Yours is a very small, dark world view, unfounded in reality and not worthy of further comment.
It will if you copy it and paste it into the address bar
x
The address you gave is not his residence.
Well, seems as though the rumor factor is alive and well. A little research is in order when passing along the latest gossip, so here you go.
Rahm Emmanuel lives at 4232 N. Hermitage. Here's a link to show you a copy of his paid-in-full property tax on his homestead exempted residence:
http://www.sangamonwatercolor.org/cap/rahmbillpaidfull.jpg
I found it here:
http://www.progressillinois.com/2008/11/07/rahm-emanuel-property-taxes
The address you gave is the office of the Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Foundation. They donate to the charities of their choice. Big whoop. You seem to have missed the point of the article, but let's say this loud and clear. Rahm Emmanuel is not evading property taxes on his home, as you can see from the link provided above that clearly shows how much me pays on his residence. There is no THERE there.
Here is the speaker's email address.
Maybe we should all send her an email. Let her know how we feel about her use of taxpayers' money for her own personal benefit.
sf.nancy@mail.house.gov
Just copy and paste into address bar...(sm)
I obviously have a deficiency today...LOl
Please point out the insults and I will address those posts. sm
In reading the board, I am not sure who the one poster you are referring to is. As far as Nina's post, I saw no insults. Please point them out. Until a poster identifies themselves as a certain political persuasian, how do you know who they are? I'd like a clue.
Please address the 4 key points raised in terms of
x
The subject did not change. I will address you concerns
You remember the one about the fact that our tax system has always been progressive and the table posted above shows you just how moderate in comparison Obama's proposed tax rate is. What I want to know is were those 7 republican presidents between 1932 and 1981 all MORE socialist than Obama or what?
I will answer you just as soon as you address my orignal post
that question repeatedly and I think you and I both know why you have been running from it all day long.
You may notify admin of their email address,
and that can be blocked as well. Usually there is a link in the email that says report as spam, which will direct you to admin@mtstars.com
If the repugs would ever actually address an issue head on
there would be no need to pull the phrase out so often. It is a positively pathologic compulsion of theirs and has a whole lot to do with why they ended up on the short end of the stick in November.
Figures....if you can't address the problem...deflect.
What possible difference does what Bush did make? That was then, this is now. We are in a huge financial crisis (largely brought on by Democrats in congress blissfully ignoring the looming housing crisis and the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle...yet you want to trust them now that we are up to our eyeballs drowning in debt with more on the way). Bush did not spend a much in 8 years as Obama has spent in...oh wait...how many WEEKS? Good grief!!!!! Don't you even WONDER how he possibly hopes to recoup all this?
Gracious enough to grant him more time? To do WHAT? Triple my taxes about the time the economy straightens out? If you think taxing the "rich" will fix this...get out your calculator and try again.
Look...I don't want to fight with anyone, but I do not understand the total blindless being exhibited here, when the microscope was used to examine Bush. Take that same microscope and start examining Obama...if you can.
The recovery package will address, in part,
The stimulus bill is a separate issue.
Thanks for Nancy Pelosi's e-mail address.
I just sent Nancy Pelosi a note telling her to keep up the good work!
This article does not begin to address the problems.
Going forward not but a few years, Social Security is a grave problem, but Medicare is a true crisis, and we won't be able to tax our way out of either, although the idiots will try.
These things ARE coming:
1. Tax increases. These will be of many different varieties, and from all levels of government.
2. Reduced SS benefits. This might be disguised in the form of raising the eligibility age, etc., but it will still be a reduction in benefits.
3. Healthcare rationing. We simply will not be able to pay the bill to provide everyone with the level of care that medical science is technically capable of delivering. Rationing will be done in two ways - by restricting access on some sort of a cost-benefit basis (if you're 80, you won't get that triple bypass), and by increasing the waiting times while forcing people to go through a series of less-effective but cheaper forms of treatment.
I continue to be amazed at the number of people - in government and out - who continue to stick their heads in the sand over these realities while we pile up debts that even China can't bail us out of.
Typical pub. Can't address a single issue directly.
nm
By trying to address 2000 and 2004 election corruption
nm
Care to address the issue of the litmus test
nm
Links not working but will if you copy and paste them in address bar...
nm
Cindy Sheehan not allowed to watch SOU address, was arrested.
Curiously, CNN reported that Cindy had UNFURLED A BANNER INSIDE THE CHAMBER WHICH IS AGAINST THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS RULES.
Half an hour later we learn that no such thing happened. Cindy simply wore a T-shirt with an antiwar message on it and was promptly hauled off to jail.
In Bushworld, you can not only be arrested and hauled off to jail for wearing a controversial T-shirt, but the major media will also make up ridiculous lies about you and broadcast them world-wide. That's some performance for a liberal press. But oh ho ho, we were all being so paranoid four years ago to claim that the press was a willing servant of deliberate Rovian disinformation spinmeisters. Once again, we are right on the mark and the Repubs? - blind and wrong and misdirected as usual - let us count the many things about which the progressive thinking people of this nation have been absolutely correct, and the Bush supporters oh so regrettably wrong. Wow, it would take pages and pages!
Can't tell them anything though - they can't admit it when they are wrong. The way things are going, they're going to deny us right into the communist USSR of 1965 - the state our teachers used to scare us about in 1965 - and we would think, oh, how awful to live in a place where the government controls all the media, where protestors are thrown in jail, where you have to be worried about speaking above a whisper if you criticize the government, because your own neighbor will turn you in! Oh those poor people, having their mail opened and never being able to see any real news, only what the govt. wants them to see!
But of course that was back in the days when dissent was patriotic, when Americans didn't spy on each other, when the govt. could not throw you in jail without a trial, when even Presidents had to resign if they wiretapped you without a warrant. You know, the OLD America, when nobody was above the law and citizens were shocked when the lies and deceit and self-serving greed of elected officials was exposed, instead of sniggering and giggling behind their hands about how bold their guys are, and ain't it grand they're still in charge.
Gee, I really miss it - was good while it lasted, and something to tell the grandkids about.
But valuing over the price of a dollar is a right thing wing thing, so you are on the wrong board. n
x
I never said it's a bad thing, it is a good thing....nm
nm
one other thing though....
Agree with everything you stated, but I am profoundly disgusted also with Rove being able to expose a CIA agent, and nothing is going to be done about it in that I feel he committed treason, as Reagan did with Iran-Contra... Treasonous acts that are let to slide...no big deal huh? Who knows if someone is getting hurt because of his mouth, and yet, nothing... The silence is very annoying...as our country drops into a stinking sea of muck.
One more thing, gt. sm
Of all the people on these boards, YOUR opinion of me is the one I value the least.
Oh, and one more thing, gt. sm
Clnton signed Kyoto in 1997, only because he knew that the Senate would not ratify it. He was right. They voted 95-0 AGAINST Kyoto. Why? Because it would have required signatory nations to significantly cut greenhouse gases resulting from the burning of fosil fuels. Because ratifying the treaty would have required a large reduction in the use of fossil fuels that we use to our our economy. Until there is an alternative fuel source that is better than gold old fashioned coal and oil, restricting our economy's ability to burn these fuels would CRIPPLE US AS A NATION. You are not seeing the total picture here, you simply cannot be seeing it. I know the left's hatred for capitalism has blinded them to the fact that without our economy, we collapse. It really is that simple. We would be reduced to a third world nation in a very short period of time and you and I would not be sitting here writing on our computers because our world as we know it would change. Yes, it really is all about oil. But not the way you think.
and another thing
we aren't controlling anybody. There are several countries in this world where you are controlled, but this ain't one of them.
One more thing:
I apologize for the length of my post, but so far, I still have freedom of speech.
Guess I just feel the need to get it all out before that freedom suddenly disappears, as well. The majority of Americans don't agree with Bush, and we all know how he/his thugs handle people who dare to disagree with him. If you don't believe me, just ask John McCain and/or Valerie Plame.
I'd like to add one more thing.
If these alleged WMDs are so widespread and so easily accessible in Iraq, why aren't any of them being used on our soldiers?
Honestly, that's one of the very first fears I had when I heard we were going to war with Iraq (when I still believed the reasons given by the president and supported the invasion based on those reasons). I had visions of massive troop deaths at the hands of Iraqis and these WMDs.
Did that happen? 
OK. Here's the thing...sm
Because we've been through this before and I feel a repeat coming on. I'm respectful and nice to everyone on these boards 99% of the time. People come over to the liberal board and pretend they are moderates or just want to *debate.* When all the time they are anti-everything liberal and have no intention of seeing the liberal point of view. In the end, they end up *insulted* off of the board and run to the other board and have a sling fest. Yawn. They have revelations over there contrary to the beliefs they portrayed on this board. So really I'm skeptical about debating with the like. You may be 100% different worldfan, but from your posts on the Conservative and News boards it would appear you would be more at home on the conservative board giving them a high five about what's going on over here. Just my observation.
I used to post on the conservative board but I left because they were getting too extreme for my liking. It's that simple. There are some topics over there that I would reply too, but I don't b/c of past comments made over there, which have made me stick to the liberal page. However, on quite a few issues I am far from liberal like abortion and fiscal spending.
I hope you get my points. If not, we don't have anything more to discuss.
Sorry. Here's the whole thing.
I was trying to avoid this but the link is not working for some reason.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Tuesday, July 04, 2006 |
|
|
Headlines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Britons Tire of Cruel, Vulgar US: Poll |
|
|
People in Britain view the United States as a vulgar, crime-ridden society obsessed with money and led by an incompetent president whose Iraq policy is failing, according to a newspaper poll.
The United States is no longer a symbol of hope to Britain and the British no longer have confidence in their transatlantic cousins to lead global affairs, according to the poll published in The Daily Telegraph.
...a majority of the Britons described Americans as uncaring, divided by class, awash in violent crime, vulgar, preoccupied with money, ignorant of the outside world, racially divided, uncultured and in the most overwhelming result (90 percent of respondents) dominated by big business. ![src=http://www.commondreams.org/images/endquote.gif]()
|
|
The YouGov poll found that 77 percent of respondents disagreed with the statement that the US is a beacon of hope for the world.
As Americans prepared to celebrate the 230th anniversary of their independence on Tuesday, the poll found that only 12 percent of Britons trust them to act wisely on the global stage. This is half the number who had faith in the Vietnam-scarred White House of 1975.
A massive 83 percent of those questioned said that the United States doesn't care what the rest of the world thinks.
With much of the worst criticism aimed at the US adminstration, the poll showed that 70 percent of Britons like Americans a lot or a little.
US President George W. Bush fared significantly worse, with just one percent rating him a great leader against 77 percent who deemed him a pretty poor or terrible leader.
More than two-thirds who offered an opinion said America is essentially an imperial power seeking world domination. And 81 per cent of those who took a view said President George W Bush hypocritically championed democracy as a cover for the pursuit of American self-interests.
US policy in Iraq was similarly derided, with only 24 percent saying they felt that the US military action there was helping to bring democracy to the country.
A spokesman for the American embassy said that the poll's findings were contradicted by its own surveys.
We question the judgment of anyone who asserts the world would be a better place with Saddam still terrorizing his own nation and threatening people well beyond Iraq's borders, the paper quoted the unnamed spokesman as saying.
With respect to the poll's assertions about American society, we bear some of the blame for not successfully communicating America's extraordinary dynamism.
But frankly, so do you (the British press).
In answer to other questions, a majority of the Britons questions described Americans as uncaring, divided by class, awash in violent crime, vulgar, preoccupied with money, ignorant of the outside world, racially divided, uncultured and in the most overwhelming result (90 percent of respondents) dominated by big business.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse
### |
 Printer Friendly Version  E-Mail This Article |
|
|
|
FAIR USE NOTICE |
|
|
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
