I will have respect for Obama once he proves
Posted By: he is legal, which will never happen.nm on 2009-01-10
In Reply to: Oh please. Even HE has no expectations of himself. - Which is why he talks gloom and doom..sad.nm
nm
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
Well, it proves that Obama isn't ...
...a terrorist, as he's been ridiculously accused of being.
I'm still worried about Bush finding a reason to declare martial law and creating a dictatorship before Obama takes the oath of office, and I wonder if a terror attack would assist in that endeavor. 
You got it! Obama proves more and more
nm
Oh my...another Obama fan proves their intelligence
or lack thereof. How sad.
Obama's Chicago thugs, one after another, proves
nm
I read about her yesterday. Obama proves again
nm
Yes, Obama the great uniter!..proves all the time
nm
Still have more respect for him that I do Obama,
nm
With all due respect, I am voting for Obama, not his
Barack Obama addresses issues that mean the most to me. Simple as that. His wife seems to be a caring mother and caring human being in general who is intelligent and well educated. I think those are great qualities for a first lady.
Obama inspires me with his speeches. He reminds me of JFK in that way. He won't fly on private jets because his vote has not been purchased by any large corporations, and he does not want to give that appearance. In other words, I do not think he has been corrupted by money and greed, and in Washington that says a lot!! When I look at the big picture he is my #1 choice. Go Obama.  Sorry, couldn't resist the cheerleader! :)
I respect Obama because he recognizes needs of
despite his wealth. I come from a privileged background myself...father and mother attorneys and heirs to real estate holdings in excess of 500 properties...all in the poorest section of the city. As a child, my dad took me with him to the office and I saw first hand how "the other half" (as our snobby neighbors called them) lived. He was a tireless advocate for them...a thorn in the side of the city council where he successfully lobbied on their behalf over 4 decades for sidewalks, roads, sewage systems amenable to INDOOR PLUMBING, schools and community centers. He was the family's closet liberal, and paid a high, high price for that when he was forced to hob-knob with the greed gang. Obama is much like he was. Those kinds of rich people are few and far between, but not entirely absent from the landscape. Case in point, Warren Buffett, investment wizard, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, who caps his own salary at $100,000 per year. I am no hypocrite on this subject and I know a good man when I see one. But don't take my word on this. Ever hear Susan Eisenhower talk about Obama?
I WANT to respect Obama, but I cant simply
nm
I don't demand anyone respect Obama. However,
I feel certain he will more than earn his respect in the way he's planning to deal with Bush's depression whereas Bush never earned any respect.
No, this is ridiculous. But out of respect, Obama
nm
Don't want a fight, just want to ask, Does Obama respect the American Flag?
I saw this picture of his airplane before the makeover
and here it is after the makeover
His "symbol" "slogan" "trademark" or whateverthatis replaced the flag. I'm
sorry but I just don't understand why unless he has no respect for it.
Can someone explain without getting upset; just explain it.
This actually proves that...
global warming is a naturally occurring event. Not manmade. No greenhouse effect by man.
You helped my point, in a roundabout way. Thanks!
By the way, your first link didn't bring up anything but someone's nightly news blog on MSNBC. Was there something important on there you wanted us to see?
This proves it
These posters are paid political trolls. I knew they would think up something else. This post is absolutely laughable, asking MTs to come up with $50,000 to $60,000 for such a ridiculous cause so they can become heroes" ....baaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaha
I think most MTs these days are more concerned with having enough work to pay the light bill and buy groceries.
Hardly? Proves it every day, many more to come.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$444
This proves only 2 things.
First, that Scarborough can criticize Bush, as well as compliment him. He can do both, unlike you. If he sees something wrong, he has the courage to say it; however, he is still a conservative and he still supports Bush. As I said before, he just doesn't *blindly* support him, and he has the ability to be objective.
The second thing it proves is the CON method of doing things is to silence and disparage those who have the audacity to exert their (so far) constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech.
Scarborough is a respectable man. He loves America and he respects the Constitution. Unlike your *God Bush,* who thinks the Constitution is only a *piece of paper.* The fact that you so aggressively defend someone so obviously devoid of morals and ethics tells me way more than I want to know about you. People like you give me the heebie-jeebies, and I'd just rather associate myself with your kind of people, so I won't be responding to you any more.
You really do belong on the CON board, you know. Your nastiness and constant harassment of people on this board is getting old, is incredibly distasteful and just might wind up being brought to the moderator's attention if it continues.
This just proves my point.
We are still talking about the MJF ad and I never even heard anything about Ben Affleck which just proves that his voice does not reach quite as many people as Rush does. If I had heard what he said I would condemn that as well. I really really do not think there is ever an occasion when it is all right to malign the disabled.
No, joke is on you and proves you do NOT
The writers of the constitution DID NOT have electoral college. It was not written into law until the 1800s it is called "college of electors" and even then, it did not work because they had to amend AGAIN because political parties emerged, which showed electoral college did not work.
When the constitution is spoke of, it should mean as our founding fathers meant it. I say again, it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Just proves one thing. s/m
Republicans are carrying on their family tradition, Democrats do the same thing. WHEN will Americans wake up and realize that neither party is what it was for your parents and grandparents? I had a similar discussion this very morning with my son. He doesn't like McCain but he is voting for him. I changed the subject. At least I taught him to think for himself.
this proves my earlier
post about the popularity of Fox News and the country being a majority of dullards. Not enough information to understand the debates on Meet The Press or other actual news programs, so watch 2 clowns argue. When finished, turn on the wrasslin' channel.
Your response proves that you obviously , , ,
didn't REALLY listen to his Cairo speech. First of all, he was not "heaping scorn" on the US. He had FIRM words for all parties involved, including us. After all, the US bears just as much culpability as anyone else and an admission to mistakes in the past is long overdue. ALL PEOPLE want respect and, sorry to disagree strongly with you, but the last administration showed anything but respect to these people. Maybe you should go back and really listen to the WHOLE speech, since it is obvious that you only heard the sound bites taken out of context that Fox News chose to play. Your words sound like they came straight from Hannity's ignorant mouth.
History proves that I am right, you can only
cite the Bible.
Bush proves how far removed he is
Rep George Miller
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, President Bush proved once again just how far removed he and his Administration are from the life experiences of most Americans. The President issued an executive order on Thursday that makes it possible for federal contractors to pay extremely low wages to workers hired for the Gulf Coast rebuilding. Bush accomplished this by suspending the 1931 Davis-Bacon law, which says that federal contractors must pay their workers a “prevailing wage” on construction projects.
Contrary to the misinformation coming from the right wing – that prevailing wages are actually high “union wages,” as John Fund wrote on The Huffington Post last week – the truth is that the prevailing wage is just the average wage for a specific job function in a local area. In parts of the Gulf Coast, these wages for construction workers can be low – even as low as $7, $8, or $9 an hour.
Deep poverty is a major part of the story of Hurricane Katrina, as is now plain for all of us to see. How are New Orleanians and other people in the region supposed to get back on their feet if they can’t even make $7 an hour? Hundreds of thousands of people have just lost everything they had. America has to put Gulf Coast workers back to work – and at wages that can help them and their families get back on their feet. Davis-Bacon guarantees a wage floor when they get back to work. If the President wants to help storm victims he should rescind his executive order immediately.
Well these posts proves one thing.
Incredible. But hey, this is truly the left exposed. You don't care about the troops at all. IT's all about politics. Pathetic losers.
Yes, that was very Coulter of you and proves just who the fool really is.
Not the least bit surprised that you're a Coulter groupie, though. I will pray for your sad, sad soul.
Which proves to me it is all about hating Bush and...
very little about *peace.* Sigh.
Still proves Biden will cheat...
When a person won't pony up the money that he owes, that is not paying your debt. He was trying to cheat the company out of a huge payment. He is capable of cheating when it comes to money, why in heck would I want him to have any say about the taxpayers' money? These kind of things say A LOT ABOUT A MAN and his ethics or lack thereof !!!!
exception proves the rule
do that phase strike a familiar note?
Well, thanks for the compliment -- just proves what i think about people like u
x
This pretty much proves the fact that
this and your hatred for this administration and have been for 8 years. Why did you never give try to give them a chance when they first took office and yet insist on doing so for the Obama administration? Strictly because of the conservative versus liberal views!
This pretty much proves the fact that
this and your hatred for this administration and have been for 8 years. Why did you never give try to give them a chance when they first took office and yet insist on doing so for the Obama administration? Strictly because of the conservative versus liberal views! You will never know what you are missing out of life.
Which apparently proves you can be wrong.
Maybe you're just as wrong about Obama, as well.
Either way, the article below shows that this is really a non-story. Nobody seems to be listening to Bush any more. He couldn't even get enough reporters to fill the seats for his final press conference, so he had to fill the empty seats with people who weren't even reporters, just to make it look like he had a full room (perhaps his final attempt to deceive Americans).
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CBS_Obama_appears_to_have_skipped_0116.html
If you did not understand it, that proves my point......nm
nm
It proves the extent of the torture that was used...(sm)
as well as shows the public exactly what the last admin did. It puts in front of the public (in particular republicans who would be against prosecuting the Bush admin) the facts. I honestly think the main point of showing pics is to gain public support for the prosecution of the last admin. I think dems are kind of fighting the battle before it gets there to make prosecution easier......but that's just my opinion.
Proves you don't read anything..Says in the 1st sentence he is Gov. Lynch of
x
Taking a look at the data proves your points...sm
From 2000 - 2004, America has seen a significant increase in poverty each year.
I agree with sm that people must have personal responsibility and not sit around waiting on a check when they are able bodied and can work. These are not the poor that I'm concerned with. I speak of the poor single mother or father who works 2 jobs, the poor mother and father who both work and still can't make ends meet. Heck, you can still just be getting by with a college education in today's economy. Look at inflation. In just ONE year gas prices have doubled. And look at the housing market. Prices of other necesities are also rising and the mean income is still 40,000.
I agree with Zauber, everyone can't be on the top, some people have to settle for lower paying jobs due to life circumstances. But if the big business had it their way, they would still be paying 4.25 an hour. They griped about going to 5.15 an hour.
Do you think this administration will even attempt to increase min. wage? They think and obviously believe Rush Limmy when he says, only teenagers who are working for extra money to buy Ipods are working min. wage jobs. They are out of touch.
Not having a good father in the household is one of the root cause issues that needs to be addressed, but I wouldn't be so quick to put this as the main or only cause of poverty. There's no one answer to the problem, but I do hold our local, state, and federal government responsible to do their part - make sure employers pay a fair wage and have fair labor practices, control inflation, and education.
That sign is disgusting. I guess it just proves...
that is another right that soldiers die for: for the right to be stupid and thoughtless and devoid of common courtesy.
Read his letter. That pretty much proves it.
nm
All this proves is that liberals pick and choose...
freedom of religion? Like ANY of you ascribe to that? Lemme seee----go back to your church. Ummm...bible-thumpin gun moll...I would have to search, but you get my drift. Yes, i know what choice is. Me, and some like me, also believe the infant should have a choice, but you certainly jumped right in and circumvented that one didn't you?
This proves that Phil Berg is a hardhead who
twice failed legal action. So you still have presented nothing that back up your claim that this is still on the docket. By the way, ever heard of frivolous lawsuits. They are not confined to medical malpractice, dontcha know?
every grunt you make just proves my point.
This is absolutely hopeless.
Check this out. Proves how well W. "ducks the issues"!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duLds-TZMGw
Hilarious!!
Thjis proves exactly Kaydie's father's philosophy...nm
nm
gee, I thought conservatives were supposed to post on their own board.....proves all you want sm
to do is fight with someone. What possible reason could you have for being over here? Obviously you are not creating dialogue or trading ideas....the only reason is to start something and then here come the insults. Guidelines posted when they started these boards were to post on your own board.
I do notice that conservatives post more on that board, but instead of discussing opinions and ideas and their reasons for them, all they do is bash the left.
Pulling things out of context when people can go read the whole thread proves nothing...
when someone says something posted from a court document with all the references in place is a lie simply because it was reprinted on a conservative website cares nothing about the truth. I said it and I meant it. That is not calling that person a liar. Stop twisting things to your advantage. Not all the liberals on this board play that game. Only a few of you do. Won't debate an issue, just say it is from a right wing rag (even if it is the original court document) and will absolutely not look at both sides of an issue. And based on what I have read about liberalism and what liberals posted on this very board in response to my question...that is the antithesis of true liberal behavior. So there are some of you who do not agree with the tactics either. So please...stop with the attacks. Does not look good on you.
With all due respect,
all the posts I've seen you post have come across to me as very confrontational. You seem to be limited to posting only posts that defend these three, and I haven't seen you post anything on any political issue -- just confronting posters and complaining about their behavior, sympathizing with poor AG, Nan and MT. That's ALL you've posted on this board, and to say it was YOU who was attacked shows, at the very least, the very same mindset that precludes you from seeing things objectively. Afraid I have to agree with GT above. I, too, smell a conservative in liberal clothing, and it also wouldn't surprise me if you were either one of those three or one who is very closely allied with them.
But I will take you at your word that this is your last post. In addition, I will make this my last post to you. I'm happy that at least temporarily we're free of all the intolerance and hatred and rage and battles that ensue when those three are around. I refuse to get back into that, and I feel that you're trying to take me down that path, and I'm not buying it.
Have a blessed day.
With all due respect.
One source is a personal blog. Those are strictly opinion pieces and carry no weight on either side. The Chicago Sun piece is more interesting, but merely makes vague statements without a single name of anyone who is bashing. Now don't get me wrong, I have serious concerns with President Bush, stem cell research not being one of them. I am alarmed at the big government policies and also at the illegal alien fiasco (which I am reading has some surprises in store). At any rate, this really is a nonstory. Remember when Lieberman gave the speech on the Senate floor criticizing Clinton. It happens. I feel no connection to the country club wing of the republican party (any more than the country club wing of the democratic party). They certainly don't speak for me.
With all due respect..
... it doesn't say very much about an Army mom who would use his service -- his putting his life on the line -- in order to try to bully, shame and coerce people who would rather see her son home with his family and safe.
It doesn't say very much about an Army mom who would sacrifice her own flesh and blood because she's too busy worshiping a very false idol in Bush.
But most of all it doesn't say very much about a president who couldn't care less about her son, a president who has recklessly, negligently and uncaringly tossed America's young people into harm's way for an unnecessary, very possible illegal war.
I honor her son, and I respect his courage very much. I thank him for putting his life on the line in service to his country. And I profusely apologize to him for the way his life has been devalued by Bush. Maybe if Bush had the integrity and courage to actually serve in a war himself, he wouldn't be so hasty about killing our young people. Her son, by virtue of having the courage to serve, is way, way, WAY above George Bush in the integrity and courage categories. Wouldn't we be fortunate if someday her son went on to become president? He's already more fit to serve than Bush is.
I hope and pray that he can return home to his family (where he belongs) and that his return is safe and without injury. I'm just very, very sorry that his mother can't see that just because we don't worship an idiot like she does, that doesn't mean we don't support our troops because we want them safe and home with their families instead of fighting an unnecessary, immoral war.
No respect
No respect for the owners of this board who have requested republicans/conservatives to not post here..Do I have to report you?
With all due respect...yes you did...
you posted that you loved to find the errors and do the research. That certainly implies that you enjoy trying to prove people wrong. And that is fine, if that is what trips your trigger. Again, what I said was we had more social programs, and again, the comparison to other nations, I would like to know what other nations and their population in relation to ours before I put a lot of stock in the data. Respectfully.
|
