No you didn't look at the facts...sm
Posted By: ms on 2008-09-08
In Reply to: I did. A week vs 18 months? Laughable. - Quit whining and find a remedy. Dems did. nm
If someone can be called whiners, it's you and the dems.
You're all so scared of her it's obvious, everywhere I look.
Sarah Palin is the remedy. She's better than McCain even, and I wish she was on top of the ticket.
No way can Obama and Biden hold a candle to here.
And you can take that to the bank and to November and beyond.
She's catapulting them towards a win.
Nothing you can do to stop it, least of which calling the republicans whiners, when clearly, you are the one doing all the whining.
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
Facts are facts - sorry you don't like it cos it doesn't support your candidate
You can't change facts. That's what makes them facts. You may not like it but that's the way it is.
Facts are facts. No bash intended.
It will be this stellar record from which voters will be assessing her and her running mate.
If you're offended, too bad. Facts are facts...
I know Muslims in this country who have turned from the hateful evil beliefs that were forced down their throats. They did not have the freedom to learn anything else growing up. But after they gained their freedom and came here, they were able to receive the Word of God and they have told me that NEVER were they taught anything about loving others, just other Muslims, and that the God they learned about spoke of nothing but killing and hate... so if Obama is receiving large donations from those middle eastern countries, as you say, and he is grounded in Muslim culture, being taught this in school for years as a child, do you honestly think he doesn't carry some of those beliefs with him? He's never denounced it.
Here ya go.........
http://bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm
stating facts folks, just the facts....if it's getting
xx
Folks want facts, you give'm facts and still
xx
This poster wants facts, facts, facts...
xx
Poster wants facts, facts, facts.....
xx
When you can't fight facts for facts
then it's buh-bye....well buh-bye to you too....I'll have a dicussion with someone who will discuss and not blame.
When you can't fight facts for facts then it's buh-bye.
Facts, stick to the facts...sm
The subject here is the media and their treatment of Gov. Palin, which continues to this day, to this minute, by the liberal left.
Tthe media threw down their gauntlet as soon as she was picked on that Friday, and hounded her for almost a full week.
And you think she should have waved a white flag at them in her acceptance speech? She put them on notice, that she is above them. And continues to be, with grace and style.
She's not whining, and neither are we.
I just shake my head at your audacity.
The media is the one that started this with her, and you would do well to remember the facts in her case.
IN this case, the facts are the facts.........
--
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't
his own personal reasons.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php
The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.
Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."
Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.
In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.
"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"
Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.
Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.
Conversations With Bush The Candidate
Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.
The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.
I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."
Debating The Timeline For War
But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.
The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.
On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"
I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."
"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …
"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.
Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.
Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"
Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.
Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."
Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.
Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.
You don't have any facts. HELLO???!!!!! NM
You don't have any facts! sm
Are you actually saying you know more than those doing the investigation? My, you are a powerful person! Will we be seeing your name soon in the headlines as "she who knows all" heading the investigation? Share your knowledge! Inquiring minds want to know!
Oh I'd like to see what facts you have
to back that one up.
My facts came from....
the Summary of Ferderal Individual Income Tax Data and yours came from some self-proclaimed non-partisan watchdog group. Tell me who I am going to believe?
Facts
Thanks for the FACTS.
Facts
We know for a fact that the person impersonating Stephen Crockett is not actually Stephen Crockett and we know for a FACT that people who have been trolling the conservative board for the past week spouting profanity, vile innuendos also posts on the L-board under different monikers. This person's posts has been turned into the FBI for their implied threats on the president, so this is serious. This is no longer a game, so if you truly are not the one posting under several different monikers on the C-board then you have nothing to worry about. However, somebody here does have something to worry about.
And oh, BTW, I am not Nan, Brunson, or any of the usual suspects you might think.
Some more facts
http://www.ipcc.ch/about/procd.htm
Above is the web site for IPCC, everything you ever wanted to know which is not much if you are a nonbeliever. They have been around since 1988 and include the World Meteorology Organization among others. It is a worldwide, inclusive organization with contributors from just about everywhere.
I don't know how global warming is seen as a step towards socialism, quite a stretch. All we want is for people to act more responsibly towards the earth we all share. Alternative fuels have been around since pre WWII. We know how to do it. We just don't and again, it's all about money all the time. What is wrong with using alternative sources of energy, it hardly makes one a socialist. If we used natural oils, say corn oil for cars.. the farmers who have suffered financial losses and loss of family farms would be back in business. Somebody would have to grow all that corn. Then it would have to be refined. Then, automobiles would have to be converted to be able to run on oil. All the automobile workers who have been laid off (13,000 Chrysler over the next 3 years - another one bites the dust) could work again. Cars would need to be built differently and the existing cars would need to be converted. Seems like the whole thing would be putting a lot of Americans to work. Whether you believe in global warming or not how could implementing these changes be harmful or turn us all into socialists. Its a good thing.
whose facts? Yours? Or the ones fed to you?
it's your choice......that's for sure....
The Facts
Obama's father was raised Muslim but not a radical Muslim and was NOT a practicing Muslim when he met and married Obama's mother. Obama's parents split, and his mother married an Indonesian oil manager, and they moved to Jakarta, Indonesia. Obama attended various schools in Indonesia for 4 to 5 years, including a Catholic. The only way any school he attended could be called Muslim is that most of the students who attended this school were from Muslim families, as Indonesia is primarily a Muslim country. He received a few hours of religious instruction per week in these schools. Obama's mother then sent him back to the U.S. to live with his grandmother. Obama has been a member of the United Church of Christ since the ྌs. Obama never received any indoctrination from his father, as his father was absent from his life since the age of 2. Obama was sworn into office with a Bible.
Get your information from somewhere else than false, inflammatory mass emails.
What facts do you need? sm
This is the whole article so a link won't do you much better. It was an AP article. The article was not complete rhetoric.
Yes, both sides do have problems. I am not disputing that at all. I'm just trying to prove again that you can't take everything at face value, politicians like to twist things and take snippets out if it is to their benefit. Notice, I said politicians - as in the whole species, not just Dem or Rep.
That's because you don't want facts and won't look for
.
Know your FACTS first
I am not afraid of a black man raised by a white family or a black family or any other family. Interesting post as you do not know my ethnicity but jump with in with your own assumption. What I am afraid of is ANY racism because I do believe in equality.
They are facts
that can be verified.
Facts
Perhaps if you stopped rah-rahing the Republicans and bad-mouthing the Democrats you could see the facts and realize that both parties and all 4 candidates are as crooked as a barrel of snakes. Both sides are to blame for this mess!
facts about him
It sounds to me as though you may be afraid of the truth. I'd love to hear that you watched it and then come back here and continue giving him a free pass.
It already changed many voters' minds.
This is what happens when you have no facts
xx
FACTS, FACTS, FACTS, FACTS, FACTS
Biden Has Served As Obama's Top Foreign Policy Critic, Even Saying Obama Is Not Ready To Be President:
Biden Said Obama Is Not Ready To Serve As President. ABC's George Stephanopoulos: "You were asked is he ready. You said 'I think he can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.'" Sen. Biden: "I think that I stand by the statement." (ABC's, "This Week," 8/19/07)
Biden: "If the Democrats think we're going to be able to nominate someone who can win without that person being able to table unimpeachable credentials on national security and foreign policy, I think we're making a tragic mistake..." (Sen. Joe Biden, "The Diane Rehm Show," 8/2/07)
Biden: "Having Talking Points On Foreign Policy Doesn't Get You There." ("Biden Lashes Out At Obama," ABC News' "Political Radar" Blog, blogs.abcnews.com, 8/2/07)
Biden Attacked Obama For Voting Against Funding U.S. Troops In Iraq And Afghanistan, Accusing Him Of "Cutting Off Support That Will Save The Lives Of Thousands Of American Troops." Biden: "And, look, Tim, if you tell me I've got to take away this protection for these kids in order to win the election, some things aren't worth it. Some things are worth losing over. That would be worth losing over. Hundreds of lives are being saved and will be saved by us sending these vehicles over which we are funding with this supplemental legislation. And I want to ask any of my other colleagues, would they, in fact, vote to cut off the money for those troops to protect them? That's the right question. This isn't cutting off the war. This is cutting off support that will save the lives of thousands of American troops." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 9/9/07)
Biden On Obama's Leadership On Iraq: "I Don't Recall Hearing A Word From Barack About A Plan Or A Tactic." (Jason Horowitz, "Biden Unbound: Lays Into Clinton, Obama, Edwards," The New York Observer, 2/4/07)
Biden On Whether He Would Meet Unconditionally With The Leaders Of Rogue States As Obama Said He Would: "Absolutely Positively No." Biden: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely positively no." (Sen. Joe Biden, Remarks At The National Press Club, Washington, DC, 8/1/07)
I realize it is painful to read but PROOF nonetheless.
I don't think you have your facts exactly right.
Even McDonalds pays better than minimum wage.
And you get your facts where?
You mistake "facts" with heresay. You dismiss FACTS by saying McCain was absolved of any wrongdoing in the Keating 5 scandal. Not quite.
You want facts? So do I.
One would do. Give me facts that he was born in the US. Make him show his real birth certificate.
http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244/stop-obama-constitutional-crisis/
He does not state truth and if he does, he changes it. New middle age class now 120,000K. He now has to kill expectations of what people think he can do if he wins. I could go on and on. Where did he get all this money for his campaign? Through unauthorized prepaid credit cards and who from? His aunt now may be living here illegal and I fear he is too. No wonder he wants to change all illegals to legal here in the US. There is something about him that is not right. By the way, I am a democrate, not a pub. I will admit he sure is a smooth talker.
the facts are
All Americans vote for their reprsentatives. That's the Constitution.
Millions of babies? How about hundreds of thousands of American lives plus millions affected by those deaths by a war founded on LIES.
Abortion, gay marriages, and the right to bear arms only works politically when things are going right in American and we have nothing else to fight about. They are nonpolitical issues and are things that God will deal with when we get there (sans bearing arms).
You can actually make these statements in the face of what has gone on in the past 8 years?
I'm not quite sure what your last paragraph meant, but I make my own bed. I just expect certain things from my leaders, honesty and decisions made in the best interest in the majority of the citizens being first on my list, not just the elite. That priority has not been met by our previous leader/party. So I voted for change. I guess I'm not the only one who felt this say.
Oh no! More facts (sm)
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administration_was_the_federal.html
That's where I get my facts too. n/m
x
facts are facts
myths are myths. Believe as you wish; it doesn't matter now. Again, how is that book and recording deal coming along?
YOU have no facts. You believe what you want.
nm
The facts
1. The OPs post was about how he is like one of us because he eats Chilidogs and cheese fries. Even read the post again and that is what it says (and other posters said the same thing) - he is not one of us.
2. It was replied to with the usual kool-aid laced reply of how wonderful for our god to be out there in public at a time we need him most, I feel safer already, etc etc.
3. I was not the only poster that thought that was absolutely ridiculous and nauseating. And all my post said was get off the kool-aid and that message was weirder than the OP.
4. I was then called chubby and tried to be ridiculed (which it didn't work) and told to keep my negativity to myself. Which was quite strange coming from a poster who has been attacking anyone below who doesn't agree with her.
5. I replied back that I am far by anything chubby. The poster I replied to was implying I have no freinds and am miserable and alienated. Well I guess we all know what they say about people who assume. I replied I am certainly not chubby and I have many friends who are on different waves of politics but we don't cut each other down because of the way we feel politically. My response was a positive one, not a negative cut down that was directed at me.
6. You then felt the need to reply to that and add some more insults and was quite negative.
7. I replied to you that you have a lot of negativity and you should try an activity to release some of that negativity. Still not a negative post, to which you then decided to reply with more negativity. Oh and on top of that you just happen to be a bike rider. Wow, what a small world we live in.
I actually didn't read any further than that line because I new it would be more of the same insults and the same. The negativity coming back to me does me no good. I would say if your not releasing your negativity by bike riding you might want to try a good comedy. It does wonders for the soul and brings one into a wonderful uplifting mood.
Gotta laugh in life from time to time otherwise...well life just wouldn't be any fun.
Where are your facts?
Don't mistake your BELIEFS for FACTS. If you can back this up with facts, then it will hold some water.
Anyone can make inflammatory comments without any truth behind them.
Facts.
x
Facts? What are those?
"Facts" lie in the eyes of the beholder..................did I say lie?
Facts?
What are you trying to say? That I'm lying? That the facts I've cited aren't true? That they're only true for me and not for you? Are you being obtuse because you have nothing to say?
Sheesh...
some more facts -
George W. Bush, D#ck Cheney's 2007 White House Bills
A recent report discloses Bush and Cheney's office expenditures for 2007
Posted February 19, 2009
- $12,337,476: Amount spent on improvements and repair of the Executive Residence at the White House
- $8,694: Entertainment expenses for President Bush
- $52, 974: Entertainment expenses for Vice President Cheney
- $103,325: Subsistence expenses for those traveling with the president
some more facts -
George W. Bush, D#ck Cheney's 2007 White House Bills
A recent report discloses Bush and Cheney's office expenditures for 2007
Posted February 19, 2009
- $12,337,476: Amount spent on improvements and repair of the Executive Residence at the White House
- $8,694: Entertainment expenses for President Bush
- $52, 974: Entertainment expenses for Vice President Cheney
- $103,325: Subsistence expenses for those traveling with the president
Do you even know what facts are? (sm)
$512 billion vs $534 billion
Need a calculator?
Here's some facts........
I posted a radio show on here who sent a reporter on the streets of Harlem to ask people questions about Obama/Biden, McCain/Palin..... those folks were dumb as rocks!!! They thought Palin as a running mate with Obama was a GREAT idea...they loved the idea of him having a "female" running mate. They thought it was a GREAT idea that Obama wanted to keep the troops in Iran a LOT longer.... and the list went on and on. That man just proved what so many of us already knew but when I posted it, some of the O lovers on here started screaming I was a racists and wanted the moderator to BAN me for putting information out there that was ALREADY public info!!
Go figure!
These were folks that had NEVER voted before and were now going to vote for no other reason than there was a black man running. THey were being led by the hand to the polls to VOTE by ACORN! Most standing on the corner smoking their crack and belonging to gangs! WOW! Those folks should never be allowed to vote....they are not productive citizens in this country and how convenient to be able to put someone in that office that they think will hand out more freebies to them as well....
many facts posted
I have posted many facts, you just dont see them as fitting into whatever beliefs you have. A closed mind is a terrible thing. Open your mind to possibilities. Half this country and many parts of the world believe as I do. You know, when I think of the real true republican party, I think of the party of Lincoln but right now it has morphed into the party of radical christian extremists..
They don't have to have no stinking facts! SM
It's all pablum fed to them by Michael Moore and his crew. They don't have original thought! Their heart and souls are charred and black. It would have to be to post some of these posts about people.
Get facts straight
Where would the word satanist even come up in your head? I mean, that is truly scarey. I dont even know what that is. It is not part of my vocabulary or thought proceses, yet you posting in a liberal board throw that my way? Obviously, these things are on your mind..to me that is downright troubling. Get facts straight? That is what we liberals and peace lovers have been trying to tell you warmonger right wingers all along..get your facts straight..the war is based on lies, Bush is a liar..
When you have no facts, always good...
...to rely on calling Liberals stupid. Hey, it's worked for a whole five years! Appeal to the lowest emotions, that's the ticket, always good for a cheap thrill. Keep catapulting the propaganda, Reagan-head:) But read up on your Goering and Goebbels while you're at it, you're going to have to show a little more finesse at it in days to come, now that your patriotic paint is washing off in the rain.
|
