Non-stop hate rhetoric for weeks and weeks on end

• Is God going to "do the right thing?" - gourdpainter
  • All we can hope for - sbMT
    • I want you to know s/m - gourdpainter
      • boy oh boy - with so many of your
        • Of course - gourdpainter
  • She's a female Bush... - HaHaHa
  • You seem to be getting meaner and meaner - AmericanMT
    • Mean???? LOL - gourdpainter
      • She did not say, nor did she imply, - AmericanMT
        • I hate to tell ya American MT, s/m - gourdpainter
    • Non-stop hate rhetoric for weeks and weeks on end - has a tendency to do that. sm
      • First of all, GP started this particular - AmericanMT
    • Maybe you should change... - HaHaHa
  • Quite frankly........sm - sm
    • Ashes are all that's left of the shrub's scorched earth policies. - Pubs will rise again...sm
      • Yup, the Real Republican Party will rise again....new blood is definitely needed, that's for sure - nm
    • HaHaHaHaHa!!! - HaHaHa
      • Sorry, but I have to ask. - AmericanMT
        • Yes, old enough to vote... - HaHaHa
          • I hate to argue, especially when - AmericanMT
            • If you hate to argue - gourdpainter
              • Peace offering up above. - AmericanMT
                • Peace back at ya. - gourdpainter
            • YOU BETCHA!!! - HaHaHa
    • Amen, sister! - Zville MT
  • If McCain/Palin win...heaven help us all! (nm) - Educated Voter
    • If they win, it'll prove there's really no God. - (Would He really let that happen?)
      • We are all praying for Obama and He/She will answer our prayers - God loves Obama
        • God loves McCain too. - cnh
    • If McCain/Palin win, Heaven has answered my - prayers!
  • We should all be very scared of people like this . . . - lom
    • If Obama wins, it has nothing to do with God. - But will put us beyond even his help.nm
      • Wahhhhh!!! - HaHaHa

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

I've received several envelopes in the mail that were sealed with a few inches torn open at the top of the envelope.  One of them was a check from my part-time employer, and it was easy to see through the envelope that it was a check folded in half.  (At least they didn't remove the contents like they did with you.)

I've never experienced anything like this in my life, and I wonder if this has been happening to any other liberals out there. 

That's it.

The rest of my life as a single mom was spent working two (sometimes three) jobs at a time in order to support us.

Now, it's getting really difficult for me because I couldn't afford my health insurance any more, my car was repossessed, and even my phone was turned off because I can't work like I used to since becoming ill almost three years ago with pancreatitis (which was finally found to be caused by cystic fibrosis).  So my pancreas is a wreck, and my lung function is getting progressively worse.  I've filed a claim for Social Security disability, but I very well may have passed on by the time I receive a hearing date, since I'm getting sicker, and my disease is incurable.

another thing, which I find absolutely ridiculous - they are blaming the the pubs for all these investigations even though there were 250 nonprofit organizations unearthed that listed ACORN's New Orleans address.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/28/lawmaker-pushes-investigation-acorn-finances/

Obama started off saying he was confident in his FOREIGN POLICY experience ("Foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain"). He then proceeded to talk about his visit to Pakistan.

SO WHAT? I visited and lived in several foreign countries, too. Does that mean I understand foreign policy better than someone who may have spent less time but has had actual interaction and policy discussions with those countries' leaders? And with the leaders of 80 countries?

If 3 weeks in Pakistan is the extent of Obama's foreign policy credentials, then I am way more qualified on the "foreign policy" front.

My point is that Obama's claim is ridiculous. Better that he stick to his "better judgement" mantra, since the "3 weeks abroad = foreign policy experience" is just pathetically weak.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/obamas-college.html

Per Onelook:
▸ noun:  study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially in public speaking)  (hmmm...yep)
▸ noun:  using language effectively to please or persuade  (okay, I get it)
▸ noun:  high flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation (ohh, for sure!)
▸ noun:  loud and confused and empty talk  (that's the nuts and bolts of it)

As far as rhetoric is concerned, I would say O has it mastered. 

Palin was speaking the truth, plain and simple, and she has the record to prove it.  Get over it.  If you are so embarrased, go live somewhere else.

I have absolutely no personal ties whatsoever to the middle east, so exactly why would I be bitter, and what would I have to gain?  Your statement makes no sense.  The main benefit of actually recognizing the history of the region (as opposed to the Israeli version of the *truth*) would be for better political relations with the middle east.  Have you noticed that the rest of the world sees what's going on?  Why do you think there is so much resentment in the middle east for the US?  Israel (or rather our empowering of it and it's abuse of that power) is one of the main problems over there. 

Why would I care about your opinion?  I don't.  There are very few people's opinions that I actually value on this board.  Those would be the ones who can actually discuss a subject with reasonable viewpoints, and guess what?  Most of them disagree with me on most everything.  LOL 

I'm simply trying to get you to stay on the subject, which is obviously a lost cause.

Oh the hypocrasy!

Fox News Crosses the Line

Target: Fox News Sunday Host Chris Wallace
Sponsored by: Media Matters

How many more lies before everyone wakes up?

Editorial Toledo Blade:  Another lie on Iraq

WHEN President Bush declared last week that nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a large segment of the American public must have been very surprised.

They would be the die-hard supporters of the war in Iraq, the one-quarter to one-third of Americans who, according to opinion polls, believe to this day that Saddam was somehow involved in 9/11.

No one likes to think that their President is lying, but for Mr. Bush to casually reverse five years of rhetoric is like Bill Clinton claiming I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

No, there is no DNA evidence that we know of to indict Mr. Bush for perjury. But the public record includes repeated statements by the President, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and other administration officials that linked responsibility for the 9/11 attacks to Iraq, both directly and indirectly.

The alleged connection was the administration's strongest selling point for the war, slaking the American people's thirst for revenge for the 2001 attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.

As Mr. Bush put it on Oct. 7, 2002, We know that Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy - the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al-Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. … We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases.

Here he is again, in his 2003 State of the Union address: And this Congress and the American people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda.

And in his Mission Accomplished photo op, May 1, 2003: In the war on terror, Iraq is now the central front.

Mr. Cheney was even more specific: In 2003, the vice president claimed that the government was learning more and more about links, before 9/11, between Iraq and al-Qaeda. This came even after the CIA had debunked any such claims. In 2004, the veep said flatly that Saddam had long-established ties with al-Qaeda.

Now, you can argue all day about whether faulty U.S. intelligence misled Mr. Bush, or about what the meaning of suggested is, but this much is clear: The administration relentlessly blurred what was a clear distinction between the militantly secular regime of Saddam and Islamic extremists like the 9/11 hijackers so as to create a laser-beam connection in the public mind that they were one and the same.

So for Mr. Bush to now claim that nobody has ever suggested that the Sept. 11 attacks were ordered by Iraq, as he did last week, is yet another lie in the chain of mendacity that shackles the Bush presidency.