Oh gt, one would have to go a long way to reach YOUR level of hatred. nm
Posted By: sm on 2005-08-26
In Reply to: So are so funny - gt
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 do you reach that conclusion?
From what I have seen, many/most of the people that are in favor of gay marriage rights are those mid-30s and younger. Not to devalue the opinion of our youth, but I'm guessing most of them were more concerned with Donnie Osmond than future cohabitating.
are you o.k? Or did your UTI reach your brain?....nm
nm
good grief, what a reach...lol nm
nm
Compassionate euthanasia. It is not that far a reach any more. sm
It happened in Italy just the other day. It took the lady 4 days to die.
That is what you have to look forward to if the premise of his health care plan is correct.
So when they talk about leaving the debt to our children, g-children, and g-gchild, then they will be healthy enough to cough up the money to pay the piper.
JMHO though.
Bush did reach across the aisle. They refused to
nm
You'll be waiting a long, long time, then, cuz she's going to do
He died a long, long time ago! (If he was ever
Don't force your beliefs on others. It further devalues your faith in the eyes of others.
Unfortunately, to get to that level he'd have to
Hee
On one level, it's rather
Think about it. Here we have Evans, Editor of Newsweek and one who is in the vanguard of elitist agnosticism (remember "The Decline and Fall of Christian America"?) who seems to acknowledge, at least tacitly, the need for some sort of God to mediate and reconcile the nations.
So far, Evans has only managed to stagger toward a rather pitiful concept of God in the form of a being as miserably inadequate as Obama, but perhaps there's hope that he'll mature to an adult notion of God, which is a bit more sophisticated.
So you and your buds bash us on *your* board and suddenly, once you reach this board,
some respect?
You publicly post on the other board that you *try not to visit the bog of eternal stench.*
Well, doesn't look like you are trying all that hard. Or is that another example of Conservative honesty, like your buddy on the other board lies 3 times before suddenly deciding to be *up front* (in her own words) about the whole bogus line of crap she was spouting.
You and your 2 friends don't respect anyone unless they're a member of your little club, think exactly as you think, belong to the same political party as you belong, and believe in the very same little narrow SUBsection of one particular religion.
That's what I interpret from YOUR WRITTEN WORDS. Your posts don't show respect. They only show twisted *facts*, ignorance, anger and hatred.
You can't be *respectful* on your own board but suddenly, when you come here - HERE - the place YOU call *the bog of eternal stench* you suddenly discover some respectability during your mouse click from there to here?
Please. Some of us aren't as stupid as you think we are.
You're becoming quite a bore. You and your friends stated you don't want us on your board, but you're not happy unless you're picking a fight. You and your *gang* told us to leave and not to post on *your* board. Maybe that should work both ways.
Out of ALL the problems with radical Conservatives, maybe the most annoying thing is that you don't believe in equality at all. You believe in SUPERIORITY. Somewhere along the line, someone made you think you were special and above everyone else. Sheesh! You're not happy unless you're dictating to everyone else in the country what they're allowed to do in their own personal lives regarding life, death, science, etc. You even think YOUR GOD IS BETTER than everyone else's.
You want to make the rules, censor people and tell them which boards they can and cannot post on, but YOU want to invade them all and spew your ignorance and hatred.
In my heart, I believe there are sincere, honest, intelligent Conservatives out there who are capable of a sensible debate. I've seen them. (I hope you don't chase them away, too.) But and your crew don't fall in that category, and this will be the last of your inane posts I will subject myself to.
Talk about stench. Just read your very own posts.
What's different is that on a state level in CA,
in the form of ballot measures, ballot initiatives, propositions or referendums. They can be heard in the California Supreme Court on any or all of these bases and are entitled to seek relief.
Just above your level of showing your
stupidity for trying so hard to appear to be intelligent.
One would have to have a certain level of intelligence to be bored. sm
You are the weakest link. Buh-bye now. 
Thank you so much for your concern about my energy level.
That just shows the level of insensitivity....
this is an anonymous posting board. You people have posted nastiness about someone and named them. Dailykrap posted it where the entire nation can look at it. You have invaded the privacy of a 16-year-old girl who has done nothing to deserve it and made her public fodder. Perhaps you are proud of that. I cannot imagine that you would be, yet you attack me and support those who would do such a thing. Amazing.
That's the only level pubs will react to.
Put your money where your mouth is. You want real issues. Just post a request for a list and let's get started.
How can you retain something at 2009 level....
when it is 2008?
With the economy the way it is, he CANNOT implement his health care plan. If he does, the fragile economy will tank. I am not an economist and I have sense enough to know that.
The estate tax is the most unfair tax ever levied. All that money has been taxed already, and they want to tax it again just because someone dies. It should be repealed. That is not a Republican or democrat thing. It is just wrong.
Think about this...when the stock market lost 700 points that day...many of the americans earning more than $250,000 lost a ton of money. And he is NOW going to roll back tax cuts for them? Is he so naive or want to get elected SO bad that he does not understand that most of the small businesses in this country fall in that category? And moderate-sized businesses? Who do you think are the employers in this country? Can he not see that will result in businesses closing or downsizing or offshoring just to SURVIVE?
I guess he doesn't. And that means he SHOULD NOT be President.
Also enjoys one-on-one ground-level
Wonder if she follows indigenous rule and only slays what she can eat? Not likely, considering her affinity for guns. What a gal, what a gal!
You don't need to attack me on a personal level... sm
by calling names.
I looked at your supporting web site and find that it is a Democratic web site, so I automatically discard it as biased.
I still am seeking an answer for my original question. What has changed? His mind, in my estimation, is not a suitable answer as that does not address the FACT that he himself stated that he did not feel he was qualified to run for POTUS.
By the same token, if he can "change his mind" on an issue as important as being qualified for POTUS, what is to keep him from changing his mind on all the promises and pipedreams he was selling while he was running. Oh wait....I think that is already happening. He is already stating that he cannot fulfill all his promises and he is not even in office yet.
If he is the "best" that this country has to offer, we're in worse shape than I thought we were.
They scare me, as well, on a very dangerous level.
Starting at the community level......... sm
is a great thing to do and I am proud of you for the work you do. I have read here before some of the things you are involved in, and you are making a difference in your community. I'll be right here, ready and willing! LOL
You sank to their level but beyond, and continue to do so.
I give up.
The playing field has never been more level!
Thanks to affirmative action, white heterosexual males cannot get jobs especially when competing with a person classified as a minority. Mintorities get college scholarships and acceptance into good schools so universities can meet their quota. It's ridiculous! There is a black man in the White House --- I think affirmative action has done its job!
It's time for everyone, no matter their race, be treated equally. The best PERSON for the job should get the job. The best student with the best transcipts should get the admission letter and scholarship. There shouldn't be quotas to fill. NOBODY should get preferential treatment anymore!
Good for you....don't stoop to that level!!
x
The level of maturity in producing that clip
is just astonishing!
You sound like one of the more level headed posters here
I'm glad you don't hate him. Disagreeing with his viewpoints and policies is one thing, but I'm reading a lot of posts and you can tell a lot of people really hate him. I don't agree with some of his issues. I don't agree with some of McCain's issues. I think your also one of the first posters who said anything good about McCain. What just really worries me about McCain is his attitude, his mean temper, and his readiness to send us to war anywhere.
Oh, I think I may have not quite said it right in my original post. I wasn't blaming oil companies and CEOs for the mess we are in, I was stating (or trying to state) that they are the ones who decide who our next president will be (that and you know that secret group that meets every year "behind closed doors"). I still have very high doubts that the "people" pic our president (but I could be wrong of course).
Take a good look at your level headed poster...nm
000000
On a level playing field that would be correct...
this is not a level playing field. I don't see her encouraging Obama to do town hall meetings with McCain...and after 18 months running for the #1 seat, he just this past month sat down with someone who was not in the tank for his candidacy. You really don't see how lopsided this is? Obama being inteviewed by the lambs and the left wanting to feed her to the wolves.
Mocking SP delivers the message on a level
respond well to colloquial discourse and positively bristle at the introduction of serious dialog on those doggone pesky issues.
It just seems to me to be wrong on a basic moral level....
Christianity aside...that the power of life and death be given to one individual over another. Any OTHER time than abortion that is murder, not negotiable. Yet for the most innocent among us, the most vulnerable, in the eyes of some it is fine for one human being to decide to terminate the life of another on the basis of choice...and inconvenience.
I do not believe Obama sits around and thinks about how many babies will die every day (to the tune of over a million a year...!). I don't think he thinks about it much at all. How lucky for him his mother chose life.
There are also those more level-headed Obama opponents
the "country first" message of the McCain campaign and who realize how dangerously destructive this divisive rhetoric can be. They have shown the courage and wisdom to embrace the outcome of the election and made the decision to MOVE FORWARD along with the rest of us. That would account for the additional support reflected in the 75%.
You sound a lot more clear and level headed than most on this board...
even in your drug-induced state! Feel better soon!
JTBB - If you find a higher-level forum where
intellect is respected and informed debate is possible, please post that info a time or 2. I'm looking for a spot like that myself and this sure ain't it.
Taking it to a new level meaning posting a whole new thread
I still say no response is the best response.
Abortion Rate Continues to Drop, at Lowest Level Since 1976
Abortion: Just the Data
With High-Court Debate Brewing, New Report Shows Procedure's Numbers Down
By Naseem Sowti
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 19, 2005; HE01
A new analysis of the most recent abortion data shows that the number of U.S. women having the procedure is continuing its decade-long drop and stands at its lowest level since 1976.
In the year 2002, about 1.29 million women in the U.S. had abortions. In 1990, that number was 1.61 million.
The data, collected by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit group that collects information from abortion providers and public sources, show that for every 1,000 pregnancies that did not result in miscarriage in 2002, there were 242 abortions. This figure was 245 in 2000 and 280 in 1990. The institute's mission is to protect reproductive choice, but its reports are considered accurate across the political spectrum.
With President Bush preparing to nominate at least one new Supreme Court justice whose presence on the high court could produce new rulings on abortion, the data are already being interpreted differently by abortion rights advocates and antiabortion activists. But scientists say it is difficult to determine why the number of abortions has been dropping.
"There are so many things feeding into" the decline, said Lawrence Finer, associate director of domestic research at Guttmacher. Possible factors, he said, include changes in contraceptive technologies and use, changing ideas about family size and abortion, and reduced access to abortion services. Pregnancy clinics and abstinence programs may also have contributed to the declines, he said.
Who Gets Abortions?
Women with unintended pregnancies are those most likely to get abortions. According to the Guttmacher report, 47 percent of unintended pregnancies are aborted. Teenagers, unmarried women, black and Hispanic women, and those with low incomes are more likely than the population as a whole to have unintended pregnancies.
The report shows that non-Hispanic white women get about 40 percent of all U.S. abortions, black women 32 percent and Hispanic women, who can be of any race, 20 percent. Women of other races account for the other 8 percent. Black and Hispanic women have higher rates of abortion than non-Hispanic whites, the report states.
Other facts about U.S. abortions from the Guttmacher report:
· Six in 10 women who had abortions in 2002 were mothers. "Despite the common belief, women who have abortions and those who have children are not two separate groups," said Finer.
· A quarter of abortions occur among unmarried women who live with a male partner, putting this group at elevated risk of unintended pregnancy and abortion.
· The majority -- 56 percent -- of women who terminate their pregnancies are in their twenties. Teenagers between 15 and 19 make up 19 percent of abortions, although this percentage has dropped substantially in recent years.
This drop may be due to use of longer-acting hormonal contraceptives and lower rates of sexual activity, said Joyce Abma, a social scientist at the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
She added that there has been a decline in sexual activity reported by teenage males, which could be a contributing factor to lower pregnancy and abortion rates among teens.
· The incidence of abortion spans the economic spectrum, but low-income women are overrepresented among those having the procedure. Sixty percent of women who had abortions in 2000 had incomes of less than twice the poverty level --below $28,000 per year for a family of three, for example. This is in part because "low-income women have lower access to family planning services" such as contraception and counseling provided by health departments, independent clinics or Planned Parenthood, Finer said.
· Almost 90 percent of abortions are performed in the first trimester -- during the first 12 weeks after the first day of the woman's last menstrual period -- with most performed before nine weeks. Because of newer surgical and medical techniques, the proportion of abortions performed at six weeks or earlier has almost doubled in the past decade.
Less than 1 percent of abortions are done after 24 weeks.
· The number of abortion providers declined by 11 percent between 1996 and 2000, to 1,800. In 2000, one-third of women aged 15 to 44 lived in a county that lacked an abortion provider.
About the Data
There are two main sources of national data on abortion: the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. While both are regarded as dependable by major groups on both sides of the abortion issue, their numbers are different, and less precise than some other health statistics.
Not all states require reporting of abortions. The District, Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey do not mandate abortion reporting. California does not collect abortion data at all. Alaska and New Hampshire have not released statistics since 1998. This affects CDC's data, which is assembled every year from reports received from state health departments.
Due to differing reporting requirements and data-gathering procedures, abortion information for the District, Maryland and Virginia does not permit meaningful comparisons.
Guttmacher produces its reports by contacting abortion providers nationwide; its reports are considered more comprehensive than the CDC's. But the institute publishes the data only every four or five years. Neither group has published data for years beyond 2002.
Despite the inconsistencies of methods, the trends reported by CDC and Guttmacher correspond closely to each other. ·
Resources
For the complete Guttmacher report, visit http://www.agi-usa.org/sections/abortion.html , click on "An Overview of Abortions in the U.S."
For the CDC's complete report, visit http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/indss_2004.html , and click on "Abortion Surveillance -- United States 2001.
Or visit http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_23.pdf to download "Estimated Pregnancy Rates for the United States -- 1990-2000: An Update").
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Abramoff Attended staff-level meetings at Bush White House
White House Silent on Abramoff Meetings
WASHINGTON, Jan. 18, 2006
(AP) The White House is refusing to reveal details of tainted lobbyist Jack Abramoff's visits with President Bush's staff.
Abramoff had a few staff-level meetings at the Bush White House, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday. But he would not say with whom Abramoff met, which interests he was representing or how he got access to the White House.
Since Abramoff pleaded guilty two weeks ago to conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion charges in an influence-peddling scandal, McClellan has told reporters he was checking into Abramoff's meetings. I'm making sure that I have a thorough report back to you on that, he said in his press briefing Jan. 5. And I'll get that to you, hopefully very soon.
McClellan said Tuesday that he checked on it at reporters' requests, but wouldn't discuss the private staff-level meetings. We are not going to engage in a fishing expedition, he said.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, along with three other Democratic senators, wrote Bush a letter Tuesday asking for an accounting of Abramoff's personal contacts with Bush administration officials and acts that may have been undertaken at his request. The American people need to be assured that the White House is not for sale, they wrote.
McClellan has said Abramoff attended three Hanukkah receptions at the White House, but corrected himself Tuesday to say there were only two _ in 2001 and 2002.
McClellan said Bush does not know Abramoff personally, although it's possible the two met at the holiday receptions.
Abramoff was one of Bush's top fundraisers, having brought in at least $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney '04 re-election campaign and earning the honorary title pioneer. The campaign took $6,000 of the contributions _ which came directly from Abramoff, his wife and one of the Indian tribes he represented _ and donated it to the American Heart Association. But the campaign has not returned the rest of the money Abramoff raised.
Well of hatred???
Extremist talking point. Do you realize that this entire plan of attack, i.e. liberals hate this and hate that and ooze this and ooze that and spew this and spew that requires not one iota of rational or analytical thought. It is simply responding to just about anything a liberal says with bumper sticker talk, no cognitive thought going on whatsoever. It is becoming tiresome.
No hatred
for a group of people but a nasty, immoral type of behavior. There is a difference.
Hatred
for immoral acts is not a sin.
I don't see her as being consumed by hatred.
From her posts, it's clear that she's a very compassionate, kind, intelligent person who is capable of thinking independent thoughts. She cares about people who need help in this country. Nobody who is consumed by hatred can do that.
She's expressed fear and concern and frustration at this administration and where it's taking us, and she expressed anger at the person who's leading us in that direction. She's not alone. An increasing number of Americans feel the same way.
The only person I see consumed by hatred is YOU. You've repeatedly littered this board with your hateful posts. It's very easy to see who the hateful people are.
I suggested below that you/all the others (assuming there really is more than one) should be ignored. You contribute nothing to this board but anger, rage, hatred and skewed thinking.
Having said that, I won't bother reading/responding to your posts any more. It's simply not worth it because you don't want to debate. All you want to do is attack others.
I pity you.
River of hatred???
If Michael Moore has tapped into the river of hatred of the Democrats, what about a guy like Rush Limbaugh? What has he tapped into, the river of good will of the Republicans?
Elections are held every two years, and this election the people chose a majority of Democratic candidates. I for one am glad that they did if for no other reason than it will bring new perspectives into a government that has been completely controlled by one party. Further hope is that it may bring changes that work to the good of all of us.
I did not say river of hatred....
I said Michael Moore tapped into hatred and that liberals are on a river of denial...and I believe that. Why else would the very first thing they announced was that they planned to investigate Bush and corruption (not corrupt Democrats, just corrupt Republicans) and at least two have posted on the liberal board that they think terrorism should be on back burner to investigating Bush. Something is VERY, VERY wrong with that line of thinking, and that stems from hatred and revenge, certainly not any concern for this country.
You are so consumed by hatred
nm
Me too. Am so tired of their hatred.
nm
I did check. It is much more hatred for the right
nm
Too much hatred and lies here
I come (used to come) to this board to hear about the candidates. Instead all I'm reading lately is posters attacking others for posting their viewpoints. Someone posts something about Obama and the O supporters attack them "lies" they call them. They don't defend Obama but instead insult and attack the poster. Then they come out and say "oh poor me, you just hate Obama, your so insulting" while at the same time calling them every name in the book. What I'm hearing is the republicans are trying to shed some light on what Obama is but some of the democrats don't want to hear it and already exclaim that Obama has won. They are condescending towards anyone who has a different viewpoint than theirs. They won't read anything that has negative things to say about Obama and they won't read anything that has anything positive to say about McCain. It's just hate-filled spew that comes out. You'll cite polls if they favor Obama, and if they favor McCain you ignore them. You won't even admit that the race is too close to call. In your minds Obama has already won the election. You'll support cheating if it favors Obama and condemn it if it favors McCain. You'd rather live your lives having government regulate your lives, tell you what you can and cannot do, and take all your money to give a check to the people who are able to work but won't because why should they since they are receiving a check from government, while you are being told its your patriotic duty to give to these poor fellow Americans. You'd rather have an inexperienced radical person running the country than someone who has experience and has shown by his voting record that he fights for the American people. Yet not giving any reason (being older is not a reason). I have not yet read any posts that are positive reasons for Obama being president, just hate-filled garbage against Palin. Also makes me wonder why people are trying to keep Biden out of the spotlight. Makes me want to find out more about what he's done in the past.
So I have decided to give the board a rest for awhile and will be back to vist after the election is over. I'm no longer getting any valuable information here. We have not had an election yet. The polls are too close to call and even then you can't rely on the polls to give you accurate information (after all these polls are incuding all the dead people, pets, Santa Claus, Mary Poppins, Rama Dama Ding Dong, and all the other fictitious people, not to mention the people who registered 13 and 14 times or more as a democrat) in their polls. I remember back in 2000 everyone was claiming Gore had won the election and it was very very close and look what happened. He lost.
I will also continue to listen to all stations, and read all articles so I can at least get a fair and balance opinion of what is going on.
So have at it y'all. You seem to love attacking people for no reason and when I read these posts I can really feel the negativity and hatred oozing. So maybe I'll just stick to the Gab board - I need some more positive vibes.
P.S. - Just one more note. Whoever wins will win, and whether it is democrat or republican we will deal with it. When a democrat has won in the past there were no riots, republicans continued to try to work with the democrats, but we all know what happened the last two times a republican won. As for the threats of "if Obama doesn't win there's going to be rioting in the streets". Well if that does happen that goes to show you how many biggots wanted him in just because he's black - all the things they claim don't matter will come out.
over the hatred from the left... I see so much of it
nm
More hatred against Obama
This video has the same creep with the monkey in it. He calls the monkey little Hussein. Can't hide this time buddy. Link below.
Sorry, but I am independent. As far as hatred,
nm
Hatred some of you have towards her is obsessive
nm
I absolutely HAVE seen such hatred
before, and it was turned against Bush. 'He's a moron, a retard, a national embarrassment a bumbler, a fool, a cowboy, a yokel.' 'So happy the moron is gone and we have Obama.' yada, yada, yada. And it's still going on, right on this very board, although (and I hate to break it to everyone) Bush ain't prez anymore and did not run in the last election.
I think it's impressive that Obama has managed to draw all this fire in 90 short days! It took some dems twice that long to hate Bush's guts.
|
