Paying close attention. Sidestepping direct debate.
Posted By: Out of character for you. Why is that? on 2008-09-05
In Reply to: JOhn McCain on the issues... - sam
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
Pay close attention to what's NOT being said
This is a big story because imagine if that had happened to another presidential or vice-presidential candidate, that members of their follow church members were murdered in seperate killings.
Not even a liberal journalist can find ONE time Obama spoke about this while he was in that church. He has NEVER demanded more be done to find the killers. It's more like out of sight, out of mind.
Remember Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian leader.....he says there are NO gays in his country. Right!!
Since Obama is from a strong Muslim background, just makes me wonder what his true feelings are on this matter.
You don't pay very close attention then do you?
O'Reilly has defended Obama on many occasions, trying to find some middle ground as to why he has done or not done some things.
He isn't far right by any means but on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with wanting to preserve our constitution as written.
If he's so far right conservative, it's funny then how FOX news has run circles around all the other news outlets in the ratings. Even adding all of the others' ratings together, FOX news still trumps them big time. That means all the liberal idjits out there are losing ground big time. Those MSNBC/NBC/CNN hate mongerers out there are losing ground big time.
Could it be folks are finally realizing Obama isn't living up to all those promises? It's finally starting to dawn on them this isn't the man for the job. The ratings are proof positive people in this country are ready to hear the truth, not the far left immoral agenda....
Pay close attention.....
I have read this and it made my skin crawl...
pay close attention to what she is saying...
Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led -- oftentimes to their own slaughter.
How many tried to point out BEFORE the election that this man is a racist individual with absoutely no concern for the American people. He is an African Muslim through and through and ANYONE who truly took the time to find out anything about Obama would have seen him for what he truly is, a person who is very loyal to Africa, thinks the African colonial views are best and has started enforcing HIS beliefs one after another on this country.
"Lambs to the slaughter"!! Only those with blinders on think he is going to be the answer to their prayers....
ACORN obsessed with the color his skin as did most ALL black people and whites that voted for him...
It sickened me then and it sickens me even more now. I have said it all along. That man is NOT an American, STILL has produced no VALID birth certificate(not a surprise), has no loyalty to this country and never will, and is a Muslim through and through, just like his father. He spells it all out in his book and truly like "lambs to the slaughter" they still voted that non-American into office.
Now we ALL pay the price!!
Too many most that put O into office will NEVER read this article and even if they could read and did read it, they wouldn't comprehend a thing this indivdiual is trying to say...
She is right. He has no interest in what the American people want, only what he sees as right and only dictators do what he is doing to this country!
'lambs to the slaughter'
'nuf said!!
have you been paying attention
to the differences between what he said and what he does on other issues. things like (Paraphrased) "I don't want to be in the business of running car companies." ".....won't see any new taxes of any kind." "taxing health care benefits would be wrong." I think when you say when thing and do another that is a lie and it is manipulative.
You really must not have been paying attention
Other than a very brief period about 8-1/2 years ago, the divide in the country has been growing larger for about the last 10 years...surely you did not think we had national unity back in the Clinton years, did you? How about the 8 years of Bush the Younger? Frankly, other than a few of the more vociferous 'radical right' pundits, the country is not doing too bad. The moderates and independents have not chimed in yet as they realize that it's going to take longer than 150 days to clean up the mess left when the keys were handed to the POTUS. So far, the only people truly divided are the extremes, and, frankly, I tend to be happier when I'm catered to in the middle since we're so often forgotten.
Terrible debate! Jim was not direct or specific enough in his ...sm
questions and allowed too much of the same old retoric from both candidates.
Pay close attention. The question was about pub/NeoCon
Do the conservatives have any clue about how to address these issues, other than run from them. This is a yes or no question.
Pay close attention to today's news!!
MSNBC, CNN, all the liberally biased news telecasts have focused their reports on nothing but drugs, guns and violence from Mexico, North Korean, you name it.... ANYTHING but discuss the joke that stood on our national TV and ran his mouth about carrying this country into an absolutely catastrophe!! When highly socialist countries, who have seen how socialism DOES NOT work and are begging Obama to get his act together and not take this country down that road, doesn't even phase Obama and he hasn't listened to a word they say, that should tell you how bad it's gonna be. Of course, what Obama is going to do is take this country FAR FAR away from socialism and straight into dictatorship if the American people sit idly by and let it. This man has never been an American, was NEVER raised American, and NEVER has had a loyalty to this country EVER! It's high time people see this....
FOX news is the only one trying to focus the attention to this country's future and the fact that foreign countries are actually begging Obama to NOT nationalize and NOT do what he is planning to do; they know all too well what he is up to!
Mexico certainly needs to be addressed but the day Obama sends our troops down to the border to shoot on sight any and all crossing our borders, then we won't have to worry so much about illegals and their drug runs into this country. That won't happen just like it didn't happen with Bush......... our government has become a big joke!!!
He's paying attention to ducking the RNC
Just like last time.
You obviously haven't been paying attention...(sm)
Dems oppose UNJUST war, like going into Iraq or Israel's constant terror against Palestine. There's a huge difference. We are in the middle of 2 wars -- that Bush started. Did you really think that we would be able to clean his mess up with just a wave of a hand?
Pakistan has a government that has no control of its country, which means that militants are currently in charge of the attacks on the supply line that goes into Afganistan. Those are the targets. My guess is that the real Pakistan gov probably gave the coordinates to the US for these and many previous hits. However, they can't really claim that because their people would be all over them because of the anti-American sentiment in Pakistan. This is why you haven't heard a lot of arguement from the UN about these hits. This was the same thing that was going on when Bush was in office.
Obama has consistently said that he wants diplomacy first, but he has also said that he will not hesitate to use force when necessary. In this particular instance, the US is currently working out a deal with Russia for a different route for supplies to Afganistan, but in the meantime it is necessary to protect the existing route through Pakistan. Did you really think that Obama was just going to leave our people in Afganistan with no supply line? And if he had, what would you have said about that?
It looks as though you weren't really paying attention...
He said the same thing over and over. Withdraw troops from Iraq and put more boots on the ground in Afghanistan..........how could you have missed THAT? Selective hearing? Selective posting, too, I guess.
Then you haven't been paying attention.
Because this is exactly the attitude O has been taking when visiting foreign countries. America has to be rebuilt because the way we are now does not agree with the European model. And good thing he is around now to guide us in through that. Most of us are way too enterprising and independent for his taste and that's something he is looking to change.
You should really start paying attention....(sm)
to what is said by the president as opposed to the Fixed Noise version. What Obama actually said:
".....we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."
He is absolutely correct. The US is not a theocracy and is therefore not bound by or based on any relgion.
The Fixed Noise version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEF2-a6QBx8
Pay close attention folks....quit closing
Then you haven't been paying attention to Able Danger. sm
It's a huge story, being ignored by the MSM right now, but investigation is underway.
Started paying attention to Obama right after
nm
In case you haven't been paying attention (sm)
Most of the time we (democrats) have only defended our position or raised opposition to off-the-wall posts. If you will look back you will see that most (but not all) of these threads are started by someone posting some crazy link to either a biased website or (and this is my favorite) an email that just happened to come across their desk.
Pay close attention....posting a candidate's stand on issues
is not bashing. And I talked abou the DNC as much as I talked about Obama. It is their agenda, not his. He is the messenger.
My post was a direct answer to the direct post...
of Democrat. It was not a blank open-ended statement. And dial it back a notch...it is certainly your right to protest anything any time you want to. Just like it is my right to protest you protesting while men and women are still in harm's way, because you are in effect aiding the enemy. Apparently the Viet Nam experience taught you nothing. Americans protesting in the streets heartened the enemy and when they were about to surrender decided not to, based a lot upon what was happening in the American streets. I believe that the protesting in that war prolonged the war and cost more American lives. Hanoi Jane should have been tried for treason. That being said...lessons were not learned and the protestors are doing the exact same thing now. Exercising the very right bought for them by shedding of American military blood. And I still say common courtesy should keep people out of the streets and off the TV until the military are home safe. But it just proves the same thing to me over and over...the selfISHhness of the protestors vs. the selfLESSness of the military. They continue to put it all on the line for your right to protest anything you want to protest...it is up to YOU to decide where and when that is appropriate, and it is up to you to take the heat for same. It is up to me and others like me (in my opinion) to apply that heat. Go ahead and do whatever your conscience or lack thereof moves you to do. But do not expect those of a different mind not to protest the protest.
I do believe that there is a direct
response to the OP with the title of "You're Whack." The inside message said, "Who cares? So what? Get a life."
Seriously...if you have nothing constructive to add, why waste your time responding with that?
I guess I just don't get why some of you hate Christians so much? I admit that there are those who try and force their religion upon others. I don't do that. If someone doesn't want to believe in what I do, like my husband, I don't push my views on him. However, he doesn't ridicule me for believing either.
It just seems like every time someone mentions something about religion the bashing and name calling, etc. starts. I'm beginning to think that maybe Christians should be placed on the hate crime list because it sure sounds like a lot of people hate us.
Can someone direct me to a site (sm)
that states the candidates' detailed respective platforms at a glance? I've watched most of the debates, as much as I can anyhow, but I've not been able glean and distinguish a lot of specifics.
I'm in FL and vote on Tuesday. Believe it or not, I am undecided. I liked Dennis, but he pulled out today and probably wouldn't have voted for him... won't go into why, but I'm sure I don't have to :-)
Dennis says to go Obama.... not sure if I want to. What I want is to have a Dem president. I like Edwards...
My demographic falls into Hilary's (female 45 and over lol).
Input appreciated.
that was a direct quote from
Ronald Reagan. How SHAMEFUL that you make fun of a dead man and one with Alzheimer's to boot. I am appalled at your lack of manners.
I believe this is a direct quote from big O
'The buck stops here.'
May I politely and respectfully direct you
back to God's word? Obviously a little more study and maturing will do you no harm.
You know, I hate hypocrisy. You want to direct me
back to God's Word?
When you can show me in God's Word where He approves of what Osambo approves, then we can talk.
Let's talk abortion, gay marriage, taxes, lying, cheating, subversion of government, indoctrination of preschoolers, redefining marriage, etc., a whole litany of what Osambo stands for and compare it to God Almighty's Word.
I warn you in advance. You are up against an adversary you do not want to tackle with because you are ill prepared to defend your comments and beliefs in the light of Scripture.
Ready to go for it, old girl?
Debate, lets debate
Honey, I dont know if your problem is Alzheimer's or Parkinson's but I have debated all over this board..I have tried and tried again and again to debate with your cohorts..It starts out okay and then your conservative friends start attacking and it continues through the debate to where then there is no longer a debate. I ask for you to check the archives and you will see this..nothing but personal attacks against me, which then I attacked back..Debate..lets debate..I WOULD LOVE TO DEBATE WITHOUT ATTACKS..Place an issue and lets debate..Who knows..my consciousness might be raised or yours might be..Lets do it,,
Please direct me to the bible verse where it is written
about the right to bear arms. I missed this.
"They are no more pro war than God is. They do believe in the right to bear arms..."
You give me a direct answer. You dodge it like he does.
How can he give 95% of AMericans a tax cut if 30-40% of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to use refundable tax credits. How else can he do it? PLEASE, PLEASE, explain that to me. If I am wrong, all you have to do is explain to me HOW he is going to give tax cuts to 95% of people, 30-40% of whom DO NOT PAY federal income taxes, wITHOUT cutting them a check. Please, please explain that to me.
Sam understands the basic principles of socialism and Marxism just fine. Most of which Mr Obama taught me in his books and associations. Which you are willing to ignore.
So please...very simply. Explain to me how he is going to give tax breaks or cuts to 95% of Americans if 30-40% of that group don't pay taxes. You said yourself, he can't. So either he is lying about the 95%...or he is going to cut that 30-40% a check.
PLEASE explain his tax plan to me since you are such an expert on it. HOW is he going to do it without cutting checks? HOW?
Are you not able to answer a simple direct question?
It's obviously over your head.
Don't want to direct quote, can't stand to watch it again sm
The point being, cutting unnecessary procedures to seniors who "would not get any better anyway." I was so fuming angry that I would like everyone to hear it, but I for one could not stand watching it again. We are bailing out all these losers and he's going to deny our seniors. If he touches their benefits, I will march on Washington. Most of them paid their way all their lives and now they're being "cut" because he thinks it's frivalous as they "wouldn't get any better anyway." Who the blazes is he to make that decision???? Everyone deserves a choice of care, even Gramma and Grampa. I don't care how old they are!
Yeah, direct me to some homosexual "scientific"
site. Believe me, if that were the case, it would be well publicized, especially in the New York Times.
Don't you even know that the first "scientists" who "came out" with a gay gene were homosexuals? You don't think they have an agenda, my dear?
Nan-ism post was in direct reply/rebuttal to the two posts above it.
Surely you would agree that when accused of something we should have a chance for rebuttal? And that our rebuttal would surely include proof/evidence of why we took a particular stand? Would you deny the liberal board that right? SOME of us may be tolerant (or as Nan put it, "sissies") but some of us are very capable of speaking up for ourselves.
I have read Nan on this board (and others as well) for almost two years so I think I have a pretty fair grasp of her opinion and style of posting.
Feel free to direct your concerns to the Administrator. sm
You can reach the adminstrator at Admin@MTStars.com. As far as deleting, since the incident of several weeks ago, I have made a concerted effort on BOTH boards to keep the bashing to a minimum.
Hardly. Consorting with vs direct quote? Supports succession
The quote thing, whether SP or her husband is not the only example of the problems SP will be facing once the convention is over and the campaign goes into high gear. So far, this morning, you have managed to dodge every single effort to elicit a response to SP's OWN words. Dismiss the pastor, but not her own preaching on video. That just won't fade away no matter how much spin you are able to produce. These are land mines waiting for detonation.
With regard to the "got not use for America's damned institutions" and support of succession question, these issues will not play well for yer in terms of country first, in the context of ethics (can't practice what is preached) and when it comes to change versus same old stuff.
Before pronoucing this as a nonissue, suppose we give this a little time to play out in the political arena? Your guilt by association campaign has already run its course, and Obama managed to clench the nomination. In the light of the blaring negative publicity that will be issuing forth in the weeks to come with SP being the newest rock star on the block, how much political mileage do you really think that empty tank is going to give you?
Still waiting for a direct answer to a simple question.
nm
The huge emphasis on tomorrow is in direct proportion to
Finally. A President we can all be PROUD of, instead of hide-your-head-in-a-bag EMBARRASSED.
Must also be hard for some people to give direct answers after making a statement like that.
nm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)...sm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)
May 12 (Bloomberg) -- United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan today said the U.S. needs to follow up on Iranian offers of direct negotiations in order to resolve peacefully their dispute over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
``I've asked all sides to lower their rhetoric and intensify their diplomatic efforts to find a solution,'' Annan said at a briefing in Vienna. ``I think it's important that the United States comes to the table.''
The U.S. has let French, German and U.K. diplomats lead talks with Iran over the atomic dispute. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a meeting of the Developing Eight group of Islamic countries in Indonesia, said Iran is ready for direct talks and will comply with any UN decision on its atomic program based on international rules. A U.S. State Department spokesman in Vienna declined to comment.
The U.K. and France, backed by the U.S., have proposed a resolution under Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter to compel Iran to stop its nuclear work. A Chapter 7 resolution can invoke economic sanctions or military force against ``any threat to the peace'' of other countries. Iran says it's developing nuclear technology to generate power, while the U.S. and European countries accuse Iran of trying to develop atomic weapons.
China and Russia, veto-wielding members of the Security Council, oppose a Chapter 7 resolution for Iran.
Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said he didn't have any information about an Agence France-Presse report that inspectors found traces of highly enriched uranium in his country.
Uranium Particles
``I haven't been informed of any such findings,'' Aliasghar Soltanieh said in a telephone interview.
Particles of weapons-grade uranium came from sample swipes that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors took at the Lavizan-Shian site in Tehran, where a physics research center was dismantled and topsoil removed in 2004 after suspicions were raised about activities there, AFP said.
The IAEA reported to the Security Council on April 28 that inspectors took environmental samples at suspected nuclear sites in their most recent visit to Iran. The samples were to undergo testing for uranium particles at IAEA laboratories. IAEA spokespeople declined to comment.
The Iranians won't ``put everything on the table'' until the U.S. joins the European-led negotiations, Annan said. Negotiations should be around a ``comprehensive package'' including economic and regional security concerns, he said.
`Engaged in Dialogue'
Annan's call for direct talks between Iran and the U.S. followed those of Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA. ``Once we get to security issues, the U.S. should be engaged in the dialogue,'' ElBaradei said March 8.
The Security Council's five permanent members plus Germany will meet in London May 19 to consider new incentives for Iran to renounce its atomic program, AFP reported, citing unidentified diplomats. The permanent five are the U.S., U.K., France, Russia and China.
The U.S. and Iran broke off diplomatic relations in 1979 after Islamic revolutionaries overthrew the government of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and kept 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. |
To contact the reporter on this story:
Jonathan Tirone in Vienna at jtirone@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 12, 2006 10:33 EDT |
No, you are not even close to getting it.
You still think I believe people should priotize other things over their kids' health. I don't believe that, and I definitely don't do that. My children are definitely well cared for. I just think the middle-class deserves a break now and then, and I think a break in insurance costs for their kids would be an amazing gift to the good people of the working class.
I am not the only one not close to getting it....
why then not get a tax break resulting in a refund for paying the premiums yourself? That is a break. But you completely discount that. Bush offered that, Democrats weren't interested. Now you tell me why that is not giving the middle class a break toward more affordable health care. No, not FREE, but more affordable. My kids are well cared for too. But I do not think you, or anyone else, should have their taxes raised so that I can get free insurance for my kids.
Not even close...nm
x
Close, but not quite
Actually, the man behind the curtain in the Emerald City (which, after all is GREEN) is AL Gore!
close up of him checking
his watch every few minutes.
Close, 22 in December
But you have to start somewhere right? I could be like the majority of "kids" my age, buying $200,000 dollar homes, brand new cars, having babies, and then going "OH CRAP, credit doesn't mean free??"
My point of the post was that it's not fair for those who make more to have to give to those of us who make less. We have to climb our way up the economic ladder just like everyone else. If someone LEGITIMATELY needs help, let's give it to them.
But it shouldn't take the government to do that.
close friend
My best friend had an abortion when she was a senior in high school. She was afraid to tell her parents. I took her and her boyfriend paid for the procedure. He did not go with her. Fast-forward 24 years. She has 3 children and has been married for 20 years. Does she regret her decision? Some days she does. Would she do it again? She says she would. She has talked about it with her teenage son and hopes that her children will never have to make the choice. She is a conservative Christian now (Assembly of God) and she still fights for abortion rights.
Tell us who a few of his close friends
shadowy backgrounds. If he and all his followers insist that all his questionable past associations mean nothing, then where are the ones that do mean something to him? Someone had to influence his life.
What I have heard, and I am close to you
in Atlanta is that lots and I mean lots of illegals have left the country because of our economy and being unable to find jobs. Heard this not too long ago. If our economy is suffering, then theirs is also. Grady is clamping down after bleeding for years.
Be careful, you are getting too close to
proving your point. Some folks on here don't want to see you do that! Not if it disagrees with their infatuations, even when they know deep inside it is the truth. This dude wrote this junk before the election and Obama loved it! Enough so that he had the man's wife, Beyonce (sp), peform at the inauguration! and Jay-Z was in the guest of honors spectators seats. Racism? Heck NO!
If you looked really close to
Nancy Pelosi you would have seen the large brown on her nose. That is what that was all about. Look at me.....I'm Obama's right hand woman and I'm going to applaud and give a standing O for every little thing he says whether it is stupid or not. Woo hoo! Personally, I'm surprised the dems didn't do the wave or something. I wonder what kind of kool-aid they served last night. Hmm.
Close, but still no cigar.
Going a step further, maybe this will help explain.
The Amish are fundamentalist Christians who govern entire communities by religious principles. They are also completely nonviolent, do not seek converts, and will live in harmony with neighbors who are not of their faith.
The Branch Davidians were about as fundamentalist (to their own sect) and out-there as you can imagine. They did have a program of conversion, some would say there were instances of forced conversion. They fortified their headquarters and stockpiled weapons for what they perceived as impending government attack against them, but still never tried to overthrow the government.
There are fundamentalist Christian groups who are violent on single issues (bombing abortion clinics, for instance) or who are intolerant on single issues (racial purity or ''God hates fags''). Still, can we name any organized umbrella under which an intolerant and violent coalition of Christian fundamentalists advocates the overthrow of government, conquest of non-Christian countries and replacement of all secular law with religious law? That would be the Christian equivalent of Islamism.
All Islamists are fundamentalist Muslims. All fundamentalist Muslims are NOT Islamists.
The Jesus that I know was very close to...sm
Mary Magdelene a prostitute. He did not agree with her profession, but he loved her and saw her value apart from what she did to survive. Things are not ever just black and white, good and bad. Because Obama does not agree with you on certain heartfelt beliefs does not mean that Jesus would not support him in his efforts to bring peace to the world.
|
