Posted By: Just the big bad on 2009-02-07 In Reply to:
From Rupert Murdoch speaking about Fox dealing with economic downturn:
While it's impossible to be completely prepared for a downturn of this magnitude, we began priming ourselves for a weakening economy earlier last year. We implemented strict cost cutting measures across all our operations. We reduced head count in individual businesses where appropriate and we scaled back on capital expenditures.
Even on [finance] terms, we have never been a company that tolerates facts.
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 You can always watch Fixed Noise...(sm)
I hear O'Reilly plans on doing another temper tantrum tonight. That should be good for a few laughs.
Anyone interested in being well informed watches Fixed Noise
How else can one keep up with what the myopic right-wing is up to, especially nobody else in the mainstream media with any ethical integrity will carry the bulk of their stories?
Anyone interested in being well informed watches Fixed Noise
How else can one keep up with what the myopic right-wing is up to, especially since nobody else in the mainstream media with any ethical integrity will carry the bulk of their stories?
Reality check
You just cannot stay off this board can you? Don't you get it? We don't want to debate with you. We are just as set in our beliefs as you are in yours. No one here is interested in anything you have to say, so please, get a life or at least stay on your own board.
For Reality Check. sm
I think my post did sound a little hateful. I am sure you are a very nice person. You see, this is a country divided, and I am certain I am not the only one on this board, to feel that GWB has had a lot to do with that. Like I said, I am sure you are a nice person. However, this is a country divided, nothing will make me change my mind about this administration. I fear for either party that gets in next time, if it is a democrat, they cannot hardly get ahead because of the blunders made by the current administration. In a nutshell, I sincerely feel like this country has never been more divided, and perhaps that is why the moderators decided to split the two boards to begin with. Post all you want, you will get no more nasty responses for me. I however will feel at liberty to post jokes when I feel like it. I lurk on the conservative board, but do not post. There are many right-winged jokes and cartoons over there and I do not post my opinion - because that is their board.
Reality check.
October 2001 to February 2003. That’s how long it took to sell the war to Congress, democrats and republicans alike, and to the American public, according to Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Ret.). Not some left-wing wacko. Just a high-rank retired Air Force colonel who conducted a study.
A Strategy of Lies: How the White House Fed the Public a Steady Diet of Falsehoods
http://www.rense.com/general44/50.htm.
The power of propaganda. They bought it, hook, line and sinker. That was then and this is now, and what we know NOW is that Bush lied. No WMDs. No Iraq-sponsored terrorism. It's still about the oil.
BTW, there is a Bechtel-commissioned BTC pipeline in Georgia, "secured" by US troops, who also provide advisors and training to Georgia military. Russia doesn't like US-trained troops in its backyard either. You won't hear it on Fox, but Russia has not confined it's invasion to Ossetia. They targeted that pipeline 18 hours ago. Sometimes you follow the money. Other times, you follow the oil.
Fox News, YouTube, nohussein.org? Consider the source. Abortion is legal. The issue is choice. Some choose not to do it, others choose to exercise their right to choose. Those who do appreciate any politician who is willing to go to the mat to uphold Roe vs Wade. Unlikely to be reversed anytime soon and, in this election, far down on the list of priorities. Reality check #2.
No need to wonder what the colonel would have to say about that uranium since the issue was extensively scrutinized in his study.
It has been known for decades that Iraq had a reactor at Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center and a nuclear materials testing facility at Osiraq, damaged in a bombing by the Iranians in 1980 and disabled by Israeli air attacks in 1981 in an operation that was condemned by the US at the time since we were backing Saddam against Iran. Ten years later, these same facilities were completely destroyed by Americans in the 1991 Gulf War, 12 years before Bush sold his version of Gulf War II to the American public.
This would be the same 500 metric tons of reactor grade uranium (the kind used as fuel in producing clean electricity). It was NOT weapons grade uranium. Being well documented by the UN and the IAEA, this stash of uranium was legal and had been controlled and monitored in accordance with international law since the Gulf War. The uranium was removed from Iraq and transported to Canada to be used in their nuclear energy facilities. The inspections team found NO EVIDENCE of any yellowcake in Iraq dating from after 1991. So if the terrorists had managed to get their hands on it, the US would be held accountable since they destroyed the reactor, knew about the stock piles, returned to occupy Iraq in 2003, but were too busy killing Iraqis to bother with disposing of the uranium for 5 full years. No wonder they were keeping it a secret.
Speaking of yellowcake uranium and propaganda, back in January 2003, Bush accused Saddam of trying to buy it from Niger, based on Italian, British and French intelligence sources. Notice this occurred between October 2001 and February 2003, as stated in the previous post, when Bush was busy doing anything and everything he could to dupe the Congress and public into supporting his war. The polite word for this intelligence is “faulty.” A more accurate description would be forgery. The colonel talks about this too, but his study is a bit obscure and hard to locate. Google Niger uranium and Iraq and this link pops up in case anybody wants to read more about that one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries
As for the chemical and biological weapons used against his own people, that would be the Kurdish town of Halabja in March 1988, when 7000 civilians died and in 14 other Kurd villages. The reason we knew about those chemical and biological weapons is because the US sold them to Saddam to use against the Iranians (as did the UK, Germany, France and others). Check out the Senate committee's reports on US Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq from a 1992 report. Reagan and Bush Sr. sold Iraq anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs, botulism, germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia, Salmonella, E. coli, brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene, to name a few.
From 1991 to 1998 UNSCOM inspected and scoured Iraq, accounting for some 95+% of the known agents before they left. Despite all the suspicions put forth by the Bush propaganda machine in 2003 and the best search efforts of the US since the occupation, no evidence of the remaining inventory has been uncovered.
Like it or not, abortion has been legal in the US for 35 years. The answer to your questions about choice is simple. It’s the mother’s body, not yours, not the government’s. Her choice. Nobody’s else’s. That is the law. The law does not force abortion for those who do not believe in it, nor does it prevent it for those who do. Morality can be legislated after the American theocracy has been established. Until then, it is about choice.
Bush’s contempt for the courts is no secret. They do not simply uphold law. They also interpret it and have discretionary authority to issue decisions and opinions. The constitution provides us with 3 executive branches for a reason. It’s called checks and balances. No candidate or president should be opposed to seeing that part of the constitution upheld. EU reality check....
1. Member states in the EU all maintain their separate set of laws. Members of the EU Parliament are elected every 5 years by all citizens of the EU. It operates in much the same way as the US federal system.
2. Member states are responsible for their own defense. Many, but not all, are members of NATO (by choice). Nascent EU military forces (as opposed to separate national forces) have engaged in peacekeeping missions and humanitarian aid missions in Africa, the former Yugoslavia and in the Middle East.
3. Each member state maintains it's own legal system. EU laws are analogous to our US federal laws. No threat here. As a matter of fact, national sovereignty is stronger under this system than states' rights are in the US. EU law mainly relates to enforcement of treaties, the environment and fundamental rights of member states.
4. 15 of the 27 EU countries have adopted the euro....again, by choice: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain. I hate to break this to you, but the Euro already is worth more than the US dollar (1 Euro = 1.2652 US dollars)....they must be doing something right.
5. The EU has PROGRESSIVE policy oversight on it's own agriculture, energy and infrastructure (as it should be) and is competitive in world markets based on the value of their currency...again, higher in value than the US dollar.
No need to "research" the NAU. I know what it is and I know what it is not. The NAU is a THEORETICAL region. It does not exist. There are no current government plans in Canada, the US or Mexico to form such an entity. NAFTA is the closest manifestation of the CONCEPT of an NAU.
Your version of the NAU is nothing more to me than a conspiracy theory...paranoia on a grand scale. I have a few questions for you. Ever heard of evolution. How about survival of the fittest? Do you believe in these concepts? Here's the deal. The world we live in now is not the same world your parents and grandparents grew up in...especially in terms of population and technology. The survival of the human race and of the nations depends upon their ability to adapt and CHANGE. IF (and I emphasize the word IF) there is a better economic or governing system around the evolutionary corner, then no amount of belly-aching and conspiracy theory spin is going to keep it at bay. PROGRESS HAPPENS. Reality check.........sm
So you don't need to research the NAU? I hope the sand will protect your little brain when all heck breaks loose.
The concept of the NAU has been actively pursued by our government (Bush) and the government of Canada and Mexico since 2005. Check it out.
The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:
At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.
What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:
In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.
To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.
I cannot believe there are people living today who actually believe that there are not hidden agendas in our government and that "we the people" actually know what is going on.
Reality check...(sm)
While I do think that Blago needs to go down, I think it should be recognized that this happens in politics ALL THE TIME. That pay to play mentality among politicians is nothing new. I don't think Blago did anything worse than most do. His big mistake was getting caught.
Reality check............ sm
Did you even read the article? It says in part...
"The Obama administration moved on Friday to undo a last-minute Bush administration rule granting broad protections to health workers who refuse to take part in abortions or provide other health care that goes against their consciences."
It goes on to say: "The rule prohibits recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or assist in abortions or sterilization procedures because of their “religious beliefs or moral convictions.” "
This sounds to me like providers who refuse to do abortions or provide other health care that goes against their religious/moral/personal convictions will lose protection from "discrimination" (read prosecution) by "recipients of federal money" (read welfare recipients). In other words, if this protection is lifted and a woman goes to a physician who refuses to perfrom an abortion because of moral beliefs, then that woman would be free to sue the doctor for withholding medical care....and who would be more prone to sue a physician than one who is on welfare and always looking for free money?
It has nothing to do with asking a health care professional to perform a procedure or deliver health care outside of his/her realm of education or specialization.
Time for a reality check
I keep seeing posts telling us to "drop ridiculous charges", etc about Obama's b/c. You may not realize this yet, but we are just MTs here voicing our opinion that we do not believe the b/c issue has been resolved (because it hasn't) and that we are glad there are others (judges, lawyers, politicians, etc) who are suing and taking this to the supreme court. However to tell us to "drop the charges" is just too silly. We're not the ones who are going to courts, only voicing our opinions. And last I knew that is what this site is for.
I see many posts with interesting articles written by jounalists and people who have been involved in the case since it all began (and even people outside the country), and those posts are met with such replies all screaming how any article that is posted is not a "credible source". I saw someone give news headlines and was told "show us a credible source". Yet time and time again those same people will come back and cite pro-Obama sites like Factcheck.org, PolitiFact, Huffington Post, etc as credible sources (I even saw someone state Obama's own website as a credible source - had to laugh at that one).
People from all over the country (and the world) are writing articles about this. That means there is something to it. People who are journalists, lawyers, etc, are not going to write articles based on nothing. If it was all based on nothing we'd be seeing more lawsuits filed against the people writing the articles.
On this board I see that the people who want the issue resolved and are looking forward to hearing what the supreme courts have to say, and the outcome of all the other numerous lawsuits are doing just that and voicing their opinions. No need to treat them with disrespect. You can post your own post on why you believe what you do. We are all entitled to our opinions, and I enjoy reading the articles.
So let me just say once more....people on this board - we are just MT'sn not the actual people going to the courts suing Obama, hence we have no "charges to drop". We leave that to more capable hands. We are voicing our opinions here and will continue to do so until the issue has been resolved. Don't tell us it has been resolved otherwise there would be no court cases out there.
Lets all wait and see. And as my grandma used to say to me when I was little "Stop being so silly, you silly goose you".
fair and balanced? Brought tears to my eyes, too. O must have been right there balling those symbols of our country up into wads of disrespect and slam dunking them right in those cans!!!! It just gets me right here ( i )
God forgive them for they know not what they do!!!!!!
Oh my Lord, next thing you know they'll be burning their bras - help us Jesus - help us Lord - the self-righteous pleads for your guidance once they remove the lumbar from their own eyes!!!!
I don't think all christians should be lumped together as republicans. There are just as many christian dems as pubs. Having said that though, what pubs call *the base of the party,* which at present seems to be to the far right, are definitely typically hard line christians.
The main problem I have with republicans when it comes to abortion is that they are against abortion and yet also against *welfare.* So, the way I see it is that they want you to have the baby regardless of the fact that you may not be able to take care of it, but are not willing to assist in the care of that child. And yeah, I understand the concept of responsibility, but that only happens in fairy tales. If everyone was responsible we wouldn't be in the economic nightmare we're in right now.
I understand all the noise
about smoking and how cigarettes cause diseases, and how billions of dollars are spent on smoking-related problems. What I don't understand, is why isn't there as much passion about ALCOHOL, and how it destroys not only the alcoholic, but the families of the alcoholic; the money that is spent on rehabilitation for alcoholics, who, after 30 days in a rehab walk out and within days they are drinking again. I see on the TV and in movies, when someone gets stressed they pick up a drink. What message does this send to young people????? I just don't get it.
I understand all the noise
about smoking and how cigarettes cause diseases, and how billions of dollars are spent on smoking-related problems. What I don't understand, is why isn't there as much passion about ALCOHOL, and how it destroys not only the alcoholic, but the families of the alcoholic; the money that is spent on rehabilitation for alcoholics, who, after 30 days in a rehab walk out and within days they are drinking again. I see on the TV and in movies, when someone gets stressed they pick up a drink. What message does this send to young people????? I just don't get it.
DH and I should get our mortgage fixed....
we have no debt but our home, have never missed a payment or been late, pay a few hundred dollars extra every month towards the principal, have never taken out a HELOC or used our equity (quite a bit) for anything and have a fantastic credit score. We should have our rate lowered below the 5% it is now for doing a great job. But no, we'll give a break to those who bought too much house, had to compete with the Jones' and who took out foolish loans to begin with.
Yeah and she's already making noise
about running for the presidency in 2012. God save us all.
If it is broken, why haven't they fixed it?
Updated in light of today's news that kangaroo centers, petting zoos and ice cream parlors are included in Homeland Security's list of vulnerable terrorist targets:
If Its Broken, Why Haven't They Fixed It?
Fort Knox is robbed in an unusual way. Burglars break in through an air conditioning vent and shine a laser at the video cameras to blind them. Billions are stolen.
The head of Fort Knox (let's call him the Chief) announces that no one could have foreseen this type of burglary.
The commission investigating the robbery -- stacked with the Chief's business partners and friends -- finds that the break-in was unexpected. The commission makes numerous suggestions on how to thwart similar burglaries by installing motion detectors in the air conditioning vents and main vault.
Independent researchers, however, discover that there have been many previous break-ins at repositories of valuable items where the burglars crawled in through the air conditioning vents and shined lasers at video cameras.
They also discover that the Fort's security system would normally have caught the burglars in the act and alerted the military in time to stop the burglarly, but the system was undergoing a series of safety tests that night -- including some that were similar to what actually occurred -- and so the military assumed that the alarms were part of the test.
There had been safety tests before, but never so many at the same time. The Chief personally scheduled multiple, overlapping tests for the night of the robbery, and then oversaw the operation of the tests and the Fort's reaction to those tests.
Years pass, but the Chief does not follow the commission's recommendations. He fails to install any motion detectors.
That's circumstantial evidence that the Chief was in on the heist. Why? Because if the robbery really had not been foreseeable and if he was innocent, he would have a very strong incentive to install motion detectors to prevent further robberies at the Fort. His personal reputation, the government's reputation, and its gold reserves would all depend on it. You can bet that he'd shore up the Fort's defenses.
Perks
Let's take it a step further: the Chief's personal bank account has suddenly gotten alot bigger after the heist. That helps to prove he was in on it, right? But it also shows that one of the reasons the Chief is leaving the Fort's defenses in a compromised state now is so that additional heists can occur, and he'll get more loot.
And while the 9-11 Commission made numerous recommendations on how to prevent future terrorist attacks -- many of them simple and inexpensive to implement -- the Bush administration has failed to do so. Indeed, the Department of Homeland Security, instead of protecting vulnerable targets, has instead randomly made up lists which include kangaroo centers, petting zoos and ice cream parlors as high-priority terrorist threats.
Just like with the Chief, the current administration's failure to make the recommended and preventative changes -- many of them cheap fixes -- despite billions being spent on supposed homeland security, is strong evidence that the administration was in on it.
This is especially true because the administration has recieved so many perks from 9/11: justification for wars in Afghanistan (where a huge oil pipeline benefitting American companies was being held up by the Taliban) and Iraq (one of the world's largest oil producers), permanent military bases in the Middle East, and consolidation of power at home.
And by failing to implement the recommendations of the 9-11 Commission, the administration keeps open the possibility that another terrorist attack will occur which will whip the now-dissenting American public into line, justify the invasion of Iran, and allow for the suspension of our remaining constitutional rights.
The bottom line is that the administration's, like the Chief's, inaction to fix the alleged holes in security which allowed supposedly unforeseeable crimes to occur shows that they are guilty of the crimes, and hope to benefit from additional crimes in the future.
Right now there are single, low income mothers (and fathers I would assume) who by the time they get the earned income credit and claim head of household do not owe taxes and actually get back more than they paid in to begin with. So why haven't you been carrying on about that all along? (And when people without children are contributing to this with their tax money, why isn't that considered socialism?)
You guys really do need to bring in some credible sources. The reality is that companies don't like unions, not because unions put them in a financial hole, but because they cut down on the profit margin (aka CEO wallets). Again, the republican goal is to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. This is a perfect example of that. You guys gripe about the CEO payoffs from the 700B bailout, but support an idea (killing unions) that essentially does the same thing.
I work for MQ. If we had had a union for MTs, then we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.
Faux Noise? You mean Fox News? I have watched
nm
I meant fixated on her breasts not fixed
Thought I'd clarify that before people jump down my throat on that word.
and what about people on fixed incomes who don't have mortgages
What if all this triggers inflation and screws them?
Explain what you want fixed? The voter fraud
xx
Can you stop parroting Faux Noise long enough
The freeze is pending review of the Gitmo operations. You are just plain STUPID to think that Obama is going to flood the streets with the detainees. They will be transerred to different facilities (last I heard, they were considering re-opening Alcatraz, for example!), their charges and cases reviewed and heard in a legitimate court proceedings, but don't look for ALL cases to stand, especially the ones where the only evidence against the accused was gained by means of torture. Some of them may well end up walking. You will have your beloved shrub and Cheney to thank for that.
Wow, once again jumping to conclusions based on Faux Noise sm
inaccurate reporting by jumping on a story strictly for sensationalism. Mr. Latham has since been reinstated his job. It all turned out to be a misunderstanding by argumentative student that took something that Mr. Latham said, twisted it, and reported it to the principal. Once the misunderstanding was cleared up after all parties told their stories, Mr. Latham has his job back. Just another example of those ambulance chasers at Fox stirring the pot for their own hateful agenda. Maybe those of you on here that take everything they say as gospel woulld be wise to wait before you report something as fact!!
No more creepy than you to be fixed on her breasts - ewww back at ya.
.
I'd be happy if they just reduced everybody's mortgage rate to a fixed 3%. sm
Then everyone is still responsible for the debt they took on, yet they're still getting a break. It would free up a couple hundred bucks a month for me, which I could then use elsewhere to stimulate the economy. Fewer foreclosures, banks are still getting their money.
You can't throw money at this problem and expect it to be fixed.
Spending and spending and then more spending isn't the answer - it just creates more of the same problems. It's true that Bush never met a spending bill he didn't like and that lost him a lot of support and, as you stated, created quite a bit of the mess we're in today. But Obama's spending really isn't doing anything to jumpstart the economy - okay, maybe in the short-term, but none of the money he's spending is sustainable.
Example: Part of his stimulus money went to pay for the salaries of police officers in Columbus, Ohio. For one year. The City of Columbus is broke and Mayor Coleman says that if things don't turn around soon, jobs that are going to be cut are... guess what? Policemen and firefighters. Even if those officers make it to next year, the city can't afford to take over paying thier salaries after that. Is Obama going to pay for it next year and the year after that?
When you're in debt, the first thing you learn is that you can't spend your way out of it. You have to cut back, "trim the fat", and learn to live on a tighter budget. What burns me is that none of the politicians in DC understand that because they don't have to live it - they do the majority of what they do on our dime.
It's not about doing nothing, but it's about doing what's right and since no one in DC even reads the spending packages they keep signing, you can't say even they know what's right anymore.
You can't throw money at this problem and expect it to be fixed.
Spending and spending and then more spending isn't the answer - it just creates more of the same problems. It's true that Bush never met a spending bill he didn't like and that lost him a lot of support and, as you stated, created quite a bit of the mess we're in today. But Obama's spending really isn't doing anything to jumpstart the economy - okay, maybe in the short-term, but none of the money he's spending is sustainable.
Example: Part of his stimulus money went to pay for the salaries of police officers in Columbus, Ohio. For one year. The City of Columbus is broke and Mayor Coleman says that if things don't turn around soon, jobs that are going to be cut are... guess what? Policemen and firefighters. Even if those officers make it to next year, the city can't afford to take over paying thier salaries after that. Is Obama going to pay for it next year and the year after that?
When you're in debt, the first thing you learn is that you can't spend your way out of it. You have to cut back, "trim the fat", and learn to live on a tighter budget. What burns me is that none of the politicians in DC understand that because they don't have to live it - they do the majority of what they do on our dime.
It's not about doing nothing, but it's about doing what's right and since no one in DC even reads the spending packages they keep signing, you can't say even they know what's right anymore.
Unfortunately the reality is....
that liberals get a HUGE PASS when it comes to verbal spillage. I've heard some of the most hateful things come out of Howard Dean and all we hear about is what Karl Rove said, and a lot of it was taken out of context. He didn't say ALL Democrats, he said SOME liberals, i.e. Move On.Org and George Soros. There WERE groups demonstrating against the war in Afghanistan. That was a fact. And how does the Democratic party get by with a former KKK member (Byrd)? That wouldn't be allowed for 2 seconds on the Republican side.
You should try to relax. Music always helps me. Try this. LOL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBk32JsV9l8
Reality
You obviously saw Senator John Ensign (R-NV) on Meet The Press this morning along with Congressman Barney Frank (not Barney Fife). Ensign says that Frank is "fearmongering" and says that state budgets are "bloated" and that we should be "cutting back."
Well, how's your state doing, Senator Ensign? The state of Nevada has to cut 38% from its state budget. The Nevada schools are facing a 15% cut. Outpatient oncology services at University Medical Center in Las Vegas have CLOSED because of state Medicaid cuts. If you're lucky, maybe your gynecologic oncologist will open a chemotherapy center in his clinic's storage room like Dr. Nick Spirtos did.
That's only one example. Do yourself a favor and read the article. There are plenty more examples in plenty of other states. The idea that states need to "cut back" in the midst of a recession is absolutely idiotic and so is Senator Ensign.
Reality?
The majority of voters in the United States have dismissed your idea of reality and voted against it. Maybe it is you who needs to get a cup of coffee and join the majority.
This is reality Reality
Reality and Glenn Beck have nothing to do with each other.
You are the one not dealing in reality
there's so many wrong statements in your post I wouldn't know where to begin in rebutting them... I pity you and your pessimistic outlook on our country. You are one very bitter and jaded person. Just like Cindy Sheehan who has to blame someone else for her life's problems. I'm sorry her mother had a stroke, and I hope that everything is okay, but I think Cindy Sheehan needs to take this as a sign to take care of her family that is living...which I'm glad she is doing right now for the sake of her mother.
Running From Reality
If there was one pre-eminent characteristic of the Republican convention this week, it was the quality of deception. Words completely lost their meaning. Reality was turned upside down.
From the faux populist gibberish mouthed by speaker after speaker, you would never have known that the Republicans have been in power over the past several years and used that titanic power to lead the country to its present sorry state.
Summary On the defensive over the extent of multiple McCain homes, the GOP candidate strikes back. But his TV spot gives an oversimplified and misleading account of how Obama bought his own $1.6 million house in Chicago.
The ad says Chicago power broker Tony Rezko got "political favors" including "$14 million from taxpayers." But there's no evidence of any connection to the Obama home purchase. The $14 million was to build apartments for low-income seniors. Obama wrote a letter supporting the "worthy" project, but both men say Rezko didn't ask for the letter.
It says Rezko "purchased part of the property [Obama] couldn't afford." Rezko's wife did buy an adjoining tract but later sold the land at a profit. Obama paid market price for his home.
McCain launched the attack after Obama ran one capitalizing on McCain's inability to recall for an interviewer how many homes the McCains own. Obama's ad says it's seven. The best tally we've seen puts the figure at eight, counting all the apartments and homes owned by McCain's wife, Cindy, and various family trusts, for themselves and their children.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/154782
REALITY? Do you know who deregulated
xx
Not a break from reality,
but more a trance. Freaks me out. Thanks for the statements you posted. This is not a normal election, but more of a movement. Hope it will not be like it was in the 60's with riots going on. Getting more and more like the Book of Revelations. A person who will deceive the nations with persuasive language and have massive christ-like appeal and people will flock to him as he will promise false hope and world peace, but destroys everything. FREAKS ME OUT. He keeps changing his mind and now he and his campaign want to try to kill the expectations of what he has been stating for months. Beyond creepy. This is not your normal every four year election.
You need a dose of reality.
nm
Thank you for the dose of reality.
It seems people like to think in exponentials lately. 'Bush was the worst president in the history of time.' Obama will face 'the most daunting challenge in the history of the country.'
Goodness sakes. Are these posters just so bubble-wrapped in their protective cocoons that they don't know anything about US History?
Our country was forged with blood and steal. This ain't a country for whimps. But I guess we'll find out now what happens when we elect a man who feels it is necessary to apologize for America instead of defend it.
marks the location of current message within thread
