So basically we are screwed either

way this plays out? My biggest fear is having democrats in total control of everything. I don't like idea at all. I know a lot of people are just wanting to get republicans out of the way since they blame Bush for everything.

The big picture is that government as a whole (all parties) were involved in this crisis and it really is going to take all parties to pull us out. We need a split to keep things under control. Our country cannot afford to let everything go extreme left like it appears to be doing. We need some contrast and balance. If Obama were more middle of the road and not so extreme left.....I might consider voting for him. But he is way too extreme left for me. As a conservative.....I don't like that at all.

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

no matter who gets in. I feel sorry for whoever wins...what a mess they are taking over, not just with Bush but going back to the Clinton years. Neither candidate impresses me at all. I'm writing in someone this year.

I don't fit into either political party. My Dad was just an absolute RABID (LOL) Democrat. He would absolutely turn over in his grave if he knew 2 of his children had gone Republican (not this one). My brother and sister join me in this mess and thinking we're screwed either way. They haven't volunteered how they're going to vote but I suspect they'll stick with the Republicans (they both married RABID Republicans LOL). Neither of them want to see Palin in the White House, this I know but that's as far as we've gone.

All this aside, I totally agree with you. We don't need, particularly at this time, one party in control of everything. I know a lot of Americans are angry about a lot of things, of which I am one, but I don't want to throw the baby out in the bathwater either.

NBC: Charges against Sheehan to be dropped
Antiwar mom removed from State of the Union for wearing protest shirt

WASHINGTON - Charges against antiwar protester Cindy Sheehan, who was arrested after an incident involving a T-shirt she wore to the State of the Union address, will be dropped, officials told NBC News Wednesday.

U.S. Capitol Police took Sheehan away in handcuffs and charged her with unlawful conduct, a misdemeanor, when she showed up to President Bush�s address Tuesday night wearing a shirt that read, �2245 Dead. How many more?� � a reference to the number of soldiers killed in Iraq.

But Capitol Police will ask the U.S. attorney's office to drop the charges, NBC News� Mike Viqueira reported Wednesday.

�We screwed up,� a top Capitol Police official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

He said Sheehan didn't violate any rules or laws.

Sheehan, whose son Casey died in Iraq, was not the only one ejected from the House gallery. The wife of a powerful Republican congressman was also asked to leave, but she was not arrested.

Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Florida � chairman of the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee � was removed from the gallery because she was wearing a T-shirt that read, �Support the Troops � Defending Our Freedom.�

The Capitol Police official said officers never should have approached Young.

Criticism from Rep. Young
Holding up the shirt his wife wore, Rep. Young said on the House floor Wednesday morning: �Because she had on a shirt that someone didn�t like that said support our troops, she was kicked out of this gallery.�

�Shame, shame,� he scolded.

Beverly Young was sitting about six rows from first lady Laura Bush and was asked to leave. She argued with police in the hallway outside the House chamber.

�They said I was protesting,� she told the St. Petersburg Times. �I said, �Read my shirt, it is not a protest.� They said, �We consider that a protest.� I said, �Then you are an idiot.��

They told her she was being treated the same as Sheehan, who was ejected before the speech. Sheehan wrote in her blog Wednesday that she intended to file a First Amendment lawsuit.

She did not issue an immediate response to the charges being dropped.

�I don�t want to live in a country that prohibits any person, whether he/she has paid the ultimate price for that country, from wearing, saying, writing, or telephoning any negative statements about the government,� Sheehan wrote in her blog.

Sheehan was invited as a guest of Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif. She later was released on her own recognizance.

Told she could not wear shirt?
Capitol Police Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said police warned Sheehan that such displays were not allowed in the House chamber, but Sheehan did not respond, she said.

Sheehan, however, told a different story in her blog.

�I was never told that I couldn�t wear that shirt into the Congress,� Sheehan wrote. �I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things, ... I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later.�

She said she felt uncomfortable about attending the speech.

�I knew George Bush would say things that would hurt me and anger me and I knew that I couldn�t disrupt the address because Lynn had given me the ticket,� Sheehan wrote. �I didn�t want to be disruptive out of respect for her.�

She said she had one arm out of her coat when an officer yelled, �Protester.�

�He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs,� she wrote in her blog. She was then cuffed and driven to police headquarters a few blocks away.

Sheehan was arrested in September with about 300 other anti-war activists in front of the White House after a weekend of protests against the war in Iraq. In August, she spent 26 days camped near Bush�s ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he was spending a working vacation.

As much as you want to blame Bill Clinton......don't forget who held the reins for the last 8 years......who let them run amuck? Why was nothing done?

Check out the mortgage failures.
Tell me which failed more, prime or subprime
Tell me what is the rate of failures under the CRA or even Bush's ADDI (which i attack alll the time)
Once again, REALITY AND THE DATA doesn't fit ya'lls claims.

Basically what happened was.. we reformed bankruptcy laws.. so that people who ran into dire straights could not restructure.

We packaged the loans into commodity derivatives. These are sorta mirror bets on the loans. Sorta..as the same loan will be sold many times in many derivative packages.. that's why the housing derivatives are worth more than all the real estate in the US. Derivatives are actually not that bad.. when a market is stable and only has to deal with natural forces. The housing market was bubbled.. partially due to low interest rates that encouraged everyone to buy, even the rich, and partially due to the CRA and the ADDI.. which did add customers to the market (helping form the bubble was the extent the CRA and the ADDI had in this mess)

All it took was a few failures to pop the bubble..and make real estate prices drop,. and mind you, it was mainly prime loans (READ not loans given to poor people and not loans under the CRA) that failed. The derivative market.,.which like I said, is really mirrors of the same loans.. cause the defaults to explode with ten times the ferocity, because one loan could effect the price of dozens of derivatives.

Really the poor and even irresponsible people .. simply did not have the economic ability to cause this mess. Pool all their money together and waste it on hookers.. it would have zero effect without help from the rich elites and their magnifying packaged derivatives.

THE CRA and ADDI both had stricter requirements than loans you got from normal banks.. both required income data.. where many prime loans did not.. they also greatly limited you on how much home you could purchase..whereas private banks did not care if you tried to buy something you could not afford.
Don't believe me?.. Look in the phone book.. call your own housing authority - you can get a loan for 106% the purchase price of a home even today.. if you're poor enough.

Ask to hear the red tape and hoops you must go through.. Heck, it is probably easier to just get a real job and earn real money than go through the FHA.

Get off my back is about as simple as I can put it. I never said Laura Bush was drunk, so I don't see why you keep responding to my posts asking me to post a credible link to prove this.

The link I posted in this thread is for liberal entertainment a "what if it was Hillary idea" so to speak. What I find ironic and even hypocritical is how you boast on the "TRUTH" in the "you probably are a liberal if..." article on the neocon board, but then come over here and throw your weight around about my post (the thread we're in now - let's not get it confused).

Hope you can understand this better, or even better you are staying on the conservative board so you will not get this response. Geez Louise.

I think we need change and I'm sure Obama will make mistakes, but McCain might as well said "I totally disrespect women." By picking Palin with no experience tells me he doesn't really care. JMO.

I think splitting the country up like that would do much more harm than good. We would wind up in the same situation as in the middle east....just a bunch of small factions (if you will) and total loss of control. Not one of these individual factions would be able to fend off foreign threats, much less threats from other factions. Individual factions would not be able to compete in a global economy. We have gained the power that we currently have by being a united country, and that would be totally lost. This would put us back to civil war days and in my opinion would not serve any real purpose other than to appease those who encourage separation of the country now.

antichrist which some believe it could be the O. I had a study if this in the Book of Daniel, not only in Revelations. No matter who it is, better be ready. Some state middle age, 40's and 50's.

censorship is unconstitutional. That was his reason for not having restrictions on certain websites in libraries and schools. However, as a parent, I do not feel comfortable knowing that people can go to porn sites in libraries where my child might see this or at school where children might pull this stuff up. If people want to look at porn on the internet, they can feel free to buy their own computer and watch it from the privacy of their home, but not where children can see. Also, I do not see why it was important to Ogden to oppose a law stating porn distributors had to verify with documentation the age of their models. Doing away with this law would make child pornography easier to do. Having a law making them prove the models age, to me, is a responsible thing to do and also will prevent underage children being used in lewd sexual acts.

I just cannot support a man who would not allow restrictions for obscene sights in public libraries and schools and not see why it is important to have laws to verify that a person is of legal age to be involved in pornography.

Seriously, pornography is intended for the privacy of our homes with adults. Not in public places or involving children whether those children be watching or actually involved in the porn.

This is not a personal attack on Obama. I honestly wouldn't like anyone if they had these views on pornography. I personally feel that all appointees should be scrutinized whether it be dem or pub. I think if we hold them to higher standards than we have, maybe we will start getting some honest people in Washington.

anyone for fear of picking up an innocent person. Kind of hard to do that since most of these terrorists blend right in with civilians and have no problem using civilians as human shields.

You still have not answered my question about how many in Gitmo were "tortured."

So there are no innocent people in our local prisons? I'm sure there are some but the majority of them are guilty.......just like Gitmo.

What was done was done in an attempt to protect Americans whether you want to believe that or not. Terrorists are NOT covered under the Geneva Convention. How fast we forget the horrible things that were done to use by terrorists. We weren't waterboarded or electrocuted. We were either beheaded or just simply blown up. Which would you prefer?