There is absolutely nothing in the entire mess this
Posted By: country's in that the 'pubs are "clear of on 2008-09-29
In Reply to: This is one case where the Repubs are in the clear... - sam
Their greed, and the greed of those who so stalwartly support every move they make, is the root of most of the problems we face today.
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
There is no way you can do an entire
report by the point and click method.
I think the entire country knows how old he is...
I think they use the picture of him in his uniform to underscore his military service...which I don't think hurts his cause but helps it, in this world we live in now.
As to his mind...that is kind of a cheap shot, don't you think? I haven't seen any evidence of an unsound mind. Obama is not "old" but take him away from a teleprompter or a planned statement and he stumbles and stutters with the best of them...just trying to be fair here.
Nobody said he was. You ignored the entire text
nm
This is a really BIG mess....
instead of talk radio or Gore's electrice bill. I am referring to Libby's trial,
Well....he was convicted of perjury and if he in fact did lie under oath to the grand jury, he should go to jail. That being said...why not pardon him? Clinton was cited for exactly the same things...lying under oath (perjury) before a grand jury and obstruction of justice. He is free as a bird, finished his term as President, making money hand over fist....yes, for that reason alone I think Libby should be pardoned to level the playing field again. If liberals were happy that Clinton walked, they should not scream bloody murder if Bush does pardon Libby. Because it is the very same thing and would expose the hypocrisy BIG time. But, that has never stopped them before, has it?
the firing of 8 judges,
I am having a hard time finding much usable information about this. What I can find are various blogs that lean hard right or hard left and not much fact. I saw where it was stated that they were fired for cause, citing one refused to file death penalty cases, one refused to file immigration cases, yada yada. But I did not really find anything compelling and not in a blog that compelled me to fall either way on this. I don't see any reason to think they were not fired for cause...don't see anything in writing to convince me either.
Pete Domineci,
If you are talking about the firing of David Iglesias, I am not much buying it that the administration fired him because of something he did or did not do back during the presidential election. I can't find any evidence to prove that. It is of concern to me that Iglesias held that information all this time, and now that he has been fired brings it forward. He said himself, or at least was quoted as saying, he had no proof that his firing was related to that. It sounds like sour grapes for being fired to me. Typical, human reaction to being fired. But because it is a political position, the sour grapes are made public.
the unnecessary and ever rising numbers of dead - everywhere, 40 towns in Vermont calling for impeachment (of course this won't go anywhere but the gesture is telling),
Nothing much to say about this. Wars kill people. Most of the Iraqi deaths are at the hands of other Arabs. You can blame that on America if you wish. I choose not to. More Iraqis are coming forward and fingering the bad guys, and that is what it is going to take. We have had a lot of successes. Of course, you have to watch Fox to see them. CNN studiously ignores such things as it does not fit their agenda. As do the networks. I hope you are not going to suggest that Fox has a soundstage where they fake the reports.
a pardon for Libby (and does he have to admit guilt to be pardoned which he has not done), the fact that Libby was the attorney to the much maligned Marc Rich who was pardoned by Clinton, which was also much maligned. Was Scooter as evil as Clinton for having defended him in his dealings with Iran and his tax evasion as Clinton was for pardoning him ?? If all this was just about infighting between the FBI and the administration and George Tenet, then why did Libby lie at all; wouldn't be important enough to lie about, IMHO. Throwing it out there.
This whole thing smacks of getting back, to me. More interesting to me than Scooter and Marc, is Fitzgerald and Comey. Fitzgerald and Comey were both prosecutors working on the Marc Rich case. Obviously they were not happy when they were on the eve of an indictment when Rich ran (wonder who leaked to him that the indictment was imminent) and were even more UNhappy when Clinton pardoned him. And who should be now prosecuting Scooter? And who did most of the investigation? Why, that would be Fitzgerald and Mr. Comey. Which is why I think they went for Scooter's throat and did not indict the man who REALLY leaked the information, Richard Armitage. Payback in politics is hael, my friend!!
No he isn't. He's trying to mess up
my debate party!
Yep...that's a mess....(sm)
I will have to admit though that I don't know that much about that aspect of it. I do know there is some controversy surrounding the whole Hezbullah vs Hamas and Lebanon vs Gaza. I obviously have some catching up to do on that one...LOL.
I do think, however, that Hamas kind of got a bad rap because they couldn't keep up with the demands for food, housing, etc, and particularly the distribution of aid....? However, I also think that it's kind of hard to keep that flow of aid going when Israel is attacking incoming ships that carry that aid. With that and the constant bombardment from Isreal in a military sense on the ground, I think it kind of put them on shaky ground to begin with.
I think in the end the success of whoever wins will be very dependent upon us being able to control Israel.
That is not even close to the entire transcription of what he said. nm
I believe O'Liely invented the entire
thing to help his pal John Gibson sell his book on this fictional topic.
After this *War on Christmas* was conjured up by these two, I believe that some people jumped on the *Happy Holidays* bandwagon simply because they're sick and tired of the religious right forcing their religion down everyone's throats for the past 5 years in the form of laws, supreme court nominees, FDA rulings, etc.
I think people of all religions are sick and tired of their religions being regarded as somehow *less* if they're not Christian (or even begin the *right kind* of Christian).
The other week, I made a contribution to a Salvation Army *pot* outside of a store I was visiting. The young man wished me a Merry Christmas, and I responded back with *Merry Christmas,* because I'm aware that the Salvation Army is a Christian organization. I would never dare to ASSUME that every stranger I encounter is Christian, and if I am the person initiating the *Happy* greeting, I use the phrase *Happy Holidays.* If I'm responding, I respond back with whatever they say to me first.
Yes, CHRISTMAS obviously is a Christian holiday first and foremost. But this holiday has also evolved into a secular one which includes Santa Claus and jingle bells, lights, tinsel and credit cards. It provokes people of ALL religions to act in a *Jesus-like* way: With kindness, charity, love and tolerance.
I believe that the Christmas *season* is so loved by ALL people that they are just unwilling to give it up to those who have proven to be so intolerant for the last 5 years. They want to feel included and validated, as well. It's ironic how some of the ones who claim to be the most *Christian* are unwilling to share their holiday with the rest of the country, and rather than being inclusive and welcoming of others under the umbrella of *Happy Holidays,* they instead choose, once again, to bully others. Must be the true meaning of the *bully pulpit.*
Merry Christmas to all Christians who celebrate Christmas.
Happy Holidays to others of all religions who just might enjoy the Jesus-LIKE feeling they get in their hearts during this time of the year. And as long as I initiate holiday wishes to strangers, I will be very respective, tolerant and inclusive of those who just might not be Christian, as I fondly remember the *good old days* when freedom of religion for ALL was not only *tolerated* but was unquestioned, welcomed and encouraged here in the United States of America. 
I agree the entire interview was not there.
And I truly don't understand why. I tried to quickly find the transcript of the entire interview, but I was unable to find it.
I wish they would have posted the entire interview because Sean and Newt argued and probably for the first time did not agree. If I remember correctly, there was even a jovial comment at the end about Newt being closer to Alan than Sean (or something to that effect). I don't remember the exact words. I did watch the entire interview, and I can tell you that Sean challenged Newt on points, but Newt still disagreed with him. The gist of what Newt said was that the President just needs to start being honest with the American people about things he does.
If I have more time later, I will search some more and see if I can find the entire interview in case you don't believe what I have told you after watching the entire interview.
I do agree, however, that the entire interview should have been there because I think his disagreement with Sean was much more interesting than his agreement with Alan.
That would certainly apply to the entire MTStars
(Thumbs up.)
Yes...this would be the liberal viewpoint of the entire...sm
Gov. Palin interview. Not surprising.
Charlie Gibson did perform his role for the left well, didn't he? Entrapment journalism at its best.
I have read his entire plan
And I think it is still a national health care plan. Slice away all the pretty words and what are you left with? Government control. Sorry, no thanks.
I don't agree with the entire thing....
X
You are missing the entire point. How sad. nm
x
LOL you missed the entire point...
If saving innocent lives (abortion) is your goal, then MCBUSH is certainly *not* the lesser of two evils because he is CHOMPING at the bit to start MORE fake wars that kill MORE innocent people.
Or as I said before, does it only matter if the "innocent life" being killed is American...?
Are Americans really this stupid they can't see that all these FAKE WAR deplete our own treasury, kil people, and MAKE US MORE ENEMIES??
OR, DO WE have to be brought to our knees by the CIVILIZED portion of the world before we stand up to government that invades innocent countries with OUR money using OUR sons and daughters as cannon fodder?
If you base your perceptions of the entire
populace of our country from the postings on this forum, you need to get out more.
I'm sorry they said bad things about your candidate. It obviously hurt you deeply.
Ditto your entire 2 posts...
I agree wholeheartedly. This should not be a race issue, but unfortunately that's all it has become and thats too bad. I'd like to give Obama the benefit of the doubt that he may be able to do a decent job, but I'm afraid these next 4 years are gonna be just one race issue after another, not very productive for our country. Like the posters below, where's my check?
Wrong! If you had seen the entire video, you ....sm
would have seen that Queen Elizabeth had first put her arm around Michelle Obama. You all are a bunch of crazy people. Obama is doing a terrific job, just what we elected him to do. I feel sorry for you.
Yeah - not at all like the NY Times, which has had entire
When you get up tomorrow morning, look in the mirror and say "Today, I will try NOT to be a dope".
The only guy that made a mess is
So the ends justify the means when it come to rebpulicans, abuse of power and the ethically challenged ethics maid? Said it once, will say it again. Divorce/custody issues are typically played out in family courts without interference and manipulation of the Governor's office. Marginalized? Is that the best spin you can think of for cold, hard fact? No backs up against the wall here. You see, JM has made life a whole lot easier by his latest senior moment. This decision smacks of "he just doesn't get it." Alienated women with his token showcase and moved the party straight back to the far right. If there were any doubt that he would be 4 more years of the same before, now it is plain as the nose on his face. We knew he would self destruct sooner or later, but noone expected it would come in the form of his VP pick. Nothing petty and vindictive about it, but if you feel the need to insult, bash and vent a little, by all means, knock yourself out. You, like your candidates, are underestimating the Clintons, their supporters and their party. She may have the same genitalia, but she is about as far from Hillary as it gets.
why do you care what I think so much? (No/mess)
@
More on the Acorn mess....
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/the-democratic-acorn-bailout/
What a mess! More bad news about ....sm
the economy. Cooporations starting to lay off and anticipate many more lay offs next year, affecting local and state governments, police, fire and rescue operations due to a fall in tax revenues, precipitating more foreclosures. Wow, all frowning faces and gloom and doom. I really think we are on a runaway train into the second great depression, something we have no idea about other than stories from our parents and grandparents. Very scary. I think that we MTs are pretty secure in our jobs but so many people's jobs are at risk. 
To top it all off, the treasury department has decided to not use our tax bailout money they way they promised, rather are taking a different tactic without telling any of us or congress. I sure hope they know what they are doing because I sure don't understand it. 
Where are you hearing this mess? It's
absolutely not true. What, 1 or 2 whackjob republican electorates are nervous about it? LOL.
The BC is a NON-ISSUE, he won by a large margin, and he will be inaugurated. This has all gotten so SILLY.
Yeh, your' re right, he's gone and look at the mess he left!
But yet you people begrudge O taking his wife out for for dinner and theater (which he paid for), promoting and supporting the arts. How dare he? Ticket sales tripled the nights following their appearance there. I'm quite sure the theater industry didn't hate the boost they got from that appearance. Get over it. Focus on something that is actually important.
You're a mess. nm
nm
I read that entire article and I still didn't see where it said sm
U.S. military was protecting the Hezbollah supporters. Am I really missing it?
We need to vote as if our entire future depends on it,
x
Why would Obama bring his entire family
they were all just there as recently as August 7th? Michelle was an effective, seamless stand-in on the trail. Stop and think for a minute. Malia is 10 and Natasha is 7. That would make them both school age. They visited their GM 2-1/2 months ago when, although her health was frail, she was in much better shape, now that she has broken her hip and just been released from the hospital, is "gravely ill" and believed to be near the end.
A couple of things to consider. As responsible parents, it seems to me that the Obamas have all they can say grace over just trying to maintain some sense of normalcy during a heated and often hateful political campaign. Children of this age do their best when their normal routines are maintained. What makes no sense to me is the idea that they should return to Hawaii to see their GM after her health has deteriorated considerably, is weak and probably not looking that good. Personally, I would want to protect my children from seeing that, especially if it meant preserving a final memory of their grandmother during the happier days of a family vacation, rather than a deathbed scene.
I do not see anything "weird" in their decision not to take their children out of school in the middle of the week, put them on a 10-hour 4250 mile flight for a 1-day jet-lagged stay and a final farewell, and then turn them right back around again for a second 10 hour 4250 mile trip.
There is a distinct possibility that in the next 10 days, these children's lives are going to be changed forever, should they become the first children. They will be negotiating the glare of the media and in another 2 months, could be making a move from Chicago to DC into the White House. Hopefully, they will not have to be dealing with the death of their grandmother in the middle of all that.
You obviously failed to read the entire link.
to back up her claims. I don't need to research this further. I was a 40+ grown-up when the confirmation hearings were held and I remember them vividly, since it was one of the most blatent miscarriages of justice I have witnessed first-hand in my entire life. I was a bit more naive back then but now, of course, I understand completely how the Bushes operate and how this could have happened under their watch.
Not an iota of truth in this entire post, except
x
You're obviously one who has missed his entire point
nm
what a mess bush has created
Iraq's Fig Leaf Constitution
By Robert Scheer
The Los Angeles Times
Tuesday 30 August 2005
Who lost Iraq? Someday, as a fragmented Iraq spirals further into religious madness, terrorism and civil war, there will be a bipartisan inquiry into this blundering intrusion into another people's history.
The crucial question will be why a preemptive American invasion - which has led to the deaths of nearly 2,000 Americans, roughly 10 times as many Iraqis, the expenditure of about $200 billion and incalculable damage to the United States' global reputation - has had exactly the opposite effect predicted by its neoconservative sponsors. No amount of crowing over a fig leaf Iraqi constitution by President Bush can hide the fact that the hand of the region's autocrats, theocrats and terrorists is stronger than ever.
The U.S. now has to recognize that [it] overthrew Saddam Hussein to replace him with a pro-Iranian state, said regional expert Peter W. Galbraith, the former U.S. ambassador to Croatia and an advisor to the Iraqi Kurds. And, he could have added, a pro-Iranian state that will be repressive and unstable.
Think this is an exaggeration? Consider that arguably the most powerful Shiite political party and militia in today's Iraq, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and its affiliated paramilitary force, the Badr Brigade, was not only based in Iran but was set up by Washington's old arch-foe, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. It also fought on the side of Iran in the Iran-Iraq war and was recognized by Tehran as the government in exile of Iraq.
Or that former exile Ahmad Chalabi is now one of Iraq's deputy prime ministers. The consummate political operator managed to maintain ties to Iran while gaining the devoted support of Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon, charming and manipulating Beltway policymakers and leading U.S. journalists into believing that Iraq was armed with weapons of mass destruction.
Chalabi is thrilled with the draft constitution, which, if passed, will probably exponentially increase tension and violence between Sunnis and Shiites. It is an excellent document, said Chalabi, who has been accused by U.S. intelligence of being a spy for Iran, where he keeps a vacation home.
What an absurd outcome for a war designed to create a compliant, unified and stable client state that would be pro-American, laissez-faire capitalist and unallied with the hated Iran. Of course, Bush tells us again, this is progress and an inspiration. Yet his relentless spinning of manure into silk has worn thin on the American public and sent his approval ratings tumbling.
Even supporters of the war are starting to realize that rather than strengthening the United States' position in the world, the invasion and occupation have led to abject humiliation: from the Abu Ghraib scandal, to the guerrilla insurgency exposing the limits of military power, to an election in which our guy - Iyad Allawi - was defeated by radicals and religious extremists.
In a new low, the U.S. president felt obliged to call and plead with the head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, Abdelaziz Hakim, to make concessions to gain Sunni support. Even worse, he was summarily rebuffed. Nevertheless, Bush had no choice but to eat crow and like it.
This is a document of which the Iraqis, and the rest of the world, can be proud, he said Sunday, through what must have been gritted teeth. After all, this document includes such democratic gems as Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation, and No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam, as well as socialist-style pronouncements that work and a decent standard of living are a right guaranteed by the state. But the fact is, it could establish Khomeini's ghost as the patron saint of Iraq and Bush would have little choice but to endorse it.
Even many in his own party are rebelling. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur, said Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel last week, one of a growing number of Republicans who get that we should start figuring out how we get out of there.
Not that our what-me-worry? president is the least bit troubled by all this adverse blowback from the huge, unnecessary gamble he took in invading the heart of the Arab and Muslim worlds. What is important is that the Iraqis are now addressing these issues through debate and discussion, not at the barrel of a gun, Bush said.
Wrong again, George. It was the barrel of your gun that midwifed the new Iraq, which threatens to combine the instability of Lebanon with the religious fanaticism of Iran.
Let's see if we can make a little sense out of this mess....
You said:
The subject is not the name of the proceedings, the intent of the inquiry, whether or not you think he should or should not be impeached or any of the other distractions you have thrown up in this thread.
Answer: I know what Dennis Kucinich says. It is not new. I have heard it. I have heard it from any number of Democrats. All I am saying is if they think they have the evidence to impeach him, why the heck don't they do it?? That is not a distraction, it is a valid question. I don't care what they call it...all I said was, what they are doing now, even the chairman said was not an impeachment hearing. HE said it, I didn't, so why don't you accuse HIM of throwing up distractions and circling around, yada yada. Perhaps because when Democrat throws up distractions and circles around that is fine in your books??
You said: You circled around the subject when you thought you could gain some traction/advantage when trying to refute the accusations against Bush regarding lying about WMDs/yellowcake uranium intelligence, trying to make it appear that total exoneration would be a piece of cake..as if that were the only thing the democrats have on the table.
Answer: Geez, stop putting words in my mouth and assigning agendas to me I don't have. In going and doing some of the research you shouted at me to do, I found excerpts from the impeachment-trolling-factfinding-whatEVER the heck makes you happy to call it committee, I found where one of the lone Republicans on the committee made mention of a document recently declassified by the CIA that supposedly corroroborates (and I said supposedly because I don't know, because I haven't seen it, because it is part of the blacked out stuff) Bush's story about Niger and yellowcake and exposes Joe Wilson's story about the same. I did not say it myself, and I did not make it up. One of the committee members said it. Yes, I would be interested in it. I would be interested in any evidence Kucinich has other than speechifying about it. That is why I would be interested in a real impeachment trial, if that is what they want, so we can hear from ALL witnesses, see ALL the documents, and make our OWN decisions. I want more that Kucinich's word and Vincent Bugliosi's book. I want the CIA declassified document and the whole ball of wax. I want people under oath when they testify. Although, after Bill Clinton, even that is not always helpful since he chose to lie anyway, but still...not everyone is willing to perjure himself/herself. If that means I have my head in the sand, so be it. LOL.
YOU SAID: The subject is the CONTENT of the hearings, otherwise known as the ISSUES. It makes no difference where you get them from. DK is the best when it comes to explaining the positions concisely. The prosecuting parties are all amazingly consistent in their identification of what their contentions are and how they back them up.
ANSWER: Well excuse me, but didn't I read the hearings were closed and blacked out? So how do you know what the content is??? As I said, I have heard what Kucinich says. It is not new with him. I just need more than his word for it.
YOU SAID: What you are refusing to do is examine the other side of the story (that is to say, the specifics as laid out by the democrats)...that side of the story that takes you out of that safe place where you always stay...
ANSWER: Look that that finger in the mirror, points right back at you. You are completely unwilling to entertain any thought that you, and these Democrats, might just be wrong. If I was terrified, as you state, or did not want to hear anything about Bush maybe being guilty, I would not be hawking for his impeachment. What you are doing is make me the enemy, classic attack mode. Turn that mode off and try to hear me this time: I DON'T KNOW if Bush lied. NOBODY does. I don't know if he did or he didn't, but I DO KNOW that I need more than Dennis Kucinich's word or interpretation of whatever evidence he has to believe that Bush lied. You are so consumed with hatred for the man and the so-called right wing that you are ready to move right to "you're guilty." You believe he is guilty and you have not heard any of the defense. You do not WANT to hear any of the defense. How, pray tell, is your attitude any different from the one you accuse me of? If this was a Democrat president instead of a republican president, would you be on here righteously indignant presupposing his guilt based on a Republican-dominated committee and a lawyer's book who was not even close to the events that took place? Of course you wouldn't! You would be here saying it was a railroad hatchet job. Don't bother denying it. It would ring pretty hollow.
YOU SAID: that support your arguments, making nice with those who agree with your ideas, the condescending "let me enlighten you" instructions (i.e., "read up on Marxism, but let me interpret it for you if you don't see it my way" passages) and the inevitable name-calling, innuendoes, half-truths, misprepresentations, statements taken out of context, jumping to far-fetched conclusions when making degrading statements about democrats, and the vitriol that issues forth in your endless Obama bashing.
ANSWER: Talk about throwing up a distraction. As to condescending, when that tone is used with me I respond in kind. If you don't like it, don't condescend to me.
As far as that other litany, it would apply to Dennis Kucinich and Vincent Bugliosi as well. If they have documentation and not opinion to back up what they are saying, then why (and please stop dodging this fundamentally important question as you have so artfully what, three times now?): If they have the evidence, all these "prosecutors," why don't they go to trial?? That is a simple question. Answer it, please. As I said, I would WELCOME a trial, where BOTH sides are heard, under oath, all the documents in evidence, and no opinion, just fact. I mean that. And if it was proven that Bush lied, that he cooked intelligence, abused executive privilege or whatever and they convict him he should be thrown out of office (which would be largely symbolic, doncha think, since he has what, about 3-4 months left? Sheesh). I have no problem with that. My question is why don't they do it?? And if they are unwilling to, why are you so incensed at me? It is not MY fault they won't impeach him.
You can sure see the splinter in my eye, but the timber in your own seems to escape you.
As to Obama bashing, I gave opinion on what are known facts. His association with Reverend Wright...his church's association with Louis Farrakhan...his church's black liberation theology...his radical way left pro abortion stance...all facts. There is plenty of McCain bashing going on too. I don't hear any righteous indignation on your part concerning McCain bashing. So it is okay to bash Republicans? I see.
YOU SAID: Obstruction is something the right-wingers have down to an art. You have mastered well.
Answer: Ahem. Seems like the Democrats are the obstructive ones. Last time I looked, Pelosi was a Democrat, and she is obstructing an impeachment. Take your rant to her where it might do some good. I would tell them if you think you have the goods, bring it on. Ms. Pelosi is obstructing that.
You said: At the same time, it is an extremely transparent and ineffective way to address issues that are vital to our country.
Answer: Issues vital to our country? Impeaching a president who only has 3 more months in office is vital to our country? For everyone to just assume dennis Kucinich and these prosecutors are telling the truth and the accused has no opportunity for defense? That sounds more like Russia than America.
You said: Clearly, you are unwilling to attempt to look at, let alone participate in any kind of real debate that excludes the tactics you use in these posts.
Answer: Debate involves both sides being willing to hear both sides. You are not willing to entertain the thought of Bush not being guilty. In fact, absolutely will not entertain it. I, on the other hand, said let's have the impeachment trial and get it all out in the open once and for all, both sides. That sounds like I am very willing to hear both sides. Unlike you.
YOU SAID: That would involve actually knowing what you are talking about...and the only way to get that is to peek inside the hearings and focus on the ISSUES under discussion. Somehow this seems to terrify you. No problem. There are plenty of places beyond this forum where really informed discourse is available.
Answer: Peeking inside hearings where only one side is presented is NOT debate, and it is NOT the way to find the truth. Anyone with a reasoning OPEN mind sees that. Impeachment would be televised. We would hear testimony first hand. We could see documents first hand. None of this behind the door whispering stuff. Get it ALL out in the open. THAT seems to terrify you, not me. Seems to terrify Democrats, otherwise Nancy Pelosi would not be blocking it. That is common sense.
As to knowing what I am talking about...you only know what Dennis Kucinich is talking about and what little leaks out of those closed hearings. One-sided without anything from the other side. That is decided UNdemocratic for someone who calls himself/herself a Democrat. I am just amazed that you cannot see that everything you accuse me of, you are in spades. LOL. Amazing.
You said: Go head. Stick your head in the sand, and keep it there, if that's what makes you happy. That's what a comfort zone is...a world where you can be right 100% of the time and live under the pretense that you know all there is to know.
Answer: Sheesh. Dial it back a notch will ya. You just described yourself to a tee. "Your comfort zone where you can be right 100% of the time and live under the pretense that you know all there is to know." You have basically been lecturing to me paragraph after paragraph that you know all there is to know, YOU know the truth, and I just refuse to see it. You say honest debate, yet you have no intention of entertaining any such thing. If you did, you would want to hear both sides in an open forum. You don't. You want a select committee comprised of majority partisan Democrats calling witnesses they know are going to support their aim without asking anyone who might refute any of it...come ON. Talk about transparent. Lynch mob mentality, hang him and ask questions later. All this drama over a man who is leaving office in 3 months. All this anger....
I will try to say this again, and maybe you can dial back your disdain and condescencion just long enough to hear it...I have stated emphatically and will state it again: I DON'T know all there is to know. I have heard stuff from both sides, both sides equally convinced of innocent and guilt, but neither able to prove it definitively. Which is why I said...impeach the man. If you feel like they have the goods, then you should be lobbying the Democratic leadership not to block impeachment, little obstructionists that they are. Let's get it ALL out in the open. Both sides. ALL of it. And if they are not willing to do it...then in my opinion, they should fold their tent and HUSH. And that is the difference between you and me...if this was a Democratic President I would be saying the same thing to a Republican committee...if you aren't going to do anything other than a political exercise, fold up your tents and HUSH.
And I bet you voted for George who got us in this mess.
Hiliary could have handled this. Obama is our only hope. Taxes is the issue people and you know what mccan't will do - give the rich their tax breaks along with corp america, cut funding to states, causing state taxes to go up. Oh yeah, McCann is not working for you, and your support of him is a slap in the face of middle america.
It didn't bother them to cause this mess....
won't bother them to perpetuate it. Amazing...and people just lap it up. Amazing, ain't it?
distraction. don't let it mess your mind.
nm
It was too lenient on the ones that caused this mess (sm)
That's why it didn't pass last week. It was too one-sided.
It's not my party. Clean up your own mess....
oh...what am I thinking. You don't see any mess. Got it.
Don't have a range rover; 6 cylinder jeep. No leather. don't smoke, never have.
Class envy is really ugly.
The subprime mess sm and iraq too
Really started about 5 years ago when the mortgage brokers were given money incentives to sign on subprime even to people who qualified for conventional loans. They fraudulently did not offer the conventional loans to people who didn't even need subprime. It was all about the commissions. And your precious GW is the one who kicked off the loans with NO DOWN PAYMENT...!!! He saw this mess coming and he figured SS dollars going into wall st, which he TRIED TO DO in 2005 but got voted down... he figured our SS money would bail out Wall St.
Yes, so I do blame him. I also blame him for pretending this Iraq war was for our security when it was about oil and cheney getting richer and oil men getting richer. $350 million a day and thousands of young people's lives lost. For what? He pretended there were WMD which there were not. He pretended it was related to 911, which it was not. Bunch of dips following him, waving a flag, when he has dragged our beautiful country way down.
I found this interesting too. What a mess this will
nm
It will take a long time to get out of this mess.
That is for certain. I don't blame it on the unions though. My family (not my husbands) have been involved with unions for years and I see it as a positive thing.
I do have a problem with the higher-ups in these companies pulling in millions and using company jets, etc. for personal needs. Instead of laying off 50 factory workers they could do away with 5 high-paid workers. It's a well known statement that the higher up you get, the more you deligate and less work you do - in any company. The middle class is falling away and this needs to stop. Perfect example, the guy from GM (I think) making his way to ask for bailout money in the companies private jet. What kind of hotel you think these people have been staying in while fighting to stay out of bankruptcy - probably enough to pay a few factory workers wages for a month or two.
He was hired to SOLVE the mess.
nm
and you blame Obama for this mess?
Oh... God forbid... going on Leno resulted in thousands of dead and more thousands maimed Americans in an illegal war that put us where we are now. Americans forgotten. Earth forgotten. Money he does not have? GW spent money he did not have to murder. At least Obama's intentions are inherently not evil.
So much more I could say, but it would go on deaf ears.
gt read an entire thread before you start spouting off
it would save a lot of that foot taste in your mouth and egg on your face.
I never said that the transcript was not Rush's words. What I said was a bunch of bunk and lies was the columnist's comments about Rush and I stand by that. and for your information just because something is posted on the internet does not make it factual or true. Do I really have to point that out to you?
Oh, and BTW I don't agree with Pat Robertson's remarks. I am Christian, but I think Pat R. needs to shut up and retire. He definitely does not speak for all Christians, but again, Cindy Sheehan has said the equivalent about Bush except in much, much more vulgar and hateful language.
It's really too bad you didn't take the time to read the entire transcript
of what William Bennett said, Democrat. But I am not surprised.
I heard it to on the radio, the entire dialogue. He has been taken totally
x
Get real, I read the entire article. Bush had NOTHING to do with it!
My gosh, the lengths you will go to. Shame on you! Obviously, German would not give him up, as Democrat says. Next you will post that Bush is responsible for orginal sin. And you would believe it, too! 
The cost of S-CHIP for an entire year equals
Iraq = $333 million per day. S-CHIP = $19 million per day. Hmm, if we can "find" money for one, don't you think we can find money for the other. Again, I ask, "What would Jesus do?" What would the leaders of any religion recommend? I think they would recommend taking care of our most innocent souls.
The cigarette tax would go a long way in covering the program, but I think our government could come up with money to fund the rest.
Post if you find the entire Wright sermon1
That was a very interesting article. I've read a number of articles on Huffington Post - I think tends towards liberal but - to me - seems like fair and informative info!
If anyone comes across a transcript of Pastor Wright's entire sermon, I would definitely be interested in reading it and seeing all the Sound Bites in context! Please post if you do. As we know from our work, context means everything.
Oh yeah, judge an entire party by a few bad apples.
nm
|
