Tongue firmly in cheek, please
Posted By: Billie on 2005-09-19
In Reply to: Message inside. - Libby
Okay, I just checked out the website and have come to the conclusion that the whole thing is indeed a joke. Somebody's got WAAAY too much time on their hands (funny if you read it in the right frame of mind, scary if you take it seriously).
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
Tongue firmly in cheek during that post....
after we have all been regaled here about why we should not be judgmental and be more open-minded like Barry from Chicago and the Europeans...LOL...well, the worm is turning it looks like. More power to him...at least he walks the walk as well as talks the talk. More than I can say for Barry from Chicago. lol. ;-)
Sometimes comments are made tongue in cheek....
like Obama saying (in response to comment about Bill Clinton being the first "black President:" he would have to see Clinton dance to see if he was really a "brotha." Imagine the bruhaha if Rush Limbaugh said that.
That being said...again I invite people to check out Obama's church and his pastor. The pastor has made several racist comments, not only about whites in general, but Jews in particular. Jesse Jackson has as well. There are a host of black racists out there. The pastor is a great admirer of Louis Farrakhan (the pastor). They don't come much more racist than Louis Farrakhan.
And, frankly...Rush Limbaugh is not running for President. Barack Hussein Obama IS.
I would think his ties to racism would worry a person much more than a talk show host.
Many times I think Rush Limbaugh is over the top; however, he is also very astute and makes some very good points...if he did not, liberals would not hate him to the degree they hate him. The same people who decry him laud people on the other side...but I guess as long as it is conservatives being made fun of vs liberals...that is acceptable? Sigh. Sometimes the truth pinches...sometimes it downright hurts.
I'm pretty sure that Pope post was tongue in cheek.
Ever heard of tongue in cheek? Am adding comments
meant as a spoof, OT. Were I serious about this, then it would not be a case of tongue in cheek...rather foot in mouth.
Tongue in cheek political parody meant to mock
is generally not meant to be taken as fact. Those among us who actually stop and think before we post pretty much know this. BTW, please take your foot out of your mouth. It's not a pretty sight.
Bring us out of the 20th century and plant our feet firmly
Keep it simple.
Pgh girl with B on cheek
Have you seen the latest news on the supposed McCain supporter who was attacked at an ATM for having a McCain bumper sticker? Turned out she wasn't at the ATM (per camera) and did not remember anything as she was unconscious. See how this starts getting out of hand. I just wish the candidates would concentrate on their ideas and stop the attacking of each other. I want to hear what they really, really stand for and what their plans are.
Tonge-in-cheek too complicated for pubs.
x
The Bible says, 'If sb slaps you on your right cheek,
offer him your left cheek, too.'
I never understood that. Are you living your life like that as a 'good' Christian? Not me.
Does this mean not to resist people who are evil? If someone hits the right side of the jaw of my son, does he offer the left side of the face? Is that what Jesus meant for him to do?”
Bite Your Tongue !!!!!
He has been my governor for 8 loooooooong years. He is smarter and more articulate than W but he is the definition of ruthless.
I have been holding my tongue on that ...sm
It is interesting though. These were Bush, Reagan, Ford and Clinton appointees that made this decision (5-3). And I see where the right is upset, but to me it is pivotal that they followed the law and not beliefs and I'll tell you why.
Charles Lane, writer for the Washington Times wrote (see link below), *Brushing aside administration pleas not to second-guess the commander in chief during wartime, a five-justice majority ruled that the commissions, which were outlined by Bush in a military order on Nov. 13, 2001, ***were neither authorized by federal law nor required by military necessity, and ran afoul of the Geneva Conventions.*** As a result, no military commission can try Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the former aide to Osama bin Laden whose case was before the justices, or anyone else, unless the president does one of two things he has resisted doing for more than four years: operate the commissions by the rules of regular military courts-martial, or ask Congress for specific permission to proceed differently.*
Looking at it this way, *Bush* NOT the Supreme Court, has held this up for four years when he could have done the prior one or two things. No president can just willy nilly make up things as he goes without going through the proper channels. This case is no different. Checks and balances is taught in elementary nowadays. I predict as he ways he will, he will get with Congress and they will collectively make a decision on something that will bring the POWs to justice (wishful thinking).
Do I want to see bin Laden's assistant, or any other war criminals walk? No, especially not the perpetrators in the 9-11 attacks. That's something I do not want to see come of this decision, but we must respect our own democracy in seeking justice.
This is just my opinion of what I understand is going on with the decision. If anyone can shed some more light on it I'd appreciate it. Have a good holiday weekend!
lol....I like how she sticks her tongue out at the end.
.
Did you stick your tongue out at me too?
x
The only thing sam exercises is forked tongue
su
not biting....go away your snide little tongue in check post.....nm
|
