What a lame excuse
Posted By: IMHO on 2009-03-12
In Reply to: Blame Sarah Palin. - Palintology
To bash someone. She lost, get over it. She didn't use her kids as props. If so then so did obama and Biden (his grandkid that he clung to his chest every time the camera was on him). Now that's what I call a prop if I ever saw one. Sheesh!!!!
Her daughter is not in politics. Leave her alone. And you should be ashamed as even Obama himself during the campaign said if you want to discuss him or Biden, Sarah or John that's one thing, but leave the family's alone.
You really can't get over her can you? News flash - She lost, she's gone. Time to move on with your life and live in the present day and looking forward to what tomorrow (and 2012) brings. Isn't it the Obama people that keep saying to look ahead and stop living in the past?
Here's another news flash. Bristol Palin and her boyfriend and their baby are not in politics. Take the idol gossip and gloating to the gab board.
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
you are the lame one
No, my dear, you and all of your pro-war, pro-Bush cohorts are lame and have no conscience. If you did, you would be wanting to get our brave military out of harms way and out of the hell hole Bush created call Iraq. You and your neocon buddies are the lame ones and history will show you were wrong so deadly wrong..Go ahead, keep defending and backing up that jerk in the WH..You are becoming a sad laughing stock of this country and the world. Remember only approximately 38% back his so wrong, immoral, uncivilized, illegal, hateful war..For pete sake, his approval rating is lower than Nixon's was when he was dealing with Watergate..Havent your neocons gotten the picture yet? Your boy is hated around the world and more and more Americans are seeing him for what he is..a hateful, spiteful, vindictive, grudge holding, never admitting he was wrong, never saying he is sorry, low IQ warmonger chickenhawk.
That was lame. No, seriously, it was lame. SM
LAME-O
nm
so lame
Lame. nm
nm
How lame you are
If you would spend half as much time educating yourself as you did quoting definitions you might actually learn something. Talking about devoted to opinions, I believe you would be speaking about yourself. All the O supporters on him think ONLY their opinions and conclusions matter. They have NO facts to back up anything they say, only listening to their little TV set and repeating what they hear.
Why do you confuse prejudice with facts? If this were a white man running, you couldn't care less. But believe it or not, I don't really care. This man has spent so much time with terorrists in this country, continued his relationship with them AFTER and BEFORE he knew of their associations, and still tries to defend them.
He began racial baiting from the onset of his campaign, going down to Selma and running his mouth and making a fool out of himself. Blabby on and on about the march is the reason his mom and dad got togeher and had little Obama, Jr. I guess he thought everyone in Selma are dumb folks that don't now his age or when the march actually took place!!
He wasn't even born when the march took place. He was born 4 years later. He is a race baiter and has been from the get go. He has made sure he hits little towns like Selma, thinking all blacks will love him. I got news for you. Many blacks laughed at him when he said that and were not happy that he was using that trying to play into their good graces. They were offended that he thought they were so ignorant they would fall for that one.
Maybe you have insufficient knowledge, which is obvious and why you seem to feel you need to bring definitions into this, but friends in my neighborhood, who are black, were there and said they felt he was pandering to them as if they had no sense at all, as if he needed to tell them who to vote for 'cause they might make the wrong decision if left on their own.
Maybe you don't care the people he associated with are terrorists with no remorse and preachers who spew hatred, bigotry, racism, but I do. Maybe you should be more concerned with his bigotry and racism, if you dare!
Just because I have facts to back up this and you can't refute it, don't call me all the little names you sit and think up.
Anyone with half a brain knows ACORN is racist. Why do you think they encourage the people they sign up to vote for Obama and not to mention all the corruption they have already been in trouble for and indicated to boot.
Believe what you want and maybe he'll lead you to the promised land. I care more about this country than what you think with all you yammering.
Oh please - this is so lame
Bush is not the decider. Bush is an id!ot. I wasn't saying in my previous post that he isn't. Bush is bought and paid for by the people above him (the same ones that bought and paid for Clinton and the same ones who have bought and paid for Obama). All that the President does is get out and give speeches (the ones he is told to). He does not write his own speaches and he does not make any decisions (which is good because he's a complete whacko). But the hatred towards him is so evident.
Why do you keep saying the buck stops at Bush's desk, it does not. He does not supply our troops with clean/dirty water. He doesn't even know where they get it from and he doesn't care.
The commander in chief is only a talking head. They make no real decisions (except those they are told to).
Once again, it would serve those well to stop bashing Bush for every single problems going on on this planet and go to where the true source is. Bush/Cheney have no input.
The hatred has gotten way out of hand and you remind me of the guy in the movie the Matrix that says "ignorance is bliss".
Lame
.
That is like, so totally lame. nm
very lame logic; and she never said only.
x
Lame logic??????
If it's lame logic that I have listened to ALL candidates and decided for myself based on what they have said without regard for the media take, the political party affiliation, gender or color, then so be it. By whatever means you have made YOUR decision, I assume you don't consider your logic lame and I certainly will not put you down for coming to a conclusion that differs from mine.
You don't even know who organized what.....such lame
BTW an architect organized the NY tea party! Ya know, an educated hard-working man who made his own way..... are you aware of how that actually works?!
That was a truly lame comeback to this thread.
nm
T How Lame Are You/What a Joke RE: Racism
Where to start? I simply presented a logical argument predicated on definitions the original poster was obviously unfamiliar with. So far, there is nothing in this current post that even begins to address the challenge to show what part of that "dense" post was not prejudiced, bigoted and racist, seeing as how there is no proof presented here to back up these tiresome wild-eyed accusations.
I was 15 years old when the March on Washington occurred. My mom was a political junkie, a trait that I began exhibiting at around age 12, since I admired her so much...the same way that Obama obvious admired his own mother. So I began paying attention to the civil rights movement when they desegregated my school when I was around 11. You see, down South, they were a bit slow to comply with Brown vs the Board of Educaton..and in my state, they fought tooth and nail all the way up into the early 70s before complying with the order.
I also paid attention to all things racial, because I came from what would be considered an elite, privileged background and was raised by 2 black women (maid and nanny) and a black man (gardener) who were employed in my Highland Park, Dallas Texas household (BUSH country). Back then, it was not considered "fashionable" for the wealthy to do "hands-on parenting." So, I know a thing or two about racism, bigotry and prejudice first hand. I never understood why those 3 kind, wise souls (who I loved more than anyone else in the world and every bit as I loved my own parents) were treated so horribly every time we were out in public. Consequently, I took an avid interest in the civil rights movement at the tender age of 12, began reading everything I could get my hands on regarding the subject. At age 16, I started becoming active in those movements.
Now, these facts are for you. Obama was born in 1961. The march on Washington occurred in August of 1963. The Selma to Montgomery march occurred in 1965. Those marches were not exactly spontaneous events, but rather were a culmination of years of work and organization, and Obama's "blabby" in Selma abouthis parents is perfectly chronologically consistent, unlike your LAME attempt to educate me.
Beyond that, I refuse to address this racial diatribe. I learned at an early age to DESPISE racists and have very little to nothing to do with them. I will, however, confront racism whenever I see it, without fail. Over these last 5 decades, I have developed a keen sense that enabled me to sniff out the stench of racism 1000 miles away. You, dear, are a consummate prejudiced, bigoted racist and as such, have absolutely no credibility no matter how vehemently you doest protest.
One more thing. Prejudice, bigotry and racism is an anachronism that belongs buried far back in that shameful chapter of our history and is definitely a huge part of what kind of change voters are seeking in this election...the goal being to march forward, not backwards. I for one will be on that march forward until the day I take my last ragged breath.
I would expect this lame comeback
Everybody is seeing Obama for what he is......nothing new!
That was lame.............Christ on a cracker!
x
THE SAME, lame excuses! It was about the SIZE
and not asked for permission!
This lame scare tactic is aimed at
twisting both the free choice of English language usage and the Bible verse/word of Jesus (who you claim is your Savior) to support the claims of a snarky cult. Back in the Puritan times, that was considered blasphemy and the ONES who chose to do this could be burned at the stake.
You make me ashamed to be associated with the Christian faith.
Our sympathies to your lame brother. But shouldn't this
x
Food for thought..lame duck watch (sm)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#27670344
Another lame attempt to try to not get people to read the article
Your computer got a virus, yeah right!!!!
You don't like that I'm not drooling all over the O like you are then fine, but to come out and say that articles that are not praising your god gives your computer a virus is a bunch horse hockey.
Sheesh, I would have expected a better excuse than that.
P.S. - Am anxious to hear the supreme courts ruling. They are meeting on the 5th. Although I know that all the O worshippers will try and cut it down for some insane reason. The SC's ruling will determine it. Let's just wait and see.
Same lame garbage JTBB spouted before election
xx
Cheney? All whatt he is saying now is just a lame attempt to justify all the
evil he did during this 8 years.
At least Bush keeps silent. I think Cheney was worse than Bush.
I bet Cheney has nightmares.
No wonder that he is so concerned with the security of this country, he is afraid somebody might 'get' him.
Lame duck watch --you're gonna love this...(sm)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#27831761
That's just lame, no cheese here, I work but I will take care of the poor unlike YOU nm
nm
I just don't have the energy to fight anymore, I guess. This was lame attempt!
I need to work anyway.
Calling people honey and dear just weakens your lame repub cause SOUR GRAPES
too bad you can't be a real American and be proud of Obama!
Excuse me.....
How can it be easy enough to prove with ISP numbers if the ISP numbers are not available? Yes, I may be blowing this out of proportion but you seem to be contradicting yourself and your posts, as well as some others did raise the specter (sp?) of this being a nonsecure website.
I do know such outings' with a lot more info that just ISP numbers have occurred on other political forums, i.e., proteswarrior.com (although I am bracing myself right now for the retaliation this mention will bring from right-wingers).
Golly, I kind of feel like this forum is in the midst of being hijacked by the conservative in-your-face folks somewhat.
Excuse me, but I'm AO.
You are careless. Even a small brain like mine can see there are major differences in gt and ao's writing styles. Check it out. Besides, we don't even live in the same part of the country. I'm sure the administrator can verify that for you if it makes an important difference in your life.
Also, AO is not Another Observer, in case that was your next accusation. See, there's more than one of us out here.
Excuse me but it should have said *did not*
Geesh, I forgot that this forum doesn't like apostrophes. Do you ever make a mistake? I don't make fun of people's typos, but evidently because you can't stick to the subject or respond directly to my post without calling names it's just a rabbit trail to discredit me. You know, whatever, you've proven that you're not worth my time.
See ya...
Excuse me, but it's a law. sm
She was asked to comply by the police and she IGNORED THEM. She is not above the law. None of us are. Everyone should be concerned about this behavior. Bush had nothing to do with it! My gosh, the things you say.
Excuse me.
If you don't want my opinions then don't read them. It's that simple.
Sorry I dared to enter your high and mighty world. I'll leave you to your hate.
Excuse me, but yes you did. sm
I usually don't post here, but here is what you said below. You have posted on our board, so I am posting here. By the way, your temper tantrums and attacks are not doing anyone any favors. Not an attack but an observation. Here is what you said below.
*The neocons, of course, can't have this, so they send our threads to people like you to crash the liberal board, utilizing their very own name calling and intimidation tactics. They never gave a hoot about Israel in the past, but suddenly they see Israel as their new best friend. They're winking at God and saying, See? We're on Israel's side now and won't be one of the groups against Israel, so bring on the Rapture. We've secured our place with God. The Rapture Index has indicated it's fasten your seatbelt time and they can't wait.*
As far as for the rest of what you have said, most of us have always been on Israel's side. You are showing how really and truly uninformed you are by statements like this.
Excuse me.....
the first settlers were not slave owners and came here for religious freedom. The founding fathers were deeply seated in Christianity. The country WAS founded on those principles. However, others came who did not ascribe to those principles, just as there are those who do not ascribe to those principles now. May I also remind you that slavery was introduced here by Dutch traders who bought slaves in Africa and brought them to America...much later. And who sold those slaves to Dutch traders? I believe it was other Africans, who enslaved and sold their own people. The original colonists at first got along with the Indians. It was much later, in the plains, where the near annihilation as you call it occurred. All during that time were present the Christian missionaries who tried to intervene, were often killed for it, by whites and Indians alike. I am Choctaw, I am descended from the indigenous peoples. Indians also killed and enslaved one another. It is not an *American* invention. And...who said I was painting anything as *rosy?* My point was, and still is, and is borne out daily, that the further you travel from Christian principles the more acceptable killing, slavery, and all other ill of the world becomes. Turning the blind eye so to speak. And it is generalizations like you state above, that the entire country is responsible for what a few did...it is that kind of mindset, like the other poster who thinks *Republicans* need to be destroyed. That kind of generalization is dangerous. Blaming an entire country, an entire group of people, for what a few do is not realistic. Not everyone in the country condoned everything. All through history you will see Christians spoke out against slavery, spoke out against what was happening with the Indians, spoke out against segregation, spoke out against abortion, and on and on and on. Perhap I should stop saying *this country* and say *the people in it.* *This country* was founded on Christian principles, and for a long time for the most part most of the people in it followed those principles. As time went on, fewer did. And somehow, the tide has completely turned and Christians are the enemy. But, I do stand corrected. America, the concept of America, has not chnaged. But the people in it most certainly have.
Excuse me again...
See my responses below.
You said: You need to read up on your history of this country.
I say: Right back at you. And you need to look deeply into books published 100 years ago as well as ones published in this century so you get the whole picture.
You said: Why does it matter what the origins of slavery were? The fact is, most of the founding fathers either owned slaves or families' had owned slaves. Washington owned hundreds of slaves, although he freed them as part of his will upon his death.
I say: I never said the founding fathers did not hold slaves. Re-read my post. I said that the original colonists did not hold slaves, and they did not. Jamestown was settled in 1607...slaves were introduced to this country around 1640, several years later. That is the truth and that is what I said. What matters about the origins of slavery is you want to condemn this country for holding slaves. I don't see you railing against Africa for starting the slave trade...if no slaves to sell, none would be bought. If you are going to rail against something, rail at the source. That is like blaming the school child for taking the drugs the dealer sold him.
You said: What do you mean, slavery came much later. Later than what?
I say: See my answer above.
You said: This country still condoned slavery for 100 years.
I say: Please do not say *this country condoned* because this country as a whole did NOT *condone.* Huge numbers of people did not own slaves. You know that. Only the more well to do folks could afford it. And through the years several thousand people did speak out about it and did what they could, and in case it escaped your attention, we finally fought a civil war in which one of the principles was to abolish slavery.
You sid:
As far as the founding fathers and our rights we protect here's some info:
It's important to differentiate the Constitution that the Founding Fathers cooked up from the Bill of Rights. Today when we think of the protections of the American system, we usually think of the shining example of ethics and goodness contained in the Bill of Rights. These are the first ten amendments to the Constitution. They are primarily the work of George Mason (1725-1792). He would have been a Founding Father because he was a delegate to the convention from Virginia, but he refused to sign the Constitution. He realized that it failed to protect individual liberties and failed to oppose slavery.
I say:
Excuse me, yet again, but isn't this the same George Mason who himself held slaves? Yes, he did. What he did was speak out about the slave trade, but he did not give up the slaves he already had. Don't know if he released them upon his death or not, like Washington did. He was holding slaves at the time he was criticizing the practice. Pardon me if I do not see that as the height of hypocrisy. And you are wrong,because the Constitution did not address slavery is NOT one of the reasons he did not sign it. You are correct that he did not sign it because he did not feel it addressed individual freedoms; but, in fact, he spoke OUT against including mention of slavery in the Constitution (probably because he owned slaves himself). Get your facts straight.
I can find no mention at all of the founding fathers lobbying against the Bill of Rights. Please supply me with the historical references.
You said: Mr. Mason lobbied against adoption of the Constitution just as many of the Founding Fathers lobbied against the Bill of Rights. Most of the Founding Fathers disapproved of giving ordinary citizens such liberties as freedom of religion, freedom from unreasonable search and torture, the right of free speech and so forth. In fact, when John Adams (1735-1826) was president (1797-1801), he took away freedom of speech.
I say: Well, what John Adams did then is no different than what the Democrats are trying to do now in shutting down talk radio. Same song, second verse. Get after them with equal zeal, I challenge you.
You said:
The Bill of Rights is really the people's voice against the Founding Fathers; liberty against conformity.
I say:
You are very liberal with your interpretation.
_________
You said:
As far as the Native American disgrace/slaughter, all I can say is you have an interesting viewpoint that is not shared by many indigenous. Bhoo-zhoo.
I say:
It is shared by many more than you are aware. But remember my friend...we are still entitled to our opinion, whether or not it agrees with yours. Question for you: if you still hold such emnity today, hundreds of years later, what could be done about it? You cannot turn back time. Most tribes are doing very well, have their own lands, pay no federal taxes on those lands, and are among some of the more well-to-do among us. If the Nation does not share that wealth properly with the tribe, then the people should take it up with the Nation, which many of us are doing. Native Americans did not just suffer at the hands of white men. They have also suffered a great deal at the hands of their own, and that has nothing to do with this country and everything to do with human beings. There are the good and bad among us, always have been, always will be...in every culture, every population, until the end of time. And dwelling in the past does nothing to help. Learn from the past, yes; but do not dwell there.
And try to get your information from several sources. Study for yourself, research for yourself. I learned long ago that is necessary.
Excuse me....
Thou shalt not kill - there is a federal law against murder. Thou shalt not steal - there is a federal law against stealing...you will have to do better than separation of church and state. That being said, the words "separation of church and state" are not in the Constitution. It says that there shall be no state-sponsored religion. To my knowledge there is no religion called United States of America. Did that happen while I wasn't looking? Funny to me that the government can pull many laws right out of the Bible, but come to one that that doesn't suit the more liberal ones among us and they start yelling separation of church and state. Go figure.
That being said, most of the laws on the books today have "religious wacko" origins. This country was founded by "religious wackos," or was that missed in history class? Oh yes, I forgot...the more liberal among us stopped teaching that inconvenient truth. However, one can still do searches and read the original writings of the founding fathers...if one is really interested in the truth.
What would folks like in place of "religious wacko" laws? Just let everyone do whatever they want...kill you if you are annoying or a burden to them? Kill you if you are no longer wanted? Steal from you if you have something they want and can't afford to buy for themselves? America was basically a ""Christian theocracy in its infancy, meaning the basic laws all came straight from the Bible. It was also a democracy...the two are not mutually exclusive. And there it goes again, lumping Christians and any other religious group into one group of "religious wackos." Extremely divisive and unnecessary. And, it looks to me like it is not the "religious wackos" on this site who are going bananas when someone doesn't agree with them....
Excuse me?
Excuse me but I do not believe
I bashed SAHMs. I think it should be a personal decision and one should not be looked down upon if they choose to work or choose to stay home. You have no right to bash her any more than she has right to bash you for staying home. I work out of my home because my husband and I need this extra income I bring in. My sister-in-law stays home with her kids and my brother works his @ss off trying to support them and he hardly ever gets to see his kids because he is supporting his family. He wants to spend more time with them but he cannot. So why is it fair for him to never see his kids to support his family working 2 jobs? My mom stayed at home and I hardly ever saw my dad because he was working to support us. Don't you think that sucked with me never seeing my dad or was that okay because my mom was there. If my sister-in-law would get a job, my brother wouldn't have to work 2 jobs and he could see his kids more. If my mom would have worked, my dad wouldn't have had to work that OT and I would have seen him more.
It is great that you can stay at home if that is what you choose to do, but don't bash others for their choice. It isn't like SP is up and walking out of the door to never see her kids again and they do have Todd Palin, their dad, to be with them.
Excuse me, but I think that
"Divine and perfect order" originates in God and only God.
Excuse you. lol. nm
nm
Any excuse at all
Black Republican Activist Bob Parks predicts riots will ensue if Obama wins or loses the election.
Parks, a syndicated writer, talk show host, and Republican activist, lists his reasons in the video, Obama’s America: Win or Lose, as to why he believes an Obama loss would mean “things could get ugly on a grand scale” or that an Obama win would give ‘”punks” the “greatest of reasons” to take to the streets:
“Now what occasionally happens when a city’s team wins a championship? We have riots! There’s looting, hooliganism, vandalism, drunk and disorderliness, assaults, and sometimes injury or death, and this wouldn’t be about one single city. Can you imagine the potential for nationwide rioting by punks, looking an excuse and now having the greatest of reasons to do so?”
Excuse me? I was not the one
who posted that other post about being jealous. So please do not attack me when you don't know what I have or have not posted.
Well, excuse me! I am too new to this
board to be familiar with all the vernacular. I was just responding to a remark made by a poster earlier who spewed out a hateful personal attack on another poster, and someone asked the Moderator to ban that person from the board!
Excuse me....put yourself out there??
Because you ask a simple question that merits a background check and having your life made public? He is not RUNNING for ANYthing!! Do you hear yourself? The more posts I see like this the more I understand the way most socialist countries end up going....freaking amazing.
Excuse you, but...
he has already said that yes, he does fall into the over 250,000 bracket, and while noone likes to pay taxes, he would be paying taxes imposed on that bracket.
Excuse me?
Who gives a rip about medical records. I want proof this guy was born in the USA. I want proof before he can be elected president. Who cares about Palin's health. McCain may have skin cancer, but it is not as bad as lung cancer. Did you know Obama smokes? Shoot he could pass away from lung cancer before McCain's skin cancer. Honestly, cannot compare medical records to birth certificate.
That's the best excuse you have for the
nm
Please excuse me....(sm)
I saw scripture quoted and many references to God on here, so I assumed this must be the faith board. Funny how you didn't have a problem with that.
Excuse me?
Of course, we have the enigma of being home to some of the biggest crooks in the world (Bush, Cheney, Delay, Perry, etc.) but this is a beautiful state. Do not associate this beautiful state with the ugly criminals.
Excuse me, but I think YOU are the one with the
Whenver someone posts something you don't agree with you are quick to jump on and insult them. You have a very nasty attitude and if you don't believe me, go down the board and read some of YOUR comments. You are the one who invites attacks by your nasty attitude and name calling.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
Excuse me.
Most of us have 401Ks and are anything but "gleeful" that 50% of the value has been wiped out. Pointing out that Obama and his Treasury chief had a significant role in the enormous drop in the market since inauguration day has nothing to do with "glee". It's just simple fact.
And even the Dems wondered when Geithner was going to get off his bony a$$ and show us the "boy wonder" that he was said to be - and isn't. Meanwhile, the markets continued to tumble. There's no disputing any of this.
And the markets have a very, VERY long way to go before any of us get back what we've lost, so I would kindly suggest that you save any and ALL market-related comments for that moment. You should know, thought, that it might be a very long time coming.
It took decades for the market to recover what it lost in the Depression. Meanwhile, of course, there were "up days" and "down days" and "up months" and "down months"...and if you had been living then, it would have been extremely foolish for you to make anything at all out of the little rallies that occurred. Don't make the same mistake here or you'll only make yourself look foolish.
|
