Where did I state that? I simply stated
Posted By: that he won fair and square on 2009-03-12
In Reply to: My point is.... - IMHO
You've really got a bee in your bonnet today, don't you?
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
I accused nobody of anything. I simply stated that
a triple digit IQ, i.e., intelligence quotient, as in intelligent leadership, would be good for the country for a change, the implication being we have not had that until now. If it speaks stupid, thinks stupid, looks stupid and acts stupid, chances are it is, well, stupid.
I do not spend any time on sites that speculate about widely varying IQ scores for either party's candidates, since that type of data can only produce subjective conclusions. I also do not pursue illogical arguments that in one breath give Obama's SAT/LSAT scores and in the next, accuse him of hiding that information. For me, SAT scores and IQ are 2 mutually exclusive concepts unless and until someone can produce a resource that can convince me otherwise.
I made a simple statement in response to Bushisms which any self-respecting American would find embarrassing and not worthy of the highest office in the land. That statement was construed as some sort of accusation in a reply from somebody who felt the need to defend Bush. I answered that by further discussion of Bush's stupidity, not his IQ. I was not focused on the number, rather the lack of intelligence.
Therefore, I feel no need to defend my position nor excuse myself for not conducting exhaustive research in defense of somebody else's ideas and number hang-ups.
I want smart leadership. Sue me.
Two Border State Governors Declare Illegal Immigration State of Emergency
Two Border State Governors Declare Illegal Immigration State of Emergency
SIGN THE PETITION!
CLICK HERE!
THANK YOU!
You can have our federal money along with a new state motto: "Michigan - The Slave State". n
NM
Laws vary state-to-state
Many people were confined against their will just because someone wanted them "out of the way." These were normal people with no mental illness - that is why it is so difficult - don't blame the liberals. Blame your state.
CONFINING THE MENTALLY ILL
In the legal space between what a society should and should not do, taking action to restrict the liberty of people who are mentally ill sits in the grayest of gray areas.
Our notions about civil and constitutional rights flow from an assumption of "normalcy." Step beyond the boundaries and arrest and prison may legally follow. Short of that, government's ability to hold people against their will is severely and properly limited. Unusual behavior on the part of someone who is mentally ill is not illegal behavior. Freedom can't be snatched away on a whim, or on the thought that a person is hard to look at, hard to hear, hard to smell.
It was only a few decades ago that the promise of new medications and a change in attitude opened the doors of the mental hospitals and sent many patients into society. There, they would somehow "normalize" and join everyone else, supported by networks of out-patient facilities, job training, special living arrangements and regular, appropriate medication. But the transition has been imperfect, long and difficult.
In some parts of urban America there is little professional support for those with mental health problems. A new generation of drug and alcohol-fueled mental illness has come on the scene. People frequently end up on the street, un-medicated and exhibiting a full range of behaviors that are discomforting at the very least and threatening at their worst.
Red state, blue state?
Written last Thanksgiving: "Some would argue that two different nations actually celebrated: upright, moral, traditional red America and the dissolute, liberal blue states clustered on the periphery of the heartland. The truth, however, is much more complicated and interesting than that.
Take two iconic states: Texas and Massachusetts. In some ways, they were the two states competing in the last election. In the world's imagination, you couldn't have two starker opposites. One is the homeplace of Harvard, gay marriage, high taxes, and social permissiveness. The other is Bush country, solidly Republican, traditional, and gun-toting. Massachusetts voted for Kerry over Bush 62 to 37 percent; Texas voted for Bush over Kerry 61 to 38 percent.
So ask yourself a simple question: which state has the highest divorce rate? Marriage was a key issue in the last election, with Massachusetts' gay marriages becoming a symbol of alleged blue state decadence and moral decay. But in actual fact, Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country at 2.4 divorces per 1,000 inhabitants. Texas - which until recently made private gay sex a criminal offence - has a divorce rate of 4.1. A fluke? Not at all. The states with the highest divorce rates in the U.S. are Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. And the states with the lowest divorce rates are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Every single one of the high divorce rate states went for Bush. Every single one of the low divorce rate states went for Kerry. The Bible Belt divorce rate, in fact, is roughly 50 percent higher than the national average.
Some of this discrepancy can be accounted for by the fact that couples tend to marry younger in the Bible Belt - and many clearly don't have the maturity to know what they're getting into. There's some correlation too between rates of college education and stable marriages, with the Bible Belt lagging a highly educated state like Massachusetts. But the irony still holds. Those parts of America that most fiercely uphold what they believe are traditional values are not those parts where traditional values are healthiest. Hypocrisy? Perhaps. A more insightful explanation is that these socially troubled communities cling onto absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice.
But doesn't being born again help bring down divorce rates? Jesus, after all, was mum on the subject of homosexuality, but was very clear about divorce, declaring it a sin unless adultery was involved. A recent study, however, found no measurable difference in divorce rates between those who are "born again" and those who are not. 29 percent of Baptists have been divorced, compared to 21 percent of Catholics. Moreover, a staggering 23 percent of married born-agains have been divorced twice or more. Teen births? Again, the contrast is striking. In a state like Texas, where the religious right is extremely strong and the rhetoric against teenage sex is gale-force strong, the teen births as a percentage of all births is 16.1 percent. In liberal, secular, gay-friendly Massachusetts, it's 7.4, almost half. Marriage itself is less popular in Texas than in Massachusetts. In Texas, the percent of people unmarried is 32.4 percent; in Massachusetts, it's 26.8 percent. So even with a higher marriage rate, Massachusetts manages a divorce rate almost half of its "conservative" rival.
Or take abortion. America is one of the few Western countries where the legality of abortion is still ferociously disputed. It's a country where the religious right is arguably the strongest single voting bloc, and in which abortion is a constant feature of cultural politics. Compare it to a country like Holland, perhaps the epitome of socially liberal, relativist liberalism. So which country has the highest rate of abortion? It's not even close. America has an abortion rate of 21 abortions per 1,000 women aged between 15 and 44. Holland has a rate of 6.8. Americans, in other words, have three times as many abortions as the Dutch. Remind me again: which country is the most socially conservative?
Even a cursory look at the leading members of the forces of social conservatism in America reveals the same pattern. The top conservative talk-radio host, Rush Limbaugh, has had three divorces and an addiction to pain-killers. The most popular conservative television personality, Bill O'Reilly, just settled a sex harassment suit that indicated a highly active adulterous sex life. Bill Bennett, the guru of the social right, was for many years a gambling addict. Karl Rove's chief outreach manager to conservative Catholics for the last four years, Deal Hudson, also turned out to be a man with a history of sexual harassment. Bob Barr, the conservative Georgian congressman who wrote the "Defense of Marriage Act," has had three wives so far. The states which register the highest ratings for the hot new television show, "Desperate Housewives," are all Bush-states.
The complicated truth is that America truly is a divided and conflicted country. But it's a grotesque exaggeration to say that the split is geographical, or correlated with blue and red states. Many of America's biggest "sinners" are those most intent on upholding virtue. In fact, it may be partly because they know sin so close-up that they want to prevent its occurrence among others. And some of those states which have the most liberal legal climate - the Northeast and parts of the upper MidWest - are also, in practice, among the most socially conservative. To ascribe all this to "hypocrisy" seems to me too crude an explanation. America is simply a far more complicated and diverse place than crude red and blue divisions can explain.
I don't know what state you live in but in my state
they are adding police and only in the big cities do they have paid firemen. The rest are volunteers.
I look at it this way: If a state can't stay in the black, then they have to cut spending some place that wouldn't jeopardize the safety of the citizens. Threats of cutting essential services like Barney Fife stated today are unjustified. Cut the non-essential services first.
Our governor talks about cutting back on services, laying off government workers, which I think is a good idea because government is too big anyway, but then he turns around and spends more money on non-essential items. Doesn't make sense.
Simply put... sm
The 1st amendment protects the speech you don't want to hear, not just the speech you want to hear.
You don't want to hear my dissenting opinion, but thank you, U.S. forefathers and subsequent soldiers, for protecting my right to say it to you.
I don't want to hear YOUR holier-than-thou bible thumping rants, but you have every right to say it to me, and I'm not going to tell you that you can't.
Who says I don't care... I am simply saying
that the rich are not evil, which you seem to paint them as. In fact, a lot of philanthropy comes from the rich. College scholarships, donations, etc. We are not all the same and we cannot all be the same and we never will be the same. How about instead of pity for those less fortunate, let's encourage them to be self-sufficient? This is the LAND OF OPPORTUNITY and there will always be a segment of society who will not pull themselves up in spite of all the opportunities available. I can't spend a lot of time worrying about that because it futile.
Well perhaps we are simply misunderstood
like this:
We look forward to hearing your vision, so we can more better do our job. That's what I'm telling you. —George W. Bush, Gulfport, Miss., Sept. 20, 2005
Wow! Brazil is big. —George W. Bush, after being shown a map of Brazil by Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Brasilia, Brazil,
If it were to rain a lot, there is concern from the Army Corps of Engineers that the levees might break. And so, therefore, we're cautious about encouraging people to return at this moment of history. —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2005
The relations with, uhh — Europe are important relations, and they've, uhh — because, we do share values. And, they're universal values, they're not American values or, you know — European values, they're universal values. And those values — uhh — being universal, ought to be applied everywhere. —George W. Bush, at a press conference with European Union dignitaries, Washington, D.C., June 20, 2005
I can only speak to myself. —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 28, 2005
It's in our country's interests to find those who would do harm to us and get them out of harm's way. —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 28, 2005
After all, Europe is America's closest ally. —George W. Bush, Mainz, Germany, Feb. 23, 2005
I'm also mindful that man should never try to put words in God's mouth. I mean, we should never ascribe natural disasters or anything else to God. We are in no way, shape, or form should a human being, play God. —George W. Bush, ABC's 20/20, Washington D.C., Jan. 14, 2005
I want to appreciate those of you who wear our nation's uniform for your sacrifice. —George W. Bush, Jacksonville, Fla.
See, that's the thing...you simply cannot allow
That's one of many things that make this kind of stupidity forum domination. Grownups back off and let their children throw tantrums sometimes. Go ahead. Let her rip. I'm outta here for now, but not for long.
I am simply saying that I think it is funny
that they listed that as a point for her foreign experience. Yes, I saw the first one and it should be listed. I just don't have a clue why they would list that as a point for it. Though, it is clearly a Republican or anti-Obama site so it would, just as the Democrat, anti-Republican sites would do something equally as ridiculous.
I also try to not bash either side, unless I am provoked  . I do think you can oppose one side and keep it level-headed. When people start completely bashing and name-calling, etc., it kind of throws all credibility out the window for me.
Like I said, pubs simply do not
nm
Why would you post this, other than to simply
nm
you are simply wrong.
Posting over and over and over does not make something true. Case in point - Iran was involved in the 911 attack. It has been 7 years, and SP is still saying that lie.
We don't HATE, like the right does. We simply
XX
And he could easily do that simply by....(sm)
upholding G. W. Bush's patriot act. Go figure.
I simply prefer not to post here. SM
I have a hectic and stressful enough life as it is, as many MTs do. I don't know anything about the other issue. I use to go to MTDaily and there was always trouble there with the ISP thing and their own prejudice. So I don't go there anymore. I suggest that might be an option for you if you feel the way you do.
Murtha simply wants it investigated, one way or the other...sm
Although I doubt the soldiers have corrupt intent *if* there is any merit in the claims.
I was simply imitating your posts...
I guess you don't like to be on the receiving end.
I'm not assuming you are white. I simply
meant put yourself in the role that she was in, a minority in college. You are right though, I assumed that you weren't a minority for that scenario and I apologize. And, I didn't mention anywhere in my post about Wright, I was simply referring to her as a college student and the fact that I did not think her thesis was racist.
I dont see it that way at all. Obama simply cant be
nm
This is simply a matter of color.
This man has gotten off the hook answering the tough questions because everyone is trying to be so PC; we don't want to upset the black man or the black community. WHo cares? He's running for President. If being black keeps him from answering the hard questions, why the heck do I want him running my country.
Racism is alive and well in this country.
Simply curious about the motive.
x
I WANT to respect Obama, but I cant simply
nm
Simply not true... FOXISM nm
nm
It's simply that I take nothing from this source at face value.
I know some of the other side of issues that MM has addressed, I know what he does to produce some of the "effects" he creates, and I refuse to be sucked in by anything he does, most of which is deceitful.
Get a room? Something on my nose? Simply
because I was polite to someone, chose to give one of the "nice" ones the benefit of the doubt while finding posts like yours uninformative, childish and a pure waste of keystrokes?
I agree, given the never-ending bitterness and hatefulness you have, it will all come back to bite you in the butt some day. One usually gets back what they give.
you stated this better than I could have.
I sickens me how the victims of this disaster are now being blamed and vilified by people on the conservative board!
My son (age 20) told me that he met some people last night who were speaking the same way - in essence, that it was the fault pf the citizens of New Orleans for not getting out in time, etc, that they deserved to not be rescued sooner, and that the government was not to blame at all.
And I'm sure those conservative posters on the other board probably consider themselves good Christians and not racist at all.
Meanwhile, it is apparent that our president could do (or not do) anything at all and they will blindly defend him...
I'm going to focus on the positive and not visit that board at all.
We have sent money to the Red Cross and all my children donated clothes to the Salvation Army. This morning our priest said that some evacuees may be relocating to our area, and our parish will welcome them! These are our brothers and sisters in Christ...
good night and peace to ya'll
As I stated above.......... sm
if this situation were to occur, and it does seem that it is with the advent of ASR, then our line rates would be lowered to those paid to Indian MTS, just as the UAW was offered what is paid to foreign auto workers. I could not survive on 0.05 cpl or less in our economy. I doubt anyone else could either.
I'm really sorry to hear about your hubby's situation. I know anyone in the housing industry is facing much the same situation. There is really not a lot of new house construction going on and there is no much call for a trim carpenter in most commercial building.
My opinion is to bring MT back inhouse and pay us a decent HOURLY salary. We deserve it as much as the next person.
he also stated that he
respects other people's beliefs that are different from his own and supports separation of church and state. I guess all we can learn from this issue is that Joe Biden will never personally have an abortion. Good job, Joe.
As stated above . . .
according to her a heterosexual relationship can be equated to a plastic cup and a turkey baster.
You stated
"My point is proven by your post. You stated that when Obama gets into office, for me to look around and see how many names I can pronounce.. "
This happened under Clinton before Bush. Can't pronounce half the names now. Guess I fell down on my research a bit as I didn't see anything about the "Muslim for Stowe, OH" appointed by Bush.
VERY well stated!! :-) thank you
this is just too awesome on SO many planes!!!
Very Very well Stated
Yes, the moral compasses do seem to change from day to day on here, you are right.
Thank you for this post. It is very well put.
Simply put, those who have salvation are bound for heaven.
matter if a person is Jewish or not.
Right, nothing psychotic, simply common sense.
nm
That is simply not true. No funerals for fetuses ever.
THINK about it. Foolish to argue this point.
Simply displays a different point of view...nm
x
Did you bother to read the endorsement or simply
Think about it.
I agree....simply because what people will say to a caller...
or even on this board or to a friend even...when that person gets to the point of voting...I am not sure all those saying to the pollsters "Obama" will actually vote for him. Remember the exit polls for Kerry...it looked like he was winning everywhere by large margin and when the votes came in...not so. We are not going to know until election night. And I still think it will be close, but I don't think Obama has it sewn up by a long shot.
This is a day for us to simply step back and stand together
progressives, conservatives liberals and the like...just simply as Americans, waking up and greeting the dawn of a new day.
This is simply NOT TRUE. Read what the United
Mine Workers of America have to say about it. I've copied and pasted it in its entirety. It completely REFUTES yet another false claim that's been repeated on this board.
McCain campaign’s last minute distortion of Obama’s coal record an act of desperation
United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) International President Cecil E. Roberts issued the following statement today:
“Sen. John McCain and his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, have once again demonstrated that they are willing to say anything and do anything to win this election. Their latest twisting of the truth is about coal and some comments Sen. Obama made last January about the future use of coal in America.
“Here is what the McCain campaign left out of Sen. Obama’s actual words: ‘But this notion of no coal, I think, is an illusion. Because the fact of the matter is, is that right now we are getting a lot of our energy from coal. And China is building a coal-powered plant once a week. So what we have to do then is figure out how can we use coal without emitting greenhouse gases and carbon. And how can we sequester that carbon and capture it.’
“Sen. Obama has been consistent with that message not just in the coalfields, but everywhere else he goes as well. Despite what the McCain campaign and some far right-wing blogs would have Americans believe, Sen. Obama has been and remains a tremendous supporter of coal and the future of coal.
“I noted that Sen. McCain even went so far yesterday as to say he has always been a supporter of coal. I wonder, then, how he can justify his statement at a Senate hearing in 2000 that, ‘In a perfect world we would like to transition away from coal entirely,’ and his leading role in sponsoring legislation in 2003 that would have wiped out 78 percent of all coal production in America?
“Fortunately, UMWA members, their families and their friends and neighbors in the coalfields know all too well what is going on here. They’re not going to fall for it, and we urge others throughout America who care about coal to review what the candidates’ records on coal actually are. We are confident that once they do, and once they see the many other benefits to working families of voting for Sen. Obama, they will make the right choice for themselves and their families
Berg is no leftie. He is simply a disenfranchised
and, NO, that does not make him a leftie. The dem party has a broad range of degree of conservativism vs liberalism. A fringe pub is not qualified to judge one way or the other who among the dems is left, right or center, since everyone left of them (including the majority of their own political party) are "lefties." Berg is a Hillary diehard, pure and simple. If you doubt this, just take a look at the timing of when he filed his law suit. He did not challenge O's eligibility until it became apparent that his own candidate was going to lose in the primaries.
Berg is no leftie. He is simply a disenfranchised
and, NO, that does not make him a leftie. The dem party has a broad range of degree of conservativism vs liberalism. A fringe pub is not qualified to judge one way or the other who among the dems is left, right or center, since everyone left of them (including the majority of their own political party) are "lefties." Berg is a Hillary diehard, pure and simple. If you doubt this, just take a look at the timing of when he filed his law suit. He did not challenge O's eligibility until it became apparent that his own candidate was going to lose in the primaries.
This is simply not true. I doubt that Obama will be...sm
anyone's "puppet" as both Bushes were. As well, the president does have a power of veto. It will be interesting to see how everything pans out over the next few years. I believe Obama sees an open, transparent, cooperative presidency but will be no ones fool.
You're simply pathetic, you know it? Your posts
x
Excuse me? JM has clearly stated his will be
nm
What would be a lie about verses stated
xx
I stated in my post that I had
posted that below. If you find it a waste of time, please feel free to ignore what I've said instead of being hateful.
Where is that stated, and what does nawnaw mean??
nm
Yes, that is what he stated, but it was not true....
hospitals were allowing babies to die. And that was his SECOND excuse when the first one about Roe v. wade didn't fly. Do you take EVERYthing he says at face value?
|
