Why be nasty? Just goes to show that the left are the first ones to name call. nm
Posted By: peanut on 2008-09-24
In Reply to: and now you know - Margeaux
//
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
Are you what they call a far left-wing
.
Just goes to show the j@ckas@es/crooks running the show!
nm
Beck says - almost every show - that he is NOT doing a news show.
He does an opinion show - meaning HIS opinion. As such, he's entitled to stick pins in little Obama dolls for all I care.
I can hear Chris Wallace laughing at you folks from here because it's pretty obvious whoever wrote that knows zip about Beck, or Wallace for that matter. In fact, I can't think what Wallace has to do with Beck anyway. Everyone of INTELLIGENCE who watches Beck and Wallace is perfectly aware that one does one type of show and the other does another.
But what do you expect from one of George Soros' puppet sites like Media Matters and Move Bowels.org?
You really should delete your Favorites list and start over.
Call me what you want, just don't call me late for dinner. LOL....
GP, I like your sense of humor.
You call it hysteria, some call it concern for the
nm
you mean left wing....it's a left wing ding website on the messiah....the right wouldn't bothe
Saw the show. It was a guest on the show....
not a commentator. Why don't you post the link to the clip so everyone can decide?
Show me who your friends are and I’ll show you who you are.’
This subject is not old, and is very, very relevant.
Obama's friends/associates (supposedly former friends and associates, only since this campaign):
Ayers
Wright
Dorhn
Michelle
Khalidi
The company he keeps:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YThjYTU1ZDBjNmQ2YzcwNzU1MmYwN2JiMWY0ZGI0NDA=
I find it very, very troubling, that this man has no visible friends, other than the ones above (not Michelle, although she has been kept under lock and key out of public sight for some time now, so as to keep her from embarrassing herself again).
Does this man not have any other friends/associates, other than the ones above?
Then call it what it is...or call for conservation...
but don't make up a myth to try to gain control. That is what Gore is after...what all the global warming hoohah is after. They have an agenda...pure and simple. And the base fact is that a very low percentage of the greenhouse gas effect is from cars. Every time you breathe out, you contribute. Are we all going to stop breathing? Are cows going to stop belching? I have no problem with ethanol...I have used it. My husband is from Iowa...I would love it if we started using ethanol more extensively. But in previous years, Democrats (Hillary being a primary one) opposed the use of ethanol. I guess if I believed any of those people out there hawking global warming actually believed what they were saying it would be different...but I don't. The science is not there. As I said...if the real interest is conservation with the side benefit of less CO2...fine. Just say so. But as the article pointed out...if it is as bad as they say it is, you can't stop it anyway. It just does not make good sense to me.
Fine. Call if whatever you want to call it....
I will call it as I see it. I look at a totality of things. He has embraced black liberation theology which is racist and has Marxist tones for 20 years. There is no way the man went to that church for 20 years and did not know their doctrine. But, if you choose to believe that, again, fine. I do not. I believe he knows that theology backward and forward and believes it to his core. You don't have to. That is the wonderful thing about America. We can agree or disagree. On this we disagree.
Yes, I am feeling a pinch. But I don't think the government should take money from you and give it to me. I don't think they should take money from any private business and give it to me. If you think that is fair, fine. I don't. That is how socialism/Marxism takes hold. Historically it ends the same way. I don't want that for America. Perhaps you do...you want the pinch eased for you and if that means taking money from someone else that they earned, and giving it to you, who did not earn it, to you it is all good. To me it isn't.
He never has said who the $1000 checks are going to. I am thinking not every person in the whole US of A...so not only does he get to choose who he takes the money from, he gets to choose who to give it to. That would be another interesting piece of the puzzle. If he confirms to the Marxist view, it would be issuing checks to the "poor." And he gets to define who that is. You may be okay with that...me, not so much.
And by the way...have you ever researched an oil company profit margin? It is not as huge as Obama would like you to believe. But, again, he is counting on no one researching what he says. They hear free money and that's all they want to hear. Also, do you think oil companies don't employ people? You think it is one CEO at a desk in an office raking in billions? You don't think there are rank and file regular folks who work for oil companies? Whose jobs might be impacted by you and others wanting to take money away from their employers and doling it out to people who have not earned it? You think there is a chance they might have a problem with that?
I call, fax, and call again and I do campaign....
xx
I won't be nasty. sm
American Woman, if I wuz to venture a guess, I'd say you and gt were definitely the same person, but I don't really care. I really don't. And I don't care if you believe me either. GT did tell us both not to leave. I am sorry that you don't feel the need to verify that, but GT just as much admitted to it above, so there you go. Have a safe holiday weekend.
Why be so nasty? sm
I mean really. Why is that necessary? Why? Can you tell me? Is it something you can't help. I have been civil the entire time I have posted here. When I go to school, one person, ME, will not be posting. I can't speak for the rest. So let it go. Take a deep breath, let it out. Let it go. Let all that anger go. You will feel better.
Nasty. (nm)
nm
no need to get nasty as the same could be said about you.
,
wow - sam -- you really do get nasty
I don't know about you, but I'm American, not dem or pub, just American. I refuse to shut up or put up, as you so kindly put it, about anything. I have to admit the last election I voted pub, and I'm still paying for that one. But seriously sam, keep playing the blame game. You'd make a good politician. See where it gets us.
Fact is 140 dems did vote to pass it, while only 65 pubs voted for it. Maybe because the pubs didn't feel they were getting enough out of it for themselves or because of fear of its failure. It's a shame that pubs can't even support their own party, ie Bush, who wanted this to pass.
cause you are nasty
You were so nasty in your first post. I was answering questions to someone who asked about my faith and you come bouncing in with h*ll fire and damnation. I don't believe in heaven or h*ll, so I'm not real worried about it. Give your prayers to someone else. I certainly don't need someone as hateful as you praying for me. I don't believe what is in the NT and you screaming about it isn't going to change that. I bet you are the top evangelizer at your church, aren't you?
Why do you believe the KJV is right? Do you know the history of it? Have you studied original texts? Probably not ...
why be so nasty?
What's your point? If you didn't like it, no need to read it, but why be nasty for the sake of being nasty?
Why do you have to be so nasty
and stoop to attacking people? Attack the politician if you like, but this is just so juvenile.
And it's still nasty (nm)
n
My my - how nasty can you get
Very I see.
Your above post is very nasty....
Calling democrats "traitorcrats."
Nasty response, I see.
You became nasty. Too bad. Guess you couldn't help yourself and couldn't stay reasonable and even-handed for more than a post or two. I was starting to think I'd been too hard with my thinking that some of the conservative posters were...well...kind of mean-spirited. Apparently I was wrong.
Dang you are nasty.
read ur post again. U R talking about it like its true. Maybe U can't see it but i can.
I did read it. No need to be nasty.
I have tried to keep an even tone here. That wasn't necessary. I think it stands to reason when you get men like Jong and the leader of Iran who have openly said they wish for our death, that the next step would be nuclear weapons.
Oh, got your hackles up I see. Nasty
I am not making excuses for anyone. Clinton and his presidency with all the bull is over. I know it, he knows it. You know it. Get over it already. He is washed up and has little to no credibility left. Don't mean jack to me right now. Others get away with far more in our justice system every day. I am not defending them either, it's just the way it goes. Am I going to cripple myself because of it? No way.
I could say the same for you in the predictability arena. You've reduced yourself to being flippant once again. You get downright nasty. Morals my foot.
It is not just about the Plame case. It is much bigger and wider, and it is growing every day.
Here is a part of it:
http://www.nlg.org/convention/2007%20Resolutions/Impeachment%20resolution.pdf
This was put together by the National Lawyers Guild. It is just one of many. It will get to the point where it can't be ignored. I can send you batches more if you like.
Nasty and proud of it.....obviously. And...
definitely not someone who should be calling someone else ignorant. But, since your opinion means les than nothing to me...knock yourself out.
Vicious and Nasty
Just vote early and get over yourselves. Unbelievable.
But you are beyond nasty to anyone who disagrees.
in your posts.
You cannot even practice what you preach, the happy, joyous hopeful part.
Just downright nastiness is your party line.
The nasty thing
is your wishing misery on fellow Americans because you have your nose in a snit (or something darker and moister).
nasty on all sides
Can't we just state our opinions without calling each other "idiots" and "children?" Does that really enhance the argument? Ever?
wow, nasty this morning,,,
in our area there are people struggling but not to the extent that seem to be here on this board every day. Certainly don't live in a glass house; have struggled before in the past and have figured out a way not to. We are in a fortunate situation at the moment and have taken steps to ensure that we will be okay financially should the rug be pulled out from under us; so be it if that is considered snooty. Bash away as is your style; it humors me.
Boy, sis, you have a really nasty 'tude there...
my world is anything but gloomy. I know I am not responsible for that fella in the White House. That lets me sleep nights. Much Palin's carpet? Change parties? If you read any of my posts as you claim you have, either you have no retention or you would know I have never been a "pub" or a "Dem." Independent from day one. Conservative, yes definitely; "pub" no. Democrat...no way,not ever in this lifetime. The Democrats of my parents' days and Zell Miller are gone forever it would seem, and too bad. Too darned bad.
Yeah, it breaks my heart (not) that you are unimpressed. I know what impresses you and that is sure not where I desire to be.
It does not take a prophet to see where this is going. However...one has to remnove the blinders...ahem.
Just what was his nasty behavior?
I'm curious...........
No, she is sounding very rational and not nasty at all, but once again
the mighty mouth gt shoots another poster down! Wow, that's gotta feel good, huh? Just vomit those words out there without thought. I read all the posts by AR. Other than Suzie and at one time Lurker they are the most rational posts on either board I have ever seen. Hey gt, little bitty clue, it all really is not about YOU. And as far as getting a life, you practically LIVE on this board. Just look down it and go a couple pages back. POT KETTLE BLACK.
No gt you're never hateful or nasty
don't stand in an open field during a thunderstorm.
Well, that's nasty propaganda at work...
...and they use it because it *does* work, unfortunately.
But hey - Jesus and his closest followers were never a majority of anything. They weren't the powerful, or those in control of the Temple, or those who lived in luxury in the lap of Rome. Those who were in control hated them and considered them pesky liberals. So I guess Democratic Christians stand in pretty good historical company.
You're particularly nasty today
I don't think a liberal has lost an election anywhere today, so what's the the nastiness?
HRC supporters downright nasty
Watched some of the DNC hearing (or whatever it was called). I was utterly disgusted with the supporters of HRC. She said she wanted the delegates seated. Well they are going to be seated! So what's the problem now? Oh - I get it, they want everything and they want it their way or no way. They just want to be placed in the position whether or not they got more votes. They are not playing fair. First they want the delegates seated - they are. They want their votes to count - they are. But because HRC does not get every single vote and Barack with none they are going to keep pushin it. You want to talk about just looking like a bunch of spoiled losers that is surely what they are. And what are they screaming about. As some lady said "a black man came and took it away from HRC". Well boo hoo. You want to talk about downright biggots - there you go! First you have the comments about Jesse Jackson by Billy boy, then you've got the "I'll win because white working people will vote for me and not a black man" statement by HRC. I'm tellin ya, they are really gearing up for a racial war. She lost, fair and square. End of discussion! The media if anything always gave her the benefit of the doubt. Gave her the easy questions at the debate, and certainly favored her, but now its just obvious she is a spoiled sport and sore loser. Well for all the ones who say they'll never vote for a black man, there are a hundred more who will not vote for that woman. Sure we'll one day vote in a woman in the white house but not her! I know there were many other qualified women who should have run. Why didn't they? Seems like the Clintons once again pulled "something funny" so she would be placed in there. Anyway...that's my rant for the evening. She just disgusts me and a lot of people I know and we are all anxious for her to just go home. Sure, go ahead, take it to the convention, but she better be prepared for the outcome. She lost, fair and square. More people and more delegates voted for Obama. Someone needs to set her figures straight. I guess if you don't count a bunch of states that Obama won then she can say she won, but I know she'd have a fit if Obama left out some of the states she won and said "See I won, we just won't count New York, Ohio and Calfornia (or any other combination of states she won). You want to talk about disenfranchizing people. She's just coming right out and saying "oh this states is important because I won so we have to count their votes, but this state over here that Obama won in, those people are not important, their votes don't count". Like I've said before....HRC go back to living under that rock you crawled out from. We're sick of you.
Here is one of those nasty four-letter words for you....
FACT...it was not the Republican Party who made it the thing to do to outsource to India...that was YOUR party. Here you go:
When Hillary Clinton threw her hat in the senatorial ring in 1999, one Sikh donor with business interests in India enriched her to the tune of $50 thousand-and she enriched him with access. The Sikh is a millionaire whose circumstances suggest may be living on “borrowed” wealth. The man is hotel-restaurant mogel Sant Singh Chatwal. Chatwal a naturalized citizen from India who initially raised $500 thousand for Clinton in a fundraiser in his Upper Eastside penthouse. Chatwal reportedly committed 14 entities controlled by him to donate $210 thousand of that amount to Hillary’s first campaign for the US Senate. Not in the least surprising is the fact that Chatwal is also a key Trustee of the William J. Clinton Foundation.
Chatwal, a US tax deadbeat since at least 1996 (and a debt deadbeat before that) began donating to Bill and Hillary Clinton early in the Clinton years. The Clintons reciprocated (that old political quid pro quo) by approving grants to Indian-American advocacy groups that were used to finance the outsourcing of jobs from the United States to India. Beginning in 1996 Cisco Systems (another major Clinton donor) began laying off $60 thousand-plus high tech employees and replacing them with new hires from Bangalore, India for about half the dollars. Cisco Systems justified the hirings, claiming they could not find qualified employees in the United States. By 1998 Cisco had only a handful of Infosys Technology workers overseas (Infosys is an outsourcer of jobs to India). Most of their 850 employees are now Indian. (Infosys has just launched an IT subsidiary in Monterray, Mexico to outsource outsourced jobs from India to Mexico.) In 2006 Newsweek reported that Cisco System’s R&D facility-employing 3,000 people, would be located in India. (Bill Clinton received $300 thousand from Cisco in 2006 for two speeches at $150 thousand per speech. Cisco employees-those who still had jobs-donated $39,450 to Hillary.)
Bill Clinton invested upwards of $50 thousand in an Indian bill paying company through his WJC Investments, LLP when outsourcing became a hot property. The company, Easy Bill Limited, is an Indian corporation. Easy Bill functions as a one-stop bill paying outlet for utility bills, credit card bills or any other debts you pay online. (It’s website, www.easybillindia.com (does not conceal from anyone interested in billing collection services that they are outsourcing to India).
In 2004 Congress-and several States-attempted to enact anti- outsourcing laws. In March, 2004 the Senate approved an amendment by Sen. Chris Dodd [D-CT] disallowing tax dollars from being used to facilitate the outsourcing of American jobs. A day earlier, Congressman Bernie Sanders [I-VT] (now one of Vermont’s two US Senators) introduced a bill that would deny grants or loans to any company that outsourced jobs if they laid off workers in the United States to a greater level than layoffs of employees in any other country in the world. Several industrial States attempted to enact anti-outsourcing laws that year, but those bills either failed and were defanged before passage.
As pressure mounted to kill outsourcing, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Chuck Schumer were instrumental in creating the Senate India Caucus (which was “coordinated” by the US India Political Action committee) to lobby Senators who were attempting to derail job outsourcing. When the Caucus was formed, Hillary Clinton told Roll Call that “…[i]t is imperative that the United States do everything possible to reach out to India. This Caucus is dedicated to expanding areas of agreement with India and engaging in a candid dialogue of differences.” With their money in her pocket, what else could she say? Hillary is a co-chairman of the Caucus. On the House side, Hillary’s allies are House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Joe Crowley [D-NY]. (If your job has been outsourced, you now know who to thank.)
Yes, this is an article, but you can confirm every bit of it on line if you are inclined to do so. You are so driven by your hatred of Republicans that you would vote for the YOUR party, the party who instigated outsourcing to India. So you have THEM to thank for outsourcing your profession overseas and driving your wages into the ground.
Not being nasty - it's true. Her and Rush like their
saying something you think is incorrect. The FACT is --- she's a druggie!!
Anyone who would post rumors that are mean and nasty...
concerning a 16-year-old girl are mean-spirited. The dailykos is a swamp with no bottom, as someone so astutely said, and there are those here who prefer to wallow in it. So be it.
Sticks and stones, sticks and stones. And as to go away...you first.
Her post wasn't nasty at all!
I think it could have been much worse! I think she was being rather nice about the whole thing! Get over it!
You refer to being nasty, yet you state...
"I could give a flying crap." Personally, I find that offensive and feel that you are a big part of the problem.
I caught the nasty racist
little dig there. I got that you were saying that Obama is ahead but his being black will doom him. I didn't miss your sneaky way of signalling your fellow Rothschilds.
It wasn't unnecessarily nasty. (sm)
Do you deny that there are liberals out there that are like that? I know there are conservatives who are going to be setting off the "crap-o-meter" every time Obama takes a breath. But that doesn't mean I'm one of them.
There are liberals that have taken way too much time out of their lives in the last eight years to bash Bush just because and unfortunately, they have been the loud ones. That doesn't mean that all liberals are like that.
If you know that's not you he's describing, why take offense? Every post on here that starts out something like "you pubs..." doesn't offend me because I know I'm not like the offensive pubs out there - you know, the ones making all the noise?
Just take it all with a grain of salt and don't let it ruin your day.
Keep smiling - people will wonder what you're up to!!!=)
What do you find viscious and nasty?
xx
what a nasty comment - see message
We could say the same thing about the dems. Seems to me the dems have done enough damage. Go home and quit screwing up our system. It's the same ol retoric by the nasty dems. The pitiful thing is you don't even see it. O says jump off the bridge and the O lovers follow without question.
America is a Republic. There is a very good reason our Pledge of Allegiance refers to our country as a Republic and a very good reason the Declaration of Independence and constituion do not even mention the word democracy.
Yet another nasty comment by a liberal
This comment was so mean-spirited and unecessary.
So far:
4 Nasty hate-filled comments by liberals.
0 by conservatives.
Yet another nasty comment by a liberal
This comment was so mean-spirited and unecessary. Your up another point by your nasty comments
So far:
5 Nasty hate-filled comments by liberals.
0 by conservatives.
Time will tell on the election - besides you were nasty first.
x
|
