Wouldn't surprise me if he still is.

• *Heckuvajob Brownie* starts disaster planning firm - American Woman
  • Who would be silly enough to consult with him on how to handle a disaster? Nevermind, forget I asked - Democrat
    • Maybe FEMA? Oye! - no message - Starcat
      • LMBO! - American Woman
        • He was still on the payroll until - recently...geez - no message - Starcat
          • Wouldn't surprise me if he still is. - American Woman

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

People who use God to lie and twist things to their liking are the people who offend me.

The purpose of the site you posted is to bring people to Jesus Christ.  There is certainly nothing wrong with that.

What IS wrong, however, is that the people they list as being *athiests* are people who don't follow their personal religious beliefs, and they are therefore *judged* to be athiests.  This doesn't make it true.  I asked you for facts.  You haven't provided any.  All you provided was slander.

If anything, Phil Donahue respects God more than anyone on this laughable *athiest* site.  Phil Donahue has always taken to task those who feel their God is *better* than anyone else's, always pushed the envelope with the most radical and least credible of the religious fanatics who claim to have an *inside track* to God that nobody else has.  He's asked these so-called Christians if Jews are privileged to go to heaven to their way of thinking, or people of other religions.  Phil Donahue has exposed these people as being totally UN-Jesuslike in their hatred and condemnation of groups of society.  Phil Donahue BELIEVES in freedom of religion for everyone and doesn't buy into spiritual superiority. 

THAT'S why you don't like him.  Trying to pass off this ridiculously slanderous site as being authentic shows who truly is uninformed on this board.

Two Democrats today commented on leftists like you and several others on this board.  I sure do agree with them.

Mike Kinsley, lifelong Democrat, on Pelosi’s pathetic platform:

For national security in general, the Democrats’ plan is so according-to-type that you cringe with embarrassment: It’s mostly about new cash benefits for veterans. Regarding Iraq specifically, the Democrats’ plan has two parts. First, they want Iraqis to “assum[e] primary responsibility for securing and governing their country.” Then they want “responsible redeployment” (great euphemism) of American forces.

Older readers may recognize this formula. It’s Vietnamization—the Nixon-Kissinger plan for extracting us from a previous mistake. But Vietnamization was not a plan for victory. It was a plan for what was called “peace with honor” and is now known as “defeat.”

Maybe “A New Direction for America” is just a campaign document—although it seems to have had no effect at all on the campaign. My fear is that the House Democrats may try to use it as a basis for governing.

Orson Scott Card, lifelong Democrat, on the only issue that matters in this election:

I say this as a Democrat, for whom the Republican domination of government threatens many values that I hold to be important to America’s role as a light among nations.

But there are no values that matter to me that will not be gravely endangered if we lose this war. And since the Democratic Party seems hellbent on losing it — and in the most damaging possible way — I have no choice but to advocate that my party be kept from getting its hands on the reins of national power, until it proves itself once again to be capable of recognizing our core national interests instead of its own temporary partisan advantages.

To all intents and purposes, when the Democratic Party jettisoned Joseph Lieberman over the issue of his support of this war, they kicked me out as well. The party of Harry Truman and Daniel Patrick Moynihan — the party I joined back in the 1970s — is dead. Of suicide.

With all that lynch mob mentality going on, people are waking up to the real deal.  Even a lot of very prominent pubs are turning away, advising JM to dump that noose around his neck because she is dragging him down.  After all, he did create the monster.  I say, what goes around . . .

and your husband will be home for the birth of your first child.  I admire that you accept that it is his job.  You are a brave young lady.

Just a coincidence, my favorite Kiger Mustang mare is expecting her first foal on Feb. 21 so I'm going to be a "granny."  LOL

Take care of yourself and that baby!  I'll "argue" with you anytime.  LOL

Did you read the other story on that page regarding the U.S. plans to invade Venezuela?  Is the administration so stupid to think that people will actually believe that troops were sent there for R&R?  Gimme a break!

It's really a shame when a socialist leader has more honesty and integrity than an American president.  Given the choice, who would you believe, Bush or Chavez?  Not much of a contest, is it?

And, as usual, you twist my words in order to attack my posts.  I wrote, *It's too bad that these *rotten apples* are making the majority of the good military look bad.*

Shame on YOU for not thinking this is horrible. 

Bush took to TV cameras again to try to sell his Brooklyn Bridge of a war, this time tossing around buzz words like *communism* and *fascism.*  (Yawn)

But wait!!

Within a couple hours, during a televised news conference with Mayor Bloomberg, it was announced that evidence of a bomb threat specific to place, time and method had been received and that the source was very credible. (First thought: *But I thought were were fighting them there so we don't have to fight them HERE.*  Second thought: *This is bad.  We've been warned in advance of this.  Look what happened when we were warned in advance about Katrina?!*)

Yikes!

But wait!

Shortly following that news conference with Mayor Bloomberg, the powers that be in Washington issued a statement that the  threat has doubtful credibility.

Oh.

Okay.  Just another terror warning in America......or not.

Since we've never cared enough about the average American to try universal healthcare.  We could probably find out how it works from the Iraqis, though, since part of Bush's war budget was to provide comprehensive universal healthcare to THEM. 

It's sad that some people are okay with paying for Wall Street crooks to get richer and richer. 

We're all about greed, greed, greed.  Even with all the publicity about Bush's bailouts, I just heard on the news that the end-of-year bonuses are still in place for the Wall Street crooks.

Seems to me that when a government runs around and buys up banks, that's FASCISM, so if we move to SOCIALISM (which will never happen and which is a ridiculous statement), that move will be a giant step UP from what we have now.

I'm sick and tired of eight years of greed.  By the looks of things, the majority of Americans are sick of it, as well, which gives me some hope for what is left of humanity.

Obama is right.  "Trickle down" hasn't worked.  It's time to try "trickle UP." 

The Catholic heads are really pushing this issue, as are a lot of other Christian leaders.  Most people don't like either candidate (like me), but they'd rather vote for the one that settles their conscience. 

Add that to the fact that Americans like their guns and McCain has a strong chance.  He's really been coming up in the poles (not sure if it'll be enough, though).

Keep in mind that Reid was actually trying to stop him from getting into the Senate but couldn't find any legal grounds to do so, and it was both pubs and dems doing the investigation into Blago.  Dems don't want him in the senate anymore than the pubs do.  From our point of view, he's a has been and can't win an election.

If you want to talk about those all important votes for the stiumulus package, you might want to check out how long pubs have been holding up Franken in Minnesota with court battles.  How many times do they plan on counting that vote anyway?