You cite THIS as factual?
Posted By: Hmmmmmmmmmmm on 2005-09-24
In Reply to: I assume Goggle works as well for the left as for the right but here are a few - -
This is a site that judges who is and isn't an athiest/agnostic, etc. based on their PERCEIVED OPINION.
It would be like the people who judged Phil Donahue the other night on O'Reilly as being drunk to then adopt that as the truth and adding his name to a site designed to expose drunks.
This isn't fact. It's trash, as are the other sites that come up when someone googles Donahue/athiest. What authority do you have that Donahue refers to himself as an athiest?
From their own site, this is how people are added to the list.
Who qualifies?
To be a celebrity as it applies to the list, one must have achieved some notoriety, such as appearing often in media with wide distribution. This would include publishing bestselling or critically acclaimed books, appearing in movies, being a leader in one's field, etc.. If a name you submitted does not qualify, it is probably because you did not provide sufficient information. See existing entries for the range of 'celebrity' covered.
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
If you had read any FACTUAL
you would realize that knowing these people does not constitute believing as they do or sharing an agenda. If you had done any reading from unbiased anti-Obama sources, you would realize that he often listens to people that do not share his personal POV.
Please provide factual evidence of this...
....but MUST be from a nonpartison source absolutely. Actually I thought it was just as much the case with the Republican party, but I freely admit that I have no concrete statistics at this point to back that up.
Another quote from that site, a wee bit more factual. and thought out......
Maybe it was the fruitless search for the weapons of mass destruction or the lack of any credible Al Qaeda ties to Saddam Hussein. As months dragged on, it became more and more evident that these would never be found. As these justifications for war dissipated, so did my own personal justifications for the death I had seen.
So, here I am. I'm left with pride in my own service and the men I served with, but the sickening feeling that it was avoidable. I would gladly lay down my life for our country. Like every other man who wears this uniform, our commitment is not at issue. Call it naivety, but it never occurred to me that my country was less committed to us than we are to it. Sending us in harm's way for a lie amounts to a betrayal that may prove to be criminal. It's unfortunate that on November 2nd 59,000,000 Americans failed to do their duty and hold the administration accountable for this betrayal of the troops. A dishonorable discharge was never more warranted.
They are not! They are factual. A great deal of research, actually
going and talking to people who were THERE over the years when Obama was growing up, a teen, a young adult, and adult. This is not speculation folks, this is downright brass tacks in person research. Don't be fooled. And, to the person below who posted that you have no problem with Muslims, then you need to reprioritize and realize that while there is a small portion of Islamic people who do no wish harm on Americans, most of them do. They were raised up to do precisely that.
I don't understand...you are saying Hitler's beliefs are factual and sane?
I am very puzzled. When challenged on your historical knowledge, you cite Hitler as a source for your information? Remember, he also planned to exterminate the Poles and all Catholics eventually. I don't think the reasons he cites for hating the Jews are really the basis for any historical reality. He was, after all, one the greatest propagandists.
Then cite them, don't just sit there. sm
There's an article on the C board.
Please cite your proof........
x
Please cite source........
x
cite source please...........
Please provide a VALID source. Thank you.
cite source
x
andyou know this how? Please cite sources
nm
Could you please cite your sources? No fear here.
Don't you think you are being just a little presumptuous? There is nothing to fear from Saracuda. O will not be addressing her seriously because he is running against the tin man...you know, the silenced sidekick whose mouth has rusted shut that tags along behind her? How presidential do you think that he is looks when he behaves like that? Dems have BTDT 24 years ago. Geraldine Ferraro surged polls up to the sky for a week or 2, yet ended up being the same kind of sideshow JM has become when it was time to come back to earth and address campaign issues. Hype and hysteria is no substitute for substance.
This is a lie. Cite the rag you call a source.
But if he were, he'd still have my vote because he is the better man in this race.
And you know this how? Cite sources. Give stats.
Status even as old as 10 days ago would not reflect the shift in POTUS since the Palin debaucle. Your Obama bash has nothing to do with POTUS. Supposed you explain what you are talking about now. What do you feel so compelled to blame his for this morning?
Please cite ACLU case that aims to ban
I am not talking about displaying a cross on a wall or behind a podium at an assembly, because that is not what your original post inferred. You said that the ACLU would go to court to prevent a person from WEARING a cross. Last I heard, there is no problem with children wearing crosses to school. Am I missing something here? Please cite the case you were referring to. I am trying to understand what you were talking about. What is your point, exactly?
Cite resources. Which machines (manufactured by)?
Do you really want to go there?
I'm sure you couldn't even cite the execute orders he has
!!
Put up or shut up. Give examples, cite sources
x
Oh yes andro and ExMQ you are both so knowledgeable - you can cite what the issues are - woohoo nm
x
typo - meant cite things as hoax, not "site" things
Just thought I'd correct that before I get pummeled by the people who want to believe snopes is a truthful organization.
|
