You evidently have a hard time staying on task.
Posted By: Pay attention. My question was....sm on 2008-11-03
In Reply to: sorry, my little brain got confused by all the - questions you asked -- sm
if your mother, father, daughter, son, grandmother, grandfather, husband or best friend cast a vote in the early election and passed away on November 4th, how would it make you feel if their votes were thrown out?
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 seem to be having a little trouble staying on task.
Let's try this again. The subjct is guilt by association. The post you are answering listed Mc'Cain's associates as follows:
Just off the top of my head:
1. US Council for World Freedo. Can you say Iran contra? How about dong business with terrorists (the arms seller AND the arms customer)?
2. Phil Gramm, (co-chair of the McCain campaign), champion of Enron tax loopholes and author of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that effectively neutralized any existing regulation of financial services industry. You remember good ole Phil. He's the one talking on McCain's behalf when he said we were having a "mental recession" and we have a nation of a bunch of whiners.
3. Gordon Liddy. That's the guy who got a 20-year sentence for his conviction of conspiracy, burglary and illegal wiretapping in the Watergate fiasco. m
4. Let's don't forget the Keating 5.
5. Richard Quinn, publisher of Southern Heritage ragazine for neo-confederates…unapologetic bigotry and proud of it!
6. Rick Davis, McCain CEO, lobbyist, paid $15,000 each month for "consulting" from end of 2005 until September 2008.
Let me spell out the issue at hand. If we are to infer that Obama embodies the phuilisophies of each and every single person or organization that he has ever encountered dring the corse of his lifetime, then we can infer the same about McCain. Are you with me so far? an appropriate, direct and credible response would not include the word democrat in it. It would deal with the issue at hand and with the list of pub snakes McCain pals around with.
Why do pubs have so much trouble staying on task?
I like facts. Troopergate has lots of them. Try reading it. Then try answering the questions. Challenge yourself. Get though one single entire post, begining to end, without trashing Obama. Can you handle that? Probably not, but give it your best shot. By the way, there is only one person here who you need to educate....and it ain't me, babe.
Why do pubs have such difficulty staying on task?
Evidently smearing the dems is more important to you than equal pay for women. With this kind of tendency to self destruct, no wonder you folks lost so many elections.
Next time, please try to stay on post task.
1st paragraph. I agree. That's why O's and B's supporters are voting for them. Not more government. Better government...smarter government…and one with vision for a different America than what you cons are peddling. You are straying from the subject again. Pay attention. The discussion is about O and JM how JM's plan differs from Bush's plan. On the voting record, last time I checked only O and JM are running for president and those are the voting records we are inspecting now. It is the 90+% of MC'CAIN'S votes in support of Bush's initiatives that we now showcase. Do not complicate the plan comparisons with a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors peripheral unknowns. Candidates. Got it?
Have it your way. Bush adopted O's exit strategy first and JM followed his lead who followed O's lead. He did not start talking exit at all until the Bush flip-flop(s) (i.e., we dont negotiate with terrorists but a US interests section in Iran might work) began getting press during the primary campaigns. I have not had time to examine the context from which you lifted O's surge statement from the other O's Fox interview which you continually and confidently predicted he was too scared to do. Once I do that, I will comment further on the surge statement. Don't know how to tell you this, but the surge was not the greatest national security/foreign policy decision, although it is plain to see that the cons often get military strategies pretty mixed up with foreign policy. Again, ask the Iraqis how successful our missions have been at slaughtering more than 100,000 of their family members. Another bubble to burst here. There are many among us who do not feel that the war has made our nation safer from terrorists. So, in fact, we are not done with this subject, no matter how quickly you would like to dismiss it. Obama was simply trying to avoid MORE quagmire and advance the withdrawal plan that is not only promoted by him, but now suddently promoted by Bush and JM in tow. Some call it vision, others call it judgment.
Did not ask about JMs speeching. Asked about the plan. What is it, if he laid it out so plainly? Must have missed all that between the fear/military references last night. BTW, as I told you in the past post, govt transparency is a democratic initiative that was launched back in the early 90s during the Clinton administration, squashed during the undercover Bush administration and is now clearly articulated in O's technology section under issues.
Cons cannot speak for democrats as to how they can or cannot define pork barrel spending. I know very well what it is. I do find your example of moveon.org rather peculiar in this context. When was the last time they benefited from pork barrel legislation? Please do not reply with a regurgitation of Fox and O'Reilly campaign to demonize the group. You want to talk PACs, fine, but put them in the correct context and tread very lightly for your own sake.
The class warfare is waged by pubs against dem constituents, so yes, I am familiar with that subject and plan to continue to advocate and support measures that will level that playing field. I have a lot of company in that regard. TBone advocates drilling once or twice inside the context of a whole arsenal of other energy initiatives that you discount by omission. He does not, however, try to sell the public on the notion that this will bring prices down anytime in the first of second terms of the upcoming administrations like JM and company would have us believe. On the American imperialist delusions of grandeur, if you have to ask, no soup for you. Would be a waste of time, but this concept is not lost on the better versed in Bush/Cheney NeoCon visions which JM is trying to deny and embrace at the same time. Good luck with that one.
Evidently you forgot Bush has been releasing terrorists for some time.....
Releasing Gitmo prisoners carry risks
Andrew O. Selsky ASSOCIATED PRESS
Thursday, January 29, 2009
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico | The re-emergence of two former Guantanamo Bay prisoners as AL Qaeda terrorists in the past week won't likely change U.S. policy on transfers to Saudi Arabia, the Pentagon says.
More than 100 Saudis have been repatriated from the U.S. military's prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Saudi Arabia, where the government puts them through a rehabilitation program designed to encourage them to abandon Islamic extremism and reintegrate into civilian life.
The online boasts by two of these men that they have joined al Qaeda in Yemen underscore that the Saudi system isn't fail-safe, the Pentagon said Monday. A U.S. counterterrorism official in Washington confirmed the men had been Guantanamo detainees. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to disclose that fact on the record.
Another two or three Saudis who had been transferred from Guantanamo cannot be located by the Saudi government, said Christopher Boucek, a researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said the U.S. sees the Saudi program as admirable.
"The best you can do is work with partner nations in the international community to ensure that they take the steps to mitigate the threat ex-detainees pose," he said. "There are never any absolute guarantees. There's an inherent risk in all detainee transfers and releases from Guantanamo."
The deprogramming effort -- built on reason, enticements and lengthy talks with psychiatrists, Muslim clerics and sociologists -- is part of a concerted Saudi government effort to counter the ideology that nurtured the 9/11 hijackers and that has lured hundreds of Saudis to join the Iraq insurgency. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers who attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, were Saudis, as is the mastermind of the attacks, Osama bin Laden.
A total of 218 men, including former Guantanamo detainees, have gone through the reintegration program, according to the Saudi Ministry of Interior. Nine were later arrested again, an "official source" at the ministry said in a dispatch from the official Saudi Press Agency. The report said some of the nine were former detainees, but did not give a breakdown.
The Saudi Interior Ministry official said most of the graduates "resumed their natural lives and some of them voluntarily contributed to the activities of this program to help others return to natural life."
Frank Ciluffo, a researcher on security issues at George Washington University, said a program that doesn't work all the time is better than none because the alternative is an extended prison sentence, which only further radicalizes a person.
You would have a hard time.......... sm
convincing most schools that they need to teach basic good values to students. They would argue, and I tend to agree with them, that they have their hands full teaching children the educational skills needed to be successful in school and college. More and more is being required of our children at a younger and younger age. Most of the teaching revolves around learning the skills necessary to pass the standardized tests required in most states. Here in Texas, TAKS instruction takes up the majority of the school day. My son has a 2-hour math class and 2 separate language arts classes, both subjects of which are TAKS-required and required to pass the TAKS inorder to matriculate to the next grade.
I believe, and I believe most teaches would agree with me, that morals begin at home and are best taught by example and not by a teach-and-test method. I live in what is considered to be an "economically depressed" area and the attitudes of a good number of our students is abysmal at best, reflecting the attitudes of their own unemployed, welfare-recipient parent(s). Until parents' attitudes and values change, neither will the children's, and they are the ones who will suffer.
Having a hard time keeping up.
The numbers of Iraqi deaths that is. Today, 93 Shi'ite pilgrims were killed and 147 injured in a suicide bombing in Hilla. Two bombings in Baghdad killing 18 to 20 and I don't know how many injured, 9 American soldiers killed on this one day. This is all just so wrong, all of it, and the numbers just keep on climbing.
I have a hard time seeing a good ... sm
side to the Iraq war. What are the successes? I am only asking because I want what you think are the successes. Not bashing your opinion, just curious. Because, I see no success in the thousands and thousands of deaths of our military and the civilians.
I know I will get bashed about this but... It just seems like we have enough going on in our own country that nobody is doing anything about. We have wars here every day, many of us don't see it first hand because of where we live but go into any big city and you will realize it the wars kids have to avoid or fight just to stay alive. I just wish Bush and Congress would pour more money into our fights and problems like they did in Iraq. Maybe I am being selfish when I saw that I think our people should come first.
I have a hard time with bailing
them out, but when I think of my mother who will lose my late dad's pension and her medical benefits.....I can't help but push for a bailout so my father's hard work of 35+ years wasn't for nothing.
I personally feel that this is a combination of things. These companies made bigger vehicles and trucks because that is what people wanted to buy....that is until gas prices went up and that changed. I believe management there hasn't been the greatest and I truly believe that unions and the money spent on them has really caused this downfall.
However, I must state that it seems to me that some of the same people who professed to vote for Obama and had no problem with robbing from hard-working Americans to redistribute that wealth to others.....so why now are some of you so he!! bent on letting the automakers go belly up? Wouldn't it technically be redistributing wealth to help keep millions of Americans in their jobs? I just find it ironic that some people say we should give our money to less fortunate and yet scream and yell when their money could go to saving millions of Americans jobs.
Try to pay attention this time. I know it's hard.
**I'm completely convinced he is not a Christian.**
That he was **not a Christian** was the fable that was spread all over this board and on every conservative site before he was elected. Instead he was accused of being a muslim and a terrorist and the **fables** just got worse and worse.They were all lies. So you're **completely convinced he is not a Christian and then you go on to provide proof that he is. His Christianity is not the **fable**. Bringing back all the speculation about his Christianity like you did in your 1st post is the **fable**.
Got it now?
You really do have a hard time facing reality
I posted an article that someone (with more knowledge than you have regarding the history of past and present presidents) wrote. I did not write that myself, so don't tell me "nice try". Your post is a "nice try" but your clouded vision of the truth is so far from the truth which makes it void.
The fact which most dems hate to face is that while Bush may be one of the worst presidents in our history he is not "the" worst.
As for the election between Bush/Gore, I understand as a Gore lover you hate to face (and evidently have not faced it yet) the facts.
Bush beat Gore by 543 votes in FL (BTW - I didn't vote for Bush so I didn't help him there). The reason for that...you have Nader to blame not Bush. So with Bush ahead by 543 votes you just expected him to step down? I think Obama said it very well when he was running against Hillary and he was ahead and Hillary was saying that he should accept a position as VP. He said "Why would the person who is ahead in votes talk about becoming VP to the person who is in 2nd place". This is a presidential race. Sorry but Gore did not receive more votes than Bush did (if your talking about Florida alone - there was a whole country who voted for Bush). You've really got to come to grips with reality.
Florida vote -
Republican - 2,912,790
Democrat - 2,912,253
Overall election outcome
271 Electoral votes for Bush
266 Electoral votes for Gore
Elections are based upon electoral votes. I also find it funny that each election if democrats are ahead by electorals they all say that its the electoral votes that matter, but when they find they are losing in electoral votes and head in popular vote they push and push and push to have the popular vote be the ones that count.
If AL Gore had conceded the way he should have the country would have not felt this rift he created. So if you have anyone to thank for Al Gore losing, which he did fair and square then I'd go talk to Nader. Even people who advised Bill Clinton and are democrats are coming out saying Nader was the losing factor for Gore.
So for now I will stick with the article posted by someone who has done research, who does not like Bush but has pointed out the fact that is not "the" worst president in history.
All the other Bush haters can think all they want. Their hate towards a person taints any inkling of what they think is the truth. Hence, your reply has no truth to it.
Yup, Biden has a hard time speaking without putting a foot in his mouth.
He's like that crazy family member everyone has that they always try to keep under wraps.
Then perhaps you might consider staying
.
i had trouble staying with what JM was saying -
it was rambling & almost incoherent.
Yes, and we need those dollars staying here too!
..
Crap. Dodd is staying on?
x
Yep. He's probably staying. Obama likes him. (nm)
x
I wish we could go back to the staying at home and
supporting our man kind of life. I would love it. 
Whatever happened to staying on the subject? (sm)
Your post has absolutely nothing to do with the original post -- but I guess Bush is just an embarrassment for the republican party. I guess if I had supported a war criminal [aka -- that guy with a lower approval than Nixon (who resigned)] I wouldn't have anything to say on the subject either.
Speaking of staying on the subject...(sm)
why don't you try it for a change? I believe the OP was about turnout at the tea parties, followed by the "crowds" and why the turned out. (Just tell me if I start going to fast for ya). So what do you do? How about yet another mindless tantrum. Yeah, those are getting old.
Here's the point about Newt. Newt has a record for voting for higher taxes as well as the bailout. Other "leaders/organizers" of this little tea mission are lobbyists. Any other time you would be screaming bloody murder about these guys, but now since Fixed Noise is sucking up to them, you are suddenly ready to jump over the cliff with them....and you want try to say that I can't think for myself? Yeah right...get your wading boots out folks.
I am on task.
You answered your own challenge here. Of course you cannot reduce taxes, give tax breaks (or whatever other ill-considered literal read you may choose) on people who do not pay them. That would lead any person with a triple-digit IQ to conclude that he is referring to people currently paying taxes....wouldn't it? Your main premise is faulty, as in flawed, caput, no dice, etc. Let's state the obvious again, in case you weren't paying attention. You can't cut something that is not there. We agree on that one.
However, we not agree on your assertion that Obama is lying. According to you, any movement of wealth out of the hands of those who earned it into the hands of those who didn't is redistribution of wealth. Perhaps those fat cat oil company CEOs and stockholders would not agree with your argument. The O windfall profit proposal is a one-time jump-start energy rebate aimed at economic stimulus for middle class families, who in case you haven't noticed lately, are having a helluva of time. It is not a permanent scheme where Americans become "collective owners" of the resource (decidedly more Marxist) as Palin's is...income sharing at its finest hour. There is a difference, all right, but not the one you are willing to concede.
Again, we see you dance around the issue of the long-established progressive tax structure question and just how is it socialist only when Obama reforms it? You cannot seem to answer that fundamental central issue, can you?
No, let's don't. Let's stay on task.
0
Again. Could you PLEASE stay on task.
!
Sorry. Just trying to stay on task.
Thread started out about hate speech, then turned toward lawsuit. Silly me. Do you always change the subject when you start to look stupid? The only plants at the SP rallies spring up from the seeds of bigotry and racism that come spilling out of her mouth every time she opens it...in the form of a crop of hateful ignorance. Must make you feel right proud.
You as well need to stay on task...
Fact. He has said he is going to give a tax break to 95% of the American people. 40% of the American people don't even pay federal taxes. How can you give a tax break to people who don't even pay taxes? In the form of a check. How ELSE is he going to do that? THAT is classic redistribution of wealth Marxist style. Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to cut a lot of checks. YOU tell ME how he is going to do it.
As far as Palin...you really need to focus here. Yes, she did a windfall profits task. And yes, she distributed it to the Alaskan people. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, rich and poor alike, every single citizen of Alaska. That is NOT redistribution of wealth. See the difference? And it is not taking from the tax coffers that everyone in Alaska paid into...which is what Obama is going to do. He is going to tax small businesses and the so-called rich (the threshold for which gets smaller every day) and redistribute that to 95% of people...40% of whom don't even pay federal income tax.
Marxist re-distribution of wealth.
No soup for you either, but plenty of ice cream.
That's why Osamabama moved to Chicago insteady of staying in NY.
nm
Not interested in taking this off task.
nm
I think you're the one who needs to stay on task
you even asked it. Go back up a few posts and you'll see where I said:
"I'd say the same about anyone who dies after they cast their vote but before the election. It shouldn't count. Where's the accountability?"
Anyone would refer to grandma, pap, brother, sis, aunt, uncle, etc.
Geez, you people make it so easy for me to feel smart. 
Stay on task, sam. This thread is about refuting
Guess you can't reconcile facts staring you straight in the face with the fiction you couldn't wait to post. Again, if O voted against Katrina funds, there had to have been something REALLY stinky the proposal, and I for one prefer to wait and see exactly what it was before passing judgment.
Chavez Takes Bush to Task Over Iraq War
See link
Counting by hand of 100 million votes would be a task...sm
Not that it is an unworthy one, I just doubt it will be done.
One idea was that the computer gives the voter a reciept of their selection and then the reciept, once verified by the voter, is deposited into the machine.
Brainstorming, I suggest they take it one step further and have a real time tally for each candidate per voting center. That way the voters can verify that their vote was casted, counted, and affected the number. The last voters, along with the volunteers could verify the final numbers for the districts.
Pubs can't stay on task if their lives depended on it.
Americans don't elect issues wimps.
You should but evidently you don't.
Did you bother reading it before you posted?
Evidently everybody here gets this
except you. It will never fly. Will be looking forward to your retraction on this stupidity.
You evidently don't know what a NeoCon is.
She is not one of them. Why do you think Bush & Cheney and other NeoCons are upset by this pick.
Is this what the democrat party has turned into...hateful, mean-spirited, sour, and jealous. Your comments are about the lowest I have seen in a long time.
The only thing I can think of is that you thought because Bush was such a horrible president and everyone hates him that Barack and Joe would just be able to waltz in and take over. Now the republicans have a good VP candidate and there is more and more discussions about how JM has just elevated his chances of winning. The more people are learning about her the more they are like her and all reports for both conservative and liberals are in agreement with one thing...this is an amazing lady and definitely qualified to become the first woman president in history.
You are just grasping at straws trying to invent things that are not true and just stir up trouble.
Your comments are so juvenile. I just say thank goodnes at least I'm not in grammar school anymore.
Well you evidently didn't -
read the article. Can't stand hearing that McCain and Obama are closing in on the polls can you. Not even when it's from CNN which is a liberal station.
Next you really need to change your name. If you are a Christian I am glad I am not one because all you are filled with is hate!
Evidently you are not following your own thread
The rational people are the Obama folks who will not engage in the foolishness of the conspiracy theory to nowhere and the brick wall...well, that would be you, "Everyone should be interested!"
She has it right - evidently you don't know what it means
In Wikipedia: In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more serious acts of disloyalty to one's sovereign or nation.
Dictionary.com: 1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
For sure Obama is committing treason.
Whether he gets in or not Hillary Clinton should file a law suit against him. She understand the country better than he does and would make our country a better. We all know whose skeletons are in Hillary's closet. Obama's are just starting to come out.
If they lose I truly hope to hear of a lawsuit as Obama's lies will be what causes them to lose and the democrats a chance of getting in.
So you say, but evidently the courts
I have a tendency to agree with them....so do an overwhelming majority of rational citizens who are just as disgusted as I am over the mental illness that is the driving force behind this lunacy.
Evidently, she did't quite catch your drift.
nm
Evidently these tiresome accusations
Ever get the feeling you are being tuned out? Boy cries wolf once too often?
Evidently, better than you do. I'm backing the winner,
Better luck next time. Do us all a favor and nominate Failin/Bailin/Palin in 2012.
Different strokes for different folks, but evidently....
I respect your opinion, but do not share it...not on any level.
Evidently not. It's 2930 more days until 01/17/17.
x
Evidently, this is nothing new - check date
Recently, one of the most irksome members of the Senate, Joe Lieberman (I-Clowntown) expressed openness to one of the boldest and most effective climate-change policies possible. Some background,
A cap-and-trade system begins by placing a cap on carbon emissions and distributing permits (permission to emit a certain amount of CO2) equal to the capped amount. The notion is that permits will be bought and sold, allowing market forces to determine where emission reductions can be made fastest and easiest. The question is how to distribute those initial permits.
When the EU carbon trading system was established, permits were given away based on emissions, meaning the biggest polluters got the most permits. The idea was that those polluters most needed the money because they had the biggest reductions to make, but in practice it was an enormous financial windfall for their shareholders and prompted very little action on their part to reduce emissions.
The alternative is to sell the permits at auction. This would, in effect, put the proceeds in government coffers rather than in the pockets of utility shareholders. The question then becomes: what should the gov't do with all that money (up to $50B a year)?
The Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade proposal, released early this year, was widely seen as the "moderate" bill that could get some support from Senate Republicans. One of the biggest criticisms it faced is that it would auction only 20% of the permits -- 80% would be given away to polluters.
But an intriguing item in Politico indicates that Lieberman may be open to changing that:
Lieberman, following a forum sponsored by the Progressive Policy Institute Wednesday, said such a change to his legislation was possible. "We've heard [calls for a 100 percent auction] from some stakeholders and heard that from some of our members. We're thinking about it. Warner and I haven't closed our minds to that. It's on the table," he said.
This could be huge news. The L-W proposal is viewed as the middle of the road. If it moves to 100% auctioned credits, that will effectively sanctify it as the new baseline. The policy and political implications are both huge.
Prove it - You evidently have done your research
I just went back through the last three pages to when I first began posting. Never once did I start off badgering posters calling them names. Not to Mrs. B or anyone else on this board. I have even posted that I was wrong on some issues. I'm never disrepectful of posters. Just because I have a difference of opinion with someone doesn't mean anyone should be disrespectful and I'm not.
So seeing as you are acusing me of having a nasty attitude I want you to find the post and prove it. I've just gone through every single post. I have not been the one initiating anything. But call me Newton, and yes I'll reply by calling you Einstein. So I guess that makes me the nasty name calling and not her?
Telling someone I think they are wrong and explaining why is not having a nasty attitude. Calling someone names for no reason is.
My pardons to you, then. It was evidently picked up by
Fox and of course had the 'ole Fox spin put on it, riling up once again the unstable.
Evidently you hadn't heard the latest.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
and
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76933
Evidently, some rich folks have a conscience
for the sake of COUNTRY FIRST.
Evidently he does not understand the gravity of the crisis.
Farewell to Iraq trip timing and all.
Evidently you didn't read the package.
Most of the money will not go to the people. So far, I have not come across anything that deals with foreclosures, etc. The item I posted last night from our local newspaper is the so-called stimulus package that will help foreclosures.
Read the doggone bill that they are trying to pass, please. Then you may see the light of day.
|
Posted September 20, 2007 | 05:06 PM (EST)