You sound a lot more clear and level headed than most on this board...
Posted By: onlyinamerica on 2008-10-30
In Reply to: As I was sitting on my couch - Chele
even in your drug-induced state! Feel better soon!
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 sound like one of the more level headed posters here
I'm glad you don't hate him. Disagreeing with his viewpoints and policies is one thing, but I'm reading a lot of posts and you can tell a lot of people really hate him. I don't agree with some of his issues. I don't agree with some of McCain's issues. I think your also one of the first posters who said anything good about McCain. What just really worries me about McCain is his attitude, his mean temper, and his readiness to send us to war anywhere.
Oh, I think I may have not quite said it right in my original post. I wasn't blaming oil companies and CEOs for the mess we are in, I was stating (or trying to state) that they are the ones who decide who our next president will be (that and you know that secret group that meets every year "behind closed doors"). I still have very high doubts that the "people" pic our president (but I could be wrong of course).
Take a good look at your level headed poster...nm
000000
There are also those more level-headed Obama opponents
the "country first" message of the McCain campaign and who realize how dangerously destructive this divisive rhetoric can be. They have shown the courage and wisdom to embrace the outcome of the election and made the decision to MOVE FORWARD along with the rest of us. That would account for the additional support reflected in the 75%.
Guess you fooled us. All dems sound alike these days on this board.
.
I don't think it's right but I think that's where we're headed.
Actually, we're all headed for the slaughter
x
poll: how many think we are headed for another great depression
me for one
Towel-headed terrorist? Is that how you see ALL Moslems
a young man visiting his Kenyan relatives in search of his roots who is paying respect to his family and his host nation by donning traditional Dashiki and head gear. I also see a sense of pride in his expression...something that he is entitled to have. When in Rome...
McCain? A soldier who served his country with honor, came home and dumped his crippled wife and mother of his children, traded her in for a younger model, then turned around years later and exploited his POW status for political gain.
Asian markets were headed up til O was elected
nm
The "level-headed" people here voted for McCain.
nm
Shocking personal attacks after you just called people empty headed?
the hypocrisy is mind boggling and humorous at the same time.
Unfortunately, to get to that level he'd have to
Hee
On one level, it's rather
Think about it. Here we have Evans, Editor of Newsweek and one who is in the vanguard of elitist agnosticism (remember "The Decline and Fall of Christian America"?) who seems to acknowledge, at least tacitly, the need for some sort of God to mediate and reconcile the nations.
So far, Evans has only managed to stagger toward a rather pitiful concept of God in the form of a being as miserably inadequate as Obama, but perhaps there's hope that he'll mature to an adult notion of God, which is a bit more sophisticated.
What's different is that on a state level in CA,
in the form of ballot measures, ballot initiatives, propositions or referendums. They can be heard in the California Supreme Court on any or all of these bases and are entitled to seek relief.
Just above your level of showing your
stupidity for trying so hard to appear to be intelligent.
One would have to have a certain level of intelligence to be bored. sm
You are the weakest link. Buh-bye now. 
Thank you so much for your concern about my energy level.
That just shows the level of insensitivity....
this is an anonymous posting board. You people have posted nastiness about someone and named them. Dailykrap posted it where the entire nation can look at it. You have invaded the privacy of a 16-year-old girl who has done nothing to deserve it and made her public fodder. Perhaps you are proud of that. I cannot imagine that you would be, yet you attack me and support those who would do such a thing. Amazing.
That's the only level pubs will react to.
Put your money where your mouth is. You want real issues. Just post a request for a list and let's get started.
How can you retain something at 2009 level....
when it is 2008?
With the economy the way it is, he CANNOT implement his health care plan. If he does, the fragile economy will tank. I am not an economist and I have sense enough to know that.
The estate tax is the most unfair tax ever levied. All that money has been taxed already, and they want to tax it again just because someone dies. It should be repealed. That is not a Republican or democrat thing. It is just wrong.
Think about this...when the stock market lost 700 points that day...many of the americans earning more than $250,000 lost a ton of money. And he is NOW going to roll back tax cuts for them? Is he so naive or want to get elected SO bad that he does not understand that most of the small businesses in this country fall in that category? And moderate-sized businesses? Who do you think are the employers in this country? Can he not see that will result in businesses closing or downsizing or offshoring just to SURVIVE?
I guess he doesn't. And that means he SHOULD NOT be President.
Also enjoys one-on-one ground-level
Wonder if she follows indigenous rule and only slays what she can eat? Not likely, considering her affinity for guns. What a gal, what a gal!
You don't need to attack me on a personal level... sm
by calling names.
I looked at your supporting web site and find that it is a Democratic web site, so I automatically discard it as biased.
I still am seeking an answer for my original question. What has changed? His mind, in my estimation, is not a suitable answer as that does not address the FACT that he himself stated that he did not feel he was qualified to run for POTUS.
By the same token, if he can "change his mind" on an issue as important as being qualified for POTUS, what is to keep him from changing his mind on all the promises and pipedreams he was selling while he was running. Oh wait....I think that is already happening. He is already stating that he cannot fulfill all his promises and he is not even in office yet.
If he is the "best" that this country has to offer, we're in worse shape than I thought we were.
They scare me, as well, on a very dangerous level.
Starting at the community level......... sm
is a great thing to do and I am proud of you for the work you do. I have read here before some of the things you are involved in, and you are making a difference in your community. I'll be right here, ready and willing! LOL
You sank to their level but beyond, and continue to do so.
I give up.
The playing field has never been more level!
Thanks to affirmative action, white heterosexual males cannot get jobs especially when competing with a person classified as a minority. Mintorities get college scholarships and acceptance into good schools so universities can meet their quota. It's ridiculous! There is a black man in the White House --- I think affirmative action has done its job!
It's time for everyone, no matter their race, be treated equally. The best PERSON for the job should get the job. The best student with the best transcipts should get the admission letter and scholarship. There shouldn't be quotas to fill. NOBODY should get preferential treatment anymore!
Good for you....don't stoop to that level!!
x
Oh gt, one would have to go a long way to reach YOUR level of hatred. nm
The level of maturity in producing that clip
is just astonishing!
On a level playing field that would be correct...
this is not a level playing field. I don't see her encouraging Obama to do town hall meetings with McCain...and after 18 months running for the #1 seat, he just this past month sat down with someone who was not in the tank for his candidacy. You really don't see how lopsided this is? Obama being inteviewed by the lambs and the left wanting to feed her to the wolves.
Mocking SP delivers the message on a level
respond well to colloquial discourse and positively bristle at the introduction of serious dialog on those doggone pesky issues.
It just seems to me to be wrong on a basic moral level....
Christianity aside...that the power of life and death be given to one individual over another. Any OTHER time than abortion that is murder, not negotiable. Yet for the most innocent among us, the most vulnerable, in the eyes of some it is fine for one human being to decide to terminate the life of another on the basis of choice...and inconvenience.
I do not believe Obama sits around and thinks about how many babies will die every day (to the tune of over a million a year...!). I don't think he thinks about it much at all. How lucky for him his mother chose life.
JTBB - If you find a higher-level forum where
intellect is respected and informed debate is possible, please post that info a time or 2. I'm looking for a spot like that myself and this sure ain't it.
Taking it to a new level meaning posting a whole new thread
I still say no response is the best response.
Abortion Rate Continues to Drop, at Lowest Level Since 1976
Abortion: Just the Data
With High-Court Debate Brewing, New Report Shows Procedure's Numbers Down
By Naseem Sowti
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 19, 2005; HE01
A new analysis of the most recent abortion data shows that the number of U.S. women having the procedure is continuing its decade-long drop and stands at its lowest level since 1976.
In the year 2002, about 1.29 million women in the U.S. had abortions. In 1990, that number was 1.61 million.
The data, collected by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit group that collects information from abortion providers and public sources, show that for every 1,000 pregnancies that did not result in miscarriage in 2002, there were 242 abortions. This figure was 245 in 2000 and 280 in 1990. The institute's mission is to protect reproductive choice, but its reports are considered accurate across the political spectrum.
With President Bush preparing to nominate at least one new Supreme Court justice whose presence on the high court could produce new rulings on abortion, the data are already being interpreted differently by abortion rights advocates and antiabortion activists. But scientists say it is difficult to determine why the number of abortions has been dropping.
"There are so many things feeding into" the decline, said Lawrence Finer, associate director of domestic research at Guttmacher. Possible factors, he said, include changes in contraceptive technologies and use, changing ideas about family size and abortion, and reduced access to abortion services. Pregnancy clinics and abstinence programs may also have contributed to the declines, he said.
Who Gets Abortions?
Women with unintended pregnancies are those most likely to get abortions. According to the Guttmacher report, 47 percent of unintended pregnancies are aborted. Teenagers, unmarried women, black and Hispanic women, and those with low incomes are more likely than the population as a whole to have unintended pregnancies.
The report shows that non-Hispanic white women get about 40 percent of all U.S. abortions, black women 32 percent and Hispanic women, who can be of any race, 20 percent. Women of other races account for the other 8 percent. Black and Hispanic women have higher rates of abortion than non-Hispanic whites, the report states.
Other facts about U.S. abortions from the Guttmacher report:
· Six in 10 women who had abortions in 2002 were mothers. "Despite the common belief, women who have abortions and those who have children are not two separate groups," said Finer.
· A quarter of abortions occur among unmarried women who live with a male partner, putting this group at elevated risk of unintended pregnancy and abortion.
· The majority -- 56 percent -- of women who terminate their pregnancies are in their twenties. Teenagers between 15 and 19 make up 19 percent of abortions, although this percentage has dropped substantially in recent years.
This drop may be due to use of longer-acting hormonal contraceptives and lower rates of sexual activity, said Joyce Abma, a social scientist at the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
She added that there has been a decline in sexual activity reported by teenage males, which could be a contributing factor to lower pregnancy and abortion rates among teens.
· The incidence of abortion spans the economic spectrum, but low-income women are overrepresented among those having the procedure. Sixty percent of women who had abortions in 2000 had incomes of less than twice the poverty level --below $28,000 per year for a family of three, for example. This is in part because "low-income women have lower access to family planning services" such as contraception and counseling provided by health departments, independent clinics or Planned Parenthood, Finer said.
· Almost 90 percent of abortions are performed in the first trimester -- during the first 12 weeks after the first day of the woman's last menstrual period -- with most performed before nine weeks. Because of newer surgical and medical techniques, the proportion of abortions performed at six weeks or earlier has almost doubled in the past decade.
Less than 1 percent of abortions are done after 24 weeks.
· The number of abortion providers declined by 11 percent between 1996 and 2000, to 1,800. In 2000, one-third of women aged 15 to 44 lived in a county that lacked an abortion provider.
About the Data
There are two main sources of national data on abortion: the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. While both are regarded as dependable by major groups on both sides of the abortion issue, their numbers are different, and less precise than some other health statistics.
Not all states require reporting of abortions. The District, Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey do not mandate abortion reporting. California does not collect abortion data at all. Alaska and New Hampshire have not released statistics since 1998. This affects CDC's data, which is assembled every year from reports received from state health departments.
Due to differing reporting requirements and data-gathering procedures, abortion information for the District, Maryland and Virginia does not permit meaningful comparisons.
Guttmacher produces its reports by contacting abortion providers nationwide; its reports are considered more comprehensive than the CDC's. But the institute publishes the data only every four or five years. Neither group has published data for years beyond 2002.
Despite the inconsistencies of methods, the trends reported by CDC and Guttmacher correspond closely to each other. ·
Resources
For the complete Guttmacher report, visit http://www.agi-usa.org/sections/abortion.html , click on "An Overview of Abortions in the U.S."
For the CDC's complete report, visit http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/indss_2004.html , and click on "Abortion Surveillance -- United States 2001.
Or visit http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_23.pdf to download "Estimated Pregnancy Rates for the United States -- 1990-2000: An Update").
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Sorry, CJ...it is not as clear to me as it is to you..
that John McCain wants to continue fighting anywhere. What John McCain understands is that you cannot reason with some people (including terrorists) because they have no interest in getting along. That is not their agenda. They want us dead and our way of life dead. That is not going to change by sitting down and talking to them.
Seriously, I believe that all the things that enable a person to endure such torture over an extended period of time builds character and traits that are essential to leadership. So if you put 5 years in a prison camp up next to 4 years as a senator (2 of those at state level) where you voted present when you voted...then yes. I think 5 years in a prison camp plus serving as a military officer and commanding hundreds of soldiers makes him more qualified than Obama on the face of it...at the very least, AS qualified. And, at the very least, it demonstrates to me that John McCain puts his country first, even before himself. And to me, friend, that speaks volumes.
Obviously I was not clear enough either...
you could always ask where someone stands on a ban on gay marriage without asking how they VOTED on an issue.
I have not seen that many people on this board who were really invested in gay marriage.
If you're not gay and you don't live there...not sure why it matters to you so much? What anyone thinks?
Oh no, you have been quite clear,
and throughout this discussion you have been very cordial (I do apologize for the momentary snapishness in my last post.) Nor in your most recent post did you sink to the level of saying 'I will type slower - or use smaller words - so you can understand.' However, when someone tells me that my argument lacks merit because I do not truly understand the problem or have not thought the implications through, it brings out a bit of bitchiness in me. It is the same reaction I have when I read posts on this board saying that those who listen to Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc., are being manipulated and not thinking for ourselves. (I actually consider myself a conservative, strangely enough.)
I think you do see and maybe even understand my point, as I see and feel I get where you are coming from. We see, but will have to agree to disagree.
I do not pretend that legalizing marijuana will make the world a better place, only that it will make our laws more consistent. The legality of alcohol and tobacco while marijuana remains illegal is very inconsistent. And I think the bottle no longer contains that particular genie (if it ever did). The criminalization of such behavior creates small criminals and enriches bigger criminals.
You say 'I wish no one took any mind-altering substances of any kind.' Does this mean you are a teetotaler and not somebody who enjoys a brewski on a summer day after mowing the lawn, maybe a glass of wine with dinner, as I do?
I think kids hear their government, teachers and parents painting marijuana as the 'demon killer weed' which opens the floodgates to all other substance abuse. Smoke a joint, die with a needle in your arm. Then they watch those same adults drink legal alcohol, smoke legal cigarettes, overuse prescription drugs and they see the entire thing as yet another example of extreme phoniness.
Maybe some people will try legalized marijuana who never did when it was illegal. Maybe, deprived of its mystique and the element of rebellion, fewer kids will need to act out in that particular way. If alcohol were illegal for everyone and their parents were committing a criminal act just to obtain it (which you know they would do) would fewer or more teenagers use it? If a kid walking into a 'speakeasy' were no more or less illegal than his parents doing it, what would be the result? Interesting question.
And now I am going to offer you something a woman seldom does - the last word. The final post can be yours. I've said my piece.
So clear this up for me
The man who rapes and kills a young child, but truly believes in Jesus, acknowledges that what he did was wrong and a violation of both God's law and man's law...this man gets into heaven. The Jewish man, who spent his life working hard, raising his family to be wonderful human beings, donated regularly to the American Heart Association, and volunteered his time in an inner city school in a literacy program...he is doomed?
And I refer to myself as a heathen because I believe that it is my character and the life I have lived here that will determine my entrance to heaven, not my belief in Jesus's death and resurrection. Of course, maybe I'm just pragmatic. Just in case the Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, or even the Native Americans have it right, I'd like to think I've still got a chance at getting past St. Peter or whoever their respective gatekepper is.
So clear this up for me
The man who rapes and kills a young child, but truly believes in Jesus, acknowledges that what he did was wrong and a violation of both God's law and man's law...this man gets into heaven. The Jewish man, who spent his life working hard, raising his family to be wonderful human beings, donated regularly to the American Heart Association, and volunteered his time in an inner city school in a literacy program...he is doomed?
And I refer to myself as a heathen because I believe that it is my character and the life I have lived here that will determine my entrance to heaven, not my belief in Jesus's death and resurrection. Of course, maybe I'm just pragmatic. Just in case the Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, or even the Native Americans have it right, I'd like to think I've still got a chance at getting past St. Peter or whoever their respective gatekeeper is.
If it is all clear cut that
Pelosi told the truth and the CIA is, in fact, lying....why not just let the investigation go on so the dems could tell the GOP to stick it and prove once and for all who was involved and who is lying, etc. If Pelosi is telling the truth, which I highly doubt, there should be no reason to avoid an investigation.
Abramoff Attended staff-level meetings at Bush White House
White House Silent on Abramoff Meetings
WASHINGTON, Jan. 18, 2006
(AP) The White House is refusing to reveal details of tainted lobbyist Jack Abramoff's visits with President Bush's staff.
Abramoff had a few staff-level meetings at the Bush White House, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday. But he would not say with whom Abramoff met, which interests he was representing or how he got access to the White House.
Since Abramoff pleaded guilty two weeks ago to conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion charges in an influence-peddling scandal, McClellan has told reporters he was checking into Abramoff's meetings. I'm making sure that I have a thorough report back to you on that, he said in his press briefing Jan. 5. And I'll get that to you, hopefully very soon.
McClellan said Tuesday that he checked on it at reporters' requests, but wouldn't discuss the private staff-level meetings. We are not going to engage in a fishing expedition, he said.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, along with three other Democratic senators, wrote Bush a letter Tuesday asking for an accounting of Abramoff's personal contacts with Bush administration officials and acts that may have been undertaken at his request. The American people need to be assured that the White House is not for sale, they wrote.
McClellan has said Abramoff attended three Hanukkah receptions at the White House, but corrected himself Tuesday to say there were only two _ in 2001 and 2002.
McClellan said Bush does not know Abramoff personally, although it's possible the two met at the holiday receptions.
Abramoff was one of Bush's top fundraisers, having brought in at least $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney '04 re-election campaign and earning the honorary title pioneer. The campaign took $6,000 of the contributions _ which came directly from Abramoff, his wife and one of the Indian tribes he represented _ and donated it to the American Heart Association. But the campaign has not returned the rest of the money Abramoff raised.
Oh, I red you loud and clear
and "red" was not a spelling error. Strong arming anyone into producing anything for the government is like pre and post WWII Soviet Union....you got it right when you said red and I'm not referring red state conservatives either.
Many (not all) think you have all the answers, but when it turns to action you are ready to guilt and strong arm SOMEONE ELSE to do the work.
Yep...clear....said talking to me was
like talking to your mother who had a personality disorder. Bashing me and using your mother's illness to do it. Not many ways you can take it. YOU said it. YOU brought it up. This is YOUR can of worms.
I would like to clear up perhaps some confusion.....
About "socialized" medicine. What most of you may not know is that we already have socialized medicine. That is what Medicade and Medicare is (which is financially driven by insurance companies for insurance companies tell the government what they will pay. In essense, the insurance companies are setting the bar). Most countries have some sort of socialized medicine. Canada has what is referred to as single-pay medicine, which is soley funded by the government. Those opposed to single-pay medicine here in the US are the ones stating that it does not work. However, those who have it in Canada and Britain for the most part are not complaining. Of course, you can't please everyone.
For every $50,000 in income that you make about $10,000 of your tax dollars (equal to what is allocated for defense) is going toward healthcare. Add that along with roughly the $10,000 dollars that most companies pay for your insurance, that's quite a chunk of change. But you say, well the company is paying for it, not me. But that is wrong as well, if the companies whom we work for did not have to provide medical insurance for us, there would be higher wages.
So, for someone like me, a healthy 40 something :o), who spends about $1000 dollars a year in preventative health maintenance, why am I paying $20,000, which I might add that for any catastrophic healthcare issue should occur, I would still be desitute from the financial responsibility of picking up where my insurance company falls short? If this is not an argument for healthcare reform.....
Healthcare in the US is the hands of insurance companies, where I don't believe it should be. So for those of you opposed to socialized or single-pay medicine, you are already paying for it, why not make it function better and pull it out of the hands of the fat-cat insurance companies?
Let me be perfectly clear about what I said.
Since the poster above seems to think he/she can put words in my mouth, I will tell you exactly what I said.
I fully expect all posters to be respectful and not put down the President (current or past) or anyone else for that matter. I don't care if they're Liberal, Conservative, or polka dotted.
On the forum, you will be respectful in posting or you won't be allowed to post.
Think you can handle that? If you can't, don't post. It's just that simple.
Let me make something clear.
I am African American. I have never seen Africa. The human race originated on the continent of Africa. Now, what do you consider yourself? You can call yourself whatever you want. We want to be known as African American.
Let's make this a little more clear as well...
Both Obama and Biden voted to fund the bridge to nowhere and then voted to defund it. Who flipped first? biggg LOL.
Well, Howard Dean was governor of Vermont, right? Little old Vermont? Fewer folks than Alaska. His approval rating wasn't that high. He also ran for Presidential nomination. Only having been a governor of a state with population smaller than Alaska's. He is now the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Apparently Democrats only have problems with smaller population governors if they are Republican. That is a belly LOL.
Oh please...cheating? Have you done any research on how Obama had one of his early rivals for office kicked off the ticket so he would not have to run against her? Now THAT is cheating I can believe in. Because that was cheating in politics, not his personal life.
What McCain did in his personal life does not excuse Barack Obama for what he did in his public life. I don't care what either of them does in his personal life...what I care about is what they have done in their public life. McCain certainly keeps better company than Obama does...talk about "uglies." And they are not in the past.
I think we can retire the bridge to nowhere since Obama and Biden were for it before they were against it also. THEY voted with COngress to defund it, so she turned the money to other infrastructure projects that she felt Alaska needed more. Sounds like good judgment to me.
Don't understand the Wild West comment. "Maverick" was a term applied to cattle who refused to run with the herd.
Actually, you are rehashing the same old stuff and accusing her of rehashing old stuff. Does that mean you need a thesaurus also? Just asking.
The difference is clear.
No one is saying it's all 'we people' have to worry about. But it does give us a glance in to O's morals. Win at all cost. No matter who he has to betray in the process. Doesn't that concern you at all?
And I fail to see your correlation between Obama exploiting a bracelet he was not asked specifically NOT to, and McCain choosing a woman as his running mate. If Clinton had been O's running mate, what would your argument be then?
And I beg you to do a bit more research on exactly what O is proposing to do to the middle class. Just because someone tells you something, it doesn't mean you should believe it without checking the facts, especially from a man running for president.
It reminds me of grade school class president elections. There was always that 'popular kid' who didn't know jack but got everybody to vote for him by promising longer lunch periods and movies on friday and free pop in the lunch room. The difference is, we're not twelve anymore.
Forgive me for not being clear enough for you (sm)
I guess the simplified question for you would be -- why bring religion into a post that had nothing to do with religion?
I think it is perfectly clear
how things will go with regards to Obama. As evident by this board, I think it is very obvious that some people may hold back their "judgments" or concerns about Barrack Obama for the simple fact that any criticism aimed at the president thus far is construed as racism. How dare we criticize what he does, his agenda, etc. because he is the first mixed race president.
I also think that he will be judged less harshly because the liberal media will not cover things fairly. They will continue to portray Barrack Obama as the savior/rock star.
When this stimulus package fails to stimulate the economy and when our economy is still suffering at the end of his term, we will see how fairly he will be judged. Until then, he is getting a free pass by the liberal media and people too eager to throw out the race card or people who are too afraid to criticize for fear of being called racist.
|
