Your post is grammatically confusing and makes no sense nm
Posted By: Mrs. M on 2008-11-12
In Reply to: Did those ignorant who thought Palin was his - running mate misspeak?
jm
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
Your post makes no sense. nm
.
Your post makes no sense..
But then, that has never bothered you guys in the past.....not making sense, that is.
What??? Another post that makes no sense
What is the bustling metropolis of Zberg? And you think rhetoric is a "fancy" word? And what town and mayor are you talking about?
You once again posted a reply that makes no sense at all and has nothing to do with the OP's message. A hint to trying to make a point about something would be to stick to the content of the OPs message, and write in complete sentences that we all can understand. Your post makes no sense and was not amusing (I mean funny - wouldn't want you to think I'm using a "fancy" word like amusing).
Thanks,
Mary (also known as hmmm)
This post makes no sense to me at all. But never mind. NM
Your post makes no sense and neither do the ones you cut and pasted. SM
Having said that, since you obviously are going to KEEP cutting and pasting the same post, I will gladly leave. I guess I could do like you do, remain anony behind many names, too gutless to stand behind my convictions, but that's a liberal trait. The fact is, this board dies when people are not agitating you because you cannot sustain a conversation without attack. It's an absolute fact and one need only look at the two boards to see that. I am sure you will last work, maybe even cut and paste again, and say something only you will find hilariously funny. Go ahead, I won't be posting back. 
That's probably because this is what makes sense to you.
Perhaps you could be a translator for us?
REPORTER: Is the tide turning in Iraq?
DUBYA: I think -- tide turning -- see, as I remember -- I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of -- it's easy to see a tide turn -- did I say those words?
-- White House, Jun. 14, 2006
If one were to measure progress on the number of suiciders, if that's your definition of success, I think it gives -- I think it will -- I think it obscures the steady, incremental march toward democracy we're seeing. In other words, it's very difficult -- you can have the most powerful army of the world -- ask the Israelis what it's like to try to stop suiciders. ...That's the -- but that's one of the main -- that's the main weapon of the enemy, the capacity to destroy innocent life with a suicider. ...Trying to stop suiciders -- which we're doing a pretty good job of on occasion -- is difficult to do. And what the Iraqis are going to have to eventually do is convince those who are conducting suiciders who are not inspired by al Qaeda, for example, to realize there's a peaceful tomorrow.
-- White House, May 23, 2006
I've reminded the Prime Minister -- the American people, Mr. Prime Minister, over the past months that it was not always a given that the United States and America would have a close relationship.
-- With Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan, White House, Jun. 29, 2006
Ok, that makes sense then
I was thinking when I read the headline that that sounds like something sports players would do to each other (like patting each other on the "behind"). The headline made it sound like he did it in a room full of reporters in the senate. HA HA HA
Sorry...this makes no sense....
I think you mean Taliban, and bin Laden is not their boss. He is AL Qaeda's boss.
That being said...they were only doing what they were told to do? We are talking Congress here. They had the evidence that this could happen, and blocked legislation that would have prevented it. Who do you think "told" them to block it?
makes sense to me
x
makes no sense to me either
x
Makes a lot of sense
Why don't we all do that??????
Well, now it all makes sense!! nm
x
That makes sense.
I guess I'm just cheap though. I'd rather spend my money on a local ceremony for my friends and family and swap rings. The commitment in either circumstance still has the same meaning but I could see why they would make the trip. Like I said....I'm just cheap and wouldn't want to pay for the trip. LOL. Of course, I didn't go all out for my wedding either. It was small with friends and family and m yhsuband and I spent a day at an amusement park for our honeymoon. It still meant as much to me as if I'd gone to Hawaii, got married on the beach at sunset, and stayed for 2 weeks for my honeymoon.
Oh, that makes perfect sense.
They're simply not the *right* EC (evangelically correct) Christians.
Did you by chance see the Barbara Walters special last night on heaven? I watched part of it, but I also taped it.
The two religions that stuck out like a sore thumb were the *born again* Christians and the *jihad Muslims*. They were the two groups who felt that everyone who didn't believe exactly as they do are doomed to go to hell.
So the fact that Catholics are targeted makes perfect sense to me and is in line with the Bush & Co. MO.
That makes perfect sense. not. lol. nm
nm
Again, not clever and makes no sense.
xx
I think it makes perfect sense.
They are both getting their victims to do what they want them to do with a promise neither of them will keep.
Your logic makes no sense at all
!!
that makes sense......and you talk out of the other end?
nm
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. None. nm
Yep...the other side of the story...makes sense to me...
Global Warming Equals Socialism
Philip V. Brennan
Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2007
There's a very simple question that the global warming scaremongers don't seem to be able to answer in a straightforward, credible manner.
It has to do with the current refrigeration of much of the United States and the claims of the global warming alarmists which appear to be very much at odds.
According to the propaganda campaign being hammered at the people of the world, the polar ice cap is melting and the polar regions are on the verge of becoming a tropical paradise.
I would like to know, if the polar regions are warming, how they able to bestow Arctic weather upon much of the U.S. as they are currently doing?
If the Arctic is the planet's refrigeration system and if that system is losing its coolant due to global warming, how can it continue to bless the U.S. with cold fronts that continue to break records for their severity?
The lame excuse the alarmists provide is that, oh well, climate is measured over the long term, you see, and over a year's time, the climate is seen as getting warmer, despite the frigid temperatures seen in the winter, which are merely temporary.
That's called begging the question.
In an e-mail promoting a new book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming the Conservative Book Updates from Human Events Book Service had the following wisdom to impart: For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small.
It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior.
With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before.
In that book, CBC reports that author Christopher C. Horner explains why, although Al Gore and his cronies among the media elites and U.N. globalists endlessly bleat that global warming is an unprecedented global crisis, they really think of it as a dream come true.
Global warming is the ideal scare campaign for those who are doing all they can to secure strict control over society, business, and the minutest details of individual life. As Horner explains, if global warming really were as bad as the Leftist doomsayers insist it is, then no policy imaginable could 'solve' it . . . no matter how much we sacrifice there would still be more to do. That makes global warming the bottomless well of excuses for the relentless growth of Big Government.
Writing in Canada's National Post, Feb. 5, Timothy Ball addresses the strongarm tactics employed by the environmentalist left. Dr. Ball, chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and a former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg, Canada recalls what happened to him when he spoke out against the global warming hoax.
What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in university, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.
Dr. Ball recalls that he once got a three-page letter from an academic colleague telling him he had no right to say what he was saying, especially in public lectures.
He was also accused by Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki of being in the pay of oil companies. That is a lie. Apparently he thinks if the fossil fuel companies pay, you have an agenda. So if Greenpeace, Sierra Club, or governments pay, there is no agenda and only truth and enlightenment?
What did Dr. Ball say that got him in such trouble with some of his colleagues?
Just this: Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and that for 32 years I was a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg.
Politicians are being listened to, however, wrote Dr. Ball, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention.
In recent weeks we have seen environmentalist wackos issuing fatwas against any scientist who dares to contradict their propaganda, demanding they be exiled from the scientific community and tried in international courts.
For example, The Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist, Heidi Cullen, advocated that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming.
Appearing on the Larry King Show Jan. 31, MIT's professor of atmospheric science Dr. Richard Lindzen spoke about the widely touted scientific report issued by the U.N.'s Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and allegedly the work of 2,500 scientists insisting that it's 90 percent certain that global warming is manmade.
In fact, Dr. Lindzen explained, all that was issued last Friday was a summary for policy-makers that is not prepared by scientists. It's not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else.
They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policy-makers has the input of about 13 of the scientists; but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, of environmental organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, and industrial organizations, each seeking their own benefit.
Added Lindzan about the whole global warming scare, I think it's mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves.
Then there is this juicy story about the lengths to which the globalbaloneyists will go to convince the world it is tottering on the brink of a cataclysm.
The pro-global warming BBC reported that rising seas, caused by global warming have for the first time washed an inhabited island of the face of the earth.
According to BBC, The obliteration of Lohachara island, in India's part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, marks the moment when one of the most apocalyptic predictions of environmentalists and climate scientists has started coming true.
According to TheNewsisNowPublic.com, the story was a hoax.
BBC didn't bother to mention that Lohachare Island disappeared 22 years ago and that the entire region of The Sundarbans is a river delta, or that the disappearance of the island has been attributed to erosion, not global warming.
All of this provides solid evidence that Christopher C. Horner is right on target in his charge that the whole global warming business is nothing but pure politics — a means by which the left can take control of just about every human activity worldwide.
The real purpose behind the global warming movement is the establishment of a world socialist order under the control of the United Nations.
Global warming is what I've been saying it is since 1997: a lot of globaloney.
World socialist order? Shades of Revelation.
I am glad Sam is back. She makes sense.
nm
Makes perfectly good sense.....has no
xx
Agree but I think this is too simple...and makes way too much sense. lol nm
Now that makes all kinds of sense. Sheesh. I am sure murders occur...
where you live too. Are you a murderer? What a goofy post. I just happen to be one of those people who knew of Bill before he came to national fame. And I did not say he murdered anyone. All I said is that there are unexplained deaths. All you have to do is google. People should not post rumor and innuendo if they do not want it turned around and applied to their side.
Can't make sense of your post.
Are you saying that the conservatives believe only videos portray the truth? Then wouldn't the videotape of soldiers being interviewed for 60 MInutes also be the truth then?
Military Times is not a military newspaper and does not speak for servicemen? Who does it cater to primarily if not the military? Hairdressers?????? Medical transcriptionists???? Yes, it is privately owned and is a Gannett publication. While their survey may not be the most scientific thing ever done it still has merit. See below:
A poll for the Military Times newspapers, which questioned 6,000 randomly selected active-duty members, gives us a much better sense. In case the myth that military personnel still widely support the president's policy hadn't been debunked enough, these results should do the trick.
Barely one in three service members approve of the way the president is handling the war, according to the new poll for the four papers (Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Times). In another startling finding, only 41% now feel it was the right idea to go to war in Iraq in the first place.
And the number who feel success there is likely has shrunk from 83% in 2004 to about 50% today. A surprising 13% say there should be no U.S. troops in Iraq at all. [...]
Nearly three-quarters of the respondents think today's military is stretched too thin to be effective.
As for the escalation, only 38% of those surveyed believe more troops should be sent to Iraq, while 39% think there should be the same number or less than there are now. (The rest said they didn't know.)
The post made sense to me......just because
a man and woman may not be able to reproduce certainly doesn't mean God intended for those of the same sex to get together. The Bible also speaks to those who can't have children of their own. It does give you a place to go for comfort; the Bible never said every couple would be able to have children of their own. But it most certainly does speak AGAINST homosexuality.
Excellent, common sense post!
Great points!
Great common sense post! nm
nm
Huh?? This post doesn't even make sense
.
This post makes it appear YOU are
nm
Your post makes no
sense. What are trying to say?
your post makes no
sense. How is turning off the television related to the faith board. I wonder about you.
What a beautifully written, truthful, common sense post.
Cannot add a thing. Thank you for telling it like it is so profoundly and full of truths! 
This is getting confusing! sm
I am not prowar, I am, as AG says, proactive. I believe we should have gone into Iraq. We have to deal with Iran. I believe the money is coming from Saudi Arabia. We need to deal with them. And then there is North Korea. By *dealing with*, I mean we must be vigilant, identify the real enemy, and plan accordingly. What exactly is worth fighting for if not our way of life. One of my favorite quotes is by John Stuart Mill, who penned his thoughts with prophetic brilliance: ‘War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. A man who has nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance at being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.'
I think that's where it gets confusing
There was an article in the Des Moines Register today that a busload of people came up from Missouri to get married here in Iowa, where it is now legal, knowing that when they went back to Missouri, the marriage was null and void. What makes the situation somewhat atypical in this case is that if I recall correctly, Missouri has a constitutional amendment defining marriage as 1 woman/1 man. Historically states have recognized the marital status between each other (which is why we don't have to get remarried each time we move!), so whether an Iowa marriage license among same-sex couples would be valid in a state that does not have a constitutional amendment specifically banning those unions is not clear.
You are correct - confusing
This whole war thing has gone on so long it is confusing. I'm not purposely trying to put wrong facts up there. I read it from a newspaper and also I've been hearing it on TV all day. All I remember throughout the campaign was him saying he'd bring the troops home. To me its all the same thing. I don't ever remember him separating the two regions, but like you say it is on youtube and I can research for myself which I will. But I about fell off my chair when I heard he's sending more troops and I never heard him talk about sending troops during his campaign. Like I said, and I'll be the first to admit if I'm wrong. I just honestly don't remember it like this.
I will, however, not admit that I put up deceiving posts. I stated a fact. Obama is sending more troops to Afghanistan, 17,000 according to the news source I read. I did not make that figure up.
Question for you though. Where are those troops going to come from. If you tell me that Obama is going to re-route them from Iraq to the Afghanistan, then I would have to say that is what I would consider a lie/deceit (my opinion - and don't shoot me for having opinions). He had many of us fooled into believing the troops would be coming home. My best friend told me her son (in Afgan. would be coming home as would her husband in Iraq). But if he doesn't re-route them and sending fresh soldier's over, then no it's no a lie on his part (IMO).
I also wouldn't be so quick to judge people for their beliefs. If I'm wrong I'll say I'm wrong but one other poster wrote "selective hearing". (I voted for the guy in the primaries, I believed in him back then). I don't know about anyone else out there but it can be real confusing. Just like the stimulus bill, etc, etc. I will however do some research and watch some more youtube when I get a chance.
Do you need new eyeglasses? You are confusing me with somebody. I never said that....nm
nm
Wow...that is sort of confusing.
I guess if I were gay and had a partner, I'd just swap rings on my own and throw a party. The love two people have between each other means more than a legal piece of paper, IMO. I wouldn't travel to another state to get married just to go back home and it not mean anything legally. As often as people get divorced, you gotta wonder if straight people really get marriage.
Are you sure your are not confusing arrogance with intelligence and sm
confidence? Those are the qualities we need in a president aren't they?
No, I am not confusing the body with an 844-ft mountain top...
What I am referring to are the many cases where schools will have rules that ban crosses or any form of Christian expression, but allow Muslims/Sikhs to wear headscarves. The ACLU by and large will not take those cases even if asked. If situation reversed, they will sue on behalf of Muslims/sikhs without being asked.
Again...the first ammendment guarantees freedom of religion and the free expression thereof. The last 4 words mean as much as the first words.
The first ammendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion...like the church of England that required everyone to follow that religion. There is nothing in the constitution that uses the words separation of church and state. The founding fathers did not seperate Christianity from the government...it is interwoven in the founding documents, on our currency, on the walls of Congress. It is part of the American heritage. From the drive to come here for religious freedom came the drive to set out the other individual freedoms.
As I said, if people find sharing the gospel annoying a simple I am not interested works with most Christians. There is always a radical fringe associated with any religion...some more than others. There is a radical political fringe.
All I am saying is that Christians are discriminated against in this country. And the same people who will rise up and decry discrimination against Muslims, et al, will not rise up and decry the same discrimination against Christians. I would think civil liberties apply to ALL of us....
I said nothing about putting a cross on public ground...don't know why you went off on that tangent. :)
Maybe she's confusing Obama's parties with.(sm)
the parties held at the Department of Interior under Bush....LOL.
You are confusing tyranny with losing
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=223862&title=Baracknophobia---Obey
This post really makes me WANT to vote for Obama. I am undecided, but this pushes me closer to Obama
...Thanks for the info!
O&B have more sense than that,
nm
But in the same sense
you are saying we should remove the law to not murder someone because every can make choices right or wrong?
I don't believe we should give free reign to abortion. The law he wants to sign can even make it where doctors cannot say no to doing an abortion because of the conscience clause. Therefore physicians who are against abortion because of their beliefs will be forced to perform abortions or lose their job. The FOCA is to broadly written.
I'm not fooling myself. They may not be moral, but they aren't voting for legislation that my faith says is against what God wants. Yes, God gave us free will, but he also gave us laws. I believe murder is murder. The Bible tells me that we are given life from the moment of conception, and therefore an abortion takes away that life, meaning it is murder.
I hope you didn't think I was questioning your beliefs btw, I wasn't. I was just stating how I look at the situation. My father-in-law is a Baptist preacher also. I used to be scared of the Baptist doctrine, but now I really appreciate it, because they preach straight from the Bible. My father-in-law won't even paraphrase! LOL
I see no sense in this.
Obama wants to take away our guns. If there are no guns, we won't shoot each other right? WRONG. Just because you take guns away from good people doesn't mean the bad people won't still get them. The honest folks who would abide by the rules would be at the mercy of the crooks who would obtain weapons illegally.
Ignorant people who do stupid things with guns gives the rest of us gun totting hillbillies a bad name and it isn't fair. No reason to take our guns away. We just want to protect ourselves and our family. If someone breaks into my house with the intent of harming myself or my family....I feel I should have a right to protect them. Why are criminals being protected instead? They are the ones doing wrong. Sometimes this country has things so backwards it isn't funny.
You are not by yourself in your sense of
renewal and having cause to rejoice. I had that sense immediately after the results came in and expecially the next morning. I live in a major US city where the change has actually been visible and palpable. The people here have been holding their heads up and making eye contact, greeting each another on the street, talking to one another and smiling a lot more. It's been great to see and to be a part of it.
Do not let the naysayers take that from you. Welcome to the politics board where you can take advantage of another great opportunity...to exercise, strengthen and hold your faith tight, and to develop a thick hide such that the gloom and doom expressed here will go in one ear and out the other and roll off you like water off a duck's back.
I want a President who has sense enough...
while "multitasking" to put the most important issue on the front burner. The failing economy to me is the front burner...not the run for the Presidency. Obama proved to me again why I am not voting for him.
Well that does not make sense because
Her daughter is an adult and able to make her own decisions on what she wants for her life. Unless your going to lock her inside the house and accompany her every single place she goes to outside the home its impossible.
Here's some examples. I joined the military without asking my parents. Would you hold my parents responsible for that. My cousin grew up in strict Christian home (church 3 times a week, sang in chorus, taught in their sunday school. And she was 17 years old. She also got pregnant (and this was in a town of less than 10,000 people so her parents knew where she was at all the time. My aunt and uncle should not be held accountable for what their daughter does. A lot of kids are getting pregnant at earlier and earlier ages. There is a point where they have minds of their own and decide what it is they want to do with their lives and a lot of them want to have families. Gov. Palin's daughter evidently did too. She's an adult and do not need to tell or get permission from her parents on that.
As for Gov. Pailin dealing with her issues at home? There are no issues to deal with and she is doing just fine.
we will need our sense of humor
and some solar panels for this next chapter.
|
