Yup, they actually admitted that if the "outrage and publicity" they create gets their message
Posted By: Cyndiee on 2009-02-01
In Reply to: That seems to be the problem with PETA. I actually - agree with some issues, but they're way over to
I agree with their founding sentiments, but sickening sensationalism is a turn-off to me, it seems like fanaticism, and I have a beautiful daughter, I find it all so offensive. Also, I do not want my two sons ever to objectify women like that in their minds, sooooo sick! PETA cares for physical health with vegetarianism, but what about mental health with healthy body image, healthy relationships, and healthy respect in life, not important?
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
Yes - "outrage without rage". I was proud of all these great Americans. NM
x
privacy for publicity seeking
nobody, no talent Joe. Where was/is your concern about the government listening in on our military members phone calls home to their loved ones? The government paid listeners who passed the private love messages around the office for entertainment? If you wish to be in the spotlight, you have to stand the scrutiny.
He is an elected official which leaves him open for publicity -
They do not have to have his permission to run his pictures.
at least you admitted it.
WITH THIS YOU JUST ADMITTED THAT IT WAS Y O U ....s/m
who posted THIS NASTY REPLY TO 'ABC' ON 11/16/08.
Whereas a couple of post below you swore to the question: 'M, did you post this message?'
'OF COURSE NOT.'
Liar you are!!
I caught you redhanded!
I don't like lies!
create another board
You know, what this bulletin *system* needs is a bashing board. I used to post at a relatively calm board and some wanted to pick fights no matter what..The owner in her wisdom created a bashing board where those who have anger, upset, whatever and wanted to bash could and could also leave those other boards alone which did not want turmoil. Maybe the owners here could do that. I dont know who owns this board. I have been told it no longer is owned by the owner of MTstars..Maybe if the owner reads this, he or she will create another board for **Political wars**..
Please tell me, what did the "libs" create. sm
We have had a republican president for 8 years and a republican congress for 6 of those years, and 2 just barely on the dem side. When Bill Clinton's presidency was over, we had a multimillion dollar surplus and low unemployment; however, the republicans thought it was more important to impeach him for "sex crimes". Just think of all the good he could have done if time was not wasted in defending himself, not to mention all our tax dollars that were spent. Hello? Their marriage has obviously survived and it is no ones business but theirs.
You are trying to create something that did not happen
His picture is colored in on the coins. You sure did misinterpret what she said and you turned it into a racial thing. This is not racial. These coins are colored/painted in and they are CHEAP!!!! Maybe you should take a look at them and you will see what she means. Your trying to make it a racial thing where there is no racial tendencies in her message.
I think you're the one who is bigoted, prejudice, etc. Give the race relations a break. There is no room for your kind of behavior on this board. Period!
You know if they want to create jobs
why aren't we drilling for oil? Why aren't we getting wind farms going? If our government would take more money to look into alternative fuels, not only would that stop our dependency on foreign oil but we will need workers to maintain those things, etc. Those will be jobs that will last. It won't be like construction work like Obama wants. Once the roads are repaired and bridges fixed, etc....then what? I just think we are going in the wrong direction and I just don't understand why. We need to tap our resources with offshore drilling. We need to drill Alaska. While we are doing that, we need to look for alternatives to oil. The sooner they do that, the sooner car companies can make environmentally safer cars and vehicles. I mean....come on.
Uh....when have you admitted a fault...
or fallacy, piglet?
Threatened...? Nope. Mildly amused. You two obviously feel the need to have each other to pile on; that certainly sounds more like feeling threatened than anything I have done.
I think you mean what do I feel about comradery that is distasteful not tasteful..?? I did not say it was distasteful at all! I said it was amusing. And it is. You enjoy ridiculing and find it humorous. You have that in common, and I find that amusing. I am allowed.
Distasteful joke? Oh COME on. Geez. Some of the things guys have posted and guffawed here about actual people by name and you call me distasteful?? Apparently Whorn at least has a sense of humor. Belittled an entire human race? An entire human race? I thought there was only one...human race that it is.
You are really reaching on that one. If one cannot poke fun at Osama Bin Laden without you getting all up in arms about "an entire human race..."
You are always good for a laugh, piglet. To use your own words...guffaw.
Oh yeah CNN...the same ones who admitted...
paying of Saddam so they could keep a reporter in Iraq...THAT CNN. Bastions of democracy.
Well Obama did both and admitted to doing too much
))
And he ADMITTED to lying.
I wonder if he'll get demerits for doing the unthinkable: telling the truth!
And he ADMITTED to lying.
I wonder if he'll get demerits from the GOP for doing the unthinkable: telling the truth!
TS himself admitted being of advanced age.
I think he just enjoys teasing and arguing with women.
The money is certainly not going to create jobs
This will not create jobs for anyone.
ACORN has already admitted to fraud.
nm
Even GREENSPAN admitted to his mistake to believe
correct themselves. Deregulation and the politics of greed are not a democratic platform plank. Unbelievable that this camp would STILL be trying to garner all that compassion and sympathy for the rich.
Here's what Obama himself admitted last year about
His exact words, people:
"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket... whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that cost on to consumers."
If anyone needs it put any more clearly, I'm afraid I'll have to resort to drawing pictures with stick figures - if I can still afford a #2 pencil.
His plans are to create bigger government, which
nm
Obama didn't create this mess
I am amazed at the criticism directed at Obama regarding the current economic crisis.
1. Did he run up our huge debt with China?
2. Who blew billions on Wall Street without any oversight - Bush/Paulson - ring a bell?
3. Who gave us the stimulus checks last year that the government couldn't really afford to give?
4. Who got us into a $10 billion a month Iraq war when our allies and the UN Security Council could see that the "evidence" was total b.s.? Wasn't it McCain who said we would keep at it 100 years? How much has that and would that fiasco cost us?
I speak as a former Republican/turned independent. Both parties have sold us down the river to appeal to the interests of big multinationals interested in "free trade". How could we possibly hope to keep our economy healthy by allowing trade with people making pennies an hour? Our own profession is a microcosm of the maladies caused by the "global economy". We make far less and work much harder - finding it difficult to pay bills. It had to crash sometime.
I agree with you that this stimulus package will probably not do the trick, but to blame Obama for it is ridiculous. It would be the equivalent of having been sent in a barrel over the side of Niagara Falls, and halfway down Obama tries to figure out a way to soften the landing. He didn't put us in the situation - and maybe he can't get us out.
One thing is certain - McCain could not have done better. He would have kept us bleeding billions in Iraq that we simply do not have.
We are likely going to see runaway inflation. The government is committing itself to compounding the effects of the disaster - starting with Bush allowing Paulson to throw billions to his Wall Street buddies and the continuing effort to stave off the inevitable crash of our economy. The only way they can afford these megabillion plans is to print more money - and the money will become worth a lot less. Get ready for a $100 loaf of bread.
It would just create a huge black market, and
Everybody admitted that Adam is a very good singer,
better than Kris, come on! The fact that he is gay cost him the trophy. Same case with Miss California, the other way around. It is not fair!
Bush didn't create the federal reserve......
xx
Obama to create Iran outreach post...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/19/obama-will-create-iran-outreach-position/
It took only 2 years to create this mess? You missed your meds.
x
Scotty also slipped up and admitted Rove and Abramoff
...have known each other for 30 years. Sounds really cozy! This whole Abramoff thing is just a dodge - this guy has been all over the world, very busy and the tendrils go very deep. He happened to be in Italy at the time that the bogus yellowcake report was issued to the White House. He was instrumental in the whole Suncruz affair, arranging a source of non-taxable non-traceable income for political operatives. His pleading guilty now to some very minor charges keeps the rest of the offenses safely under wraps and hidden from further investigation. He'll do a few easy years in a posh hotel prison and then back to business as usual!
What I really wonder is, who's BEHIND this guy? Who's been financing him, assigning him, paying his travel expenses, telling him where to go and what to do?
Why does the Government have to create Laws to make people Volunteer?...
http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/03/15/meet-the-compulsive-service-orwellian-give-act-to-be-voted-on-this-week/
Next up on the agenda this week is the GIVE Act, short for the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act”.
The ABC News headline ‘GIVE’ Act Would Give Back. Volunteer Programs Would Provide Jobs to Unemployed, Assist Those in Need says it all.
In his address to Congress last month, President Barack Obama called on lawmakers to expand federally funded national service opportunities.
“To encourage a renewed spirit of national service for this and future generations, I ask this Congress to send me the bipartisan legislation that bears the name of Sen. Orrin Hatch as well as an American who has never stopped asking what he can do for his country — Sen. Edward Kennedy,” the president said.
Democrats say they may be able to respond to that call by the end of this month.
The Senate is working on the Kennedy/Hatch Serve America Act of 2008, and the House is working on a similar bill, called the Generations Invigorating Volunteering and Education (GIVE) Act.
Kissinger: Obama's 'task' is to help create a 'new world order'
"New World Order," the phrase previously attributed to "whacky conspiracy theorists," is now being PUBLICLY advocated by this senile old man. I hope Obama is too smart and too reasonable for this "NWO" stuff because this is one of the reasons I voted for him.
Kissinger: Obama's 'task' is to help create a 'new world order'
RAW STORY
Published: Tuesday January 6, 2009
|
President Nixon's Secretary of State, the aging Henry Kissinger, recently told CNBC that he believes the current world economic crisis is a "great opportunity" for President-elect Obama to help create a "new world order."
"What do you think the most important thing is for Barack Obama?" Kissinger was asked. "... If you had to say, this is going to be the country, or the conflict, or the place that will define the Obama administration, what would it be?"
Kissinger replied: "The President-elect is coming into office at a moment when there are upheavals in many part of the world simultaneously. You have India-Pakistan. You have, ah, a jihadist movement."
"But," continued Kissinger, "he can give new imputus to American foreign policy, partly because the ascension of him is so extraordinary and admirable.
"I think that his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period, when really a "New World Order" can be created. It's a great opportunity. It isn't such a crisis."
In response to a parting question, Kissinger added that Obama's cabinet is an "extraordinarily able group of people."
"The phrase 'new world order' traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government," writes Drew Zahn. "The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used the phrase in a 1989 speech."
In that 1989 speech, the elder Bush told Congress, "A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective –– a new world order –– can emerge: A new era …… in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony."
It is a quote echoed across the Internet by those who believe a non-elected governing body is forming at the very top of the world's elite, and spreading.
Kissinger previously spoke at some length about this "new world order" during an interview with Charlie Rose.
"I think that when the new administration assess the position in which it finds itself it will see a huge crisis and terrible problems, but I can see that it could see a glimmer in which it could construct an international system out of it," Kissinger told Rose in a Dec. 2008 conversation.
"The jihadist crisis is bringing it home to everybody, that international affairs cannot be conducted entirely by drawing borders and defining international politics by who crosses what borders with organized military force," he said. "This has now been reinforced by the financial crisis, which totally unexpectedly has spread around the world. It limits the resources that each country has for a foreign policy geared to an assertion of its own pure interests."
Kissinger publicly supported McCain for President in 2008.
The following video was aired on CNBC on Jan. 5, 2009.
Find story and video at:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Henry_Kissinger_Obama_should_act_to_0106.html
I agree, this fact was suspected long time before Adam admitted. to it,
and this might even have been - unjustified - the reason why Adam, by far the best singer in the group, came in 2nd place.
see message
I think the behavior you describe is pretty common for ignorant folks. Just because they voted for him, they feel they have to uphold every stupid decision he makes.
Thank you - please see message
I'm glad you felt comfortable responding to my post. I didn't realize how heated things had gotten but could tell from what remains on the conservative board that it had gotten pretty ugly, and I thought the tax issue was a fairly safe issue to broach to provide a cooling period while discussing an issue that pretty much everyone agrees on - a need for tax reform.
Note, though, that it was one post on one topic and the first I have submitted in some time. Most of the threads on the board begin with an issue/article posted by Nan or AG.
However, regardless of who contributes most to the conservative forum, I must agree with Brunson and thank him/her for recognizing that the conservative forum is the conservative forum. I realize that tempers have flared there and things got out of hand, but the conservative posters have given no worse than they received. It seems to me that, at any time, liberal posters tired of dealing with Nan and AG (and MT, as well) on the conservative board could have done as Nan and AG did - remained on the forum dedicated to their point of view.
Thank you for your welcome to this forum - you have been very congenial, and I have enjoyed the discussion today. Frankly, I cannot see myself fitting into this liberal forum - as I said, my views on most issues tend to be pretty conservative. I don't see much point in hanging around the conservative forum if there isn't anybody there, so it looks like I'll probably just be peeking in now and again to see if/when discussion resumes. If I reply again on this forum, I will certainly try to do so with as much respect and kindness as you have shown me today, even though my opinions will probably differ.
Hey.....see my message!
I live in a rural area, have three dogs and do weight training also!!!
Actually it is said by the experts that if you are inexperienced with a gun you're better off not having one. It's kind of complex, but check out the info if you're interested.
I used to have military mace (actually from when I lived in a big city) - not sure if it's available to the public - probably easier to use than a gun and just as effective. Otherwise, not sure who we're supposed to be afraid of here.....I generally am not afraid of intruders and I don't have any weapons in my house other than my dogs and my mouth!!!
See Message.
Maybe if you were more tolerant and didn't pose such a rude message, someone would be interested in debating with you. I think it's just human nature to not want to associate with people who approach others in such a nasty confrontational way. If you were nicer to others, others would be nicer to you.
See message.
I can't wait to see what Fitzgerald's investigation unfolds.
Libby and Rove both were sources for the leak of Plame's occupation.
This was after Joe Wilson made public that Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein was purchasing uranium to make nukes was FALSE. The administration KNEW it was false, yet Bush used this fake threat of nukes in his State of the Union address to scare the heebie-jeebies out of the American public so they would support this bogus war.
That's how Bushies handle people who cross them. Don't DARE tell the truth or expose the administration for what it truly is. If you do, they'll not only put the life of a CIA agent in danger, but every single person she worked with around the globe pertaining to WMD. Why isn't this treason? It's the Bush way of doing things, and Karl Rove is an expert and accomplished thug.
I hope this goes beyond Rove and Libby and goes straight to Bush and Cheney. This is definitely an illegal war, brought on totally false premises, and Bush and Cheney should be personally held accountable for all the deaths (American and Iraqi) that have resulted from their lies.
It's truly sad when the only man on earth who can make Saddam look not so bad is GEORGE W. BUSH. I'm very ashamed of my government. 
See message.
I'm writing to my Congressman and Senator and see if this is true, express my objection and see if they can BOUNCE the *blank check* they gave him regarding Iraq and require Congressional approval for air strikes.
The article you posted included the following:
After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the former official said, he was told that Bush felt that “God put me here” to deal with the war on terror. The President’s belief was fortified by the Republican sweep in the 2002 congressional elections; Bush saw the victory as a purposeful message from God that “he’s the man,” the former official said. Publicly, Bush depicted his reëlection as a referendum on the war; privately, he spoke of it as another manifestation of divine purpose.
Someone needs to tell Bush that God thinks Bush is too engulfed in his own ego to fully understand God's REAL message to him, and that's why God gave us POLLS.
See message.
I don't believe religious symbols of ANY kind belong in schools (unless they're religious schools) or government buildings. If Walmart or Target wish to be inclusive to all religious beliefs, more power to them. Private businesses should be free to do as they wish. If they want to limit it to the religious Christmas and exclude the secular *Christmas,* some people might not want to shop in that kind of *exclusive* shop. You can bet their profit margin is the bottom line for them.
For every religion out there, there are buildings: churches, mosques, temples, etc. where like-minded people gather to worship. Trying to control the very WORDS people say isn't going to work unless and until you guys figure out a way to implant a chip in every American that will force them to speak, think, believe and worship just like you do. Maybe some of us think you'd do that if you had the ability, and maybe THAT'S the underlying thing that people are fighting.
OMG!!! (see message)
That mental image HURTS.
I am so SICK of this man's lies. Bush needs to get them straight. When he said the following in 2004, he was clearly lying and KNEW IT, as we now all know. I just wonder if there's ever been just ONE TIME in the last 5 years when he's actually told the truth. Have you seen this?
Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order, he said on April 20, 2004 in Buffalo, New York.
Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so, he added.
On April 19, 2004, Bush said the Patriot Act enabled law-enforcement officials to use roving wiretaps, which are not fixed to a particular telephone, against terrorism, as they had been against organized crime.
You see, what that meant is if you got a wiretap by court order -- and by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example, he said in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Please see message.
I totally agree this absolutely reaches across the board. This monster repeatedly raped this child for 3 years, but the damage he's done to her is going to affect her entire life. How about putting him in jail FOREVER so he can't hurt anyone else??? I also wouldn't have a problem with the death penalty for animals such as this.
I've recently seen this judge on TV, actually defending his actions, as if there is a defense for them. Thank God for Bill O'Reilly (I don't usually care for him) and Joe Scarborough and Dan Abrams (and others, I'm sure) who are publicizing this. Hopefully, this judge will be removed soon so maybe more children won't suffer. This judge, in my opinion, is just as guilty as the molester himself.
I sat here, trying to put myself in the parents' shoes, and I wonder how many parents will begin to feel that taking the law into their own hands and killing these rabid animals is the only way to keep their children safe in lieu of a judge that cares more about the criminals than their victims. If and when that happens, I'm not sure I could blame them.
I've written to Vermont's governor, as well. I'm glad so many people are writing and publicizing this issue. It's the only way things will change.
See message.
Number one, despite what is so *obvious* to you, I do not hate my country. In fact, I miss it very much. And I don't hate Bush because I don't *hate* anyone. When he took over the Presidency, I began my impressions of him on an even keel. Slowly, bit by bit, he has corroded any good impressions I ever may have had of him with his constant lying, dirty tricks, contempt for the Constitution, total and complete refusal to admit that he is NOT PERFECT, blatant disregard for the security of our borders, presiding over an econmy where people can barely afford gas but oil company executives get richer and richer, etc., etc. I truly and sincerely believe he poses a HUGE threat to the security of every American citizen.
Regardless of what the Iranian President (his name is Ahmadinejad, by the way) claims to have, they don't have the capacity to nuke anyone, but the USA does, and Bush has a ZERO record when it comes to diplomacy. Again, both Bush and Ahmadinejad are whack jobs, and neither can be reasoned with. I believe this is a very dangerous combination of two out-of-control egos, and the end of humanity could very well be imminent. I'm not going to apologize for caring if my grandchildren might not have the opportunity to reach voting age in this country because of a president who doesn't care about his legacy because, when asked, he said Who cares? We'll all be dead, anyway. That statement, combined with his love of war, I find to be quite chilling.
As far as being *lost in my world,* I can see very clearly a President who is losing more and more credibility, not on a daily basis any more but on an HOURLY basis. I have ZERO faith or trust in this man. Again, contrary to your implied intimate knowledge of me, my brain, my heart and my soul, these aren't because of any preconceived notions I might have about Bush. These are because the actions of Bush himself. As polls are evidencing more and more each day, I'm not alone in my skepticism of him.
Regarding where I got the quotes, if you are genuinely interested, I would suggest you Google them. You've already indicated an inclination to not believe them, so I'm not going to waste my time by going back to the multiple sources I found, simply to provide you with a link that you've already decided not to believe. If your interest is sincere, you'll look it up. 
Regarding your response to my *shopping spree* statement, I'm sorry, but it didn't come across as a joke to me. It sounded like a negative character judgment regarding someone who doesn't agree with you, which is a common Neocon MO from Bush and his cronies all the way down to the lowest peon on the totem pole who is convinced Bush is on his or her side. 
Likewise, you can't possibly know the extent of my intelligence since you don't know me, have never met me and aren't qualified to offer such an opinion. Inherent in your assessment that I'm *not that stupid* is the notion that you feel I do possess a certain degree of stupidity, which leads me to your comment that I feel I have to *label everyone who disagrees* with me as *uninformed and unthinking.* I respectfully point out that these *labels* are YOUR words, not mine, and I would challenge you to point to those words in my above post to you.
Have a very pleasant day. 
Please see message.
I try to get my information from a variety of sources. These days, it's hard to find a completely neutral source.
The main thing I'm interested in is finding the truth, and it seems that the party with the most to hide is the least likely to provide it.
When Clinton was President, I listened to a lot of right-leaning news sources for the very same reason. I thought the lack of respect Clinton showed in the Oval Office was terrible, and I was actually in favor of impeaching him for that. I didn't buy into and agree with the notion that what he did in his private life was his business. In my opinion, the Oval Office doesn't belong to the President; it belongs to every American tax-paying citizen.
I voted for Ronald Reagan, and to this day, I still think of him as a wonderful President. Historians may disagree with me on that point, and they may be right, because I'm obviously no expert in that field. I even voted for George Herbert Walker Bush, so I'm not some hardline lefty who hates the United States, is godless and has no moral values.
(I just wanted to share a thumbprint of who I really am because some people want to crucify me on this board simply because they see my name and couldn't care less what I have to say. You, on the other hand, have been posting here in a very respectful, intelligent manner, and I'm very appreciative of that and hope you continue to do so. I'm beginning to look forward to reading your posts after the last day or so.)
I believe that many people were looking for a big change in the White House when they voted for George W. Bush. I believe they wanted some sense of decency and honor restored to it. I was one of those people.
When I look back at the thing Clinton did that I thought was so terrible, and I look at what Bush has done, I guess the only thing I can say to sum it up is what Jay Leno said in his monologue the other night: At least Clinton only screwed one American at a time (I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it).
What amazes me the most about (what seems like) blind loyalty to Bush is that I wonder what they thought they were voting for, compared to what they got. I thought Republicans (conservatives) were supposed to beiin favor of less spending, smaller federal government and fiscal responsibility. After really disliking President Clinton, I actually feel that when it came to things important to the everyday lives of Americans, Clinton was a far better President.
I feel no sense of trust for President Bush. I don't feel he is on the side of the average American. I truly believe he wants to get rid of the middle class altogether, so the only ones left are the rich (who he referred to as his *base*) and the poor.
Whether he made the pejorative comment about the Constitution or not, he ACTS like he has no respect for it (as was also mentioned in the article). There is truly no need any more for Congress, regardless of whether it's a Republican or Democratic Congress because it doesn't matter what laws they write, if Bush doesn't like it, he will simply issue a *signing statement* expressing that he will do what he wants, anyway.
We have a system of checks and balances for a reason, and he seems to totally disregard it. To me, it's ironic that he seeks to search and destroy all dictatorships -- except the one that is of his own creation here in the United States.
There's a growing history of how he treats those who either tell the truth or simply don't agree with his policies. He *Swiftboats* them.
There are many stories out there about the Diebold machines being rigged so that a certain political party wins. I have a friend who voted on a Diebold machine that produced a paper receipt. Sure enough, it reflected that she voted for the other party, when, in fact, she did NOT.
I'm completely against his views on immigration. I believe we should have immediately tightened and secured ALL our borders after 9/11 and, at least for the time being, not allow ANYONE in. Instead, we used that money to go to war with Iraq, not because Saddam Hussein was a threat but because Bush needed a war to insure a *successful Presidency.* Did you know that the President's itinery was found by an ex-con in a trash can last week? Why was that allowed to happen?
Did you know that part of his Iraq war spending includes a comphrehensive healthcare plan for every Iraqi? Look at the healthcare system in the United States. Shouldn't the healthcare for Americans take precedence over the healthcare of Iraqis?
Do I want our troops to come home? You bet I do. I believe the best way we can support them is to get them out of there.
Having said that, I also believe we simply cannot *cut and run.* We simply cannot go into a country and completely destroy and then leave without fixing what we broke. I believe we morally owe it to the people of Iraq to leave their country in a better place than when we found it. I wish democracy would have worked in Iraq INSTANTLY. Then maybe Bush would have hopefully begun to worry about fixing the massive problems in his own country. Having said that, I have serious doubts that a long-lasting democracy will survive in that region. I believe that many of them view us as being evil and having no morals. (I can't really disagree with this view, considering some of the things that go on in this country.) I think Joe Biden had an excellent idea of dividing Iraq into three provinces (which is supported in the Iraqi Constitution).
Instead, I believe this war was a whim, based on his own personal goals, without regard for one single soldier he sent to die. To me, that is unforgiveable.
Should he be allowed to spy on innocent Americans during wartime? I guess that depends on the definition of *innocent.* I sure don't know any terrorists. Heck, I don't even know my own neighbors. But I have repeatedly expressed my disagreement with his policies, and I've read how innocent Americans whose only *sin* is disagreeing with this President, so I have no reason to believe that I won't find myself being *investigated* by some agency eventually, maybe even the IRS in the form of an audit or some other intimidating tactic that this President is so fond of using.
As far as the Democrats are concerned, I personally can't stand Hillary Clinton and would never vote for her (even if I DID live in a country where my vote actually counted). I'm as disgusted with the Democrats as I am with the President.
I'm not some Godless heathen without morals simply because I don't agree with Bush. I very much believe in God. In fact, I believe God has been sending Bush a series of *signs* that he has chosen to ignore. What I don't believe is pushing my religion down everyone else's throats. What I believe in most of all is tolerance and respect for everyone, regardless of their religious beliefs. When one religion acts as if it is superior to all others, that concerns me and automatically forces me further to the left. Freedom of religion in this country is a wonderful thing, and nobody's religion is better than someone else's (including those who simply don't believe at all). Yet, the fallacy that all Democrats (or anyone else who doesn't believe in Bush) are godless heathens is alive and well. Ann Coulter, who can't seem to remember her address and is under investigation for voter fraud (see http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002807.htm, complete with the complaining document) plans on releasing a book outlining evil devils (such as myself and other millions of Americans she's never met) on none other than 6/6/06. I believe that one particular religion has no place in government. Do I have a problem with *In God We Trust* on our money? Of course not. When the word *God* is used in a generic term, it's INCLUSIVE, not EXCLUSIVE. But whether or not I can read it as I purchase a newspaper is irrelevant to what I feel in my soul and my heart. I can assure you my morals are very high, and it truly hurts (thus turning to anger) when certain conservatives accuse people like me of being evil and Godless. They say that most anger is the result of fear. The times I'm most angry is truly when I'm the most frightened. It's really hard to carry on a dialogue with someone who has labeled you so negatively, a sense of self-defense kicks in, and often arguments and more name-calling ensues, none of which is productive and all of which is hurtful and fruitless.
I'm sorry this is so long, but as I said, I enjoy reading your posts. Although I don't know you or your political beliefs, you seem to be conservative. You also seem to be intelligent and respectful and don't resort to personal attacks on posters, which is very refreshing on these boards. I was just trying to give you some insight into who I am and the reason I don't like Bush. In fact, I'm very frightened of him.
As I've said before, if I felt my President was honest, trustworthy, ethical and truly had the interests of ALL Americans foremost in his mind, I would have no problem at all with his obtaining lists of my telephone calls because I truly have nothing to hide, and if it saved one life, to me, it would be worth it. I just don't trust him to do the right thing, and that isn't based on anything I've heard or read from any left-leaning media. It's based solely on his own actions in the last six years.
I'm no far left-leaning whacko. In fact, I'm truly a middle-of-the road kind of thinker. I think there are a lot of us out there. Speaking personally, it's just that the *righter* he goes, the *lefter* I automatically wind up, not because I voluntarily choose to, but because in order to maintain my original thoughts, that's where he pushes me.
I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact, I fully expect you not to agree with me, and I hope you respond because I am very interested in hearing your views. Again, I thank you for being respectful and not resorting to name calling. You have opened the door to serious, honest and intelligent debate, and for that, I thank you.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
Please see message.
I hope you had an opportunity to read the article I posted before it was censored. It certainly explains the few bad apples in an otherwise wonderful military and also answers the question you raised regarding the recruiting tactics.
Please see message.
It was just a very angry hateful person who wished bad things on America. Just a one-line post on the subject line with a red angry face in the text portion of the post. (I don't want to repeat it because it might cause this thread to be deleted again.)
See Message...
I have decided to lock this thread. I do not believe the OP had bad intentions, but I do not like the direction in which this thread is going.
Moderator 
See message....
Please watch your comments. This is the second post of yours I have edited based on inappropriate remarks. Let this serve as a warning to you.
Moderator
See message...
Your comments about race were inappropriate. They were bound to offend, and it is best to leave those kind of remarks off this site.
Moderator
Please see message.
You've just summed up exactly my impression of Hillary Clinton, and my impression wasn't formed by anybody who is anti-Clinton. It was formed by Hillary's own self-portrait that she eagerly showed to the world.
Thanks - see message
Thanks - its such a breath of fresh air to hear more people feel the same way I do. I'm am sick to death of her people trying to push her in the VP slot (which just is not going to happen) but seems thats all that's on the news just can't wait for it to end. If it does happen well they can be assured that McCain will definitely win. The Clintons should not be allowed anywhere near the white house. Don't people remember what they did the last time they were in there? I listen to the people who support her and think...why? there is not one good quality about that woman. People are saying she's a good role model for their children??? People think that someone who is a liar, cheater, thief, bribes people, gives people false hope, walks all over people not caring who she steps on just as long as she is on top, is a sore loser, not humble, has a foul mouth to match her attitude, is just downright nasty to people when she doesn't get her way, etc, etc, well I then question their character. Never mind all the people whose lives and careers have been destroyed because they went against the Clintons. And another thing they talk about the Clinton Dynasty or Clinton Legacy? I always thought a Dynasty was if you have a long line of people in the family who have been in politics (like the Kennedys). It is only the two of them. Nobody in their family is in politics or is decent. These two came out of nowhere and they've only done harm to the democrat party. They are tearing the party apart for their own personal gain and they don't care.
See message...
The portion that I edited were not statements made by Hillary Clinton. Those statements were made by you. They were aggressive and strange, to say the least, and those kind of comments have no place on this site.
Moderator
Please see message.
Well, it worked just as well for me during this occasion. I think different people react differently, depending on the dosage, their tolerance, and how tired they might be. It might work differently for you than it does for me. Heck, it might (and does) work differently for ME, depending on the above. I have an illness which may (and usually does) awaken me in the middle of the night. If it's not too bad, I can take a pain pill and actually even be able to work a little. (If it's hospital-worthy, then I slap on a Fentanyl patch, and once that enters my system, I'm usually out like a light for a couple days. If that doesn't work, then it's back to the hospital again, which I try to avoid.) However, when this stuff happens, I wind up in a backwards sleep cycle and wind up being awake all night. This is what happened to me Friday/Saturday, and if you'll note, I began the post by stating I had been up most of the night.
Secondly, it was not a two-hour nap. Please read the post again and note the difference between 10:26 a.m. and 7:14 P.M.
Thank you OP - appreciate your message.
Thanks.
|
