oops, ignore the last partial sentence....nm
Posted By: good grief on 2008-12-17
In Reply to: Well.....sm - good grief
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
oops...first sentence posted twice by accident.
:)
Partial explanation perhaps?
I've been noticing that quite often when there is a conservative belief/claim being put forth repeatedly on this board (right now it's that Republicans always do the right thing and admit to their behavior and resign versus the Democrats who never do the right thing/can't admit their behavior and never resign), when doing research I find that the posters on this board are simply regurgitating what they are reading on the many far-right blogs/newsletters/publications. It's almost word for word. THere have been many examples in the past besides this most recent rant. At this point it seems that the far-rights are guilty of being unable to have original thoughts. Now let's see if they can do the right thing and admit it.......(laughter here, please).
On a more serious note, I never saw Clinton referred to as a serial rapist until reading this board. Once again, upon checking this out I see multiple, multiple references on -- you guessed it - multiple far-right-crazy political blogs/newsletters, etc......you get the idea. The thing that I find worrisome, though, is that we have been requested repeatedly not to bash Bush on this board in any fashion, yet past presidents (especially those that are Democrats) are fair game for any manner of accusations. If we shouldn't question Bush's decisions (as an example) because of how it will look to other countries who might read this forum, how does it look to call our former president a serial rapist?
That means you may be partial to SP?
if you don't care about experience?
Ok, I'm going to give you a partial okay on this one
Let me explain without sounding towards one side or the other.
Yes, Nov 4th was historic - not grass roots, just historic.
Since 11/4 so much has changed. I'm talking about changes that have not been good. I voted for the O thinking the changes would be good, as a lot of other democrats did too. We all expected good things. However, within less than 90 days he has done a world of damage.
These tea parties happening all over the country (sorry, think I did a typo earlier and said countries - but that may be a freudian slip). This is a true grass roots movement. Even us democrats who voted for him (and a heck of a lot of democrats who are in politics) are saying "wait a minute here. This is not what you campaigned on and this is not what you said you were going to do". Many people from both sides of teh political arena are saying enough. The spending has got to stop and stop NOW.
A note about community organizing. Community organizing is not having ACORN go around and register the same people 60 and 70 times. Community organizing IS exactly what these tea parties are. These tea parties are being organized by groups (if you ever had to organize a group function its no easy task), to arrange the stages, camera crews, professional musicians, guest speakers. This is organizations by people all over the country. Thousands upon thousands upon thousands turning out to say "We the people have a voice. Listen to what we are saying". We had enough of Bush's spending over an 8 year period, but now here he comes and within less than 3 months he has tripled the amount spent by Bush. If we didn't like Bush's spending, why in the world would anyone think we want this spending - and 3 times as much.
It's not a matter of democrat leadership versus republican leadership. We need a leader who will represent what the people want and what will make our nation once again great. We have that with neither party and people keep making this into a democrat versus republican issue. It is not. We should have one party and the politicians should be voted on based on their experience and how they perform their job, not what party they belong to. When it boils down to it "issues" do not have a political party. Homelessness is not republican or democrat. Unemployment is not democrat or republican, etc. Issues are issues, but people make them into democrat or republican.
When someone wants to speak up that they don't want to pay more in taxes, or they speak up because they have lost their job to an overseas company, or they speak up because they are losing their home because of the decisions that politicians in WA are making. Why are they made fun of and ridiculed.
Wanting the politicians in Washington to know how upset we are that the decisions they are making and that are having severe impacts on us (for the worst (worse?) is not a way of life for us, it's putting us in a prison without parole. So if we want to stand up and say something why are we labeled with horrible names like paranoid, racists, radical right-wingers, and everything else they are being called on this board and on the liberal media stations. I heard from a lot of democrat speakers today and they said they are even tired of it.
So yes, 11/4 was a great day. People put aside their racist viewpoints and voted for a man, yet this man that I voted for is much different than the man that campaigned. So much has changed. While 11/4 was a memorable day, today is a true grass roots movement.
I'm glad that there are many others like me.
That you can say this about partial birth abortion sm
says to me that you are a proponent of relative morality or that you have no idea what partial birth abortion entails. Once a society starts with the whatever seems right to you mentality in regards to life, then we are doomed. Pardon me if I say that I am so glad I am not you.
The procedure of partial birth abortion you describe is...sm
somewhat true, as well as gruesome. However, It is never done as an elective procedure, rather as an emergency procedure in order to save the life of the mother when it is a breech delivery and the cervix clamps down before the head delivers, or when the fetus has died in utero. The few times I saw it done during my career, everyone in the room, sometimes even the doctor was crying. To say that someone choses this to get rid of a baby is simply just not true.
My belief? "late-term abortion" or partial-birth abortion" = infanticide, it is sickening
So in these cases I do think, as in most things, there is no ABSOLUTE, but a judicious guideline for this should be investigated and established by the medical community, as far as survival/outcome, but then we must be willing to prosecute mothers and doctors who go outside the guidelines...with established jail terms....and more money to house these "criminals" for years. Why not let God by the ultimate judge, He has the wisdom and the power, and eternity without God is worse than anything we as humans can mandate, don't you think?
Your first sentence says it
It's a question of who is shouldering the burden. Well apparently you're a billionaire,'cause I know many hardworking, responsible, professional middle-class people (no one looking for a handout)working pretty darn hard just to stay afloat...people with degrees who are delivering pizza. Our local food pantries can't keep up with the demand and this was before Katrina. There are Meals on Wheels volunteers, who pay for their own gas, have had to stop because they simply can't afford it. And the meals that WERE being delivered weren't even hot, because THAT was cut back. Go, good for you on your shiny throne passing judgement on who is or isn't looking for a hand-out, but I can tell you that even with every kind of insurance and adequate income, I pray my husband or I don't get sick or have some unforeseen catastrophy, because in many cases that is all it takes.
You said it all in one sentence...
Hindsight IS 20/20, something Democrats tend to forget. The pre war intelligence was very ominous, and it was international intelligence, not just ours. If an attack had come our way which was then traced to Iraq, you would have placed the blame squarely on the back of GWB. Of course, now that we have hindsight, he's blamed for the war being not worth it, wrong war, ad nauseum. Apply a little logic and you can see that it's a no-win situation. I believe the man did what he had to do, AT THE TIME. You can't play Monday morning quarterback. The prominent Democrats were all on the same page before the war, just read some of their quotes.
I think the last sentence says it all..sm
Either way, even if you believe McCain's health plan is a train wreck and that none of his math adds up, he proposes to fix that with Medicare savings, not with $882 billion worth of "cuts."
Tell me what the difference is, one says medicare savings and one says medicare cuts. Both mean less money for medicare, no? Semantics on both sides I think.
We can sum all of the above in one sentence:
LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!
me neither......Your sentence that
I quoted in my former post reminded me so much of the situation between Israel and the Palestinians, therefore I swerved away from the issue at hand.
Ahmadinejad should step down and give his position to Mousavi. Same with Khatami.
On what are you? In your last sentence
of your post you contradict what you wrote in your subject line!
Hahahaha! LMAO !
You are a joke, 'Backward typist,' are you really .....?
Confused or imbibed?
Your last sentence tells it all
Your last sentence concerning ammo, in my opinion, sums up your beliefs, i.e., republicans, versus democrats. Everything to you righties is fight time, attack time, war time whereas we lefties post something for people to read or debate, not to fight. I cant speak for all, but I believe negotiating, talking out problems, trying to understand each other works better than slinging insults, attacks, and using ammo. A nonpartisian person reading these posts would be able to see, the attacks more often than not are from the right wingers.
I do believe that the last sentence is especially true.
Isn't it amazing. So many here with ties to Vietnam veterans and so many differing viewpoints. Nearly every male in my family has served in the Armed Forces and this down to third cousins. Many of them served in Vietnam. Every one of them has bad feelings towards the peace movement in the 60s and 70s.
I will finish your sentence. sm
an impossible thing for YOU.
regarding your list sentence
your body might not be there anymore.
is there a subj in that sentence?
just does not make sense. Please proofread what you post so you don't look illiterate.
I just went to the link and the first sentence
states it was from January. I am not even sure he is saying rates will skyrocket, but that will be the argument against his plan to cap greenhouse gases and retrofitting.
Your last sentence of the third paragraph was just as...sm
uncalled for, I believe, and untrue.
ADD time. The end of that sentence should be
shares in the responsibility at this point.
Don't need to explain to you, you explained yourself in your last sentence.
t
Thanks for the post. I was especially impressed by the last sentence...
of the article. At least they showed both sides (good for them), albeit three paragraphs on Palin and 1 line on Obama. Big sentence tho.
Can't ge past the ignorance of the first sentence here.
the constitution is not a static document and is, in fact, a living, dynamic, changing, vital document. To wrap you brain around this concept, consider this. The orignal Constitution contained 10 amendments. Amendments 11 through 27 commenced over time as such: 1795, 1804, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1913x2, 1919, 1920, 1933x2, 1951, 1961, 1964, 1967, 1971 and 1992.
There. You see? The (progressive) authors of the constitution in their wisdom provided the mechanism of amendement, that would allow for change and growth. That makes it a living, breathing, dynamic document. Got it?
Next time you try to interpret Obama's book, watch your step.
That last sentence just didn't EVEN sound right! sm
And I think the missing sheep brains is the main thing in this picture.
Did you forget to finish our sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Did you forget to finish your sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Your very first sentence, "Trying to bomb...
... a grassroots political force into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy," reminds me very much of a quote by Michael Corleone in Godfather II, where they're in Cuba trying to "do business" while in the midst of unrest and rebellion of the people.
Michael Corleone: I saw a strange thing today. Some rebels were being arrested. One of them pulled the pin on a grenade. He took himself and the captain of the command with him. Now, soldiers are paid to fight; the rebels aren't.
Hyman Roth: What does that tell you?
Michael Corleone: It means they could win.
Although Israel has very sophisticated American-made weapons, maybe, as above, that won't be enough. 
Interesting sentence construction.
I would have gone with the adjective ''grammatical'' to modify the noun ''mistakes'' rather than using the noun ''grammar'' to modify another noun, or perhaps ''bad mistakes in grammar.'' Then again, I might have linked ''bad-grammar'' as a compound modifier, but then that's just me (as well most who are truly English literate.)
The last sentence is particularly worrisome for Michigan.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061804053.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Senate's Health-Care Draft Calls for Most to Buy Insurance, Nixes Obama's 'Public Option'
By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 19, 2009
A draft proposal in the Senate to overhaul the nation's health-care system would require most people to buy health insurance, authorize an expansion of Medicaid coverage and create consumer-owned cooperative plans instead of the government coverage that President Obama is seeking.
The document, distributed among members of the Senate Finance Committee yesterday afternoon, addressed none of the funding questions that have consumed House and Senate negotiators in recent days. But it included an array of coverage provisions that were drastically scaled back from earlier versions, as lawmakers seek to shrink the bill's overall cost. The proposal, for instance, would reduce the pool of middle-class beneficiaries eligible for a new tax credit meant to make insurance more affordable.
The absence of a "public option" marks perhaps the most significant omission. Obama and many Democrats had sought a public option to ensure affordable, universal coverage, but as many as 10 Senate Democrats have protested the idea as unfair to private insurers. In its place, the draft circulated yesterday outlines a co-op approach modeled after rural electricity and telecom providers, subject to government oversight and funded with federal seed money.
Yesterday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) met with four Republicans, including Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa), the ranking GOP member on the panel, along with two Democratic colleagues in an attempt to find bipartisan consensus. Baucus dubbed the group "the coalition of the willing."
Meanwhile, in the House, Democrats are exploring a range of funding options, including a surtax on the rich and an increase in the payroll tax imposed on all U.S. workers. The list also includes new taxes on sugary drinks and alcohol, along with broader levies, such as a national value-added tax of up to 3 percent.
The Senate's preferred option -- taxing the health benefits that millions of Americans receive through their employers -- is also on the House list. So is Obama's favorite idea: limiting the value of itemized deductions for the nation's wealthiest 3 million taxpayers.
Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee charged with developing a financing plan, said lawmakers have not "embraced any particular source of revenue." But he confirmed that big, broad-based taxes like the payroll tax and a value-added tax are under discussion, mainly because they have the potential to raise "a lot of money" for an expansion of health coverage expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
The House will not unveil a financing plan until after the July 4 recess, Neal said, though House leaders were expected to release an outline of the rest of their plan today, with a goal of putting a bill to vote later this summer. The Senate is aiming to debate its legislation in July as well, and is seeking a bill that would cost less than $1 trillion.
Maintaining that tight schedule could prove difficult, though, because daunting issues remain in both chambers. One area of contention is the extent to which private employers must subsidize public coverage for their workers if the companies don't offer their own plan or if the premiums are unaffordable. The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if lawmakers don't find the right formula, employees may flee their company plans for federal coverage, sending government costs soaring.
The draft in the Senate committee spells out one possible solution: It would require employers to pay 50 percent of Medicaid costs for workers enrolled in the low-income program and 100 percent of the cost of health-insurance tax credits for eligible employees. Workers could forfeit employer coverage only if the cost exceeds 12.5 percent of their income.
The draft, earlier reported on by washingtonpost.com blogger Ezra Klein, spells out four options for requiring employers to provide coverage, with exemptions for firms with up to 200 employees. It would fine individuals who do not purchase coverage, though certain groups, including Native Americans and undocumented workers, would be exempted.
It also would loosen eligibility requirements for Medicaid, a proposal certain to alarm many governors who are grappling with budget crises.
Proves you don't read anything..Says in the 1st sentence he is Gov. Lynch of
x
Did you just use the name Rush and the word honesty in the same sentence? (sm)
Limbaugh lied about 9-11 Commission report
Limbaugh falsely claimed "Nobody ever said there was" a connection between Iraq, 9-11 attacks
Limbaugh misrepresented Duelfer report on Iraqi WMDs
Limbaugh lied about AIDS
Limbaugh overstated the minimum wage
Limbaugh made false claims about the Democratic National Convention
Limbaugh distorted the Kyoto Protocol
Limbaugh falsely accused Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Limbaugh claimed Clintons are funding Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
Limbaugh lied to defend Swift Boat Vets
Limbaugh misstated Pew report on journalists
Limbaugh mischaracterized the federal deficit
Limbaugh misstated federal education spending
Limbaugh lied about Bush's false uranium claim
And that isn't even the tip of the iceburg for him. And by the way, what's with the *he owns his problems* junk? Does that mean that since he admits he's a drug addict then he's not a bad drug addict? Give me a break.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180006
Haha! I so agree, she summed it up in 1 sentence, there is nothing more to say!..nm
nm
That wasn't my whole message - you just picked out the sentence you wanted to
But that's no surprise. There was one sentence in those two paragraphs about how the crats always blame the pubs, but they never take responsibility and blame the people in their own party who are at fault too. So you take one sentence out of the whole two paragraphs and say that's what the whole message was about. Nice try. My message was about this admistration so far being a disaster in less than one month. The only ones who see it okay are the kool-aid drinkers, and that I'm sick of all the people acting as though there was never a United States until Obama came along. Since you evidently did not read my message I'll repeat it now.
American has been around for over 200 years. We've had some good presidents and we've had some bad presidents, but Obama did not discover a new country here.
Since McCain was not elected nobody can say whether or not he would have been a better president or not, so time to put that dog to rest.
In the last sentence of her post she retracts what she said in her subject line, lol!..nm
nm
Your first sentence really shows was a mean hate filled shallow person you are.
Too bad McCain can't form a sentence w/o gagging, slurring, making faces
That is his problem. Obama is eloquent... oh well
Ignore MT and maybe it will go away nm
dd
Will ignore you.
Your postings have deteriorated to a level of delusional ranting, it seems. You bring up things I've never mentioned, accusing me of all sorts of crazy things. It's pretty messed up all in all. I wonder if it made you feel better about yourself or relieved some tension with all your grievances. I am not going to read your posts for a while. They are disturbing in their being out of touch with reality and their accusations and they waste my time. End of story.
PS>>>>You guys keep giving us orders on how to act on the liberal board, that we shouldn't campaign for each other, etc., etc. Why is that? Isn't this our board? Who made you the liberal board police? Also, why would you say I'm not Lurker's equal? What is the point in that comment? Did I ever boast that I was? Just things for you to think about, don't need answers as these are rhetorical questions.
Just ignore them, and hopefully they will go away...sm
You brought up very valid points in your original post.
They're just trying to get your goat. It's one of the more childish games they like to play on the board, as you know.
At least they're not being potty-mouthed. For that, this heckler here, gets half a point for playing slightly nice.
I don't just ignore anything --
There are parts of what Obama stands for that I do not agree with, there are parts of what McCain stands for that I do not agree with. Either way I voted this time, there were things I was going to have to overlook.
can't ignore this
I don't make this stuff up. WND is very reputable.
Sen. Barack Obama is a Muslim of Kenyan origins who studied in Islamic schools and whose campaign may have been financed by people in the Islamic and African worlds, Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi said during a recent televised national rally. Read the latest now on WND.com.
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78309
WorldNetDaily
http://wnd.com
MAJOR STORIES NOW POSTED:
* Report: Islamic radicals use child porn to exchange info
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78342
* Feds confiscate, pirate investor's gun shop software
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78334
* Radio host scolded over Obama coverage
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78327
* The 'how-to' plan to criminalize Christianity
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78339
* 'G-Man' Liddy, Farah debate nation's future on C-SPAN
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78314
TODAY'S WND POLL:
* What do you make of video showing Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi claiming Obama is a Muslim?
http://forums.wnd.com/polls
OTHER MUST-READ HIGHLIGHTS:
* Jesse Jackson now off-limits for news briefings
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78318
* Michelle tape to 'change' U.S. 'political atmosphere'?
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78259
* College associate editor says 'Obama is my Jesus'
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78197
STILL ON-SITE:
* Second lawsuit challenges Obama's citizenship
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78111
All this, plus much more and the latest breaking news.
WorldNetDaily.com is faster than ever -- and no more pop-ups!
Make it your homepage today!
http://wnd.com
Just ignore her...she seems to be just trying.
Ok, let's just ignore...(sm)
the military defense attorney who stated exactly who is in Gitmo. According to your statement, he must just be lying. What about all those prosecuters who have resigned or asked for reassignment because they knew what was going on and didn't want any part of it? If Gitmo prisoners are as bad as you say they are, why haven't they been tried and sentenced? But I guess you know better because, what, Bush said so?
I think a lot of people miss the point of Gitmo. In my opinion, Gitmos is nothing more than a tool to play on American fears (meanwhile sacrificing all US credibility). From your statement, I think it would be safe to say that it seems to have been effective on a few.
I hate to see you go and I wish you could just ignore, or even...sm
wear your feelings on your sleeve and brush them off everyday. One thing I learned a long time ago on this board is that we can not change the conservatives and they are not going to change us, so I think the separate boards is a good thing, so I do try to stay off their board but sometimes it is tempting to respond to them when they are bashing us over there.
But, in politics there are going to be trolls, there are going to be people who don't want to do anything but argue and incite, so just stand your ground and figure out which ones are here to debate (in rare form) and don't take the other ones serious at all.
You are correct. Please ignore
my above post. I was given incorrect information and failed to check its validity before passing it on. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. My humble apologies.
Yes, definitely ignore the past if it does not...
fit your agenda. It clouds nothing. Somehow I cannot see you blasting JFK for Viet Nam. Just cannot see that happening...though you swear you would. You just can't bring yourself to be disguated about something that is not happening NOW? Wanna talk about Carter and Iran? Oh no, we can't do that, that was in the PAST.
Well hang in there piglet...as soon as Congress pulls funding, the troops are brought home because of it, Viet Nam revisited, the horror that will become Iraq when that happens making NOW look like a walk in the park...you will be able to ignore THAT as the past also.
Must be nice.
Then probably the best thing to do would have been to ignore it...
and not call more attention to it? Maybe?
Last try - ignore typo ś" after why.
xx
Why do you just ignore the important
the gutter? Girl, you need to get a life! Oh, that's right, you said you did already. Transcribing 3500 lines a day, then the rest of a day stirring the pot on an internet forum just isn't my idea of a life.
Why do you just ignore the hard
the gutter? Girl, you need to get a life! Oh, that's right, you said you did already. Transcribing 3500 lines a day, then the rest of a day stirring the pot on an internet forum just isn't my idea of a life.
|
