sam, do not even give this person the honor of a response. nm
Posted By: oldtimer on 2008-09-04
In Reply to: let me ask you this - tootietoo
.
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
Perhaps you'd like to give a common sense response to
Would be interested to hear your spin on that.
Some honor
Hope his family is duly impressed. What a friggin' bunch of psychos.
You can't honor the flag and still think about those things? nm
x
Alaska AG: State employees won't honor
By STEVE QUINN
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) - Alaska's investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power, a potentially damaging distraction for John McCain's presidential campaign, ran into intensified resistance Tuesday when the attorney general said state employees would refuse to honor subpoenas in the case.
In a letter to state Sen. Hollis French, the Democrat overseeing the investigation, Republican Attorney General Talis Colberg asked that the subpoenas be withdrawn. He also said the employees would refuse to appear unless either the full state Senate or the entire Legislature votes to compel their testimony.
Colberg, who was appointed by Palin, said the employees are caught between their respect for the Legislature and their loyalty to the governor, who initially agreed to cooperate with the inquiry but has increasingly opposed it since McCain chose her as his running mate.
"This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity," Colberg wrote.
Last week, French's Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed 13 people. They include 10 employees of Palin's administration and three who are not: her husband, Todd Palin; John Bitney, Palin's former legislative liaison who now is chief of staff for Republican House Speaker John Harris; and Murlene Wilkes, a state contractor.
French did not immediately return a telephone call Tuesday for comment.
Earlier in the day, Harris, who two months ago supported the "Troopergate" investigation, openly questioned its impartiality and raised the possibility of delaying the findings.
Like Colberg's letter, the surprise maneuver by Harris reflected deepening resolve by Republicans to spare Palin embarrassment or worse in the final weeks of the presidential campaign.
And it marked a further fraying of a bipartisan consensus, formed by a unanimous panel before Palin became McCain's running mate, that her firing of the state's public safety commissioner justified the ethical investigation.
In a letter, Harris wrote that what "started as a bipartisan and impartial effort is becoming overshadowed by public comments from individuals at both ends of the political spectrum," and he urged lawmakers to meet quickly to decide on a course.
"What I may be in favor of is having the report delayed, but only if it becomes a blatant partisan issue," he told The Associated Press, while indicating he already believes it has become politically tainted.
Democratic state Sen. Kim Elton, chairman of the Legislative Council, the 14-member panel that authorized the probe, had no immediate comment on Harris' request. Under an unusual power-sharing agreement, the council is made up of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats.
At issue is whether Palin abused her power by pressing the commissioner to remove her former brother-in-law as an Alaska state trooper, then firing the commissioner when he didn't.
The matter risks casting a shadow on Palin's reputation, central to her appeal in the campaign, that she is a clean-government advocate who takes on entrenched interests - not a governor who tried to use her authority behind the scenes to settle a personal score.
Palin has defended her behavior and said she welcomed the investigation. "Hold me accountable," she said. But she and the McCain campaign have taken actions that could slow the probe, possibly past Election Day.
Also Tuesday, five Republican state lawmakers filed a lawsuit against an investigation they called "unlawful, biased, partial and partisan." None serves on the bipartisan Legislative Council that unanimously approved the inquiry. They want it pushed past the election or top Democrats removed from the probe.
Making clear the dispute has ramifications beyond Alaska, Liberty Legal Institute, a Texas-based legal advocacy group, was working on the lawsuit. The institute has taken on a variety of cases in defense of conservative Christian positions.
Elton called the lawsuit "a distraction."
"The silver lining in this action initiated by the five lawmakers is that some of that debate now has been kicked to the judicial branch which, unlike the Legislature and the governor's office, is more insulated from the red-hot passion of presidential politics," he said.
Palin fired public safety commissioner Walt Monegan in July.
Weeks later, it emerged that Palin, her husband, Todd, and several high-level staffers had contacted Monegan about state trooper Mike Wooten, who had gone through a nasty divorce from Palin's sister before Palin became governor. While Monegan says no one from the administration ever told him directly to fire Wooten, he says their repeated contacts made it clear they wanted Wooten gone.
Palin maintains she fired Monegan over budget disagreements, not because he wouldn't dismiss her ex-brother-in-law. She has sought through her lawyer to have the matter investigated in a more favorable forum, the state personnel board.
Obama Blows Off Medal of Honor Recipients
Obama Blows Off Medal of Honor Recipients... Not Exactly
Scott Isaacs on Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:10 AM EST
According to TSO who was at the “Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball”, this newly sworn-in President for the first time in 56 years blew off the ball (that’s 14 Inaugurations).
Some background on the ball;
The American Legion sponsors the ball, which recognizes recipients of Medal of Honor, the nation’s highest military award. It started in 1953 for President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s first inauguration.
Event co-sponsors include 13 other veterans service organizations, among them the Military Order of the Purple Heart and the Paralyzed Veterans of America.
So where was our new President instead of honoring Medal of Honor recipients who by some miracle are still alive? According to Huffington Post, this was his schedule for Inaugural celebrations;
Later that day, the Presidential Inaugural Committee will host 10 official inaugural balls:
— Neighborhood Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
— Obama Home States (Illinois and Hawaii) Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
— Biden Home States (Pennsylvania and Delaware) Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
— Midwest Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
— Mid-Atlantic Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
— Western Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
— Commander in Chief’s Ball at the National Building Museum.
— Southern Inaugural Ball at the National Guard Armory.
— Eastern Inaugural Ball at Union Station.
— Youth Inaugural Ball at the Washington Hilton.
Unofficial balls include:
— Congressional Black Caucus Inaugural Ball at the Capitol Hilton.
— Creative Coalition Inaugural Ball at the Harman Center for the Arts.
— Recording Industry Association of America’s ball for Feeding America.
— BET’s Inaugural Ball at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel.
— Africa on the Potomac inaugural celebration at Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, Va.
— American Music Inaugural Ball at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.
— Inaugural Purple Ball at the Fairmont Hotel.
— Human Rights Campaign’s Equality Ball at the Renaissance Mayflower Hotel.
— Inaugural Peace Ball at the Smithsonian National Postal Museum.
— Impact Film Fund ball.
Mr. Wolf from Blackfive sends along this link to which Inaugural Balls Obama actually attended last night.
Source
Blackfive, which I read occasionally for military pieces, confirmed that President Obama did not come to the inaugural ball. So I became curious because the only two sources were two blogs and one source that consisted of initials. Therefore, I did what any rational person would do: I contacted the American Legion to get the straight story from the people who would know. I was put in contact with a very pleasant gentleman named Craig Roberts who is the American Legion's Media Relations Manager and after our conversation he e-mailed me this statement which I will include in its entirety:
In answer to your inquiry:
The American Legion, as it has on every inauguration evening since 1953, hosted the Salute to Heroes Inaugural Banquet & Ball on January 20th. The quadrennial event is co-sponsored with fourteen veterans service and military service organizations and honors recipients of the Medal of Honor. Forty-seven of these heroes attended this year’s event which was held in the Renaissance Washington DC Hotel.
President Obama was invited but did not attend. Vice-President Joe Biden did appear, however, and was very warmly received. The new President’s absence was understandable considering the unprecedented logistical challenges presented by the vastly increased number of visitors to this inauguration and the necessary attendant security measures. The American Legion, as an organization, does not feel offended or “snubbed.”
Thank you,
Craig Roberts
Media Relations Manager
The American Legion
1608 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
202.263.2982 (direct)
First of all, I would like to thank Mr. Roberts for taking my call and taking the time to compose this statement so that I can share it on behalf of the American Legion. So to those fellow Obama supporters that think this ball did not happen, it did. It was omitted from the media outlets it was omitted from because of logistical challenges due to the extraordinary number of people that flooded Washington D.C. to see Barack Obama be inaugurated as the 44th president and it is not yet on the American Legion's website (as I type this at 8:30 A.M. on 1-23-09) because of some difficulties in updating the website. However, there will be media coverage of the event forthcoming.
I have found out also that the likely reason that Barack Obama attended the auxiliary balls that he did is because six of the balls that he attended were held in the same building. Therefore, attending those balls and the others that he attended were the most efficient with regards to security. It is no secret that President Obama has had questions surrounding his security, that is evident by observing that he was the earliest presidential candidate ever to get a security detail. If the Secret Service felt it prudent to guard him so early in the campaign can the reader imagine what the Secret Service feels is prudent now that he is the President of the United States?
The most likely reason that President Obama did not go to the "Salute to Heroes" inaugural ball is because it was held in the Renaissance Hotel which consists of 16 floors. There was an event called the "Illinois Party - Presidential Event" held at the Renaissance the night before that the then-President-elect did not attend either (I have a call in to the President's press office asking for confirmation of this information which was given to me by one of my sources for this story). Given the amount of time and resources it would have taken to clear a 16 floor hotel as well as protect it while President Obama was inside, I can only guess that he was advised by his Presidential Protection Detail not to attend either inaugural ball because of the building and the inherent problems in securing and then protecting it. The sheer number of people crowding the streets and staying in the hotel surely presented a formidable screening problem as well. But, there's your story... it's not as sexy as "Barack Obama Hates The Military" but it is the truth as best I can tell after talking to the organization responsible for hosting the event and doing some research and educated guesswork about why a security team wouldn't want to protect a principal in the Renaissance with more than 2 million extra people in Washington D.C.
Update: It would appear that, according to Stars & Stripes that Obama had some Medal of Honor recipients at an inaugural ball that he attended. This gives the number of living Medal of Honor recipients as 99, but I believe that two have passed away since that number was compiled leaving 97. There are 7 in this picture and there were 47 at the American Legion inaugural event. I'm curious if there were more at the event this photo was taken at.
Further update: I received an e-mail from Mr. Roberts today (which I would have gotten yesterday if I had not miscommunicated my e-mail address to him) with his original statement along with a new statement. I will include both statements in their entirety:
My statement on behalf of our National Adjutant, Dan Wheeler:
"The American Legion, as it has on every inauguration evening since 1953, hosted the Salute to Heroes Inaugural Banquet & Ball on January 20th . The quadrennial event is co-sponsored by fourteen veterans service and military service organizations and honors recipients of the Medal of Honor. Forty-seven of these heroes attended this year's event. President Obama was invited but did not attend. Vice-President Joe Biden did appear, however, and was very warmly received. From The American Legion's point of view, the new President's absence was understandable considering the unprecedented logistical challenges presented by the vastly increased number of visitors to this inauguration and the necessary attendant security measures. The National Adjutant of The American Legion states that, as an organization, The Legion does not feel offended or "snubbed" by the President's failure to appear."
Mr. Wheeler's message as of noon today (January 26):
"We extended an invitation as we always do. There are numerous Balls and we know he can't attend them all. Of course, we would have loved for him to make an appearance, but he didn't. It's a logisticalnightmare. He did meet with the troops at the Commander In Chief's Ball, and we are grateful for that. Our Ball wasn't about the President; it was about the Medal of Honor recipients and the veterans and families who were there. We are grateful that the Vice President appeared, and our guests were very appreciative.
"That having been said, there are much more important issues to dwell on, which we intend to do. We look forward to working with the new administration on ensuring full and guaranteed funding for VA health care services, and the very best treatment for our service people who have been wounded, and on the quality of life of all members of the Armed Forces and their families, as well as the maintenance of a national security force that will deter any enemy from considering an attack on America."
Michelle Malkin has it right.."no honor among thieves" and
x
Not the worst...Jimmy Carter holds that dubious honor....
Mr. Democat Jimmy Carter. Check out the economy while he was in office...and what Obama is doing will make that look like a walk in the park. Oh, but the rest of the world will love us....LOL. Ya kill me. LOL.
Bush memo instructs officials: "Say I had honor and dignity."
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this! "Honor" and "dignity" are NOT words that would come to mind to describe Bush.
What is INCREDIBLE to me is that Bush's "memoir," "A Charge to Keep" is referenced here. The original ghostwriter (and long-time Bush family friend) for that memoir was fired and his reputation tarnished (in usual Bush fashion) because Bush talked TOO much during his interviews with the writer, including how he wanted to invade Iraq back in 1999 -- 2 years before 9/11. I've posted that link on here before, but here it is again:
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php
For Bush's staff, upbeat talking points on his tenure
Administration officials get a memo from the White House suggesting what to say about the last eight years: President Bush upheld 'the honor and the dignity of his office,' for one.
By Peter Nicholas
December 9, 2008
Reporting from Washington -- In case any Bush administration officials have trouble summing up the boss' record, the White House is providing a few helpful suggestions.
A two-page memo that has been sent to Cabinet members and other high-ranking officials offers a guide for discussing Bush's eight-year tenure during their public speeches.
Titled "Speech Topper on the Bush Record," the talking points state that Bush "kept the American people safe" after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, lifted the economy after 2001 through tax cuts, curbed AIDS in Africa and maintained "the honor and the dignity of his office."
The document presents the Bush record as an unalloyed success.
It mentions none of the episodes that detractors say have marred his presidency: the collapse of the housing market and major financial services companies, the flawed intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war, the federal response to Hurricane Katrina or the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
In a section on the economy, speakers are invited to say that Bush cut taxes after 2001, setting the stage for years of job growth.
As for the current economic crisis, the memo says that Bush "responded with bold measures to prevent an economic meltdown."
The document is otherwise silent on the recession, which claimed 533,000 jobs in November, the highest number in 34 years.
A copy of the memo was obtained by The Times' Washington bureau. A spokesman for Bush said Monday that the White House routinely sends out suggestions to officials and allies on ways to talk about the administration's record.
"What we have in mind with these documents is we feel the president's many accomplishments haven't been given the attention they deserve and in some cases have been purposely ignored," said Carlton Carroll, a White House spokesman.
No one is required to recite the talking points laid out by the White House, Carroll said.
The memo closes with a reference to Bush's 1999 memoir, "A Charge to Keep":
"Above all, George W. Bush promised to uphold the honor and the dignity of his office. And through all the challenges and trials of his time in office, that is a charge that our president has kept."
One accomplishment cited is passage of the No Child Left Behind law, Bush's attempt to improve education. "He promised to raise standards and accountability in public schools -- and delivered the No Child Left Behind Act," the talking points read.
On the presidential campaign trail this year, Democratic candidates found that any criticism of No Child Left Behind was a surefire applause line.
President-elect Barack Obama promised to revamp the program, contending that it elevated test-taking at the expense of a well-rounded education.
Nicholas is a writer in our Washington bureau.
peter.nicholas@latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-bush9-2008dec09,0,4145069.story
Another classy response. I won't say liberal response,
because I don't think you and these pile-on posters are indicative of liberals as a whole. Don't know why they let you speak for them...but that is up to them. Obviously you don't think compassion is a personality trait...obviously you feel that it can be turned on and off to suit your agenda. So be it.
yes, the first person did....the person replying to that post...
was talking about the founding fathers...who came along a long time after the witch trials. You replied to the second post, not the first one. I was replying to you based on that. Purtianism came first...Christianity was the religion practiced by the founding fathers. It is evident in their writings and in most of our original documents.
I think we can stop whipping this dead horse now.
Whoops....A person....not I person.
.
no response ....
No response
We are not supposed to cross post, so I am respecting the administrator's request.
My response
There is no sound byte answer about Rev. Wright. I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the fact that men of his generation experienced life in America differently than the whites did. Historically, many black churches have been and are political forums, stemming from the days of slavery, when the churches provided a refuge where freedom of speech was possible. I don't know what Obama did or did not hear, and neither do you. What I do know is that he has written extensively about the confusion he had over the "black" part of his identity and part of his search for meaning, purpose and belonging in his younger days was played out in South Chicago. If you have read anything about the church at all, you will know that they have been engaged in many extensive and successful outeach programs in their community and I suspect his "association" with Trinity was focused and centered around that. Too bad a person cannot be judged but his deeds, rather than wild speculation, innuendo and smear campaigns about the company he keeps.
A response from.....sm
To the first 4 paragraphs decrying the decay of black leadership while attempting to lay the blame at the feet of the democratic party, encouraging blacks to bail and proclaiming the dawn of a new day for black conservatism, all that needs to be said is yeah, right. The proof is in the pudding. Black voters are backing Obama 94-1, according to this random poll citation: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1192 …6% stampede, and we have not even made it through the convention. Great big whoop.
The abortion graphics let us know that the minister is pro-life. OK. Fine. Next, we have this twisted accusation that Obama supports partial birth abortion. That is not his position on abortion, and it is laid out in no uncertain terms on his website and countless times in his speeches and townhall meetings. What he said is that he supports the notion that things should stay as they have been and that those issues should be determined on a state-by-state basis at the local level. Same thing with regard to same-sex marriage and the federal government not being in the business of defining the meaning of marriage, which he clearly believes is a union between a man and a woman (not exactly the most popular position in the gay community).
Yet despite this, the pastor insists he is champion of the gay agenda and the abortion "industry." Never mind that the democratic party platform includes many pro-active initiatives that conservatives will continue to obstruct regarding abortion prevention through sex education, birth control, encouraging and enabling single parents to keep their children with parenting education, job skills training and making adoption laws more user friendly. Most democrats perceive the conservative views on abortion as caring about unborn right from conception to the moment of birth. Beyond that, the babies kind of fall off the radar screen.
For this radical stance (i.e., preserving status quo), the pastor evokes the Barack HUSSEIN Obama slur and is all indignant that Obama puts himself out there as a Christian. Champion of the dead horse drumbeat. This guy is not looking real credible at this point. Performer, he calls him, doubting Obama's sincerity. The "God's on our side" mantra rings hollow as well, considering the conservative pathologic disdain for poverty and conflicts over notions such as the measure of a nation's moral character is only as strong as it's care for the least among us.
He then proceeds to twist the words of THE greatest black leader of modern times…MLK. The infanticide he referred to was the practice of killing female infants/gender selection in biblical patriarchal societies.…a practice emphatically condemned by the Islamic Prophet Mohammed in the Quran back in the day. Twist, turn, spin.
Lets see. Obama is evil incarnate because homophobic interpretations of the Bible do not impress him as much as the Sermon on the Mount? That would be the moral teachings of Jesus, to include the Lord's Prayer, the injunctions to "resist not evil" and "turn the other cheek", as well as Jesus' version of the Golden Rule. Other lines often quoted are the references to "salt of the Earth," "light of the world," and "JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED." These are the core beliefs of the Christian doctrine. Drag out the tar and feathers and hang him high for that sacrilege.
Then another call to arms for those 6% black conservatives, a 2nd reference to Barack HUSSEIN Obama. As for the upcoming black conservative youth, it is the youth vote from the remaining 94% blacks and whites alike that just might boost Obama over the top, last I heard.
Then of course, there are a few paragraphs of closing prayers. If this is what it means to be "right," this guy ends up making the Obama nation look better and better.
response
So you are saying all other media outlets except Fox are liberal and therefore cannot be trusted to provide accurate information. Therefore, you can only get true information from their network, because they tell you that is so. I see where you are coming from.
response
All the examples you use about being make to hate, if the individuals mentioned being indoctrinated resisted by using their minds to seek broader or alternative information could simply resist the information being forced on them and resist hating. Poor sentence structure, I admit.
response
McCain did the same thing when he was defeated in N. Caroline because Rove used dirty tactics like push polls calling people and asking if they would vote for McCain if they knew he had a biracial baby. McCain had to suck it up and stand next to Bush and announce that he would support him. I thought he was ethical enough to resist using such tactics when he the chance to campaign. but I was wrong.
response
Of course I believe they can. Luckily you tacked on white supremacists right there at the end or I would have been appalled at the assumption that non-caucasian, non-christian people are incapable of thinking for themselves.
response...
Both Bush and McCain supported privatizing social security IF a person wanted to...neither have advocated making it mandatory. Perhaps if that had been done in the first place, it would not have been a fund that a Democratic congress could have raided to fund other programs. I personally would like to have control of my own funds (except congress has already spent them) and put in a CD..not the stock market. So that govt grubby paws could not get at it anymore. But that is just me.
I think the operative word is McCain said he did not disagree. He did not say he himself would re-start the draft. In the world the way it is, if enlistment really dropped off, it might be necessary just so we would have the size Armed Forces we would need, should the need arise. That just makes good sense. A peace time draft might be a good thing...two years in the service might change the direction some kids might choose to go. Would also provide some skills training and the ability to go to college after their service...instead of gangs...instead of being on the street...learn a trade, get a job...I don't necessarily think it would be a bad thing. The Armed Forces have been good careers for a lot of men and women...the Armed Forces are not just for war. But again...that is just me.
See my response above. And you are right - sm
I think both sides need to leave the experience thing alone.
The rep response is
lie, lie, lie and CYA. This whole SP story is going to blow up in their faces. At least, that's what I'm expecting, but sure will be amusing to watch over the next couple of weeks. Joe Scarborough, a former republican representative, said he would have never chosen her with just 1 1/2 years of governership and a mayor of a small town as experience. The media is not expected to ask questions or interview Ms. SP at least for two weeks yet. What are they hiding? Why can't the media ask her questions? This is quite as someone said before "a sideshow." Very entertaining.
response (sm)
Let the oil companies bail them out since they directly benefited from some of the bad management decisions.
This would never happen. I doubt the oil companies care if the US auto industry goes down. If it does go down, then we will have imports, for which we will also have to buy gas (which would actually be a better alternative for the oil companies as opposed to us building vehicles that would not be dependent on oil).
Don't bail out the companies. Give the money to the workers for re-education, etc., while the auto companies restructure.
Re-education takes time. If these workers are already or soon to be out of work, they need jobs yesterday. They have families to feed, and that can't wait for a new career.
I think the best approach is to go ahead and bail them out (as much as that stinks), but set criteria they have to meet that would show re-tooling and progression to non-gas vehicles. I like the Pickens plan myself.
You know, that was my first response too.
but would like to see him cut loose a little and put it against a contrasting charcoal gray shirt. I think he's a knockout....nothing sexier than a confident, intelligent man with a heart of gold.
and your response to GP was so much
Your original post to wasn't an attack on the pubs? Hypocrit.
Response
Yes, we do only have one president at a time.
However, both the incoming and outgoing Presidents have a responsibility -- they are handling the nation's business.
As Obama comes into power, it is very transparent of him to keep the nation apprised of what he is doing, thinking, planning.
Good for him! I hope we hear from him every single day!
It doesn't matter whether it is Obama or it would have been McCain -- we need to hear what the incoming President is planning and doing.
response (sm)
Move to Russia----that's the problem. If you guys are confronted with any sort of ideas that are not part of your belief your first instict seems to be to just remove it. That's not tolerance -- that's segregation.
As far as kids go, I would challenge you to show me 1 child 4th grade and up (probably lower than that) that does not know what *gay* means, and homosexuality is not being taught in schools now. As far as the TV, mine came with a remote with little buttons for changing the channel and a handy dandy on/off switch. Toy dispensers in gas station bathrooms: Yes, there are some of those out there. However, they are no where near as common as you would make them out to be.
Marriage -- what is it to you if they call it marriage? You do realize there are christian gays and lesbians? The problem is that on this issue christians seem to think that everyone should live by their rules when everyone else has a different set of rules. What about Muslims who are married? Is thier marriage worth anything in your eyes? They didn't get married with God as a witness as you would discribe Him. I'm married and yet I'm and athiest. Is my marriage worthless?
Christianity is an all or nothing proposition. When it comes to laying down legislation for a nation as diverse as ours, that all or nothing mentality does nothing but divide the nation.
Response...(sm)
Whether you aggree with Al Jazeera or not, they are a valid news organization. They show the viewpoint of others in the region. In order to understand a situation I feel it is important to understand both sides of it, and then make an informed opinion. Your unwillingness to even consider what they say as a different viewpoint is pretty typical of Americans, which in my opinion is to only concern themselves with the viewpoint that best suits thier agenda.
Why is it that your only response....(sm)
to any discussion is just one-line BS? Do you have any evidence to show that the people being held at Gitmo are what you say they are? Can you show where this defense attorney is incorrect? Do you perhaps have inside info on exactly what will happen to the prisoners? Or better yet, do you even have any kind of rationale for your opinion other than your obvious paranoia concerning bringing the prisoners here? There is the concept of us having to pay for their upkeep, but hey, guess what? We're already paying for that. In addition to that, how much do you think it costs just to keep Gitmo open, not only financially but in political capital as well?
Helpful hint: If when responding to a post if you click inside the big white box underneath the subject line, it will allow you to type in a more detailed note, thereby, possibly (and I use that term loosely), giving more credibility to your posts.
Well, at least YOU got a response.
I wrote to them, as well, and didn't receive a reply at all (not that I was expecting one of any substance).
I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who wrote to them.
Response...
1. You'll find it useful to look at the upcoming budgets and then re-discover the notion of percentages.
2. If unions infested the transcription industry, you might very well not have a job. Don't believe me? Tour Detroit.
3. Trash talk that typifies political discourse today, says nothing, doesn't advance your cause, and doesn't merit response.
4. More of #3.
Response...
You have a very narrow view of taxes, my friend, and obviously have no idea what's coming down the tracks.
We are already seeing increases in taxes (on everyone) at the state and local level, for one thing, and many more are in the works. Look for higher sales tax rates, higher car license fees...oh, who knows where your piddly little "increase" will wind up going?
You can't possibly - even if you're no economist - believe that the government can print $trillions and obligate the nation to $trillions more in debt and none of the cost is going to come home to roost on your doorstep. You're just going to float along while someone else ("the rich") pay for all of this, eh? You're a politician's dream come true.
Politicians count on people who will look no further down the road than this week's pay stub and scream for joy at the $23.48 increase. "Lord, let them never realize that we're going to take it all back away from them at some other level of government - and so much more besides", pray the politicians.
My response is --
President Obama's sequel came out during his presidency. His first book was actually released in 2005 before he even entered politics. The income was listed on his taxes that were released as a presidential candidate.
His charitable contributions were also listed, but the information I just quickly googled said his 2006 contributions amounted to a little over 6% of his income.
He was of interest to folks before he became involved in politics.
what is this in response to?
The original post was not about George Tiller or William Long?
in response --
I have been duly chastised and I accept that. However, i saw no need for him to be "protecting" himself. Noone was bothering him. They stool calmly by and watched him do what he did. Secondly, there was no need to cut the flag down, he could have just removed it. Then, as he removed it, he could have folded it in some way other than just wadding it into a ball.
There was never any confrontation wher he had to be scared or feel threatened - so that is not an adequate defense. I understand that he was upset, I agree that he very well should have been, and I myself am upset about the way things are going in this country and the things that are being allowed to happen.
Yes, I very well do get it!!!
Thanks for an intelligent response
and for the information you supplied. 
Sorry. This was supposed to be in response to LOL
Someone should actually read an article before saying untrue things about it. But that doesn't surprise me. It's in line with the way this administration lies about everything.
Nasty response, I see.
You became nasty. Too bad. Guess you couldn't help yourself and couldn't stay reasonable and even-handed for more than a post or two. I was starting to think I'd been too hard with my thinking that some of the conservative posters were...well...kind of mean-spirited. Apparently I was wrong.
shameful response
But..you see, we liberals arent supposed to point fingers or ask questions, at least that is what the radical right wing is spouting..however, there is no doubt if there was a democrat in the White House, the radical right wing would be asking for his head on a silver platter.
vs, I don't think this response was directed at you...nm
The obvious response would be
if it bothers you so much, why do you watch it? I assume you possess free will. No big bad mean Republican has super-glued your dial to Fox News, I am assuming?
My response is to Hmmmmm.
who hates cats, blah blah blah and the woman accuser/suer who insists that the cat be euthanized. I don't think the owner was the one who brought this to the public forum. There are many things that can be done other than killing the cat as the first and only measure. I read that the cat was being kept confined to home but this was not okay with the accuser. She wants the cat euthanized, nothing less. So.......the extremes I see are a woman who will not agree to consider compromise and another person who hates cats because they behave as they have been designed by the Almighty to behave. I do agree that those who drop off animals somewhere rather than take them to the pound fit into the dangerous category (no pun intended) as well. It makes me wonder how they treat their kids or neighbors. These are the cats who become a nuisance. It takes one generation for a cat to become feral and in order to survive they hunt for prey....also not a rocket scientist level deduction. These cats carry disease because of the prey they kill and the fact that no one is taking care of them so they obviously are not vetted. Usually these cats would rather walk on broken glass than even approach a human and that is 1 good thing. But again, it is the people, not the animals, who are the culprits. Lewis, the cat in question, however, can be kept housebound. The cat can be declawed and defanged (cruel and unusual punishment but it is done and I suppose it is better than being dead). The cat can be medicated...also just a better-than-dead solution. People who feel extremely negative towards animals and would just as soon kill them as look at them as a viable and even desirable solution are those Francis, Kant, Gandhi and I are referring to. I could go into the serial killer thing but I'm sure you know that.
About the response I suspected
You infer that you know how and where I get my information. If you're so freaking clairvoyant then what are you doing here?
The elitism just oozes from you.
Thanks for a great response.
I happen to agree with you, but does this also mean:
That all liberals aren't as bad as they are routinely portrayed on the conservative board?
That all Muslims aren't death-seeking people?
That extremist fringes in any group are bad?
Muslims are routinely portrayed on this board and by the media and by Bush as lumped together in one violent clump. This is unfair, untrue and does nothing to promote peace and understanding.
All religions need to be respected and tolerated in America. Isn't that what America is supposed to stand for?
I should not be surprised by your response. sm
But I have to admit it sickens me more than a little. People like Ward Chamberlain, who has not been found to be a plagiarist, a liar (he is NOT Native American) and he made up his service record, among other things, don't deserve to be defended. Unless you are a socialist and have no problem with liars and thieves. I guess that says it all.
Wow! Loooong response there....
Honestly, I am not even going to take the time to read it. It would take too much effort for something I care little about.
Weird response...to say the least.
Response to Justme sm
Don't believe everything that you read in the news. I am certain that both Hillary and Bill are upset and dispirited after losing such a close primary election. But, the truth of the matter is that Hillary, in spite of losing so close a race picked herself up, dusted herself off and is now actively helping Obama in just a very short couple of weeks. Bill will too. The goal here is to get Obama elected. The Clinton's are Democratic party members first and foremost and know full well what the stakes are in this election.
Give the Clinton's credit. They are not out to "get" Obama and will be a huge help to him in uniting the party behind him.
It's quite an emotionally tough thing to go out campaigning for 15+ months, get that close and within a very short period of time start actively endorsing another candidate, yet they are doing just that.
I don't think you could ask more of either of one of them. They are doing the right thing here, and doing it very quickly.
Thanks for your response. That is probably what would happen....
just did not know for sure.
Taking this response
x
In response to your post...sm
Now let's see. In the absence of a living minimum wage, benefits for impoverished Americans to provide health care, food security, subsistence income for the disabled, shelter for the homeless, low-income housing programs, educational/job training assistance, aid to families with dependent children/temporary assistance to needy families, provision of clean, healthy day care services for single parents who are attending job training programs
Versus
Funding for a delusional "pre-emptive" war/invasion of a sovereign nation and subsequent illegal 5-1/2-year illegal occupation under the pretext of WMDs that to this day cannot be proven, bogus claims of state-sponsored terrorism (the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis and bin Laden/Al-Quaeda, Afghani), the ever popular spread of democracy hogwash (i.e., lets bomb them into democracy) that has resulted in more than 107,000 fatalities that left millions of grieving mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, children, aunts, uncles, cousins and friends it its wake, the destruction of the country's infrastructure and most cherished religious/historical shrines, the installation of countless private war profiteers/mercenaries (are we that greedy and that desperate to increase corporate profits?), the rising gas prices, runaway inflation, collapsing economy, housing crisis, political divide, loss of standing in the international community, the loss of all moral authority/credibility and the embarrassment of a leader and his party's 2008 candidate who have the gall to exhibit the pretense self-righteous indignation on an international stage when Russia behaves in exactly the same manner, not to mention the multi-trillion dollar subsidy of Israel over the past 60 years that has created and supported their nuclear arms for that American military outpost, the resulting Palestinian body count that is nearing 2,000,000 along with all those who grieve their loss, and let's not forget all the other failed Middle East foreign policies that have destabilized the area to the point where Islamic fundamental governments assert their own justification for 9/11 and amassing their own nuclear arsenals in self defense?
Hmmmm. I opt for helping impoverished Americans with the war chest after the troops are withdrawn.
|
