REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES

 

Posted In Forum: All Forums Alabama Alaska Alberta Arizona Arkansas Art/Music Ask A Girl Ask A Guy Australia British Columbia Broken Hearts California Colorado Connecticut Dating & Love Advice Dating Experiences Dating Sites Delaware District Of Columbia Event Hosts forum Florida Georgia Hawaii Health & Fitness Humor Idaho Illinois Indiana Introductions Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Manitoba Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Brunswick New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York Newfoundland News/Current Events North Carolina North Dakota Nova Scotia Off Topic Ohio Oklahoma Ontario Oregon Over 30 Over 45 Pennsylvania Plentyoffish Get Togethers Plentyoffish Site/Suggestions/Help Poems And Quotes Politics Prince Edward Island Profile Reviews Quebec Recipes & Cooking Relationships Religion/Supernatural Rhode Island Saskatchewan Science/Philosophy Sex and Dating Single Parents South Carolina South Dakota Sports Stories/creative writing Technology and computers Tennessee Testimonials Texas Uk Forums Utah Vermont Virginia Volunteer Moderators Only Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Home   login   MyForums   Show ALL Forums      Author  Thread: GITMO works!  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 13 (view)   GITMO works! Posted: 12/8/2008 11:42:12 PM Ever since Obama briefings at the White House, he's not closing Club Gitmo. Turns out Club Gitmo works and has been working. Now Barak Obama's AmeriKKKa. Suddenly there is no sympathy for the savages in Club Gitmo. Comparing them to the World trade bombings in the 90s is ludicrous. Those guys were angels compare to the combatants in Club Gitmo. Sympathy also went down the drain for the Club Gitmo detainees ever since Al-Qaeda called Obama a house negro. And now the American left is finally upset at Al-Qaeda (and Al Sharpton particularly) because how dare they say something racist! They can kill whoever they want, whenever they want, and we'll do our best to understand it. But when they start using racist language, why, that's the last straw! This reminds me of another story, Polly Klaas in California, the little girl who was kidnapped and raped and murdered. They found the guy that did it, and they brought him to trial, and they found him guilty; and at the sentencing he turned around and flipped off the journalists. He flipped them the bird, and that's when they started hating him, only when he flipped him off. They were sympathetic to the guy. This is the same thing. We treat these psychopathic killers better than their own countries do. They don't want them back, we cannot and should not try them in anything other than military tribunals, and we could only release them if Castro would take them. Hey, that would be payback for the Mariel boat-lift, when Castro shipped all his criminals to us care of Jimmy Carter. How about the big jihadist attack in Mumbai, India, targeting Westerners? Didn't the Islamists get the memo that Obama is our new leader, and they're supposed to love us now? Not to worry, Obama will sic Janet Napolitano (the new Homeland Security czar) on them. I'm sure Obama's fans will figure a way to blame this and any subsequent attacks on Bush. They're already working on how to blame the coming depression on Bush. A meteor struck Canada the other day. I think that was Bush's fault, too! Far from being sodomized and tortured by U.S. forces, as Obama's base has wailed for the past seven years, the innocent scholars and philanthropists being held at Guantanamo have been given expensive, high-tech medical procedures at taxpayer expense. Abdullah Massoud was sent to Guantanamo, where the one-legged terrorist was fitted with a special prosthetic leg, at a cost of $50,000-$75,000 to the U.S. taxpayer. Upon his release in March 2004, Massoud hippity-hopped back to Afghanistan and quickly resumed his war against the U.S. Aided by his new artificial leg, just months later, in October 2004, Massoud masterminded the kidnapping of two Chinese engineers in Pakistan working on the Gomal Zam Dam project. This proved, to me at least, that people with disabilities can do anything they put their minds to. Pakistani forces stormed Massoud's hideout, killing all the kidnappers, including Massoud. Only one of the Chinese engineers was rescued alive. As a result of the kidnapping, the Chinese pulled all 100 engineers and dam workers out of Pakistan, and work on the dam ceased. Massoud's return to jihad after his release from Guantanamo is there any mention of the fact that his prosthetic leg was acquired in Guantanamo, courtesy of American taxpayers after he was captured trying to kill Americans on the battlefield in Afghanistan. News about the prosthetic leg might interfere with stories of the innocent aid workers being held captive at Guantanamo in George Bush's AmeriKKKa. Although Massoud's swashbuckling reputation as a jihadist with a prosthetic leg appears in many news items, where he got that leg is almost purposely hidden, even lied about. "Abdullah Massoud ... had earned both sympathy and reverence for his time in Guantanamo Bay. Upon his release, he made it home to Waziristan and resumed his war against the U.S. With his long hair, his prosthetic limb and impassioned speeches, he quickly became a charismatic inspiration to Waziristan's youth." The New York Times Anyone who thinks the Guantanamo detainees can be released without consequence doesn't have a leg to stand on.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 121 (view)   ABC's Charles Gibson lands First interview with Sarah Palin Posted: 9/12/2008 1:55:17 AM Howard Dean is from Vermont which has the about the same population of Alaska. The same with Delaware where Biden is from. Yet since Sarah is from Alaska, the media and Democrats belittle Alaska while ignoring Vermont and Delaware. It's all about a hate they have for what Sarah stands for. What most Americans stand for. An independent is a liberal without the guts to at least be a Democrat. We've been through some of the characteristics that Sarah Palin possesses that the liberals hate. Obama has no plan. It's taxes and more taxes because it is the Democrat way, always. All the programs the Democrats are for, is what Obama is peddling, that's no plan, it's big government. More taxes across the board, Democrat platform. Then there's the Obama own personal beliefs spoon-fed to him by his unstable mother to his present wife and his associations with shady characters like Ayers and Wright. By the way, let's not forget one thing, on this, the seventh anniversary of 9/11: the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Obama's mentor, from the pulpit of his church in Chicago, saying we deserved it and America's chickens are coming home to roost.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 9 (view)   The Democratic Party Has Healed were do WE go from Here! Posted: 8/28/2008 12:40:12 AM The OP also claim to be a Democrat delegate yet found the time to post instead of resting for the Ancient Greek Temple speech tomorrow by Apollo, ug eh ug Obama.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 228 (view)   Obama picks Joe Biden for VP Posted: 8/25/2008 12:47:17 AM The book "What It Takes" by journalist Richard Ben Cramer's Pulitizer Prize-winning epic that looked at six presidential candidates. Cramer reported that Joe Biden often didn't know what he thought until he had to say it. Then, too, there was the sorry corollary, sometimes Biden spoke before he thought. In August of 1987, when pollster-political analysist Bill Schneider showed up with a tape of a long, lovely, TV ad for Neil Kinnock, the British Labour Party leader who was running against Margaret Thatcher. Kinnock had some beautiful stuff about what the Labour Party meant to working folk. To Joe, that was exactly why he was running: to give people a platform on which to build their futures. He grabbed that tape and took it home, he inhaled the thing. The rest is history. Biden knew "that stuff from the Kinnock tape like a song in his head" and, in four or five speeches, quoted it. In every case, he identified who Kinnock was and told audiences "he said something that I think is important." And it worked great, until Biden spoke at the state fair in Iowa and adapted Kinnock's words and life to himself. It was only in Washington, in front of the TV, the gurus looked at each other," according to "What It Takes", "Someone had to tell Biden . . .he'd better credit this stuff, or he'd get his ass in trouble." He did. John Sasso, political adviser to Biden's chief rival Michael Dukakis, saw a tape of the remarks Biden had made and "he couldn't believe it. Sasso knew the Kinnock ad--where the hell did Biden get off, using it word for word? It was like he was borrowing Kinnock's life? Did he think no one else in the country had seen it?. . . Why didn't anybody write that?" Sasso, of course, put together a tape slicing Biden's words and Kinnock's and made sure somebody wrote it. A lot did and Biden soon concluded "that I will stop being a candidate for President of the United States."  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 49 (view)   White House: John McCain was NOT Tortured in Vietnam Posted: 8/20/2008 12:57:46 PM Amnesty International and the New York Times have never visited McCain when he was a detainee in North Vietnam. McCain has still not whine and cry to Amnesty International and the media like the detainees at Club Gitmo, which they do best outside of killing innocent people. It turns out that the most unpleasant aspect of life at Guantanamo for the detainees came with the move out of the temporary Camp X-Ray. Apparently, wanton homosexual sex among the inmates is more difficult in their newer, more commodious quarters. (Suspiciously, detainees retailing outlandish tales of abuse to the ACLU often include the claim that they were subjected to prolonged rectal exams. ) Plus, the views of the Caribbean aren't quite as good from their new suites. Each detainee's cell has a sink installed low to the ground, "to make it easier for the detainees to wash their feet" before Muslim prayer, Saar reports. Detainees get "two hot halal, or religiously correct, meals" a day in addition to an MRE (meal ready to eat). Loudspeakers broadcast the Muslims' call to prayer five times a day. Every detainee gets a prayer mat, cap and Koran. Every cell has a stenciled arrow pointing toward Mecca. Moreover, Gitmo's library, yes, library, is stocked with Jihadi books. Even the tales of "torture" being pawned off by the detainees on credulous American journalists are pretty lame. The Washington Post reported that a detainee at Guantanamo says he was "threatened with sexual abuse." One detainee in Afghanistan told a hyperventilating reporter for Salon that he was forced to stand with his arms in the air for "hours." Others claimed they were forced into uncomfortable, unnatural positions, sort of like the Democrats' position on abortion. Next, the interrogators will be threatening to slightly undercook the Lemon Chicken! According to Times magazine, "The best-behaved detainees are held in Camp 4, a medium-security, communal-living environment with as many as 10 beds in a room; prisoners can play soccer or volleyball outside up to nine hours a day, eat meals together and read Agatha Christie mysteries in Arabic." Maybe the White House assumed McCain received all of these accommodations too?  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 43 (view)   Let's discuss military policy. Posted: 8/19/2008 12:43:45 AM Discussing military policy with American lefts is an oxymoron. The prefer cup of tea would be anything that's on Oprah. Women's rights or welfare? Reducing the military? Social work? Gay rights? Increasing taxes? Motherhood? Many other similar subjects. But not military policy, leave that for a conservative original poster and thread. As for the Cold War, I'll copy and post these facts from another poster in the Georgia invades Russia: Gorbachev was the guest on Larry King last week. Larry King, asks, "Do you fear, Mr. President, the world is moving toward a new cold war?" Gorbachev says: I think that the signs of a cold war are present. There you have it. Mikhail Gorbachev basically signaling, "Yep, there's a Cold War," and he wouldn't be saying this if he weren't excited about it and if he weren't thinking that it was actually going to be happen. Some people are now saying that we fooled ourselves, that the Cold War never actually ended. The wall came down and there were some democratic reforms in Russia, but then Putin showed up and the KGB started asserting itself.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 19 (view)   Georgia Invades Russia Posted: 8/19/2008 12:22:56 AM Leaders like Obama represent a new way of thinking about world politics. We have to get rid of all this "cold war" mentality. ^^^^^^^^ It was tried before by a "people like Obama" and that was Jimmy Carter. He's still going around attempting the new way of thinking. The new way of thinking is actually a defeatist mentality. It didn't work back then and it still won't work. Unless Russia and Muslims learn to think like a "people like Obama" and Jimmy Carter. President Bush is still President, still in office and already history is showing George Bush as one of the best Presidents. He showed leadership in the midst of many patsies here and abroad cowering in all four.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 39 (view)   Clinton Rallies Planned for Convention Posted: 8/14/2008 11:27:32 PM It's more like the Clinton convention. They got two nights of it. Hillary's got Tuesday night, Bill's got Wednesday night. Edwards is nowhere to be found. The roll call comes, the delegate count, if you throw out the supers and the delegate count is very close. Her delegates will still stick with her, we know what's going to become quite apparent, and not even the news commentators are going to be able to ignore it.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 39 (view)   Barrack Obama in Europe Posted: 7/27/2008 4:04:20 PM Beach Bum, you got it all backwards. It's the other way around. Without America, Europe is nothing. Whenever we fart, Europe gets the runs. America is still the big gorilla in the world. And Europe is not a superpower. It's a fairy tale to think it is. Your last post indicates wishful thinking for America and it is not going to happen. Take a note, we have military bases in Europe, that means we rule not Europe. No Spanish bases here. No German bases here. No French bases here. No Englsih bases here. The main reason for the fragile EU is to compete, and be be independent with America and still Europe depends on us, for 60 years now. Fact is, it has become more dependant on Russia as well these past 10 years. And we still run NATO and the World Bank. Not Italy or Portugal and not even Germany. Germany still runs under the surrender treaty of the second world war. It cannot help us in our current wars. The few soldiers it sent to Afghanistan are on summer camp. Away from all the action. Other than America in the front lines, poor small Canadians troops are in the front lines. Putting to shame the French and Germans. We do fine with Japan and China. We built their economies. President Nixon pulled it off with China as President Truman pulled it off with Japan. We also restored Europe because they could not. These two nations alone have placed Europe in close third world status. I still remember the anger expressed by the Europeans of Japan and China stealing their markets in the 80's. The Iraq thing, you are paying for it. Whenever we de-value the dollar, Europe pays. I've read of massive layoffs and increase of homelessness for the past three over there. Less money to support their socialist programs. Even the labor party in the UK is hurting badly. All because the U.S. gets a cold. Brown is getting the boot so is Merkel. Wonder why? Admit it, the economy over there is going down the tubes. Ours is still good despite problems with some in housing and credit. It withstands unlike that of any country in Western Europe. Every month we have 5 times the growth compare to the EU. And because of Europe's dependency of Russian oil and gas, Russia is the emerging superpower over there not the EU. America is betting on Eastern Europe over Western Europe. The West countries have have a track record of weakness and disloyalty. The East countries have proven to be reliable, even Georgia. And she part of the USSR.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 8 (view)   Could America have gotten it's Mojo back????? Posted: 7/24/2008 11:35:19 PM He opens up this speech by saying he doesn't come as a candidate. That's the only reason he went there. We all need to be more like Europeans, right? We need to stop embarrassing the Europeans. The Dem nominee Obama was over in Germany speaking English, and he just told us that we need to all learn to speak a foreign language. Because it's embarrassing when we go over to their countries and don't speak their language, and he's talking about goat herders and that gets a big line of applause. He should have given the speech in German. In this English version there was no stutters or "uh's" or "ands" or other because it was on a teleprompter. He talked about sacrifice. Every time a Democrat start talking about sacrifice, we know exactly what that means: increase taxes. And he was talking about raising taxes all over the world, tearing down imaginary walls. That was just tacky, trying to rip off Reagan, and tear down all these imaginary walls. President Ronald Reagan on June 12th, 1987, West Berlin. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall. The wall shortly thereafter came down. Ronald Reagan, of course, an elected President, speaking not as a candidate and not at a campaign rally. President John F. Kennedy on June 26th, 1963, West Berlin. We can look forward to that day when this city will be joined as one and this country and this great Continent of Europe in a peaceful and hopeful globe. When that day finally comes, as it will, the people of West Berlin can take sober satisfaction in the fact that they were in the front lines for almost two decades. All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin. And, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words "Ich bin Berliner." Obama could not make such great speeches, nor could any other Democrat today because they are appeasers, because they don't see that much wrong with communism. But he couldn't make this speech, either, because Obama believes that it was a mistake to free 25 million Iraqis from tyranny because it angered our enemies. We are so afraid of angering our enemies today Obama wouldn't make a speech like this, not aimed at Iran. George W. Bush will, but there is not a Democrat who will do it. At the Brandenburg Gate, 1963, John F. Kennedy tells the communists their days are numbered. In 1987, 1988, 1989 the communist days are over. A Democrat president and a Republican president were on the same path bringing about the same objective. John Kennedy laying it out and Reagan fulfilling it. Within that time there were a number of Republican and Democrat Presidents who didn't think it would be possible. Kennedy did and Reagan pulled it off. People talk about unity and compromise. There wasn't any compromise. There was a single-minded purpose and objective that was morally correct, and that was to end the tyranny of communism in Europe. The Germans enjoyed his speech because he just upgraded all of us for not speaking a foreign language and said he was embarrassed because Europeans have to learn our language to communicate with us. He forgets that we're the superpower not them. They have to talk English. His dream of demoting America is one of his many downfalls. Obama won't be President of the United States. So let's just make him president of the EU, the European Union. He's a citizen of the world. The Democrats and the MSM want this to be a referendum on Bush. Now because Obama has inserted himself so prominently and is acting presidential when he doesn't even have the nomination secured, people are thinking it's about Barack Obama. There's an NBC poll out that's not good for Obama. He's getting no bump out of this trip. He's losing in a lot of ways to John McCain in terms of who do you trust more to deal with the problems, who's closer to your values. McCain wins big in both these, and the surprise is everybody's stunned that NBC put this news out. It got even worse, because last night on the NBC Nightly News Brian Williams interviewing Chuck Todd, reported that this election has suddenly become a referendum on Obama. It's not about McCain, this election is not about McCain. Right now it's an up or down referendum on Obama. In this NBC poll that they reported last night on the Nightly News. Those surveyed felt it's Obama that's the riskier choice. Chuck Todd, explaining the polling data to Brian Williams, "Yeah, they're trying to figure this out, this guy out. They're trying to figure out who Obama really is, what these leaders overseas are doing. And then we're trying to figure out why is Obama doing this trip, why did he feel they had to do it? Well, when we asked our voters who is a riskier choice for President, McCain or Obama, 55% told us that it's Obama who is the riskier choice. We asked who would be the safer choice for President and they picked McCain. So we see why Obama is over here doing this. He's trying to allay those fears that he's risky and not ready to do these things. Then Chuck Todd said the good news for McCain, he connects on values, 58% in the NBC survey, say that McCain reflects their values.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 30 (view)   Nader again? Please explain it to me like I'm a six-year-old. Posted: 7/17/2008 11:09:58 PM Considering Obama's lack of experience. On election day, voters will see that the election is really about John McCain and Ralph Nader. Perhaps this time around, Nader will get all the votes wasted on a Democrat candidate. After all, Obama is no John Kerry and Al Gore. Both of these Democrat nominees at least had a record. This time around it's McCain's record verses Nader's. Everyone knows Nader has done much good for everyone. He's the real social-liberal Democrat candidate and libertarian not Obama.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 55 (view)   TV One: Celebrating black candidate or backing black dependency? Posted: 7/17/2008 9:58:55 PM ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Tisk, tisk, tisk another race card hand that's as old as dirt and unproductive. A little wisdom please goes well and long. If the share of the black vote that goes to the Democrats ever falls to 70 percent, it may be virtually impossible for the Democrats to win the White House or Congress, because they have long ago lost the white male vote and their support among other groups is eroding. Against that background, it is possible to understand their desperate efforts to keep blacks paranoid, not only about Republicans but about American society in general. Liberal Democrats, especially, must keep blacks fearful of racism everywhere, including in an administration whose Cabinet includes people of Chinese, Japanese, Hispanic, and Jewish ancestry, and two consecutive black Secretaries of State. Blacks must be kept believing that their only hope lies with liberals. Not only must the present be distorted, so must the past and any alternative view of the future must be nipped in the bud. That is why prominent minority figures who stray from the liberal plantation must be discredited, debased and, above all, kept from becoming federal judges. Blacks have voted so overwhelmingly for Democrats for so long that Republicans have few incentives to try to gain black votes. When Republicans from time to time try to reach out to blacks, they tend to do so ineptly. For reasons unknown, they seem to want to appeal to black voters in the same ways that Democrats appeal to black voters, by adopting a liberal stance. John McCain's recent gala at the NAACP is an example. Why would anyone who wants liberalism go for a Republican imitation when they can get the real thing from Democrats? Republicans do not have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the votes of liberal blacks. Nor are they likely to win a majority of the black vote as a whole any time soon. But if Republicans can get just a fourth or a fifth of the black vote nationwide, that can shift the balance of power decisively in their favor. Black self-reliance would be almost as bad as blacks becoming Republicans, as far as liberal Democrats are concerned. All black progress in the past must be depicted as the result of liberal government programs and all hope of future progress must be depicted as dependent on the same liberalism. Many things that would advance blacks would not advance the liberal agenda. That is why the time is long overdue for the two to come to a parting of the ways.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 48 (view)   TV One: Celebrating black candidate or backing black dependency? Posted: 7/13/2008 11:48:22 PM HR has made good points and I think a much needed new thread can be appreciated by some on this forum. The OP has not mentioned any of the issues facing us as Americans, instead he has chosen to 'play the race card' to convince black people to vote for the Republicans. Not well said! Well said statement came from Intricate Gina. In a nutshell she answered your remark of issues, as I have in the original post and further down. There is no "race card." Only the ones that Democrats have a habit of bringing up. And once again, a Democrat brought it up and shamefully accusing me of such nonsense. I know it pains some of the facts posted but all I have done is share truths hidden by Democrat black leaders and the Media. Black studios also as TV One, have kept many blinded. Too many Americans are either unwilling or unable to think, and that is going to be a significant factor in taking this country down. Here are some other issues concerning this election year stated by former President Bill Clinton. He is actually saying that Obama is polarizing despite his game of being a different kind of politician. Bill Clinton warned Saturday that the country is becoming increasingly polarized despite the historic nature of the Democratic primary. Clinton noted that on the one hand, following the early stages of the Democratic primary, "the surviving candidates were an African-American man and a woman." But this achievement was overshadowed by a growing distance between Americans, said Clinton. "Underneath this apparent accommodation to our diversity, we are in fact hunkering down in communities of like-mindedness, and it affects our ability to manage difference," Clinton said. He cited statistics compiled by Bishop that found that in the 1976 presidential election, only 20 percent of the nation's counties voted for Jimmy Carter or President Ford by more than a 20 percent margin. By contrast, 48 percent of the nation's counties in 2004 voted for John Kerry or President Bush by more than 20 points, Clinton said. "We were sorting ourselves out by choosing to live with people that we agree with," Clinton said. A final note is that everywhere he goes, Obama is greeted by supporters hoisting placards and gymnasiums and podiums festooned with HIS central theme: "Change We Can Believe In." After hearing Wright define exactly what he means and what he thinks, it is now impossible for the candidate to continue to dodge telling us exactly what HE means and what HE thinks. Wright's speeches are a call for specificity from Barack Obama. The days of allowing Obama to leave himself as an undefined, vague, "Hope, Unity, and Change Guy" must end. It is now incumbent on Obama to tell us what HE means by "change." Senator: you sat at Wright’s feet, absorbing his teachings like a sponge for 20 years. Is your interpretation of "change" the same as Wright's? How does Wright's version of "change" agree with yours? Or differ from yours? By the way, Senator, what IS your version of "change?" Unless you tell us, Senator, specifically and with great detail, what YOU mean by your call to “change,” we can only assume that your agenda looks like Wright’s agenda. After all, you said you could “no more disown him than” you could “disown the black community.” You also said that Wright is “a part of you.” OK: which part? How can we vote for "Change We Can Believe In" when you won't even tell us what, exactly, we are "believing in?" Which Obama do we believe, the LEFT OBAMA or the CENTRAL/RIGHT OBAMA or the WHO REALLY KNOWS WHAT HE WILL DO OBAMA. I know what McCain will do, unfortunately.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 4 (view)   Martial Law coming soon Posted: 7/11/2008 3:02:24 PM It may come soon but not under Bush or another Republican. It would be under a Democrat. Remember, don't confuse the left control policies, socialism with capitalism. Capitalism thrives on freedom. Russia showed the world and Chinese have benefited in much freedom by their capitalism. In time, socialism will disappear all together in China.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 25 (view)   TV One: Celebrating black candidate or backing black dependency? Posted: 7/11/2008 2:43:12 PM ^^^^^ Example: Democracy only works when parties are forced to compete for votes. Since the majority of the black population will always and without fail vote for the Democratic candidate over the Republican one, they ensure that the Democrats give only lip service to their causes while addressing the concerns of the swing voters. living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays and so fort.... "I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he’d bring to the White House. And Sen. Obama has a speech he gave in 2002." -------- Agree ----------- The Armed Forces ended segregation after World War Two that enabled in changes, elimination segregation all together in society. The GOP has not changed, it has remained the same since Lincoln. Southern liberals have stayed the same, only their victims have changed. An example is the Duke University case. The Duke case was reminiscent of a black woman's vulnerability to a white man during the days of slavery. Duke lacrosse players' total vindication and the exposure of a Southern liberal prosecutor as a corrupt hack backed by the liberal press and people like Jesse Jackson. It's all done to keep the black base and fake self-appointed black leaders like Jackson has helped keeping most blacks in ignorance the past 40 years. A lot of dishonesty that still goes on. Here's another example that most blacks don't know. Harvey Gantt, the first black student to be admitted to Clemson University in South Carolina rejected the label of a conquering hero and would not accept the liberal press of glorifying him as they have done with Barack Obama. In fact, Senator Helms from N.C. was viciously and falsely portrayed as a racist but Harvey Gantt defended the Senator. Senator Helms praised Harvey Gantt and stated that Harvey just wanted to be an architect and Clemson is the only college in South Carolina that can teach him how to be one. This was 10 years before he became Senator in 1973, the Senator worked for a conservative press and had written an editorial on Harvey Gantt. Black TV stations does not share facts about MLK, Gnatt and Meredith with the community. It's old Southern liberal tactics including the fact that another black, James Meredith, who was the first black to attend the University of Mississippi with the help of federal troops, became the Senator's assistance. Liberals discount Helms' hiring of Meredith on the grounds that Meredith had wandered off the reservation. Blacks are allowed to have only one set of political views. It just shows you how dumb they are. Blacks don't live on reservations, Indians do. It's pretty much the same thing liberals are accusing Barack Obama of right now. The New York Times harangued Obama for his diversions from the liberal line on Iraq, the domestic surveillance bill, capital punishment and guns. TV One and other black entertainment outlets will not bring that up. While TV One focuses on the color of skin as the most important factor in life, here's some more on the Republican record: Abraham Lincoln not only emancipated slaves, but spent his late political career calling slavery “a relic of barbarism” and advocating its “ultimate extinction.” A Republican Congress advanced a “Second American Revolution” by passing Civil Rights Acts and three constitutional amendments: abolishing slavery, guaranteeing equal protection of the law and securing voting rights. Republican Justice Harlan who dissented from the “separate but equal” ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), declaring that “our Constitution is colorblind.” Republican presidents Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge denounced KKK violence and supported a federal anti-lynch law, which passed the Republican House before repeatedly dying in the Democrat-controlled Senate. Franklin Roosevelt (Democrat) refused to have pictures taken with blacks, the Republican Party called for desegregation of the military, anti-lynching laws, and the right to vote. In 1964, Lyndon Johnson passed the landmark Civil Rights Act only after Republicans introduced their own bill and overcame a Democratic filibuster. 89% of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act, a far greater percentage than the Democrats, who mustered a bare majority. It’s no wonder Rev. Jesse Jackson, the house Negro for the Democrat party wants to neuter Barack Obama, that’s exactly what Obama has done to him. He may be apologizing for his remarks, claiming lamely that he didn’t know there was a live microphone eavesdropping on what he said, but he meant exactly what he was overheard saying because that’s exactly what he and black Democrats would like to do. Jackson and other self-appointed black leaders are mad. It drives him up a wall when Obama echoes Bill Cosby by demanding that his fellow African American men assume the responsibilities of fatherhood. By so doing, Obama neuters Jackson, who always blames an alleged racist white America for the failure of many black fathers to act like fathers. These are dominate platform of the Democrats all together. Obama neuters Jackson when he echoes the hated George Bush in favoring a faith-based initiative. Many of Jackson's fellow blacks have bolted his plantation and moved so far right that are on the verge of having one of their number win the White House, and doing it by winning the votes of vast numbers of white Americans, an affront to Jackson and Democrats who would have us believe that white America is a racist America which would never cast a vote for an African American. Let's face it, Republicans did more for blacks in the U.S. then Democrats ever could have done.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 23 (view)   TV One: Celebrating black candidate or backing black dependency? Posted: 7/11/2008 1:23:18 AM Independents and moderates are not conservatives, they are liberals. Claiming and advertising of not being a Democrat or a Republican is a cop out. Conservative values is not in the heart of a moderate and that of an independent. MLK was not a liberal and not a Democrat and never an Independent. His message has always been Christian values not liberal. What he wanted for blacks is entirely different of what the Democrats have been feeding blacks the past 40 years. I've already posted in the original post. TV Ones' CEO cannot speak for all of his viewers who may or may not be Republican. Although I am conservative, I still watch the DNC convention. Purposely not airing the RNC convention, viewers will get a liberal view and that's it. I know several black people who will not be voting for Barack Obama, saying that people will vote for him because he is black is so incredibly wrong. Its such a shame that people can not see past color when it comes to electing the next Commander In Chief and for that, the whole country will suffer. They say they are not a news network, so here's an idea, don't cover either conventions and stick to it's regular programing. TV One is a television network based in Silver Spring, Maryland and primarily owned by Radio One, Comcast Corporation and DirecTV. It targets African American adults.The network airs original lifestyle and entertainment shows, movies, fashion and music programming, as well as classic series such as 227, Good Times, Martin, Boston Public and It's Showtime at the Apollo.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 1 (view)   TV One: Celebrating black candidate or backing black dependency? Posted: 7/9/2008 4:12:09 PM Given Barack Obama's historic run for the Oval Office, African American-themed cable network TV One plans to break from its usual entertainment programming to provide extensive coverage of the Democratic National Convention in August. "Sen. Barack Obama running for president is a huge deal for TV One as it is for the African American community," said Johnathan Rodgers, president and CEO of TV One, a channel in about 40 million homes. "African Americans have fallen in love with his candidacy, his family … we will be covering the democratic convention all the time." But John McCain shouldn’t expect the same treatment. The network doesn’t plan any coverage of the Republican Convention. "We are not a news organization," said Rodgers, speaking at the opening session of the semi-annual Television Critics Association press tour in Beverly Hills. "We are a television network designed to celebrate African American achievement. If Hillary was the nominee, we would not be covering this year's Democratic Convention." "My audience is 93% black," Rodgers added. "I serve my audience." TV One does have a Republican pundit as part of its convention coverage, comedian Sheryl Underwood. But she’s also voting for Obama. When critics pressed a panel of TV One’s convention pundits about whether African American republicans will feel slighted, Underwood said, “I speak for all eight of us -- we are not slighted ... McCain is not going to win it, that's why I'm over here, because I want to be with the winners -- and I'm a Bush Republican." When TV One's coverage panel was asked if their coverage will raise criticisms of Obama, contributor Hill Harper, who said he's been a friend of Obama's for 20 years and serves on his National Finance Comittee, said "the whole purpose of the event is celebration. We're not covering a debate." But Rodgers added, "It's primarily a celebration but, yes, we'll also be critical when necessary." As a cable network, TV One is likely exempt from any equal time access rules. Federal Communications Commission rules state that broadcast networks are required to give equal time to presidential candidates. In 2007, when “Law & Order” actor Fred Thompson entered the race for the Republican nomination, NBC pulled episodes that featured him, but cable network TNT did not pull “L&O” repeats. Still, the matter is also considered a regulation gray area, with the FCC largely untested on the issue. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It seems odd that the vast majority of black voters would show such loyalty to the Democratic Party which historically has worked to suppress their rights. Below are some facts to ponder. 1) The Republican Party was formed for the purpose of abolishing slavery. 2) The slaves were emancipated by a Republican president, Abraham Lincoln. The 13th Amendment which emancipated the slaves was passed by 100% of Republicans, but only 23% of Democrats. 3) Following the Civil War 23 blacks were elected to congress in the 1800's. Thirteen of these men were ex-slaves. Hiram Revels, who was elected in 1870, was the first black U.S. Senator. All of these black congressmen were Republicans. 4) The first black Democratic congressman wasn't elected until 1935. The first black Democratic congressman from the South wasn't elected until 1973(100 years after the first black Republican). The first black Democratic senator wasn't elected until 1992. 5) The Texas Republican Party was founded in 1867 by 150 blacks and 20 whites. 6) In 1868 the 14th Amendment was passed giving full civil rights to the emancipated slaves. Every Republican vote was in favor of the amendment while not a single Democrat voted for it. 7) In 1870 the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the right to vote, was passed with every single Republican voting for it while every Democrat voted against it. 8) In 1872 during congressional investigations, the Democrats admitted they started the Ku Klux Klan to suppress the spread of the Republican Party. Robert Byrd, who is currently a Democratic Senator from West Virginia, was a Grand Kleagle in the Ku Klux Klan. 9) In 1876 Democrats took control of the House of Representatives and no further race-based civil rights laws were passed for the next 81 years. 10) In 1964 The Civil Rights Act was passed with 80% of Republicans voting yes, while only 64% of Democrats voted yes. Abe Lincoln would have been discriminated against because he was Republican. TV One saw the opportunity and went for it. I for one had not heard of such a network. Now with this big issue created for their personal gain, the word is out. Pure and simple "Free Publicity". What they fail to understand is that they have undermined Obama's chances of winning. All America has to do is close their eyes and listen to this two candidates speak. It does not take too much to know which one is more prepared and knows where he is going. Forget race, look at the two persons for what they are. Shame, shame, shame on TV One for making such a fuss. They should just have covered the convention and let the word flow out in the communities. They would have increased their ratings. But, TV One is a capitalist venture and must make money to survive, even if it means selling out to the devil. The oldest member of the Senate is also a former Grand Dragon of the KKK, Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, and yet he is given a free pass on his past transgressions whereas Bush is assaulted vigorously for drinking in college. The Christian repentance broadcast by agnostics dose not carry since it's southern Democrats who really repented by leaving the party. Southern Democrats embraced the party's hand outs thereby having the black vote. Senator Byrd continued the filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights bill and it took several Republicans; Senators Everett Dirksen (R-IL) and Thomas Kuchel (R-CA) along with some more conservative democrats, Hubert Humphrey, to get this filibuster broken. Our government has grown and this has increased its burden on those of us that actually believe in a conservative libertarian viewpoint: that people are best able to help themselves and know the best way to do that. Does everyone need a hand once in a while? Yes. Does that translate to 24/7 care from birth to death? Unquestionably, no. Yet, this is precisely the stance that people are voting for when they check the (D) box on election day. It's why Congress stands at 9% approval. What most people don't understand is that Dr. Martin Luther King was a Republican. He wanted to see to it that all blacks have the same opportunities as everyone else in the country. The opportunity to make something of themselves and develop a sense of pride and determination to succeed. The Republican philosophy is exactly the same. They have always fought for the equality of all races but don't get credit for it by the media and people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. These people and the Democrats want to keep control of minorities and they have done that by putting into place all of these welfare programs. They are the ones that destroyed the black family by offering money to women to keep men out of their homes. This left the young boys without a role model and is the reason so many of these kids get into trouble. The Jacksons, Sharptons and Democrats want to keeo you under control because for them it is big business and they don't want to give it up. The Republican Convention is not going to be covered because these people don't want the average black person to get any ideas about how they can help themselves. They don't want them to see that it's the Republicans that can show them how to make more money and be self reliant. They have to keep promoting their agenda that is good for them but not the average black person. They would rather lie to blacks than really help them. It's criminal.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 25 (view)   Helms Dies Posted: 7/5/2008 11:04:13 PM A case can be made that with the exceptions of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, the figure most pivotal to the success of postwar conservatism was Jesse Helms. If one were to name the two elected leaders of the last third of the 20th century who best represented the conservative creed in national politics, they would be Ronald Reagan and Jesse Helms. It is a defining difference between a traditional conservative and a neocon that the former would name Helms as the best senator of the era, while the latter would name Scoop Jackson or Pat Moynihan. Helms voted with the AFL-CIO on all three big labor issues, against NAFTA, against trade with China and for half a million good jobs in Alaska. Helms was one of the main lobbyists against trade with China. Former Sen. Gordon Humphrey from New Hampshire said Helms had the force of the United States Marine Corps.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 44 (view)   Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S. Posted: 6/21/2008 11:04:22 PM So something like 76% of that population is non-Anglo, composed of Arabs, Asian, Africans, French and others. It has the stink of apartheid. No wonder they fear the Muslims. Anything truthful would be considered "Hate Speech" or risk provinces breaking away, starting with Quebec. Good thing those provinces are semi-independent. We might end up with different countries at our northern cold border.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 24 (view)   US Sucked Into Israeli - Iran Conflict Posted: 6/21/2008 9:25:16 PM If Al Gore was president he would have gone nuclear on Iraq and Iran. When a liberal in power is forced to act tough, he over does it with everything at his disposal. Clinton in Kosovo for instance and Johnson in Vietnam. Liberals don't fight, they only want to talk. It's the nanny persona developed by having a controlling, feminist for a wife. Then to prove their manhood, they F' up. The sheer repetition of lies about Bush is wearing people down. There is not a liberal in this country worthy of kissing Bush's rear end, but the weakest members of the herd run from Bush. Compared to the lickspittles denying and attacking him, Bush is a moral giant, if that's not damning with faint praise. John McCain should be so lucky as to be running for Bush's third term. Then he might have a chance.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 33 (view)   When You're not Wanted... Posted: 6/17/2008 9:33:40 PM You all got it wrong except for Springgen's post. For years the Iraqi people want all and any foreign troops out. But they also make it clear and their polls show it, Americans to remain until they can manage on their own. It's current events and history. Liberals should make an effort to be open-minded. All threads about Iraq and America's goals have been very ignorant and quite the same. Read this recent article which covers current articles worldwide and we all know the press is pretty much slanted towards the left. LA times is no exception. This article is not from 2006 and back then, Iraq's leaders were concerned the Democrat lead in Congress was going to order the troops out of Iraq. Bush reassured them that it was not going to happen. That they will not be abandoned, cut and run as liberals have a history of doing. Maliki and the Iraqi people were very worried about withdrawal of American forces in 2006. By Ned Parker, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer June 11, 2008 BAGHDAD -- Officials in Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's ruling coalition are questioning whether Iraq needs a U.S. military presence even as the two countries press forward with high-pressure negotiations to determine how long American forces will remain. Some officials in Maliki's Islamic Dawa Party and his larger Shiite United Iraqi Alliance bloc, which has cooperated with the U.S., have spoken in favor of imposing severe restrictions on U.S. forces after the United Nations mandate authorizing their presence expires at the end of the year. Maliki and President Bush last year outlined goals for an agreement covering military, trade and cultural relations. They pledged to return Iraq to full sovereignty and said the agreement was expected to be finalized by July 31. According to Iraqis, Americans supported a draft of the agreement that called for allowing U.S. forces to detain Iraqis and conduct missions without the government's permission. They have also said the Americans required up to 58 permanent bases, control of Iraqi airspace and immunity for troops and contractors. American officials have refused to disclose their negotiating stance and have accused their critics of deliberately distorting U.S. positions. David Satterfield, the State Department's senior advisor on Iraq, said Tuesday that the U.S. remained committed to an agreement by late July. He denied that the U.S. was pushing demands that infringed upon Iraq's independence. "We want to see Iraqi sovereignty strengthened, not weakened," he said. U.S. forces are scaling back from a massive troop buildup last year known as "the surge," which helped put the brakes on Iraq's civil war. U.S. troop levels are expected to drop to an estimated 140,000 by July as the Americans evaluate the effect of their military reductions on Iraq's security. It remains to be seen whether the fragile peace between the country's Shiite majority and onetime Sunni elite will hold if the Americans quickly leave the country. United Iraqi Alliance lawmaker Sami Askari, who is considered a member of Maliki's inner circle, said the changes in opinions in many cases are gradual. "There is the camp who still believe that we need the Americans to stay and the other camp that says we don't need them anymore," Askari said. "You can't draw a line, even within the Dawa Party, even within" the alliance, he said. Shiite officials like Askari have warned there is no way any Iraqi politician could back the current U.S. security agreement proposals. "If I'm from the group that believes in the need for the Americans to stay, and then they face me with such a draft, then I'll say, look, I'd rather go with the others," Askari said. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, a Kurd, has defended the agreement. "The recent statements you've heard, the recent politicking you heard by different groups has really been very unhelpful," he said. "There has been no agreement yet. "Secondly, most of the statements are coming from people who are unaware or not involved in the heart of this negotiating procedure. It has really been used for political brinksmanship," Zebari said. Senior Iraqi politicians and Western officials confirmed the friction and debate within the alliance about an agreement. "Of course there are some people who are against it, no doubt," said Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, who is a leading negotiator on the Iraqi side. Salih vowed that the Kurds, Maliki and the country's presidency council would get approval for a bilateral agreement despite any opposition within the alliance. Others warned that some Dawa members were seeking to sabotage a long-term deal. "There is a lot of misrepresentation. It is deliberate. Some people don't want this on principle. Some people may have ideological problems with this. Now they are showing their true colors," said a senior Iraqi official who did not wish to be identified because it could endanger his position. He warned that even Maliki's backing was not a given. The prime minister is faced with pressure within his party. In the past, officials have described Maliki as flip-flopping on government decisions. The official described Dawa members as having become overconfident after successful military campaigns this spring in the southern port of Basra, Baghdad's Sadr City and Mosul that relied heavily on U.S. air support to defeat Sunni and Shiite armed groups. "It has given this false image we are strong enough and we can stand on our own feet, that there is no need for any foreign presence," the official said. A Western official who works closely with the Iraqi government said the wave of offensives had encouraged Maliki's advisors to dismiss U.S. demands as not worth the price. "When faced with the question, 'Do we need the Americans?' they are inclined to say, 'No, what do we need them for? We can do just fine,' " said the official, who was not authorized to speak to reporters. Maliki's advisors are now asking aloud whether the American presence creates more trouble for Iraq with its Arab and Iranian neighbors or whether it safeguards the country's sovereignty, the Western official explained. During Maliki's trip this week to Iran, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned Iraq against such a deal with the Americans. Tehran's protests have been echoed in Lebanon by the armed Shiite political movement Hezbollah and by Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr's Mahdi Army militia. Within the two biggest parties in the alliance, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council and Dawa, there are those who also have long viewed America with mistrust. "Some never supported a sustained U.S. presence from the Coalition Provisional Authority onwards. Some were willing to accept a limited U.S. presence that brought them to power and then defeated Sunni forces, but oppose lasting ties with a non-Islamic and non- Arab state," said Iraq expert Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Senior members of the alliance say U.S. forces should be called into action only by the Iraqi government. They argue Iraqi forces should be in charge of cities next year and the American troops ought to wait on bases to serve in a backup role. "If the Americans insist that they have their own mission in Iraq, then an agreement will be difficult to reach," Askari said. If there is a failure to compromise, Iraq has two options: It can ask for a six-month or yearlong extension of the U.N. mandate, which will allow Iraq time to build up its army and buy weapons, Askari said. The other choice is to go it alone. Officials like Askari think Iraq could gamble on parting with the Americans and survive. "For sure we need them [the Americans], but not at any price," Askari said. "I feel we are more secure now. There isn't any chance that civil war will happen. . . . If we feel we have enough power, enough forces, to defend our country, there is no need for friendly troops."  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 25 (view)   McClellan to Testify Posted: 6/10/2008 11:13:41 AM Same OP, same thread. The McClellan talking liberal points book is not an exhibit "A" like Monica Lewinsky's blue dress containing Bill Clinton's sperm and semen. That led to Bill Clinton's Impeachment since it uncovered his false tongue. Watergate was real like Bill Clinton's adultery in the Oval Office with Monica Lewinsky. Not McClellan and his book. It's re-runs of the last six years of liberal blogs, not new information as the blue dress, cigars and Monica's fallatio on President Clinton in the Oval Office. Conyer's a (black) Democrat will remind people that Democrats are giving leftist blacks too much power. You have Rangel, Maxine Waters and others being loud, now you have Obama for president. This is not good for Democrats. It makes Bill Clinton's comments about Jesse Jackson winning South Carolina kid's play. Why the party elite are choosing leftist black representatives to do their dirty job is not a mystery. Democrats are only hurting themselves. It reminds the nation that when Democrats have a small majority, all they do is hearings and push unsavory topics and characters to the nation. Two years of that crap and no solution to problems. Prosecutor Kennedy, a tough and thorough prosecutor closed the leak case and now these Democrats think they can do better than Kennedy. Maybe since Kennedy didn't investigate the book's author, since it was not out then, maybe it will come out who really wrote it. That's if the Democrats actually are serious about their comical hearing in the matter. It will be a one day act like the CEO of Oil Compannies hearings. Makes the Democrats look like they are doing something while having stock in the Oil Companies.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 48 (view)   What do you think of Former Press Secretary McClellan's book? Posted: 5/30/2008 1:56:03 AM No you see, you're not attempting to portray your statement as your own. As for non-liberal professionals, I hardly think Ruch Limbaugh (which his post was plagiarized from) would be considered a professional in this field. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Yes you see, every word posted, does not portray your thoughts. No attempt has yet been made in refuting Rush Limbaugh, because you cannot. Accusing is of the devil. I went to the website you provided and Rush Limbaugh's statements are not the same as the poster's. In fact, Rush Limbaugh's statement, the whole very long monologue comes from many sources at the bottom. However, all I see posted are the exact wording from Democrat bloggers. Memorizing the posts of other liberals does not make for a professional, in this case, a liberal professional on this forum. The envious opinions about Rush Limbaugh for example is exactly the same old remarks out of the mouths of liberal correspondents and leftist bloggers. Not original there. Not at all. At least the poster took some of what Rush Limbaugh talked about, and that of others, and condensed it in a most informative post. All I read from your posts are similar to what George Soros says. Some from Ariana Huffington and of liberal bloggers. (You have to love Karl Rove, ass kisser for fox news.Tell me why not a right wing blogger? Perhaps because McClellan failed to use a racial slur in his book?) Exact words of Ariana Huffington. The guy that published Scott McClellan's book is a guy named Peter Osnos. He is a huge, far-left liberal. His publishing house is affiliated with The Nation magazine. His company has also published The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. This man's name is Peter Osnos, and so far six books have been bankrolled by George Soros. So there is a George Soros connection to the Scott McClellan book. In addition, this guy, Peter Osnos, has ripped me."A reporter and editor at the Washington Post during the 1970s and 1980s before going into book publishing, Osnos pens a weekly column for the left of center The Century Foundation. In a March column he denounced Rush Limbaugh as 'bombastic, aggressive, and mean,' bemoaning how the late William F. Buckley Jr. left behind 'a right-wing culture that tends to be as coarse and leaden as his demeanor could be buoyant,' charging Buckley provided 'unfortunate cover to others who followed with a spirit that was distinctly and consistently malevolent.'" So that's the publisher. This is the guy who published McClellan's book. This is probably the guy who wrote McClellan's book. There is a connection with George Soros and Peter Osnos and McClellan and his book, and Vincent Bugliosi, the longtime lawyer that used to be on every night talking about O.J. Simpson, he has written a book called The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, 4,000-plus American soldiers in Iraq being murdered by George W. Bush, in a pointless, worthless unjust war, published by the same guy, by the same publishing house, George Soros. So Scott McClellan has a new bunch of friends, in addition to this. This I love. Bob Wexler, US Congress, from just south of us here, he's in Boca Raton, he called yesterday for Scott McClellan to appear before the House Judiciary Committee to testify under oath regarding the devastating revelations made in his new book. Here's what Wexler said in his released statement: "The admissions made by Scott McClellan in his new book are earth-shattering and allege facts to establish that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby -- and possibly Vice President Cheney -- conspired to obstruct justice by lying about their role in the Plame Wilson matter and that the Bush Administration deliberately lied to the American people in order to take us to war in Iraq. Scott McClellan must now appear before the House Judiciary Committee under oath to tell Congress and the American people how President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby and White House officials deliberately orchestrated a massive propaganda campaign to sell the war in Iraq to the American people." I hope this happens. All this is gonna do right now is just add to his book sales, but I hope this happens because he doesn't have any information! He wasn't in any of the meetings! He was a deputy for all those years. He had no input in policy. At times he even complains in the book about being kept out of the loop. He was not a big-time player. He doesn't have anything substantive to tell these people. He probably didn't write this garbage that's in his book. So let Wexler call him up there and let him tell Wexler and the House Judiciary Committee, Can a liberal professional top and refute all of this? Nope! It's from the website that was advertised by you. All factural and accurate, all in today's news. As the post below, All factural and in yesterday's news. No plagiarism, just repeated thoughts of many. (Scott McClellan had an obligation, a responsibility to voice concerns on policy issues. McClellan never did that on any of the issues. For him to do this now is self-serving, disingenuous, and unprofessional. This is exactly the kind of stuff that you read on the blogs, and I've gone and checked out the Democratic blogs today. They're not particularly worked up about it because this is not new stuff. They've known this since 2000. They don't care about this. There's nothing new in his book, it's just liberal talking points. How does a guy in the Bush administration who was the spokesman and ends up getting fired, end up writing a book that could have been written by MoveOn.org bloggers? Here's a quote from McClellan back when he was the White House spokesman. Richard Clarke came out, he quit the administration. He wrote some tell all book about how the Bush administration and Condoleezza Rice dropped the ball and 9/11 was basically their fault. Turned out he was in the Clinton administration. But Bush sort of deserved it because they held the guy over from the Clinton administration. McClellan, as press secretary, was asked about this, and he said: "Why all of a sudden, if he had all these grave concerns (Richard Clarke) did he not raise these sooner? This is one and a half years after he left the administration, and now all of a sudden he's raising these grave concerns that he claims he had. And I think you have to look at some of the facts. One, he's bringing this up in the heat of a presidential campaign. He has written a book. He certainly wants to go out there and promote that book. Let's look at the politics of it. McClellan, too, has now written a book. He couldn't wait until the administration of his president was over. He had to inject his book into this presidential campaign. And he and his grave concerns, where were they all the time he was out there fronting for the administration? The motivation that he has for this is certainly what people are questioning. There's a theory going around about Scott McClellan, Scott McClellan's book is making big waves in the last election for Texas governor. The Republican Texas comptroller, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, who used the slogan "One Tough Grandma" based on her cost saving reputation as comptroller, ran as an independent Republican, against the incumbent Governor Rick Perry. Rick Perry was Bush's lieutenant governor and he became governor when Bush moved to Washington. Carole Keeton Strayhorn started her campaign with a flurry, faded fast and got trounced in the election, receiving virtually no support from the GOP. Scott McClellan is Carole Keeton Strayhorn's son. It's payback. The book is payback from the family, for McClellan's mom being ignored in her campaign for governor of the state of Texas.) ^^^^^^^^ It's what everybody is saying, including many in the MSM. Liberal anchors are questioning Scott. Diane Sawyer showed disdain towards Scott, as has Charles Gibson. Plagiarism does not apply in this forum, unless you are the original George Soros and someone is using your exact words. By all means whine about it. It's not a term paper/essay at a university for grade.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 21 (view)   What do you think of Former Press Secretary McClellan's book? Posted: 5/29/2008 2:11:11 AM I trust K1ngmaker will compliment me too. Like "nice copy and paste" and "fantastic plagiarism." Facts are still facts, especially from renowned non-liberal professionals. Here we go..... Several former Bush administration officials have written tell-all accounts. But none was as close to Bush or his inner circle as McClellan, 40, an amiable Texan known for his cautious demeanor. He started out in politics by managing several state election campaigns in the 1990s for his mother, who became Texas comptroller, and was recruited to the governor's mansion by Bush confidante Karen Hughes. Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary before McClellan took over in 2003, said he first met McClellan in 1999 when the two worked on Bush's presidential campaign. "That's one of the reasons this book comes as such a shock," Fleischer said. "It comes from the last person that anyone would have thought would have said these things or written these things. ... All you can do is scratch your head when you see how far he's turned." Martha Kumar, a Towson University expert on presidential communications, said she could not recall a previous White House press secretary making such policy-based criticisms of a president. "Generally, there is a tacit understanding that when you leave you don't make a lot of waves," she said. Kumar said one thing is clear: "He has burned a lot of bridges, ones that he has used through his lifetime." To that end, several former Bush aides took to the airwaves Wednesday to blast McClellan and his book. "For him to do this now strikes me as self-serving, disingenuous and unprofessional," Fran Townsend, former head of the White House's counterterrorism office, told CNN. Former top Bush aide Karl Rove compared McClellan to a "left-wing blogger." "If he had these moral qualms," Rove told Fox News Channel, "he should have spoken up about them." Two former Bush aides who preceded McClellan in criticizing the president offered support. Richard Clarke, a former counterterrorism adviser and former Clinton aide published a 2004 book critical of the administration, told CNN he received the same treatment from former associates. "I can show you the tire tracks," he said. (Ironically, as press secretary, McClellan targeted Clarke: "Why, all of a sudden, if he had all these grave concerns, did he not raise these sooner?" McClellan said then.) McClellan is scheduled to appear this morning on NBC-TV's "Today" program. He also will be a guest on National Public Radio's "Morning Edition" and liberal commentator Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" show on MSNBC this week, to be followed by a book tour starting next Wednesday in New York. Yikes...the liberal are already in love with Scott, but they will have a leprosy tone with him since he is indeed, a "Turncoat" pleasing his mommy. She is defending him. Furthermore, she says it's for the future her son turned rat.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 4 (view)   McCain's Hagee - Holocost punishment for Jews Posted: 5/24/2008 1:32:47 AM Jesus foretold of the destruction of Israel. He even told the Pharisees and Sadducees, to their faces, when in Jerusalem. Shortly after, they rejected Christ, they handed Him over to the Romans. In 70 AD, Jerusalem was destroyed and the remaining Jews dispersed throughout Europe. Furthermore, re-named the land Palestine after their arch enemy, the Philistines. Rome finally dealt with the Jews. Jeremiah 16 "When you tell these people all this and they ask you, 'Why has the LORD decreed such a great disaster against us? What wrong have we done? What sin have we committed against the LORD our God?' then say to them, 'It is because your fathers forsook me,' declares the LORD, 'and followed other gods and served and worshiped them. They forsook me and did not keep my law. But you have behaved more wickedly than your fathers. See how each of you is following the stubbornness of his evil heart instead of obeying me. So I will throw you out of this land into a land neither you nor your fathers have known, and there you will serve other gods day and night, for I will show you no favor.' "However, the days are coming," declares the LORD, "when men will no longer say, 'As surely as the LORD lives, who brought the Israelites up out of Egypt,' but they will say, 'As surely as the LORD lives, who brought the Israelites up out of the land of the north and out of all the countries where he had banished them.' For I will restore them to the land I gave their forefathers. "But now I will send for many fishermen," declares the LORD, "and they will catch them. After that I will send for many hunters, and they will hunt them down on every mountain and hill and from the crevices of the rocks.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 8 (view)   These folks should lay off my wife,....Or What???? Posted: 5/20/2008 11:00:19 AM I find this humorous. ^^ So did his wife. She laughed at his face like an adult would laugh at a toddler acting all tough and angry. He's too liberal to act tough and angry just like a toddler is too small and weak to act tough and angry. If he gave her lip after the interview, she most likely bad mouth him. He's that kind of male, the kind with the stronger wife in control. She's an angry woman too. So he better obey her or his clothes go on the lawn. Notice the difference between Russian leaders. They keep their wives at home, and Obama wants to be the American leader.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 28 (view)   Did Bush commit political treason today ? Posted: 5/15/2008 11:41:47 PM He was recounting history not politics. His words were: "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they had been wrong all along. We've heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American Senator declared, "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is, the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history". Of course he's right. He looked authoritative. He looked more authoritative than McCain does. He looked more authoritative than Obama does. What is going on here is that the Democratic party is trying to create a false issue. Bush with an unprecedented political attack from foreign soil. They're trying to create a false issue. They are trying to immunize Obama from criticism on his pathetic ignorance on foreign policy. They send Kerry out to talk, who lost the presidency. They send Tom Daschle out to talk, who lost his Senate seat. By the way, did Howard Dean or any of these other people demand that Jimmy Carter apologize for any of the so-called political attacks on his own country and on Israel that he has made in his international travels? Of course not. They are just upset because somebody got the truth out about Obama and what he intends to do. The illustration that the Democrats have only losers to support their flawed candidate. They've got to send Daschle out. They've got to send the haughty John Kerry out. They're doing everything they can to shield Obama from any attack because they need to shield his incompetence. Bush just finally exposed the appeasers. Something he should have been doing since at least 2004. And the liberals are going ballistic, they hate it when they are exposed. If they had kept civilized and quiet, it would not had reminded us of their treason ways. There's a column by Marc Sheppard at the AmericanThinker.com. Here is a quote from Obama: "It's conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, 'This is a guy who spent time in the Muslim world. He has the middle name of Hussein and appears more worldly, and has called for talks with people. So he's not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush, and that's something they're hopeful about. I think that's a perfectly legitimate perception as long as they're not confused about my unyielding support for Israel's security." Now, Obama himself is admitting that Arabs -- that terrorists, Islamofascist enemies -- might want to talk to him because he's "worldly." He spent time in the Muslim world, and his middle name is Hussein, and he's called for talks with people. So when you hear this quote, there's a lot in this quote to trouble you and to bother you.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 25 (view)   Pizza man shooting would-be robber is good example Posted: 4/5/2008 12:06:19 AM loveoregon, leslie321 and FishOwl, those are words friends.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 2 (view)   Pizza man shooting would-be robber is good example Posted: 4/3/2008 12:51:26 AM Shame on you for not owning gun. It's Un-American. I own four and they have doubled in price. What are you a Canadian or something dressed like a John Wayne with no gun?  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 62 (view)   What Would Be the Consequence of the US or Israel Bombing Iran? Posted: 4/3/2008 12:39:01 AM It all began with the U.S. Embassy take over and hostage taking, unstable and threatening enough there? We'll keep the annihilation of Israel out since you're anti-Semitic and will deny the facts of such repeated threats, which invites an attack. It seems that Iran have absolutely no interest in negotiating with the United States, unless of course to continue the state of crisis through its gamesmanship to buy time to build its nuclear bomb. Case in point: in the summer of 2005 the lead negotiator for Iran's nuclear program bragged on Iranian state-run TV that the nuclear negotiations with Europe bought them the three years they needed to complete an enrichment plant at Natanz, hardly a sign that Iranian regime feels any obligation to its commitments or that it is interested in good-faith negotiation. In spite of large amounts of equipment aid from Europe for the Iranian police to prevent drug trafficking, the regime has not been keeping its own word in preventing the flow of narcotics to Europe. Has it stopped arming Hezbollah and Hamas even after promising to the contrary in numerous occasions? Just last summer, a Syrian bound train from Iran which was carrying sophisticated weaponry was found crossing Turkey. Turkish authorities declared that a substantial amount of weaponry was among the cargo which was supposed to be limited to construction materials. Taking into account the nature of that Islamic regime, it seems that they have absolutely no interest in negotiating with the United States, unless of course to continue the state of crisis through its gamesmanship to buy time to build its nuclear bomb. Any agreement with the United States is rightfully viewed by them as a step towards an open society and that is what they do not want. Let's remember that the theocratic regime in Iran thrives on crisis and is only capable of living in crisis conditions. The subject of negotiations with the international community is only a game theory and not a policy. When they see weak spot, they act bolder, and when they see strength they cave in. The international community should view these negotiations as just a game and not a policy. The real change in the region will only come after the change of the regime in Iran and democracy in Iran can be guiding principle of any policy in the region. Why should a regime that has survived for 27 years just by relying on terror to successfully advance its foreign policy change its modus operandi? Iran's latest round of hostage-taking has netted it four Iranian-American dual nationals and perhaps another American who went missing in Iran. The most prominent hostage is Haleh Esfandiari, director of the Middle East Program at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars, who was arrested after four months under house arrest and several weeks of questioning. Esfandiari, who traveled to Iran last year to visit her ailing 93-year-old mother, was prevented from leaving the country after her American and Iranian passports were stolen by thugs (a favorite tactic of Iran's secret police) while she was en route to the airport to return home. Iran's radical regime essentially holds 65 million Iranians as hostages. As long as that situation continues, Iranian hardliners will not think twice about taking foreign hostages to advance their goals. The United States should help Iranians to free themselves, not make concessions that would reward a repressive regime for taking more hostages. The country's oil industry is in serious trouble. Oil production, which peaked at about 6 million barrels a day in the late 1970s, now hovers at around 3.5 million, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Iran's oil fields, which lie in the southwestern part of the country near the Iraq border, were severely damaged during the 1980s Iran-Iraq war. Repairing the fields has been tough, partly due to American sanctions imposed after the 1979 revolution but also due to a poor investment climate. The country needs foreign investment to keep exporting oil, such funding is getting increasingly tricky to come by as U.S. officials hound foreign companies to keep out of the country. A Japanese company that was interested in developing a large project in Iran reportedly got cold feet after some dissuading from the U.S. government. U.S. sanctions, which largely keep firms like ExxonMobil (Charts), Chevron (Charts) and ConocoPhillips (Charts) out of the picture, have kept Iran from pumping more oil.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 11 (view)   Is the true battle in this election religion (Hagee vs. Wright) Posted: 3/18/2008 4:28:01 PM What do we really want! Christians we need to pray. ^^^^ Your heart is with a politician, Obama, and in politics, since you have opted to not just vote, but actively involve in a political party. Christ said: "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. Delegate, what do you really want? I Timothy 2:1-3 says, "Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior."  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 2 (view)   Ati-Quran film stirs controversy Posted: 3/10/2008 2:02:22 AM WOW! These people for being raised in a patriarchy sure behave like p u s s i e s. They are so easily offended of what other countries do and in this case, Holland. The audacity of these people. Only in many European countries can Muslims file criminal complaints. It's what they get for being whipped. The producer of the film has to live in fear, in his own country, amazing.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 82 (view)   $4 a gallon gas? WTF? What do you think? Posted: 3/10/2008 1:54:17 AM Supply and Demand is not operating properly these days. We have large inventories and consmption of gas has not changed since last year. Meaning that people have been driving less. What we need is an extra drop in driving and maybe Supply and Demand would return to normacy. Gas costs $3.15 a gallon here. It was $2.85 last month.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 4 (view)   under no obligation to notify consumers Posted: 3/10/2008 1:43:37 AM It's all for the shareholders. Cheap products equals maximum profits for these shareholders. The result is many more recalls in the future.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 3 (view)   Germans Seek China Tie to Tainted or fake Blood Thinner Heparin Posted: 3/10/2008 1:23:15 AM Everything from China and not the U.S. is what is posted. I read that easily. Like you knew heparin came from China? When it comes to medicine, I for one felt it was made in a quality place and not in China. Should I ever need heparin or any meds, I for one will check it's not from China. If the MD doesn't know, I will wait. Many diabetics out there, they should check for it's origin. As for India, they have a reputation of a degree of quality, unlike China. Indian guy in his garage forming lumps of mush into tablets sounds a bit derogatory, don't you think?  Shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 34 (view)   Fractured fairy tales Posted: 3/1/2008 5:26:52 PM The prince looks better in his NAZI uniform compared to the fatigues and oversized helmet. He reminds me of snoopy. It's been a long time that I had read some of Nile Gardiner's articles. Good reading there. The last article from Nile read was of Blair Must Not Betray Britain Over Europe and Britain, A Hornet's Nest of Islamic Extremism. Tony Blankley and Pat Buchanan too. Thanks for posting his recent articles. A little of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter makes up for the silly and comical liberal and Anti-American posts here.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 163 (view)   Benazir Bhutto assassinated Posted: 1/4/2008 12:25:16 AM ^^^More venom, jealousy and carping...it's no wonder she lost and in third place. So much for the smartest woman in the world. Clinton also mentioned Bhutto’s two children...good friend Hillary has forgotten that Bhutto has three children not two. These are the people who claim they're going to keep us all safe, America. Everybody good with that? Hillary Clinton is a candidate who is running claiming big-time foreign policy knowledge and experience that she says her closest opponents in the Democratic Primary don’t have. Pakistan? A nuclear power? A front-line ally in the war on terror? A country that’s been in the news an awful lot in the past few months? A candidate with all of those advisors has got to know at least the basics about Pakistan’s political system. No such luck. The upcoming elections are for the next parliament. Musharraf was just elected president of Pakistan, overwhelmingly, by popularly elected electors on Oct. 6. He’s just begun his five-year term as the president of the country. Why would he ever want to run for one seat in parliament? It wouldn’t make sense. Now we see the reason she has kept herself from interviews all this time. She has been kept from reporters unlike the other candidates in having reporters in their busses, planes and hotels. People are seeing that she actually is a moron. It's no wonder liberals love her and get their extra large panties in a wad when she is exposed. Yup, that's right, I say it, Hillary has an enormous big butt.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 60 (view)   Benazir Bhutto assassinated Posted: 12/28/2007 12:11:58 AM For being in Pakistan a little over 2 months, Bhutto acted as if she was invincible, campaigning even in areas where militant Islam held sway. She returned from exile in October largely with the backing of liberal western officials, who wanted her to become prime minister because they believed her anti-militant stance. Her father, who founded the Pakistan People's Party and served as president and prime minister, was hanged two years after an army coup. Her two brothers were killed mysteriously. She spent years under house arrest and in prison. After serving two terms as prime minister, she fled Pakistan under the shadow of corruption charges and spent eight years in self-imposed exile. With the surge in Iraq working, liberals are completely demoralized. Al-Qaida was counting on them. The media also adore Bhutto because she went to Harvard and Oxford. Musharraf has not staged a military coup. In fact, he was re-elected in a landslide just before Bhutto's arrogant return, under Pakistan's own parliamentary system. But the Pakistani Supreme Court, believes it is above the president and refused to acknowledge Musharraf's election on the grounds that he is disqualified because he was still wearing a military uniform. That's when Musharraf sent them home. Musharraf's election was more legitimate than that of Syrian president Bashar Assad, with whom every leading Democrat has had a photo-op or Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, adjunct professor at Columbia University. The last time liberals were this enthusiastic about popular rule in some Third World country was in 1979, when they were gushing about Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran. Western liberals concluded that the fanatical Muslim leaders in Iran may yet provide us with a desperately needed model of humane government for a Third World country. And just look at all the wonderful things Khomeini did for Iran. Pakistan is a country where local Islamic courts order women to be raped as punishment for the crimes of their male relatives. Among the Islamists' bill of particulars against Musharraf is the fact that he has promoted the Women's Protection Bill, which would punish rape, rather than using it as a device for social control. Bhutto never touched that subject in her messiah like campaigns the last few months. Pakistan went badly since she returned and the Bush Administration in order to please the liberals, supported her in some insane idea of power sharing with Musharraf. She was a trouble maker, hungry for power and thought she already had it since western liberals were backing her. She even distant herself from Musharraf after the West pressured Musharraf to give up his uniform. Pakistan didn't need Bhutto. It needed someone like Mustafa Kemal Ataturk to impose military rule and drag a country of Islamic savages into the 19th century, as Ataturk did in Turkey. Pakistan's Ataturk is Gen. Musharraf and Western liberals are now hypocritically mourning for Bhutto. They should have left her alone in exile where she was enjoying her life and where no one knew about her until she was ushered into Pakistan by the liberal elite of the western world. They all must feel like crap now.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 58 (view)   The United States is once again suppressing information that runs counter to invasion. Posted: 12/5/2007 12:59:13 PM Pressure will remain on Iran. They (Iran) are using the new assessment as the defeatists in this part of the world are using it to weaken our resolve and awareness of Iran. As usual, the cowards want us to look the other way. To walk around with our hands up in the air as they do reveal themselves in threads after threads while brave ones secures their freedom to whine like hysterical women. Thank God they are in forums and not in government. Here's today's latest reaction of the new assessment from one of the Mainstream Media, the New York Times. The defeatists continue to ignore other nations opposition to Iran. They only express enmity with Americans. They (defeatists/liberals) hate the loud and opinionated defeatists Americans as well, not just the normal Americans. The beginning of this thread as usual, shows this person looses sleep and peace due to his hatred of Americans, whether they are leftist and defeatist as he is or not. He fails to attack in all his threads, particularly this one of the French, British and others supporting America and America's leadership in the world. Perhaps he is Hugo Chavez incognito, he seems to have many personalities in this site. Monitoring Agency Praises U.S. Report, but Keeps Wary Eye on Iran By ELAINE SCIOLINO Published: December 5, 2007 “To be frank, we are more skeptical,” a senior official close to the agency said. “We don’t buy the American analysis 100 percent. We are not that generous with Iran.” The official called the American assertion that Iran had “halted” its weapons program in 2003 “somewhat surprising.” That the nuclear watchdog agency based in Vienna is sounding a somewhat tougher line than the Bush administration is surprising, given that the administration has long criticized it for not pressuring Iran hard enough to curb its nuclear program. But the American finding has so unsettled governments, agencies and officials dealing with Iran that it has suddenly upended commonly held assumptions. There is relief, as one senior French official put it, that “the war option is off the table.” There is also criticism and even anger in some quarters that the American intelligence assessment may be too soft on Iran. Israel, for example, on Tuesday took a darker view of Iran’s nuclear ambitions than the American assessment, saying that it is convinced that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and that it has probably resumed the weapons program the Americans said was stopped in autumn 2003. The British government said the international community should maintain pressure on Iran over its uranium enrichment efforts. “It confirms we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons,” a spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown told reporters. He said the American assessment had also shown that past international pressure on Iran had succeeded “in that they seem to have abandoned the weaponization element.”  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 24 (view)   Ecuador wants military base in Miami Posted: 10/25/2007 2:28:24 PM Colombia wants and needs a new base. We should find a way without breaking the lease and close the base in Ecuador. Hopefully the Chavez clone in Ecuador can make it possible with his silly rhetoric. Care to back them up with reputable references? Just one needed Einstein. If not for America, you will be speaking Russian or Chinese and in servitude to them. Ecuador has a lefty president, for now. We need to close more bases that are not needed anymore. Ecuador base has been kept open due to the lease. Clark AFB and naval bases in the Philippines was closed. Saving us billions a year. Those bases were once strategic. Philippines are still hurting over those closures. The more bases we close worldwide the more money we have to maintain our strong smaller version United States in the Middle-East, Israel. Israel superiority is second to the United States and Canadian lefties, Russia, Iran and China hate it. Ecuador new president is voicing the stupid thoughts he reads from Canadian lefty press and commentators. Yes, Canada, that is the Canadian left is a world player indeed and destroying economies already a mess in third world countries. Because the envious idiots of the world subscribe to these anti-American, hostile self-destructive rhetoric. Too many African nations for example have suffered and perished due to Canadian lefty thoughts. Ecuador has not saved any nation and continent, America has. It's maintain with bases around the world. Ecuador has no Ecuadorian interest in the world, America does. Fact is all that the world has is due to America. From technology to the Moon and further. Democracy all over the world, especially the fall of the Soviet Union from America. American Empire is alive and well. All your entertainment come from us. Try living without an American film or song for a week and you will die of loneliness. And you know much more of your lives are affected from American influence and inventions. Your Computer, phone and TV alone came from us and now made all over even in Ecuador. And you need them so very much.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 45 (view)   Michigan is closed for business! Posted: 10/7/2007 5:44:13 PM Chatterbox you failed to write down of the 395,000 new jobs in the health care industry and 355,000 in the food service industry in Michigan despite the 300,000 jobs lost in the auto industry. Over 750,000 new jobs. Making it possible to increase taxes. If you're going to be Michigan's representative and spokes person at least get all the facts in. It explains the reason others are contradicting you and the op. Attacking their informative posts only reveals sour grapes on your part. Maybe you can advice yourself, friends, lovers and relatives to give up hope in returning to work at GM and find work in another area. Those unemployment checks do run out.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 26 (view)   This happens in AMERICA? Posted: 10/5/2007 11:47:42 AM The classic race card comes into play here. I'm black therefore I have to side with you since you are black. Confirming my previous post and that of others, this thread created by you is racist. I rarely check profiles but the negative thread title and post compelled me check out your residence. I did not read your profile only your residence. There was no need to read your profile. Your post speaks volume. I am taking a leap here of you residence status. You are an emigrant from Africa arranging the furniture in Ontario and now attempting to arrange the furniture here from the border. If I'm wrong, it doesn't matter. My previous post still stands and my agreement with the other posters. I will suggest that you abandon hate and try love, because love is lifting. I would love to sing one of Chef's love song to a beautiful woman but this isn't South Park.  Shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 15 (view)   This happens in AMERICA? Posted: 10/4/2007 8:42:31 AM Well Brownsu what's going on here with the posters is simple. They are talking back to you and you can't handle it like others from your area. You are used to with holding a gathering hostage with your self-righteous scoldings leaving all others in shocking silence. Every poster has made a clear and merit response to your anti-American, racial and media bashing. Judging by your retaliatory posts, you are also anti-democratic. In a democracy, everything goes. One cannot stop bigotry unless a crime is made and the perpetrators caught and punished. Which has happened to all your sample situations. OJ and Vick are celebrities and excellent quarterbacks. They make big money for others in sports. Spears like others her ranks do the same for entertainers and lots of money she made for them. Now if the young girl abused by her ex-boyfriend's trailer trash family, of which his mother and sisters participated in, one will be constantly hearing of it until the paying advertisers insist on new stories. The girl was attracted to trash. Instead of accusing some poster of being ignorant, take the time to see that most news are read not TV viewed. Plenty of good stories on TV networks of course. There are tens of thousands of print news and magazines all over the country. In every city and town. Larger ones, national and local ones. If one doesn't read it a particular day, another does and shares the stories in conversations. All of your posted articles are old. It is fascinating that you leave in Ontario yet fixed on searching American news while ignoring the many news stories in your neck of the woods. You have an arterial motive and that is to spread your hate of America by using the misfortunes of others in your quest. The world is full of people like you. They are the ungrateful controlling leftist ones. Of which it's evident you subscribe to. There are a few idiots in this small site alone spurting their jealousy, ignorance and hate of America. Deliberately dismissing all the good and charity Americans like myself have done and still does around the world. Yet people like you love aiding America's enemies just for the sake of aiding America's enemies. Shame on you.  Shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 14 (view)   Iraq: this doesn't seem to add up Posted: 10/3/2007 2:05:39 AM Garden....It makes sense to have the UK completely out from that area. Iran will continue to defy the west, unlike North Korea where Japan, China and Russia applied pressure. There's no country in the region to pressure Iran and they won't listen to France. Iran's response to France recently was that the use of such words creates tensions and is contrary to the cultural history and civilization of France. That was funny and witty of the Iranians. Diplomacy however, is the best solution for settling differences with Iran. When diplomacy is exhausted, then the much talked about limited strike against Iran's nuclear facilities will inevitably happen. Unless Israel strikes beforehand. The Terraces and Philips will always get offended, as will Hamas if we move our embassy to Jerusalem. Imagine that, we don't want to offend Hamas. LOL.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 106 (view)   Bush states the Northwest Passage is International Posted: 9/3/2007 11:52:20 AM The northwest passage will remained frozen for decades. Some researchers think it will melt because the polar ice cap is melting. Most researchers think all the frozen islands will be under the sea if indeed there is a complete meltdown. Making the area a greater Arctic ocean. It won't be a passage at all. It will be all Arctic ocean. The off topic about Canadian soldiers being killed in Afghanistan by friendly fire is appalling. These men were ordered by government officials to risk their lives in Afghanistan. Saying that their lives was purposely and deliberately snuffed out by American forces is careless and evil. It only makes the family if these fallen ones hurt and grief with more pain. Furthermore, Careless and ignorant remarks of their deaths makes their deaths futile. Given that the politicians in Canada sent them to Afghanistan. How un-Canadian and inhumane to say their lives were taken carelessly and intentionally by Americans. If those who feel that the northwest passage is not international, why not move to the passage areas? In doing so maybe the world and the US would reconsider the status of the passage. Populating the northwest passage areas would also reduce the 90% Canadian population along the US border. A border agreed between the United States and Great Britain and placing those who hate the United States far and away from the United States and making a contribution to Canada thereby those fighting in Afghanistan would feel good about being ordered to fight there.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 8 (view)   Close to 7 yrs without love in my life... What to do. Posted: 2/12/2007 9:03:53 AM There is nothing wrong with being aggressive for the right reasons. Next time you see a man you like, go after him. Ask him out. A movie or treat him to lunch for example. Also, you need to get into the fighting trim. It will show that you are serious about baiting a man then after you snared him, gain the weight back as so many women do.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 49 (view)   A spiritual connection in a relationship? Posted: 2/8/2007 11:19:38 PM Those who cannot love use some kind of spirituality to cloud their bad hearts. It's loving your boyfriend and husband that makes and keeps the connection not new age crap. Interesting how the spiritual women shout from the top of their lungs of how spiritual they are yet have hostility and domineering qualities. They attack and project their ugly selves at those who correct them. So much for their doctrines of demons disguised as spiritual. These women will sometimes blatantly tell you she is a witch or psychic. Biblically, the first lie ever told was to a female. This female, Eve, was given personal instruction by Satan. She has never forgotten this, and her most effective technique is the same used by Satan. After a steady progression of truths, she slips in the lie, or simply raises doubts and then suggests the lie.  shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 48 (view)   men who want a pat on the back for doing their job Posted: 12/23/2006 9:42:42 AM This is a no brainer. He would be tending to his daughter, her needs, everything if he had custody. You would be the distant parent. Even worse, you would be sleeping around with various men while he is raising the child. You're already doing this with custody. Some example there for a daughter. Those fathers whose children were taken from the courts after raising them during marriage have it the worse. They lost their children. The ex wife has custody and she smirks about it. In time he gives up and accepts his new status of being a visitor and not a Dad. Eventually he marries again and starts a new family. Giving all his love and attention to his new children. Until he gets divorce again and the cycle repeats itself unless the second wife is not evil but normal in loving her household. Courts have realized this mistake in giving the mothers sole custody during the 60s and 70s even the 80s. Led to far more delinquencies, teen pregnancies, drugs just all messed up new generations with little to no morality. Maybe I am wrong but it seems that you were not married and got knocked up by your black boyfriend. Decided not to take him to courts for child support because it will give him at least weekends and summers with Christmas with his daughter. Part time fatherhood which could lead to him having full time custody in time. Because he would established the bond with his daughter he so ignorantly allowed you in preventing him to have. And here you are patting yourself as a good mother. A good mother would not raise her kid in a broken home with boyfriends coming in and out of her life. At least you did not do what many women do, you did not have an abortion or did you at one time? I know that there is a trend going around with white women dating black men. Countless Rap songs have these men brag about knocking up their women and being hauled to jail for child support. This is what you are attracted to? It appears your kid's father is like this. You cannot take back what you have posted about his distance and bragging of the little he does for his daughter. Usually all they cared about when with you is sex. In fact, you have one referring to you in your profile as that, a sex object. Black men are mommy's boys if you notice. Because they were raised solely by their mothers. No Fathers. The reason black men are very sensitive about their mothers. Don't diss their mothers or you have a brawl. Their fathers could be any men out there in many cases. What you need to do is change your lifestyle. You have a daughter and she needs structure and integrity in being raised. Unfortunately, she will be one of many in a new generation yet another generation without a father figure with all the bad that comes with it. Thanks to you and your lifestyle. How's that for judging, my has merit yours does not?  Shawhan Joined: 12/2/2006 Msg: 30 (view)   Note To Self.....Actions Speak Loader Then Words!!! Posted: 12/17/2006 12:01:54 PM You are at a point of being tire of the same old routine and rhetoric that goes with dating. You are feeling a brokenhearted. You loved this lady and thought she felt the same only to be shocked that it was all a sham on her part. Society will tell you with phases to return to the dating game. Get back on the saddle, risk your heart again or she is out there, the one. At your age you have done this repeated only to be disappointed yet again. Is she hurt? Will she? By a man who is experienced as she? Maybe, and she will cry foul. A person fooled by a scam artist will never lose money again. Most know not to be taken by the mistakes of others when it comes to money. Why then should allow your heart to be broken again? The roots of your situation was not you. You have a heart and trusted someone who was trained not to have one. It was an agenda with her. You did not nothing wrong just failed to see the obvious. Like many who lost money by ignoring if it is too good to be true, it's usually is. You have no resentment. That is garbage. You are thinking, realizing and accepting the big lie many follow blindly. You cannot ever find a kindred soul, that's another lie. Think about it. With all her faults, unsavory past and foibles she's a kindred soul? You make your own happiness. No other can make you happy. To continue to believe this lie will lead to further disappointments. Concentrate in yourself, she does. Instead enjoy the company of women and if you feel horny, don't play the dating sham. Rent a woman. For $200 to $300 dollars you can rent a beautiful, agile and high class woman. She will make you feel like a boiled chicken and it's a lot cheaper. They are the most honest women in the world for it being the oldest profession and she tells you her price up front. In some jurisdiction they are legal. In the meantime, don't give them your heart just your money and find yourself FBs...many women are into it. They cannot find a man to marry them and also horny. Give your heart to your children, your parents and other relatives who have your best interests in their hearts.   Show ALL Forums