Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

          

Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 1142 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/23/2008 9:58:28 AM
Be careful for what you wish for...

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/23/palin/index.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/15/bess/index.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/19/palin/index.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/17/palin_mayor/index.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/12/palin/index.html

This woman is scary as hell!

No wonder why McCain keeps her as far as possible from reporters.

Well, this was fun while it lasted. Adios plentyoffish forums!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 35 (view)
 
Changes to Forums.
Posted: 9/17/2008 10:41:17 AM

I don't think getting more moderators is the solution.


Why not??? It’s not like it will create more expenses since they are suppose to work without pay...right? So, if true, where’s the problem? Ad a few mods for those forums alone...problem solved!


It may be just *two hundred or so,* who post in the political forums, but I know that I have personally recommended the site to hundreds people locally and across the country in personal emails and by posting links in on other sites.


We all promoted this website to bring in more interesting people. Guess that doesn’t count.

By the way...200? Have you considered all the people who just read the threads without posting anything? I seriously doubt it! A lot of them will look at which forums you participate in so they can learn more about who you are and decide to write or not based on that alone. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if a survey was done, that it would come back with a very high number of members who do so.

Anyway, I find it shameful that instead of promoting great forums with smart debaters, you prefer to either ban or remove them completely.

Oh well, c’est la vie!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 127 (view)
 
ABC's Charles Gibson lands First interview with Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/12/2008 8:30:07 AM

Sarah did better than expected with the broad and general questions put to her

She did BETTER than expected??? God...I truly dont want to know what they expected in the first place!

She's just the flavor of the month...nothing more. Sooner or later, she will take a plunge...they all do.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 124 (view)
 
ABC's Charles Gibson lands First interview with Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/12/2008 7:59:38 AM

Questions about Palin's knowledge of foreign policy dominated the interview with ABC's Charles Gibson. Palin repeated her earlier assertions that she's ready to be president if called upon, yet she sidestepped questions on whether she had the national security credentials needed to be commander in chief.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain has defended his running mate's qualifications, citing her command of the Alaska National Guard and Alaska's proximity to Russia.


It’s difficult not to laugh when you read the above quote. McCain defends her qualifications citing that Alaska is near Russia??? And to think people actually buy that like a hot bake apple pie.


Pressed about what insights into recent Russian actions she gained by living in Alaska, Palin told Gibson, "They're our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."


Please stop!


Pressed repeatedly on whether the United States could attack terrorist hideouts in Pakistan without the country's permission, she said: "If there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend."


So, according to Palin, it’s ok to plan attacks in any countries if the US believes that terrorists are in them. How about in England? Canada? Better yet...Russia or China??? What a nutcase!


Asked three times what her position would be if Israel felt threatened enough to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, Palin repeatedly said the United States shouldn't "second guess" Israel's steps to secure itself.


Riiiiiiiiiiight! Although I certainly do not approve, it’s well known that the US backed atrocities committed by Israel and vetoed most UN resolutions critical to them. Well trained Palin. Can she sit and beg as well?


Called for Georgia and the Ukraine to be included in NATO, a treaty that requires the U.S. to defend them militarily. She also said Russia's attack into Georgia last month was "unprovoked." Asked to clarify that she'd support going to war over Georgia, she said: "Perhaps so."


“Unprovoked”??? Don’t they have cable in Alaska???

Going to war with Russia over Georgia? “Perhaps so” ??? WOW! Yeahhh she’s the one alright!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 803 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/5/2008 12:13:20 PM

I don't think you'll find ANYONE who will admit voting for him, as time passes. If one could take an "exit poll" of people who voted in the 2004 election - Kerry seems to have won it by a landslide.


So true!

Here's my dilemma...a lot of republicans will refuse to admit that they voted for Bush because of all the HUGE gaffes and then they turn around and look at McCain and Palin as the saviours of the country even though McCain supported Bush at over 9o% of the time in the past 8 years .

Year/Support/Oppose
2008 (to 05/15/08)/100%/0%
2007/95%/5%
2006/89%/11%
2005/77%/23%
2004/92%/8%
2003/91%/9%
2002/90%/10%
2001/91%/9%
Sources: FactCheck.org

How is it possible for some who claimed that they never voted for Bush and those who actually did, admit that the country is not only in bad shape but was badly governed for the past 8 years, then turn around and vote for someone who CLEARLY supported this present failure of a government which obviously means continuing on the same direction?

Where's the logic in that?
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 799 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/5/2008 10:32:01 AM

My God... are we this dumb as a country to fall for this trick a THIRD TIME?!!! My goodness. Damn.


I certainly wouldn't bet against the possibility after seeing Bush re-elected even with all the crap that he has done. Clearly, some people are just too damn dumb to vote.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Joe Biden calls for prosecution of George Bush (maybe)
Posted: 9/4/2008 6:55:26 AM

"out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president -- no one is above the law"


I completely agree. This is not about partisan political games. If the Bush government is involved in criminal acts, why should they get a free pass?
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 641 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/3/2008 8:18:14 AM

Actually with all the squawking and crying those on the left are doing in regard to McCains VP pick, I think it just shows they are scared.


Considering everything that was written in here alone, the only ones who are scared are the republicans.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 494 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/1/2008 3:34:59 PM

As for being taken seriously, anybody willing to take a lesser qualified candidate as the top of one ticket and has problems with a better qualified person on the bottom of another (then citing their own lack of knowing who they were as a negative issue) needs to do some catching up if they want to be taken seriously.

I know...McCain will have to catch up eventually if he wants to be taken seriously.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 486 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 9/1/2008 2:08:59 PM
I think that this is something interesting...


Why McCain selected Mrs. Palin (VP or Ralph Nader) Palinader
News Type: Event — Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:01 PM EDT

Who will you vote for when McCain cries "Gender Bias"?

As it stand right now the McCain Campaign is struggling to the point of losing the election. Even if the polls boaster they are closing the gap, we all know that isn't true. McCain could easily lose in an electoral landslide. I must say, I too, like so many of you laughed so hard , a few times even, at McCain's choice for VP and the speech she gave. That speech seemed to have a juvenile tone to it. It was like a person interviewing for a typical everyday -Joe job. When I stopped laughing I felt sad for Mrs. Palin when I realized how serious this choice is and why McCain selected Mrs. Palin to be his VP while passing on more seasoned candidates. Here's why McCain selected Palin. You see it doesn't matter who Palin is, as long as she is a women. It doesn't matter if she is or isn't qualified. It doesn't matter if McCain doesn't know her or if he disagrees with her. The idea (strategy) was formulated before McCain and his advisers chose Mrs. Palin. The only question was which woman will he choose. A pipe line from Canada to Alaska made the choice easier. The McCain strategy is to select a women (any women) to implement a well thought out plan. McCain's secret weapon is (a women ) operation "Tear Drop". To understand this plan, you have to understand the full impact of the plan. McCain doesn't only want HRC's defectors, as so many are suggesting, he also wants Obama loyalist, the undecided and the independents. By choosing a woman, immediately a very small unintelligent group of women will vote for McCain because he chose a women. This is a small group but worth mentioning. On the larger scale women don't vote for women because they are women, and simply putting a woman on the ticket won't compensate for their policy positions. The McCain Campaign is not worried about the larger scale of women who are intelligent and has high expectations concerning the broad issues on the economy, domestic and national security and health care. The McCain strategy is of no respect of a woman's intellect but her emotions. Here is the gamble of the McCain campaign. Not if, but when the McCain campaign provoke the Democrats to attack Mrs. Polin, or when the McCain campaign plant a man in their audience to heckle Mrs. Palin with a gender remark like " Go home and raise your five kids" or when the Obama campaign says anything to Mrs. Palin, the McCain Campaign will continue to cry foul by reason of gender bias. women all over will get upset, take offense and think that the democrats are attacking her because she is a women. Then the women all over the U.S. will throw their votes to McCain and Palin. Thus making it a good game play that lead to victory for McCain. Sadly Mrs Palin would have served her purpose and so would the American women also be of no more use to McCain. It will happen. So will the American women be ready to stand firm and don't fall for the McCain sneak-attack hype?


Perhaps it is the plan. By attacking Palin, it will give tools to the Republicans to show that it's not about politics but gender. When you think about it, McCain only met Palin once before she was selected...an unknown that couldn't come close to better candidates available. It's clear that it's a game and like it or not, this is about gender and nothing else!

For those who are crying about sexist comments, here’s a tip…It is probably the reason for McCain to select her in the first place therefore, be vewy vewy quiet!

If (and that’s a HUGE if), McCain is elected, Palin will be force to resign. There’s just no way the republicans will keep her in as Vice-President…no way no how!

She’s just a means to an end…Nothing more!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 420 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 8/31/2008 7:42:02 PM

McCain and Palin had approx. 20,000 to show up at a campaign stop today. Reports said more wanted into the area but, there was no room so they lined the streets leading in. Little advance notice and McCain/Palin can pull off this many...while with many months advance and a lot of hoopla, Obama and Biden get 84,000 into a well staged event which holds 90,000.


You know what this means huh? "Beware airport restrooms, the Republicans are making their way to Minneapolis."
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 412 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 8/31/2008 2:22:11 PM

well golly gee whiz... excuuuuuuuuuuuse me for asking. It wasnt clear to me, thats why I thought I would keep the lines of communication open by asking.


It wasn’t clear ??? Really??? Reddwine: (Perhaps too much of it…wouldn’t you say?) So sorry about that. I will try to be more explicit the next time.


Anytime you hear someone call someone else an idiot rest assured you are standing within earshot of the true idiot.


Well, I suppose it’s a poor way at attempting to insult posters but then, when one has nothing intelligent or (funny) to come up with, what else is to be expected?


Looked to me like he was looking more at her speech laying on the podium, not her a$$.


I thought of it as well but then, why would he look at a speech when he cannot read a word without his glasses? Either way, it was funny nevertheless…well…maybe not for diehard republicans


There is only one possibility. Out of your pocket and mine!


So true! If people expect that none of these two candidates will eventually raise taxes, you are living in dreamland for sure. The debt needs to be paid and unless it rains money, higher taxes is certainly lurking in the horizon.

I guess the main question should be: Who is most likely to be able to reduce the debt?

And another one comes to mind...which candidate will most likely force the oil industry to reduce prices?

As far as I am concerned, most certainly not one who is a warmonger!


Seems some here are having fun with calling Palin...'what's her name'


Pa who? Ohh right! The one who seem to have a nice butt? McCain AAA approved!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 395 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 8/31/2008 10:49:41 AM

Who's' an idiot?


The "idiot" part was quite obviously aimed at McCain. Seems pretty clear to me.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 394 (view)
 
It looks like McCain's VP pick is Sarah Palin
Posted: 8/31/2008 10:43:04 AM

Enthusiasm..

I could see in McCain's face when he was introducing Sarah Palin


We ALL can see what McCain was sooo enthused about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13LRTrxC_fU



What an idiot!


Thank you to the poster who brought this one up. Not only does it show McCain lack of class but also one has to question his REAL motives to select what's her name.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 34 (view)
 
Banned for Being Too Good
Posted: 8/27/2008 9:33:22 AM

I am glad you support the right of Nicole Scott to take legal action.


She paid to have her son playing in this league. If the league administrators are too damn stupid to admit their fault, that’s all they deserve as far as I am concern.


Bring the league to their knees......
I bet it bankrupts the League


And who should be blame if it happens? The league or the kid who seem to put the ball in the strike zone fairly accurately?


Thats what youth sports is all about... Winning


Hmmm...what else is there? Kids play sports to win. I never EVER saw a bunch of kids losing a game and be happy about it. Have you? They are dissapointed and they deal with it. That’s when parents should teach good sportsmanship by telling the kids to congratulate the other team and pass along the message that it will not be as easy the next time. Suck it up, practice and the kids will do better the next time. If they like the sport, it will come automatically. If they don’t, then they should quit and try something else. Whining because they can’t win is bullshit!

The same goes for board games. Have you ever seen kids who wants to play to lose? I sure as hell never did.


Everyone should watch her son pitch


Well, that’s part of the problem.
There's plenty of sites with recommendations on how many pitches a 9 year old should take during a game and per week. Seems like all agree for 50 pitches. Now, if the kid strikes everyone out in 3 pitches, it would mean that he should be replaced half way through the game. Personally, I seriously doubt that he’s that good so let’s say for the sake of argument that he averages 4 to 5 pitches per kid but still have no one on bases (3 outs), it means that the kid should be replaced after 3.5 innings which means at least 3 pitchers per team. Sounds fair to me. What do you think?

Who’s to blame? Coaches, the league and quite often the parents. All the league has to do is to enforce the recommendations and the problem will be solved. Kids will have the challenge to try to hit the pitches from the better pitcher for 3 to 4 innings than have better chances with not so accurate ones which of course means that they will get hit here and there but hey, all will be happy.


Simple solution. Everyone who does not wish to play against this pitcher can quit.


There you go! Teach them how to whine and quit. Amazing!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 31 (view)
 
Banned for Being Too Good
Posted: 8/27/2008 7:48:29 AM

Does he HAVE to pitch? If he has perfected the pitch to the point that he is way out of the division he is playing in, why not have him work on the skills he HASN'T perfected?


Let’s see here...YES YES YES! Clear enough? That would be like saying that when Tiger Woods was a child, he should’ve tried other sports as he “perfected his skills” at golf. Or Saying to Wayne Gretzky (that would be a hockey player) when he was seen as the best even at a very young age, that he should be a goalie instead of a center player. Absolutely ridiculous!!!


Tuesday, in response to threats of a suit from an angry Nicole Scott, the LJB held a disjointed press conference at Criscuolo Field. Attorney Peter Noble, the league’s advisor, hemmed and hawed his way through real questions and kept getting back to the fact that league parents were in fear for the eyes, ears, and noses of their precious kids.

Yet there are a couple others in the league who throw almost as hard with less control. No one is demanding that they turn in their pitching spikes.


So therefore, the parents who are involved by saying that they fear for their kids are liars and aholes…BIG TIME! It’s not that they fear for their kids, it’s because their kids can’t friggin win! They don’t mind having their kids being hit by another pitcher with the same ball velocity as they are NOT talking about the other pitchers with similar speed but with obviously less talent.…Just the one who just happens to strike them all out!

May God forgive me for posting something from FOX...


Have YOU ever protested over a 9-year old pitcher?
Aug 26, 2008 | 8:45AM |

This question I have posed does seem a little extreme. What reason would you have to be against some 9-year old kid pitching against 8-10-year old kids?

Well, in New Haven Connecticut parents and their kids protested over a young boy named Jericho Scott. Scott is/was a right-handed pitcher who threw about 40 mph and has been so good in the New Haven Youth Baseball League that opposing players and parents urged league officials to ban him from pitching. To add to this story, Scott apparently has pinpoint control and has yet to hit any player in the league this season.

Back on point, are we kidding? You ask the league to stop a great pitcher from pitching? That would be like every country protesting that Michael Phelps shouldn't be allowed to swim because he's too good. Not only is this league wrong for preventing Scott from pitching, they have violated his rights. His parents paid for him to play in this league and he deserves the opportunity to pitch, hit, play the field and more importantly, play baseball.

For those people who opposed Scott from pitching in this league should not only be ashamed of themselves but they are what's wrong with sports.

This is far worse than showing up a player on the field or breaking an unwritten rule, these people have done what they could to break the spirit of a 9-year old boy who loves to pitch. Are you proud of yourselves? Have you accomplished something positive? No, you have brought unnecessary attention to yourselves for all the wrong reasons. This boy should have been given proper respect for his good play, and instead I have to read about how parents and a Youth Baseball League have ripped this kid's heart out. Great work people! Are you going to make the best hitter in the league swing with wood while the rest hit with aluminum bats?

Why don't we punish the kids who get straight A's in school because they are simply too smart in class.

Why don't we punish the salesperson who has 100 clients and makes $100, 000 from each of them because he's simply too good for his company.

In fact let's punish Tiger Woods when he gets back from injury because he should let other golfers win major championships.

This is one of the worst stories to hear when you have lived, breathed and sweat baseball for nearly 20 years. These people should appreciate what Jericho Scott does on the mound and hope that he succeeds later on in life. To take something away from him because of something he didn't do is one of the worst things you can do to a child. Heinous actually.

These are the same people who are allowed to have kids and teach them terrible life lessons like this story. These are also the same people who formulate terrible opinions about sports and are allow to vote in presidential elections. It is scary to think about how responsible parents like these are to a country, let alone their own family. It also paints a terrible picture of how their kids will perceive this situation and feel this is right. It isn't right. It is wrong in the worst way.

Developmental league or not, Jericho Scott's love for pitching was taken away because he happened to develop faster than other kids. Instead of the league being proud of that, they have taken a step backward as to say, "we don't want THAT kind of development". That is a slap in the face to him, his family, his team and his coaches. Shame on you.

Jericho's mother Nicole will meet with a lawyer, and that's the right play. Don't allow shallow, self-centered and naive parents to allow control over your son. And lots of people would have blown their top over this, myself included (probably), if I found out a league banned my son or daughter from pitching because they are too good. What should also be pointed out is he turned down playing for the defending champions of the league who happens to be sponsored by an employer of one of the league's administrators. Does someone have an AXE to grind on this kid? Or do they really want to repeat this year and banning Scott is the way to go.

This is a sad story for kids who participate in sports. But I'm not sure what's worse; pushing for Scott to never pitch in the league or going to bed at night thinking what you did was right.

I hate that we had to learn about a dominant 9-year old pitcher this way. Jericho Scott has earned and deserved better than this


I stole this one from another site…

no wonder America's children and teens are so soft these days. Why not take the challenge and try and hit the kids stuff?? Nooo, the other team packs it in and runs off afraid like a bunch of wusses. That's absurd. Only as far back as the 70's, not long ago, the best played, prospered and moved on to higher leagues. Today, with all the political correctness going on, kids hit off tee's, they play for more than 3 outs an inning, everyone gets a chance to hit the same and everyone feels oooh soo good after the game. It doesn't help you develop. That does not help you become a strong young man when you face no adversity. It has to be a woman who came up with this stuff. "Ohh I don't want my Jimmy getting hurt". America is soft and getting softer. Young boys are being raised predominantly by their moms with little to no adult male interjection and increasingly having female values instilled. It's called the Pussification of America. Young men are wimps these days and wanna cry wah wah wah, like a girl, when things don't go their way. When you don't experience problems you can't adjust to them and take them on either. Jeeez, what about the brainiac kid that wins all the scholarships and comes in #1 and takes up time away from the teacher while the other kids that aren't as gifted don't do as well? What happens? Nothing. This kid who has exceptional arm strength was made to feel like an outcast or worse yet, a freak. He outta take the ball and bean one of the league geniuses that banned him. Totally absured.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Banned for Being Too Good
Posted: 8/26/2008 5:59:50 PM
This kid is no bigger or taller than the other kids. As someone mentioned in here, a 40 mph ball is fairly common for a 9 year old so where’s the problem? It’s simple really…This one happens to be able to control the ball very well as he never hit anyone... but that was not the problem. The problem was that he “turned down an invitation to join the defending league champion, which is sponsored by an employer of one of the league's administrators.”

Now, coming back to the speed, if 40 mph is fairly common for that age, then when I analyse what some are saying, it will be ok for any other same age pitcher to hit other kids as long as they have fun learning the game and have a fighting chance...right? Same speed...hitting players…but can win = OK Right? Or are some just debating because other kids can’t seem to challenge him? They want their kids to play as long as there’s no special talented kids around…right? And we should agree because after all, we should not challenge kids…right?

When it comes to the excuse of “learning the game” goes, the same can be applied to Little League players as quite a few never played baseball before they registered. So now they are 12 but the average speed goes up to 70 mph. Ohhhh…we should ban baseball as someone is bound to get hurt!

As for from having him in another class goes, isn’t Little League the next step? If so, isn’t 12 the minimum age requirement?

Hmmm….3 years without playing where he seems to have a certain talent...That just doesn’t sound fair to me and again, it would promote mediocrity
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Banned for Being Too Good
Posted: 8/26/2008 1:06:52 PM

Some folks here just don't get it: this isn't a competitive league, but one for beginners and others to learn the game, learn sportsmanship and have fun


Isn't a competitive league? Let's see here...eight teams and about 100 players? Not competitive??? What does it take for it to be "competitive"?


The right-hander has a fastball that tops out at about 40 mph.


How did they figured that speed out? "about 40 mph"? About??? Perhaps it is closer to 30 but since he was on target, some parents didn't like having their kids to strike out? Hey...it happens allll the time.


I agree that at this level, the game should be about the teamwork not the ringer.

The kid is 9 years old! A "ringer"???


Why not make him work a little on a part of the game he isn't so good at? What harm can come of that?


Yeah...that makes perfect sense. Hey kid, you are just too damn good as a pitcher so where can we put you so we could win for a change?

They basically punished the kid because he exceled at something?

"Make him play on a part of the game he isn't so good at"? That doesn't promote the sport. That promotes mediocrity!

Is this baseball or flowers 101??? Jesus!

So what about the accusation? No one seem interested in it...


Jericho's coach and parents say the boy is being unfairly targeted because he turned down an invitation to join the defending league champion, which is sponsored by an employer of one of the league's administrators.

Jericho instead joined a team sponsored by Will Power Fitness. The team was 8-0 and on its way to the playoffs when Jericho was banned from pitching.


If that's really what happened, they will deserve all the crap that will come with it.

By the way, what about the team that forfeited the game? Is that promoting the game or how to quit??? Wouldn't it be better for parents and coaches to work on the kids pride instead of being cry babies? Sure this kid is better but it should be an incentive to push the other kids to at least try to beat him at his game. No...it's better to forfeit and than get rid of him. WOW!!! An then we wonder why some are so damn screwed up!

Bottom line...the kid is 9 years old...playing with other kids of his age! Sheeesh!!!

There's ALWAYS a kid sticking out in regards to any sports who is better than the rest. Should we always ban those kids because of natural talents???
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 7 (view)
 
Banned for Being Too Good
Posted: 8/26/2008 9:07:16 AM

Well the boy should just get used to it. That's just life. You pitch too well, they won't let you play. You work too hard, you'll make your co-workers look bad, they will hate you, and get you fired. You make too much money, and the democrats will tax it all away from you... That's just the way life is, and the sooner the boy realizes that, the better off he'll be...

NOT!


As sad as it is, developing talents at a young age can create problems for those who really stick out from the crowd. Some are driven by jealousy and fear and will use all the tools available to get rid of such a person. This is true for kids just as it is for adults.

I think that this league should be sued.

What kind of message are they sending by acting this way? The message is simple...if you stick out from others by being much better (or than my son), you will not be allowed to play? Ridiculous!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 68 (view)
 
White House: John McCain was NOT Tortured in Vietnam
Posted: 8/24/2008 10:03:46 AM

I cannot fathom why he objects to these documents becoming public because it makes him look like there's more to the story that he doesn't wish to reveal.


There's only one explanation as far as I am concern...there's information that he wants to make damn sure it will never come out and bite him in the ass.

I wonder why some call him "Songbird"?

Perhaps the link below will help answer a few questions.

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/02/17/in-1992-pows-accused-mccain-of-collaborating-with-vietnamese/
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 66 (view)
 
White House: John McCain was NOT Tortured in Vietnam
Posted: 8/24/2008 6:29:08 AM

"when McCain trots out daily his POW status "


Well, I cannot blame him for bringing is POW status all the time. After all, isn't it what happens when you get to a certain age? Your memory plays tricks on you and brings you to the past? Ohhh just kidding!


It speaks of his character well , certainly, but it's not something that directly makes him a better presidential candidate in any real way.


It only "speaks of his character" well over 30 years ago and I am definitely not sure it should be viewed as good! Character changes with time...for better or for worst. To see him advocating war they way he does, it's clear in my mind that it's for worst.

As far as making him a better candidate because he served his country goes, I cannot believe that some people would actually take that in to consideration. I even heard this woman saying on the news how good he would be because he was tortured therefore he knows right from wrong. A sandwich short of a picnic for sure but some will buy anything they hear on the big screen.

A bit of reading…
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20299.htm
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 7 (view)
 
Bush widens the Cold War... Provocations against Russia...
Posted: 8/23/2008 7:05:44 AM
I would like to take a moment to congratulate the dumbass, warmongering fool in Washington as he somehow managed to bring back the cold war in only his last term alone.


HAVANA (Reuters) - Cuba and Russia have stirred memories of their Cold War alliance with recent talk of restoring "traditional" ties in what experts said was a warning to their old adversary, the United States.

Russia, once the island's top economic benefactor and military ally, has hinted at re-establishing a military presence in Cuba in a tit-for-tat for U.S. activities in Eastern Europe, including plans for a missile defence system, they said.

"Russia is clearly irritated at what it perceives as U.S. meddling in its neighbourhood," said Cuba expert Phil Peters at the Lexington Institute in Virginia. "It seems to be sending a message that if you play on our periphery, we'll play in yours."


As far as I am concerned, Bush should be hung for all to see. This man managed to put a good part of Europe in danger not to mention the good ole USA and Canada as well.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 23 (view)
 
Georgia Invades Russia
Posted: 8/19/2008 9:05:13 AM

President Bush is still President, still in office and already history is showing George Bush as one of the best Presidents


Some are sooo funny in here...

History will be showing something alright but you will have to look at the other side of the scale to see what it will be.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 19 (view)
 
Our American Moral Compass and the Rest of the World
Posted: 8/18/2008 8:33:40 AM

I politely disagree that we have "done more than any country to fight suffering and oppression of those who cannot defend theirselves against evil"


I couldn't agree more.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 18 (view)
 
Our American Moral Compass and the Rest of the World
Posted: 8/17/2008 12:35:30 PM

With the proliferation of nuclear missiles in the mid east / possibly one day from North Korea, why on earth would we not want to have defensive missiles?


We??? Who's we??? The "defensive missiles" will be in Europe and the Middle East!


Perhaps because some can not be trusted?


Exactly! Which is the reason why Russians don't want any American "defensive missiles" close to their borders.


Russia has many nuclear weapons unaccounted for, you never know what can happen.


And I suppose America doesn't???


If a defensive missile shield can stop one missile from reaching a major populated area, then why wouldn't we build them?


Here's a better question...if no threats were made to ANY European countries, why make moves that will provoke other major players?

Let's turn things around and have Russia signing deals for "defensive missiles" systems in Cuba and Venezuela? While we are at it, China is more and more involved in Africa so perhaps they could have "defensive missiles" in place in a few countries as well. Surely if that would happen, England and France will follow the same path. Why? Because the truth is, any type of missiles (defensive and offensive) can be used once the system in place.

Where does it stop???


This is basic security for Europe, who is the closest possible victim to some of these unknown threats. Once again, the US has its moral compass pointed at protecting others.


Most European countries can defend themselves against a possible missile threat so your argument is moot at best.

The US has it's moral compass pointed in one direction alright but it's certainly not to protect others!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Russians Not to Blame for Attacks??
Posted: 8/15/2008 9:50:41 AM
I had to laugh when I read this...


Bush says Russian 'bullying and intimidation' are not acceptable


And better yet...


bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century.


Yep...coming from bushie himself!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 33 (view)
 
HILLARY COULD HAVE BEEN NOMINEE, IF NOT FOR EDWARDS
Posted: 8/14/2008 7:38:29 AM

HILLARY COULD HAVE BEEN NOMINEE, IF NOT FOR EDWARDS


I could have won a golf tournament yesterday if not for a strong wind that made me miss a birdie putt on the 18th hole.

So the point is...move on already!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 50 (view)
 
Just Words...Just Speechs...
Posted: 7/28/2008 11:00:51 AM
This thread perfectly matches it's OP...

Just words...Just speeches!

 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 35 (view)
 
Just Words...Just Speechs...
Posted: 7/27/2008 5:36:04 PM

Do you know how naive that sounds ..The great uniter?? He can't even unite his own party


This coming from someone who calls others "childish"???

Naive? The world was much more united a little over 8 years ago. In fact, immediately after 911, most of it was behind the US including Iran. Bush pretty much destroyed that special bond/trust. Today, if a political party (from another country) backs Bush, others will hammer them for it! That means that a vast majority couldn't give a rat ass if something would happen to the good ole USA. In fact, if (God forbid) there would be another attack, I wouldn't be surprised to hear reactions from around the world such as:
Well, they did ask for it...or...it was bound to happen...or...what did they expect after all the crap this government has done in the past 8 years or so.

Having a world that is united with a superpower is a hell of a lot better than one wishing for it's destruction.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 23 (view)
 
Just Words...Just Speechs...
Posted: 7/27/2008 10:24:57 AM
did the tax payers get their monies worth? if so how?


Just words? Just speeches? Isn’t exactly what all politicians do? So why relate those words to only Obama? What you asked doesn’t make sense but then smoke screens are always a good way to distort a subject and a poor attempt to confuse people.

Just words and speeches? Let’s turn this around for a moment. When McCain talks, he cannot seem to be able to do it in front of large crowds...Why is that? I mean, the man is obviously a better speaker than Bush and for that reason alone, one would think that more people would show up and listen to him...but they don’t.

Then, we have Bush who couldn’t gather a crowd if he paid all of them. He can’t even step out of the country without being threaten everywhere he goes. Do you think that Bush could be talking in front of 200,000 people abroad? Well not unless he’s in a tank as most would want him hung from the nearest tree.

Obama? Well, that certainly doesn’t seem to be the case for him in America and quite obviously abroad as well. What does that tell me? It tells me that Europeans are willing to listen and open up to possibilities of a friendlier America. What Bush literally destroyed within only his first term, people are willing to pay attention once more which shows possible trust. No amount of money can buy that my friend.

Did American tax payers got their monies worth from Obama's world tour? For some, I am sure that it was a waste of time and money while for most, it was well worth the expense.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 121 (view)
 
The Hillraisers just won't fold
Posted: 7/26/2008 7:28:46 AM
Don’t you find it amusing to see an idiot on the news saying that he’s a “passionate democrat for 18 years” and “ I never voted for anything but democrat” then turns around and says “I will personally vote for John McCain” followed by “it’s good for the greater picture and good for the long term of the democratic party.” This from the leader himself???

So the message of PUMA is basically vote for McCain because it will be better for Democrats in the long run???

Will Bower (leader of PUMA), actually quit his job in July to oversee PUMA. Either this guy has serious mental problems or he his remunerated through undisclosed funds.

It’s quite obvious that PUMA is a backed GOP group who’s out there to feed the un-informed and the morons all the bullshit they can to create mayhem so some can switch to the republican party. There’s even a woman still questioning Obama’s religion and where he was born! I thought that most would’ve had that right since allllllll the information that was passed on since last winter. WOW!!!

The stupidity of people is astonishing. Mind you, considering that half the country voted a second time for Bush, nothing and I mean NOTHING surprises me anymore.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 3 (view)
 
From Russia, With Love????
Posted: 7/25/2008 4:21:53 PM
First, anyone who is hot and 18 years younger than you needs to be in here. That's a HUGE red flag if you ask me. They hope that you will be dumb enough to believe that hotties want you...and it works big time. Why? Because the smaller head takes control

As far as generic letters goes, scammers are way past that one. They now communicate properly and will answer your questions...well kinda sorta. They usually try to get you to communicate with them through a free email site such as yahoo or Hotmail. Why? So you cannot report them in here.

Within less than a week, they will ask for money...garanteed.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 76 (view)
 
McCain and Age
Posted: 7/25/2008 4:06:02 PM

As for illnesses. Either one could drop dead in office. Obama is a smoker. He could contract lung cancer/COPD, etc. and die or become greatly physically weakened. Either one could have a brain tumor...the list goes on and on and on.

Oh come on! There's a 25-year age gap for crying out loud! I think that it would be a sure bet to see McCain go first.

No one would want to see someone leading the most powerful army in the world going senile within a few years. Life expectancy for men in the US is 75…need I say more?

McCain already has a foot in the coffin... nuff said.

Anyway, I believe that as soon as things will heat up this fall, travelling and long hours, McCain health will become a very serious issue.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 86 (view)
 
President Bush's Masterful Job On Terrorism
Posted: 7/10/2008 9:10:45 PM

I am so amazed by the lack of respect for the President of the United States.

I'm so amazed that he still has respect from some citizens!


The other thing i find funny is so many want to condemn the President of the United States. Yet, he was voted into office ... not once? but twice?


Now that was very unkind! People have enough regrets as it is. There’s really no need to remind them of the tremendous gaffe.


President Bush will go down in history as an awesome President.


You just got to be kidding! Bush will go down in history as the WORST of them all. He is nothing but a pathetic liar, and idiot and a warmongering criminal.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 8 (view)
 
How Canada stole the American dream
Posted: 7/10/2008 7:40:37 AM

Because as far as I know most of us wanted a Canadian Dream


I agree. The American dream is fading quite rapidly and will be even harder to attain for most in the future. Perhaps a "change" of government will help in bringing the US back on track.

I am glad that we are working on the Canadian dream and having a better life for it.

to all Canadians.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Hezbollah and Hamas --- Terrorists? or National Resistance Groups?
Posted: 7/7/2008 5:23:24 PM
Terrorist states are defined by what the USA says. If anyone refuses to bow down to the mighty USA, they are labeled terrorist. Hezbollah is a perfect example. Funny thing is that as soon as one is labeled as a terrorist state, a few other countries such as Canada and England accepts it without asking questions.

Saying this, what would happen if other countries decided to publicly announce that the US and Israel are terrorists states? How would it be accepted from the rest of the world? Would others join the fun?
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Afghanistan Troop Deaths Surpass Iraq Deaths... Is that improvement?
Posted: 7/4/2008 12:15:47 PM
That was before the Taliban harbored OBL who as you know was the mastermind of attacks on our country in 2001 so the US was right to go after the Taliban..we can't give the Taliban a free pass for harboring the mastermind who killed so many of our innocent people and was also responsible for many other attacks on Amerian embassys and ships..etc..


“Before the Taliban harboured OBL”??? Are you sure? Right...so I guess the 43 millions that Bush gave to the Taliban in May 2001 doesn't really count? I mean, knowingly that Osama bin Laden still operates the leading anti-American terror operation from his base in Afghanistan and allegedly launched two terror attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998, how would you call that?

Hmmm…maybe I am wrong…what do you think?
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 45 (view)
 
Dating service that bans ugliness comes to Canada
Posted: 7/1/2008 9:29:13 AM
Beauty IS IS IS in the eye of the beholder, and beauty is not measured primarily by physical attributes because it is an entity of who we ARE ... starting from within. Beauty always radiates from deep inside, and the most beautiful people in my life have not been people who were considered physically attractive by societies' standards ... and this dating service is a bunch of BS.


That was a typical way to explain how beauty is without crossing boundaries. The fact of the matter is, for most people out there, physical attraction comes first. This is true for people just as it is for any other type of living creatures on this planet. I never heard anyone telling me that he or she started to go out with someone because of their beauty within. Let me put it in another way, without physical attraction, how will you have a sex life? If I am not physically attracted to a woman, it wouldn’t matter how beautiful she is inside, Mr magic will not give any private show anytime soon.


Gentlealltheway this site is about a lot more then excluding fat people. It excludes ugly or average to below average people too. You might want to really think before rooting for this site. I wont say any more . It would be too mean.


I never mentioned that they were just excluding overweight people. Perhaps you should take the time to read properly before making accusations.

As far as “rooting” for the site goes, if people in general are willing to accept other sites with conditions, they should welcome this one as well. As I wrote before, if you are that bothered of such a site, switch page.

The way I look at it is that perhaps they will have less people who enjoys deceiving others such as on a site like this one. I met only three women from in here. The first one posted pictures of her that were at least 10 to 15 years old. In fact I hardly recognized her. The second, had only one picture and claimed to be 40 which no one would’ve argued from the picture but then, she was actually 54 and the picture was a false one. The third, posted pictures of her younger sister. Once I met her, she said that it didn’t really matter as they look exactly the same. Well, I suppose if you added about 10 years, a few inches taller, less lines and weighed 40 pounds less, yeah I could see a resemblance.

This is a free site and a VERY large percentage of members will gladly posts false pictures. As far as age goes, it’s a farce! You don’t have to go very far to find people deceiving others in here. Just look within this thread alone! Funny thing is that they are the very same people who will b itch about a site such as described on this thread. Why? Because they can’t get in.


I couldn’t pay to be on that site. Does it bother me? Absolutely not! Anyway, I am just too damn old…


I wonder how it would feel if you were on that site and couldn't get a date

I’m guessing pretty much the same as on this site.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 27 (view)
 
Christianity 'could die out within a century'
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:53:45 AM

Christianity 'could die out within a century'


Could? I believe that it will. There are signs all over the world that religion is slowly dying. For example, how many churches were sold in the past 10 years? Have any of you seen any for sale? I sure do...all over the country.

I guess albert Einstein said it best...


"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.

"No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this,"
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Test #1 for Obama Supporters
Posted: 6/28/2008 1:53:00 PM
Question # 1:
It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. All he has to do is to remove the threat of war and oil prices will come down by half within the first year alone and he knows it very well.

Also, he will have to support all States that are willing to force the automobile industry to produce zero emission cars (again) as they did in California in the 90’s until the federal government (bushie) decided to get involve to scrap the project by suing the State. Bushie didn’t want electric cars around…I wonder why???

I also believe that he should provide grants for groups working on different alternatives in regards to oil and protect them from any or all possibilities of either being bought out or forced to cease whatever they are doing because some groups (oil companies) will do anything possible to shut them down. There’s been plenty of fantastic ideas in the past 20 years and all just vanished once oil producers got involved.

Question # 2:
Forget all the election promises and bullshit. Someone will have to raise taxes to attack the debt created by the bushie league of terror. Anyone who thinks that he is a miracle worker is a complete fool. He will have a hell of a challenge to deal with and no matter how some may look at it, raising taxes is in part, a way to work on the main problem. People have to pay for electing such a dumbass government….TWICE!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 35 (view)
 
Dating service that bans ugliness comes to Canada
Posted: 6/26/2008 7:14:44 AM
One glaring untruth in your post though ...
There are no "selective" sites for whites , that would be "politically incorrect" , and whites aren't allowed this freedom. A big time double standard.


Seems to me like they are allowed as some sites clearly indicates for "whites" .
http://www.allwhitedating.com
http://www.matchmaker.com/mm/dating/georgia-white.htm
http://www.thedateexchange.com Powered by http://www.whitelabeldating.com
http://www.mybestdate.co.uk/community/Ethnicity/1/Caucasian_white.aspx
http://www.speeddate.com/online-dating/white-singles-p-1.html
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Dating service that bans ugliness comes to Canada
Posted: 6/25/2008 1:09:44 PM
Dating service that bans ugliness comes to Canada


Soooo what? The same thing is happening through all dating websites including this one! A very high percentage of men and women on dating sites couldn't get a date unless they try with those who are less attractive and even then they better be patient.

It's always been this way. Good looking people do have higher expectations...Is that a crime? Of course not! Then they are shallow for sure…right? People who take care of themselves prefer to be with someone with similar ways of life. I for one am not interested in someone who is overweight. I am not a hypocrite…it’s on my profile. I want to be with someone who is active and in good shape. Is that shallow? Of course not! It’s a choice…my choice.

The not so good looking and fat people would probably never have a chance in dating someone from one of those sites who select people by the way they look so they complain...all the friggin time. Bring those same good looking people in here and most still wouldn't have a chance in hell but it's not so bad because they are on the same website…right?

I for one, have no problem whatsoever with those sites. In fact, I welcome them.

Here’s a question…for those hypocrites who find such sites to be sooo appalling. How do you feel about the sites for only big/fat people? Selective business people only? Just for blacks? White? Jews? Christians? ect ect.

For all the other “selective” sites, it’s quite alright. When it comes to looks/beauty then it’s taboo! What a bunch of hogwash.

Bottom line, it's just a choice. You don’t like it, move on to another page. Sure sounds simple to me.


so, why do your care? unless they also screen for brains, heart, spirit, compassion, integrity, honesty, communication, etc. well, then you may have a catch! but why are they not already taken?

ps i disagree with the above slant. you can be attractive and have all those qualities, but i doubt you would join the site then.


So do i! Furthermore, there's plenty of great looking people who are single just as the ones who are not. Good looking means that they should be taken???

What I find funny is the people who automatically label good looking men and women as dumb. Seriously, who’s dumb again?

I am fortunate to have known some very beautiful women. The vast majority of them were kind, loving, sweet, intelligent and with a great sense of humour.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 20 (view)
 
Israeli official: Attack on Iran 'unavoidable'
Posted: 6/10/2008 11:06:44 AM

There's probably a very good chance that Israel will act before Bush leaves office.
Why?....To seal Obama out and guarantee a McCain victory.


If the US is attacked before Bush is out (which is what I believe will happen as well), there will not be any elections from that point on. Bush will bring into effect the Presidential Directive 51 and declare martial law making him the dictator of the United States of America.

Bush didn’t sign that directive for nothing in 2007. He fully intends to use it before 2009.

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/bush-declares-himself-dictator-presidential-directive-51-may-2007-video-link/
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 57 (view)
 
support our troops? but they are terrorists.
Posted: 6/9/2008 9:53:50 AM

The troops didn't choose to be there


That’s the popular justification for them to target and kill civilians. They didn’t choose to be there??? I couldn’t care less if they did or not! They intentionally target civilians! What’s next? They only listen to orders? That makes it ok to most…right?

http://freethoughtmanifesto.blogspot.com/2007/03/us-soldiers-fire-at-unarmed-iraqi.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/world/middleeast/10iraq.html


Four U.S. soldiers accused of murdering suspected insurgents during a raid in Iraq said they were under orders to “kill all military age males,” according to sworn statements obtained by The Associated Press.


How much clearer does it need to be?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13974639/


Witnesses angrily accused U.S. forces of firing blindly on the innocent, and Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki condemned the raids and demanded an explanation for the assault into Sadr City, named after the father of the anti-American Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr. Maliki has barred U.S. operations there in the past.
The Iraqi officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity out of security concerns, said 20 people had been wounded.
Witnesses said U.S. forces rolled into their neighborhood before dawn and opened fire without warning.
"At about 4 a.m., a big American convoy with tanks came and began to open fire on houses — bombing them," said Basheer Ahmed, who lives in Sadr City's Habibiya district. "What did we do? We didn't even retaliate — there was no resistance."
According to Iraqi officials, the dead included three members of one family — a father, mother and son. Several women and children, along with two policemen, were among the wounded, they said.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/30/africa/iraq.1-85932.php



Marines Ordered To Execute Civilians In Nazi-Like Slaughter

A military court heard Thursday that a US Marine was ordered to execute a room full of Iraqi women and children during the massacre in Haditha which left 24 people dead.

“There is constant pressure to kill Iraqi civilians, 22-year-old GI Darrell Anderson said. “At traffic stops we kill innocent people all the time. If you are fired on from the street, you are supposed to fire on everybody that is there. If I am in a market, I shoot people who are buying groceries.”
http://www.infowars.net/articles/august2007/310807Slaughter.htm


There are loads of reports such as the ones above that clearly proves that soldiers are ordered to kill civilians.

So, how should I categorize what they do? Terrorism? Crimes against humanity? How about both?

Now, for those apologists who always say that we should be grateful and respect those so called soldiers, I do have a question for you…are you all blind, deaf or just totally brainwashed?

The ONLY time that such crimes are truly “investigated” is when they were caught on tape or when many witnesses saw what happened. Then the bullshit really piles up.

Bottom line, soldiers have to make difficult decisions at times and I respect that. But to accept on shooting at innocent men, women and children and intentionally murder them, is unacceptable. There’s just no excuses for that. None whatsoever!

When will the madness stop?
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 27 (view)
 
support our troops? but they are terrorists.
Posted: 6/8/2008 4:23:03 PM
Well, the US and Israel are now deemed as terrorists state worldwide therefore so is the army.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14120.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhoNu9PJXzM

If anything, no one can deny historical facts and there’s plenty that shows to what extent the US government will go for it’s own evil deeds.

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/Amerikan_Terrorism.html

When ordinary people within Iraq decided to fight the aggressors (guess who that would be), they were automatically branded as terrorists by the US government even more so if they killed US soldiers.

When the US kills hundred of thousands civilians and to make it worst, intentionally target civilians, it’s then called counter terrorism. Someone will have to explain that one to me one of these days!

Hey, we all know how the US likes to be number one. Well congratulations as you earned that spot as the number one terrorist state in the world. Tap yourselves on the back people.


I have a great respect for the job that they do, and have had the great honor of knowing more than my fair share of troops serving in various military units.

U.S, British, Canadian, Dutch, and Israeli....amongst others.


I normally would've respected your opinion but you included "Israeli"! Are you friggin kidding??? They are well known for intentionally target civilians. Hell, they even use human shields for crying out loud! I have no respect whatsoever for the Israeli army. They are murderers and nothing more.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 20 (view)
 
The true state of Iraqi security forces today
Posted: 6/6/2008 1:20:21 PM

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08143r.pdf isn't this site thet ya psoted mg abuut huw to be excaptad as a jihat?I cuuuld be wroang aboot thet thuugh


Kids, don't do drugs!
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 44 (view)
 
Taking Back America - Can A Republican President Do It?
Posted: 6/5/2008 7:10:18 AM

Can A Republican President Do It?


I seriously doubt it considering that since 1946, Democratic presidents increased the national debt an average of only 3.2% per year while the Republican presidents are at an average of 9.7% per year. Quite a difference if you ask me. Furthermore, with the present Republican candidate's views, I truly cant see any improvements whatsoever.

Therefore, even though Democrats clearly showed that they are better at controlling debt, I believe the only way a President can take the country back is with his undying love for it. He will have to place country before his own agendas/profits. Once/if such a person is ever in office, America's repution will change drastically and countries will once more back it up as a true world leader.

Keep the millionaires and the religious nut jobs out of the office and the country just might have a chance to get back on his feet.

Millionaires do have a reputation of taking care of themselves first.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 42 (view)
 
Taking Back America - Can A Republican President Do It?
Posted: 6/5/2008 5:22:49 AM

Iraq desperately needed to be a Democratic State.


Really? And is it now?
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 63 (view)
 
Neoconism Is Alive and Well
Posted: 6/3/2008 4:02:28 PM

there are anti western revolutions going on all over the world


I wonder why that is???

Did you forget your medication? Your paranoia tendencies are in full blast again.
 gentalltheway
Joined: 9/9/2006
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Rachel Ray a Terrorist?
Posted: 6/2/2008 4:07:14 PM

well, the swastika was around way before hitler highjacked it too. it didn't used to have such an evil conotation. of course, now it does, and noone would ever dream of parading THAT symbol ANYWHERE


Which is a HUGE difference with a kaffiyeh scarf as the scarf is still use all across the Middle east, parts of Asia and Africa as well. But it’s usage is mainly to protect people from the harsh weather...sun, wind and sand. So, your comparison is quite flawed if you ask me.


personally, i could care less about the whole scarf thing.


You couldn’t care less??? YIKES!!! You did fooled me on that one.


but to act like it's no big deal is completely ludicrous


It’s more like...To make a big deal out of it is completely ludicrous.


to acuse those who simply pointed out the fact that this IS making a political statement of being racist, xenophobic, and bigoted...is moronic. it's basically shooting the messager.


Simply pointing out??? Are you kidding me??? The messenger deserves to be shoot! She is a trouble maker!


IT IS PECIEVED AS A PRO-PALESTINIAN-ANTI-ISRAELI SYMBOL IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD


Only to a few right wing who TRULY don’t have anything better to do than to look for problems. The vast majority will perceive it as for what it is. A SCARF!!!


people on the right are too busy going to work, running thier businesses, etc. to have the time to even bother with such bologne....
people on the right rarely protest... we leave that up to the perpetually angry left


Reaaaalllly??? Who again started this bullshit???

Geraldo Rivera said it best.... "Michelle Malkin is the most vile, hateful commentator I've ever met in my life,"

As far as I am concerned, she’s a waste of time!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/category/right-wing-pundits/michelle-malkin/
 
Show ALL Forums