How droll. But wouldn't that make her the third?Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Printable View
How droll. But wouldn't that make her the third?Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Geraldine was a man!
The short hair may have thrown you off!;)Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
Transgendered then.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Now, now , now... just because she sports the Ellen Degeneres look doesn't mean she plays on the same field. Be nice boys!
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...aro1-sized.jpg
Isnt Ellen the "Man" in the relationship?
And by the way, the term "boys" is very derogatory.Quote:
Originally Posted by jenn_librarian
--------
GF is way better looking.
-------------
http://minimovie.com/film-128454-Dan...itical%20Stars
------------
Did anyone see the Code Pink moron that came on stage during and tried to arrest Karl Rove?
SHe tried to slap a pair of cuffs on him while she said, "citizen's arrest".
I love stupidity, it means I don't have to lower myself to get a laugh.:eek:
Don't really know. But if Portia DeRossi liked me, I think I'd be whatever role she asked me to (and I don't play on the same team, thank you). :p ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
I call myself a girl. Is that derogatory? Boys, girls, men, women, guys, gals. Same thing.
Let me pull out my ghetto slang book and fling a few across your bow?:DQuote:
Originally Posted by jenn_librarian
That would be Urban Dictionary, not Ghetto, if you want to be PC. ;)
Opinions can change, values rarely do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
1.) BO wants to take your money and give it to people who did not earn it.
2.) BO thinks the Constitution is the PROBLEM in this country.
Think long and hard about this people. Go past some petty feelings. THINK about what that means.
1. The Bush administration is handing out buckets of $$$ (our money) to the banks - did they 'earn' it? What about sugar subsidies?Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
2. Hmmm, and wasn't it George Bush who said about the Constitution of the United States - “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
Come on Grace... I'd expect a deflection like this from the lefty drones here, but not you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
You are using Bush's actions as a excuse for BO doing the same thing? What? I thought BO was a man of "change". But it just seems like he IS more of the same...
Do you think wealth SHOULD be redistributed? Do you think the Constitution is the problem and not the answer?
I've got a news flash for everyone, the government already taxes people
and "distributes the wealth" the way it sees fit. It's nothing new. Only thing
that should change is who gets the "perks". The wealthy & well connected,
or the average ,middle class folks who support (with taxes) their government.
I am saying that redistribution of money, in this country, is nothing new. Farm and sugar subsidies, graduated income tax, bailout of banks. I’m not saying I approve; I’m just stating a fact of life.
As for the Constitution, while it may be a problem for Obama, it was a bigger one for Bush. His administration has trashed it. I most certainly did not approve of that - but then he didn't request my approval :rolleyes:
Yep, instead of playing Robbin Hood and taking from the rich and giving to the poor, they are taking from the poor and giving it to the rich!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
Do oil companies REALLY deserve billions of dollars in profits while lots of people can't afford to heat their homes? :(
It's becoming whoever is the biggest crook wins!
Quote:
I've got a news flash for everyone, the government already taxes people and "distributes the wealth" the way it sees fit. It's nothing new.
OK, so we KNOW the government does it. Both "sides" do it. Yet we are willing to keep on letting them do it by putting them back in office?Quote:
I am saying that redistribution of money, in this country, is nothing new. Farm and sugar subsidies, graduated income tax, bailout of banks. I’m not saying I approve; I’m just stating a fact of life.
As for the Constitution, while it may be a problem for Obama, it was a bigger one for Bush. His administration has trashed it. I most certainly did not approve of that - but then he didn't request my approval
Grace - You think BO will get your approval to further negate the Constitution? Look, we all know that Bush is the devil and most of what he did was bad. Lets move past that and NOT put another person, just like him OR WORSE in the White House. BO is on record, many, many times now, saying that the Constitution is the problem. Not that we don't adhere to it, but that it is THE problem. If that does not scare the crap out of you.... Well, then there really is no hope and it will come, eventually, to open armed conflict. Why? Because there are way to many people who took an oath to uphold and defend that document and what it stands for... Against ALL enemies, foreign or domestic. I took that oath, to defend the document and what it stands for, not the men and women in DC raping it. I keep my word. It is not time yet, but those storms clouds are getting nasty.
If there ever was a case for a 3rd party... This election is IT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momoffuzzyfaces
If they EARNED it, yes. But you want to go after a REAL evil greedy company? Pick on Google. Pick on Microsoft. Pick on APPLE.
8% "windfall" profits, that kind of money is chicken feed compared to Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
Sorry, but they have to get in line behind all the wall street investment
firms and large banking firms that need some of our"wealth" to put them back
in business.:rolleyes:
The Constitution is not THE problem!!! It's the idiots who don't follow it. Bush had the support of Congress before he invaded Iraq, no matter what they are trying to make everyone believe now. I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution saying go invade another country if you don't like their leader!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
If the Constitution falls, so does our country. At least it can't be amended by just one person.
By the way, I've heard the European Union is wanting to take over the banking systems of the world. Now THAT scares the bejeebers out of me. :eek:
So you agree the bailout bill is bad?Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
OK, so we AGREE.Quote:
Originally Posted by momoffuzzyfaces
A vote for Obama is a vote for doing away with the Consitution. A vote for McCain is a vote for more of the same "back room" redistirbution of wealth.
Pick your poison. OR Vote for a 3rd party.
Bush will be a saint compared to either one of these clowns. Think about THAT.
If I were president, you can bet your underwear, I would go after them if they were a US comany and subject to taxes!!! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
A long but excellent editorial. And NEUTRAL. Please read the whole thing. The best part is at the end.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=5
THIS is the link you should have posted. Yours takes one to the 5th page of the article, and I would have read only that. But you said the article was long, and that one page was short.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
Since I voted yesterday, it's too late for any one to change my mind! :)
I did see a funny commercial by McCain today. He said he would not sign ANY bill that had ANY pork attatched to it. I remember lots of people saying the same thing when running.
Only problem is, the only way they can get bills passed that they want, is if they allow pork that the congress wants. Same way congress sneaks the big raises they get every year by everyone while pretending they are not getting them. :D
Stick them in a long bill and don't allow line by line veto!!! :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
:o
Thanks Grace. I am such a tool. LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
Shall I warn the FBI now that you are inviting armed conflict among
citizens after this election? Do you realize how you sound saying all
this stuff?
Please, pretty please, show me your proof of Obama saying this the US
Constitution is a problem in any way.
Just wanted to share my very favorite cartoon of the day.:D
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/...0/43075357.jpg
And I voted last week.Quote:
Originally Posted by momoffuzzyfaces
Good God Liz... You are such a drama queen. Please get over yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
I pray every day that it does NOT come to that. But I fear it might. And yes, I realize how I sound saying this. The scary truth is, well, scary.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=79225Quote:
Please, pretty please, show me your proof of Obama saying this the US
Constitution is a problem in any way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11OhmY1obS4
Now I know you are going to rip the source. But listen to the Youtube link. the read this article...
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=1
Quote:
If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK.
But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.
And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.
The man wants to modify the Constitution. He wants it to be a document of entitlement, rather than a document of FREEDOM. He thinks the Constitution CONSTRAINS people.
I have read just about every word of the Federalist Papers. I have done extensive reading and research into the founders, their ideals and their motives. The documents they created are the greatest documents of governance in history. Perfect? No. But they must have done something right. Weare, in a short span of time, the most free, prosperous and influential nation in history.
To put it in one sentence... The man wants to turn it into a document of entitlements, and change it from a document of FREEDOMS.
I challenge you to actually READ the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution. Tell me what you think. Then compare it to the "government" we have today.
You have seriously misunderstood what was being discussed & what Obama was trying to show to whomever he was speaking to.
The constitution was mentioned & so was the Warren Court, but his main
points in the conversation was about neither.
lol,
Bill Bratton, the uber general of the LAPD, did broach the idea of having more cops on board for election night in case there was social unrest due to the results of the election.
Many police chiefs across the country have already stated this concern....
I think that it may be a thinly veiled racist desire to keep the peace.
And on the female front?
In West Hollywood a hanging effigy of Sarah Palin hangs on the side of a home- Now, where are all the women that should take exception to this show of woman hatred-there was an interview with the two men that put it up as 'installation art".
I love El Lay!
Right Liz... I am the one who misunderstood. You are so infinetley more clairvoyant than I, than anybody for that matter. It's not like I have spent most of my adult life spending time reading, discussing (honsetly... not with intellectual juveniles...) and studying our founders and what their intent was for our country.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
Liz, there is not one intellectually honest bone in your body. You would not see the truth if it slapped you in the face with a brick. See, I admit it when I am beaten.... I am honest enough and wise enough to know that we learn more from failure than success...
So tell me... What WAS his point? The more detail you can provide, the better, please.
But Puck, that interview was 7 years ago. According to my coworker it has no bearing on NObama's views now. Surely NObama in his work in the State and Federal Senates he has grown to respect the Constitution and its intent.
I couldnt type that with a straight face.
How does someone do that?? That would be like hanging a dummy of a black person from a noose in a tree.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
I may not be pro-Palin, but geez... that's going a little too far.
They spoke to the gents who seemed a little "effete"-they probably were upset about SP having more money to dress up and nicer than they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by jenn_librarian
I think it was the FBI or SS that were parked outside the residence and I guess they were in for a visit and intelligence BBQing (grilling) from them.
----------
Now,
There was a cardboard BO that was hung from a tree outside a school. Someone hung him with fishing string from a tree branch and put a sign on it that said something about rejects.
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,305246,00.html
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/54960.html
Here are two links to the story.
Now, It you want to look at the 'racist' side of the story, you can conjure up
white sheets, burning crosses and lynching.....
Or you can see the hanging of the cutout with a piece of fishing string, something not as obvious and probably not as offensive . What if they had hung it by the ears? Or punched a hole thru his head?
The AHs that see evil behind every bush and under every rock are the same people that won't hesitate to blow something out of proportion for their cause-or to improve a "victim status".
I laugh when I see Al Sharptongue and the rev Jerkson jump thru hoops to prove that world is full of hate - instead of trying to bring people together they only jump the gap to prove there is a chasm between everyone.
It's all in bad taste. The Palin hangers have the same right to 'clown' on her, but it's only a crime when your skin, religion or race is involved.
Being obvious with a noose is one thing, fishing string is stretching it.
--------------
I also saw a sports report on a white sports writer that did a story about a coach who was on a black athlete's case. He wrote something like 'Coach X is tightening the noose on Player Y"
That turns out to be a "racist" commentary because a black player was involved.
Supidity is alive and well in America.
That's about the size of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Some more evidence Liz.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122515067227674187.html
Who needs LAWS? Let your heart be your guide. :rolleyes:Quote:
These numbers ought to raise serious concern because of Mr. Obama's extreme left-wing views about the role of judges. He believes -- and he is quite open about this -- that judges ought to decide cases in light of the empathy they ought to feel for the little guy in any lawsuit.
But you CAN'T ask those questions. If you do, he shuts you down.Quote:
This raises the question of whether Mr. Obama can in good faith take the presidential oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" as he must do if he is to take office. Does Mr. Obama support the Constitution as it is written, or does he support amendments to guarantee welfare? Is his provision of a "tax cut" to millions of Americans who currently pay no taxes merely a foreshadowing of constitutional rights to welfare, health care, Social Security, vacation time and the redistribution of wealth? Perhaps the candidate ought to be asked to answer these questions before the election rather than after.
Facist much?