Posted by Guest (Post 256682)

Donna you are correct. This is pure Liberal hate speech.

Posted by Guest (Post 256687)

With all due respect to everyone, we should focus on the issues, holding on to what is left of our US Constitution and restoring this country financially, morally and emotionally. We shouldn't fall into the argument of which side did what or who is worse.

It's easy to resort to name calling and spitting rhetoric. Both sides will use it to their dirty advantage. The Democrats are going to blame the recent "threats of violence" against Congressional Dems on Republicans and use the "threats" as a fundraising tool!!

"A senior adviser to the president said his party was not out of bounds in issuing fundraising appeals linked to recent threats of violence against congressional Democrats," according to CNN Political Ticker.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ed-to-threats/


"Obama senior adviser David Axelrod also suggested congressional Republicans bore some responsibility for the overheated rhetoric and incidents of vandalism directed at Democrats."

I recall the threats against AIG employees and people were asking for names of family members and AIG employees' children were even being threatened. One threat was of strangling AIG employees with piano wire. When AIG CEO Edward Liddy said he was afraid to release the names of employee who had returned all or part of their bonuses, Barney Frank basically said tough, let the police handle it if something happens but release the names or be subpoenaed.

I watched Black Panthers standing at the front door of a polling place holding a black-jack club hitting it into his hand during the last Presidential election!
I remember an Iraqi journalist throwing shoes at our President.
You know what Bush said? Did he say let's use this as a fundraiser? No.

"So what if the guy threw his shoe at me?" Bush told a reporter in response to a question about the incident.

"Let me talk about the guy throwing his shoe. It's one way to gain attention. It's like going to a political rally and having people yell at you. It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers. ...

"These journalists here were very apologetic. They ... said this doesn't represent the Iraqi people, but that's what happens in free societies where people try to draw attention to themselves."

Republican Minority Whip Eric Cantor had a bullet shot through his Richmond, Va., office. A man was just arrested today, who authorities believe was the shooter, for posting a Youtube video threatening Cantor. Cantor's response when the bullet was shot through his campaign office, "Let me be clear -- I do not condone violence," Cantor said at the start of his press event. "There are no leaders in this building, no rank and file members in this building, that condone violence, period."

Then he contrasted his own actions with those of Democrats who have been harassed:

"I've received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position but also because I'm Jewish. I've never blamed anyone in this body for that, period. Any suggestion that a leader in this body would incite threats or acts against other members is akin to saying that I would endanger myself, my wife or my children. Just recently I have been directly threatened. A bullet was shot through the window of my campaign office in Richmond this week, and I've received threatening e-mails. But I will not release them, because I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent," he said.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...democrats.html

It happens on both sides. What both sides are doing should be what we are looking at.

Posted by Guest (Post 256717)

Bucco, you are acting just like they want you to act, defensively. They are trying to discredit anybody that doesn't follow their mindset. It is the old divide and conquer theme, so to speak. They want to quiet the opposition. When they protested it was patriotic. When the opposition protests we are racists. Oldest trick in the book.

As far as I'm concerned this president is worse for this country then the terrible Jimmy Carter. He does not respect anything about this country. He goes around the world dissing the USA and he won't even salute it's flag. He obviously don't care that the unemployment rate is 20% and he don't care that he and congress just passed the most destructive bill in history. A bill that will bring us to ruin.
At least Jimmy Carter was a veteran and a patriot, he was just a very bad president.

Posted by Guest (Post 256722)

This statement is simply untrue.....He goes around the world dissing the USA and he won't even salute it's flag. Where do you get this stuff from?

And the unemployment rate is running nationally at 10% not 20%.

Posted by Guest (Post 256725)

Your wrong. Just ask the discouraged people who haven't worked in over 2 years. The 10% you quote is only people who are currently collecting unemployment. It is estimated at close to 20% and that doesn't include the millions of people who can't find full-time work and have 2 or more low paying part-time jobs.
Tens of thousands getting laid off every month and the only one hiring is the government. People still losing their homes and congress ratings at are an all time low. Consumer confidence under this president is at historic lows.
Social security, for the first time is dishing out more money then coming in because of the 20% decrease in contributions because they are not working. Obama has accumulated more debt then the 43 president before him combined.
Looks like were right in line with Greece.

Posted by Guest (Post 256725)

Your wrong. Just ask the discouraged people who haven't worked in over 2 years. The 10% you quote is only people who are currently collecting unemployment. It is estimated at close to 20% and that doesn't include the millions of people who can't find full-time work and have 2 or more low paying part-time jobs.
Tens of thousands getting laid off every month and the only one hiring is the government. People still losing their homes and congress ratings at are an all time low. Consumer confidence under this president is at historic lows.
Social security, for the first time is dishing out more money then coming in because of the 20% decrease in contributions because they are not working. Obama has accumulated more debt then the 43 president before him combined.
Looks like were right in line with Greece.

Posted by Guest (Post 256727)

Do not argue with COLOGAL.....she will defend this President 100% each and every time. She will claim to be middle...she will claim lots of stuff...she only appears to agrue hate and go after people. This is the proverbial party member who will spout all the rhetoric she is fed !

She thinks Republicans are evil and Democrats are saints. Fruitless battle !

Posted by Guest (Post 256732)

Wow. there really is people like that out there. Totally amazing.

Posted by Guest (Post 256711)

Cashman...Please point out the Hate speech I employed in that post.

Posted by Guest (Post 256450)

Apparently not!

Posted by Guest (Post 256487)

Targeting can be indicated without using a gun sight symbol! The use of this symbol implies the use of a gun which, by its nature, is violent. In light of the nasty crowds using the N word and spitting on elected officals.....gas line being cut. One simply cannot look the other way.

And geez I thought Bush was the constant target of the liberals not Palin.

Posted by Guest (Post 256711)

Cashman...Please point out the Hate speech I employed in that post.

Posted by Guest (Post 256940)

I repeat what is a card carrying NRA member?

Did you or did you not use this as a negative "trope" and an "epithet" of hate to fellow Americans who legally bear arms?

You made the staement so what did you mean?

Posted by Guest (Post 256944)

Anger is all well and good - it can be a motivation to DO something.

But where do we go? What do we do?

VK says "don't vote for an incumbent". Fine, I can see that. But let's look at our choices.

We can vote for Democrats, who will have to raise taxes to cover their profligate spending. Or we could vote for Republicans who will have to raise taxes to cover their profligate spending (that was worse than previous Democrats but not quite as bad as current Democrats). Neither one of them seems to know the meaning of the phrase "cutting spending"

We can vote for Democrats who want to redefine free speech into "non-offensive speech" or we can vote for Republicans who want to shred the Constitution's other clauses with warrantless wiretaps (even special 'express courts' and allowing 'after the fact warrants' aren't good enough for them). And Free Speech? Don't disagree with them or you're "supporting the terrorists". Neither one of them seems to understand the Constitution is a document to be taken as a whole - you don't just cherry-pick what you like.

What's left?

Posted by Guest (Post 256961)

djplong, I don't believe it is a Democrat or Republican question. I think your freedoms are the answer. Your right to vote is the number one answer. We have to start on the local level and really question who we are voting into office. I personally believe in the rights of the people not the government.

I got excited watching Americans getting involved and attending town hall meetings and questioning their elected representatives. Somehow that got overtaken by extremists, unions and community organizers. The tea party protesters gave me faith and now I see it being corrupted and sabotaged.

I understand the premise behind wire-taps and such, but I have also watched in fear as it snowballs down a slippery slope of abuse.

This may be a stupid example, but I love to watch the reality police shows. I am amazed at how a person can be handcuffed and their vehicle and personal belongings searched without a search warrant and they haven't been read their rights or arrested. It is done for the safety of the police officer and the person being questioned they always say. I understand reasonable suspicion and all that. My husband laughs at me for my concern on something like this while watching Cops and says these are crack-heads and hookers.

Did you hear about the case in Pennsylvania where students were given computers to take home? A lawsuit is now alleging that the school administration "spied" on students in their homes.

http://jonathanturley.org/2010/02/20...dents-at-home/

I don't mind going through security at airports. I actually had the magic number at Logan recently and had to undergo the more intense search. I didn't mind one bit. I'm not complaining, but somewhere we've lost common sense in the minorities pleas of political correctness.

Somewhere our compass has been misdirected and we've lost our standards.

Posted by Guest (Post 256953)

Another use of the Liberal term "warrantless wiretaps" to incite hate for Bush and Republicans.

Would you use this terminology if the use of wiretaps saved a member of you family.

Posted by Guest (Post 256968)

And what if it was YOUR INNOCENT FAMILY MEMBER who was imprisoned for 7 years or more for being a SUSPECT? What if YOU are the one who had their business assets seized without a warrant? What happens when it's YOUR ox being gored? What happens when YOU get tarred and feathered because of something an acquaintance does that you had no idea about?

This is EXACTLY what I mean about cherry-picking the Constitution I'll QUOTE it FOR you since you seem to have a hole in your memory where the ENTIRE FOURTH AMMENDMENT BELONGS:



There is no "unless we don't feel like issuing a warrant" in there. This is why they're no longer allowed to seize your house or boat just because a guest of yours might have had marijuana in their possession while under your roof! (Remember THAT wonderful little controversy from the 1980s?)

You complain (justifiably) about Obama trampling the Constitution to provide health care but you give a pass to THIS? Outrageous!

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson. [Side note - Red State Texas decided to eliminate Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum, apparently because of his anti-organized-Christianity quotes from back then]

Posted by Guest (Post 256968)

And what if it was YOUR INNOCENT FAMILY MEMBER who was imprisoned for 7 years or more for being a SUSPECT? What if YOU are the one who had their business assets seized without a warrant? What happens when it's YOUR ox being gored? What happens when YOU get tarred and feathered because of something an acquaintance does that you had no idea about?

This is EXACTLY what I mean about cherry-picking the Constitution I'll QUOTE it FOR you since you seem to have a hole in your memory where the ENTIRE FOURTH AMMENDMENT BELONGS:



There is no "unless we don't feel like issuing a warrant" in there. This is why they're no longer allowed to seize your house or boat just because a guest of yours might have had marijuana in their possession while under your roof! (Remember THAT wonderful little controversy from the 1980s?)

You complain (justifiably) about Obama trampling the Constitution to provide health care but you give a pass to THIS? Outrageous!

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson. [Side note - Red State Texas decided to eliminate Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum, apparently because of his anti-organized-Christianity quotes from back then]

Posted by Guest (Post 256961)

This may be a stupid example, but I love to watch the reality police shows. I am amazed at how a person can be handcuffed and their vehicle and personal belongings searched without a search warrant and they haven't been read their rights or arrested. It is done for the safety of the police officer and the person being questioned they always say. I understand reasonable suspicion and all that. My husband laughs at me for my concern on something like this while watching Cops and says these are crack-heads and hookers.

Did you hear about the case in Pennsylvania where students were given computers to take home? A lawsuit is now alleging that the school administration "spied" on students in their homes.

...

I don't mind going through security at airports. I actually had the magic number at Logan recently and had to undergo the more intense search. I didn't mind one bit. I'm not complaining, but somewhere we've lost common sense in the minorities pleas of political correctness.

Posted by Guest (Post 256972)

DJPLONG....I honestly dont mean this to be antagonist in anyway but reading your comment about those INNOCENT folks detained at GTMO.....this is a honest legitimate question....have any of those released by this administration be proven to be innocent ?

I know there are documented cases of folks going back to Jihad activities after being released, but wondering about the few who this administration released. We always here about INNOCENTS being held and always related to GTMO...dont know of anywhere else that happened.

Just curious if you know of any "INNOCENTS"

Posted by Guest (Post 257059)

Hey, I ask honest questions that sound antagonistic all the time - that's why I try to preface them.

But to answer your question, a few seconds with Google found this:

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/0...-innocent.html

Posted by Guest (Post 256444)

Yes people did say Bush was a Nazi and many people on this site call Obama a socialist. Insults from the left and right. Neither side was or is correct.

But spitting on people, hurling the N word or F word at Congressmen is just plain wrong whoever does it right or left. The threat of gun violence is uncalled for and even the Tea Party has condemed the practice.

I was very upset at many things that Bush and Company did in the 8 years they were in power...but not once did I reach for my gun. Oh wait a minute I don't own a gun.

Posted by Guest (Post 257276)

Maybe you should read this:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...e_tea_par.html

Posted by Guest (Post 257420)

Another good post Donna, and not just because it reenforces my earlier deductive post, which no one tried to dispute. This was a deliberate attempt by the progressive libs to "Rodney King" the Tea Party movement and it didn't work because we are not them

Posted by Guest (Post 257421)

Thanks Richie,

The Tea Party is not going away. We'll be at the polls in November, much to the Lamestream Media's chagrin.

Posted by Guest (Post 257494)

been presented as either left or right in preference.
It has consistently been presented as re-elect no one!!!!

So to categorize it as either one or the other (nice reference calling the opposition "gestapo"....doesn't tip your hand too much as to your leaning...eh?).

The objective: SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON......

I feel very fortunate that my sphere of knowledge/information is not limited ONLY to the Bush years and the last 14 months. Must be a real handicap believing nothing happened prior to that very miniscule period in history.

Vote for no incumbent IS NOT a partisan endeavor! And some will not be able to deal with that....eh?

btk

Posted by Guest (Post 257490)

Donna, I don't mean this as an insult. But WHAT can POSSIBLY - and by that I mean *realistically* happen in November?

Either NOTHING happens and "The Socialists" stay in power.

Otherwise, they get voted out and "The Gestapo" goes in. (And an incompetent Gestapo at that - 8 years and they still can't stop terrorists from getting on planes, even when they're warned in advance - this is the "Hogan's Heroes" style Gestapo).

How far are we from "Your papers, please?". And they justify it all with so-called 'Security' that is nothing more than theater. At this rate, in a few years, we'll all have to board planes naked.

Neither one of the parties seem to give a damn about Americans. It's all in what they can pitch to buy votes - either by promising benefits (Democrats) or scaring them (Republicans). The people in power are tribal - they belong to their tribe first ('R' or 'D') and their country comes in somewhere behind that, family and maybe the prostitute-du-jour.

I'm more than a little sympathetic towards the Tea Party's groundswell of anger (though some radicals cross the line, IMO). I just don't see what good it's going to do. At best we'd be jumping out of the fire and back into the frying pan.

I'm convinced that we need a third party rising from the ashes of the existing two. One that can rein in the government growth while protecting the freedoms that were supposed to be guaranteed by the Constitution. Not GIVEN by the Constitution (so that some legislooter could take them away), PROTECTED by it.