So it is not nice sharing the board with someone who shows such disrespect and resorts to using names like this ? WOW...go figure.

Originally Posted by buggyone

It would be great if there was not so much obvious HATRED posted on our President and the attempts at getting others angry by calling him by his middle name. Did you hear people call Bush by the name of Herbert Walker, Clinton by the name of Jefferson, or Ronnie Reagan by the name of Wilson? What is the purpose of calling Pres. Obama by the name of Hussein?

I remember one poster who answered that by saying that Pres. Obama used all 3 names in his swearing in ceremony so it was perfectly acceptable to do also. I think EVERY president uses his entire name when being sworn into office.

This is just a flaming by a poster who wants to try and get others angry.

I actually am disappointed in those that are intelligent but show a lack of imagination.

Actually, you are correct...they do not use middle names for Presidents...I have seen "Junior", "the ignorant one" and a few others that escape me but correct...they all do use their names EXCEPT ...posters on here do not however.

Now, as regards to disrespect....I was under the impression after hearing what SENATOR Bachmann was called, and a few others that I was ok with at using a given name....you really cannot figure it out...I am so dumb and now I am being lectured on having respect.....I am so embarrased by showing so little respect.

WOW...go figure !

Originally Posted by janmcn

It just shows total lack of respect for the office of president by ignorant people. I guess since Willard Mitt Romney goes by his middle name, it's going to be the norm until election day.

Yes you are right....Junior will just have to get used it uh ?

And since you called me ignorant, I will learn from your posts from now on...will review them for respect for all and how detailed and driven by issues they are. Just will learn everything there is to know about politics and how to be respectful from you.

Originally Posted by Bucco

Actually, you are correct...they do not use middle names for Presidents...I have seen "Junior", "the ignorant one" and a few others that escape me but correct...they all do use their names EXCEPT ...posters on here do not however.

Now, as regards to disrespect....I was under the impression after hearing what SENATOR Bachmann was called, and a few others that I was ok with at using a given name....you really cannot figure it out...I am so dumb and now I am being lectured on having respect.....I am so embarrased by showing so little respect.

WOW...go figure !

I wrote:
It would be great if there was not so much obvious HATRED posted on our President and the attempts at getting others angry by calling him by his middle name. Did you hear people call Bush by the name of Herbert Walker, Clinton by the name of Jefferson, or Ronnie Reagan by the name of Wilson? What is the purpose of calling Pres. Obama by the name of Hussein?
____________________________-

I did not say anything about "respect". I said HATRED directed toward the President based upon his non-mainstream name of foreign extract.

Unless Michelle Bachmann's middle name is "Minnesota Moron", I was not insulting her background but only her intelligence.

And if you noticed in my posting, I called you intelligent - which I certainly think is true.

Still the question to you was, and still is "What is your purpose of calling President Obama by the name of Hussein?"

Originally Posted by buggyone

I wrote:
It would be great if there was not so much obvious HATRED posted on our President and the attempts at getting others angry by calling him by his middle name. Did you hear people call Bush by the name of Herbert Walker, Clinton by the name of Jefferson, or Ronnie Reagan by the name of Wilson? What is the purpose of calling Pres. Obama by the name of Hussein?
____________________________-

I did not say anything about "respect". I said HATRED directed toward the President based upon his non-mainstream name of foreign extract.

Unless Michelle Bachmann's middle name is "Minnesota Moron", I was not insulting her background but only her intelligence.

And if you noticed in my posting, I called you intelligent - which I certainly think is true.

Still the question to you was, and still is "What is your purpose of calling President Obama by the name of Hussein?"

The answer is easy. I am trying to learn from you on how to do the right thing. I thought, and again showing my stupidity, that Hussein was his given name and could not see that being insulting. Why is that insulting may I ask ?

I see the way to go.....like you call names I need to come up with a name to make fun of the President instead of using his real name.

I think I got it....will give it a try....gotta work on a good name to insult him good,huh?

Help me a bit....cant use what you used to insult...on this particular one, and you have posted some great insults...you used the state...so I could go for Hawaii and then add an insult at the end huh ? OR....as you like to use Mittens for Romney, I could come up with a variation on the Presidents name.

Thanks so much..this NOT READING and verifying what I say and simply coming up with insults is already clearing my schedule..no more reading or thinking about issues...thank you

WHATEVER

Originally Posted by buggyone

WHATEVER





[/FONT][/SIZE]

Now that is good...thanks

Originally Posted by janmcn

This is why we have elections. In 2008 the democratic primary went on from Feb until June with countless debates between the candidates. Based on all this campaigning and information, the voters spoke loud and clear on election day in November 2008.

janmcn: Perhaps you should re-read my post. I am not addressing the voting results, its the flawed vetting process.

if the powers to be continue down this road it is conceivable they will help elect a manic demigod rather than a president

Originally Posted by rubicon

janmcn: Perhaps you should re-read my post. I am not addressing the voting results, its the flawed vetting process.

if the powers to be continue down this road it is conceivable they will help elect a manic demigod rather than a president

The vetting process in this country is the primary system where candidates travel to all 50 states, meet people, give speeches, participate in debates, get quizzed by news organizations. And then they do it all over again in the general election. What better vetting process can you suggest?

Originally Posted by janmcn

The vetting process in this country is the primary system where candidates travel to all 50 states, meet people, give speeches, participate in debates, get quizzed by news organizations. And then they do it all over again in the general election. What better vetting process can you suggest?

janmcn: Might I politely suggest that you goggle "vetting process" and see the number of ways and indepth analysis needed before a satisfactory candidate is accepted. You would not suggest that the average citizen can really vet a candidate? As much as it pains me to say so, the majority of voters probably have no idea what their candidate really stands for or what position he/she holds on various issues.

OK I done with this thread.....

I always laugh out loud when I hear the lefties moaning and crying about the disrespect shown this failed President.

They have short memories about their own actions.

I'll alway respect Obama as much as they respected George W. Bush. I haven't gone back on that vow. I don't think I'm near as disrespectful as they were, but I'm striving.

Originally Posted by janmcn

The vetting process in this country is the primary system where candidates travel to all 50 states, meet people, give speeches, participate in debates, get quizzed by news organizations. And then they do it all over again in the general election. What better vetting process can you suggest?

Originally Posted by rubicon

janmcn: Might I politely suggest that you goggle "vetting process" and see the number of ways and indepth analysis needed before a satisfactory candidate is accepted. You would not suggest that the average citizen can really vet a candidate? As much as it pains me to say so, the majority of voters probably have no idea what their candidate really stands for or what position he/she holds on various issues.

OK I done with this thread.....

You can't leave now. You haven't told me what are your better ideas for selecting candidates.

Originally Posted by buggyone

I had thought of putting this on as a Private Message at first.

I worked for 36 years with the Dept. of Veterans benefits and truly am put off by Richie's post. I did PM him about it, too.

The benefits provided are the profits. It is said that the VA benefits about50% of the citizens in the US. The VA is divided into 3 parts: The Veterans Health Administration, the Veterans Benefits Administration, and the National Cemetery System.

1. The health administration takes in all the VA hospitals and clinics nationwide. They care for veterans from the remaining WWII vets to the recent Afghanistan vets with the most modern techniques and well trained medical staff. I am sure l lots of the readers have used VA benefits at the VA hospitals or clinics either in Florida or wherever you came from.

2. The benefits administration takes in VA guaranteed home loans, educational benefits for veterans, their widows, and children, monthly pensions for disabled veterans as well as for their widows and children, insurance, and job training when needed. How many of us used VA benefits for college after we got out of the military or for buying our first home? I know I did. Does it work perfectly? Not all the time but improvements are constantly being made.

3. The cemetery system took over all the military cemeteries in the US back in the 1980's. With the exception of Arlington and a few others, all are under the care and administration of the VA. Any veteran is eligible for free burial at a national cemetery as well as their spouse. This is a growing administration as the WWII vets are dying at a rate of about 1,000 per day.

I was in the staffing part of HR for a lot of my career. I cannot estimate how many Vietnam-era veterans that I placed into a job or a career. Not all were success stories but many, many were. I am proud to say that I worked for the VA and that I was able to help veterans find a job when they needed it after they served their country.

Do not bash the federal government as a whole. Sure, there are areas of it that are not needed. Do not say that the federal government employee is sucking at the public trough. Most are hard workers and take their jobs seriously. I am sure some might point out federal workers who are slugs - but there are many of those in private industry. One of my co-workers claimed to have relatives "who were connected" and were phantom employees of the New York Post. Just had to show up on payday. Look at some of the "customer service representatives" we have all had to deal with before coming to The Villages. Slugs!

Anyhow, off my soapbox. This really does not need any replies but I was steamed at the posting about federal workers who get their salaries fort not being in jobs that have to show a profit. The profit is not in dollars but in the betterment or service to people.

Thanks for taking the time to read this rant. I do feel better now having written it. Richie is still my friend and I know his viewpoints, too.

I would have left this alone as you seemed to want in your PM, but since you decided to go public, I guess I will also.

Benefits provided are “profits”? All benefits provided by the government was provided from money extracted from taxpayers and then divied up amongst “benficiaries”, after government employees skim their salary and perks off the top. How am I wrong?

I never said there weren’t government employees who do good work, but it’s also all strictly overhead. There is no product manfactured and sold, or no service provided for value, that translates into definable money earned. There is no value added to measure profit aquired by a government employee in relation to the work he does. That’s just a fact, and that’s all I’m referring to.

So what I’m saying is because of this, the work of government employees is not evaluated with the measure of producing profit as are their contemporaries in the market economy.

In the market economy if an employee is not pulling his weight or is a drag on profits instead of an asset, he is terminated. This does not happen in the public sector, and there’s no system to even measure such a scenario. If a government employee is deemed incompetent in his duties, or maybe just superfluous to the situation (Just for the sake of argument. We know this almost never happens) he will be transferred and most likely even promoted out of his department in order to maintain peace in his department. The salary and perks of said employee is never considered in this equation as it would in the private sector.

Public employees do no live in the real world of economics in terms of their employment. There is an entitlement atmosphere in the public sector that is wholly foreign to the world of the private sector employee.

You can regale us with all the good you’ve done in your many years of government service, and those of your contemporaries, and I would not argue even one of those points with you. It has absolutely nothing to do with what I’m saying here, though.

Originally Posted by buggyone

WHATEVER

Obama's new name on TOTV= whatever.