Positive Obama thread
Comments
-
That's what I mant to say...
Most Catholics I know (LGBT and straight) find many of the Church's official opinions horrifying, wrong and inconsisitant. For example, if the Vatican claims an "ethic of life" (which they use to support their pro-life stance, their anti-euthanasia stance, and their anti-captol punishment stance), they are failing to follow that "ethic of life" in this instance. I.e., by saying that governments can execute gays and lesbians and bisexual people, the Vatican is condoning capitol punishment and *not* supporting "life" in pursuit of a narrow agenda--i,e,, condemnation of GLBT people.
-
Oooh....I can see that things have gotten a little steamy over here... I just came back to report on the Inauguration thing.We decided not to go, it wasn't the ticket problem it was a very long car ride (17 hours each way), stopping to see friends and relatives along way, and it turned in a Grand Tour...too expensive and time consuming. And I hate crowds. DC is going to be completely mobbed, and from my memory of Woodstock, when that kind of thing happens the biggest issue of all is clean toilets.Anyway, I invite any of you who are intellectually inclined and have ideas about what to do with the economy, education, infrastructure, green technologies to come over to Robert Reich's Blogspot. There are all kinds of interesting people there...economists, socialists, conservatives, all hashing out what is going on and what to do. RR is a well known economist and his ideas may have some influence in what actually happens. From what I am hearing, Obama already has control of things to a degree because people like Paulson are listening to him and not to Bush anymore.Linora
-
Why must there always be controversey here on the positive Obama thread?
Shirley, Amy probably doesn't respond to your questions/challenges because she may have you on ignore. I have several folks whose posts I consider to be harsh and/or argumentative that I have on ignore, so I'm not faulting her at all (in fact, I bet my "ignore" list is bigger than her's, lol). That and staying the heck away from the "Respectfully Republican" and now the "Not so Respectful Political Thread" make life much less stressful for me.
If her comments bother you so much, perhaps you should do the same. I'm just sayin'...
-
ijl wrote:
Well I've got to admit that although I am a republican who voted for McCain , I am pleasantly surprised by Obama pragmatism and middle of the road choices.
***
ijl - You are in good company, with 78% of the country. The other 22% must be the same ones who somehow still find Bush to be doing a good job!
Laura - you are too funny.
Felicia - well said!
-
Why must there always be controversey here on the positive Obama thread?
Felicia, I think Shirley was responding to something not stirring it up ... I think no matter what we try to do or want done on the respective threads, someone will create or disrupt a thread ... I mean over on the Rep thread, that idiot Blaest/thunderbeak/truthdistorter kept coming over IN ORDER to disrupt and got encouragment from this thread to do it. Someone else was encouraged to go over there and post something disruptive over there, too ... so it's not "just" Shirley ...
-
djd
I don't think that Bush did a terrible job, We cannot put a blame for our economic woes squarely on his shoulders. Therewere a few reasons for this disaster and Bush anti-regualtion stance did not help. But let's not forget Clinton administration push to have bank approve loans for people who would not normally qualify for them. it was supposed to be a social issue instead of an economic one.
As far as the security goes Obama does have big shoes to fill contrary to the cartoon posted earlier on this forum. Bush had almost 8 years without an attack and I am sure it was not for the lack of trying by terrorists. If the radical islamists see any signs of weakness or hesitation, they can intensify their efforts to strike again. And if we have another 9/11 , we might look at Bush's policy in the different light. Losing job is tough but loisng life .....
-
ijl: I bet Bush would agree with you wholeheartedly! Unfortunately, he has demonstrated in his latest interview with (I forget who, a journalist) that he pretty much blames all the economy troubles, and the lack of WMDs in Iraq on whoever was running this country oh say 10 years ago!! Yep, his father. George wishes they had found WMDs and that if they had, he would do it again. Never even said he made a mistake listening to faulty intelligence from his own advisors. George will probably continue to put into place all kinds of laws that support his "morals" ( with his 8 year tenure I can't really find any "moral" stance) and attempt to suppress those citizens that he has little consideration for and truthfully doesn't even care about any of us in this country--only how good he looks years from now! Well, he will go down in history as the worst ever president of the usa. There's no way he can fix that now as hard as he is trying!
So, I can only rely on my standard--treat others as you would like to be treated; and never forget what goes around comes around--and will eventually bite you in the behind!
He can't leave office soon enough. And for Laura to withdraw an ornament from the White House Christmas tree just goes to show that me is really afraid to really, really look at himself. To quote a media jouralist: "If there's nothing to see in your soul, there's no reason to look."
And George has no reason to look (or desire to) because there is nothing there.
I'm really very sorry your husband lost his job. I hope he finds another one soon. This economy is really hard on so many of us right now. I wish you all the best. even if I don't agree with you. LOL
-
ijl- I think Bush did about as bad a job as anyone could have done with the office, but I guess that's why we're in different parties.
grace- I think that Bush had an agenda to take down Saddaam and asked for the intelligence he received. As for morals, I don't think invading countries and causing a war is very moral so I guess Bush and I have different ideas on morality.
felicia- My ignore list only has one person on it, so if you have more than 1 your list is longer than mine.
-
Felicia, she does respond. Look back and see. It's not important enough for me to search this thread. She has "insinuated" that I am toxic (stays away from toxic people), ignorant and a troll when I have come over her to post. We have NEVER said anything like that to ANY of you. I am a member of this board. I am not attacking anyone.
Felicia, I have always liked you. You guys have been over to the respectful repub thread and made comments. Please show me where we have been "unkind" to any of the Obama supporters (except for Blaest). I really don't want to lose your "friendship" over politics or someone on this board with whom I strongly disagree on several things. Call it a "personality conflict."
Shirley
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Felicia wrote:
Why must there always be controversey here on the positive Obama thread?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My post...is it negative?
ShirleyHughes wrote:
Amy, President Bush is not a "holy roller." He's a Methodist and they're far from being "holy rollers." I hope you know that you may be insulting some people who may come and read YOUR thread when calling someone's choice of worship as "holy rollers." No, I'm a Baptist (if you want to know).
President Bush has done nothing illegal so there's no reason to impeach him. Please read the 9/11 Commission. You can google and find it.
Respectfully,
Shirley
-
Felicia- I'm waiting for my email tomorrow telling me you scored the inauguration tickets.
-
This is the first paragraph introducing the topic.ObamasPresidentWeWon wrote:I wanted this thread for people who are enthusiastic about an obama candidacy and presidency since both other political threads seem mostly to be anti obama ones. I hope this thread can stay positive since people who want to pick at anything have two other threads to do that.
Just like Felicia stays away from the republican thread, perhaps you should stay away from this thread, for your continued good health of course--less stress you know. LOLI stay away also (from the republican thread) for the most part, and am careful how I word things if I do respond to something. I just disagree with everything you all say for the most part, that it's not worth my energy to respond on that thread. I hope we can continue to have a positive obama thread as was intended by the creator of this thread. Respectfully, -
Did I word something in the wrong way?..because you said... I stay away also (from the republican thread) for the most part, and am careful how I word things if I do respond to something.
Just like Felicia stays away from the republican thread, perhaps you should stay away from this thread, for your continued good health of course--less stress you know. LOL
LOL, Thanks for being concerned about my health. Actually, I'm quite calm. Listening to some very nice music.
-
Drama Queen
A person.. especially a girl.. who likes to stir up stuff between other people just to be the center of attention
Someone who turns something unimportant into a major deal. Someone who blows things way out of proportion when ever the chance is given.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=drama%20queen
Shirley, go away. eom
-
Laura, Grace- Trolls and Drama Queens thrive on negative attention. I think if everyone always ignored the troll, they would have no reason to come back here. Toddlers usually stop their temper tantrums if they don't have an audience.
-
-
As a psychologist...well. let me put it like this. ..my grandchildren had some pretty good temper tantrums and when ignored they just continued. Now that it's TIME OUT it's a bit better.
Sorry, Laura, but I don't fit the definition of a drama queen. I was merely making a comment about Bush and the ornament and that he did nothing illegal to be impeached. Sorry if you see me as wanting to be the center of attention. My comment wasn't a "major deal" until you made it into one. I merely made a comment.
Amy, stop calling me "the troll." Women usually mature by the time they in their 40s. If I thrived on negative attention I'd be here ALL the time. And, I do not come here often. However, I came back to DEFEND myself. So, ignore me and I won't have to post again...PLEASE!
Shirley
-
What I notice over here is that all you guys do is Bush bashing. I think you guys need to come over to our there ---------------------> and you may get some real info..important info.
Okay, I gone.. BYE BYE..you know you loved me coming here to brighten things up.
Shirley
-
Amy, point taken. I will use the ignore feature for the first time here at BC.org.
I too sincerely hope that this board remains on topic.
It is just ridiculous to log on and read half of the last ten posts about Shirley drama.
My last post on the matter, and my apologies for feeding the fire.
-
Okay, I gone.. BYE BYE..
Going to hold you to your word Shirley.
-
I read an article about a poll yesterday where they asked people 3 factual questions about our national political news. They also profiled key demographic data about each person. Then, they took the number who got 3 right, 2 right, and 1 right, divided them out, and compiled statistics on each of the key demographic indicators. One of the indicators they checked was "what are your primary sources of national news?"
An excerpt:
"In general, well-educated news audiences have high levels of political knowledge; for instance, 54% of regular readers of publications such as The New Yorker, The Atlantic and Harper's Magazine are college graduates, as are 54% of regular NPR listeners. However, a greater proportion of regular readers of business magazines are college graduates (60%), but just 36% answered all three political knowledge questions correctly."
People who watch Fox news were at the bottom of the heap.
Is it any coincidence that the folks on the other thread, who claim to be so knoweldgable, are consistently proud to say they watch Fox?
It all makes perfect sense now...
Here's the link if you want to check it our - lots of interesting data to read if you are statistically inclined!
-
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998."Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001."We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do." Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!! -
Let's just ignore the negativity from the naysayers.
-
Oh, Donna, we love you!!
That's what watching Faux News does to those who watch it--they are smart challenged!
Interesting to wonder if Bush gets all his news from Faux also LOL--perhaps that's why he is unable to answer an interviewer's questions unless the question is a who what where and why--one at a time! Bush just failed throughout the latest interview. A psychologist explained that he does that to protect himself. He puts all these other supposedly "smart" people around him to deflect what is being done wrong, and then he can blame it on others (either those around him, or before him). He is simply unable to intellectually see what he might have done wrong. He is just unable to take a complex issue and break it down to solve it properly. So, he relys on others to tell him what should be done, and when it doesn't work, Bush has no inner resources to figure it out. Well, it all makes perfect sense!
Oh we are so ready for Obama to bring us all together.
Did you get the message from David Plouffe about having house meetings across the country on a particular day? Obama wants us to gather with our neighbors and friends and discuss what has been done so far since the election; and wants feedback from all of us on what should be done next to get us back on track. I'm looking forward to this! I certainly hope I can gather with my neighbors, one of whom appears to have changed position since the election--is even looking forward to Bush leaving office--this a neighbor who told me that because Bush was president he deserved respect. LOL Also, in the next topic of conversation proceeded to tell me that if I did not give my live to Jesus I would not go to heaven when I died. That only those who choose Jesus will go to heaven and be with the Lord. Floored me! Didn't even get that this person's religion was one religion and that it was only a belief--that could not be placed upon me--it was only to be placed upon this person, as this person so believed. Needless to say, that was the last neighbor dinner at their house. The others at the table were sitting there with their mouths open. Learned my lesson--no sex or religion discussions with neighbors--politics is fair game in my mind! Hee-hee.
-
My post seems to have disappeared, so I apoligize if I am getting ready to repeat myself, but...
grace - I remember reading that Cheney requires that all TV's in his presence be tuned in to faux at all times.
Seriously, if that isn't a sign of psychosis, I don't know what is!
-
donna--- the article you quote makes me think about obvious studies that say things like, "depressed people are more likely to commit suicide than those who are not depressed." I think uneducated people who think they're smart are far more dangerous than those who realize others have more knowledge. You never see me pretend to know anything about cooking, I fully admit to being a culinary moron.
-
Grace, when you say no sex or religion discussions, but politics is fair game, how do you separate them? Seems like every other political discussion on this board ends up being an argument about sex and religion.
I think Bob Woodward summed up the intellectual difference between Bush and Obama rather nicely. He said Bush doesn't like to do homework, whereas Obama will do the homework, then ask for the extra credit questions.
The Obama house party idea is great. It's nice to know they're still wanting feedback from "John Q. Public." Of course they probably would like some donations too. I wonder if we could do a virtual house party and let them know we want healthcare and insurance to be a priority.
-
djd ,
First a disclaimer : I watch Fox news and can't stand CNN.
The article that you posted has the information that contradicts your statement. It says
"More than four-in-ten regular Hardball (43%) and Hannity & Colmes (42%) viewers also score relatively high for political knowledge."
So where are Fox news readers as any less politically savy? In addition it also stated that Republicans were more likely to know who was in power in Congress among other things.
-
ijl -
You are pointing out some good points that I was aware of, and I am glad you did. Why? Because this is one example of me "cherry-picking" a statistic that was true, but without putting the surrounding context in my position.
Yes - Fox news viewers were at the bottom, right along with CNN watchers! For what it's worth, I despise CNN. Lou Dobbs and Wolf Blitzer give me severe headaches, to say the least.
I think a valid and noteworthy take-away from the study is that people who get their political news from a variety of sources are better informed, as I (rightly or wrongly) believe that people who listen to NPR and read a variety of blogs and magazines are better informed.
But that is MY bias - and we all have a bias, whether we realize it or not!
What I did with my citation of this statistic is exactly what many pundits do everyday - I quoted one result of a study, without the appropiate context.
If I was a Fox pundit, I could have substituted "CNN" for "Fox" and said the exact same thing be technically truthful, but dishnoest in spirit.
-
Is there anyone else here who watches no TV news?
-
djd- you're absolutely right when you say everyone has some bias, whether or not we realize it. The better we know ourselves, the better we can be aware of that. I am well aware, when watching MSNBC that there is a liberal bias and that's why I choose the station, but that doesn't mean I don't also routinely explore the other side of the story to make the most informed decisions possible.
What's everyone saying about Detroit and congress? I hate how easy it was for the banking industry to get so much money with virtually no oversight and how Detroit, which is only asking for loans, looks like they won't have access to a small portion of how much the financial district has been given. Somebody says the difference in republicans going along with the loans is that they have an easier time giving to people who shower before work vs. after work. I hate how the republicans are trying to blame the unions because they advocate for their members to get a decent living wage and health benefits. This is where universal health care would be helpful to the American economy.
Categories
- All Categories
- 679 Advocacy and Fund-Raising
- 289 Advocacy
- 68 I've Donated to Breastcancer.org in honor of....
- Test
- 322 Walks, Runs and Fundraising Events for Breastcancer.org
- 5.6K Community Connections
- 282 Middle Age 40-60(ish) Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 53 Australians and New Zealanders Affected by Breast Cancer
- 208 Black Women or Men With Breast Cancer
- 684 Canadians Affected by Breast Cancer
- 1.5K Caring for Someone with Breast cancer
- 455 Caring for Someone with Stage IV or Mets
- 260 High Risk of Recurrence or Second Breast Cancer
- 22 International, Non-English Speakers With Breast Cancer
- 16 Latinas/Hispanics With Breast Cancer
- 189 LGBTQA+ With Breast Cancer
- 152 May Their Memory Live On
- 85 Member Matchup & Virtual Support Meetups
- 375 Members by Location
- 291 Older Than 60 Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 177 Singles With Breast Cancer
- 869 Young With Breast Cancer
- 50.4K Connecting With Others Who Have a Similar Diagnosis
- 204 Breast Cancer with Another Diagnosis or Comorbidity
- 4K DCIS (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ)
- 79 DCIS plus HER2-positive Microinvasion
- 529 Genetic Testing
- 2.2K HER2+ (Positive) Breast Cancer
- 1.5K IBC (Inflammatory Breast Cancer)
- 3.4K IDC (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)
- 1.5K ILC (Invasive Lobular Carcinoma)
- 999 Just Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastasis
- 652 LCIS (Lobular Carcinoma In Situ)
- 193 Less Common Types of Breast Cancer
- 252 Male Breast Cancer
- 86 Mixed Type Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Not Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastases but Concerned
- 189 Palliative Therapy/Hospice Care
- 488 Second or Third Breast Cancer
- 1.2K Stage I Breast Cancer
- 313 Stage II Breast Cancer
- 3.8K Stage III Breast Cancer
- 2.5K Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
- 13.1K Day-to-Day Matters
- 132 All things COVID-19 or coronavirus
- 87 BCO Free-Cycle: Give or Trade Items Related to Breast Cancer
- 5.9K Clinical Trials, Research News, Podcasts, and Study Results
- 86 Coping with Holidays, Special Days and Anniversaries
- 828 Employment, Insurance, and Other Financial Issues
- 101 Family and Family Planning Matters
- Family Issues for Those Who Have Breast Cancer
- 26 Furry friends
- 1.8K Humor and Games
- 1.6K Mental Health: Because Cancer Doesn't Just Affect Your Breasts
- 706 Recipe Swap for Healthy Living
- 704 Recommend Your Resources
- 171 Sex & Relationship Matters
- 9 The Political Corner
- 874 Working on Your Fitness
- 4.5K Moving On & Finding Inspiration After Breast Cancer
- 394 Bonded by Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Life After Breast Cancer
- 806 Prayers and Spiritual Support
- 285 Who or What Inspires You?
- 28.7K Not Diagnosed But Concerned
- 1K Benign Breast Conditions
- 2.3K High Risk for Breast Cancer
- 18K Not Diagnosed But Worried
- 7.4K Waiting for Test Results
- 603 Site News and Announcements
- 560 Comments, Suggestions, Feature Requests
- 39 Mod Announcements, Breastcancer.org News, Blog Entries, Podcasts
- 4 Survey, Interview and Participant Requests: Need your Help!
- 61.9K Tests, Treatments & Side Effects
- 586 Alternative Medicine
- 255 Bone Health and Bone Loss
- 11.4K Breast Reconstruction
- 7.9K Chemotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 2.7K Complementary and Holistic Medicine and Treatment
- 775 Diagnosed and Waiting for Test Results
- 7.8K Hormonal Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 50 Immunotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 7.4K Just Diagnosed
- 1.4K Living Without Reconstruction After a Mastectomy
- 5.2K Lymphedema
- 3.6K Managing Side Effects of Breast Cancer and Its Treatment
- 591 Pain
- 3.9K Radiation Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 8.4K Surgery - Before, During, and After
- 109 Welcome to Breastcancer.org
- 98 Acknowledging and honoring our Community
- 11 Info & Resources for New Patients & Members From the Team