Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 7:41:43 AM
From: lorne	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 224729

Every woman here should read this. Message 25471515

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 7:50:00 AM
From: Hope Praytochange	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224729

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass, each taking a portion. That's going to be the difficult part, but I'm sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy. Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate taste. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can have those. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. And since you hate guns and you hate war, we'll take the firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell. But you are going to be responsible for finding a biodiesel vehicle big enough to haul them around. We'll keep the capitalism, the greedy corporations, the pharmaceutical companies; we will keep Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have the homeless, the homeboys, the hippies and illegal aliens. We will keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, the greedy CEOS and all of the rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and we'll let you have NBC and Hollywood. You can be nice to Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer anybody that threatens us. You can have the peaceniks and the war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we will provide them with security. You won't have to worry about it. We will keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley Maclaine. You can also have the UN, but we will no longer pay the bill. We will keep the SUVs, the pickup trucks and the oversize luxury cars. You can have the compacts, the subcompacts and every Subaru station wagon you can find. You can give everybody healthcare, if you can find any practicing doctors. We will continue to believe that healthcare is a privilege and not a right. We will keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and the national anthem, and I am sure you will be happy to substitute in their place "Imagine." I'd like to teach the world to sing "Kumbaya" or "We are the world." We will practice trickle-down economics and you can give trickle-up poverty your best shot. And since it so offends you, we will keep our history, our name and our flag. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots. And if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the friendly spirit of parting, I'll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in about 15 years. Sincerely, John J Wall Law student and an American P.S. You can also have Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 9:09:56 AM
From: Little Joe	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224729

"Guess what people, BANKERS BROKE THE WORLD." And of course the government was just an innocent victim, and had nothing to do with it. Ask yourself a question, why hasn't the government prosecuted any of the CEO's and others who engaged in a huge fraud on the American People. I will answer the question for you. They paid their tribute to the politicians. Bush did not prosecute and now Obama is not. Surely you can see that both parties are complicit in the fraud. The fact is the banks did what they do. They steal. Banks are nothing but legalized thievery. Who else can lend you money they don't have and charge you interest on it, still manage to lose money and then get bailed out by taxpayers. The government did nothing to stop it even though it was clear to many that there were problems and then like Sargeant Schultz they proclaim, "I know Nothing" No Bankers did not break the world. They are guilty of fraud but the Government broke the world. lj

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 11:16:32 AM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224729

How come the dems aren't complaining that the bankers are giving bail out monies to their campaign funds ?

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 11:20:22 AM
From: MJ	6 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224729

I have read this recent post and your previous posts and purposely ignored some of your rants. This is my single message as a woman-----there will be no further responding to your messages. After reading your post, I suggest you improve your knowledge about the O-Messiah-----Obama born of a Kenyan father, no records to affirm(and no DNA). Obama's bigamist Kenyan father was already married in Kenya with a child---got Stanley Anne pregnant---left her and little Barry----picked up another woman named Ruth-----went to Harvard, didn't graduate----went back to Kenya with Ruth following, continued to have children by the first wife in Kenya, with Ruth and with his mistress------and never saw his charming Barry until Barry was 10 years old. And now we have this mixed up Barry Soetoro Barrack Hussein Obama as President of the US---the O. This man who grew up on food stamps claims to know what is best for the economy, the USA and the world as he parties at the White House------will give out food stamps eventually for beans and rice. Yes, a President who used drugs as a teenager and is still hooked on nicotine if you believe the press. An inexperienced man, on all fronts, except for his Harvard education which means little in the practical, real world outside of academe. Yes, a President who refused during the Primary and has yet to release all records regarding his birth and the marriages of his mother and father. This is a man who wrote two books fictionalized and romanticized to get elected while David Axelrod and the DNC handpicked Obama to be their Socialist candidate. Obama is the apple and did not fall far from the tree----a socialist apple. Do remember that women who become pregnant out side of marriage are pregnant because it takes two to tango-----unless the woman is raped. Also, consider that a man reacts like a male chauvinist pig when women act like pigs. mj

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 11:27:03 AM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224729

You libs wished Bush failed. How come it's different for Ophoney ?

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 11:41:26 AM
From: Ann Corrigan	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224729

kathtoo, We'll see in 4yrs if you continue to support Obama's socialist agenda. Women who place their personal priority list above that of the greater good for the USA are the real fools in America today. Anyone who continues to condone Obama's destructive liberal effect on this once great nation will one day live with nothing but regret.

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 2:51:43 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224729

Like or hate his beliefs, you have to be wowed. Please watch all three links, this kid is amazing and what a grasp he has formed all on his own. youtube.com youtube.com defineconservatism.com 1. Life 2. Personal Responsibility 3. Less Government 4. The Founding Principles

To: kathtoo who wrote (60776)	3/9/2009 11:02:52 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224729

iraq of democraps: Ms Steavenson seeks to examine the inner lives of other Iraqi military men. She relentlessly tracks them down to their abodes of exile in Abu Dhabi, Amman, Beirut, Damascus and London. After a while, there is a dispiritingly drab sameness about their stories. In short, you had to lie to survive. Perhaps the most honest in his reflections is a doctor who became a senior officer in the medical corps. “You had to lie against your principles. You had to say things you did not believe. It was mental conflict. To live 35 years like this. It becomes a personality trait.” All those interviewed have tales of horror. Just about all of them witness summary executions: of enemy soldiers (mainly Iranians), of Kurds, of Kuwaitis, of Iraqi deserters, of senior Iraqi officers who are deemed to have been guilty of losing battles or even merely of retreating when they should have stayed to fight and die. General Sachet is ordered to oversee such executions. A sergeant witnesses an Iraqi, who was alleged to have abused a woman in Kuwait, hauled up by a crane to be shot by fellow Iraqi soldiers. The same happens to an Iraqi colonel caught smuggling gold. Kuwaiti prisoners have their ears nailed to a plank of wood. A former bodyguard of Saddam’s describes, admiringly, how he saw the dictator taking out his revolver and “shooting between the eyes” one of his own relatives who had taken a younger wife and had rejected the president’s request to go back to his original one. A relation of General Sachet tells how Qusay Saddam Hussein, the dictator’s son, gave an order to kill 2,000 prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison (which became notorious for abuses during the early years of the American occupation) to relieve overcrowding. Perhaps most dispiriting of all, virtually none of those interviewed acknowledges responsibility for what was done. Most of their explanations are variations on “we were only obeying orders”. “What could I do?” “But I helped people, many people!” “I suffered also, you know.” “This was usual then.” The gassing of 5,000 Kurds in Halabja was, concedes a seemingly upright general, “a political mistake”. “I liked them. I joked with them. I sympathised with them,” writes Ms Steavenson. “But not one ever looked me straight in the eye and admitted responsibility for the crimes of the government which they had served.” Even after the depredations of Saddam Hussein, many of those Ms Steavenson talked to still hankered after someone like him. Iraqis, says one, are “an unruly mass of shirugi—slang for thick-headed Marsh Arabs—who need the rule of the rod, a strongman, to control them.” Judging by this remorselessly bleak account of Iraq’s moral collapse, one cannot but feel squeamish about Iraq’s future, under any regime. economist.com