Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Excuse me but I am a "right-wing" conservative who believes in creationalism and take offense at your comment. Not all conservatives are into president bashing just as not all liberals bashed Bush.
Why do you use the rhetoric of the left "bashing" ???
Conservatives like myself refer to it as constructive criticism of Obummer!
So by definition you are not a Conservative since you can't or won't "constructively critisize" the Divider-In-Chief ObaMao.
I don't know what that NRC you referred to has said about Obama but how about you telling me how he is not going to go along with the Slaughter Solution which his people in the House have come up with to pass the Senate bill without the House voting on it. I keep reading about it places but don't see it being discussed by lefties on this forum. Try this link if you don't know what the Slaughter Solution is.
You asked for a link to a conservative blog and you now have one.
Why are you attempting to high jack a thread???
This slaughter rule you keep trumpeting as an excuse for un-civil behavior dosen't pass the test.
Start a topic about this "Slaughter Solution" but stick with the topic at hand on this thread!!
The posts that you an the "chicago" poster have become so toxic with irrational hate, blind partisonship, and character assasination, that rational discourse becomes impossible.
So now personal attacks and insults are the manner in which you seek to establish your point of view??
Chatress attempted to have people believe that people like yourselves are the minority on the right, however you blew her assertion clean out the water.
This thread needs an infusion in decency, rationality, and common sense from the right...any takers.
Last edited by reconmark; 03-15-2010 at 06:08 AM..
It might be nice if Laura and you would learn to provide the entire quote. Since you didn't here is what Obama said:
"................as radical as I think people tried 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 Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."
What you and Laura have done here is deliberately edit the quote to distort the fact that Obama was talking about the Warren Court interpretation. You can disagree with the supreme court ruling but you can't condemn a president whose own opinion agrees or disagrees with a ruling that you obviously don't understand.
You're version changing and adding to my text. You've added 'cut and pasted's to my post where there were no breaks in the text of Obama's speech that I quoted and you even added a line in my post that I didn't say. (All the bolded stuff was added by the OP.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman It might be nice if Laura and you would learn to provide the entire quote. Since you didn't here is what Obama said:
"................Cut&Paste as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court,Cut&Paste it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — Cut&Paste at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way,Cut&Paste that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."
What you and Laura have done here is deliberately edit the quote to distort the fact that Obama was talking about the Warren Court interpretation. You can disagree with the supreme court ruling but you can't condemn a president whose own opinion agrees or disagrees with a ruling that you obviously don't understand. Helloooo! that was ObaMao's opinion and he disagreed with the Warren Court in not going far enough!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtinChicago
Is that a full-time or part-time hobby of yours? Cutting and Pasting?
go and re-read the article again.
Jeesh!
You've just proven my point, that you edit stuff to fit your own agenda and not for a true representation of what was actually said. Check the text of Obama's radio interview/speech online if you want to see who cut and paste to distort and it wasn't me.
Last edited by Wayland Woman; 03-15-2010 at 07:55 AM..
ObaMao (a cunning way of making the point that Obama is Mao like in his associations, appointments, admiration of, thinking, governing style)
cun·ning
Pronunciation: \ˈkə-niŋ\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from present participle of can know
Date: 14th century 1: dexterous or crafty in the use of special resources (as skill or knowledge) or in attaining an end <a cunning plotter> 2: displaying keen insight <a cunning observation> 3: characterized by wiliness and trickery <cunning schemes> 4: prettily appealing :cute <a cunning little kitten>
So you're saying eF' your Principles and just go along to get along.
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying.
Your quotes were cunningly (that's in sense #3, "using wiliness" and trickery") edited to make it appear as if President Obama (tired of the nickname game now, mildly entertaining as it was for a while) picked out of a larger context to support your extrapolations. Which isn't exactly lying, but it's not very honest, either. You were called on it.
Incidentally, do you disagree that the US Constitution is a "charter of negative liberties"?
You read ???(surprised) but you don't understand!(not so surprised)
You just made my point by posting this... Redistribution of Wealth is unconstitutional and Communistic in practice. political andeconomic justice in this society Communistic lingo and thinking... most definitely not in our Constitution. It's there in the Soviet Constitution but not in the U.S.Constitution.
Frightened? Not in the least bit. PO'd absolutely, that a Harvard scholar graduated in Constitutional Law thinks he knows more than the Framers of the Constitution.
""as radical as I think people tried 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 ""
Speaks for itself... radical .... Warren Court ... and didn't take it where ObaMao intends to go and where he would have liked it to go.
I agree with what Laura Hollis said in the paragraphs following ObaMao's stupid "negative liberties" comment and his unConstitutional thinking of expanding the Federal Government beyond its clearly defined role.
Now if only you'd be able to grasp it! That is why I say he HATES the Constitution.
What I can see of your clarification -- actually, just reiteration -- through the thicket of on-off bold seems to prove that you didnt understand the statements in their context, which I provided to you in an earlier post.
Are there any Palin bashers among the progressives around here? I guess that is ok though since she is a woman and also a conservative. Right?
This thread isn't about Sarah Palin but, since you asked... your girl, Sarah P., really thrives on the negative attention.
Remember, Rogue Sarah who wanted to tell her side of the story? The one who can't think of any newspapers that she reads but feels qualified to govern the USA?
You remember, the Sarah Palin who went out on the Tea Party circuit with an opening like "How's that hopey changey stuff goin' for ya? "
But, as someone else pointed out... Sarah P. is not the topic of this thread.
Last edited by World Citizen; 03-15-2010 at 09:38 AM..
The one who can't think of any newspapers that she reads but feels qualified to govern the USA?
Speaking of newspapers, are there many of the so-called mainstream media that are worth reading?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does Sarah Palin compare to the President?
