Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
LOL, now THAT was funny!
I don't know HOW or WHY that post jumped onto the thread before I was finished with it - dang it!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If Obama's critics would offer something coherent, I would listen to them.
- Thread starter Alceste
- Start date
LOL, now THAT was funny!
I don't know HOW or WHY that post jumped onto the thread before I was finished with it - dang it!
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Hey, I'm no martyr. I'm lucky - lucky to be an American, lucky to be a Texan, lucky to be able to watch a football game in my comfortable home on a big screen TV, lucky to have a decent job and a good husband, and lucky to have such a stellar group of people as the people on this forum to challenge me, force me to do more intense research, expand my understanding of their various positions and opinions, and encourage me to become, every day, an even more informed and conscientious American citizen.
I really, really appreciate the opportunity to interact with each of you, and I mean that in all sincerity.
I really, really appreciate the opportunity to interact with each of you, and I mean that in all sincerity.
Alceste
Vagabond
What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? I'm simply asking for a coherent, rational, fact-based criticism of a specific, verifiable Obama policy.
I don't see what the big deal is. Smoke and Sunstone do it all the time.
I hope you enjoy the game.
(I've been (GASP) lounging around in my PJs til noon while all the decent hard-working folk were in church giving money to charity. In a minute I'm going to go to the gym and (GASP) do some exercise while all the decent hard working folk watch football.)
Alceste
Vagabond
Smoke
Done here.
I think most of us have caught on to your unalterable conviction that people who are just like you are the very best people in all the world. Perhaps you could put it in your signature, rather than trying to make it the topic of every thread.
Alceste
Vagabond
BTW, if you would like to know where I'm getting the impression that the Tea Partiers are not rational or informed, I'm getting it from them.
YouTube - Tea Party Interviews Bureaucrash Independence Day July 4 2009
"Spreadin' freedom, fightin' tyranny an' all that good stuff..."
YouTube - Tea Party Interviews Bureaucrash Independence Day July 4 2009
"Spreadin' freedom, fightin' tyranny an' all that good stuff..."
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Let's see...in my immediate family I enjoy the company of African Americans, Koreans, native Panamanians, Guatamalans, plain ol' white people from Arkansas, liberals, active duty military personnel, white separatists, rednecks, and urbane New Yorkers.
Hell,even my immediate family is not just like me - and they are my favorite people in the entire world! My husband and I are poles apart politically, and we manage to enjoy each other's company too.
I honestly enjoy diversity much more than homogeny. I think diverse views, lifestyles, and expressions of faith and belief add an incredible richness to life.
And don't forget, as a white person in Texas, I am actually a minority.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
Must be my own opinion? It was my own opinion! I have never even heard of Michelle Malkin. You are no better than those you rail against.
Alceste
Vagabond
The point of that rule is that you have to have done your own thinking to qualify. I'm not interested in factual claims that are simply regurgitations of Republican yapping you read on a blog, or heard on a talk radio show. Please refer to rule number one as well: it must be a verifiable White House legislative initiative or official policy.
Plus, I'm not "railing against" anyone, I'm asking a simple question that you are at present unable to answer, apparently. Instead of whining about your first offerings being disqualified due to lack of substance, why don't you go find out what policies and legislative proposals the Democrats have initiated, think them over, then come back and explain why you disagree with them? That's the topic of this thread.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Ok - first one: American Clean Energy and Security Act (aka Cap and Trade):
I oppose the American Clean Energy and Security Act for a variety of reasons:
1. It creates an imbalance of compliance and therefore production between the US and two major world competitors – China and India, who have not adopted the same standards and costs. Imagine the future impact on trade and our market. Unless China and India adopt similar standards, the total effect on global environment will be negligent, which means that the US will be hurt economically while basically gaining nothing in return.
The Cap and Tax Fiction - WSJ.com
2. The costs of compliance are unknown, unquantifiable and capricious, hinging on the future costs of energy, which will almost certainly negatively impact the American consumer – smack dab in the middle of their wallet. The whole purpose of the bill is to HIKE THE PRICES OF OIL, GAS AND ELECTRICITY SO THAT AMERICANS WILL USE LESS OF THEM. These price hikes will show up, not just in gas and electric bills, but in every manufactured product, and every grocery bill in the United States. Yes, people will consume less – which will negatively impact our Gross Domestic Product, further weakening both the global economy and our own economy.
3. The bill will disproportionately affect lower income households, adding hundreds of dollars a year, possibly thousands, to their energy costs – an expenditure they can hardly afford.
4. The bill is obviously partisan – only 2 of 17 proposed Republican amendments have been adopted, while 24 Democrat amendments have been adopted. This is especially ironic considering that most of the proposed Republican amendments directly addressed the costs to American consumers, and were proposed to provide relief to those American consumers if costs of cap and trade implementation exceeded projected costs.
I oppose the American Clean Energy and Security Act for a variety of reasons:
1. It creates an imbalance of compliance and therefore production between the US and two major world competitors – China and India, who have not adopted the same standards and costs. Imagine the future impact on trade and our market. Unless China and India adopt similar standards, the total effect on global environment will be negligent, which means that the US will be hurt economically while basically gaining nothing in return.
The Cap and Tax Fiction - WSJ.com
2. The costs of compliance are unknown, unquantifiable and capricious, hinging on the future costs of energy, which will almost certainly negatively impact the American consumer – smack dab in the middle of their wallet. The whole purpose of the bill is to HIKE THE PRICES OF OIL, GAS AND ELECTRICITY SO THAT AMERICANS WILL USE LESS OF THEM. These price hikes will show up, not just in gas and electric bills, but in every manufactured product, and every grocery bill in the United States. Yes, people will consume less – which will negatively impact our Gross Domestic Product, further weakening both the global economy and our own economy.
3. The bill will disproportionately affect lower income households, adding hundreds of dollars a year, possibly thousands, to their energy costs – an expenditure they can hardly afford.
4. The bill is obviously partisan – only 2 of 17 proposed Republican amendments have been adopted, while 24 Democrat amendments have been adopted. This is especially ironic considering that most of the proposed Republican amendments directly addressed the costs to American consumers, and were proposed to provide relief to those American consumers if costs of cap and trade implementation exceeded projected costs.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Now - Cash for Clunkers:
The first rollout of this bill the Cash For Clunkers Program was so ridiculous and such a fiasco that it hardly seems necessary to go into much detail. But here are just a few points: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204313604574326531645819464.html
(good article here, by the way)
Then let's use the typical skills, or lack thereof, of government workers to actually develop the website and the processing system, burdening the dealerships and consumers with a myriad of incomprehensible forms and regulations, creating a bottleneck of backlogged claims (ie, kicking the car market in the kahunas - with love like this, who needs enemies?), and hey - while we're at it, let's destroy thousands and thousands of vehicles by pouring corrosives into their engines!
WHAT A GREAT IDEA!
The first rollout of this bill the Cash For Clunkers Program was so ridiculous and such a fiasco that it hardly seems necessary to go into much detail. But here are just a few points: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204313604574326531645819464.html
(good article here, by the way)
- So you have a clunker thats paid for. But its better for you to go into debt to the tune of about $20,000 or more than get a few more years of use out of that clunker? Who is really the winner here the consumer or the auto dealerships and banks? Oh, wait we already knew they were government favorites, right?
- This is short term gain and long term loss. What happens to the used car market over the next few years? This is the market that has been necessary for people who cannot afford to buy a new car. Now these vehicles, all of which were required to be DRIVEABLE in order to be eligible for the program, are intentionally destroyed. Talk about government waste! THANKS, GUYS.
- This is a deal with the devil. Upon contract date, the consumer had to turn over possession of the vehicle to the dealership, even before the dealership knew whether or not the vehicle would truly qualify under the extremely complicated application process required by the government. If the applicant lies about anything on the application, and the app is denied, it is up to the dealership to recoup the money. Now do you really think they intend to be left holding this bag or do you think they were able to build in that wiggle room to cover their, err, assets? Who do you think paid for that cushion?
- As of Sept 2, 2009, only 5.7 percent of the Cash for Clunkers dealer claims had been paid by the government. In fact, more claims have been rejected than have been paid. (NADA, Sept 2009)
Then let's use the typical skills, or lack thereof, of government workers to actually develop the website and the processing system, burdening the dealerships and consumers with a myriad of incomprehensible forms and regulations, creating a bottleneck of backlogged claims (ie, kicking the car market in the kahunas - with love like this, who needs enemies?), and hey - while we're at it, let's destroy thousands and thousands of vehicles by pouring corrosives into their engines!
WHAT A GREAT IDEA!
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Abortion – Above Obama’s Pay Grade?
Obama is an ardent supporter of the Freedom of Choice Act, a position he made clear in a speech to Planned Parenthood in July 2007. This bill’s sole purpose is largely to repeal the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. This bill would effectively invalidate any parental consent laws, informed consent laws, and partial birth abortion restrictions. There are currently over 300 such laws throughout the United States.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8
Obama is an ardent supporter of the Freedom of Choice Act, a position he made clear in a speech to Planned Parenthood in July 2007. This bill’s sole purpose is largely to repeal the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. This bill would effectively invalidate any parental consent laws, informed consent laws, and partial birth abortion restrictions. There are currently over 300 such laws throughout the United States.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
And I haven't even started on the various healthcare reform bills that are pending. But to be honest, I'm sort of tired of and bored with that topic, so I may just skip out on that one for awhile.
Actually, I have some work to do, so I'll save the whole issue of Obama's corrupt cabinet and appointees for another time (though I WILL get to it).
Also forthcoming - my issues with his history of association with radical racists.
Sheeze, I hate to even bring up the race issue - but apparently some groups seem intent on making this an issue of the man's race - when in reality it is an issue of personal integrity and political platform.
Actually, I have some work to do, so I'll save the whole issue of Obama's corrupt cabinet and appointees for another time (though I WILL get to it).
Also forthcoming - my issues with his history of association with radical racists.
Sheeze, I hate to even bring up the race issue - but apparently some groups seem intent on making this an issue of the man's race - when in reality it is an issue of personal integrity and political platform.
Last edited:
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Well, I will not be holding my breath.
You yourself said that they are so long and complicated that you cannot understand them.
So anything you would now present about them, in my opinion, will be highly suspect.
ANd given your "argument", and I use the word extremely haphazardly, against the Freedom of Choice Act....
EDIT: I am thinking that the word "argument" in this post should really be changed to "fear mongering"....
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Wow, I am so impressed with your source.
Tell me this - why do YOU think that Obama felt the need to voice such support for this bill? We already have legalized abortion in the US. Read the bill - it's obviously an expansion of abortion rights. If it's not expanding already liberal abortion rights, then it seems redundant, doesn't it?
The life or health of the mother - third trimester abortions? It should be very easy to prove that the life or health of the mother is in jeopardy with ANY pregnancy.
And on the topic of healthcare reform, the public option, and abortion, even Snopes concludes that it is unclear whether or not public funds (ie, tax dollars) will be used to pay for abortions on demand. The possibility becomes more of a probability with every step toward the public option.
This is not fear mongering - this is called debating the possible ramifications of unclear legislation.
Last edited:
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
At least my source is not an agenda filled group of people who are still upset that McCain lost....
Yes, you need to actually read the bill for yourself and stop relying on the nonsense you want to hear.
Or perhaps we are back to your not being able to understand what is written in the bill and are reliant upon the "interpretations" of others?
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Was there supposed to be some underlined conspiracy message in that video. If more people started to do the things that were expressed in the video it would be great.
And the comments from one of the Youtube subscribers gave was priceless drivel......
"snake10143 Wow. A day of serving your community. How scary. Compared to Bush's decade of serving your country and dying for it. And what sort of communist bails out large multi-national companies? Please..."
How ignorant....What's wrong with serving the community? And where in the video did it say for only one day? Wen did Bush "serve and DIE" for the country? Wasn't it the Busch administration along with many Dems that wrote the first round of bail out checks?
I mean...with wrong with people?