Friday's Thought

[noodle creek]

Couple questions: Do some of yall really think Obama is a good president and hasn't, or isn't, trying to destroy the country?

Do any of yall believe that 99% of the actions he has taken are actually the best decisions that could have been made?

If CNN is bad and Fox News is bad, where do we get our news? Do yall really believe that the media isn't 90% liberal?

Someone explain to me how Hannity, O'Reilly, and Rush are full of **** and dishonest.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Couple questions: Do some of yall really think Obama is a good president and hasn't, or isn't, trying to destroy the country?

Do any of yall believe that 99% of the actions he has taken are actually the best decisions that could have been made?

If CNN is bad and Fox News is bad, where do we get our news? Do yall really believe that the media isn't 90% liberal?

Someone explain to me how Hannity, O'Reilly, and Rush are full of **** and dishonest.

Name 3 things you have disagreed with Rush and Hannity on.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Name 3 things you have disagreed with Rush and Hannity on.

Not sure it was an honest question. I'm not as up to date with the news as I should be, but when I do watch Hannity and O'Reilly or listen to Rush they seem to make sense and be more down to earth than anyone else. I like common sense, and there isn't much of that going around these days.

I'd like to see Allen West or Perry in office.

[simplepeddler]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Name 3 things you have disagreed with Rush and Hannity on.

Are any of these guys throwing thier hat in the ring?
I "agree" with them about as much as I "agree" with Jessie Jackson.........all these guys are in the entertainment/exploiting business and not the real news business............

I wished Walter Cronkyte would be reborn

on general I am apethetic these days...........I am going to support any candidate that works to allow me to keep my guns and more of the money I make.......all the other crap is rehtoric

selfish for sure...............but honest

[Dogface]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Couple questions: Do some of yall really think Obama is a good president and hasn't, or isn't, trying to destroy the country?

Do any of yall believe that 99% of the actions he has taken are actually the best decisions that could have been made?

If CNN is bad and Fox News is bad, where do we get our news? Do yall really believe that the media isn't 90% liberal?

Someone explain to me how Hannity, O'Reilly, and Rush are full of **** and dishonest.

I think he is a terrible president and is intentionally trying to ruin the country. If you study his background you will see that he was taught that America is terrible and he wants to bring us down.

[duckman1911]

He's the half breed offspring of a communist. He is not just trying to collapse the country he is succeeding. He's a Muslim sympathizer and cares nothing about the justice system. He does however care greatly about the black only justice system. Kill whitey.
He fails horribly at even pretending to care about our borders and protecting this country from outsiders. Why should he though? Overloading the system was his plan from day one. Just too many stupid people that didn't want to see it. They just wanted to vote for a brother. The brother that promised them checks.
Hermain Cain was black but they despised him. He was educated and loved his country. That was too much information for the rest of the brothers and sisters to handle.
White liberals voted for him because it was the fair thing to do. They wanted to go to bed after voting that day and feel that they helped right all the wrongs in this world. They slept better because they single handidly rid the world of the burden slavery. They get up the next day and drive to their work cubical in their Prius and smile at themselves because they feel that they helped make the world a better place with their vote.

[Dogface]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

He's the half breed offspring of a communist. He is not just trying to collapse the country he is succeeding. He's a Muslim sympathizer and cares nothing about the justice system. He does however care greatly about the black only justice system. Kill whitey.
He fails horribly at even pretending to care about our borders and protecting this country from outsiders. Why should he though? Overloading the system was his plan from day one. Just too many stupid people that didn't want to see it. They just wanted to vote for a brother. The brother that promised them checks.
Hermain Cain was black but they despised him. He was educated and loved his country. That was too much information for the rest of the brothers and sisters to handle.
White liberals voted for him because it was the fair thing to do. They wanted to go to bed after voting that day and feel that they helped right all the wrongs in this world. They slept better because they single handidly rid the world of the burden slavery. They get up the next day and drive to their work cubical in their Prius and smile at themselves because they feel that they helped make the world a better place with their vote.

Very well said!!! And for me it's not a racial issue, I would vote for Ben Carson in a second. Obama is definitely a Muslim sympathizer with strong communist figures in his background. After his father left him he was raised by a card carrying communist.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by Dogface

Very well said!!! And for me it's not a racial issue, I would vote for Ben Carson in a second. Obama is definitely a Muslim sympathizer with strong communist figures in his background. After his father left him he was raised by a card carrying communist.

Ben Carson is a good man. Someone else would have to be really good to be better than Dr. Carson.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Dogface

Very well said!!! And for me it's not a racial issue, I would vote for Ben Carson in a second. Obama is definitely a Muslim sympathizer with strong communist figures in his background. After his father left him he was raised by a card carrying communist.

Ben Carson IMO is nowhere near where Allen West is. Sure, Dr Carson hates Obamacare, but his views on second amendment don't do it for me.

[Dogface]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Ben Carson IMO is nowhere near where Allen West is. Sure, Dr Carson hates Obamacare, but his views on second amendment don't do it for me.

Oh, I would vote for Allen West also. I'm not aware of Carson's 2nd amendment views.

[noodle creek]

It's unbelievable that someone associated with Bill Ayers is now our president. What is also unreal, is that half of Ayer's little gang are now professors at various universities. One more generation of children being brainwashed by POS teachers like this and our country is done for.

[Goooh]

Rick Perry is saying and doing all the right things in the limelight, and Hannity and Limbaugh are showing you what needs to be shown when they talk about him.

What neither of them will ever shine a light on is the fact that he ;

1) supported and pushed for a $3,000,000,000 taxpayer funded research institute championed by lance Armstrong (not so different from Obamacare - it's not free market). Eight cancer scientists resigned from this place because they said the focus was based on political and commercial gain as opposed to science.

2) tea party folks booed him on the capital steps after putting till booths all over the place and supporting a new business tax

3) signed an executive order forcing the HPV vaccination of school aged girls even if it were against their (and their parents) will. Coincidentally, his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck. Texas legislature went ape sh** and overturned it.

4) his Texas enterprise find has proven to be a joke, and is a nice way for them to funnel money to companies that donate directly to his campaigns. There is very little transparency, and it's "audited" by the board members. A true audit hasn't happened in a decade (up until a couple years ago). He uses his job numbers to decent this, but actually about 30% of the companies involved actually contribute to the overall job count in Texas.

The point of contention for me is that all these items are there if you dig, yet the media will keep it out of your reach - THEY ARE CHOSING THE CANDIDATES, AND WRAPOING THEM ALL NICE AND PRETTY. That's why I can't stand Hannity, Limbaugh and all the others. Either side, they are doing the same thing...

Up next is West.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Rick Perry is saying and doing all the right things in the limelight, and Hannity and Limbaugh are showing you what needs to be shown when they talk about him.

What neither of them will ever shine a light on is the fact that he ;

1) supported and pushed for a $3,000,000,000 taxpayer funded research institute championed by lance Armstrong (not so different from Obamacare - it's not free market). Eight cancer scientists resigned from this place because they said the focus was based on political and commercial gain as opposed to science.

2) tea party folks booed him on the capital steps after putting till booths all over the place and supporting a new business tax

3) signed an executive order forcing the HPV vaccination of school aged girls even if it were against their (and their parents) will. Coincidentally, his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck. Texas legislature went ape sh** and overturned it.

4) his Texas enterprise find has proven to be a joke, and is a nice way for them to funnel money to companies that donate directly to his campaigns. There is very little transparency, and it's "audited" by the board members. A true audit hasn't happened in a decade (up until a couple years ago). He uses his job numbers to decent this, but actually about 30% of the companies involved actually contribute to the overall job count in Texas.

The point of contention for me is that all these items are there if you dig, yet the media will keep it out of your reach - THEY ARE CHOSING THE CANDIDATES, AND WRAPOING THEM ALL NICE AND PRETTY. That's why I can't stand Hannity, Limbaugh and all the others. Either side, they are doing the same thing...

Up next is West.

Just as a curiousty question. Where do you get the information on which you base your opinions of candidates or political figures? According to you all information sources are bias so how is it you come to nonbias opinions? Have you actually met and spoke with these politicians? Everyone seems to be wrong in your view so would you please tell us who is the right person and on what information you came to that conclusion.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

Just as a curiousty question. Where do you get the information on which you base your opinions of candidates or political figures? According to you all information sources are bias so how is it you come to nonbias opinions? Have you actually met and spoke with these politicians? Everyone seems to be wrong in your view so would you please tell us who is the right person and on what information you came to that conclusion.

I use all media sources, then dig into individual items and/or instances that I find compelling - whether they be positive or negative.

I'm not scared to listen to someone that I don't agree with in order to broaden my knowledge base. Anyone here read Saul Alinsky's book?

If you feel so strongly against something it's imperative to dig deep into and fully understand it. I will never for one second believe what you or any man tells no matter how popular, reputable or famous he is. My opinion and belief will be based on my research that was prompted by what you said.

If I run across something that says Rick Perry is a proponent of a $3 billion dollar research center that the taxpayers have to foot the bill for, I will begin researching that instance. Some times it turns out ok, other times the layers get peeled back further and I realize he is just another big spending Texas goober with an affinity for lining his pockets.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Rick Perry is saying and doing all the right things in the limelight, and Hannity and Limbaugh are showing you what needs to be shown when they talk about him.

What neither of them will ever shine a light on is the fact that he ;

1) supported and pushed for a $3,000,000,000 taxpayer funded research institute championed by lance Armstrong (not so different from Obamacare - it's not free market). Eight cancer scientists resigned from this place because they said the focus was based on political and commercial gain as opposed to science.

2) tea party folks booed him on the capital steps after putting till booths all over the place and supporting a new business tax

3) signed an executive order forcing the HPV vaccination of school aged girls even if it were against their (and their parents) will. Coincidentally, his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck. Texas legislature went ape sh** and overturned it.

4) his Texas enterprise find has proven to be a joke, and is a nice way for them to funnel money to companies that donate directly to his campaigns. There is very little transparency, and it's "audited" by the board members. A true audit hasn't happened in a decade (up until a couple years ago). He uses his job numbers to decent this, but actually about 30% of the companies involved actually contribute to the overall job count in Texas.

The point of contention for me is that all these items are there if you dig, yet the media will keep it out of your reach - THEY ARE CHOSING THE CANDIDATES, AND WRAPOING THEM ALL NICE AND PRETTY. That's why I can't stand Hannity, Limbaugh and all the others. Either side, they are doing the same thing...

Up next is West.

No one is perfect and no one ever will be. No one will agree with 100% what you agree with. If Hannity and Rush are picking and choosing their candidates, tell me who you would like to see run for office. Who out there is the best overall person to run for president in your opinion? I'm just curious.

I didn't mean to make it seem like I was talking about Rush and Hannity's views on Perry and West, that was just an after thought. I was just talking about Hannity, O'Reilly, and Rush's take on everything in general.

[silver_snipe]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Rick Perry is saying and doing all the right things in the limelight, and Hannity and Limbaugh are showing you what needs to be shown when they talk about him.

What neither of them will ever shine a light on is the fact that he ;

1) supported and pushed for a $3,000,000,000 taxpayer funded research institute championed by lance Armstrong (not so different from Obamacare - it's not free market). Eight cancer scientists resigned from this place because they said the focus was based on political and commercial gain as opposed to science.

2) tea party folks booed him on the capital steps after putting till booths all over the place and supporting a new business tax

3) signed an executive order forcing the HPV vaccination of school aged girls even if it were against their (and their parents) will. Coincidentally, his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck. Texas legislature went ape sh** and overturned it.

4) his Texas enterprise find has proven to be a joke, and is a nice way for them to funnel money to companies that donate directly to his campaigns. There is very little transparency, and it's "audited" by the board members. A true audit hasn't happened in a decade (up until a couple years ago). He uses his job numbers to decent this, but actually about 30% of the companies involved actually contribute to the overall job count in Texas.

The point of contention for me is that all these items are there if you dig, yet the media will keep it out of your reach - THEY ARE CHOSING THE CANDIDATES, AND WRAPOING THEM ALL NICE AND PRETTY. That's why I can't stand Hannity, Limbaugh and all the others. Either side, they are doing the same thing...

Up next is West.

1. How is a research insititute like obamacare? Are they forcing the citizens to buy something from a private company? Obamacare does that.
2. If one side is happy and the other is mad then the person govering is playing favorites and is not really looking out for the people. If both sides are upset cause neither got what they wanted then they are looking out for everyone. As for the actual tax cited here I don't know anything about it so whether it's right or wrong I have no opinion.
3. How is this different from the required MMR, Polio, and other immunizations required to start school? Especially since the vast majority of cervical cancer is caused by this virus and over 75% of women are exposed to it in their life time.
4. Again I know nothing of this issue and have no opinion.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by silver_snipe

1. How is a research insititute like obamacare? Are they forcing the citizens to buy something from a private company? Obamacare does that.
2. If one side is happy and the other is mad then the person govering is playing favorites and is not really looking out for the people. If both sides are upset cause neither got what they wanted then they are looking out for everyone. As for the actual tax cited here I don't know anything about it so whether it's right or wrong I have no opinion.
3. How is this different from the required MMR, Polio, and other immunizations required to start school? Especially since the vast majority of cervical cancer is caused by this virus and over 75% of women are exposed to it in their life time.
4. Again I know nothing of this issue and have no opinion.

1.) I stated that the way it was funded was just like Obama care

2) if both sides are upset then it could clearly mean the gain is to be had by the politician and his buddies

3) HPV is an STD, that means you get it from unprotected sex or passed down to you from your mother who was having unprotected sex. Routine checkups will find this well in advance of cervical cancer and can easily be eliminated... Educate yourself as a parent, educate your kid and leave the legislation and forceful nature out of something as easily prevented and/or controlled as HPV. And I don't believe the fact that his OAL was a lobbyist for Merck is such a coincidence.................

http://www.ihs.gov/healthcommunicati...uments/HPV.doc

[silver_snipe]

Originally Posted by Goooh

1.) I stated that the way it was funded was just like Obama care

2) if both sides are upset then it could clearly mean the gain is to be had by the politician and his buddies

3) HPV is an STD, that means you get it from unprotected sex or passed down to you from your mother who was having unprotected sex. Routine checkups will find this well in advance of cervical cancer and can easily be eliminated... Educate yourself as a parent, educate your kid and leave the legislation and forceful nature out of something as easily prevented and/or controlled as HPV. And I don't believe the fact that his OAL was a lobbyist for Merck is such a coincidence.................

http://www.ihs.gov/healthcommunicati...uments/HPV.doc

The pamplet you cited left some things out. Yes HPV is an STD but when you get a wart on your finger that too is HPV. The same as herpes is a STD and cold sores are herpes. Again the pamplet pointed out most people are exposed to this virus. My question boiled down is how is ordering vaccination against one disease that is easily passed around different from ordering it for another?

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by silver_snipe

The pamplet you cited left some things out. Yes HPV is an STD but when you get a wart on your finger that too is HPV. The same as herpes is a STD and cold sores are herpes. Again the pamplet pointed out most people are exposed to this virus. My question boiled down is how is ordering vaccination against one disease that is easily passed around different from ordering it for another?

What are you runnin circles for? HPV on your finger in the form of a whart isn't the cause of cervical cancer, which is why the vaccination was mandated and part of your arguement (see 75% statement above).

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by silver_snipe

1. How is a research insititute like obamacare? Are they forcing the citizens to buy something from a private company? Obamacare does that.
2. If one side is happy and the other is mad then the person govering is playing favorites and is not really looking out for the people. If both sides are upset cause neither got what they wanted then they are looking out for everyone. As for the actual tax cited here I don't know anything about it so whether it's right or wrong I have no opinion.
3. How is this different from the required MMR, Polio, and other immunizations required to start school? Especially since the vast majority of cervical cancer is caused by this virus and over 75% of women are exposed to it in their life time.
4. Again I know nothing of this issue and have no opinion.

1.) I stated that the way it was funded was just like Obama care

2) if both sides are upset then it could clearly mean the gain is to be had by the politician and his buddies

3) HPV is an STD, that means you get it from unprotected sex or passed down to you from your mother who was having unprotected sex. Routine checkups will find this well in advance of cervical cancer and can easily be eliminated... Educate yourself as a parent, educate your kid and leave the legislation and forceful nature out of something as easily prevented and/or controlled as HPV. And I don't believe the fact that his OAL was a lobbyist for Merck is such a coincidence.................

http://www.ihs.gov/healthcommunicati...uments/HPV.doc