tdslf1

Leroy,

Your fears are well founded. I have those as well because of the following.

They FEAR the UNKNOWN. Something different, foreign scares people, left and right. Despite the fact that in order to grow you have change in this ever changing world. People heard the word "CHANGE" and lost their mind on the right.

I think Fear drives them the most. Look at how they lost their mind and still are losing their minds over Obama, a black man. Some of them are scared of him and disguise it by attacking his policies. They may have a little objection, but to this extent? There is a wack job waiting to take his shot, trust. They will always live in this fear. They are comfortable with the ignorance of no change. Look how many want to keep doing the same thing Bush did, because its comfortable, even though our world and our challenges have changed?

The bible is a story. For lack of better wording, these stories are centuries old. Some stories can be applied to today but I refuse to believe that they all fully encompass present day circumstances. I personally don't follow the bible to that extent. I take a lesson and applied to current circumstance how I think God would want me to.

When I hear one of the religious right speak, this is how I feel. Don't try to force your love of God onto me. I have love but I have my love. I personally think God wants me to love him, how I am capable, not how the RR think I should be capable. Why? Your love of God is not mine. Not better, just different. Keep yours to explain your life and I will do the same. This force is what is scary.

That is why it may be scary for some to see people fully invest in biblical teachings. It is scary to see people judge others as killers when women want to have abortions. No one has that right to judge. And that dude who killed Tiller? That was crazy and scary. Who lets their beliefs take them to that point?

On my favorite comedy show, they brushed the religious talk off as though, one of these wingnuts had never attacked in the name of religion. The people in Muslim countries talk crazy and do horrendous stuff. What makes these religious nutjobs any better than the Muslim crackpots? You think American people are incapable of committing violence against other Americans? Tim McV? It has been done and it can get worse. The UNKNOWN about crackpots and what religion can and will drive people to do is scary to us who could not conceive of doing things in the name of religion. I can't see it for me anyway.

Tea baggers make it no better with their over the top signs about death to Obama and such. They make it impossible to want to hear them even though they may be not be off, but crazy talk leads to crazy action when people don't get their way. Crazy and disheartning.

Peaches says,

I was talking to anyone who is interested in a healthy debate

You and me both, Peach. But a healthy debate involves facts from liberal as well as conservative sides. Here, with PG, no such thing exist. Our side has repeatedly called for PG to present facts, back up her arguments with facts not talking points. She can't do it. Just can't. Thus there will not be a healthy debate with her.

I and others point to the following exercise in which I asked PG to dispute information from a fact base reading about the administration which listed things Obama did. It has the following:

-Promises fullfilled

-Promises broken

-Promises in the process, etc.

True to form and in the spirit of debate after Cleo posted it, we asked can any of the accomplishments about what Obama has done for this country that are listed by this site be disputed and if so present facts to the contrary if any.

Instead we get another round of talking points, innuendo and supposition. No fact that can be decifered from the garbage. Now, I love a health debate, but facts are facts and garbage is garbage.

-We said look at the accomplishments from this independant website Cleo posted. We all already know what he didn't do. We asked them to:

a. dispute the accomplishments listed since the other side says he never did anything to help this country.

b. back up that argument

PG comes back with "he hasn't done anything for this country". Although we know she read the website making sure she pulled all his broken promises. If she was not such a hypocrite and really wanted a healthy debate she would have taken the accomplishments as well. And knocked those down. PG is a liar for the above statement and a dishonest and fake debater.

So, when you deal with dishonest people like PG, you get dishonest debate. Oh, and don't ask direct questions, she can't answer those.........

Originally Posted by tdslf1

Still waiting for a DISPUTE of ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

PG says,

There aren't any , IMO.

I see the Fake Noise dog whistle is at work again. Facts just do not appear. Disheartning and sad.

Still waiting for a DISPUTE of ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

Holder said they were reviewing the case. That is double speak for we will sue if it is politically viable to do so pending american reaction. Trust me, Holder has probably read that law and specific section regarding probable cause many times. He has worked in that office for a while. He know the AZ immigration law. According to many posters, it is the same as the federal law, except a few inserts. If you think he doesn't know the law and is waiting to see what impact these rallies and protest will have, you don't know too much about "washington speak".

A party of "Hell No" is losing ground.

This is the same crowd that said Obama would never win.

I'm going in, all in, just like the Rethuglicans.

Again PG,

Where is the DISPUTE of ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

What is your point about Chris?

PG,

We are still waiting for a DISPUTE of ACCOMPLISHMENTS per Cleo's post.

birds still chirping...........

PG,

We know your talking points. What we said was DISPUTE the points of his accomplishments per Cleo's post. We know you went there. You made sure you came back with his broken promises. Come back with DISPUTE of his accomplishments. Are the birds chirping........

Leroy,

You crazy, lol.

PG says,

This bill is going to kill an economy that is just beginning to rally.

It's beginning to rally. Your words. What president did that, PG?

PG says,

Obama has broken most all of his promises.

Put your money where your mouth is, and show us. Point by point from Cleo's post.

PG,

I put you in the same category as the tea baggers. Your arguments hold no Water. I am beginning to think you can't read some post and that Fake Noise has a whistle only people like you can hear when you COMPLETELY ignore CL's post. Soon as facts come in front of your eyes, the whistle sounds off.

This thought. If that website posted ALL lies regarding what Obama has done(and take the accomplishments that CL posted point by point so we can all see his lies) show it, otherwise don't waste our time with Fake Noise talking points because you're too afraid to read.

This is a debate about lie and fact and if I am believeing in lies, as you say, then I would like to see it. Not be subject to emotional outbursts about the president that don't help the conversation.

Minute details. Sure we pay taxes and we will pay more. What the hell is wrong with that when we have to pay for this country to run and the former president kept us going in the wrong direction, thus we need to tax? People say stop the spending. Great, we can do that, now what? War still has to be paid for, roads still need to be built, police still need to be there to keep law and order, we still need to build that fence around the country, the poor still need health care. We are going to stop dead in outr tracks and pay for this HOW? Do I hear crickets from the rethugs?

How would we not have to pay more taxes? Come up with a solution that can work, not just harp on this bull--- mantra of "reign in the spending' the tea baggers keep harping about. We can't reign in the spending and lower the taxes for long cause that ain't gonna work when there are ongoing activities and activities that need funding coming down the pike.

That is why I think the tea baggers are simple and short sighted. They hold small claims against a president when he has accomplished more important big things that you can acually see, like turning the economy around. But these things are trivial to them. They mean nothing to them.

CL, I see you posted some campaign promises that Obama made. Bottom line, no president can do all of that but they can try and succeed on some big ones and some small ones. Obama has done that in his first year. I can't even remember what Bush promised because everything went to hell in a handbasket right after he took office.

If Obama completes even half of what he says he wants to do and apparently that website seems to be keeping up with it, he has my vote in 2012 so he can possibly finish the job.

Ari, great you don't like him and you didn't vote for him, whatever, but don't post this minor bull--- like you don't know how politics work and that the senate can veto anything he runs down the pike, so the man is limited in what he can do. Also don't act like you're not smart enough to realize that we have to raise taxes to pay for these wars and other stuff we need. Great, you caught Obama in a pledge he can't fullfill by keeping taxes lower for the poor. You get a gold star for being partially right about raising taxes, but a demerit for calling foul when the previous administration put him in a position to where he had to raise taxes or we would have stayed in the ditch.

The difference between the libs and the repugs, we know all campaign promises are contingent on senate approval and we might not get all we want, but we may get some. Any person that keeps in touch with politics understands we need to raise taxes to pay for it all. Rethugs got a war us libs didn't want, but we took that hit. Now us libs got healthcare, so rethugs its your turn to take the hit. This means taxes, bottom line.

We all got something we wanted, now its time to stop griping figure out a way to pay for it.

There was no facetiousness about it. Keep 'em all behind the fence, then we will have no need for this outrage in the future when canadians decide that USA might be more prosperous.

I believe Obama did worst among the middle(only slightly worst) because the middle is so used to getting the short end, (not good enough for the country club and too much income for low income help) they don't belief half of what is told to them by government and was never going to believe there was hope anyway. Keep grinding the wheel and you might get somewhere. (thus a lower percentage for Obama, the hope guy) If you are comfortable doing sh---, but nudging up a notch every few years, stay where you are, thus a vote for Bush/Mccain, the old way that broke us.

Any hoo, it was a big blow out election that we won. Poor folk didn't have anything to lose, their life was crappy anyway, so hope flourished. Rich folks like what he had to say about altruism, and change but didn't believe he would raise taxes right away. Which he didn't.

I think most got what they wanted and if they didn't, they were uneducated about Obama's platform. About Obama policies: I'd rather win dirty than lose cute. i.e. I didn't get all I wanted in healthcare but I got healthcare for the poor.

I think the first thing is a BIG BAD A-- border fence. High enough where they can be seen crossing and hard enough so they think twice about climbing. Lets do that first on ALL borders, top and bottom. There are many Canadians here illegally too. They just look more like the native pop.

Ari says,

Get the illegals to leave and stop coming in illegally and you wont have too. Simple fix.

Yes!!! Lets gather them all up and drop them off at the boarder. Simple.

Now tell us how you get 10 million illegal immigrants to leave without trampling on legal immigrant and natural american rights? How are you and me gonna do this?

Oh!!!I know. Lets gather all the white people first and work our way down. Lets see how that works.

Well, on second thought, lets not start with them. They look too much like us. Brown people are different, foreign, alien, nazi's. They definitely should go first.

Ari says,

most of the drug traffickers, murderers, and kidnappers in AZ are illegal immigrants

WOW, enough of a blanket statement or do you need to round it out with the black folk too?

"This is america, I'm an american, I don't need to buy no damn healthcare if I don't want to", I heard someone say that a couple weeks back at a rally. I say, I'm an american and I don't need to carry around some damn papers in my own neighborhood just because I have dark skin."

Can I get a tea bagger rally outta this?

Ari says,

And again what part of this law is unconstitutional?

Sorry, let me rephrase. The initial bill would have allowed legal immigrants to be harrassed along with illegal immigrants because of the "probable cause clause" with legal contact. This would have been unconstitutional to keep it that way. Now since they have revised the law, because they got people calling foul on civil liberties, it fell in line with more peoples sensibilities. This law does nothing to solve their problem. Drug traffic, murders and kidnappings is their problem, not immigration to that large an extent.

Ari says,

Tell him your DL # or SS # they can probably very easily verify online who you are and send you on your way. You don't need to make up unreal scenarios and think the worst of every cop in the world.

And again what part of this law is unconstitutional?

What is the meaning of scenario again? We digress. So, the cop is supposed to believe me when I spit out a random DL or SS? What if I don't know them by heart? I know plenty of people who don't know theirs. Then I state, "there is no law that says I need my ID, when I don't need it for business."

I ask the question again, what does the cop do? Arrest me because I don't have identification?

Why should I have to carry my ID if I am jogging around my town? I am not driving, but I am legal. What if the cop is fresh off an illegal raid somewhere and there is a call in on the radio that says an illegal is running in the community and the cop stops me? I am dark skinned, but with no ID? What should the cop do, ask me my name and forget about the ID, when I don't have it? Or am I going to jail or detention?

This is the dilemma with that law.

Merely living on the land does not confirm ownership. Where do you get the idea that America belonged to the Indians? The white man's record is not clean, but the only land the indians owned is the land they cleared, lived on and cultivated. To suggest that they owned the whole country simply because they rode around it on horseback is pure poppycock. Most, if not all indian tribes did not believe in personal ownership of land. They did not consider a plot of ground theirs to be passed on to a son but ground that was owned by the tribe for the good of all. The same attitude was held toward food. If a brave took a bison or deer in a hunt, it did not belong to him but to the tribe. The shallow thinker says, "That's magnanimous and unselfish." but it is also socialism and could be one reason why the Indians were living substantially the same way when Columbus arrived as they had lived 500 years earlier.

Proof