Sometimes it’s hard to believe that there are people out there that think this way.

White Supremacy Groups Threatened by Obama Candidacy

This is not the conversation one might expect in Barack Obama’s colorblind America. Especially on the outskirts of North Fulton County.

“Daddy, why does his dream make you so mad?” asks Kimberly, nine, as she and a hulking man in camouflage step over fallen pine logs on a raw, damp afternoon in western Forsyth County, about 30 minutes north of Milton.

“Sweetie, it’s science fiction, like the comic books you read,” Thomas Stevenson replies in a gentle, fatherly tone.

Steadying Kimberly’s shoulders as they approach another slab of deadwood, Stevenson notices the bewilderment in his fourth grader’s gaze, so he tries again to put her curiosity to rest. “The dream is that everybody is the same,” he says. “In other words, if you get a potato, I get a potato. If I get a loaf of bread, you get a loaf of bread. If you live in a mansion, then I should too.”

Later that Saturday, coming in from the drizzle and settling in at the computer, the 38-year-old carpenter clicks on several white supremacist sites to catch up on the chatter, particularly as it pertains to U.S. Senator Barack Obama.

“Some idiot out there’s going to put a bullet in that silver-tongued devil,” he says, “and then there’ll be a race war. There are some in our movement who are preparing for war, [even] praying for it.”

(Full article linked above)

a romney political action committee…

scary…

Progress notes that CO2 emissions would have grown faster under Bush if not for “two economic slowdowns, 9/11…and a rapidly growing trade deficit with China.”

If you ever wonder how climate change skeptics get the impression that the issue is being hijacked by socialists, take another look at this charge:

CO2 emissions would have been worse if it weren’t for economic slowdowns. Translation: Strong economy = more CO2 emissions. Strong economy = global warming.

When Obama insists that our economy is weak and that we need to make it stronger, is he really advocating increasing our CO2 output?

Additionally, when progressives lament the trade imbalance with China on one hand and insist that we should agree to Kyoto (that exempts China, while the U.S. is required to make costly production changes) seems inconsistent.

In my Army basic, we had one communal shower facility. I was amused to see it was the other straight guys who were checking other guys out! Nobody knew I was gay, but they were making me unconfortable with their none-too covert glances.

Democrat Soldier. I didn’t have a problem with it, but I try to think of it like this:

How comfortable would women be in military training, if they had to shower with men.

It’s one thing to be in the situation and not know it or for it not to be condoned. But, when people are ‘out’ and condoned (which, I support) it takes on a different
characteristic.

The obvious answer for me, is for full acceptance of the gay community in the military, but private facilities.

Actually, Hillary could care less about the delegates being seated. She just wants the two states to be recognized so that she can claim the popular vote from both states without giving Obama any popular vote from MI. That is the only scenario under which she can claim she is winning the popular vote.

Are you asking?

Well I’m certainly not gay, I just like the way it feels.

May 22nd, 2008 at 10:56 am

In my Army basic, we had one communal shower facility. I was amused to see it was the other straight guys who were checking other guys out! Nobody knew I was gay, but they were making me unconfortable with their none-too covert glances.

I wonder if other gay men had the same experience in Army basic as did I?

backup; I’m only asking if you have any personal experience about gays being good soldiers. Nothing more.

Uncle Ho. I’m just joking with you. The only concern I’ve ever had with gays in the military was with privacy issues.

When I went thru my initial training in the Air Force, everybody showered in one big shower. I’m sure there where gay guys there, but if they were ‘out’ it would have caused some privacy issues or obvious sensitivities (in the shower room).

I’ve heard that now, the facilities are more private. That would allay my only opposition.

I’m sure you would agree that someones sexual preference has no bearing on how good a soldier they are.

1. In the meantime she is spending herself more and more into debt.
2. She has killed any chance Obama will put her on the ticket with this one.

The woman has become delusional.

The Way Things Break http://thingsbreak.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/oregon-petition-redux/
has done a little bit of research on the “Oregon Petition” and from the very start has discovered some super-fun facts. For instance the first five signatories listed (alpabetically) include a biologist, an oncologist, a vet, a dead telecom guy and someone apparently with no scientific qualifications at all.
The last five include a mechanical engineer, a materials scinetist, a chemical and aerospace engineer working for an energy company, and a guy who makes sure fiber-board is sufficiently fiber-y and board-y.

Are you speaking from personal experience?

Uncle Ho. I’m not gay, but maybe I’ve never been asked the right way.

Are you asking?

“What is amazing to me is that she has got a camp filled with DNC operatives. These are the people who essentially created the rules,” Dowd said. “She has been in the game a long time. It’s not as if she’s new to this and didn’t know better. Her campaign is run by the insiders who have been running the party for the past 16 years.”
[...]
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4905785&page=1

i don’t understand the hostility…
and i DO care about that opinion…
we need all the help we can get – why alienate?

katy. Thanks for saying that. But, I think what happens is that I disagree with many issues here and coincidentally with many of the posters.

I just happen to support gay rights and equal rights for women and minorities.

Although I understand that the hositility comes over from other issues, I wish that on the issues of tolerance, bigotry, and equality; progressives might understand that I am on the same page.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Wednesday defended as “successful” the US administration’s policy on Iran after Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama criticized its approach.

Though she tried to avoid commenting on the presidential campaign, Rice told reporters that the United States and other powers agreed on what she considers a common, effective approach to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

“I will note that the Iranian problem is not just America’s problem, it is an international issue, and it is an issue on which the international community is united in confronting Iran with choices before it,” Rice said.

http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Rice_defends_Bush_policy_on_Iran_as_05212008.html

Obama’s comments are right on target about their refusals to high-level negotiations with Tehran. This is what he had to say.

“Thanks to George Bush’s policy, Iran is the greatest threat to the United States and Israel and the Middle East for a generation. John McCain wants to double down on that failed policy,” Obama said.

Progress notes that CO2 emissions would have grown faster under Bush if not for “two economic slowdowns, 9/11…and a rapidly growing trade deficit with China.”

If you ever wonder how climate change skeptics get the impression that the issue is being hijacked by socialists, take another look at this charge:

CO2 emissions would have been worse if it weren’t for economic slowdowns. Translation: Strong economy = more CO2 emissions. Strong economy = global warming.
When Obama insists that our economy is weak and that we need to make it stronger, is he really advocating increasing our CO2 output?

Additionally, when progressives lament the trade imbalance with China on one hand and insist that we should agree to Kyoto (that exempts China, while the U.S. is required to make costly production changes) seems inconsistent; to be kind.

How many diffent sides of these issues would you like?