Community > Posts By > look4you

 
look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 10:46 AM



raising the hands is symbolic only ie, the Hitler pic, the customary stance for the Pledge of Allegiance and it is also used when one wants to be chosen (ohh pick me; pick me)

Well, I guess I don't see it as a big deal but, when you don't bother doing what has be customary for soo long it's a just becomes a sign of disrespect. It takes no effort just to put ur hand over chest rather it's takes more just trying not to.

you are entitled to feel how ever you feel; I never said I do or don't raise my hand :wink: what I do find disrespectful is when a person assumes, that also takes no effort :wink:


what
What are you talking about? I never said that YOU are being disrespectful. I was just responding to your statement that you felt that raising your hand or not doesn't mean anything.

look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 10:43 AM



raising the hands is symbolic only ie, the Hitler pic, the customary stance for the Pledge of Allegiance and it is also used when one wants to be chosen (ohh pick me; pick me)

Well, I guess I don't see it as a big deal but, when you don't bother doing what has be customary for soo long it's a just becomes a sign of disrespect. It takes no effort just to put ur hand over chest rather it's takes more just trying not to.


It's disrespectful if you allow yourself to think that way.


So, if I was chatting on my cell durning a service in church it's not a sign of disrespect unless someone allows themselves to think that way?

look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 10:39 AM

raising the hands is symbolic only ie, the Hitler pic, the customary stance for the Pledge of Allegiance and it is also used when one wants to be chosen (ohh pick me; pick me)

Well, I guess I don't see it as a big deal but, when you don't bother doing what has be customary for soo long it's a just becomes a sign of disrespect. It takes no effort just to put ur hand over chest rather it's takes more just trying not to.

look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 10:35 AM
not sure and I don't feel like doing research but didn't the pledge (the original one with raising your hand in the air) come before Hitler?


I'm just trying to state that it's symbolic regardless if it's right or wrong. It's mean something to put your hand over your chest as you say the Pledge.

look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 10:28 AM



i think he "forgot"... whoops... whoa

there has to have been somebody who has done more in their lifetime to advance the cause of world peace...

what were they smoking?!

laugh


http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp


Snopes says he does it sometimes and other times not. There are pictures of him holding his hand over his heart during the pledge and stuff.




What's the big to do with raising one's right hand? It's all symbolic no more no less.

Raise your hand if you're sure, and don't if you're unsure (laugh)



Maybe, it's me but I think that raising your hand can mean something...no?



look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 08:44 AM


I'm not talking about your boyfriend. I'm aghast at your attitude that you would be selling your soul to salute our flag. Simple as that.


It's a choice she's allowed to make. Why does it bother you if someone doesn't salute the flag?


I think that she was more upset at her statement of "selling your soul to salute the flag" than anything else.

look4you's photo
Mon 10/12/09 08:17 AM

I'm not talking about your boyfriend. I'm aghast at your attitude that you would be selling your soul to salute our flag. Simple as that.


:thumbsup:

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 11:50 AM








Let me put to you two imgages:

The first is of a hispanic man, mid- to late 20's, 5'8" about 160#, low slung sagging blue jeans, white tank top undershirt, shaved head, tattoos on his face, neck, shoulders, back, arms, a couple of tear drop tattoos under his left eye.

the second, another hispanic man, again mid to late 20's, 5'8", about 160#, wrangler blue jeans, western boots, polo shirt, cell phone on his belt, clean shaven, straw cowboy hat...

there are two vehicles in the parking lot.. one is a chevy silverado step side, mud on the sides. the other is an early 80's monte carlo, withe the roman numeral XIV carved into the vinyl behind the side windows..

which car belongs to which man?




I cannot pick because I don't know enough about either person.


would it help you to know that one of the tattoos across the first gentleman's back read "Norteños".. that his elbows had spiderwebs tattooed on them.. another tattoo featured a prominent N and F.. ??


Nope because looks do not mean anything about people. I need to know them, talk to them, watch them, see about them, etc....


Your soooooo lying right now.


No I am not.

Don't impose your prejudices onto me.


I'm not. But, your not being honest at the moment bc you knew where he was going with his story...


Yes you are.

Then get tougher skin bc I'm not again. But, your not being honest here.Why would anybody in their right mind want to talk first to someone that the other person just described? You have to profile like Rose said bc it's awareness that we were always taught growing up.




look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 11:40 AM






Let me put to you two imgages:

The first is of a hispanic man, mid- to late 20's, 5'8" about 160#, low slung sagging blue jeans, white tank top undershirt, shaved head, tattoos on his face, neck, shoulders, back, arms, a couple of tear drop tattoos under his left eye.

the second, another hispanic man, again mid to late 20's, 5'8", about 160#, wrangler blue jeans, western boots, polo shirt, cell phone on his belt, clean shaven, straw cowboy hat...

there are two vehicles in the parking lot.. one is a chevy silverado step side, mud on the sides. the other is an early 80's monte carlo, withe the roman numeral XIV carved into the vinyl behind the side windows..

which car belongs to which man?




I cannot pick because I don't know enough about either person.


would it help you to know that one of the tattoos across the first gentleman's back read "Norteños".. that his elbows had spiderwebs tattooed on them.. another tattoo featured a prominent N and F.. ??


Nope because looks do not mean anything about people. I need to know them, talk to them, watch them, see about them, etc....


Your soooooo lying right now.


No I am not.

Don't impose your prejudices onto me.


I'm not. But, your not being honest at the moment bc you knew where he was going with his story...

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 11:26 AM




Let me put to you two imgages:

The first is of a hispanic man, mid- to late 20's, 5'8" about 160#, low slung sagging blue jeans, white tank top undershirt, shaved head, tattoos on his face, neck, shoulders, back, arms, a couple of tear drop tattoos under his left eye.

the second, another hispanic man, again mid to late 20's, 5'8", about 160#, wrangler blue jeans, western boots, polo shirt, cell phone on his belt, clean shaven, straw cowboy hat...

there are two vehicles in the parking lot.. one is a chevy silverado step side, mud on the sides. the other is an early 80's monte carlo, withe the roman numeral XIV carved into the vinyl behind the side windows..

which car belongs to which man?




I cannot pick because I don't know enough about either person.


would it help you to know that one of the tattoos across the first gentleman's back read "Norteños".. that his elbows had spiderwebs tattooed on them.. another tattoo featured a prominent N and F.. ??


Nope because looks do not mean anything about people. I need to know them, talk to them, watch them, see about them, etc....


Your soooooo lying right now.

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 10:26 AM





Obama did not win the prize in ten days. History will make that clear. If he deserves it later, only time will tell. The prize was a politically motivated message intended to "help" direct the direction of US policy on world events. This "proactive" concept of winning a prize is against the history of the award and sets a bad precedence. Others were more deserving of the prize.

When I watched the news today it was evident that even the most stanch Obama supporters realized that this event "wasn't right".

It is also a little "odd" that the award came just as Obama was making the decision whether or not to escalate the war in Afghanistan. A slight tip might be all that is required to change the direction of the war.


the voting ended when he was only in office for 10 days is what I said.


This might sound weird, but the whole world was closely following the entire election campaign in 2008. They might have ended up liking him during the campaign and like the enthusiasm he was bringing.


Even if that was the case it doesn't make it right. 12 days in and to even get considered alone is a joke then, 9 months later win the prize. It's just wrong anyway you look at it.


I think somewhere in like the first page of this, or the other thread, can't remember, I already have agreed that to nominate Obama for his 10 days in office, is not only wrong but stupid.
I was the first person to bring that up on this forum, yellowrose can confirm it.
I'm trying to figure out myself the "why" and then there was an article I posted from the huffington post, that had a piece from the associated press report with the Nobel association and they said in a summary that "they did not nominate Obama based on his 10 days in office, but because of hoping that he will perform well as a president".



No, I knew what you meant, it came out wrong as I wrote it. It was meant to say that I was agreeing with your thoughts on the subject

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 10:23 AM
Just wondering people thoughts on here...
And don't everybody profile people everyday???
Does that make all of those people racist too?

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 10:13 AM



Obama did not win the prize in ten days. History will make that clear. If he deserves it later, only time will tell. The prize was a politically motivated message intended to "help" direct the direction of US policy on world events. This "proactive" concept of winning a prize is against the history of the award and sets a bad precedence. Others were more deserving of the prize.

When I watched the news today it was evident that even the most stanch Obama supporters realized that this event "wasn't right".

It is also a little "odd" that the award came just as Obama was making the decision whether or not to escalate the war in Afghanistan. A slight tip might be all that is required to change the direction of the war.


the voting ended when he was only in office for 10 days is what I said.


This might sound weird, but the whole world was closely following the entire election campaign in 2008. They might have ended up liking him during the campaign and like the enthusiasm he was bringing.


Even if that was the case it doesn't make it right. 12 days in and to even get considered alone is a joke then, 9 months later win the prize. It's just wrong anyway you look at it.

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 10:08 AM


a couple of things I kept noticing in all those articles

1. his department has been audited already several times in the last few years and every audit found him in strict compliance with the law

2. the drive for another investigation seems to be coming from a ACORN petiition


I don't care who starts the investigation, if wrong doing is found and you end up getting punished for it that is what happens to all of us, this man is no different.


I don't think that anybody in here would argue that. If you do wrong then you should get punished...

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 10:07 AM

The investigations started of this man in 2008. Obama wasn't in office in 2008

http://news.aol.com/article/sheriff-joe-arpaio-facing-limits-on/711589

Lets discuss it as if it wasn't Obama's idea since it wasn't.


Yes, the investigation started in 08' and no wrongdoing was founded. BUT, as of recently it was homeland that revoked the special immigration enforcement contract.


look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 09:58 AM




"There will be peace in our time"

And the winner of the prize goes to


Quietman:banana: Why you ask because he said there will be world peace.

Hey shouldn't the miss America women who want world peace get a prize to?



Not really, because they dont actually REACH out beyond their pageant areas to do much difference GLOBALLY. As a president, OBama has and takes opportunties to reach out in efforts of diplomacy to more than just his fellow citizens but citizens of the world and I am very proud for him on this day.


jeez I was hoping SOMEBODY had studied world history in high school and would recognize that quote


Sorry but, I was getting indoctrinated "mmmm...mmmm...obama."


look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 09:49 AM


what it shows is how much trouble we are in . when a criminel group has more influence than people who vote . its time to start buying a lot of bullets for the neer future .when the police are stoped from inforceing the laws we are in big trouble.this is how the liberials work best .


It was time to start buying lots of bullets a long time ago.. if you don't have a stash already, it's going to be hard to build one now..

as for Sheriff Joe, I don't find any part of this surprising.. He's got a history of hardline tactics enforcing the law and God love him for it!

This move out of Washington is a clear signal from the Administration how they feel about enforcing border laws and policing the border.. Janet Nepalitano has a very selective sense of how laws should be enforced. Her view of America's military veterans and classification of them as threats is more than a little offputting..

but I'm just being paranoid. I know..

As much as I agree with everything that you said I see it more related to healthcare and getting the immigration reform. I don't understand the thinking of having some people work very hard to become a legal citizen and others sneak in illegally and wait for the country to hand them citizenship...

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 09:45 AM





What does it say about the state of our country when we will not accept the honor given our president as just that an honor?

If the committee feels he deserves it and gives it to him isn't our job as American citizens to applaud?


I don't think its a duty to be applaud it. But if on is smart, no matter what I thought of it I wouldn't be putting him down for getting it. Why? Because it just makes those who do look petty and small. If I were the Republicans I wouldn't put my image further in the toilet by acting like children about it. Goes for the other side too had Bush won it.


I don't agree with putting him down. He isn't to blame at all. I just wish he would have earned it...but it's just my opinion that he didn't earn it ohwell


That's all this boils down to, he just didn't earn it. Whether I can't stand the man or not, he doesn't deserve it. Even some democrats say he doesn't earn it so bashing us conservatives for giving our honest opinion is hmmmm...... I'll be nice. :wink:
]]]

Can anyone give consistent examples,,based on the founders ideas and the commonality of past awardees,,how the award is EARNED?

I see it as a man who has a GLOBAL platform (not just in their own country) spreading a message of hope and peace, and also having a history of actions that indicate he is dedicated to and sincere about that hope and willing to put the work in to be a part of it,, as he has urged a GLOBAL audience to do. Many people do great things for their own and that is noble and Im sure some of those have received awards. Obama has done something on a Global scale where peace and hope are concerned, and he deserves it as well.

With your post it almost like that your trying to convince yourself that obama earned or deserved this award. All that this award has done is tie obama's hands and make us being the U.S look weaker in the world's eyes.Yes, I do give him credit for his never ending talking and speeches of "hope and change" BUT, that's all it is...talk. He can not or since it's too late, shouldn't have recieved this award. M.L.K, earned that award, Princess Di eared the award, The Dilai Lama eared that award as well. Now you are suggesting that obama has the right to even be mentioned in the same company???????

look4you's photo
Sat 10/10/09 09:34 AM

Really an example of TOO little information. I would love to see the actual DOCUMENTED reasons the action was taken.

This is the rest of the article...
Sorry but I'm not sure how to send the link over on this site yet.

“The 2008 audit … cites utterly no wrongdoing on behalf of the Sheriff’s deputies and even goes so far as to praise Arpaio and his office for their professionalism and adherence to all the 287G contract guidelines,” the sheriff’s office release stated. “The results of the 2008 audit identically mirror other audits conducted over the last few years by several different agencies, all of which found no wrong doing in Arpaio’s enforcement of the federal immigration program.”

That Arpaio’s deputies could conduct their operations so faultlessly despite the severity of the illegal immigration problem facing Arizona is a testament to Arpaio’s leadership. The Milwaukee Examiner for October 7 pointed out that Arizona is “home to the second highest kidnappings in the world,” and that Arizona state data for Maricopa County shows “more than 53 percent of violent crimes committed in the county are perpetrated by illegal aliens.”

Arpaio has found some support in Congress from Representatives Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) and Lamar Smith (R-Texas). In a joint statement, Franks and Smith have urged Homeland Security and the White House to reconsider their action against Sheriff Arpaio and his deputies.

“The key to combating illegal immigration is federal, state and local cooperation,” Smith and Franks said. “This is why we believe it is crucial for the federal government to continue to support individuals like Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the implementation of agreements under section 287g, which provides for the Department of Homeland Security to delegate authority to enforce federal immigration laws to state and local officials.”

Smith affirmed the success of federal cooperation with local agencies: “The fact is, [the] 287g program works. Thousands of illegal immigrants apprehended for other crimes are being identified and deported.”

Franks would like to see local officials like Arpaio get a “thank you” from the federal government, not harassment and vilification. “Maricopa County has seen an increase in crime, drug trafficking and other issues because of the immigration problem,” Franks explained. “It is reprehensible for DHS to bully law enforcement officials who have honorably served this nation and the state of Arizona by enforcing federal and state laws and who are continuing to work to protect the American people.”

And Sheriff Arpaio’s deputies are indeed protecting America, not only from illegal immigrants from Mexico, but also from illegals who are not Mexican and who could be terrorists. As recently as September 23, a Sheriff’s office release pointed out that four illegals from Communist China had been apprehended.

Speaking through an interpreter, the Chinese suspects said they were from the province of Fu Jian and had begun their journey by boarding a plane in Beijing. Cuban currency was found in their possession, indicating the international scope of the problem. “If people are being smuggled into the United States illegally from a communist country like China through Mexico, who knows where else they could be coming from?” Arpaio said.

It is infuriating that the federal government under the Bush administration so eagerly used 9/11 as an excuse to crack down on American citizens, virtually strip-searching them at airports and illegally monitoring their electronic communications without warrants. Now, eight years later, the withdrawal of support from Sheriff Arpaio sadly proves that this same government under the Obama administration is willing to leave our borders open and invite another 9/11 to occur rather than enforce the immigration laws that would protect America.

look4you's photo
Fri 10/09/09 03:35 PM
All of these people mentioned has won the Nobel Prize. So, you can honestly say that obama belongs in the company of these people???

Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King and Teddy Roosevelt to name a couple.