100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Book Banning by Palin | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Sarah Palin is intelligent, personable, and most effective and engaging as she demonstrated in her acceptance speach tuesday night last. She is a self declared 'bible believing' fundamentalist christian, and 'political reformer'. As such, and in keeping with their beliefs, they see 'evil' in numerous places, including BOOKS on public library shelves. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that a bible believing fundamentalist christian WILL PUT RELIGION AHEAD OF STATE!!! Sarah Palin is intelligent, personable, and most effective and engaging as a human being. She is also very clear in the positions and convictions she will be championing if elected Vice-president, a stone throw away from President. If you are a bible believing religious fundamentalist, NRA card carrying member, ennemy of free choice, and a die-hard conservative, vote for the McCain-Palin ticket. If on the other hand you are 'moderate' anything (republican, democrat or independent), the choice is just as clear the other way: STAY WELL AWAY FROM THE McCain-Palin ticket!!! No need for personal attacks, or inaccurate associations, Sarah Palin's positions couldn't be more explicit, and THE CHOICE COULDN'T BE CLEARER!!! You are in Canada, you don't have a say You're on the WORLD WIDE WEB, and so am I. I HAVE ALL THE THE SAY, ... I SAY!!! Have you a 'say' on that!!! Have your say then Mr WWW |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sarah Palin is intelligent, personable, and most effective and engaging as she demonstrated in her acceptance speach tuesday night last. She is a self declared 'bible believing' fundamentalist christian, and 'political reformer'. As such, and in keeping with their beliefs, they see 'evil' in numerous places, including BOOKS on public library shelves. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that a bible believing fundamentalist christian WILL PUT RELIGION AHEAD OF STATE!!! Sarah Palin is intelligent, personable, and most effective and engaging as a human being. She is also very clear in the positions and convictions she will be championing if elected Vice-president, a stone throw away from President. If you are a bible believing religious fundamentalist, NRA card carrying member, ennemy of free choice, and a die-hard conservative, vote for the McCain-Palin ticket. If on the other hand you are 'moderate' anything (republican, democrat or independent), the choice is just as clear the other way: STAY WELL AWAY FROM THE McCain-Palin ticket!!! No need for personal attacks, or inaccurate associations, Sarah Palin's positions couldn't be more explicit, and THE CHOICE COULDN'T BE CLEARER!!! You are in Canada, you don't have a say You're on the WORLD WIDE WEB, and so am I. I HAVE ALL THE THE SAY, ... I SAY!!! Have you a 'say' on that!!! Have your say then Mr WWW I believe he has already. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And we shouldn't like her based on her wanting to ban books? PlEEEEEEEEEEEEZE!! 
No, we shouldn't like her because she's a republican. I like her because she is not Obama Republican-Democrat makes no difference... Comments such as these are what show the integrity of the posters. Palin has not been convicted of any scandal. Every family has problems, personal trials throughout raising kids. That is life. Relevance is to this, to me- any intentional misguided roads of deception she might have chosen. It is not admirable to be making one of your first few speeches and seen to millions bashing people who have stood up for our country doing 3 decades of honorable work in our government. Being condescending and so vocally opinionated in areas of politics she has never stood. Making strong statements of falsities because she has not been there to know. On the other side of that- she should be well versed on things she speaks of- because of the position she has been currently placed. That is some of what I find disappointing about Palin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am sure the IT guys in Alaskan state government are pretty busy now. The press worldwide and many private citizens are hitting government sites like crazy looking for all kinds of information. I tried off and on for a couple days to get onto several of their government sites without success. I can give You the link to the Alaska State Health dept.. they have all the statistics.. but I can't find a link on there that works for the teen pregnancies or abortions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... Anyway, that is the whole internet, I can post a web site with whatever I want on it. If that is your bases on making it unreliable, then every web site has the potential for unreliability. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... What people? A five year old? Anyone in the living world with access to the internet can edit wikipedia. You talking about those people-the world? Great sourcing- 13 year olds bored at home bored with their friends doing random edits for kicks- those people? :/ I edit on wikipedia- =) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... What people? A five year old? Anyone in the living world with access to the internet can edit wikipedia. You talking about those people-the world? Great sourcing- 13 year olds bored at home bored with their friends doing random edits for kicks- those people? :/ I edit on wikipedia- =) That is good that you edit on Wikipedia, If it is soo unreliable why do you even bother? At least that is kept in check by multiple people, instead of just one person expressing their views. You just proved the whole internet could be unreliable |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spaceman2008
on
Sun 09/07/08 09:22 PM
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... What people? A five year old? Anyone in the living world with access to the internet can edit wikipedia. You talking about those people-the world? Great sourcing- 13 year olds bored at home bored with their friends doing random edits for kicks- those people? :/ I edit on wikipedia- =) Oh damn, not another one..... Nancy Pelosi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, D!ck Cheney said, "In the final analysis we will find that the Iraqis did have a robust program." So WTF are they? Got nothing on this, huh? Confirmed US Deaths: 4152 War in Iraq Costs: $552,077,857,154 How many deaths and cost (inflation adjusted) did we have against Hitler? Wasn't it a democrat that got us involved in that war? Did Hitler have any weapons of mass destruction? What is the death toll and ongoing cost of being in Korea? Who got us involved there? Any weapons of mass destruction found? What about Vietnam? Why do the Democrats always have us going to war in these countries so far away from the U.S. and at such a great financial and mortal cost to us? Do we really want another democrat when there are so many hot situations with Pakistan, Iran, Russia/Georgia, etc? BS Smokescreen... We invaded Iraq with fictional WMD's as justification. So did Bill Clinton, Operation Desert Fox, Killed about 600 to 2000 Iraqis, You can see on my Previous posts  What do you think about this bookbanning issue kerbear?  It looks like there may be something to some of this?
I am not exactly a Fan of book banning. but it is not exactly Banning it all together, More like banning from the library, But as long as you can still buy the books... What does "i am not exactly a fan of book banning" mean? It's ok if a book is just banned from a library? The Books are not Being "BANNED", you are still allowed to buy them and read them. They just don't want to fund them in the Library because they could be some controversy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... What people? A five year old? Anyone in the living world with access to the internet can edit wikipedia. You talking about those people-the world? Great sourcing- 13 year olds bored at home bored with their friends doing random edits for kicks- those people? :/ I edit on wikipedia- =) That is good that you edit on Wikipedia, If it is soo unreliable why do you even bother? At least that is kept in check by multiple people, instead of just one person expressing their views. You just proved the whole internet could be unreliable Because I can, it is a given right to anyone that logs on to wikipedia to edit- It is part of the current educational system to know how wikipedia works and not to use or source it. The educational system takes you in a step by step process on sourcing/citing/referencing- It is amazing to me that people have a counter opinion once they have been explained to about that site. Hay don't waste time arguing a stale point with me read what wikipedia says themselves on 'what is, and what wikipedia is NOT,' on their facts pages. Which can probably be edited as well. :/ It goes to show you it isn't about the content of information- or learning something, it is about 'the fight.' to some people. :/ Common sense says, your posts are unreliable, and now you have been deemed not worthy of my future review. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nancy Pelosi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
kerbear73
on
Sun 09/07/08 10:12 PM
|
|
I like this one September 29, 1998 The United States Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act", which states that the US wants to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution. November 13-14, 1998 US President Clinton orders airstrikes on Iraq. Clinton then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises once again to unconditionally cooperate with UNSCOM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997%E2%80%932000 Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 2,546,194 articles in English You did not just use wikipedia as a source. Jeez- It is done by the people, it is not one sided like CNN or FOX News..... What people? A five year old? Anyone in the living world with access to the internet can edit wikipedia. You talking about those people-the world? Great sourcing- 13 year olds bored at home bored with their friends doing random edits for kicks- those people? :/ I edit on wikipedia- =) That is good that you edit on Wikipedia, If it is soo unreliable why do you even bother? At least that is kept in check by multiple people, instead of just one person expressing their views. You just proved the whole internet could be unreliable Because I can, it is a given right to anyone that logs on to wikipedia to edit- It is part of the current educational system to know how wikipedia works and not to use or source it. The educational system takes you in a step by step process on sourcing/citing/referencing- It is amazing to me that people have a counter opinion once they have been explained to about that site. Hay don't waste time arguing a stale point with me read what wikipedia says themselves on 'what is, and what wikipedia is NOT,' on their facts pages. Which can probably be edited as well. :/ It goes to show you it isn't about the content of information- or learning something, it is about 'the fight.' to some people. :/ Common sense says, your posts are unreliable, and now you have been deemed not worthy of my future review. So tell me what is reliable on the internet? Tell me a book that is 100% reliable? Not one site, not one book... Not even the Bible... Like I said before, Anyone can post anything on the internet, Wikipedia is nothing different than me creating a web site and throwing content on it. You are just childish that I don't see it your way. I am glad that I am not worthy of your reviews, They were for intelligent people.... Typical Liberal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, why is it being used by the educational System if it is not reliable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Cali66, I take it that applies to youtube also, since anyone can post on it.... You know, the liberals favorite resource......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kernear73 Wiki citations are an auto-fail in most community colleges in this state. Unless you are in the entry level classes.
I know of several high schools who will not accept any wiki source as legit research as well. If I showed up in a class with a wiki citation well...I wouldn't. If youtube is the liberals favorite resource then Fox must be republicans*favorite. FOX News, tell you what you want to hear! *I didn't say conservatives by the way because I know there is a difference. I respect real old school conservatives... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Books are not Being "BANNED", you are still allowed to buy them and read them. They just don't want to fund them in the Library because they could be some controversy. It's censorship. Period. And you and I get to make a judgement based on that. You may think it's ok. I say it's very scary. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
kerbear73
on
Sun 09/07/08 11:17 PM
|
|
Kernear73 Wiki citations are an auto-fail in most community colleges in this state. Unless you are in the entry level classes. I know of several high schools who will not accept any wiki source as legit research as well. If I showed up in a class with a wiki citation well...I wouldn't. If youtube is the liberals favorite resource then Fox must be republicans*favorite. FOX News, tell you what you want to hear! *I didn't say conservatives by the way because I know there is a difference. I respect real old school conservatives... I used Wikipedia because it was not Biased, it showed both the liberal views as well as the conservative. Have you ever seen me use Fox as a source, or any news source? Anyone can put anything on the internet, correct or incorrect.. So what is the purpose of sites like Wikipedia if they are not reliable or must have some reliability? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Books are not Being "BANNED", you are still allowed to buy them and read them. They just don't want to fund them in the Library because they could be some controversy. It's censorship. Period. And you and I get to make a judgement based on that. You may think it's ok. I say it's very scary. You know, I hear Liberals wanting to "FIX TALK RADIO", that is a form of Censorship. They don't like what they hear on there and they think it needs to be fixed. Liberals Hate Rush and Sean Hannity and they would love for them to be off the Air. But it is funny how they don't want to fix CNN, a channel that should be called ONN, Aka Obama News Network. There are tons of censorship out there, just the way you look at it... |
|
|
|
|
