Bob-1887910

"Radical Leftist community organizer" only: 1

FYI: Jesus was a community organizer. If he were alive today he'd be a Radical Leftist

Bob:

"There you go again" quoting Ronald Reagan. Speaking of Reagan, he was an actor. Actor or Community Organizer. I'll pick a community organizer. In fairness Reagan was a governor and President Obama was a senator. It could be easily argued that Obama is more conservative than was Reagan. Remember Reagan's words, "I don't worry about the nation's debt".

FYI: Jesus was a community organizer. If he were alive today he'd be a Radical Leftist

Too funny Beverly,

Liberals are always speaking for everyone - telling everbody what they think, who they are ...... FDR would have changed his mind yesterday ........ and today ......

even Jesus!

Not to be liberal, but I doubt Jesus would have thrown his grandmother under the bus, his pastor under the bus, his allies under the bus .......

besides the radical left is not real big on the Christianity stuff ........ the name sake?

My Favorite Mark is immaterial to the Fact that each one listed has a First name with the exception of our current President!

Why is it yall at 1st Read print this without including Barrack Obama?

Incredible!

Ron,

Yea, governor is a little bit better, especially when it is the chief executive of the state that has one of the largest economies in the world.

About the debt comment. There is a difference between manageable debt and Obaminsanity debt. Everyone goes into debt to buy a car, a house, etc.

There is difference though between you and everyone else on the block when you run up more debt on your house than the 43 neighbors combined debt that came before you.

I'm thinking Reagan would worry about that lastest nut on the block.

Bob, how is that You know enough about the radical left to state that thier Not Into Christianity Stuff.

I'm neither Radical left or Christain!

I'm also Notta HYPOCRIT, such as those that claim to be Christain's on Sundays(sometimes Wednesday's)but Sinner's & Liars the rest of the Week.

I'd venture to guess since I try to live Right, ole St.Peter might open them Pearly Gates for me & tell you & other's like you:

Seeya, would'nt wanna Beya!

Bob says:I'm thinking Reagan would worry about that lastest nut on the block! Kinda like he did in Lebanon when a little known bunch of Terrorist(Hezzbolah) drove a TruckBomb into the Marine barracks, killing around 180! That Reagun? Aint he the one that turned Tail & Run!

Or shall I say the Original Cut & Runner, former President Ronnie Raygun.

bob-1805084

FYI: Jesus was a community organizer. If he were alive today he'd be a Radical Leftist

Too funny Beverly,

Liberals are always speaking for everyone - telling everbody what they think, who they are ...... FDR would have changed his mind yesterday ........ and today ......

even Jesus!

Not to be liberal, but I doubt Jesus would have thrown his grandmother under the bus, his pastor under the bus, his allies under the bus .......

besides the radical left is not real big on the Christianity stuff ........ the name sake?

Jesus said feed the hungry

Christ acknowledges all the poor, and needy, and strangers of every land, as his brethren. SeeMatthew 25:40. "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.''Matthew 25:40

Proverbs 28:27

Whoever gives to the poor will not want, but he who hides his eyes will get many a curse.

Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
"Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
"Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
(Matthew 5.3-

Not to be liberal, but I doubt Jesus would have thrown his grandmother under the bus, his pastor under the bus, his allies under the bus .......

FYI: The president didn't throw his mother that's the sh!t Swan Hannity spinned because Hannity did not understand the word typical. 1 Corinthians 8:12 When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ

Bev...I can't believe you dare to tell anyone who Jesus would be if he were alive today. That just goes to show what a narcissist you are....

btw.....never heard back from you on that Planned Parenthood/Obamacare dilema. Are you for double-dipping or not?

And the government says prayer in school is not permissable. What would Jesus say about that? And what Bev, would he say about the governmental need to separate him from Christmas? Do you believe it is sound and just to spend beyond one's means? Not being a bible expert, or a great fan of searching for cut and paste information, I do however believe the spending issue is somewhere in the book.

When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.

HE may not forgive you Bev, but I will.....for you not know what you do.

"Liberals are always speaking for everyone."

Really, Bob? So nice to see you all over the posts again today.

Hey, what's THIS mean? "besides the radical left is not real big on the Christianity stuff"

Whatever it is, it must not be 'speaking for everyone else", huh?

"...each one listed has a First name with the exception of our current President!"

Barack Obama and George Washington are named by last name only, since they were both referenced earlier in the post. It's an acceptable journalistic choice to repeat a name with surname only.

Galatians 6:5 For each will have to bear his own load

2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living.

Luke 12:48 Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand more.

You do realize Mark, that if Sarah Palin wins in 2012, you'll have to add an additional category for: Half Term Governors who quit their job!

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

You do realize Mark, that if Sarah Palin wins in 2012, you'll have to add an additional category for: Half Term Governors who quit their job!

I love it, Feisty.

I have a few more descriptions...

anti-establishment

incompetent

unlikable (too whinny whinny)

unbelievable

hollow

untrustworthy

full of malarkey

proud capitalist

shameless patriot

Dodo (Hell yeah!!)

But you gotta include

Mama Grizzly

Barracuda

Hockey Mom

...and of course, the vice-presidential candidate who will never be President!

"George Washington. He was ahead of his time he freed his slaves"

Perhaps Bev, but the fact remains that he owned another human.

It was the thing to do.....own another human!

No kudos for that!

OH *snap* I forgot:

Lipstick wearing pitbull & salmon spanker! ;o)

Not being of AA descent... May I ask... is it called AA History Month or Black History Month? (Sorry) I am just a bit confused becasue all I have seen on TV for the past month is stuff on 'Black History Month'.

Which raises a question... why do we have a special month set aside for black (or AA) history? I am not trying to be mean or racist or argumentative... just asking. I mean isn't the history that is celebrated during this month actually AMERICAN history?

I am of Italian descent. Why do we not have an Itialian American History Month?

Again, I am not trying to be mean about any of this but it seems to me that certain groups in this country want to be part of the 'mainstream' when it's to their advantage and separate when THAT is to their advantage. A bit of a double standard wouldn't you say?

Either you are AMERICAN or you are not. What makes you think you are so special that you deserve your own month to celebrate 'YOUR' history?

Just asking...

SickOfTheBickering

There are many reasons. Every descendant from the motherland in the Diaspora can put African in front for distinction. For instance a person of African descent born in Italy you'd be African Italian.

Again, I am not trying to be mean about any of this but it seems to me that certain groups in this country want to be part of the 'mainstream' when it's to their advantage and separate when THAT is to their advantage. A bit of a double standard wouldn't you say?

Either you are AMERICAN or you are not. What makes you think you are so special that you deserve your own month to celebrate 'YOUR' history?

Just asking...

Assuming you are sincere with your question, let me explain it's not a matter of being special. It came out of need.

Carter G Woodson started Black History month because we as a people have had our history suppressed and omitted.

During the dawning decades of the twentieth century, it was commonly
presumed that black people had little history besides the subjugation of
slavery.

Recognizing the dearth of information on the accomplishments of
blacks in 1915, Dr. Woodson founded the Association for the Study of
Negro Life and History, now called the Association for the Study of
African American Life and History (ASALH).

http://www.asalh.org/woodsonbiosketch.html

European history is everyday. As child there was usually a parapgrah about cotton pickers

opps I made a mistake. European history is everyday. As a child I would see only a parapgrah about slaves brought to America. Usually they'd be in a field picking or chopping cotton. I hope that answers your question. That perception for African American children tends to give a perception of inferiority and servitude and is not good for self-esteem. Also, it gives others perceptions Blacks are not capable of other tasks; thus instiutiolinalized racism

"When you control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand here or go yonder. He will find his "proper place" and will stay in it. You do not need to send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education makes it necessary."
-- Dr. Carter G. Woodson, "The Miseducation of the Negro"

http://www.freemaninstitute.com/woodson.htm

Bev...thank you for sharing the Dells "StarSpangleded video, it is beautifully done. Last night I watched on one of my local PBS stations a documentary entitled "Eye on the Prize", it was wonderfully put together. Made about 10 yrs ago, so many of the participants were still alive and gave first hand accounts of their experiences It covered the Selma to Montgomery march, in March1965. They were brave souls all of them. I loved listening to Martin Luther King,Jr. speak, his words, even today so profound.

Lyndon Johnson was a very brave man for pushing the Civil Rights Act through, his speech to COngress, following the march, was an act of pure courage. I never before appreciated much of what was happening then, although sympathetic, it seemed so far away now I feel very different, I am only sorry so many had to die or be beaten to make it happen.

BEV, FEISTY,

never heard back from you on that Planned Parenthood/Obamacare dilema. Are you for double-dipping or not?

Cowards!!! Just can't find the spin, can you?........I realize FR didn't give you a "clue", but still.....disappointing!

SOB... you diminish your sincerity, by whining as to why no Italian American history month. I could ask why no Irish-American month, No one ethnic background has the agonizing history in this country as have African-Americans. No race of people have been so subjugated, by bullying, intimidation, fear, beatings and killings in the most despicable and cowardly ways than has the negro.

Read some history if you are really interested, rents some videos they may help you and others to have a better understanding of why there is still so much hate and racism in our country. These were Americans who were horribly treated by other Americans, simply because their skin was a different color and that, they could do nothing about.

Think about that, to be judged before you could walk a step or two or open your mouth. It was and is a cowardly way of bullying and it still goes on today. They have a rich and beautiful culture and a history that must never be forgotten to do so would diminish all us.

The American Indian

That may be... but those holidays are only that ... a single day... not an entire month. How does anyone rate a whole month? (LOL!)

Hope the Mrs. Has not already bought a new dress.

Someone's reading waaay too much 'Tiger Beat' again, while hitting the hate-or-aide pretty hard!

No Joe

Wouldn't you be more comfortable revelling in your Obama hate on one of the many websites for people like you, like Redstate.com?

So are you saying that only one viewpoint is welcome on this site, Amy? I can see how anyone who espouses a conservative opinion is trashed on First Read, but I've never heard anyone openly acknowledge it the way you did.

Yes, they want only one point of view on this site- it baffles or enrages them to see opposing viewpoints.

NoJoe -

Did you even read your own link this time? It says the Obamas are being invited over for an official state visit a few weeks after the wedding, in May. I would think that you, of all people - the official keeper of the Obama travel budget - would prefer that they make just one visit instead of two in less than a month. No?

There you go again nojo, any opportunity to knock the President. You really have to stop taking soundbytes and turning them into reality. As is often said, the devil is in the details. Pay attention here:

As a Royal Wedding is a state event for the British people , no Presidents are invited. Only family and friends and members of other Royal Families, and as most European royalty are somehow related to the British Monarchy they are included, they are usually not heads of state either.

Now nojo, here is a little tidbit that you can start working on, President and Mrs Obama are going to England in May for an official visit, that we can be sure will make you and others who hate our President start drawing out the knives once again.

If you believe all the drivel that comes from the British tabloids, many owned by Rupert Murdoch. whose sole purpose in life appears to be to destroy this country with his trash talking Faux news, he should pay you for your services, then on the other hand maybe he does.

And while we're at it, that claim about how the President "sold their nuclear secrets to the Russians" has been debunked so many times that it's really getting tiresome:

"In a February 5 post on ABC News' Political Punch blog, ABC News senior White House correspondent Jake Tapper wrote that "[b]oth the U.S. and British governments disputed on Saturday a London Telegraph report asserting that the 'U.S. secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain's nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty.' " Tapper further noted:

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley called the report "nonsense," saying the information sharing about U.S. transfers of nuclear weapons to the U.K. dates back to the original START treaty, an assertion backed up by the White House and British government officials.

[...]

Crowley emailed ABC News that "Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom, such as the transfer of SLBM's to the U.K., or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to continue under New START. We simply carried forward and updated this notification procedure to the new treaty. There was no secret agreement and no compromise of the U.K.'s independent nuclear deterrent."

A knowledgeable source with the British government, speaking anonymously because his government has a policy of not commenting on Wikileaks, says his understanding of the policy conforms with that asserted by the State Department. [ABC News, Political Punch]"

And one more thing - The bust of Churchill was always intended as a LOAN - to President Bush, not to President Obama or even to the American people in general:

"The original U.K. Telegraph article detailing the return of the statue made clear that the British embassy said it had only been "uniquely lent to a foreign head of state, President George W Bush," not given in perpetuity to the U.S. government:

A British Embassy spokesman said: "The bust of Sir Winston Churchill by Sir Jacob Epstein was uniquely lent to a foreign head of state, President George W Bush, from the Government Art Collection in the wake of 9/11 as a signal of the strong transatlantic relationship.

"It was lent for the first term of office of President Bush. When the President was elected for his second and final term, the loan was extended until January 2009.

"The new President has decided not to continue this loan and the bust has now been returned. It is on display at the Ambassador's Residence."

Likewise, the White House has stated that the Churchill bust had been scheduled for return to Great Britain prior to Obama's presidency:

Some Britons took offense when Winston Churchill's bust was replaced with King's. But the decision to return the Churchill bust to the British - it had been presented by former Prime Minister Tony Blair to Bush on loan - had been made before Obama even arrived.

"It was already scheduled to go back," [White House curator William] Allman said.

no jo; who demonstrates daily that she is not terribly bright cannot possibly know that the wedding in Great Britain of HRH and Ms. Middleton is not a state occasion, and therefore heads of state would not be asked. The stated goal of this couple was to have a "people's wedding, and also to include people from the charities supported by William. no jo cannot possibly know that the Queen would be related to other royals in Europe, who would therefore receive invitations. But, we are all well aware that basically....? no jo knows nothing relevant.

This is a silly debate, but since you're so eager to point out who's not terribly bright, thought you'd want to know that there'll be 40 heads of state at the 'people's wedding.' I guess they were asked after all.

No. Invitation. To. The .wedding.

They invited THEMSELVES over for a state visit.

What are the odds the Queen is unavailable?

Or he gets dissed by Downing Street.

Face it, worshippers- you are all he has got.

And your numbers are dwindling.

Nicholas Sarkospzy got invited. Angela Merckel got invited. It think even Putin got invited..
The Obamas did NOT get invited.

Before yup ask, the Reagans got invited to the royal weddings.

Looks like the Obamas are persona non grata.

Wonder if the Mrs. Can take back the dress?

You missed the part, didn't you Captain whoever you are that HM is related to the royals of Europe. Of COURSE there are heads of state coming. Here is where the confusion is for the moronic. The Reagans were invited to Charles and Diana's wedding. The reason they were is that Charles, Prince of Wales is the the heir, which therefore makes it a state occasion, and tighter rules of protocol are in place. William is second in line, which means the rules are different, and William can have more latitude to have the people that he wishes to have. The evidence is that HM is very fond of the Obamas, particularly the First Lady. Now, do quit talking about things you have no knowledge of. I have forgotten more about the Royal Families of Europe than you will ever know.

Oh, one more thing, and I know this will come as a very personal disappointment to our resident hater. The Obamas are going to Great Britain in May at the invitation of the Queen. They will stay at Buckingham Palace.

You're awfully impressed with yourself, though I'm uncertain why. You appear to be confused as to the difference between royalty and head of state. At any rate, Kanye West doesn't exactly qualify as either and he's invited. Hmm.

And the 'whoever you are'? MOTO, as most people understand, is 'master of the obvious.' You'd think someone who is so confident of their intellect would get that.

That is because Captain whomever, The Prince William is making his own invitations. What is it that you don't get about this? The Commonwealth will have invitations to leadership, the royals will have relatives there. There is no mystery why the President and Mrs. Obama will not be invited. If McCain were President (God help us) he would not be invited either.