[CS-FSLUG] OT: Suspension of Nurse Who Offered to Pray for Patient's Recovery Sparks Uproar!

[David McGlone]

On Sunday 08 February 2009 2:46:05 am Jon Glass wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 2:39 AM, David McGlone <d.mcglone at att.net> wrote:
> > I'll bet anything you agreed to the bailout that we got under the Bush
> > administration.
>
> People may find this hard to believe, but all true conservatives were
> against the Bush bailout--and look at the result.... Just what we
> predicted. You don't solve these issues by throwing somebody else's
> money at it. Government has one option at this point that will truly
> work.

I didn't particularly care for the bailout myself, but thats beside the fact 
of what I was trying to say. 
>
> That is absolute fiscal responsibility. They need to do what private
> citizens are expected to do--tighten their belt, control spending. End
> welfare (which is nothing more than a form of slavery. All good
> socialists ought to be opposed to slavery--and welfare is the _worst_
> kind), and then, slash taxes. Government has one constitutional task,
> and that's national defense. Everything else is icing, and not
> constitutional (at least in the US). Guaranteed, if this were to
> happen, the recession (as it is being called) would end most quickly,
> and more so, the sloppy accounting practices and business practices
> would be wiped out, because such companies would cease to exist. Wages
> would normalize, thanks to the plentiful labor, illegal immigration
> would cease to exist, and people would be much happier, as consumerism
> would also "cease". Does it sound "mean" or "brutal"? Well, which is
> worse? That, or a decade of depression, with millions out of work,
> living in dependency, hunger, malaise and a continuing downward
> spiral, like we had in the 30? or a short-term shock that relatively
> rights itself? All government intervention can do is prolong the
> misery.
>
> >> End of story! And if
> >> you refer to "global warming," that's probably the biggest lie Al Gore
> >> has told.....but maybe not...he did claim to invent the Internet. 'Boy
> >> simply thinks way too much of himself. ;)
> >
> > And George Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction so where's the
> > difference? LOL
>
> And this shows who has _truly_ lied, and who has believed their lies!
> I can't believe that people still trot this bull hockey out. Tell me
> one, solid lie that Bush told. Or better yet, produce evidence that
> any weapons were actually destroyed in sufficient quantity that can
> prove that the weapons, which existed, no longer exist. Until you can
> give me convincing evidence of their destruction, all you have is a
> bunch of media hype and lies _about_ Bush and the Bush administration.

Jon, That was my whole point with the sarcasm. What I was trying to say is, 
it's Ok to listen and believe the media hype when it's someone that one 
doesn't like, but when it comes to someone they do like, everything they do is 
always condoned.
>
> But let's go one step further. Bush has _admitted_ that he was wrong
> about wmd, that he was as deceived as Clinton, the UN, and everybody
> else. Are you going to do the Christian thing, and forgive him? Or are
> you going to simply continue to accuse him of lying?

I'm not accusing him of lying. 

> It's funny how we
> tend to want to believe certain people (such as Obama), and accept all
> sorts of fault, lies, etc. Yet others, who have only ever shown
> themselves to be honest, we treat as liars.

> What Bush was hated most
> for (especially by Europeans) was that he always said what he was
> going to do, and did what he said--none of that political
> double-speak. I remember reading news reports, and watching EuroNews,
> and was amazed at the vitriol that Euro diplomats had for him for this
> very reason.
>
> In other words, Bush was honest to a fault. More so, he expended every
> last bit of his political capital--leaving office despised by most
> people--because he tried to keep his country safe. By the most
> important measure--no more attacks on American soil--he was
> successful. He knew he would be treated as a disgrace from the start.
> Yet he did it. Let's see a Clinton or Obama be willing to do this. You
> hate Bush all you want, but I believe a good Christian would respect
> him for who he was and what he did. The problem is that, unlike most
> presidents, he didn't toot his own horn, or try to play the publicity
> game, and manipulate people to make himself look good. So, go ahead
> and hate the man.

I don't hate anyone. My whole point was missed with the sarcasm.

It's just too funny how someone is so quick to blame. Don't ask me to explain, 
just think about what you said above and then think about the sarcastic 
remarks I made.


-- 
David M.
http://www.dmcentral.net