auggybendoggy

I do push them in diagnoally. Unfortunatley when I push one in (it locks) but then when pushing in the second the locked one pops out because I have to apply too much pressure. I finally got it to lock all four but it was like a trial and error game. I studied the locking devices on it and nothing too complicated. You push, the tab expands locking it into the hole.

I think they are just a sucky design.

Aug

Guys,

I think it's just me but these plastic push in tabs suck. When I push one corner the first corner come undone. I turn the screw to lock it but for some reason one or two will give and so I'm always fiddling with them.

Is there some trick to these?

Aug

I think shazz is right. I watched it and wondered whos not shakin? It seems mutual. But it would have been or at least looked better had he at least extended his hand out.

Aug

Mandatory volunteering is bad...

Isn't it ironic

Unclean, you def are right about checking and not taking it to the bank simply because it was on a website. However, flagging it and discussing it as a concern is within reason. I don't think anyone has "freaked" out in a sense of panic. But to say "it bothers me it said that" is a good thing.

Even if Obama did not write that and it was some punk kid like Shaft who did it, it can cause damage. I'm not screaming "mutiny" but it's fair for people to complain that at some point in time it did say "enforce".

Sure corrections are made but it's an UGLY correction no matter how you want to spin it.

I'm saying your both right.

Aug

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/u/uraniumyellowcake.htm

What do you make of this? Some are saying the major news media stayed away of this in fear that Bush may have been right about Saddam having obtained uranium or trying to purchase it from Africa?

Give me your wisdom, I WANT IT NOW!

Aug

Duke has a point.

Jury duty is not really a " on " "option". Citizens are required to do jury duty.

However I still agree with Play and clue on the grounds that comparing a vital part of our system such as Jury duty is VERY different than making "clean up" a vital part of our system. In other words Community service is not vital to our system where Jury Service is.

Thus it is a good Idea for require jury duty

it is a bad idea to require clean up.

If they make me clean up I'll become more rebellious and start littering since Unclean loves the idea of cleaning up my mess : )LOL!!! KIDDING UNCLEAN!

Seriously, some things are required for good reason and that does not require "socialism" as we understand it.

Also Unclean,

Play I think is still correct. If you saw Bush's website which you know he did not write say Every male was going to be FORECED to serve 2 yrs in Iraq would you be concerned? Then later you find he said he encouraged ALL males to enlist to serve would you think the first was a simple typo?

Would you think there was a reason why Obamas site had "enforced" originally? As you say we don't know and that gives reason for concern. The ONLY way to not be concerned is to KNOW he did NOT INTEND that.

My point is when you argue "we simply don't know" therfore it's a hypothetical, isn't it true We DO know it said ENFORCED at some time? That is NOT a hypothetical. I trust play and clue since I've known em (online and CS) for years so I tend to see no reason why they suddenly become such bashers of Obama that they start posting untrue posts.

Anyhow, I see reason to dialogue and reason to at least flag it.

Aug

What ZD posted in the first post is what the official website said. What Auggy posted is what it says now. I have no idea why they changed it but it doesn't change that the original intent is a horrible thing for this country.

I'm not sure why the real issue is avoided. Play has nailed it here. ENFORCING is simply DICTATOR STYLE. None of us who have ?'d Obamas Idea stated that giving tax credits to people who "want" or "volunteer" is a bad thing. As play has stated quite CLEARLY, FORCING people to do such things is.

but like I said before, perhaps welfare people should be the ones who are ENFORCED to do such work. Now thats a good idea

Aug

it seems the idea of

if you want school money then work, might be a good idea.

will this also be true for welfare?

If you want free money, then take this shovel and go dig a ditch outside. When your done, fill it up. Then dig it again

maybe it's not that bad an idea.

enforcing it will be an utter failure. I don't think it will happen.

Still yet it is wierd that the site said "enforce" as showin in zeros post and now it is changed??? I once got suckered down the right wing path on the obama flag but this one is legit as much as I trust zero. I do trust zero so it makes me scratch my head.

Aug

No offense guys (I voted for McCain) but

This is what it reads when I click on it...

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

Perhaps they changed it?

What gives?

Aug

Mav,

I agree with your last post. There are def points for obama. The international affairs was a HUGE plus for Obama over McCain. the Bush "dont' talk with the enemy w/o preconditions" just doesn't sit well with me.

Simply sitting with Amedinijahd (spelling) does not mean you have to buy his rhetoric. Obama was CLEAR that sitting with Iran or Putin took a level of "grain of salt" understanding.

I never got the sense from Barry that he was saying..."If I sit with them, I'm GOING TO JUST BUY THEIR BULL!@#$@#$ and BRING IT HERE TO AMERICA."

He even used the words "We need to HUNT DOWN Bin Laden and kill him" which I found to be strong language for him.

Still yet there are faults I hold with him that I did think neede explaining like...

who will pay for the social med coverage....WE WILL!!!!

and I'm not fan of Robin hood stealing from people who aren't breaking the law. The RICH do pay more in percentage so theres no need to raise it cause their simply going to raise the prices on us. THEY WILL GET THEIR MONEY no matter how hard you make it on them. Ask the gas companies.

So there are def points for Obama the right side just is not willing to fess up to. I'm one who voted for McCain simply because I cannot resolve the abortion issue. Had Obama not been inconsistent with his views it would have been REAL close for me.

Aug

allkill,

LOL! That rant is hilarious.

Aug

LOL rick astley.

reminds me of "astley in the noose, he hasn't got a use, but he's trying, trying to be someone..." - Miles Hunt / The Wonderstuff.

Bweildered,

my point is that some say he was and CBS, NBC or ABC did not healine this. HAD THEY AIRED IT "it would have been a dead issue as of late" the reason McCain did is because they felt a policial need to (biased urge) ask?

I am not faulting LA times, heak they said something about it just before the election (why reprint it?)

I'm saying CBS, NBC, ABC, Yahoo, MSN none of them headlined this EVER because it might "miselad" people into thinking he's having dinner with anti-semetic people.

I agree with the link as I found upon my own research I like the rashid guy (from what I know of him) HOWEVER it should have been headlined that this tape existed and la times was withholding it ON ABC, NBC, CBS and others.

I think it shows a clear bias they did not want to touch it with a 10 ft pole for a reason.

If there is no biased then why worry if people will think hes a terrorist supporter. Wouldn't you want to air that?

If he's not then why worry if hes not?

The event occured and it looks dubious to some and therfore qualifies.

They know conservatives were sketchy on ayers and he apprerently was at the dinner as well.

it simply smells like a bad fish not to air it.

Aug

Ok I just read a bit more on ayers. So I want to say this concerning the polarization of people and the media.

he participated in blowing up a NY police station

the U.S. capitol and the Pentagon.

If this is "just outlaw days" or "reckless behavior"

then I'll assume a man who blows up a abortion clinic (and no one dies) is a humanitarian hero?

The glass is always half empty or half full.

I truly believe that if Bush and Ayers were pals then the liberals would claim that ayers is a right wing fanatic whou uses violence and bombs to get what he wants.

Lucas (star wars) is brillinant on these grounds that most people (including himself) become the very monster they spend their life fighting.

The media coverage would be believable had we seen specials on ayers and why he did what he did and how ne now renounces them. LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE.

I had to do online searches on ayers to find out who he was and part of it was from his own blog. And still today I'm not convinced he's all that different from those "outlaw years" when he writes..." the fifth anniversary of the spectacular hijacking of the monstrous crimes of September 11" sure he says "it's a terrible thing" then why call it wonderful how about "ironic" or "earned".

was the 911 a spectacular hijacking. In his opinion I would assume yes because Bush is the very monster he tried to blow up in the 70's.

it appears to me that he has fallen prey to what Lucas has dubbed "Darth Vader".

Aug

Zeros passion and what many might see as being too polarized is exactly what fuels Zero.

He knows from (self examination) that it is within reason for those of the media to practice and therfore project a certain bias which become very apparent.

a good question would be not to debunk it but to prove that it is possible for MSM to be UNBIASED.

It's a fair question and I tend to think it is not possible.

However I do agree with the appearance that Palin gets news coverage that she spent tax money on a wardrobe but NOTHING on the la times withholding a video of Obama dining with ayers and Rahid (former member of plo).

Perhaps showing how Ayers blew a bomb on the pentagon story might have been a cover story which affiliates him with Obama.....But that was a long time ago and now he's a "education reformer".

LOL

Do you think if Bush would have been in that spot they would have called his friend ayers a "education reformer" or a "past outlaw" who tried to blow up the pentagon?

You decide

aug

I agree Zreo the nice thing will be shutting up the people who think America is so racist. Yes there are many recists but each country has at leason one of em. So their all racists. Not only that but each race as at least one of em so each race is racists. I HATE STEREOTYPES.

in what should be a term of unification, i'm afraid we're going to have a sect that polarizes even further, not just to the right, but to a radical degree. that consideration is what motivated my comment, nothing more.

I agree stutter, and part of the problem I believe which causes this is the press. Conservatives know that major networks did not carry the story about the L.A. Times hiding the video of Obama with Ayers and Rashid at this "jew bashing" dinner. The major networks SHOULD have at least reported it as a headline. That does not mean they have to report it as being "bad" but that it could be potentially bad depending on the tape.

But the fact that they did not report it as a headline makes every conservative NOT trust the MSM (main stream media) for it's unbiased reporting.

I myself do not think there will be anything on the video which is alarming but I must admit not seeing it as a headline or on yahoo, msn or anywhere EXCEPT a small article in the times, makes me think they clearly wanted Obama to win.

Heak when their knocking McCain for bashing and then their reporting what she spent on her wardrobe???

These things make conservatives feel like liberals hijacked it and therfore they will not accept and backup their president fully.

It's too bad because if the media would play fair then we really could see a much stronger unification. At least I believe so.

Aug

Aug

I voted for McCain and No on 8 (lame marriage ban in california).

LOL i wrote the G word and saw "lame" and thought...

wow did I do that. I've got real problems typing what I'm thinking. Is it a freudian slip?

Aug

Abortions aren't the problem...un-wanted pregnancies are the problem.

 

Guns aren't the problem...idiots owning guns are the problem.

 

Cars aren't the problem...bad drivers are the problem.

 

It goes on and on for every "problem" we have in this country. If we can fix the real problem then the percieved problem will go away.

This seems fallacious.

Guns and cars are items

abortion is an action.

Thus it would be more like

Murder is not the problem it's the guy pulling the trigger

Car accidents are not the problem it's bad drivers behind the wheel

Abortion is not the problem it's people having sex without responsibility.

This seems more accurate to me.

Thus I would conclude

Murder is the result one is trying to avoid so outlawing murder is good

car accidents are results we try to avoid to putting laws on how we drive is good

abortion is a result we (should) try to avoid so putting laws on it would be good.

I don't think I would vote for Gond.

Sorry Gond

Aug

Monk,

I'm not one to push the envelope so hard to not sympathize with a woman who is raped or whose life is being directly threatened and has 3 other children with no father. Certainly there are other factors to rule on. But because there may be reason for an abortion does not mean all women who are pregnant qualify either. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Mook has capped on one of the points I made which seems to not be addressed which I wish to address.

"We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby."

Those are all things that we put in the Democratic platform for the first time this year, and I think that's where we can find some common ground, because nobody's pro-abortion. I think it's always a tragic situation."

so here I go; my feeble attempt at philosophy...

P1. (abortion) it's always a tragedy.

p2. determining when it's a life is beyond his paygrade.

conclusion: abortions which are tragedies are not conducted in america?

For if it truly is a life and if it truly is a tragedy then why is proclaimint it a life beyond his paygrade?

Again, I'm back to the ultrasounds vs. the satellites.

If the child is not alive

then the earth is still flat.

I do however AGREE STRONGLY with Monk on this

But I wonder what the depth of my dedication is to that life. Once that person walks away to their car, do I still care? Am I going to help that woman? For all I know, the father might have left, and that woman doesn't have the means to care for that kid. Maybe she was raped and doesn't feel like anyone's going to help her

Monk, this is so true. I tend to think both catholic and protestant ought to think about where their money is going. Instead of stained glass windows perhaps it would be better spend on helping moms in need.

Aug

The question of logic I proposed is based on an assumptions, namely is the fetis a live person.

If it is then Obama has put the mothers life at greater value. The child is expendible.

if not then it seems it would have to be proven it is not since science prove that it in fact is.

If it is argued that the machines do not prove it is alive (ultrasounds and other technologies) then it would be hard to prove the earth is not flat (telescopes and satellites). Thus on scale would it seem AKWARD to pro choice people if the church yelled out today....THE WORLD IS FLAT.

Of course many pro choice people "might" (I really don't know) argue the baby is alive and is a person but still expendible.

So I do understand the point Obama is making. BUT I do assume the entity within the mother is a child. Thus "infanticide" might not be so far off track.

It simply means that Obama endorses a mothers choice and protection (as killer has pointed out, ie. coat hanger abortions or bathroom abortions) over the life (or lack of life) of the infant (within the womb).

the words of keith green always creep me out on this issue. If they do not ring true to you then I understand. But I tend to think there is truth in them.

"I find it hard to just ignore, the murdered unborn children

yes times have changed, but still God warns...

You shall not take a life"...

Does this moral statement "do not murder - kill - take a mans life" also include children in the womb or does God sympahize to the point that the child becoming the victim is the lesser of evils?

My heart hurts on this issue yet I know many christians who embrace Obamas stance on this.

I have a hard time, probably due to upbringing, or possibly the Spirit of God.

Aug

Guys,

I'm looking for some feedback on my heart. I actually like alot of Obamas Ideas however abortion is one that makes me ill.

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02..._to_barack.html

look at page 85 to read the transcript of Obama.

http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf

In a general sense I know abortion exists and it's not easy to just say "stop". What will become of the babies who's mothers do not want them? Who will care for them? Who will pay for them (food, living)? Tis a pickle.

But in thinking as of late, I do feel a bit of conflict on this issue.

I don't quite understand how people who care so much about the poor don't care about the unborn. The Obama supporters who cling to his "humanitarian" ways like the second coming of Jimmy Carter seem to be in a contradiction on humanitarian ethics.

so...concerning Obama and abotion

Logically speaking...

Why would one care about a poor person and not care about a child in the womb of her/his mothers?

it seems the only way to resolve the illogic is to persuade oneself that the thing in the mothers womb is not a person (human being).

Thus i'm forced to say that if indeed it cannot be proven that life has begun in the womb (beyond his paygrade) than it might be said the earth MIGHT still be flat or the earth is the center of our solar system or universe.

What I mean is if science has taught us that the earth is not the center of our universe, likewise science has taught us the earth is not flat, than it seems reasonable to say that science has taught us the infant is very much alive (via machines monitoring brainwaves, heartbeat, formation).

So perhaps I don't know the real arguments of why the baby can be killed without it being defined as "killing a baby".

I realize roe vs wade is a major reason why the law is what it is but I'm asking a logical question not a legal.

P.S. I'm voting McCain because I do find that killing babies is a deal breaker just as I would feel if Adolph Hitler were to say I'll cook jews in ovens would be a deal breaker for me. If you find me to be illogical than help to understand why (don't bash).

Aug

Watchtower, oh my I did not know you were still here. I have not seen a post of yours for like 100 years

Good to see (read) you again.

Watch,

I agree to some extent. My OP was not about how this guys is such a crook and terrorist. When I read up on him, I thought WOW I like this Rashid Khalidi guy.

However it still seems to me that the lack of coverage is a fear base of obamas. The fear being many will then move to the McCain camp. I don't think the entity of the press should have a conscinece. They should report what has happened whether it is to their liking or not. I'm not attacking the L.A. Times because they printed the truth that they are withholding the video. HOWEVER I've heard nothing on other sources about this. I've been following this race fairly closely and back in APRIL till now, I never heard about this tape.

If it was reported back in April then the L.A. Times never had a reason to post it recently AGAIN. I think it's a recent report. But I could be wrong about that.

Still yet, I never saw it on major online sources such as msnbc or yahoo or anyother massive giants. I never saw it on the NCB, CBS, CNN or anywhere else.

That is not a problem with McCain supporters it is a problem with the press. NO MATTER who wins or who loses it's a problem because the win becomes a tarnished win.

MY guess is Obama supporters DONT want this talked about for a dang good reason. Yet after ward they will then say, it did not matter we would win anyways.

Well then lets put it out there now and see what people think.

At least make a reading of the video (transcript) so we can read what was said. Even I would feel better about that.

Anyways, good to talk to you again watch.

Aug

I agree Play,

it seems had no one have leaked this Times would have kept it quiet.

Still yet seems Shaft and I agree that LA time DID come out with the info at least. HOWEVER why isn't other sources discussing this as a concern.

Once obama wins, it will be all over the place. At least that's what I expect.

Perhaps I'm wrong but it looks to me like thats the way the media works.

Aug

Shaft,

I did read it right from LA Times website. They even said in the article that it could be seen by jews and pro jewish voters to be crossing the line on what is tolerable and what is not (my paraphrase).

Again, the problem I've seen is not with the la times not releasing the tape but with the LACK of mention by main stream media that la times wrote such an article.

VERY SAD.

and I'm one who after reading about the character in this article (some professor) actually liked the professor. So though it would not change my feelings about obama I find it very sad that the media has to control the public like this.

Aug