timesjoke

I don't see it that way. Obama is having great success with making the long term guys look bad because of the same old and tired politics. Nevermind he has no specifics to show how he is different, but it is still working for him. Most Americans are very pissed right now with how our politics have been going and I believe Obama is doing so well because he is truly the only guy able to say he is not mired down with a lifetime of politics and owing people. Mccain against Hillary leaves a lot of baggage to attack before the election including her husband and her involvement with more scandles than any other canidate in history. Nobody has gone truly negative against Obama because all of the small attacks have backfired against everyone. In my opinion, Mccain has a better chance against Hillary than Obama. There are a lot of consvatives who would motivate to stop another Clinton from taking office, those same conservatives do not have anything personal against Obama.

But that is just it, we do toe our own line, and then some. We lead by example. In the last 20 years, I can only remember missing 5 days of work that were not scheduled, there are not too many people that can claim that.

I have to say, it has me pegged pretty close, I underlined a few that were very much me: The Portait of the Supervisor (ESTJ) Supervisor Guardians are squarely on the side of rules and procedures, and they can be quite serious about seeing to it that others toe the mark-or else face the consequences. They do not hesitate to give their stamp of approval, nor do they withhold their directions or suggestions for improvement. Like seasoned, stalwart umpires, Supervisors will set their jaw and make the call on anyone who steps up to bat. They even feel obligated to do so, and they're sometimes surprised when others don't seem grateful for being set straight. Comprising at least ten percent of the population, Supervisors go by experience and that is what counts, not speculation and experimentation, and certainly not fantasy. They keep their feet firmly on the ground and make sure that those under their supervision do the same, whether employee, subordinate, offspring, or spouse. If others wish to fool around and daydream, fine, as long as they do it on their own time-which means after the job is done. But if they fritter away their time while on duty, they should not be surprised when the Supervisor calls them on the carpet. The top sergeant will not put up with such nonsense. Supervisors are gregarious and civic-minded, and are usually key players of their community. They are generous with their time and energy, and very often belong to a variety of groups, supporting them through steady attendance, but also taking a vocal leadership role. Indeed, membership groups of all kinds attract Supervisors like magnets, perhaps because membership satisfies in some degree their need to maintain the stability of social institutions. Like all the Guardians, Supervisors worry a good deal about society falling apart, morality decaying, standards being undermined, traditions being lost, and they do all they can to preserve and to extend the institutions that embody social order. Supervisors are so in tune with the established institutions and ways of behaving within those institutions, that they have a hard time understanding those who might wish to abandon or radically change them. Jack Webb, Judge Judy, Dr. Laura Schlesiger, George Washington, Sandra Day O' Connor, Mike Wallace, and Vince Lombardi are examples of a Supervisor Guardians.

Nope, this is the kinder, gentler JustBS forum now.

This story came up and it has me wondering: CBS News Video - Top Stories and Video News Clips at CBSNews.com What would have been the reaction if it had been a black person in the wheelchair and a white officer dumped them on the ground? In a world where the "Dog" and Imus gets fired for what they say, I find it interesting that not even one news group is calling this the same way they would if it was reversed. This just keeps going back to the fact that the news will only call a white racist.

they excel at bringing out the best in others-??????? Well, I won't say it, but I want too, lol............

Man, you have no idea how much I want to believe that. I just have real problems believing it when you watch the two speak. Mccain is so lack luster I keep thinking he could use something to pick him up. I have been listening to a lot oc commentators lately about trends for running campaigns and most of them see this the way I do. Most of the time, you see a guy rally the bas, the standard large numbers of a party and then after their selected as the party canidate, they move to the middle to pick up votes. If Mccain move any more away from conservative, he will be a full liberal. If he was facing Clinton, I would believe the conservative vote would get motivated to vote against her instead of for Mccain, but Obama, well he scares us to a point, but I don't know if it is enough to do the same thing. The horrible point about Mccain is if he does win it will not be because we like him.

And leaves no marks, maybe a slight red mark that will fade away in an hour. A properly trained cop these days can put you through hell by stimulating nerves and after it is all done, you don't even have a bruise to show for your experience.

I don't like the man but I have to give him one thing, he is a great speaker. I watched speaches from both him and Mccain tonight and even though the promises Obama was making made my conservative skin crawl, I have to admit that he far surpasses anyone else in his ability to speak. He is building up a head of steam that I am starting to believe will not only knock off Hillary, but Mccain as well. Start hiding your money guys, I see tax increases so large comming that even rocks will be spitting out money.

I prefer to stimulate nerve endings myself. Take the Infraorbital or Hypoglossal nerve for example, I can either ease you into tremendious pain slowly or just spike you into so much pain you pass out instantly, all with almost no effort on my part. But I am rarely interested in talking much, lol.

Nope, it is real torture, just like mental abuse is real abuse even if you cannot see a bruise. I am not one of the idiots playing games with words, I agree that waterboarding "is" torture and I also say hell yes, do that and much, much more. We are not dealing with girlscouts trying to bully a few extra cookie sales on us.

Well, as I said before, I would not give them the same rights as Americans because they have not earned those rights. I don't care if they were waterboarded or even had their fingernails pulled off, they are the enemy and want my children dead, let them lay in the bed they made.

No, no back problems, but great big hug where you hear your back popping is something real. Something powerful. Most of the time when people do move to contact, it is a weak and pathetic hug, when I get a hug, I want it to mean something. Anyway, If I can't get the hug, I'll take a nice pat on the behind

I like a good hug, especially the big bear higs, they have a nice side effect of poping my back too, lol.

I guess that is based on if your done with them yet. I am sure there are hopes of gaining information and such from them even years later. Another problem is to not show your cards until everyone has played and made their bets. A fast trial puts all your cards on the table faster than you may want that information made public. If Bush was not wanting some closure before he leaves office, I would bet these guys would still be held without taking them to trial.

I agree, with all the BS methods people are using to make money these days, I am sure this is one of them. I mean, teachers still have continuing education requirements and such, I just cannot believe this is true.

I will be honest and say I may be expecting too much from IWS sometimes but all I can judge him on is by how I see other mods at other forums as well as my expectations for my own mods. I do not see it possible for a mod to be a member first. A Mod must set the example for the board in my opinion. It is like a cop who you see speeding down the road at shift change. If the rule makers and enforcers are running around breaking the rules, how can you respect them? Well, what we "should" be and what we are is two different things. To be honest, I contributed to some of the bad behavoir, I admit that, but I believe the new attention given to childish actions will end my need to respond in kind. At least I hope so. Nobody forced IWS to take the mod job, he had a choice. By accepting that job he must also take the added responsibility that goes with it. I run my own debate forum but I cannot get in the trenches and maintain my objectivity, so I have to scratch that debate itch on other forums. The only things I offered up to IWS for consideration was under the guise of his duties as a moderator, like chewing me for something I did not do. Like I already said, there were other factors like a few comments leading up to the ban comment that was also a consideration for me at the time. I have seen more then my fair share of abusive staff and maybe I can be a tad over cautious in trusting them, but at any rate, even without the earlier issue of the ban comment, I would still have taken issue with getting chewed out for something I did not do. I just did and it looks like IWS agreed to draw a line in the sand so this will be my last comment on the past stuff with him and me so hopefully we can all get along better. I like all of you guys for different reasons, I even like Wez sometimes. I believe we all have things to offer each other, that is why I come to places like this. I may never change my views on things, but even if I am secure that I am going down the right path on things, I always want to know why others choose other paths.

The appology I offered to Wez was not so much because I did anything wrong but to try and offer a path to mending fences. We have created a lot of negative stuff on the forum and I was trying to help fix things. The stuff between you and me is based on a moderator/member association and is not the same as two members. I did not start believing you had issues with me out of thin air, you have this tendancy to give mixed comments, example to follow: Here we see you still refusing to admit you made a mistake. Hard to accept you mean your appology when you cannot even see where you made an error. I felt you treated me in an unfair way, am I supposed to just ignore what seems to me as unfair? As I just pointed out, you still don't truly see how you made a mistake in your own mind, so how can you say your sorry about something you don't believe was wrong? I agree with Wez sometimes, that does not mean I like him. Why not? As I just pointed out, agreeing with someone in one or two things does not mean anything. I can understand you made a mistake if you just came out and said that but your still saying you didn't make a mistake. Your two completely different comments on the same topic is confusing to be honest. Intentions are important, but the end does not justify the means in the real world. You have to make sure you don't make a situation worse. In this case, you gave me one heck of a chewing out based on your mistaken assumption I started things and your still waffling about if you see your mistake as a mistake. True, and the same goes to you. You control how you respond as well and the responding you did turned out to be both wrong and unfair to me. How can you ask us to be careful how we respond when your not? Your staff, we take our cues of proper behavior on the forum from you. Jumping to conclusions and chewing me out from a bad assumption on your part is now the standard offered. Leading by example. Trust is earned, not given. You are the staff member, not me. I can respect your possition but you must earn my respect as the person in that staff possition. So far, your still waffling on taking responsibility for your actions so it makes it difficult for me to completely respect you. Your still human and making mistakes is human. Admitting you are still human would increase your standing on the forum, not decrease it. All I can say is the proof is in the pudding. His actions to jump on people was still happening and even in this thread, we saw his most negative side several times. It is not necessary for the members to see your actions to make corrections on the forum, we would just like to see good results. I believe your truly trying to deal with Wez now while there was no "effective" attempts in the past, so now the way I respond to Wez will change, at least as long as the new attention is kept up. I would agree with all things being equal and among similar people, but there are situations where intent does not change the harm done. If I accenditally shoot someone, they are still shot, no matter what my intentions were at the time. Now, I responded to your post and even though the sincerity of your appology is in question to be when you cannot even admit you made a mistake, I am will to say we can move foward and just let the past go if that is what you want to do. We are humans who both make mistakes and have emotions and such that get in the way sometimes. Sometimes all two people can do is draw a line in the sand ans promise to leave the past in the past, so, this is what I am offering to you.

Heck no, in fact I made sure to say a couple times that I felt your comment saying Democrats are socialists was on topic (and very accurate I might add). The forum will not suffer harm by honest on topic comments like this even if it can be seen as a kind of attack. The attacks that are harmful are the ones designed to directly attack the person and are off topic.

Wow, now IWS is pan handling for appologies, lol. Being as most of the problems of late have been between myself and Wez, I though a conserted effert on my part to offer a clear slate and move foward would help the entire forum, This is like my kids, one gets something, the other wants the same things or they feel bad. IWS, your a moderator who was part of this situation getting out of hand in the first place, wez was given too much slack and a few of us gave as good as we got. I am hoping that your efferts were successful and I am giving Wez a chance to mend fences, but now it seems like your trying to keep the mess stirred up. You are a moderator, any kind of threat of banning, implied or not is a very serious matter and is taking things to a level the regular members cannot go. The reason I doubt your sincerity of claiming it was innocent due to other things you have said and done, not the specific act itself. You have been pissy with me both before and after the incident and then we add to that your mistaken assumption of what Wez said to me driving you to toung lash me on the open forum. You were wrong and said that you see your mistake like a football mistake, nothing to feel bad about. If you cannot see how your status as a staff member makes your actions more severe then the other normal members, maybe you need to rethink your role here. I am not staff here, I cannot effect you the way you can effect me so clearly when you E-raise your voice to me, it has a bigger impact. Wez and I are not staff, we are on the same footing. I am offering the olive brance for both of us and for the entire forum to find peace. I am willing to do the same between the two of us but we are not on the same footing. It is up to you to mend this fence because your the one blasting me from a possition of power, a possition to effect me where I cannot effect you.

Eddo, your right, I attempted to just tell Wez I never intended to attack him but as usual, he just twists everything to get an arguement. Wez, again, I never intended to offend or attack you, take it or leave it, I am very much wanting to end this mess.

My example was quoting your own words, you said you killed your child, I never said I was a hypocrite. Calling me a hypocrite without my admission/permission first most likely would be considered a personal attack based on the new rules. Still a child, but yes, I already agreed we are both killers, just for different reasons. I simply repeated your own admission for killing your child, there was no judgement in my comment. I did include a judgement in the abortion thread, but not here or the new rule thread.

Killer-One that kills (killer - definition of killer by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.) Killer-one that kills (Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online) While I was not talking to you, what I said cannot be considered an attack because it is simply a statement of fact being as you have already admitted to killing your child, in fact, I fit that same description because I have killed someone as well. Being a killer is not bad or good in and of itself. I will gladly explain this to you again. Let me give you an example: "I am a liberal..........not" Many times people will be a smart butt and pretend to agree with someone to simply add an insult at the end. One must look at the entire sentence or paragraph to try and figure out what is being said, and even then, sometimes there can be a lot of gray area so then we must look to what we know of people to try and fill in the blanks of what was being said. In my opinion, you tend to be very smart mouthed so I view your posts in that light most of the time to fill in the blanks. You are also very negative tword me (as I am with you) so again, this trend helps to fill in the blanks. You cannot hurt me Wez, but you can and have irritated me. As I have said many times, you have some very good points on issues sometimes but you feel a need to add "extras" to your posts that ruin your possitions. If you could learn to drop the "extras" and stay with your good points, I believe you would be a great forum member. Your passonate and active. You have stong opinions. Your only flaw is to try and tear apart anyone who does not agree with you in any way you can possibly think of. Sometimes this takes the form of lies, sometimes you attack people on a personal level. sometimes you use childish "I'm not you" posts, sometimes you even do it just to disrupt a discussion without any real obvious point other than to get attention. Now, you may or may not see some of this as a personal attack but it is all me trying to be honest with you and even trying to help you. I have added to the issue of the bickering on the forum because the day to day moderating tended to give you a pass and I felt someone had to stand up to you but now that there is some writing on the wall that your kind of posting is going to be addressed, I am going to try very hard to not bicker or fight with you. Up to now, this forum has been like the old saying: "I went to a fight and a hocky game started." We were fighting more than discussing things and an honest debate was rare. If there is now a concern to stop the bickering, I want to do my part to support this concern.

Well, I don't buy the non-American getting American rights stuff. We pay a high price to have our freedoms and they have not earned the right to enjoy our rights. I would not make any decision as to what charges or penalties to chase based on fear of reprisal, if we start going down that path, we will never make it back. In my opinion, they should die.

I just saw a report tonight she says she does not care about recent losses because she believes certain States like Texas are in her pocket. I don't care how much she talks about being secure with the other states, she must be concerned with the recent momentum Obama is getting. Attitudes change real fast and she could lose the states she is counting on just because Obama is seen as having that momentum.