timesjoke

lol, back to attacking my dead mother hugo? I guess I hit you pretty close to the mark to get you to go there again, I'm sorry if you were a child victim hugo, it really is not a laughing matter, I have worked with abused children for over 20 years and I know how you can take that pain with you your entire life but just because you were abused that does not mean every parent is a pedo who does not agree with you against this dance video. I'm inclined to believe that things just got a little off track. Most of these dance studios don't even have seperate areas so the older kids and the younger ones will see each other as they dance and the younger ones most likely wanted to emulate the dances they see from the older ones and from the dancing they see most often......music videos. Most dance instructors want their students to open up and express themselves through dance and they also see the older kids dancing all the time so this kind of thing could gain a certain level of acceptence overall. Again, I have said all along that I don't think this is "good" just not as bad as the over reacting hugo is trying to make it sound.

No she is not, that claim was originated by the Obama Administration right after she was nominated for Vice President and you radicals have taken up the chants from the Obama administration like good little puppets. Hell you even defended his buddy the Professor when he was screamign racist claims at a cop that was there only because he was doing his job protecting that community. Just about every time there is a controversal possition we discuss, your almost always on the side Obama and his fellow liberals are on, everything from helping to get him elected to your opposition of any limitations to abortion. Why do you think these liberals give such glowing support to people like Ron Paul? You like Ron Paul, they like Ron Paul, your being played hugo.

She might lose, but not because of a lack of integrity, she has more integrity than the last three Presidents combined. The problem with guys like you is your all too willing to carry the Liberal lies around and pass them off as your own. Obama and company is scared to death of a real person like Sarah being in power, so they insert their operatives in your fringe groups and plant seeds that grow very well in your radical minds. Defeating Sarah would be a huge win for the Liberals, and your onboard with their gameplan, as usual, that is why you guys helped to get Obama get elected, you can certainly copy/paste conservative ideas, you do it all the time, but when you speak your own words they are the words of a radical liberal, nothing close ot the conservative values you "claim" to hold. So keep on bashing good honest conservatives like Sarah Palin, your making your liberal masters very proud.

lol, so now your back to not believing that taking responsibility is important hugo? You started this mess by calling snaf a pedo, I can see why your always mad at me for pointing out your hypocracy on a regular basis but snaf? Snaf is one of the nicest members of this comunity and you called him a pedo just because he did not completely agree with you. You do tend to always call people names who don't agree with you but you have been exceptionally nasty this time, there is something different. You know Em, you may be closer to the truith than you know, maybe hugo had a family member who used to make him dance for their pleasure when hugo was a little boy?........

I know right? I have no idea why hugo goes into these fits sometimes insulting anyone who does not completely agree with him, that has always been his way but this seems a little different for some reason.

See? What is the real justification for someone who would say such things? Hugo even attacked my mother right after he found out she had died. I will steal from someone else for my reply to this horrible accusation from hugo. "You are what you hate, that is why you hate it." You spend so much time accusing other people of being a pedophile and being all worked up over watching girls dance that there is a very high possibility that it is you who holds these beliefs and your trying to project your own sickness onto other people.

^as usual, sounding like an Obama mouthpiece, lol. Palin has more substance and real morals than Obam will ever have, she is real, Obama is manufactured, I'll take real any day. Sure, she does not have the lifetime knowledge of some things like a career politician like Obama, but that is what good advisors are for. What matters is integrity and honesty, Obama gets a zero score on both while Sarah gets an A+.

Spoken from "YOUR" experience hugo? You think it looks good to wack off to? Now your questioning my parenting skills because I don't go off the deep end over somethiong this small? hugo I have represented children who were made "stars" of home porn movies by their own parents and they were selling those movies to hundreds of other people. If a Pedo wants kiddie porn, he can easily get it, they do not need to look at this dance video to get their jollies. I never said this was "good" just not to the level of kiddie porn as your trying to make it seem. Why do you need to make such nasty and personal attacks on people if they do not agree with you hugo? Never said it wasn't bad, just not "AS BAD" as hugo is trying to paint it all things considered. Have you ever been to a real ballet Ren? I thought the costumes were worse than the dancing on a sexual level but yes, I agree that a couple of the moves were also too much, the entire display was not something I would have approved of if my child was in that dance troop, but my point was that is was not porn as hugo keeps trying to paint it. As usual these discussion with hugo tend to be about the radical side. Most of us agree this was not good, we just have the ability to see that no everything is a capital offence. I agree Ren, my point was that monsters have always existed, and a sane person is not going to turn a pedo just watching this dance video..... I really do not understand hugo's reaction to this, unless he found himself thinking bad thoughts and is trying to blame the video for what he thought.......no way of knowing for sure.

Other people do use them, but they don't "NEED" them as much as Obama does . You thought the word "Bushisms"was relivent because it was a general belief that Bush made a lot of mistakes, but this word and the concept was created by the liberal media and people like you who would jump on every mistake and blog about it millions of times trying to give each mistake greater impact. But.....the teleprompter crutch Obama needs is an understanding by "EVERYONE" Bender, even the normally hands off networks have all commented on his overuse of this device to do his public speaking while Bush only used it on special occasions. Maybe Bush should have used it more to look better but I prefer to see a real man speaking to me, not one who is completely created from the ground up. The liberal media spent years trying to paint Bush as uneducated but Obama established his weakness for needing a teleprompter in just a couple months of taking office. If Bush making mistakes speaking without a teleprompter "IS" an issue Bender, then Obama needing a teleprompter to keep him from making the same mistakes is also an issue. You can't have it both ways Bender, again, this is a double standard. Consider this also, Obama has allowed much fewer informal interviews and question and answer sessions that Bush or Clinton in his first year. Obama tends to only allow very structured and controlled speaking events so that also gives him less chances to mess up. If Obama did as many informal sessions as Bush did, there is no doubt in my mind Obama would fall flat on his face and do much, much worse than Bush did......and that is why Obama does not allow the informal sessions.

No, you as usual always try to demonize those who do not take the radical and 'knee-jerk' possitions you do. Your entitled to your opinions but you never believe other people are entitled to theirs so you try to "punnish" them. No, in fact I do not think this would even be close to kiddie porn, my time working with the Guardian ad Litem has show me the difference and how easy it is for child molesters to get what they want, they do not need this kind of thing to feed their fantacies Hugo. Of course your over reaction to this might mean you already know exactly how easy it is to get that stuff don't you hugo? Responsibility hugo? Your the guy who was preaching that the professor who screamed at cops should not be punnished right? That the adult should not be held responsible for his own actions because cops are an agent of the Government and deserve to be abused? You were also defending people from showing more responsibility tword their reproduction so obviously sometimes your okay with turning off responsibility. Spinning our wheels on things that are not at that high of a level is taking time away from real harms hugo...is that your intent? Get people worried about a show like this and they don't have the time to go after the real filth that is out there? Misdirection hugo? Real concerned parents and community minded people trying to protect children have gotten involved with things like "Jessica's Law" as we did here in Florida hugo, we pettition our law makers, we visit our capitals, we even work with other liked minded people in other States to get similar laws passed in other places I even worked with some people in your State of Texas on their law Hugo, I believe your state suppreme court shot down part of the law though......how much of that have you done hugo? We you involved in pushing for "Jessica's Law"? Like Tori said, usually those being the most outlandish in their violent opposition on something is usally hiding something about themselves. And tell me Hugo, what violent movie, sexual dance video, or video game inspired Hitler? I agree that sick people will look for material to feed their sickness, but they were already sick to start with to even look for the material. The material does not transform a good person into a sick person hugo, while a sick person is not cured by not letting kids dance in stupid costumes. As I said before, sure this was not thought out very well, but it is not kiddie porn, your over reacting and I wonder why.......... While your advocating censorship hugo? Why are you going off the deep end on this dance if not to make the case to block it and things like it hugo? How do you protect children from pedophiles by complaining about this dance hugo? Your not making any sense at all hugo. I can see complaining a little, but your long past showing concern and your running down the road to nuclear explosion over something that most pedophiles would not even notice hugo. A "real conservative" knows feigned concern when we see it, and your showing it right now hugo.

And after just a couple months in office Obama was already famous for his need to have a teleprompter, don't pretend to not see the double standard Bender. You know Bender, I know your smarter than this, you can see this stuff, "Bushisms" was created by the same media that now refuses to report on Obama's mistakes. Hell Obama has made a lot of mistakes even with his teleprompter. Yes, Bush made some mistakes, but at the same time he was genuine, Obama is a "created" personality, there is nothing real about Obama other than his radical agenda. That is why Obama needs his teleprompter to help him remember the persona and style of person that has been created to fool Americans.

Did you just try to say snaf was a pedo because he did not condemn this the way you did? I agree that the outfits were very bad and should have been different but the overall dance was not much different than what you would see in a ballet as Tori pointed out, I also agree with Tori where she pointed out the most likely pedo is one who hides behind loud and excessive outrage proclaiming various tortures and attacks they would like to perform on the parents showing that kind of "zero tolerance" face to the public while their private life is much, much different.......... Yes, it could have used some changes though, I remember the Maddona inspired shows kids did many years ago, they were much worse than this.

No, no, nice things you for boy do, boy then buy buy dress you like so on arm you look nice for freinds........see?

You know, I have to ask a question, do liberals really believe it is the Government's responsibility to provide jobs even if the work is not needed? I don't care if some dead weight is tossed into the unemployment line, the point is do we "NEED" that agency or that employee? If the answer to that question is no, then eliminate it. I work hard to earn the tax money that is being wasted on Government employees we do not need. Many agencies can be combined and keep the actual workers but drop the massive buracracy and overhead maintaining seperate offices and seperate bosses, combining these agencies can save us billions of dollars. Oh, I agree that the fist and most important agency to cut should be the IRS, go to the 'Fair Tax' and dump all of those useless IRS idiots out on the street. By the way, "why now"? Because only now has an administration taken power and completely ignored the will of the people on this big of a scale, right after Obama promised that "jobs" will be the number 1 priority, he turned away from "jobs" and went back to his healthcare mess nobody wanted. Today the only priority Obama has for jobs is more Government jobs as he is helping to kill more private sector jobs. The average every day person in America is pissed off because they are getting less money, while the Government is taking more money, Bush and company did increase spending and grew Government, this is true, but he did it while we were still relatively strong, and we were only at the start of the housing and loan meltdown caused by the fair housing laws Clinton signed. Obama on the other hand is spending more money, in less time than Bush and is doing it in a time when the Nation is badly bleeding, hurt and broke while they watch the Washington elites spend, spend, spend without a care in the world. That is "why now".

No, Democtats see nothign wrong with Government workers watching porn, what else are they going to do with their time?

Well the point is so much time has been put into praising Obama and his speaking abilities while every tiny stumble over a word by Bush was used to try and make him look stupid, it is just another great example of the double standard where the majority of the media outlets expose every little flaw from a conservative and at the same time, try as hard as they can to bury and hide every flaw by a Liberal. Obama has already been shown to be a very weak speaker without his teleprompter, but still the liberal media does what they can to hide that fact.

Like my comment to you about Beck, I like some of what these guys say and some I do not, I have an open and educated mind, I can listen to everyone and get the good stuff I like while rejecting the bad things I don't. You do know that people like Rush are just paid to do commentary right? They don't set policy or spend one thin dime of taxpayer money, their ideas and beliefs do not cost Americans jobs or raise their taxes, so what they say is not really that big of a deal. I don't feel compelled to worship a leader or blogger of a party the way you liberals do. To you Obama is a God and cannot do anything wrong, that is why you react violently and be insulting whenever your liberal leadership and agendas are challenged. Take this for example, do you try to defend why we are not running into finiancial trouble? Do you tell us why living on "credit cards" is a good idea for Governments? No, because the reality is, we are already out of money with no expectation that it will ever change under our spend, spend, spend mentality in Washington, and yes I include the Republicans in that as well, nobody who has been there is innocent. But Obama promised us change, where is the change? All we see is more of the same partisan politics and higher spending of money we don't have. It is not a question of IF we need to take action, that is already a fact, the question is only will we make tough decisions now when we have some control to make this as less drastic as possible, or will we keep our heads buried in the sand and pretend like the problem does not exist and let this get so out of control that once it fails, the ripple of the results will last generations?

You still don't understand IWS, your supposed to ignore the actual words and trust them when they say they really did not mean that they wrote. And Bender, I would not call myself a fan of Glenn Beck, but some of what he says is pretty good, just like I enjoy a lot of what Ron Paul says, but when Ron Pauls starts talkling about America is to blame for 9/11 and we should turn to isolationist beliefs I step back. I like many of the Bush policies but I also was very verbal about things he did I did not like such as his support for the McCain amnesty bill. And there is one of the truly defining differences between normal liberals and normal conservatives, the normal liberals still feel the need to defend and even embrace everything their leadership proposes no matter how crazy while a normal conservative can find fault in one thing and support other things without feeling like we are betraying the party.

Think of it like morals IWS. The Liberals claim they never take issue with their 'bad apples' because none of them ever take stands or possitions of being moral or standing for "family values". The same is true for things like this, Sarah Palin making a mistake is huge because Conservatives to tend to offer an air of being more educated while Liberals are all about taking care of people and empathy for the poor (so they claim) and not about being educated or smart so when they mess up, it is not news, it is normal.

One of the biggest things I hear people including myself complain about with our Government that even in a time like now where almost all non-government workers are having to live with less money in our homes to support ourselves, the Government is "raising" and yes, they sometimes hide thise tax increases with words like fees, assessments, stc but the reality is the Government on all levels are taking more from us, in a time when we can afford it the least. The average householed has to make tough, and even very painful monetary decicions on what things they have to give up on to survive, but the men and women we have running our Country are so arrogant they don't believe they should have to do what the rest of us are having to do. Imagine if each of us had the power to ignore the reality of less money and take more money from our employer by force? Everyone in America tells our employer to give us more money no matter if the company has the funds or not........how long would these companuies be able to stay in business if they were paying out more money than they are taking in? Well that is America, even with the much higher financial burdon Obama has placed on us our Government is still spending more money than it is taking in, it is like a family who has reached the end and is in the process of living on their credit cards, it can only end in tragedy. So do we "need" to cut spending? Yes, it will happen no matter what we want because the credit cards are going to run out eventually, painful decision must be made, if we make them now we can avoid some of the pain, if we have to make the decisions when we hit the wall.....then the cuts will be drastic and much more painful. In my opinion the most costly expense that can easily be fixed is the over the top welfare and ssi abuse. Close the borders, kick out the illegals, and cut welfare down to only those who "can't" work. The loss of the illegals will create more than enough jobs to employ most of those comming off welfare and with the jobs filled, no real draw for the illegals to come here in the first place so we fix that problem too. The largest voter block for liberals who are spending most of our money on welfare will now have jobs and will mostly tuen conservative because they started paying taxes again, once your paying taxes, your worried how those tax dollars get spent......................the Government will get a big boost of tax income, will save money not supporting the non-workers "and" supporting the illegals that also get welfare in the millions, and there will also be savings in taxes from local communities who no longer have to give the free rides for things like schools and healthcare. That is another of the Obama commentary on healthcare, yes, a lot of people do get medical care from emergency and not pay, illegals, and the healthcare bill will not fix that problem, sending illegals home will. Creating massive fines for hiring illegals to business owners will, putting people into those jobs illegals tend to work will.

Something said by hugo I completely agree with, birds of a feather and all that, there is no doubt that anyone who is close to Obama is a socialist.

So a man can't be affected? If a woman killed my child growing in her womb it most certainly would affect me. My children, one being a female, grows up in a world where abortion is considered a reasonable method of birth control and using other precautions is considered 'too hard', she can likely have this procedure herself. Long after the cold and calculating abortion workers have "done their job" and talked her into getting an abortion because it is "no big deal", tell me something em, who is going to be there trying to help my daughter pick up the pieces of her now broken emotional state? I will love my daughter no matter what she does, that is part of unconditional love and family but will she love herself? Will she be one of millions of women who fall into a lifetime of depression caused by her abortion? Will she try to kill herself from her internal termoil? But your right em, I am a man and there is no possible way I could be affected...........

Well I can't judge what shows are funny and will be popular, I thought the show jackazz was just too stupid to make it, sure it was funny but it was funny because you were astounded at just how insane people can get just to make a couple bucks doing a show, shove a toy car up your anus and go to the doctor is funny? I guess I am getting old, lol. Must be like music, each generation has to come up with things to baffle the earlier generation as to the quality of it, lol.

I also never argued it was not intrusive, of course it is intrusive, the question is, does the level of intrusion seem reasonable? This is why I pointed out things like placing people in jail for speeding or requiring Americans to purchase car insurance, or requiring Americans to have a background check and trigger lock if they want to own a gun (gun ownership "IS" a right under the Constitution while abortion "is not"). The Government already intrudes in the freedoms of Americans all the time for much lesser reasons than to reattach the humanity puzzle piece to the abortion equasion. Think of it this way, while a lot of people play games with the whole "tax money does not go to abortion" claim when all know it does, tax payer funds go to planned parenthood groups under "education" claims but we all know some of that money funds abortions. These planned parenthood groups already use taxpayer money to push the clinical side of abortion so in a certain sense, the government is already involved and at this time is only offering one side of the arguement, this ultrasound requirement brings the Government back to the middle, back to offering both sides of the discussion and offers balance to the information process prior to a woman deciding to kill her child. Please remember, it is the lack of the human side that is the most likely reason women even 20 years later suffer from their rash decision. They have made a decision with only one side of the coin being considered because the abortion clinics intentionally block the woman from considering that other side. If we let women consider both sides, it is my belief that their decision will be made from the benefit from having considered all sides and would most likely not have the issues so many women have later in life.

The White House press office is behaving more and more like an independent media outlet, bypassing traditional news avenues in favor of releasing its own "exclusive" video, voicing administration opinions on its official blog and blasting out updates via Twitter. The trend has raised questions among the press corps about whether the administration is looking to just tap its own resources to make major announcements. President Obama leans more on internal media as he continues to criticize the "24/7" media environment -- singling out cable news, radio and blogs for occasional lectures -- and appears to be abandoning the prime-time press conference forum he used to discuss major developments during his first few months in office. "They're doing a very adept job of using new media in the White House," said Pete Snyder, CEO of New Media Strategies. "Whether it's from the constant updates of information at the White House website to ... bypassing the mainstream news media in answering questions and thoughts via Twitter to their use of the photo-sharing site Flickr, really to show the softer side, the more human side, of the administration." But the White House says the office is just trying to get information out as directly and efficiently as possible. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs used his new Twitter account on Tuesday to distribute an Associated Press article reporting the Minerals Management Service would be split into two agencies -- and seemingly confirm the news at the same time. He used the same account to break the news in March that Obama would be delaying his trip to Indonesia and Australia to work on the health care bill. Asked how heavily his Twitter account would factor into the news cycle, Gibbs bemoaned technical difficulties with his White House e-mail account and said: "I would say Twitter is a quick medium to get information out and we'll probably use it more often." The technologically adroit administration has gone far beyond Twitter in promoting its activities and establishing its own self-sufficient media arm. The administration started its roll-out of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan with an internally produced video and interview posted to the White House blog. Bereft of hard questions, the video showed Kagan talking about her parents and growing up in New York City. She said in the video that she hopes people will see that she is open-minded, fair, has good judgment and "will faithfully apply the law." MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday suggested on air that the White House was "crossing a number of lines here." Asked on Tuesday whether the rest of the press might get a crack at a one-on-one interview with the nominee, Gibbs replied: "She's not told me that, no." The White House even labeled its content as "exclusive footage" when it posted video of first lady Michelle Obama visiting Haiti to survey the earthquake damage last month. The documentary-style video showed footage of the first lady flying over the devastation and scenes from the ground and included a voiceover by Obama. Meanwhile, Obama has not held a full-blown solo press conference since last July, when he convened the press corps at the White House to discuss health care. He held a joint press conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Wednesday at which two questions from the U.S. press and two questions from the Afghan press were allowed. He also came to the back of Air Force One last month to talk to the media, and he made an appearance at the daily White House briefing in February. Earlier this month Gibbs ridiculed a reporter who complained that none of those constitute a traditional press conference. Gibbs noted that Obama took eight questions at the Nuclear Security Summit on April13. Asked earlier in the year about the press conference drop-off, Gibbs complained that Obama had previously been accused of being "overexposed." White House Correspondents' Association President Ed Chen has held a sit-down with Gibbs to plead reporters' case for more exposure. Comparisons to recent administrations show that Obama, during his first year, opened up to the press in some venues and shied away from the press in others. Obama had 47 informal, brief question-and-answer sessions with the press corps in the first year of his presidency. By comparison, President George W. Bush had 147 and President Bill Clinton had 252, according to statistics compiled by Towson University professor Martha Joynt Kumar. Obama held four prime-time press conferences in the East Room, according to Kumar -- an unprecedented number for a president's first year, though he has not held one since. But in terms of total press conferences, he and Bush paled in comparison to Clinton. In their first years in office, Obama held 27 total press conferences, Bush held 19 and Clinton held 45.