Seems very McCarthyesque :yes:
Thoughts?.
Let me say this, I have read opinions on this topic.......It come down to this, in my opinoin.....that it is the duty of Congress to investigate any and all security threats that is brought to them. There have been studies indicating that three-quarters of the mosques in the U.S. actively seek to teach Shariah Law.... we all know that the vast majority of Muslims in the United States great Americans, who are peaceful and have been against all of the terrorist acts that have been committed to us since 9/11. But it is NO secret that the vast majority of terrorist acts in America are committed by Muslims. Some like the Ft. Hood shooter, the Times Square car bomber, the Detroit airline would-be hijacker, all had been indoctrinated by Shariah law....that is being taught HERE in the U.S. ... that is a threat that needs to be looked into.
I think comparing this to McCarthyism, is just a propaganda ploy to downplay the signifcance that this investigation may have.
How is Shariah Law any different than Christian Law, or Buddhist Law, or any other religious law????
QuoteSharia law: founders and schools:
Perhaps the two greatest original founders of Sharia law were Malik ibn Anas and Ibn al-Shaf'i. Anas established the Maliki school of jurisprudence. Al-Shaf'i was one of Anas' students; he disagreed with his teacher about the reliability of the hadith. He felt that it was necessary to trace each hadith from the time of Muhammad through its chain of devout Muslims. This concern led to Islamic scholars considering "... which hadith were true and which were not." Needless to say this led to conflicts among scholars as to the proper application of Sharia law.
Ibn al-Shafi'i promoted the use of additional sources for Shari'a law:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)
The technique of "... reasoning by analogy in order to develop new laws from existing laws." As the culture evolves, new types of problems emerge that need to be dealt with. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) used to prevent the development of a severely defective human embryo is one example.
The technique of accepting the consensus of a Muslim community. The reasoning is that Allah would not allow an entire community to be in error on a basic Islamic principle.
There are four main schools of Sharia law:
Hanbali: This is the most conservative school of Shari'a. It is used in Saudi Arabia and some states in Northern Nigeria.
Hanifi: This is the most liberal school, and is relatively open to modern ideas.
Maliki: This is based on the practices of the people of Medina during Muhammad's lifetime.
Shafi'i: This is a conservative school that emphasizes on the opinions of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad.
What applies within one school of Sharia law does not necessarily apply in the other schools. For example, the Maliki Law School accepts evidence of pregnancy as proof that an unmarried woman has either committed adultery or been raped. The other schools "... do not recognize evidence of pregnancy as proof of Zina [Adultery]."
Recent history:
The Constitutional Rights Foundation notes that:
"In the 19th century, many Muslim countries came under the control or influence of Western colonial powers. As a result, Western-style laws, courts, and punishments began to appear within the Sharia. Some countries like Turkey totally abandoned the Sharia and adopted new law codes based on European systems...Modern legislation along with Muslim legal scholars who are attempting to relate the will of Allah to the 20th century have reopened the door to interpreting the Sharia. This has happened even in highly traditional Saudi Arabia, where Islam began....Since 1980, some countries with fundamentalist Islamic regimes like Iran have attempted to reverse the trend of westernization and return to the classic Sharia." 4
Within Sharia law, there are a group of "Haram" offenses which carry severe punishments. These include pre-marital sexual intercourse, sex by divorced persons, post-marital sex, adultery, false accusation of unlawful intercourse, drinking alcohol, theft, and highway robbery. Haram sexual offenses can carry a sentence of stoning to death or severe flogging.
Sharia law has been adopted in various forms by many countries, ranging from a strict interpretation in Saudi Arabia and northern states of Nigeria, to a relatively liberal interpretation in much of Malaysia. 1
Sharia law is intended to be only applicable to Muslims. Christians and other non-Muslims are supposed to be exempt from the provisions of the law; this is a provision that is not universally followed..
I see an awful lot of similarities in Sharia Law and the teachings of Christianity within the bible. The main differences being that Muslims in many countries still practice the punishments contained within their holy scriptures, while Christianity continues to try to impose them within its government.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 10, 2011, 05:06:46 PM
How is Shariah Law any different than Christian Law, or Buddhist Law, or any other religious law????
Here are but a few tenets of Shariah Law
Requirement of women to obtain permission from husbands for daily freedoms;
Beating of disobedient woman and girls;
Execution of homosexuals;
Engagement of polygamy and forced child marriages;
Requirement of the testimony of four male witnesses to prove rape;
Stoning of adulteresses;
Lashing of adulterers;
Amputation of body for criminal offenses;
Female genital mutilation;
Capital punishment for those who slander or insult Islam;
Execution of apostates, or those that leave the religion of Islam
Inferior status for all non-Muslims, known as Dhimmitude.
Concept of Taquiyya: A Muslim may lie or deceive others to advance the cause of Islam
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 10, 2011, 12:33:26 PM
Seems very McCarthyesque :yes:
Thoughts?.
Indeed. And unfortunately it is not just the muslim community this nation seems to want to impose this upon. Just look at hispanics if you think I am wrong!
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 10, 2011, 05:34:33 PM
Here are but a few tenets of Shariah Law
Requirement of women to obtain permission from husbands for daily freedoms;
Beating of disobedient woman and girls;
Execution of homosexuals;
Engagement of polygamy and forced child marriages;
Requirement of the testimony of four male witnesses to prove rape;
Stoning of adulteresses;
Lashing of adulterers;
Amputation of body for criminal offenses;
Female genital mutilation;
Capital punishment for those who slander or insult Islam;
Execution of apostates, or those that leave the religion of Islam
Inferior status for all non-Muslims, known as Dhimmitude.
Concept of Taquiyya: A Muslim may lie or deceive others to advance the cause of Islam
And again, this differs form the accounts of Christianity contained within the bible how??? (Other than the fact our government keeps Xtians from imposing such punishments?)
Freedom of (and from) religion mean anything to you?
Quote from: Palehorse on March 10, 2011, 05:36:34 PM
Freedom of (and from) religion mean anything to you?
Yes it does and under Islamic law you don't have this freedom. In Islam, religion and government are one and the same.
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 10, 2011, 05:49:27 PM
Yes it does and under Islamic law you don't have this freedom. In Islam, religion and government are one and the same.
Not true.
"In the 19th century, many Muslim countries came under the control or influence of Western colonial powers. As a result,
Western-style laws, courts, and punishments began to appear within the Sharia. Some countries like Turkey totally abandoned the Sharia and adopted new law codes based on European systems...Modern legislation along with Muslim legal scholars who are attempting to relate the will of Allah to the 20th century have reopened the door to interpreting the Sharia. This has happened even in highly traditional Saudi Arabia, where Islam began....Since 1980, some countries with fundamentalist Islamic regimes like Iran have attempted to reverse the trend of westernization and return to the classic Sharia."
While it is true that some are attempting to reverse this condition surrounding the adoption of western influenced law, in most of these countries it is also true that Islam (religion) and government are intertwined. OUR nation has chosen to keep religion and government separate for many of the reasons that individuals attempt to utilize as an example surrounding how bad Sharia Law is; however, who are we to judge? It is/was their decision and we need to respect that in the same way we expect them to respect our own laws and methods of worship when they are in this country.
If Muslims are attempting to impose Sharia Law styles of punishment within this country, they are without question breaking the laws of this land and should be punished according to said laws; and are as far as I know. If the victims of these actions in this country are hindering the ability of law enforcement to enforce our laws, thereby preventing the ascribed punishment from taking place, that is another matter entirely; however it is NO reason to persecute all muslims based upon their religious beliefs when said beliefs do not impact anyone else. (And automagically ascribing perceived impacts does not legally count!)
Quote from: Palehorse on March 10, 2011, 06:21:53 PM
Not true.
"In the 19th century, many Muslim countries came under the control or influence of Western colonial powers. As a result, Western-style laws, courts, and punishments began to appear within the Sharia. Some countries like Turkey totally abandoned the Sharia and adopted new law codes based on European systems...Modern legislation along with Muslim legal scholars who are attempting to relate the will of Allah to the 20th century have reopened the door to interpreting the Sharia. This has happened even in highly traditional Saudi Arabia, where Islam began....Since 1980, some countries with fundamentalist Islamic regimes like Iran have attempted to reverse the trend of westernization and return to the classic Sharia."
While it is true that some are attempting to reverse this condition surrounding the adoption of western influenced law, in most of these countries it is also true that Islam (religion) and government are intertwined. OUR nation has chosen to keep religion and government separate for many of the reasons that individuals attempt to utilize as an example surrounding how bad Sharia Law is; however, who are we to judge? It is/was their decision and we need to respect that in the same way we expect them to respect our own laws and methods of worship when they are in this country.
If Muslims are attempting to impose Sharia Law styles of punishment within this country, they are without question breaking the laws of this land and should be punished according to said laws; and are as far as I know. If the victims of these actions in this country are hindering the ability of law enforcement to enforce our laws, thereby preventing the ascribed punishment from taking place, that is another matter entirely; however it is NO reason to persecute all muslims based upon their religious beliefs when said beliefs do not impact anyone else. (And automagically ascribing perceived impacts does not legally count!)
Speaking of religion. On the news last night a large group of religious leaders and scholars got together and they rewrote the bible again.
I don't know if it was God inspired, but they say that in it. The God of the Old Testament is not the mean son-of-a-bitch as he was the other many old copies. :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on March 10, 2011, 07:33:02 PM
Speaking of religion. On the news last night a large group of religious leaders and scholars got together and they rewrote the bible again.
I don't know if it was God inspired, but they say that in it. The God of the Old Testament is not the mean son-of-a-bitch as he was the other many old copies. :biggrin:
Yeah. . . I saw that! :biggrin:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 10, 2011, 04:00:02 PM
Let me say this, I have read opinions on this topic.......It come down to this, in my opinoin.....that it is the duty of Congress to investigate any and all security threats that is brought to them. There have been studies indicating that three-quarters of the mosques in the U.S. actively seek to teach Shariah Law.... we all know that the vast majority of Muslims in the United States great Americans, who are peaceful and have been against all of the terrorist acts that have been committed to us since 9/11. But it is NO secret that the vast majority of terrorist acts in America are committed by Muslims. Some like the Ft. Hood shooter, the Times Square car bomber, the Detroit airline would-be hijacker, all had been indoctrinated by Shariah law....that is being taught HERE in the U.S. ... that is a threat that needs to be looked into.
I think comparing this to McCarthyism, is just a propaganda ploy to downplay the signifcance that this investigation may have.
Henry, do you have a link to the studies which indicate that 3/4ths of mosques actively seek to teach the Shariah Law. Also, so you have a source on the "vast majority" of attacks on the US have been committed by Muslims?
Lastly, what if there were hearings to investigate Christian churches because of the terrorist acts commited by Christians? Would you still feel that it's fair?
(Please don't say that the Christians who bombed clincs and OK city and who picket funerals of fallen soldiers and encourage mass suicide aren't "real" Christians because it doesn't matter by your own words. If most of the Muslim Americans who are peaceful and renouce the terrorist acts of 9/11 are fairly subjected to suspicion, then so the same could apply to Christians, even though I'm sure you'll say that a vast majority of Christians are peaceful - turn about is fair play)
In this world you have terrorist of all kinds. Religious and not. Just plain crazy people and there is nothing we can do to keep them from becoming crazy. If this Senator was really doing a service to the country, I would agree with him.
But he's doing it for a political reasons, He is doing it to scare the 33% of the nutty far right Christians for their votes later. He want to scare them so they won't look how bad the Republicans have screwed up this country and what they are trying to do now.
His show is all smoke and mirrors, just watch, nothing will come out of this. But we do have on problem with mental ill people coming. It is the vets coming home after they have been used over and over and over in combat. People who have be trained to handle guns, weapons and explosives. The first thing the Republicans will do is to cut medical help to these men. The men that has served this country. Just watch and see. :trustme:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 10, 2011, 09:22:19 PM
Henry, do you have a link to the studies which indicate that 3/4ths of mosques actively seek to teach the Shariah Law. Also, so you have a source on the "vast majority" of attacks on the US have been committed by Muslims?
Lastly, what if there were hearings to investigate Christian churches because of the terrorist acts commited by Christians? Would you still feel that it's fair?
(Please don't say that the Christians who bombed clincs and OK city and who picket funerals of fallen soldiers and encourage mass suicide aren't "real" Christians because it doesn't matter by your own words. If most of the Muslim Americans who are peaceful and renouce the terrorist acts of 9/11 are fairly subjected to suspicion, then so the same could apply to Christians, even though I'm sure you'll say that a vast majority of Christians are peaceful - turn about is fair play)
I will see if I can find a source to support the mosques and sharia lawother than the opinion piece I read.
I would have ZERO problems with churches were under investigation for any wrong doings. I there are certain churches promoting violence then Heck YES, lets investigate the crap out of them.
Our National Security is in the hands of our elected officials.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 11, 2011, 09:06:08 AM
I will see if I can find a source to support the mosques and sharia lawother than the opinion piece I read.
I would have ZERO problems with churches were under investigation for any wrong doings. I there are certain churches promoting violence then Heck YES, lets investigate the crap out of them.
Our National Security is in the hands of our elected officials.
But Henry, you added a caveat. "If certain churches", I don't think the mosques are getting the same loophole. He wants to investigate ALL of them.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 11, 2011, 10:12:42 AM
But Henry, you added a caveat. "If certain churches", I don't think the mosques are getting the same loophole. He wants to investigate ALL of them.
Okay, then I will refrain, if CHRISTIANS are a national security, then by all means, investigate ALL Churches....the bottom line is, I'm KNOW all Muslims are not a threat...but we DO know that some of them are....we have to do what ever it takes to secure our Nation and it's citizens. We have specialists that are trained to know what to look for...let them do it.
Yes it is absolutely appropriate. After all wasn't it the extremist that flew planes into the WTC towers and into the Pentagon? All this PC crap is getting out of hand. As an American citizen I have a right to feel secure and protected in my own country...believe me, if I traveled to Afghanistan or Iraq, I'd be profiled.....it's about time our congress and senators did something besides sit on their hands and let the extremists take over our country. What the hell have we been paying them for?
Quote from: Doc on March 11, 2011, 11:25:27 AM
Yes it is absolutely appropriate. After all wasn't it the extremist that flew planes into the WTC towers and into the Pentagon? All this PC crap is getting out of hand. As an American citizen I have a right to feel secure and protected in my own country...believe me, if I traveled to Afghanistan or Iraq, I'd be profiled.....it's about time our congress and senators did something besides sit on their hands and let the extremists take over our country. What the hell have we been paying them for?
Careful, your religious persecution is showing. . .
funny. All the uproar now over these types of hearings because a Republican is holding them But what about the many hearings held on radical Islam between 2006 and 2009 by Democrats Lieberman and Harman.
Why no uproar then? Why no media coverage then? What's the difference??
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 13, 2011, 10:24:27 PM
funny. All the uproar now over these types of hearings because a Republican is holding them But what about the many hearings held on radical Islam between 2006 and 2009 by Democrats Lieberman and Harman.
Why no uproar then? Why no media coverage then? What's the difference??
"I am not a Republican!" Quote the SquawkHawk ever more. :grin2:
Quote from: The Troll on March 14, 2011, 08:45:46 AM
"I am not a Republican!" Quote the SquawkHawk ever more. :grin2:
Ahhh, it's OK when a democrat does it but when a republican does the same thing it's bad???
That makes sense. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 14, 2011, 12:03:28 PM
Ahhh, it's OK when a democrat does it but when a republican does the same thing it's bad???
That makes sense. :rolleyes:
AHA, so you're going to finally admit you are a Republican. I just really wanted to know where you're coming from when you write. It only fair. :biggrin: We wouldn't want another Republican lying and hiding as an Independent. Like they do on Washington Journal on C-Span. :wink: :yes:
Quote from: The Troll on March 14, 2011, 03:42:38 PM
AHA, so you're going to finally admit you are a Republican. I just really wanted to know where you're coming from when you write. It only fair. :biggrin: We wouldn't want another Republican lying and hiding as an Independent. Like they do on Washington Journal on C-Span. :wink: :yes:
There you go AGAIN. Making assumptions without the facts.
I was just pointing out the liberal bias. You libs are all over this hearing simply because it was a republican holding it. When the dems do the exact same thing not a peep from the left.
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 14, 2011, 07:59:34 PM
There you go AGAIN. Making assumptions without the facts.
I was just pointing out the liberal bias. You libs are all over this hearing simply because it was a republican holding it. When the dems do the exact same thing not a peep from the left.
Pot - Kettle.
Your statement contains a WHOLE lot of assumptions itself. . . There are several here whom you are painting with your brush loaded with the broad-strokes of ignorance, who objected just as vigorously over prior attempts to initiate similar initiatives. . .
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 13, 2011, 10:24:27 PM
funny. All the uproar now over these types of hearings because a Republican is holding them But what about the many hearings held on radical Islam between 2006 and 2009 by Democrats Lieberman and Harman.
Why no uproar then? Why no media coverage then? What's the difference??
Isn't it apples and oranges? King wants to investigate ALL mosques. He's claiming that the only way to find the radical Muslims is to violate the rights of all Muslim-Americans. Holding hearings on known radicals is a bit different don't you think?
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 14, 2011, 07:59:34 PM
There you go AGAIN. Making assumptions without the facts.
I was just pointing out the liberal bias. You libs are all over this hearing simply because it was a republican holding it. When the dems do the exact same thing not a peep from the left.
First of all, Republican is always spelled with a capital letter R. But I have read of of your post and it looks like to me. With your beliefs, if you don't vote Republican you don't vote at all. Why? There is no Independent Party. Just plain and simple. :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on March 14, 2011, 09:39:25 PM
First of all, Republican is always spelled with a capital letter R. But I have read of of your post and it looks like to me. With your beliefs, if you don't vote Republican you don't vote at all. Why? There is no Independent Party. Just plain and simple. :biggrin:
Only a fool votes strictly party.
Obviously I lean towards being conservative but, not all republicans are true conservative nor do I agree with all of their ideas.
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 15, 2011, 05:20:01 AM
Only a fool votes strictly party.
Obviously I lean towards being conservative but, not all republicans are true conservative nor do I agree with all of their ideas.
amen!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 15, 2011, 08:08:07 AM
amen!
I know you guys are against gay marriage, but really you two should get married. You both are married to the Tea Bagger Party. :yes: :biggrin:
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 15, 2011, 05:20:01 AM
Only a fool votes strictly party.
Obviously I lean towards being conservative but, not all republicans are true conservative nor do I agree with all of their ideas.
Just how long has it been since you voted for a Democrat. :rotfl: :rolleyes:
Quote from: The Troll on March 15, 2011, 08:47:55 AM
Just how long has it been since you voted for a Democrat. :rotfl: :rolleyes:
I voted for a democrat this last election. ;) and THAT is no lie either.
Quote from: Nighthawk on March 15, 2011, 05:20:01 AM
Only a fool votes strictly party.
Obviously I lean towards being conservative but, not all republicans are true conservative nor do I agree with all of their ideas.
Well, anyone who votes Republican is a FOOL! A guy that has voted for George W. twice. Just look how well the Republicans have run this country. Right in to the ditch and a fool wants to trust them again. :wall: :razz: :razz:
Quote from: The Troll on March 15, 2011, 08:54:15 AM
Well, anyone who votes Republican is a FOOL! A guy that has voted for George W. twice. Just look how well the Republicans have run this country. Right in to the ditch and a fool wants to trust them again. :wall: :razz: :razz:
Troll, I would vote George W. for a third time OVER what we currently have.....there could not be any worse leadership than what we have now.....hey, lets spend another trillion $$$....THAT just might make us better, right?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 15, 2011, 08:52:01 AM
I voted for a democrat this last election. ;) and THAT is no lie either.
Yeah Henry :wink: Who was it the Anderson dog catcher. It sure wasn't Obama. :wink: :smile:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 15, 2011, 08:56:27 AM
Troll, I would vote George W. for a third time OVER what we currently have.....there could not be any worse leadership than what we have now.....hey, lets spend another trillion $$$....THAT just might make us better, right?
Which one of those trillions was yours. Did you take your Obama's tax cut. I'll bet you did. :wink: :smile:
Quote from: The Troll on March 15, 2011, 09:01:11 AM
Which one of those trillions was yours. Did you take your Obama's tax cut. I'll bet you did. :wink: :smile:
those trillions was my/our kids and grand kids....what kind of question was this anyway?.......does it really make a difference? WE, the U.S. spent over a trillion $$ with not one thing to show for it.....this is just not a dem/repub thing it is an out of control WASHINGTON thing that, this TEA PARTY you despise so much is going to fix.
Quote from: The Troll on March 15, 2011, 08:58:45 AM
Yeah Henry :wink: Who was it the Anderson dog catcher. It sure wasn't Obama. :wink: :smile:
Nope it sure was not Obama, but it was a state level person, and I even voted for a sherriff who was a democrat. YOU guys are not ALL bad.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 15, 2011, 09:03:48 AM
those trillions was my/our kids and grand kids....what kind of question was this anyway?.......does it really make a difference? WE, the U.S. spent over a trillion $$ with not one thing to show for it.....this is just not a dem/repub thing it is an out of control WASHINGTON thing that, this TEA PARTY you despise so much is going to fix.
That one trillion, the only part of that was yours and your kids was .000000000000000000000000000000000001% of an gants ass.
I never seen someone so wrapped up into himself, that he thinks he got some much of his money wrapped up in this debt. :bsflag:
Quote from: The Troll on March 15, 2011, 12:02:49 PM
That one trillion, the only part of that was yours and your kids was .000000000000000000000000000000000001% of an gants ass.
I never seen someone so wrapped up into himself, that he thinks he got some much of his money wrapped up in this debt. :bsflag:
are YOU freakin HIGH?
did your dinghy leave the dock?
are you rowing with one oar?
are you a few fries short of a Happy Meal?
are you a few pecans short of a fruitcake?
did you donated your brain to science before he you was done with it?
seriously? are you okay? do you REALLY not get it? :confused:
Keep it up Henry, you'll have your own show on the comedy channel. :biggrin:
You still haven't answered if you took Obama's tax cut and would you tell me how much money do you have personally in this debt you're worried about.
Look, just put a paper bag over your head, take some string and tie the bag to your throat and take some deep breaths. You are hyperventilating. Get over yourself and calm down. Take a nap. :zzz: :smile:
Henry, I'm glad to have you back. I thought you had gone. It was boring around here without you and now I got NightSquawk. I missed ya bro. :love: :kiss:
Quote from: The Troll on March 15, 2011, 12:52:57 PM
Keep it up Henry, you'll have your own show on the comedy channel. :biggrin:
You still haven't answered if you took Obama's tax cut and would you tell me how much money do you have personally in this debt you're worried about.
Look, just put a paper bag over your head, take some string and tie the bag to your throat and take some deep breaths. You are hyperventilating. Get over yourself and calm down. Take a nap. :zzz: :smile:
Henry, I'm glad to have you back. I thought you had gone. It was boring around here without you and now I got NightSquawk. I missed ya bro. :love: :kiss:
troll, you sure are correct, the amount that I have contributed to our fed is nuttin more than a spit in the bucket. Please don't act as if our governments spending is not at all harmefull to our future being as a Nation. Our Country is nearly bankrupt......we owe the Chinese billions and billions of dollars.....the rampart spending has GOT to stop. Repub or Dem, they both contributed...this is not about Repub or Dems...it is about folks in Washington who is going to put the brakes on wasteful spending.....
Obama did not give out any tax cuts....he just extended the tax cuts that was already in place....by Bush.
Yeah, I missed YOU too Troll....that is why I came back to make your life more complete....and show you the errors of your ways... :kiss:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 15, 2011, 01:03:56 PM
troll, you sure are correct, the amount that I have contributed to our fed is nuttin more than a spit in the bucket. Please don't act as if our governments spending is not at all harmefull to our future being as a Nation. Our Country is nearly bankrupt......we owe the Chinese billions and billions of dollars.....the rampart spending has GOT to stop. Repub or Dem, they both contributed...this is not about Repub or Dems...it is about folks in Washington who is going to put the brakes on wasteful spending.....
Obama did not give out any tax cuts....he just extended the tax cuts that was already in place....by Bush.
Yeah, I missed YOU too Troll....that is why I came back to make your life more complete....and show you the errors of your ways... :kiss:
Well, I love you too. :love and kisses :kiss: :wink: Yes, both side are wrong. We have the best congress money can buy. We have to get the buying of our congress. :stop: We have to stop the greed and the people who only chase the dollar. People who has no loyalty to our country. Till we stop :stop: the flow of the money to congress and they have to depend on the people support will anything change. :trustme: :yes: