It’s not good enough, that the Mayor of Detroit has finally caught charges, like he should have. You want his friends, family, pastor, and GOD to turn their back on him. Everybody knows that he has done wrong, and is guilty of lying in a court of law, and to a notary. But he still has the right to go through the judicial process, doesn’t he? I’m pretty sure he’s going to “GET” some time, and be put out of office. I wouldn’t expect any Politician to give up their office unless they had too. But, that’s not good enough for some. It does seem like a lynch mob mentality, in a way. It’s like justice isn’t being served fast, or hard enough.
Some people would even want to make him guilty of the murder of Tamara Green. God bless her soul. Without a shred of evidence, at least not yet.
LYNCH MOB
group of killers: a group of people who capture and hang somebody without legal arrest and trial, because they think the person has committed a crime. Encarta ® World English Dictionary ©
Some people even knock him for setting up a defense fund. LOL Donate if you want to. Don’t if you don’t. It’s that simple. I, personally, am not! He has to come up with the money some how! Because his butt is definitely in the ringer. There is NO need to boycott DETROIT, or attack his pastor for offering support!!!
Loyalty
I Know some religions will excommunicate a person for doing some of the things Kwame has done. But Just because his preacher gives him support in a time of need , you want to knock HIM for doing his job. I really don't believe that his pastor believes it's ok to commit Adultery or lie on the stand. Men of god are not supposed to turn their back on anyone in their flock. Are they?
The mayor has done some bad things and I believe there is a good chance he is going to Jail.
Justice will PREVAIL!!!
Only time will tell.
But until then…………….. Cut out all the belly aching!
DRAMA QUEENS!
Do you find it funny that all of the Republicans, and "True Conservatives"(a republican that's to ashamed to say so)are always putting up posts that slam democrats? MOST, "Rep/Con’s" Don’t “campaign” for the person they are going to vote for, they just seem to spew propaganda against the competition.
TYPICAL
It's like they have nothing good to post about their candidate for president, so there only option is to bash the competition.
Are they embarrassed by the state of the republican party?
Are they ashamed to talk about the candidate they want in office?
Do they believe the only way for Republicans to win the office of the president is with smoke and mirrors?
Ann Coulter shock columnist "Jews need to be "perfected"
Slash-and-burn columnist Ann Coulter shocked a cable TV talk-show audience Monday when she declared that Jews need to be "perfected" by becoming Christians, and that America would be better off if everyone were Christian. Coulter made the remarkable statements during an often heated appearance to promote her new book on advertising guru Danny Deutsch's CNBC show "The Big Idea." In response to a question from Deutsch asking Coulter if "it would be better if we were all Christian," the controversial columnist responded: "Yes."
"We should all be Christian?" Deutsch repeated.
"Yes," Coulter responded, asking Deutsch, who is Jewish, if he would like to "come to church with me."
Deutsch, pressing Coulter further, asked, "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians?" She responded: "Yeah."
WHAT DO YOU THINK!?
video is on first comment
Propaganda: is a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of large numbers of people. Instead of impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense presents information in order to influence its audience. The most effective propaganda is often completely truthful, but some propaganda presents facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the cognitive narrative of the subject in the target audience.
The aim of propagandist is to influence people's opinions or behaviors actively, rather than merely to communicate the facts about something. For example, propaganda might be used to gather either support or disapproval of a certain position, rather than to simply present the position. What separates propagandist from "normal" communication is in ways by which the message attempts to shape opinion or behavior, which are often subtle and insidious among other characteristics. For example, propagandist is often presented in a way that attempts to deliberately evoke a strong emotion, especially by suggesting illogical (or non-intuitive) relationships between concepts or objects. This may begin with a simple transmission such as a leaflet dropped from a plane or an advertisement. Generally these messages will contain directions on how to obtain more information, via a web site, hot line, radio program, et cetera . The strategy intends to initiate the individual from information recipient to information seeker through reinforcement, and then from information seeker to opinion leader through indoctrination Many of these same techniques can be found under logical fallacies, since propagandists use arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid.
Ad Hominem: A Latin phrase which has come to mean attacking your opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.
Appeal to fear: Appeals to fear seek to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population, for example, Joseph Goebbels exploited Theodore Kaufman's Germany Must Perish! to claim that the Allies sought the extermination of the German people.
Appeal to Prejudice: Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition. For example, the phrase: "Any hard-working taxpayer would have to agree that those who do not work, and who do not support the community do not deserve the community's support through social assistance."
Argumentum ad nauseam: This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach works best when media sources are limited and controlled by the propagator.
Bandwagon: Bandwagon and "inevitable-victory" appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to join in and take the course of action that "everyone else is taking."
Inevitable victory: invites those not already on the bandwagon to join those already on the road to certain victory. Those already or at least partially on the bandwagon are reassured that staying aboard is their best course of action.
Join the crowd: This technique reinforces people's natural desire to be on the winning side. This technique is used to convince the audience that a program is an expression of an irresistible mass movement and that it is in their best interest to join.
Black-and-White fallacy: Presenting only two choices, with the product or idea being propagated as the better choice. (e.g., "You are either with us, or you are with the enemy") Sounds familiar Colt?
Big Lie:The repeated articulation of a complex of events that justify subsequent action. The descriptions of these events have elements of truth, and the "big lie" generalizations merge and eventually supplant the public's accurate perception of the underlying events. After World War I the German Stab in the back explanation of the cause of their defeat became a justification for Nazi re-militarization and revanchist aggression.
Demonizing the enemy: Making individuals from the opposing nation, from a different ethnic group, or those who support the opposing viewpoint appear to be subhuman (e.g., the Vietnam War-era term "gooks" for NLF soldiers), worthless, or immoral, through suggestion or false accusations.
Flag-waving: An attempt to justify an action on the grounds that doing so will make one more patriotic, or in some way benefit a group, country, or idea. The feeling of patriotism which this technique attempts to inspire may not necessarily diminish or entirely omit one's capability for rational examination of the matter in question.
Obtain disapproval or Reductio ad Hitlerum: This technique is used to persuade a target audience to disapprove of an action or idea by suggesting that the idea is popular with groups hated, feared, or held in contempt by the target audience. Thus if a group which supports a certain policy is led to believe that undesirable, subversive, or contemptible people support the same policy, then the members of the group may decide to change their original position.
Oversimplification: Favorable generalities are used to provide simple answers to complex social, political, economic, or military problems.
Quotes out of Context: Selective editing of quotes which can change meanings. Political documentaries designed to discredit an opponent or an opposing political viewpoint often make use of this technique.
Red herring/Chewbacca Defense: Presenting data or issues that, while compelling, are irrelevant to the argument at hand, and then claiming that it validates the argument.
Stereotyping or Name Calling or Labeling: This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable. For instance, reporting on a foreign country or social group may focus on the stereotypical traits that the reader expects, even though they are far from being representative of the whole country or group; such reporting often focuses on the anecdotal.
Testimonial: Testimonials are quotations, in or out of context, especially cited to support or reject a given policy, action, program, or personality. The reputation or the role (expert, respected public figure, etc.) of the individual giving the statement is exploited. The testimonial places the official sanction of a respected person or authority on a propaganda message. This is done in an effort to cause the target audience to identify itself with the authority or to accept the authority's opinions and beliefs as its own.
Virtue words: These are words in the value system of the target audience which tend to produce a positive image when attached to a person or issue. Peace, happiness, security, wise leadership, freedom, "The Truth", etc. are virtue words. In countries such as the U.S. religiosity is seen as a virtue, making associations to this quality affectively beneficial .
It seems that Colt only belives in the freedom of speech when you agree with him.
LOL LMMFAO
Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana confessed to "a very serious sin"Vitter shamelessly got on his high horse, condemning those he deemed morally inferior, despite engaging in the same “anti-family” behavior he claimed to abhor. And in the process, he lied, repeatedly, to the public about his own failings.
FULL STORY
Vitter Flashback: Clinton should resign!
Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) first got his start in Congress after replacing former Rep. Bob Livingston (R-LA), who “abruptly resigned after disclosures of numerous affairs” in 1998. At the time, Vitter argued that an extramarital affair was grounds for resignation:
“I think Livingston’s stepping down makes a very powerful argument that Clinton should resign as well and move beyond this mess,” he said. [Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 12/20/98]
WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!!!!
Do you think vitter should step down?
I came across this old news article from CNN.com
What would war with Iraq cost?
Bush: Attack by Iraq 'would cripple' economy
From Dana Bash
CNN Washington Bureau
Thursday, January 2, 2003 Posted: 9:08 AM EST (1408 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House is downplaying published reports of an estimated $50 billion to $60 billion price tag for a war with Iraq, saying it is "impossible" to estimate the cost at this time.
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels told The New York Times in an interview published Tuesday that such a conflict could cost $50 billion to $60 billion -- the price tag of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
But Trent Duffy, an OMB spokesman, said Daniels did not intend to imply in the Times interview that $50 billion to $60 billion was a hard White House estimate.
"He said it could -- could -- be $60 billion," Duffy said. "It is impossible to know what any military campaign would ultimately cost. The only cost estimate we know of in this arena is the Persian Gulf War, and that was a $60 billion event."
Duffy also was careful to caution that President Bush had not made a decision to use military force against Saddam's regime. Bush stressed that point in comments to reporters on Tuesday. "I want to remind people that Saddam Hussein, the choice is his to make as to whether or not the Iraqi situation [is] resolved peacefully. ... I hope we're not headed to war in Iraq," he said.
Fielding questions about the tensions with Iraq and North Korea, Bush also said an attack by Saddam Hussein or a terrorist ally "would cripple our economy."
"This economy cannot afford to stand an attack," Bush said. "And I'm going to protect the American people. The economy's strong. It's resilient. Obviously, so long as somebody's looking for work, we've got to continue to make it strong and resilient."
'No one knows how much it will cost'
In September, Daniels disputed an estimate by Bush economic adviser Larry Lindsey -- who has since left the White House -- that war with Iraq could cost $200 billion.
Daniels said he believes Lindsey's estimate was "the upper end of a hypothetical," Duffy said. Congressional Democrats this past fall estimated the cost of a military attack against Iraq around $93 billion. But they noted that the figure did not include costs such as U.S. peacekeeping efforts, foreign assistance or loan forgiveness, or the economic impact should an oil crisis ensue. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, the outgoing Senate Budget Committee chairman, issued a statement Tuesday saying "the reality is no one knows how much it will cost us to wage war with Iraq." "Mitch Daniels' $50 billion to $60 billion estimate is as viable as Larry Lindsey's $100 billion to $200 billion estimate in September. So much depends on the duration and type of combat forces as well as the presence, duration and size of a peacekeeping force," Conrad said.
Conrad also said that "despite this potential new expense, the Bush administration continues with its ill-fated economic policy of more tax cuts for the wealthy, bigger deficits for the American people and growing debt for our children and grandchildren."
The cost of the Persian Gulf war was shared by many countries in the U.S.-led coalition against Saddam. It is unclear how many nations would pick up some of the cost of another campaign.
AS of 8:55 06/07/2007 the war cost America $ 432,614,600,000.00
Link to CNN article
Link The True Costs of War. Bill Moyers on PBS via. LIVELEAK
LInk to Iraq coalition casualties
http://costofwar.com/
Just like to hear some comments on this!
