Previous 21 - 30 Next
Was any of this data used by Obama for his election? Will any of it be used in 2014 and beyond? Considering how Mr. Obama looks at the entire executive branch as his re-election staff, I would be surprised if he didn't use this information.
They have their own union, and it donated heavily to Obama's re-election and to democrats.
In response to:

The Real Reporting on the IRS

juanitavaldez Wrote: May 22, 2013 2:13 PM
(No disrespect intended to the Navy Seals-the following is merely to point out the fallacy of logic of the White House.) If those who misused/abused the IRS are merely low-level staffers thereby absolving the White House of any wrongdoing in targeting republican donors and political organizations that might hinder Mr. Obama from re-election, and those who illegally gave guns to Mexican druglords were similarly low-level government agents--as well as the Assistant US Attorney who illegally tried to tar the whistle blower in that instance...and EPA employees treating conservative groups disparately from liberal groups...and HHS 'requesting' massive donations from individuals/corporations it regulates...and the DOJ targeting the AP, FoxNews (and the family of FoxNews reporters)...or seemingly every person who has testified on behalf of the DOJ or the IRS and conveniently cannot remember a darn thing...and the complete lies regarding Benghazi (even though Pres. Obama and Hillary Clinton knew the truth, they still lied while standing next to the bodies of the dead while speaking with the families of those they swore to protect)--all of those things were done by low-level staffers and the President (or Sec. Clinton) knew nothing about them and therefore must not be blamed for them, right? Then likewise the president would in no way try to take credit for the low-level CIA staffers who found Osama Bin Laden and the low-level navy warriors who actually went into Pakistan and killed him, right? I mean, it is merely low-level individuals in this massive government. Mr. Obama would not take credit for the few successes performed by the military while also deflecting all of the turmoil caused by the rest of his administration, would he? Wouldn't a real leader take the blame for things that go wrong and try to spread the credit out to as many people as possible? Hillary took "FULL RESPONSIBILITY" for Benghazi. Let's let her take full responsibility. She did it to help obama...or whatever reason, but she claimed full responsibility.
So the counter-talking point on Benghazi is that the troops could not have gotten there in time. Lie. They didn't have armed drones? Hard to believe since they were being used in Libya during the war. (you know, the war in Libya? The one all over the news? Never mind...) First--when does America abandon people in the field? Never. When does America not TRY to help our own under fire? Never (especially when US sovereign territory and the direct representative of the president--our ambassador--is being attacked)!! It takes 5-6 hours to fly from JFK to London. We don't have any troops in Tripoli? I'm not talking 1,000 men, I mean 10? 25? 50? We don't have anyone within 5 hours of this location? Where there had been repeated attacks of our location in previous weeks (shots, bombs) and this was September 11th? Are we that stupid? Denial! At the time the call came in that they were under attack, nobody knew how long the attack would last. It lasted over 5 hours and only ended because the people there busted out (like a Hollywood movie--tires shot out, bullet holes) and through the grace of God survived. Over 5 hours of fighting. They were abandoned and left to die. America is better than that. Our president seemed more concerned about going to Vegas for a fund raiser than in helping protect his ambassador and other Americans. Hillary was only concerned about politics--and she lied to the families of the dead, even though she knew the truth. We're better than this. Our leaders must be better than this. Then again, they haven't shown any true leadership. Real leaders accept responsibility for their actions and for the actions of those under them.
The problem is this--liberals and those who promote homosexual "marriage" are doing it so that they can eliminate believers from having jobs, running companies and doing anything in the public arena. We have a right to practice our religion 24/7/365, which includes not assisting in same-sex 'marriage' whether it be making cakes, taking photos, catering, renting space or other functions.
Zero tolerance for those who believe in God.
Write "Muhammed" and stomp on that! Good for this young woman! Stand up in every time and place. Do not shirk from the truth!
In response to:

Mormon Doctrine Leads to Socialism?

juanitavaldez Wrote: May 09, 2012 12:37 PM
because the government is not led by just people. It is run by corruption, for power and authority and self-aggrandizement. It is not for the good of all, but for the power of a few.
Mitt Romney 2012!!!
In response to:

Glee Celebrates the 'T'

juanitavaldez Wrote: Apr 27, 2012 8:00 AM
sexual identity crisis? Forget religion for a moment. Think simple biology. We are merely animals, says the left. What is the darwinian advantage to someone mutilating their only means of reproduction? Same argument for homosexuality. What is the Darwinian advantage to the species of homosexuality? oh yeah--none.
Previous 21 - 30 Next