I don't recall that, Andrew.

No, brown = Mexicans and Yellow = Asians. Seriously, did you really think he was making bathroom jokes? No, he was implying that it is racist to be anti-illegal immigration and he accused Yellow (Asians, I suppose) of not being mellow...nobody seems sure of what he was trying to say other than the words rhymed. As far as white, apparently, we aren't right.

Rush Limbaugh and his listeners...are allowed to think and act how they decide. You, Obama and the Democrats have no right to dictate how anyone should believe or think.

If Republicans THINK they are right, then why should they want to compromise? And did George Bush compromising with Liberals, letting Teddy Kennedy write his education bill, did that get him any credit? Nope! Teddy stood right up there and accused George Bush of lying. All the while, he was aware that what George Bush had said was what the Intelligence community had been saying for years...what he, Hilliary, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, John Edwards had all said before him.

Consensus is the absence of leadership.
--Margaret Thatcher

I personally see no purpose for a military base in Cuba with today's technology. I'm not saying set them all free. Charges against them are based on intel, not individual operatives. It is a wealth of intel generated by multiple operatives compiled into a file. There can be one person that sits in court and brings the evidence in their file against them. If there is insufficient proof, why are they being held?



Obama has no place telling anyone what they can or cannot listen to! He's the president, not God. It is still a free country, at least until he gets around to fixing that too...


Obama is not actually telling people they cannot listen to Limbaugh but rather suggests that following Limbaugh is detrimental to the goal of unity - and he is correct based on statements from Limbaugh's own mouth.



There is no other issue in America more divisive than Abortion. Any funds that we give to such organizations will go to ending more lives, not saving them. Why not give the money to organizations that will feed the hungry and care for the sick with the money, instead of ending more lives? If my tax money is going to a foreign country, it should at least be in the hopes of saving and improving lives, not simply ending them.


As you state, it's a divisive topic. I personally do not like abortion, but I will not vote against it (other than late-term) ever because I do not see it as a child until it can sustain life. Abortions in the first trimester to me are not murder. I do not like that my tax dollars are going toward abortion but I prioritize and am more worried about the fact there will be no Social Security when I retire (after paying 10s of thousands) and all this money going into social programs that should not exist. The abortion/planned parenthood money is a drop in the bucket to me. However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I do not judge anyone a lesser person for having beliefs of that nature.

Maybe I'm mixed up... I always seem to remember you siding with madison and lynann in other topics... I've never agreed with either of them lol.

"if it's yellow, let it mellow. if it's brown, flush it down." yes, I understand the racial connotations but people laughed at it (and that was the intent) because it's a bathroom joke.

Yes, sometimes I agree with them on certain issues.

Otherwise, when you come across them in battle, don't capture them, give them two to the chest in a firefight so it's legit.


the only problem with that is if you are in a fire fight and you are going thru clearing a building and come across a wounded "enemy" you cant put two in their chest because it's against the geneva convention "double tap" its called.

I cant remember when but when the war in Iraq first started we had a soldier on tape who thought a wounded enemy was reaching for something and he shot him. there were some in this country who wanted him courtmarshalled before even knowing what was going thru his mind when he was telling the wounded enemy to stop moving and he didnt.

THE EVIDENCE itself has to have a source. The EVIDENCE MUST be made available to the defense team. All they would need is a single name or sometimes less to jeopardize an operation or a life. Say that we got some information that lead to an arrest of a terorist from Soandso. Well, the defense team has a right to know who gave the information. And then Soandso's life is worth squat. That's why it's dangerous to put these guys on trial. Besides, by international law, enemy combatants can be held until the war is over. So if we have reason to believe they are terrorists, then we should hold on to them regardless of if we can prove it in a court of law.

And we need Git-mo. It's a good place to put prisoners who would be too politically volatile to have within the USA borders.



I consider a living being a life. I think that Steven Hawkings is alive, even though he cannot walk, talk, feed himself or wipe his own butt. I think that Christopher Reeve was alive, even when he couldn't move. I think that a human body, even one that is deformed, damaged or undeveloped is a life. I think that, because it fits every definition of a life, but what do I know?

we all have a right to opinion and my opinion is that anyone that far to one side and has that much of a blind following is bad for our country. both sides need to learn. unfortunately, the left will never accuse those on the left just like the right will never accuse those on the right. Standing for your beliefs is one thing but promoting the failure of the administration (and ultimately the nation) is detrimental. Both sides need to compromise and until we stop listening to people like Arianna Huffington and Rush Limbaugh without personal analysis, we are doomed to fail.


"The Democrats can't see all the whining Democrats because all they see is the whining Republicans. The whining Republicans can't see all the whining Republicans because all they see are whining Democrats."

--Me, just now.

That's not what he said...his little rhymning bit at the end was from a 60's civil rights song. You are very confused and off base on this. It wasn't a bathroom joke. You need to drop that line of thinking. It was a racist jab at white people and Asians. I strongly suggest you read about this topic more before you say anything else on the subject.

You admit are correct here... i know this but I typed without really thinking that through.

Googled the song and now I see... I heard yellow and mellow and put the wrong two together. i saw it off-color at first but now I'm pretty pissed about it.

The "war on terror" will never end. So by your logic, it's perfectly ok to hold a person against their will until death? How would you feel if the enemy did the same with an American? It's not holding terrorists I have issue with, it's the holding of those suspected to be terrorists on that fact alone.

We could always execute them, I suppose. I think it would be better to hold them against their will until they can no longer endanger Americans or American operations abroad. If they were captured, it was probably on a battle field...dressed as civilians...shooting at Americans. In other words, committing war crimes, for which they could be executed.

Than do it - I fully acknowledge that many of them have violated the terms of the GC and do not receive the provisions given by the convention. If they committed these crimes, outing the soldiers that witnessed it will not endanger them. I have no issues with killing them for their worthy crimes but at least bring them to trial.

Soldiers dressed as civilians aren't offered a trial, they are in violation of the GC and can be summarily executed.

have at it then. I hold them to the same standard.

Whew, I finally found it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZLw5ahxm-Q

I thought it was tacky that a reverend would say something like that.

I've researched it now. I understand.

It was an important song for black people during the emotional times of the 60's.

When the reverend said his prayer, he was taking us through his journey from former NAACP head, to 60's Civil Rights leader to now --- Obama's benediction leader.

Obama wouldn't have been elected, without all those "wrong" whites who threw away...I mean voted for him. Now all that he asks is that all white people drop their pants and grab their ankles.