I agree with sunnycottage, only a coward would send hate mail to anyone, ever. I'm not afraid to speak up, here or IRL, but it's all out in the open, I abhor sneaky, behind the scenes stuff.

sandyponder

Oh, and Allison, totally OT BUT my electrician is on his way to hang my Hubbardton Forge Twist Basket chandelier over my kitchen table :-) I've loved it since I saw it (or close to it) in one of your pics!

I think that is the only one I don't have! lol I know you love it - I love every single one of mine as much now as when we built seven years ago.

That hate mail thing reminds me of back in 2004 when I first joined and there were some women on the board who had evidently not progressed past junior high school and loved the drama...it was really tiresome. Whoever it is, please grow up and if you want to talk about something, talk about it out in the open. I almost can't believe it would be any of us folks who post regularly, because we're so brazen we just go ahead and say whatever we think anyway : )

Hate emails over a political movie on a decorating site... it would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

I feel genuinely sorry for anyone who sends anonymous emails like that; think how awful his or her life must be.
We should include the emailer in the group hug... she needs it!

I almost can't believe it would be any of us folks who post regularly, because we're so brazen we just go ahead and say whatever we think anyway : )

Snort, snort.

I am now not sure if it's a few different hate mails now because one of the last ones seemed to have the same tone and writing style of the first. The last one was under a different name, male. It was obviously a fake name. The person I thought it was, after doing some past post investigations does not seem to jive. Whoever it is seems to have a very simple writing style (simpler than mine lol). In the last email I was accused of hiding something. I have no idea what that means. Maybe they think I'm Ann Romney in incognito (please see above ,I do not belong to a party). I mean really folks, I know some do not agree with my way of thinking but can there really be any doubt about who I am and what I feel, I wear who I am right there on the front on my sleeve. Anyway, I am now thinking it a bit sad. Maybe the person or persons is going through some very hard emotional times right now and they or he or she might be reacting in a way that would not normally happen. I know I have had some real tough times in the past where I have reacted differently to things. It happens sometime when you feel you have no control over something life changing.
So, whoever you are, or they, or he or she is I hold no bad feelings. In fact I care for you!

This is very surprising. Why don't you show us the emails, please. Copy and paste the text, leave out all identifying information. On the other hand, why not call them out publicly? Shame the chicken!

Nah. This isn't blood sport. Or is it?

Jterri, post the emails with identities. Be a very bad victim and expose the creepy hate mail. Otherwise, you are a good victim who is vulnerable for more. Just saying....

That really is chickenshirt to send you emails like that. Once I hit reply all to an email my brother had sent out...he sent it to me intending to push my buttons as we're on opposite sides of the spectrum politically. I simply stated that this was an untruth by a particular pundit. Whew...did that open up a can of worms. I got more hate email from the people on his list than I could count! I mean NASTY stuff! And this was from the people my brother are friends with whom I've never had any form of contact with before. Really frightened me that some people get so bent out of shape over this stuff. Wow.

Yeah, post the emails. I'd rather hope it was a lurker than a regular. In that case, good riddance to bad rubbish.

I did not lie Tina, and I'll take that to my grave.

About hate mail, I received a hate mail during that time from an anonymouse from this board. Hmmmm.

Changing subjects,I do have a question, but please, I beg of you, no comments if it's true.

A friend and I are having a friendly debate via email about the candidates. I'm undecided. She said that Romney said during the RNC that he was going to appeal Roe vs. Wade.

I looked on the Internet, and while he's said it in the past, did he actually say it at the convention?

A "yes" or "no" is all that's needed for peace. :)

I don't think GW has any control on emails sent anonymously. We just have to remember that although we think we "know" all the posters pretty good, we really don't.

If anyone new gets an email from me, I always identify myself as "It's Oakley." lol.

I wish it would stop though, nothing is more annoying and hateful than waking up in the morning with your first cup of coffee and seeing a hate mail.

Oakley, of course you know Romney or any president could not single handledly over turn it, but what he can do, and I believe would do, if he had the chance, is appoint one or more Supreme Court justices who would likely rule in that direction.

I am a party person. I know that sounds repugnant to many..."I would never vote for the party, always the person," some say. Well, I believe in the *platform* and the values and the stance toward life that Democrats promote. I do think that Hillary C would have made a better president than Barack O, but I voted for him because the over arching vision of Republicans is not one I share.

Having said that, I harbor no ill will toward Republicans. As Bill Clinton noted in his speech at the DNC, many Republican leaders have done a lot of good for this country over the years. I have no doubt about that. Many Republican leaders and followers embrace the notion of working WITH Democrats. They embrace differences rather than shy away from or resist them. They understand that part of what makes this country great is the *process* of debate that leads to workable solutions. These Republicans actually love Democrats, because they understand both "sides" are on the same team; the team that supports and loves and works hard for our country!

Though I am not a big Obama fan, I do believe the largest reason for him not being able to make more headway is Congress. There has never been a more resistant, stubborn Congress in our history. There has never been more refusal to compromise and reach out across the aisle. That is what politics is....compromise, the art of the deal, and yes, even a little "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine." That IS politics. Instead we've witnessed over and over an obstinate refusal to bend...so that leaves us, the people, with a break, a wound, that's weakened us.

I will vote for Obama because of the Supreme Court justice issue (I don't want an appointment made to the Court via a Republican). I will vote for Obama because he will be a lame duck president, which increases the chances of him being able to get more done in the next four years. ( He will probably face up to the bullies this term!) I will vote for Obama because he is not an elitist who strives to protect the advantages of the rich. As a Democrat, I do think he shares the vision of a strong middle class and cares deeply about the poor.

The President does not play a role in amending the Constitution. Outside of a Constitutional convention, an amendment must be proposed by a joint resolution of Congress with a two-thirds majority vote and ratified by three-fourths of the states. Thirty eight states would have to jump on board and vote for an amendment to ban ALL abortions in the United States of America. So even if the laughable suggestion that thirty eight states got their way to amend the Constitution it would have little to do with Romney , the president does not on his own amend anything in the constitution. He would never in this day and age get enough support from our divided America even if he wanted or had a roll which he does not.
I have watched a few vid's where Romney has stated that he believes in a woman's right to choose, even though it is not his personal belief. However, I seem to remember him once saying that it should be up to individual states. Again, thirty eight states in the United States of America would have to join up against woman and strip them of their rights. It would be WAR. All thirty eight states would have to be prepared for war. It's a little absurd if you think about it. Romney could not get a "vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade through the US Senate even if he wanted to commit political suicide.

Jterri, the Supreme Court certainly has *the* power, and the President has enormous influence via Supreme Court appointments. Don't you agree?

SG,Do you think that power would extend to 38 states getting on board? This all falls in line with the Obama is a Muslim theory and how he is out to purposely destroy America. I like Obama, if I had a large corporation I would hire him as the PR man, he is inspiring and one of the world's greatest speakers. That is not what I want personally out of a president though.

Jterri, I'm not following you, sweetie, as far as the Muslim theory or Obama destroying the country. (Sorry, I can be rather thick-headed!) I do think that Romney, like most Republicans (not all!) wants Planned Parenthood to be destroyed and whatever his personal views on the subject may be, as a dutiful Republican, would do whatever he could to limit reproductive choice. I would not be thrilled, I am certain, about any Supreme Court appointments Romney would make. I am concerned about that.

Frankly, I am more concerned about economic issues (like most Americans, probably) and attitudes and beliefs about who gets government support--the richest among us, or the ones in need?

As I said, I'm not a gushing, OMG, isn't Obama the best thing since cold beer, supporter, but I do feel support for and alignment with, the values and stance of the party to which he belongs. Romney and his party are not representative of or in sync with, my beliefs and priorites.

I was looking at the big picture when I voted for Obama the first time, and am doing so again, this time. I hope that Hillary runs again in 2016! Now, she's the best thing since cold beer, if you ask me!

I agree about congress. I've been reading political books the past couple of years (both parties) and am amazed how little power the POTUS has, which made me feel for Obama during his first term. To an extent.

I'm in the middle. I honestly don't know who to vote for. I've belonged to both parties though, and I side with issues from both parties.

A large part of me wants a businessman in office and to ignore all the scare tactics coming from the left. I also ignore scare tactics coming from the right. The public gets these same scare tactics every 4 years so I just ignore them because they never come to fruition.

I used to not like Hillary, but now I think she'd be a darn good president. From what I've read, she's ready to retire after this term. Can't say that I blame her, I believe she travels more than anyone in office and she's ready to enjoy a "real" homelife with Bill. Who looked awfully skinny the other night!

My concern is that if Romney gains the White House, it will continue to energize the Tea Party (not so much the GOP itself) to continue to elect these radical goofballs in Congress and as state leaders to continue to erode our rights. I mean, really...read some of the crazy legislation in Arizona for example! Womens reproductive rights are being targeted, more and more lately. Perhaps the federally regulated RvW might not be repealed, but the protections afforded physicians will be lost-and we WILL go back to the days before RvW was enacted. No matter where you stand on the issue...I believe, with all my heart, that women should have the right to chose...putting into place the absurd restrictions the TP proposes erodes the rights of women, particularly if they're the victim of sexual abuse. In effect, they're abusing women a second time-and women who DO want to end a pregnancy will have it done, legally or not. It's been the way since the beginning of time.

So yes, I too hoped HC would win the nom, and while I had my doubts about Obama, I chose him over McCain...and ONLY because he'd aligned himself with Tea Party.

SG, Some of my views are on the left and some are on the right. My views on the left are a woman's right to choose, I believe same sexes should be able to get married (I don't think it other people's business).

Even as an agnostic I do not believe we should remove the mention of God on everything from money to whatever. I have no problem with people and their religious views. Most of my friends are religous. As the Democratic convention proved there are a lot of us non-believers out here though. I personally do not find religious people threatening. I respect them for their beliefs. Yes there are some people who are way way over the top, they are a minority. Most people just go about their day with their faith in a peaceful way. Most religious people are far more liberal (even if they are republicans) then what the left gives them credit for.

So as you can see I fall in the middle. I will vote for the person with a resume that fits with the troubles of the time, Romney. It will have nothing to do with whose speaking style or personality shines brighter. That is for high school proms.

I get aggravated at the usual women's rights/abortion issue every stinking election. The whole thing this time is designed to give those women on the fence an excuse to vote for Obama. I 100% believe this to be true. If it was not true and the far left women were really concerned with their rights those same women would not have been clapping uproariously at Bill Clintons speech and the fact that he was even there. He violated the most basics against women with all his sexual exploits on women when married. How can people who say they would have voted for Hillary not be affected by how he humiliated her over and over in front of the entire world? I asked some democratic women I know what in the world is this mentality? They said "well we can't help but like him" Huh? Or, they said he was good to get the male votes that's needed. Huh? So I'm guessing that they are not really worried about women being thrown back in the kitchen with a spoon, pot and a box of mac & cheese wearing no underware (just in case the "man" comes home). They are just willing to go with anything to get Obama reelected.

That's all well and good because that crap happens on the right too. That's why we can't believe anything we hear and have to spend incredible amounts of time weeding through it all.

I'm with Pesky. Roe v Wade does not have to be repealed to limit access to abortions, and that is what many on the right are doing now. I will always vote to keep women's choices their own. I have had 3 pregnancies, 2 of which were unplanned. I feel that if it weren't my choice to carry those babies I may have had resentment for them. I am happy to have three great kids now!

I truly think those who are afraid of this are greatly underestimating women and do not realize that excluding those in the far far right camp that the left would probably go into shock to realize how many republican women would happily join the fight for women's rights. This is all a joke how we are all being programed against each other. It really would be a war!!! It's not going to happen.

JT, I realize many people out there do not like the Clintons, so I no doubt ruffle feathers admitting my admiration for them. (Even the feathers of many Dems.!)

I think Bill is brilliant and I think Hillary is too (& Chelsea probably is as well!) I thought Bill's speech was probably one of, if not the best, ever given at a political convention!

Yes, he messed up big time with his sexual exploits. I don't brush off his indiscretions, or make exuses for them. He did wrong. He was wrong. But, Hillary said that she stayed with him because no one makes her laugh the way he does, they have a shared history, a life, a child. She has moved on, so I think I should be able to.

While hugely disappointing, I don't think affairs or sexual addiction signal a disregard for women. I think such behavior clearly indicates other problems, and hopefully Bill has "done the work" and addressed those issues.

I admire people who mess up and work hard to redeem themselves. I admire Bill for working right now, post-presidency, to help the poor, the disenfranchised, the overlooked citizens, not only of the U.S., but of the world. I think he cares about people, genuinely.

It would be a waste of his talents and intelligence and energy to stay locked up in a room somewhere, hiding in shame, and not reach out to help those in need when he has the know how, the connections and other resources, to do so.

I don't believe it's not going to happen (or wouldn't happen) - the overturning of Roe v. Wade. There is no way an idealoque Supreme Court Justice, who is anti choice is going to worry one whit about what women think (fear of uprising) about it, if they rule according to their own beliefs. And they would.

It wouldn't affect my state because we have a citizen voted initiative from 1970 - pre RVW, that allows a woman to chose abortion if she wishes. But in the states that are now passing all kinds of restrictions (a medically unnecessary forced ultrasound if you want an abortion) they could then ban abortion and it wouldn't be unconstitutional. The only way the feds could ban abortions in states that allow them would be by an amendment to the constitution.

But our rights can be whittled away, like is being done now, so that only the rich who can afford to travel will have access. I wish the debate would be reframed from anti choice vs pro choice to something more along the lines of safe legal abortion (should you chose that) vs. back alley unsafe illegal abortion. I had an illegal, back alley abortion in 1968 and it was one of the most horrendous experiences of my life. Not the fact (which I never regretted) that I made that choice, but the unsafe, unsterile conditions were a nightmare.

That is the scenario we will return to - how it was for women before Roe v. Wade. And since the Republican platform calls for the banning of all abortions, regardless, it's likely any Justice appointed by their candidate would have to pass that litmus test.

Hi SG, I do not dislike the Clintons either (I would have voted for Hilary) but I do find it very odd that no one, not one mention of his exploits were mentioned as upsetting to the very basics of women's rights activists. A mistake is something we all do and I think if we learn by it can make us smarter. I will leave out my thoughts on serial sexual exploiters who do not learn and repeat acts over and over and over. And over.

And over.

Why the focus on Clinton's womanzing? It is none of our business. He was an effective president, regardless. I would bet my house that every single one of us personally knows a married person we like and respect who has had an affair nobody knows about, and has lied about it. It is none of our business.

The stakes in this election are huge. Any discussion of Clinton's escapades are meant to detract from Obama. How ridiculous and unimportant. Focus on real issues.

I do agree with you, Sherrmann, about Bill Clinton's womanizing. Heck, if his own wife can forgive and move on, shouldn't the rest of us have done so by now? It's a non-issue.

Very well said, Olychick!

I couldn't agree more re:the Clinton 'situation' . Everyone has a personal life, and the president of the US is no different. Besides it *does* take two to tango, and in a weak moment, a horrendous mistake can be made. SG said it all! ;o)

Most of us vote on issues. My big one is health care. The majority of criticism lobbed at Obama (from both sides) is that he picked a bad time to tackle that cause when the economy was in the dumps. I say, if not now then when? There are always problems going on. Bill and Hillary tried to push the issue when he was in office and it crashed with a thud. The republicans wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

In the time between Clinton's administration and now, health care costs have soared astronomically. It's pretty much a house of cards that was ready to tumble. I will never be content as long as people can lose their house and everything else they own just by getting sick. We had to act quickly. Actually, quickly is a silly word to use as we are the only industrialized nation without a health plan for its citizens.

I voted for Hillary in the last primaries but Obama gained my respect when he made such a hugely unpopular decision.

I agree francy! Health care is a huge part of the economy and something needed to be done. I don't see it as an either or proposition. When people have to spend so much of their income on health insurance that's money that they can't spend elsewhere. Money needs to circulate for the economy to thrive.

I admire Obama for his healthcare reform but I still pay an arm and a leg for our insurance. We need to go further with a public option or at least the ability to purchase from companies across states. Bring on competition!

There is plenty of competition. We need national, single payer health insurance. Why people say they don't want the government in their health care but don't mind the wealthy insurance dictates is beyond me.

Yes something sure has to be done about affordable health care. Whether it's Obamacare or Mitt's plan that gives each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens and that creates competition. Whichever it is it will take time to iron out the wrinkles. I'm not looking forward to that part but we have to start somewhere. We have insurance but the bills coming in for husbands heart gig are so confusing, do I pay that or wait until they get it together on what we owe? Were there really twenty five differnt people in the room? No idea!

"not one mention of his exploits were mentioned as upsetting to the very basics of women's rights activists."

It's not that we're 'ignoring the connection' -- It's that we don't believe there IS a connection. How did Bill's infidelities impact Hillary's RIGHTS? Unless she had a RIGHT to demand sexual fidelity...

Let me clarify -- It is an agreement most people make when they marry - to remain sexually exclusive. But it is a person's RIGHT to enforce that?

Reverse the genders and consider whether a MAN should have any RIGHTS over a woman's sexual decisions. They certainly did, back when women were chattel, and rape was considered an economic crime against the man 'whose woman had been diminished in value.'

That's a RIGHTS-based claim, and it's absurd and offensive.

I don't think it's an issue of RIGHTS at all. Or even one of respect. I think it's a fairly simple matter of 'It feels good and I won't get caught.' NOT admirable. But also NOT our business and not, in itself, an adequate measure of a man.

And I couldn't agree more on the health care issue. It's a plain fact that as someone with an individual healthcare policy (not provided by a big corporation), I have no financial security in the event of a health crisis. NONE.

Thank you sweeby, Even though we don't agree at least someone had the wally's to partially address my point. I'll give it up and not go into the parts that were not addressed like rape, sexual harassment and groped women.

I'm on my own here.

Like I said somewhere above most of the independents I have spoken to who have made up their minds to Mitt are staying mum. They do not want conflict about it. I know I'm a gluten for punishment for speaking my mind here. According to Cindy Macolini who is one of the ones emailing me through gardenweb (not hateful but annoying) she says I'm showing my true colors. Well I'll have to agree, I am. This is what I think.

Jterrrilyn, I do not think you are alone in your views for the polls are almost a dead heat. I have noticed here and on facebook only one party is "in your face" vocal about what is "true", "best" and "right" while the other is more reserved and usually only answers or responds to the propaganda. For every 10 FB posts shared from the group "I love it when I wake up and Obama is president" I have one,if that, friend sharing a pro mitt piece of propaganda. I am not friends with radical tea partiers but I bet if I were than maybe this stat would be a bit different.
I was raised that your vote was private and you never tried to bully or even try to convince others to vote your way so I do not offer my opinion unless incited to do so. I am one of the undecided still, but am so turned off by all the propaganda and people telling me, a well educated and compassionate person, what is right and best for everyone. I, as a well educated and, more importantly, compassionate person, find it insulting that some people do not realize what is best for them is not best or right for all others. Most of this trying to change the opinions of the undecided or even the decided is, ironically, more prevalent from the side which feels itself to be the more enlightened and liberal party. We are all free to vote and think for our selves and I am turned off by people saying we need this and only this view is factual, it is arrogantly ignorant and totally contrary to the ideals our country was based upon.
And for the record I spent many years working for Senator Pell, who was very good personal friends with, Wait for it, Strom Thurman. If they could see past party lines maybe we should all try.

Marlene, I guess I don't have to answer your question now.

Oakley, you can deny all you want, but I have a bad habit of not cleaning out my email boxes. I have proof of at least one lie. Whatever! I am going to do my very best to not interact with you at all on this board. There is far to much snipping and snapping on this board lately and I am not proud of my part. I have really grown tired of it.

Roarah, Yes I know it is a bit pointless...all this! But you know all in all I don't see this thread as being so bad. Except for a few whack jobs on my email I think most everyone has behaved rather well considering all the opinions. A lot of times when you get this many women together it turns into a bee hive gone wild. I think everyone here is a bunch of keepers!

Tina, I had forgotten what I had asked :) I think I was being a bit rhetorical. However, I am sorry you've gone through this. It's not fun. I do agree that ignoring is the very best option. I know that's what I "try" to do!

Roarah, I'm not sure that people who express their views, opinions, and preferred candidate/party are necessarily trying to convince or persuade others. I know I wasn't. I've never been in the business of trying to change minds. Was just speaking for myself and joining the conversation.
However, I do wholeheartedly agree that one is entitled to exercise the perogative to keep their vote private.

I have noticed here and on facebook only one party is "in your face" vocal about what is "true", "best" and "right" while the other is more reserved and usually only answers or responds to the propaganda. For every 10 FB posts shared from the group "I love it when I wake up and Obama is president" I have one,if that, friend sharing a pro mitt piece of propaganda.

OMG, roarah, "more reserved"???? I was subjected to daily doses of what I consider hate speech via a radical-right family member who "liked" posts from a Facebook site called foramerica. Go to Facebook, type "foramerica" in the search box and take a look. And all it takes is one click of the button to spread the hate.

Sorry for my earlier rant...spent the night in the ER with a very sick five year old. For what it is worth the care she received was quick and efficent and much better than when she almost died in an understaffed Canadian hospital outside of montreal last year. SG and most others have politly expressed their view but it is still a thread of us trying to show that what we want should be believed by all and that never works.

Greywings i did say if I had tea party friends, which I am glad I do not, my stats would be different but my radical liberal friends,which are abuntant in my area, are also spreading lots of lies and hate they think it is fine because it is directed against the rich mostly but it is still prejudice. The radicals in each party are equally dangerous, hurtful and annoying

{{gwi:1521739}}

Just had to post this!

roarah said:

"The radicals in each party are equally dangerous, hurtful and annoying".....I so agree with you roarah.

I hope your child is feeling better!

Being Canadian, I enjoyed reading the above and getting a clearer view of what each party means to people , your beliefs, etc.. Overall I also think it went
well .

Roarah, OMG, I hope your little one is feeling better! An ER visit for any reason is very stressful. Sending you hugs!

Kelly, your pic is great (& the caption!). We could all do well to conjure up that image from time to time!

Roarah, hope your daughter is recovering well.

Kelly, that pic is going to live in my family :)

I just saw where it was mentioned that Romney has a resume that fits with the troubles of the time. Now *that's* something we can agree on--his kind of resume caused a great deal of the troubles! Or is that not what was meant? ; )

Die, thread, die!

Hope to see you all at the polls!