It didn't work
Posted By: oh brother on 2009-02-22
In Reply to: Well, now that's another issue...(sm) - Just the big bad
You can't make up whatever you want and everyone knows that graph and what it means. It didn't work. Are you discovering history for the 1st time? I know it can be exciting, but get it right. Thanks.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Well, that didn't work! LOL.
If anyone is interested in seeing the ASTRONOMICAL amount of money these corporations are costing Americans with their offshore tax shelters, please open the links I posted. 
no, it didn't work for me either
I couldn't send the vote, but then I read where it said before Friday so maybe they stopped taking votes today or something.
The link didn't work.
It took me to the YouTube site but gave me this error message, "The url contained a malformed video id."
sorry the link didn't work...sm
Type it into your browser and it appears to work..
In a word, no. Besides that, it didn't work for them
Same thing by the same people, expecting a different result? Let's see how well that works for them.
Well, link didn't work. Try this.
http://banking.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Articles.Detail&Article_id=573a46c4-822c-435c-8405-8b4c93516b52&Month=12&Year=2008
Didn't work very good - did it? nmx
x
Sorry, that link didn't work - here it is.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090510/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_correspondents
Sorry, that link didn't work - here it is.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090510/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_correspondents
Tax cuts didn't work - what is your cure? nm
x
Show me proof that it didn't work......
Maybe you just got your history lesson from Faux Noise. The New Deal DID work until the Republicans pressured FDR into instituting tax cuts - then we went into a recession - after that World War II pulled us out of that. It sure doesn't look like Ws wars have helped our financial situation.......perhaps that's because he told us all to SHOP till we DROP instead of asking Americans to sacrifice like FDR did.........but. WWII wasn't based on lies, either......
Embed didn't work. Anyway, here's my question:
As you can hear, the Congresswoman from Illinois gets a lot of cheers when she declares that the plan for national healthcare would drive private insurers out of business.
The private health care insurance industry is one that involves around 5000 companies, almost a million workers and $1 trillion in annual revenue.
Let's put aside for a minute the trivial consideration of the government bureaucracy that proposes to replace all of this, and instead ask how deliberately destroying an industry that hasn't needed bailouts, that employs so many people and generates such revenues (with the corresponding tax revenues) squares with saying that we should bail out the auto industry in order to save jobs?
Ooops, didn't work..what happens when you're in a hurry.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/print.asp?id=1412
sorry the link didn't work - its on MSN front page today
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29697096
Deny, deny, deny. Didn't work for Bill either. (nm)
nm
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't
his own personal reasons.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php
The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.
Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."
Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.
In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.
"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"
Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.
Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.
Conversations With Bush The Candidate
Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.
The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.
I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."
Debating The Timeline For War
But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.
The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.
On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"
I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."
"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …
"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.
Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.
Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"
Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.
Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."
Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.
Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.
That could work, PK.
but hey where do you work now
exMQMT? if you do not mind that is. Thanks!
Sam, please let me know where you work.
I am an excellent MT who would love to have enough free time to post messages on this board all day long, but the companies I work for require me to spend most of my day transcribing. I would love to find a company who would allow me the freedom that you have to spend hour-after-hour posting to my little heart's desire. Please point me in the right direction, as I would love to be as free as you are to repeatedly force my opinions on everyone who reads the MTStars board. You can e-mail me if you would like to keep this confidential. I want to be just like you!!!!!
no thanks, does not work for me.
I will never agree with you no matter what you say or do on this board -
As far as taxing rich democrats, I remember President Clinton objecting to not being taxed and coming forward that he was against that from the beginning.
{You really think it is fair for those who have been successful to redistribute their money to other people? Be punished for success? I do not get that mindset}
- hey you are trying to convince someone who is older than 50 that I do not deserve anything for my hard work for some 30+ years, not going to happen.
I am from the days when employers had to pay you what you were worth, health insurance, full benefits, etc etc. You will never ever convince me I am better off just by repeating it over and over.
Sorry, not interested in any how, any way or, any time for rich corps to have the right to make me work twice as hard for less, so they can send the majority of work overseas to avoid paying people decent wages or by contributing anything except by their own will to anything in this country at their own discretion. If I am forced to pay taxes, they should be also.
trickle down theory, what has trickled down to the middle class but hardship, suffering, back to slave labor and poor working conditions...
Sending work overseas and all the side-effects from that directly affects me and my family and our quality of life.
Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice - not.
I have done all the work.....all you have to do
xx
Not quite sure how that will work
but I think he meant that they would look at the value of a house and renegotiate the mortgage based on the new value of the house since values have gone down. That way people aren't upside down with owing more than their home is worth. He isn't just going to buy up and pay for these mortgages.
I know who most will have to work for
The government.....sadly enough. That is socialism for ya!!!!!
And those that do not work get all of BOTH of
@@
Won't ever work
It's not the law-abiding hunter gun owners that you have to worry about. The bad guys will always find a way to get a gun, just like drugs. It doesn't matter what kind of law there is in place. Those laws just punish the rest of us.
I don't know how this should work......nm
Then the whole responsibility would be with the people.
okay .. i have to get to work
you want to research it
the one I am talking about was posted the day after the election
and it was changed on saturday or sunday ...
the site I saw the images posted has archived that and I am not sure how to retreive it.
believe me or not, it is your choice.
and this "change" is just another reason I remain skeptical about the future administration.
peace out ..
work on your
excessive focus on what "they" think and do. Spend more time on what you think and do. Works everytime.
What I work on...
Working 2 full-time jobs 90+ hours a week, excessive focus on paying my own bills and staying afloat. Not much time for much else but sleep. Truth is truth, the reality is what it is, you know.
do you work in the
overused cliches department proliferation section?
If they don't work....(sm)
then they obviously need help making them work. Hence....funding.
You are probably right. SOME MT work may
nm
and, obviously, you don't work!
x
So you don't work?
Must not. And you think the KKK is gone? lol - sure you're black, uh-huh. whatever. Now I'm supposed to kiss your @$$? yeah, right.
Even those who work sometimes have
to get gov't assistance. Not all are lazy good for nothings as you depict, many are the elderly or the disabled. Who cares what they buy to eat.
I use to work for SS and if you are sm
an adult who has never paid in or do not have enough working credits you cannot draw SS disability. You can draw what is called SSI which is a social security supplement paid through your state to folks who don't qualify for SS or don't get enough.
Kids who get SS like Octomoms kids are getting SSI unless its a situation where a parent who was working died, then there are death benefits for minor children.
IF there is no SS for you when you retire it is not because of what people who are drawing it now are getting it is becasue our government has robbed the SS fund. Your SS benefits are based on what you have made in your lifetime. If the fund is still there and the government doesn't take it all, you will get exactly the amount you are suppose to get based on what you have made in your life time.
As far as these lawyers advertising to get benefits for folks who are depressed, alcoholic, whatever.......these people, again, cannot get regular SS disability benefits if they have not worked and paid in. These commercials don't tell you that. The attorneys can fight for SSI (the supplement) for their clients but not disability SS if not worked and paid in.
As far as someone with depression drawing benefits, there are many folks out there who suffer from debilitating depression who do deserve these benefits and are totally disabled. I do know the type you are talking about though, the deadbeats who draw benefits and then do everything else under the sun. I have seen it also. Then I have seen people with strokes and totally disabled who have to fight like dogs to get what they are entitled to. Its ridiculous. I just wanted to clear up the different funds that money come from.
Bottom line is for the regular SS disability benefit, if you have not worked and paid into it, you cannot draw it. You may be able to draw from SSI through your state but that is basically welfare and you have to qualify financially for that unlike social security disability.
I use to work for SS and if you are sm
an adult who has never paid in or do not have enough working credits you cannot draw SS disability. You can draw what is called SSI which is a social security supplement paid through your state to folks who don't qualify for SS or don't get enough.
Kids who get SS like Octomoms kids are getting SSI unless its a situation where a parent who was working died, then there are death benefits for minor children.
IF there is no SS for you when you retire it is not because of what people who are drawing it now are getting it is becasue our government has robbed the SS fund. Your SS benefits are based on what you have made in your lifetime. If the fund is still there and the government doesn't take it all, you will get exactly the amount you are suppose to get based on what you have made in your life time.
As far as these lawyers advertising to get benefits for folks who are depressed, alcoholic, whatever.......these people, again, cannot get regular SS disability benefits if they have not worked and paid in. These commercials don't tell you that. The attorneys can fight for SSI (the supplement) for their clients but not disability SS if not worked and paid in.
As far as someone with depression drawing benefits, there are many folks out there who suffer from debilitating depression who do deserve these benefits and are totally disabled. I do know the type you are talking about though, the deadbeats who draw benefits and then do everything else under the sun. I have seen it also. Then I have seen people with strokes and totally disabled who have to fight like dogs to get what they are entitled to. Its ridiculous. I just wanted to clear up the different funds that money come from.
Bottom line is for the regular SS disability benefit, if you have not worked and paid into it, you cannot draw it. You may be able to draw from SSI through your state but that is basically welfare and you have to qualify financially for that unlike social security disability.
Also if the government stops borrowing from SS and wasting it, you will get exactly what you worked and paid into. you can determine that by looking at your SS statement you get every year.
What works for you may not work
If you are a good Christian, good for you; be a shining example of your faith. But if in the process of being a good Christian you trample MY rights and/or faith, well, sorry, that isn't good. THAT is why I believe in the separation of church and state. We are all different and have different levels of development, spiritual and otherwise. God is the ONLY and ultimate judge; I believe we all come before Him to account for our lives. My relationship with God is between Him and me...no one else. I don't think it is the job of my fellow humans to judge me and and tell me, *My religion/faith is better than yours* I don't care how much YOU believe it.
I can't get the video to work...sm
But I read an interview on the web where he talks about the clash of civilizations. Will read more on what he has to say. I will agree this has gotten far bigger than politics - far.
For the record, I don't hate Bush I just don't think he is the best choice for president.
Thank you very much for such a good work
Congratulations on a great web site. I am a new computer user and finding you was like coming home. Continued success.
Hopefully the link will work
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TCR-ABC-Path.mov
Works for me. But it will never work for you and we all know it. nm
nm
Link did not work, here it is sm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhh89RVs3ps&mode=related&search=
Oh well, I guess it's not going to work....
You can find the same piece on the 2nd page of the MQ board (11/15) under "Christmas off???...What luck!!!! it seems to work there just fine.
That ought to work well for you, at least for tonight.
nm
Doesn't work that way.
IF Obama gets in, then Hilary can't run against him next time. He would be the incumbent, and I don't see her jumping ships.
She can run against McCain in 2012...
Work less, earn less.....
Well, that is called socialism to the core. Those that make less think they have a right to those that make more, but do they ever think WHY someone else makes more? Maybe a higher education, many many many longer hours and a MUCH harder job?
My husband has worked his butt off for 30+ years and made a good salary for it. But there are sacrifices made along the way. So he should be penalized because he worked his way through college, struggled the entire time, worked his way up in a company and has paid his dues? No, I don't think so.
If you want more money, get a higher education and go work for it just like he did.
sorry 'bout that...this one should work
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main4476173.shtml
That one doesn't work either. What's it about? nm
.
and you work with words all day? sad.
x
|
