Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

No fight. Just looking for space and issues.

Posted By: Not popularity contest. nm on 2008-09-03
In Reply to: See? there you go again, trying to fight - -just being yourself I guess. nm

nm


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

Can't find the space. Our threads get buried
nm
The boyfriend's My Space page disappeared too. nm
.
Issues people, issues. I need issues

I'm not seeing any discussion about issues.  Can we stick to the issues.  Jeeze - I want to hear good and bad about both candidates but with facts to back whatever is being said.


P-L-E-A-S-E.....I want issues.  How can I make any kind of determinatons about who I'm going to vote for if I don't hear about the issues.  Reading some of this I'm thinking I'd get more truth if I read the National Enquirer.


Then they should be willing to fight...sm
if it is democracy they want. After all, that's their fight not ours.
ooh cat fight
compassionate hippie cat fight!!!  I've got so much patchouli on that you couldn't stand to get near me anyway.
See? there you go again, trying to fight
nm
Your guy is still going to fight the war...
in Afghanistan and is backing off a bit on his timetable for Iraq...but as long as it his HIS idea to fight, its okay?

Why don't you do a little bit of research on Obama, and not close your eyes to the numerous skeletons in HIS closet? Only one guy talking about cleaning up washington, both parties. Only one guy talking about cutting spending. That is the guy I am voting for.

Looking at the shape this country is in right now, looking at what Obama says he is going to do (STILL) when he knows there is no money to do it with...the Dems on the banking comittee and the ones getting rich while our economy was going down the tubes...you on the left have such a problem with the "rich" but Franklin Raines, Timothy Howard, James Johnson...ALL advising Obama...got RICH dragging Fannie Mae to the ground and all of us with them...and Obama the MOST liberal senator in his voting record...that isn't CHANGE. That is the same old Washington politics.

You really can't see that? Really?
GO FIGHT WIN
MCCAIN!!!!!
Do I want to fight?
Oh yes, I want to have an email war! Lets go, first one to type the dirtiest word wins!

Sheesh. Does your mommy know you are on here?

But seriously, get help.
Sometimes it is necessary to fight, whether we want to or not...
not one service member wants to be in Iraq, but they ARE doing good things over there. Unfortunately, our media is so biased that we rarely see the good that comes of our efforts. I do not believe that the war is senseless and it is not because I "have to believe" any such thing. It is because someone needed to stop Hussein before he became another Hitler. He was well on his way. Also, by fighting a little on other soil, I believe that we keep it from happening on ours and, unfortunately, our general populous doesn't have what it takes to defend their own way of life. Someone else has to do it for them.
I don't know why you would choose this fight anyway...sm
Bennetts words are right there for all to see/hear. This came out of his mouth, you can't make this stuff up.

If you can't see any wrong, hate, inappropriateness in what he said then that's on you.
Well....we know they have no stomach for the fight. ;-) (nm)
nm

Thank you for your post.....some of us do fight
xx
She's willing to fight for the blob....(sm)
but not the turkey!!  The voice of the turkey will be heard!!!!  LOL.
P.S. I hope you fight to the end.
There should be no way you should take a smaller amount if he was insured for a certain amount.
Not to get a fight started...just an observation...
that little twinge is probably be the Holy Spirit and you would be well served to maybe listen to it....? Or perhaps you think not listening to the twinge in favor of listening to John Edwards is the better path.

God bless!
One more question...and I am NOT trying to start a fight....
just curious as to what you mean by "extremely conservative viewpoint?" Could you give examples? I won't even respond if you do not want me to...I just want to know what you consider an extremely conservative viewpoint.

Thanks!
why did you even bring this up - looks like you are trying to start a fight
Everytime a subject is brought out you seem to like to interject a bash to Sam. I've been reading the posts and nowhere in response to my post here did I see sam post a "message with the express intent of wreaking havoc and instigating argument". I'm reading the responses to my post about issues and I'm not seeing one from sam called "let the games begin", so I have no idea what you are talking about. If your talking about another post awhile back, then start a new thread, but for Pete's sake don't drag it into mine. Forget sam - it looks like you are the one who is trying to start arguments. Leave your personal hatred out of this and be an adult for once. Posts like this I would expect from my 12 year old, but we are adults here. What's frustrating is to finally start reading about a lot of issues that both sides would like to know about and info they are sharing with us and then all of a sudden - bam, here comes your post bashing sam. I'm sitting here now looking at all the responses to my post and I'm not seeing the one you are talking about. Lets stick to issues and facts. It also sounds like some other posters want that too.
I still vote for a jello fight
I mean since that's about how silly these campaigns have gotten :)

But seriously, why waste this much money on campaigning from either side? I admit it was just a bit of a pot shot at Obama (sorry!) but Mccain could do it too.

Then again our nation pays celebrities and professional athletes millions and teachers and police/fire/EMS etc make barely above minimum wage...

No wonder we are going down the crapper! Where are our priorities? When it's more important to see Lindsey Lohan's tadadada instead of paying teachers decent money to teach "our future".

*sigh* Maybe I'll go to Australia. I don't ever hear anything about Australians, 'cept for barbies and kangaroos and Steve Irwin (God rest his soul!). :-D


Not picking a fight, truly curious

As a nonbeliever what do you think it is that makes you feel good inside when you do something good?  I don't know much about atheists, always thought there wasn't much to know, except they don't believe in God and so I would assume when they die they believe that everything stops right there.  I feel that there has to be a better life in the world to come so I am asking a sincere question which is thought provoking at least to me.  If a loved one dies, how do you deal with it?  What happens to them.  When you die what happens to you?


Not picking a fight, truly curious

As a nonbeliever what do you think it is that makes you feel good inside when you do something good?  I don't know much about atheists, always thought there wasn't much to know, except they don't believe in God and so I would assume when they die they believe that everything stops right there.  I feel that there has to be a better life in the world to come so I am asking a sincere question which is thought provoking at least to me.  If a loved one dies, how do you deal with it?  What happens to them.  When you die what happens to you?


Keep it about the politics. Argue, fight it out...
disagree, agree, whatever. It's not a personal bash board to personally attack and insult other posters though.
At least Obama knows WHICH COUNTRY the fight is with
Not Iraq, since he doesn't have a Daddy that he has to clean up after, he can just go to the right country immediately and bypass the special agenda that fueled the last guy!
The opposition is going to fight the other side...
no matter who it is. George Washington was the only president that did not face opposition to his being the president - at least for the first term. Mind you, he was not elected to his first term and after his first four years when he was asked to serve another four, he was beaten down from both sides so much so that he swore he would never enter into politics again. This is the father of our country - the man who helped win our freedom from England! If he can't escape from being shot down at every turn, what makes anyone else who runs for president think they can? It's the nature of the beast and comes with the job.

What's the old saying? You can make some of the people happy some of the time, but you can't make all of the people happy all of the time.
You would pick a fight with anyone, wouldnt you?
nm
NYC using fed millions to fight sick WTC workers. sm
Shame on them. Looks like the articles by the Daily News is finally getting them some much needed attention.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/438101p-369136c.html
Syrians fight off attack on U.S. Embassy

How can this be?  I thought Syria was one of those Islamofascist countries harboring the evil doers who hate us for our freedom and a potential target on Bush's hit list after (before?) Iran.  How could they possibly save American lives?


Syrians fight off attack on U.S. Embassy





By SAM F. GHATTAS, Associated Press Writer 25 minutes ago



Armed Islamic militants attempted to storm the U.S. Embassy in a brazen attack Tuesday, the government said. Four people were killed, including three of the assailants. There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but an al-Qaida offshoot group was suspected, Syria's ambassador to the United States said.


No Americans were hurt in the attack, in which the militants used automatic rifles, hand grenades and at least one van rigged with explosives.


The al-Qaida offshoot group, called Jund al-Sham, has been blamed for several attacks in Syria in recent years, the Syrian ambassador, Imad Moustapha, said in comments to CNN.


Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised Syrian security agents for repelling the attack, but added it was too early to know who may have been behind it.


I think it's very early to try and speculate why this may have happened, said Rice, speaking at a news conference in Nova Scotia Tuesday with her Canadian counterpart, Peter MacKay.


The attackers apparently did not breach the high walls surrounding the embassy's white compound in the city's diplomatic neighborhood.


One of Syria's anti-terrorism forces was killed and 11 other people were wounded, the official news agency reported. The wounded including a police officer, two Iraqis and seven people employed at nearby technical workshop.


A Chinese diplomat also was hit in the face by shrapnel and slightly injured while standing on top of a garage at the Chinese Embassy, China's Foreign Ministry said. The diplomat, political counselor Li Hongyu, was in stable condition at a hospital, the ministry said.


A witness said a Syrian guard outside the U.S. Embassy also was killed, but the government did not immediately confirm that. As at most American embassies worldwide, a local guard force patrols outside the compound's walls while U.S. Marines are mostly responsible for guarding classified documents and fighting off attackers inside the compound.


Witnesses also said the gunmen tried to throw hand grenades into the embassy compound, shouting Allahu akbar! or God is great! It was not clear if any of the grenades made it over the walls, which are about 8 feet high.


The attack came at a time of high tension between the United States and Syria over the recent Israeli-Hezbollah war in neighboring Lebanon. In Damascus, the sentiment has become increasingly anti-American.


Syria has seen previous attacks by Islamic militants. In June, Syrian anti-terrorism police fought Islamic militants near the Defense Ministry in a gunbattle that killed five people and wounded four. In 2004, four people were killed in a clash between police and a team of suspected bombers targeting the Canadian Embassy.


The Bush administration has been critical of the tight control that the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad has over its people. Rice, meeting with her Canadian counterpart in Nova Scotia, would not speculate on whether Tuesday's attack may be an indication that the regime's control is slipping.


White House press secretary Tony Snow also expressed gratitude to Syria.


Syrian officials came to aid of the Americans, Snow said. The U.S. government is grateful for the assistance the Syrians provided in going after the attackers, and once again, that illustrates the importance of Syria being an important ally in the war on terror.


It does not mean they are an ally. We are hoping they will become an ally and make the choice of fighting against terrorists, he said, adding that the Bush administration does not know who is responsible for the attack.


Washington recalled Ambassador Margaret Scobey after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, amid suspicions that Damascus had a role in it. She has not returned since, effectively downgrading U.S. diplomatic representation to the level of charge d'affaires.


Pools of blood lay on the sidewalk outside the U.S. Embassy, near a burned car apparently used by the attackers. A sport utility vehicle with U.S. diplomatic tags had a bullet hole in its windshield, and the windows of nearby guard houses also were shattered.

There were conflicting reports of what happened.

Syrian TV said one car was rigged with explosives but never was detonated by the attackers. But one witness said a second car did explode, and TV video showed a burned car.

The Interior Ministry, which is in charge of police, said a fourth attacker now in detention was wounded in what it called a terrorist attack. The report, carried on state-run television, said anti-terror units brought the situation under control and an investigation was under way.

In Washington, a State Department spokesman confirmed the attack by unknown assailants but had few details. Local authorities have responded and are on the scene, said spokesman Kurtis Cooper said.

A U.S. Embassy statement said the embassy came under armed attack at 10:10 a.m. and that all embassy personnel were safe. One Syrian guard was injured by gunfire and was hospitalized in a stable condition, the statement said.

The embassy's charge d'affaires, Michael Corbin, met with Interior Minister Bassam Abdel Maguid at the scene, and spoke by phone with assistant minister of foreign affairs, Ahmed Arnous, according to the statement.

It said the Syrian government has pledged full security cooperation.

About 30 Syrian guards usually are posted around the embassy 24 hours a day, Moustapha said.

State television said four armed attackers attempted to storm the embassy, using automatic rifles and hand grenades. Syrian security guards attacked the gunmen, killing three and wounding a fourth, TV said.

The attackers came in two cars and parked one that was rigged with explosives in front of the embassy but did not blow it up, state-run TV reported. Explosives experts dismantled the bomb, it said.

But a witness told The Associated Press that two gunmen drove up in front of the embassy, got out of their car, shot at the Syrian sentries at the building's entrance, and then detonated explosives in the car.

The witness, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said the security personnel fired back, and security forces rushed to the scene.

Television showed a delivery van loaded with pipe bombs strapped to large propane gas canisters outside the embassy. Had the bombs detonated, the explosions could have caused massive damage.

The video also showed the charred remains of a smaller car parked several feet behind the van.

Up to 40 U.S. diplomats are posted at the embassy, which is average in size, according to Tom Case, a deputy spokesman at the State Department.




Ron Paul supporter? Not wanting to fight, just asking.
nm
Why should O be desperate? Pubs have been spoiling for a fight
All nice and legal, headed up by a brilliant, constitutional attorney. DOJ is considering the request. Stay tuned.
Don't fight it, sweetie. Let the love in. You'll feel better.

If possible, think for one moment what it would mean for Israeli troops to fight in Iraq. TI
If I need to say anymore, my suspicions will be confirmed.
Don't want a fight, just want to ask, Does Obama respect the American Flag?

I saw this picture of his airplane before the makeover



and here it is after the makeover


His "symbol" "slogan" "trademark" or whateverthatis replaced the flag. I'm
sorry but I just don't understand why unless he has no respect for it.


Can someone explain without getting upset; just explain it.


Pretty hard to fight city hall........
There isn't a whole lot he can do with the pubs obstructing everything he is trying to accomplish. My theory is, they put up McPalin because they KNEW they wouldn't win because they have NO IDEA how to clean this freakin' mess up either. That way, just possibly, the RNC can gain some ground since they have all but buried themselves. Kinda like Carter inheriting Nixon's upstanding accomplishments. Gotta love the RNC, they are such an honest, upstanding, homophobic and value-oriented tribe. How's that for a wide stance?
From **Stars and Stripes** Obama: Taking the fight

Obama: ‘Taking the fight’ to Afghanistan


New president will have his hands full with war that is eclipsing conflict in Iraq




A worsening war in Afghanistan — and a growing Taliban and al-Qaida insurgency in the tribal areas of nuclear-armed neighboring Pakistan — will loom large on the agenda for President-elect Barack Obama during the next four years.


On the campaign trail, Obama argued that the war in Iraq has drained troops and resources from the battlefield in Afghanistan, causing the situation there to deteriorate. He has described Afghanistan as "the war we need to win," and he has pledged to send at least two more brigades of U.S. troops to reinforce the 70,000 U.S. and NATO forces already serving in the country.


Obama has also pledged to press NATO allies to contribute more forces, and he has said he will step up training for the Afghan army and police, as well as increase non-military aid to Afghanistan by $1 billion.


"When I am president, we will wage the war that has to be won," Obama vowed, outlining his plans in an Aug. 1, 2007, speech at the Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. "(But) the first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan."


Obama has said he will not "tolerate a terrorist sanctuary" in Pakistan, and he has suggested that he will send U.S. forces on cross-border raids to eliminate high-value terrorists if the Pakistani government cannot or will not take action.


But making campaign promises is one thing. Turning them into realities on the ground is another.


Afghanistan is quickly eclipsing Iraq as the deadlier of America’s two wars. Since May, U.S. casualty figures in Afghanistan have virtually matched those in Iraq on a monthly basis, and for the past two months, more U.S. troops have died in Afghanistan than in Iraq.


At least 151 U.S. troops have died in Afghanistan so far this year, making 2008 the deadliest for U.S. forces since the war began seven years ago, according to icasualties.org. Another 104 soldiers from other countries also have died, according to the Web site. Insurgent attacks and the numbers of civilians killed in the war are also at an all-time high.


At least 626 U.S. soldiers have died in Afghanistan since the war began in 2001.


More troops urged


There are currently about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, but commanders have been clamoring for more forces. U.S. Gen. David McKiernan, the commander of NATO-led troops, has said that at least 10,000 more soldiers are needed in the country, along with more helicopters, intelligence teams and logistics support.


But with 150,000 U.S. servicemembers committed to Iraq, a significant drawdown is going to have to occur there first, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned last June. And analysts caution that sending more troops to Afghanistan is not likely to have the same effect as it did in Iraq, where the so-called troop "surge" last year played a significant role in reducing violence.


"My sense is that we’re not going to troop-surge our way out of Afghanistan," said Stephen Biddle, a former Army War College professor and now a senior fellow on defense policy at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C. "The problem is that the troop ratio needs are too much. Conventional wisdom says that there are not enough feasible reinforcements that can be sent to Afghanistan, even if you draw down fully from Iraq."


In addition to sending at least another two combat brigades to Afghanistan, Obama has said he will press other NATO countries to send more troops and that he would push for those countries that have restrictions on sending troops into combat to lift them.


But there now appears to be little appetite within NATO for either.


Britain, which has 8,000 soldiers operating mostly in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, has said it doesn’t plan to send any reinforcements, even as it pulls its remaining forces out of Iraq. Britain has lost more than 121 soldiers in Afghanistan, the second-highest total after the United States.


Canada, which has 2,500 soldiers operating in neighboring Kandahar province, plans to pull its troops out of the province by the end of 2011. Canada has lost 97 troops so far, the third-highest total of the war.


France has about 2,600 soldiers serving in Afghanistan, and its parliament voted in September to send another 100 troops, along with more helicopters, unmanned aircraft, mortars and intelligence gathering equipment. But according to press reports from the country, polls indicate that opposition to the Afghan mission is growing. France has lost at least 24 soldiers in Afghanistan since 2002.


Of the other major NATO powers, Germany has about 3,000 soldiers operating in Afghanistan, but its troops are limited to operating north of Kabul, mostly away from combat, and Berlin has repeatedly resisted pressure from the United States and Britain to send troops south into the fighting. Germany has lost about 28 soldiers in Afghanistan, and the mission remains deeply unpopular among Germans.


"It’s probably not going to happen, in terms of caveats or numbers," said Michael E. O’Hanlon, who specializes in U.S. national security policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., speaking of a larger NATO commitment.


The Pakistan problem


In addition to dealing with the war in Afghanistan, Obama is also going to have to confront a growing Taliban and al-Qaida insurgency in Pakistan’s tribal areas, which some analysts see a bigger and more important threat.


"Dealing with Pakistan, where America’s mortal foe al-Qaida is nestled alongside the Taliban, is clearly the most pressing problem we face," Bing West, a retired Marine and former assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan, wrote last week in The National Interest, a foreign policy journal.


In one of his most provocative stances of the campaign, Obama suggested that he would send U.S. combat troops into Pakistan to take out terrorist targets.


"If the United States has al-Qaida, bin Laden, (or) top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out," Obama said, during the first presidential debate at the University of Mississippi on Sept. 26.


But the one known cross-border raid that U.S. forces conducted into Pakistan on Sept. 3 elicited strong condemnation from the Pakistani government, which threatened to open fire on any more U.S. troops who cross the border.


Pakistan has also demanded that CIA missile attacks on its territory be stopped. Missile attacks by unmanned drones operated by the CIA have gone up dramatically in recent months, as U.S. officials have complained that the Pakistani military has not done enough to go after Taliban and al-Qaida sanctuaries in the tribal areas.


The ISI, Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency, has long-standing ties to the Taliban and other militant groups that date back to the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, and the agency has funded Kashmiri militant groups in its decades-long struggle against India. Pakistan claims those ties have been severed, but many Western officials remain skeptical.


While more attention to Pakistan is generally welcomed among analysts, some warn that taking too much aggressive action in the country could actually destabilize relations with the United States and harm efforts to hunt terrorists.


Independent U.S. action should be taken "only if we have a very, very high-value target in our field of view," said O’Hanlon.


Biddle said that he would be "careful" judging from Obama’s campaign statements how aggressive he might be in Pakistan.


"It’s his way of indicating he’s not soft on terrorism," Biddle said. "(But) I would hope that as a citizen and a taxpayer that should Obama be elected, strategy reviews of these positions would take place between him and his advisers."


Yes, key word is FIGHT, you don't debate. You name call and badger, and when that fails
x
Fight terrorists where they live. Iraq=Shia OBL=Sunni
OBL last sighted in a cave in Afghanistan. Taliban power concentrated in Afghanistan...never Iraq. Iraq had secular govt. Afghanistan govt based on Sharia law.

O is not about a phoney war. He is about disarming the real terrorists who waged war on our country. He has not wavered on this message and has always been candid about his intent. He knows what he is doing. You are being disingenuous with your little veiled innuendo. Ineffective and uninformed.

BTW, SP gave us a 7th grade social studies definition of what NATO membership means. What she did not seem to be aware of is the controversy that has surrounded Georgia's aspirations to become a NATO nation. Its's really tricky business and not a foregone conclusion that it will actually happen, especially in view of its own recent aggression in South Ossetia. NATO has been cautious at best and is not terribly enthusistic about extending membership to Georgia, given the fact that it could very well touch off a litany of cold war scenarios in the region relative to those countries' relationships to Russia, both past and present. Bush has his own agendas to serve by pushing in favor of Georgia's NATO membership. Three guesses what that might be. Think pipeline. Think Oil, oil or oil. There has been a lot going on there behind the scenes in that respect with US troops in the region.

Therefore, a leader of the US versed in foreign policy might have been more forthcoming in response to Gibson's question than a simplistic 7th grade definition of a NATO's function. For example, ask Biden the same question and he could talk for hours on the subject.
I just don't have the energy to fight anymore, I guess. This was lame attempt!
I need to work anyway. 
New Mexico, Arizona Declare Border Emergencies to Fight Crime

What a shame that these two governors had to declare states of emergency simply because we have at president who knows that this problem exists but just doesn’t care enough about preventing another 9/11 to do anything about it.


From: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=akXph_LySDzs&refer=latin_america#


New Mexico, Arizona Declare Border Emergencies to Fight Crime


Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- New Mexico and Arizona governors declared states of emergency for their borders with Mexico, pledging to increase funding to stop the rise in drug smuggling and violence by illegal immigrants.


New Mexico's Bill Richardson and Arizona's Janet Napolitano blamed a lack of money from the federal government that has left the borders and their residents unprotected by U.S. patrols.


``Governor Richardson was asked to take this action by local law enforcement and ranch families.'' Billy Sparks, Richardson's chief of staff, said in a phone interview today.


The declarations were made Friday by Richardson, 47, and yesterday by Napolitano, 47. Richardson, who has been named a possible 2008 presidential candidate, said in a press release there has been ``total inaction and lack of resources from the federal government.''


The escalation in violence during the past month, including gunshots fired at Columbus, New Mexico, police chief Clare May, the attempted kidnapping of three girls and the deaths of 100 cattle along New Mexico's 180-mile border with Mexico prompted Richardson to declare the emergency, Sparks said.


The declaration makes $750,000 of state funding available in affected counties. Richardson pledged to make an additional $1 million available. The money will be used to increase local law enforcement, open a new homeland security office in the border region and help build a fence to protect livestock near Columbus.


Fences, Neighbors


Unlike some border areas in the U.S., landowners in New Mexico maintain their own fences to keep illegal immigrants off their property. In one case a landowner's entire fence was stolen, Sparks said. The U.S. Border Patrol has 109 workers for 200 miles from El Paso, Texas, across New Mexico to Arizona, said Sparks. That is expected to increase by 75 in October.


Napolitano's order makes $1.5 million available to fight crime along the border, according to her press release.


``I intend to take every action feasible to stem the tide of criminal behavior on the Arizona side of the border,'' she said.


The number of unauthorized immigrants entering the U.S. each year rose to more than 700,000 in 2004 from 140,000 in the 1980s, according to the Arizona declaration.


Questions about the security of the U.S. border with Mexico have risen since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as officials have tried to limit movement into the U.S. of potential terrorists along with the illegal immigrants and drug smugglers. Immigration restrictions have forced more illegal crossings over landowner- built fences in Arizona and New Mexico.


The border emergency declarations were reported earlier today by the New York Times.


Numbers Jump


So far in the fiscal year that began in October, agents in the Yuma, Arizona, sector of the U.S. border patrol have captured 122,344 illegal immigrants, said Michael Gramley, spokesman for the sector. The previous record was 108,000 in 2000. The Yuma sector covers 126 miles of border in Arizona and California.


``We're taking greater strides toward reaching a higher level of border security,'' said Gramley, in a phone interview. ``The border patrol values any assistance that we receive from state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies.''


Federal officials said they have been making progress in increasing border security.


``Extraordinary progress has been made over the last couple of years as far as strengthening our borders,'' said Jarrod Agen, spokesman for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He declined to comment on the state of emergency in Arizona and New Mexico. ``It's the authority of the governors there.''


Both governors called on authorities in Mexico to increase security on their sides of the border, the press releases said.


Mexico's Response


Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement yesterday that it had agreed after meeting with Napolitano to support her actions and work to reduce crime on its side of the border. The ministry blamed organized crime for the border problems.


``On that side and on this side there's organized crime,'' Mexican President Vicente Fox said in an interview with reporters during a visit to the northern border state of Sonora yesterday. ``On that side and this side there's drug consumption. The question is how do all the drugs that cross over there reach the consumer markets? What's being done on that side?''


Texas Governor Rick Perry, 55 doesn't plan to declare an emergency because he believes protecting the U.S. border is the federal government's responsibility, said Robert Black, Perry's spokesman, in a phone interview. Texas's 1,200-mile border with Mexico is the longest of any U.S. state with a foreign country.


``The governor had said that you can't have homeland security without the federal government,'' said Black. ``The feds can't avoid their responsibility to the states.''

To contact the reporter on this story:
Darrell Preston in Dallas at dpreston@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: August 17, 2005 14:52 EDT


 


Issues

Certainly I agree the issues you mention must, must, MUST have our attention.  However, what we are doing this year is chosing a leader.  In my most humble opinion it is of the utmost importance to know what kind of person we are chosing to lead us.  We absolutely must look beyond what the politicians say; we must study their character and with whom they associate.  As the saying goes, birds of a feather flock together.


 As a life long Democrat, I am totally against Obama.  There are a number of reasons, not the least of which is his choice of pastors.  I believe his chosen church is a radical, devisive, racist group.  If Pastor What's His name isn't enough; what about the priest who delivered the sermon ridiculing Hillary in that same church?  By no means am I a supporter of Hillary Clinton but that show was disgusting.  Neither can I support John McCain.  I have changed my registration from Democrat to Independent because neither mainstream political party represents my values.  My voice will be heard in the election but I will do a write-in for Lou Dobbs.  Would he make a good or great leader?  I don't know.  He talks the talk but would he walk the walk?  The only thing any of us can do is to vote and vote our convictions......and pray.


you have issues
x
Whether or not I have issues....
doesn't change the fact that they both did the same thing and one is being banned from speaking while the other is allowed to speak.  Sounds like one of them smelly ole double standards to me. 
Why? What does this have to do with issues
I read the first two paragraphs and then that was it. Do I need to keep reading? Is there something in the rest of this post that will tell me how Barack has voted in the past or how McCain has voted in the past? Will this post tell me how they will fix the health care system, win the war and bring the troops home, fix the housing economy and the newest FM/FM crisis? And all the other matters that affect my life every single day.

Your going on and on and on about a number and what kind of cars someone has. We all know that Cindy McCain is very wealthy and if she wants to own 50 or 100 cars I don't care. I also don't care how many pairs of shoes or purses she owns. If you are trying to say she is not a frugal person I'm sure we could pull up other issues like how the Obama's send their daughter to a $10,000 camp. We can talk about Todd & Sarah Palin eloping to save the cost of a wedding for her parents (now that's what I call smart money thinking). But to go on and on about what kind of cars and how many Cindy McCain owns, and personally I don't think very many people care what they buy their daughter or if her daughter bought the car herself. That is unless your a liberal making a lame attempt at trying to prove something, but I don't think many people care about their daughters car or what Cindy has. She's wealthy, her dad worked hard to give his family what they have, and Cindy has a degree in education has worked hard her whole life as a nurse and teacher among other things. If she wants to have more than a couple cars who cares.
You hit on some key issues........... sm
SS age eligibility has already been raised. I cannot draw full benefits until I am 67 years and some few months of age. I have to wonder if this will be raised further still. Will I still be clacking at the keyboard at 70 or even 80 years old? Granted, folks are living to an older age in general, but look at the medical condition of a lot of Baby Boomers. I see more 40-year-olds and 50-year-olds with serious health problems such as coronary artery disease and cancer which I attribute to unhealthy lifestyles as well as the mystery meat we buy at the supermarket. Who knows what that chicken was injected with to achieve such full and meaty breasts? All of which leads me to your next point......

Healthcare for those of Medicare age will very likely be rationed as you illustrated. Need a hip replacement? Sorry! Buy a wheelchair. Need a bypass? Forgedaboudit! Of course, this could possibly help with the SS issue as a younger and younger age group that needs lifesaving surgery dies off, leaving SS benefits for the survivors. Sounds like some kind of twisted reality show but I can see it happening. Sure makes my Golden Years something to look forward to............ NOT!


I think that there would be a lot of issues...sm
around the world that Jesus would be interested in, not just gay marriage and abortion, and he would not exclude the good intentions of someone trying to bring the world together in peace.
I'm all for the issues....BUT
when I see a handful of racist on this board who I know full well voted for Obama just because he is a black man, it bears pointing out the facts they just aren't aware of. And that is very obvious. They scream republicans and racists in the same rant, but never stop to think all their name calling just points out the facts that they ARE racists..... but what they don't know is Martin Luther King was a REPUBLICAN (which I guarantee you they don't know...their elders have failed to tell them this or didn't know it themselves) and when enlightened, they shut their traps tight! This is what they do when they really have nothing intelligent to add to conversation and I have realized know absoutely NOTHING about the issues at hand as well.

Notice how quickly the ranting stopped when a HUGE fact was pointed out to them.

So, to be perfectly honest, those would not be the people to discuss issues with, because they really cannot get past color and ANYTHING said against Obama becomes a race thing....

sick to death of that!
You have some serious anger issues

Ann Coulter, has issues. nm
Nuff said.
Dude, where are my issues?
xx
What part of we got other issues do you
nm
why don't you address the issues here instead of
nm
real issues

such as celebrity, Ayers, etc.??