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

Still waiting for a direct answer to a simple question.

Posted By: Is it too much for pubs to handle? nm on 2008-09-07
In Reply to: and the answer is....sally....you have nothing better to - 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

Are you not able to answer a simple direct question?
It's obviously over your head.
You give me a direct answer. You dodge it like he does.
How can he give 95% of AMericans a tax cut if 30-40% of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to use refundable tax credits. How else can he do it? PLEASE, PLEASE, explain that to me. If I am wrong, all you have to do is explain to me HOW he is going to give tax cuts to 95% of people, 30-40% of whom DO NOT PAY federal income taxes, wITHOUT cutting them a check. Please, please explain that to me.

Sam understands the basic principles of socialism and Marxism just fine. Most of which Mr Obama taught me in his books and associations. Which you are willing to ignore.

So please...very simply. Explain to me how he is going to give tax breaks or cuts to 95% of Americans if 30-40% of that group don't pay taxes. You said yourself, he can't. So either he is lying about the 95%...or he is going to cut that 30-40% a check.

PLEASE explain his tax plan to me since you are such an expert on it. HOW is he going to do it without cutting checks? HOW?
My post was a direct answer to the direct post...
of Democrat. It was not a blank open-ended statement. And dial it back a notch...it is certainly your right to protest anything any time you want to. Just like it is my right to protest you protesting while men and women are still in harm's way, because you are in effect aiding the enemy. Apparently the Viet Nam experience taught you nothing. Americans protesting in the streets heartened the enemy and when they were about to surrender decided not to, based a lot upon what was happening in the American streets. I believe that the protesting in that war prolonged the war and cost more American lives. Hanoi Jane should have been tried for treason. That being said...lessons were not learned and the protestors are doing the exact same thing now. Exercising the very right bought for them by shedding of American military blood. And I still say common courtesy should keep people out of the streets and off the TV until the military are home safe. But it just proves the same thing to me over and over...the selfISHhness of the protestors vs. the selfLESSness of the military. They continue to put it all on the line for your right to protest anything you want to protest...it is up to YOU to decide where and when that is appropriate, and it is up to you to take the heat for same. It is up to me and others like me (in my opinion) to apply that heat. Go ahead and do whatever your conscience or lack thereof moves you to do. But do not expect those of a different mind not to protest the protest.
I'm waiting on the answer to this one too. sm
That's the problem with SOME bible thumpers. They make things up as they go.
I am waiting for your answer...
Here is the question again.

Keith Olbermann is a graduate of Cornell University...and you are a graduate of what?

Why are you afraid to answer this question?
No, I'm still waiting for your answer - see message
You acused me of making racist statements way before I posted the message you are talking about. Try again. I'm still waiting to know what posts you were referring to where I made racist statements you accused me of. As far as Michelle Obama...she's one classy lady. That's all I have to say about her!
I'm still waiting for an answer to my question about s/m
about where poster got those grossly inflated statistics.  But, as usual, you're just more interested in deflecting the truth by attacking a Canadian news article.  Not surprised -- par for the course for you people.
Simple answer...
#1. Anything that passed Congress required votes from both sides to carry. So both parties did.

#2. Obama voted against. Biden voted for.

#3. Obama, according to his website it was January. Trouble is, Gen. Petraeus said to commit to some kind of a line in the sand date was the wrong thing to do. I vote with Gen. Petraeus.

#4. I imagine several Republicans lobbied against it...I think David Petraeus knows more about whether a timetable will work than Barack Obama does.

#5. Gen. David Petraeus said: WASHINGTON: General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, has said that US forces could hand over control of the entire country to the Iraqi military by the end of next year.

That could coincide with Obama's withdrawal timetable. If you are saying General Petraeus is trying to highjack Obama's timetable...I don't think so. It is his recommendation that drives what the administration says. Since he is the architect of the surge, which has worked "beyond anyone's wildest dreams" (Obama quote), he is in the best position to know what is feasible. But even he does not call it a timetable. COnditions on the ground dictate how something plays out. Or it SHOULD.

And that is the rest of the story.


Simple answer

The diet industry rakes in the big bucks because it is human nature to look for a shortcut.  A segment of the American public is like this.


Tell somebody they can lose an entire person's worth of weight by drinking some glop for six months and they will buy it.  Tell them that they can learn a foreign language in six weeks by listening to tapes while they sleep, they will buy it.  Tell them they don't need verifiable income or means to repay to buy a house, they will sign anything. 


Tell us we have to actually WORK at something - losing weight, building our credit to get a mortage, whatever, we will just look for the guy who says we don't have to. 


Simple answer. Because there is no money in...
providing contraception. There is money in abortions. With 200 mill from the feds (your tax dollars and mine) and all the abortions they perform (it was 200,000 a year in 2005, no telling how many now)...that is where the money is. It is the only thing in Planned Parenthood they won't take a check for...cash or insurance up front. No checks for abortions. That is their cash cow. People complain abot high oil company profits but profiting from killing babies is okey dokey in their books. Good grief.
There is a simple answer to that, anon....
again, when you think something has been distorted or made up, say so. I for one, when I am proven wrong on something I have posted as fact and not opinion, I have apologized and owned up to it. I am assuming I am one of the ones you are talking about, so please...if I post something as fact (not opinion) and you prove to me it is distroted or made up, I will certainly own up to it. Thanks.
nine times..waiting..waiting..sigh..waiting

Still waiting for the NINE OTHER TIMES I HAVE CALLED YOU A BIGOT..Please post them..Otherwise you are a liar.


Closing Gitmo is not as simple as simple
nm
simple exercise or simple mind
ever heard of thyroid dysfunction, ever heard of drugs that cause weight gain (such as steroids) or any other cause for obesity? Don't be so self-righteous.
Where are the posts..SM..still waiting....and waiting...
Still waiting.....SM..when have I ever called you a bigot..Show the proof..Bigot is not a word I throw around easily or frequently, so if there are posts here with my handle stating bigotry, I WANT TO SEE THEM..Still waiting............and waiting..........and waiting.........and waiting.........where are the posts?  Show them or forever been labeled a neocon liar..
I do believe that there is a direct

response to the OP with the title of "You're Whack."  The inside message said, "Who cares? So what? Get a life."


Seriously...if you have nothing constructive to add, why waste your time responding with that? 


I guess I just don't get why some of you hate Christians so much?  I admit that there are those who try and force their religion upon others.  I don't do that.  If someone doesn't want to believe in what I do, like my husband, I don't push my views on him.  However, he doesn't ridicule me for believing either. 


It just seems like every time someone mentions something about religion the bashing and name calling, etc. starts.  I'm beginning to think that maybe Christians should be placed on the hate crime list because it sure sounds like a lot of people hate us.


Can someone direct me to a site (sm)

that states the candidates' detailed respective platforms at a glance? I've watched most of the debates, as much as I can anyhow,  but I've not been able glean and distinguish a lot of specifics. 


I'm in FL and vote on Tuesday.  Believe it or not, I am undecided.  I liked Dennis, but he pulled out today and probably wouldn't have voted for him... won't go into why, but I'm sure I don't have to :-)


Dennis says to go Obama.... not sure if I want to.  What I want is to have a Dem president.  I like Edwards...


My demographic falls into Hilary's (female 45 and over lol).


Input appreciated. 


that was a direct quote from

Ronald Reagan.  How SHAMEFUL that you make fun of a dead man and one with Alzheimer's to boot.  I am appalled at your lack of manners.


 


I believe this is a direct quote from big O
'The buck stops here.'
May I politely and respectfully direct you
back to God's word?  Obviously a little more study and maturing will do you no harm.
You know, I hate hypocrisy. You want to direct me
back to God's Word?

When you can show me in God's Word where He approves of what Osambo approves, then we can talk.

Let's talk abortion, gay marriage, taxes, lying, cheating, subversion of government, indoctrination of preschoolers, redefining marriage, etc., a whole litany of what Osambo stands for and compare it to God Almighty's Word.

I warn you in advance. You are up against an adversary you do not want to tackle with because you are ill prepared to defend your comments and beliefs in the light of Scripture.

Ready to go for it, old girl?

Please direct me to the bible verse where it is written
about the right to bear arms. I missed this.

"They are no more pro war than God is. They do believe in the right to bear arms..."
Terrible debate! Jim was not direct or specific enough in his ...sm
questions and allowed too much of the same old retoric from both candidates.
Don't want to direct quote, can't stand to watch it again sm
The point being, cutting unnecessary procedures to seniors who "would not get any better anyway." I was so fuming angry that I would like everyone to hear it, but I for one could not stand watching it again. We are bailing out all these losers and he's going to deny our seniors. If he touches their benefits, I will march on Washington. Most of them paid their way all their lives and now they're being "cut" because he thinks it's frivalous as they "wouldn't get any better anyway." Who the blazes is he to make that decision???? Everyone deserves a choice of care, even Gramma and Grampa. I don't care how old they are!
Yeah, direct me to some homosexual "scientific"

site.  Believe me, if that were the case, it would be well publicized, especially in the New York Times.


Don't you even know that the first "scientists" who "came out" with a gay gene were homosexuals?  You don't think they have an agenda, my dear?


Nan-ism post was in direct reply/rebuttal to the two posts above it.

Surely you would agree that when accused of something we should have a chance for rebuttal? And that our rebuttal would surely include proof/evidence of why we took a particular stand?  Would you deny the liberal board that right?  SOME of us may be tolerant (or as Nan put it, "sissies") but some of us are very capable of speaking up for ourselves.


I have read Nan on this board (and others as well) for almost two years so I think I have a pretty fair grasp of her opinion and style of posting.


Feel free to direct your concerns to the Administrator. sm
You can reach the adminstrator at Admin@MTStars.com.  As far as deleting, since the incident of several weeks ago, I have made a concerted effort on BOTH boards to keep the bashing to a minimum. 
Hardly. Consorting with vs direct quote? Supports succession
The quote thing, whether SP or her husband is not the only example of the problems SP will be facing once the convention is over and the campaign goes into high gear. So far, this morning, you have managed to dodge every single effort to elicit a response to SP's OWN words. Dismiss the pastor, but not her own preaching on video. That just won't fade away no matter how much spin you are able to produce. These are land mines waiting for detonation.

With regard to the "got not use for America's damned institutions" and support of succession question, these issues will not play well for yer in terms of country first, in the context of ethics (can't practice what is preached) and when it comes to change versus same old stuff.

Before pronoucing this as a nonissue, suppose we give this a little time to play out in the political arena? Your guilt by association campaign has already run its course, and Obama managed to clench the nomination. In the light of the blaring negative publicity that will be issuing forth in the weeks to come with SP being the newest rock star on the block, how much political mileage do you really think that empty tank is going to give you?
The huge emphasis on tomorrow is in direct proportion to
Finally. A President we can all be PROUD of, instead of hide-your-head-in-a-bag EMBARRASSED.
Paying close attention. Sidestepping direct debate.
nm
Must also be hard for some people to give direct answers after making a statement like that.
nm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)...sm





Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)

May 12 (Bloomberg) -- United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan today said the U.S. needs to follow up on Iranian offers of direct negotiations in order to resolve peacefully their dispute over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.


``I've asked all sides to lower their rhetoric and intensify their diplomatic efforts to find a solution,'' Annan said at a briefing in Vienna. ``I think it's important that the United States comes to the table.''


The U.S. has let French, German and U.K. diplomats lead talks with Iran over the atomic dispute. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a meeting of the Developing Eight group of Islamic countries in Indonesia, said Iran is ready for direct talks and will comply with any UN decision on its atomic program based on international rules. A U.S. State Department spokesman in Vienna declined to comment.


The U.K. and France, backed by the U.S., have proposed a resolution under Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter to compel Iran to stop its nuclear work. A Chapter 7 resolution can invoke economic sanctions or military force against ``any threat to the peace'' of other countries. Iran says it's developing nuclear technology to generate power, while the U.S. and European countries accuse Iran of trying to develop atomic weapons.


China and Russia, veto-wielding members of the Security Council, oppose a Chapter 7 resolution for Iran.


Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said he didn't have any information about an Agence France-Presse report that inspectors found traces of highly enriched uranium in his country.


Uranium Particles


``I haven't been informed of any such findings,'' Aliasghar Soltanieh said in a telephone interview.


Particles of weapons-grade uranium came from sample swipes that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors took at the Lavizan-Shian site in Tehran, where a physics research center was dismantled and topsoil removed in 2004 after suspicions were raised about activities there, AFP said.


The IAEA reported to the Security Council on April 28 that inspectors took environmental samples at suspected nuclear sites in their most recent visit to Iran. The samples were to undergo testing for uranium particles at IAEA laboratories. IAEA spokespeople declined to comment.


The Iranians won't ``put everything on the table'' until the U.S. joins the European-led negotiations, Annan said. Negotiations should be around a ``comprehensive package'' including economic and regional security concerns, he said.


`Engaged in Dialogue'


Annan's call for direct talks between Iran and the U.S. followed those of Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA. ``Once we get to security issues, the U.S. should be engaged in the dialogue,'' ElBaradei said March 8.


The Security Council's five permanent members plus Germany will meet in London May 19 to consider new incentives for Iran to renounce its atomic program, AFP reported, citing unidentified diplomats. The permanent five are the U.S., U.K., France, Russia and China.


The U.S. and Iran broke off diplomatic relations in 1979 after Islamic revolutionaries overthrew the government of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and kept 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.


To contact the reporter on this story:
Jonathan Tirone in Vienna at jtirone@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 12, 2006 10:33 EDT

The waiting

Waiting

Still waiting...

but you said Michelle Obama does not talk like a black woman?  Again, how do black women talk?


waiting for it.....waiting....waiting...
when is this supposed to break for all of us to know about?
Sure and I'm waiting for it just like you.

Problem is, it ain't gonna happen. There's no magic wand. There are too many things in a heckofamess and nobody can fix it. It will take years and as long as the government keeps in-fighting, it will be the same old, same old, just like it's been for the past 20 years or so.


Still waiting...........
I'm stll waiting for all those Obama lovers who said yes, Obama WOULD make all those wonderful tax cuts for us, to stand up and admit he's a joke! He LIED, plain and simple. Of course, we told them he would not make these tax cuts but oh no, their precious Obama would NEVER lie. Now, they'll say it's the economy. He knew the economy was slowing when he kept making those promises. Sorry, you can't use the economy as an excuse. Of course, Obama knows if he DID make those tax cuts for those he promised it to, he would then be a REPUBLICAN! ROFL!
I'm waiting..... sm
Okay, I do agree with you on some points. This is what I see...

I used to be a democrat and I used to be a republican and I used to be an independent, and I used to be a green party/constitutional party. What I see is this...the whole thing is a mess, all over. Plenty of blame to go around. What I see is, Obama inherited one big huge fat mess. No way to disprove that. Its fact (IMHO). I'm not blaming Obama for any of this and I believe he wants to do what is best and try and pull the country up. With that said....he doesn't "run the country". He is not the grand pubah in charge making decisions, he just gets to tell the American people in a nice and calming way "your screwed". He has a way about him that he can say your screwed and the country will be fine with it. Just the way it is and I am thankful we have a leader who is a calming reassurance to the people. However, with that said...congress/house (don't know which it is), just all those politicians that stand up and make decisions and vote on issues. Those are the people I blame, and last I knew we have had a democratic congress for that last two years. I will no way blame everything on just the dems because the pubs had a fair share in it too. But it's time to stop blaming everything on the pubs because they were not in charge of making all the decisions. They were not in charge of the FM/FM crisis. How long has Pelosi been in? Reid? Dodd? Franks? Conyers? and yes I can think of pubs too but those are the first ones that come to mind and who are on the top of the decision making tree. I take offense (well not really offense, but it is unfair and one-sided) for people to post obviously far left or far right media-wh@re articles blaming all those rich white ugly republicans when they don't take any of the blame themselves. There's enough blame to go around and for every far left article theres a far right one too.

I will stand by what I say...the republicans don't need anything to bring down the dems. They are doing a fine job of it and approval ratings are falling like a lead weight.
Waiting must be something
that happens on the coasts in really high-population areas.  Here in 'flyover country' (the midwest) I've never waited more than a week for a mammo appointment and 3 days for the followup ultrasound when the  mammo found a cyst.  And I've gone through the followup ultrasound routine three times now. 
I keep waiting and waiting for

the free stuff to start flowing to me, but I am simply not being stimulated by any of this.  Is there an application I can fill out...or something? 


I keep waiting and waiting for

the free stuff to start flowing to me, but I am simply not being stimulated by any of this.  Still got a house payment.  Still buying my own gasoline.  Grocery store still charging me the regular rate for food.  Is there an application I have to fill out for all the freebies...or something? 


why do you answer so stupidly, the right answer
if you had any brains, would have been......

'well, she made a mistake.'

But telling me that I need a job, is so stupid, yes, stupid AND a very weak point.
Still waiting..where is the post?
Still waiting....tick-tock..tick-tock..still waiting..where, pray tell, is the post where I said ALL republicans are liars?  Still waiting..sigh..
Still waiting, Carla. ???
x
They are waiting in the wind for the day...sm
to bring the Lords of the Talking Loud and Saying Nothing back full swing.

This was a good read.
Won't be waiting around for your standard
nm
How many reporters were waiting for
Iraq/Afghanistan? How many liberal reporters followed O around Europe, putting him on a pedestal for the whole world? Biased reporting, not even a doubt. JM & SP still rising above it. Maybe there is something to this Christianity thing after all. I suspect that a lot of us uneducated, unscientific, believers in creationism, simple-minded people who know what our future holds, are praying for them daily.
What is it that you're waiting for him to say?
nm
ing - waiting patiently
To be fair, I am waitING and watchING, I have not made up my mind at all about who is the best candidate. Joe says, "talkin", "What am I talkin about?" Spirited debate about "real" issues coming up. One has to have a professional presence at all times. I want the best person representing America who is educated, honest, with a breadth and depth of experience. Why she would ever use "Joe six-pack" to represent the working people or avoid important issues, I don't know. She certainly should know better if she is going to represent my country and its future dialect with the rest of the world. Why does anyone have to go to "debate camp" to make it? Rambling idiot(s)and/or barracudas may show up tonight -- we shall see!! I hope God is in the room! I hope He is also in this room, as a high level of respect expected here as well for all of us. Our future is in His hands, and there is only ONE of Him, may we find him now.
We are still waiting for one pub to articulate
nm