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

What's pathetic and "UnAmerican" is being judge and jury

Posted By: To the President of the United States on 2009-04-17
In Reply to: Calling people "un-American" simply because they - disagree with you...that is really "pathetic

THAT is what is truly pathetic.


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

And the jury's still out on that one.
nm
I will wait for the jury to come in.
We haven't heard the whole story or even the tip of the iceberg.  Personally, I cannot abide Bill O'Reilly.  John Murtha is a 37 year military veteran and has always been a hawk. I would like to hear more of what he knows.  I will withhold judgment until I do hear. 
Grand Jury Declines to Indict McKinney...sm
Grand Jury Declines to Indict McKinney
Grand jury declines to indict Cynthia McKinney in connection with Capitol Police confrontation

WASHINGTON, Jun. 17, 2006
By LAURIE KELLMAN Associated Press Writer
(AP)


(AP) A grand jury declined Friday to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney in connection with a confrontation in which she admitted hitting a police officer who tried to stop her from entering a House office building.

The grand jury had been considering the case since shortly after the March 29 incident, which has led to much discussion on Capitol Hill about race and the conduct of lawmakers and the officers who protect them.

We respect the decision of the grand jury in this difficult matter, said U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein.

His statement, released late Friday, also included support for the officer involved, Paul McKenna, and the Capitol Police. He said, This is a tremendously difficult job, and it is one that Officer McKenna and his colleagues perform with the utmost professionalism and dignity.

With that, Wainstein closed a case that has simmered with racial and political tension.

I am relieved that this unfortunate incident is behind me, McKinney said in a statement Friday night. I accept today's grand jury finding of 'no probable cause' as right and just and the proper resolution of this case.

The encounter began when McKinney, D-Ga., tried to enter a House office building without walking through a metal detector or wearing the lapel pin that identifies members of Congress.

McKenna did not recognize her as a member of Congress and asked her three times to stop. When she ignored him, he tried to stop her. McKinney then hit him.

McKinney described the encounter as racial profiling, insisting she had been assaulted and had done nothing wrong.

McKinney is black. McKenna is white.

She received little public support for that stance, even within the Congressional Black Caucus.

Wainstein, meanwhile, sought an indictment from a federal grand jury, with assault on a police officer mentioned in the filings as a possible charge. That is a felony that would require an indictment.

The grand jury then subpoenaed several House aides thought to have witnessed the encounter. McKenna, too, testified. The grand jury voted not to indict her. Prosecutors also could have charged McKinney with simple assault without having to seek an indictment.

Members of the black caucus privately urged McKinney to put the matter behind her. The next morning, she appeared on the House floor to apologize.

I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation, and I apologize, McKinney, D-Ga., said April 6. There should not have been any physical contact in this incident.
Federal Grand Jury Digging Deep into Bush Crimes
PRESIDENT INDICTEDFEDERAL GRAND JURY DIGGING DEEP INTO BUSH CRIMES
By Greg SzymanskiA federal whistleblower close to the Chicago federal grand jury probe into perjury and obstruction charges against President Bush and others said indictments of top officials were handed down this week. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Northern District of Illinois, however, refused to confirm or deny the source’s account.

“We are not talking about any aspect of this case, and our office is not commenting on anything regarding the investigation at this time,” said Randall Sanborn from the office of U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the attorney conducting the grand jury probe into whether Bush and others in his administration violated federal law in a number of sensitive areas, including leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media.

In December 2003, Fitzgerald was named special counsel to investigate the alleged disclosure of Valerie Plame’s name to several mainstream columnists, but the present grand jury probe has expanded to include widereaching allegations of criminal activity as new information has surfaced.

Although the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago is staying silent, it is well known that Fitzgerald is digging deep into an assortment of serious improprieties among many Bush administration figures, based, in part, on subpoenaed testimony provided by former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

According to whistleblower Tom Heneghen, who recently reported on truthradio.com, Powell testified before the citizen grand jury that Bush had taken the United States to war based on lies, which is a capital crime involving treason under the U.S. Code. “Regarding the Powell testimony, there is no comment,” said Sanborn.

However, sources close to the federal grade jury probe also allegedly told Heneghen a host of administration figures under Bush were indicted, including Vice President Richard Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Cheney advisor Mary Matalin. Heneghen, unavailable for comment, also allegedly told sources White House advisor Karl Rove was indicted for perjury in a major document shredding operation cover-up.

In recent weeks, there has been much controversy over Fitzgerald’s wide-reaching probe, which is extending far beyond the Bush administration to include what some have called “a wholesale cleansing” of a crimeladen White House and Congress.

Fitzgerald’s investigation is said to be also centered on members of the 9-11 Commission, members on both sides of the aisle in the House and Senate and also select high-powered members of the media.

Needless to say, administration officials are “fighting mad” with Fitzgerald. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts is trying to derail Fitzgerald’s probe by calling him to testify before the Senate regarding his true motives behind the investigation.

Political observers are now wondering whether administration-friendly Republican legislators, some under investigation themselves, are conspiring like President Nixon did in Watergate with Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in an attempt to shield the Bush administration from prosecution.

In late July, reports about the recent bomb scare in the subway under the congressional offices at the Dirksen Building—coincidently near where Fitzgerald was holding his grand jury hearings—raised questions as to whether government operatives were sending the zealous prosecutor a “warning message” that he was entering dangerous waters with his investigation.

The bomb scare was reported to local police late Monday afternoon, July 18, causing the subway to be evacuated for approximately 45 minutes while bomb sniffing dogs and SWAT team members searched for what was reported to be “a suspicious package” left on one of the subway cars.

Fitzgerald began serving as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois in September 2001. He was initially appointed on an interim basis by former Attorney General Ashcroft before being nominated by Bush.

The Senate confirmed his nomination by unanimous consent in October 2001. In December 2003, he was named special counsel to investigate the Plame case. Based on the testimony of ABC sources in late July, it appears that at least two close associates of Rove testified before the grand jury. One was Susan Ralston, a longtime associate of Rove and considered to be his right hand.

The other was “Izzy” Hernandez, regarded as Rove’s left hand and now a top official in the Commerce Department.(Issue #33, August 15, 2005)

It may have started with sexual escapes. It ended with Perjury to a grand jury.
So for all the Monica smokescreen, there was a crime committed by a jurist, none the less.  He (Clinton) lost his law license.  But no one even feels it necessary to mention that.
That really isn't for you to judge. sm
This is a chat board.  You people perceive lies in the slightly statement.  You must have a really really low tolerance to differing viewpoints.  I would say, having kept an eye on it, Suzie is probably the only one who has escaped being called a liar, but I remember a post that named her with some others as a liar, so I guess I am even wrong on that one.  Wait...maybe I am a liar!
judge not lest

ye also twitch, snort, flinch and giggle.


 


Who are they to judge?
I won't accept criticism from countries that refuse rights for women, have lax child labor laws, and routinely torture and kill their own people for either religious or political reasons.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone associated with a terroist group has no human rights because they aren't human, IMHO.
Let's not take it on ourselves to judge
Non-Christians are not qualified to judge whether a Christian's faith is genuine, and Christians are strictly prohibited from doing so.
Judge Roberts

Have you even bothered to take the time to notice that EVERY SINGLE POST ON THIS BOARD about Judge Roberts is a POSITIVE POST???


What planet are you from, anyway?  Is your life so pathetic that the only pleasure you get is from stalking people on this board in the bizarre way you do and constantly put them down personally?  Dang.  You need a Happy Meal, dude. 


judge roberts
To the conservatives who just have to frequent our liberal board..I have been told, conservatives, that you attribute posts questioning your beliefs or attacking you as coming from gt..THEY DO NOT COME FROM ME.  I do not go onto your board as it is too disheartening to read the way you would like America to be and your continual attack on liberal sites and liberal news articles..So, get over me, I AM NOT THE ONE POSTING ON YOUR CONSERVATIVE BOARD..

Secondly, to my democratic friends, have any of you watched the John Roberts' confirmation hearings?  I have been watching for two days now..In fact, right now they are in recess, so I thought..let me check out the MTStars political board..MSN news video site on the computer has live hearings and they are fascinating..I have to tell you, so far I kind of like Judge Roberts..My only hesitation is Bush recommended him..


If you judge O by his followers....
'nuff said.
I don't know....but I don't think it is our place to judge....
I knew girls in high school who did not want to ask their parents about birth control, intended to stay celibate, had the same boyfriend through school let hormones override their better judgment and got pregnant. Not their parents' fault. And as you said, the boy could have used a condom, and we don't know that he didn't, because we know the success rate for condoms is not that great. That we are even having this discussion to me is ludicrous...if Chelsea had become pregnant while Bill was in the White House I don't think Democrats would be attacking Bill and Hillary's parenting skills. I certainly would not have.
Way too quick to judge!
I was simply passing on a story, like the OP. I'm not Republican because my dad is. I'm a conservative and if those beliefs happen to go along with the Dem candidate, then that's who I'll vote for. The story was meant to show how people's idea of "spreading the wealth" can sound like a really good idea - everyone haveing an equal share - but when you get down to it, it goes against everything our country was founded on. The American Dream - come sign up to get your welfare check! No thanks!!!
Judge not does not mean go with the crowd
nm
Just assume and judge all you want. I AM
nm
Well, that judge is right legally
I mean, really, do we all here check the little box on our tax forms that gives extra money to whatever it is they're asking for? I try to keep up with all changes in the tax law looking for things that I can deduct.

Part of the shenanigans of the big companies, however, is that they can hire alchemist accountants who can turn lead into gold, finding ways to create deductions that is far different from the original intent when the deduction was entered into the tax code.
Are 4 months enough to judge O, especially in these
so difficult times?
It is said that the economy is already in a slight upswing and the unemployment rate went down bit.

I guess we have to give O at least 1 year to be able to judge his decisions and actions.
I'm sorry but for this judge to throw

out the tests for those firerighters who studied hard and earned those promotions and didn't get them merely because they were all white with one hispanic man.  To me...that is racism right there.  They didn't get the promotions because of their skin color.  Had they been a more motley crew of races, they would have gotten those promotions.  It is truly a sad day when hard work and studying doesn't benefit you because your skin color isn't that of a minority. 


I'm all for equal rights between the races and all of these firefighters were given the same studying materials and the same amount of time to study.  How can you take away those promotions from the people who studied hard and scored the highest merely because most of them are white? 


This doesn't present a very good opinion of this judge so far to me.  She also made a comment about how with her experience and her being a latino women, she could make better decisions than a white male.  Racism?  Hello?  If  a white man had said that he could make better decisions than a black man, woman, or latino.....OMG.....the race card would have been thrown out and that would have been the end of his career.  Why is it that minorities are allowed to say racist things and be racist and that is okay, but the moment a white person says something remotely racist.......that is the end of that person's career.  More double standards.


Prejudice: To pre-judge

without knowledge, based upon appearances. 


Can't see how this has anything to do with how I feel about Obama.  He has done and said quite enough for me to base an opinion on my knowledge of his actions.  Find another word to sling around.  Prejudice won't work.  Neither will racism. 


Judge Roberts and Roe vs Wade
I, too, am pro choice and I can remember when I was still in high school, there was no right of termination of pregnancy..It was left up to each state to decide and NY state did not allow a woman to choose.  I remember Congresswoman, Bella Abzug, was one of the strongest voices for women back then..That, I guess, is what got me into politics to the max, cause none of my sisters are political, nor my mother..They vote democrat and sure agree with me on issues but I am the one who marches and protests, etc, LOL.  I think back in about 1973, I was astonished that a woman had no right over her body, no decisions about her body..That seared my brain, I guess.  Then, thankfully the Supreme Court understood a woman has a right to decide about her body..I think if Roe vs Wade was ever overturned, we would have women in the streets, and also some men who have a higher consciousness and understand the implications of overturning Roe vs Wade.  The majority of Americans want to leave the decision alone, so hopefully the Supreme Court will leave it alone..I do not believe in abortion at late stages, only in case of a woman's health, however, in the first four months, I believe a woman should decide and, if it is wrong, the woman will explain it to her maker..far be it for me to judge, ya know?
I never ever judge people by their families. sm
I hope no one ever judges me by mine!  No, I don't think he meant what he said.  I believe they mean he was a deputy for 17 years.  It said 17-year, not year-old.  :) 
your opportunity to judge Clinton's

behavior by voting for/against him is officially over.  Break on through to the new millenium.


 


Gee wilikers....but the judge won't dismiss
--
It's called prejudice, as in pre-judge.
except to say it is a real drag.
I don't know the whole situation, so won't judge his decision nm
nm
Didn't He also say judge not lest ye be judged? nm
.
How can you already judge that he is messing things up? nm
x
Wow, why don't you post your picture so we can judge you, too?
xx
Since when are you the judge of what is more stimulating on a LIBERAL board?

I don't find anything you write to be stimulating, intelligent, educational or worthy of debate.  And as far as patting people on the back, that's what you do on the Conservative board.  You bash liberals, ALL liberals, EVERY LIBERAL IN THE WORLD, and then the people with the crudest, rudest insults against liberals are patted on the back and high-fived by the rest of you.


Liberals don't discuss things like Repuglicants do.  We would rather be civil with people and find you incredibly distasteful human beings. They obviously call you neoCONS for a reason.  Your posts are nothing but litter...trash...garbage, and I for one, can't relate to and don't want to communicate with people who do nothing but prove how ignorant, childish, hateful, nasty, untruthful and uncouth they are.  Is this really the image you want to portray of your party?  Because that's what you're doing.


Why can't you just be happy on your own board and stay away from people who have asked you repeatedly to stay away because we're not interested in your rhetoric and your attacks?  Or, like your president, aren't you happy unless you're destroying things? 


Who's to judge credibility? Certainly not you or I on a chat board.
Just seems like a lot of negativism about nothing really.  But whatever.  Not worth worrying about.  In 100 years, who will care.  You waste way too much energy on here.  Get a real hobby.  It will improve your outlook!
Judge spares Lewis' life.sm
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060620124809990015&ncid=NWS00010000000001
Judge Nixes warrantless surveillance

A brief respite to people who respect the law and want to see warrants utilized.  Of course, All the President's Men in the Supreme Court will probably strike this down, so enjoy lawfulness while it lasts, no matter how brief it may be.


To everyone who claims liberals are on the side of the terrorists:  Note the word warrantless.  Liberals aren't against the use of wiretaps.  They're just against any President ignoring the law and having no oversight regarding his actions.  It doesn't take much time to fill out a boilerplate warrant.  If Bush doesn't want to employ an American to do this, maybe he can outsource this job to another country at a cheaper rate (please note sarcasm here), as is done with the confidential medical reports of Americans.


Judge nixes warrantless surveillance





By SARAH KARUSH, Associated Press Writer 9 minutes ago



A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.


U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.


The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.


The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.


The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.


I don't judge people based on religion.

"Muslim is wrong?" "I don't judge anybody or their beliefs?"
explaining away the conflict in this statement TO YOURSELF before you take it upon yourself to explain it to others.
I have a friend who is an election judge in the next county over...... sm
And he actually had to ask people to either go home and change shirts or turn their shirts inside out so that the political statements (for one side or the other) could not be read. Isn't there something about no political statements or voter influence within 100 feet of the polling place, or is that on a state by state basis?
Quick to judge, aren't you? At least you apologized....
//
Pathetic, isn't it?

They want TOTAL control over when we're born, who we love, which God we worship, when we die, and now they want to control what we're allowed to think is funny.  Soon, they'll want a mandatory chip to be implanted in every American who doesn't agree with them in order to whip us into submission. 


How pathetic....sm
That's laughable.


Next you're going to spin it that republicana framed the son of the democrat congressman that hacked into her email.



Good grief!!!




Pathetic.
nm
joy is pathetic
x
There is nothing pathetic about
the human instinct of survival. They've been sold up the river 9 ways to Sunday over the past 6 decades in those so-called peace initiatives, lied to continuously by Israel and western peace brokers, occupied, controlled, invaded, their country shrunken and cut to shreds, starved, held hostage, demonized and dehumanized by their hostile, blood-thirsty captors. THAT is pathetic. Expecting an occupied population that has been subjected to this kind of cruelty to fall in line and behave intelligently, rationally or logically is also pathetic, and pretty STUPID, if you ask me.

You know how the saying goes. Desperate times call for desperate measures. If you torture an entire population of people over this extended period of time, don't you think it is a bit, shall we say, PATHOLOGIC to expect anything less than violence, contempt, determination and resolve to destroy the perpetrators in return?

It's not your genocidal military whose notice they seek. The whole world is watching your barbaric nation do what it does best...Goliath bullies David into submission, leaving their killing fields soaked with rivers of fresh blood and scattered with human remains, buried under the rubble of countless bombed-out, shell-shocked buildings and whole neighborhoods laid flat in their dust. Lebanon is still pretty fresh in their memories.

The Palestinians know full well the sacrifices they have to make. God knows, they have been making them now for generations. But whether you are big enough to admit it or not, it is Israel who pays the ultimate price in this tragedy. Just like Bush squandered the whole world's sympathy in the wake of 9/11 by using it as an excuse to butcher and maim in the name of democracy as a cover for imperial conquest, Israel has spent all its compassion capital in the aftermath of the Holocaust to become one of the most reviled nations on the face of the earth. There is no effective way of dealing with that, my dear, at least not in your lifetime.

Despite Israel's best efforts, they have not been able to break Palestinian spirit of unity and/or national identity.
To Beyond pathetic
How fitting. You really didn't read the message. Looks like your one of the Obama cult worshippers. I didn't say happyness, joy, and hope creeps me out (in fact I didn't even use the word hope). I said the cult worshipping of Obama creeps me out. Think you really need to lay off the Kool-Aid and come back to earth.
Pathetic....(sm)

This is actually an old e-mail.  It first came out not long after the election.  So, here's my question.  Does this refer to the millions of jobs lost during the previous administration or just those within the last 60+ days?  Less than that if you count when the e-mail actually came out.


If you're going to go back and point fingers, at least point them in the right direction -- that would be towards the guy who not only lost jobs (and did nothing about it) but lives as well in a war that was completely unnecessary that did absolutely nothing but cost lives and run up the deficit.  (Interesting that Bush didn't bother to put the cost of the wars on the balance sheet, by the way.) 


This board has turned into an absolute repuke joke.


Pathetic!
I feel sorry for our country because of all the traitors residing here now...disguised as reporters.
LOL. So right... they are pathetic.
nm
So, you judge how much one cares by how many care packages they send??? sm
Well, I'm at a loss responding because you don't know what we do to support our troops, but if it makes you feel better to think you do more than everyone else, then do go on.

My uncle is over there and he has told me not send him anything else, he wants to come home.
Oh yeah, judge an entire party by a few bad apples.
nm
So because Snopes says so it is truth. Why not have a judge look at it and make the ruling?
xx
Judge overturns Florida ban on adoption by gays

(CNN) -- A Florida circuit judge Tuesday struck down a 31-year-old state law that prevents gays and lesbians from adopting children, allowing a North Miami man to adopt two half-brothers he and his partner have raised as foster children since 2004.


"There is no question, the blanket exclusion of gay applicants defeats Florida's goal of providing dependent children a permanent family through adoption," Judge Cindy S. Lederman wrote in her 53-page ruling.


"The best interests of children are not preserved by prohibiting homosexual adoption."


The state attorney general's office has appealed the decision.


Lederman said there is no moral or scientific reason for banning gays and lesbians from adopting, despite the state's arguments otherwise. The state argued that gays and lesbians have higher odds of suffering from depression, affective and anxiety disorders and substance abuse, and that their households are more unstable.


Lederman said the ban violated children's right to permanency provided under the Florida statute and under the federal Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. Whether the ban violated the state's equal protection clause by singling out gays and lesbians should be considered, she said.


Lederman's ruling paves the way for Martin Gill to legally adopt the two half-brothers, ages 4 and 8, whom he has cared for since December 2004, the American Civil Liberties Union said.


The two boys, who are referred to as John and James Doe in court documents, were removed from their homes on allegations of abandonment and neglect.


On that December evening, John and James left a world of chronic neglect, emotional impoverishment and deprivation to enter a new world, foreign to them, that was nurturing, safe, structured and stimulating," Lederman wrote.


In 2006, the children's respective fathers' rights were terminated, court documents said, and they remained in the care of Gill and his partner.


"Our family just got a lot more to be thankful for this Thanksgiving," Gill said Tuesday, according to the ACLU, which represented him.


Florida is the only state that specifically bans all "homosexual" people from adopting children, although it does allow them to be foster parents.


This month, Arkansas voters approved a ballot measure to prohibit unmarried partners -- same-sex or opposite-sex couples -- from adopting children or from serving as foster parents. The measure is similar to one in Utah, which excludes same-sex couples indirectly through a statute barring all unmarried couples from adopting or taking in foster children.


Mississippi allows single gays and lesbians to adopt, but prohibits same-sex couples from adopting.


Neal Skene, spokesman for the Florida Department of Children and Families, said the appeal was filed so a statewide resolution on the law could be determined by an appellate court. He noted that another Florida circuit judge declared the law unconstitutional this year but that ruling had not been appealed.


"We need a statewide determination by the appellate courts," he said.


Gill's adoption petition cannot be approved until the appeal process is finished, Skene said, but the children will remain in Gill's home.


"These are wonderful foster parents," Skene said. "It's just that we have a statute, [and] the statute is very clear on the issue of adoption."


Several organizations -- including the National Adoption Center, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics -- have said that having gay and lesbian parents does not negatively affect children.


The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, a nonprofit organization that studies adoption and foster care, hailed the decision.


"This ban, which was the only one of its kind in the country, has done nothing but undermine the prospects of boys and girls in the foster care system to get permanent, loving homes," said Adam Pertman, the Adoption Institute's executive director, in a written statement.


"So this decision by Judge Lederman is a very important, hopeful ruling for children who need families."


Right back at you....it is just as pathetic that you...
as a group with that group bully mentality trying to bully the one opposition voice into submission, all the while preaching about individual rights. Please. You don't give a darn about individual rights. What a joke. Par for the course for left-wing do-as-we-say, not-as-we-do. Our way or the highway.