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

Why can't I continue to discuss

Posted By: what she did and did not know? on 2008-12-20
In Reply to: This is nonsense - New Englander

You all carry on about Obama's palling around (re: believing things that simply cannot be substantiated), but you sure can't take it when someone turns around and comments on your precious heroine. How very sad for all of you who hold this vapid, undereducated, unqualified, power hungry example of hollow charm in such high esteem. Perhaps we should be discussing your judgment instead of hers.


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

I was trying to discuss things with you

You obviously have a great hatred for our country and our president and cannot see the difference between Bush and world leaders who are set on the destruction of the United States and Israel. The Iranian president has made his intentions known about what he wants to do to Israel and the U.S. In fact, he had a nice little P.R. campaign in his country this past week detailing what he wants to do to us. If you are so naive to believe he just wants his country to have energy from nuclear plants then I guess you deviate from what much the U.S. and the rest of world thinks about Iran's intentions.

I said the nuclear option should be the last resort as I believe our president would make it, but you are so lost in your world of conspiracy theory on Bush's character and intentions that you evidently missed that part of my post.

I would like to know where you got the so-called Bush quotes. This is the first time I've heard people actually use quotes--where did those come from? I hope not a hearsay opinion piece, because that wouldn't lend much credence to those so-called quotes.

I was actually joking with you when I made the *shopping spree* remarks. I know you are much too intelligent to actually go and do that. You may, in my opinionm be a little misguided by your emotions but I know you're not that stupid. I'm sorry you cannot see humor in someone discussing this topic with you. I'm even more sorry that you feel you have to label everyone who disagrees with you as uninformed and unthinking. People will have different opinions with you on many issues but that makes them neither stupid or uninformed. Have a nice day...
I am not asking you to discuss Israel. sm

I know that it happens all the time.  I am sorry that it does.


I refuse to discuss

religion with Moonies or Scientologists.  There is just no common ground.  The same way as I refuse to discuss politics with people who actually consider Fox a news station.  They are indoctrinated and innoculated from the truth by daily coordinated talking points to distort any event (such as saying Charlie Gibson looking down his nose at SP or was too rough on her) to favor their desire to keep the corrupt repubs in power. It's a waste of my time.


 


 


No, I don't argue much. I discuss or
post articles I think would be interesting to people on this board. I try not to tear down the people who post, either, not like some on this board. They have their opinion, I have mine.  
No, I don't argue much. I discuss or

post articles I think would be interesting to people on this board. I try not to tear down the people who post, either, not like some on this board. They have their opinion, I have mine.  


Your idea of a reply very often isn't up for discussion. You seem to think it's the only one that matters. End of discussion.


Okay - let's discuss the $9 mac and cheese.
Personally, I love bacon crumbs on my mac and cheese. Anyone else?
What do you expect? You just come to antagonize not discuss.

But you don't do that. You only discuss the democratic past.

In order to smear it.


No talk about the 12 prior years of Reagan and Bush.


A time to dissect and discuss a war...
is after your military is at home and safe, if you want to debate it pubically. The time to discuss the war and how you as an American feel about it is in private until they are safe. If you want to discuss it while they are still at war, discuss it in town hall meetings. Discuss it at your house. Discuss it at Wal-Mart. Discuss it in your front yard. Write to your congressman. But do not do it publically while men and women are still fighting. You are entitled to your feelings and to express them. However, common courtesy, in my opinion, should keep a person from going public while men and women are still fighting. All that does is embolden the terrorists. They have said so themselves and it is pretty obvious that it does. I saw an interesting report on it this morning, how that is the number one *battle front* for AL Qaeda now...just feeding the propaganda machine with the daily stuff from the American public. Frankly, I don't think that is anything to be proud of. But that is just me.
Sam does discuss issues and gets attacked for it.
nm
What about parents who don't discuss with their kids?
And so you know right off, I'm not a Barack fan nor McCain fan. However, my own personal beliefs aside, I believe "it takes a village to raise a child" and there are FAR too many parents NOT doing their jobs these days, which forces schools, governments, etc. to jump in to help. I see far too many parents who'd just as soon go to the bar than raise their child. There are parents who are apathetic, and there are parents who are embarrassed or ill-informed themselves to teach their kids sex ed. I don't think sex ed is a problem at all in school, so long as it's in the context of health education and not presented to students in a biased manner of some sort. It IS how mammals reproduce and therefore does have a place in education.

God gave us free will and if you try to control the free will of someone else, how is that right? I believe in consequences of free will when someone chooses wrong, which is why we have laws in place. I don't believe it's any one person's or party's place to tell another how to live their life, period.

Personally, I'd like to see more parents do their jobs at home so gov't and schools didn't have to do it for them (and all the rest of us too as a result), and sure, ideally I'd like to see more kids abstaining from sex altogether. But I'm also a realist and know that my beliefs and willpower aren't the same as everyone else's. That's what is supposed to be great about USA.

The reality is that not all kids have the willpower to abstain in the heat of the moment, no matter WHAT their upbringing or what wonderful parents they have. As you said, it's everywhere - on TV, movies, ads, games, you name it! It's in their face now more than ever, so to ignore it and act like it won't ever happen isn't the answer, either. No, I don't know what the answer is, either, but I don't think that's it.

Also, to take away any access to sex ed and/or birth control at all is in a sense forcing the ideals/morals of one group of people on another and basically taking the free will of the other group - how do you reconcile that? I'm being sincere, as this question plagues me often when considering these issues.
I never meant to discuss the money -
my point, Kendra, was just that these kids can already be treated without their parents consent, that that part of it was nothing new.
Honey, I would glady discuss this

with you privately. Since you seem to be so well-read, as I am also, we could have a great discussion on this subject. The market can easily be manipulated by speculators and the outrageously rich to sway political minds. When the market is down it favors the dems, it's a fact. When the economy is good, the current administration gets the credit; when it's bad the same also happens. You don't think that can be manipulated at all?


My own humble opinion on why O will be elected are these:  The economy, hatred of Bush, white guilt and uninformed voters, period.


Maybe she just doesn't have anything to discuss with you....pitiful
nm
I like it here. Besides, mostly all they discuss there is current events. Imagine that. nm

Well pardon me, but how can you discuss the present without a history of sm
what shaped it?  It isn't possible.
Well, by all means lets discuss pertinent
xx
Of course, because it takes high thinking to discuss
//
Why don't we discuss the Republican candidates for a change?
This is just like a dog chasing his tail!
Don't worry JR - very easy to trounce them AND discuss the issues.
They're dumb, and they lack conviction, and they do most of the work of exposing themselves for the lackeys they are so that we don't have to spend much effort at it. I mean case in point - that the Freepers would even THINK it was a good plan to tie up liberals on chat boards to keep them from grassroots organizing. Hey, if they can get paid for it more power to them - but sheez, are they really that stupid? Or, just that desperate, heh.
Why don't you discuss like an adult instead of throwing temper tantrums?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
It's like trying to discuss Dante's Inferno with someone stuck in My Little Red Reader. nm
nm
We'll discuss that crime when Bush et al are done with their trial.
nm
It may continue until........sm
about 3-1/2 years before the end of time.

Your refusal to pull your head out of the sand, in my opinion, regarding what will happen makes any further discussion of this issue futile. Hope the sand protects your little head when all heck breaks loose.
why do we have to continue with what others before
did wrong?

Tit-for-tat and 2 wrongs doesn't make anything right.

Obama is a very promising and respectable 44th President of the United States of America and if you do not see that, I feel very sorry for you.
and yet you continue...
to slander everyone on this board who doesn't agree with you.
I will continue to care for the little guy
Well, you go ahead and defend big corporations and the rich..frankly, they could not care about you one bit.  I will continue to care for the middle class, the poor, the disadvantaged.
Why must you continue to post?
Nah, just someone who cannot imagine why a neocon dinosaur who knows she/he is not wanted or needed on the liberal board would continue to post. 
go ahead...continue...
....being rude.

Life's too short to be so full of hate, directed at every member of the opposite viewpoint.

But as you say, the silence is deafening....maybe you need a hearing aid??
Big 3 talks continue....... sm

According to the article linked below and others I have read, the two of the three auto makers who will be receiving these emergency loans will be required to either show a viable plan for their industries by March 31, 2009,  or face repayment of the loans.  While I agree with the premise of this requirement, I have to wonder if, given the amount of time that it took them to get into this situation in the first place, will 3 months, more or less, be enough time for them to find a way to save their dying companies?  Is this bailout/loan just a temporary fix to a more permanent problem?  What happens, if on 03/31/2009, the automakers have spent the money fronted them, are unable to come up with a plan to satisfy the stipulations, and can not repay the loan?  Is it fair for taxpayers to bear the burden of this as well as the other bailouts that have been given and are likely yet to come? 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/business/11auto.html?ref=us


Not what I said. Just wondering why we continue getting
and not a single person can stop and show a bit more humanity....that's all.
And I suppose you would rather we continue...(sm)
to run that torture chamber in Guantanamo.  Yeah, that would be the one where they can hold supposed SUSPECTS for how long without trial?  Maybe you should rent the documentary "Taxi to the Dark Side." 
Not that I feel I need to continue.... sm
this seemingly endless and mindless banter, but rather to just satisfy your apparent thirst for blood, I went back and looked to see what I had posted that I felt the need to apologize for.  Here is the post that I made to abc that sent her off into a tizzy about it being her body and her embryo, etc. 

""And I prefer an abortion to giving up my baby for adoption. I would not be able to sleep a single night, having given my baby to strangers."  (Note:  This was a quote from abc that I was addressing.  )

But you could sleep knowing that you took your baby's life? I am not trying to criticize but simply trying to understand this line of reasoning. " (This was my answer to her quote.)

Now..... go cool off! 


Why do you continue to ask "where" when you have
=>
Obama will continue to act like he did regarding
nm
and the personal attacks continue

Go ahead continue to talk about which you know nothing about
Go ahead, then, continue to talk about what you know nothing about other than news reports and slanted history books and we, who truly know a bit more about jewish issues and Israel will sit back and continue to smile and, of course, like I said in my previous post, there are always courses in the local synagogue that you can take.  Join a jewish discussion group either in the net or in your home town, that is if your home town even has a jew in it, and learn the truth.  Not what is being put out there by radical orthodox jews.  Those are the ones that you see fighting in Israel to stay in Gaza.  The radical orthodox jews.  Sharon, as much as I dont like him, is right in what he has decided.  It is unfortunate but it is just and right. 
The gullible continue to hit themselves with hammers.
It's really amazing to see. In the first place, Bush's tax cuts mainly affected investment income. Do you think the ultra wealthy 1% do 9 to 5 at Burger King and report their wages like the rest of us working slobs? Please. They don't have wages and so, do not even contribute to the Social Security coffers (though that doesn't stop them from accepting huge chunks of OUR hard-earned money in Bush free for all tax refund giveaways). Bush took OUR money and gave it to his friends - and himself, by the way.

But here's the real story without the skewed numbers (excerpt):

Grossly Unfair: Evaluating the Bush Proposal
By Ron Sider, President
Evangelicals for Social Action

It is true that the wealthy pay a lot more taxes than others. But even though the Treasury Department reports that the top one percent pay only 20 percent of all federal taxes, Bush wants to give them 40 percent of the tax cut. The bottom 40 percent get only four percent of Bush’s tax cut—i.e., about 1/9 of what the richest one percent receive. The bottom 80 percent receive only 29 percent.

The more closely you look at what has been happening in the last few decades, the more outrageous this 40 percent tax cut for the richest one percent appears. The income of the top one percent has grown vastly more that the rest of the population. From 1989 to 1998, the after-tax income of the bottom 90 percent grew by only five percent, but the richest one percent enjoyed a 40 percent jump. That means the income of the top one percent grew eight times faster than the bottom 90 percent. (That explosion of after-tax income happened even though President Clinton and Congress raised the highest income tax rate to 39.6 percent in 1993—a small tax increase that apparently did not discourage investment, harm the economy or prevent the richest from significantly widening the gap between themselves and everybody else.) Furthermore, the total effect of changes in the tax laws between 1977 and 1998 has already lowered the federal tax payments of the top 17 percent of families by over 14 percent ($36,710) whereas the bottom 80 percent of families saw their average tax payments fall by just 6.9 percent ($335).

It gets still worse. President Bush says his plan is fair because it lowers the tax rates for everyone. In fact, the poorest 31.5 percent of all families do not get a cent from Bush’s proposal (even though 80 percent of them are working) because their incomes are so low they do not pay any federal income taxes. (They do pay substantial payroll taxes, but the tax cut does not change that.) More than half of all black and Latino children are in families that would not benefit a cent from this plan.

Abolishing the estate tax is also wrong. Of course it needs to be revised so that children can inherit family farms and small businesses (that would cost only a fraction of what abolishing it will cost). When fully implemented in 2010, the repeal of the estate tax would provide a mere 64,000 estates with a tax cut of $55 billion—which is the same amount that the poorest 74 percent of all U.S. families (192 million people) would receive in tax cuts.

Abolishing the estate tax is misguided for several reasons. It would discourage charitable giving and thus undermine civil society. Wealthy individuals today can avoid estate taxes on wealth they give to charitable organizations. Consequently, abolishing the estate tax would almost certainly reduce charitable giving to a vast array of private agencies., including precisely the private, non-profit social service agencies in civil society that President Bush (wisely) wants to strengthen and expand. His proposal on the estate tax fundamentally contradicts his desire to expand the role of civil society in general and FBOs in particular in combating poverty—which is why John Dilulio, the head of Bush’s new White House Office on Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, recently criticized abolishing the estate tax. Fortunately, some of the wealthiest Americans (including Bill Gates’ father) have launched a campaign to preserve the estate tax!

The whole article can be read at www.christianethics.com, issue 35.

Don't let anybody be misled by the sneaky claim that the rich pay oh so much more of the tax burden than you do. Say you make 30,000 and you pay 20% of your wages in taxes - 6000. Along comes rich guy who makes no wages but has to pay 20% of his 3 million investment income in taxes - he would pay 600,000.

Oh my God!!! The rich guy has just paid 600,000 and you only paid 6000! He paid 100 TIMES what you did!! Oh the poor, poor overburdened rich guy! That's how they devise their 80-90% figures. Never mind about fair share, never mind that you are paying taxes on wages that would otherwise go to rent and food and utility costs, while they are paying taxes on free money they get just for having huge sums of money invested wisely, as the rich certainly know how to do. And why shouldn't they? But let's not pretend they need that money for food or shelter. Let's not pretend that they should be in any way exempt from contributing a fair share to the system that makes their happy lifestyles possible.
Before you continue with your generalization rampage
William Bennett's remarks are definitely NOT representative of conservative views as a whole. However, you and GT's comments do nothing...absolutely nothing but make the division between political views that much worse. If you and your ideology truly want unity and peace you would do the cause much good by not adding gasoline to an already bad bonfire.

Your comments cause as much harm to race/political relations as what Bennett said himself.
No. You won't leave. You'll continue on.

Not unlike Bush, who wants to have world domination, you want to dominate all boards here. 


Accidents are exused.  There's no reason on earth to excuse you.


I don't think it serves any purpose to continue this. sm
Suffice it to say, I can't imagine how I would feel were I in his shoes.  Israel is facing some pretty terrible prospects in the days ahead.  Anyway, I'd say it's time to let it drop.  It's funny, as I am posting this, I see over to the side on the right under the ads by Google, Christian Jewish tours.  I have always wanted to go.  I have friends who have gone with their churches.  I may never get the chance. 
You continue to prove my point. (nm)
nm
oh yea, continue the horrors for the victim
Yes, make sure the mother has the baby of the person that raped her. Make sure she goes on for nine months every minute of the day remembering the horrible incident. A lot of rape victims want to commit suicide. Luckily most of them are able to get through it with counseling but most of them don't have a belly to show. But hey, let that belly get bigger. Let her feel the child of the person that committed the horendous crime and violated her body. Make sure she remembers that. Geez - why not just frame the rapists photo so she can see his picture every day. Then the cherry on the cake will be the actual birth when she can once again see the rapist once her baby is born.

And then we have the wonderful knowledge that a lot of times these tendencies are hereditary (not always but a lot of times). Would you want to raise a rapists child knowing that when he/she becomes an adult the likelihood of them committing the same crime against someone else is there.

Oh yes that's a nice 20-year sentance for the victim.
Good. Let the games continue. nm
nm
While you continue to preach to the choir
su
you continue to minimize the gravity of this...
situation. This is not your normal "crisis" for the love of Pete. Whatever McCain has done on deregulation, and I already said he had been for it, when push came to shove, when this looming disaster was foreseen, it was HE who foresaw it, and it was Obama, Dodd, and Frank who ignored everyone, and not only that, ENCOURAGED them to continue the way they were going.

THAT is the point, THAT is what you ignore, and because ou are so enamoured of Barack Obama you do not hold his feet to the fire for his part in this, nor the Democratic party for this.

In THIS issue, NO. The Republicans did NOT have a part in it. They all voted, every single ONE Of them, to push that legislation forward. All the Democrats, eVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, voted not to. That includes Obama and Biden.

Why on EARTH would you trust him as President? I just don't get it.
I'd rather leap into the unknown, than continue
Republican government. We all KNOW we'll lose our shirts with them. It'll be 'business as usual' with those old fossils. At least with some new blood in office, some of us (who AREN'T corporate CEO's) will stand half a snowball's chance in H___ of survival in the future.

Unlike past elections, which I voted in on ideals alone, this one is different. Lots of us are voting SURVIVAL.
For those that want to continue to live in the dark
I do not care to do that. As a democrat, I have watched this man whom so many think will be their saving grace. This man was raised Muslim, is Muslim through and through, and only went Christian on us after he came here and started attending Rev Wright's church.

He is very careful about skirting around questions posed to him. He has never been able to prove US citizenship...refuses to put forth a legitimate birth certificate proving it, and is now facing a suit to hopefully force him to prove just that. I am not so easily led as some O lovers.

I have a close friend in Atlanta, GA, who is an aware winning journalist. This is where one of the most recent honor killings took place. As all campaigns are questioned when something important surfaces, they want to know how the candidate feels about certain things. Well, knowing Obama is Muslim by birth and upbringing, this question was posed out of Georgia to his camp, who would not give a straight answer. They refused to let Obama speak to this. They went round and round the question, but wouldn't even come out and say he would condemn such things. Not even a condemnation of these acts.

Just not easily led about this man.
You do if you continue to meet and scheme with
@
Then idjit, why do you continue to post?
//
I'd love to continue to argue with you
but at the moment I have more pressing things to do outside of politics....like making a difference in the community I live in.  I'm sure I'll be back to argue with you some more later.  LOL