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

I have the answer to our presidential woes...

Posted By: was a happy dem on 2008-02-24
In Reply to: Does anyone else not find it totally ironic that our next president's sm - nm

It is time for some real serious thinking now.....Take your time with the following report and see if you don't agree!!!

Here we are already discussing the future President of the United States in the Year 2008.  Well, I have my own candidate; and I'm sure that once you know who I'm voting for, you will also agree.

For those of you who would like another choice for President, I have the best solution:  It is probably time we have a woman as President . My choice, and I hope yours as well, is a very special lady who has all the answers to our problems.

PLEASE give it a thought when you have a moment...   

  
MAXINE FOR PRESIDENT!
               
    
 Very eloquently put...........don't you think?

Maxine on "Driver Safety"  "I can't use the cell phone in the car. I have to keep my hands free for making gestures. ".......

Maxine on "Housework"   "I do my housework in the nude. It gives me an incentive to clean the mirrors as quickly as possible."

Maxine on "Lawn Care"  "The key to a nice-looking lawn is a good mower. I recommend one who is muscular and shirtless."

Maxine on "The Perfect Man"   "All I'm looking for is a guy who'll do what I want, when I want, for as long as I want, and then go away. Or wait nearby, like a Dust Buster, charged up and ready when needed."

Maxine on "Technology Revolution"  "My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice."

Maxine on "Aging"  "Take every birthday with a grain of salt. This works much better if the salt accompanies a Margarita."




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

Rebublican woes
I think the problem for Republicans was two-fold, first that the nation's faith in the Republican party is way down in general, and second that the candidates to pick from weren't that great. In the end the most moderate Republican candidate won the nomination. I really think he is the only Republican candidate to have a chance at winning. The others were too far right to have a chance. That's not the mood of the country right now. Of course, if McCain loses (likely) then the Republican party will blame it on the fact that he was too moderate, so their next candidate will be a far righty, and how well that person is received by voters depends entirely on how well (I'm presuming here) Obama does as president, the state of foreign and domestic affairs, etc.
I think most know that Air America has had financial woes.
Once it was learned that they had misappropriated monies which were supposed to have been used for charity, they lost some good backers. I would think it most probably is financial.  There is not a plot behind every business dealing.
Who looks more presidential?
Calmly and confidently address subjects of vital interest to the nation and runs against his presidential opponent or a robot who stands by silently picking his nails and clinging to the skirt tails of his VP instant reply mouthpiece, taking queues from her as to when to wave to the audience, all the while never uttering one sound on one policy?
Presidential race

Please do not tell any of the following their lives are not DIRECTLY affected by the President:


1.  The teachers and students who spend most of their time preparing for NCLB  standardized testing while falling behind in basic life skills. This affects EVERY student and EVERY teacher in EVERY public school in the United States.


2.  The soldiers who have been to Iraq,as well as their survivors. Their mission was to destroy nonexistent WMDs.


3.  The millions of people who cannot afford health insurance or oil to heat their homes. Of course our president does believe  "profits" are a good thing; unfortunately they are for corporate America.


I am not advising who to vote for; obviously it is a personal choice. But anyone who says no one person can make a difference, good or bad, is naive.


 


 


Presidential candidates

I think MTs should run the country!!!


Well he's already got his own presidential seal.
He's going to have to use it somewhere, lol.
I think that a presidential inauguration should be serious...
not an excuse to drink a lot in bars. I actually find it tacky. Watch the serious event in our nation's capital and celebrate if you want, but go home to party like a rockstar. Personally, I think it shows a huge amount of disrespect.
So...you are FOR anyone asking a Presidential candidate...
a question be subject to a law enforcement background check and the findings made public? Bye bye civil rights. Unreal.
The Presidential Pooch

Ok........ I'll say at least Michelle Obama said we'd like to "rescue" a dog. But now we've got the AKC involved in 2 Poodles, who are in a Poodle Rescue. I guess Id prefer that, but would prefer going to an actual kill-shelter and adopting, which is what I think Michelle meant in the first place.


Though......... What do you guys think of the hype of having a "Dog" in the White House. It's almost like it's the "designer" thing.


I remember Bill Clinton going and getting "Buddy".... It started with just Socks the cat didn't it?


I mean, all the love to them, for liking dogs and stuff, god knows I'm an animal lover.


But..... Seems weird. Now that I'm president and in the White House, you can have a dog. Not before, but Now you can.


I dont know.


=========================


President-elect Barack Obama has promised his two daughters a new puppy, sparking widespread speculation over the breed of the First Dog-to-be. 
Cristina Corbin


FOXNews.com


Thursday, November 06, 2008
 
To the lucky pup poised to become the next First Dog: Mind your manners.


Barney, President Bush's usually docile Scottish Terrier, once nipped at a White House intern -- now a FOXNews.com reporter -- when she accidentally dug a fingernail into the pooch while holding him.


Bill Clinton's cat, Socks, routinely hissed at the First Dog, Buddy. And Teddy Roosevelt's pit bull once famously ripped the pants of the French ambassador.


In his election victory speech Tuesday night, President-elect Barack Obama promised his two daughters that they'd be moving into the White House with a new puppy. Now the dogosphere is engaged in widespread speculation over the breed of the presidential pooch-to-be.


Or pooches-to-be. The American Kennel Club hopes that the pet will turn out to be a pair of 6-week-old toy poodles, rescued by Flora's Pet Project/Poodle Rescue in Connecticut. First lady-to-be Michelle Obama said in an interview last month that the family was interested in adopting a rescue dog after the election.


The puppies were transported to the AKC's New York offices, where they were to be photographed professionally Thursday in the hopes of catching the Obama family's attention.


"The dogs were in an unfortunate situation and were not being cared for properly," said Marianne Smith, a spokeswoman for the rescue agency. Smith said the puppies were "voluntarily surrendered," but declined to give further details.


In an online presidential dog poll conducted by the AKC in August, the poodle breed was the top dog among 42,000 respondents. Other contenders were the soft-coated Wheaten Terrier and Bichon Frise.


In a Communispace.com survey of 308 people taken after the election, 25 percent of those polled predicted the Obamas will get a golden retriever; 15 percent said a "pound dog," and 14 percent said a Jack Russell terrier.


Promoting her poodles, AKC spokeswoman Lisa Peterson said: "We hope the Obamas consider the survey results.... This poodle is a breed that doesn't always get the respect it deserves, but it is truly an ideal family pet."


"The poodle is a highly versatile breed," she said. "It's extremely intelligent and easily trained. This dog is going to visit many places, and so you want it to have good manners."


One of the Obamas' daughters suffers from allergies, so poodles -- which do not shed -- would be an ideal choice, Peterson said. The breed's obedient temperament and intelligence also make it a perfect candidate, she said.


In a letter to Obama in September, the AKC offered its assistance in choosing the White House dog and urged the Illinois senator to consider the toy poodle if he were elected. The AKC said it didn't send a letter to John McCain, because the Arizona senator already has 24 pets, including four dogs.


From 1960-1982, the poodle was the number one breed in America. Winston Churchill, Grover Cleveland and Richard Nixon all reportedly owned one.


Past White House breeds include George H. W. Bush's Springer Spaniel "Millie," Ronald Reagan's King Charles Cavalier Spaniel "Rex" and Caroline Kennedy's Welsh Terrier "Charlie." President Clinton's dog "Buddy" was a chocolate lab.


PICTURE BELOW:


A pair of six-week-old Toy Poodle puppies rescued by Flora's Pet Project/Poodle Rescue Connecticut visited the American Kennel Club offices in New York Thursday to be photographed in hopes of catching the attention of the Obama family.


 


It is hard to believe, isn't it....even in a Presidential election...
only about half of the people vote. I, like you, don't know why anyone would not want to exercise their right to vote.
Huckabee? Not presidential material

Here is Novak's recent article on him.  Creepy.  Reminds me a little of a wolf in sheep's clothing.  I think it is important to get the opinions of those people in the districts politicians serve.  Those opinions on Huckabee are not very good.


The False Conservative


by Robert Novak


Posted: 11/26/2007


Who would respond to criticism from the Club for Growth by calling the conservative, free-market campaign organization the "Club for Greed"? That sounds like Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards, all Democrats preaching the class struggle. In fact, the rejoinder comes from Mike Huckabee, who has broken out of the pack of second-tier Republican presidential candidates to become a serious contender -- definitely in Iowa and perhaps nationally.

Huckabee is campaigning as a conservative, but serious Republicans know that he is a high-tax, protectionist, big-government advocate of a strong hand in the Oval Office directing the lives of Americans. Until now, they did not bother to expose the former governor of Arkansas as a false conservative because he seemed an underfunded, unknown nuisance candidate. Now that he has pulled even with Mitt Romney for the Iowa caucuses with the possibility of more progress, the beleaguered Republican Party has a frightening problem on its hands.

The rise of evangelical Christians as the motive force that blasted the GOP out of minority status during the past generation always contained an inherent danger if these new Republican acolytes supported not merely a conventional conservative but one of their own. That has happened now with Huckabee, a former Baptist minister educated at Ouachita Baptist University and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The danger is a serious contender for the nomination who passes the litmus test of social conservatives on abortion, gay marriage and gun control but is far removed from the conservative-libertarian model of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.


There is no doubt about Huckabee's record during a decade in Little Rock as governor. He was regarded by fellow Republican governors as a compulsive tax increaser and spender. He increased the Arkansas tax burden by 47 percent, boosting the levies on gasoline and cigarettes. When he decided to lose 100 pounds and pressed his new lifestyle on the American people, he was far from a Goldwater-Reagan libertarian.

As a presidential candidate, Huckabee has sought to counteract his reputation as a taxer by pressing for replacement of the income tax with a sales tax and has more recently signed the no-tax-increase pledge of Americans for Tax Reform. But Huckabee simply does not fit in normal boundaries of economic conservatism, as when he criticized President Bush's veto of a Democratic expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Calling global warming a "moral issue" mandating "a biblical duty" to prevent climate change, he has endorsed the cap-and-trade system that is anathema to the free market.

Huckabee clearly departs from the mainstream of the conservative movement in his confusion of "growth" with "greed." Such ad hominem attacks are part of his intuitive response to criticism from the Club for Growth and the libertarian Cato Institute for his record as governor. On Fox News Sunday Nov. 18, he called the "tactics" of the Club for Growth "some of the most despicable in politics today. It's why I love to call them the Club for Greed because they won't tell you who gave their money." In fact, all contributors to the organization's political action committee (which produces campaign ads) are publicly revealed, as are most donors financing issue ads.

Quin Hillyer, a former Arkansas journalist writing in the conservative American Spectator, called Huckabee "a guy with a thin skin, a nasty vindictive streak." Huckabee's retort was to attack Hillyer's journalistic procedures, fitting a mean-spirited image when he responds to conservative criticism.

Nevertheless, he is getting remarkably warm reviews in the news media as the most humorous, entertaining and interesting GOP presidential hopeful. Contrary to descriptions by old associates, he is now called "jovial" or "good-natured." Any Republican who does not sound much like a Republican is bound to benefit from friendly media support, as Sen. John McCain did in 2000 but not today with his return to being more like a conventional Republican.

An uncompromising foe of abortion can never enjoy full media backing. But Mike Huckabee is getting enough favorable buzz that, when combined with his evangelical base, it makes real conservatives shudder.


it is not very presidential appearing and to me is just weird
she allowed herself to be drawn into that, what else would she do - I mean, she is too wishy-washy for my trust, goes in too many different directions, too scattered, haphazard...these are my opinions about her capabilities as a president, not a personal attack.

not to mention, if the black man did this he would have been gone from candidacy a long time ago.
And you actually think continuing the presidential campaign...
is more important than solving this problem? He has said before that he puts country first and if it costs him an election, so be it. That is integrity. Staying on the campaign trail instead of actually working to fix the problem...sounds a whole lot more chickenesque to me.
hero does not equal presidential - nm
x
According to the Presidential Transition Act of 1963 -

there is an office for the President Elect that the government pays for.  You can read the information on the link provided to see what all is paid for - but it seems quite apparent to me that there is an office of the president elect and has been for quite some time - nothing new.  Obama may have given it an official title that nobody has used openly before, but it has been established for at least 45 years.


 


http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentType=GSA_BASIC&contentId=24780


The Presidential Transition Act of 1963 -
this authorizes the General Services Administration to certify even before the December electoral college volte who the apparent winner of the president elect is.
I agree especially since Ensign had presidential

Analysis: Ensign affair a shock GOP didn't need





Media's Presidential Bias and Decline....sm

Michael Malone is a fourth generation journalist who works for abc.

This column is five pages long, but well worth the time spent reading it.

He talks about the present media bias and how he believes it came to be. Very, very enlightening.






Media's Presidential Bias and Decline
Columnist Michael Malone Looks at Slanted Election Coverage and the Reasons Why






http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=6099188&page=1
The Official Web Site of the The U.S. Presidential Transition
FYI.

http://change.gov/

Knowledge is power.

Executive power survey by presidential candidates.

In case you haven't seen this article, I am posting the link:


http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/22/candidates_on_executive_power_a_full_spectrum/?page=2


This is very enlightening for those who want to know their candidates thoughts about executive power.


Summation of today's presidential press conference

Here is NPR's write up of today's press conference by the president for those who would like a quick run down.  I just listened to it.  Made me nauseous.


WASHINGTON December 4, 2007, 1:04 p.m. ET · President Bush said Tuesday that the international community should continue to pressure Iran on its nuclear programs, asserting Tehran remains dangerous despite a new intelligence conclusion that it halted its development of a nuclear bomb four years ago.


"I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program," Bush said. "The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it."


Bush spoke one day after a new national intelligence estimate found that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, largely because of international scrutiny and pressure. That finding is in stark contrast to the comparable intelligence estimate of just two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program.


It is also stood in marked contrast to Bush's rhetoric on Iran. At his last news conference on Oct. 17, for instance, he said that people "interested in avoiding World War III" should be working to prevent Iran from having the knowledge needed to make a nuclear weapon.


Bush said Tuesday that he only learned of the new intelligence assessment last week. But he portrayed it as valuable ammunition against Tehran, not as a reason to lessen diplomatic pressure.


"To me, the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community — to continue to rally the community — to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program," the president said. "What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear weapons program."


He also asserted that the report means "nothing's changed," focusing on the previous existence of a weapons program and not addressing the discrepancy between his rhetoric and the disclosure that weapons program has been frozen for four years.


Bush said he is not troubled about his standing, about perhaps facing a credibility gap with the American people. "No, I'm feeling pretty spirited — pretty good about life," Bush said.


"I have said Iran is dangerous, and the NIE doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world."


Bush said the report's finding would not prompt him to take a U.S. military option against Tehran off the table.


"The best diplomacy — effective diplomacy — is one in which all options are on the table," he said.


The president also said that the world would agree with his message that Iran shouldn't be let off the hook yet.


In fact, Europeans said the new information strengthens their argument for negotiations with Tehran, but they also said that sanctions are still an option to compel Iran to be fully transparent about its nuclear program. European officials insisted that the international community should not walk away from years of talks with an often defiant Tehran that is openly enriching uranium for uncertain ends. The report said Iran could still build a nuclear bomb by 2010-2015.


In Kabul, Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reinforced the U.S. position that the new U.S. intelligence assessment shows that Tehran remains a possible threat. He said it shows that Iran has had a nuclear weapons program and that as long as the country continues with its uranium enrichment activities, Iran could always renew its weapons program.


The U.S. intelligence assessment "validated the administration's strategy of bringing diplomatic and economic efforts to bear on Iran," Gates said Tuesday, speaking at a news conference with Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai.


Bush called the news conference, his first in nearly seven weeks, to intensify pressure on lawmakers amid disputes over spending and the Iraq war. Taking advantage of his veto power and the largest bully pulpit in town, Bush regularly scolds Congress as a way to stay relevant and frame the debate as his presidency winds down.


Democrats counter that Bush is more interested in making statements than genuinely trying to negotiate some common ground with them.


Specifically, Bush again on Tuesday challenged Congress to send him overdue spending bills; to approve his latest war funding bill without conditions; to pass a temporary to fix to the alternative minimum tax so millions of taxpayers don't get hit with tax increases; and to extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.


"Congress still has a lot to do," Bush said. "It doesn't have very much time to do it."


On another matter, Bush was asked about a rape victim in Saudi Arabia who was sentenced to prison and 200 lashes for being alone with a man not related to her — a violation of the kingdom's strict segregation of the sexes. Saudi Arabia has faced enormous international criticism about the sentencing.


"My first thoughts were these," Bush said. "What happens if this happens to my daughter? How would I react? And I would have been — I'd of been very emotional, of course. I'd have been angry at those who committed the crime. And I'd be angry at a state that didn't support the victim."


Bush, however, said he has not made his views known directly to Saudi King Abdullah, an ally. But he added: "He knows our position loud and clear."


The president said the U.S. economy is strong, though he acknowledged that the housing crisis has become a "headwind." He said administration officials are working on the issue, but he is wary of bailing out lenders. "We shouldn't say, 'OK, you made a lousy loan so we're going to go ahead and subsidize you.' "


Asked about the 2008 election, Bush steered himself back out of commenting on politics. "I practiced some punditry in the past — I'm not going to any further."


On other issues, Bush said:


—"The Venezuelan people rejected one-man rule" when they rejected a constitutional provision that would have enabled Hugo Chavez to remain in power for life and drive changes throughout Venezuelan society. "They voted for democracy."


—He talked by telephone Tuesday with Russian President Vladimir Putin and briefed him on the new Iran intelligence estimate. Bush also said he told Putin that "we were sincere in our expressions of concern" about irregularities in the voting that produced a sweeping parliamentary victory for Putin's party.


—He has "cordial relations" with Democratic leaders of Congress despite the sharp words between the White House and Capitol Hill. He blamed Democrats for the lack of compromises, saying, "In order for us to be able to reach accord, they got to come with one voice, one position."


Palin is the most unqualified and inexperienced vice-presidential candidate in history sm
http://newsblaze.com/story/20081027173636reye.nb/topstory.html


meaning=history repeats...the PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE will be tested...no matter which one wins...nm
=)
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.
This sort of thing is not subject to Presidential trickery of that sort. nm
nm
I can answer that. The answer is no. nm

Answer

I was frequently banned on the old forum format, at least once a week during the weeks I was actually posting (I would then get disgusted and stay away for up to a month at a time).  Have only been banned once since the new format so I would agree with your analysis. 


Otherwise as to other folks banned, I remember lots and lots of complaints/comments but can offer no specifics.  I also remember seeing a lot of interesting posts go poof!  Used to really really be bad on the old religion board.  But hopefully that's improved also.


I would have bet it all that you would answer this way.
I suppose you also believe that poverty causes crime.
You would not like my answer
so I won't even go there...
So the answer is yes,
Where did the soldier in the article lie?

I come from a family with multiple generations who served and continue to serve in the military, including Iraq, so spare me your little lecture about troop morale.

Have a lovely day.
This should answer...
at least one of your questions. I found this site: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MedicaidGenInfo/05_SCHIP%20Information.asp

Which states that in general, states can not permit the implementation of preexisting condition exclusions.

However, in states like South Carolina, where SCHIP is run through BCBS, they can implement preexisting condition exclusions, but only in so far as HIPAA rules allow - which I would assume (have not researched) is the 12 month waiting period.

As for your other question, I have a muscle disease (big time preexisting) and I can't even get health coverage privately. I have to struggle to work full time, even on the days I feel like my whole body is on fire, just to get group coverage. I had the 12 month preexisting condition thing, with which they are denying everything - saying that it's all related to the preexisting condition - and I pay $260 a month. I should also mention that this coverage is just for me - no children/spouse.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the answer....
and you have a good one as well.
Right...there is no answer.
You want it your way or no way and want to squelch any kind opposition. Sounds more like the the old USSR than the old USA. There's that Marxist thing again.
answer...
Again you prove my point. And MSNBC, CNN, and the others are any different, except their slant is to the left? You really think people don't notice that? lol.

Dear...drop the condescencion. Demographics can have many meanings other than the one you describe.

I was talking about news outlets. I know there are other places to get the conservative view...but I want to get both sides. I don't watch the commentators much on either side...hard to find a point in the bashing, and that means both sides. Mostly I just turn them off.
you just know everything, don't you...have an answer for everything
no matter what anyone says, you (meaning the posters on here who continually try to bully everyone into their own way of thinking) will defend her - even if she was caught in bed literally with John McCain you would have an answer for that.

I heard an interview by Jodie Foster where she stated she literally hates weakness of any kind, in any thing. She said if there was a bird fallen out of a nest (to that affect) on the sidewalk in front of her she would want to kick it. That is the majority of what I see on these boards. Nastiness, aggressiveness, women toward women. Do you think kindness is a weakness, because I know most men do. I personally do not want to be a man.

That is okay, Jesus has said the weak shall inherit the earth - I will follow Jesus' teachings before I would ever follow people who think killing over 1 million innocent people is a good thing and are blood-thirsty for even more lives and souls, a majority of which comes right from the pulpits. I think I read somewhere those people will suffer most at the end of the world - as for me I am making sure I am not one of them.

Might is right, bigger is better - you can have all of it and women can get as aggressive as they want but you will find out it was wrong when men do it and it is wrong for women to do it.
here's the answer
I, too, am in a quandry about this election, but I do know that opening up drilling for oil in Alaska is just a temporary solution.  We are spending 10 billion ($$$) a month for the war in Iraq.  Why are we there?  For oil.  Think how far that money would go towards developing new alternative energy sources in this country in order to free ourselves from our addiction to foreign oil.  Even in Dubai, where they currently have plenty of oil, they are cuttng edge in the development of alternative energy sources.  Even they realize the oil is not going to last forever!!.  The powers that be in this country are so ignorant and greedy that they refuse to see that this is the ONLY SOLUTION to this madness!!!  Wake up, people.  This is a change that will garner HUGE improvements in all matters of economy and  environment, and showing the rest of the world that the US can be an example in leading the way to making these changes!!!
That's really the best answer
Don't talk to them about it. Judging by this board, things can get very heated and nasty and really, has anyone changed their minds after reading any of this stuff? I think at this point most of us know who we are going to vote for and arguing is just pointless.

Answer. sm
I realize what trouble we are in.  That is why it frightens me that this bimbo is literally 1 heartbeat away from the presidency. 
See answer above. Aha. nm
nm
Answer
The same number of Democrats as Republicans.
Looking for a serious answer...
I am looking for a REAL answer to this. Not a snide remark from either dems or pubs.

Why are the presidents, leaders, etc of nations we aren't "friendly" with supporting Obama?

Just real answers please. I think we are up to our ears in sarcastic remarks on this board.
Thank you for the answer - nm
nm
Got my answer
It doesn't matter and our vote will be counted.
You don't have to answer
Is it PA. That is the way it is here, God is still very much present in our schools and out, and that is a good thing.
answer this
BLACK? that's what i thought... uh... no and let me make this perfectly clear... I AM NOT INSINUATING THAT AFRICAN AMERICANS WILL RIOT.
Your answer is in the
x
Yes, see your answer above. nm
x
answer




into poverty, but you don't want the money it takes to care for these children to come out of your pocket????  Am I on the mark? 


Answer:  First of all, I wouldnt be forcing anyone to have a baby born into poverty.  That would be THEIR choice.  Yes, it is a CHOICE to get pregnant or not.  If you dont want to get pregnant you should use BIRTH CONTROL, given out FREE to anyone who cannot afford it.  Of course, you cannot actually shove it down someone's throat and make them swallow it, I guess.  Second, I already DO pay for these unwanted children.  It is called WELFARE. 



I guess this is another so-called way to sling mud at Obama.  The rich republicans can't have it both ways.  You either care for the unborn (welfare for their mothers) or you allow the mother the choice...  Which is it?

Answer:  First, I am not slinging mud at Obama.  I would be against abortion no matter who was running for office.  Second, I am not a rich republican but a poor democrat.  Sorry to dissappoint!  Third, I believe that education about birth control and sex should be funded more, there should be more support out there for teens on how to NOT GET PREGNANT in the first place.  Second, there are NO unwanted children in the world.  If the natural mother did not want the child, there should be, and I am sure there are, government funded programs to allow these girls to adopt out their babies to the MILLIONS of people who want to adopt.  Also, our government should help fund would be parents to be able to adopt w/o having to spend thousands of dollars to do it.  So that way people in the good ole' USA could adopt w/o having to go to third world countries to do it.  Another thing, the government should reevaluate their priorities in that it costs almost nothing to have an abortion and commit murder versus spending thousands on adoption.  Go figure that one!

Not all abortions are a form of birth control, ya' know.  I knew a very religious lady that aborted her child due to hydrocephalus.  The child would been born deformed/a vegetable.  This would have put this lady at high risk.  She prayed about it and soon after aborted the child.  She had to live with that. 


That is the child that God gave her.  I dont have all the answers about why that would be, but murder is still murder.  So does that mean because the baby was deformed that he was less of a baby, a human life?  Not our call to make.  As far as her having to live with that, this is true.  However, as a Christian, we also have to live with whoever we put into office.  They represent us, our beliefs.  We have to answer for who we give the power to.  We are all responsible. 



Not all situations are the same.  Furthermore, you can't force your child to have a baby or to have an abortion.  Either way, it's her body.


In the OT of the Bible God speaks about the children of Israel.  They were worshipping an idol and offering their children to it.  He spoke about innocent blood be shed and he was angered by it.  He speaks quite clearly that it is murder.  Also, if anyone supports abortion, I think they should go to the faith board and click on the post not for everyone and find the link in there to a video, copy and paste and watch what happens to an aborted fetus.  At 19 weeks what a baby looks like and see what happens to them when the are killed.  I mean, after all, if you can condone it, then you should be able to watch it.



answer s/m
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being Roman Catholic.  There is something wrong when priests or pastors start threatening their parishoners with he11 fire if they don't do as they say.  They need to stick with God's business and leave politics out of it.
Answer
When I first answered Amanda her post said that anchor babies by virtue of being born on American soil are american citizens. I said I was fine with that. The reason I am fine with that is because the 14th Ammendment of the Constitution, section 1 says -
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I have not yet found anything in the Constitution that talks about the parents of the child needing to be US Citizens.

There is a lot of info out regarding this subject. I did find an article from the Seattle newspaper that the republican party is talking about no automatic citizenship for kids born to illegal immigrants. Here's that article.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004450665_gop01m.html

Here's another article that I just found interesting. This one talks about the people who knowlingly break our laws just to have their kids born in America.

http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article4435.html


All I say is that if it is in the Constitution we need to follow it. The Constituion and Bill of Rights were written with a purpose.

If an child is born in America to illegal parents, and the constitution says that baby is a US Citizen then that child should be allowed to run for President just like all the other people born in America. If the person is born outside of US soil then no they are not eligible.

Obey the Constitution and stop trying to change it (no, not you personally, that's just my motto).

Answer...(sm)

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Orderly-bankruptcy-option-auto-firms/story.aspx?guid=%7B86C06032-FA65-4B0A-AC3C-EBA0CA835D11%7D


http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/orderly-bankruptcy-option-auto-firms/story.aspx?guid=%7B86C06032-FA65-4B0A-AC3C-EBA0CA835D11%7D&siteid=yhoof


There are numerous other articles about the bankrupcy thing.  Just Google *orderly bankrupcy.*


As far as the ethics bill (keeping in mind that I have not been able to read the actual bill yet--can't wait to get hold of that one) employers are not allowed to reprimand employees for exercising thier rights under this bill.  So, while some might be able to fire people *at will* others can't.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#28304676


As soon as I find the bill itself I'll post it or post a link.