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

Another viewpoint - to be fair and truthful

Posted By: Just me on 2008-10-30
In Reply to: this is interesting - - Amanda

Seeing as your link is to a radical left-wing blog, wanted to state the fact is that 68% of veterans have voted for McCain and 23% have voted for Obama (so I guess your article is getting just the viewpoint of those 23% or less).

To be balanced (and fair)here is a website that gives the other side.

http://vets4mccain.com/



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 you're not even truthful.
zero sum
Wonderful post and very truthful.

I read most of the posts but rarely post. When I do, it's because I think it's worth it (to post).


I feel the same way you, sam, sbMT and others feel about watching and keeping up on O's plans, who he's putting in power, etc. GP shocked me with her latest post. She was always level-headed and calming.


I am a registered 'pub but only once in my life voted a straight ticket. This election was no different. I voted for McC and Palin, but for senate and congress crossed party lines.


My husband doesn't believe there should be a 2-party system as this is what causes such hard feelings. There should not be a "R" or "D" listed behind the names of people running for office and should elect on their merits. That certainly would clean out some of the bullsh-----, lazy political figures who only care to fill their own pockets, and those who only try to bring the government to its knees. If this were to happen, we would have a better government


.....but then again, there will always be bashers who are (to me) the most unhappy people in the world and would never be satisfied with anything, who think their choices are THE WAY or NO WAY and you can't say anything against them because they are so rightous.


That's my 2 cents. Bash all you want but I won't answer the bashers because it's not worth the aggravation..


 


I have just seen that Palin was called a leader of the GOP party but be truthful
How can she be a leader of that party when she cannot even lead her own family at home? What a laugh. With leaders like that, Dems are assured of a shoo-in next election. Total laugh.
What a beautifully written, truthful, common sense post.
Cannot add a thing. Thank you for telling it like it is so profoundly and full of truths! 
Fair enough....notice especially the word FAIR. nm
nm
Thank you so much for your viewpoint . . .

You are right, we are not the greatest country in the world anymore.  Greed and selfishness have taken over this country, and it's starting to take its toll.  That's why we have one of the worst education systems in the world -- our kids are being taught it's better to have things than to be a good person.  I love Canada, have traveled there many, many times, and love the people.  I have thought for a long time about moving there -- that might become a reality if we yet again put greedy, hate-mongering fools in the White House!


Another viewpoint
There is no god and that is why he was chosen.

The people chose - not some god.
This viewpoint
Shows how delusional some can be. Pompous to presume that because some "pray" and he was picked that God chose him. While otherws who prayed got a different outcome. If there is a God, there is good and evil. One does not know if Obama was chosen by good or evil. Evil things happen all the time, so to say that because you prayed and he was chosen that God chose him. Men chose who won - not God. Men voted and put money in his campaign - not God. There are evil men and there are good men. Now the questions is and we will be finding out soon - did the men who chose Obama to be president - are they good or evil.
A different viewpoint from me

I've come to realize during this election there is a battle going on.  Many people like to speak their minds, while others are more reluctant to do so for persecution of our feelings.


 


I spoke with my dad tonight and he put a lot in perspective for me.  Dad’s always have a way of doing that (at least my dad does).  He told me tonight that things in life happen for a reason.  Sometimes we may not always see that reason until it has come to pass.  He said the ideas that you may have could possibly be wrong.  He said you may be right, but always leave the option open that you could be wrong. 


 


He told me that there is nothing I can do personally to change the minds of others, so to save some “frazzled nerves”, just read and listen but keep your opinions to yourself, and don’t look on the bad side when the guy has not even been sworn into office.  He said if there are articles of interest you want to share that is one thing, but just keep your feelings to yourself.  He said just read, watch, and listen, and in time we will see whether we have elected a good man and I hope for the countries sake he is a good man. 


 


He told me things are going to happen for a reason and you just have to learn to adapt otherwise you will just be in turmoil for things you cannot control.  Nobody knows what the future will bring.  So on those words of my dad I truly do hope President elect Obama becomes one of the greatest Presidents in history.    


interesting viewpoint

I heard a person say that if the constiutents of the republicans are rich, it is in their best interest to keep them rich; therefore, if the constituents of the democrats are the poor, is it not in their best interest to keep them poor?


 


Not saying that I necessarily agree, just thought it was interesting.


Because there's more than one church, one viewpoint?
Until we all think and behave exactly like them, some Christians won't feel they got their way?
Exactly - just as your viewpoint is being forced
It works both ways, ya know.
So much for tolerance of an opposing viewpoint....
talk the talk, don't walk the walk. Don't understand it, never will. Not trying to educate anyone; however, I am learning a good deal about liberals...and the differences among them. Very interesting indeed.

Have a good day....ignore away. :)
Yes...this would be the liberal viewpoint of the entire...sm
Gov. Palin interview. Not surprising.

Charlie Gibson did perform his role for the left well, didn't he? Entrapment journalism at its best.




another viewpoint - link inside
Seeing as truthout.org is very liberal of course they will get the worst of the worst to render their viewpoint. If you go to a more conservative site you will get a different feel of how the soldiers really feel. My best friends husband and son are both over there and they say the military are still proud to serve and encourage all of us to support them and find the good in what they are doing. I found this article from a woman soldier who was in Afghanistan and lost both her legs. She states in the article...

"My whole heart was into what I was doing. I love my people. I love my unit. I just love my job, and I'd go back and do it in a heartbeat."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15038708

fair and balanced . . . fair and

balanced . . . we're looking out for YOU . . . we're looking out for the FOLKs . . . fair and balanced . . .


 


whats fair is fair
Truth is, what is good for one is good for the other.  If Palin puts herself out there, she is a target.  But then so is Obama.  The problem is that when you say anything about O people go crazy.  When someone says something about Palin, its just true. 
I agree...and to bring a Christian viewpoint
..the Bible does state there is a time for peace and a time for war.
Shouldn't that be "another" Christian viewpoint?
nm
by the way, backwards typist - I like hearing your viewpoint -
I am not bashing anybody - I respond sometimes to comments with my own opinions, but I respect that you have the right to yours also.

I never call anyone a liar on this board - but if I see something I think is incorrect, I will try to correct the information if I can...

Also, I agree with the issues needing to be discussed and not bashing - for example, I asked who would vote for SP in 2012 and it turned into "she's better than him" or "he did this" below. I truly wanted to know who would vote for her in the primaries.

But, I don't think it is just the dems tearing down the pubs - I am standing on the fence (neutral to party sides) and I see it going both ways...
Remarkable how a child's viewpoint can often offer wisdom
nm
being fair?
What is fair when someone talks about aborting a whole race?  What has Maher to do with it?  I know for a fact if I had said something like Bennett said, I would not have my job or some friends and my family certainly would not be proud of me.  OMG, the thought of killing off a whole race to me is pretty serious and I equate it to Hitler wanting to kill off certain types of people.  To even try to defend Bennetts words makes me shake my head..Why would anyone want to defend his vile nasty comments?  The guy has proven he is a jerk. 
That's not fair...sm
I remember at least twice the topic of the Israel/Lebanon coming up, but I'll give you that it has not been discussed a lot.

See my post about WWIII. I also remember posting that I wanted to wait to see how our government reacts.
Fair enough.

Thank you for responding in a respectful manner.


For the record, I felt Kfir's remarks to me were offensive first, and that's why my remarks became nastier.  In fact, the remark about Kfir not being representative of most Israelis was in direct response and in the same tone to Kfir's post to me regarding being representative of liberals.


And I don't believe my take on the end times is a fact.  It's nothing more than my personal opinion, based on things I read that lead me to feel that way and raise the questions I raised.


I do agree that these issues are very emotionally charged and respect your decision to not discuss them further.  Again, thank you for being respectful.


Fair enough, but we need a more immediate

I would be 100% fine with my taxes being raised 3% if it meant healthcare for all American children.  Heck, I would be overjoyed with that!  So if that bill ever comes up I guarantee you I will support it, but the fact is the current bill is a solution that could help families right now, and I support it.  I would support just about any bill that would help lower health insurance costs to American families, honestly.  I just truly think this one is great because it is aimed at covering minors.  I also think it is great that Republican and Democratic leaders tried to work together and compromise on it and decided to tax cigarettes instead of raising taxes in other areas.


So yes, I would rather have a hike in taxes and have more affordable healthcare for kids.  Is that the best solution for lower health care costs for adult Americans?  Maybe not, but for the minors with no choice in what kind of family they are born into I think it is a great choice.


DW...that is not fair...
I SAID Democrats then...and I also said the Democratic Congress, because in that, just as in the Iraq War vote, the Congress is responsible, not the rank and file. The rank and file did not have an opportunity to vote on it. I NEVER said that Democratic Party TODAY was responsible for it (they are only responsible for the denial of it, and again, I mean the DNC, the policy makers, not the rank and file), I certainly NEVER said YOU personally were responsible. Why is it, help me understand, that if someone points out something truthful though not pleasant, that the "party" has done, you take it personally like I am saying it is you personally? This was a post entirely about the "party."

I guess the most startling thing about this whole thing is that if anything is said about the "party" it is taken personally. If I were in the party I would certainly be concerned that the "party" was in a state of denial about it, were actually lying about it on their website (because it is politically inexpedient for everyone to remember the past), I think THAT would offend me just as much. But...that is just me.

Suffice it to say, DW...if you choose to take a post about the Democratic Party, the voting, policy-making COngressional Democratic party at that time, personally, there is nothing I can do about that. It was not meant to be taken personally. However, I repeat...if you are going to be angry, be angry at those who did it and those who continue to lie and deny. Don't blame someone who posted the truth. And please, don't put words in my mouth. I never called Democrats baby killers. I have never called anyone a baby killer. And I certainly have not called anyone here a racist. There are certainly racists in this world, but nothing anyone has said here would make me think they are racist.

All that being said...all politics aside, all party stuff, all that crap...from one American to another...I hope you have a happy, blessed Thanksgiving Day and I hope you have plenty of family and friends around you to enjoy it with you.

Good evening!
Fair enough
point well taken. Sorry I offended you, I just get a little upset when people try and link (not that YOU were trying to link, but other posters have) trying to link any candidate running for president to a known criminal and horrible horrible person. I've heard people link Bush and Saddam together and I've been on the defensive about that.

Sorry again I offended you, I just don't like hearing the two being linked to each other.
Let's be fair now
If you repeat a slogan like "Change we can believe in" enough times you will believe him and his socialist beliefs. 
If you think that is fair, well okay. I think it is
nm
The only one fit for the job of being fair
was Tim Russert.  SOOO missing him now.  Rest in peace Tim, although I know you are briefing everyone in Heaven lol.
I don't think that is entirely fair....
I think President Bush did a wonderful job after 9-11. I think he was the President we needed then. I still credit him with holding this country together. I think he has it right on terrorism. I have a lot of problems with things he has done and things he has not done...but on 9-11 and terrorism, I think he was the right man.
why does that seem fair to you?
What reason other than jealousy could make it seem fair to impose a higher tax on someone earning more money? So they worked hard, earned more and now they get punished for it because you didn't earn as much?
fair?
i don't like the usage basis because too many will not get needed care 'trying not to use it too much'. i like the preventative measures and the mccain plan that will drive down costs for polices with the competition across state lines and the money for families to purchase insurance.
fair enough....thanks...nm
nm
Fair enough.
x
LOL...fair enough, but...(sm)

Here's what Alaska has to say about it.


http://www.ktva.com/ci_11255829


You can also find this story on Fox, AOL news, and a number of publications.  From what I gather, Palin's spokesperson has said she won't accept the raise or will donate it.  That really doesn't sound right to me, espcially since not only did she have a hand in selecting the committee that decided to give out the raises, but the committee was actually formed in order to evaluate whether raises were needed. 


Why do I care about this?  My guess is that we will see her again, so I think it's important to keep up with what she's doing in the meantime.  I don't believe in that *out of sight, out of mind* thing.


Okay, let''s be fair about it s/m
let's "level the playing field."  Let's have everyone paid on production at exactly the same rate for exactly the same amount of work.  Let's level the playing field for MTs, that is ALL dictation goes in a pool, you get paid X amount for the work you do.  You have easy stuff and you're fast.....too much advantage there.....need to level the playing field and bring you down to a level with those struggling with ESLs, mushmouths and the like.  AND by all means let's not let any bargaining power in to help us with negotiations for better pay or medical benefits and LAST BUT NOT LEAST we sure don't want to trouble the greedy MTSOs with even contributing to a 401K as we all know that all medical transcriptionists have the desire to fall over dead while pounding the keyboard at a fairly young age.  Unfortunately I know many who have done just that before they even reached retirement age.  Of course by the time you youngsters reach retirement age there won't be such a thing as an MT and you may well be cleaning toilets.
to be fair...
KBR provides the galley in Iraq that my husband eats at, which he says is probably the best galley he has ever been to, and saves us money because he still receives his BAS. Without KBR, we would really not make much more money for him being away than we make when he is home because losing his BAS would basically eat up most of the hazardous duty pay he receives. I cannot get your link to do anything, so I am really not sure what this is all about, but from a military family, we do not think KBR is the root of all evil.
I may not seem fair as a tax cut, but...(sm)

what it does do is put money in the hands of people who have to spend it.  If they were to just give money to the middle class, most of us would simply save it or pay off bills.  That doesn't stimulate the economy.  The spending deficit is the main problem with the economy, and that's what they are addressing with this.  It's the same theory behind food stamps.  Statistically, the poorer the people that receive the money, the more likely it will be spent -- and that's the goal -- to get people to spend money.


Really, if you look at the tax cuts that we are supposed to get that come to what, I think someone said about $13 a week, you will see the same concept.  When Bush sent out those rebate checks, the idea, again, was to get people spending money.  Well, they didn't.  They paid bills and saved -- so we know that doesn't work.  However, if you are just getting an extra $13 a week, most people will just see that as an extra $13 for something else they will buy.  They will be less likely to save that $13 than they would a lump sum like the ones Bush sent out.


It may not seem fair as a tax cut, but...(sm)

what it does do is put money in the hands of people who have to spend it.  If they were to just give money to the middle class, most of us would simply save it or pay off bills.  That doesn't stimulate the economy.  The spending deficit is the main problem with the economy, and that's what they are addressing with this.  It's the same theory behind food stamps.  Statistically, the poorer the people that receive the money, the more likely it will be spent -- and that's the goal -- to get people to spend money.


Really, if you look at the tax cuts that the middle class are supposed to get, they come to what, I think someone said about $13 a week, you will see the same concept.  When Bush sent out those rebate checks, the idea, again, was to get people spending money.  Well, they didn't.  They paid bills and saved -- so we know that doesn't work.  However, if you are just getting an extra $13 a week, most people will just see that as an extra $13 for something else they will buy.  They will be less likely to save that $13 than they would a lump sum like the ones Bush sent out.  That means the likelihood of the money being spent is greater.


It may not seem fair as a tax cut, but...(sm)

what it does do is put money in the hands of people who have to spend it.  If they were to just give money to the middle class, most of us would simply save it or pay off bills.  That doesn't stimulate the economy.  The spending deficit is the main problem with the economy, and that's what they are addressing with this.  It's the same theory behind food stamps.  Statistically, the poorer the people that receive the money, the more likely it will be spent -- and that's the goal -- to get people to spend money.


Really, if you look at the tax cuts that the middle class are supposed to get, they come to what, I think someone said about $13 a week, you will see the same concept.  When Bush sent out those rebate checks, the idea, again, was to get people spending money.  Well, they didn't.  They paid bills and saved -- so we know that doesn't work.  However, if you are just getting an extra $13 a week, most people will just see that as an extra $13 for something else they will buy.  They will be less likely to save that $13 than they would a lump sum like the ones Bush sent out.  That means the likelihood of the money being spent is greater.


I don't think that is fair.

The subject of abortion is just going way too far left here.  If someone doesn't approve of abortions, they should not be forced to do them.  If a mother has the right to abort her baby, a doctor should have a right to refuse to perform such a thing.  That mother will just have to go to someone else.  But to take the rights away from either the mother or the doctor......that isn't right.  If you want the government to stay out of your uterus, then don't take free will away from someone who doesn't believe in it by making them perform such an act.  Think about it.  When you look at it from both sides, the extreme left and the extreme right are both wanting unfair things. 


I really don't think that is fair.

I mean....there are the major kool-aid drinkers who refuse to see anything bad about obama no matter what the man does, but that really goes on both sides.  Some pubs are just as bad about that.  I think that Obama ran a great campaign with promises that people really wanted to believe.  However, now some of those Obama supporters are sweating it too.  It is now only the democratic kool-aid drinkers that continue to praise him. 


Fair enough....with one qualification...
The last line of the post...was in response to a poster saying that conservatives saying "I am a nice person and I know I am right so don't feel the need to defend..." yada yada. I am not trying to pick a fight. As to knowing what I am talking about and you don't...if that is the impression you take, I am sorry for that. I think most of the posts directed at me...to call them condescending would be mild. And yet again...you MISUNDERSTAND no matter how many times I have said it. I am not against S-CHIP. I was fine with it as it was. I was against expanding it to higher income levels. So, if you are going to lecture me, at least get it RIGHT. Again...not against SCHIP. I said, very clearly in my post, that I was all for taking care of low income families who could not afford to insure their children. You chose to ignore that and yet again accuse me of being against S-CHIP. So, thank you for respecting my opinion, however, please get my respect the correct opinion.

And..so sorry for trying to extend an olive branch. Obviously the wrong thing to do.

I am a Fox fan, because I believe they are fair and they are balanced...
and I think they really did the right thing in this case. I hope nobody airs it. It will get ugly enough without that kind of thing floating around.
to be fair and ba;anced here

They don't need to run that ad.  Sean Hannity repeats his mantra of Rev. Wright and Ayers every evening.  He does not seem to have much respect for his viewers.  He just repeats those 2 things over and over like the viewers are dumb stumps.


 


fair by whose standards?

Not fair by my standards.  Who is making the rules about fair and unfair?


 


My Fair Veep
Subject: Maureen Dowd - NY Times - Sept 10/08



My Fair Veep



WASILLA, Alaska


The rain in Spain stays mainly in the Arctic plain ...


I hope John McCain doesn’t throw his slippers at Sarah Palin’s head or get as acerbic as Henry Higgins did with Eliza Doolittle when she did not learn quickly enough. McCain’s Pygmalion has to be careful, because his Galatea might be armed with more than a sharp tongue.


For the first time in American history, we have a “My Fair Lady” moment, as teams of experts bustle around the most famous woman in politics, intensely coaching her for her big moment at the ball — her first unscripted interview here this week with ABC News’s Charlie Gibson.


Eliza, by George, got it and brought off the coup of passing herself off as a Hungarian princess rather than a Covent Garden flower seller. Sarah’s challenge is far tougher, and that’s why she’s pulling the political equivalent of an all-nighter. She doesn’t have to pass herself off as a different class or change her voice or be more highfalutin. The McCain campaign is reveling in its anti-intellectual tenor.


Sarah, who is now so renowned that she is known merely by one name and has a name ID of 90 percent, has to be a Kmart mom who appeals to Kmart moms and dads. She’s already shown that she can shoot the pig, put lipstick on it, bring home the bacon and fry it up in a pan. Now all she has to do is also prove that she can be the leader of the free world on a moment’s notice, and field dress Putin as adeptly as she can a moose.


After devilishly mocking Obama — and successfully getting into his head — with ads about how he was just a frothy celebrity, like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, it turns out all the McCain camp wanted was an Obama of its own. Now that they have the electric Palin, they’ve stopped arguing that celebrity is bad. All they do is worship at her cult of celebrity. As Rick Davis, a top McCain adviser, said: “This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”


Wasilla will be crawling with four groups — ABC staffers, frantically getting ready for the big showdown; McCain staffers, frantically tutoring Palin for the big showdown; McCain vetters, who are belatedly doing their job checking to see if Palin is a qualified White House contender and doing their best to shut down Troopergate and assembling a “truth squad” posse of Palinistas to rebut any criticism and push back any prying reporters; and journalists — from Sydney to Washington — who are here to draw back the curtain on the shiny reformer image that the McCain camp has conjured for their political ingénue and see what’s behind it.


Gibson has his work cut out for him. His problem isn’t coming up with a list of questions, but finding time to drill deeply enough into all the unknown territory of her life. It’s a task that dwarfs the drilling job the oil companies are doing on Alaska’s North Slope.


In the end, none of it may matter, since Palin has rocketed in the polls, drawing women and men with her vapid — if vivacious and visceral — scripted cheerleading. But if you’re reading this, Charlie, we want to know everything, including:


What kind of budget-cutter makes a show of getting rid of the state plane, then turns around and bills taxpayers for the travel of her husband and kids between Juneau and Wasilla and sticks the state with a per-diem tab to stay in her own home?


Why was Sarah for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against the Bridge to Nowhere, and why was she for earmarks before she was against them? And doesn’t all this make her just as big a flip-flopper as John Kerry?


What kind of fiscal conservative raises taxes and increases budgets in both her jobs — as mayor and as governor?


When the phone rings at 3 a.m., will she call the Wasilla Assembly of God congregation and ask them to pray on a response, as she asked them to pray for a natural gas pipeline?


Does she really think Adam, Eve, Satan and the dinosaurs mingled on the earth 5,000 years ago?


Why put out a press release about her teenage daughter’s pregnancy and then spend the next few days attacking the press for covering that press release?


As Troopergate unfolds here — an inquiry into whether Palin inappropriately fired the commissioner of public safety for refusing to fire her ex-brother-in-law — it raises this question: Who else is on her enemies list and what might she do with the F.B.I.?


Does she want a federal ban on trans fat in restaurants and a ban on abortion and Harry Potter? And which books exactly would have landed on the literature bonfire if she had had her way with that Wasilla librarian?


Just how is it that Fannie and Freddie have cost taxpayers money (since they haven’t yet)?


Does she talk in tongues or just eat caribou tongues?

What does she have against polar bears?
Yes fair and balanced. sm

I disagree - it is well known that they are extremely right-slanted.  Fair and balanced.  What a joke.  Why do you think people in the know refer to them as Faux or Fixed news - just a coincidence? 


Chris Wallace's vicious sucker-punch attack on Bill Clinton (wherin Wallace got his rear end handed to him on a platter). 


I don't think it's fair to just say pubs
GP...I have had many dems be downright hateful to me about the fact that i'm too "close minded" and "ignorant" because I won't vote for Obama.

Quite frankly I don't care, because I consider myself an independent. I just happen to be voting republican this time. I wish like heck an independent had become a viable candidate but i'll be amazed if that EVER happens.
I agree - not fair
If you don't like Bush that is one thing. To say he is evil is way out of line. Just like the people who said Clinton was evil.

Just say I'm looking forward to a different regime and that would be fine.