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

Bush starts changing his tune/rhetoric.....

Posted By: whorn on 2006-11-12
In Reply to:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061112/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq


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

You're changing your tune
You make comments you want to make with no regards to anyone feelings and you call it being funny but someone else makes a comment you don't like and you call it racist and start yelling for the moderator. Maybe they thought their comment was funny.
Bush just casually reverses 5 years of rhetoric. sm

How many more lies before everyone wakes up?


Editorial Toledo Blade:  Another lie on Iraq


WHEN President Bush declared last week that nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a large segment of the American public must have been very surprised.




They would be the die-hard supporters of the war in Iraq, the one-quarter to one-third of Americans who, according to opinion polls, believe to this day that Saddam was somehow involved in 9/11.




No one likes to think that their President is lying, but for Mr. Bush to casually reverse five years of rhetoric is like Bill Clinton claiming I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.




No, there is no DNA evidence that we know of to indict Mr. Bush for perjury. But the public record includes repeated statements by the President, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and other administration officials that linked responsibility for the 9/11 attacks to Iraq, both directly and indirectly.




The alleged connection was the administration's strongest selling point for the war, slaking the American people's thirst for revenge for the 2001 attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.




As Mr. Bush put it on Oct. 7, 2002, We know that Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy - the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al-Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. … We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases.




Here he is again, in his 2003 State of the Union address: And this Congress and the American people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda.




And in his Mission Accomplished photo op, May 1, 2003: In the war on terror, Iraq is now the central front.




Mr. Cheney was even more specific: In 2003, the vice president claimed that the government was learning more and more about links, before 9/11, between Iraq and al-Qaeda. This came even after the CIA had debunked any such claims. In 2004, the veep said flatly that Saddam had long-established ties with al-Qaeda.




Now, you can argue all day about whether faulty U.S. intelligence misled Mr. Bush, or about what the meaning of suggested is, but this much is clear: The administration relentlessly blurred what was a clear distinction between the militantly secular regime of Saddam and Islamic extremists like the 9/11 hijackers so as to create a laser-beam connection in the public mind that they were one and the same.




So for Mr. Bush to now claim that nobody has ever suggested that the Sept. 11 attacks were ordered by Iraq, as he did last week, is yet another lie in the chain of mendacity that shackles the Bush presidency.


 


rhetoric rhetoric - just tell people what they want to hear, it worked in 2000 and 2004 right?
xx
Singing a different tune.

 I almost died when I saw that the ACLU was preparing a lawsuit on behalf of (among others) Christopher Hitchens. This is the guy who went from left-leaning, writing for The Nation to so far right he is not recognizable. I rarely listen to him anymore because, like so many of the radical right, he is so abrasive I find him difficult to stomach. This is a guy who hates the ACLU until he needs it because the ACLU will defend the constitutional rights of anyone and everyone, not just the people, groups, corporations that some find acceptable. As American citizens we all have the right to due process and legal representation no matter how heinous the crimes we have committed. The right goes nuts when the ACLU defends those they disdain but interestingly, Hitchens and Rush both have turned to the ACLU for help when personally in need. Where are their right-wing lawyers?? Why do they need the ACLU to help them?? Why indeed.


Also, on another note, I am again disgusted that this administration who has not one person amongst them who has ever seen combat in any war/conflict is swiftboating AGAIN, this time John Murtha, a REPUBLICAN.  First we had Max Cleland who was decried as unpatriotic. Then Al Gore's service did not count because he was only a journalist (journalists are in harm's way and he was serving in Viet Nam). Then there was John Kerry who actually fought, led and had medals to prove it ...what to do??? Why, question the authenticity of the medals of course. And now, John Murtha, a lifelong military guy, Republican, with medals galore and now his medals are being questioned. I don't know why the military people who frequent these boards are not outraged by this. I understand that the first 3 mentioned were Democrats but Murtha...you guys are okay with this??? You could fill a library with what this administration does not know about military strategies, plans, actual experience and yet they are so arrogant as to swiftboat one of their own who has been behind them 100% up to this point.  This is beyond appalling.


 


You won't be singing that tune when

And you "a self-proclaimed" middle class become the poor.  I think to you need to check yourself.  You are totally against the poor, you're sick!  You have no sympathy or empathy?  Do you have a silver spoon on your mouth?  I guess you've been brainwashed to believe that McCain at 70+ is really going to make a difference?  The American dream - yeah right!  The rich get richer while the poor get poorer!  Are you actually an MT?  Get real!  If you believe everything the media says, you are a sad sort.  Yes, this economy needs help and that doesn't mean more taxes on our healthcare.  Are you awake?


Wow! Now I will have that tune in my head all day.
nm
So, you don't care if we are in debt to the tune

of $9T over the next 10 years?????  You really want your children, grandchildren and probably your great-grandchildren to pay for mistakes that did not have to take place in the first place?


You're not wasting tea, you're wasting the little tag on the tea bag. How hard is it to let the government know you are furious with their antics?  I just don't agree it's a waste of time.


Some of us (not me yet) are in the less fortunate boat and not getting any help at all while those in power pocket our money. It's time to stop the nonsense and hold those accountable for their actions. It's time to let the government know we don't want to be told how to live anymore. Freedom is not free anymore. It costs a lot of money and our freedoms are slowly being whittled away one by one. I want to see my grandchildren enough those freedoms, not wind up being told how to live, what to eat, where and when to work, etc.


Whew! Sorry. Am venting.  I'll get off my soapbox now.



Class envy at its best. Bet you would sing a different tune...
if you were one of those rich people. You do realize Obama is rich....right? Ten thousand dollars for kid's camp? 1.2 million house? Just so you know...he's one of those fine benevolent rich people. There are rich Democrats...lol.
Check out this video to a Depeche Mode tune. sm

John the Revelator (director's remake)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB1psXTjS4


Every time I tune into Faux News I hear
"there's nothing wrong with your TV set.  Do not attempt to adjust the picture.  We are now controlling the transmission."   
Or you could tune in MSNBC for the latest Obama leg tingle....
see the man crush first hand.
LOL. Now THERE is some unbiased journalism.
When somebody starts regurgitating that
stereotype envisioning Obama supporters as rushing to the mailbox for a welfare/tax stimulus check and waiting around to get their mortgages paid off and gas in their tanks, what color of supporter do you suppose they are conjuring up in their warped delusions?
Fat lady starts her song!
You know it has to be pretty darned bad when virtually all you see on the left-wing blogs is searing criticism of Democratic congresscritters. And I have to say, I absolutely agree with them. I'm still partial to progressive values but let's face it, elected Democrats are worthless, and have been since 2000, if not long before.

I have to wonder if that's been part of the plan all along, and if there are not much larger forces than the RNC focused on literally destroying America, her political system, her people and her former glory. With Alito's confirmation it's a done deal. The right can yuk it up all it wants and assume a smugness off the scale - but they don't appear to be aware that it's their nation too that is being dismantled. What is their powerful, pushy, money-grubbing and quasi-criminal majority party without a strong minority to watchdog it?

There's only one answer, and it is bad news 99% of the American people.

So let the fat lady sing over America's flag-draped coffin. Enjoy the song, enjoy the carnage, pop the champagne corks - it's all one big party now.


here starts the crucifying. You should love her
nm
Where do you see a mistake? His nickname starts with D nm
x
Info that starts out with the premise that
Buyer beware.
Aha! SPELLING POLICE starts again!
This is a sign that you feel in the weaker position. It was a TYPO, o.k.!

Everone who starts with grammar and spelling police, insults and bashing admits that he has been cornered and his weakness shows.

Playing grammar- and spelling-police is NOT tolerated on this Forum, read the rules of this forum!

Got it!


She is a nice eloquent lady....until she starts...
with the "rabid Republicans" type comments. Not necessary to take potshots to impart information. Fact is, I like GP. We are from the same part of the country and have a lot in common, believe it or not.

As to Obama...look. I had concerns about him during the campaign. Those did not just disappear *poof* when he won the election. I still have concerns. I don't trust him. His first choice for his administration did not make any strides toward trust, in fact, made me even more concerned. I asked if the real Barack Obama would step up, and he has. Maybe the next choices will be better. Time will tell.
I have a nightmare...ongoing, starts Jan. 20th.....and for the next

Whoohoo - change starts today!
President Obama is already beginning to undo some of the damage Georgie Porgie has done over the last 8 years, and not a moment too soon!
It isn't changing, it's in the details
Obama says if you are making under $250K you will not see your taxes go up a dime. If you are making under $200K you will see your taxes decrease. Basically if you are between $200K and $250K it's a no-change. He always gets this right, it's just that the wording on it seems similar so people get confused (or think he is).
Not changing the subject.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/13/poll-obama-facing-high-expectations/
Poll: Obama facing high expectations. Refer to the "overall approval rating" paragraph toward end of article.

http://www.gallup.com/video/111904/Most-Expect-Obama-Make-Effort-Republicans.aspx
Most Expect Obama to Make Effort With Republicans

Yet again changing the subject...(sm)

My original post merely pointed out that Olberman had a good question (which has yet to be recognized on this board).  Just as a refresher, the question was, why is Coulter trying to get on NBC to promote her book (in which she talks badly about NBC) when she has such a low opinion of the network.  This is not a battle of the networks, just a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can see.


I guess it's easier to change the subject than to actually answer a question or post an opinion on the subject matter.


Yet again changing the subject...(sm)

My original post merely pointed out that Olberman had a good question (which has yet to be recognized on this board).  Just as a refresher, the question was, why is Coulter trying to get on NBC to promote her book (in which she talks badly about NBC) when she has such a low opinion of the network.  This is not a battle of the networks, just a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can see.


I guess it's easier to change the subject than to actually answer a question or post an opinion on the subject matter.


Building of New Trade Center Starts (see article)
Without Fanfare, Building of New Trade Center Starts



By DAVID W. DUNLAP

Published: November 4, 2005


When are they ever going to start building the new World Trade Center?


Yesterday.


Thirty-nine years after the first concrete was poured into the first trench for the first telephone vault for the first trade center, carpenters built a 168-foot-long wooden trough in a gentle S curve through the south tower footprint at ground zero. From this sinuous sprout, Santiago Calatrava's PATH terminal and transportation hub will emerge.



Skip to next paragraph

src=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/11/04/nyregion/04rebuild184.1.jpg
Fidel Oliver/Port Authority

Carpenters prepared a wooden trough at the World Trade Center site Thursday.


Don't laugh; it's a milestone day, said Charles A. Gargano, vice chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the trade center site and is building the $2.21 billion terminal over the next four years.


Until now, milestones at ground zero have tended to be ceremonial.


There was not a hint of ceremony yesterday. Prince Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, were nowhere to be seen in the 70-foot-deep pit. The Freedom Tower cornerstone of July 4, 2004, sat hidden under a blue plywood box.


But anyone looking out from a PATH train screeching around the corner into the temporary World Trade Center station would have seen a crew from the Beaver Concrete Construction Company of Brooklyn.


They're finally doing something with this big hole, said Anthony Martelli, one of the workers, standing inside the newly completed trough. It's about time.


It was Mr. Martelli's first day back at ground zero since early 2002, after a six-month tour cleaning up debris and pulling out pieces of steel. Yesterday, he was building again - he and Paul Klein and Frank De Guida and Robert Manella and Tonino Sacino.


Starting at 7 a.m., they built a trough 18 inches high and 6 feet 3 inches wide out of thick wood planks. Cagelike frames of steel reinforcing bars, or rebar, will be set into the trough beginning today. Then concrete will be poured over the rebar.


That will form the footing of a seven-foot-high concrete retaining wall. The wall will hold about four feet of fill, on top of which ballast will be laid for a temporary PATH track, No. 6, alongside the future Platform D, the fourth and westernmost platform.


Currently, there are five tracks among three platforms, two of which occupy a corner of the south tower footprint, as they did in the original station. Platform D would take up more space in the south footprint and a tiny bit of the north footprint.


Once Platform D and Track No. 6 are usable, in early 2007, other tracks can be taken out of service temporarily to allow construction of the permanent terminal while commuters are traveling through the tubes to and from New Jersey.


The construction manager is a joint venture of Parsons Brinckerhoff, which counts the first New York City subway line among its earliest achievements, and the URS Corporation. A general contractor is to be chosen in the next few months.


Icanda was the contractor in 1966 when the first concrete was poured, at West and Cortlandt Streets. John M. Kyle, the chief engineer of the Port Authority, threw in a silver dollar, a 100-lire coin from Italy, a 5-franc coin from France and a British penny.


Asked about the absence of fanfare yesterday, Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority, said: I think people have become so jaded by the inordinate amount of ceremonies that have occurred at that site - disproportionate to what's actually happened - that I didn't want to add to that. This is about actually building.


There is a potential snag, however. A lawsuit filed last month by the Coalition of 9/11 Families seeks to halt the project on the ground that it violates a federal law requiring that historic sites not be used for transportation projects unless there are no feasible or prudent alternatives.


Anthony Gardner, one of the plaintiffs, whose brother was killed on 9/11, said the authority had never justified the need for Platform D.


Our focus has always been to ensure the maximum preservation and access to the remains of the footprints for the American people and future visitors to the site, Mr. Gardner said yesterday.


The Port Authority and the Federal Transit Administration have yet to answer the complaint, he said. A spokesman for the authority said it would not discuss pending litigation.


But Steven Plate, deputy director of the priority capital programs department, did talk about the authority's sense of stewardship as he inspected the site, pointing out that the tower footprints had been covered by polyethylene liners and 12 inches of stone fill to protect them during construction. We're very committed, personally and professionally, to preserving the site, he said. Eighty-four of our own perished here.


I don't want to sound melodramatic, but there is no monopoly on caring for the site. This is the Port Authority's home.


Glenn Beck starts his new show tonight
I can't wait. I've missed him. Sometimes he makes sense, sometimes he doesn't, but he sure does tell it like it is.
Consider changing your moniker to IAlwaysGetTheLastWordNoMatterWhat. nm

Ummm. Fox is changing its tone and now
"a problem with semantics," trying to slither out from under its legendary erroneous biased reporting.
Man, what a sick reason for changing

Here is a blurb from an article I read..........changing a vote just IN CASE Obama becomes president........what a sell out.


Among the 21 converts was Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Illinois, his chief of staff, Kenneth Edmonds, said.


Edmonds said Jackson was changing his vote because "he received assurances from (Sen. Barack Obama) that, if elected, his administration will aggressively use authority in the bill to prevent foreclosures and stabilize the housing market."


Changing the subject to the tax rant
nm
Changing the subject does not change
I agree. Any undecided voter should read the entire fact check site AND both candidates issues platforms on their websites.
I give up...I keep typing 7 and it keeps changing it.
xx
why do you insist on changing the subject
when Bush was in and we mentioned Clinton we'd be hemmed and hawed at that Clinton and Gore were gone and to get over it. Now that we say something about Mr. Messiah and we get Bush/Cheney comments.

Give it a rest. They are gone.
*Heckuvajob Brownie* starts disaster planning firm
Ex-FEMA Head Starts Disaster Planning Firm




Former FEMA Director Michael Brown, heavily criticized for his agency's slow response to Hurricane Katrina, is starting a disaster preparedness consulting firm to help clients avoid the sort of errors that cost him his job.


If I can help people focus on preparedness, how to be better prepared in their homes and better prepared in their businesses — because that goes straight to the bottom line — then I hope I can help the country in some way, Brown told the Rocky Mountain News for its Thursday editions.


Brown said officials need to take inventory of what's going on in a disaster to be able to answer questions to avoid appearing unaware of how serious a situation is.


In the aftermath of the hurricane, critics complained about Brown's lack of formal emergency management experience and e-mails that later surfaced showed him as out of touch with the extent of the devastation.


The lawyer admits that while he was head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency mistakes were made in the response to Katrina. He also said he had been planning to quit before the hurricane hit.


Hurricane Katrina showed how bad disasters can be, and there's an incredible need for individuals and businesses to understand how important preparedness is, he said.


Brown said companies already have expressed interested in his consulting business, Michael D. Brown LLC. He plans to run it from the Boulder area, where he lived before joining the Bush administration in 2001.


I'm doing a lot of good work with some great clients, Brown said. My wife, children and my grandchild still love me. My parents are still proud of me.












Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback















Iraq starts new year with 12 car bombings. US is in trouble, people!
God Help Us All.
Rhetoric?
I don't know what posts you have been reading, friend Lurker, with the anything to do with hatred, loving terrorists, etc., are directed at the post containing just that thing. One poster who shall remain nameless stated emphatically that investigating Bush took precedence over terrorism. To me, that is a statement supporting terrorism, and while maybe not idiotic, does not seem to me to be a very smart thing to say, considering Amadinejad stated this morning he wanted the next group of Al Qaeda leaders to come from Iran and that he was sending the US a message soon. And then this afternoon, we find out that the nuclear watchdog group found plutonium in the nuclear waste at the Iranian nuclear plant. But your liberal friend who proudly calls herself so wants to investigate Bush rather than concentrate on terrorism. That would be laughable if it were not that a great number of liberals are in full agreement with her. Which is concerning to say the least. Several who post the liberal board and on the conservative board who clearly identify themselves as liberals do hate democracy (evident in their posts), make frequent statements in support of terrorism (taking attention off them is supporting them), spout socialist policies (why they are called socialists)...if you don't fall into any of those categories, should be no big deal to you. You are including yourself in the group saying we. Liberals come to the conservative board too. Conservatives are not the only ones who cross over boards.
Rhetoric

Per Onelook:
noun:  study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially in public speaking)  (hmmm...yep)
noun:  using language effectively to please or persuade  (okay, I get it)
noun:  high flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation (ohh, for sure!)
noun:  loud and confused and empty talk  (that's the nuts and bolts of it)


As far as rhetoric is concerned, I would say O has it mastered. 


Palin was speaking the truth, plain and simple, and she has the record to prove it.  Get over it.  If you are so embarrased, go live somewhere else.


 


You seem to remember wrong, and why would I be changing races...sm
Find this and post it.
Yeah, Obama also keeps changing his definition
nm
Where is all of "O's" big bipartisan rhetoric now?
Obviously that is all it was....rhetoric.  Preached we had to work across the aisle...bipartisanship...to get things done.  And now, with the biggest crisis this country has faced in decades, and he has a chance to put his money where his mouth is...what does he do?  Decides what is best for Barack, and that is the tack he takes.  ANY credibility he had left with me is gone.
Admit what? Your rhetoric?
BTW, brush your teeth - your breathe stinks - I know where your head has been.
LoL! Must be changing of the guard in crasher-trasher land.

The solution is pretty simple.  If you don't like the liberal sermon, then don't attend the liberal church.


Other than that, I couldn't care less what you think.  Have a nice day.


This pub party rhetoric is at least 50 years old.
applies to the 21st century please?
Guess not. 50-year-old rhetoric
fu
Here's the deal. This kind of rhetoric is exactly
and does absolutely nothing to advance the cause of your broken down party and the dirth of leadership you are currently experiencing. This kind of disconnect between your party and the rest of us is exactly what you should be spending your time trying to come to terms with.

Being a democrat, it is fine with me if you persist along these lines, since it would serve to ensure similar election results next time around, but for your own sakes, you guys really do need to GET A GRIP.
Bitter self-serving rhetoric?

I have absolutely no personal ties whatsoever to the middle east, so exactly why would I be bitter, and what would I have to gain?  Your statement makes no sense.  The main benefit of actually recognizing the history of the region (as opposed to the Israeli version of the *truth*) would be for better political relations with the middle east.  Have you noticed that the rest of the world sees what's going on?  Why do you think there is so much resentment in the middle east for the US?  Israel (or rather our empowering of it and it's abuse of that power) is one of the main problems over there. 


Why would I care about your opinion?  I don't.  There are very few people's opinions that I actually value on this board.  Those would be the ones who can actually discuss a subject with reasonable viewpoints, and guess what?  Most of them disagree with me on most everything.  LOL 


I'm simply trying to get you to stay on the subject, which is obviously a lost cause.


Your rhetoric was meaningless months ago...
and it is just as meaningless today. I supported Obama then, and I support him now, as do all of the people who voted for him. It must be miserable to live with such hate in your heart. I would pity you, but it seems that you are doing a pretty good job of that on your own.
Kindly stop changing the subject. Still waiting for examples.
You made the charge, so back it up or admit that you can't. And if you don't even have that much integrity, then at least please stop saying things that you can't support.


No difference. Fact is that primary rhetoric
whenever you try depict rhetoric reversals as LIES, the challenge of your own candidates reversals will be waiting for you. Lame game and pointless.

Yes Sam, Biden is running with O. JB is a 35-year veteran in the Senate and if he felt O was not prepared for office, why then is is willing to place himself on the same ticket? JB knows what he is doing. There is no stronger statement of support than that. No brownie points for you on that one.

Day by day, we will be seeing dems, pubs and indies surface from Alaska who have bones to pick with SP. Wonder why that is? You can try to discredit and dismiss them to your heart's content, but you cannot ignore the fact that the public is never that forgiving and these types of testimonials will have impact on voter confidence. Funny how the verifiable facts that are a matter of public record included in Kilkenny's comments seem to have completely escaped your notice. Those facts will stand for what they are...challenges to the claims that she and the party are making about her fiscal responsibility and evidence of her tendency to want to run the show, run over anybody who gets in her way and take revenge on those would would oppose her. Not such a breath of fresh air after all, and looking a bit on the hypocritical side...a trait that some people associate with dishonesty. So yeah, whose lies and whose truths are not for you or I to decide. We have no choice here except to do our homework, put our views out there and leave it up to the voters to decide.
Actually, nasty, tacky, low-class rhetoric is exactly that,
You seem mighty sure of yourself while you presume to speak for a complete stranger.
I would think with all your anti-semetic rhetoric that you would be a big fan of Hitler's!

Oh the hypocrasy!