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

For me change. Bush had experience and look what he did...run our economy down to the ground..nm

Posted By: JMO on 2008-09-03
In Reply to: Change vs. experience - which is more important to you? - Sara

3


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

Change vs. experience - which is more important to you?

I was listening to a focus group on C-Span and this was a question given to the group:


Change vs. experience - which is more important to you?


Keeping this thread nice how would you answer?


I think Bush has run this country into the ground.
the better with Obama in office instead of McCain and whatever her name is?????
The breeding ground started long before Bush
I for one have never cared for allowing Iranian and Iraqi students into this country; I went to school over 20 years ago where Iranian and Iraqi students came to study, but we were always curious as to what they were really doing here. They were not sociable, did not want to tell you why they were here, and constantly went back and forth to their country several times a semester. They never even tried to fit in with their surroundings. They were openly vulgar and critical of the United States, but we allowed their sorry butts here to study?

If they want an education, let them get it in their own country and somewhere else. I don't feel sorry for them one bit. When we asked why we never saw any female Iranian/Iraqi students, they were always quick to let us know females were not important, did not need to be educated, and that God did not make females their equal. And they were always quick to let us know they believed ALL western females to be whore-like and sluts.
If you think the economy was Bush's fault....
Remember this. In 1933 President Roosevelt regulated the banks to prevent another depression, by limiting what the banks could invest in. The collapse of the banking industry was caused by whom? BUSH? Guess again. The banks were deregulated by Clinton in October of 1999. It just took some time for the bank's bad investments to do them in, just like it would us.
The economy was great for 6 years of Bush until
nm
excuse me....Bush did not destroy the US economy...
the mess we find ourselves in, his admin and John McCain tried to head off several times, only to be thwarted by the pigs at the trough...Chris Dodd, Barney Frank....

Bush is not my favorite President by a long shot and I sure don't agree with everything he did, but this is one issue he was on the right side of...he called for reining in fannie and freddie years ago, as did Mccain...but oh no...like Barney Frank said..."They will never fail, and if they do, the government won't bail them out." Helllooo Barney....to the tune of 750 billion.
Bush kept us safe after 9-11. Economy was great
nm
Bush says rebates going out Monday will boost economy
Bush says rebates going out Monday will boost economy

By TOM RAUM,
AP
Posted: 2008-04-25 13:36:26
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush said tax rebates will start going out Monday, earlier than previously announced, and should help Americans cope with rising gasoline and food prices, as well as aid a slumping economy.

Democrats said they were glad the rebate checks were about to go out, but suggested that multinational oil companies were not among the businesses the stimulus package was originally designed to help.

"Starting Monday, the effects of the stimulus will begin to reach millions of households across our country," Bush said Friday in remarks on the South Lawn of the White House.

Those first rebates will be directly deposited into people's bank accounts. The Internal Revenue Service had been saying direct deposits wouldn't start until next Friday. Bush said paper checks would begin going out on May 9, a week earlier than previously announced.

"The money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we're seeing at the gas pump, the grocery store, and also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown," Bush said.

Bush's emphasis on fuel and food prices differed from other comments he's made since signing the economic stimulus legislation, intended to aid the economy by boosting overall consumer spending - which accounts for roughly two-thirds of the nation's economic activity.

Bush has suggested the rebates could trigger a spending spree. "When the money reaches the American people, we expect they will use it to boost consumer spending," he said last month.

By saying expressly that people could use these one-time checks to pay for such necessities as food and gas, Bush underscored the deepening challenges facing the economy.

Democrats were quick to pick up on the change of focus.

"It's galling to think that taxpayers' stimulus checks will be lining the pockets of OPEC. The sad truth is that the average American family will spend almost their entire stimulus check on higher gas prices this year," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., chairman of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

OPEC is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

"Unless the administration gets OPEC to increase oil supply, American consumers are going to be in for a scorching summer of $4 gasoline with no relief in sight," Schumer said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., agreed that people "need this rebate to cope with the rising cost of gas and groceries." She said that, while the rebates would help to get the economy moving, there was a need for a second stimulus package "and we have begun some conversation with the administration and Republicans."

As he had earlier in the week, Bush used the word "slowdown" to describe the state of the economy. He has denied that the nation is in a recession, although many economists say it is.

"It's obvious our economy is in a slowdown. But, fortunately, we recognized the signs early and took action," Bush said.

The rebates - up to $600 for an individual, $1,200 for a couple and an additional $300 for each dependent child - are the centerpiece of the government's $168 billion stimulus package, enacted in February. Roughly 130 million households are expected to get them.

Bush made the comments before boarding his helicopter at the start of a day trip to Connecticut.

People must file a tax return for their 2007 income to be eligible for a rebate check.

The IRS now says all checks for those who filed tax returns on time are scheduled to be deposited or mailed by July 11.

The economy - burdened by the collapse of home prices, a financial and credit crisis, and now rising energy and food prices - grew at an anemic 0.6 percent in the final three months of last year and is believed to have gotten even weaker in the first three months of this year.

The government will report on the first quarter's performance next week.

With the economy faltering, the nation's unemployment rate has climbed to 5.1 percent, the highest since September 2005, when it suffered from the devastating blows of the Gulf Coast hurricanes. Job losses in the first three months of this year neared the quarter-million mark.

Foreclosures have surged to record highs and financial companies have taken multibillion losses on mortgage investments that soured. The situation has sent a tremor through Wall Street and has sent the administration, Congress and presidential contenders looking for ways to provide relief.

AP Economics Writer Jeannine Aversa contributed to this report.

Bush's Answer? Change the War Crimes Act!

August 29, 2006


Retroactive Laws Invoked to Protect Administration Officials from War Crimes Prosecution


Bush Turns His Terror War on the Homeland


By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS


When I was a kid John Wayne war movies gave us the message that America was the good guy, the white hat that fought the villain.
Alas, today the US and its last remaining non-coerced ally, Israel, are almost universally regarded as the bad guys over whom John Wayne would triumph. Today the US and Israel are seen throughout the world as war criminal states.


On August 23 the BBC reported that Amnesty International has brought war crimes charges against Israel for deliberately targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure as an integral part of Israel's strategy in its recent invasion of Lebanon.


Israel claims that its aggression was self-defense to dislodge Hezbollah from southern Lebanon. Yet, Israel bombed residential communities all over Lebanon, even Christian communities in the north in which no Hezbollah could possibly have been present.


United Nations spokesman Jean Fabre reported that Israel's attack on civilian infrastructure annihilated Lebanon's development: Fifteen years of work have been wiped out in a month.


Israel maintains that this massive destruction was unintended collateral damage.


President Bush maintains that Israel has a right to protect itself by destroying Lebanon.


Bush blocked the attempt to stop Israel's aggression and is, thereby, equally responsible for the war crimes. Indeed, a number of reports claim that Bush instigated the Israeli aggression against Lebanon.


Bush has other war crime problems. Benjamin Ferenccz, a chief prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg, recently said that President Bush should be tried as a war criminal side by side with Saddam Hussein for starting aggressive wars, Hussein for his 1990 invasion of Kuwait and Bush for his 2003 invasion of Iraq.


Under the Nuremberg standard, Bush is definitely a war criminal. The US Supreme Court also exposed Bush to war crime charges under both the US War Crimes Act of 1996 and the Geneva Conventions when the Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld against the Bush administration's military tribunals and inhumane treatment of detainees.


President Bush and his Attorney General agree that under existing laws and treaties Bush is a war criminal together with many members of his government. To make his war crimes legal after the fact, Bush has instructed the Justice (sic) Department to draft changes to the War Crimes Act and to US treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions.


One of Bush's changes would deny protection of the Geneva Conventions to anyone in any American court.


Bush's other change would protect from prosecution any US government official or military personnel guilty of violating Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Article 3 prohibits at any time and in any place whatsoever outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment. As civil libertarian Nat Hentoff observes, this change would also undo Senator John McCain's amendment against torture.


Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice says that Bush's changes immunize past crimes.


Under the US Constitution and US legal tradition, retroactive law is impermissible. What do Americans think of their President's attempts to immunize himself, his government, CIA operatives, military personnel and civilian contractors from war crimes?


Apparently, the self-righteous morally superior American Christian public could care less. The Republican controlled House and Senate, which long ago traded integrity for power, are working to pass Bush's changes prior to the mid-term elections in the event the Republicans fail to steal three elections in a row and Democrats win control of the House or Senate.


Meanwhile, the illegal war in Iraq, based entirely on Bush administration lies, grinds on, murdering and maiming ever more people. According to the latest administration estimate, the pointless killing will go on for another 10-15 years.


Trouble is, there are no US troops to carry on the war. The lack of cannon fodder forces the Bush administration to resort to ever more desperate measures. The latest is the involuntary recall of thousands of Marines from the inactive reserves to active duty. Many attentive people regard this desperate measure as a sign that the military draft will be reinstated.


According to President Bush, the US will lose the war on terror unless the US succeeds in defeating the Iraqi terrorists by establishing democracy in Iraq. Of course, insurgents resisting occupation are not terrorists, and there were no insurgents or terrorists in Iraq until Bush invaded.


Bush's unjustified invasion of Iraq and his support for Israeli aggression have done more to create terrorism in the Muslim world than Osama bin Laden could hope for. The longer Bush occupies Iraq and the more he tries to extend US/Israeli hegemony in the Middle East, the more terrorism the world will suffer.


Bush and the Zionist/neocon ideology that holds him captive are the greatest 21st century threats to peace and stability. The neoconized Bush regime invented the war on terror, lost it, and now is bringing terror home to the American people.


Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com


Sorry but Bush is a crook and nothing you say will change that. He did our country a lot of damage.
just move on from that, you cannot. It's damaged us a whollleee lot and your snide comments will not change that.
Change and Hope: Obama wants your change and hopes you enjoy starving.... sm
...while he's partying like a rock star with the glitterati.

Meanwhile, some little old lady is hoping he doesn't get a dog and sends her the dog food instead.
Yes, they're all nuts. The change they'll get is not the change they thought

I want change. Chump change. I'm voting for Obama as far as the pollsters go.

Obama is change you can believe in until you have to take it to the bank.


Our jobs have been offshored until now because of greed.  Under Obama and his taxation of small businesses, they will be offshored not because of greed but because of survival.  


You could make a difference for our country by not voting for Obama, but instead, if you vote for him, you are selling out to deception.  You are embracing a socialist, a communist, a Marxist, a liar, a cheat, and someone who legally cannot run as President of the U.S., much less the Illinois senate.  But, you make your choice.  You believe the consumate liar and his lies who sat for 20 years under the teachings of a black racist preacher filled with hatred for the U.S., whose association with Bill Ayers is recent and documented down to the fact that Ayers himself wrote Obama's best-selling book (best-selling in the eyes of far left liberals that is), who is a documented member of the socialist party, whose friends and close allies are extremists who not only bomb innocent people and are unrepenetent but who intend to eliminate (kill) 25 million Americans who they cannot "re-educate" in communist ideaology (gosh dog it, those dreadful capitalists), who refuses to hand over a certified copy of his birth certificate and educational records (my goodness, don't you have to provide your birth certificate to any number of entities who want to know if you are legal, i.e., social security, DMVs, etc., and your educational records would show if you had received aid as a foreigner and in 1963 would have shown you were a negro instead of an African-American which Obama's falsified record shows, please speck up on history), and who thinks Joe the Plumber is so stupid not to realize that if he wants to achieve the American dream, he is going to achieve it only if he lets Obama take what he makes to give to those WHO WILL NOT WORK.  I'd like to see you, liberals, give a share of your 7.5 cpl to those who don't work as hard as you, but then with Obama, that's what you will have to do.  Don't be fooled by his rhetoric that only those making over $250,00 will be taxed.  We will all be taxed, and there will be no incentive to work for any of us because we will all have to give up a piece of our pie so those who do not work can have a piece of our pie.


Here is the dividing line, folks.  We are at a crossroads in our history.  The Lord Jesus puts it this way, "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction; and there are many who go in by it."


Choose which gate you enter, the wide or the narrow.  It not only determines your eternal destination, but it determines the destination of this country.  If anyone here calls themself a Christian and can vote for Osambo, I daresay you are a liar and cheat just as he.  One cannot be a Christian and vote for a party and a political candidate who is in total rebellion to God's Word.  That is a fact, and if you think any differently, then you, too, like the Obamanation, call God a liar.  May He have mercy upon your soul.  As He makes the rain fall on the just and the unjust because He is no respector of persons, we will all suffer as this country is destroyed and our Constitution that guarantees our freedoms is trampled just as Bill Ayers is pictured standing upon our flag in total disrespect, and we will thank you liberals that we are all in bondage, reduced to third world status, just as the Israelites were in Egypt.  Only Obama ain't no Moses but a Muslim and has no favor with God, and there will be no one to lead us to the Promised Land coming from the Democratic party. 


 


Oil above ground..........sm
I live on an 88-acre farm that is bisected by a creek. When my grandfather was live, back in the 1940s, he used to see oil on the top of the water in the creek, so he always believed there was oil on our place. There are several companies drilling all around us, but none have drilled on our place yet. We are leased until September with the company we are with now, so they had better hurry up if they want to drill here. When they were doing the seisomgraph work, the blasts messed up our wells, too.
I agree with change....change to socialism...
NO THANKS.
Breeding ground

I agree 100%.  When it's all said and done, there won't only be more of them, but they will have gained a lot of training and experience due to the extensive "practice" they've had in Iraq.  I'm just afraid they will take all that and bring it here to the US.  I'm also afraid this is going to continue for years and years.  I thought this whole thing was described as being swift when Bush declared war.


I also wonder which life was better for Iraqis:  Saddam Hussein's regime or George W. Bush's regime.


The videos that gt posted really hit me hard.  One of them gave a glimpse of what life was like before we got there and what it was like once we invaded and occupied their country.


I would feel much more secure if steps were taken in this country to protect us, but I feel that another terror attack is inevitable, and I'm afraid the next one is going to be much worse than 9/11.  I really fear for my daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren.  Even if a miracle occurs and we aren't all obliterated under Bush's regime, my grandchildren will be paying for his war for decades to come.


This whole thing was just wrong, wrong, wrong, and I, too, wish we would just get it over with, kick some serious *s* and get out of there.


I believe that her having a son with boots on the ground...
qualifies her as the "resident expert" much more than you, Think liberal. Would it not? She is getting her information first hand. Where are you getting yours?

Why does she take it personally? You might want to put your brain in neutral and let compassion take over for a moment...it is not fatal. Then, I am thinking, you would not have asked such a silly question.

"It has nothing to do with the troops." Excuse me, WHAT??

There was suffering, starvation and death in Iraq long before we got there. At the hands of their "President." He still has a higher death toll of his own people than the casualities of this war from start to now. I personally would love to see the war footage, the Iraqi interviews, etc., on the cutting room floor at CNN...at MSNBC...at the networks. What never made it to the screen. What never made it past major news outlets' editors. Yep, I would LOVE to see that.

"Liberal thinker..." the difference appears to me to be, in you and that woman who posted about her son, is that she is honest and was not speaking from any political position and defending her son (and the military in general) from your attack. If her son was sending different pics and telling her that the war is not working, we should get out, etc., she would not be ignoring what he said and posting here to further a political agenda. She would most likely be posting what her son said and agreeing with you. Because her son is there, he has first-hand knowledge, and she believes him. On the other hand you, when presented with positive evidence from the horse's mouth, totally ignore and minimize it, as if in your world it does not matter. I do not want to think that positives do not matter in your world, but your posting does not give me that.

You basically chastize her for believing him and ridicule her for being patriotic. So basically you not only discarded the information, you had to shoot the messenger too.

Apparently when one becomes a "liberal thinker" one must abandon all compassion and the ability to think for one's self outside of any agenda. It starts in the brain and finds it's way out the mouth, but never even hesitates on its way past the heart. Sounds like a pretty desolate world to me. Which probably explains these posts.
Common ground! Woo-hoo! nm

Ground invasion may be necessary.
nm
Who has left this hole in the ground? sm

Keith Olbermann's Special Comments on Bush:  Who has left this hold in the ground?  We have not forgotten, Mr. President.  You have.  May this country forgive you. 


http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/11/keith-olbermanns-special-commnet-on-bush-who-has-left-this-hole-in-the-ground-we-have-not-forgotten-mr-president-you-have-may-this-country-forgive-you/


Also enjoys one-on-one ground-level
Wonder if she follows indigenous rule and only slays what she can eat? Not likely, considering her affinity for guns. What a gal, what a gal!
Yup - running it straight into the ground.
X
I think we have found common ground
I don't usually agree with you, but in this case I do think we have found a common ground. I am amazed at the homophobia displayed here. I find it frightening that people can be so prejudiced. By the way, this is a pretty impressive list. Just think what we would have missed out on without the genius and talent of these individuals.
You tred on danger uniformed ground. NI
123
A government that taxes businesses into the ground...
is a main cause of offshoring. It costs more in taxes to do business in America than any other country in the world save one. And Obama wants to tax them even more, even the small business owners of the S corporation type. In order to fund a cut in tax for the people already in the lowest bracket who pay the lowest amount anyway. Thereby causing more small businesses to fail or cut back on staffing...causing more job loss instead of job creation. Sorry...that makes no sense to me.
Israel has lauched ground operation...(sm)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28404637


Notice the number of civilian casualties already.  I guess the US is going to ignore that as well.


Thanks for creating a breeding ground for terrorists W!











Subject: Fwd: Fw: ISRAELI'S ASSESMENT OF OUR SECURITY


 
















































 















Juval Aviv was the Israeli Agent upon whom the movie ' Munich ' was based. He was Golda Meir's bodyguard -- she appointed him to track down and bring to justice the Palestinian terrorists who took the Israeli athletes hostage and killed them during the Munich Olympic Games. 
    
In a lecture in New York City a few weeks ago, he shared information that EVERY American needs to know -- but that our government has not yet shared with us.
    
He predicted the London subway bombing on the Bill O'Reilly show on Fox News stating publicly that it would happen within a week. At the time, O'Reilly laughed and mocked him saying that in a week he wanted him back on the show. But, unfortunately, within a week the terrorist attack had occurred.




 



Juval Aviv gave intelligence (via what he had gathered in Israel and the Middle East ) to the Bush Administration about 9/11 a month before it occurred. His report specifically said they would use planes as bombs and target high profile buildings and monuments. Congress has since hired him as a security consultant.




 



Now for his future predictions. He predicts the next terrorist attack on the U.S. will occur within the next few months.  




 



Forget hijacking airplanes, because he says terrorists will NEVER try and hijack a plane again as they know the people onboard will never go down quietly again. Aviv believes our airport security is a joke -- that we have been reactionary rather than proactive in developing strategies that are truly effective.      
    
For example: 
    
1) Our airport technology is outdated. We look for metal, and the new explosives are made of plastic. 
    
2) He talked about how some idjit tried to light his shoe on fire. Because of that, now everyone has to take off their shoes. A group of idiots tried to bring aboard liquid explosives. Now we can't bring liquids on board. He says he's waiting for some suicidal maniac to pour liquid explosive on his underwear; at which point, security wil l have us all traveling naked! Every strategy we have is 'reactionary.'       
    
3) We only focus on security when people are heading to the gates. 
    
Aviv says that if a terrorist attack targets airports in the future, they will target busy times on the front end of the airport when/where people are checking in. It would be easy for someone to take two suitcases of explosives, walk up to a busy check-in line, ask a person next to them to watch their bags for a minute while they run to the restroom or get a drink, and then detonate the bags BEFORE security even gets involved. In Israel , security checks bags BEFORE people can even ENTER the airport.      




 



Aviv says the next terrorist attack here in America is imminent and will involve suicide bombers and non-suicide bombers in places where large groups of people congregate. (i. e., Disneyland, Las Vegas casinos, big cities (New York, San Francisco, Chicago, etc.) and that it will also include shopping malls, subways i n rush hour, train stations, etc., as well as rural America this time (Wyoming, Montana, etc.). 
    
The attack will be characterized by simultaneous detonations around the country (terrorists like big impact), involving at least 5-8 cities, including rural areas.         
    
Aviv says terrorists won't need to use suicide bombers in many of the larger cities, because at places like the MGM Grand in Las Vegas , they can simply valet park a car loaded with explosives and walk away.




 



Aviv says all of the above is well known in intelligence circles, but that our U. S. government does not want to 'alarm American citizens' with the facts.




 



The world is quickly going to become 'a different place', and issues like 'global warming' and political correctness will become totally irrelevant. 
    
On an encouraging note, he says that Americans don't have to be concerned about being nuked. Aviv says the terrorists who want to destroy America will not use sophisticated weapons. They like to use suicide as a front-line approach. It's cheap, it's easy, it's effective; and they have an infinite abundance of young militants more than willing to 'meet their destiny'.           
    
He also says the next level of terrorists, over which America should be most concerned, will not be coming from abroad. But will be, instead, 'homegrown' -- having attended and been educated in our own schools and universities right here in the U. S. He says to look for 'students' who frequently travel back and forth to the Middle East . These young terrorists will be most dangerous because they will know our language and will fully understand the habits of Americans; but that we Americans won't know/understand a thing about them.     
    
Aviv says that, as a people, Americans are unaware and uneducated about the terroristic threats we w ill, inevitably, face. America still has only have a handful of Arabic and Farsi speaking people in our intelligence networks, and Aviv says it is critical that we change that fact SOON.




 



So, what can America do to protect itself?




 



From an intelligence perspective, Aviv says the U.S. needs to stop relying on satellites and technology for intelligence. We need to, instead, follow Israel 's, Ireland 's and England 's hands-on examples of human intelligence, both from an infiltration perspective as well as to trust 'aware' citizens to help. We need to engage and educate ourselves as citizens; however, our U. S. government continues to treat us, its citizens, 'like babies'. Our government thinks we 'can't handle the truth' and are concerned that we'll panic if we understand the realities of terrorism. Aviv says this is a deadly mistake.& nbsp;  
    
Aviv recently created/executed a security test for our Congress, by placing an empty briefcase in five well-traveled spots in five major cities. The results? Not one person called 911 or sought a policeman to check it out. In fact, in Chicago , someone tried to steal the briefcase!




 



In comparison, Aviv says that citizens of Israel are so well 'trained' that an unattended bag or package would be reported in seconds by citizen(s) who know to publicly shout, 'Unattended Bag!' The area would be quickly & calmly cleared by the citizens themselves. But, unfortunately, America hasn't been yet 'hurt enough' by terrorism for their government to fully understand the need to educate its citizens or for the government to understand that it's their citizens who are, inevitably, the best first-line of defense against terrorism.




 



Aviv also was concerned about the high number of children here in America who were in preschool and kindergarten after 9/11, who were 'lost' without parents being able to pick them up, and about ours schools that had no plan in place to best care for the students until parents could get there. (In New York City , this was days, in some cases!)              




 



He stresses the importance of having a plan, that's agreed upon within your family, to respond to in the event of a terroristic emergency. He urges parents to contact their children's schools and demand that the schools, too, develop plans of actions, as they do in Israel .            
    
Does your family know what to do if you can't contact one another by phone? Where would you gather in an emergency? He says we should all have a plan that is easy enough for even our youngest children to remember and follow. 
  & nbsp; 
Aviv says that the U. S. government has in force a plan that, in the event of another terrorist attack, will immediately cut-off EVERYONE's ability to use cell phones, blackberries, etc., as this is the preferred communication source used by terrorists and is often the WA y that their bombs are detonated.        
    
How will you communicate with your loved ones in the event you cannot speak? You need to have a plan.  

He did not let it touch the ground - he didn't "wad" it up
If that's what you saw, then the only thing I can say is you were all for the Mexican flag flying above the American flag. This hero came in and cut it away from the other flag and did not let it touch the ground (which you obviously do not know is a sign of respect). But you cannot fold it properly by yourself. He also had the courage to stand in front of the camera and give his name and what he was doing. He did not wad up the flag, he put it under his arm to take back to wherever he went and give it the respect it deserves. The people who had their flag flying above the American flag should be arrested, deported back to Mexico where they can fly their flag above others, and their business should be shut down. What do you think would have happened if someone had flown the American flag above the mexican flag in their own country?

Get a grip!!!!!!!!
The longer this goes on, the bigger terrorist breading ground sm
Iraq becomes. This is getting past ridiculous. Now, I don't think we should just pull out, but I think we need to let them have it, and there will be more US casualties, and get out ASAP.
You take the moral high ground and watch video
nm
But doesn't shale oil extraction use huge amounts of ground water? sm
I've heard there are enviromental issues that we haven't really delved into yet, such as contamination of your drinking water if you're on a well.
I understand that, if the people on the ground in hurricane country werwe not immediately alarmed...
why on earth would someone expect George Bush to be? He was relying on the local and state authorities to do their jobs. Kathleen Blanco knows that she messed up...which is why she is no longer in LA politics. All I am saying that everyone should share the blame...not one man.
Experience. (nm)
nm
I'm not sure how someone with no experience can

Experience
   You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after 143
days of experience.

   You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of  experience of
being a surgeon.

   You couldn't get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143
days of experience.

   You couldn't join the military and become a colonel after a 143 days of
experience.

   You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor
after 143 days of experience.

   BUT....

'From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United States Senator, to the
time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he
logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the
Senate was actually in session and working.  After 143 days of work
experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of
the  Free World .... 143 days.

We all have to start somewhere. The senate is an okay start, but after 143
days, that's all it is - a  start.

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American  public is okay with this and
campaigning for him. We wouldn't accept this in our own line of work, yet
some are okay with this for the President of the United States of America?
Come on folks, we are not voting for the next American Idol!

Please forward this before it's too late!
In my experience
I am ashamed to say I have a relative living off welfare. He and his wife use their 4 kids and one grandson to support themselves. They are part of the 40% who don't pay taxes at all. This past year they got around $2,000 in tax refunds. They bought a swimming pool and a trampoline. The rest was a down payment on their 3rd car. Every vehical is newer than what I drive. I have no problem with tax cuts for people who NEED them. Instead of giving people like this free money why not use it in a more deserving area. Maybe some of those truly needing welfare could use it for job training. Or put it towards the elderly who have worked there whole lives.
My experience...
First day, early voting.  Walk into Baum Center, NC, to vote.  Two feet from door, two chairs with end table between.  What's on end table?  Time magazine with SP on the cover.  After standing in line and being made aware of this, I went over and promptly  turned magazine over.  Didn't want to make a scene.  Called local board of elections, state board of elections, and local democratic party headquarters.  Apparently, my first call did the trick.  Within half an hour, I received a call from democratic party hearquarters that the magazine was no longer there for everyone to see as soon as they walked in to vote.  Yeah for me!  I did my job today.  Let's all be observant.  It may not seem blatant, but it really is. 
my view on experience is...
I don't think experience is that big of an issue - nobody has "experience" at being the President of the United States until they get elected - and I don't think that the experience that Hillary claims is any real experience anyway.

I am excited at the prospect of having somebody in office who has no "experience" - maybe they will really want to "change" the way the "experienced" people have been doing things!
She's the only one of the four with executive experience
Obama has little experience even as a legislator, but you believe this smart woman with executive leadership experience is less qualified to be president should it come to that? No, I don't think so.
She has as much experience as Obama....
and she is second chair, not first chair. We get Obama's experience level in first chair. This argument really doesn't hold water. No wanting to start a fight...but she actually has experience running a state. He doesn't. So actually...she has more experience than he does. Don't really think, and I mean no disrespect...the no experience thing holds water.
She has more experience than your #1 chair...
has no reverend wright, has no William Ayers, is exactly the change Washington needs. I believe when comparisons start to be made, if change is indeed what you want...she is definitely NOT a washington insider and has a reputation for being a reformer. I thought your candidate wanted change from Washington politics. Has that changed? Oh...it is good when he says it, but here is someone who is exactly what he said Washington needs...oohhhhh but she is not a Democrat. Got it.
Experience issue will not go away soon.
Whether or not a candidate is "ready" to lead is the voter's prerogative to investigate...or not. I hate nasty politics too and often will turn a blind eye to it. On the other hand, checking into it from time to time does give one a better perspective on just how divided our country has become and what issues flames the fires of discontent the most. Voters also decide whether malcontents should be left to stew in their own juices or if they are addressing legitimate, common concerns in an inappropriate manner that require attention from our highest leadership.

Beyond that, judgments must be made as to which candidate, party, issues, policies, etc. best represent not only the individual's best interests and their vision of what America is or is not, but also the best interest of the nation as a whole...another purely subjective and biased concept, depending on who you talk to. It's the nature of the beast.

What I believe about research is that it is much more valuable as a process, rather than a final destination. If one is able to come out of their comfort zone and expose themselves to many sides of the same issue, it is their own reactions and gut instincts that will help them better identify, define, prioritize, express and embody their own personal political beliefs. If the objective of research is a drive-by pot shot, the insight gained will be as fleeting and as memorable as chat room archives.
Hey - just asking, Speaking from experience.
That's why I work at home.
She already has more executive experience than your guy...
and he is 1st chair. All those negatives you posted are positives for a lot of people. THe state ethics committee investigation is not over yet, and frankly, a state trooper who tasers an 11-year-old (oh he asked me to) SHOULD be fired in my humble opinion. And a state trooper who threatens the life of his estranged wife and her parents should not be wearing the uniform of a state trooper. But that is just me, I guess.

I am sure the people of Alaska are thrilled to hear that the Democrat supporters of Obama are marginalizing them into nothing because they have smaller population than Austin, Texas.

All this kind of post does is show how petty, vindictive and mean people can get when their backs are up against the wall and they think they might lose.

The DNC should have thought about all this before they took on the Clintons. Howard Dean messed up big time.
Executive experience is a big zero
You showed up late today so rather than repeating everything that has already been said on this imponent executive experience media mantra thing, please catch up on your reading. Also, the issue of her not running has been exercised in light of the very real possibility that she would be positioned to take over sooner rather than later. Besides, the Bimbos Unite! cult sure seems to think she is running for president. You will notice just how absent McCain has been from the spotlight since yesterday morning. The notion that our party is somehow fractured or not strongly unified is more of your delusional thinking. McCain took care of that when he decided to insult most of thinking women in this country by selecting a token female he met once to save his sinking ship. Strategy is lame, transparent and has actually created an angry backlash from Hillary supporters and women in general that will make Hurricane Gustav look like a a flushing toilet. You got no idea what you are talking about when you try to analyze the democratic party but please do us all a favor and continue to feed your delusions. theonly thing that's going to come back and bite bigtime is what's-her-name calling Hillary a whiner and McCain calling US economic refugees whiners. We do agree on one thing here. Sweeeeet!
How can we make a man with less experience than the #2...
on McCain's ticket...? In the world the way it is today? I see far less danger on the other side...just my opinion.
you know in my experience in the MT field I have
than those that have 15+ years of experience in the MT field. It depends on the person and how they handle the knowledge they have...
Experience....but have no doubt...
McCain/Palin will bring change with their experience. Just not the kind of social marxist change the dems want to enforce.

I have no faith in any kind of so-called change from any current member of the Democratic party.

This is the experience currently being discussed.
Before answering the question, please read the following. This is posted in response to pub spin that would assert SP is better qualified to lead the country because of O's lack of experience. Of special note are the numerous foreign relations committee diplomatic initiatives listed below. Of course, I would be interested in any comparabl experience SP may have that the pubs can produce. I have saved this post and will be using it in reply to any similar assertions made by pubs in the future whenever I encounter them. Hope format is not too seedy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama
In Illinois senate O Worked to get BIPARTISAN support on legislation on:
1. Ethics reform.
2. Health care reform.
3. Sponsored bills for earned income tax credits for low-income workers.
4. Provisions for $100 million in tax cuts to families.
5. Provisions for early childhood education.
6. Welfare reform.
7. Childcare subsidies.
8. Funding for churches and community groups.
9. Chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee.
10. Instituted requirement for transparent videotaped police interrogations of suspects in capitol cases after a number of death row inmates were found innocent.
11. Measures against racial profiling.
12. Campaign finance reform.
13. Restrictions on lobbyists activities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama
In US Senate:
1. Senate Committee (SC) on Foreign Relations.
2. SC on Health.
3. SC on Health.
4. SC on Labor and Pensions.
5. SC on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
6. SC on Veterans' Affairs.
7. Member of Congressional Black Caucus.
8. Chairman of the Subcommitte on European Affairs.
9. Border security and Immigration reform. Cosponsor "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act introduced by JM.
10. Added 3 amendments to the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act.
11. Supported Secure Fence Act for security improvements along US-Mexico border.
12. Cosponsored Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006.
13. Introduced expansions to Cooperative Threat Reduction Program to secure and dismantle weapons of mass destruction and their associated infrastructure in former Soviet Union states.
14. Sponsor of Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security and Democracy Promotion Act, signed by Bush, to restore basic services like clinics and schools, train a professional, integrated and accountable police force and military, and otherwise support the Congolese in protecting their human rights and rebuilding their nation.
15. As member of Foreign Relations Committee, he made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa. His 2005 trip to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan focus on strategy planning for the control of world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons and WMDs and defense against potential terrorist attacks.
16. January 2006, met with US military in Kuwait and Iraq. Visited Jordan, Israel and Palestinian territories. Asserted preconditions that US will never recognize legitimacy of Hamas leadership until they renounce elimination of Israel.
17. August 2006, official trip to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad where he made televised appearance addressing ethnic rivalries and corruption in Kenya.
18. Worked on Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, signed into law, to eliminate gifts of travel on corporate jets by lobbyists to members of Congress and require disclosure of bundled campaign contributions.
19. Cosponsored bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections to include fraudulent flyers and automated phone calls.
20. Cosponsored climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050.
21. Promoted liquefied coal production of gas and diesel.
22. Introduced Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007 to cap troop levels as prelude to phased troop withdrawal and removal of all combat brigades.
23. Cosponsored amendment to Defense Authorization Act safeguarding personality disorder military discharges.
24. Sponsored Iran Sanctions Enabling Act in support of divestment of state pensions funds from Iran's oil and gas industry.
25. Introduced legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism., provisions of which were added as amendments to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.
26. Sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance program providing one-year job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries, which passed both houses of Congress with bipartisan support but was ultimately vetoed by fearless George.

You must have EXECUTIVE experience
nm
Speaking from experience?
xx