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

Hardly ancient history and your response doesn't fly

Posted By: Reality check on 2005-08-25
In Reply to: Oh please - gt

You're the one who brought up the "leadership expectations"  You opened that can of worms.


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

Ancient history
I dont care about ancient history.  I care about right now in America. The fact is, the American people have spoken and they have stated with their vote that the Republican controlled congress was not working to their satisfaction or benefit and Bush's ideological based administration was heading American down the wrong track.  I know it must be making many conservatives quite upset but majority rules in America, that is what democracy is, government by the majority of the people.  So, accept it and move on.  Democrats had to for the last 12 years and it was quite a hard pill to swallow at times.  Finally, America will be on the right track and maybe we will be able to rebuild positive relations with the world and get out of Iraq before many more of our heroic soldiers are slaughtered for nothing but a bunch of lies.
McCain ancient history? Isn't that convenient?
Let's try this one more time. During the heat of the primaries, McCain dared Obama the rookie to go abroad, so confident that he would fall on his face and pale in comparison to the image of the more seasoned and experienced aging POW. The ulterior motive was to make hay while the sun shines in Obama's absence and do some stunning campaign trailblazing.

Obliging Obama took the dare and became a sensational global superstar as I so eloquently described in my other post and is now legendary. John McCain was left with egg all over his face. End of story.

I'm kinda of glad he did not show his true colors until after his defeat. That John McCain could have given Obama a real run for his money but alas, he took the Rovian path down the tubes. Oh well, better luck next time.
How do you think ancient people
fed their family?  WIth tofu?  Besides, do you eat burgers, chicken, or bacon?  Hunting is more than a sport.  In my neck of the woods, it is tradition and heritage.  We respect the game laws and hunt with ethical behavior.  We enjoy as much of the meat as possible.  Would you rather have Bambi overpopulate and cause someone to be killed in a car accident?  It happens where I live all of the time.  A guy I grew up with was coming home one night, hit a moose and died.  His young kids are orphans now. 
Not just ancient people
did you ever watch the show Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern? He travels around the world and eats the strangest food. No part of animal is wasted. He eats eyes, testicles, feet. It is gross but fascinating.
If you believe in what many ancient cultures . . .
predict, this planet only has a little over 4 more years left, so it won't really matter too much who is elected.  Anyone else heard of the Mayan calendar?  Or the 4,000-year-old Chinese calendar?  Google 12/21/2012.  This has nothing to do with Revelations.  This has to do with a very predictable astrological event that is going to happen.  Just something to ponder . . .
You read ancient Greek? That is
Can you read Aramaic and Ancient Hebrew too? I always wanted to learn. Maybe some day I will have the time.
Homosexuality was never allowed in ancient times
and it did not become a sin because the christians said it is a sin. It's written in the Bible and this I believe, because it is 'detestable', it is so written in the Bible:

' Below are some Bible verses that condemn homosexuality:

Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death.....'
Another classy response. I won't say liberal response,
because I don't think you and these pile-on posters are indicative of liberals as a whole. Don't know why they let you speak for them...but that is up to them. Obviously you don't think compassion is a personality trait...obviously you feel that it can be turned on and off to suit your agenda. So be it.
History is history and opinion is opinion. You need to learn the difference.
x
Ayers doesn't regret the bombings, doesn't feel like they did enough sm

In a story that appeared in the Times on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, Ayers told a reporter while promoting his memoir "Fugitive Days": "I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough."


Mr. Ayers, now a professor of education in Chicago, was a founder of the Weather Underground, which bombed government buildings in the early 1970s. He was indicted on conspiracy charges that were thrown out for prosecutorial misconduct.


He served with Mr. Obama on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, a charitable organization, and, along with his wife, the former Weather Underground member Bernardine Dohrn, hosted Mr. Obama at his home in 1995 when he was running for state office.


Mr. Obama has called Mr. Ayers "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old."...so because it was 40 years ago, and Ayers is still proud of what he did, how is it justifiable for a US presidential candidate to now be friends with this man?  Unless he has the same view of America.


Let me rephrase that. It doesn't *seem like* my vote doesn't count...sm
It does not count because its in the bag that our 3 electoral votes will go to the republican party.
I know history
Jews and Communism?  Dont get the link there.  Jews are definitely not communist and even in the old world, *Old Europe*, Austria, Germany, Poland, they were not communists..they were shop owners, jewelry makers, prosperous bankers..I have never met a communist or socialist jew and I grew up in NYC.  To quote history, to remember history, to study history, does not mean we are contributing to terrorism..or aiding our enemies..that argument makes no sense.  My major in college was history, minor anthropology.  So, I pretty much know a bit about history.  When people close their eyes to the truth, refuse to admit what is really happening or what type of administration is running the country, follow like sheep without question, that is when we are headed to ruin..not when there is free flow of ideas and talk of history, even quotes from the most evil of them..
What is history but....
windows that open and close. You are correct. However, you still want to beat Bush up for going to Iraq. We went. Nothing can change that. CLinton did not fight them in Somalia like he should...we cannot change that. However, the reason for not leaving Iraq post haste is as much about running yet again from Al Qaeda as it is about abandoning the rank and file Iraqi people. You have to understand that I have been in the military culture for a long time and have daily talks with someone who has been there and done that...he does not form my opinions and we have been known to butt heads...however, he does give me great insight. He knows who the enemy is. He has faced them.
It is history, kam...look it up.
Democrats are the ones who were against freeing the slaves. When Abe Lincoln and the Republicans(yes, he was a Republican) freed the slaves and after the war passed legislation to give them the vote, the Democrats immediately passed poll taxes and literacy tests so that the newly freed slaves would not be able to exercise their new right to vote. African Americans did not get clear right to vote until the Civil Rights Act in the 1960's, when enough Northern Democrats bucked the party and joined the Republicans to pass that act. It is all history, all fact. Look it up.

history and the

impact of Supreme Court decisions on the role of government?  I guess it really has nothing to do with being VP.  All you need is a rah-rah speech, a sense of victimization and a flag pin and you are good to go.  Sorry, sometimes I think.


 


Here is a bit of history.

This election has me very worried.  So many things to consider.  About a year ago I would have voted for Obama. I have changed my mind three times since than.  I watch all the news channels, jumping from one to another.  I must say this drives my husband crazy.  But, I feel if you view MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News, you might get some middle ground to work with.  About six months ago, I started thinking 'where did the money come from for Obama'.  I have four daughters who went to College, and we were middle class, and money was tight.  We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans. I started looking into Obama's life.
 


Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California.  He is very open about his two years at Occidental, he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. 'Barry' (that was the name he used all his life) during this time had two roommates, Muhammad Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan.  During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip.  Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia, next Hyderabad in India, three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family.  My question - Where did he get the money for this trip?  Neither I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they where in college.  When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York.  It is at this time he  wants everyone to call him Barack - not Barry.  Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia?  It's not cheap! to say the least.  Where did he get money for tuition?  Student Loans? Maybe. After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000. a year.  Why Chicago?  Why not New York? He was already living in New York.
 


By 'chance' he met Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago.  Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery this year.  Rezko, was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association'.  About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School.  Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School?  Where did he get the money for Law School?  More student loans?  After Law school, he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down.  But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what?  They represented 'Rezar' which Rezko's firm.  Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago.  In 20 03, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money'  for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwoood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (less than asking price).  With ALL those Student Loans - Where did he get the money for the property?  On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased.  Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.
 


 Now, we have Obama running for President.  Valerie Jarrett, was Michele Obama's boss.  She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without talking to her first.  Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran!  Do we see a pattern here?  Or am I going crazy?
 


On May 10, 2008 The Times reported, Robert Malley advisor to Obama was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas', which controls Gaza and is connected with Iran.  This past week, buried in the back part of the papers, Iraqi newspapers reported that during Obama's visit to Iraq, he asked their leaders to do nothing about the war until after he is elected, and he will 'Take care of things'.
 


Oh, and by the way, remember the college roommates that where born in Pakistan?  They are in charge of all those 'small' Internet campaign contribution for Obama.  Where is that money coming from?  The poor and middle class in this country?  Or could it be from the Middle East? 


And the final bit of news.  On September 7, 2008, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that was made on 'This Week' with George Stephanapoulos.  Obama on talking about his religion said, 'My Muslim faith'.  When questioned, 'he made a mistake'.  Some mistake!


 All of the above information I got on line.  If you would like to check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.


 Now the BIG question - If I found out all this information on my own, Why haven't all of our 'intelligent' members of the press been reporting this?
 


 A phrase that keeps ringing in my ear - 'Beware of the enemy from within'!!!


Don't you know your history?
Yes there has always been a President Elect. They become President Elect after the electorates vote the 2nd week in December. Until then they are still just a citizen. However the media is so anxious to get Bush out (and I don't blame them), that they are not reporting the truth (although that doesn't surprise me from what I saw during the campaign).

However "Office of the President Elect" is new and invented (created out of nothing) by the O.

Here's what one of a hundred different sites says...

Obama Invents 'Office of the President-Elect'

Monday, November 10, 2008 12:54 PM

By: Jim Meyers Article Font Size


Barack Obama has created a stir by proclaiming that he heads “The Office of President-Elect” — an office that does not officially exist.

At his first news conference on Nov. 7, Obama stood at a podium bearing a sign that read: “Office of the President-Elect. Also, his Web site, Change.gov, bears the words “Office of the President-Elect” at the top of its home page.

Writer Larry Anderson referred to the “made-up little title” on the American Thinker Web site, and declared: “I nearly busted a gut ...

“Once again, [Obama] can’t wait to invest himself with the trappings of office.”

Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin wondered: “What other make-believe offices are they going to invent between now and Inauguration Day? I can’t ever recall in my lifetime any mention of such an office.”

Technically speaking, Obama may not even be the President-elect, according to the American Sentinel Web site.

“Megalomaniac Obama’s ego grows even more insufferable,” a weekend posting reads.

“Yes, he will be [president-elect]. But he’s not officially yet, until the Electoral College votes.

“The Constitution provides that on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December, electors convene in their respective state capitals. It’s then that they formally elect the President of the United States, based on the general election results.”

Has anyone ever in history won by this
large of a margin & had the electoral college cast their votes opposite? No. You're grasping at straws.
Are you saying there's a different history?
x
How's this for a history........ sm

Scroll down to the bottom of the 5th page of this report and start reading.  Ogden has argued against opposed the Child Internet Protection Act of 2000, challenged the Child Obsenity and Obscenity Enforcement Act and has represented numerous p*ornographic publishers in various causes.  I think this is more than enough reason to oppose him as DAG.


http://www.scribd.com/full/11607068?access_key=key-18yr2u50t8o0sz54rbrl


You don't know your history very well, do you?
??
no response ....

No response

We are not supposed to cross post, so I am respecting the administrator's request. 


My response
There is no sound byte answer about Rev. Wright. I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the fact that men of his generation experienced life in America differently than the whites did. Historically, many black churches have been and are political forums, stemming from the days of slavery, when the churches provided a refuge where freedom of speech was possible. I don't know what Obama did or did not hear, and neither do you. What I do know is that he has written extensively about the confusion he had over the "black" part of his identity and part of his search for meaning, purpose and belonging in his younger days was played out in South Chicago. If you have read anything about the church at all, you will know that they have been engaged in many extensive and successful outeach programs in their community and I suspect his "association" with Trinity was focused and centered around that. Too bad a person cannot be judged but his deeds, rather than wild speculation, innuendo and smear campaigns about the company he keeps.
A response from.....sm
To the first 4 paragraphs decrying the decay of black leadership while attempting to lay the blame at the feet of the democratic party, encouraging blacks to bail and proclaiming the dawn of a new day for black conservatism, all that needs to be said is yeah, right. The proof is in the pudding. Black voters are backing Obama 94-1, according to this random poll citation: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1192 …6% stampede, and we have not even made it through the convention. Great big whoop.

The abortion graphics let us know that the minister is pro-life. OK. Fine. Next, we have this twisted accusation that Obama supports partial birth abortion. That is not his position on abortion, and it is laid out in no uncertain terms on his website and countless times in his speeches and townhall meetings. What he said is that he supports the notion that things should stay as they have been and that those issues should be determined on a state-by-state basis at the local level. Same thing with regard to same-sex marriage and the federal government not being in the business of defining the meaning of marriage, which he clearly believes is a union between a man and a woman (not exactly the most popular position in the gay community).

Yet despite this, the pastor insists he is champion of the gay agenda and the abortion "industry." Never mind that the democratic party platform includes many pro-active initiatives that conservatives will continue to obstruct regarding abortion prevention through sex education, birth control, encouraging and enabling single parents to keep their children with parenting education, job skills training and making adoption laws more user friendly. Most democrats perceive the conservative views on abortion as caring about unborn right from conception to the moment of birth. Beyond that, the babies kind of fall off the radar screen.

For this radical stance (i.e., preserving status quo), the pastor evokes the Barack HUSSEIN Obama slur and is all indignant that Obama puts himself out there as a Christian. Champion of the dead horse drumbeat. This guy is not looking real credible at this point. Performer, he calls him, doubting Obama's sincerity. The "God's on our side" mantra rings hollow as well, considering the conservative pathologic disdain for poverty and conflicts over notions such as the measure of a nation's moral character is only as strong as it's care for the least among us.

He then proceeds to twist the words of THE greatest black leader of modern times…MLK. The infanticide he referred to was the practice of killing female infants/gender selection in biblical patriarchal societies.…a practice emphatically condemned by the Islamic Prophet Mohammed in the Quran back in the day. Twist, turn, spin.

Lets see. Obama is evil incarnate because homophobic interpretations of the Bible do not impress him as much as the Sermon on the Mount? That would be the moral teachings of Jesus, to include the Lord's Prayer, the injunctions to "resist not evil" and "turn the other cheek", as well as Jesus' version of the Golden Rule. Other lines often quoted are the references to "salt of the Earth," "light of the world," and "JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED." These are the core beliefs of the Christian doctrine. Drag out the tar and feathers and hang him high for that sacrilege.

Then another call to arms for those 6% black conservatives, a 2nd reference to Barack HUSSEIN Obama. As for the upcoming black conservative youth, it is the youth vote from the remaining 94% blacks and whites alike that just might boost Obama over the top, last I heard.

Then of course, there are a few paragraphs of closing prayers. If this is what it means to be "right," this guy ends up making the Obama nation look better and better.

response

So you are saying all other media outlets except Fox are liberal and therefore cannot be trusted to provide accurate information.  Therefore, you can only get true information from their network, because they tell you that is so.  I see where you are coming from.


 


response

All the examples you use about being make to hate, if the individuals mentioned being indoctrinated resisted by using their minds to seek broader or alternative information could simply resist the information being forced on them and resist hating.  Poor sentence structure, I admit.


 


response

McCain did the same thing when he was defeated in N. Caroline because Rove used dirty tactics like push polls calling people and asking if they would vote for McCain if they knew he had a biracial baby.  McCain had to suck it up and stand next to Bush and announce that he would support him.  I thought he was ethical enough to resist using such tactics when he the chance to campaign. but I was wrong.


response

Of course I believe they can.  Luckily you tacked on white supremacists right there at the end or I would have been appalled at the assumption that non-caucasian, non-christian people are incapable of thinking for themselves.


 


response...
Both Bush and McCain supported privatizing social security IF a person wanted to...neither have advocated making it mandatory. Perhaps if that had been done in the first place, it would not have been a fund that a Democratic congress could have raided to fund other programs. I personally would like to have control of my own funds (except congress has already spent them) and put in a CD..not the stock market. So that govt grubby paws could not get at it anymore. But that is just me.

I think the operative word is McCain said he did not disagree. He did not say he himself would re-start the draft. In the world the way it is, if enlistment really dropped off, it might be necessary just so we would have the size Armed Forces we would need, should the need arise. That just makes good sense. A peace time draft might be a good thing...two years in the service might change the direction some kids might choose to go. Would also provide some skills training and the ability to go to college after their service...instead of gangs...instead of being on the street...learn a trade, get a job...I don't necessarily think it would be a bad thing. The Armed Forces have been good careers for a lot of men and women...the Armed Forces are not just for war. But again...that is just me.
See my response above. And you are right - sm
I think both sides need to leave the experience thing alone. 
The rep response is
lie, lie, lie and CYA.  This whole SP story is going to blow up in their faces.  At least, that's what I'm expecting, but sure will be amusing to watch over the next couple of weeks.  Joe Scarborough, a former republican representative, said he would have never chosen her with just 1 1/2 years of governership and a mayor of a small town as experience. The media is not expected to ask questions or interview Ms. SP at least for two weeks yet.  What are they hiding?  Why can't the media ask her questions?  This is quite as someone said before "a sideshow."  Very entertaining.
response (sm)

Let the oil companies bail them out since they directly benefited from some of the bad management decisions.


This would never happen.  I doubt the oil companies care if the US auto industry goes down.  If it does go down, then we will have imports, for which we will also have to buy gas (which would actually be a better alternative for the oil companies as opposed to us building vehicles that would not be dependent on oil).


Don't bail out the companies.  Give the money to the workers for re-education, etc., while the auto companies restructure.


Re-education takes time.  If these workers are already or soon to be out of work, they need jobs yesterday.  They have families to feed, and that can't wait for a new career. 


I think the best approach is to go ahead and bail them out (as much as that stinks), but set criteria they have to meet that would show re-tooling and progression to non-gas vehicles.  I like the Pickens plan myself.


You know, that was my first response too.
but would like to see him cut loose a little and put it against a contrasting charcoal gray shirt. I think he's a knockout....nothing sexier than a confident, intelligent man with a heart of gold.
and your response to GP was so much
Your original post to wasn't an attack on the pubs?  Hypocrit.
Response
Yes, we do only have one president at a time.

However, both the incoming and outgoing Presidents have a responsibility -- they are handling the nation's business.

As Obama comes into power, it is very transparent of him to keep the nation apprised of what he is doing, thinking, planning.

Good for him! I hope we hear from him every single day!

It doesn't matter whether it is Obama or it would have been McCain -- we need to hear what the incoming President is planning and doing.


response (sm)

Move to Russia----that's the problem.  If you guys are confronted with any sort of ideas that are not part of your belief your first instict seems to be to just remove it.  That's not tolerance -- that's segregation.


As far as kids go, I would challenge you to show me 1 child 4th grade and up (probably lower than that) that does not know what *gay* means, and homosexuality is not being taught in schools now.  As far as the TV, mine came with a remote with little buttons for changing the channel and a handy dandy on/off switch.  Toy dispensers in gas station bathrooms:  Yes, there are some of those out there.  However, they are no where near as common as you would make them out to be.


Marriage -- what is it to you if they call it marriage?  You do realize there are christian gays and lesbians?  The problem is that on this issue christians seem to think that everyone should live by their rules when everyone else has a different set of rules.  What about Muslims who are married?  Is thier marriage worth anything in your eyes?  They didn't get married with God as a witness as you would discribe Him.  I'm married and yet I'm and athiest.  Is my marriage worthless?


Christianity is an all or nothing proposition.  When it comes to laying down legislation for a nation as diverse as ours, that all or nothing mentality does nothing but divide the nation.


 


Response...(sm)
Whether you aggree with Al Jazeera or not, they are a valid news organization.  They show the viewpoint of others in the region.  In order to understand a situation I feel it is important to understand both sides of it, and then make an informed opinion.  Your unwillingness to even consider what they say as a different viewpoint is pretty typical of Americans, which in my opinion is to only concern themselves with the viewpoint that best suits thier agenda. 
Why is it that your only response....(sm)

to any discussion is just one-line BS?  Do you have any evidence to show that the people being held at Gitmo are what you say they are?  Can you show where this defense attorney is incorrect?  Do you perhaps have inside info on exactly what will happen to the prisoners?  Or better yet, do you even have any kind of rationale for your opinion other than your obvious paranoia concerning bringing the prisoners here?  There is the concept of us having to pay for their upkeep, but hey, guess what?  We're already paying for that.  In addition to that, how much do you think it costs just to keep Gitmo open, not only financially but in political capital as well?


Helpful hint:  If when responding to a post if you click inside the big white box underneath the subject line, it will allow you to type in a more detailed note, thereby, possibly (and I use that term loosely), giving more credibility to your posts. 


Well, at least YOU got a response.

I wrote to them, as well, and didn't receive a reply at all (not that I was expecting one of any substance).


I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who wrote to them.


Response...
1. You'll find it useful to look at the upcoming budgets and then re-discover the notion of percentages.

2. If unions infested the transcription industry, you might very well not have a job. Don't believe me? Tour Detroit.

3. Trash talk that typifies political discourse today, says nothing, doesn't advance your cause, and doesn't merit response.

4. More of #3.
Response...
You have a very narrow view of taxes, my friend, and obviously have no idea what's coming down the tracks.

We are already seeing increases in taxes (on everyone) at the state and local level, for one thing, and many more are in the works. Look for higher sales tax rates, higher car license fees...oh, who knows where your piddly little "increase" will wind up going?

You can't possibly - even if you're no economist - believe that the government can print $trillions and obligate the nation to $trillions more in debt and none of the cost is going to come home to roost on your doorstep. You're just going to float along while someone else ("the rich") pay for all of this, eh? You're a politician's dream come true.

Politicians count on people who will look no further down the road than this week's pay stub and scream for joy at the $23.48 increase. "Lord, let them never realize that we're going to take it all back away from them at some other level of government - and so much more besides", pray the politicians.


My response is --
President Obama's sequel came out during his presidency. His first book was actually released in 2005 before he even entered politics. The income was listed on his taxes that were released as a presidential candidate.

His charitable contributions were also listed, but the information I just quickly googled said his 2006 contributions amounted to a little over 6% of his income.

He was of interest to folks before he became involved in politics.
what is this in response to?
The original post was not about George Tiller or William Long?
in response --
I have been duly chastised and I accept that. However, i saw no need for him to be "protecting" himself. Noone was bothering him. They stool calmly by and watched him do what he did. Secondly, there was no need to cut the flag down, he could have just removed it. Then, as he removed it, he could have folded it in some way other than just wadding it into a ball.

There was never any confrontation wher he had to be scared or feel threatened - so that is not an adequate defense. I understand that he was upset, I agree that he very well should have been, and I myself am upset about the way things are going in this country and the things that are being allowed to happen.

Yes, I very well do get it!!!
History speaks for itself. sm
You are simply ignorant of it and I said it was ONE of the reasons, not the only reason.  Still trying to twist my words and worm out that you don't know history at all!  Do you EVER watch the History Channel?  Read historical books, not just college course books.  I am through talking to you.  People who can't even admit they are wrong and try to put the onus on someone else aren't worth talking to.  Besides, you are so filled with hatred, I am surprised you didn't say how ugly Bush's daughters are just to throw that in just one more time.
A word on history.
 Whatever it is that is being discussed concering global conflicts, when using history to clarify, define, explain, prove, whatever...I always try to remember that history has always  been written and interpreted by the victor.
You should care about history....
and should learn from it. Sadly, that is something neither party seems to do, and both have left their origins. The sad thing is...as they sow, so shall WE reap.
Your history is messed up

Look what I found in a book about the Democratic party:


The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, championed by the party despite opposition at the time from its Southern wing, has continued to inspire the party's liberal principles.


_________


There are also multiple chapters as well as multiple books written about the metamorphosis of BOTH parties since their inception.  See, sometimes books really can be a good thing!!!  By the way, do you get your historical information from the chronic-liars-library or something?  Cuz it surely seems like it. 


Obviously you did not read the history...
I did try to get along...and got attacked wholesale for it. Which seems to be the liberal tack...based only on my experience on this board, mind you.

I do not apologize for finding "the wisdom of the Clinton Presidency" amusing. I know that people would like to think that is the way the Clinton Presidency will be remembered...but unfortunately that will be overshadowed and most people remember him as the President who jumped the intern, lied about it, and was almost removed from office for it.

I have a "fairly broad knowledge base" but pretty much founded 100% founded on those utterly awful right wing rags that make much of America cringe." Please to be specific. What have I said or posted from an utterly awful right wing rag? Please show the post and the right wing rag it came from, please and thank you. My SCHIP information came from the Library of Congress web site and the bill itself...unless you call those right wing rags. On that subject, what are you calling utterly awful right wing rags? Frankly, I think that verbiage would make much of America cringe. And come to that...what do you base THAT statement on?

So...first, what are the utterly awful right wing rags? And then suppor that with "most of America would cringe." Lets see some facts, and not from an utterly awful left wing rag, to use your colorful description. Though until you said that, I really had not viewed them that way. Thank you, really, for a new perspective.

So...let's start with your list of utterly awful right wing rags...and support with fact your assertion that said "rags" "make much of America cringe."


You must know the true history.....
Anyone who has studied history in depth knows West Virginia history and the history of its people. They have been for the most part poor people, black and white, and they are proud people. They made do for themselves, didn't take handouts. It's still that way a lot today and they do look at things a lot differently. Goes back to before civil war days. Knowing that helps me to understand their point of view a little better.