Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

I agree...I didn't get that from his speech either.....

Posted By: Agreed with about 85% of what he said on 2009-02-10
In Reply to: THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING - Chicken Little

I didn't even vote for Obama, and yet I found myself agreeing with most everything he said, particularly regarding the current behind-the-times educational system in our country.

Although it will doubtlessly impact my career in some way(s), I also see the benefits of electronic medical records. I don't think this will eliminate MTs at all; however, I do think we need to stay current with technology and stop dragging our feet about ASR/VR programs and those who don't have training in this area might want to learn.

Maybe it's just me, but as someone who didn't even for the guy, his speech impressed me. He seems to combine logic with passion and conviction, and I think those are admirable qualities.


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

I didn't see his speech
But I did read an article in the news.  I  notice that Bush's "help" is going to require union workers to get in line with non-union workers by the end of next year (can you say PAY CUT).  I do agree with doing away with the job bank.  Not one word did I read about his demanding deep cuts for the EXECS!!!!  Of course they are his buds and they need those private jets and billions in bonuses.  Makes me sick.
What I DIDN'T Think of Hillary's Speech

Yesterday, Hillary scheduled her big ballyhoo to end her campaign, curiously at high noon. I live in out west, so everything is two hours behind.


I had been up most of the night and tuned into MSNBC early, at about 9:45 a.m. (11:45 a.m. Hillary time). Although I was pretty tired, I was looking forward to personally assessing the features of Hillary's personality as she spoke and wanted to see if this was going to be another speech that was all about her, with bitterness and a sense of entitlement, or if one of her other personalities would emerge, perhaps a kinder, gentler one, very much hoping for the latter..


Here's the time line:


9:45:00 a.m.: No Hillary yet, but I'm early. Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann (my two favorites) are hosting this historic event. I can listen to these two guys talk all day.


9:50:00 a.m.: I can't listen to these two guys talk all day, so I begin channel surfing. Rachel Ray is cooking what looks to be some GOOD lasagna on the Food Network. I like Rachel Ray (despite the fact she's secretly a Muslim), but I can't get too involved because I am waiting for Hillary.


9:55:00 a.m.: Back to MSNBC. Chris and Keith still chatting. Hey, guys. We've got FIVE MINUTES to go here. Shouldn't we be -- what? Senator Clinton hasn't left her house yet? Quick shot to Senator Clinton's house reveals no visible activity. (Whose motorcycle is that, anyway?)


10:00:29 a.m.: Back to the remote. Animal Planet generously offers, "Cracking the Secret Code of Ants," complete with close-up shots of a gazillion ants. Uh, thanks, but no thanks. Whatever happened to that cute little meerkat -- Daisy or Rose or whatever flowery name the gave her -- yeah, that's it: Her name was FLOWER! Those ants are just too creepy!


10:00:30 a.m.: History Channel is showing Ax Men. I think not.


10:00:32 a.m.: Back to MSNBC: Clinton still hasn't left house. What the -- I bet she handcuffed herself to a piano, swallowed the key, they're trying to drag her out of the house, and she is refusing to leave.


10:00:35 a.m.: Beginning to feel extreme anxiety and tension. Recall that I was prescribed Xanax for such occasions. I'll only take a half of one because otherwise, I'll fall asleep, and I can't do that because Hillary's speech is too important!


10:03:00 a.m.: More surfing. Ooooooh. FX is showing Dharma and Greg at 10:00. As I tune in, Dharma is at her in-laws', having dinner and explaining why she sleeps in the nude. Some hot-looking foreign guy declares everyone at the table to be sexy. (Hot-looking foreign guy is Greg's aunt's new boyfriend. Greg's aunt wants a divorce from Greg's uncle and wants Greg to represent her.) As usual, Dharma does her good deed and tries to bring aunt and uncle back together. Greg is angry because Dharma's interference causes him to lose client. I decide Dharma would make a great diplomat to Iran. As you can see from the time line, this show moves very quickly (plus, it's a rerun that I've already seen).


10:07:00 a.m.: Back to surfing. Hit "channel down" button. "Army Wives" is on Lifetime. Like the show, but these are all reruns.


10:08:00 a.m.: Back to the clicker, hitting "channel up" button. Arrive at Animal Planet just in time to be greeted by the words, "...something gripped in ant's jaw." Am reminded to check MSNBC again.


10:08:02 a.m.: MSNBC makes another announcement: "Senator Clinton has not left her house. Endorsement speech delayed." Well, DUH! Am becoming a tad annoyed at this point. I wonder if she'd be late for her own funeral -- oops -- bad example. She already is, politically, "presidentially" speaking. Banner at bottom of screen: "Senator Hillary Clinton to Suspend Campaign and Endorse Obama." Suspend? SUSPEND???!!! Is she still holding out for that bizarre RFK scenario she shared with the entire world the other week? All the other candidates ENDED their campaigns, and she's still SUSPENDING?!!


10:11:00 a.m.: Back to Food Network. Someone's preparing grilled peach salad. Being basically a meat and potatoes kind of person, this is just a little too "busy" for me. (It's really quite simple: Peaches are good either plain or with ice cream, yogurt or cream; burgers, dogs, chicken, ribs and steaks, etc. are grilled; and salad consists of lettuce, tomatoes, cucumbers, celery, onion, and maybe a few other ingredients, but PEACHES ain't one of them.) Thinking how strange this all is triggers my memory to try MSNBC again..


10:13:00 a.m.: No news yet. Annoyance still present but somewhat "soothed."


10:14:00 a.m.: Channel-surf my way to Oxygen. "Snapped" is on. Again reminded of Hillary and tune back in to MSNBC.


10:17:00 a.m.: People still yacking, no Hillary, and the motorcycle outside her house is looking smaller all the time.


10:17:45 a.m.: Remote takes me back to the Food Network. The show is called "Rescue Chef." Acutely aware of my own personal culinary challenges, I pop a tape into the VCR and press "Record."


10:18:15: a.m.: I come to the realization that the show with that weird grilled peach salad IS "Rescue Chef," the show I'm taping. I remove tape from VCR.


10:19:00 a.m.: Back to the clicker. "Dominick Dunne's Power, Privilege and Justice" is on truTV. Again reminded not to take eye off prize and click back on to MSNBC, this time for the duration.


10:26:00 a.m.: People moving about outside Hillary's house. Motorcade leaving. Why does she need a MOTORCADE? Why couldn't she just do all of this, ON TIME, perhaps in the setting of one of her "conversations," sitting on her couch, smiling and trying to sound sincere? My annoyance quickly turns to anticipation, though. Finally!!! I yawn. My tension and anxiety have completely abated. I yell "Hurry, Hillary. Hurry!!" out loud. Dog stares at me in tilted-head confusion.


7:14:00 p.m.: I suddenly awaken to one of MSNBC's boring prison shows, distressed, sweating profusely and panic-stricken, after having had a nightmare about watching "Snapped," showing Dharma Montgomery in prison, having been convicted of poisoning her husband, Army Private Greg Montgomery, after serving him a dinner of lasagna with grilled peach salad in which she had hidden fire ants that she had killed with an ax. An Army Colonel by the name of Barack Olbermann had discovered Private Montgomery's body in the desert, near a colony of meerkats. Hillary Clinton, Dharma's attorney, is also interviewed. Dharma is sentenced to life in prison without parole.


What I learned today:


1. A half a Xanax works just as well as a full one.


2. Grilled peach salad really IS bad.


okay -- so you agree that I didn't

twist the words "moderate muslims" but rather the words "win over"? 


I guess I'd better buy a new dictionary, because the last time I looked, "win over" was a good synonym for "make friends."


It's okay that you stand by your post even though you aren't.  I get it.  Some people just like to argue. 


I wholeheartedly agree that he didn't consider

the Constitution at all when running (not walking) into Iraq.  In fact, there are a multitude of things he didn't consider.  It seems the ONLY thing he considered was his potential legacy as a *great leader* and he *needed* a war to be seen as a war-time *Commander in Chief.*


As far as an article being left leaning, in case you hadn't noticed, you are posting on a predominantly left-leaning board. 


As more facts concerning this President's outrageous behavior begin to surface, I believe the true character of this man will be revealed to those who are willing to see the truth.


Have a great evening. 


I didn't agree with Pat Robertson either. sm
However, I doubt Chavez offer came free of strings.   I am glad we did not accept his help.  He has shown himself for what he is.
Didn't say I agree with his tactics.....
Just noticing how poster doesn't seem to care for anyone protesting against gays.

It wouldn't matter if it were ANYONE from ANY church, poster would have a problem with that too!

I think Rev Phelps needs to do a little more Bible reading. His methods are sickening.
"kill him" speech is not acceptable free speech - it is against the law - nm
x
I agree, but - he got an endorsement from an evangelist but he didn't attend the church for 20 ye
McCain did get an endorsement from a radical evangelist, but I don't think it involved racism or hate, he is just sort of "out there." However, McCain did not attend his church(was it Hagee, not sure), just got an endorsement from him. That is a huge difference from attending the church for 20 years under him.
Original pledge by forefathers didn't include God. I agree with keeping the original.

http://www.usflag.org/history/pledgeofallegiance.html


The original Pledge of Allegiance


I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands- one nation indivisible-with liberty and justice for all.


On September 8,1892, the Boston based The Youth's Companion magazine published a few words for students to repeat on Columbus Day that year. Written by Francis Bellamy,the circulation manager and native of Rome, New York, and reprinted on thousands of leaflets, was sent out to public schools across the country. On October 12, 1892, the quadricentennial of Columbus' arrival, more than 12 million children recited the Pledge of Allegiance, thus beginning a required school-day ritual.


At the first National Flag Conference in Washington D.C., on June14, 1923, a change was made. For clarity, the words the Flag of the United States replaced my flag. In the following years various other changes were suggested but were never formally adopted.


It was not until 1942 that Congress officially recognized the Pledge of Allegiance. One year later, in June 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite it. In fact,today only half of our fifty states have laws that encourage the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom!


In June of 1954 an amendment was made to add the words under God. Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.


I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
the speech

I heard, I am very old and I suffered greatly at the hands of the enemy.  Did I ever tell you I was a POW?  I suffered greatly.  Please feel sorry for me and vote for me.  I deserve it.  I suffered greatly.  No economic plan, no health insurance plan, just  I suffered greatly.  Sarah's speech was John suffered greatly.  No one else has suffered as much as he.  Joe Biden's loss of family members and Obama's struggle with identity because of being mixed race do not qualify.  This is an election about the issues of the american people not a Queen for A Day episode where the person with the saddest story gets a new washing machine.


 


 


The Speech to Nowhere
http://www.truthout.org/article/palins-speech-nowhere
Anybody see O's speech about

10:30 this morning? If he can accomplish half of what he talked about, I'll have a little more faith in him.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/03/president-to-ta.html


So much for your pre-speech intelligence

He did talk about the war.... Hey, wait a minute, your intelligence was bad....You lied to us!!!   You twisted the information to fit your post...Don't you want to apologize and tell us all what a terrible mistake you made!!!!       How does it feel to be called a liar without justification?


Freedom of speech, LOL
Freedom of speech?  To get up there and state you believe A WHOLE SOCIETY OF PEOPLE, A WHOLE ETHNICITY OF PEOPLE OUGHT TO BE ABORTED?  Yet, you people jump all over Cindy Sheehan when she rags on Bush, LOL..You jump all over anti war people when we scream..STOP THIS WAR..But NOW you are stating freedom of speech..LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL..Better to shut up now about Bennett, cause you sure are looking silly..
and this wise speech comes from a man

who admitted he's had too many wives, done too many drugs....and was happy to admit he inhaled.


Ahhh the credibility....


That's the only line you took from the speech...sm
But you think Bush who admits that he did drugs - obviously inhaled or sniffed, and was an alcoholic is a living testimony of credibility. Is there a double standard here?
Ah, yes. Freedom of speech.

I remember it well. 


It was a cute joke.  In case any of you missed it before it was removed from the board, one of the many places it can be found is http://www.justpetehere.com/2004/11/george_bush_pas.html.


Better do it quickly, though, because this post is sure to be removed as soon as the Cons start whining again.


freedom of speech

 Check out the St. Pete Times, Sunday, 11/13/05, The Perspective, article by Robin Blummer. Sorry I don't have the link but it is easy to find. Talk about scary. By the way, I see that there are a number of comments to posts listed on the board but they are not available to see. Is this a new policy...we know people read or responded but we can't see what the response is?


the speech, annotated...
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0111-25.htm

Long but worth the read.
do you or do you not believe in freedom of speech....
and do you or do you not believe in the right of people to have opinions different from those and voice them? Is someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read my posts? You might be more comfortable in Russia where it is the policy of the counry to control thought that does not agree with the party line.
Do you believe in free speech?
If so, please allow me mine.
If you believe Obama's SPEECH,
nm
her speech, and debate later. I think
nm
Freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech is freedom to all.

When watching TV if there is something I don't like I change the channel. I would suggest you do the same on this board instead of trying to silence those you don't agree with.

Keep on postin sam - you must be hitting home if there are those who want to silence you.
acceptance speech

was written by Bush speech writer.  But there is not connection between the McCains and the Bushs.  Mere coincidence.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.


 


FYI, the prompter went out during her speech
at the convention -- but you didn't know it by watching her! I have every confidence she can handle whatever comes her way. she is a quick study, with common sense and intelligence.
Hate speech
You are a racist a__hole.  Who cares what you think? 
So is freedom of speech.
If the lady wants to talk about religion, so what? It's not like she's gonna get into office and make us all abide by her religion - Pa-leeeze!!!
Freedom of Speech? Think Again.

See 2nd link. 


  • Hyscience
  • Missouri Law Enforcement Targeting Anyone Who Unfairly Attacks Obama | THE HOT JOINTS
  • Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
  • Werner Patels - A Dose of Common Sense
  • A Small Corner of Sanity - An Online Oasis for Conservative Thought
  • Liberal Fascism Obama Truth Squad Style | Bitter Knitter



    ShareThis


  • No, more like all the hate speech
    "energizes" fanatic fervor and mobilizes race-baiting hoaxters, cyberspace skinhead assassination plots and the other more than 500 threats to Obama. See link.
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6123157&page=1
    What a great speech........
    so handsome, with his captivating smile, terrific speaker, cool under pressure, so humble, refined and much more...CHANGE IS HERE, CONGRATULATIONS to the American people and the world.
    Bush's Speech
    Bush was surprisingly coherent and articulate in explaining the bailout and its reasoning. His plan, by the way, is virtually identical to the one that the White House and Senate Democrats hammered out and Senate Republicans stonewalled a couple weeks ago.

    The pay cut for auto workers is nonbinding, and there are limits on executive pay.
    Maybe he should have made his speech in the 50s then.
    His hate speech is not in line with today's reality. In most major cities, and for most young people, the black culture is the dominant culture. Fashion, music, media, sports - look at today's icons.

    His speech was racist and makes me sick, because it is only going to spawn - guess what - MORE racism. If this is how the Obama presidency is going to be run, I predict the ranks of the KKK will be full to bursting by the time his first term is over.
    freedom of speech
    Hillary said that Bill always was a hard dog to keep on the porch. So what. At least we weren't embroiled in an unjustified war, we had a SURPLUS in the treasury and the whole country wasn't going to the dogs. I believe in the 1st amendment - she can say whatever she wants. Take some cojones to talk about propriety................look at dubya and turd blossom.
    This man has NEVER believe in free speech
    He has made no secret of his belief that our constitution is NOT a static document, which it is. He believes it should be a "living" document, so he can make up things as he goes along.

    This guy is so uptight and immature that he continually makes comments about Hannity and O'Reilly and Limbaugh. What rock did he crawl out from under? Too bad when he decided to come back to this country he didn't learn that FREE SPEECH mean just that, FREE SPEECH!!

    Of course, he doesn't believe in our constitution anyway, so it shouldn't be a surprise.

    Anyone in his position who obsesses over a few conservative talk heads isn't mature at all but this guy is so messed up, he actually believes he has the right to censor talk show hosts just 'cause he doesn't like them...... now that is a dangerous dictator!!!
    Well, in his speech last night, he sure

    seemed to be trying to put fear at the retreat. He started out calm enough but before it was over, he was livid, blaming the pubs for everything. He WAS trying to put fear in the dems to the words that they HAVE to pass this bill. No way was he going to let it fail.  He wants the package the way it is. He doesn't want to compromise on this package no matter what he says to the media with his smiling face.


    What did you think of PM Brown's speech
    Don't get me wrong. I love England a lot (many of my family came from that country, have visited it and the people of England are wonderful people), but I caught PM Brown's speech the other day and I though it was... well "lame" for lack of a better term. He was kissing the behinds of the people to get funding from America his nose was covered in feces. I see he has also been studying President Obama's speeches and it was so blatantly obvious. President Obama is probably one of the greatest in giving speeches. No doubt about that, but this was clearly an imitation of Obama's past speeches. (We are not blue states and we are not red states, we are the United States). Here Mr. Brown says "There is no old Europe, there is no new Europe, there is only your friend Europe". The way he presented his speech all I could think of was that Obama's speech writers wrote it for him. All I thought of was how lame.

    Just curious what your opinions are. Mine is that America does not have the funds to be sending money over to England. Unemployment is rising, home loss is on the rise and they are trying to have us send money to them??? Maybe I'm wrong about this but I just think it's very arrogant, as was his speech to congress.

    I also heard that I guess it didn't go as well as England had planned because now The Queen is having a private meeting with Mr. Obama.

    Just wondered what others opinions are.
    Each to his own....... that's why we have "free speech"
    xx
    Deplorable speech!
    What was breathtakingly shocking about Obama's speech is that he proposes "oversight" of executive decisions by the other branches of government under the guise of the principle of "checks-and-balances". As a former Constitutional lawyer, even he has to know that this was never what was meant by that principle for the simple reason that it abrogates executive responsibilities to the other branches.

    Never mind that he failed to say what would happen if one of these other branches says "No you can't do that". Would the third branch then resolve the question?

    Never mind that such a process would mean that the executive - which must often make critical defense decisions in minutes - couldn't act for days or months.

    Never mind that he fails to mention that such a misapplication of "checks-and-balances" would set a precedent so that the next President could insist on exercising "oversight" over the Congress and the courts.

    We shouldn't be surprised by this, though. This administration has demonstrated a shocking disregard for Constitutional principles from the very moment it took office and continues to do so to this very day.

    Anyone who understands the principles of this country will have been very, very disturbed by Obama's speech today. And the country is getting sick of the blame game, too, Mr. President. At some point you should go into the Oval Office and see if you can find out who's President now. That's where the buck stops.
    I think you have the wrong speech...(sm)

    the discussion is about when he was talking in Turkey.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIVd7YT0oWA&feature=related


    I really doubt that O's speech had such
    a big impact on the voters, in Lebanon and the EU, to change the outcome of the elections.
    The EU voters changed to conservative, as so many poor countries were taken into the EU, and many countries were against this.
    Turkey, a foremost Muslim country, is trying to get approved into the EU, causing a big controversy.
    This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't

    his own personal reasons.


    http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php


    The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.


    Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."


    Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.


    In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.


    "He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"


    Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.


    Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.


    Conversations With Bush The Candidate


    Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.


    The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.


    I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."


    Debating The Timeline For War


    But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.


    The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.



    On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"


    I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."


    "I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …


    "Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.


    Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.



    Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"


    Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.


    Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."


    Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.


    Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.



     


    Who's denying her freedom of speech.sm
    What you guys want is for her freedom of speech to go unanswered. Since she is an army mom then we should worship her and allow her to dump on us because of our beliefs.

    If she wants praise and high-fives she should be posting on the conservative board.
    Its called freedom of speech
    Hey, neocons, its called freedom of speech..part of our Constitution. Dont like it, dont read the posts, dont come on the liberal board to cause trouble..stay where you are safe on your own board..
    The issue is not free speech....
    the issue is whether this guy was doing his job. He's a geography teacher for crying out loud. His remarks had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the job he was hired to do and that's teach geography. The excuse that he was teaching *human geography* is the most hilarious pitiful excuse I've ever heard. This guy should be fired for unprofessionalism and not performing the duties he was hired to do. If he wants to be a political activist so be it, but do it in your off time or quit your public education job and do it. This goes for anybody whether your conservative, liberal, or independent.

    I think a new ammendment should be made to get teachers back to teaching the basics instead of trying in indoctrinate kids to think the way they do, but I doubt that will happen any time soon.

    Well about the walkout---I doubt the kids did it for political reasons, they did it to get out of class and to get some attention.


    Sandra Day O'Connor speech
    Apparently only NPR and Olbermann covered this.

    Audio here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5255712

    Former top judge says US risks edging near to dictatorship

    · Sandra Day O'Connor warns of rightwing attacks
    · Lawyers 'must speak up' to protect judiciary
    Julian Borger in Washington
    Monday March 13, 2006

    Guardian
    Sandra Day O'Connor, a Republican-appointed judge who retired last month after 24 years on the supreme court, has said the US is in danger of edging towards dictatorship if the party's rightwingers continue to attack the judiciary.

    In a strongly worded speech at Georgetown University, reported by National Public Radio and the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Ms O'Connor took aim at Republican leaders whose repeated denunciations of the courts for alleged liberal bias could, she said, be contributing to a climate of violence against judges.

    Ms O'Connor, nominated by Ronald Reagan as the first woman supreme court justice, declared: We must be ever-vigilant against those who would strong-arm the judiciary.

    She pointed to autocracies in the developing world and former Communist countries as lessons on where interference with the judiciary might lead. It takes a lot of degeneration before a country falls into dictatorship, but we should avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings.

    In her address to an audience of corporate lawyers on Thursday, Ms O'Connor singled out a warning to the judiciary issued last year by Tom DeLay, the former Republican leader in the House of Representatives, over a court ruling in a controversial right to die case.

    After the decision last March that ordered a brain-dead woman in Florida, Terri Schiavo, removed from life support, Mr DeLay said: The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behaviour.

    Mr DeLay later called for the impeachment of judges involved in the Schiavo case, and called for more scrutiny of an arrogant, out-of-control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at Congress and the president.

    Such threats, Ms O'Connor said, pose a direct threat to our constitutional freedom, and she told the lawyers in her audience: I want you to tune your ears to these attacks ... You have an obligation to speak up.

    Statutes and constitutions do not protect judicial independence - people do, the retired supreme court justice said.

    She noted death threats against judges were on the rise and added that the situation was not helped by a senior senator's suggestion that there might be a connection between the violence against judges and the decisions they make.

    The senator she was referring to was John Cornyn, a Bush loyalist from Texas, who made his remarks last April, soon after a judge was shot dead in an Atlanta courtroom and the family of a federal judge was murdered in Illinois.

    Senator Cornyn said: I don't know if there is a cause and effect connection, but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country ... And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters, on some occasions, where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in violence.

    Although appointed by a Republican, Ms O'Connor voted with the supreme court's liberals on some divisive issues, including abortion, making her a frequent target for criticism from the right. After announcing that she intended to retire last year at the age of 75, she was replaced in February this year by Samuel Alito, who is generally regarded as being more consistently conservative.

    In her speech, Ms O'Connor said that if the courts did not occasionally make politicians mad they would not be doing their jobs, and their effectiveness is premised on the notion that we won't be subject to retaliation for our judicial acts.

    So your saying Ann's not entitled to her free speech
    but you are entitled to yours? The 9/11 widows can say anything, but Ann better shut up?


    The double standards rule the day here.

    Ann has her opinions but at least she is not saying America is guilty of genocide.
    JFK speech 10 days before his death. sm

    Please take 5 minutes to listen to this.  It gave me chills.  He truly was a visionary and what a great loss to America. 


     


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU&search=JFK%20on%20Secret..


    I distinctly remember this speech.
    And it is not a new one. I remember it because it made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. The cards were on the table, I clearly remember thinking that. 
    Yes, his speech was awesome, wasn't it?